Author: Msgr. Charles Pope

Posted on

Biblical Basics About Mother Mary – A Homily for the Second Sunday of the Year

011913In the Gospel today of the Wedding Feast at Cana we have a theological portrait both of Mother Mary and also of Prayer. Lets look at the Gospel along Five lines:

I. The Place that Mary has – The text says, There was a wedding at Cana in Galilee and the mother of Jesus was there. Jesus and his disciples were also invited to the wedding.

It is a fascinating thing about these opening verses that Mary almost seems to dominate the scene and the presence of Jesus is mentioned secondly. St. Thomas Aquinas, noting this says that at Cana Mary is acting as the “go-between” in arranging a mystical marriage (Commentary on John, 98; and 2,1, n.336, 338, and 343, 151-152). Hence in a way she almost dominates the scene, and, once the Marriage is arranged, steps back, her final words to us being, “Do whatever he tells you.”

How many of us have experienced Mary’s role in helping us find her Son and our place at the wedding feast of the Lamb. I know in my own life it was Mary who drew me back to her Son when I had strayed.

II. The Prayer that Mary Makes – The text says, When the wine ran short, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.”

Notice now another central role that Mary has: she is interceding here, she is praying for others to her Son. Notice three qualities to her prayer:

Her discernment – She notices the problem, probably even before the Groom and Bride. Indeed Mothers often notice the needs of their children before they do. But why didn’t Jesus notice? Perhaps he did, and surely as God he knew. But he waits for us to ask. Yes, God waits and expects us to ask. In part this respect, for not all of us are ready to receive all his gifts. In part also, this expectation that we ask is also rooted in God’s teaching us that we must learn to depend on him and learn habitually to bring him our many needs. The Book of James says, You have not because You ask not (James 4:2).

Her diligence – Simply put, she actually prays. Rather than fret and be anxious she goes straightway to her Son out of love for the couple (us) and trust in her Son. She sees the need and gets right to the work of praying, of beseeching her Son.

Her deference – Note that she does not tell Jesus what to do per se, says simply notes the need: “They have no wine.” She is not directive, as if to say, “Here is my agenda and solution for this problem, follow my plans exactly, just sing here at the bottom of my plan for action.” Rather she simply observes the problem and places it before her Son in confidence. He knows what to do and will decide the best way to handle things.

Thus Mary models prayer for us. What wine are you lacking now? What wine do your children and grandchildren lack? Do you notice your needs and the needs of others and consistently pray? Or does it take things getting critical for you to notice or pray? And when you pray do you go to the Lord with trust or an agenda?

So the Scriptures teach that Mary is the quintessential woman of prayer, a model of prayer. She not only intercedes for us, she teaches us how to pray.

III.The Portrait of Mother Mary – The text says, Woman, how does this concern of yours affect me? My hour has not yet come. His mother said to the servers, “Do whatever he tells you.”

Notice three things about this brief dialogue

The Title of Mary – Jesus calls her “Woman.” In Jewish culture a man could well respectfully call a woman “Woman,” but it was unheard of for a son to call his mother “Woman.”

Hence this text stands out as unusual and signals us that Jesus is speaking at a deeper level here. In fact, in the Johannine texts Jesus always calls his Mother, “Woman” and  this in fulfillment of Genesis 3:15  which says I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall crush your head, while you strike at his heel.” And thus Jesus is saying that Mary is this woman who is prophesied.

So far from being disrespectful to Mary, Jesus is actually exulting her: You are the woman who was prophesied. You are she from whose “seed” comes forth the Son destined to destroy the power of Satan.

In this sense, Mary is also the new Eve. For Jesus also calls her “Woman” at the foot of the Cross wherein He is  the New Adam, Mary is the New Eve, and the tree this time is the Cross. And thus, just as we got into trouble by a man, a woman and tree, so now we get out of trouble by the same path. Adam’s “no” and sin is reversed by Jesus who saves us by his, “Yes.” Eve’s “No” is reversed by Mary’s yes.

The Tenacity of Mary – Jesus says to his mother, literally in the Greek, “What to me and to thee, Woman?” (τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοί, γύναι – ti emoi kai soi, gunai) Usually, in the Scriptures, when the phrase comes up (e.g. Gen 23:15; 1 Kings 19:20) it indicates some kind of tension between the interlocutors. And thus, on the surface, it would seem that Jesus is expressing resistance over his mother striving to involve him in this matter. And yet, what makes this interpretation odd, is that Mary doesn’t seem to interpret it as resistance.

Perhaps there was something in the tone of voice that Jesus used, or perhaps there was a look between them that resolves the tension, and evokes the sympathy of Jesus to the cause. Whatever the case, Mary stays in the conversation with Jesus, and overcomes whatever tension or resistance existed at first. In this, we surely see her tenacity.

And this tenacity comports well with the kind of similar tenacity we observe of her another places. For though startled by the presence of the angel Gabriel, she does engage Gabriel in a respectful, but pointed conversation that seeks greater detail. She also hastens to visit her cousin Elizabeth, and in the dialogue that follows, she proclaims a Magnificat that is anything but a shy and reclining prayer. She joyfully acknowledges the Lord’s power in her life, and all but proclaims a revolutionary new world order.

To be tenacious means to hold fast in spite of obstacles or discouragements. However we are to interpret Jesus’ resistance to Mary’s initial concern, it is clear that Mother Mary does not give up, and that she confidently expects the Lord to answer her favorably. This is clear from her confident departure from the conversation and turning to the Stewards with the instruction, “Do whatever he tells you.”

The Trust of Mary – She simply departs, telling the stewards, “Do whatever he tells you.” She does not hover. She does not come back and check on the progress of things. She does not seek to control or manipulate the outcome. She simply leaves the scene and leaves it all to Jesus.

IV. The power of Mary’s prayer – Whatever his initial concerns regarding mother Mary’s request, Jesus now goes to work: Now there were six stone water jars there for Jewish ceremonial washings, each holding twenty to thirty gallons. Jesus told the them, “Fill the jars with water.” So they filled them to the brim. Then he told them, “Draw some out now and take it to the headwaiter.” So they took it.  And when the headwaiter tasted the water that had become wine, without knowing where it came from — although the servers who had drawn the water knew —, the headwaiter called the bridegroom and said to him, “Everyone serves good wine first, and then when people have drunk freely, an inferior one; but you have kept the good wine until now.”

If we do the math, we may confidently presume that Jesus produced almost 150 gallons of the best wine. Mary’s prayer, and tenacity have produced abundant results.

Sometimes the Lord says wait, only to grant further abundance. Scripture says, But they who wait for the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings like eagles; they shall run and not be weary; they shall walk and not faint (Isaiah 40:31).

The Catholic tradition of turning to Mary and regarding her as a special intercessor with particular power, is rooted in the passage. But she is not merely an intercessor for us, she is also a model for us.  Namely, that we should persevere in prayer and go to the Lord was confident expectation of its abundant response.  The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much (James 5:16).

V. The product of Mary’s prayer – The text says, Jesus did this as the beginning of his signs at Cana in Galilee and so revealed his glory and his disciples began to believe in him.

And thus, at the conclusion of this Gospel is the significant result that many began to believe in the Lord this day on account of this miracle. And here is Mary’s essential role with reference to Jesus, that she should lead many souls to a deeper union with her Son. And having done so, she leaves us with this instruction, “Do whatever he tells you.”

Mary’s role is to hold up Christ for us to see, and she did a Bethlehem for the shepherds, and later the Wise Men; to hold him up as she did for Simeon and Anna and the Temple; to point to his glory and she does here at Cana; and ultimately to hold his body in her arms at the foot of the cross after He is taken down.

Note too, that as a mother, Mary has a special role in the beginnings of our faith, in the infancy and childhood of our faith. The phrase in the text says many “began to believe.” This is something called an “inceptive aorist,” which is often used to stress the beginning of an action or the entrance into a state. Thus Mary has a special role in helping to initiate our faith, in helping, by God’s grace to birth Christ in us. She is, as St. Thomas says, the go-between, the great match-maker in the mystical marriage of Christ and the soul. And having done that her final words are, “Do whatever he tells you.” And while she may draw back a bit, she continues to pray for us.

Here then are some Biblical basics about Mother Mary, in this Gospel of the wedding feast of Cana.

Somehow I am mindful of an old Gospel song which says, My Mother Prayed for me had me on her mind. Took the time and prayed for me. I’m so glad she prayed. I’m So glad she prayed for me.

Posted on

An Inspiring and Beautiful Video for Altar Servers

011813-pope-1The Video at the bottom of the page was sent to me today and I want to say that I find it beautiful.

What makes the video so good is that it inspires a spirituality for the server that includes some of the following encouragement and advisement:

  1. That the Mass is mystical, beyond mere human sight, and that the server must learn to be sensitive to what lives beyond ordinary perception and become more spiritually aware.
  2. In so doing he should lead others to greater reverence by the example of supreme awareness of the presence of God.
  3. He should also, by his reverence  lead others to understand that what takes place on the altar is the making present of the most important moment in all of human history.
  4. The Altar server also provides practical leadership for the congregation as to when to sit, stand and kneel.
  5. Even the folded hands, pointed upward are meant to direct attention upward to God.
  6. The manner of his clothing (e.g. dress shoes, pressed trousers etc) are meant to and ought to show that what he is doing is a matter of utmost seriousness and importance.
  7. Our body, (posture etc) and our clothing impact our disposition, so all we do should be to help our hearts worship, and lead others to the same.
  8. Prayer, especially the rosary, is a good way to prepare one’s heart to be a better server.
  9. The goal is to have your heart in the right place.

A couple of other things I like about the video, that the man interviewed models well a piety that is serious but not somber looking. Not everyone gets this balance right, and some who are trying to look prayerful merely look sad, angry, or bored. But the man in this video shows an appropriate balance, a kind of natural and serene sobriety well suited to the Mass.

The images throughout the video are also beautiful and the photography is wonderful.

I suspect (sadly) that not all will be happy with some of the more traditional elements in the video: the ad orientem celebration of mass and the expressed preference for the cassock and surplice, rather than the alb. There is also no reference to girls serving. However, none of these aspects is forbidden. Perhaps a word about each.

  1. The ad orientem celebration of Mass (I speak here of the Ordinary Form), while less common, is not forbidden. I use it occasionally, after proper catechesis, in smaller settings in my parish. We have several side altars in the Church that I use on occasion, and I have also used the high altar for that purpose from time to time.  The catechesis I use includes the fact that the priest does not have his back to us. Rather we are all facing God, looking to the liturgical east for Christ to come again. I will say I would not adopt this position in my main Sunday liturgies at this time without consulting with the Bishop, simply out of respect for the fact that he is the chief liturgist of the diocese. But for smaller liturgies of a more private or intimate character, I do use the eastward orientation occasionally.
  2. The cassock and surplice – the preference here for this vesture is traditional. And while the current norms speak of the alb as being the common vesture for ministers of every rank in the Mass, (GIRM # 336). However the cassock and surplice are not forbidden and tend to be worn today especially by clerics who assist at mass but are not celebrating or concelebrating. As such, the cassock and surplice have a more priestly look. For this reason I think it unadvised that a girl or woman should wear the cassock and surplice. In my own parish the seminarians that assist us, as well as some of the older men wear the cassock and surplice. The younger boys and all the girls and women wear the alb.
  3. That only males are envisioned as servers – Here again, while it is common in most parishes today that box sexes serve, it is not required that the pastor observed this permission. For pastoral reasons, such as encouraging priestly vocations, the pastor may employ only men and boys as servers if he sees fit. In my last parish that is what we did. In my current parish, I inherited a server program that uses both sexes, and younger as well as older people. The mix is good and I see no reason to change it. But it is neither wrong for a pastor to make use of only males in this role. Neither is it wrong for the lay faithful to seek to encourage this sort of approach, as the video makers do.

I hope you will find this video as inspiring and beautiful as I do. And, just as the video we looked at last week did not please all, I do pray and ask for charity toward, and the presumption of good will by those who have made and produced this video. It is a good effort and has an important message in regard to reverence and spiritual preparation for altar servers.

Posted on

Violence in Gaming and Movies and the Christian Walk

011713-pope-1In the wake of several mass killings, there has been a lot of talk about further restricting the sales of guns and various types of ammunition. I want to stay out from that discussion since reasonable Catholics will differ and I really don’t know much about the topic.

However, I do find it odd that there is a lot less discussion about other and perhaps more relevant issues related to explosive violence in our culture. Surely the breakdown of families, the decreasing discipline in schools, and a steady diet of violent video games and movies are factors too.

It is about the last matter that I would like to say a few things. Let me say from the start I am not calling for bans or boycotts. Actually, I am turning my attention to we the viewer, the consumer and am asking why it might be that violent “entertainment” appeals so much to so many of us. I wonder how well this can be squared with the Christian walk and if it is just harmless fun, or if there aren’t a few questions we should ask our self.

When I was a young man in my twenties I loved “action movies.” I remember that we guys often talked about the “kill ratio” as a way of rating the movie. High kill ratio movies were “good,” and low kill ratio movies were poor and dangerously on the way to becoming a “chick flick.” Car chases, buildings being blown up, and the bad guys being killed in large numbers, was the recipe we looked for.

In fact, I’ll save you some money and give you the plot of every adventure movie ever made or to be made:

  1. The movie opens with some bad guy, a guy who is unambiguously evil, doing some terrible thing. Perhaps he kills some one, takes hostages, or engages in a terrorist act.
  2. After this our hero steps on the scene.
  3. There follows about ninety minutes of car chases, blowing things up and killing lots of people
  4. He has a final showdown with the unambiguously evil bad guy and kills him.
  5. In having done this, He has exacted vengeance, restored justice and now walks off the scene, girl in arm, burning city in the background, roll credits.
  6. (There is usually a sub-plot which involves the girl wherein she enters the scene, complicating things for our hero. She is usually a combination of an insistent partner to our hero who is reluctant to accept his need for her help. Some other leading ladies play the role of damsel in distress, but that is less politically correct today).
  7. Bottom line, our hero is victorious and justice once again reigns in Gotham City.

OK, so save your $15. You’ve just had them all presented to you. There is almost no variance to this theme and it is usually downright cartoonish.

In recent years I have lost interest in these movies. Some of it is age. But a lot of it is my Christian walk. I no longer love these movies because it is seems to me that the Lord does not love them. For a Christian, who really stops to think about it and to apply the faith in violent movies and video games, it should, in my estimation become clear that violence ought not be proposed as entertainment, or be experienced as entertaining. Violence is always regrettable and is a cause for sober reflection, not exuberant joy.

I am no pacifist, there are times when the police have to repel or restrain criminals with violent force. There are times when nations, for a grave reason, and as a last recourse, must go to war. But this is always lamentable, and surely not entertaining. People often die terribly in war, and in other violent ways.

The adventure movies and video games often present simplistic and cartoonish notions of violence. For example, our hero may be involved in a high speed car crash. Despite this, he often walks away from it and remains quite fit to do further battle. But in reality no one walks away from a high speed car crash unscathed. The whole body is wrenched and there are almost always neck and back injuries that require months to recover from. Some never recover. Further, as our hero kills bad guys left and right, we are never invited to consider that in real life death has terrible ripple effects as families, children and others related to the dead, experience the tragedy and often never recover.

The CBS video below speaks of an area I know little, the world of video games. I will admit, that video games are simply not, and never have been a part of my world. When I was in high school the only video game available was “PONG” (a simple monochrome tennis game). Pac Man and Donkey Kong were just on the horizon, but I never warmed up to them in college years. The first video shows that a new rating system has come into play for these games, many of which are horribly violent as well as being saturated with sex and bad language. I am personally glad to see it and hope it will guide parents to be more sober about what their kids are playing.

I intend no crusade here. I am not calling for abolishment of such games, or of adventure movies. Neither am I saying that these movies and games cause mass killings. I am simply saying that they don’t help. I will even say I oppose those who refuse to let little boys have toy guns and play war. I figure for them it is just a stage, a boy thing. But that is a central point, it should be just a stage.

So what I do propose is that, as we grow in our Christian walk, the notion of raw violence as a form of entertainment, should become increasingly untenable for us. As we grow and consider real life, violence is something we increasingly mourn, increasingly find troubling. If it ever did appeal to us, it appeals less and less. The voice of Jesus echoes in our conscience: Put away your sword (Matt 26:52).

And as we grow in grace, that still small voice of Jesus gradually has its way. The swords are sheathed, the video controllers are set aside, the movies look silly, and violence becomes unappealing, lamentable, and a subject for prayer, rather than a form of entertainment. At least that has been my experience.

I’m glad I don’t like the “high kill ratio” movies any more. Somehow I think that’s how it should be, that I’ve outgrown them. I do worry that some young people have a pretty steady diet of this stuff and may be desensitized. I rather doubt that most of them will ever become mass killers. But I don’t think it helps by making the simulated killing of other people entertainment. And, at some level, it is worth asking our self, “Why do I like this?” Honestly, to say that the killing of large numbers is a reasonable solution to a problem, is generally a kind of an “anti-gospel.” At best, the violent engagement of an enemy is deeply lamentable and rarely necessary. And when it must be undertaken it is subject to the tenets of the Just War Tradition. Surely there is nothing “entertaining” about real violence.

A couple of videos for further reflection.

The first video is from CBS News and details some of the problems with violence in video games. The second video is a humorous description of how silly adventure movies really are. Pardon a could mild profanities. One of the lines says, Cool guys don’t look at explosions, they blow things up and walk away, and never think of the people they’ve killed.

Posted on

A Beautiful Summary of Eucharistic theology in an antiphon by Aquinas

011713-pope-2There is a great hymn, an antiphon actually, written by St. Thomas Aquinas for the Office of Corpus Christi. It is O Sacrum Convivium and it serves as a wonderful summary of Eucharistic theology that is worth our attention. With that in mind I’d like to make a brief reflection on some of its compact teachings. First the text, then some commentary:

O sacrum convivium!
in quo Christus sumitur:
recolitur memoria passionis eius:
mens impletur gratia:
et futurae gloriae nobis pignus datur.

O sacred Banquet
In which Christ is received
The memory of his Passion is recalled
The Mind is filled with grace
And Pledge of future Glory is given to us.

O Sacred banquet (O Sacrum convivium) – In recent decades there was perhaps a tendency to over emphasize the meal aspect of the holy Mass, without due and balanced reference to the sacrificial aspect of the holy Mass. But the necessary correction in more recent times, back toward emphasizing that the Mass makes present the Sacrifice of the Cross, should not lead us to forget the mass is also a holy banquet, a sacred meal with the Lord.

For the Lord says, For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink (Jn 6:55). Thus, the Holy Eucharist is no mere sign, or symbol, but is in fact the true food of Christ’s true Body, true Blood, Soul and Divinity. The Eucharist, is also a foretaste, a praegustatum, of the great banquet in heaven, of which Christ says, And I confer on you a kingdom, just as my Father conferred one on me, so that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom and sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel (Lk 22:29-30). And yet again, Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me (Rev 3:20).

Note too that the Latin word convivium, of which “banquet” is an adequate translation, but also contains nuances that go beyond a mere meal. The Latin emphasizes a kind of coming together a sort of celebration of life. Con (with) + vivere (to live). Hence, the meal here is no mere supplying the food or calories. It is a coming together to celebrate new life. We receive the food of Christ’s Body and Blood, which not only gives an ingredient for life, but is in fact the true and very life of Christ.

In the Eucharist, we receive Life Himself, for Christ said of himself, I am the life (Jn 14:6). And further, he declares, As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will have life because of me. (Jn 6:57).

Of this life, he further describes it as “eternal life,” a term which refers not merely to the length of life, but also to the fullness of life.

Thus the Holy Eucharist is a meal, but no mere meal, it is Life, it is a convivial celebration of that life; it is a banquet which gives Life Himself.

In which Christ is received (in quo Christus sumitur)– Here again, is affirmation that we do not receive mere food, we receive Christ himself. This is no mere symbol, no mere wafer, no mere memory. It is Christ himself that we receive.

The verb here, sumitur, is in some sense bold. More literally translated than “received,” it is more literally translated as “taken up.” It is a present passive indicative form of the verb. And this indicates the great humility of our Lord. He lets himself “be taken up.”

Imagine, the Lord being in a moment of a passive relationship with us. He lets himself be taken up, or taken in by us. He is taken up, and becomes our food. Here is an astonishing humbling by our God, who then allows himself to be assimilated by us, and thereby assimilates us into him.

His humility, is meant to conquer pride in us. Yes, in this great banquet Christ himself is taken up, is received, is assimilated by us. And in this humble manner we are taken up into him, taken in, more perfectly to be a member of his body.

The memory of his passion is recalled (recolitur memoria passionis eius) – The Eucharist is not only a meal, it is the making present of the Passion, Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ. In every mass, we are brought to the foot of the cross, and the fruits of that Cross are applied to us.

We are also at the resurrection, for in Holy Communion we receive Christ who is living, present, and active.

The Latin verb recolitur, is properly translated “recalled.” However, once again there are nuances in the Latin verb which are hard to render with one English word. The Latin verb recolere means “to cultivate anew.” This somewhat agrarian image points to a kind of careful and intentional growing and fostering of something, in this case the memory of Christ’s Passion.

To cultivate in agriculture, is also to prepare for, and or pave the way for the growth of something. It means to prepare the soil.

In non agrarian settings, to cultivate anything implies a kind of care for it, and intention to foster the growth of something, to further or encourage something.

In all these images we see that the memory of Christ’s Passion is something that we should cherish, encourage and foster. It is something in which we should prepare the ground of our heart for ever deeper insights and for new growth in the memory of what He’s done for us

The other word, “memory,” is also a very precious word. What is memory and what does it mean to “remember?” To remember is to have deeply present in my mind and my heart what Christ has done for me, so that I am grateful, and I am different. It means to have it finally dawn on us what Christ has done for us in such a vivid and real way that our hearts and minds are grateful, transformed, and different. Our hearts of stone are broken open and God’s light and love flood in and we are changed. This is what it means to remember.

It is of course and ever deepening process to recall the memory of His Passion, not a mere one time event.

The Mind is filled with Grace (mens impletur gratia) – There are many graces of course that come with holy Communion:

Our venial sins are forgiven, our holiness is increased, our union with Christ becomes more perfected, we gradually become the One we receive, we receive strength and food for the journey across the desert of this world unto the Promised Land of Heaven, we receive life, and begin to participate in eternal life, our union with Christ and membership in his body is strengthened, as is our union with one another, and our union with the saints in heaven.

Yes, so many grace are infused, are poured forth into the mind and heart!

And a pledge of future glory is given to us (et futurae gloriae nobis pignus datur) – with the reception of Holy Communion come promises from Christ:

But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which a man may eat and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever….Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day….Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him. Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your forefathers ate manna and died, but he who feeds on this bread will live forever.” (John 6:50-58)

Yes, here is a pledge of future glory, of victory. Jesus alludes to the manna in the wilderness that sustained them for forty years in the desert. It was a sign of the victory to come. For why would God sustain them in the desert if he did not will to lead them ultimately to the Promised Land? It is the same for us. That God feeds us in this way is a sign and promise of his will to save us and bring us to the Promised Land of Heaven. He blesses and strengthens the journey and so adds surety and the pledge of the destination of future glory.

To this pledge the Lord also adds a warning: I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you (Jn 6:53)

And St. Paul also adds: Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself. (1 Cor 11:27-29)

Not a bad little summary of Eucharistic theology, all in a short antiphon.

Posted on

A Beautiful Summary of Eucharistic theology in an antiphon by Aquinas

011613There is a great hymn, an antiphon actually, written by St. Thomas Aquinas for the Office of Corpus Christi. It is O Sacrum Convivium and it serves as a wonderful summary of Eucharistic theology that is worth our attention. With that in mind I’d like to make a brief reflection on some of its compact teachings. First the text, then some commentary:

O sacrum convivium!
in quo Christus sumitur:
recolitur memoria passionis eius:
mens impletur gratia:
et futurae gloriae nobis pignus datur.

O sacred Banquet
In which Christ is received
The memory of his Passion is recalled
The Mind is filled with grace
And Pledge of future Glory is given to us.

O Sacred banquet (O Sacrum convivium) – In recent decades there was perhaps a tendency to over emphasize the meal aspect of the holy Mass, without due and balanced reference to the sacrificial aspect of the holy Mass. But the necessary correction in more recent times, back toward emphasizing that the Mass makes present the Sacrifice of the Cross, should not lead us to forget the mass is also a holy banquet, a sacred meal with the Lord.

For the Lord says, For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink (Jn 6:55). Thus, the Holy Eucharist is no mere sign, or symbol, but is in fact the true food of Christ’s true Body, true Blood, Soul and Divinity. The Eucharist, is also a foretaste, a praegustatum,  of the great banquet in heaven, of which Christ says, And I confer on you a kingdom, just as my Father conferred one on me, so that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom and sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel (Lk 22:29-30). And yet again, Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me (Rev 3:20).

Note too that the Latin word convivium, of which “banquet” is an adequate translation, but also contains nuances that go beyond a mere meal. The Latin emphasizes a kind of coming together a sort of celebration of life. Con (with) + vivere (to live).  Hence, the meal here is no mere supplying the food or calories. It is a coming together to celebrate new life. We receive the food of Christ’s Body and Blood, which not only gives an ingredient for life, but is in fact the true and very life of Christ.

In the Eucharist, we receive Life Himself, for Christ said of himself, I am the life (Jn 14:6). And further, he declares,  As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will have life because of me. (Jn 6:57).

Of this life, he further describes it as “eternal life,” a term which refers not merely to the length of life, but also to the fullness of life.

Thus the Holy Eucharist is a meal, but no mere meal, it is Life, it is a convivial celebration of that life; it is a banquet which gives Life Himself.

In which Christ is received (in quo Christus sumitur)– Here again, is affirmation that we do not receive mere food, we receive Christ himself. This is no mere symbol, no mere wafer, no mere memory. It is Christ himself that we receive.

The verb here, sumitur, is in some sense bold. More literally translated than “received,” it is more literally translated as “taken up.” It is a present passive indicative form of the verb. And this indicates the great humility of our Lord. He lets himself “be taken up.”

Imagine, the Lord being in a moment of a passive relationship with us. He lets himself be taken up, or taken in by us. He is taken up, and becomes our food. Here is an astonishing humbling by our God, who then allows himself to be assimilated by us, and thereby assimilates us into him.

His humility, is meant to conquer pride in us. Yes, in this great banquet Christ himself is taken up, is received, is assimilated by us.  And in this humble manner we are taken up into him, taken in, more perfectly to be a member of  his body.

The memory of his passion is recalled (recolitur memoria passionis eius) – The Eucharist is not only a meal, it is the making present of the Passion, Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ. In every mass, we are brought to the foot of the cross, and the fruits of that Cross are applied to us.

We are also at the resurrection, for in Holy Communion we receive Christ who is living, present, and active.

The Latin verb recolitur, is properly translated “recalled.”  However, once again there are nuances in the Latin verb which are hard to render with one English word. The Latin verb recolere means “to cultivate anew.” This somewhat agrarian image points to a kind of careful and intentional growing and fostering of something, in this case the memory of Christ’s Passion.

To cultivate in agriculture, is also to prepare for, and or pave the way for the growth of something. It means to prepare the soil.

In non agrarian settings, to cultivate anything implies a kind of care for it, and intention to foster the growth of something, to further or encourage something.

In all these images we see that the memory of Christ’s Passion is something that we should cherish, encourage and foster. It is something in which we should prepare the ground of our heart for ever deeper insights and for new growth in the memory of what He’s done for us

The other word, “memory,” is also a very precious word. What is memory and what does it mean to “remember?”  To remember is to have deeply present in my mind and my heart what Christ has done for me, so that I am grateful, and I am different. It means to have it finally dawn on us what Christ has done for us in such a vivid and real way that our hearts and minds are grateful, transformed, and different. Our hearts of stone are broken open and God’s light and love flood in and we are changed. This is what it means to remember.

It is of course and ever deepening process to recall the memory of His Passion, not a mere one time event.

The Mind is filled with Grace (mens impletur gratia) – There are many graces of course that come with holy Communion:

Our venial sins are forgiven, our holiness is increased, our union with Christ becomes more perfected, we gradually become the One we receive,  we receive strength and food for the journey across the desert of this world unto the Promised Land of Heaven, we receive life, and begin to participate in eternal life, our union with Christ and membership in his body is strengthened, as is our union with one another, and our union with the saints in heaven.

Yes, so many grace are infused, are poured forth into the mind and heart!

And a pledge of future glory is given to us (et futurae gloriae nobis pignus datur) – with the reception of Holy Communion come promises from Christ:

But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which a man may eat and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever….Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day….Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him. Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your forefathers ate manna and died, but he who feeds on this bread will live forever.” (John 6:50-58)

Yes, here is a pledge of future glory, of victory. Jesus alludes to the manna in the wilderness that sustained them for forty years in the desert. It was a sign of the victory to come. For why would God sustain them in the desert if he did not will to lead them ultimately to the Promised Land? It is the same for us. That God feeds us in this way is a sign and promise of his will to save us and bring us to the Promised Land of Heaven. He blesses and strengthens the journey and so adds surety and the pledge of the destination of future glory.

To this pledge the Lord also adds a warning: I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you (Jn 6:53)

And St. Paul also adds: Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself. (1 Cor 11:27-29)

Not a bad little summary of Eucharistic theology, all in a short antiphon.

Posted on

What are you going to believe, your eyes or your ears?

011513I have found myself in recent years insisting that people believe their ears and not their eyes.

Now our flesh demands to see by its own unregenerate power, only then will the flesh say it believes. But the truth is, our flesh does not often believe even when it sees. We usually figure, “they have some way of doing that” or perhaps we’ll say, “This is a trick, an illusion.” And illusionist can do some pretty amazing stuff! (See the video below).

But the Scriptures are clear to say that Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God (Rom 10:17) . It also says, Faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things unseen (Heb 11:1). Even Thomas who is said to believe because he sees is really confessing something he cannot see, that Jesus is Lord and God (Jn 20:29).

For example, when it comes to the sacraments we have to believe our ears, for our eyes cannot see the reality that faith declares to be so. St. Thomas Aquinas in the beautiful hymn Adoro Te Devote says:

    • Visus, tactus, gustus in te fallitur, (Sight and taste and touch in thee fall short)
    • Sed auditu solo tuto creditur; (But only the hearing is safely believed)
    • Credo quidquid dixit Dei Filius, (I believe whatever the Son of God has said)
    • Nil hoc verbo veritatis verius. (Nothing is truer than this word of truth)

And thus I must often remind people when it comes to sacraments:

  1. Eucharist – Though your eyes may still see bread and wine, believe your ears: “This is my Body, This is my Blood…..” (Matt 26:26 inter al). The Bread I will give is my flesh for the Life of the world….(Jn 6:51).”
  2. Marriage – Though your eyes may still see a newly married bride and groom as two separate distinct individuals, believe your ears: “They are no longer two, they are one. What God has joined together let no one divide.” (Matt 19:6)
  3. Baptism – Though your eyes may see a newly baptized baby as just the same, believe your ears: “This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased….(Lk 3:21) If anyone is in Christ he is a new creation (2 Cor 5:17)…..We who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death so that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of God the Father we too might live in newness of life (Rom 6:4)
  4. Confession – A person who emerges from a confessional may appear just the same, but believe your ears: I absolve you from your sins..…Whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven them (Jn 20:23).

What are you going to believe….your eyes or your ears?

  • [For] we look not to what is seen but to what is unseen; for what is seen is transitory, but what is unseen is eternal….for we walk by faith, not by sight (2 Cor 4:18, 5:7).
  • And to the Pharisees who claimed they could see (but still refused to believe) the Lord said, “If you were blind, you would not be guilty, But you remain guilty because you claim you can see. (John 9:41)
  • And to those who do believe the Lord says through Peter: You have not seen him, yet you love him; and still without seeing him you believe in him and so are already filled with a joy so glorious that it cannot be described (1 Peter 1:8)

What are you going to believe, your eyes or your ears?

Your flesh demands to see. But I promise you, even if you do see, your flesh will explain it away. Consider this video. Illusionists can do some pretty amazing things. But notice how quickly your flesh is willing to explain it away. And this case it should for these are illusions. But what if you saw a real miracle? What do you suppose your flesh would do? What do you suppose?

Faith comes by hearing.

Posted on

Death by a Thousand Cuts – Pondering Painful Divsions in the Church

011413There is, to me, a certain sad division in the Church that has set up in recent decades that is rooted in what I think is ultimately a false dichotomy. It makes me particularly sad because I respect and esteem people in both camps. And though I hold them both in my heart, they barely speak to one another and hold one another in deep suspicion and sometimes outright contempt.

I speak specifically of the division in the Church between those who focus especially on the moral issues related to Life, sexuality and family and those who focus on the moral issues related to the social teachings of the Church such as poverty, immigration, housing, healthcare, wages and so forth.

The issue recently resurfaced on the comment thread of this blog on Saturday. The blog post featured a video (re-posted below) that speak to the problem of being Catholic in name only.

Certain commentors opined that the video was unbalanced because it ends by highlighting the corporal works of mercy as essential to being a good Catholic. To be fair, the video also deals with issues of mass attendance, modesty, chastity, and respect for authority and is aimed at teenagers.

Despite this, some readers saw the video as only emphasizing the corporal works of mercy and were troubled that no mention was made about abortion, redefining marriage, and other issues often termed non-negotiables. Here is a sample of some of the comments:

  1. I think there is the danger that the “take away” here is that as long as I am freely volunteering to help the poor that is all that is needed to be a good Catholic. I know many students at the nearby Jesuit high school who have gone New Age or totally lapsed into religious non-observance and yet are service oriented.
  2. Strangely, there is not a single criterion mentioned in this video that would help identify this young lady as a Catholic. Generic Christian, yes, but not Catholic. The defense lawyer should have asked her whether she completely upheld the truth of the Scripture, Tradition and Magisterium; whether she unreservedly believed in the doctrine of transubstantiation; and whether the Pope was for her the visible head of the one true holy and apostolic Church (to name just a few pertinent issues). One can be an atheist and still follow Jesus’ call for charitable behavior.
  3. I’ll echo some of the other comments by saying the video, while clever, runs the risk of reducing Catholicism to social service work. Jenny Smith could well have claimed to be Catholic and worked in a soup kitchen and still not have been Catholic. It would have been nice to have seen the defense attorney ask her if she believed abortion to be evil (with her being pro-choice) or if she could explain transubstantiation (with her holding the Eucharist to be just a symbol) or have her recite the new translation of the Nicene Creed (which of course she wouldn’t be able to do from heart) or even ask her when the last time she went to confession was (years, no doubt).
  4. Interesting. The Gospel of Matthew is clear about the corporal works of mercy. But, the movie would be good for discussion with youth if there were clear Catholic teachings that were in question.

Well OK, you get the point. The comments above all think the focus was either wrong or incomplete. Though, as I point out, the movie does reference things other than the corporal works of mercy.

To be sure, there is a special priority to be had on the life issues especially today. As some have rightly observed, it is necessary to be alive in order to enjoy other things such as decent housing, healthcare, just immigration laws etc.

That said, I think the sorts of comments highlighted above do call for some concern, and show forth the need for some distinctions.  I would like to highlight some of the following concerns distinctions:

I.  The comment expressed concern about balance. But the comments themselves show some lack of balance. For, critical and foundational as they are, focusing in the life/sex/marriage  issues cannot eclipse the fact that there are a wide range of other moral issues as well.

Both Scripture and tradition set forth a wide range of issues, certain issues ranking higher importance  than others. But that some issues are more foundational and critical than others  should not artificially truncate the wholistic presentation of Biblical and Catholic moral teaching tradition.

For example, the necessary discussion and emphasis on mortal sin, should not preclude any discussion of venial sin. Indeed, venial sins often contribute to mortal sin and lay the foundation for it.

So the discussion on being an authentic Catholic is not a zero-sum game, as if discussing and focusing on certain critical issues, means we cannot thereby engage other issues as well. Certain areas may need special attention, but it is not healthy to completely forsake one thing for another. The priority the urgent should not wholly eclipse the priority of the important,  and the whole is often in service of the particular and the urgent.

Thus, the Catholic teachings on the sacredness of life are part of a wider teaching that respects the dignity of the human person at many levels. Demonstrating the Catholic concern for the individual involves wide and diverse issues, fosters credibility in terms of our concerns for issues of life and family.

II. The comments seem to presume an animus against certain issues or intentionally omission of them where it may not be. While it is true, but the video does not mention abortion, the marriage issue or euthanasia,  it is also true it does not mention divorce, or theft. This does not thereby mean video either supports divorce or theft, or is indifferent to these issues. It may simply mean that not everything could be covered in the span of a short video.

Jesus does not cover every moral topic in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5-7) either. In fact, some very critical issues are left out from that sermon. Many gay activists love to emphasize that Jesus never explicitly mentioned homosexuality. (Never mind that the Apostles He commissioned to speak in his name did speak to the issue very clearly and excluded it entirely). Never mind all that,  they say Jesus never mentioned it!

But an argument from silence, is one of the weakest inductive arguments. To argue a position from someone based on something they did not say is at best chancy, and at worst unjust. The video’s silence on abortion and other important moral issues does not constitute an argument or just accusation that the video makers intend thereby a selective reading of Catholic teaching, or a setting aside of pro-life priorities.

III. Many things help make the whole. The Church today faces a world and a culture that is in increasing and widespread disrepair. There are many things that need attention and it is good that we have some in the Church who specialize in many different ways.

I am mindful of a recent experience when, after I tripped over a loose pavement stone and had a bad fall, I was knocked unconscious. The rescue squad was summoned and I was taken to a nearby shock-trauma unit.  As I was wheeled in, now conscious, no less than six people went immediately to work, and each had a very specific job. One took my blood pressure, another got other vitals such as EKG. Yet another had a job to remove my outside clothing, and another interviewed me in order to test my mental state. Still another collected information on my medical history from a brother priest who accompanied me to the hospital. Someone else drew true blood, and so forth. Eventually I was handed to others and got a brain scan and an x-ray of my sprained ankle. Each one had an important job to do, some things were more critical than others, but all were necessary and important.

As a pastor, and priest who walks in the wide Church, I am grateful that there is not only a diversity of gifts, but also the diversity of specialties and interests. I have parishioners who are  passionate pro-life activists, and others who are wonderfully dedicated to the cause of affordable housing and youth programs in the community. I am glad that I have people passionate and concerned and committed in all these areas and more besides.  Some issues are more critical than others, but all are important, all affect human beings, their dignity, and how we best and justly treat one another.

I live for the day when we will all appreciate and respect that there is some need for a division of labor, and come to appreciate that it is good thing that some work for affordable housing, so that others are free to work for pro-life, that’s some volunteer in crisis pregnancy centers run by the Church, so that others can reach out to immigrants, or provide clothing for the poor.

IV. I am aware, and share the concern that, in recent decades to some extent, the Church drifted too strongly in the direction of social action, and away from the sacramental life, prayer, and the study of the faith.

But that said, it does not follow that we should over-correct and or be suspicious of every reference to the social Gospel. The fact is, there are corporal works of mercy, as well as spiritual works of mercy.

And, the fact is, God is passionately concerned about how we treat the poor. A significant amount of Scripture is devoted to matters of justice for the poor, the widow, the resident alien, and other socially vulnerable individuals. Some of God’s greatest anger is directed toward those who would neglect obligations to the poor and needy.

Nowhere does scripture require or even envision that this should be a large role for big government. But God does speak to Israel both individually and collectively. That is to say, we all have individual obligations, and also communal obligations.

The Church cannot be the Church, and cannot credibly claim lay hold of faith without consistently and strongly advocating for the poor. And thus, whatever correction we need to do to add back the spiritual and personal moral conversion we have sometimes neglected, neither can we neglect to mention the very things which this video well articulates, namely the corporal works of mercy.

We ought to avoid either-or scenarios. It is not the spiritual works of mercy or the corporal works of mercy, it is not the moral issues or the social issues, it is all of these things in proper balance. This is necessary both for catholicity and credibility.

Let me again be clear that I am not hereby advocating large government programs, or expansive federal management of problems related to the poor.

And to be fair, neither is the video. The video speaks directly to the young lady named Jenny and to what she has or has not done. Reasonable Catholics will disagree on how best to help the poor, but we cannot disagree that we must help the poor, and that God expects, even demands it of us.  Poverty is complicated, many social ills are very complicated, but this does not exempt us from entering into vigorous discussion and action regarding solutions.

I have written more on my concerns in this matter on the Blog of the US Bishops (to read CLICK HERE). In the article there I argue that the Church needs two wings and one heart to fly. Thank God for the diverse passions and actions of many in the Church on many and different fronts. In the end it is one battle to usher in the full kingdom of God and insist on the whole counsel of God. The “justice wing” is not in competition with the “life wing”. Both wings are needed and necessary. And both wings are and must be united in one Heart, the heart of the Church, the heart of Christ.

I’ll tell you what, perhaps the most discouraging thing about being a blogger and being out there is not the scorn of the secular. It is the death by a thousand cuts executed by some (thank God not most) fellow believers who nit-pick, and object that something I say is not said just they way they want it said. This is very painful and part of the cost of being out there. But think about it now, how many give way under such scorn, and fear to be “out there.”

It is very unfortunate by my estimation that some have seen fit to criticize this video for what it does not (even) say. To my mind it is an excellent video, well produced and thought-provoking. Brevity cannot permit every issue to be addressed.

If you think you can do better or add to it, raise your own money and do your own project. More is better. But the kind of particularism and the narrow-casting attitudes that set up in the blogosphere can be very discouraging and even harmful. It is a big Church and a lot issues need addressing in this dysfunctional culture of the West. Lets thank God for each other and learn to appreciate the diverse efforts that are needed today.

In case you missed it, here is the video in question.

Posted on

What is Does Scripture Mean by”The Flesh?”

011313I was recently talking with someone and I recalled that there is  a common misunderstanding of the meaning of the Biblical phrase “the flesh.”  There are many references to “the flesh” in New Testament Scripture, especially in the letters of St. Paul. The phrase confuses some who think it synonymous with the physical body.

It is true that there are many times when Scripture uses the word “flesh” to refer to the physical body. However when the definite article “the” is placed before the word “flesh” we are dealing with something else. Only very rarely does the Biblical phrase “the flesh” (ἡ σὰρξ (he sarx), in Greek) refer only to the physical body (eg. John 6:53; Phil 3:2; 1 John 4:2) , but almost always the phrase refers to something quite distinct from merely the physical body.

What then is meant by the term “the flesh” (ἡ σὰρξ)? Perhaps most plainly it refers to that part of us that is alienated from God. It is the rebellious, unruly and obstinate part of our inner self that is operative all the time. It is that part of us that does not want to be told what to do. It is stubborn, refuses correction, and does not want to have a thing to do with God. It bristles at limits and rules. It recoils at anything that might cause me to be diminished or something less than the center of the universe. The flesh hates to be under authority or to have to yield to anything other than its own wishes and desires. The flesh often desires something simply because it is forbidden.

The recent Protestant translations of the Bible such as the NIV often call the flesh our “sin nature” which is not a bad term in summarizing what the flesh is. In Catholic tradition the flesh is where concupiscence sets up shop. Concupiscence refers to the strong inclination to sin that is in us as a result of the wound of Original Sin. If you do not think that your flesh is strong, just try to pray for five minutes and watch how quickly your mind wants to think of anything but God. Just try to fast, or be less selfish, and watch how quickly your flesh goes to war.

The flesh is in direct conflict with the spirit. “The spirit” here refers not to the Holy Spirit but to the human spirit. The (human) spirit is that part of us which is open to God, which desires him and is drawn to him. It is that part of us which is attracted by goodness, beauty and truth, which yearns for completion in God and to see His face. Without the spirit we would be totally turned in on ourselves and consumed by the flesh. Thankfully our spirit, assisted by the Holy Spirit draws us to desire what is best, what is upright, good and helpful.

Perhaps it is good that we look at just a few texts which reference “the flesh” and thus here in Lent learn more of the flesh and its ways. This will help us to be on our guard and to rebuke it by God’s grace and learn not to feed it. I make some comments in red with each quote.

  1. The Flesh does not grasp spiritual teachings – [Jesus said] The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life. (John 6:63) Having taught on the Eucharist, most of his listeners ridicule his teaching and will no longer take Jesus seriously. So Jesus indicates that their hostility to the teaching on the Eucharist is of the flesh. The flesh demands that everything be obvious to it on its own terms. The flesh demands to see physical proof for everything; demands that it be able to “see” using its own unregenerate power. And if it cannot see based on its own limited view, it simply rejects spiritual truth out of hand. In effect the flesh refuses to believe at all since what it really demands is something that will “force” it to accept something. Inexorable proof which faith demands takes things out of the realm of faith and trust. Faith is no longer necessary when something is absolutely proven and plainly visible to the eyes of flesh. The flesh simply refuses to believe and demands proof.
  2. The flesh is not willing to depend on anyone or anything outside its own power or control – For it is we who are the circumcision, we who worship by the Spirit of God, who glory in Christ Jesus, and who put no confidence in the flesh— though I myself have reasons for such confidence. If anyone else thinks he has reasons to put confidence in the flesh, I have more: circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; in regard to the law, a Pharisee; as for zeal, persecuting the church; as for legalistic righteousness, faultless….I [now] consider this rubbish, that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ (Phil 3:3-9 selected) The flesh wants to be in control rather than to have to trust in God. Hence it sets up its own observance, under its own control. And when it has met its own demands it declares itself to be righteous. Since the flesh hates being told what to do it takes God’s law and makes it “manageable” based on the flesh’s own terms. So, for example, if I am supposed to love, let me limit it to my family and countrymen but I am “allowed” to hate my enemy. But Jesus says, no, love your enemy. The flesh recoils at this for unless the law is manageable and within the power of the flesh to accomplish it, the Law cannot be controlled. The flesh trusts only in its own power. The Pharisees were “self-righteous” That is to say, they believed in a righteousness that they themselves brought about through their flesh power. But the Law and flesh cannot save. Only Jesus Christ can save. The flesh refuses this and wants to control the outcome based on its own power and terms.
  3. The Flesh hates to be told what to do – For when we were controlled by the flesh, the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in our bodies, so that we bore fruit for death. (Rom 7:5) The disobedience and rebelliousness of the flesh roots us in sinful behavior and prideful attitudes. The prideful attitude of the flesh is even more dangerous than the sins that flow from the flesh since pride precludes instruction in holiness and possible repentance that lead to life. But the flesh does not like to be told what to do. Hence it rejects the testimony of the the Church, the scriptures and the conscience. Notice, according to the text, the very existence of God’s Law arouses the passions of the flesh. The fact that something is forbidden makes the flesh want it all the more! This strong inclination to sin is in the flesh and comes from pride and indignation at “being told what to do.” The flesh is refuses God’s Law and sets up its own rules. The flesh will not be told what to do.
  4. Flesh is as flesh does – Those who live according to the flesh have their minds set on what the flesh desires; but those who live in accordance with the spirit have their minds set on what the spirit desires. The concern of the flesh is death, but the concern of the spirit is life and peace (Rom 8:5-6) The flesh is intent on things of this world, upon gratifying its own passions and desires. On account of the flesh we are concerned primarily with ourselves and seek to be at the center. The flesh is turned primarily inward. St Augustine describes the human person in the flesh as “curvatus in se” (turned in upon himself). But the spirit is that part of us that looks outward toward God and opens us the truth and holiness that God offers. Ultimately the flesh is focused on death for it is concerned with what is passing away: the body and the world. The human spirit is focused on life for it focuses on God who is life and light.
  5. The Flesh is intrinsically hostile to God – The mind of the flesh is hostile to God. It does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so. Those controlled by the flesh cannot please God. (Rom 8:7-8) The flesh is hostile to God because it is pridefully hostile to any one more important than itself. Further the flesh does not like being told what to do. Hence it despises authority or anyone who tries to tell it what to do. It cannot please God because it does not want to.
  6. The Flesh abuses freedom – You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh; rather, serve one another in love. (Gal 5:13) The flesh turns God given freedom into licentiousness. Licentiousness is to demand freedom without limit. Since the flesh does not want to be told what to do it demands to be able to do what ever it wants. In effect the flesh says, “I will do what I want to do and I will decide if it is right or wrong.” This is licentiousness and it is an abuse of freedom. It results in indulgence and paradoxically leads to a slavery to the senses and the passions.
  7. The Flesh Demands to be fed – So I say, live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. For the flesh desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want. (Gal 5:16-17) Within the human person is this deep conflict between the flesh and spirit. We must not be mistaken, the flesh is in us and it is strong. It has declared war on our spirit and on the Holy Spirit of God. When the spirit tries to obey the flesh resists and tries to sabotage the best aspirations of the spirit. We must be sober about this conflict and understand that this is why we do not do what we most know is right. The flesh has to die and the spirit come more alive. What you feed grows. If we feed the flesh it will grow. If we feed the spirit it will grow. What are you feeding? Are you sober about the power of the flesh and do you and I therefore feed our spirit well through God’s word and holy communion, through prayer and the healing power of confession. What are you feeding?
  8. The Flesh fuels sin – The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God (Gal 5:19-210) This catalogue of sins that flow from the flesh is not exhaustive but is representative of the offensive and obnoxious behavior that flows from the flesh. Be sober about the flesh, it produces ugly children.
  9. This [condemnation by God] is especially true of those who follow the corrupt desire of the flesh and despise authority. (2 Peter 2:10) Clear enough, the flesh hates authority and, did I mention (?) The flesh does not want to be told what to do.

So here is a portrait of “the flesh.” It is ugly. You may say I have exaggerated, that the flesh is not really this bad. Well I am not, just buy a newspaper and see what the flesh is up to. You may, by God’s grace, have seen a diminishment in the power of the flesh in your life. That is ultimately what God can and will do for us. He will put the flesh to death in us and bring alive our spirit by the power of his Holy Spirit. But step one is to appreciate what the flesh is and understand its moves. Step two is to bring this understanding to God through repentance. Step three is, by God’s grace, to stop feeding the flesh and start feeding the spirit on prayer, scripture, Church teaching and Holy Communion. Step four is to repeat steps 1-3 for the rest of our lives. God by his grace will cause the flesh to die and the spirit to live by his grace at work in us through Jesus Christ.

There is no musical better at (humorously) depicting the flesh as Camelot. Here are a few video clips that depict well the flesh

In this first video Sir Lancelot ponders what a great and perfect guy he is. He goes so far as to say that “Had I been made the partner of Eve we’d be Eden still!”

In this clip, the Knights (in the flesh) ridicule goodness and sing “Fie On Goodness!” It well illustrates the tendency of the flesh not only to indulge sin, but also to resist and ridicule what is good.