Author: Msgr. Charles Pope

Posted on

Even Jesus Sometimes said, "No."

One of the struggles that many Christians experience is that the needs around us are so great, and yet we are limited, both in personal strength, and in resources. And, lurking in the back of our mind, is a notion that whatever the problem, Jesus would always help and so should we. But, then, is it always wrong to say no when there is need?

It is a true fact, Jesus was quite generous with his time, attention, and resources. We too are counseled to be rich in mercy and kindness, expansive in our charity and to be willing to forsake everything to follow Christ. But for limited human beings, often with many obligations are there no limits? Of course there have to be. But, “What would Jesus Do?” Did he ever say, “No?”

Many think the answer to this question is no! But in fact there are instances where Jesus said, “No.” I’d like to look at three of them. I choose these three, because to some extent they deal with the needy. Other examples of Jesus saying no pertain more to specialized or inappropriate requests (e.g. James and John want seats of honor, Peter wants to use a sword to defend Jesus). But lets take a look at three occurrences of Jesus saying no and see what we can learn.

I. No to the Sick? The scene is Capernaum. Jesus and his apostles have made quite an impression. Jesus has cured a demon-possessed man in the synagogue and word has spread. Jesus is lodging at the house of Simon Peter and has just cured Peter’s mother-in-law of a great fever. The Gospel of Mark picks up the story:

When it was evening, after sunset, they brought to him all who were ill or possessed by demons. The whole town was gathered at the door. He cured many who were sick with various diseases, and he drove out many demons, not permitting them to speak because they knew him. (Mark 1:34-35)

So, clearly the Lord is helping a lot of people here, as was his custom. The crowd seems to have grown quite large and goes on curing till sundown. But then comes a twist:

Rising very early before dawn, he left and went off to a deserted place, where he prayed. Simon and those who were with him pursued him and on finding him said, “Everyone is looking for you!” He told them, “Let us go on to the nearby villages that I may preach there also. For this purpose have I come.” (Mark 1:35-38)

Here we have what seems an unusual occurrence, Jesus is informed by Peter and the others that “Everyone is looking for you!” The exasperated statement implies that a line has once again formed in Capernaum of those seeking healing from various ailments. Many of the sick are waiting for his ministrations. But Jesus says, “No” to the request to return. He also indicates an intention to go to other villages so that he might preach, for THAT is what he has come to do.

Why does Jesus say no? For two reasons it would seem.

First, in terms of his humanity, he is limited. He has not come to save Capernaum only and must devote attention to other places as well. In effect he must allocate his (humanly speaking) “limited” resources justly and effectively. This is also the case with us. We must help the poor, but we must also feed our children, and meet other just obligations. Saying “No” is not necessarily un-Christlike, but is rather a humble admission of our limitedness.

A second reason Jesus likely says no is that he will not allow himself to be defined merely as a medical miracle worker. He has come to preach and ultimately to take up his cross. Part of what he preaches is the role of the cross in life. It is not always appropriate to alleviate every burden. To be labeled as “Mr Fix-it” is to be diminished. For the Lord did not come merely to heal the body, but also and even more so, the soul. Jesus’ “No” is therefore also a teaching moment.

We too who would imitate Christ should not think that alleviating burdens is our only mission. Sometimes it is more loving to let others carry the crosses God intends. We are not necessarily callous or un-Christlike in this if our intent is allow people to experience necessary growth or to experience the necessary consequences of their choices.

We must be careful not to easily excuse ourselves from our duties to help others but neither should we become enablers or those who cause others to become too dependent. We should not usually do for others what they can do for themselves.

The good should not eclipse the best – The Lord could not allow himself to be drawn into a situation where what was good about him (healings) eclipsed what was best (salvation and the preaching of the Kingdom). Hence, he said, “No.”

II. No on a matter of Social Justice?? On another occasion in the context of Jesus’ Sermon on the Plain a man called out from the crowd:

“Teacher, tell my brother to share the inheritance with me.” [But] Jesus replied, “Man, who appointed me a judge or an arbiter between you?” Then he said to them, “Watch out! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions. (Luke 12:13-15)

Here too we have a bit of an unexpected twist. We might almost expect Jesus to side with this man. After all isn’t sharing the family inheritance with potentially needy siblings a just and charitable thing to encourage and do? But Jesus says, “No” and then warns the man of greed.

Here too the no of Jesus seems to point to two issues: First, Jesus is not going to be roped into being a legal arbiter of worldly matters. He has come to preach the Kingdom and save us and will not be defined down into probating wills and settling inheritance law.  Another issue is that Jesus, who is able to see into the man’s heart, says no to rebuke the man’s greed.

And thus we are taught two things by Jesus’ “No.”

First, that we are not always obliged to solve every one’s problems. Sometimes people try inappropriately to draw us into what does not involve us. They may ask us to take sides in a family dispute or some community issue where it is not right for us to take sides. On other occasions we may be asked to resolve matters involving two adults who should reasonably be expected to work out their own differences. Supervisors, pastors, and other leaders often experience such inappropriate attempts to draw them into disputes or take sides. There are surely times when leaders have to help arbitrate matters, especially if they pertain to the specific matters over which they have authority. But there are also many occasions when requested help in such matters deserves a “no” and it is not un-Christlike to do so.

A second thing that we are taught here by Jesus’ “no” is that we are not always required to give people what they want. Although we are not gifted with Jesus’ ability to see into people’s heart and understand their motives fully, it remains true that we CAN sometimes see that “no” is the best answer in given circumstances. Perhaps we can see that what a person asks for is inappropriate or will cause harm to others. Perhaps it will offend against the common good or show favoritism. Perhaps the request involves an unwise use of resources or goes contrary to agreed upon goals and priorities. There may be any number of reasons we can and should say “no” and doing so is not necessarily un-Christlike. This may be so even if the one requesting insists that it is about what is just and fair. It may cause disappointment or even anger in others but that does not mean that we are necessarily doing anything wrong. Jesus did sometimes say, “No.”

III. No to the Hungry?? The final example brings us to the shores of the Sea of Galilee. Jesus had just multiplied the loaves and fishes and fed somewhere between 5000 and 20,000 people. News of this has spread and the word of free food is starting to draw a crowd. Further, some of the crowd was not dispersing. So Jesus draws apart to pray and sends the apostles to the other side of the lake where he promises to join them later. After walking on the water (!) to meet them in the boat they come to other shore. News that Jesus had headed in that direction reached some in the crowd who ran around the lake and as Jesus disembarks they greet him with false surprise: “Rabbi! When did you get here?!” Jesus was not born yesterday and he knows that they are seeking more free food so he says to them: I tell you the truth, you are looking for me, not because you saw miraculous signs but because you ate the loaves and had your fill. Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. (John 6:26-27).

In effect Jesus refuses to produce again the food of this world and summons them to faith. He goes on to teach extensively in the remainder of John 6 on the Holy Eucharist and insists that this was the food that was more necessary for them. They are unimpressed and reject his teaching as a “hard saying” (Jn 6:60). But in effect here to we have a “no” from Jesus.

Feeding the hungry is usually something commended, even commanded. But Jesus, in the end will not allow them to seek only that which is good (bread) and refuse what is best (the Bread of Life).

As a priest I have frequently had this problem with some of the poor who come to me. When they first come asking for financial assistance I give it whole heartedly and inquire as to their story. They almost always admit that they have no real church home (otherwise why would they be coming to me). I indicate to them that it is absolutely essential for their salvation that they come to Church and receive Holy Communion. If they are not a Catholic they should at least come and see if they are ready to accept the faith. But most of them do not follow up on this invitation and yet still come back seeking for money and resources. I begin then to place conditions upon the continued assistance, that, if they do not start coming or I cannot be sure they are attending somewhere, I will not continue to give worldly food to those who refuse heavenly food.

Some have argued that this is not what Jesus would do, but in fact this is exactly what he did. He said no to those who wanted only their bellies filled but not their heart. Of course in utter emergency and if little children are involved this approach may have to be adapted. Further, there ARE other places to get food and essentials in this country than one Catholic Parish. Perhaps I can refer an individual somewhere else.   But in the end, I have to summon people not merely to the good, but to the best. This is not un-Christlike.

The essential point then, is that it is not always wrong to say no. Jesus did so, even in some classic social justice and charity situations. We should never glibly say no or be unnecessarily hurtful. But there are just times when no is the best and most Christ-like answer.

Your additions, distinctions and rebuttals are encouraged and appreciated.

Image above is an ancient fresco

This song says, “Some of God’s greatest gifts are unanswered prayers” Actually they are answered, I suppose, and the answer is “No”

Posted on

On Two Gifts of Deeper Prayer: Silence and Spaciousness

One of the great spiritual battles and journeys is to get beyond, and outside our self. St. Augustine described one of the chief effects of sin was that man was curvatus in se (turned in on himself, i.e. turned inward). Forgetful of God we loose our way. Called to look outward and upward, to behold the Lord and his glory, instead we focus inward and downward, on things that are passing, noisy, troubling, and far less noble. No longer seeing our Father’s face and experiencing joyful confidence, we cower with fear, foolishly thinking things depend on us. Yes, we are turned inward, and I would add, downward. Scripture bids us, If then you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. (Col 3:1)

One of the graces of deeper prayer, if we persevere through the years, is that the Lord to turn us upward and outward. And, gradually our prayer turns more toward God and is less anxious about our own aches and pains. For now, it is enough to give them to God and trust his providence. Gradually, we simply prefer to experience the Lord quietly, in increasingly wordless contemplation. God draws us to a kind of silence in prayer as we advance along its ways. But that silence is more than an absence of sound, but instead results from us being turned more toward God. An old monastic tale from, I know not where, says:

Sometimes there would be a rush of noisy visitors and the silence of the monastery would be shattered. This would upset the disciples; but not the Abbot, who seemed just as content with the noise as with the silence. To his protesting disciples he said one day, “Silence is not the absence of sound, but the absence of self.”

Yes, as prayer deepens and becomes more contemplative the human person is turned more to God and a kind of holy silence becomes private prayer’s more common pattern. This does not mean nothing is happening, the soul has communion with God, but it is deeper than words or images. It is heart speaking to heart (cor ad cor loquitur). This is a deep communion with God that results from our being turned outward again to God. And the gift of silence comes from resting in God, from being less focused on ourselves, more and more on God: Let all mortal flesh keep silence, and with (holy) fear and trembling stand, ponder nothing earthly minded….. Yes, there is a time for intercessory prayer, but not now. Don’t just do something, stand there. Don’t rush to express, rest to experience. Be still, know that He is God. An old spiritual says, Hush….Somebody’s callin’ my name. Yes, pray for and desire holy silence, praying beyond words and images. Here are the beginnings of contemplative prayer.

Another gift that is given to those who are experiencing deeper prayer is a sense of spaciousness and openness. As the soul is less turned inward and increasingly turned outward, it makes sense that one would experience a kind of spaciousness. Those who have attained to deeper prayer often speak of this. Scripture does as well. Consider some of the following passages:

  1. For the Lord has brought me out to a wide-open place. He rescued me because he was pleased with me. (Ps 18:19)
  2. I called on the LORD in distress: the LORD answered me, and set me in a large place. (Ps 118:5)
  3. The Lord brought me out into a spacious place; he rescued me because he delighted in me. (2 Sam 22:20)
  4. You have not handed me over to the enemy but have set my feet in a spacious place. (Psalm 31:8)
  5. Hear me when I call, O God of my righteousness: you have enlarged me when I was in distress; have mercy on me, and hear my prayer (Ps 4:1)
  6. And I shall walk in a wide place, for I have sought your precepts. (Psalm 119:45)
  7. And he moved from there and dug another well, and they did not quarrel over it. So he called its name Rehoboth (which means latitude or width), saying, “For now the LORD has made room for us, and we shall be fruitful in the land.” (Gen 26:22)

Yes, as we are turned outward and upward to God we soon enough experience the spaciousness, and latitude of knowing God. No longer pressed and confined by the experience of being turned inward (curvatus in se), the soul has room to breathe. Many people who begin to experience contemplative prayer, though not able to reduce the experience to words, express an experience of the the spaciousness of God. But this spaciousness is more than a physical sense of space. It is a sense of openness, of lightness, of freedom from burden and from being pressed down, it is an experience of relief. But again, all who experience it agree, words cannot really express it well.

St. Paul speaks of the unspeakable quality of deep prayer as well, though his experience likely goes beyond what we call contemplative prayer:

I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know—God knows. And I know that this man—whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, but God knows— was caught up to paradise. He heard inexpressible things, things that man is not permitted to tell. (2 Cor 12:2-4)

Yes, it is “un-sayable,” words fail. St. Augustine was said to remark of the Christian mysteries: If you don’t ask me I know. If you ask me, I don’t know.

But here too is a gift of deepening prayer to be sought: spaciousness, and that openness that comes from being turned outward and upward by God. An old Spiritual says, My God is so high, you can’t get over him, He’s so low, you can’t get under him, he so wide, you can’t get round him. You must come IN, by and through the Lamb.

Two gifts of the deeper prayer we call contemplative prayer, prayer which moves beyond words and images, beyond the self to God Himself.

Posted on

On the Imprudence and Uncharitableness of Immodesty

The video below contains a  fascinating interview between Sean Hannity and two women on the question of immodest dress as a dangerous thing for a woman. It would seem that a Toronto police officer was quoted as saying, “Women can avoid rape by not dressing as sluts.” He said this in the context of a lecture to college students about a recent campus crime wave. He has since apologized, but some will not accept it, or do not think he was specific enough in his apology. His remarks have touched off worldwide protests in Europe and also in Boston and New York by women who engage in what they call “Slut Walks.” In these, they dress provocatively and carry signs that denounce the blame the victim attitude of the police officer and others who explain rape by blaming the victim.

OK, so lets all admit that there is nothing that justifies the rape or assault of any woman. Further, the officer did not need to speak of women as “dressing like sluts.” It is possible to counsel caution without resorting to such terminology.

But the reaction has gone to the other extreme by insisting that there ought to be no thought women should give as to the way they dress, and the effect it may have on others. You will see in the interview how one of the women Mr. Hannity interviews gets more and more extreme as the interview progresses. She begins saying “Just because a woman dresses provocatively does not mean she welcomes an abuser.” OK, fair enough. And even if she is attacked, there is no justification for it. But that said, is there no legitimacy in advising women to refrain from provocative dressing? Men too, for that matter, though the physical dangers to them are far less. Further, is it legitimate to talk to women in our life about ways to reduce their risk without being called sexist, and told that we are blaming the victim?

A Central Problem – One of the women says, “In dressing provocatively a woman is saying, I am asking you to look at me as a sexual object, instead of a woman worthy of respect.” The other woman responds, “There is nothing wrong with looking like a sexual object.” And this pretty well spells out where many in our culture have gone. Intentionally provoking a purely sexual response not only tempts men, it also diminishes women by encouraging the notion that sex is the main thing.

There is surely a time to provoke and celebrate a sexual appeal and joy…, in the marriage bed. But outside this context, women ought to be seen more richly as wives, mothers, sisters, daughters, teachers, scientists, indeed, whole persons with interests, needs, concerns, and richly varied lives. That many women are advocating a hypersexualized notion of who they are by taking “slut walks” (the protestors’ term not mine) is a sad commentary. It is one thing to protest the “blame the victim” remark, but calling it a slut walk is to go further and advocate immodest dress and raw, unintegrated sexuality. That is not helpful to women and I suspect most women do not appreciate this sort of “advocacy,” or the extreme comments rendered by one of the women in this interview below.

Some younger women really don’t seem to know – That said, I have come to discover, through discussions with women on the issue of modesty that many (especially younger) women really don’t have any idea the effect that they have on men. I have confirmed this in discussion among our teenage Sunday school kids. In discussions moderated by women, many young girls just haven’t figured it all out yet. When asked, “Why do you dress that (provocative) way?”  they often say, “I don’t know, it’s……like……y’know…..comfortable???…..It’s like…….cool??”

While some of them may be fibbing, and they really do know, I don’t doubt that, to some degree, there is an innocence about what they do that needs to be schooled. Some years ago I remember a remarkable little passage by John Eldridge, in the Book, Wild at Heart that decoded something I have noticed even in the youngest girls:

And finally, every woman wants to have a beauty to unveil. Not to conjure, but to unveil. Most women feel the pressure to be beautiful from very young, but that is not what I speak of. There is also a deep desire to simply and truly be the beauty, and be delighted in. Most little girls will remember playing dress up, or wedding day, or twirling skirts, those flowing dresses that were perfect for spinning around in. She’ll put her pretty dress on, come into the living room and twirl. What she longs for is to capture her daddy’s delight. My wife remembers standing on top of the coffee table as a girl of five or six, and singing her heart out. Do you see me? asks the heart of every girl. And are you captivated by what you see? (Kindle edition Loc 367-83)

Perhaps it is this innocence that has gone somehow wrong, has been untutored, and thus, causes some younger girls to dress immodestly. And many of them bring that into adulthood.

But even if their intentions are innocent, it is not wrong to teach them that not everyone views their display so innocently, and further than some are deeply troubled by the temptation it brings, especially as these girls get a bit older and more vivacious.

So where to go? From the Christian point of view modesty is reverence for mystery. Modesty accepts the norm that there are some things that are simply private and meant for the intimacy of marriage that are not to be disclosed in a general sort of way. Further, modesty respects the fact it is wrong to unnecessarily tempt others. And many do easily fall prey to sexual temptation. To simply disregard this and say, “Well that is their problem,” may well be to lack both charity and a realistic attitude.

That said, the word unnecessarily is important in the phrase, “it is wrong to unnecessarily tempt others.” For it is not always possible to protect others from all temptation, and we ought not impose unreasonable standards and expectations upon women. Some men are tempted just by a pretty face. That doesn’t mean we ought to expect women to hide their faces. It also pertains to women to have curves that appeal to men,  and to expect them to never manifest any curves at all, also seems unreasonable.

Hence the word modesty comes from the word “mode” meaning “middle” or “mean.” So modesty involves observing a certain middle ground wherein we do not oppress women (or men for that matter) with severe standards and cumbersome cover-ups. But neither do we neglect to understand that some degree of charity and understanding is due to those who are possibly tempted by tight or revealing clothing and immodest postures or movements. It is wrong to tempt others when we can reasonably avoid doing so. But inhuman and unreasonable standards are also to be rejected.

The bottom line is that immodest and provocative dress is both imprudent and uncharitable. The officer involved used inappropriate language to convey his “advice.” But to advise women appropriately how to reduce their risk of rape does not ipso facto equate to blaming the victim. A little equanimity in the issue is helpful, though sadly rare, in our easily offended and strongly polarized culture.

I have written more on the questions of modesty here:

  1. Modesty is Reverence for Mystery
  2. Modesty and Men
  3. A School Finally Cracks Down

As always I am interested in your thoughts.

Posted on

Books are Wonderful Things, But Not in the Liturgy

One of the oldest things I own is a book. It is a printed copy of Milton’s Paradise Lost from 1678. 333 years old! Older even than this country. It was printed only 11 years after Milton first published it. It’s still in good condition too. Printed in London in 1678 and somehow, by miracle, on my shelf in Washington DC after all these years. I often pick it up with reverence and read passages, wondering how many other eyes, eyes of men and women long gone, have passed over the very same text, it lighting up their mind as it does mine now. How many hands held it? On what shelves did it rest? Did George Washington or Ben Franklin ever hold it? Who is to say?

Ah yes, the book. A wonderful thing. Yet some are predicting the death of the book as we know it. Recently an article appeared on this topic at the Los Angeles Review of Books, by Ben Ehrenreich. Just a brief excerpt here:

Last I checked, Googling “death of the book” produced 11.8 million matches. The day before it was 11.6 million. It’s getting unseemly. Books were once such handsome things. Suddenly they seem clunky, heavy, almost fleshy in their gross materiality…..

Last summer Amazon announced that it was selling more e-books than the paper kind. The time to fret had passed. It was Kindle vs. kindling. MIT Media Lab co-founder Nicholas Negroponte—whose name is frequently preceded by the word “futurist”—declared that the demise of the paper book should be written in the present tense. ”It’s happening,” Negroponte said, and gave the pulpy artifacts just five years to utterly expire.

All of our words for book refer, at root, to forms no longer recognizable as such: biblos being the Greek word for the pith of the papyrus stalk (on which texts in the Greco-Roman world were inscribed); libri being Latin for the inner bark of a tree, just as the Old English bóc and Old Norse bók referred to the beech tree. Likewise “tome” is from a Greek word for a cutting (of papyrus) and “volume” is from the Latin for a rolled-up thing—a scroll, which is the form most texts took until they were replaced by folded parchment codices. … The printed, paper book, as we know it, dates only to the mid-fifteenth century, but those early Gutenberg exemplars were hardly something you’d curl up with on a rainy Sunday afternoon. The book as an affordable object of mass production—as something directly kin to the books that line our shelves—was not born until the 19th century, just in time for the early announcements of its death. [1]

But I refuse to accept the predicted death of the Book. I like my Kindle, and there are some things I prefer to read in that format. I can also travel lighter. But in the end it doesn’t beat the book for quick sequential access and beauty. I don’t care what they say, moving back and forth through a text quickly just isn’t that simple on an electronic reader. Lots of clunky keystrokes and guesswork is still required. True, one can search the text and copy and paste text with ease, but quickly flipping through an electronic book is not an easy thing.

Books are also in their special glory when it comes to combining art and illustrations with text. I just bought Dennis McNarama’s Catholic Church Architecture and the Spirit of the Liturgy and the splendidly illustrated and colorful book just doesn’t work on a Kindle or other portable reader.  You just have to get the hard copy, it’s magnificent in the way it brings art and word together. Yes, the trusty book, and I love being able to dog-ear a page!

Yes, I think books will be with us for a while yet, but more an more they will need to do what books do best: present not only word, but picture, illustration, and quick access to the text.

So, I like books!

But, paradoxically, when it comes to books in the liturgy, I say, “Away with them!“ Clearly the clergy need the sacramentary and the lectors, the lectionary. Musicians too most often need some printed reference materials. But in the end, the faithful, if you ask me, should strive to worship without books, other than a hymnal. The liturgy is meant to be seen and heard. Some claim they cannot follow without the books and “worship-aids.” But I suspect the problem, then, is poorly presented liturgy, poorly trained lectors and clergy, if you will. The goal is to go “hands-free”and to allow the liturgy to unfold. Incessant references to texts and the “order of service” steal away some of the mystery, and cause us to look down at texts, rather than up and outward at the liturgy before us.

I once had a Protestant visitor who expressed concern that we did not announce chapter and verse when we proclaimed the Scripture. For her, the Bible was the physical book she carried. I explained that the Catholic tradition stretched back long before books were affordable and literacy was presupposed. In the Catholic Tradition the Word of God is what is proclaimed, more than what is printed. Even today, in many parts of the Catholic world, literacy is low. So the Church proclaims God’s Word, in the Liturgy, but also in the stone carvings, stained glass, music and the art of the Church. The Word is proclaimed and heard more than being thought of as a printed page. Yes, the liturgy is older than newsprint missalettes and widespread literacy.

Protestantism, on the the other hand emerged at the time just after the invention of the printing press and grew up with the rise of literacy in the West. The Bible, as a printed book, thus came to the fore and their liturgy turned more from a sacrifice to a kind of Bible Study. Chapter and verse (a Catholic invention, by the way) became more central when the Book is the main point. Now, I love Bible Study and the Protestant tradition has made quite an art of the preached word. This is commendable and worth imitating, but the often single focus on the printed book can short-change worship and certainly sacrifice.

Liturgically the Word is to be proclaimed, explicated and celebrated largely as a listening event. Then, the Word must become Flesh in the Eucharist. And as Christ, our Word, becomes flesh for us.  And as we receive that flesh, He becomes one with us, and enables us to live his Word. All of this is so much more than a printed page or a physical book. The proclaimed Word is experienced and transforms us and we receive its power not only through the spoken Word but also the Sacrament of the Word made flesh.

I realize that, whenever I suggest going largely “book-less” in the Mass I often get push-back. I understand the controversy I create, and also the laments over poor acoustics, lectors and clergy.  But what do you think of the goal? Books are wonderful things, but I wonder if the pew is the place for them? As we go to the new translation, some cards and printed material may need to make a brief reappearance.  But in the end, a good listening ear, hearts open to obedience, and eyes in search of glory (rather than the right page) are the greatest “worship aids.”

How say you?

Here’s an old classic video on the invention of the book.

Posted on

On Proclaiming the "Whole Counsel of God" A Word to Priests and Parents from St Paul.

I am preparing some notes for a Retreat for Priests that I will be preaching this summer. And one of the Key texts I will be using is Paul’s farewell speech to the presbyters (priests) of the early Church. Here is a skilled bishop and pastor, exhorting others who have pastoral roles in the Church. Lets take a look at this text and apply its wisdom to Bishops and priests as well as to parents and other leaders in the Church.

Paul’s Farewell Sermon – The scene is Miletus, a town in Asia Minor on the coast not far from Ephesus. Paul, who is about to depart for Jerusalem summons the presbyters (priests) of the early Church at Ephesus. Paul has ministered there for three years, and now summons the priests for this final exhortation. In the sermon, St. Paul cites his own example of having been a zealous teacher of the faith who did not fail to preach the “whole counsel of God.” He did not merely preach what suited him or made him popular. He preached it all. To these early priests Paul leaves this legacy and would have them follow in his footsteps. Let’s look at excerpts from this final exhortation. First the text them some commentary:

From Miletus Paul had the presbyters of the Church at Ephesus summoned. When they came to him, he addressed them, “You know how I lived among you the whole time from the day I first came to the province of Asia. I served the Lord with all humility and with the tears and trials that came to me…., and I did not at all shrink from telling you what was for your benefit, or from teaching you in public or in your homes. I earnestly bore witness for both Jews and Greeks to repentance before God and to faith in our Lord Jesus…..But now, compelled by the Spirit, I am going to Jerusalem……“But now I know that none of you to whom I preached the kingdom during my travels will ever see my face again. And so I solemnly declare to you this day that I am not responsible for the blood of any of you, for I did not shrink from proclaiming to you the entire plan of God….. (Acts 20:1-38 selected)

Here then is the prescription for every Bishop, every priest and deacon, every catechist, parent and Catholic: that we should preach the whole counsel (the entire plan of God). It is too easy for us to emphasize only that which pleases us or makes sense to us or fits in our worldview. There are some who love the Lord’s sermons on love, but cannot abide his teachings on death, judgment, heaven and hell. Some love to discuss liturgy and ceremony, but the care of the poor is far from them. Others point to His compassion, but neglect his call to repentance. Some love the way he dispatches the Pharisees and other leaders of the day, but become suddenly deaf when the Lord warns against fornication or insists that we love our neighbor, enemy and spouse. Some love to focus inwardly and debate over doctrine, but the outward focus of true evangelization to which we are commanded (cf Mat 28:19) is neglected.

In the Church today, as a whole, we too easily divide out rather predictably along certain lines and emphases: Life issues here, social justice over there; strong moral preaching over here, compassionate inclusiveness over there. When one side speaks, the other side says, “There they go again!”

And yet somewhere we must be able to say with St. Paul that we did not shrink from proclaiming the whole counsel of God. While this is especially incumbent on the clergy, it must also be true for parents and all who attain to any leadership in the Church. All of the issues above are important and must have their proper place in the preaching and witness of every Catholic, clergy and lay. While we may have gifts to work in certain areas, we should learn to appreciate the whole counsel and the fact that others in the Church may be needed to balance and complete our work. It is true, we must exclude notions that stray from revealed doctrine, but within doctrine’s protective walls, it is necessary that we not shrink from proclaiming and appreciating the whole counsel of God.

And if we do this we will suffer. Paul speaks above of tears and trials. In preaching the whole counsel of God, (not just your favorite passages and politically correct and “safe” themes), expect to suffer. Expect to not quite fit in with people’s expectations. Jesus got into trouble with just about everyone. He didn’t just offend the elite and powerful. Even his own disciples puzzled over his teachings on divorce saying “If that is the case of man not being able to divorce his wife it is better never to marry!” (Matt 19). Regarding the Eucharist, many left him and would no longer walk in his company (John 6). In speaking of his divine origins many took up stones to stone him, but he passed through their midst (Jn 8). In addition he spoke of taking up crosses, forgiving your enemy and preferring nothing to him. He forbade even lustful thoughts, let alone fornication, and insisted we must learn to curb our unrighteous anger. Preaching the whole counsel of God is guaranteed to earn us the wrath of many.

As a priest I have sadly had to bid farewell to congregations, and this farewell speech of Paul is a critical passage whereby I examine my ministry. Did I preach even the difficult stuff? Was I willing to suffer for the truth? Did my people hear from me the whole counsel of God, or just the safe stuff?

How about you? Have you proclaimed the whole counsel of God? If you are clergy when you move on…..if you are a parent when your child leaves for college…..if you are a Catechist when the children are ready to be confirmed or have reached college age…..If you teach in RCIA and the time comes for sacraments……Can you say you preached it all? God warned Ezekiel that if he failed to warn the sinner, that sinner would surely die for his sins but that Ezekiel himself would be responsible for his death, (Ez 3:17 ff). Paul is able to say he is not responsible for the death (the blood) of any of them for he did not shrink from proclaiming the whole counsel of God. How about us?

The whole counsel of God; not just the safe stuff, the popular stuff, not just the stuff that agrees with my politics and those of my friends. The whole counsel, even the difficult stuff, the ridiculed things. The Whole Counsel of God.

This video contains the warning to the watchmen (us) in Ezekiel 3. Watch it if you dare.

Posted on

Taste and See the Goodness of the Lord – A Meditation on the Gospel for the Third Sunday of Easter

In today’s gospel we encounter two discouraged and broken men making their way to Emmaus. The text described them as “downcast.” That is to say, their eyes are cast to the ground, their heads are hung low. Their Lord and Messiah has been killed; the one they had thought would finally liberate Israel. Yes, it is true, some women had claimed he was alive, but these disciples have discredited the reports and are now leaving Jerusalem. It is late in the afternoon. The sun is sinking low.

The men cannot see or understand God’s plan. They cannot “see” that he must be alive, just as they were told. They are quite blind as to the glorious things that have already happened, hours before. Their eyes are cast downward. And, in this, they are much like us, who also struggle to see and understand that we have already won the victory. Too easily we are downcast, our eyes cast downward in depression rather than upward in faith.

And how will the Lord give them (and us) vision? How will he enable them to see his risen glory?  How will he encourage them to look up from their downcast focus and behold new life?

In effect, if you are prepared to “see” it, the Lord will celebrate Holy Mass with them. In the context of a sacred meal we call the Mass, he will open their eyes, and they will recognize him, they will see glory and new life.

Note that the whole gospel, not just the last part, is in the form of a Mass. There is a gathering, a penitential rite, a Liturgy of the Word, Intercessory prayers, a Liturgy of the Eucharist, and an Ite Missa est. And, in this manner of a whole Mass, they have their eyes opened to Him and to glory. They will fulfill the psalm which says: Taste, and see, the goodness of the Lord (Psalm 34:8).

Lets look at this Mass, which opens their eyes, and ponder how we too taste and see in every Mass.

Stage One: Gathering Rite – The Curtain rises on this Mass with two disciples having gathered together on a journey: Now that very day two of them were going to a village seven miles from Jerusalem called Emmaus (Lk 24:13). We have already discussed above that they were in the midst of a serious struggle and are downcast. We only know one of them by name, Cleopas. Who is the other? If you are prepared to accept it, the other is you. So they (this means you, this means me) have gathered. This is what we do as the preliminary act of every Mass. We who are pilgrims on a journey come together on our journey.

It so happens for these two disciples that Jesus joins them: And it happened that while they were conversing and debating, Jesus himself drew near and walked with them (Luke 24:15). The text goes on to inform us that they did not recognize Jesus yet.

The Lord walks with us too – Now for us who gather at Mass it is essential to acknowledge by faith that when we gather together, the Lord Jesus is with us. For Scripture says, For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them (Matt 18:20). It is a true fact that for many of us too, Jesus, though present, is unrecognized! Yet he is no less among us than he was present to these two disciples who fail to recognize him.

Liturgically we acknowledge the presence of the Lord at the beginning of the Mass in two ways. First, as the priest processes down the aisle the congregation sings a hymn of praise. It is not “Fr. Jones” they praise, it is Jesus, whom “Fr. Jones” represents, that they praise. Once at the Chair the celebrant (who is really Christ) says, “The Lord be with you.” And thereby he announces the presence of Christ among us promised by the Scriptures.

The Mass has begun, our two disciples are gathered and the Lord is with them. So too for us at every Mass. The two disciples still struggle to see the Lord, struggle to experience new life and that the victory has already been one. And so too some of us who gather for Mass. But simply the fact that these disciples (us) are gathered is already the beginning of the solution. Mass has begun, help is on the way!

Stage Two: Penitential Rite – The two disciples seem troubled and the Lord inquires of them the source of their distress: What are you discussing as you walk along? (Lk 24:17) In effect the Lord invites them to speak with him about what is troubling them. It may also be a gentle rebuke from the Lord that the two of them are walking away from Jerusalem, away from the site of the resurrection.

Clearly their sorrow and distress are governing their behavior. Even though they have already heard evidence of his resurrection (cf 24:22-24), they seem hopeless and have turned away from this good news. As we have well noted, the text describes them as “downcast” (24:17).

Thus the Lord engages them is a kind of gentle penitential rite and  wants to engage them on their negativity.

So too for us at Mass. The penitential rite is a moment when the celebrant (who is really Christ) invites us to lay down our burdens and sins before the Lord who alone can heal us. For, we too, often enter the presence of God looking downcast and carrying many burdens and sins. We too, like these disciples may be walking in wrongful directions. And so the Lord says to us, in effect, “What are thinking about and doing as you walk along? Where are you going with your life?

The Lord asks them, and us, to articulate our struggles. This calling to mind of our struggles for them and us in the penitential rite, is a first step to healing and recovery of sight.

And thus again, we see in this story about two disciples on the road to Emmaus, the Mass that is so familiar to us.

Stage Three: Liturgy of the Word – In response to their concerns and struggles the Lord breaks open the Word of God, the Scriptures. The text says: Then beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them what referred to him in all the scriptures (Luke 24:27).

Notice, not only does the Lord refer to Scripture, but he interprets it for them. Hence the Word is not only read, there is also a homily, an explanation and application of the Scripture to the struggles these men have. The homily must have been a good one too, for later, the disciples remark: Were not our hearts burning (within us) while he spoke to us on the way and opened the scriptures to us? (Luke 24:32)

And so too for us at Mass. Whatever struggles we may have brought to the Mass, the Lord bids us to listen to his Word as the Scriptures are proclaimed. Then the homilist (who is really Christ) interprets and applies the Word to our life. It is a true fact that the Lord works through a weak human agent, (the priest or deacon), but God can write straight with crooked lines. As long as the homilist is orthodox, it is Christ who speaks. Pray for your homilist to be an obedient and useful instrument for Christ at the homily moment.

Notice too, though they do not fully yet see, their downcast attitude has been abated. Their hearts are now on fire. Pray God, too, for us who come to Mass Sunday after Sunday and hear from God how victory is already ours in Christ Jesus. God reminds us, through successive Sundays and passages which repeat every three years,  that though the cross is part of our life, the resurrection surely is too. And we are carrying our crosses to an eternal Easter victory. If we are faithful to listening to God’s Word, hope and joy build within our hearts and we come, through being transformed by Christ in the Liturgy to be men and women of hope and confidence.

Stage Four: Intercessory Prayers – After the homily we usually make prayers and requests of Christ. We do this based on the hope that his Word provides us that he lives, he loves us and he is able. And so it is that we also see these two disciples request of Christ: Stay with us, for it is nearly evening and the day is almost over. (Luke 24:29)

Is this not what we also say in so many words: “Stay with us Lord, for it is sometimes dark in our lives and the shadows are growing long. Stay with us Lord and those we love so that we will not be alone in the dark. In our darkest hours, be to us a light O Lord that never fades away.”

And indeed, it is already getting brighter for we are already more than halfway through the Mass!

Stage Five: Liturgy of the Eucharist – Christ does stay with them and then come the lines that no Catholic could miss: And it happened that, while he was with them at table, he took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them (Luke 24:30). Yes, the Mass to be sure. All the basic action of the Eucharist are there: he took, blessed, broke and gave. It is the same action as at the Last Supper and the same action in every Mass. Later, the two disciples will refer back to this moment as the breaking of the bread (Luke 24:35), a clear Biblical reference to the Holy Eucharist.

And so, the words of Mass come immediately to mind: “While they were at supper He took the bread, and gave you thanks and praise. He broke the bread, gave it to his disciples and said, take this all of you and eat it: this is my Body which will be given up for you.”

A fascinating thing happens though: With that their eyes were opened and they recognized him, but he vanished from their sight (Luke 24:31).

Note that it is the very act of consecration that opens their eyes. Is this not what Holy Communion is to do for us? Are we not to learn to recognize Christ by the very mysteries we celebrate? Are we not to Taste and See?

The liturgy and the sacraments are not mere rituals, they are encounters with Jesus Christ, and though our repeated celebration of the holy mysteries our eyes are increasingly opened if we are faithful. We learn to see and hear Christ in the liturgy, to experience his ministry to us.

The fact that he vanishes from their sight teaches us that he is no longer seen by the eyes of the flesh, but by the eyes of faith, and the eyes of the heart. So though he is gone from our earthly, fleshly, carnal sight, he is now to be seen in the Sacrament of the Altar, and experienced in the Liturgy and other Sacraments. The Mass has reached it’s pinnacle, for these two disciples and for us;  for they have tasted and now they see.

Consider these two men (and us) who began this gospel quite downcast. Now their hearts are on fire and they see. The Lord has celebrated Mass to get them to this point. And so too for us, the Lord celebrates Mass to set our hearts on fire and open our eyes to glory. We need to taste in order to see. Consider a fuller number of verses from that psalm (34):

I sought the Lord, and he answered me; he delivered me from all my fears. Those who look to him are radiant; their faces are never covered with shame. This poor man called, and the Lord heard him; he saved him out of all his troubles. …Taste and see that the Lord is good; blessed is the man who takes refuge in him (Psalm 34:4-8).

Yes, blessed are we if we faithfully taste in order to see, every Sunday at Mass.

Stage six: Ite Missa est – Not able to contain their joy or hide their experience the two disciples run seven miles back to Jerusalem to tell their brethren what had happened and how they encountered Jesus in the breaking of the bread. They want to, they have to,  speak of the Christ they have encountered, what he said and what he did.

How about us? At the end of every Mass the priest or deacon says “The Mass is ended, go in peace.” This does NOT mean, “OK, we’re done here, go on home, and haver nice day.” What it DOES mean is: “Go now into the world and bring the Christ you have received to others. Tell them what you have heard and seen here, what you have experienced. Share the joy and hope that this Liturgy gives with others.”

Perhaps you can see the word MISSion in the word disMISSal? You are being commissioned, sent on a mission to announce Christ to others.

The Lucan text we are reviewing says of these two disciples: So they set out at once and returned to Jerusalem where they found gathered together the eleven and those with them…..Then the two recounted what had taken place on the way and how he was made known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:33,35). How about us. Does our Mass finish as well, as enthusiastically?  Can you tell others that you have come to Christ in “the breaking of the bread,” in the Mass?

So Jesus has used the Mass to drawn them from gloom to glory, from being downcast to delighted,  from darkness to light. It was the Mass, do you “see” it there. It is the Mass. What else could it be?

Picture Credit: Bobosh_t via Creative Commons

Posted on

Cultural Misandry? – A Minor Rant on The "Men are Stupid" Commericals.

OK, you know the typical drill of a TV commercial: As the scene opens, some buffoon of a man, usually a husband, is struggling to have a clue as to what something is all about. Sure enough, an all-knowing woman (usually the wife), rolling her eyes and shaking her head in pity, is there to help the stupid buffoon of a man not utterly ruin everything. And of course the product  being peddled is usually part of the solution.  And, by the way, did I mention that the man is stupid? In an alternate version, it is the children who are all-wise, and they help the idiot father figure things out as they step in with the product. And of course we’re all supposed to laugh: “Ha, Ha, Ha look at that stupid guy. What an idiot!”

Obviously these ads are not trying to sell anything to me. I am far more prone to refuse to buy any product that says, “Hey, buy our product you buffoon.” Perhaps they are targeted to women? Even worse, to children?

OK, now remember this is a “rant.” And a rant is “to talk in a noisy, excited, or declamatory manner.” I don’t lack any sense of humor, and can laugh at myself and the male sex from time to time. But, after a while, these ads are wearying, and their frequency does indicate to me something that is fundamentally unhealthy in our culture.

The greatest harm, I think, comes to children who see men, and especially fathers, presented as idiots, crude, foolish, lustful and just plain stupid. A steady diet of this served up in commercials does not help them respect their elders, especially their fathers, and other male authority figures.

Neither does it really help women. The “men are idiots” thinking may have a certain “charm” or humor angle, (i.e., it’s interesting at times to poke fun at the differences between men and women), but in the end, it isn’t a good attitude to cultivate. Women do owe men respect, just as a fellow human beings. And, for those who accept Scripture, a husband is at the head of the house. Ridicule and caricature, are not helpful dispositions in cultivating family love and unity.

Neither do these ads help men. It is always best for men to see their best qualities exemplified. Instead what they get is a portrait that men are not only stupid, they are lazy, unfaithful, lustful, inappropriate, addicted to beer, lousy fathers, unkempt, inattentive to their wife and kids due to sports, and did I mention, stupid? How does a steady diet of this help men?

Some argue that these ads, of reflect culture. Really? Are all men like this? They may reflect culture in the sense that male characteristics are often on the outs and that it is politically correct to caricature men. Try reversing the roles and put the woman in the role of buffoon and see how that would fly.

But not only do the ads reflect culture, they help shape it. Again I ask, how does all this negativity help men and boys to understand what is good about them? There are very few healthy male portraits in current culture. It is not only the buffoonery of the ads, it is the extremely violent and hyper-sexualized  “heroes” of the movies, idiosyncratic actors, freakish rock and rap stars, often immoral or out of control sports figures, effeminate, and weak sitcom “dads,”  and the thuggish, criminal and unfaithful men of series such as Sopranos.  None of this helps young men toward grasping their better nature and becoming good, responsible husbands and fathers.

So there is my rant. Below are a number of videos that portray the “men are idiots” commercials. As always, I am interested in your thoughts.

Posted on

Vocations in the Wake of Scandal – "I am Part of the Solution, not the Problem."

At the Bottom of this post is an encouraging excerpt taken from a video, The Catholic Priest Today, produced by the Cresta Group.  In it we are reminded once again of the resiliency of the Church, and that the Holy Spirit can make a way out of no way.

From a worldly perspective one would expect vocations to the priesthood to take a real hit in the wake of the sexual abuse scandal. Yet in many, if not most dioceses, vocations are up, or at least steady. One of the seminarians in the film clip says, “I want to get close to our Lord, I want to pray, I want to help other people get close to Christ and I’m not going to let the scandal that’s been perpetrated by an another generation worry me, I’m part of the solution, I’m not a part of the problem.” Well, said.

Here in Washington our vocations are strong. Many fine men are coming to us to discern a vocation to the priesthood. We are opening a pre-theologate house of formation, since our numbers are strong and we expect them to continue to be so, even to grow. God the Holy Spirit is up to something good. Some of our men come to us straight from college, others have had a career path of some years.

I have remarked before how pleased I am with the caliber of the seminarians I meet. They love the Church, have a strong and manly devotion to our Lord and our Lady, and deeply desire to preach the Gospel with courage and without compromise. They are committed to and well immersed in the teachings of the Church and seem keenly aware of the cultural obstacles that must be addressed. Many of them too, have experienced first hand the necessity of speaking the faith with clarity to a world that increasingly finds belief in God untenable.

I have also seen a wonderful turnaround in our seminaries. I have shared before how problematic things were when I was studying back in the early 1980s. But here too, great reform has been effected, stemming largely from the Vatican Visitations conducted some years ago. But reform has also come, quite frankly, from the students themselves and from the ranks of newer teachers who have entered the system. There is an increasing thirst and insistence on solid, authentic Catholic teaching, and sound liturgical practice.

Yes, God is raising up, a whole new generation of priests. He is purifying, and invigorating a whole new generation of priests. I am mindful of the 132nd Psalm which says of Israel and the Church:

I will clothe her priests with salvation and her faithful shall ring out their joy. There David’s stock will flower; I will prepare a lamp for my anointed. I will cover his enemies with shame but on him my crown shall shine. (Psalm 132:15-17)

Truly our enemy, Satan, has sought to rejoice over a destruction of the priesthood. But it would seem God has other plans!

All this said, continue to pray. Remember that Satan hates priests in a particular way. For if the shepherd is struck, the sheep are more easily scattered. Priests, indeed the whole priesthood, is under consistent attack by Satan. Surround your priests with prayer. Ask the Lord to put a hedge of protection around them.

When I was first ordained, my mother looked at me with concern and said, “Satan wants you, to destroy you. But I am praying for you. And when you feel tempted, remember, I am praying for you.” She most concerned about the effect that the young ladies would have over me. I recall feeling a little embarrassed by what she said, and I replied, “Aw mom, don’t worry about me, I’m not even all that handsome.” But I could tell she was serious and she said again, “Remember.” And praise God, I have always felt the protection of those prayers and been faithfully celibate. And though I am far from sinless in other areas, I have never felt any crisis related to my vocation.  Even now that she is gone on to God, I know those prayers continue and I feel their effects.

I know and experience too the prayers of my parishioners. Every morning some of faithful women in the parish do a morning conference call and pray together.  And they tell me that they pray for me every morning. Yes, I am the result of prayer. And I ask of God that I too will always be part of the solution, not the problem in the priesthood.

So even as we give thanks to the Lord for the way he is raising up new and faithful vocations to the priesthood and religious life, remember to pray. Satan cannot be happy, he’s taken his best shot at the priesthood and here we still are. But pray! He’s surely not done, and every priest you know is under special attack. So pray, and to quote my mother, “Remember!”

Photo Above: Me in my seminary days, being designated acolyte. My mother is in the (blurry) background looking on, next to my father.

This video clip is taken from The Catholic Priest Today, sponsored by the Midwest Theological Forum,  and produced by the Cresta Group. For more Visit Here.