I am taking a few days of solitude at the Delaware Shore and I want to ponder with you one of our American spending priorities that irks me just a bit, especially on account of it’s direct violation of a Biblical axiom.
The practice is building on sand which Jesus uses as an image for foolishness:
But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash.” (Mat 7:26-27)
Now here I am, mind you, sitting in a dwelling built on a sandbar as I write this! Hence, I am somehow partaking, albeit in a temporary, rent paying manner, in the very foolishness imaged by Jesus’ parable.
Consider too, as most of you know, the “beach” is not often where the mainland reaches the ocean. The beach, if it is of sand, is often a barrier island, a sand bar really, with a back bay, and its front toward the ocean. These barrier islands can be as wide as a mile or two, and as narrow as a few hundred feet in places. (See photo upper right).
Always Changing – It is also the nature of these barrier islands, and even of mainland beaches, to shift and shape differently over the decades and centuries. They are dynamic systems, if you will, interacting with the sea currents and wave actions which form, deform and reform them. They are powerfully affected by hurricanes and “Noreasters” here on the east coast. Even beaches directly connected to a mainland shift and shape differently over the years.
So in the end it seems pretty clear why building on sand and especially on sand close to the ocean is a euphemism for foolishness.
And yet we do it in abundance. Here on the Delaware and Maryland shores, just about all barrier islands, whole cities and resorts have sprung up in recent decades. Ocean City Maryland really is a city, with condo buildings as high as 25 stories right along the edge of the water.
So here comes the spending question. I was out on the boardwalk and saw that the beach is much wider than last summer. In fact it now extends almost 300 feet out from the boardwalk. Lots of expensive equipment is still up at the north end of the beach continuing a “beach replenishment project.” They pump sand from way out in the sea (about a mile away) up on to the beach. The cost for the Bethany Beach area alone (about 5 miles in length) is over 5 million dollars, spent over 3 three years. And most of the money comes from the Federal Government. I have no idea what the whole Delaware coast project costs but am sure it must be in the hundreds of millions.
Is this an appropriate use of Federal money? Is it even an appropriate use of State money? Frankly it is none of my business if someone wants to build a home or business out on a sandbar. But should I be asked to pay for this “foolishness?”
Now I realize the rhetorical tone of my question may disclose what is ultimately a more complicated question. For indeed, these beech front towns and cities are little economic engines, and sometimes not so little. And where there is an economic engine there is also a tax base.
So I can hear the local mayors, and state governors and federal senators and congressmen saying, “You gotta spend money to get money.” Hence to their mind, these beach front properties are worth protecting and restoring to the tune of many millions (and billions Federally) each decade. Indeed, this is about the third major project I have seen out at Bethany Delaware in the 25 years I have visited here.
This argument to spend works better for me at the State level.
But why is most of the money in these mega-projects federal?
And so I still must say we spend Federal money on the craziest things. Any owner of beach proximate property is by definition, a wealthy person. It’s just not possible to buy near the shore and not be prepare and able to lay out lots of bucks. Now it just seems to me that if someone (almost always wealthy) wants to build their house on a sand bar, I shouldn’t be asked to help foot the expenses.
If they want to replenish the beach as the ocean erodes their property (as oceans have always done in the waxing and waning of the beach front), then let them pay for it. Perhaps beach front owners, and all whole build homes and businesses out on barrier islands could contribute to a common fund (let’s call it the “fools fund” in honor of the Biblical text). Beach goers like me might also be expected to contribute to a local tax during our stay.
But in the end, the Federal Government should not be asked to pay lots of money to protect the property of people who are already quite well healed.
And as we consider this question consider the horrible condition of the federal debt. And before we too quickly ask the poor and the more urgently needy to take a hit, as we balance the federal budget, maybe its time to look at what and why we are spending huge amounts to protect the properties where we really shouldn’t be building any way.
Sand bars and barrier islands naturally shift about, eroding here, growing there. The way I figure is that the Federal Government ought just as well post a sign: Build at your own risk.
Disclaimer: I like the beach. I especially like Bethany Beech, and there are a lot of great people who live out here. But if you live in Nebraska, I’m not sure your federal tax dollars should have to go to build up my little corner of paradise. I, and those who come here, should enjoy the beach at our own cost. And if the beach and island shift about (as beeches do) we have to adjust without asking you, (or the poor), to pay for what is a biblical euphemism for foolishness, building on sand.
Somehow, in the last hundred years in America we’ve gotten into a bad and expensive habit of building cities and communities (too big to fail?) on sandbars and on land far too close to the ocean (littoral).
Cremation, though permitted by the Church, often presents pastoral problems for the Church. For, as experience shows, many people treat cremated remains (aka, cremains) in ways that would be unthinkable in terms of the more complete body. Some of the most common practices involve scattering the ashes on the ground, pouring them in rivers or seas, or scattering them from planes. All of these sorts of practices are forbidden by the Church to Catholics. There are other problems we will talk about below.
But recently, one of the most absurd things I have ever heard in terms of cremated remains appeared in USA Today. Here are some excerpts of the article:
By Mari Darr Welch, for USA TODAY
Officers Thad Holmes and Clem Parnell have launched Holy Smoke LLC, a company that will, for a price, load cremated human ash into shotgun shells, and rifle and pistol cartridges.
It’s the perfect life celebration for someone who loves the outdoors or shooting sports, Parnell says….
“This isn’t a joke. It’s a job that we take very seriously,” he said. “This is a reverent business. We take the utmost care in what we do and show the greatest respect for the remains.” It has established myholysmoke.com to promote the service and traffic on it has been growing, Holmes says.
For $850, one pound of ash will be loaded into 250 shotgun shells. The ash is mixed in the cups that hold the shot, not the powder.The same amount of ash will fill the bullets of 100 standard caliber center-fire rifle rounds or 250 pistol rounds…
“Some people have been concerned that a small amount of ash will remain in the animal that is shot with the ammunition, Holmes said. “But it’s just carbon, and a small amount at that. You don’t have anything to worry about.” The animal should be killed quickly by the shot, to prevent any possibility of spreading the ashes in the animal’s blood, he says. The area around where the animal was struck should not be consumed…. The full article is here:
Sigh…Where to begin. It is interesting that the proprietors have to assure us this isn’t a joke. For indeed, it seems just that, a sick joke. And then things descend to the absurd when we are also instructed to thoroughly clean the meat of the animal killed by cremains laden bullet.
Some bad jokes come to mind, to wit: Joe really lived to hunt, now he’s dying to hunt. Joe would really be blown away by this…etc., add your own. But remember, as the proprietors assure us, “this is a reverent business” and thus all joking is inappropriate.
And so it is, but so is loading human ashes into shotgun shells and bullets and shooting away. Simply calling something a reverent business does not make it so.
Again the Church allows cremation so long as the reason for doing so is not contrary to the faith (e.g. denying the resurrection of the Body). But pastorally there are challenges presented to the Church in the way people routinely treat ashes.
Granted, most of the “scattering” practices are not as absurd and irreverent as shooting animals with them. Many in fact consider various scatterings as reverent. But the bottom line for the Church is that cremains, though in ash form, are still what remains of the body. And we should no more scatter them than we would scatter body parts about.
Reverent burial or placement in a mausoleum are the only proper destination for cremated remains. Thus, not only is scattering not considered appropriate, but so is the practice of some of retaining the ashes in their home.
Yet another problem encountered by cremation is the practice of delaying the burial indefinitely. I often find that the burial of cremated individuals is not scheduled the day of the the funeral. When I ask as to the specific date I often get a lot of vague answers. I am beginning to conclude that I will not schedule the funeral until the burial is also scheduled. For too often Uncle Joe is waiting in the closet to be buried.
To conclude, a new cremation regulation, dated March 21, 1997, was granted by the Holy See as an addition, or indult, to the Order of Christian Funerals.
The instructions indicate the cremated remains should be treated with the same respect we give to the body of deceased person. The remains are to be placed in a worthy vessel which then is carried and transported with the same respect and attention given to a casket carrying a body.
Their final disposition is equally important, say the instructions: “The cremated remains should be buried in a grave or entombed in a mausoleum or columbarium [a cemetery vault designed for urns containing ashes of the dead]. The practice of scattering cremated remains on the sea, from the air, or on the ground, or keeping cremated remains in the home of a relative or friend of the deceased are not the reverent disposition that the Church requires.” The instructions also state that, if at all possible, the place of entombment should be marked with a plaque or stone memorializing the deceased.
The video at the bottom of this post is a humorous commercial that depicts how things, when unaddressed, can pile up and get out of hand. The commercial depicts a man who becomes angry, and how this anger eventually leads him to wake up in a roadside ditch. The commercial of course presents an intentionally absurd, and therefore funny, chain of action.
But in a real and far less funny way, bad things unaddressed do tend to pile up in our life and lead to ever deeper “ditches” for both individuals, and our culture. St. Augustine famously wrote:
Because my will was perverse, lust came forth, and lust yielded to habit, and habit not resisted, became necessity.” (Confessions Book 8.5)
Biblically we are admonished: They sow in the wind, they shall reap the whirlwind! (Hosea 8:7)
Yes, terrible addictions, bad habits, and serious consequences can result from long chains of decisions, wherein one bad choice or premise, leads to others, and ultimately to a real mess. Things tend to pile up. The commercial below admonishes us: “Don’t wake up in a roadside ditch.” Of course their solution for us is to buy DIRECTV.
But Perhaps too there is a lesson for our culture here. For, to a large extent, we have woken up in a roadside ditch. We have sown in the wind, and now we reap the whirlwind. Many of us who are a bit older remember a world that was quite different, and wonder how we got into this roadside ditch.
To some extent, while admitting the danger of oversimplifying, we can see our current malaise has often resulted from certain basic premises that have now reached “full flower.”
Consider two “thought chains” similar to the commercial below, as our culture “thinks out-loud” It may help you to watch the video first so you can see what I’m trying to imitate and can hear the voice.
Scenario one: The roadside ditch of sexual confusion
When you’re lustful you say, Sex is just for fun. It really has no relationship to the procreation and rearing of children at all, unless the couple wants it to have that meaning. So sex is just for fun.
And when sex is just for fun you say, “So what’s wrong with contraception? Bring it on!”
And when you bring on contraception you think you can have free sex without consequences.
And when you think there are not consequences you start to discover sexually transmitted diseases, exploding promiscuity, teenage pregnancies, skyrocketing single motherhood rates, higher divorce rates, plummeting marriage rates, terrible abortion rates, broken and incomplete families.
And when you have these things, you don’t connect them to contraception because lust has darkened your intellect.
And when your intellect is darkened you loose your ability to see even the physically obvious facts about human sexuality and start to say that there is nothing wrong at all with homosexual acts.
And when your darkness is light, how deep will the darkness be!
Don’t wake up in a deep darkness. Buy a Catholic Catechism and the Holy Bible. Get them today.
Scenario two: The roadside ditch of Marital destruction
When you are a baby boomer you say, “The purpose of marriage is the happiness of the couple….Children are merely a way of accessorising the marriage and are not essential.
And when you think this way, you contracept and have few children.
And when you have few children, they are less of a priority in terms of money and decisions.
And when you run into difficulties, as most marriages do, you don’t say “Let’s work it out for the sake of the kids.” After all there’s only one or two of them, and the purpose of marriage is the happiness of adults. Kids are just an accessory and can be raised well in any circumstance.
And when you think this way you get lots of divorces.
And when you get lots of divorces, marriage starts to look like a flimsy social fiction that exists only for adults, rather than a sacred trust oriented toward the raising of children.
And when marriage looks like a flimsy social fiction, the homosexual community comes to you and says, “You mean that the purpose of marriage is just for two adults to be happy and is not linked to the procreation of children? Then Why can’t Gays be married?”
And when they ask this you have nothing to say.
Don’t wake up with nothing to say. Get a biblical and Catholic understanding of marriage that links it to the mutual support of the spouses AND the procreation of children. Do it today.
Just something to consider, based on a creative commerical. The critical among you, will cry “simplistic.” But I already admit that, so chill. These chains I have constructed are influenced by a lot of other things too. But it’s fun to follow some of our often unquestioned premises through to their end in a roadside ditch.
Don’t wake up in a roadside ditch. Examine your premises now.
Pardon another post from the Pet Peeve file, or is it the “Lost Opportunities File,” or is it simply the “FAIL!” File?
Avoid immorality? I must say that I had decided to preach out of the first reading on the Call of Samuel this past Sunday, so I had not carefully reviewed the Epistle (1 Corinthians 6). Thus when the lector spoke the words “Avoid immorality,” I must say, I winced, and reached for a misalette. It couldn’t be, could it? Yes it was: 1 Corinthians 6:18; but with all the meaning and oomph surgically removed by a translator who seemed to want to hide the true and very specific meaning of the text.
Vague! “Avoid immorality?” It may as well have said “Do good and avoid evil.” Nothing could be more vague.
For the record the Greek text is Φεύγετε τὴν πορνείαν (Pheugete ten porneian) which is accurately and easily translated: Flee fornication (sexual immorality). It is a powerful admonition in the Greek, and just about every other English version of the Bible, except the Revised New American Bible (RNAB). I checked twenty other translations, and they all say “Flee fornication” or “Flee sexual immorality.”
Why on earth do we continue to use in the Catholic Lectionary a translation of this passage that is so vague and inferior? Even if the RNAB continues to be the basis of the Catholic Lectionary, could not future additions correct a passage like this; a passage, with its clarion call to chastity that is so necessary to hear in this sex saturated culture?
There are two fundamental problems with this translation.
In the first place, πορνείᾳ (porneia) (which is a specific reference to sexual immorality) is translated vaguely as “immorality.” I have written more extensively on this problem throughout the Epistles of the RNAB here: RNAB gets Porneia Wrong. But let it suffice here to say that “immorality” is far too vague.
Immorality can mean practically any sin. If I were to say, “That group is immoral,” I could mean almost anything from it being greedy, or racist, or violent, or just promoting some sinful activity. Frankly sex is not the first thing that comes to mind when the word immorality is encountered.
But πορνείᾳ (porneia) is a specific word referring to sexual immorality. Usually it refers to pre-marital sex (fornication), but sometimes it may be used to refer to other sexual sins, depending on the context, like incest or adultery.
So problem one is that “immorality” is so vague as to be inaccurate.
In the second place “avoid” (as in “avoid immorality) is profoundly weak as a translation of Φεύγετε (pheugete) which means, quite simply, “Flee!” It is a present, active, imperative verb in the second person plural. As an imperative it is thus a command, and merits the exclamation point: You (all) flee!
Strong’s Greek dictionary of biblical terms defines the verb as “to flee, escape or shun.
One might argue that “avoid” captures the word “shun” which is the third meaning. No it does not. “Shun” is a strong word, “avoid” in English is exceedingly more vague. “Avoid” says, “other things being equal, you ought to steer clear of this, if it is not too much trouble.” “Avoid” is friendly advice. “Shun” indicates a strong detestation.
Flee, which is the first first meaning is an unambiguous command of warning, one which calls for immediate action due to something that is more than a small threat.
This Greek verb φεύγω (pheugó) is used 29 times in the new Testament (see here) and in no case is “avoid” the best or proper translation. In fact to use “avoid” would yield often times unintelligible, sometimes comical results. Consider some of the following verses and mentally try to substitute the word “avoid”
The angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream saying Arise and take the young child and his mother and flee into Egypt (Matt 2:13)
But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism he said unto them O generation of vipers who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come (Matt 3:7)
And they that kept [the pigs] and fled into the city and told every thing and what was befallen to the possessed of the devils (Matt 8:33)
When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet stand in the holy place whoever reads let him understand Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains (Matt 24:16)
the disciples left [Jesus] and fled. (Matt 26:56)
the woman fled into the wilderness (Rev 12:6)
In other words “fled” or “flee” is the first, and best translation of the Greek verb φεύγω (pheugó), followed by “escape.” “Avoid,” just doesn’t capture what is being said.
Pastorally, this is a lost moment for Catholics with the translation “Avoid immorality.” Not only is the meaning obscure, but the imperative voice of the Greek is almost wholly lost by the vague and suggestive “avoid.” Who will follow an uncertain trumpet? (cf 1 Cor 14:8). The clarion call of this text is to get way as far, and as fast as possible, from fornication. This trumpet-call is reduced to barely a kazoo by the translation, “avoid immorality.” And even if a listener does finally get that “immorality” here means “sexual immorality” he or she will hardly be moved by the word avoid.
The bottom line is that 1 Corinthians 6:18 (Φεύγετε τὴν πορνείαν. πᾶν ἁμάρτημα ὁ ἐὰν ποιήσῃ ἄνθρωπος ἐκτὸς τοῦ σώματος ἐστιν· ὁ δὲ πορνεύων εἰς τὸ ἴδιον σῶμα ἁμαρτάνει) is better and correctly translated as:
Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body. OR:
Flee fornication. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but the fornicator, sins against his own body.
In other words, Run! Flee! Head for the hills! Get as far and as fast away from fornication as you can.
Do you get it? Probably not if you heard the RNAB yesterday to wit: Avoid immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the immoral person sins against his own body. Not exactly a clarion call.
This is surely something to bring to the attention of the Bishops as a new Lectionary is prepared. Rest assured I will surely bring it to the attention of a few bishops I know. I pray you might do the same.
Painting at top: St. Paul Writing at his Desk by Rembrandt
While the official title of this reflection is “Principles for Prophets” the unofficial title is My Feet is Tired, but my Soul is at Rest. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., used these words, quoting an elderly Black woman who said this during the Montgomery Bus Boycott. She, though well into her 70s, had been walking to work for the better part of a year, to protest the law requiring Blacks to ride in the back of buses, and give up their seats to white passengers. It was a great sacrifice for an elderly woman, but she was willing to make the sacrifice to see justice done. And as Dr. King asked of her well being she said in her own way: My feets is tired, but my soul is at rest.
And herein lies a great principle of all God’s prophets, that they were willing to suffer for the sake of God’s Kingdom, and for the sake of his Truth and Justice.
This weekend in America we celebrate the Birthday of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and recall the astonishing legacy he left, of what it means to be committed to God’s justice and truth. And we cannot fail to note how different things are in this country because of the struggle that he, and so many others undertook, to end the horrifying, embarrassing, and painful legacy of racism, and Jim Crow segregation. Such dramatic change came at great cost, as Dr. King and others suffered arrest, death threats, hatred, disrespect and endless other hideous outrages.
I am only 50 years old, but do still remember, living in the deep south from 1969-1971, that some of the “Colored” and “Whites” signs were still hanging, rusting away at the back of buildings. I attended my 3rd grade year, (in 1969), in what had been the “Colored” school just a few years before. It was a poor excuse for a school building: run down, little plumbing, sulphur water, leaky roof, dim lights, and poorly maintained. It had been, up until a few years prior, a separate but “equal” school facility. I couldn’t wait to get out of that school and go to the 4th grade, and move over to the former “white” school. The outrageous difference between the facilities was obvious, even to my untrained, 9 year old eyes.
Thank God that some folks, like Dr. King, and that 70-some year old woman got angry enough and committed enough to end this hideous part of our history. And we ought not fail to honor the sacrifices they made to do it.
In what follows, I would like to articulate some principles for prophets, articulated by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail. For indeed, prophets are still needed today to speak out and work to end abortion, to address the lack of affordable housing, increasing threats to religious liberty, and to assist immigrants in the the legal morass that many of them face. Prophets too are needed to reach out to women in crisis pregnancy, to help secure the rights and dignity of the disabled, and to assist those returning from prison to reconnect with the community. Frankly there are endless opportunities where God needs to send his people to work for justice. In the principles that follow, lengthy though they are, Dr. King enunciates some basic understandings that all who would be prophets must grasp. Unless otherwise noted, all the quotes are from the Letter from a Birmingham Jail.
Principle 1: Non violence. One of the most fundamental principles for any prophet is that he loves God’s people; yes, even his enemies. A true prophet in this land, loves America, loves this land and what she stands for. A true prophet loves God and his kingdom and wants to effect a marriage between the God he loves and the people he loves.
Hence, no true prophet will advocate violence or destruction. He will advocate a non-violent resistance of what is evil and unjust. He does have an anger, but this anger is born in love and does not seek to do violence, even to the enemy.
This love of one’s enemy of course is difficult and irksome, but God can do this for us. Many in the Civil Rights movement often remarked that Dr. King taught, it was not enough simply not to retaliate, we were actually to love those who hated and feared us.
Dr. King writes:
So we decided to go through a process of self-purification. We started having workshops on nonviolence and repeatedly asked ourselves the questions, “Are you able to accept blows without retaliating?” and “Are you able to endure the ordeals of jail?”
And elsewhere he wrote:
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Hate multiplies hate, violence multiplies violence, and toughness multiplies toughness in a descending spiral of destruction….The chain reaction of evil –hate begetting hate, wars producing more wars –must be broken, or we shall be plunged into the dark abyss of annihilation. (Strength to Love, 1963)
Principle 2: No Tension No Change – Generally people like to avoid tension. But as the prophets well knew, sometimes the role of a prophet is to introduce tension, and to be willing to hold it. Prophets are often called to ask uncomfortable questions, to “call the question” and point to inconsistency and hypocrisy. This usually makes people uncomfortable. But prophets must learn that the role of a true evangelizer is to comfort the afflicted AND afflict the comfortable. There are just some things that need to be confronted in a loving but clear way. And tension is part of the picture.
Dr. King writes:
But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word “tension.” I have earnestly worked and preached against violent tension, but there is a type of constructive nonviolent tension that is necessary for growth….we must see the need of having nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men to rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. So, the purpose of direct action is to create a situation so crisis-packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation….My friends, I must say to you that we have not made a single gain in civil rights without determined legal and nonviolent pressure. History is the long and tragic story of the fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily. Individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give up their unjust posture; but, as Reinhold Niebuhr has reminded us, groups are more immoral than individuals. And thus We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.
Principle 3: Now is the Time – (Holy Impatience). There is the tendency for a human being, so easily overwhelmed, to postpone what they know must happen. Many of the Founding Fathers of this country knew Slavery was a terrible blight on the vision they had articulated, and yet, for many reasons, facing the slavery issue was postponed. Then too even after slavery, a mitigated form of the same institution (Jim Crow) descend on the South, especially. African Americans were often counseled to “wait” and that justice would “inevitably” come. But there comes a moment when a holy impatience wells up in a people and God delivers a grace to transform that impatience into action. For those who are hungry and thirsty for righteousness, “wait” is not a legitimate instruction and it serves only to deepen injustice.
To those who seek justice in the question of abortion, in the selective abortion of the disabled, in the lack of affordable housing, in increasing unemployment and so forth, the question goes up: “Are you impatient enough? Angry enough? Hungry and thirsty enough? Do you have a holy impatience, or are you just going to watch the news, shake your head, say “Ain’t it awful…Someone ought to do something about that” ??
Of Holy Impatience, Dr. King writes:
For years now I have heard the word “wait.” It rings in the ear of every Negro with a piercing familiarity. This “wait” has almost always meant “never.” ….I guess it is easy for those who have never felt the stinging darts of segregation to say “wait.” But when you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers and fathers at will and drown your sisters and brothers at whim; when you have seen hate-filled policemen curse, kick, brutalize, and even kill your black brothers and sisters with impunity; when you see the vast majority of your twenty million Negro brothers smothering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society;…. when you suddenly find your tongue twisted and your speech stammering as you seek to explain to your six-year-old daughter why she cannot go to the public amusement park that has just been advertised on television, and see tears welling up in her little eyes when she is told that Funtown is closed to colored children, and see the depressing clouds of inferiority begin to form in her little mental sky, and see her begin to distort her little personality by unconsciously developing a bitterness toward white people; when you take a cross-country drive and find it necessary to sleep night after night in the uncomfortable corners of your automobile because no motel will accept you; when you are humiliated day in and day out by nagging signs reading “white” and “colored”; when your first name becomes “nigger” and your middle name becomes “boy” (however old you are) and your last name becomes “John,” and when your wife and mother are never given the respected title “Mrs.”; — then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait. There comes a time when the cup of endurance runs over and men are no longer willing to be plunged into an abyss of injustice where they experience the bleakness of corroding despair. I hope, sirs, you can understand our legitimate and unavoidable impatience.
Principle 4: Persistence is the Key. It is not enough to get angry or be impatient for a moment. We have have to allow the Lord to put a deep hunger and thirst in us for what is right and be willing to stay committed to the course laid out for us in securing justice. Are you willing to go to bed tired? Are you will to say with the older woman quoted by Dr. King, “My feet is tired but my soul is at rest.” ?? It’s one thing to turn out to a pep rally and say “Yes!” But where will you be on Monday morning? Where will you be six months from now? An old spiritual laments: Some go to Church for to sing and shout, before six months they’s all turned out. Will you persist in the work that needs to be done or just dabble in it?
Of Persistence, Dr. King writes:
We must come to see that human progress never rolls in on wheels of inevitability. It comes through the tireless efforts and persistent work of men willing to be coworkers with God, and without this hard work time itself becomes an ally of the forces of social stagnation.
Principle 5: Silence is Unacceptable – Many years ago W.B. Yates wrote: The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity. Too many supposed Christians remain silent in the face of injustice. Is it fear? Yes. Is it individualism that says, “Not my problem?” Yes. But in the end silence about injustice can come to equate to affirmation of that injustice.
Of the silence of the “elect” Dr. King writes:
We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the vitriolic words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people.
He wrote elsewhere:
The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands in moments of challenge and controversy. (Atlanta recognition dinner -1965)
Principle 6: Creative Anger – Most of us are trained that anger is a sin. I can be. But not all anger is sinful. Jesus was often angry. There are some things worth being angry about. We have to recover a more distinguished notion anger that accepts that some anger is given by God as a creative energy, as passion to set things right. Most of the prophets exhibited anger, but it was an anger born in love for God and neighbor, for truth and justice. One of the most fundamental gifts of Dr. King was to able to tap into the legitimate anger of many who suffered and opposed segregation and racism, and to channel that energy to creative ends.
Of this creative anger, Dr. King writes:
The Negro has many pent-up resentments and latent frustrations. He has to get them out….If repressed emotions do not come out in nonviolent ways, they will come out in ominous expressions of violence. This is not a threat; it is a fact of history. So I have not said to my people, “Get rid of your discontent.” But I have tried to say that this normal and healthy discontent can be channeled through the creative outlet of nonviolent direct action.
Principle 7: The Church must be lighthouse not a clubhouse – Too many parishes and churches exist more for the social purposes of the members than as true outposts of the Kingdom, where the Word of God shines forth to transform the community. The Sodality debates with the Knights over who gets to use the hall for an occasion, meanwhile the poor go uncared for and un-evangelized. Parishes exist in neighborhoods where thousands have never been called to Christ, where the poor and the downcast are uncared for, where poor and single mothers hear the call of the abortionist, not the local pastor. Meanwhile back at the parish the main even is to argue about who left the kitchen a mess and worry about paying for the new roof since our numbers are diminishing. Why are the numbers diminishing? Many reasons, but among them is that, increasingly, the Church is seen as irrelevant building in the neighborhood rather than a refuge for sinners and and a place to find solidarity and real solutions. Is your parish a clubhouse or a lighthouse?
Of this sad fact of too many churches and parishes, Dr. King writes:
In deep disappointment I have wept over the laxity of the Church. But be assured, my tears have been tears of love. There can be no deep disappointment where there is not deep love. Yes, I love the Church, how could I do otherwise. I am the son, and grandson and great grandson of preachers. . Yes, I see the Church as the Body of Christ. But Oh!, how we have blemished and scarred that body through social neglect and fear of being non-conformists. There was a time when the church was very powerful. It was during that period that the early Christians rejoiced when they were deemed worthy to suffer for what they believed. In those days the church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was the thermostat that transformed the mores of society. Wherever the early Christians entered a town the power structure got disturbed and immediately sought to convict them for being “disturbers of the peace” and “outside agitators.” But they went on with the conviction that they were “a colony of heaven” and had to obey God rather than man. They were small in number but big in commitment. They were too God-intoxicated to be intimidated. They brought an end to such ancient evils as infanticide and gladiatorial contest. Things are different now. The contemporary church is so often a weak, ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound. It is so often the arch supporter of the status quo. Far from being disturbed by the presence of the church, the power structure of the average community is consoled by the church’s often vocal sanction of things as they are. But the judgment of God is upon the church as never before. If the church of today does not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early church, it will lose its authentic ring, forfeit the loyalty of millions, and be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning for the twentieth century. I meet young people every day whose disappointment with the church has risen to outright disgust.
Well, there you have it. I know it is a long article, but I pray, well worth reading. These are some important principles that Dr. King enunciated for those of us who are passionate for justice.
What about you? What are you passionate about? There are so many issues of justice that ought to concern us today: Unemployment, abortion, mothers in crisis pregnancy, affordable housing, dignity and help for immigrants, hunger, homelessness, the rights and dignity of the disabled and elderly, religious liberty and the list goes on.
But it’s not enough to say, ain’t it awful. The legacy of Dr. King and others like him is that on Monday morning, after the rousing Church service and call to Jesus, there must be a will to get out and do the work persistently and consistently. To say at the end of the day, “My feet is tired but my soul is at rest!”
Again, what of you? Next year in the diocese (I pray) and surely in my parish, the observance of the Birthday of Dr. King is going to have a practical aspect. Every one of our social ministries are going to be available to sign some new folks up for the Christian jubilee. And NO ONE ought to leave without committing to work in the area of justice that they are most passionate about and to which God summons them.
It is not enough to praise Dr. King. We have to imitate his example.
The First Reading today speaks to us of the Call of Samuel. In examining we can see what it is that makes a great prophet. Put more theologically we can see the ways in which God’s graces form a great prophet. Samuel was surely one of the most significant prophets of the Old Testament and lived at a critical time as Israel shifted from the time of the Judges to the time of the Monarchy. Ultimately it was he who would see Israel through he difficult time of Saul’s reign and prepare and anoint them for David’s Kingship to follow.
What then are some of the ways that God prepares Samuel and every prophet (this means you) for mission? Consider these five.
1. The CLOSENESS of a great Prophet – In the first reading we find the young Samuel sleeping in the temple of the Lord. In those days the temple was not yet in Jerusalem and was not yet a permanent building. It was a tent structure in Hebron and Samuel, as one in training for temple duties, is sleeping near the Ark of the Covenant which carried the presence of God. Thus we see that a great prophet begins and remains so by staying close to the Lord.
We who would also be prophets must do the same if we wish to be great prophets to our family members and friends. Who will a priest preach with authority and power if he does not stay close to the Lord. How will a parent give prophetic witness to their children if the Lord is a distant God to them?
How do we draw close to the Lord? Daily Prayer, daily and devout reading of scripture, frequent confession, weekly reception of Holy Communion, and a spirit of wonder of and awe. Ask for these virtues. Stay close to the Lord. Great prophets stay close to the Lord.
2. The CONSTERNATION of a great Prophet – The first reading depicts Samuel as struggling with some confusion as to what and who he is hearing. God is calling, but he doesn’t get it. He struggles to figure out what is happening to him. A look at the call of most of the great prophets reveals that most of them struggled with their call. Moses felt old, inarticulate and inadequate. Jeremiah felt too young, Isaiah too sinful. Amos would have been content to remain a dresser of sycamores. Most prophets feel overwhelmed and experience consternation.
Samuel as we see, eventually figures it out who is calling him and begins his journey. He had to listen for a awhile to to do however.
How about you? Many of us too would want to run if God made it clear he had something for us to do. In a way, it is a proper response, for pride is a bad trait for a prophet. To experience a bit of trouble, consternation and anxiety helps to keep us humble and leaning on the Lord.
What is the Lord asking of you? Perhaps like Samuel you struggle to understand at first. But stay close to God. Things will eventually become clear.
The great prophets struggled. But that is the point, they struggled with God for an answer and for a vision.
3. The CONNECTEDNESS of a great Prophet – Notice that Samuel does not discern alone. He seeks counsel from a wiser man to help him. Though Eli is not a perfect teacher, God does make use of him to help Samuel.
So too for us, who ought to seek good, strong spiritual friends and clergy to help us discern. Scripture says, Seek counsel from every wise man (Tobit 4:18). It is a bad idea to discern alone. Hence we should cultivate relationships with wise and spiritual men and women in our journey.
Great prophets are connected to spiritual leaders and teachers. Prophets read and consulted other prophets. God does not just call us to a vertical private relationship with him. He also connects us to a horizontal relationship with others. Seek wise counsel, great prophets do.
4. The CORE of a great Prophet – Samuel is advised by Eli to say to God: Speak Lord, for your servant is listening. A great prophet listens to God. And God does not always say easy things. He often challenges in what he says, and wants to send them. But great prophets listen, they listen very carefully to God. They do not try and bury his word or become forgetful of what he says. They take seriously what they hear and do not compromise God’s Word.
And what of us? It is too easy to avoid listening to God, or to compromise on what we have heard. But great prophets listen carefully to God by: reading and studying his word, looking at how he speaks in creation and in the events of their day, studying the teachings of the Church and carefully, prayerfully listening to the still small voice within.
To you want to be a great prophet? Listen.
5. The CONVERSION of a great Prophet. We see in Samuel’s life how be became gradually transformed into a great prophet of God who never compromised God’s word. The text says: Samuel grew up, and the LORD was with him,
not permitting any word of his to be without effect. Because Samuel was close to the Lord, faced his consternation, was connected to the wise, and had that core virtue of listening, he became a great prophet. The text says in Hebrew (more literally) that not a word of his fell to the ground.
Being a great prophet is a work of God. But we, who would and should be great prophets ourselves, ought to heed the way God works to make great prophets. Learn from Samuel, study all the prophets, and you will see what God can do.
And while most of us wish our words had greater effect, it is less clear we want to undertake the process to get there. Ask for the gift. Ask for the gift to stay close to God, to struggle and accept some of the consternation that comes with being a prophet. Seek to be connected to wise counsel, learn the core value of listening. And thus will God bring about in us a conversion such that none of your words will ever fall to the ground.
This song says, The Lord gave the Word, Great was the company of the preachers.
I read an article over a year ago in First Things by Sally Thomas entitled: The Killer Instinct. The article ponders the modern aversion to the male psyche. Young boys are full of zealous energy, full of spit and vinegar, and have a a proclivity to rough and even violent play. Many modern parents and educators seem troubled by this and often attempt to soften boys, make them behave more like girls. Sadly there is even an attempt by some to diagnosis typically rough-house and energetic boys as having ADHD and they are put on medicines to suppress what is in the end a normal male energy. I do not deny that there can be a true ADHD diagnosis in some cases, but it may also be a symptom of an increasingly feminized culture that finds normal male behavior to be violent and a diagnosable “disorder.” What I have said here may here may be “controversial” but in the finest male tradition, remember, we can always “spar” in the comments section!
I’d like to present excerpts of the article here and then add some of m own comments in red. You can read the whole article by clicking on the title above.
The default mode of many parents is to be as alarmed by [the] proclivity in their sons [to shoot and stab at things and be aggressive]…..An obvious fascination with shooting things might seem like one of those warning signals we all read about…It used to be that parents waited for Johnny to start torturing the cat before they worried. My generation of parents seems to worry that owning a rubber-band shooter will make Johnny want to torture the cat.A friend of mine told me that he and his wife had decided not to give their boys guns for toys. What they discovered was that without the toy everything became a gun: sticks, brooms, scissors, their fingers. In the end, they “made peace” with the fact that boys love guns and swords and stopped worrying about latent tendencies to violence. Somehow it was in a boy’s nature and they couldn’t “nurture” it away.
As a toddler, one of my sons liked to stand behind his baby sister’s chair and pull her head back as far as it would go, to watch it spring up again like a punching bag on its stem….and then she screamed….From my son’s point of view, it was altogether a gratifying exercise. My intervention was always swift and decisive…I implored my son, “Don’t be rough. Be gentle.” …I am struck, now, by the strangeness of what I said to him. We don’t tell someone struggling with lust simply not to want sex; we don’t tell a glutton that his problem will be solved if he stops being hungry. Yet, I might as well have said, “Stop being a boy.”…. What I think I have come to understand about boys is that a desire to commit violence is not the same thing as a desire to commit evil. It’s a mistake for parents to presume that a fascination with the idea of blowing something away is, in itself, a disgusting habit, like nose-picking, that can and should be eradicated. The problem is not that the boy’s hand itches for a sword. The problem lies in not telling him what [the sword and itch] are for, that they are for something. If I had told my aggressive little son not, “Be gentle,” but, rather, “Protect your sister,” I might, I think, have had the right end of the stick.(This is a very brilliant insight. It is essential that we not try to destroy the innate gifts that God gives us in order to “control” them. We must learn to harness them and sublimate them so that they achieve the end to which they are intended).
Anne Roche Muggeridge, who reared four boys in the 1970s and 1980s, observes that
prevailing society now thoroughly regards young men as social invalids. . . . The fashion in education for the past three decades has been to try to make boys more like girls: to forbid them their toy guns and rough play, to engage them in exercises of “cooperation and sharing,” …to denounce any boyish roughness as “aggressive” and “sexist.”
Muggeridge writes of a visit to a doctor who urged on her a prescription for Ritalin, saying that a child as constantly active as her two-year-old son must be disturbed. “He’s not disturbed,” she responded. “He’s disturbing.” It is to realize, as Anne Roche Muggeridge did while watching her sons take turns throwing each other into a brick wall, that what you have in your house is not a human like you but a human unlike you. In short, as Muggeridge puts it, you are bringing up an “alien.” Yes, it has been very frustrating to be a man in the modern age let alone have to grow up under the tutelage of social scientists and education bureaucrats who scorn and suspect your very nature. Boys are aggressive. That is natural and good. They must be taught to master it and focus the energy of their aggression on the right object, but they should not be scorned for who and what they are. Such scorning has become for too many a sense that they are socially “enlightened.” It is time to see this attitude as a the type of bigotry and sexism that it too often is. To many women (and some feminized men) a boy in his raw state may in fact seem like an alien, but even aliens deserve respect 🙂
[There is an] initiation rite, devised and performed by our parish’s young priest twice a year in the church. This rite involves a series of solemn vows to be “a man of the Church,” “a man of prayer,” and so forth. It includes induction into the Order of the Brown Scapular, the bestowing of a decidedly manly red-and-black knot rosary, and the awarding of a red sash. What the boys look forward to, though, with much teasing of soon-to-be inductees about sharpened blades and close shaves…is the moment when a new boy kneels before Father and is whacked smartly on each shoulder with a large, impressive, and thoroughly real sword.Great idea. I’m going to work in my parish about initiating something like this.
These Holy Crusaders are, after all, ordinary boys—sweaty and goofy and physical. For them to take the Cross seriously requires something like a sword. For them to take the sword, knowing what it’s for, requires the Cross. …A boy’s natural drive to stab and shoot and smash can be shaped, in his imagination, to the image of sacrifice, of laying down his life for his friends. In the meantime, this is the key to what brings these boys to church. It’s not their mothers’ church or their sisters’ church; it is theirs, to serve and defend.Yes, yes! Amen. Greater love hath no man that to lay down his life for his friends. Christian manhood needs to be rediscovered in some segments of the Church. Too many men stay away from Church because it seems feminine to them. Sermons about duty, courage and fighting the good fight have given way to a steady diet of compassion, kindness, being nice, getting along, self actualizing and, did I mention being nice? These are not wrong virtues but they must be balanced by virtues that call us to stand up and speak out with courage, accepting our duties and fighting the good fight of faith, if necessary unto death. Men respond to the call when it is given in a way that respects their manhood. Balance is needed in the preaching and teaching of the Church and it seems that in recent decades we may have lost this in many settings, IMHO. If you think I’m crazy, remember this is a conversation. Hit the comment button and have it.
Sally Thomas, a contributing writer for FIRST THINGS, is a poet and homeschooling mother in North Carolina.
When I was in seminary back in the mid 1980s I was informed by some, (not all) of my Seminary teachers, that the old funeral masses were a very dark affair. Black vestments and somber prayers all focused on judgment were supposedly an extreme that had to give way. Never mind that the new Mass permitted black or purple vestments, the point was that we were not to use black vestments and were to wholly avoid any “negative” themes like judgment, purgatory or (the absolutely forbidden) hell.
Discussions about funeral masses were common in my seminary years since the revised rite of funerals was coming out at that time and, just like the new translation we have just inaugurated, there were many vigorous discussion about the funeral rite of 1970 and how the one coming out in 1987 (in think) was either an improvement or a step backward.
By the time I was ordained in the late 1980s it was once again permitted to offer the traditional Latin Mass, and though some argued that this didn’t include funerals, we routinely celebrated them here in DC as early as 1987. I have been privileged to celebrate at couple of these traditional Latin funeral masses per year, by request all 24 years of my priestly life. (The photo at upper right is me celebrating one last November in one of our Maryland Parishes). I celebrated a Requiem today, in fact: James Glenn, rest in peace.
And I find these funerals (called Requiem Masses) anything but dark. Let me explain.
To begin, though, early in my priesthood I had little of no memory of the older funeral rites. I was, in those days before the current motu proprio, one of the few priests permitted by the diocese to celebrate the TLM. Thus, as I began my study of the old Requiem Mass I fully expected, based on my training to wince, and to have to try and reassure the faithful who requested this form of the Mass, that things weren’t so bad after all. So, upon receiving my first request for a Requiem, I studied the Requiem Mass carefully.
I noted first that the dreaded and dark affair, described so by some of my seminary faculty, was called a “Requiem Mass.” Hmm…. in other words, a “Mass of Rest.” That doesn’t shout of foreboding things, seems rather peaceful actually, and far more hopeful that the more usual modern word, “funeral.”Indeed the opening words of the dreaded Requiem Mass read (translated) Rest Eternal grant unto them O Lord and may perpetual light shine on them. Hmm… I thought, we’re not off to such a terrible start.
Greeting the Body at the door of the Church, though less baptismal in focus contains the beautiful wishes:
Come to his assistance, ye Saints of God, come forth to meet him, ye Angels of the Lord….receiving his soul, offer it in the sight of the Most High…..May Christ receive thee who has called thee….and may the Angels lead thee into Abraham’s bosom.
The opening prayer too, appeals to God’s mercy, though (heaven forfend), it does mention Hell:
O God, whose property is ever to have mercy and to spare, we humbly entreat Thee on behalf of the soul of Thy servant whom Thou hast bidden to pass out of this world: that Thou wouldst not deliver him into the hands of the enemy nor forget him for ever, but command him to be taken up by the holy Angels, and to be borne to our home in paradise, that as he had put his faith and hope in Thee he may not undergo the pains of hell but may possess everlasting joys.
Perhaps to modern ears the very mention of Hell is “dark,” but the whole prayer is premised on God to whom it is proper to show mercy and to spare. Hence it is a prayer uttered in confident expectation that grace and mercy mean we stand a chance. And, as for that little mention of “Hell,”….isn’t that….like….in the Bible or something?
So, in my study I still had not found where we had gone to dark, negative places, as I had been taught to expect.
The readings too surprised me. The Epistle is from First Thessalonians 4: Brethren, we would not have you ignorant concerning those who sleep, lest you be like the others who have no hope. Then comes the great teaching on the day of resurrection and the conclusion: Therefore console One another with these words. The Gospel too is of Jesus dialogue with Martha in John 11: Your brother will rise…I AM the resurrection and the life, whoever believes in me, even if he dies, will live. Beautiful and consoling, really.
There is of course the Dies Irae in between these two readings. I recall an older priest many years ago when the subject came up proclaiming exultantly: “Thank God we got rid of that dreadful thing.” It does truly begin on an ominous note: Day of wrath and doom impending, heaven an earth in ashes ending….Oh what fear man’s bosom rendenth, when from heaven the judge decendeth, on whose sentence all dependeth. True, these are dark lines, but biblical lines. Yet the same Dies Irae contains some of the most hopeful and tender lines in all Christian writing:
Faint and weary thou hast sought me:
On the cross of suffering bought me:
Shall such grace be vainly bought me?
Through the sinful Mary shriven,
Through the dying thief forgiven,
Thou to me a hope has given.
Loving Jesus Lord most blest,
Grant to them eternal rest.
Amen.
The darker lines thus highlight the lightsome ones. Even the Dies Irae is not all that bad. I have written more on it here: Sing the Dies Irae at my Funeral
I obviously cannot reproduce the whole Requiem Mass here but consider just a few other highlights of the hopeful and gentle themes that are struck in the prayers
From the Preface: …through Christ our Lord, in whom the hope of blessed resurrection has shone on us, so that those who are saddened by the certainty of dying may be consoled by the promise of a future deathless life. For to thy faithful people, Oh Lord, life is changed, not taken away, and when the home of this earthly sojourn is dissoloved, an eternal dwelling place is being prepared in the heavens.
From the Communion verse: May light eternal shine on them O Lord, with your saints forever. For you are kind.
Finally, if there is any “darkness” at all in the old Requiem Mass, it is more likely due to the fact that we have departed a great degree in modern times from the notion that, after we die, we are certainly judged. And this judgement is a moment of honesty before God. Surely all of us will need much in the way of grace and mercy. The prayers of the older Requiem give honest acknowledgment of that, but draw heavily on Biblical themes. In the end, these prayerful reflections are always couched on the fact that God is rich in mercy. One of the final prayers, at the commendation of the soul shows this balance. Standing before the casket the priest says:
Enter not into judgment with Thy servant, O Lord; for, save Thou grant him forgiveness of all his sins, no man shall be justified in Thy sight. Wherefore suffer not, we beseech Thee, the sentence Thou pronounce in judgment upon one whom the faithful prayer of Christian people commends to Thee, to be a doom which shall crush him utterly. Rather sustain him by Thy gracious favor, that he may escape Thine avenging justice who, in his lifetime, was signed with the seal of the holy Trinity. Who livest and reignest world without end. Amen.
Disclaimers – Most of you know that I love the Traditional Latin Mass, especially in its sung forms. However, I also like the Ordinary Form of the Mass and it is the way I celebrate 99% of my masses.
The New Funeral Mass is not intrinsically flawed, such that it wholly fails to balance notions of judgement and mercy. It does tip the hat more to the baptismal and Easter themes, but there are enough options in the readings and prayers that allow for proper balance.
If there are imbalances in modern funerals it is not wholly the fault of the liturgy. Rather, the imbalance of our culture and the clergy’s emphases seem more at work.
For the record, black vestments can still be worn in the newer rites, as well as purple. There is nothing to prevent the clergy from preaching clearly on judgement and purgation, as well Heaven. I surely do, and also issue a pretty sober “come to Jesus” talk in the sermon, since so many who are at funerals are not practicing their faith.
Thus, balance can be had in the newer rites. This post is simply meant to express that a pronouncement of the Requiem Mass as dark and somber, which I was regularly subjected to in my training, is simplistic.
The reality I have come to experience in over 23 years of celebrating Requiem Masses is that they are both gentle and hopeful, sober about judgement but well steeped in mercy and confidence in God’s loving kindness.
Here is an example of my “Come to Jesus” talk at funerals. Please understand, this is only an excerpt from a longer sermon wherein other themes of mercy are well explored.
