Letter to the Postulators for the OFM, Regarding Bl. John Duns Scotusk

To the Office of Postulation for the Causes of Saints,
Order of Friars Minor
Dear Brothers,

First, as a Secular Carmelite, I would like to congratulate you on the canonizations of Sts. Louis and Zelie Martin, who have significance to both our Orders. I don’t know how these proceedings work, but I would like to report a potential miracle for the cause of Bl. John Duns Scotus.

I have had a lifelong battle with the Marfan syndrome, a genetic disorder of the connective tissues. I grew up with a dilated aortic root which went aneurysmal and was replaced-with a “St. Jude” valve in June 1996, when I was 19 years old (http://www.discovery.org/a/514). Approximately 10 years later, my descending thoracic aorta began dilating. In October 2008, I suffered a spontaneous pneumothorax. That same year, I was diagnosed with a tortuous carotid artery and a brain aneurysm (it’s complicated, but does not need surgery although it causes some neurological deficits). On January 1, 2011, at approximately 1 AM, I suffered an aortic dissection from the middle of my aortic arch to iliac arteries. The blood flow to my right leg was cut off for 24 hours. The only surgery they did at the time was a “femoral-femoral” bypass.

I have a wife and four children, and, though I have always waivered between accepting my cross and praying for healing, I prayed in early 2011 for guidance on which Blessed to pray to for healing, that he or she might be canonized. I have a BA in philosophy, and I have long been fascinated with the figure of Bl. Scotus, particularly given his defense of the Immaculate Conception. In my own speculations, I had considered Bl. Scotus or one of several Carmelite venerables and beati, or a few others, and after praying about it, I felt Our Lord wanted me to devote my prayers for healing to Bl. Scotus.

Surgery on the descending aorta is a high-risk procedure for anyone. For someone with Marfan syndrome who has already had a previous aortic graft and a dissection, it is especially risky: putting various mortality studies and statistics together told me that I’d have a less than 10% chance of surviving the surgery and not having permanent organ damage or paralysis. I have read many stories of people with Marfan syndrome undergoing post-dissection aorta repairs and ending up in comas, having their lungs fill up with fluid, etc.

I was told in May 2012 that I wouldn’t survive the summer without surgery, but I wanted to wait for the right doctor. I prayed about it. In December 2012, I made my final profession as a secular Carmelite and then found the name of a highly ranked vascular surgeon, Dr. John “Jeb” Hallett at Roper-St. Francis Hospital (a Bon Secours hospital that merged with a Protestant nonprofit hospital) in Charleston, SC, 3 hours from where I live. Dr. Hallett and the then-head of cardiothoracic surgery at Roper, Dr. David Peterseim, performed the surgery on March 27, 2013. On March 20, they performed a bypass of my left subclavian artery to my left carotid to prevent a stroke. I was permitted to come home for my daughter’s Confirmation. Then I went back for the main surgery. Though it had been scheduled for that day for months, the doctors told my family that the widest part of my aorta was larger than 6 cm, and that it was so weak that I should have already had a fatal dissection and likely would have if the surgery had been a few days later.

The surgery went relatively smoothly, but there were complications. I ended up in the hospital for 3 months, spending 3 weeks anaesthetized. I had to have surgery to repair a tear in my thoracic duct, a drainage tube for a chyle leak, a trachyostomy, and insertion of a J-peg feeding tube. I was fed intravenously and by feeding tube for 2 months. My stomach was paralyzed, though some of its function has returned. The only long-term complication was a paralyzed vocal cord. Every day until I was well on the road to recovery, my wife posted a prayer to Bl. John Duns Scotus on her and my Facebook pages, asking people to pray for his intercession.

Almost every doctor I’ve talked to has said my survival and recovery are miraculous. Few surgeons would have put the care and dedication into my survival that the people at Roper did, and most patients in my situation would have had their respirators and feeding tubes pulled. I know as postulators you know what does and does not count as miraculous, but I’ve heard of cases being used in canonizations that were far more medically explicable than my own. While it’s easy to say, “You just had the right doctors,” even finding those doctors at the right time was an answer to prayer.
I hope my story will help to get the champion of the Immaculata the canonization he well deserves.

Advertisement

Carmelite Office, Morning Prayer: St. Teresa of Jesus (of Avila), Virgin, Doctor and Foundress

Download the Carmelite Propers in PDF.
(This link is the only link I can find from this domain name)

Invitatory
Ant.     Come, let us worship the Lord, source of all wisdom.

Morning Prayer

Ant. 1  For you my soul is thirsting, Lord; my body pines for you.
Psalms and canticle from Sunday, Week I, v. 4, p. 652 (CP., p. 707).
Ant. 2  All your creatures praise you, Lord; your saints shall bless  your name.
Ant. 3  I have sung the praises of your mercies, Lord, in the assembly of the faithful.

READING                                                      2 Corinthians 4:5-7

RESPONSORY
My heart is ever pleading, show me your face. —My heart is ever pleading, show me your face.
I long to gaze upon you, Lord. —Show me your face.
Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit. —My heart is ever pleading, show me your face.
CANTICLE OF ZECHARIAH
Ant.     All who love me will be loved by my Father,  and I will love them and reveal myself to them.

INTERCESSIONS
The Lord of glory, Crown of all the Saints, gives us the joy of honoring our Mother, Saint Teresa.
Let us praise him, saying:
Glory to you, Lord!

Source of life and holiness, in your saints you show us the infinite marvels of your grace;  —in company with Saint Teresa may we sing of your mercies forever.
You want your love to blaze like fire throughout the world;  —with Saint Teresa, make us zealous in spreading your charity.
You make friends of your saints, and reveal to them the mysteries of your heart;  —bind us to yourself in friendship so close that we may taste the secrets of your love, proclaim your wonders, and draw others to you.
You pronounced blessed the pure of heart, and promised that they should see you;  —purify our sight, so that we may see you in everyone and be faithful to you in all things.
You resist the proud and give wisdom to little ones; —make us humble of heart, so that we may receive your wisdom for the sake of the whole Church

Our Father . . .

PRAYER (Collect)
Father, by your Spirit you raised up our Mother Saint Teresa of Jesus to show your Church the way to perfection.  May her inspired teaching awaken in us a longing for true holiness.
Grant this through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, forever and ever.

Flos Carmeli and Litany of Carmelite Saints

Let’s say the “worst case scenario” happens . . .

I happened to pray the Office of Readings for the first time in ages today, and it was a very appropriate reading from St. Gregory the Great that could have been written about the church today:

Beloved brothers, consider what has been said: Pray the Lord of the harvest to send laborers into his harvest. Pray for us so that we may have the strength to work on your behalf, that our tongue may not grow weary of exhortation, and that after we have accepted the office of preaching, our silence may not condemn us before the just judge. For frequently the preacher’s tongue is bound fast on account of his own wickedness; while on the other hand it sometimes happens that because of the people’s sins, the word of preaching is withdrawn from those who preside over the assembly. With reference to the former situation, the psalmist says: But God asks the sinner: Why do you recite my commandments? And with reference to the latter, the Lord tells Ezekiel: I will make your tongue cleave to the roof of your mouth, so that you shall be dumb and unable to reprove them, for they are a rebellious house. He clearly means this: the word of preaching will be taken away from you because as long as this people irritates me by their deeds, they are unworthy to hear the exhortation of truth. It is not easy to know for whose sinfulness the preacher’s word is withheld, but it is indisputable that the shepherd’s silence while often injurious to himself will always harm his flock.
There is something else about the life of the shepherds, dearest brothers, which discourages me greatly. But lest what I claim should seem unjust to anyone, I will accuse myself of the very same thing, although I fall into it unwillingly—compelled by the urgency of these barbarous times. I speak of our absorption in external affairs; we accept the duties of office, but by our actions we show that we are attentive to other things. We abandon the ministry of preaching and, in my opinion, are called bishops to our detriment, for we retain the honorable office but fail to practice the virtues proper to it. Those who have been entrusted to us abandon God, and we are silent. They fall into sin, and we do not extend a hand of rebuke.
– See more at: http://divineoffice.org/ord-w27-sat-or/?title=Oct+10%2C+Office+of+Readings+for+Blessed+Virgin+Mary&date=20151010#sthash.zuBnCfii.dpuf

And in the midst of the debates about the Synod, there’s something I’ve never understood about people’s understanding of Papal primacy and infallibility. The “Old Catholics” broke off because they rejected Vatican I’s declaration of Infallibility. Then the “traditionalists” broke off, or whatever, because by their understanding of papal infallibility, and previous papal statements about modernism, religious liberty, etc., Vatican II was in violation of Vatican I, and they developed various approaches to the question. Now, I take the doctrines of infallibility and indefectibility to mean that the Holy Spirit will protect the Church from falling into error–She just can’t. It has never happened in many situations similar to our own–though some crises have come close, and there was even at least one pope in history who was a material heretic.
Now, let’s say that the Synod does something directly at odds with the words of Christ in the name of Mercy. In practice, it means no more than a regional or national bishops’ conference. After all, B16’s Synod on Liturgy came up with some pretty strong statements that have been mostly ignored, such as calling for an end to “bilingual” Masses, and saying that it needs to be Latin, one vernacular and Latin, but not multiple vernaculars, and any congregation with significantly multiple languages should be Latin–how many diocese have implemented those guidelines?
Now, let’s say Francis, either with the support of the Synod, or unilaterally, does something that directly contradicts the words of Christ. *I am not saying I think it will happen*, but it is not outside the realm of possibility.
What becomes of infallibility and indefectibility?
The way I have always seen it, both the Vatican I schisms that we now consider to be morally “liberal” groups, and the Vatican II schisms and “not in schism but not fully in communion” groups that we call “traditionalist” are taking intellectually dishonest positions.
If Vatican II was heretical, then just saying, “It’s pastoral and not doctrinal” isn’t enough–“pastoral and not doctrinal” means that it is formulating authentic teaching, and promoting an approach to methodology, that is not necessarily “wrong” but one is free to disagree with. If one truly believes that teaching contradicts previous anathemas, one cannot simply say, “it’s pastoral and not doctrinally binding.” That only works for rectifying the apparent contradiction in approach.
That’s why the sedevacantists say that the “Seat is vacant,” and compare to times when there were exceptionally long papal interregnums, the Great Western schism, the Cadavar Trial and surrounding events, etc. Yet the sedevacantist position is that Vatican I was right.
What if Vatican I was wrong? Then we get to the “Old Catholic” position that Vatican I was wrong to say the Pope has unilateral infallibility, yet they hold to the teachings of Trent.
What I have not understood for a long time is how either group still clings to Trent.
If it’s possible for a Council to err, what makes this Council erroneous and not that one?
Between “in union with Rome” Catholics, anti-Vatican II traditionalists, anti-Vatican I “Old Catholics,” Protestant of various sorts, Greek and Russian Orthodox, and “Oriental” Orthodox (Copts and Chaldeans), Rome and Byzantium had the strongest and most intellectually consistent claims.
For me, though, one of the key proofs of Rome’s being the true Church of Christ is that She holds fast to Christ’s teachings on the indissolubility of marriage. If that ceases to be true, it creates a theological rift that simple sedevacantism cannot rectify. It cannot simply be “The Pope of Rome is infallible until I disagree with him.” It *has* to be, “maye he was never infallible to begin with.”