Fr. Gordon Francis Knight C.S.SP, S.T.D.

Fr. Gordon Francis Knight

Fr. Gordon Francis Knight
Born: June 7 1899 East Orange New Jersey Died: Feb 3 1961 Vienna Va.
Born in East Orange, New Jersey, in 1899, Fr. Knight made his collegiate studies at City College, New York City; his philosophical studies at St Mary’s Seminary, Norwalk, Conn; and his theological studies in Rome, Italy, where he acquired a great admiration for Cardinal Louis Billot’s theology. He was ordained on July 28, 1929 and awarded the degree of Doctor of Sacred Theology in the following year at the Gregorian University.
Upon returning to the United States in 1930, Fr. Knight was assigned to the Holy Ghost Fathers’ St. Mary’s Seminary, where he taught for fourteen years. He was appointed to the faculty at Duquesne University in 1944. He taught Apologetics and many loved to hear him talk and adored his logic. Struck by cancer in 1960, he retired to prepare himself for death in Ferndale.
Like many scholars, he had trouble remembering names, even the names of people who lived with him in the same house. He tried to cover up his ignorance by addressing everyone as “Gents.” It quickly earned him the title as a nickname. His favored hobby was tinkering with all kinds of scientific equipment, so that his room resembled a repair shop and a study. He was buried in Ferndale.

How do you know that you are right?

I have a good friend and over the years we had many discussions on Catholic teachings. He believes the Catholic Church to be in error on many issues such as: baptism, the Eucharist, confession, praying to saints, purgatory, etc.. We have both learned much from these discussions. Sometimes the debate got a little heated, a danger when discussing religion. After a while I grew weary of the circular nature of our conversations. So I decided to ask him a simple question. How do you know that you are right?

“In order for me to continue our discussions about Catholicism” I said to my friend, “Please tell me how you know that you are right?” After a short pause, he replied that he reads the Bible and prays to the Holy Spirit for guidance. “Well, all Protestants do that and yet they still disagree with each other so that can’t be right.” I countered. He said Protestants are in agreement on the major issues such as the Trinity so it is fine to have disagreements on the minor ones. “Is salvation a minor issue?” I inquired. For instance, some denominations agree with Catholics that baptism is necessary for salvation while others do not. Or how about the “Once saved, always saved” doctrine? That teaching is highly contested in Protestant circles. How do you settle the matter? He never satisfactorily answered my question and our discussion ended that day without any further debate.

“How do you know that you are right?” I asked a protestant coworker. He thought about it for a minute and then directed the question back at me. “How do you know that you are right?” This is a good question for all Catholics. How do we know that the Church is right? It is the same question that Pilate asked Jesus; “What is truth?” And the truth was standing there right in front of him when he asked it. We know the truth is available. Jesus promised to send the Holy Spirit so that we will know all truth into perpetuity. "I will ask the Father and He shall give you another Paraclete that He may abide with you forever, the spirit of truth . . the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, will teach you all things, and will bring all things to your mind whatsoever I shall have said to you." (John 14 :16)

Why do we say the fullness of the truth subsists within the Catholic Church? The answer is not elusive - we have apostolic succession. We have a documented unbroken line of popes all the way back to Peter. But this alone wouldn't amount to much if it could be proven that our doctrines had changed over time. For objective truth is immutable and cannot change. Just as God is truth and cannot change. He is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. I can’t stress this point enough; 2000 years of church history wrought with many questions, heresies and opinions and yet there emerges a Church whose doctrines (when defined as binding) have remained the same. No doctrine declared by the Church as binding ever contradicted and rescinded an earlier one. This is an important fact and is known as the infallible magesterium of the Catholic Church. Only the Catholic Church claims to teach infallibly. Protestants don’t claim to teach infallibly. As a matter of fact, they have taught certain things in the past that were accepted as a sure norm only to be reversed at some later date. Some examples would be: allowing women ministers, divorce and remarriage, and contraception. Also today we see a growing trend toward greater acceptance of homosexuality and abortion. Protestantism is a house built on shifting sand.

I asked a popular Christian writer to define a “Bible based” church. What criteria does one apply? While he had written much about his journey from atheism to Christianity he wrote nothing on his process of discerning which Christian Church to attend. He told me that I asked a great question and that he would address this topic on his web site. He informed me he had joined several different churches in the process of discernment and his experiences could help others find a good church. The fact is, he never got around to putting that information on his web page. How could he? At the time I told him that he would never be able to write such a guide without having an authoritative majesterium (teaching) to base it on such as exists only in the Catholic Church. There are more than 33,000 protestant denominations all teaching different doctrines while claiming to be “Bible based”. So how could he write such a guide? The only area in which all Protestants seem to agree on is the Catholic Church is wrong.

Instead of looking to see if a church is based on the Bible one should look to see where the Bible came from. The Bible itself is a Catholic tradition that came out of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church existed some 390 years before there was a Bible. The canon (table of contents) of the bible was determined by the Catholic Church at the Council of Carthage and monks preserved the scriptures by copying them down through the centuries. Truly the Bible is a Catholic book and who is more qualified to interpret it?

I like to read about Catholic conversion stories and there are many to be found on the Internet. I've read testimonies from staunch Protestants that have found their way into the Catholic Church in spite of their initial extreme prejudice. Invariably they overcame their bias when their quest for truth pointed toward the Catholic Church. Also they never look back with disdain on they church they left. In contrast I have also searched the Internet looking for the opposite scenario - conversion stories of “strong” Catholics that left the Church and became Protestant in their search for truth. Inevitably, they would cite a long list of reasons for their disdain of Catholicism but cite precious few reasons for their selection of which Protestant Church they feel is teaching the truth in its fullness. Sometimes their answer is simply any church—as long as it’s not Catholic.

My rhetorical question; “How do you know you're right?” is not about winning a religious debate. Rather, it is about finding truth because finding truth is finding God.

Contraception

“Forty years I loathed that generation; I said: "This people's heart goes astray; they do not know my ways.” Therefore I swore in my anger: "They shall never enter my rest."” – Psalm 95

    We have now reached forty years since Pope Paul VI issued his encyclical “Humanae Vitae” upholding the Church’s consistent teaching on the sinful nature of contraception. However, this encyclical has been largely ignored as surveys indicate that 80 percent of Catholics practice some form of contraception within their marriage.

    How did we arrive at this juncture where so many people dissent from Church teaching on this matter? You may be surprised when you consider that prior to 1930, contraception had been uniformly condemned by every Christian denomination in the world since the death of Christ. This fact is very important! This includes all Protestants. Keep in mind they hold to the belief that the Bible is the infallible word of God and the sole authority. They had historically validated that scripture condemns the act of contraception and therefore it is sinful and offensive to God. Again, this teaching was universally taught by every Christian denomination! Then a change that came about in 1930 that rocked the Christian world. The Anglicans decided at their conference in Lambeth England that contraception was not sinful if utilized within marriage and only under grave extenuating circumstances. Soon other denominations quickly followed suit in lifting the ban on contraception. Now today contraception is largely accepted as the norm without any stipulations required for its practice.

    Now where has this wrought us? In the aftermath of universally accepting contraception we now have greater acceptance of other evils such as: abortion, homosexuality, pornography, immodest dress, cohabitation, divorce, and remarriage. Has your church in any way accepted these things in part or in whole? 

    In his 1989 essay, “The Body’s Grace”, Dr Rowan Williams; Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury argued that the Church’s acceptance of contraception meant that it acknowledged the validity of non-procreative sex. He stated “This could be taken as a green light for gay sex.”

    Something to think about; couldn't homosexual sex be considered the ultimate form of contraception?

    What about abortion? The United States Supreme Court links contraception to Abortion. In Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the recent Supreme Court decision that confirmed Roe v. Wade, stated, "in some critical respects abortion is of the same character as the decision to use contraception . . . . for two decades of economic and social developments, people have organized intimate relationships and made choices that define their views of themselves and their places in society, in reliance on the availability of abortion in the event that contraception should fail."

   Would the ancient Christians recognize the modern church today since their long held beliefs do not align with modern thought? The ancient Romans were pagans and in the first 300 years of Church history they persecuted the Christians.  As pagans the Romans practiced homosexuality, abortion, contraception and polygamy - divorce and remarriage.  The Christians did not. These were big issues separating the two factions and the Christians were often martyred  for holding to these beliefs. More and more protestant churches today have abandoned early Christian dogmas and have accepted many of those pagan practices. Whether it be in part or in whole these practices were never reconcilable with Christianity.

    How bad is the practice of contraception on your marriage? Consider what Fr. Gordon Knight said in his book “Rational Theology: Marriage”:

    "One of the worst features about the use of contraceptive means of birth is that the one who is willing to use such means may be requiring his partner to cooperate in an act which is wrong. He may be leaving his partner only a choice between offending God or offending him. He may be leaving his partner no possibility of a happy marriage, for no one can be happily married who lives in fear of what he deserves from God or who lives in fear of estranging her partner by refusing to do as he requests. Marriage dose not make improper intercourse permissible, for nothing can make what is improper, proper. And improper intercourse is fatal to a happy marriage."

Marriage is a covenant and not a contract. It is a covenant formed between the spouses and God. God will provide us with His grace to help us throughout our marriages. If we think that we can make it on our own without His grace we are severely fooling ourselves. However, one cannot offend God within the marriage while asking  Him for marital blessings at the same time.

IDENTIFYING THE CATHOLIC PROBLEM

I went to a protestant church for a rummage sale and ended up having an interesting discussion with a dynamic senior pastor. His enthusiasm was augmented by the fact that his church was growing by leaps and bounds.  At this particular event he had church members distributing promotional DVDs to all the bargain hunters gathered there - including me. Later when I viewed my DVD I could see how this was an effective marketing tool for increasing church membership.  It was professionally made and highlighted their church in a very appealing manner. In the course of my conversation with the pastor he got around to inviting me to Sunday worship service. I told him I was Catholic. He replied, no problem, Catholics are welcome here. I asked him if he ever studied Catholicism and if he knows what the Catholic Church actually teaches. First he looked around to make sure that nobody else could hear what he was about to reveal, then he replied that he was once Catholic! He followed up by telling me that the teachings of the Catholic Church contradict the teachings found in the bible. It was this discovery (of contradictions) that led him out of the Catholic Church He also informed me that I can talk to a local Catholic priest who will confirm the existence of these contradictions.

       He wanted to continue our discussion from his office where he could show me certain documents to support his claim. I was curious to see what he was about to show me. Unfortunately, I didn’t have the time at that moment. From the little that I did talk to him I got the impression that he harbored contempt for the Catholic Church. So, in realizing this I knew that he was not predisposed to listen to anything that I might say. At one point I had to tell him that I was interested in having a dialog and not an argument. Then the  most fascinating part of our discussion occurred when he asked me this question; “Do you know what your problem is, as a Catholic?”

       I was taken aback by what he said next; “Your problem is that most of my congregation is made up of ex-Catholics!” It was a profound statement and it cut right to the bone. He made his point and I agree – this is a big problem for the Catholic Church. I replied that those ex-Catholics don’t actually know what they left behind. In other words, they weren't fully catechized Catholics making a fully informed decision to leave the Catholic Church. For instance, how many Catholic clergy can you think of that left the Church for Protestantism? In contrast I can think of many Protestant ministers that left their livelihoods to become Catholic.

       I enjoy reading conversion stories. There are many books available on this subject as well as Internet sites. When people have a conversion experience they are more than willing to share their experience as a way of helping others find the fulfillment that they have found. In my research of looking for these stories I have noticed that there are more Protestant to Catholic conversion stories available than the reverse. I particularly like reading about Protestant clergy that find their way into the Catholic Church. Their conversion usually hinges upon the study of early Church fathers. Often the study was  undertaken with the intent to improve their protestant services by incorporating some early Church practices. Becoming Catholic was the last thing on their minds when starting their endeavor! They found that the early Church looks more like the Roman Catholic Church of today. But as they say, all roads lead to Rome. It is also important to note that these pastors never look back on their protestant past with any disdain. Rather, they affectionately look at them as grace filled moments on their journey towards God.

      In contrast, you never read about Catholics studying Church history and then decide to become Protestant. Catholic convert John Henry Newman phrased it well; “To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant." I think Catholics who are well informed (such as priests) leave the Church when their own personal desires conflict with Church teachings. In the words of Cardinal Ratzinger "We are moving towards a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognize anything as for certain and which has as its highest goal one’s own ego and one’s own desires."

      As Catholics we can point to the Catechism as a sure norm for dogmas and doctrines.  Our biggest problem is that many Catholics aren’t familiar with the Catechism nor do they have one in their home. This lack of catecheses is a problem that now extends back several generations. In I Peter 3:15 we are exhorted to: “Always be ready to give an explanation to anyone who asks you for a reason for your hope, but do it with gentleness and reverence…” and many of us are not prepared.

Missing Sunday Mass

“Did you know that missing Mass on Sunday is a mortal sin?” My friend said excitedly on the phone. “I was reading the Catechism that you gave me and it says that missing Sunday Mass is grave matter so essentially a person can end up in hell for missing a single Sunday Mass. Isn’t that too extreme?” My friend is right – it is too extreme if you look at it from his perspective. He is a Protestant so he is looking at the Mass through the lens of Protestantism. However, the Mass is not merely a formalized worship service.

So what is the Mass? It is something that I cannot fully explain it any more than I can fully explain or comprehend the mysteries of God. The Mass is a mystery. The one aspect of the Mass that I would like to discuss here is the sacrifice of the Mass and I will do this with the aid of a picture. They say a picture is worth a thousand words, so my thousand word essay on the Mass is depicted at the top of this posting.
It is an artist’s rendering of the reality of the Mass. The sacrifice of the Mass is Christ’s sacrifice on Calvary made present in our time for the sins of the world. This is what takes place at every Mass; we are literally at the foot of the cross. God is outside of time. So yesterday, today and tomorrow is described as an “eternal now” to God. Events that happened two thousand years ago appear before God as an open book.
The sacrifice of Christ is not renewed at every Mass but rather the same sacrifice that occurred over two thousand years ago is made present to us in our time in an un-bloody manner. Who can fathom the mysteries of God?

Take a look at the picture again and take particular notice the angel. Now listen to the words from Eucharistic Prayer I :

    “Humbly we beseech Thee, almighty God, to command that these our offerings be carried by the hands of Thy holy Angel to Thine Altar on high, in the sight of Thy divine Majesty...”

    An angel is present at every Mass with the purpose of taking the Sacrifice made present to us to God in heaven. We should contemplate this reality when we are at Mass.
In recognizing what actually takes place at Mass it then becomes easy to see the seriousness of missing a single Sunday Mass. So remember this picture and then realize  what you are walking away from when you miss Mass. It is mortally sinful to reject God who loves us. To willfully miss Mass on Sundays (and holy days) is in essence, rejecting Him.

There is so much more that could be said about the Mass. Few people have been able to comprehend the mystery of the Mass to the extent of Saint Pio of Pietrelcina. To help us better appreciate the Mass I conclude with his words:

    "It would be easier for the earth to carry on without the sun than without the Holy Mass."