Category: Moral Life

Posted on

What’s mine, is God’s. And What’s Yours is God’s. A presentation on the 7th Commandment

Some one stole my iPhone today, so I thought, maybe it would be good to post on the the 7th Commandment: You shall not steal!

At first glance this commandment seems pretty simple and straight-forward: “Don’t take anything that doesn’t belong to you without permission.” True enough, the seventh commandment does call us to respect the rights of others in regard to their personal property. This understanding alone, however, is incomplete.

The seventh commandment has very far reaching implications by calling upon everyone to act with justice in regards to the goods of this world. For example, take note of the following quote from the Catechism of the Catholic Church and see how wide ranging the sins against the seventh Commandment are:

The seventh commandment forbids theft, that is, [unjustly taking or keeping] another’s property against the reasonable will of the owner…deliberate retention of goods lent or of objects lost; business fraud; paying unjust wages; forcing up prices by taking advantage of the ignorance or hardship of another… appropriation and use for private purposes of the common goods of an enterprise; work poorly done; tax evasion; forgery of checks and invoices; excessive expenses and waste. Willfully damaging private or public property is also contrary to the moral law and requires reparation. (Catechism 2408-2409)

And, while the seventh commandment clearly involves questions of the rights to personal property, it has extensive social justice implications as well, since the unjust distribution of goods amounts to a form of theft. In order to understand the social justice implications of this commandment it is necessary to consider some principles regarding creation and our stewardship of it. Then we go on to principles regrading the respect for the goods of others.

I. The universal destination of goods – This principle of the universal destination of goods is described by the Catechism in the following way:

This means that the goods of creation are destined for the whole human race…In his use of things man should regard the external goods he legitimately owns not merely as exclusive to himself but common to others also, in the sense that they can benefit others as well as himself. The ownership of any property makes its holder a steward of Providence, with the task of making it fruitful and communicating its benefits to others, first of all his family. (Catechism 2402, 2404).

Stewards – God who is the giver of every good gift, generously gives us the whole of creation. But we are the stewards, not the owners of creation. A steward is expected manage the properties under his care according to the true owner’s instructions and manifest wishes. In countless passages of the Old Testament as well as the New, God commands a generous stewardship of his creation. We are not to hoard things or be selfish. We are to share the goods we have received with others. This is particularly true for those who have strong influence in the economy or who have received special business-related skills:

Goods of production – material or immaterial – such as land, factories, practical or artistic skills, oblige their possessors to employ them in ways that will benefit the greatest number. (Catechism 2405)

Reiteration – Thus the catechism while acknowledging the right to private property justly acquired, nevertheless emphasizes that such property rights must be understood in the light of the universality of God’s gifts to the whole of mankind:

The right to private property, acquired by work or received from others by inheritance or gift, does not do away with the original gift of the earth to the whole of mankind. (Catechism 2403).

II. The principle of moderation – A second principle in the possession and use of goods is moderation. Greed is the insatiable desire for more and it leads some to hoard the goods of this earth or to squander them for selfish purposes. The Catechism teaches that:  those who hold goods for use and consumption should use them with moderation, reserving the better part for guests, for the sick and the poor. (Catechism 2405).

Greed not only leads to an unjust distribution of goods, it also frequently leads to harmful effects through pollution and to the dissipation of resources. In addition, moderation is not only a virtue for the present time, it also regards the future.

The seventh commandment enjoins respect for the integrity of creation. Animals, like plants and inanimate beings, are by nature destined for the common good of past, present, and future humanity.[cf Gen 1:28-31] Use of the mineral, vegetable, and animal resources of the universe cannot be divorced from respect for moral imperatives. Man’s dominion over inanimate and other living beings granted by the Creator is not absolute; it is limited by concern for the quality of life of his neighbor, including generations to come; it requires a religious respect for the integrity of creation. (Catechism 2415)

III. Injustice is a form of theft – It is evident then, according to the Catechism, that to willfully neglect either the principle of moderation or the principle of the “universal destination of goods” amounts to a form of theft. This is because it neglects the just distribution of goods which God gave for all.

Thus, the Catechism upholds the need for justice and charity in the care and use of earthly goods. Care and concern for the poor should be considered an integral part of the justice and charity to which we are called.

The seventh commandant also provides an important basis for the social doctrine of the Church. This is an important body of Church moral teaching regarding economic and social matters and how they relate to the fundamental rights of the human person. There is simply not enough room in this context to consider all these moral teachings in detail but they are found collected here: Compendium of Social Doctrine

IV. Avoiding extremes – The heart of these teachings however is always to emphasize the rights and the dignity of the human person. This dignity must never be undermined by collectivist systems, or  by considerations that are purely economic or where profit is the only norm and end of economic activity. In all her pronouncements the Church has steered a middle course which has found much to critique in both communism and capitalism as well as other ideologies and economic theories:

The Church has rejected the totalitarian and atheistic ideologies associated in modem times with “communism” or “socialism.” She has likewise refused to accept, in the practice of “capitalism,” individualism and the absolute primacy of the law of the marketplace over human labor. Regulating the economy solely by centralized planning perverts the basis of social bonds; regulating it solely by the law of the marketplace fails social justice, for there are many human needs which cannot be satisfied by the market. Reasonable regulation of the marketplace and economic initiatives, in keeping with a just hierarchy of values and a view to the common good, is to be commended. (Catechism 2425).

There are other matters spoken of in the Catechism relating to the social doctrine of the Church that flow from the seventh commandment. To intentionally neglect them amounts also to a form of theft: Failing to pay a just wage, Failing to perform a just day’s work for a just day’s wage, Engaging in unfair or unjustly discriminatory hiring practices, And subordinating basic human rights to production schedules or market forces.

V. The duty to work – The Catechism in its consideration of the seventh commandment also admonishes every Christian regarding the duty of work:

Human work proceeds directly from persons created in the image of God and called to prolong the work of creation by subduing the earth, both with and for one another.[cf Gen 1:28] Hence work is a duty: “If any one will not work, let him not eat.”(2 Thess 3:10) Work honors the Creator’s gifts and the talents received from him. It can also be redemptive. (Catechism 2427)

Clearly “work” here refers to more than a wage paying job. Work includes all the ways in which we are expected to contribute to household and community tasks. It must be recalled that God expects us to put our gifts which we have received from him at the service of one another.

The unreasonable refusal to work is a form of theft since it robs the human community of necessary human resources, deprives it of gifts God has given, and all the while still draws on the fruits of others’ labors. This reflection clearly presupposes that one is able to work in some fashion and not prevented from contributing to the human family due to illness of some other serious reason.

VI. Respect for the goods of others – Our work is not only a blessing for the community, it is also a blessing for the individual and his or her family. For this reason, the seventh commandment also protects and honors the fruits of our labor.

Everyone should be able to draw from work the means of providing for his life and that of his family, and of serving the human community..The goods of creation are destined for the whole human race. However, the earth is divided up among men to assure the security of their lives, endangered by poverty and threatened by violence. The appropriation of property is legitimate for guaranteeing the freedom and dignity of persons and for helping each of them to meet his basic needs and the needs of those in his charge. (Catechism 2402, 2428).

Hence the personal or private property of individuals that is justly attained is to be respected by others. It is not to be used by others without the explicit permission of the one to whom it belongs. If it is damaged intentionally or by accident, reparation must be made.

By respecting the property of others we honor their freedom and dignity. We also acknowledge respect the duties of others when we respect their property for it is out of the fruits of their labors that they must support their family and meet their obligations to the community. In this way respect for private property is also related to the common good.

VII. Respect for the intellectual and artistic works of others – Individuals not only have tangible goods like houses and cars (and, might I add, iPhones), but many have also created works of art, written books, performed and recorded music, patented ideas and so forth. To use or take these goods against the reasonable will of the owner or creator, is usually a form of theft. Today many are quite casual in the way they share recorded music and other creative products. Often the artist, author, patent and or copyright owner is not compensated. Again, other things being equal, this is theft.

It is true that there are norms for something known as fair use, and it is not always possible, especially in the “wild west” of the Internet, to find the owner of photo or creative work. There are also many things that exist in what is usually called the “public domain,” and things like this may be used freely.

It is not always easy to know what exactly is proprietary and what is public domain, or how much use of a volume of work is “fair use” and what is going to far. As the Internet grows and matures, some of these answers are getting clearer, and when one comes to know that something is proprietary, one ought not use the art, music or other matter without permission and remuneration.

Further, copying and sharing music or professional movies is almost never allowed, and ought not be done. If one uses an brief excerpt, (often considered fair use) they should refer the viewer or listener to the whole work and identify the artist or author in hope that others might buy the complete work. Most artists and authors actually appreciate a little publicity, but no one appreciates outright theft.

VIII. The call to respect our neighbors’ goods is ultimately a call to respect our neighbor. In this way the seventh commandment, like all the others, is a solemn reaffirmation of the dignity of the human person. By setting forth our responsibilities with regard to this world’s goods God calls us to honor our neighbor, he also reminds us of the nobility of our call to be stewards of his creation.

Thus, the seventh commandment is a rich treasury of moral reflection for us. So, whoever took my iPhone, I hope they’ll read this and repent. I’d like it back! But preparing this reflection, I see that I too have much to ponder, for the 7th Commandment reminds me I am a steward and will be held to account for how I use the goods of this earth for the benefit not only of myself, but also of others.

Posted on

On the Sin of Rash Judgment as Humorously Depicted in a Commercial

On of the most common sins committed, and yet, one of the sins least confessed, is the sin of Rash Judgment. The commercial below humorously depicts the sin and how wrong we can sometimes be.

But in reality the sin is not often humorous and can lead us to some very dark places. We may, on account of rash judgments, harbor grudges, resentments, fears, and unjust anger. We may allow rash judgment to foster our pride as we feel superior to others, and we may carry deep hurts, or even seek revenge, all based on misinformation, or misinterpretation of what others do. And gossip is usually the daughter (or son) of rash judgment.

St. Thomas speaks of rash judgement as those times, When the human intellect lacks certainty, as when a person, without any solid motive, forms a negative judgment on some doubtful or hidden matter, it is called judgment by suspicion or rash judgment. (Summa Theologica, Quest. 60, art 2)

According to Fr. John Hardon: Rash Judgment is unquestioning conviction about another person’s bad conduct without adequate grounds for the judgment. The sinfulness of rash judgment lies in the hasty imprudence with which the critical appraisal is made, and in the loss of reputation that a person suffers in the eyes of the one who judges adversely (Modern Catholic Dictionary).

The Catechism places rash judgment in the context of the obligation we have to preserve the good reputation of others:

Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury. He becomes guilty:

– of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor;

– of detraction who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another’s faults and failings to persons who did not know them;

– of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them.

To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way (CCC 2477-2478)

All this said, rash judgment is often committed in weakness. Our minds are weak and we often lack patience or determination to carefully discern the whole truth. Sometimes we commit this sin based on hurts of the past, or the general climate of cynicism that permeates our culture.

On account of these roots in weakness, the necessary antidote is humility, and a quick appreciation that, in most incidents, we do not have all the facts at first. Further, we must often admit that we may never have all the facts in certain cases. In our humility we ought, usually, to presume the more benign interpretations of uncertain matters unless, and until, the facts require otherwise.

In our instant media culture of 24/7 news, we are encouraged to make quick judgments. News outlets often rush to “analysis” before most of the facts are in. And, with plausible “experts” at the anchor desk, rash judgments often seem “credible” when, in fact, they are little more than rash judgments.

Be very careful. Rash judgment, especially when shared with others, can do a lot of damage. It is not a sin to be taken lightly, even if it is often committed in weakness.

Perhaps then a little humor will make the point. In this commercial, a man with all the best of intentions, looks quite guilty of all the worst intentions. Enjoy.

Posted on

What Is Sloth? It’s a bit more subtle than laziness

One of the more misunderstood of the Cardinal Sins is sloth. This is because most see it merely as laziness. But there is more to sloth than that. Lets take a moment and consider some aspects of the Cardinal sin we call in English, Sloth.

The Greek word we translate as sloth is ἀκηδία akedia (a = absence + kedos = care), meaning indifference or negligence. St Thomas speaks of sloth as sloth is sorrow for spiritual good. By it we it shun spiritual good, as toilsome (cf ST II-II 35,2).

Some modern commentators speak of sloth as a don’t-care feeling, some even as a kind of falling out of love with God and the things of God (cf Rev 2:4). On account of  sloth, the idea of right living, and the gift of a transformed humanity inspires, not joy, but aversion or even disgust, because it is seen as laborious, or as involving the setting aside currently enjoyed or sinful pleasures. By sloth many experience sorrow, not joy or zeal, in following God and receiving a transformed human life. Rather they are distressed at the prospect of what might have to occur should they embrace the faith more deeply.

Sloth also tends to dismiss the power of grace since it focuses on the “trouble” or effort attached to walking in the Christian way, rather than to understand it as a work of God.

As said above, many people today equate sloth with laziness. But sloth is not merely laziness, it is more properly understood as sorrow or indifference. While it is true, sloth may sometimes look like boredom and and a casual laziness toward attaining spiritual good, it is also true that sloth can also be manifested by a frantic busyness about worldly things, so as to avoid spiritual questions or live a reflective life.

Consider, for example a man who is a workaholic. Now suppose too that this man has a wife and children. A man in this position has some very significant gifts and duties beyond his career. He is a husband, a father, and the spiritual leader of his home. He is also a disciple, whom the Lord has summoned to new life, to the great discovery of God, and the deepest meanings and realities of his life. He also has the awesome dignity to announce these truths to his wife and children.

But all of the duties and glories of his vocation overwhelm and even scare him. It all seems so irksome and the task too open-ended. Frankly, he doesn’t want to reflect too much, because it might summon him to ponder things he would like to avoid considering,  such as moral questions, or priorities, or whether he is really spending enough time with his wife and children, or whether his life is really focused on things that matter most. No, its all just too irksome, too ridden with uncertainty to enter more deeply into the spiritual life. Work is easier, and at work they call him “sir” and do what he says.

So, he buries himself in his work. And this helps him to avoid prayer, and reflection. Of course there is “no time” for mass or for praying with his wife and children. There is no time for scripture, retreats and the like.

This man is not lazy, but he is slothful. In the end his workaholism is sloth, for it is sorrow and aversion at the gift that the Lord offers him to come out into the deeper waters and lower his net for a catch. His sorrow for spiritual goods, in this case, is manifest by a kind of avoidance rooted in fear. By sloth he is not joyful at the invitation of the Lord or the Church. Instead he is sorrowful and averse to what he sees as toilsome, and possibly as raising uncomfortable things he would rather not look at. He does not hate God or the faith, but it is all just too much.

That said, sloth does often manifest as a kind of lethargy, and kind of boredom that can’t muster any interest, energy, joy or enthusiasm for spiritual gifts. Such people may be enthusiastic about any number of things, but God and the faith are not among them.

To a great extent boredom is elevated in modern times and this fuels sloth. In effect we are hyper-stimulated in the modern world. Our frantic pace, endless interruptions, and the rich abundance of entertainment, fast-paced movies, video games, all are a feast for the eyes but they hyper-stimulate. From the time we awaken to our return to sleep there is almost never a moment of silence, or a time when we are not being bombarded by images, often flickering and quickly changing.

This hyper-stimulation means that when we come upon things like quiet prayer or adoration, or are asked to listen for an extended period, or when the imagery is not fast changing we are easily bored.

And boredom feeds right into sloth. The “still, small voice of God,” the quiet of prayer, the simple reading of Scripture and pondering its message, the unfolding of spiritual meaning through reflection, the slower joys of normal human conversation in communal prayer and fellowship…none of this appeals to many who are hyper-stimulated, and used to a breakneck pace. Sunday, once the highlight of the week for many (due to the music, the beauty of the liturgy, the hearing of the sermon, the joy of fellowship and the quiet of Holy Communion), is now considered by many as boring and about as appealing as getting a flu shot; a necessary evil at best.  Thus, sloth is fueled by the boredom our culture feels at anything not going 90 miles and hour.

Peter Kreeft says that

Sloth is a cold sin, not a hot one. But that makes it even deadlier. [For] rebellion against God is closer to him than indifference….God can more easily cool our wrath than fire our frozenness, though he can do both.  Sloth is a sin of omission not commission. That too makes it deadlier,  for a similar reason. To commit evil is at least to be playing the game… Sloth simply does not play God’s game, either with him or against him….It sits on the sidelines bored….Better to be hot or cold than lukewarm [Back to Virtue, P. 154].

Sloth of course gives rise to many sins whereby we do not pray, attend mass, go to confession, or read Scripture, we do not grow in our spiritual life and whereby we fail to become the man or woman God has made us to be. In some sense every sin contains an element of sloth for when we sin we indicate a kind of aversion to the perfecting graces God offers us. Rather than see the moral law of God as a great summons to freedom, we sorrowfully reject that call as too much trouble.

Socially too there are many manifestations of sloth. But just to mention two that are common in the modern world.

1. Secularism – By secularism, here is meant not the more recent hostility to religious faith, but more the older meaning of the word wherein one’s preoccupation is essentially a worldly one. It is amazing how passionate and interested we can get about worldly things. Perhaps it is a football game, or it is politics, or some new electronic device that has just come out. Perhaps it is our careers or our, or the stock market, or something in the news. Yes, we are passionate people and even the most reserved have strong interests that occupy their mind and vividly capture their interest.

And yet, many of those who rejoiced at the basketball game that ended so thrillingly, or were passionately engaged at the political rally, or excited about the latest twist on their favorite television shoe, many of these same passionate, joyful people can muster no interest in prayer, Mass, or Bible study. And if they do get to Mass they look in agony until it is over.

This is secularism and  a form of sloth. We have time and passion for everything else, but not for God. It is a very deep drive. We are mesmerized by many things of the world, but bored, sorrowful and thus slothful over the things of the spiritual life. Where is the joy? Where is the zeal? Where is the hunger for completion in God?

This is sloth. It is not merely depression or boredom, it is sloth, it is a sorrow toward the spiritual gifts of God. It is a deep drive of the flesh, and it has to go. But only God and our openness to his grace can ultimately save us and bring us more alive from this death directed drive.

2. Relativism – Many today indulge a notion that there is no absolute or unchanging truth to which we are summoned and must ultimately conform. This is relativism. And many who practice it actually congratulate themselves for their “tolerance” and open-mindedness. They think of their relativism as a virtue. But, more often than not, relativism is simply sloth masquerading as tolerance. The fact is, if there is a truth, (and there is), then I should joyfully seek it, and base my life on its demands and promises.

But many indulge the notion of relativism, for it is an easy way out. If there is no truth then I am not obliged to seek it, and base my life on it. Frankly many are averse to and sorrowful toward the truth for they find its demands irksome. This is sloth, for their sorrow is directed toward a very precious spiritual gift of God, the gift of truth. Instead of joyfully seeking the truth, the relativist is sorrowful and avoidant of the gift though they couch their sloth in other words such as “broad-mindedness” and “tolerance.”

To be sure there is a place for tolerance. But the true virtue of tolerance is usually misunderstood today and equated with approval. The proper understanding of tolerance is the conditional acceptance of or non-interference with beliefs, actions or practices that one considers to be wrong but still “tolerable,” such that they should not be prohibited or unreasonably constrained. The key point that is often lost today is that the tolerated beliefs or practices are considered to be objectionable, wrong or bad. If this objection component is missing, we are not speaking any longer of “toleration” but of “indifference” or “affirmation.”

Hence, relativists who slothfully dismiss that there is truth to be found cannot rightly call their position “tolerance.” It is, in fact mere indifference, and a form of sloth.

For all of our modern claims to be tolerant and open-minded, the more usual fact is that we are just plain lazy and slothful when it comes to seeking the truth. We (collectively speaking) do not love the truth but shun it, sorrowfully regarding its possible claims on us. Jesus said rightly, This is the judgement: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God (Jn 3:19-21).

A few reflections then, on Sloth.

Coming to recognize sloth for what it is, calling it by name and learning its moves is the first step on the road to healing. Sloth is, of course, one of those drives that is so deep that we must ultimately fall to our knees and beg deliverance form the Lord who alone can heal us.

The gift that the Lord offers us is promised in the beatitude: Blessed are they that hunger and thirst for righteousness (Matt 5:6).

We must also ask for and seek the fruits of the Holy Spirit, especially love, joy, and peace. These gifts enkindle a fire of love in our hearts for God and for the gifts he offers.

Since sloth is a very deep drive, we must cast ourselves on the care of God with great humility, recognizing our poverty and seeking his miraculous grace to give us grateful, loving and passionate hearts.

Finally, since sloth can also be generated by the feeling of being overwhelmed at the perfection of our call, we do well to consider two points:

  1. We ought to meditate carefully on what our specific call is. Since we cannot do and be everything we need to come to an understanding of our own gifts and how God expects us to reasonably use them. Having done this we do well to stay in our lane.
  2. It is also true that we must understand that spiritual progress grows in stages and by many steps, not by one giant leap. Hence we not not be so sorrowful or adverse to the good things God offers, for, as a loving Father he leads us and forms us most often in gentle ways as one spiritual victory leads to others.

Pray for zeal, joy, hope, confidence and a hunger for holy things. The Christian journey is meant to be a thrilling one as we experience how God is utterly transforming us.

I don’t know, something tells me, after a heavy post it’s time to play the Bach Jig Fugue. It’s Joy in G Major!

Posted on

What is Our Most Serious Problem?

The Gospel from today’s Mass sets for the healing by Jesus of a man who had been paralyzed some 38 years. The Lord found him lying by the sheep gate of the Temple at the pools called Bethesda (A Hebrew word meaning “House of Mercy”). Having healed him the Lord says something unusual, Look, you are well; do not sin any more, so that nothing worse may happen to you (Jn 5:13).  Now, to us who often think in worldly ways, the thought may occur: “What could possibly be worse than to be paralyzed for 38 years?”

The Spirit answers with our faith, “To die and go to Hell is far worse.” But I wonder how seriously we take this insight at a practical, daily level. Do we really see our sins as our most serious problem? Or, are we more likely to obsess over things like our finances, our physical health, our job, who is in political power, etc?

Note how the Lord says in effect: Your paralysis was far from your most serious issue. Right now you face far bigger issues in your life that you ought to be thinking about (like greed, lust, anger, worldliness, and a host of other sinful and disordered drives that can destroy you).

Here of course is a kind of paradigm (or example) of a common human problem, and that is, that we often get all worked up about the less essential  things and pay little attention to things that matter far more. Consider a few examples:

I. In listening to people pray, including myself, at public gatherings it is interesting how most of the prayers (almost 100%) deal with worldly matters. “O Lord, fix my finances, fix my health, fix my spouse, fix this or that situation so I am more comfortable and better situated, help me get a promotion at work.” None of these things are wrong to pray about, but notice the worldly and passing quality of most of it. It is almost as if we were saying to God, “Just make this world a better and comfortable place for me. Give me enough health, friends, money and creature comforts, and that’s all I need, I’ll just stay here forever!” In a way it’s a terrible thing to say to God, and surely there are things for which we should ask that matter more to God.

I am sure God waits for the day when we will finally say from our heart, “Lord give me a closer walk with you….help me hunger for your justice, righteousness, truth and holiness. Help me repent of my sins and desire greater holiness. Help me yearn for the day when I can come and live with you and grant me the grace to be prepared to enter your presence. Take away my sinful attachments to this world, and make my heart’s truest desire to be You and the joys waiting for me in heaven with you.” I am sure God’s waits for the day, for these are things that matter to God.

In the end, nothing matters more to God than you, and that you be made ready to be with him forever. Money, who cares? Health? That passes anyway, as does the body, and worldly glories. But the soul? Now here is something that matters particularly to God. But we go one praying for money, health, greater comforts, etc. Not wrong per se, but not the true priority, a priority which is often wholly neglected by us.

II. What then is our greatest problem? Lack of money, health or resources? No! Our greatest problem is our sin. Jesus says, If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better to loose part of your body than to have it all cast into hell (Matt 5:30).

What is Jesus saying? He is saying that it is more serious to sin than to lose your hand, or your eye, or your foot.

Now we don’t think like this. If I were to lose my hand in some terrible accident, I would hate this day for the rest of my life. Indeed, it would be terrible. But why don’t I think this way about my sin? To God my sin is a far greater problem than a financial shortfall, or even bodily loss.

My sin matters to God, because he sees what it does to me, and that it is a far greater danger for me than any other worldly danger or problem. And yet, most of us pay little heed to this and are unalarmed by it. But we sure know how to hit the panic button if we lose our job or get a diagnosis of cancer.

Our priorities are wrong and we are not rich in what matters to God. That is, we are not rich in repentance, cries for mercy, and a sober understanding of our truest and deepest problem, our sin.

III. And look how we too often raise our children. Almost all the focus is on worldly success. Johnny might know little or nothing about God, the Mass, Scripture or Sacraments, but let Johnny bring home a bad report card, and the reaction is quick. Here is a problem to get to the bottom of, because if Johnny doesn’t get better grades, he might not get into the premier local High School, and then, might not get into the best college, so he can make a killing, (oops, I mean a living).

So, the parents go into action. Perhaps a tutor is hired to help with math etc. Meanwhile Johnny barely knows the Our Father, doesn’t have a clue at Mass, his moral life is heading south, and all he knows about Adam and Eve is that they were “in the Bible or something.” Finally Johnny’s scores are better and he proceeds apace to the finest local High School.

One day his father proudly says to the Catholic pastor, “Great news! John has gotten a full scholarship to Princeton.” And the pastor says “Great!” When what he should say to the father is “OK fine. Now let’s find out who is going to preach the gospel to him up there. You know that it will be, (like most college campuses), a moral cesspool of fornication and drinking. So, if we’re not serious about John’s spiritual life, he may go in there, come out a big-wig lawyer, and yet be heading straight for Hell. So what’s the plan for his spiritual welfare and growth?”

But do the pastor or parents really give any thought to this? Usually not.

And so John climbs the ladder of success but it’s leaning up against the the wrong wall.

Too often parents, pastors, families and parishes are not rich in what matters to God. Our children hear that they should study hard, get good grades etc., to make it in this world. Of itself this is not wrong. But their souls are more important, and matter more to God. How well do we teach and equip them to care for the vineyard of their own soul? How does this compare to worldly preparations? And do we conform to what matters more to God?

Well, perhaps this is enough. But the point here is that too often, too many of us are not rich in what matters to God. We too need to occasionally hear Jesus say after he has blessed us in some worldly way, Look, you are well; do not sin any more, so that nothing worse may happen to you. If we are irritated by this sort of exhortation we ought to see it as the disclosing of a basic human tendency of caring more about passing worldly things, than eternal lasting things or God himself. Too easily we store up riches for ourselves but are not rich in what matters to God.

Help Lord! We need a new mind, but even more, a new heart.

In this sermon snippet I try to set forth that there are many ways we think, and many philosophies around today that do not reflect the mind of God, his priorities or his plans for us. In this world there are many false messiahs and false visions that vie our attention and loyalty. In the midst of all these, we must come to discover more of how God thinks, and what His priorities for us are.

Posted on

1968 – A Fateful and Terrible Year Where Many in the Church Drank the Poison of this World

There was something awful about the year 1968.

I was but a lad at the time, merely seven or eight years of age, but almost everything on the T.V. terrified me. Terrible reports from Viet Nam, (where my father was at the time), the Tet Offensive nightly reports of death and casualties (was my daddy one of the ones killed?). Riots and anti-war demonstrations in America’s cities and college campuses. The first stirrings of militant feminism. A second hideous year of hippies with their “summer of love” nonsense, which was just an excuse for selfish, spoiled college kids to get high, fornicate and think they were some how doing a noble thing. There was the murder of Dr. Martin Luther King, later that year also of Robert Kennedy, the riots and burning cities that followed King’s assassination. I remember my mother who was teaching on the South Side of Chicago have to flee for her life and finally be rescued by and escorted out by police. There was the ramp up to the yet more hideous Woodstock festival that would happen the following year. 1968 was a terrible year, a year that I do not think we ever recovered from. It popularized the sexual revolution, drug use and lots of just plain bad behavior. In the Church sweeping changes were underway and this added to the uncertainty of those times. Even if one will argue they were necessary changes they came at a terrible times and fed into the notions of revolution. And then the whole revolt against the magnificent and prophetic Humane Vitae, thus ushering a spirit of open dissent that still devastates the Church.

1968 was a terrible year. When I mention that year and shake my head, I often get puzzled looks. But I stand by my claim, 1968 was a cultural tsunami from which we have not yet recovered.

Thus my interest was peaked when I saw an article by James Cardinal Stafford also singling out that year also for being a year of intense darkness. I’d like to share some excerpts of the Cardinal’s article. He focuses particularly on the devastating effects of angry and open dissent set loose in August of that Year by theologians and priests who rebelled against Humanae Vitae. In that decisive moment the Cardinal sees that the violent revolution raging outside the Church decisively entered within her and that we still real for this today.

English historian Paul Johnson dubs 1968 as the year of “America’s Suicide Attempt.” It included the Tet offensive in Vietnam with its tsunami-like effects in American life and politics, the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in Memphis, Tennessee; the tumult in American cities on Palm Sunday weekend; and the June assassination of Senator Robert F. Kennedy in Southern California. It was also the year in which Pope Paul VI issued his encyclical letter on transmitting human life, Humanae Vitae (HV). He met immediate, premeditated, and unprecedented opposition from some American theologians and pastors. By any measure, 1968 was a bitter cup….

The summer of 1968 is a record of God’s hottest hour. The memories are not forgotten; they are painful. They remain vivid like a tornado in the plains of Colorado. They inhabit the whirlwind where God’s wrath dwells. In 1968, something terrible happened in the Church. Within the ministerial priesthood, ruptures developed everywhere among friends which never healed. And the wounds continue to affect the whole Church. The dissent, together with the leaders’ manipulation of the anger they fomented, became a supreme test. It changed fundamental relationships within the Church. It was a Peirasmòs [i.e. a trial, a test of faith] for many.

During the height of the 1968 Baltimore riots following the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., I had made an emergency call to [an] inner-city pastor…He described the view from the rectory while speaking on the phone…his parish was becoming a raging inferno. He said, “From here I see nothing but fire burning everywhere. Everything has been set ablaze. The Church and rectory are untouched thus far.” He did not wish to leave or be evacuated. His voice betrayed disillusionment and fear. Later we learned that the parish buildings survived.

Memories of the physical violence in the city in April 1968 [following the king Assassination] helped me to name what had happened in August 1968 [in the explosion of dissent against Humanae Vitae]. Ecclesial dissent can become a kind of spiritual violence in its form and content.

What do I mean? Look at the results of the two events. After the violent 1968 Palm Sunday weekend, civil dialogue in metropolitan Baltimore broke down and came to a stop. It took a back seat to open anger and recriminations between whites and blacks. The…priests’ August gathering [against Humane Vitae] gave rise to its own ferocious acrimony. Conversations among the clergy…became contaminated with fear. Suspicions among priests were chronic. Fears abounded. And they continue. The Archdiocesan priesthood lost something of the fraternal whole which Baltimore priests had known for generations. 1968 marked the hiatus of the generational communio….Priests’ fraternity had been wounded. Pastoral dissent had attacked the Eucharistic foundation of the Church. Its nuptial significance had been denied. Some priests saw bishops as nothing more than Roman mannequins.

Cardinal Shehan later reported that on Monday morning, August 5, he “was startled to read in the Baltimore Sun that seventy-two priests of the Baltimore area had signed the Statement of Dissent.” What he later called “the years of crisis” began for him during that hot… August evening in 1968….Its unhinging consequences continue. Abusive, coercive dissent has become a reality in the Church and subjects her to violent, debilitating, unproductive, chronic controversies.

The violence of the initial disobedience was only a prelude to further and more pervasive violence. …Contempt for the truth, whether aggressive or passive, has become common in Church life. Dissenting priests, theologians and laypeople have continued their coercive techniques. From the beginning, the press has used them to further its own serpentine agenda.  (These are excerpts, Click HERE for the full article).

Yes, a terrible year, 1968. And we have yet to recover. Discussion in the Church has often retained its painful, divisive, and, as the Cardinal notes, “spiritually violent” tendencies. Bishops are excoriated  by the right and left in the Church, and even by priests, who promised them obedience and respect. In effect, Bishops are treated more like elected officials, than the anointed leaders and fathers they are. And whatever imperfections the bishops have individually and corporately, this does not excuse our treatment of them as though they were simply elected officials accountable to us. We are neither docile nor loving and supportive of them. And when we have concerns about the course they set, we do not speak to them, or of them, as Fathers, but we lay them out as though they were political enemies. Discourse in the Church which should be marked by charity and a family love is, instead, modeled on angry and protesting political discourse, the acquisition of power and the hermeneutic of suspicion and scorn.

And this is true not only in our treatment of Bishops but also of one another. Catholics who are passionate about the family, the life issues and the sexual issues go to one side of the room, and Catholics passionate about the social teachings of the Church to the other. And from their sides they both hurl blame, venom, scorn,  and debate who is a true Catholic and who really cares about what is most important.  We do this rather than appreciate the work that each of us does in essential areas and we fail to understand that the Church needs two wings to fly.

The easiest thing in the world is to get Catholics fighting and divided. And we take the bait every time. The media knows it and so does the President. Shame on them for doing it, but shame on us for being such an easy target.

And to a large extent it all goes back to those angry August days back in 1968 when priests and laity took the violence and discord of that awful year and made it the template for Church life; when there emerged a kind of spiritual violence, and discord, when there developed  a hermeneutic of suspicion; and when there was an embracing of a distorted ecclesiology of the Church as a political entity rather the Body of Christ.

Perhaps such tendencies were decades in coming, but, as Cardinal Stafford notes, there was something about that hot and fateful August of 1968, something in that awful year slouched into the Church and grew like a cancer. It is still too much with us today and it is has infected us all. Somehow it’s still August, the scorching heat wave lingers, and the hazy air reminds us of the summer of our discontent, that awful and fateful year of 1968. Usquequo Domine…usquequo?  (Ps 12:1)

This song says, I need you, you need me. We’re all part of God’s Body. Stand with me, agree with me, you are important to me, I need you to survive.

Posted on

What Does Jesus Mean by Hypocrisy? It’s Deeper than You Think

In the Gospel from Ash Wednesday’s  Mass, Jesus gives an extended teaching on the problem of hypocrisy. You can read it here: Matthew 6 – On Hypocrisy. In the modern age we have tended to reduce the notion of hypocrisy to duplicity. The modern notion is that a hypocrite is someone who says one thing but does another, a person who is two-faced, who is inconsistent or phony. Jesus’ teaching on Hypocrisy does not exclude this notion but is far richer.

The Biblical understanding enunciated by Jesus is rooted in the original meaning of the Greek word ὑποκριταί (hypokritai) which means “stage actors.” At one level it is easy to see how this word has come to mean some one who is phony. For what they claim to be, they really are not, they are just acting a role. But when no one is looking (i.e. the audience is gone) they revert to their true self, which is some one quite different. But Jesus in his teaching here develops the understanding far more richly that shows how sad and poignant hypocrisy is, what its origin is and how it can be overcome.

Hypocrisy defined – In effect Jesus describes hypocrisy as the sad state of a person who reduces himself to being an actor on a stage, because he does not know God the Father. There are many people who live their life in a desperate search for human approval and applause. They discern their dignity and worth, not from God, (who is in effect a stranger to them), but from what other human beings think of them. They are willing to adapt themselves often in dramatic ways to win approval. They are willing to play many roles and wear many masks to give the audience what they want. They are like actors on a stage, who seek applause or perhaps laughter and approval. Notice the way Jesus describes the heart of hypocrisy:

Jesus said to his disciples: “Take care not to perform righteous deeds in order that people may see them;….The Lord goes on to say that they blow a trumpet so that others will see them giving alms, they pray ostentatiously so that others may see they are praying, and they alter their appearance so that others may see they are fasting.

The heart of hypocrisy – Thus, the goal of such a person is to be seen. They are on stage and seek to ingratiate themselves to the audience and win applause. Hence they engage in some action “in order that people may see them.” It is clear that this is ultimately very sad. A lonely actor on a stage performing whatever role is required in order to win approval from the current audience. Their inner core or deepest self is repressed and replaced by the demands of others. This is the true heart of and description of hypocrisy.

Many take this desperate need for approval from others to very self destructive extremes. Many young people, due to peer pressure, will engage in dangerous and unhealthy practices to win approval. Some will drop out of school, join gangs and commit crimes. Others will drink heavily or use drugs. Still others will tattoo and pierce their bodies, engage in sexual activity before marriage, and do many risky things. The need for approval is often the deep drive that underlies this desperate behavior. But like actors on a stage seeking applause they rush to fill these rolls and wait for the applause and acceptance.

Adults too will often compromise core principles in order to fit in and be liked, gain promotions or earn access. Christians will hide their faith, playing the role of a secular modern in order to win approval. Some will act deceitfully to please a boss, others will gossip or engage in any number of sinful behaviors to ingratiate themselves to a group.

It is also clear that our modern notion of hypocrisy as duplicity, while incomplete, is not wrong either. Why does the hypocrite act inconsistently, often in a duplicitous manner? Because the audience changes, and he must change with it. So to one group he will say “yes” and to another group he will say “no.” Since the goal of the hypocrite (actor) is to be seen and win approval, the answer must change if the group does. Hence he will morph, hide his true thoughts or outright lie to gain the approval. He no longer has a core, his identity is outside of himself in what ever the audience requires in order to grant him approval.

Why does this happen to a person? Here too Jesus is rather clear. This happens to a person who does not know God the Father. The great tragedy of many lives is that they do not know the Father. They may know ABOUT God, but they do not personally know God or his love for them. God is at best a benevolent stranger who runs the universe but he is in some remote heaven and the interaction that many have with him is vague and abstract. God exists but he is on the periphery of life. In effect he is a stranger.

Notice the remedy that Jesus assigns for each example of hypocrisy he cites:

Your heavenly Father, who sees in secret will repay you for giving alms….Your heavenly Father who sees in secret will repay you for praying…..Your heavenly Father who sees what is hidden will repay you for your fasting.

In other words the goal in life and the remedy for hypocrisy is that it is enough that Your heavenly Father sees what you do. Now of course, as long as God the Father remains a distant and aloof figure what he sees never WILL be enough for us. But to the degree that we begin to experience God the Father’s love for us, his providence and his good will toward us, then we become less concerned with what others think. We begin to come down off the stage and be less concerned for the approval of men and more focused on and then satisfied with the approval of God.

Notice too the intimacy that Jesus sets forth. He says of God, He is “Your heavenly Father.” He is not merely the “Deity.” He is not merely God in heaven. He is not even merely the Father. He is “YOUR heavenly Father.” He is the one who created you, sustains you, provides for and loves you.

Journeying away from Hypocrisy – To the degree that this becomes real for us, and is more than words on the page of a book, or inferential knowledge base only on what others have said, to the degree that this is a real experience for us, we start to climb off the stage. We are less the actor (the hypocrite) and more the authentic self God has created us to be. We begin to loose our obsession with what others think of us. We are less desperate for their approval. It is not that we become sociopaths caring not one whit what others think. We still groom ourselves etc., but we are not obsessed with the good opinion of others. It is enough that we know our heavenly Father and his love for us.

Hence, hypocrisy, at least as Jesus teaches it here. is a richer concept than we often think of today. To this sad and poignant problem, Jesus addresses a very powerful and personal solution of knowing “your heavenly Father” and experiencing his love for you. Thank you Lord Jesus!

Posted on

Rick Santorum is Right to Raise Concerns About How Amniocentesis is Used. The Disabled Are Being Aborted in Terrifying Numbers.

Candidate Rick Santorum was grilled on Face the Nation by Bob Schieffer on his position that certain forms of pre-natal testing end up as conduits for abortion. In particular, Mr Santorum is concerned about amniocentesis, a test used to screen for fetal chromosomal abnormalities and certain infections. The procedure is not without its dangers. Complications of amniocentesis include miscarriage, respiratory distress at delivery, postural deformities, fetal trauma and rhesus disease. Studies estimate the risk of amniocentesis-related miscarriage at around 1 in 200.

Rick Santorum is right to raise serious concerns about this procedure and the fact that the government is going to force insurers to pay for this. Free amniocentesis means more of it and more of it, frankly, means more abortions.

This does not mean there is absolutely no legitimate use of amniocentesis. Indeed it can be argued that if there is a problem, it is best to know beforehand. However, for one to legitimately have recourse to amniocentesis, it is necessary that they exclude abortion, no matter the results. They must also understand there are risks involved with amniocentesis and, further, that they will likely be pressured to terminate a child with a poor diagnosis.

A hidden but tragic truth in this country is that there is a quiet sort of genocide being committed against the disabled. Mr. Santorum is right in pointing out that the rates of abortion in poor prenatal diagnoses trends as high as 90-100%. Indeed if the test come back “poor,” abortion is almost always recommended.

And, the pressure on such families to abort is often enormous. They are told, “It is the right thing to do” and, “You should not make the child suffer.” Some are even made to feel they are doing something “unethical” by bringing forth such children. There are also time pressures placed on such parents. Doctors often want the decision to terminate, made quickly, within a matter of days.

A life not worth living? There seems to be operative a notion on the part of many in our culture that there is such a thing as a life not worth living. We have stumbled upon the very unusual and tragically ironic concept that death is a form of therapy, that the “treatment” for disabled babies is to kill them. Of course death is not a treatment or a therapy, it cannot be considered a “solution” for the one who loses his or her life. Yet tragically this is often the advice that many parents with a poor pre-natal diagnosis receive, the urgent pressure that they terminate the pregnancy now.

90 % are lost – All this pressure goes a long way to explain that just over 90% of families with a poor pre-natal diagnosis choose to abort. We in the Church cannot remain silent in the face of this. We must prophetically and compassionately reach out to families in such a crisis. Many of them are devastated by the news that their baby may have serious disabilities. Often they descend into shock and are overwhelmed by fear, conflicting feelings and even anger at God, or others. Sometimes the greatest gifts we can give them are time, information, and the framework of faith. Simply considering some of the following may help:

1. They do not have to rush, despite what they are told. Serious life-changing decisions should never have to be made in a 48 to 72 hour time period. Pressure should never be applied to families by medical personnel and the family should consider such pressure a grave injustice.

2. Pre-natal diagnoses are not always right. We often think of Medicine as an exact science. It is not. Data can be misinterpreted and premises can sometimes be wrong. Further, there is a difference between the result of a screening and an actual diagnosis. Screenings can point to potential problems and likelihoods, but are not an actual diagnosis of a problem. Further study is always needed if a screening indicates potential problems. Quite frequently, further tests, after a screening reveal no problem at all.

3. Disabilities are not always as terrible a reality as we, in our “perfect-insistent” world, think. Many people with disabilities live very full lives and are a tremendous gift to their families, the Church and the world. Providing families with further information about disabilities and connecting them with families who have experience in these areas are essential to avoid the catastrophizing that sometimes sets in when an adverse pre-natal diagnosis is given.

4. For those with faith it is essential to connect them with the most basic truths of our Christian faith. The cross is an absurdity to the world. But to those of the Christian faith, the cross brings life and blessings, even despite its pain. Where it not for our crosses, most of us could never be saved. Bringing forth a disabled child will not be easy but God never fails. He can make a way out of no way and do anything, but fail. My own sister was mentally ill and she carried a cross. We too had a share in that cross. But my sister, Mary Anne, brought blessings to our family as well. I don’t know if I’d be a priest today if it were not for her. I am sure I would not be as compassionate and I doubt I could be saved were it not for the important lessons she taught me. I know she brought out strength and mercy, not to mention humility, from all of us in the family. Her cross and ours brought grace, strength and many personal gifts to all of us. Yes, the cross is painful, but it brings life as well. Easter Sunday is not possible without Good Friday. To the world the cross is absurdity but to us who believe it is salvation, it is life, it is our only real hope, it is our truest glory to carry it as Christ did.

5. Disability is not an all-or-nothing thing. Disability exists on a continuum. In some way all of us are disabled. Some of us have very serious weight problems, others diabetes, pressure, heart problems, etc. Some of us are intellectually challenged in certain areas. Some of us struggle with anxiety or depression, addictions, or compulsions. Some experience losses in mobility through an accident or just due to age. All of us have abilities and disabilities. Some of our disabilities are more visible than others, some disabilities are more serious than others. But in most cases we are able to adjust to what disables us and still live reasonably full lives. We may not be able to do all we would like, but life still has blessings for us. And even our weaknesses and disabilities can, and do, bring us blessings by helping to keep us humble. How much disability is too much? Can you really be the judge of that? Can you or I really decide for someone else that their life is not worth living?

6. Life is not usually what it seems. In this world we esteem things like wealth, ability, strength and power. But God is not all that impressed by these sorts of things. God has a special place for the poor and the humble. The Lord has said that many who are last in this life are going to be first in the next (cf Mat 19:30). There is a great reversal coming wherein the mighty are cast down and the lowly are raised up. In this world we may look upon those who suffer disability with a misplaced pity. But understand this: they are going to be the exalted ones in the kingdom of heaven. As we accept the disabled and the needy into our midst we are accepting those who will be the royalty in heaven. We ought to learn to look up to them, beg their prayers and only hope that their coattails may also help us attain to some of the glory they will specially enjoy. They have a dignity that this world may refuse to see but we who believe cannot fail to remember that the last are going to be the first. Life is not always what it seems.

What of those who aborted? We as a Church cannot avoid our responsibility to prophetically declare the dignity and worth of the disabled. More than ever our world needs the Church’s testimony, for it is a startling statistic that 90% of parents choose to abort in cases of a poor pre-natal diagnosis. Even as we prophetically witness to dignity of the disabled and the wrongness of abortion in these cases we must also embrace those who have chosen abortion and now struggle with that choice. We are called to reconcile and bring healing to all who have faced this crisis and fallen. Many were pressured, afraid and felt alone. We offer this embrace through confession, and healing ministries like Project Rachael which offers counseling, spiritual direction, support groups and prayer services. Even as the Church is prophetic in speaking against abortion she must also reconcile those who have fallen under the weight of these heavy issues.

For more information:

  1. National Catholic Partnership on Disability
  2. Project Rachel – Post Abortion Healing
  3. Be Not Afraid – an online outreach to parents who have received a poor or difficult prenatal diagnosis
  4. Parental Partners for Life – Support information & encouragement for carrying to term with an adverse prenatal diagnosis and support for raising your child with special needs after birth

Here is Mr. Santorum’s interview on the topic of amniocentesis. I think he raises very legitimate concerns:

This video was produced by the Office of Special Needs and the Life Issues Department for the Youth Rally and Mass for Life, held at the Verizon Center in Washington, DC on January 22, 2010. It shares the story of Maddie, who reminds us of the dignity and joy that can be found in every human life