The first reading for this Wednesday of the 27th Week of the Year, from Galatians, speaks to sins that exclude one from the Kingdom of Heaven. If one dies unrepentant from committing any of these sins, one cannot go to Heaven but rather must be excluded in Hell. It is an important reminder to pay heed to the toll that sin takes on our heart, our character, and ultimately our destiny.
One of the great deceptions of our time is the notion that serious sin is only a remote possibility for most people and that such sins are only committed by truly wicked people. Too many people assess their moral standing with unhelpful platitudes such as these: “I’m basically a good person,” or “Well, I haven’t murdered anybody.”
We must be more serious and mature in our discernment. Of course, God does not leave us in such a fog of uncertainty. His Word is quite clear in specifying some of the more serious sins so that we can humbly recognize our tendency to do these very things. Note that stating that a particular sin excludes one from the Kingdom of Heaven is the biblical way of saying that it is a mortal sin.
Simply listing mortal sins is not sufficient because there are important factors affecting culpability. For example, some of the sins listed below (e.g., lying) can admit of lighter matter (one might tell a lie to avoid hurting someone’s feeling). Lies can also be devastating, robbing people of their good name or depriving people of necessary information. Some of the sins listed can result from a compulsions or addictions that erode the freedom necessary to be guilty of mortal sin. Hence, a sin that is of itself serious in nature might be venial if the person were acting under some compulsion. This does not mean that it is not a sin at all, just that it may not be fully mortal in its effects.
Nevertheless, the Lord, in love, wants to warn us urgently of the sins that can most commonly exclude us from Heaven. In reading from the lists that follow, avoid adopting a legalistic mentality. Take them to heart and allow them to become part of your daily moral reflection. The Lord warns us in love that sin is a serious matter. Even smaller sins, unattended to, begin to grow like a cancer and can ultimately kill us spiritually.
Be serious about them. Do not buy into the deception that sin is a trivial matter. God loves us, and because He loves us He warns us that unrepentant sin is serious and can rob our hearts of the desire for Him, for Heaven, and for the good things awaiting us there.
Here, then, are five lists. They are not exhaustive and there are other passages in the Bible that include sins not mentioned below (e.g., refusal to forgive, cf Matt 6:15).
Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor homosexual offenders, nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were (1 Cor 6:9-10).
The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God (Gal 5:19-21).
But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God’s holy people. Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking, which are out of place, but rather thanksgiving. For of this you can be sure: No sexually immoral, impure or greedy person—such a person is an idolater—has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of such things God’s wrath comes on those who are disobedient. Therefore, do not be partners with them (Eph 5:3-6).
“Look, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to each person according to what they have done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.” Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood. “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star” (Rev. 22:12-16).
Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’ They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’ Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life (Matt 25:41-46).
Finally, here is a general warning from the Lord:
Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out—those who have done what is good will rise to live, and those who have done what is evil will rise to be condemned. By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me (John 5:28-29).
Here is a performance of Gregorio Allegri’s “Miserere Mei” (Psalm 51). “Have mercy on me, O God, according to thy great kindness.”
The past three Sundays have featured shocking parables about our readiness, fruitfulness, and decision as to whether to accept and enter the Kingdom of God. The Lord has used the image of a vineyard extensively: a vineyard into which workers are dispatched at different times of the day but who have different attitudes about what is due to them at the end of the day; a vineyard into which two sons are sent, one of whom goes and one who does not; a vineyard in which are wicked tenants who refuse to render rightful fruits to the landowner and who abuse and even kill those sent to call for the harvest, including the landowner’s son.
The parables point to the great and dramatic decision to which we are all summoned: Will we accept the Kingdom of God, entering into to and accepting its terms or not? It is a decision on which your destiny depends. Jesus is not playing around; he lays out the drama in stark and shocking ways. He is not the harmless hippie or mild-mannered Messiah that many today have recast Him to be. He is the Great Prophet, the Very Son of God, the Lord who authoritative stands before us and tells us to decide.
This Sunday’s Gospel is perhaps the most shocking and dramatic of all. In it, the Lord Jesus issues another urgent summons to the Kingdom. As with past Sundays, there is the warning of hellish destruction for the refusal of the Kingdom. This view must be balanced, however, by the vision of a seeking Lord who wants to fill His banquet and will not stop urging us until the end. You might say the theme of this Gospel is “Party or Perish!”
Let’s look at today’s Gospel in five stages.
I. RICH REPAST – The text says, The kingdom of heaven may be likened to a king who gave a wedding feast for his son. He dispatched his servants to summon the invited guests to the feast …
Of course the King is God the Father and the wedding feast is that of His Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. On one level, the wedding feast is the invitation to faith in general. More biblically, the wedding feast is that of the Lamb, which is described in the Book of Revelation (19:7-9). Hence it is also the Liturgy of Heaven in which we share through the Mass.
What a wonderful image of the Kingdom: a wedding feast! Most Jewish people of that time looked forward to weddings all year long. They were usually scheduled between planting and harvest, when things were slower. Weddings often lasted for days and were among the most enjoyable things imaginable. There was feasting, family, and great joy in what God was doing. Now consider the unimaginable joy and honor of being invited to a wedding hosted by a king!
Yes, these were powerful images for the ancient Jews of the Kingdom: A wedding feast, and for a king’s son at that! The joy, the celebration, the feasting, the magnificence, the splendor, the beautiful bride, the handsome groom, the love, the unity; yes, the Kingdom of Heaven may be likened to a king who gave a wedding feast for his son.
Who would not want to come? We may well ask, if this is Heaven, who would not want to go?
II. RUDE REJECTION – The text says, … but they refused to come. A second time he sent other servants, saying, “Tell those invited: ‘Behold, I have prepared my banquet, my calves and fattened cattle are killed, and everything is ready; come to the feast.’” Some ignored the invitation and went away, one to his farm, another to his business. The rest laid hold of his servants, mistreated them, and killed them.
Here is a real twist to the story, an unexpected development. Why the rejection of the king’s offer? In our time, why the rejection of what God offers? Are these people crazy? In effect, Jesus explains their rejection in a two-fold way: worldliness and wickedness.
One group of those rejecting the invitation to the Kingdom of Heaven do so for worldly reasons. Jesus describes them as going one to his farm, another to his business. In other words, the things of the world, though not evil in themselves, preoccupy them. They are too busy to accept the invitation; their priorities and passions are elsewhere.
They think, weddings are nice but money is nicer; God and religion have their place, but they don’t pay the bills.
The goal of the worldly, is this world and what it offers, not God or the things awaiting them in Heaven. Things like prayer, holiness, Scripture, and sacraments don’t provide obvious material blessings to the worldly minded so they are low on the priority list. St. Paul speaks of people whose god is their belly and who have their mind set on worldly things (cf Phil 3:19).
So off they go, one to his farm, another to his business; one to watch football, another to detail his car; one to sleep in, another to go golfing; one to make money, another to the mall to spend it.
A second group of those rejecting the Kingdom do so out of some degree of wickedness. Jesus speaks of how they abuse and even kill those who invite them. Why this anger? For many, the kingdom of God is rejected because it is not convenient to their moral life. Many of them rightly understand that in order to enter the wedding feast of the Kingdom, they will need to be “properly dressed.” Of course “proper dress” here refers not to clothes but to holiness and righteousness, to living the moral vision of the Kingdom.
The invitation to the wedding feast of the Kingdom incites anger because it casts a judgment on some of their behaviors and tweaks their conscience. A great deal of the hostility directed toward God, Scripture, the Church, and her servants who speak God’s truth, is explained by the fact that, deep down, they know that what is proclaimed is true.
If their minds have become darkened or their hearts hardened by sin, they simply hate being told what to do or any suggestion that what they are doing is wrong. Being told to live chastely, or to forgive, or to be more generous to the poor, or to welcome all new life (even if there are deformities or disabilities), or that there are priorities higher than money, sex, career, and worldly access; all of this is obnoxious. Yes, the world often treats God and those who speak of Him with contempt. Some are even martyred in certain places and times.
Of course many who reject the Kingdom do so for multiple reasons, but Jesus focuses on these two broad categories, under which a lot of those reasons fall.
III. RESULTING RUIN – The text says, The king was enraged and sent his troops, destroyed those murderers, and burned their city.
As with last week’s Gospel, there is a shocking detail to the story that is somewhat mysterious. How can such a violent punishment be squared with a vision of God who loves us?
It is not an easy thing to answer, but to respond by pretending that this is not taught or that this will never happen, is to reject the loving urgency with which Jesus speaks. He is not simply using scare tactics or hyperbole; He is teaching us what is true for our salvation.
Historically, this destruction happened to ancient Israel in 70 A.D., forty years after Jesus’ resurrection. After forty years the no of the invited guests (in this case, the Ancient Jews) became definitive and led to their ruin and the end of the temple.
It is the same for us. The Lord invites us all to accept His Kingdom as long as we live. If we are slow to respond, He repeats his offer again and again. In the end, though, if we don’t want to have the Kingdom of God, we don’t have to have it. Upon our death, our choice is fixed. If our answer is no, our ruin is certain, for outside the Kingdom there is nothing but ruins. We will either accept the invitation to live in the Kingdom of God and by its values or we will reject it and make “other arrangements.” Those other arrangements are ruinous.
Be sure of this: God wants to save everyone (cf Ez 18:23, 32, 33:1; 1 Tim 2:4). If Hell exists, it is only because of God’s reverence for our freedom to choose. Mind you, there are not just a few who reject the Kingdom. They live showing that they do not want a thing to do with many of the values of the Kingdom of Heaven: chastity, forgiveness, love of enemies, generosity to the poor, and detachment from the world. God will not force them to accept these things or to be surrounded by those who live them perfectly in Heaven. They are free to make other arrangements and to build their eternal home elsewhere. Compared to Heaven, everything else is a smoldering ruin.
IV. RELENTLESS RESOLVE – The text says, Then he said to his servants, ‘The feast is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy to come. Go out, therefore, into the main roads and invite to the feast whomever you find.’
When some reject the invitation, God merely widens the invitation. He wants His Son’s wedding feast to be full, so He keeps on inviting and widening the invitation. Here is an extravagant God who does not give up. When rejected, He just keeps calling.
V. REMAINING REQUIREMENT – The text says, The servants went out into the streets and gathered all they found, bad and good alike, and the hall was filled with guests. But when the king came in to meet the guests, he saw a man there not dressed in a wedding garment. The king said to him, ‘My friend, how is it that you came in here without a wedding garment?’ But he was reduced to silence. Then the king said to his attendants, ‘Bind his hands and feet, and cast him into the darkness outside, where there will be wailing and grinding of teeth.’ Many are invited, but few are chosen.
Here, then, is a warning, even for those of us who do accept the invitation and enter the Kingdom: We must wear the proper wedding garment.
As we have already remarked, the garment referred to is not one of cloth but of righteousness. This righteousness in which we are to be clothed can come only from God. God supplies the garment. The book of Revelation says that the saints were each given a white robe to wear (Rev 6:10). The text also speaks of the Church in a corporate sense as being clothed in righteousness: Let us rejoice and exult and give him the glory, for the marriage of the Lamb has come, and his Bride has made herself ready; it was granted her to be clothed with fine linen, bright and pure”—for the fine linen is the righteous deeds of the saints (Rev 19:7-8). Hence righteousness is imaged by clothing, and that clothing is given by God. At our baptism the priest makes mention of our white garment as an outward sign of our dignity, which we are to bring unstained to the judgment seat of Christ. At our funeral, too, the white pall placed upon the casket recalls the white robe of righteousness given to us by God.
Scripture speaks elsewhere of our righteousness as a kind of clothing that we “put on”:
Let us then cast off the works of darkness and put on the armor of light (Rom 13:12).
But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires (Rom 13:14).
And be renewed in the spirit of your minds, and put on the new nature, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness (Eph 4:23).
Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. (Eph 6:11).
Stand therefore, having girded your loins with truth, and having put on the breastplate of righteousness (Eph 6:14).
You have put on the new nature, which is being renewed in knowledge after the image of its creator (Col 3:10).
Therefore, as God’s chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience. (Col 3:12).
But, since we belong to the day, let us be sober, and put on the breastplate of faith and love, and for a helmet the hope of salvation. (1 Thess 5:8).
Hence, when the king comes upon a man “not properly dressed,” he confronts him. The man has no response and so is cast out. Recall two things. First, this is not about a dress code, but a holiness code. The clothes symbolize righteousness. Second, the garment is provided. We have no righteousness of our own, only what God gives us. Hence, the refusal to wear the proper clothes is not about poverty or ignorance of the rules; it is an outright refusal to accept the values of the Kingdom and to “wear” them as a gift from God.
Scripture says of Heaven,Nothing impure will ever enter it, nor will anyone who does what is shameful or deceitful (Rev 21:27). Scripture also warns us, without holiness no one will see the Lord (Heb 12:14b). An old spiritual says, “None can walk up there, but the pure in heart.” Consider that Heaven would not be Heaven if sin and unrighteousness were allowed to exist there.
Only God can make us pure enough to enter Heaven, but He offers this gift of purity to everyone. Yet not everyone chooses to accept the garment of righteousness He offers. Not all will agree to undergo the purification necessary to enter Heaven.
The Lord concludes by saying that many are called, but few are chosen. Indeed, the Lord calls many (likely, all), but far fewer are chosen, for they themselves do not choose the Kingdom and the garment of righteousness. God ratifies their own choice.
Understand the urgency with which Jesus speaks and teaches. Our choices have consequences and, at some point, our choices become fixed. At that point, God will ratify what we have chosen. Notions of judgment, fixed choices, and Hell may be obnoxious to some; surely these teachings are sobering and even frightening to all. We may have legitimate questions as to how to reconcile the existence of Hell with God’s mercy, however judgment and the reality of Hell are all still taught—and they are taught by the Lord Jesus who loves us. No one loves you more than Jesus Christ, yet no one spoke of Hell more than He did.
The Lord is solemnly urging us to be sober and serious about our spiritual destiny and that of those whom we love. Hear the Lord’s urgency in this vivid parable, told in shocking detail. Realize that it is told in love and heed its message.
In the Gospel of Luke, the Lord told the parable of the Prodigal Son. In it, the sinful son returned to his father, who, joyful and moved, threw a great feast. The older son sulked, refusing to enter. Incredibly, his father came out and pleaded with him to come in. “We must rejoice,” he said. Oddly, the parable ends there. We never learn if the sulking son entered. The story does not end because we must finish it. Each of us is the son. What is our answer? Will we accept all the Kingdom values and enter, or will we remain outside? And what are we doing to ensure that our loved ones give the proper answer? The Father is pleading with us to enter the feast. What is our answer?
In the Gospel for today’s Mass (Thursday of the 27th Week of the Year) Jesus says,
If you then, who are wicked, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him? (Lk 11:13)
I received an e-mail once, regarding this verse:
“This line bugs me. I think I know the larger point that Jesus makes here, and/or perhaps it’s poorly translated, but it seems a bit harsh for Jesus to refer to mankind as ‘wicked’. Wicked? That’s tough stuff! But perhaps, to Jesus, we are evil.”
So what is going on here? Why does Jesus call us wicked?
First let’s make sure that the translation from the Greek is a good one. The Greek expression used is πονηροὶ ὑπάρχοντες (poneroi hyparchontes). Poneroi is defined “bad, of a bad nature or condition,” but it is also defined as “full of labors, annoyances, hardships.” Hyparchontes is defined as “from the very beginning” or “being inherently.”
Thus, the translation “you who are wicked” is likely accurate. However, there is a sort of sympathy contained in it as well, implying that this wickedness comes from the fact that we have inherited a fallen nature that is weighed down with the labors and hardships that come from living in this fallen world, this “paradise lost.”
What do the commentaries say? It is interesting that in the seven modern commentaries I consulted, not one of them mentions this expression. However, some of the ancient Fathers did:
Cyril of Alexandria wrote, When he says, “You who are evil” he means, “You whose mind is capable of being influenced by evil and not uniformly inclined to good like the God of all” (Commentary on Luke, Homily 79).
In one of his homilies, Bede had this to say:Any human mortal, weak and still burdened with sinful flesh, does not refuse to give the good things which he possesses, although they are earthly and weak, to the children whom he loves (Homilies on the Gospel 2.14).
Elsewhere, Bede is quoted as follows:He calls the lovers of the world evil, who give those things which they judge good according to their sense, which are also good in their nature, and are useful to aid imperfect life. Hence he adds, “[They] know how to give good gifts to [their] children.” The Apostles even, who by the merit of their election had exceeded the goodness of mankind in general, are said to be evil in comparison with Divine goodness, since nothing is of itself good but God alone (Quoted in the Catena Aurea at Lk 11:13).
Athanasius said,Now unless the Holy Spirit were of the substance of God, Who alone is good, He would by no means be called good, since our Lord [Jesus] refused to be called good, inasmuch as He was made man (Quoted in the Catena Aurea at Luke 11:13).
What, then, can we draw from the fact that the Lord calls us “wicked”?
Jesus seems to be speaking by comparison or degree. He may not mean that we are evil in an absolute sense, rather that we are evil in comparison to God, who is absolute good. The Hebrew and Aramaic languages have fewer comparative words, so the ancient Jews would often use absolute categories to set forth comparison or degree. For example, elsewhere Jesus tells us that we must hate our father, mother, children, and even our very self and that we must love Him (e.g., Luke 14:26). This does not mean that we are to literally despise our family and others. It means that we are to love Jesus more than we love them. Because of the paucity of comparative words available, the ancient Jews used a lot of what we would consider to be hyperbole. In modern English we might say, “If you, then, who are not nearly as holy as God and are prone to sin, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will God, who is absolutely good and not prone to sin, give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him?”
However, we ought to be careful not to discount Jewish hyperbole and simply rewrite the words; the point of the hyperbole cannot be completely set aside. Created things may share in God’s goodness, but God alone is absolutely good. So good is He, in fact, that everything else is practically evil in comparison. The hyperbole places the emphasis of God’s absolute goodness. We have no goodness apart from God’s goodness. If we do share in God’s goodness, it is infinitesimal in comparison. Hence, as Bede said, The Apostles even, who by the merit of their election had exceeded the goodness of mankind in general, are said to be evil in comparison with Divine goodness, since nothing is of itself good but God alone.
Even Jesus refused the title “good” for Himselfin terms of His humanity. The Gospel of Mark contains the following dialogue: As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. “Good teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?” “Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good except God alone (Mk 10:17-18). As God, Jesus is good—absolute good. One could also argue that in His sinless humanity, Jesus is also good; but Jesus, presuming the man merely regarded Him as ordinarily human, rebukes him and declares that God alone is good.
In the end, it’s time for us to eat some humble pie. Jesus probably does not mean we are absolutely evil and have nothing good in us, but God alone is absolutely good. He is so good that we can barely be thought of as anything but evil in the face of His immense goodness. Humble pie doesn’t have much sugar in it, does it!
In daily Mass we have been reading from second chapter of the Letter to the Galatians. In it, St. Paul recounts his personal history and describes his authority. St. Paul’s story is interesting for three reasons:
It shows that St. Paul did not ascend to the office of apostle (bishop) overly quickly but rather was formed in the community of the Church for quite some time and did not go on mission until he was sent.
It spells out Paul’s relationship to authority within the Church.
It shows the need for fraternal correction even of those under whose authority one falls.
Let’s take a look at each of these matters in turn.
1. On Paul’s conversion, formation, and ascent to the office of apostle (bishop)– Many people have oversimplified notions of Paul’s conversion and subsequent missionary activity. Many who have not carefully studied the texts of Acts, Galatians, and other references, incorrectly assume that Paul went right to work as a missionary immediately following his conversion.
Near the time of his conversion, Paul was described as “a young man” (neanias). Sometime after the death of Stephen, St. Paul had his conversion, encountering the risen Christ on the road to Damascus. Immediately following that encounter, he was blinded for three days and eventually healed by a Christian named Ananias, who also baptized him (Acts 9:9-19).
At that point, Paul went into the Desert of Arabia (Gal 1:17). Why he went there is not known, but it was likely to reflect and possibly to be further formed in the Christian faith to which he had come so suddenly and unexpectedly. Scholars differ on whether he was there for several years or just a brief time, but it would seem that some amount of time would be necessary to pray, reflect, and experience formation in the Christian way, possibly with other Christians. A period of one to three years would seem reasonable, but we can only speculate.
Paul then returned to Damascus, joining the Christian community there for a period of almost three years (Gal 1:18). While in Damascus, Paul took to debating in the synagogues. He was so effective in demonstrating that Jesus was the hoped-for Messiah, that some of the Jews there conspired to kill him.
St. Paul then fled Damascus and went to Jerusalem (Acts 9:20-25). He states that he went there to confer with Cephas (Peter) (Gal 1:18). Paul seems to imply that he thought it was time to confer with Peter because he had begun to teach and was gaining followers. Later, Paul would describe the purpose of another visit to Peter and the other leaders: to present the Gospel that I preach to the Gentiles … so that I might not be running or have run in vain (Gal 2:2). While there on this first visit, Paul stayed for 15 days, also meeting James.
After this consultation, Paul returned home to Tarsus and remained there for about three years. What he did during this time is unknown.
Barnabas then arrived and asked Paul to come to Antioch to help him to evangelize there (Acts 11:25-26). Paul stayed there for about a year.
Paul made another brief visit to Jerusalem to deliver a collection for the poor.
Upon his return to Antioch, Paul (Saul) was ordained as a bishop. The leaders of the Church at Antioch were praying and received instruction from the Holy Spirit to Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them (Acts 13:3). As a result, the leaders of the Church in Antioch then laid hands on Barnabas and Saul and send them forth on their mission. This is Paul’s ordination and the source of his status as apostle (bishop).
Notice, however, that this sending forth happens years after Paul’s conversion. Depending on how long we assume he spent in the desert, we are talking about 7-10 years during which Paul lived in community with other members of the Church and conferred with Peter. He was not a self-appointed missionary and his conversion required completion before the Church sent him forth. Paul only undertook this going forth after being sent.
2. On Paul’s submission to authority – Paul was not a “lone ranger.” He submitted what he taught, first to Peter and later to other apostles and leaders (Acts 11 and 15). Paul states that to preach something other than what the Church proposes would be to run “in vain” (Gal 2:2).
Here was a man who was formed by the community of the Church and who submitted his teachings to scrutiny by lawful authority.
Here was man who went forth on his missions only after he was ordained and sent.
He appointed other leaders. As they went through the towns and villages on their missionary journeys, Paul and Barnabas also established authority in each church community they founded by appointing presbyters in each town (Acts 14:23).
Upon completion of their first missionary journey, Paul and Barnabas reported back to the leaders at Antioch who had sent them (Acts 14:27) and later to the apostles in Jerusalem (Acts 15). Hence, we have an accountability structure in the early Church and a line of authority. Paul was not an independent operator. He was not a self-appointed or self-ordained leader. He both respected authority and established it in the churches he instituted. He also made it clear to the Galatians and others that he had authority and that he expected them to respect it.
3. On true respect for authority – Paul clearly respected the authority of Peter: he conferred with him early on and later set forth the gospel that Peter had preached. However, there is also this description of Paul offering fraternal correction to Peter:
When Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong. Before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray. When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter in front of them all, “You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs? (Gal 2:11-14)
There is something refreshing about this understanding of authority. Having authority does not mean that one is above reproof. Too many people shy away from speaking honestly to those in authority. Today that is beginning to change and well it should.
Paul stands face to face (κατὰ πρόσωπον αὐτῷ ἀντέστην) with Peter and rebukes his practice of sitting only with Jews. Peter had taught rightly of the equality of the Gentiles but drew back from keeping company with them. As Catholics, we teach of the infallibility of the Pope, but we do not teach that he is impeccable (sinless). Even those who teach rightly (as Peter did) sometimes struggle to fully live the truth they preach.
Clearly, correction and/or frank discussion should be done charitably, but it should be done. Paul is bolder than I would be, but he also lived in a different culture than I do. As we can see from the Gospels and other writings, Jesus and the apostles really “mixed it up” with others. The ancient Jews were famous for frank and vigorous discussion of issues, often including a lot of hyperbole. Our own culture prefers a gentler approach. Perhaps the modern rule is best stated this way: “Clarity with charity.”
Clarity – We show far greater respect for authority figures by speaking clearly and directly to them than through false flattery, inappropriate silence, or sinfully speaking scornfully of them behind their backs.
Charity – The need for clarity does not exclude an accompanying need for charity and proper respect for office and age. Sadly, I have found that those who wish to correct clergy today often go to the other extreme: using bold, disrespectful, and even insulting language; name calling; and impugning motives. Not only is this unnecessary, it is ineffective, especially in these times.
St. Paul demonstrates refreshing honesty with Peter, acknowledging his authority while respecting him enough to speak to him directly and clearly, not behind his back.
This video provides a brief summary of St. Paul’s life. Most scholars don’t agree with the remark (at about the 2:55 mark in the clip) that Paul was released from his imprisonment in Rome and then went to Spain, but there are two traditions in this regard.
On one level “human respect” seems like a good thing. After all, we ought to respect, honor and appreciate one another. What then is meant by the “sin of human respect”? It is that sin wherein we fear man more than God; we are more concerned with what people think of us than what God thinks of us. This is an unholy, sinful fear, and is at the root of many of our sins, both of commission and of omission.
Consider some examples:
A man goes up to a group of other men who are talking about the boss and also speaking inappropriately about some women in the office. He knows that their disparaging comments about the boss are unfair or even untrue. He also knows that talking about the women in the office using crude sexual imagery and lustful references is wrong. But because he wants to “fit in,” he joins in the conversation and contributes to what he knows is wrong. He laughs at the off-color jokes and makes no attempt to steer the conversation in a more appropriate direction. He does this because he fears rejection and is more concerned about what his co-workers think of him than what God thinks of him. He fears man more than he does God. That God is displeased with his actions is less important to him than that any of these men should be displeased.
A young woman knows that sex before marriage is wrong and that this displeases God. However, she has dated a number of men now and has slept with most of them. She does this partly because she fears rejection. Perhaps if she does not give in to the desires of the young men she dates they will reject her and she will be alone. She thinks that a woman “has to do this” in order to be popular and desirable. She fears man more than she does God. What human beings think is more important to her than what God thinks. She may well minimize the importance of God’s displeasure by saying to herself, “Oh well, God understands.” But at the same time, she maximizes in her mind the importance of the displeasure of weak and fallible human beings, thinking that displeasing them would lead to catastrophe. She respects—that is, fears—man more than she does God.
A pastor of a parish has a mandate from God and the Church to preach the whole counsel of God but he struggles to preach the “hard” things. After all, teaching on things like abortion, fornication, divorce, contraception, homosexual activity, euthanasia, and capital punishment causes some people to be upset. He fears this anger, fears offending people, fears being misunderstood. Once, when he spoke about abortion (because the Bishop mandated it), a few parishioners came up to him and told him that he should not bring politics into the pulpit. Once, when he had preached about the problem of divorce (the topic of that day’s Gospel), a (divorced) woman approached him after Mass saying that she felt hurt and “excluded.” Experiences like these have led the priest to “play it safe.” He always starts the homily with a joke and the people seem to love him for it. He chooses to preach only in abstractions and generalities. He exhorts people to be a little more kind, a little more generous, but avoids specificity. He does this because he fears man more than he does God. That God might be displeased that His people are not hearing the truth about important moral issues or receiving proper instruction in discipleship is a vague and distant fear to this priest. But one person raising an eyebrow at what he says is enough to ruin his whole week. Thus he goes silent as a prophet and becomes a people-pleaser instead. He respects—fears—man more than he does God.
A mother knows that she is to raise her children in the fear of the Lord and train them in godly way, but oh, the protests when she tells them to do their chores, or go to bed, or do their homework! It’s just such a hassle to endure their anger and disappointment. She also remembers how stern her parents were and how she had vowed she would be nicer to her own children. So, little by little, she lets her authority erode and the children more often than not get their way. Her husband is not a strong disciplinarian and he wants to be thought of as “cool” by his children and their friends. God’s insistence on prayer, discipline, and respect for elders, gives way to what the children want. The oldest, a teenager, doesn’t want to go to Mass anymore. But after all, “You can’t force religion on kids,” they think. Here, too, the parents fear their children more than they do God. They have greater respect for their children than they do for God.
So these are some examples of the “sin of human respect.” It runs very deep in our wounded nature and leads to many other sins as well. Many people are desperate for attention, respect, acceptance, and approval from other human beings. Many of these same individuals, though (even the religiously observant), struggle to be nearly as concerned with what God thinks of them or whether He approves of their behavior.
God has a straightforward solution to this: we should fear Him and no one else. There is an old saying, “If I kneel before God I can stand before any man.” It makes sense that it is a lot easier to fear (respect) one, than many. The more we learn to fear (respect) God, the less concerned we become with what others think. This is not an invitation to become a sociopath who cares not a whit what others think. We are to remain polite, groom ourselves, and not intentionally pick fights. But in the end, we are instructed by the Lord to be freed of all the fearful trepidation of what others think.
Calling this is a straightforward solution refers more to its description than its execution. It is not easy to extract ourselves from this very deep drive; in fact, it takes a life time. But the first step to healing is admitting we have a problem. Then we begin to see it for what it is, understand its moves, and let the Lord steadily free us.
Let us also be clear: the fear of the Lord that is counseled here is not a cowering and servile fear. If this is all one can muster, though, it is better than having no fear at all! But the real goal is to have a filial fear of God, fearing to offend Him because we love Him. This type of fear of the Lord holds Him in awe. It is to have a reverence for Him rooted in deep love and gratitude. Out of this love and gratitude we fear to offend Him more than offending any other.
Perhaps some Scripture quotes that address various aspects of the problem of human respect and the remedy of holy fear will be a fitting conclusion to this reflection:
Through the fear of the LORD a man avoids evil (Prov 16:6).
Do not let your heart envy sinners, but always be zealous for the fear of the LORD (Prov 23:17).
Better a little with the fear of the Lord than great wealth with turmoil (Prov 15:16).
The fear of God will be with you to keep you from sinning (Ex 20:20).
You alone are to be feared O Lord (Psalm 76:7).
God is more awesome than all who surround him (Psalm 89:7).
I lie down and sleep; I wake again, because the LORD sustains me. I will not fear the tens of thousands drawn up against me on every side (Psalm 3:4-5).
I will give them singleness of heart and action, so that they will always fear me for their own good and the good of their children after them (Jer 32:39).
The Pharisees came to Jesus and said, “Teacher, we know you are a man of integrity. You aren’t swayed by men, because you pay no attention to who they are; but you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth” (Mark 12:14).
Woe to you when all men speak well of you, for that is how their fathers treated the false prophets (Luke 6:26).
If anyone is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels (Luke 9:26).
And do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in Gehenna (Matt 10:28).
If the world hates you, realize that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, the world would love its own; but because you do not belong to the world, and I have chosen you out of the world, the world hates you (Jn 15:18-19).
It does not concern me in the least that I be judged by you or any human tribunal; I do not even pass judgment on myself; I am not conscious of anything against me, but I do not thereby stand acquitted; the one who judges me is the Lord (1 Cor 4:3).
From now on, let no one make troubles for me; for I bear the marks of Jesus on my body (Gal 6:17).
We know what it is to fear the Lord, we try to persuade men. What we are is plain to God, and I hope it is also plain to your conscience (2 Cor 5:11).
There is an urgency and clarity about today’s Gospel that is often lacking in modern Christians, including the clergy. In this Gospel, the message is urgent, provocative, and clear: there is a day of judgment coming for every one of us and we simply must be ready. The message is a sobering one for a modern world that is often dismissive of judgment and certainly of Hell. Yet Jesus says clearly that the Kingdom of God can be taken from us for our refusal to accept its fruits in our life.
Parables used by Jesus to teach on judgment and the reality of Hell are often quite vivid, even shocking in their harsh imagery. They are certainly not stories for the easily offended. And they are also difficult to take for those who have tried to refashion Jesus into a pleasant, affirming sort of fellow rather than the uncompromising prophet and Lord that He is.
No one spoke of Hell more often than Jesus did. Attempting to reconcile these bluntly presented teachings with the God who loves us so, points to the deeper mysteries of justice and mercy and their interaction with human freedom. But this point must be clear: no one loves us more than Jesus does and yet no one spoke of Hell and its certainty more often than Jesus did. No one warned us of judgment and its inescapable consequences more often than did Jesus. Out of love for us, Jesus speaks of death, judgment, Heaven, and Hell. As one who loves us, He wants none of us to be lost. So He warns us; He speaks the truth in love.
Historically, this parable had meaning for the ancient Jews that had already come to pass. God had established and cared for his vine, Israel. He gave them every blessing, having led them out of slavery and established them in the Promised Land. Yet searching for the fruits of righteousness he found little. Then, sending many prophets to warn and call forth those fruits, the prophets were persecuted, rejected, and even murdered. Finally, God sent His Son, but He too was murdered. There comes forth a sentence: He will put those wretched men to a wretched death and lease his vineyard to other tenants who will give him the produce at the proper times … Therefore, I say to you, the Kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people that will produce its fruit. By 70 AD, Jerusalem was destroyed; the Temple was never to be rebuilt.
The Jewish people are not singled out in the Scriptures, for we all, like them, are a vineyard, and if we are not careful, their story will be our own story. We, like the ancients, have a decision to make. Either we accept the offer of the Kingdom and thereby yield to the Lord’s work and bring forth a harvest, or we face judgment for the fact that we have chosen to reject the offer of the Kingdom. God will not force us to accept His Kingship or His Kingdom. We have a choice to make and that choice will be at the heart of the judgment we will face.
Let’s take a closer look at the Gospel and apply it to the vineyard of our lives.
I. THE SOWING – The text says, There was a landowner who planted a vineyard, put a hedge around it, dug a wine press in it, and built a tower. Then he leased it to tenants and went on a journey.
Note the care and providence of the landowner (God) who has given each of us life and every kind of grace. The image of the vineyard indicates that we have the capacity to bear fruit. This signifies the many gifts, talents, and abilities that we have been given by God.
The hedge calls to mind the protection of His grace and mercy. Though the world can be a tempting place, God has put a hedge of protection around us that is sufficient to keep us safe from serious sin, if we accept its power.
But note, too, that a hedge implies limits. And thus God’s protective graces, though sufficient, mean that we must live within limits, within the hedge that keeps the wild animals of temptation from devouring the fruits of our vine.
The tower is symbolic of the Church, which stands guard like a watchman warning of dangers to us who live within the boundaries of the hedge. And the tower (the Church) is also standing forth as a sign of contradiction to the hostile world outside, which seeks to devour the fruit of the vineyard.
That the landowner leases the the vineyard is a reminder that we are not our own; we have been purchased at great cost. God and God alone created all these things we call our own. We are but stewards, even of our very lives. We belong to God and must render an account and show forth fruits as we shall next see.
But this point must be emphasized: God has given us great care; He has given us His grace, His mercy, His very self. As the text from Isaiah says, What more was there to do for my vineyard that I had not done? God loves us and does not want us to be lost. He gives us every grace and mercy we need to make it. The Lord says, As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways! Why will you die, O house of Israel? (Ez 33:11) This must be emphasized before we grumble too quickly about the subsequent judgment that comes. God offers every possible grace to save us. It is up to us to accept or reject the help.
II. THE SEEKING – The text says, When vintage time drew near, he sent his servants to the tenants to obtain his produce.
There come moments in our lives when God looks for fruits. Remember that He is the owner and the fruits are rightfully His. He has done everything to bring forth the fruit and now deserves to see the produce of His grace in the vineyard of our life, which is His own.
And what fruits does the Lord seek? The values and fruits of the Kingdom: faith, justice, mercy, peace, forgiveness, chastity, faithfulness, generosity, love of the poor, love of one’s family and friends, even love of one’s enemy, kindness, truth, sincerity, courage to speak the truth and witness to the faith, and an evangelical spirit.
Note, too, that the text says he sends servants to obtain the produce. Here also is evidence of God’s mercy. Historically, God’s “servants” were the prophets. And God sent the prophets not only to bring forth the harvest of justice, but also to remind, clarify, and apply God’s Word and warn sinners. God patiently sent many generations of prophets to help Israel.
It is the same for us. God sends us many prophets to remind, clarify, apply, and warn. Perhaps they are priests or religious, parents, catechists, teachers, or role models. But they are all part of God’s plan to warn us to bear fruit and to help call forth and obtain some of those very fruits for God. Each in his own way says, as St. Paul did in today’s second reading, Whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is gracious, if there is any excellence and if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. Keep on doing what you have learned and received and heard and seen in me (Phil 4:8-9).
Yes, God seeks fruits, and rightfully so. And He sends His servants, the prophets, to help call them forth in us.
III. THE SINNING – The text says, But the tenants seized the servants and one they beat, another they killed, and a third they stoned. Again he sent other servants, more numerous than the first ones, but they treated them in the same way. Finally, he sent his son to them, thinking, ‘They will respect my son.’ But when the tenants saw the son, they said to one another, ‘This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and acquire his inheritance.’ They seized him, threw him out of the vineyard, and killed him.
Thus, despite all God has done by sending His servants, the prophets, the tenants reject them all, and with increasing vehemence. Their hearts grow harder. The landowner (God) even goes so far to demonstrate his love and his will to save, that he sends his own son. But they drag him outside the vineyard and kill him. Yes, Jesus died outside the city gates, murdered for seeking the fruit of faith from the tenants of the vineyard.
And what of us? There are too many who reject God’s prophets. They do so with growing vehemence and abusive treatment. Many today despise the Church, despise the Scriptures, despise fathers, mothers, friends, and Christians in general who seek to clarify and apply God’s Word and to warn of the need to be ready. It is quite possible that, for any of us, repeated resistance can cause a hardening of the heart to set in. In the end, there are some, in fact many according to Jesus, who effectively kill the life of God within them and utterly reject the Kingdom of God and its values. They do not want to live lives that show forth forgiveness, mercy, love of enemies, chastity, justice, love of the poor, generosity, kindness, and witness to the Lord and the truth.
We ought to be very sober as there are many, many today who are like this. Some have merely drifted away and are indifferent. (Some, we must say, have been hurt or are struggling to believe, but at least they remain open.) Still others are passionate in their hatred for the Church, Scripture, and anything to do with God, and they explicitly reject many, if not most of the kingdom values listed above. We must be urgent to continue in our attempt to reach them, as we shall see.
IV. THE SENTENCING – The text says, What will the owner of the vineyard do to those tenants when he comes? They answered him, ‘He will put those wretched men to a wretched death and lease his vineyard to other tenants who will give him the produce at the proper times.’ Therefore, I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people that will produce its fruit.
Here then is the sentence: if you don’t want the Kingdom, you don’t have to have it. At one level, it would seem to us that everyone wants the Kingdom, i.e., everyone who has any faith in God at all wants to go to Heaven. But what is Heaven? It is the fullness of the Kingdom of God. It is not just a place of our making. It is that place where the will of God, where the Kingdom’s values are in full flower. But as we have seen, there are many who do not want to live chastely, do not want to forgive, do not want to be generous to and love the poor, do not want God or anyone else at the center, do not want to worship God.
Self exclusion – Having rejected the Kingdom’s values, and having rejected the prophets who warned them, many simply exclude themselves from the Kingdom. God will not force the Kingdom on anyone. If you don’t want it, even after God’s grace and mercy and His pleading through the prophets, you don’t have to have it. It will be taken from you and given to those who do want it and appreciate its help.
The existence of Hell is rooted essentially in God’s respect for our freedom, for we have been called to love. But love must be free, not compelled. Hence, Hell has to be. It is the “alternative arrangement” that others make for themselves in their rejection of the Kingdom of God. At some point, God calls the question, and at death our decision is forever fixed.
Yes, Hell and the judgment that precedes it, are clearly taught here and in many other places by Jesus (e.g., Matt 23:33; Lk 16:23; Mk 43:47; Matt 5:29; Matt 10:28; Matt 18:9; Matt 5:22; Matt 11:23; Matt 7:23; Matt 25:41; Mk 9:48; Luke 13:23; Rev 22:15; and many, many more). This is taught by a Lord who loves us and wants to save us, but who is also well aware of our stubborn and stiff-necked ways.
What is a healthy response to this teaching? To work earnestly for the salvation of souls, beginning with our own. Nothing has so destroyed evangelization and missionary activity as the modern notion that everyone goes to Heaven. Nothing has so destroyed any zeal for the moral life or hunger for the Sacraments, prayer, and Scripture. And nothing is so contrary to Scripture as the dismissal of Hell and the notion that all are going to Heaven.
But rather than panic or despair, we ought to get to work and be more urgent in our quest to win souls for Christ. Who is it that the Lord wants you to work with to draw back to Him? Pray and ask Him, “Who, Lord?” The Lord does not want any to be lost. But, as of old, He still sends His prophets (this means you) to draw back anyone who will listen. Will you work for the Lord? Will you work for souls? For there is a day of judgment looming and we must be made ready for it by the Lord. Will you be urgent about it, for yourself and others?
This video features the words of an old spiritual: Sinner please don’t let this harvest pass, and die and lose your soul at last. I made this video more than a year ago and in it there is a picture of Fr. John Corapi preaching. Since I made it long before his recent “troubles,” please do not attribute any implication from me by its inclusion; it is simply indicative of the “age” of the video.
Most of us struggle with the fact that God allows bad things to happen. Why does he not intervene more often to protect us from attacks of various sorts and from events that cause sadness, setbacks, or suffering?
While the answer is mysterious, the clearest response is that God allows suffering in order that some greater blessing may occur. To some degree I have found this to be so in my life; some of my greatest blessings required that I accept painful things as well.
I wonder if we consider often enough the countless times Goddidstep in to prevent disaster in our life. We tend to focus on the negative things, overlooking an enormous number of often-hidden blessings: every beat of our heart, the proper functioning of every cell in our body, and all the perfect balances that exist in nature and the cosmos in order to sustain humanity.
Just think of the simple act of walking and all the missteps we might take each time but most often do not. Think of all the foolish risks we have taken in our life—especially when we were young—that did not end in catastrophe but surely could have. Think of all the poor choices we have made and yet escaped the worst possible consequences.
I thought of all these things as I watched the commercial below. While it speaks of the watchfulness of a father, it also makes me think of my guardian angel, who has surely protected me from many disasters.
As you watch the commercial, don’t forget to thank God for the many times He has rescued you through the intervention of your guardian angel. Thank Him, too, for His hidden blessings—blessings you know nothing of—that He bestowed upon you anyway. Finally, think of the wonderful mercy He has often shown in protecting you from the worst of your foolishness.
The video below shows Bishop Robert Barron at his best. He is a master at decoding the deeper currents in our culture, and his analysis goes a long way toward showing how things have reached this point. He gives an in-depth review of the ideologies that are behind the rioting and unrest, pointing out the continued influence of the ideas of Karl Marx, Friedrich Nietzsche, Jean-Paul Sartre, and Michel Foucault.
The video is fifty minutes long, and some parts of it can be difficult to get through if you’re not schooled in philosophy, but no one can break it down the way Bishop Barron can. (If your time is limited, I’d suggest at least listening to the portion of his talk beginning at 37:05.) The Bishop explains why the assertions of these philosophers that there is no meaning in the external world other than what we humans put there, God has to be removed. The will overturns reason and man asserts his power to ascribe whatever meaning he wishes to all that is. Hence, reality and reason are replaced by raw power. This explains the bizarre assertions of the transgender movement and others who espouse views that deny obvious reality. It also explains the increasing violence we are seeing and the seeming inability to disagree or even converse in a civil manner. It is the tyranny of relativism. Power replaces reason and discourse. Those with the most power do not merely assert their views, they compel others to adopt and approve of them: “Bake me a cake, you bigot, or else we will destroy you.” Nietzsche is walking our streets.
Reality used to be something that we studied, learned from, and whose norms we obeyed. It’s the entire basis of the physical sciences. Beginning with the rise of nominalism in the 14th century, we have increasingly been living in our heads rather than in reality. We do not discover meaning; we project and assert it.
Scripture says,[A bishop] must hold firmly to the word as it was taught, so that he can encourage others by sound teaching and refute those who contradict it (Titus 1:9). Many long for our bishops to do more of this, especially at the deeper level of faith rather than just through policy statements aimed at the political order. I think Bishop Barron is to be commended for his effective teaching that helps people to identify errors, to recognize the hidden trends in our culture, and to celebrate the truth and beauty of Catholicism.
I must, however, also express a lament.
Many traditional Catholics have a tense relationship with Bishop Barron:
1. Traditional Catholics are concerned with what they describe as Barron’s puzzling views on universalism (the idea that most or all will be saved).
Word on Fire (Bishop Barron’s Evangelizing Organization replies: Bishop Barron does not hold to universalism, described here as “the idea that most or all will be saved.” He has explicitly denounced that view, which is heretical, and it’s both unfair and unhelpful to accuse of him holding it. You can read more about position here: https://wordonfire.org/hope
2. Traditional Catholics also lament his recent description of Jesus as a privileged wayrather than the only way to the Father (cf. John 14:6).
Word on Fire replies: Bishop Barron affirms that Jesus is the only way to the Father. He has written and preached endlessly about the uniqueness and centrality of Christ for the salvation of the world. The phrase he used in the Shapiro interview (“privileged way”) was pulled out of context and interpreted in the worst possible way by critics. See what he actually said here, in its full context: https://www.wordonfire.org/hope/#shapiro
3. Traditional Catholics also wonder at his recent project on Vatican II, which though seemingly aimed at traditional Catholics did not address their concerns.
Word on Fire replies: The specific concerns he was addressing were those of extreme, radical traditionalists (not ordinary traditionalists) who claimed that Vatican II taught heresy, was not binding, and should therefore be “dropped and forgotten.” He adequately addressed all those criticisms in several places, including here: https://www.wordonfire.org/vatican-ii-faq
4. Finally they express concerns that requests for direct discussions with Bishop Barron seem, in general, to have gone unanswered. This is unfortunate. The Bishop shows great solicitude for many in our culture who are troubled by Catholic teaching; he’s good at listening and at responding effectively and charitably. This same solicitude seems to be lacking, however, toward some of his own flock who are troubled by certain trends in the Church.
Word on Fire replies: He’s talked with several traditionalist Catholics over the years, both privately and publicly…. Also, he’s an incredibly busy man and this isn’t his fundamental mission. His two main tasks are to shepherd the people of his Santa Barbara region and to evangelize people outside the Church, introducing them to Christ and all the gifts he wants to offer them. That isn’t to say traditionalist Catholic criticisms aren’t important to Bishop Barron, only that he has limited time and that’s not his top priority.
Traditional Catholics and Bishop Barron should be natural allies in the battle for souls and for our culture. Word on Fire claims that “90+%” of traditional Catholics are with them and that only a small vocal minority is concerned. I wouldn’t be so sure about that; I think the numbers are higher than they think and are growing, at least from my interaction and the reactions I get when I quote the good bishop.
The rift is both painful and harmful. I hope that Bishop Barron will become more open to direct discussions with some of the unofficial leaders and commentators from the more traditional wing of the Church. Without this we all tend to caricature and simplify each other’s positions. These discussions could be private at first and have the goal of crafting a strategy to heal the divisions that have set up. If Bishop Barron can sit down with Ben Shapiro, why not with Dr. Peter Kwasniewski or Dr. Ralph Martin?
I understand WOF’s retort about his external mission but I am concerned that ignoring this growing rift may make his external mission more difficult. Bishop Robert Barron is one of the great evangelizers and bridge-builders of our day, and I commend him for this. But it is also time to recognize that the traditionalist part of the Church is growing, and it is ill-advised for anyone to simply wave it off as a fringe movement. There are extremists in every sector of the Church, but there are also many faithful and joyful traditional Catholics who need to be kept close to the bosom of the Church and who deserve thoughtful interactions with our bishops. I and others have sought to initiate such discussions with Bishop Barron; I hope he will consider this.
Meanwhile, I will continue to enjoy and learn from what Bishop Barron does and pray for an end to this unfortunate rift. He does so much good; please don’t write him off just yet. Pray for unity and for a healing of the divisions that currently exist but should not.
