After Mass a few weeks ago, I encountered a parishioner who was feeling very hurt by the Church and specifically, a comment that made her feel unwelcome in the parish.
Her story made me recall many years ago when I was starting my career as a high school teacher. I attended a small parish in the town where I was living and teaching. I was one of the few African Americans living in the town and it seemed like I was one of the only African American Catholics for hundreds of miles. Having said that, I never felt entirely welcome in the parish. I thought I was a fairly active member of the parish (Knights of Columbus and lector ministries were my favorites). Nonetheless, I often wondered if the pastor considered me a joy or an intrusion in his little church.
On leave – Not missing in action!
As a teacher, I often spent my summers traveling, visiting family and teaching at a summer program in another part of the country. So, though I attended Mass faithfully during the summer months, I rarely attended Mass in my parish of registration. Furthermore, I would inform the parish secretary of this each June and ask her not to schedule me as a lector until I returned in September. Year after year, she would accommodate my request in the spring and welcome me back to town warmly in the fall.
Well, one fall, I returned and was told that I would have to talk to the pastor in order to get back into the lector ministry. When I approached Father, he chastised me for my “sparse attendance at Mass.” Furthermore, he told me that I had no business on the altar if I did not bother to come to Mass regularly.
Judge not
Needless to say I was livid! Once I explained my circumstances, I think he understood and almost apologized. But, I was livid still. I told him, “What if I were sick, or lost my job and couldn’t come to church? Worse yet, what if I had actually lost faith as you suspected and did not find Mass important? As a pastor, couldn’t you have made a phone call before you removed me from the lector schedule?!”
Almost a lost sheep
I walked out and vowed never to return to that parish. Every Sunday, I drove an extra 15 miles to the next Catholic Church until I moved back to Washington a year later. Furthermore, that is certainly not the only time in my life I have been hurt by the Church.
Now that I am older, wiser and more grounded in my faith, I wonder how many others have walked away not just from a parish but from the entire Catholic Church because of a negative experience such as the one I described. On the other end of the spectrum, I wonder about those who have experienced far worse than a judgmental pastor and how impossible healing may seem to some of them.
A step toward healing
Consider the following poem that was given to me a few years ago after a hurtful experience with our beloved Church. What do you think about it?
How much I must criticize you, my church, and yet how much I love you!
You have made me suffer more than anyone and yet I owe more to you than to anyone.
I should like to see you destroyed and yet I need your presence.
You have given me much scandal and yet you alone have made me understand holiness.
Never in this world have I seen anything more compromised, more false, yet never have I touched anything more pure, more generous or more beautiful.
Countless times I have felt like slamming the door of my soul in your face—and yet, every night, I have prayed that I might die in your sure arms!
No, I cannot be free of you, for I am one with you, even if not completely you.
Then too — where would I go? To build another church? But I could not build one without the same defects, for they are my defects.
And again, if I were to build another church, it would be my church, not Christ’s church. No, I am old enough, I know better.”
In the first reading at Today’s Mass (and all last week at daily Mass) we have recounted for us the Council of Jerusalem which scholars generally date to around the Year 50 AD. It was a pivotal moment in the history of the Church since it would set forth an identity for the Church that was independent per se from the culture of Judaism, and it would open wide the door or inculturation to the Gentiles. This surely had significant impact upon evangelization in the early Church.
Catholic Ecclesiology is Evident here: I want to set forth in this article the proposition that we have reflected here a very Catholic model of the Church in terms of how a matter of significant pastoral practice and doctrine is properly dealt with. In effect what we see here is the same model the Catholic Church has continued to use right to our own time. What is evident here and in all subsequent Ecumenical Councils is a gathering of the Bishops presided over by the Pope which considers a matter and may even debate it. If necessary the Pope resolves debates where consensus cannot be reached. Once a decision is reached, a letter is issued to whole Church and considered binding.
All these elements are seen here though somewhat in seminal form. Let’s consider this First Council of the Church in Jerusalem of 50 AD. beginning first with the remote preparation –
1. Bring in the Gentiles! – The Lord, just before he ascended gave the Apostles the great commission: Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (Matt 28:19). Hence, the Gentiles are now to be summoned and included in the ranks of discipleship and of the Church.
2. But it looks like the Church was mighty slow in beginning any outreach to the Gentiles. It is true that on the day of Pentecost people from every nation heard the Sermon of Peter and 3000 converted. By they were all Jews (Acts 2). In fact it seems the Church did little at first to leave Jerusalem and go anywhere, let alone to the nations.
3. Perhaps as a swift quick in the pants the Lord allowed a persecution to break out in Jerusalem after the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7). This caused the gospel to begin a northward trek into Samaria at least. Samaritans however are not usually considered Gentiles, since they were a groups that had intermarried with Jews in the 8th Century BC. There is also the Baptism of an Ethiopian Official but he too was a Jew.
4. Fifteen Years ?! The time line of Acts is a bit speculative however if we study it carefully and compare it to some of what Paul says (esp. in Galatians) it would seem that we are dealing with over 15 years before the baptism of the first Gentile! If this is true then it is a disgrace. There were of course strong racial animosities between Jew and Gentile that may explain the slow response to Jesus’ commission. It explains but does not excuse it.
5. Time for another kick in the pants. This time the Lord went to Peter who was praying on a rooftop in Joppa and by means of a vision taught him that he was not to call unclean what God had called clean. The Lord then sent to Peter an entourage from Cornelius, a high Roman military official who was seeking baptism. He, of course was a Gentile. The entourage requests that Peter go with them to meet Cornelius at Cesarea. At first he is reluctant. But then recalling the vision (kick in the pants) that God had given him he decides to go. In Cesarea he does something unthinkable. He, a Jew, enters the house of a Gentile. Peter has learned his lesson and been guided by God as the first Pope to do what is right and just. After a conversation with Cornelius and the whole household, and signs from the Holy Spirit, Peter has them baptized. Praise the Lord! It was about time. (All of this is detailed in Acts 10)
6. It is a true fact that many were not happy with what Peter had done and they confront him on it. Peter explains his vision, and also the manifestation of the Holy Spirit and insists that this is how it is going to be. While it is a true fact these early Christians felt freer to question Peter than we would the Pope today, it is also a fact that what Peter has done is binding even if some of them don’t like it. What Peter has done will stand. Once Peter has definitively answered them, they reluctantly assent and declare somewhat cynically: “God has granted life giving repentance (even) to the Gentiles!” (Acts 11:19)
7. Trouble Brewing – So, the mission to the Gentiles is finally open. But that does not mean trouble is over. As Paul, Barnabas and others begin to bring in large numbers of Gentile converts some among the Jewish Christians begin to object that they were not like Jews and began to insist that they must be circumcised and follow the whole Jewish Law, not just the moral precepts but also the cultural norms, kosher diet, purification rites etc. That is where we picked up the story in today’s Mass.
8. The Council of Jerusalem – Luke is a master of understatement and says “Because there arose no little dissension and debate….” (Acts 15:2) it was decided to ask the Apostles and elders in Jerusalem to gather and consider the matter. So the apostles and some presbyters (priests) with them meet and, of course, Peter is there as is James who was especially prominent in Jerusalem among the apostles and would later become bishop there. Once again Luke rather humorously summarizes the matter by saying, “After much debate Peter arose” (Acts 15:7). In effect Peter arises to settle the matter since (it would seem) that the apostles themselves were divided. Had not Peter received this charge from the Lord? The Lord had prophesied: Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has demanded to sift you all like wheat but I have prayed for you Peter, that your faith may not fail; and you, when once you have turned again, strengthen your brothers (Luke 22:31-32). Now Peter fulfills this text as he will again and every Pope after him. Peter clearly dismisses any notion that the Gentiles should be made to take up the whole burden of Jewish customs. Paul and Barnabas rise to support this. Then James (who may have felt otherwise) rises to assent to the decision and asks that a letter be sent forth to all the Churches explaining the decision. He also asks for and obtains a few concessions.
So there it is, the First Council. And that Council like all the Church-wide Councils that would follow was a gathering of the bishops, in the presence of Peter who works to unite them. A decision is then made and a decree, binding on the whole Church, is sent out. Very Catholic actually. We have kept this Biblical model ever since. Our Protestant brethren have departed from it for they have no Pope to settle things when they dispute. They have split endlessly into tens of thousands of denominations and factions. When no one is pope every one is pope.
A final thought. Notice how the decree to the Churches is worded: It is the decision of the Holy Spirit and of us (Acts 15:28). In the end we trust the Holy Spirit to guide the Church in matters of faith and morals. We trust that decrees and doctrines that issue forth from Councils of the Bishops with the Pope are inspired by and authored by the Holy Spirit Himself. And there it is right in Scripture, the affirmation that when the Church speaks solemnly in this way it is not just some bishops and the Pope as men, it is the Holy Spirit who speaks with them.
I have long observed that many if not most Catholics are more passionate about their politics than their faith. This goes for both sides of the political spectrum and for moderates too. I will not say that I am immune from the tendency either. It’s just so much easier to speak of the faith when it conforms to something in our political mindset or worldview, and it’s so easy to doubt it if it offends against it.
Instead of being the light by which we see all things, the Faith tends to get “tucked under” our worldview and political view, our careers and preferences. The world should be seen through faith. The world should be on trial by the Word of God and the teachings of the Church. But as it usually happens, the Church, and the Scriptures end up being on trial instead. In this situation Faith is not the priority, politics and the world are. In any conflict between the two, guess what usually has to give way?
Some examples and stories:
1. Abortion– The most common and perhaps most egregious example is the horrible scourge of abortion. Too many Catholics allow their politics to trump what they know is the consistent teaching of their Faith and the Church. It is a horrible thing too when we consider that 70 million Catholics in agreement on this issue would be hard to ignore politically. If even 10% showed up in Washington for the Pro-life March that would be 7 million people on the Mall and no media bias could ignore that many people. As it is we are woefully divided and the usual cause of this is politics. Most people of any political persuasion know Abortion is indefensible. But they line up on the issue more on political than moral reasoning. Saying that they merely want to stay out of people’s personal affairs does not add up since EVERY law or legal limit inserts itself into people’s personal affairs. The question is what should the limits be or not be and that gets back to politics. It is a sad truth that many Americans allow politics to over-ride the most crucial moral decision of the day. The Church teaching against abortion is not Republican, it is Catholic.
2. A Story– As a priest in Washington DC I am called on numerous occasions to meet with members of the DC City Council and also on fewer occasions, with Federal officials. Most recently I was meeting with a certain City official over the issue of recognizing so-called Same-sex “Marriage.” I explained to him why the Church opposed such a change in the Law. I remember well what he said to me and though the quote is not exact it’s pretty close, “Father, I know what your Church teaches. But I am a politician, I was not born yesterday and I have read the polls. Almost half of your people don’t agree with your teachings about homosexuality. You claim to speak for them but you don’t speak for at least half, and I think, more than half. Don’t tell me how your people are going to vote. I already know how they are going to vote. You don’t represent most of them and surely not the votes I count on to win.” I guess I could have gone on to distinguish between the beliefs and voting patterns of Church-going vs. non-Church- going Catholics but that would merely have led to the fact that we rather pathetically can count on only 30% of Catholics to even come to Church, let alone vote with us. Truth was he DID know his business and he can count votes better than I can. How different would this scenario have been if Catholics were Catholics first before anything else and did vote based on their faith and what the Church teaches about marriage rather than other things such as the wallet or politcal party or personal views? Had that been the case he probably would have asked to me with me and other clergy.
3. What party is the Catholic Church?– Neither of course. But depending on what is in the news you can count on labels being applied. If the issue is abortion, embryonic stem cell research, or homosexual “marriage” detractors will say the Church and bishops are “in bed” with the Republicans. But if the issue is immigration reform, capital punishment, concerns about war, or care for the poor, then they’re all “just a bunch of Democrats.”
Now I hear the objections even now that go something like: “Abortion is doctrinal, Capital Punishment is not. True enough. But it is only solemn and doctrinal things that should claim our loyalties? What if the Pope and Bishops as our teachers and leaders are asking us to stand together on an important issue in the battle against the culture of death?…an issue that affects our credibility (rightly or wrongly) with the world on the matter of abortion? Even if there are proper distinctions to be made, what if the Pope and bishops have determined that, as a pastoral strategy, we ought to oppose the State taking life under either of these circumstances? Does that have any bearing on the issue? And if not, why not? I am aware that some would not attribute their disagreement here to politics at all but rather are clinging to distinction that the Church does not absolutely forbid capital punishment. But is absolute forbiddance the only source of our unity? Is it not enough that the Catechism, recent Popes and the Bishops see the need for recourse to capital punishment as practically non existent (cf CCC # 2267). Scripture does ascribe the right of capital punishment to the State. But the Church, through her leaders, has asked the State to have little or no recourse to this right. What if our stance on capital punishment was not rooted in liberalism but in Catholicism? And what if we stood together with the Church on this issue out of respect for what our legitimate teachers and leaders have asked us to do as a prudential rather than a doctrinal matter? Not as democrats, but as Catholics.
And as regards immigration. I can almost guarantee you that even Bishop’s who are predictably conservative on many issues aren’t going to line up with a strong law and order approach to this issue. There are Catholic and Biblical principles which call us to welcome the stranger and the foreigner. Legality is an important issue as well but it is complicated. Many who are currently here illegally came here legally and their status expired and the process of legalization is bewildering. Not all illegal immigrants have flagrantly violated the law in coming here. Hence, while upholding a respect for law the instinct of the Church is also to attend to the humanity of the problem which is often complex. The Catholic position on this will not be (cannot be) strict, law and order, enforcement. The posture for a Catholic ought to be, why does the Church teach in this manner and why are the Bishops as teachers of the faith taking this position? The reasons are Catholic not Democratic.
4. A story– Some few ago when I was pastor of St. Thomas More Parish I joshed with the congregation there, who, by the way, love me exceedingly more that I deserved. But I said, in jest but not without some truth: “When I preached against abortion some said, ‘He is a Republican.’ When I spoke against Capital Punishment some here said, ‘He is a Democrat.’ When I said, Gay marriage is wrong and that Children should not be given condoms some said, ‘See, he is a Republican!’ Then I preached along with the Pope and Bishops expressing concern about going to War in Iraq so quickly, and when we raised millions to build a new Recreation Center for the kids of Southeast, some said, ‘He is a Democrat!’ And all this time I just thought I was a Catholic Christian. “
Well, I may have stirred up a hornet’s nest here. But true Catholicism is radical. It cannot be tamed by any political party or mindset. True Catholicism will comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. As it was with Christ, most every one will have reason to hate it, and some will come to love the faith as it is and the Church as she is. In the end we are to be those who are “simply Catholic.” Every other party affiliation, membership, alliance, or connection must yield to the Faith and be judged by it. No worldly thought should ever trump the Faith which God has revealed through the Church. And, even in some matters that are prudential in nature, our alliance to the Church founded by Jesus Christ ought to win the day when it comes giving the benefit of any doubt.
You will surely want to add some distinctions, and a few “yes-buts.” That’s what comments are for. But be careful not to distinguish the main point to death which is that in the end we should be simply, plainly and essentially Catholic.
In this video, Cardinal George and the Chicago Archdiocese are making a similar point very creatively:
Please permit a brief blog from me today. I am just stepping off a plane from Seattle where I have been the past few days and it is rather late.
I would like to cal to your attention a CBS News report on how Catholics are dealing with the Sexual Abuse scandal.
A New Poll indicates that 86% have not allowed it to affect their belief in the Catholic Faith. The writted version of the CBS article with other links can be read here: Catholics Still Loyal
It is more evidence of what I have also come to know that Catholics are more sophisticated in such matters that the some have either allowed us to be or wanted us to be. I think most Catholics know that there is sin in the Church and that this is surely one of the most egregious things we have recently experienced. But I also think that most Catholics know that God associates with sinners as well as saints and that the Church, like any other gathering where humans beings are involved will have significant struggles and well and great aspects.
I know that some will remark that what I have just said amounts to a minimizing of what has happened. It deny that it does and surely intend no such minimizing. However most Catholics know that there is more to the Church that the sexual abuse crisis, more to her than abusive priests, or Bishops who were sleepy. The fact is that there are innumerable good things that are happening in the Church as you will see in this video. There are good priests, bishops, and religious, good lay people. The Lord is being worshipped, the poor are being served, schools continue to operate, and many people find the Lord in the Catholic Church.
Our sins are real and hurtful, but our graces are also real and helpful. Enjoy this video.
Recent revelations of clergy sex abuse cases here and abroad have caused great distress among the people of God. There is simply no excuse for such offenses that can satisfy, and there should not be. The crime is bad enough but further charges of cover up cause even more distress and anger.
But while the Church remains in the media focus, questions should also arise in the minds of all observers.
Is the Church the only place where such things take place?
Are the Church and Catholic Clergy worse offenders than, say, non-Catholic denominations and clergy, or public schools, or sports teams, scouting and the like?
Are celibate Catholic clergy more likely to offend than married men?
Are Catholic settings more dangerous for children than non Catholic or secular ones?
Many have quickly (and I would say unfairly) concluded that the answers to questions like these would generally be “yes.” For them this is a reason to stay away from Church. Or, for those who dislike and distrust the Church it helps them to become even more hardened in their aversion. But are all these charges against the Church fair? Are there no distinctions to be made? Is the exclusive focus on things Catholic appropriate?
Timothy Radcliff, O.P. the former Master of the Dominican Order has written a thoughtful essay in The Tablet entitled Should I Stay or Should I Go?I would like to print excerpts here and make my own comments in RED. I encourage you to read the whole article by clicking on the blue title in the previous sentence.
Why stay? First of all, why go? Some people feel that they can no longer remain associated with an institution that is so corrupt and dangerous for children. The suffering of so many children is indeed horrific. They must be our first concern. Nothing that I will write is intended in any way to lessen our horror at the evil of sexual abuse. But the statistics for the US, from the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in 2004, suggest that Catholic clergy do not offend more than the married clergy of other Churches. Some surveys even give a lower level of offence for Catholic priests. They are less likely to offend than lay school teachers, and perhaps half as likely as the general population. Celibacy does not push people to abuse children.The general media present a very myopic picture by focusing almost exclusively on the Catholic Church. Our offenses are real but so are offenses in other sectors which do not make the news. The fact is the sexual abuse of minors is a worldwide problem made even more extreme by the promiscuous and hypersexualized culture in which we live, especially in the West. Children are often sexualized in movies and advertisements. Women for example have commented extensively on the pages of this blog how hard it is even to buy modest clothes for their daughters. Further, children are exposed to sexual imagery far too early. Both adults and children are inundated by sexual imagery and boundaries are very poor in western culture. In the “old days” young people were chaperoned and there was greater emphasis on modesty. We cannot single out the Church. The sexual abuse of minors is a global problem that cuts across every sector and segment of the human family.
It is simply untrue to imagine that leaving the Church for another denomination would make one’s children safer. We must face the terrible fact that the abuse of children is widespread in every part of society. To make the Church the scapegoat would be a cover-up.….. (Here too, the Criminal Justice System is also to blame. During the same era of the 1950s-1980s too many sexual predators were let off easy. This included rapists. Even today, there are many egregious sex offenders walking our streets. Many have long track records and yet get out early. Recently, two women were killed by a sex offender who was out of jail. He had a track record a mile long and yet he walked freely. Why? So if the Church took such things far too lightly that is wrong. But psychologists, therapists, judges and juries also stand accused. The Church has adopted a zero tolerance policy but our criminal justice system still has too many holes. When will attention turn there?).
But what about the Vatican? Pope Benedict has taken a strong line in tackling this issue as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) and since becoming Pope. Now the finger is pointed at him….I am morally certain that he bears no blame here. (As the evidence continues to unfold it looks as if Cardinal Ratzinger was one who took this matter more seriously that others and for this reason the matter was remanded to his care. Remember that he had a very strong reputation (and was hated by some for it) of being the enforcer-in-chief!)
It is generally imagined that the Vatican is a vast and efficient organisation. In fact it is tiny. The CDF only employs 45 people, dealing with doctrinal and disciplinary issues for a Church which has 1.3 billion members, 17 per cent of the world’s population, and some 400,000 priests. When I dealt with the CDF as Master of the Dominican Order, it was obvious that they were struggling to cope. Documents slipped through the cracks. Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger lamented to me that the staff was simply too small for the job.. People are furious with the Vatican’s failure to open up its files and offer a clear explanation of what happened. Why is it so secretive? Angry and hurt Catholics feel a right to transparent government. I agree. But we must, in justice, understand why the Vatican is so self-protective…..Confidentiality is…a consequence of the Church’s insistence on the right of everyone accused to keep their good name until they are proved to be guilty. This is very hard for our society to understand, whose media destroy people’s reputations without a thought (Some of the most important work of the Church has to include an expectation of confidentiality. Every day people in my parish tell me of things that are going on in their lives. Many of these things are of a sensitive and personal nature. I have no right to share this information freely. If there is a serious crime involved and I learn of this matter outside the confessional I do have reporting obligations. But 99.9% of what I am told has nothing to do with crime. As a priest confidentiality, discretion and respect for people’s reputations is paramount. The secrecy of the confessional is absolute. Professional confidentiality while not absolute is expansive and people would never come to me or the Church if they felt that their information would be freely shared or that files with their personal data etc would be freely opened to a nosey media and a demanding state. Covering up a serious crime is a crime. But calling the Church secretive because we do not open our files without limit is unfair. The Church is not secretive. Rather, we are deeply respectful of the privacy and reputation of people who often come to us in their weakness and struggles. A few years ago media and government officials demanded the right to search our priest personnel files without any limits. But that is unjust. I, for example, have never offended sexually. I have never violated my celibate commitment. I have never committed any crime. This is true of almost every priest I have known. It is unfair and unjust to demand that my files be open to anyone who asks. Even though I have nothing to hide, I do have a right to privacy and that my personal files not be opened without warrant. It is the same with my lay employees at the parish and with any other personal information about parishioners).
But what about the cover-up within the Church? Have not our bishops been shockingly irresponsible in moving offenders around, not reporting them to the police and so perpetuating the abuse? Yes, sometimes. But the great majority of these cases go back to the 1960s and 1970s, when bishops often regarded sexual abuse as a sin rather than also a pathological condition, and when lawyers and psychologists often reassured them that it was safe to reassign priests after treatment. It is unjust to project backwards an awareness of the nature and seriousness of sexual abuse which simply did not exist then
Why go? If it is to find a safer haven, a less corrupt church, then I think that you will be disappointed. I too long for more transparent government, more open debate, but the Church’s secrecy is understandable, and sometimes necessary…. And so the Church is stuck with me whatever happens. We may be embarrassed [at times] to admit that we are Catholics, but Jesus kept shameful company from the beginning. (Yes, in the end the Church is not a “haven for saints” only but is also a “hospital for sinners.” Many of the Pharisees of Jesus time were scandalized at the company he kept. Jesus said, those who are well do not need a doctor but the sick do, but I have come to call sinners (Mk 2:17). So the Church is a hospital. And what do we find in a hospital? We find care, medicine, treatment, healing and love. But we also find disease, hurt, heartache, pain, and even death. So in the Church is to be observed great holiness, healing, love and beauty. But in the same Church is to be found sin, sorrow, heartache, sinners and other unpleasant matters. Thank God that Jesus is not ashamed to call us his brethren and to be found in our company! (Heb 2:11))
So, to be fair there is sin in the Church, and we have handled many disciplinary matters poorly. But again, to be fair, we are not alone in this. The spotlight is on us to be sure. But spotlights have a way of leaving many other things in darkness. There are serious problems elsewhere in our society as regards the sexual abuse of minors. Scrutiny is needed everywhere. For the sins of the Church, Lord have mercy! For the sin of the whole world, Christ have mercy. For the sins of our own hearts, Lord have mercy.
At the heart of our faith is the Paschal Mystery: the Passion, Death, Resurrection, and Ascension of Jesus Christ. All of salvation history leads up to and goes forth from these saving events. The purpose of this post is to describe Jesus’ Final week. We call this “Holy Week” for Jesus’ public ministry culminates with his suffering, death and resurrection. What follows is a brief description of each day of Holy Week. It is hoped that you might print out the pdf flyer (Walking-with-Jesus-In-Holy-Week) and read it each day of this week. Prayerfully walk with Jesus in his most difficult and yet glorious week. Plan to attend some or all of the special liturgies of Thursday, Friday and Saturday at your parish. By celebrating them in community, we make them present today and learn again, in a new way, the reality of our Risen Lord alive in our midst.
PALM SUNDAY – Our celebration of Holy Week begins this Sunday as we remember and make present the triumphal entrance of Jesus into Jerusalem to begin his final week and initiate his Passion. All four Gospels recount this triumphant entry that Sunday Morning so long ago, but made present to us today. As you receive your palms, consider that you are part of that vast crowd. How will you journey with Jesus this week? Let the palm remind you to praise him with your prayerful presence during the sacred Triduum. According to Mark 11:11 Jesus returned that evening to Bethany, a suburb of Jerusalem. Perhaps he stayed with his friends Martha, Mary and Lazarus. Pray with Jesus this evening as he considers the difficult days ahead of him.
Monday of Holy Week According to Matthew 21, Mark 11 and Luke 19, Jesus returns to Jerusalem today and, seeing shameful practices in the Temple area, he cleanses the Temple. John’s Gospel also records that he rebuked the unbelief of the crowds. Mark 11:19 records that he returned to Bethany that night. Pray with Jesus as he is zealous to purify us.
Tuesday of Holy Week According to Matthew, Mark and Luke, Jesus again returns to Jerusalem where he is confronted by the Temple leadership for what he did yesterday. They question his authority. He also teaches extensively using parables and other forms. There is the parable of the vineyard (cf Mt 21:33-46), the parable of the wedding banquet, (cf Mt. 22:1). There is also the teaching on paying taxes (cf Mt 22:15) and the rebuke of the Sadducees who deny the resurrection (cf Mt. 22:23). There is also the fearful prophecy about the destruction of Jerusalem if the inhabitants do not come to faith in him. He warns that not one stone will be left on another (cf Mt 24). Continue to pray with Jesus and listen carefully to his final teachings just before his passion.
Wednesday of Holy Week. Traditionally this day was called “Spy Wednesday” for it was on this Wednesday before the crucifixion that Judas conspired to hand Jesus over. For this he was paid thirty pieces of silver (cf Mt. 26:14). Jesus likely spent the day In Bethany. In the evening Mary of Bethany anoints Jesus with costly perfumed oil. Judas objects but Jesus rebukes him and says Mary has anointed him for his burial! (cf Mt 26:6). The wicked are besetting Jesus and plotting against him. Are you praying?
HOLY THURSDAY, marks the beginning of the sacred Triduum, or “three days.” Earlier this day Jesus had given instructions to the disciples on how to prepare for this most holy meal, which will be his last supper. Through the day they make these preparations (cf Mt 26:17). In the Mass of the Lord’s Supper conducted at our parishes, we remember and make present that Last Supper which Jesus shared with his disciples. We are in the upper room with Jesus and the Apostles and do what they did. Through the ritual of washing the feet (Jn 13:1) of 12 parishioners, we unite in service to one another. Through our celebration of this first Mass and Holy Eucharist (Mt 26:26), we unite ourselves to Jesus and receive his Body and Blood as if for the first time. At this Eucharist, we especially thank God for his gift of the ministerial priesthood. After the Last Supper (First Mass) the apostles and Jesus made a short journey across the Kidron Valley to the Garden where he asks them to pray and he experiences his agony (cf Mt 26:30). We too will process in Church with Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament to a garden (the altar of repose) which has been prepared. The liturgy ends in silence. It is an ancient custom to spend an hour before the reposed Blessed Sacrament tonight. We are with Jesus in the Garden and pray as he goes through his agony. Most of our parish churches remain open until close to midnight. It was near Midnight that Jesus was betrayed by Judas, was arrested and taken to the house of the High Priest (cf Mt. 26:47).
GOOD FRIDAY, All through the night Jesus has been locked in the dungeon of the high priest’s house. Early this morning he was bought before a Pilate who transferred his case to Herod. Herod sent him back to Pilate who, sometime in the mid-morning, bowed to the pressure of the Temple leadership and the crowds, and condemned Jesus to a horrible death by crucifixion. In the late morning Jesus was taken by the soldiers through the city and up the hillside of Golgotha. By noon he is nailed to the cross where he hangs in agony for some three hours. He dies around three in the afternoon. He is taken down from the cross and placed in the tomb hastily before sundown. Today is a day of prayer, fasting and abstinence. Whenever possible, Christians are urged to keep today free of work, of social engagements, of entertainment, and to devote themselves to communal prayer and worship. At noon many parishes gather for stations of the cross for recollections of the seven last words of Jesus. Many parishes also offer staions of the cross at 3pm the hour of Jesus death. In the evening, we gather quietly in our parish Churches to enter into time of prayer as we reflect on Jesus death on the cross. We also pray for the needs of the world. To acknowledge the power of the cross in our lives today, we one by one come forward to venerate the cross with a kiss. Our hunger from this day of fasting is satisfied with Holy Communion distributed at the end of this liturgy.Consider too how the apostles might have gathered that night together in fear and prayer reflecting on all that happened.
HOLY SATURDAY – The body of Jesus is in the tomb but His soul is among the dead to announce the kingdom. The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear it will Live (John 5:25). Consider what it must have been like for the dead in Sheol to awaken to the voice of Jesus! Meanwhile The Disciples, heartbroken at the death of Jesus, observed the Jewish Sabbath in sorrow. They had forgotten the promise of Jesus that He would rise. We cannot forget His promise. We cannot forget. Tonight in our parishes after sundown we gather for the Great Easter Vigil where we will experience Jesus rising from the dead. We gather in darkness and light the Easter fire which reminds us that Jesus is light in the darkness. He is the light of the world. We enter into the church and attentively listen to Bible stories describing God’s saving work of the past. Suddenly, the church lights are lit and the Gloria is sung as we celebrate the moment of Christ’s resurrection. He Lives! In the joy of the resurrection we then celebrate the Sacraments of Baptism, Confirmation and Eucharist for our Catechumens and Candidates who have prepared for many weeks for this night. As a Church we sing Alleluia for the first time in forty days. Do everything you can to be present on this evening and invite friends and family to join. Our Vigil ushers in an Easter joy that never ends!
Let’s say you have a choice to take one of two airplanes to take to a distant city, lets call it “Heavenly City.” The one plane (Church Airlines) gets there 100% of the time. The other plane (Alsoran Airlines) gets there sometimes, but other times it is in disrepair, or it lands in the wrong city, or at still other times it crashes. OK, which plane are you going to take?
Now I am not going to tell you that only Church Airline riders get to Heavenly City. A few people on the other plane do sometimes get there, but its a pretty uncertain ride. At least with Church Airlines the plane is certain to get there: it won’t crash, get lost or fail to take off. So, choose your airline! But remember that Church Airlines has a 100 % record, Alsoran Airlines can make no such claim. When it comes to flying even 99 1/2 won’t do, gotta make a 100!
The simple fact is that the world and other inferior brands might not get you there. Untested spiritualities and the latest trends won’t cut it. Only Jesus and the Catholic Church he founded are up to the job 100% of the time. Now be careful though. You have to stay on the plane for the whole journey. Don’t get off at a connecting city (such as Sin City) or any such thing. Stay the course to Heavenly City. The Catholic Church alone (aka Church airlines) is 100% reliable by Jesus’ own promise. It’s a pretty good reason to get on board before the door closes and walkway swings back. There is a mid-flight meal, (called the Eucharist), and an in-flight movie, “The Greatest Story Ever Told (aka the Scriptures) included in the price of your ticket which is, by the way, free.
The Church is Indefectible- There are very few certainties in this world about anything but one thing is for sure: The Church will prevail, the Church will be here to infallibly lead us to the end of days. “How arrogant!” you might say. And yet, I did say it. Why? Not because of any human guarantee, but based rather on the firm promise of Jesus himself:
The place is Ceasarea Phillipi and Jesus is speaking to Simon Peter who had just confessed him to be the Christ and the Son of the Living God. Now Jesus speaks and says, You are Peter (Rock), and upon this rock I will build my church,and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. (Matt 16:18) The Church will surely be hated, attacked and persecuted but Hell will never prevail, never defeat the Church Jesus founded. Now I want to emphasize that this power of the Church to endure to the end is no human power. It is not based on brilliant or perfect human leaders. It is based solely on Jesus’ promise. So it is not arrogant to make this claim, it is simply biblical and a matter of faith in Jesus.
This prevailing power of the Church means that the Church will be here to the end. Count on it since Jesus promised it. This is what is meant by the “indefectibility” of Church.
The Church is Infallible – Christ promise also means that the Church cannot mislead us or teach falsely in a matter of faith and morals. This is what is meant by the “infallibility” of the Church in matters of faith and morals definitively taught. Here is the way the catechism puts it.
In order to preserve the Church in the purity of the faith handed on by the apostles, Christ who is the Truth willed to confer on her a share in his own infallibility…It is this Magisterium’s task to preserve God’s people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error. Thus, the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at seeing to it that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates. To fulfill this service, Christ endowed the Church’s shepherds with the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals. The exercise of this charism takes several forms: “The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility in virtue of his office, when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful – who confirms his brethren in the faith he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals. The infallibility promised to the Church is also present in the body of bishops when, together with Peter’s successor, they exercise the supreme Magisterium, above all in an Ecumenical Council. (Catechism of the Catholic Church 889-891)
Now some object to this claim of the infallibility of the Church. But reason with me for a minute. Jesus promised that the gates of Hell could not prevail against the Church. But if the Church could formally teach error about faith and morals, and if the Church could mislead people about what was necessary for their eternal salvation, then it would be a fact that the gates of Hell HAD prevailed. But since Jesus promised it could never happen, then, by God’s grace, the Church is protected from formally teaching falsely on matters of faith and morals. Do you trust Jesus and believe his word? Then the Church is unsinkable and infallible regarding faith and morals.
There are many other gifts given to the Church and Fr. Barron speak of them here:
There is a passage in the Gospels that breaks conventions and cuts to the core of what has come to be called the “Social Gospel.” Before looking at the passage we need to define “Social Gospel.” The phrase “Social Gospel” emerged in the Protestant denominations but has also come to be used in Catholic circles as well. Basically defined the Social Gospel is an intellectual movement that was most prominent in the late 19th century and early 20th century. The movement applied Christian ethics to societal problems especially injustice, inequality, alcoholism, crime, racial tensions, slums, child labor, labor unions, poor schools, and the danger of war. Basically stated, if faith was to be real it must address these issues and be relevant to those who suffer these maladies.
So far all true. But then comes this very troubling Gospel. A Gospel that breaks the conventional wisdom that the service of the poor is the first priority of the Church. It obnoxiously states that there is something more important than serving the poor. To be sure, serving the poor is essential, but it is a gospel that said something was even more important. How could this be so! Who said such a thing?? And that brings us to the text:
While Jesus was in Bethany in the home of a man known as Simon the Leper, a woman came to him with an alabaster jar of very expensive perfume, which she poured on his head as he was reclining at the table. When the disciples saw this, they were indignant. “Why this waste?” they asked. “This perfume could have been sold at a high price and the money given to the poor.” Aware of this, Jesus said to them, “Why are you bothering this woman? She has done a beautiful thing to me. The poor you will always have with you, but you will not always have me. When she poured this perfume on my body, she did it to prepare me for burial. I tell you the truth, wherever this gospel is preached throughout the world, what she has done will also be told, in memory of her.” Then one of the Twelve—the one called Judas Iscariot—went to the chief priests and asked, “What are you willing to give me if I hand him over to you?” (Matt 26:6-14)
The other Gospels contain this account as well. It is in Mark 14 and Also in John 12. John attributes the objection only to Judas and reckons it on account of his greed whereas Mark and Matthew attribute the objection to all the disciples present. Even more interesting all three Gospels link this to Judas’ decision to hand Jesus over. It obviously floor the disciples and especially Judas to hear Jesus speak this way.
There is simply no other way to assess this Gospel than “earth-shaking.” The reader surely expects Jesus to agree that extravagance toward him should be jettisoned in favor of serving the poor. Had he not said that judgment would be based on what we did for the “least of my brethren” (cf Matt 25:41ff) ?? Why does Jesus not rebuke the extravagance and demand it be sold and given to the poor? It is a shocking Gospel, and earth-shaking declaration: “The poor you shall always have” ??! But there it is, glaring at us like some sort of unexpected visitor.
What is the Lord saying? Many things to be sure, but let me suggest this essential teaching: “Nothing….absolutely nothing…..not even the service of the poor, takes precedence over the worship, honor and obedience due to God.” Nothing. If even the service of the poor takes precedence over this, it becomes an idol. An idol in sheep’s clothing to be sure, but an idol nonetheless.
An old Seminary professor (deceased now) told me many years ago” “Beware the poverty of Judas.” What does this mean? Fundamentally it means that the care of the poor can sometimes be used (by some) in an attempt to water down Christian doctrine and the priority of worship. The social gospel, if we are not careful, can demand that we compromise Christian dogma and the priority of proclaiming the Gospel.
Let me be clear, the Social Gospel is not wrong per se. But, like anything, it can be used by the world and the evil one to draw us into compromise and to the suppression of the truth. The reasons for this suppression are always presented as having a good effect but in the end we are asked to suppress the truth in some way. Thus the social Gospel is hijacked, it is used to compel us to suppress the truth of the Gospel and to not mention Jesus.
Perhaps some examples will help. Let me state at the outset, I am adapting these examples as generic. They are based on real world examples but I am not mentioning names and places because it is not the purpose of this blog to engage in personal attacks of other people’s struggles to uphold the gospel. If you demand specifics I cannot and will not give them. This is about you and me, not merely other people. It is possible for us to condemn others for their faults but not look at ourselves. Hence. I offer these examples in humility realizing that I struggle too.
A large diocese in the USA is offered the possibility to serve drug addicts. Price of admission is that they coordinate a “needle-exchange program” which helps addicts shoot up without contracting AIDS. The Government money is substantial and may permit them to serve the poor who are addicts with treatment programs that may lead to their sobriety. Only cost is that some other addicts may be enabled in their self-destructive behavior and encouraged by the clean needles to shoot up. Church teaching does not permit us to do wrong even if good may possibly come from it. Nevertheless the Diocese takes the money and hands out clean needles to addicts but gets the money to serve others. The poor are being served! Shouldn’t we look the other way? But is serving the poor an absolute good or do we owe God obedience first? ? What do you think? Is Jesus more important than even poor drug addicts? Or is he less important? Remember, you have to choose! You can’t just say “I think both are important.” The Government is demanding you choose. Will it be Jesus and what he teaches or will it be the poor at the price of compromising the Gospel? What will it be?
A Bishop from a moderately large diocese is confronted with the fact that he has not rebuked the local senator for his votes to fund Abortion for the poor using Federal Money. The Bishop responds, “But he is with us on important social legislation and we cannot afford to alienate him.” The senator in question does surely believe in a substantial funding of programs the Church supports. Programs such as: supportive housing for the poor, aid to families with dependent children, drug treatment programs, affordable housing initiatives, etc. The senator in question is a great advocate for these issues that the Church supports. Only Problem? He thinks it’s OK to fund the killing of babies in their mother’s womb. The Bishop reasons that it is not good to alienate this Senator who “is with us on so many issues.” He fails to rebuke the Catholic Senator and urge him to repent. The Church would lose too much you see. The price is too high. We could not serve the poor as well. This Senator might not vote to fund the Bills that fund programs that Catholic Charities depend on. We “need” to compromise here, the poor are depending on us. “Surely Jesus will understand.” And thus Church teaching yields to the need to serve the poor. Surely it is good to serve the poor. But at what price? What do you think? Is Jesus more important than even the poor? Or is he less important? Remember, you have to choose! Yon can’t just say “I think both are important.” The Government is demanding you choose. Will it be Jesus and what he teaches or will it be the poor at the price of compromising the Gospel? What will it be?
In several large cities, Catholic Charities runs adoption programs. Lately, cities and state governments have begun to demand that Catholic Charities treat “Gay” couples on the same basis as heterosexual couples. In order to receive State funds that help Catholic Charities carry on its work of service to the poor who are needy children looking for a stable family Catholic Charities will have to agree to set aside Church and Scriptural doctrine that homosexual unions are not only less than ideal for children, such unions are sinful. If Catholic Charities wants to continue to serve these poor children at all, they must deny the teachings of Christ and His Church. Is this too high a price to pay in order to be able to serve the poor? What do you think? Remember, you have to choose! You can’t just say “I think both are important.” The Government is demanding you choose. Will it be Jesus and what he teaches or will it be the poor at the price of compromising the Gospel? What will it be?
Many Catholic hospitals receive government funds to treat the poor. But lately the government is demanding, in certain jurisdictions, that Catholic hospitals dispense contraceptives, provide abortion referrals, and cooperate in euthanasia. Remember now, the poor are served with these monies. Should the hospital compromise and take the money? Should it is say OK, thus enabling it to go on serving the poor? What is more important, the poor or Jesus and what he teaches? ? What do you think? Is Jesus more important than even the poor who come to hospitals for service? Or is he less important? Remember, you have to choose! You can’t just say “I think both are important.” The Government is demanding you choose. Will it be Jesus and what he teaches or will it be the poor at the price of compromising the Gospel? What will it be?
Catholic Charities is offered the possibility of getting a large amount of money to serve the homeless. But there is a requirement that Jesus never be mentioned. Catholic Charities must remove all crucifixes, Bibles, and any references to Catholic teaching. Now remember, the poor will be served with this money! It’s a lot of money to walk away from! ? What do you think? Is Jesus more important than even the homeless? Or is he less important? Remember, you have to choose! You can’t just say “I think both are important.” The Government is demanding you choose. Will it be Jesus and what he teaches or will it be the poor at the price of compromising the Gospel? What will it be?
In the end, I leave you and me with these questions:
How far do we go in serving the poor?
The service of the poor, and the issues that the poor face are an essential work of the Church, but does it trump worship and doctrine?
Should Church teaching bend to the demands of the Government in order to serve the poor?
What does Jesus mean in the Gospel above when he teaches that anointing him is more important than serving the poor?
What is the Church’s truest priority? Is the truth of the Gospel or is it serving the poor?
What if these two things are in conflict? Which is chosen over the other?
Given the Gospel above, what would Jesus have us choose as first priority?
When large amounts of money are made available for the Church to serve the poor but at the price of us compromising or hiding the truth of Gospel, what do you think the Church should do?
Why?
The Social Gospel is essential. It cannot be merely set aside. But the Social Gospel cannot eclipse the Full Gospel. A part, even if essential, cannot demand full resources and full obedience, not at the expense of the whole or the more important!
Money and resources to serve the poor are essential, but they are still money and it remains stunningly true that we cannot serve both God and money. In the end, even serving the poor can become a kind of idol to which God has to yield. It is the strangest idol of all for it comes in very soft sheep’s clothing, the finest wool! But if God and his reveled truth have to yield to it, it is an idol, the strangest idol of all.
I do not agree with everything in this video, but it well presents the temptations that Catholic Charities faces:
