Author: Msgr. Charles Pope

We live in times in which there is a widespread notion that to correct sinners is to “judge” them. Never mind that it is sin that we judge, not the sinner.  Never mind that in accusing us of  judging, the worldly-minded are themselves doing the very judging they condemn. Never mind any of that; the point of the charge is to seek to shame us into silence. And despite the fact that Scripture consistently directs us to correct the sinner, many Catholics have bought into the notion that correcting the sinner is “judging” him. In this, the devil, who orchestrates the “correcting is judging” campaign, rejoices; for if he can keep us from correcting one another, sin can and does flourish.

Today’s gospel is an important reminder and instruction on why and how we should correct the sinner and be open to correction ourselves. Let’s look at in four steps.

I. PRESCRIPTION – The text says, Jesus said to his disciples: “If your brother sins (against you), go and tell him.” I placed “against you” in parentheses because many ancient manuscripts do not contain this phrase, while others do. While some may want to limit this gospel to commanding correction only when someone sins “against you,” none of the other texts we will review contain this restriction and so the phrase seems superfluous. For the purpose of this reflection, I will favor those manuscripts that do not include the phrase “against you.”

Now, therefore, observe the brief but clear advice that when we see someone in sin, we ought to talk with him or her about it. Many prefer, probably due to sloth, to say, “It’s none of my business what other people do.” But Jesus clearly teaches otherwise.

In teaching this way, Jesus is obviously speaking to the general situation. Some distinctions are helpful and admissible in specific situations. For example, one is generally more obliged to correct people in grave matters than in less serious ones. One is more compelled to correct those who are younger than those who are older. One is more obligated to correct subordinates, less so superiors. Parents are strongly duty-bound to correct their children, but children are seldom obligated to correct their parents. And so on. But the general rule remains: all other things being equal, there is an obligation to engage in Christian correction. Jesus says, “If your brother sins, talk to him about it.”

There are many other scriptures that also advise and even oblige us to correct the sinner. Some of the texts also speak to the way in which we should correct.

James 5:19 My brothers, if one of you should wander from the truth and someone should bring him back, remember this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of his way will save him from death and cover over a multitude of sins.
Gal 6:1 Brethren, if a man is overtaken in any sin, you who are spiritual should recall him in a spirit of gentleness. Look to yourself, lest you too be tempted. Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.
Col 3:16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teach and admonish one another in all wisdom.
1 Thess 5:14 And we exhort you, brethren, admonish the unruly, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, be patient with them all.
Lev 19:17 Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbor, and not suffer sin upon him.
Ez 3:17 Son of man, I have made you a watchman for the house of Israel; whenever you hear a word from my mouth, you shall give them warning from me. If I say to the wicked, ‘You shall surely die,’ and you give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, in order to save his life, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood I will require at your hand.

Hence, we have an obligation in charity to correct someone who has gone over into sin. In correcting we ought to be gentle but clear. Further, we ought to correct with humility and not fall into the temptation of acting “superior” and such. Our goal is to limit sin’s effects and to apply necessary medicine to the problem of sin.

We will see more “correction texts” in a moment. But for now, let the first point be repeated: if your brother sins, talk with him about it.

II. PURPOSE – If he listens to you, you have won over your brother. Here, let us just briefly note that the point of this correction is to win a brother or sister back to the Lord. The point is not to win an argument or to show superiority. The point is to contend with Satan, by God’s grace, and win the person, who is in Satan’s grasp, back for God.

III. PROCESS – The Lord next sets forth a process for fraternal correction. It would seem that the process here is generally for more serious matters and that all these steps might not be necessary for lesser ones. For addressing the general situation in which a brother or sister is in a state of more serious and unrepentant sin, the following process is set forth:

1. Go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. – This first stage is often omitted in our fallen, gossip-prone, human condition. If one is in sin, it is too frequently the case that we will talk to everyone except the actual sinner. This is usually not helpful and in fact merely compounds the sin. The sinner goes uncorrected and sin multiplies through gossip. Satan gets a high return on his investment, often netting dozens of sinners for the price of one.

Jesus is clear: speak to the sinner himself, FIRST. There may be situations in which we need to seek advice from someone we trust about how best to approach the sinner. And sometimes we may need to check a few facts first. But in the end, such lateral discussions ought to be few and only with trusted individuals. The Lord is clear: step one is to go first to the sinner himself.

2. If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, so that ‘‘every fact may be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses.” – This sort of option may seem rare today in our large cosmopolitan settings, but such things do occur in the right circumstances. Often these sorts of team efforts are called “interventions” and they are frequently done in the cases of addicts who are resisting treatment. Sometimes, too, it is used when a certain family member is engaging in hurtful practices such as severe anger, or the refusal to forgive, or causing division within the family. Such interventions are usually conducted by several family members that the person trusts and they often receive training of some sort before doing so. Depending on the gravity of the matter, these interventions are both necessary and counseled by the Lord as part of a method to end destructive and sinful behaviors.

3. If he refuses to listen to them, tell the Church. – Here, too, note the presupposition that the Church is experienced in a personal way and that the individual is somehow connected to a body of believers who matter to him in some way. The presumption is that these are people he knows (pastors, parish leaders, etc.). This is not always the case in modern parishes, which can be large and impersonal and where many can attend yet stay only on the fringes. Rather than simply dismissing this step of Jesus’ as unrealistic in most cases today, we ought to see it as setting forth an ideal of what parishes ought to be. I hope to work with this vision in a post later this week.

Nevertheless, for those who have some relationship to the Church, this step needs to be considered in cases of grave sin. As a pastor, I have sometimes been asked to speak to a family member in serious sin. Presuming other measures have been taken, I often do speak to him or her to warn about such things as fornication, shacking up, abortion, drug use, anger issues, disrespect for parents, and so forth.

But to be honest, unless the individual has more than a superficial membership in the parish, such talks are of limited effectiveness. Further, “Church” here should not be seen merely as meaning clergy. Sometimes there are others in the Church who ought to be engaged, leaders of organizations to which the person belongs, older men and women (to speak to younger ones), and so forth. I have often engaged a team to speak, especially to younger people.

4. If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector. – And here we come to a matter of some controversy: that of excommunication. Treating someone as tax collector or Gentile is a Jewish way of saying, “Have nothing more to do with such a one; let him be expelled from the community.”

Some today object to the use of excommunication and often suggest, with some superiority, that “Jesus would never do such a thing.” Yet Jesus himself is teaching us here to do this very thing. As we shall again remark, excommunication is not a punishment to be inflicted upon someone simply to be rid of him or her, but rather as a medicine to bring forth repentance. As we can see, too, excommunication only comes at the end of a long process and is not something that the Church rushes to do. But it IS taught here and elsewhere in Scripture. Consider some of the following examples:

2 Thess 3:6 We instruct you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to shun any brother who walks in a disorderly way and not according to the tradition they received from us.
2 Thess 3:14 If any one refuses to obey what we say in this letter, note that man, and have nothing to do with him, that he may be ashamed. Do not look on him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother.
1 Cor 5:1 It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and of a kind that is not found even among pagans; for a man is living with his father’s wife. And you are arrogant! Ought you not rather to mourn? Let him who has done this be removed from among you. For though absent in body I am present in spirit, and as if present, I have already pronounced judgment in the name of the Lord Jesus on the man who has done such a thing. When you are assembled, and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus, you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
1 Cor 15:33 Do not be deceived: “Bad company ruins good morals.” Come to your right mind, and sin no more. For some have no knowledge of God. I say this to your shame.
1 Cor 5:11 But rather I wrote to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or robber — not even to eat with such a one. Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge?

So a fairly strong and clear biblical mandate exists from both Jesus and St. Paul that excommunication may at times have to be used. It would seem from the texts we have surveyed that the purpose of excommunication is two-fold: to protect the community from the influence of serious sinners, and to be a medicine to urge the wayward Christian unto saving repentance.

And if any doubt the seriousness of excommunication or think nothing of the Church’s solemn declaration of it, note that Jesus indicates that he will in fact recognize the Church’s authoritative declaration. For He says, Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Thus, let no one make light of the Church’s solemn declaration in such matters.

In our times there is increasing demand for bishops to use this measure more often, especially for those who openly support and help fund abortion. It seems clear from the Scriptures we have surveyed that such a measure can, and at times should, be used at the end of a process like Jesus describes. If one is directly involved in abortion, either by having one, performing one, paying for one directly, or directly assisting someone to have one, he or she is automatically (self) excommunicated.

What of “Catholic” politicians and jurists who advance the availability of abortion and vote funding for it? Most (but not all) bishops have made a prudential decision not to make use of this measure for “Catholic” politicians who support abortion or same sex “marriage,” etc.  Most of them say they have concerns that the matter would be perceived as a partisan political act rather than a moral shepherding of these wayward souls. And since it would be misread and falsely portrayed by the media, they consider it unwise in these circumstances to excommunicate.

Bare minimum – It is not my role as a priest to critique bishops on whether or not they choose to excommunicate. There are prudential judgments bishops must make. But at a bare minimum I would surely hope that every Catholic (politician or not) who even comes close to procuring an abortion or advancing its availability, has been privately instructed and warned by his pastor (or bishop in prominent cases) that if he does not change, and dies unrepentant, he will almost certainly go to Hell. Likewise those of any prominence who help  advance other serious moral evils should be strongly admonished by pastors to return to the truth.

It is simply too serious a situation to leave a sinner of this magnitude uninstructed, unrebuked, or in any way unclear as to the gravity of the matter. The sinner should be instructed—yes, warned vividly—to repent at once and to refrain from Holy Communion until confession can be celebrated following true repentance.

IV. POWER –  Again, amen, I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything for which they are to pray, it shall be granted to them by my heavenly Father

The Lord is showing here how our unity will bring strength. But how can we have unity in the Church when there is not agreement on basic moral principles and behavior. Thus fraternal correction not only helps the sinner, it helps the Church by helping to preserve our unity in the truth of the Gospel. Surely central to the truth that unites us is the moral law of Christ and his Church. Thus fraternal correction increases our unity and makes us and our prayer stronger.

Sadly today it is evident that our unity and the power of our prayer as a Church is greatly diminished by the disunity among us and the way in which many go on too long never being corrected in and by the Church. We are not a force for change since we are divided on the very truth that is supposed to unite us. Much of our division is further rooted in our failure to teach with clarity and correct the sinner.

Much work and pray is necessary today to unlock the power here of which the Lord speaks.

The Lord sometimes comes in unexpected ways and in unexpected packages. The Jews of Jesus’ time were expecting a Messiah who would ride in on a warhorse, and after a bath of blood, reestablish an earthly kingdom of David in all its glory with economic prosperity and military superiority. But Jesus defied their expectations and asked them to risk the unexpected. He came not in might, but humbly, riding on a donkey. He spoke with a rural “hick” accent common to Galilee  and hailed from a town so lowly that only a footpath went to it. Even one of His apostles wondered what good could ever come from Nazareth. He ended his earthly ministry dying on a cross.

Yet to those who risked the ride, the Lord reappeared gloriously resurrected, with might and power in His hand. St. John, who saw Him in His glory, said,  I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet  and in the midst of the lampstands one like a son of man … and his voice was like the sound of many waters (Rev 1:10,15). So He came in humility and mercy, but when He returns you’d better be ready, by His grace, for He comes in judgment. And the mighty shall be cast down and the lowly raised.

Some of this occurred to me as I watched this KIA commercial the other day.

It is filled with unexpected things. A rather well-heeled couple comes to the valet to get their luxury car. And yet a strange Christ-figure meets them and challenges to take the risk of a different ride. He tells them that the world of luxury has blinded them from the world of true luxury. (Pay attention, Christian!) He offers them a blood-red key (that brings to mind the Cross) to a different ride than their worldly luxury car.

At some point the couple is led to a KIA car—not exactly the first luxury car that would likely occur to this couple, that is clearly more used to a Rolls, or a Mercedes, or maybe even a Bentley. To them it must have seemed as meek and humble as riding on a donkey. What kind of luxury is this?

But entering the car with the strange, Christ-like figure they are surprised. Interestingly, after being handed their blood-red key, they are in a car with a resurrection-white interior. Driving past, they are grateful that no one outside seems to notice or be impressed. But they are, and the Christ-figure tells them that this is what true luxury is like.

And then in the most unexpected twist of all he lets out a voice “like a trumpet blast and the rush of many waters!” And the unimpressed, unbelieving world outside is literally blown away. Judgment day! This world cannot endure the war cry, the shout of Jesus, who shall come to judge the living and the dead and the world by fire.

Enjoy the commercial and pay heed, fellow Christian. Christ asks humility and a forsaking of the lies of this world. But only to usher in a greater glory!

Yesterday’s feast of St. Gregory provided rich reflections from the great Doctor of the Church. And I supplemented my readings as well by looking over some of his homilies. Frankly, St. Gregory the Great was tough on himself and on preachers and he spoke of the office in lofty and demanding terms. For example he taught,

The lips of the priest are to preserve knowledge, and men shall look to him for the law, for he is the messenger of the Lord of hosts … That is also the reason why the Lord warns us through Isaiah: Cry out and be not still; raise your voice in a trumpet call. Anyone ordained a priest undertakes the task of preaching, so that with a loud cry he may go on ahead of the terrible judge who follows (Pope Gregory Pastoral Guide).

For yesterday’s Office he also says, Note that a man whom the Lord sends forth as a preacher is called a watchman. A watchman always stands on a height so that he can see from afar what is coming … must stand on a height for all his life to help the people by his foresight (Homily on Ezekiel, 1.11).

I was privileged for the past four days to be with the priests of Burlington, VT, and to be the presenter at their presbyteral days. Among the things we reflected on were these words from Gregory on his feast day.

Another teaching of Pope St. Gregory that struck me is his assertion that the preacher goes ahead of the Lord, announcing him as it were, and the Lord comes behind to “close the deal.” It is an important insight that can also help the preacher avoid both pride and also an exaggerated sense of responsibility. I’ll say more of this in a moment, but for now listen to St. Gregory:

Beloved brothers, our Lord and Savior … sends his disciples out to preach two by two …

Rightly is it said that he sent them ahead of him into every city and place where he himself was to go. For the Lord follows after the preachers, because preaching goes ahead to prepare the way, and then when the words of exhortation have gone ahead and established truth in our minds, the Lord comes to live within us. To those who preach Isaiah says: Prepare the way of the Lord, make straight the paths of our God. And the psalmist tells them: Make a way for him who rises above the sunset … Therefore, we make a way for him who rises above the sunset when we preach his glory to you, so that when he himself follows after us, he may illumine you with his love.

Think over, my beloved brothers, think over his words: Pray the Lord of the harvest to send laborers into his harvest. Pray for us so that we may be able to labor worthily on your behalf, that our tongue may not grow weary of exhortation, that after we have taken up the office of preaching our silence may not bring us condemnation from the just judge.

From a homily on the gospels by Saint Gregory the Great, Pope (Hom 17, 1-3: PL 76, 1139).

It is a powerful and helpful insight that the preacher goes before the Lord, who then follows after to quicken the Word that is planted.

And here is a remedy, first of all for pride. For the preacher is not the Lord. And, though it is the Lord’s own Word he preaches, mere human eloquence cannot completely express what God alone, who is love, can effect in the human heart. The preacher can but sow the seed of the Word; only God can bring forth the harvest. As St. Paul wrote,

I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase. So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God, who makes things grow (1 Cor 3:6-7).

The preacher can propose, but the Lord must come after to “close the deal.” The Samaritan woman was rather abruptly but truthfully told this by the townsfolk.

We no longer believe just because of what you said; now we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this man really is the Savior of the world” (Jn 4:42).

And every preacher should delight to hear this. It is a valuable lesson for the preacher to remember his place. He goes before to announce the presence of the One who alone can heal and bring in the truest harvest by His grace.

The preacher is like the best man in an ancient Jewish wedding, to whom St. John the Baptist equated himself:

He who has the bride is the bridegroom; but the friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices greatly because of the bridegroom’s voice. So this joy of mine has been made full. He must increase, but I must decrease (Jn 3:29-30).

St. Gregory’s insight also helps the preacher to avoid an exaggerated sense of responsibility. For it sometimes happens that a preacher may think too much rests on him, on his eloquence, and on finding just the right analogy or formulae. He may also lament his flaws. And while it is true that every preacher must work to hone his skills, it also remains true that Unless the LORD builds the house, its builders labor in vain (Ps 127:1).

Thus the preacher can help lay a foundation, but it is the Lord who must build the house. It is freeing and helpful for the preacher to remember that he merely goes before the Lord, and that the Lord will follow after, with every good grace. The preacher must do his part in proclaiming the authentic word of God, but only the Lord can perfect the message in every soul. He must preserve knowledge and prepare the way for the Lord, who will judge the living and the dead, but who also comes in the meantime to the faithful and causes the seed to grow in their hearts.

This is freeing and reassuring. And most of us who preach realize this from time to time when someone tells us something we have said, but recounts it in a way that surprises us. And this shows how the Lord helps them to hear what our feeble words only suggested.

In the end every preacher must trust the Lord, who comes after him to complete what is lacking and to bring forth the fruits that the preacher can only point to.  The Lord causes His truth to shine forth in consolation for the faithful and in judgement for the wicked. The battle is the Lord’s. So is the victory and the harvest.

How have we gotten into this mess wherein we have set aside reality in favor of what we think reality is? No longer do we go out to meet reality and accept the obligation of conforming to reality; now we sit back and claim the right to posit our own reality, to project reality and define it on our own terms. How did we get here?

Look to the nominalists, my friends.

A rather informative, though challenging, book on this matter is Journey to Modernity by Louis Dupré. In it he traces the medieval synthesis and rise of nominalism in the late 15th century, which in turn gave way to the Cartesian Revolution in the 17th century.

The nominalist revolution introduced the concept by insisting that we do not go out and discover reality so much as we simply create it by categorizing it with “names” (nomina –> names –> nominalism). The names we assign are not a recognizing of reality; they are a “making” of it. We assign meaning rather than discover it.

Welcome to the modern dark ages—dark, and getting darker. Welcome to the age of nominalism, invented in the late 15th Century and now a weed that has been allowed to flourish and is more widespread than ever.

The old version of nominalism denies the existence of universals: qualities or characteristics that can be illustrated or exemplified  by many particular things. At least this version of nominalism was debatable. Is there a universal “chair-ness” that all chairs exemplify, or is this just a human abstraction? Here a legitimate debate can be had.

The modern and more lazy version of nominalism, which I will call here “neo-nominalism,” holds that words (nomen = word) are simply arbitrary sounds we assign to things that reflect us, more so than anything we call reality. In a more sweeping way, whole categories are also dismissed.

Thus, for example, words and categories such as male, female, marriage, abortion, euthanasia, etc. are just words we assign; they are mere human “constructs” that do not exist in reality. So, many claim the right today to move beyond these human words and categories. They also claim the right to assign new words to describe these realties. Abortion becomes “choice,” “reproductive freedom,” or “women’s healthcare.” Unnatural sexual acts are called “gay” (a word that used to mean happy) and anal sex is celebrated as an “expression of love.” Same-sex “pseudo-gamy” is called “marriage.” Suicide or killing of the aged or imperfect is called “euthanasia” (a word that means “good death” in Greek). Sexual identity is now called “gender” (a grammatical classification of nouns found in nearly one-fourth of the world’s languages, not a word for human sexual differentiation).

Neo-nominalism claims the right to define new reality and scoffs at the more humble proposition that we ought to discover reality and conform to it. Neo-nominalism casts aside such humility and claims the right to define reality by inventing new words and thoughts and then imposing them on what really is. And thus we get endless absurdities such as LGBTQ (and Lord knows what letter will be added next). We have bizarre notions such as being “transgendered,” a concept that denies human distinctions that could not be more obvious and are literally inscribed in our bodies. But the neo-nominalists will not be troubled with reality.

The next and even more absurd “edge universe” for many of them is the so called “trans-human” movement in which even the reality of being human is dismissed as a mere “construct.” People will claim the right to start calling themselves other species and (presumably) the right to consort in all sorts of bizarre ways with animals, the “right” to develop cross-cloning, etc. For after all, who is to say what is “human” to these neo-nominalist iconoclasts?

For them, there is no reality, per se, just human constructs that are fungible. So-called “reality” is merely to be toyed with and defined according to the latest whim and need for self-justification through the re-describing of what is actually happening.

Neo-nominalism gets very dark and very absurd very quickly, as we are observing every day in our increasingly indecipherable “anti-culture.”

In effect, for them nothing is real; everything is just names, sounds, and abstractions. Reality is not something to go out and meet; it is not something to discover. There is no reality, just constructs that we invent and publish.

Welcome to the world of tyranny, where the powerful, the richly endowed, and those who have access get to say what reality is, rather then reality itself and those who have the intelligence and common sense to recognize it. Welcome to deep and gloomy darkness.

Rebel by insisting on reality, common sense, and the obvious. Refuse the lies and the rationalizations. Point unceasingly to reality.  And remember this: facts are stubborn things and in the end reality will befriend you and win the day. The nominalists currently have the power, but reality cannot be on holiday forever. People who live in this fantasy world will eventually either die in their sleep or awaken to the strange nightmare of reality. It will come; stay at your post. Do not forsake reality!

The singer in this song asks you to guess his name. Who do you think he is? Remember, regardless of what you’d like to call him, he is what he is. We don’t define him, and if we think we do, he defines us.

Here’s an answer from faith

I first wrote on the topic of religious persecution over two years ago and since then things have only gotten worse. Clearly the situation in Iraq is awful. But here in the U.S. as well, the threats against religious liberty have continued.

Indeed, here in the States it is rare that a respected segment of American life would become vilified and hated overnight. The usual transformation from respect to vilification progresses in stages that grow in intensity. And thus the Catholic Church, once a respected aspect of American life (along with the Protestant denominations), has become increasingly marginalized and even hated by many. It may help us to review these stages of persecution since it would seem that things are going to get more difficult for the Church in the years ahead. Generally there are five basic stages of persecution.

By way of giving due credit, I want to say that these stages were introduced to me by Johnette Benkovic, of Women of Grace EWTN. She spoke at a fundraiser here in DC for WMET 1160 AM, our Catholic radio station in the Guadalupe Radio Network. She gave a wonderful talk and a summons to courage. Among the things she set forth was a sober vision of how we have arrived at this current place where the culture is increasingly hostile to Christians, and to Catholics in particular. The stages are from her talk; the commentary is my own.

Here, then, are the five stages:

I. Stereotyping the targeted group – To stereotype means to repeat without variation, to take a quality or observation of a limited number and generalize it to describe the whole group. It involves a simplified and standardized conception or view of a group based on the observation of a limited sample.

And thus as the 1960s and 1970s progressed, Catholics and Bible-believing Christians were often caricatured in the media as “Bible thumpers,” simpletons, haters of science, hypocrites, and as self-righteous, old-fashioned, and backwards.

Catholics, in particular, were also accused of having neurotic guilt and a hatred of or aversion to sexuality.  We were denounced as a sexist institution filled with clergy who were sexually repressed, homosexuals, or pedophiles. We were labeled an authoritarian institution stuck in the past, one with too many restrictive rules.

Basically, as the stereotype goes, Catholics and Bible-believing Christians are a sad, angry, boring, backward, repressed lot. To many who accept the stereotype, we are a laughable—even tragic—group caught in a superstitious past, incapable of throwing off the “shackles” of faith.

To be sure, not everyone engages in this stereotyping to the same degree, but those are the basic refrains. And the general climate of this sort of stereotyping sets the foundation for the next stage.

II. Vilifying the targeted group for alleged crimes or misconduct – As the stereotyping grew in intensity, Catholics and Christians who did not toe the line in the cultural revolution were described as close-minded, harmful to human dignity and freedom, intolerant, hateful, bigoted, unfair, homophobic, reactionary, and just plain mean and basically bad people.

The history of the Church is also described myopically as little more than a litany of bad and repressive behavior as we conducted crusades and inquisitions, and hated Galileo and all of science. Never mind that there might be a little more to the story: that the Church founded universities and hospitals, was a patron of the arts, and preached a gospel that brought order and civilization to divided and barbaric times in the aftermath of the Roman Empire. The critics won’t hear any of that, or if they do, will give the credit to anyone or anything except the Church and the faith.

In writing this, I fully expect to get a bevy of comments saying, in effect, that this is exactly what we are. And not only will they feel justified in saying this, but even righteous, so ingrained has this vilifying become in the wider culture.

As with any large group, individual Christians and Catholics will manifest some negative traits, but stereotyping, vilifying, and crudely and indiscriminately presuming the negative traits of a few to be common to all is unjust.

Yet all of this has the effect of creating a self-righteous indignation toward believers and of making anti-Catholic and anti-Christian attitudes a permissible bigotry for many today.

III. Marginalizing the targeted group’s role in society – Having established the (false) premise that the Church and the faith are very bad and even harmful to human dignity and freedom, the critics proceed in the next stage to relegate the role of the Church to the margins of society.

To many in secularized culture, religion is seen as something that must go. They will perhaps let us have our hymns, etc. within the four walls of our churches, but the faith must be banished from the public square.

In this stage it becomes increasingly unacceptable and intolerable that anyone should mention God, pray publicly, or in any way bring his or her Christian faith to bear on matters of public policy. Nativity sets must go; out with Christmas trees. Even the colors red and green during the “Holiday Season” are forbidden in many public schools!

Do not even think of mentioning Jesus or of publicly thanking him in your valedictory address; you could very well have a judge forbid you to do so under penalty of law. You may thank Madonna the singer, but not the Madonna.

The LGBT club is welcome to set up shop and pass out rainbow-colored condoms at the local high school, but Christians had better hit the road; no Bibles or pamphlets had better see the light of day anywhere in the school building … separation of Church and State, you know…

IV. Criminalizing the targeted group or its works – Can someone say HHS mandate?

But even prior to this egregious attempt to violate our religious liberty there have been many other times we have had to go to court to fight for our right to practice our faith openly. An increasing amount of litigation is being directed against the Church and other Christians for daring to live out our faith.

Some jurisdictions have sought to compel Catholic hospitals and pro-life clinics to provide information about or referrals for abortion and to provide “emergency contraception” (i.e., the abortifacient known as the morning-after pill). Several branches of Catholic Charities have been de-certified from doing adoption work because they will not place children with gay couples. In 2009, the State of Connecticut sought to regulate the structure, organization, and running of Catholic parishes. And recently a number of Christian valedictorians in various states have suffered legal injunctions when it was discovered that they planned to mention God and/or Jesus in their addresses. (More details can be found HERE.)

Many of these attempts to criminalize the faith have been successfully rebuffed in the courts, but the number and frequency of the lawsuits, and the time and cost involved with fighting them impose a huge burden. It is clear that attempts to criminalize Christian behavior is a growth sector in this culture and it signals the beginning of the steady erosion of religious liberty.

Many indeed feel quite righteous, quite politically correct in their work to separate the practice of the faith from the public square.

V. Persecuting the targeted group outright – If current trends continue, Christians, especially religious leaders, may not be far from facing heavy fines and/or incarceration.

Already in Canada and in parts of Europe, Catholic clergy have been arrested and charged with “hate crimes” for preaching Catholic doctrine on homosexual activity.

In this country there are greater provisions for free speech, but as we have seen, there is a steady erosion of our religious liberty and many Catholic dioceses are very familiar with having to spend long periods in court defending basic religious liberty. The trajectory points to suffering, lawsuits, fines, and ultimately jail.

Unlikely you say? Alarmist? Well, stages one through four are pretty well in place. One may wish to “whistle past the graveyard,” but it looks like we’re pretty well set for stage five. You decide.

Maybe a heavy post requires a light video. Here, Paul and Silas land in jail. It’s so bad its good: 🙂

In Sunday’s Gospel the Lord sets forth the theology of the Cross and redemptive suffering. In so doing he sets forth a doctrine that is utter absurdity to this world. The indignation of the modern world against the Cross borders on outrage. Why is this? Simply put, hedonism. Hedonism is the worldly “doctrine” that pleasure or happiness is the sole or chief good in life. It comes from the Greek word hēdonē “pleasure” and is akin to the Greek hēdys meaning “sweet.”

Of course pleasure is to be desired and to some degree sought, but it is not the sole good in life. Indeed, some of our greatest goods and accomplishments require sacrifice: years of study and preparation for a career; the blood, sweat, and tears of raising children.

But hedonism seeks to avoid sacrifice and suffering at all costs. Hedonism is directly opposed to the theology of the Cross. St. Paul spoke in his day of the enemies of the cross of Christ. Their end is destruction, their god is the belly, and they glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things (Php 3:18–19). He also taught that the Cross was an absurdity to the Gentiles (1 Cor 1:23).

Things have not changed, my friends. And thus the world reacts with great indignation whenever the Cross or suffering is even implied. And so the world will cry out with bewildered exasperation and ask (rhetorically) of the Church: “Are you saying that a poor woman who was raped needs to carry the child to term and cannot abort?” (Yes we are.) Are you saying that a “gay” person can never marry his or her gay lover and must live celibately?” (Yes, we are.) “Are you saying that a handicapped child in the womb must be “condemned” to live in the world as handicapped and cannot be aborted and put out of his (read “our”) misery?” (Yes we are.) “Are you saying that a dying person in pain cannot be euthanized to avoid the pain?” (Yes, we are.)

The shock expressed in these rhetorical questions shows how deeply hedonism has infected the modern mind. The concept of the Cross is not only absurd, it is downright “immoral” to the modern hedonistic mentality, which sees pleasure as the only true human good. To the hedonist, a life without enough pleasure is a life not worth living. And anyone who would seek to set limits on the lawful (and sometime unlawful) pleasures of others is mean, hateful, absurd, obtuse, intolerant, and just plain evil.

When pleasure is life’s only goal or good, how dare you, or the Church, or anyone seek to set limits on it let alone suggest that the way of the Cross is better or is required of us!  You must be banished, silenced, and destroyed.

And indeed many faithful Catholics in the pews are deeply infected with the illusion of hedonism and thus take up the voice of bewilderment, anger, and scoffing whenever the Church points to the Cross and insists on self-denial, sacrifice, and doing the right thing even when the cost is great. The head wagging in congregations is often visible if the priest dares mention that abortion, euthanasia, IVF, contraception, and so forth are wrong and should be set aside regardless of the cost, or if he preaches about the reality of the Cross. The faithful who swim in the waters of a hedonistic culture are often shocked at any notion that might limit the pleasure others want to pursue.

Hedonism makes the central Christian mysteries of the Cross and redemptive suffering seem like a distant planet or a strange, parallel universe. The opening word from Jesus’ mouth, “Repent,” seems strange to the hedonistic world, which has even reworked Jesus and cannot conceive that He would want them to be anything but happy, content, and pleased. The cry goes up, even among the faithful, “Doesn’t God want me to be happy?” And on this basis all sorts of sinful behavior is supposed to be tolerated because insisting on the opposite is “hard” and because it seems “mean” to speak of the Cross or of self-discipline in a hedonistic culture.

Bringing people back to the real Jesus and to the real message of the Gospel, which features the Cross as the way to glory, takes a lot of work and a long conversation. We must be prepared to have that long conversation with people.

In today’s Gospel the Lord firmly sets before us the need for the Cross, not as an end in itself, but as the way to glory. Let’s consider the Gospel in three stages.

I. The Pattern that is Announced – The text says, Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer greatly from the elders, the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed and on the third day be raised.

Note here that the Lord does not announce only the Cross, but also the Resurrection. In effect, He announces the pattern of the Christian life, which we have come to call the “Paschal Mystery.”

The expression “Paschal Mystery” refers to the suffering, death, resurrection, and glorification of Jesus as a whole. The word “Paschal” is related to the Hebrew word for Passover, “Pesach.” Just as the shed blood of a lamb saved the people from the angel of death and signaled their deliverance, so does Jesus’ death, his Blood, save us from death and deliver us from slavery to sin.

So He is announcing a pattern: the Cross leads somewhere; it accomplishes something. It is not an end in itself; it has a purpose; it is part of a pattern.

St. Paul articulates the pattern of the Paschal Mystery in this way: We always carry around in our body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be revealed in our body (2 Cor 4:10). It is like an upward spiral in which the Cross brings blessings we enjoy. But we often circle back to the crosses God permits, and then there come even greater blessings and higher capacities. Cross, growth, cross, growth—and so the pattern continues until we reach the end, dying with Christ so as to live with Him.

This is the pattern of our life. We are dying to our old self, dying to this world, dying to our sins; but rising to new life, rising to the Kingdom of God, becoming victorious over sin. The Cross brings life; it is a prelude to growth. We die in order to live more richly. An old spiritual says of this repeated pattern that “every round goes higher, higher.”

Do you see the pattern that Jesus announces? The Lord does not announce the Cross to burden us, neither does the Church. No, the Cross is part of a pattern that, if accepted with faith, brings blessing, new life, and greater strength.

II. The Prevention that is Attempted – The text says, Then Peter took Jesus aside and began to rebuke him, “God forbid, Lord! No such thing shall ever happen to you.” He turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are an obstacle to me. You are thinking not as God does, but as human beings do.”

Notice Peter’s exact wording: “No such thing shall ever happen to you.” And we ought to ask, “What such thing?” For in precluding that Jesus suffer and die he also implicitly blocks the rising and glorification of Jesus. For Christ cannot rise unless He dies.

Peter, of course, is not thinking this all the way through; he is not connecting the dots. But neither do we when we seek to avoid crosses for ourselves or to hinder others improperly from accepting the Cross. For the Cross brings glory and growth and we run the risk of depriving ourselves and others of these if we rush to eliminate all the crosses, demands, and difficulties of life. Perhaps we do this by enabling behaviors; perhaps we do it by spoiling children.

We also hinder our own growth by refusing to accept the crosses of self-discipline, hard work, obedience, resistance of temptation, and acceptance of suffering, consequences, and limits. In rejecting the Cross we also reject its fruits.

All this explains Jesus’ severe reaction to Peter’s words. He even goes so far as to call Peter, “Satan,” for it pertains to Satan to pretend to befriend us in protesting our crosses while it is really that he wants to thwart our blessings. Peter may not know what he is doing, but Satan does, and he seeks to become an obstacle to Jesus’ work.

Jesus’ severe reaction is rooted in protecting our blessings.

III.  The Prescription that is Awarding – Jesus goes on to teach further on the need for and wisdom of the Cross. The text says, Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Whoever wishes to come after me must deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me. For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. What profit would there be for one to gain the whole world and forfeit his life? Or what can one give in exchange for his life? For the Son of Man will come with his angels in his Father’s glory, and then he will repay all according to his conduct.”

The heart of Jesus’ teaching here is the deep paradox that in order to find our life we must lose it. More specifically, in order to gain Heaven we must die to this world. And that dying is a process more so than just an event at the end of our physical life here. Though we cling to life in this world, it is really not life at all. It is a mere spark compared to the fire of love that God offers; it is a single note compared to the great symphony God directs.

Jesus instructs us to be willing to exchange this tiny and dying life for that which is true life. The Lord says that whatever small blessings come from clinging to this life and this world are really no benefit at all. If you choose life in this world rather than the true life God offers, you’re nothing but a big loser.

Of course what the world’s cheap trinkets offer is immediate gratification and evasion of the Cross. We may feel relief for a moment, but our growth is stunted and those cheap little trinkets slip through our fingers. We gain the world (cheap little trinket that it is) but lose our souls. Total loss. Or to quote a modern expression, “FAIL!”

Jesus’ final words, however, remind us that the choice is ours. For the day will come when He will respond to our choice. Either we accept true life and win, or we choose the passing, dying life of this world and we lose. The choice is ours.

This songs speaks of life as a kind of spiral climb between cross and glory. As the spiritual says, “Every round goes higher, higher, soldiers of the Cross.”