Recently I have found a persistent line of questioning in reference to the traditional understanding of the Lord’s promise to the Church: the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it (Matt 16:18) . Yesterday on the blog a reader stated the question quite well:
This is just a curiosity question, but why is it that “gates” is always phrased by Catholics as if they were an offensive weapon being wielded against the Church? I’ve never heard them used as such ….
But in the normal usage of the word “gates” wouldn’t it be that the Church is doing the attacking against [the domain of] Hell, but that Hell’s gates will not be able to hold out (ie, prevail) against the Church’s onslaught [in Christ]? Gates don’t normally go around attacking things on their own…
As I said, this is a good summary of the objections that I am rather consistently hearing recently. In effect, the objection amounts to taking the word “gates” in a rather literal sense. And thus, interpreting the word gates rather literally, our questioner humorously asserts the gates don’t normally go around attacking things. But language, as is true with many things human, admits of subtleties. And thus it may be helpful to explore the figurative meaning of the word “gates” as well.
The Greek word underlying our English translation “gates” is πύλαι (pulai). And “gates” is a fine translation of the word.
However Strongs Greek Concordance and Greek Lexicon of New Testament indicates that πύλης “gates” in antiquity was also used to indicate authority and power.
Further, while the word may simply refer to the large entrance gate to a city or fortress, it also typically refers to the exit the people go out of. And in this sense, word focuses on “what proceeds out of something.”
And thus we see some of the subtleties of the wordpules. Now, for the translator, “gates” is a perfectly adequate translation. But for the reader and interpreter, more is required.
Contextually, it would seem rather clear that Jesus does not have literal gates in mind. First, Hell does not have literal iron gates. Further, since Jesus speaks of the gates as “not prevailing,” it would also seem that he has in mind something more than inanimate metal gates of some sort. For as our reader states, it does not pertain to gates to do much more than just sit there.
Further still, the verb κατισχύσουσιν (katischusousin = will prevail) is a future, indicative, active verb. Now, inanimate objects tend to be acted upon, and thus they generally take passive verb forms, not active ones. For again it does not pertain to inanimate object to act, but to be acted upon.
And thus, contextually, it seems clear that our Lord here uses the word “gates” in a figurative, rather than a literal sense. Figuratively, he probably means that the powers of Hell would not prevail against the Church. And, as stated above this is a common figurative meaning of the Greek word πύλης (gates) in ancient usage.
However, we need not understand this text in merely an “either-or” way. Many biblical texts admit of a number of different interpretations which need not be seen as mutually exclusive, even if they are rather different. For, one of the geniuses of human language and expression is that it can admit of many potential meanings.
And so, there may be a certain pastoral sense in which we can read this text in a way that it describes the Church, attacking the strongholds of the Hell in this world, and of gaining back territory for the Kingdom.
However, in this interpretation, we would once again want to avoid an overly literal sense of the term “Gates of Hell.” For in nowise, would the Church seek to storm The actual entrance of Hell so as to enter it. Rather, the gates of hell are to be sealed off by the Lord And locked from the outside (e.g. Rev 20:3). Of course, once again, these are not likely literal iron gates of some sort, But are at some sort of barrier or boundary marker indicating the limits of Hell, and it’s influence.
In this limited, and I would argue secondary sense, one might might see the Church as storming the “gates of Hell” and Hell not being able to prevail against her.
Another interesting question that arises in this passage is a precise definition of the Greek word used for “Hell” in this passage. The Greek Word is ᾅδου (hadou or hades).
Here too, many insist that the term only means “the place of the dead,” and is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew concept of Sheol. Thus according to this position, Hades refers only to the place where all the dead went prior to the coming of Christ, and never means the place of the damned.
But again, the actual New Testament texts seem to bespeak a greater flexibility than an either-or argument would imply.
It is certainly true that “Hades” most often translates the Hebrew concept of Sheol. In this sense, Hades does not mean the theological place of the damned, where Satan and the other fallen angels dwell.
But it would also seem that there are uses of “Hades”to refer to the place of the damned, to the place of utter and permanent exclusion from the presence of God.
For example, in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, the rich man is in torment in “Hades.” But here, the torment does not seem a mere temporary abode until the Messiah comes to call him. Jesus seems to describe a fiery place of torment, and the rich man is not sleeping in death but is quite alive and aware. Neither does he, or Father Abraham, seem to look to a day when this separation will be ended. Rather, there is mention of a “great abyss” over which no one can cross. The arrangement seems quite definitive, quite permanent, and the description more like that of Gehenna (γέεννα), the more common term Jesus uses to indicate Hell.
Further, in the Book of Revelation 20:14–15, there is the description of death and Hades being thrown into the lake of fire. And thus, even if there is a distinction between Hades and Gehenna, they now seem, in a text like this, to be quite coterminous, indeed they become one reality.
So in the text that concerns us here, when Jesus speaks of the powers of Hell not prevailing, it would not seen that he has in mind simply Sheol (Hades), or purgatory. For why would Sheol or purgatory wage war against the Church?
Hence, contextually, it seems stronger argument that the Lord in using “Hades” to mean here what we moderns mean by the word “Hell,” namely, the theological place of the damned, to include Satan, the fallen angels, and human persons who have chosen to exclude themselves from the Kingdom of God.
As with all Biblical texts, reasonable scholars will differ, even within the Catholic Church. What I have tried to do here, is to show that the traditional Catholic understanding that the powers of Hell would not prevail against the church is at least a valid interpretation of the text, and at best, a better interpretation of the text.
Let’s say you have a choice to take one of two airplanes to take to a distant city, lets call our destination, “Heavenly City.”
The one plane (Church Airlines) gets there 100% of the time. The other plane (Alsoran Airlines) gets there sometimes, but other times it is in disrepair, or it lands in the wrong city, or at still other times it crashes.
OK, which plane are you going to take?
Now I am not going to tell you that only Church Airline riders get to Heavenly City. Some people on the other plane do sometimes get there, but its a pretty uncertain ride. At least with Church Airlines the plane is certain to get there: it won’t crash, get lost or fail to take off.
So, choose your airline! But remember that Church Airlines has a 100 % record, Alsoran Airlines can make no such claim. When it comes to flying even 99 1/2 won’t do, gotta make a 100!
The simple fact is that the world and other inferior brands might not get you there. Untested spiritualities and the latest trends won’t cut it. Only Jesus and the Catholic Church he founded are up to the job 100% of the time.
Now be careful though. You have to stay on the plane for the whole journey. Don’t get off at a connecting city (such as Sin City) or any such thing. Stay the course to Heavenly City.
Further, there is no claim that every steward or pilot is perfect or all the passengers are pleasant, or that the ride is never bumpy and without incident. But this much is clear, the plane gets there.
The Catholic Church alone (aka Church airlines) is 100% reliable by Jesus’ own promise. It’s a pretty good reason to get on board before the door closes and walkway swings back. There is a mid-flight meal, (called the Eucharist), and an in-flight movie, “The Greatest Story Ever Told” (aka the Scriptures) included in the price of your ticket which is, by the way, free.
The Church is Indefectible- There are very few certainties in this world about anything but one thing is for sure: The Church will prevail, the Church will be here to infallibly lead us to the end of days.
“How arrogant!” you might say. And yet, I did say it. Why? Not because of any human guarantee, but based rather on the firm promise of Jesus himself:
The place is Ceasarea Phillipi and Jesus is speaking to Simon Peter who had just confessed him to be the Christ and the Son of the Living God. Now Jesus speaks and says, You are Peter (Rock), and upon this rock I will build my church,and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. (Matt 16:18)
The Church will surely be hated, attacked and persecuted but Hell will never prevail, never defeat the Church Jesus founded. Not only will Hell not prevail over the Church, but the gates of Hell cannot prevail against the ultimate incursion of the Church into the territory of the Devil.
This power of the Church to endure to the end is no human power. It is not based on brilliant or perfect human leaders. It is based solely on Jesus’ promise.
So it is not arrogant to make this claim, it is simply biblical and a matter of faith in Jesus.
This prevailing power of the Church means that the Church will be here to the end. Count on it since Jesus promised it. This is what is meant by the “indefectibility” of Church.
The Church is Infallible – Christ promise also means that the Church cannot mislead us or teach falsely in a matter of faith and morals. This is what is meant by the “infallibility” of the Church in matters of faith and morals definitively taught. Here is the way the catechism puts it.
In order to preserve the Church in the purity of the faith handed on by the apostles, Christ who is the Truth willed to confer on her a share in his own infallibility…It is this Magisterium’s task to preserve God’s people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error. Thus, the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at seeing to it that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates. To fulfill this service, Christ endowed the Church’s shepherds with the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals. The exercise of this charism takes several forms: “The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility in virtue of his office, when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful – who confirms his brethren in the faith he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals. The infallibility promised to the Church is also present in the body of bishops when, together with Peter’s successor, they exercise the supreme Magisterium, above all in an Ecumenical Council. (Catechism of the Catholic Church 889-891)
Now some object to this claim of the infallibility of the Church. But reason with me for a minute. Jesus promised that the powers of Hell could not prevail against the Church. But if the Church could formally teach error about faith and morals, and if the Church could mislead people about what was necessary for their eternal salvation, then it would be a fact that the gates of Hell HAD prevailed. But since Jesus promised it could never happen, then, by God’s grace, the Church is protected from formally teaching falsely on matters of faith and morals. Do you trust Jesus and believe his word? Then the Church is unsinkable and infallible regarding faith and morals.
There are many other gifts given to the Church and Fr. Barron speak of them here:
When I was very young, perhaps 10 years old, I took some sailing lessons, and once again when I was in my early 30s. Sailing involves a kind of romancing the wind wherein one observes the wind as it is, and then adapts to it, wooing it, learning its moves, its vicissitudes, and its often subtle and changing signs.
Oh for the great times when the wind was with us! And catching the wind, the boat would speed along making a slick sound in the water. And Oh too, for those daring and thrilling times when the spinnaker was put out. The boat would almost strain, as the proud winds filled her arcing sail.
But then too, there were the difficult days when the winds were contrary and the hard work of tacking, with beating and jibing had to be engaged.
Now sailing is an image of receptivity. One cannot control the wind, but must simply accept it, and take it as it is. Yes, sailing requires a sailor to adjust to what is, to learn acceptance and work with what is given, to live in the world as it is, rather than wish for world as it ought to be.
The sailor must simply accept wind’s bidding and blessings, the way in which it would have us go: this way and that, now shifting directions, somewhat unexpectedly. And the good sailor is accepting that a good strong breeze, can suddenly grow becalmed, only to stir again. This is especially the case in the sultry summer days when the prevailing winds are less evident and the strength and direction of the winds can be very local, and very subtle.
Yes it is all very mysterious. Indeed Jesus used the wind as an image for mystery when he said to Nicodemus, The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit. (Jn 3:8).
And thus the wind, and sailing, become something of an image for the soul interacting with God. We cannot control God, nor should we. Our role is to sense His direction and put out our sails accordingly. We are to “romance the wind” by growing deeper in our love and trust of God. We are to discover the serenity of accepting what is, of following the lead of God, or receiving what is offered rather than seeking to control and manipulate outcomes.
Sometimes the wind of God’s Ruah, his Spirit and breath is a strong and refreshing wind as at Pentecost when Scripture says, And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were (Acts 2:4). At other times God speaks in a whispering breeze: And after the fire came a gentle whisper. When Elijah heard it, he pulled his cloak over his face and went out and stood at the mouth of the cave. Then a voice said to him, “What are you doing here, Elijah?” (1 Kings 19:12-13).
Yes, allow the wind to represent the movements of God’s Spirit, his Ruah, his breath. And God is looking for some good sailors who know the subtleties of the movements of the wind and can adjust accordingly.
Now since wind cannot be controlled and must simply be accepted for what it is, many therefore prefer motorboats. How much nicer it is to feel empowered from within and to be able to resolutely set our own course, no matter the wind. With a motorboat there is little or no threat of being at the whim of the winds. There is no need to relate to, or be in relationship with the wind, no need of romancing of the winds here! No here, with a motorboat, there is need only of driving forward with a powerful motor, following one’s own designs.
Here is control, here is power, here is the sailor alone with his own will, dependent on little, and on no one. It is one man against the elements.
But motorboats are a mixed blessing, they require a good bit of gas, can be noisy, require maintenance, suffer breakdowns and can be downright dangerous to other things and people around them.
And here too is another image for our soul interacting with God. For there are many who prefer to be under their own power, dependent on no one, other than themselves, preferring never having to wait on God or other human beings; just acting independently, and operating independently. They prefer not to sense the direction of the winds or of any other signs or factors.
And just like a motorboat, there are dangers associated with this sort of controlling image of the human person. For indeed such individuals can be noisy, gas-guzzlers, prone to breakdown, and potentially hazardous to things and people around them. For in their perceived power they often truck through life, missing its subtleties and frequently causing harm to themselves and others. “Breakdowns” are almost predictable with this sort of person.
Most people prefer a motorboat. But God is more in the sailboat business. He’s looking for some good souls to sense the breeze of his Spirit, is Ruah. And having sensed that Gentle Breeze, to hoist their sails and follow where the Wind, the Spirit, leads.
Yes, we are invited to be more like a sailor, following the Spirit’s lead. Yes, like a sailor, trusting and yielding to a Godly breeze.
Do you prefer a motorboat, or a sailboat? Are you a boater or a sailor.
Here is a remarkable video, not of a sailor at sea, but of a land sailor, a kite flier. Note the beautiful interaction of this man as he romances the wind, working with its subtleties and rejoicing in its moves, as in a great dance of sorts:
Over at Space.com there is an article that sets forth a recent discovery of a new but fleeting set of Van Allen belts around the earth. These radiation belts have a critical role in our ability to survive since they help deflect most of the more harmful rays of the sun. Without these radiation belts we would “cook” in the harmful radiation of unfiltered sunrays.
The presence of the “Van Allen Belts” are another reminder that life on this planet isn’t just the result of a few simple things. It depends on a large number of things being present so that our beautiful blue marble can sustain the vast amount of life it does. More on this in a minute. But first, Here’s a brief excerpt from the article:
A ring of radiation previously unknown to science fleetingly surrounded Earth last year…made of super-high-energy electrons embedded in the outer Van Allen belt about 11,900 to 13,900 miles above the planet’s surface. This stable ring of space radiation apparently formed on Sept. 2 and lasted for more than four weeks…..This newfound radiation belt then abruptly and almost completely disappeared on Oct. 1. It was apparently disrupted by an interplanetary shock wave caused by a spike in solar wind speeds.
[The] Van Allen radiation belts, [are] zones of magnetically trapped, highly energetic charged particles first discovered in 1958…..Unexpectedly, the probes revealed a new radiation belt surrounding Earth, ….It remains uncertain how this temporary radiation belt arose. Van Allen mission scientists suspect it was likely created by the solar wind tearing away the outer Van Allen belt. [More at Space.com]
Clearly the scientists are still studying this matter but the protective Van allen Belts are not just a static system it would seem. Rather they are a dynamic and flexible system that respond to and interact with the “solar winds” so as to provide us additional protection when necessary.
I remain stuned with awe and gratitude at the glory of God’s creation and also the fact that, it is not just a few things that come together to permit higher life to exist here. No indeed, the conditions that God maintains for us here on earth have a remarkable complexity and thereby are likely rare conditions that may not be found easily even in this vast cosmos. Let me explain.
Rare Earth?? While most people, including most scientists, presume that there may be billions of inhabitable planets out there a lot like Earth, there is another theory base (called “rare earth theory”) that is dubious of such a high number.
This is because as we have already noted, there are not just a few things that come together to support life on earth, there are many. Here are just a few:
The earth is at just the right distance from the sun so that water is warm enough to melt, but not so hot as to boil and steam away into space. Water is also able in this habitable zone to both evaporate and condense at lower levels in the atmosphere, thus permitting a more even distribution of water, and a cycle of water over dry land known as precipitation.
The earth is in a “habitable zone” in the galaxy too. Closer to the center of galaxies, radiation and the presence of wandering planetoids make life there unlikely.
Earth’s orbit is almost a perfect circle rather than an “eccentric” (i.e. steep or elongated) ellipse that some other planets have. Steep elliptical orbits take the planet relatively close and then relativly far from the sun and this is great consequences for warmth and light. But the earth has a very stable orbot that is alomost a perfect circle. This keeps our relationship with the Sun and it s heat and light, quite stable.
We have the nearby presence of two “gas giants” (Jupiter and Saturn) that attract and catch many wandering asteroids and comets and keep them form hitting the earth often.
Our molten core and volcanism generate the magnetic field mentioned above. These field or belts protect the earth from the most harmful rays of the sun.
Volcanism also has a role in helping generate our atmosphere and in cycling rich minerals widely.
Our sun is just the right kind of star, putting out a fairly steady amount of energy. Other types of stars are more variable in their output and this variance can utterly destroy life or cause it to be impossible due to the extremes caused.
The earth’s fairly rapid rotation reduces the daily variation in temperature It also makes photosynthesis viable since there is enough sunlight all over the planet.
The earth’s axis tilt relative to it orbital plane is also just right to allow seasonal variations that help complex life but not so tilted as to make the seasons too extreme.
The moon also has a good effect by causing tides that are just enough to permit tidal zones (a great breading ground for diverse life) and not too severe so as to destroy life by extreme tides.
Are you praying with me Church? The conditions for life that come together on this planet are complex, remarkable and, some argue, likely rare in the Universe. Life here is the balance of many fascinating things (and a lot more I don’t have time to mention). Just Google “Rare Earth Theory” to read more.
The recent discovery of a possible third Van Allen Belt that comes and goes only adds to the complexity and the statistical factors that measure the likelihood of lots of other “Earths” out there.
Whatever you want to make of this discovery, we cannot but be amazed at the complexity of life and the intricacies it takes for life to flourish here.
As for me and my household, we will give God all the glory and reamin in wonder and awe and the marvelous things he does! How about you?
There’s an old Johnny Cash song that is rooted in today’s Gospel, a song that says,
You can run on for a long time, But sooner or later God will cut you down. Go tell that long tongue liar, go and tell that midnight rider, tell the rambler, the gambler, the back-biter, tell em that God’s gonna cut em down, sooner or later God’ll cut em down.
Now of course these verses of the song go right to the end point of judgement. But there is more to the story, a story of offered mercy and patience, but in the end there is a judgment.
We live in times that are dismissive of judgment, or that the judgment will result in anything but instant entrance to glory.
Today’s gospel contains a kind of necessary balance that speaks of God’s patience and care now, but also speaks of the day of reckoning, the day of judgment that must finally come when our decision is final and also adjudicated by God, and there will be no turning back.
Let’s look at this Gospel in two main parts:
I. The Proclamation of the Problem – The Gospel opens with the following lines:
Some people told Jesus about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with the blood of their sacrifices. Jesus said to them in reply, “Do you think that because these Galileans suffered in this way they were greater sinners than all other Galileans? By no means! But I tell you, if you do not repent, you will all perish as they did! Or those eighteen people who were killed when the tower at Siloam fell on them — do you think they were more guilty than everyone else who lived in Jerusalem? By no means! But I tell you, if you do not repent, you will all perish as they did!”
In effect what Jesus is saying is that is so easy for us to focus on the sins of others and fail to discern our own need for repentance and mercy. Before God we are all beggars, all of us have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (cf Romans 3:23). Every one of us is in need of boatloads of grace and mercy. And while we may rightly distinguish that there is a difference here on earth in the sanctity of a Mother Theresa and the wretchedness of Hitler, yet before God we are all far short of the glory and holiness of God. We are all beggars.
Sin surely does have its effects in the lives of others and we are not asked to be blind to that. There is important truth in learning from the example of others, and we can learn form good example as well as bad example. But the point is to learn! We miss the point if all we do is stand around when someone suffers the effects of sin and say, “My, my my, God don’t like ugly!” Well then, if that be the case, what about the ugly in us? What about our own sin?
And thus to our all-too-eager question, “What about them O Lord!?” Jesus replies, “What about you? Stay in your own lane and work on your issues and leave their final fate to me. Judgement and punishment don’t just come others, if you don’t watch out, they will come to you as well.” And just to make sure we get it the Lord adds: [And] I tell you, if you do not repent, you will all perish as they did!
In effect, the Lord tells us to get serious about our sin and what it can do to us. The most serious problem in life is not the manner of our death, or even that we physically die. The most serious problem we face is not Pilate, or any political misfortune; it is not falling towers or any physical threat; it is not financial setback, or suffering, or losing our job, or losing our possessions. The most serious problem we face is our sin.
Now we don’t think like this. We minimize the maximum and maximize the minimum. We get all worked up about lesser things, and often completely ignore greater things. We are forever worked up about passing things like health and money, and give little heed to the things of eternity and to getting ready to go and meet God. Let our physical health be threatened even for a moment and we are instantly on our knees begging God for deliverance. But let our sins pile up and sinful drives be eating at our very soul and we take little notice and have little care to be delivered from things that are far more serious than mere cancer.
The Lord says, If your right hand causes you to sin cut it off and throw it away. It is better to lose one of your members than to have your whole body cast into hell (Matt 5:30). Pay attention, the Lord is saying that it is more serious to sin than to lose my right hand.
Again, we don’t think like this. If I were to lose my right hand I would lament this day for the rest of my life. The very thought of losing my hand gives me stabbing grief. But then why don’t we think of our sin this way? See how obtuse we are? See how distorted our priorities are?
One day the Lord looked at a paralyzed man and decided to cure his most serious problem. And thus he said to the quadriplegic, Your sins are forgiven. Could his sins have been more serious than his paralysis? Yes!
And thus the Lord warns us that we ought to be more serious about our sins lest we perish, not merely losing our earthly life, but more so, our eternal life. . The very fact that the solution to our problem required the death of the Son of God, indicates that we are evidently in worse shape than we think and that without our repentance and the magnificent mercy of God, something far worse than having a tower fall on us, or our enemies kill us might happen. Elsewhere the Lord says: I tell you, my friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that can do no more. But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after the killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him. (Lk 12:4-5). Now, to be sure, the Lord does not counsel here a cringing and avoidant fear, but a respectful fear that is willing to be serious about judgement day, and realize that its effect is eternal unlike the passing quality of any earthly encounter.
Having portrayed the problem and underscored its seriousness both here and in other places, the Lord them reminds us that he is willing to help us to get ready with his grace and mercy. And, hence, he sets forth a process in which we must cooperate, for the day of judgment will surely come. Lets look at the Process.
II. The Portrayal of the Process –And thus the Lord tells a parable that sets forth the process in which we are currently engaged, a process of patience and mercy but leading ultimately to the finality of judgment. Note the following steps:
1. ASSESSMENT –There was once a person who had a fig tree planted in his orchard and when he came in search of fruit on it and found none said to the gardener, “For three years now I have come in search of fruit on this tree and have found none. So cut it down. Why should it exhaust the soil?”
Faith is a fruit bearing tree. It is to bear the fruits of love, of justice, of the keeping of the commandments. Now the Lord looks for these fruits and often, through our conscience and by his Word, and He assesses if such fruits are present.
Many claim to have faith, many claim to be fruitful in what the Lord seeks. But, as owner of the field, it is He who sets the terms. We are not a judge in our own case. It is the Lord’s on-going work to assess our progress and and fruitfulness and it is he who has the right to determine if the necessary fruits are present.
Yet many today in this proud age claim the right to assess their own status, and many make bold proclamations that God would not “dare” find in them anything substantial to be lacking. And in presumption many declare themselves to be safe, fruitful and righteous.
But this is not for us to say. In the parable it is the owner, the Lord, who makes the assessment. And note that in this parable he proposes that something significant is lacking.
And yet, some interlocutor, here called the gardener, but let us call her the Church, asks mercy and time. And as we shall see such mercy and time is granted along with necessary supplies (grace) to help accomplish what is sought, namely the fruit of faith. And this leads us to stage two in the process.
2. ASSISTANCE –The text goes on to describe the prayers and requests of the gardener, in this case Mother Church: Sir leave it for this year also. I shall cultivate the ground around it and fertilize it. It may bear fruit in the future.
And thus we see that the Lord, the owner of the garden not only grants the request but will also be the one to supply the necessary helps to draw forth the fruits patiently awaited.
Indeed, the Lord sends us help and graces in so many ways:
He speaks in our conscience, has written his law in our hearts
He gave us the law
He sent us prophets
He punishes our wrong doings to bring us to repentance. Before I was afflicted I strayed. But now I have kept your word. (Ps 119:67) And again, But God disciplines us for our good, that we may share his holiness. For the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant; later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it. (Heb 12:10)
Sent us his Son!
Who established the Church
And gave us the grace and the Sacraments
And It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ. [That we be] no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming. Instead, speaking the truth in love, in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ. (Eph 4: 11-17)
Yes, see how much God has done for us! He has graced us in every way and entrusted to the Church, in answer to here pleas, every necessary grace to bear fruit. And now he patiently awaits. Looking to return again to seek the fruits that are necessary for those who claim to have saving faith, fruits that are necessary to be able to endure the day of his comings, fruits which are necessary that we have the holiness without which no one will see the Lord (Heb 12:14)! Indeed we cannot see or endure his presence without the fruit of holiness by his grace. For as Scripture says, Who may ascend the mountain of the Lord? Or Who may stand in his holy place?Only he who has clean hands and a pure heart (Ps 24:3-4). And only God can accomplish this. But he who made us without us will not save us without us, and thus we must, by his grace, renounce our sin and accept his grace.
3. ACCEPTANCE– The parable ends simply with this line: If not you can cut it down.
The word “acceptance” is chosen carefully here, for judgement is not so much God’s decision, but rather, is his acceptance of our decision to bear fruit or to refuse to bear fruit, to accept or refuse his offer of the bearing the fruits of faith such as chastity, mercy, forgiveness, reconciliation, love of the poor, appreciation of the truth and so forth.
The day of judgement amounts to the day when God accepts our final choice. Our judgment is not so much a passing of sentence on us but is rather the recognition of the final and absolute choice we have made.
Mysteriously it would seem that there comes a day when change for us is no longer possible. What we are remains fixed forever. Even as we get older we note how it is harder to change. We are like concrete that sets, and becomes ever harder. We are like pottery which begins moist and malleable but when subjected to the fire has a shape that is forever fixed.
And thus the Lord teaches us to be serious about sin and about the day of judgement. For now there is mercy and every grace available to us, thank you Jesus! But there comes a day when our decision is finally called, and forever fixed.
The Gospel today teaches beautifully of God’s patience, but ultimately of our need for mercy, (we are all beggars before God), and warns us that our decision will finally be called. Yes, there is a Day of Judgement and it closes in on us all.
Talking about how we sang “Kum bah ya” etc., will not suffice. St. Paul also warns in today’s second reading against presumption and of us trying to serve as a judge in our own case:
Our ancestors were all under the cloud and all passed through the sea, and all of them were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. All ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they drank from a spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was the Christ. Yet God was not pleased with most of them, for they were struck down in the desert. These things happened as examples for us, so that we might not desire evil things, as they did. Do not grumble as some of them did, and suffered death by the destroyer. These things happened to them as an example, and they have been written down as a warning to us, upon whom the end of the ages has come. Therefore, whoever thinks he is standing secure should take care not to fall. (1 Cor 10:1:ff)
For now there is mercy! But there comes a day of ratification, of judgement, when the question is called and the lasting answer is supplied, not so much by God as by us.
Be careful, your flesh says, “No worries!” But the Lord says “Repent!”
This song by Johnny Cash rooted in the image from today’s parable warns:
You can run on for a long time Run on for a long time, run on for a long time Sooner or later God’ll cut you down
Well, you may throw your rock and hide your hand Workin’ in the dark against your fellow man But as sure as God made black and white What’s down in the dark will be brought to the light.
Go tell that long tongue liar, go and tell that midnight rider Tell the rambler, the gambler, the back biter Tell ’em that God’s gonna cut you down
One of the things I often marvel at is that a good number of young people are more socially conservative than their parents.
I am in the last five years of the Baby Boom generation, perhaps the most selfish, immature, egotistical and rebellious generation that has ever lived in this country. The rebellion reached full flower in 1968, a terrible year not only of assassinations, but also of open sexual misconduct, the celebration of rebellion, of immature disrespect of authority and tradition, and a large percentage of people stoned out of their mind.
Now, this generation (my generation) at some point had to take a bath (after wallowing in the mud of Woodstock), take the flowers of out its hair, put on a suit and go to work. But a lot of the selfish, egotistical and iconoclastic tendencies remained with this spoiled generation as they (we) ushered in abortion on demand, no fault divorce, cohabitation, low birthrates, widespread pornography, and numerous other social ills that amount to a general shredding of the family and a coherent and functional culture.
To some degree, the next generation will react to the reaction, rebel against the rebellion. And at least to some extent I have seen it. A lot of the younger people I have met and am preparing for marriage or see at theology on tap sessions, or meet over at the seminary and in novitiate for the Order in my parish , are re-embracing the tradition their parents and grandparents so carelessly cast aside. Further, these younger people see what a disaster the lives of their parents and grandparents have been with failed marriages, addictions, STDs, and many other ills.
At some level, disgusted by what they see, they are resolved to be more careful to avoid their parents mistakes. The knee-jerk rebelliousness of the boomers seems far less evident in their grandchildren whom I find more reasonable, teachable and even hungry for the truth.
I don’t know how widespread the phenomenon I describe is, and I suspect that the overall numbers in our culture are still headed in the wrong direction. The whole gay union thing is emblematic of that. Nevertheless there is a growing core, perhaps a remnant, of younger people who are picking up the pieces of things their boomer parents shattered and reconsidering once discarded treasures.
I pray only that it will grow and that increasing numbers of younger people will simply shake their heads in dismay at the foolishness of the Boomer generation and work explicitly to restore maturity, accountability and a love for the good, true and beautiful.
The following video is a humorous illustration of how, in order to rebel against the status quo involves another rebellion that, in effect, is a shift back to the status quo ante. What this video illustrates in a small and humorous matter is what I hope will be the case in bigger matters.
Now that attention shifts to the College of Cardinals, it might be good to spend a brief time reflecting on what a Cardinal is and how the College of Cardinals functions. Perhaps it is good to start with a little history and then describe the present realities.
History [1]- Originally the term “cardinal” simply referred to any priest who was attached to a particular church or diocese. Even to this day we speak of diocesan priests as being “incardinated” (or attached) to a certain diocese, and this is required for every priest. There are not to be “free-ranging” priests. Later however, from about the 4th Century through the late Middle Ages the term “cardinal” came to be used only of certain more prominent priests in the larger and more prominent dioceses of antiquity such as Constantinople, Milan, Ravenna, Naples, Sens, Trier, Magdeburg, and Cologne and of course, Rome. In more recent centuries the term came only to be used of Rome.
And thus we find the term cardinal used in the Church at Rome (from at least fifth century) to designate priests permanently serving in the Roman parishes and ministries under the Bishop of Rome, the Pope— These were the “cardinal priests.” However, as the number of priests grew, not all the priests attached to these Roman parishes were known as cardinal, but only the first priest in each such parish—i.e. the Pastor or Rector.
Cardinal priests attended not only to their own ministry or parish but also convened regularly to oversee matters of Church discipline in the diocese of Rome. These might include matters of disciplining the clergy, filling vacancies and so forth. But it also involved matters pertaining to the laity insofar as they interacted with the Church. Thus the Cardinal priests assisted the Pope in the administration of the Diocese of Rome. There are some echoes of all this in every diocese through a mechanisms known as the College of Deans and College of Consultors who assist the Bishop in administrative details and matters of Church discipline.
Cardinal Deacons – During all this time just described there also existed a group known as the cardinal deacons. The Roman Diocese was divided into seven regions and a deacon was assigned to each. They performed numerous duties but chief among them was record-keeping and the coordination of the care of the poor, cemeteries and the like. Given their elevated status over a deacon who only served a parish, they came to be called cardinal deacons. These cardinal deacons would also assist the Pope liturgically whenever he was in that region of the diocese. The number of these cardinal deacons gradually rose over the years.
Cardinal Bishops – Yet again, during all this time there also emerged the cardinal bishops. As the worldwide Church grew in size, the duties of the Pope, and the administrative concerns of the Roman Church (diocese) grew. The Pope increasingly came to call on bishops of nearby dioceses (esp. Ostia and Velletri, Porto and Santa Rufina, Albano, Frascati (Tusculum), Palestrina (Præneste), and Sabina) to represent him in an official capacity and to give him counsel. In a way it was like the modern notion of a local synod.
Thus we see that the Cardinals had varying ranks and functions. They were, assistants of the pope in his liturgical functions, in the care of the poor, the administration of papal finances and possessions, and met in synod over the disposition of important matters to include Church discipline.
By the 11th Century the College of Cardinals took on more importance as they began to oversee the election of a new pope when this became necessary. They not only saw to the election but they also ran things during the interregnum. From this time on their functions and importance grew. The Pope met regularly with them in something called the “consistory,” i.e. the reunion of the cardinals and the pope. In these meetings were regularly treated doctrinal questions of faith, disciplinary matters, canonizations, approvals of rules of new orders, indulgences for the Universal Church, rules for papal elections, the calling of general councils, appointing of Apostolic legates and vicars etc. The consistory also oversaw matters concerning dioceses and bishops, creation, transfer, division, the nomination and confirmation of bishops, also their transfer, resignation, etc.
The Modern Scene – More could be said of the history but allow this to bring us to modern times [2].
Although we see historically that there are three ranks of Cardinals (bishop, priest and deacon) it is now the practice that only bishops are elevated to the College of Cardinals. Since 1962 all cardinals have been required to receive episcopal consecration unless they are granted an exemption from this obligation by the Pope. Most recently this happened with Cardinal Avery Dulles who was elevated to Cardinal but remained a priest.
Though all the Cardinals are now bishops, the traditional distinctions are maintained. The title of “Cardinal Bishop” only means that he holds the title of one of the “suburbicarian” (nearby dioceses of Rome listed above) or that he is the Dean of the College of Cardinals — or that he is a patriarch of an Eastern Catholic Church. Cardinal priests are the largest of the three orders of cardinals. Cardinal priests today are generally bishops of important dioceses throughout the world, though some hold offices in the Curia. The cardinal deacons are either officials of the Roman Curia or priests elevated after their eightieth birthday (such as Cardinal Dulles was).
As for the functions of the College of Cardinals, we have already seen much of this in the history above. In modern times the function of the college is to advise the Pope about Church issues whenever he summons them to an ordinary consistory. The cardinals not only attend the meetings of the College but also make themselves available individually or with small panels of cardinals if the Pope requests their counsel in this way . Most cardinals have additional duties, such as leading a diocese or archdiocese. Others run a department of the Roman Curia.
The College of Cardinals also convenes on the death or abdication of a pope as a papal conclave to elect a successor. The college has no ruling power except during the sede vacante (vacant see) period, and even then its powers are extremely limited.
Those who attain to this office have proven their worth as stable and wise counselors, good bishops of the Church. May our Cardinals experience many graces and blessings in their work of electing a new Pope, likely from among their own number.
Now that attention shifts to the College of Cardinals, it might be good to spend a brief time reflecting on what a Cardinal is and how the College of Cardinals functions. Perhaps it is good to start with a little history and then describe the present realities.
History [1]- Originally the term “cardinal” simply referred to any priest who was attached to a particular church or diocese. Even to this day we speak of diocesan priests as being “incardinated” (or attached) to a certain diocese, and this is required for every priest. There are not to be “free-ranging” priests. Later however, from about the 4th Century through the late Middle Ages the term “cardinal” came to be used only of certain more prominent priests in the larger and more prominent dioceses of antiquity such as Constantinople, Milan, Ravenna, Naples, Sens, Trier, Magdeburg, and Cologne and of course, Rome. In more recent centuries the term came only to be used of Rome.
And thus we find the term cardinal used in the Church at Rome (from at least fifth century) to designate priests permanently serving in the Roman parishes and ministries under the Bishop of Rome, the Pope— These were the “cardinal priests.” However, as the number of priests grew, not all the priests attached to these Roman parishes were known as cardinal, but only the first priest in each such parish—i.e. the Pastor or Rector.
Cardinal priests attended not only to their own ministry or parish but also convened regularly to oversee matters of Church discipline in the diocese of Rome. These might include matters of disciplining the clergy, filling vacancies and so forth. But it also involved matters pertaining to the laity insofar as they interacted with the Church. Thus the Cardinal priests assisted the Pope in the administration of the Diocese of Rome. There are some echoes of all this in every diocese through a mechanisms known as the College of Deans and College of Consultors who assist the Bishop in administrative details and matters of Church discipline.
Cardinal Deacons – During all this time just described there also existed a group known as the cardinal deacons. The Roman Diocese was divided into seven regions and a deacon was assigned to each. They performed numerous duties but chief among them was record-keeping and the coordination of the care of the poor, cemeteries and the like. Given their elevated status over a deacon who only served a parish, they came to be called cardinal deacons. These cardinal deacons would also assist the Pope liturgically whenever he was in that region of the diocese. The number of these cardinal deacons gradually rose over the years.
Cardinal Bishops – Yet again, during all this time there also emerged the cardinal bishops. As the worldwide Church grew in size, the duties of the Pope, and the administrative concerns of the Roman Church (diocese) grew. The Pope increasingly came to call on bishops of nearby dioceses (esp. Ostia and Velletri, Porto and Santa Rufina, Albano, Frascati (Tusculum), Palestrina (Præneste), and Sabina) to represent him in an official capacity and to give him counsel. In a way it was like the modern notion of a local synod.
Thus we see that the Cardinals had varying ranks and functions. They were, assistants of the pope in his liturgical functions, in the care of the poor, the administration of papal finances and possessions, and met in synod over the disposition of important matters to include Church discipline.
By the 11th Century the College of Cardinals took on more importance as they began to oversee the election of a new pope when this became necessary. They not only saw to the election but they also ran things during the interregnum. From this time on their functions and importance grew. The Pope met regularly with them in something called the “consistory,” i.e. the reunion of the cardinals and the pope. In these meetings were regularly treated doctrinal questions of faith, disciplinary matters, canonizations, approvals of rules of new orders, indulgences for the Universal Church, rules for papal elections, the calling of general councils, appointing of Apostolic legates and vicars etc. The consistory also oversaw matters concerning dioceses and bishops, creation, transfer, division, the nomination and confirmation of bishops, also their transfer, resignation, etc.
The Modern Scene – More could be said of the history but allow this to bring us to modern times [2].
Although we see historically that there are three ranks of Cardinals (bishop, priest and deacon) it is now the practice that only bishops are elevated to the College of Cardinals. Since 1962 all cardinals have been required to receive episcopal consecration unless they are granted an exemption from this obligation by the Pope. Most recently this happened with Cardinal Avery Dulles who was elevated to Cardinal but remained a priest.
Though all the Cardinals are now bishops, the traditional distinctions are maintained. The title of “Cardinal Bishop” only means that he holds the title of one of the “suburbicarian” (nearby dioceses of Rome listed above) or that he is the Dean of the College of Cardinals — or that he is a patriarch of an Eastern Catholic Church. Cardinal priests are the largest of the three orders of cardinals. Cardinal priests today are generally bishops of important dioceses throughout the world, though some hold offices in the Curia. The cardinal deacons are either officials of the Roman Curia or priests elevated after their eightieth birthday (such as Cardinal Dulles was).
As for the functions of the College of Cardinals, we have already seen much of this in the history above. In modern times the function of the college is to advise the Pope about Church issues whenever he summons them to an ordinary consistory. The cardinals not only attend the meetings of the College but also make themselves available individually or with small panels of cardinals if the Pope requests their counsel in this way . Most cardinals have additional duties, such as leading a diocese or archdiocese. Others run a department of the Roman Curia.
The College of Cardinals also convenes on the death or abdication of a pope as a papal conclave to elect a successor. The college has no ruling power except during the sede vacante (vacant see) period, and even then its powers are extremely limited.
Those who attain to this office have proven their worth as stable and wise counselors, good bishops of the Church. May our Cardinals experience many graces and blessings in their work of electing a new Pope, likely from among their own number.
Recently I have found a persistent line of questioning in reference to the traditional understanding of the Lord’s promise to the Church: the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it (Matt 16:18) . Yesterday on the blog a reader stated the question quite well:
Now that attention shifts to the College of Cardinals, it might be good to spend a brief time reflecting on what a Cardinal is and how the College of Cardinals functions. Perhaps it is good to start with a little history and then describe the present realities.