by William Doino Jr.
1 The name of Fulton J. Sheen brings to mind many things: “the Golden Age of Catholicism” . . . the stirring sermons . . . the amusing stories and dramatic conversions. . . the black cassock and red cape . . . the glistening pectoral cross . . . the angel cleaning the blackboard . . . and the signature sign-off to his Life is Worth Living television shows: “God love you!”
And now, a new description can be added to the list: a saint-in-waiting.
The advance of Sheen’s cause has elated his many supporters, especially three priests who’ve had a special devotion to it.
Monsignor Hilary Franco, who served as the Archbishop’s assistant when he headed the Society for the Propagation of the Faith in America—and is the only surviving member of his New York household—told me how thankful he was for the announcement: “I am a living witness to Archbishop Sheen’s holiness.”
Despite all the acclaim he received, Sheen strived to maintain “the simplicity of a dedicated parish priest,” said Monsignor. For Sheen, the priesthood was a precious gift that needed to be nourished through continual prayer. Every day, no matter where he was, even if traveling abroad, he made it a point to spend one hour in front of the Blessed Sacrament. It kept his mind constantly on the divine, and fortified his work.
Archbishop Sheen’s generosity was legendary. Apart from donating his own earnings to the Church, he raised enormous sums of money for the poor, the missions, and additional works of mercy. He brought famous celebrities into the Church, but brought far more unknowns into it, who were famous “in the eyes of God.” His private acts of charity were never publicized, but flowed from the heart of a servant. Monsignor Franco revealed how the Archbishop rescued a man named Victor from the streets:
He had suffered from leprosy and was so badly deformed he was afraid to show himself during the day. When Archbishop Sheen discovered Victor’s desperate condition, he immediately saw to it that he was cared for, given proper medical attention, and invited him to dine with us every Friday night. He embraced Victor’s full human dignity and treated him as a member of his own family.
Father Andrew Apostoli, the Vice-Postulator of the Archbishop’s cause, seconds Monsignor Franco’s testimony, adding. “I remember watching Archbishop Sheen myself as a young boy, at my grandfather’s promptings, and being so inspired by his teachings. There was no one else like him. He became a hero, and influenced my decision to enter religious life . . . though I never thought I’d actually meet him.”
Father Apostoli not only met the Archbishop, but—through a providential series of events—was ordained by him in 1967, an event he remembers vividly. “At my ordination, Archbishop Sheen spoke prophetically about the critical importance of the clergy, saying: ‘If there is a key to the reform of the Church and the salvation of the world it lies in the renewal of the priesthood.’”
Msgr. Stanley Deptula, the executive director of the Archbishop Sheen Foundation, never got the opportunity to meet Sheen, but he feels as if he did, and he is not alone. “The letters we receive from both clergy and laity show what a profound impact Archbishop Sheen has had upon the Church. His books and recordings speak to people today, as much as they ever did.” Msgr. Franco adds: “And not just in America, but throughout the world, and among many non-Catholics, too.’
All three men stressed how important Sheen’s witness was for them as Catholic priests, calling special attention to his book, The Priest is Not His Own. “I am convinced this book is a spiritual classic, and defines the missions of priests like no other,” says Msgr. Deptula. One passage, in particular, gives a hint as to why the Archbishop was so committed to his daily holy hour:
The only defense against acedia, against the tragic loss of divine reality, is a daily renewal of faith in Christ. The priest who has not kept near the fires of the tabernacle can strike no sparks from the pulpit.
What Archbishop Sheen did for the clergy he expanded for the laity. In books like God and Intelligence, Old Errors and New Labels, The Cross and the Crisis, Communism and the Conscience of the West, Peace of Soul, The World’s First Love, Three to Get Married, and The Life of Christ, he showed what Christianity meant for the contemporary world, and how to protect and extend it when it came under attack.
Long before the new atheists appeared, Sheen exposed their faulty premises and answered their supposed logic. He denounced the evils of Communism, but knew denunciation was never enough, and so fought for an ethic of peace and social justice. He condemned racism and anti-Semitism, and spoke out against the Vietnam War—not because he had softened his views against Communism (far from it), but because of his commitment to just-war principles, and out of conscience. He inveighed against the “false compassion” of certain psychologists, and said the only way to redemption was by acknowledging sin and personal responsibility. He was a champion of Vatican II and Catholic tradition, embodying that vital center of Catholic orthodoxy which represents the Church at its best.
None of which is to say the now-Venerable Archbishop lived an impeccable or tension-free life. Like all the saints (save only the Blessed Virgin), he was an extraordinary but imperfect vessel of God’s grace. He had a lifelong struggle with vanity, which he candidly admitted in his autobiography; had well-known battles with Cardinal Spellman; and his time as the bishop of Rochester (1966-1969) was anything but serene: after just three years of service, he retired.
But it is precisely during the last ten years of his life, mostly off-camera and during serious illness, when the Archbishop reached a new level of holiness. He overcame his temptations toward vanity, said no harsh words against Cardinal Spellman (whom many believe mistreated Sheen), and expressed nothing but admiration for the people of Rochester, even though not everyone there had been open to his dynamic orthodoxy.
In 1979, shortly before he died, Blessed John Paul II embraced a frail but joyful Archbishop Sheen on the altars of St. Patrick’s Cathedral, and commended him for his tremendous faith and work, “You have been a loyal son of the Church!” Overwhelmed, Sheen broke into tears.
Fr. Andrew Small, successor to Archbishop Sheen as the current head of the Society for the Propagation of the Faith, told Vatican Radio that this moving encounter has tremendous symbolic meaning “because Sheen had known suffering in his life. He had known rejection, he had known pain; he had known exile to some extent when he left New York and went to Rochester.” Learning about his crosses, encouraged others to persevere with theirs.
This was the true stardom of Fulton Sheen: his burning love for Christ, his incredible devotion to the Church, and his boundless love for people, whom he gave so much to, and who are still benefiting from his magnificent gifts.
William Doino Jr. is a contributor to Inside the Vatican magazine, among many other publications, and writes often about religion, history and politics. He contributed an extensive bibliography of works on Pius XII to The Pius War: Responses to the Critics of Pius XII.
RESOURCES
“Archbishop Fulton Sheen Beatification Could Come Very Quickly,” Catholic News Agency, June 30, 2012.
“Ad gentes: Joseph Ratzinger and Fulton Sheen,” Vatican Radio, July 11, 2012.
Treasure in Clay: The Autobiography of Fulton J. Sheen (Image, 1982).
America’s Bishop: The Life and Times of Fulton J. Sheen by Thomas C. Reeves (Encounter Books, 2001).
Fulton J. Sheen: An American Catholic Response to the Twentieth Century by Kathleen L. Riley (Alba House, 2003).
The Spiritual Legacy of Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen by Charles P. Connor (Alba House, 2009).
Archbishopsheencause.org, official website of the Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen Foundation.
Brother Burrito
Catholicism Pure & Simple
Gertrude
kathleen
mmvc
teresa
The Raven
For those of us who saw him on television or listened to recordings of his sermons or read his books, Bishop Sheen was a great man. He not only lived during that “Golden Age of Catholicism” (which we look back on now with great nostalgia), he was one those who made it golden.
.
The news that there was recently a “Golden Age of Catholicism” (presumably in the U.S.) is news indeed to Toad. Who would be obliged if Robert John, or someone, can elaborate further, or provide references to books, or whatever.
.
“(Sheen) was a champion of Vatican II…”
What?
Really?
Golly!
There was nothing wrong with Vatican ll Toad. What was wrong was that along with the liberalism that swept most of the Western world from the 60′s on , many who should have known better established their own agenda’s and misinterpreted many of the Council documents to fit! This brought parts of the Church to the brink almost of heresy, and I would imagine Blessed John XXlll would have wept if he could have forseen this. It is said that subsequent Popes certainly have.
It has taken Pope Benedict (who was an advocate of Vll) most of his Pontificate to bring about the restoration of much of what was lost during these years, and, please God, he will live long enough to restore much more.
.
Well. Gertrude, Toad rather likes Vat II, what little he knows of it.
Much more “matey.”
The Sign of Peace, for example, is excellent. Or so he thinks.
It’s just that there appears to be a certain antipathy regarding the whole boiling on this blog.
Or so he had formed the opinion.
Occasional cries of “wicked, ” and “hate.”
That sort of thing.
I concur absolutely with Gertrude’s pertinent comment.
Toad, Councils are not convened to make things more “matey” or whatever, but to either clarify Doctrines, denounce heresies and, in the case of Vatican II, the announced purpose was the “spiritual renewal of the Church and the reconsideration of its position in the modern world”. V2 didn’t teach anything new dogmatically, but merely tried to express its time-old Teaching in a new way that modern man could understand.
The worst outcome of VII in the opinion of many Catholics was the new Mass (otherwise known as Novus Ordo) replacing the sublimely holy Tridentine Mass.
But as Gertrude pointed out, the great Pope Benedict XVI is restoring much of the damage done to the Liturgy and rectifying abuses. He’s getting us right back on track again, DG!
.
Very concise explanation, Kathleen, thanks.
“V2 didn’t teach anything new dogmatically, but merely tried to express its time-old Teaching in a new way that modern man could understand.”
Toad takes that to mean, “Dumb it down.” If he’s right, it’s surprising V.2 wasn’t less unsuccessful. “Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of people,” saud P.T.Barnum.
To relate it to Toad’s working experience; this was a “re-design” – re-arrange the furniture a bit, maybe change the typeface – (as he has done on several newspapers) but one that not only failed to attract new “readers,” but also succeeded in annoying many of the existing ones.
And it fails to address the fact that people just aren’t either buying papers (or going to church) in the numbers that they did in the past, for good reasons, as they see them.
Reasonable analogy? If so, it’s really not possible to go back to the original. You have to re-design the re-design. Toad painfully learned.
Toad, I am not an expert on Vatican II, but I know it was not a “re-design”! A reading of the V2 documents would prove that to you.
The trouble really was with the interpretation of some of those documents, and the many abuses that occurred surrounding them. The Novus Ordo Mass, though a truly valid Mass, allowed unholy innovations to creep into it, in a way that the Tridentine Mass never did. Messing about with the Liturgy brought about a lot of trouble, for as Laura pointed out on another thread: Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi.
It really does seem, with hindsight, that in the aftermath of V2 there were either “enemies in our midst” who wanted to destroy the Faith by implementing all kinds of abuses, or just some well-meaning but gravely mistaken people. This all caused Pope Paul VI, and the truly Catholic clergy and faithful (which included my parents) a lot of heartache,
Do you remember this post from last year?
http://catholicismpure.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/vatican-ii-–-bishop-schneiders-call-for-a-syllabus-of-errors/
Our Holy Catholic Church, who has weathered many a storm in Her long history, will, as we can see, weather this one too.
.
Not all that long a history, Kathleen, a mere 2,000 years so far.
Similar to when some horrid old Chinese Communist, (Mao? Chou?) once said, when asked what he thought of the French Revolution, “It is too early to tell.”
However, be that as it may – whatever that means – Toad has been giving some serious(!) thought to the vicissitudes of VAT 2, as seen by many on CP&S.
And he diffidently suggests it is a case of the deck chairs on the Titanic being thrown out with the bathwater.
That may help.
No?
Oh, well.
It seems as plain as the nose on Toad’s pikestaff, to him.
Please don’t start me on the ‘peace’ Toad. It might be different in Spain, but in the UK some people really ‘go to town’. Personally I would like to see it abolished; but that is purely personal (along with Extraordinary Ministers!).
.
Aw, come on, Gertrude, loosen up – Gizza Great Big, Sloppy, Kiss!!! After all, it’s Christmas, innit?
Toad’s never caught anything fatal yet! (Well, hardly ever.)
All Ministers are Extraordinary,* Orwell tells us – (It’s OK to paraphrase him – he’s dead ) but some are less unextraordinary than others.
…As is only to be expected, under the circs.
(*The more one looks at the word “extraordinary,” the more it seems to be misspelled. Wow. Lurid. Mysterious.)
.
“Toad, I am not an expert on Vatican II, but I know it was not a “re-design”! A reading of the V2 documents would prove that to you.”
No, Kathleen, I can assure you it would not “prove” any such thing to me. How could it? What it might, just possibly, do is convince me of its likelyhood.
But even this particular hood is, I fear, not very likely.
To provide another analogy to the Titanic, I suspect what the Vatican did back then, was the same as a car dealer taking an old crock, giving it a re-spray paint job, turning back the mileometer a few thousand miles, and then waiting for some trusting soul to come along and bite.
But I’m almost certainly wrong, as usual. And so I should be.
I’m much more confident on foreskins.
Gertrude,
I would like extraordinary ministers to be confined to the War Cabinet! And yes, why can’t the sign of peace be given a some other point in the Mass? eg afterwards.
Am I the only Catholic who hasn’t read a single word of the documents of Vat2? How about CP&S does a series of concise “heads ups” on them?
.
Exactly what Toad, who is deeply puzzled by it Vart2, would appreciate someone else doing, Burrito.
But what earthly difference does it make where “the sign of peace” takes place during the Mass?
On the way in, maybe? Or on the way out? Or where it already is, about over half way?
Or where else?
Wherever it appears, A kiss is still a kiss, a sigh is still a sigh. The fundamental things of life, as time goes by.
Gertrude will agree, very likely. But then, very possibly not. (Toad thinks she just might be a teeny weeeny bit snobbish about this kind of thing.
No! Perish the thought!
We will be told, anyway.)
.
Well, just to concentrate on the ‘sign of peace’: I refer to the Instruction Redemptionist Sacrementum, which states:
Re: the sign of peace to be given only to those nearest and in sober manner; the [riest may offer it to ministers but always within the sanctuary; that the sign manner be established by the Conference of Bishops according to local dispositions and custom, subject to the recognitio of the Apostolic See. (RS.72)
The same instructions insists Extraordinary ministers are used only when the priest and deacon are lacking or when the priest is prevented by weakness or old age!, oh – and if the number of communicants would unduly prolong the Mass!
Snobbish is perhaps the wrong word Toad. I just abhor the deviations that have crept in since Vatican ll which were never intended by the Council Fathers, of which the above is just one. Holy Mass is not, or ever was entertainment for the congregation, and some of the antics during the ‘peace’ I have seen leave me speechless. Obviously I would prefer the Mass of Ages with none of these ‘diversions’ from the purpose of Holy Mass which is, after all, to prepare to meet Our Blessed Lord present in the Sacrament.
Because I worship in a parish that is a monastic community I am glad to say at the Conventual Mass such ‘goings-on’ do not happen.