Author: Msgr. Charles Pope

Posted on

A Dramatic Moment in Biblical History that Almost Everyone Missed

Presentation in the Temple – L. Carracci (1605)

Continuing our reflection on the Presentation of Jesus in the Temple, let’s ponder a moment that was glorious in its significance and fulfilment, yet was missed by nearly everyone.

Joseph and Mary had brought Jesus to the Temple to present Him there. As they ascended the glorious steps to the Temple Mount, they were fulfilling a requirement of the Law.

You are to give over to the LORD the first offspring of every womb. All the firstborn males of your livestock belong to the LORD. Redeem with a lamb every firstborn donkey, but if you do not redeem it, break its neck. Redeem every firstborn among your sons. In days to come, when your son asks you, ‘What does this mean?’ say to him, ‘With a mighty hand the LORD brought us out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. When Pharaoh stubbornly refused to let us go, the LORD killed the firstborn of both people and animals in Egypt. This is why I sacrifice to the LORD the first male offspring of every womb and redeem each of my firstborn sons’’ (Ex 13:12-15).

Although they were fulfilling an obligation, something much more dramatic was taking place. To understand what, we must look back to 587 B.C.

The Babylonians had invaded Jerusalem and the unthinkable had happened: the Holy City of Jerusalem had been destroyed and along with it the Temple of God. Inside the Temple had been housed the precious Ark of the Covenant.

Recall what the Ark of Covenant was in the Old Testament. It was a gold-covered box of acacia wood, inside which were the two tablets on which God had inscribed the Ten Commandments, the staff of Aaron, and a vial of the manna. Even more important, in this ark dwelt the very Presence of God in Israel; here He was present as nowhere else. This is certainly our belief today regarding the tabernacle in Catholic churches: though present everywhere, God has a true, substantial, and real presence in the Eucharist reserved there.

The Lost Ark – Incredibly, the Ark of the Covenant was lost when the Babylonians destroyed the Temple and Jerusalem in 587 B.C. Some thought that Jeremiah had hidden it in the mountains. Others, that the priests had hastily secreted it in the maze of caves beneath the Temple Mount. Still others argued that it was taken to Ethiopia. But the Ark was gone.

Empty Temple – When the Temple was rebuilt some eighty years later, the Holy of Holies was restored, but the Ark was still missing. The high priest still performed the yearly ritual and entered the Holy of Holies, but the room was empty. Some argued that there was a spiritual presence in the Temple, but in fact the Ark and the certain presence of God were missing after 587 B.C. Something—someone—was missing. The very Holy of Holies was an empty room. The Ark and the presence of God it carried were missing. The Ark, the mercy seat, was gone. Would it ever be found? Would it ever be returned to the Temple? Would the Holy Presence of God ever find its way to the Temple again?

The ascent to Jerusalem is a steep one. Mountains surround Jerusalem and it sits at a higher altitude than the area around it. As the ancient Jews made the climb, they sang the psalms of ascent (120-134). As Joseph and Mary ascended, they too sang the words that instilled joy:

I Lift up mine eye to the mountains from whence cometh my help (Ps 121). I rejoiced when they said to me let us go up to the House of the Lord (Ps 122). To you O Lord I have lifted my eyes (Ps 123). Like Mount Zion are those who trust in the Lord (Ps 125). Out of the depths I call unto you O Lord (Ps 130). Let us enter God’s dwelling, let us worship at the Lord’s footstool. Arise O Lord and enter your dwelling place, You and the Ark of your strength (132). Come and bless the Lord. You who stand in the House of the Lord Lift your hands to the Sanctuary and bless the Lord. The Lord bless you from Zion (134).

Singing these songs, Mary carried Jesus. The climb was even more difficult when carrying a newborn, but the burden was sweet. Then came the final ascent up the stairs to the Temple Mount. They probably entered on the southern side through the Huldah gates. They went up the steep stairs, through the tunnel in the walls, and emerged on the bright Temple platform.

God had returned to His Temple. He and the Ark who carried Him were now found: Mary, the Ark, carrying Jesus in her arms. Jesus, very God Himself, true God from true God. Yes, God and the Ark had been found; God was once again present among His people on the Temple Mount. Scripture says,

And the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his Temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts. But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? (Mal 3:1-2)

What a dramatic moment, yet remarkably understated by God! If I had directed the moment I would have called for blaring trumpets, claps of thunder, and a multitude of angels. Everyone would have fallen to his knees in recognition of the great fulfillment and the great return of God to His Temple.

Despite the significance of this moment, only an elderly man and woman (Simeon and Anna) recognized it. They alone understood that they were in the presence of greatness and marveled in it.

Now there was a man in Jerusalem called Simeon, who was righteous and devout. He was waiting for the consolation of Israel, and the Holy Spirit was upon him. It had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit that he would not die before he had seen the Lord’s Christ. Moved by the Spirit, he went into the temple courts. When the parents brought in the child Jesus to do for him what the custom of the Law required, Simeon took him in his arms and praised God, saying: “Sovereign Lord, as you have promised, you now dismiss your servant in peace. For my eyes have seen your salvation, which you have prepared in the sight of all people, a light for revelation to the Gentiles and for glory to your people Israel.” The child’s father and mother marveled at what was said about him. Then Simeon blessed them and said to Mary, his mother: “This child is destined to cause the falling and rising of many in Israel, and to be a sign that will be spoken against, so that the thoughts of many hearts will be revealed. And a sword will pierce your own soul too.” There was also a prophetess, Anna … Coming up to them at that very moment, she gave thanks to God and spoke about the child to all who were looking forward to the redemption of Jerusalem (Luke 2).

Yes, this was the moment that had been anticipated for centuries. The Ark of God (Mary) had been found and God (Jesus) had returned to His temple, but only Simeon and Anna noticed, understood, and celebrated.

What about us? At every Mass, Jesus, God Himself, is present. Do you notice? Do you really see Him or do you see only the priest and the human elements of the Mass? Are you Simeon? Anna? Mary? Joseph? Or are you like the many on the Temple Mount who missed the dramatic moment of God with us?

Cross-posted at the Catholic Standard: A Dramatic Moment in Biblical History that Almost Everyone Missed

Posted on

The Churching of Women and its Relation to the Feast of the Presentation

On Saturday we celebrated the Feast of the Presentation. I thought it might be appropriate to describe a related liturgy of the Church that has been largely lost: The Churching of Women. To some extent it is subsumed in the modern Rite of Baptism with the blessing of the mother, but it is not what it used to be. We may still celebrate this for women who ask, and I often do so, especially in extraordinary form baptisms.

The Churching of Women is rooted in the Feast of the Presentation. Biblically this feast commemorates the Jewish practice of a woman presenting herself at the temple forty days after the birth of a male child in order to be “purified” and blessed by the priest. As an observant Jew, Mary fulfilled this obligation and it is recorded in Luke’s Gospel:

When the time of their purification according to the Law of Moses had been completed, Joseph and Mary took him to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord (as it is written in the Law of the Lord, “Every firstborn male is to be consecrated to the Lord” and to offer a sacrifice in keeping with what is said in the Law of the Lord: “a pair of doves or two young pigeons” (Luke 2:22-24).

The Jewish practice of “purifying” a woman after childbirth was set forth in the Book of Leviticus:

The LORD said to Moses, “Say to the Israelites: A woman who becomes pregnant and gives birth to a son will be ceremonially unclean for seven days, just as she is unclean during her monthly period. On the eighth day the boy is to be circumcised. Then the woman must wait thirty-three days to be purified from her bleeding. She must not touch anything sacred or go to the sanctuary until the days of her purification are over. If she gives birth to a daughter, for two weeks the woman will be unclean, as during her period. Then she must wait sixty-six days to be purified from her bleeding. When the days of her purification for a son or daughter are over, she is to bring to the priest at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting a year-old lamb for a burnt offering and a young pigeon or a dove for a sin offering. He shall offer them before the LORD to make atonement for her, and then she will be ceremonially clean from her flow of blood. These are the regulations for the woman who gives birth to a boy or a girl. If she cannot afford a lamb, she is to bring two doves or two young pigeons, one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering. In this way the priest will make atonement for her, and she will be clean” (Leviticus 12:1-8).

As you can see, there is a fairly negative concept at work here: A woman becomes ritually “unclean” by giving birth due to the flow of blood and other fluids. (Note that ritual impurity is not the same as moral impurity.) And a woman who gave birth to a daughter was considered ritually unclean for even longer! It is well that the Church’s power to bind and loose has freed us from this thinking. Keep in mind that this was ceremonial law, not moral law, so the Church is not setting aside immutable moral law in abrogating this notion of ritual impurity.

Nevertheless, the custom and instinct of blessing women after childbirth was retained in the Church, albeit with an altered understanding from Jewish teaching. The rite came down through the centuries and was largely intact until very recent times. (The official Latin title of the Rite was Benedictio Mulieris Post Partum, the blessing of women after giving birth. The rite was largely discontinued in the 1960s in the wake of the Second Vatican Council. The Book of Blessings published in 1984 does contain a “Blessing of a Woman after Childbirth,” but it is seldom used and is significantly altered from the old rite that was use until the mid-1960s. There is also a blessing of the mother at the Rite of Infant Baptism.

There are many reasons for the discontinuance. I remember my mother and other women of her generation saying they had been taught the Jewish history of this rite and rejected it for that reason, but the Catholic Church was clear to distinguish its practice from the Jewish roots. As early as the 6th century, Pope Gregory protested the notion that childbirth caused defilement. Further, the prayers of the old Churching of Women Rite did not mention a need for purification, speaking only of blessing and thanksgiving. So, those who taught women of my mother’s generation against this practice were probably engaged more in polemics than anything else. Another reason for the discontinuance was probably just because so many things were dropped after the Council.

I would like to recommend this beautiful ritual to your attention. In an extended sense it fulfills what Mary did forty days after the birth of Christ. We do not understand it in an Old Testament way, but we rescue and fulfill the tradition with the beauty of Christian faith and the dignity of mothers.

A PDF version of the ritual can be found here: The Churching of Women. Though it has never been required by the Church, it is a beautiful way to welcome back and bless a woman who may have been away for a few weeks after giving birth. She has labored well for her family and this ritual can serve simultaneously as a blessing and thanksgiving extended by the Church to the noble women who are our mothers. The blessing can be given after a baptism or after Mass, collectively to recent mothers or individually. While the current baptismal rite contains a blessing for the mother, this older rite is a more special blessing. Pope Benedict’s Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum, which permits the use of the older forms of the sacraments, has made these older rituals more available. Here is the concluding prayer of the rite:

Almighty, everlasting God, through the delivery of the blessed Virgin Mary, Thou hast turned into joy the pains of the faithful in childbirth; look mercifully upon this Thy handmaid, coming in gladness to Thy temple to offer up her thanks: and grant that after this life, by the merits and intercession of the same blessed Mary, she may merit to arrive, together with her offspring, at the joys of everlasting happiness. Through Christ our Lord.

Cross-posted at the Catholic Standard: The Churching of Women

Posted on

A “Rule of Life” for Prophets – A Homily for the 4th Sunday of the Year

Basilica di San Vitale, Ravenna (540)

Prophets are those who speak for God. They love Him and His people. They speak the often-painful truth to God’s people not to win an argument but because of their love and their conviction that only His undiluted truth can save us in the end.

People-pleasing and other forms of human respect cannot supplant reverence for God and His truth. Prophets are willing to endure pain, suffering, and even death in order to proclaim God’s truth to an often-unappreciative audience.

Today’s readings set forth a kind of “rule for life” for prophets. We who are baptized into the order of the prophet do well to listen to these teachings. Let us examine them in three stages.

I. The Call that is Declared – In the first reading God says to Jeremiah (and to us): The word of the LORD came to me, saying: Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I dedicated you, a prophet to the nations I appointed you. But do you gird your loins; stand up and tell them all that I command you.

The Prevenient nature of our Call – The word “prevenient” is an adjective describing something that comes before, something that is anticipatory. God has not chosen us on a whim, as if to say, “I suppose you’ll do.” Before He made us, He considered our call and then equipped, empowered, and enabled us for our work.

God tells Jeremiah (and us) that He knew, loved, and cherished us long before He made us. He made us in a way that prepared and equipped us for the work of being prophets.

How? The answer to that different for each person. There is no one who can proclaim God or announce the kingdom the way you can. Perhaps He has especially equipped you to evangelize certain individuals whom no one else can reach. Just know this: God thought a long time about you and prepared you in very specific and thoughtful ways. Whatever you need has “come before,” is “prevenient.”

The Purview of our Call – God tells Jeremiah (and us) that we are appointed unto the nations. Jeremiah himself did not journey beyond Israel, but since that time the Word of the Lord uttered through him has reached every nation.

Never doubt the influence you can have by the grace of God. Even in and through reaching one person you can change the destiny of many. Stay in your lane and do your work, but remember that through you God can accomplish more than you can imagine. By His grace, your influence can reach the nations.

The Preparation of our Call – The Lord tells Jeremiah (and us) to “gird our loins.” This is an ancient way of saying, “roll up your sleeves.” In other words, prepare to work by assembling what you need and getting ready to expend effort.

For us this surely means daily prayer, weekly Eucharist, and frequent confession. It means prayerfully reading God’s Word and the teachings of the Church. It means keeping fellowship with the Church and with fellow believers. All of this equips, empowers, and enables us for the work God has called us to do: being prophets.

Beyond this there may be other specific gifts God calls each of us to develop: music, a second language, healing, preaching, or administration. God will show you what those gifts are and help you to grow the talents you have received.

In all this you “roll up your sleeves” for the work God has given you and prepared you for so that you will be an effective prophet.

The Prescription of our Call – The text says, “[T]ell them all that I command you.” In other words, leave nothing out; proclaim the whole counsel of God. Don’t just proclaim what appeals to you or agrees with your politics and worldview. Don’t just say what is popular or agrees with worldly thinking. Tell them the whole message, in season or out of season.

II. The Courage that is Demanded – The text says: Be not crushed on their account, as though I would leave you crushed before them; for it is I this day who have made you a fortified city, a pillar of iron, a wall of brass, against the whole land: against Judah’s kings and princes, against its priests and people.

Strong – A prophet needs to be strong, for people are stubborn and hesitant to change. Indeed, we are collectively a stiff-necked people; we have necks of iron and foreheads of brass. We are thick-headed, willful, and obdurate. A prophet must be willing to endure a lot to move the ball even a few inches. If you don’t think we’re a hard case, look at the cross and see what it took to save us. Prophets need strength and persistence.

Supporting – A prophet is called “a pillar of iron.” That is, he is to lend support to a crumbling nation and culture. Whether our culture likes to admit it or not, it is crumbling and collapsing. If it is to stand any chance at all, we must be willing to be pillars of iron, calling this culture back to modesty, decency, chastity, self-control, maturity, obedience to God, and generosity to the poor. Otherwise, everything is destined for ruin.

Sadly, the Church has often had to pick up the shattered pieces of fallen cultures, nations, and eras that refused to repent. But this is what prophets must do: they must be pillars of iron when cultures go weak and soft, or when they crumble under the weight of pride, sin, and unrepentance.

Failing that, we must become, by God’s grace, the new foundation and pillar of what rises from the ashes. All of this takes great courage.

Sanctifying – Jeremiah is told that the priests, kings, and princes have all been corrupted and that he must speak the truth to them and summon them to repentance.

The hardest work of the prophet is calling those who benefit from the status quo to change and repentance. This is hard not only because they are at the “top” of the current system but also because they are owed some degree of respect and obedience as lawful superiors.

Finding the balance between respecting authority figures and summoning them to repentance is not easy and only God can really pull it off. Nevertheless, speaking the truth to powerful people is the unenviable lot of the prophet.

Well, fellow prophets, all of this refers to you and me. Bishop-bashing and ridiculing political leaders is not the solution, but neither is quiet acquiescence when those in authority need to hear a call from the Lord. A lot of prayer and a general tone of respect will surely lead the way. Practice clarity with charity and light with love.

III. The Conclusion that is Determined – The text says, They will fight against you but not prevail over you, for I am with you to deliver you, says the LORD.

In the end, the truth will out. God always wins. Every night gives way to day, when the light scatters the darkness. Darkness has its hour, but truth has eternity. Good Friday only points to Easter Sunday, when death is cast off like a garment. In the end, every true prophet is on the winning team. While he may face laughter, ridicule, persecution, setbacks, and trials, what every true prophet announces will come to pass. History bears this out and it will be made manifest on the Last Day. Darkness cannot prevail; it always gives way to the light.

The conclusion for the prophet, the Church, the gospel, and the Lord is total victory. It cannot be any other way. God has spoken it and He will do it.

The Lord Jesus shows us this in today’s Gospel, even if only in a small way. The text says,

They rose up, drove him out of the town, and led him to the brow of the hill on which their town had been built, to hurl him down headlong. But Jesus passed through the midst of them and went away.

This is a preview of Easter: just when Satan is running his victory lap, the Lord casts off death and stands as light in the shadow of the cross. Satan loses; Jesus wins.

So, get on the winning team. Pay little heed to the current struggle; it cannot last. Jesus has already won.

 

Cross-posted at the Catholic Standard: A “Rule of Life” for Prophets

Posted on

Straining Out Gnats but Swallowing Camels, as Seen in a Commercial

In the Gospel of Matthew (Mat 12:1-8), Jesus is rebuked for violating the Sabbath. This reminded me of the video below, which illustrates how we sometimes follow smaller rules while overlooking more important ones in the process.

The Lord Jesus was often scorned by the people of His day, who claimed that He overlooked certain details of the law (often Sabbath observances). But those who rebuked Him for this were guilty of far greater violations. For example,

  1. [Jesus] went into the synagogue, and a man with a shriveled hand was there. Some of them were looking for a reason to accuse Jesus, so they watched him closely to see if he would heal him on the Sabbath. Jesus said to the man with the shriveled hand, “Stand up in front of everyone.” Then Jesus asked them, “Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?” But they remained silent. He looked around at them in anger and, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts, said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” He stretched it out, and his hand was completely restored. Then the Pharisees went out and began to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus (Mk 3:1-6).
  2. Woe to you Pharisees, because you give God a tenth of your mint, rue and all other kinds of garden herbs, but you neglect justice and the love of God. You should have practiced the latter without leaving the former undone (Luke 11:42).
  3. Indignant because Jesus had healed on the Sabbath, the synagogue ruler said to the people, “There are six days for work. So come and be healed on those days, not on the Sabbath.” The Lord answered him, “You hypocrites! Doesn’t each of you on the Sabbath untie his ox or donkey from the stall and lead it out to give it water? Then should not this woman, a daughter of Abraham, whom Satan has kept bound for eighteen long years, be set free on the Sabbath day from what bound her?” (Lk 13:14-16)
  4. You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel. Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean (Matt 23:24-25).

Yes, they are straining out gnats but swallowing camels, maximizing the minimum but minimizing the maximum. Note that in the first passage above they are actually planning to kill Jesus for healing on the Sabbath!

Perhaps my all-time favorite illustration of this awful human tendency is in the Gospel of John:

Then the Jews led Jesus from Caiaphas to the palace of the Roman governor. By now it was early morning, and to avoid ceremonial uncleanness the Jews did not enter the palace; they wanted to be able to eat the Passover. So Pilate came out … (John 18:28-29).

They are plotting to kill a just and innocent man; indeed, they are plotting to kill God. They are acting out of wickedness, envy, jealousy, hatred, and murderous anger, but their primary concern is avoiding ritual uncleanliness! Yes, they are straining out gnats but swallowing camels.

We who are pious and observant need to be wary of this tendency. Sometimes in congratulating ourselves over adherence in lesser matters, we can either offend or neglect in weightier ones. Perhaps I attend Mass each Sunday (a grave obligation); perhaps I pray the rosary (a highly commendable practice); perhaps I tithe (a commendable precept). These are all things that ought to be done (one is commanded, one is commended, and one is a precept). But what if at the same time I am hateful toward someone at the office, unforgiving to a family member, and/or insensitive to the poor?

The danger could be that I let my observance of certain things allow me to think that I can “check off the God box” and figure that because I went to Mass, prayed the rosary, and gave an offering, I’ve “got this righteousness thing down.” Too often, very significant and serious things like love, mercy, forgiveness, and charity are set aside or neglected as I am busy congratulating myself over my adherence to other, sometimes lesser, things.

This oversight can happen in the other direction as well. Someone may congratulate himself for spending the day working in a soup kitchen, and think that he therefore has no need to look at the fact that he is living unchastely (shacked up, for example) or not attending Mass.

We cannot “buy God off,” doing certain things (usually things that we like) while ignoring others we’d rather not. In the end, the whole counsel of God is important.

We must avoid the sinful tendency to try to substitute or swap, to observe a few things while overlooking others.

We see a lot of examples of this in our culture as well. We obsess over people smoking because it might be bad for their health while ignoring the health consequences of promiscuous behavior, which spreads AIDS and countless venereal diseases and leads to abortion. We campaign to save the baby seals while over a thousand baby humans are killed each day in the United States. We deplore (rightfully) the death of thousands each year in gun homicides while calling the murder of hundreds of thousands of babies each year a constitutional right. The school nurse is required to obtain parental permission to dispense aspirin to students but not to provide the dangerous abortifacient “morning after pill.” We talk about the dignity of women and yet pornography flourishes. We fret endlessly about our weight and the physical appearance of our bodies, which will die, and care little for our souls, which will live. We obsess over carbon footprints while flying on jets to global warming conferences at luxurious convention center complexes.

Yes, we are straining gnats but swallowing camels. As the Lord says, we ought not to neglect smaller things wholly, but simply observing lesser things doesn’t give us the right to ignore greater ones.

Salus animarum suprema lex. (The salvation of souls is the highest law.) While little things mean a lot, we must always remember not to allow them to eclipse greater things.

The ideal for which to aim is an integrated state in which the lesser serves the greater and is subsumed into it. St. Augustine rightly observed,

Quod Minimum, minimum est, Sed in minimo fidelem esse, magnum est (St. Augustine – De Doctrina Christiana, IV,35).

(What is a little thing, is (just) a little thing, but to be faithful in a little thing is a great thing.)

Notice that the lesser things are in service of the greater thing—in this case fidelity. And thus we should rightly ask whether some of the lesser things we do are really in service of the greater things like justice, love, mercy, fidelity, kindness, and generosity. Otherwise we run the risk of straining out gnats but swallowing camels.

Enjoy this commercial, which illustrates how one rule (no loud voices in the library) is observed while violating nearly every other.

Cross-posted at the Catholic Standard: Straining Out Gnats but Swallowing Camels

Posted on

The Masks Are Coming Off

An abortion bill, similar in many respects to the horrifying bill recently passed in New York, was recently tabled by the Virginia General Assembly. It would have eliminated many of the requirements already in state law for third-trimester abortions. That it was tabled is the only good news.

Most of you have already heard the exchange between Virginia state delegate Todd Gilbert and the bill’s sponsor, delegate Kathy Tran. He asked Tran if her bill would allow a woman who is in labor to request an abortion if a physician certified that the pregnancy would impair her mental health; Tran replied that it would.

About this truly shocking (but honest) admission, delegate Tran afterwards lamented, “I was caught off guard and probably wasn’t as artful in the moment as I could have been,”

“Artful”—In other words, she couldn’t wordsmith quickly enough to cloak the shocking truth that if this bill became law, a woman already in labor could legally have her child killed (with a physician’s approval).

And just in case you think things couldn’t get worse, Virginia Governor Ralph Northam sought to defend Delegate Tran and imagined the following scenario:

“So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother” (*).

Words cannot describe just how awful this is, claims that we “critics” simply misunderstand the governor notwithstanding. No indeed, the message is loud and clear: a baby is set off to the side and “kept comfortable” while the caring doctors and the mother have a nice little discussion about whether the newborn should be allowed to live or killed—truly shocking. We might just as well be back in pagan Rome under the Pater Familias laws, under which the father decided whether to keep a certain baby or have it cast into the Tiber or exposed to die. Infanticide, like abortion, is a very ugly business.

There has been plenty of news analysis about this “controversy,” but I prefer to call the bill a calamity, the legalization of outright cruelty.

This much must also be clear: the masks are coming off and the fierce face of abortion on demand is on display. Upon Governor Andrew Cuomo’s signing of the “Reproductive Health Act” in New York, the open celebration, the applause, the lighting of the World Trade Center spire in pink were egregious and boldly fierce—“in your face,” if you will. (I have written more about that travesty here.) Now we have this shocking episode in Virginia.

For years, the pro-choice movement has cloaked itself in talk about keeping abortion safe, legal, and rare—but it was a cloak then and it is certainly one now. Today the cry is increasingly, “No limits! The right to abortion is an absolute, human right!” Why are the masks coming off? Scripture provides an answer, at least in terms of the satanic inspirations behind abortion:

But woe to you, O earth and sea, for the devil has come down to you in great wrath, because he knows that his time is short (Rev 12:12).

In past decades, the devil has seen fit to work largely in secret, but recently he seems to have changed strategies and is increasingly coming out of hiding. The dramatic increase in the need for exorcisms and deliverance ministry is indicative of this. I also see evidence of this as he inspires ever-more-radical abortion laws—edging right into infanticide; he further deceives many into calling this good and something to celebrate.

Satan rages because he knows his time is short. Science is on the pro-life side. It is undeniable that a unique human individual comes into being at conception. Fetal development is now widely documented with 3D ultrasounds and in utero cameras—something from which abortion advocates like to “shield” pregnant women. Although the age of viability is usually considered to be 24 weeks gestation, some infants born earlier now survive; neonatal units are fighting to save the lives of children that across town at the “clinic” could be legally aborted. Young people are increasingly pro-life, and most Americans now support increasing limits on abortion. Yes, Satan knows that his time is running short, and so he rages, inspiring blindness to obvious truths and callousness toward human life—even the most helpless.

Will the Church boldly engage in this ever-fiercer battle or will we be fearful and ineffective? Will our leaders and the laity have courage to counter the callousness that is settling in? Will we resist or just be resigned? Will you be outspoken and join the ranks of those who witness, act, and pray?

Satan once raged at the babies when God, through Moses, was about to liberate His people. He raged again when Christ entered the world to save us. When God is up to something big, Satan rages. Remember this:

  • The Midwives resisted Pharaoh’s evil law.
  • The parents of the holy innocents in Bethlehem fought to protect their children from Herod’s wrath and fear.
  • Joseph and Mary obeyed God’s command to carry Jesus off to protection in distant Egypt leaving behind all that was familiar.

If we want to usher in blessings and end Satan’s raging, we must resist evil laws, act to protect our children, and be willing to suffer as a result. What are you willing to do?

Cross-posted at the Catholic Standard: The Masks Are Coming Off

Posted on

God’s Mercy and Justice – Balance or Bust!

balance-1475025_1920One of the signs of orthodoxy is the ability to hold competing truths in tension, realizing that they are there to balance each other. For example, on the one hand God is sovereign and omnipotent, but on the other we are free to say no to Him. Both of these are taught in Scripture. Our freedom mysteriously interacts with God’s sovereignty and omnipotence, but how?

Heresy will not abide any tension and so it selects one truth while discarding others meant to balance or complete it. For example, is God punitive, or forgiving; is he insistent or patient? Too often we focus on one while downplaying or dropping the other. In some eras, the notion of a harsh, strict God was so emphasized that His mercy was all but lost. Today, the tendency is to stress His mercy and kindness while nearly dismissing His role as the sovereign Judge who will set things right by upholding the just and punishing the wicked.

A recent reading from the Letter to the Hebrews at daily Mass (Saturday of the First week of the Year) presents us with a balance. It speaks of two very different experiences of God, both of which are needed to balance each other.

The word of God is living and effective,
sharper than any two-edged sword,
penetrating even between soul and spirit,
joints and marrow,
and able to discern reflections and thoughts of the heart.
No creature is concealed from him,
but everything is naked and exposed to the eyes of him
to whom we must render an account.

Since we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens,
Jesus, the Son of God,
let us hold fast to our confession.
For we do not have a high priest
who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses,
but one who has similarly been tested in every way,
yet without sin.
So let us confidently approach the throne of grace
to receive mercy and to find grace for timely help (Heb 4:12-16).

The two parts of this passage are very different. The first uses somewhat violent imagery in describing how closely the Word of God examines us, exposing our hidden thoughts and actions. It speaks to God’s justice, His passion to set things right. The emphasis is on the sobering and frightening truth that we will have to render an account to the Lord for every word, thought, and action, no matter how hidden. Jesus is our savior and brother, but He is also sovereign Lord and judge of the world. He is not to be trivialized, minimized, or domesticated. He is the Lord and we will have to answer to Him.

In contrast, the second half of the passage bids us to remember that we have a compassionate Lord, one who sympathizes with our weakness and offers us mercy, grace, and help. We are encouraged to approach the throne of grace. The emphasis here is on a merciful and kind Lord, ready to be approached and to give us every assistance we need in order to be saved.

So, notice the balance in this passage between God’s justice and His mercy. Remember that both are necessary. God’s mercy is needed now because there is a day of judgment. God is not going to stop being God. He is all-perfect and all-holy. He is the Truth Himself, the refulgent light of all glory. We cannot simply walk into His unveiled presence without first being prepared and purified. And thus He makes every help and grace available to us. He is good to us and patient with us. He is merciful and kind.

In this way, God’s mercy and grace prepare us for us his Justice. But there is no justice if sin is unanswered, or injustice is not rectified. That is why we need both His grace and His mercy. Their purpose is to bring the needed changes so that we can be ready for the day when we shall see the Lord.

As a whole, the text therefore speaks of the Lord Jesus in tightly woven tapestry of darker and lighter themes. It requires careful balance.

Too easily in our times we set mercy and justice in opposition to each other. But where is mercy if justice is absent? Could the victims of genocide really be said to experience mercy if their unrepentant killers were ushered past them into the Kingdom of Heaven? Could Heaven even be Heaven if unrepentant sinners dwelled there? At some point, mercy demands that justice rightly separate what is stubbornly evil from what is good; that is why the balance of this passage is necessary. For now, there is a time of mercy and access to the throne of mercy, but there comes a day when justice requires a final answer and verdict. It is mercy that accompanies us to justice of the final judgement. Mercy and grace prepare us.

So, orthodoxy is in the balance. Both visions of the Lord in the reading from Hebrews above are accurate and necessary. To overemphasize or minimize one is to harm the other.

A mercy that would cancel the requirements of justice would not be mercy at all. It would leave us deformed and incomplete; it would mean that injustice would continue forever. Neither of these outcomes is merciful.

Further, a justice that did not rely on grace and mercy would not be justice at all. This is because without grace and mercy, we are dead in our sins; justice is unattainable.

So, balance is the stance of orthodoxy. We cannot ever hope to attain to the glory of God without both the justice and mercy of God.

Balance or bust!

Cross-posted at the Catholic Standard: God’s Mercy and Justice – Balance or Bust!

Posted on

Of the Glory and Means of our Salvation in Christ Jesus

The Crucifixion – Giotto (1304-06)

As we continue to read the Letter to the Hebrews in daily Mass, we are reminded that although the Temple liturgies were glorious and elaborate, they merely pointed to the perfect sacrifice of Christ.

Let’s consider three things regarding the saving work of Christ:

IT IS SURPASSING. At Tuesday’s daily Mass we read this passage:

The Law is only a shadow of the good things to come, not the realities themselves. It can never, by the same sacrifices offered year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. If it could, would not the offerings have ceased? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all and would no longer have felt the guilt of their sins. Instead, those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins, because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and of goats to take away sins (Hebrews, 10:1-4).

All the shed blood of lambs could not save. Those offerings only pointed to the true Lamb of God and our Passover, Jesus Christ. Even the extravagant offering of a bull could never pay our debt of sin; only Jesus could redeem us, paying the price of our salvation. All those ancient sacrifices could only remind us that by our sins we had a debt we could not pay; they could only serve to symbolize our repentance.

The Temple, though glorious—one of the wonders of the ancient world—was not Heaven itself, but a poor copy. Monday’s reading said,

For Christ did not enter into a sanctuary made by hands, a copy of the true one, but heaven itself that he might now appear before God on our behalf. Not that he might offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters each year into the sanctuary with blood that is not his own; if that were so, he would have had to suffer repeatedly from the foundation of the world. But now once for all he has appeared at the end of the ages to take away sin by his sacrifice (Heb 9:24-28).

Christ does not operate on some movie set or some earthly copy of Heaven. No, he enters the real temple, the Holy of Holies in Heaven, a place not made with human hands but eternal.

Unlike the high priest, who must repeat the offering again and again, Jesus does this once and for all. Thus, the Mass is not a re-sacrificing of Christ but a making present of His perfect, once-for-all sacrifice. Calvary and its fruits are made present and applied to us in every Mass.

IT IS SUBMITTED. What was the sacrifice that Christ offered? It was surely His suffering and blood, but it was more than that and deeper as well. We also read this passage at Tuesday’s Mass:

Therefore, when Christ came into the world, He said, “Sacrifice and offering You did not desire, but a body You prepared for me. In burnt offerings and sin offerings You took no delight. Then I said, ‘Here I am, it is written about Me in the scroll: I have come to do Your will, O God’” (Heb 10:7-9).

Thus, it is also by Christ’s submission to the Father’s will, by His obedience, that we are saved. His suffering and the shedding of His blood are expressions of that obedience. His suffering and obedience are so together as to be one, and yet we can distinguish them. Had Christ suffered without having obediently willed it, we would not be saved. It was thus necessary for Him to take a human nature—and thereby a human will—so that he could obey His Father. We are saved by the human decision of a divine person. Christ’s obedience to the will of the Father undoes Adam’s disobedience, and that obedience is expressed in His sufferings.

Tuesday’s reading from Hebrews concludes as follows:

By this “will,” we have been consecrated through the offering of the Body of Jesus Christ once for all (Hebrews 10:10).

IT IS SINGULAR. Christ Himself is singularly and personally the sacrifice that saves us. In the older, imperfect Temple rituals, the priest sacrificed something distinct from himself (a lamb, a goat, a bull, or some turtle doves), but Christ the perfect priest sacrifices His very self! As we read in the text just above,

… but a body You prepared for me. … Then I said, ‘Here I am, it is written about Me in the scroll: I have come to do Your will, O God.’

On coming into the world, Christ did not sacrifice something else or someone else (none of which could save). No, He sacrificed His very self, who alone can save us!

Consider well, then, Christ’s surpassing priesthood, His submitted obedience and His singular sacrifice. Be grateful for what He endured out of love for us and for His Father. His is the perfect, once-for-all sacrifice to the Father.

Cross-posted at the Catholic Standard: Of the Glory and Means of our Salvation in Christ Jesus

Posted on

The Key Question of Every Liturgy

There is a legend that explains how the liturgy and the faith took hold in Rus (Russia):

Prince Vladimir of Kiev, seeking a right worship for his people, sent representatives to look into various faiths as well as liturgies. When emissaries went south to observe the Greek Christian Liturgy, they returned saying that they were not sure if they had been in Heaven or on Earth, so beautiful was what they had seen in the Hagia Sophia in Constantinople. They were sure that God dwelt there among men.

The roots of Christian faith among the Russians are obviously a lot more complicated. However, the legend does capture the fact that the Byzantine Liturgy of the Eastern Church was a significant factor in advancing Christianity among the people who populate what is today Russia, the Ukraine, Georgia, and other nearby lands.

Joseph Ratzinger (Benedict XVI), although noting the legendary quality of the story, underscored that the Sacred Liturgy can and does have a missionary quality that can inspire and draw others to the one true God.

Exactly how the liturgy does this, however, is a matter of debate. Some say that it is essentially the beauty of the liturgy and its ability to draw us away from the mundane that leads people to God. Others emphasize the liturgy’s ability to teach; the elements of the liturgy must be intelligible and easily grasped by the faithful and made applicable to daily life.

Of course we want to avoid a false dichotomy, in which one vision must be chosen to the exclusion of the other. Both notions have important insights. Yet in our time it is clear that at least in the Roman Liturgy, the emphasis has fallen on making the liturgy more intelligible and “relevant” to modern life, than ethereal and meant to draw us up and out of the ordinary through sublime beauty.

Cardinal Ratzinger, writing in 2005, said of this trend,

The way of thinking about “missionary liturgy” that became widespread in the fifties is, at the least, ambiguous and problematical. In many circles, among people concerned with liturgy, it led, in a quite inappropriate fashion, to turning a didactic element in the liturgy, and its comprehensibility even for outsiders, into the primary standard for shaping liturgical celebrations. Likewise, the saying that the choice of liturgical forms must be made with respect to “pastoral” points of view betrays the same anthropocentric error. The liturgy is then being constructed entirely for men. … Thus suggestions for styling liturgy became profane models, drawn for instance from the way meetings are held … or socialization rituals. God does not actually play a role there; it is all concerned with winning people over, or keeping them happy and satisfying their demands. … No faith [is] aroused in that way (Theology of the Liturgy, p. 332).

His language is quite strong here. Yet the influence of anthropocentricism (the belief that man rather than God is the central or most important entity in existence) in liturgy remains a consistent, troubling trend. It is a hard mentality to break in a culture so centered on consumerism and “pleasing the customer.” This may work well in markets, but in faith and to some degree in education, it is a harmful trend. God, the liturgy, and truth itself do not exist to please us, but rather to summon us to challenging heights, beyond our mere pleasures and passions.

I have written about anthropocentrism in greater detail before (here). While we obviously cannot wholly abandon a notion of the liturgy being intelligible, we are ultimately being drawn into mysteries above and beyond us. Thus, the liturgy should have mysterious and sublime aspects.

In the same essay, Cardinal Ratzinger wrote,

What persuaded the emissaries of the Russian Prince of the truth of the faith celebrated in the … liturgy was not … arguments that seemed clearer than those of other religions. What moved them was in fact the mystery as such, which demonstrated the power of the truth actually, transcending the arguments of reason … The Byzantine liturgy was not, and is not, concerned to indoctrinate other people or show them how pleasing and entertaining it might be. What was impressive about it was particularly its sheer lack of practical purpose, the fact that it was being done for God and not for spectators. … It was simply striving to be pleasing to God as the sacrifice of Abel had been pleasing to God … turning the gaze toward God was what allowed God’s light to stream down [and] … be detected even by outsiders (Ibid, p. 331-332).

And there is the money quote: it was being done for God and not for spectators. … It was simply striving to be pleasing to God.

How different this is from today, when the liturgy seems so focused on us! Everything must be understood (using the vernacular both literally and figuratively). Music must not be too taxing; it must be something the people can easily sing along with. Rituals must not be too elaborate. Ironically, in the one place where intelligibility is most important (the homily), it is often said that it should be brief, more exhortatory than instructive.

None of these things are intrinsically bad, but they are out of balance. There is little notion that the liturgy is directed first and foremost to God, that it is worship of God, that the rituals are for Him and are a sacrifice of praise, not merely a ceremony that pleases us.

It is fair to say that in the older form of the Roman Rite (especially low Mass) the people were so uninvolved as to be almost unnecessary, an afterthought. Everything was done by the priest and the servers. But perhaps we have overcorrected. Turning toward the people, introducing more vernacular, and simplifying the rites were seen as a way to involve and reintegrate the whole people of God, the whole Body of Christ, into the sacred action of Christ as Head and High Priest giving perfect worship to the Father.

Now may be the time for us to consider bringing back the balance we have lost, reintroducing sacred language, and teaching that God and the worship of Him are the essential focus of our liturgy. A gentle reintroduction of orienting especially the Eucharistic Prayer toward God through a unified posture and direction of all toward the cross may be helpful (under the guidance of the bishop). The Liturgy of the Word can and should remain directed toward the people, for they are the target of this proclamation.

Many will debate exactly what should be done and how quickly, but it seems clear that balance needs to be restored in most parish settings. The ultimate goal, as Cardinal Ratzinger wrote, is that our Liturgy be done for God more so than for man, that we simply strive to be pleasing to God. The inclusion of God’s people is important, but not in a way that neglects our collective purpose of worshiping God, who is worthy of our sacrifice of praise. The liturgy should not be reduced merely to what pleases us.

Pope Benedict observed elsewhere that for those who prefer traditional Liturgy there is also a risk in reducing the liturgy to mere aestheticism, in which what is considered beautiful and more ancient is preferred for only those reasons. The manifestation may be loftier and less worldly, but the error is the same: that the liturgy’s purpose is to cater to man’s tastes. Things in the traditional arena can get very particular, such that Roman vs. Gothic vestments, tabernacle veils vs. none, or a missed genuflection by the celebrant can become contentious issues and lead to uncharitable remarks after Mass.

There is not room in this post to lay out the essentials of liturgy as Scripture sets them forth. (I have done that on the blog in the past: here.) God gave at least the essentials to Moses on Mount Sinai, to His disciples at the Last Supper, and to John in Revelation 4, 5, and 8. From these essentials we build and set our focus on what pleases God.

The deepest questions to answer after any liturgy should be these: “Was God worshipped?” and “Was God the true focus of our hearts?”

Cross-posted at the Catholic Standard: The Key Question of Every Liturgy