Author: Msgr. Charles Pope

Posted on

Pat Robertson Gets it Wrong

Enough ink has already been spilled objecting to Pat Robertson’s comments describing Haiti’s disastrous earthquake as the result of a pact they made with the devil 300 years ago. If you’re unfamiliar with the comments you can view the video below. Not only are the remarks insensitive and ill-timed, but they bespeak an flawed mentality common in biblical times that Jesus himself moves away from. I’d like in this post to examine the passages where it seems clear that Jesus himself would have something of a rebuke for Mr. Robertson.

First, just a few facts. Whatever pact Mr. Robertson thinks Haitians made 300 years ago with the Devil, the current population of Haiti is overwhelmingly Catholic and Christian. Approximately 80% of Haitians are Catholic. It is true that there are vestiges of voodoo intermingled with the Catholic Faith of some Haitians. Haitians who observe some voodoo rituals still think of and refer to themselves as Catholic. The Catholic Church to be sure condemns this intermixing of ancient voodoo with Catholicism though it persists in some places, especially in rural areas. But voodoo is not satanism. The Church condemns it as idolatry, not as satanic. False or imperfect  religious practice and intermixing of idolatry are not unique to Haiti. But lets be clear the vast majority of Haitians are Catholic Christians, even if some are imperfectly so, they are NOT worshippers of Satan.

Now, let’s return to Pat Robertson’s remarks. The premise of them seems to be a philosopy not uncommon in biblical wherein those who suffered catastrophic loss must have been guilty of some sort of sin for this misfortune to have happened. Perhaps they were born blind, then their parents must have sinned. Perhaps they were killed in a sudden accident, then they must have sinned. At least this was the thinking.

Now such a thinking carried forward into Jesus’ times  and he both encounters and deals with the attitude. In effect he sets such thinking aside or at least dispenses with the notion that God singles out certain people or groups out for punishment. Let’s look at these texts.

As he went along, he saw a man blind from birth. His disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” “Neither this man nor his parents sinned,” said Jesus, “but this happened so that the work of God might be displayed in his life. (John 9:1-3)

Note how the disciples manifest the typical attitude of the day that it must have been the sin of the man or his parents that he is blind. But Jesus says that he is not blind sue to the fact that he sinned and then goes on to set forth an entirely new understanding that suffering is often an opportunity to manifest the glory of God shining through our human weakness. Suffering and the cross lead to glory. But it is clear that Jesus does not accept the notion advanced by his disciples that link this man’s suffering to his or his parents sin. Hence, even if we were to accept Pat Robertson’s rather questionable historical data that the ancestors of these Haitians made a pact with devil it hardly follows from Jesus’ teaching that they are suffering today due to that. Let’s consider another text:

Now there were some present at that time who told Jesus about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. Jesus answered, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish. Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them—do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish.” (Luke 13:1-5)

Here again Jesus refers to the attitude that those who suffer calamities are worse sinners than the rest. He refers to it only to reject it. But then Jesus turns the tables on those with such an attitude and warns them that something far worse than the physical loss of life will await them if they do not repent. He warns them that they will perish unto hell. This much is clear  for he goes on to tell a parable (not reproduced here) of a fig tree that comes under judgement. It will be spared for one year more but it still does not bear fruit it will be cut down and thrown into the fire (cf Luke 13:6-9). So here again, Mr. Robertson’s theory that the Haitians have suffered due to some sin that makes them as the parable puts it worse sinners than all the others,  is rejected quite explicitly by Jesus.

Further, consider the over all approach of Jesus toward the crippled, the lepers, the blind, deaf and others with similar physical maladies. Jesus does not say to any of them that they have these problems due to sin that they or their ancestors committed. He heals them without mention of sin being the cause of their distress. There is one exception to this in the paralyzed man let down through the roof (cf  Mark 2:1-12). When healing him Jesus says, have courage son, your sins are forgiven. This causes a stir among the Pharisees who declare that God alone can forgive sins. To prove his power to forgive sins Jesus heals the paralyzed man. And this seems to be the general context of the passage which is more an affirmation of Jesus’ power to forgive sins than a teaching that the man was paralyzed due to his own sin.

Finally, a couple of disclaimers. Jesus teaching does not exclude ANY relationship between sin and suffering. First of all, in a general sense,  ALL suffering is traced back to Original Sin which brought suffering and death into the world. Secondly there are surely some sufferings we experience in relationship to sins committed. Maybe it is a hangover from too much drinking, or a sexually transmitted disease from fornication, and so forth. But it is not as though we can claim that everyone who suffers anything is guilty of some sin or that God singles some people out for special punishment. These are things we cannot know, especially in the case of natural disasters that affect so many people.

Let’s be honest, most of us have never gotten the the punishment we really deserve. If God were “fair” we’d all be in hell. As it is he is merciful, thanks be to God! To point to others in a disaster and say, “Look at them, they must have sinned” is to invite disaster upon ourselves. Because as Jesus in effect says above “If you think they are worse sinners than you, wake up, I’ve got something coming for you that might be far worse if you don’t shape up.”  So careful Pat Robertson, not only are you at odds with the New Testament and Jesus himself, you also risk a stern warning from Jesus that you repent or experience something far worse.

Pray for the people of Haiti right now.

Posted on

The Story of Eli: A Moral Tale on the Peril of Poor Parenting and Unfaithful Priestly Ministry

In the reading from today’s Mass we are introduced to Samuel for the first time. We also see are rather stunning portrait of poor parenting and poor priestly leadership in the person of of High Priest of the Sanctuary at Shiloh, Eli. Consider this line from the Scripture today:

Samuel was sleeping in the temple of the LORD where the ark of God was. The LORD called to Samuel, who answered, “Here I am.” Samuel ran to Eli and said, “Here I am.  You called me.”“I did not call you,” Eli said.  “Go back to sleep.” …..At that time Samuel was not familiar with the LORD, because the LORD had not revealed anything to him as yet. (1 Sam 3:3-5).

Now let me ask you, how could it be that Samuel, a young boy living in the temple of the Lord and under the foster parentage of the High Priest was “not familiar” with the Lord? Some may argue he is but a young boy. Still, he is old enough to speak with Eli, to hear and heed Eli’s instructions. Has Eli told him nothing of the Lord? It would seem so. Ah, but you say, the text has indicated that Samuel knew nothing because the Lord had not yet revealed anything to him. The text seems to root the cause of his unfamiliarity in the Lord rather than Eli. But Eli is still without excuse for it remains true that God reveals himself to us not usually as a voice in the night, or some unusual theophany. Rather, God reveals himself to us through parents, priests, religious and other elders. For a young and already talking Samuel to be unfamiliar with the Lord while living under the care of the High Priest supposedly ministering in the very House of The Lord is unconscionable. It is a dereliction of duty. Eli has failed thus far as a parent and a priest. Children should be taught of God from their first interactive moments. Among the first things they learn should be Bible stories and prayers. They should be made aware of and become familiar with the “still small voice”  of God as he whispers his presence to them.

I have only a few memories of being a very young child of about 5 years of age. But one of the memories I most cherish is how plainly I heard the voice of God and felt his presence. There was a very beautiful statue of the  Sacred Heart near my dresser and God surely spoke to me from there and I was familiar with his calming and loving presence. But I could understand what I was experiencing because my parents had made me familiar with the Lord. I knew who it was that was speaking to me in those quiet and calm whispers. It was the Lord. Sadly, as I grew older and the flesh became more alive I lost my ability to hear the “still, small voice” of the Lord. I have sought it ever since my conversion back to the Lord and am only in recent years beginning to experience it again in moments of contemplative prayer.

I knew who spoke to me and had been made familiar with him, but Samuel did not and this is a very serious dereliction of duty on the part of Eli. When asked he finally did tell Samuel of the Lord but Samuel should not have had to ask.

Perhaps you think I am being too hard on Eli or reading into the text a bit. Maybe Eli was a busy man being High Priest and all. Or perhaps I am just plain wrong and Eli was actually a good father figure for Samuel. But I do not think I am wrong nor am I being too harsh for poor parenting and poor priestly leadership are a pattern for Eli. Consider another story about the two priestly sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas:

Eli’s sons were wicked men; they had no regard for the LORD. Now it was the practice of the priests with the people that whenever anyone offered a sacrifice and while the meat was being boiled, the servant of the priest would come with a three-pronged fork in his hand. He would plunge it into the pan or kettle or caldron or pot, and the priest would take for himself whatever the fork brought up. This is how they treated all the Israelites who came to Shiloh. But even before the fat was burned, the servant of the priest would come and say to the man who was sacrificing, “Give the priest some meat to roast; he won’t accept boiled meat from you, but only raw.”  If the man said to him, “Let the fat be burned up first, and then take whatever you want,” the servant would then answer, “No, hand it over now; if you don’t, I’ll take it by force.” This sin of the young men was very great in the LORD’s sight, for they were treating the LORD’s offering with contempt……Now Eli, who was very old, heard about everything his sons were doing to all Israel and how they slept with the women who served at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting.  So he said to them, “Why do you do such things? I hear from all the people about these wicked deeds of yours. No, my sons; it is not a good report that I hear spreading among the LORD’s people. If a man sins against another man, God may mediate for him; but if a man sins against the LORD, who will intercede for him?” His sons, however, did not listen to their father’s rebuke, for it was the LORD’s will to put them to death…..Now a man of God came to Eli and said to him, “This is what the LORD says:  Why do you scorn my sacrifice and offering that I prescribed for my dwelling? Why do you honor your sons more than me by fattening yourselves on the choice parts of every offering made by my people Israel?’ “Therefore the LORD, the God of Israel, declares: …those who despise me will be disdained. The time is coming when I will cut short your strength and the strength of your father’s house, so that there will not be an old man in your family line …” ‘And what happens to your two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, will be a sign to you—they will both die on the same day. I will raise up for myself a faithful priest, who will do according to what is in my heart and mind. I will firmly establish his house, and he will minister before my anointed one always.  (1 Sam 2:selected verses)

The basic facts are these:

  1. The priestly sons of Eli, Hophniand Phinehas, are wicked men. They violate the sacred liturgy and and take more than their portion, a portion that belongs to God. They scandalize the faithful, act unjustly toward them and have illicit sexual relations with the young women assigned to care for the Shrine at Shiloh.
  2. But Eli does nothing. When it is called to his attention he gives a verbal rebuke. But he must do more than this. They have acted so scandalously that they must be removed. They are a threat to others by their exploitative and opportunistic behavior. They should have been removed. It is a true fact that we struggled with this very same thing in the clergy sexual abuse scandal of recent years.
  3. God rebukes Eli for his weak rebuke and tells him that his weak response indicates that Eli favors his sons more than God and also scorns the sacred liturgy.
  4. God cannot allow Eli and his sons to minister at Shiloh any longer. He will bring Eli’s family down and replace him with a priest who is faithful and will do what is in God’s heart and mind. In a word, Eli has been replaced. Samuel will soon enough take up the holy priesthood. Hophni and Phinehas will die soon for their sins, and Eli’s line is at an end.

How has all this happened? Poor parenting and an unfaithful priestly ministry. In failing to raise his children in the fear of the Lord and in failing to punish wrongdoing Eli has brought grave harm upon himself, his family and his sons. In addition, when Samuel was placed in his care he continued with his pattern of failing to preach the Lord and make Samuel familair with him.

This is a moral tale for our times as well. How many young people today have not been raised in the reverential fear of the Lord, have not been raised to be familiar with the Lord, have not been properly disciplined by parents  and trained in righteousness? How many of them have not been instructed in God’s ways and have been allowed to fall deep into sinful habits and patterns.

In the Church  too some have not at times been willing to discipline where necessary.  Sin is often not rebuked from our pulpits, children are poorly instructed in the faith. We celebratete compassion but sometimes to a fault where sin is tolerated and grows very serious in people’s lives. Silence by many clergy and Church leaders in the face of serious sin can and  is taken to be tacit approval of sin and has led to a widespread moral malaise. Disobedience in the clergy has sometimes been tolerated. Liturgical norms and the sacred liturgy have often been abused. And yes, as we sadly know there has been abusive and illicit sexual activity too.

Thank God there are signs of revival and renewal in many of these areas in the Church and in some of our families. But the story of Eli is an important moral tale for our times that God wants us to take serious our obligation to raise our children to know the Lord and walk in his ways. Through proper discipline and instruction we are summoned to have our children be familiar with the Lord at the very dawning of consciousness and reason. To fail in this regard is something God takes very seriously. Thank God for good parents, clergy and religious who have done their very best in this regard. Hopefully the story of Eli for most of us is simply an encouragement to do what we are already doing. But for those who fail to take seriously their obligations in this regard it should be seen for what it also is: a warning.

Since this was a rather heavy post, perhaps you’ll allow me to post a humorous video. As I have pointed out, Parents and priests should teach Children to pray. But this video by Tim Hawkins tells us what to avoid when teaching children to pray. In a phrase: “Don’t be spooky!”

Posted on

The Problem of a Depersonalized Church

Most people today tend to think of and describe the Church in very institutional terms. The usual pronoun used in reference to the Church is “it” rather than the more traditional “she” or “her.” There is very little love for an institution or abstraction. In fact there tends today to be a downright cynicism for institutions or entities perceived as institutional. And so the Church is often dismissed in very impersonal terms: “It is so out of touch….., it is corrupt……, it ran the crusades…..it conducted the inquisition, and so forth. Even faithful believers usually refer to the Church as “it.” Our modern liturgical translations don’t help much since they too, more often than not, refer to the Church as “it.” But the Church is not an “it” she is the Bride of Christ. She is mother to us. The Church is also the Body of Christ. These images are deeply personal and we should make every effort to begin anew in thinking  of the Church in these terms. I would like to look at these descriptions of the Church briefly and encourage you to readopt them if you have need to. It will help us and others to love the Church as God loves the Church which is Body, Bride and Mother.

The Church is first of all the beautiful Bride of Christ. She is his bride and he loves her intensely. As the first Adam’s bride came forth from his wounded side in the taking of his rib, so the New Adam came to redeem his bride and her new life came forth from from his wounded side. He loves her willingly and hands himself over for her, he dies for her. (Eph 5:19ff).  The reality of the Church as bride really begins with the Old Testament. One of the more common ways God chooses to describe his relationship with Israel is in terms of a marriage (e.g. Hosea 1-3; Ezek 16) and His relationship with her is called a covenant. The New Testament also calls God’s Church a bride (Rev 22:17; Eph 1:4; 5:27; 1 Cor 6:15-17; 2 Cor 11:2).  Here it is important for us to understand that the Israel and the Church are not two different brides. St. Paul is clear to teach in Romans 11, that the true Israel consists of Jews and Gentiles who have faith in Christ Jesus. Thus the Church is the same Israel but now consisting of both Jews and Gentiles who believe in Christ Jesus.

Since the Church is Christ’s Bride then each of us, members of the Church, are also espoused to Christ and to God. St Paul wrote: I feel a divine jealousy for you, for I betrothed you to Christ to present you as a pure bride to her one husband. (2 Cor 11:2). Just as the Church is called to be faithful to Christ, so too are we as individual members of the Bride called to that same fidelity.

In an extended and complimentary sense the Church is also Mother to us since we come forth from the womb of the baptismal font through the chaste union of Christ and his Bride. Some decades ago it was common to hear the Church called “Holy Mother Church.” Again a very personal and endearing image. The Church like a mother brings us to birth, feeds us, cares for us and instructs us. The Church is not an  “it.” Rather she is Bride and mother.

The Church is also the Body of Christ. As St. Paul writes, Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. (1 Cor 12:27) St. Paul goes on to develop this image in great detail in Chapter 12 of the First Letter to the Corinthians. Just as a body is one but has different members with different functions, so it is with the Church, the Body of Christ (See also Eph 4:11ff). Each of us has different gifts and fulfills different functions but it is all the work of the one Body. And no one member should feel any more or less important because of their function for in a body all parts and functions are essential for the well being of the whole body. This is how it is with the Church as well. And, Jesus Christ is the head of the Body, the Church (Col 1:18). Thus, we all have a unity and can work together only because Christ is our head, uniting and directing us. Hence the Church is the very precious and holy Body of Christ. Through his Body the Church Christ continues to speak to our world, to stretch out his hands to feed and heal, and to manifest his presnce to the world.

 Complementary images but one reality – But you may wonder how can the Church be both Bride of Christ and Body of Christ?   And yet this is not only possible but it is essential to understanding the Church as a marital union of Christ and His Bride. The scriptural teaching about marriage is that the two spouses become one. And thus it is that the Church is at one and the same time the Body of Christ and the Bride of Christ. Christ says of Bride and Groom, They are no longer two, they are one  (Matt 19:6). And St. Paul directly links this mystery to the Church and Christ:  Even so husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body.”For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” This mystery is a profound one, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the Church(Eph 5:28-32).

In terms of her human members the Church is imperfect and sinful. But she is no less loved by Christ. In her Bridegroom and the Divine Head of the Church, the Church is perfect. We ought to love  her personally and intensely. She is not an institution, not an “it” she is Bride, She is Mother, The Church is the Body of Christ.

As a priest, I am not a bachelor. I have a bride, the Church. She is a beautiful  (and demanding) bride. Religious Sisters are not single either. One of the beautiful images of women religious is that they are Brides of Christ. In this video from the Nun’s Story, the postulants are invested in their habits. In the traditional ceremony the women come in dressed in bridal gowns of the world and and then depart to be invested in the bridal gowns of their religious habits. They are brides of Christ, imaging the the Church as Bride and mother.

Posted on

The Gospel in Miniature

If you were asked to summarize the message of Jesus in the Gospels in a couple of sentences, could you do it? Now before you scramble to creatively work on such a noble project, understand that Jesus himself has already done this. In three brief sentences Jesus gives us the Gospel in miniature. He sounds a kind of keynote upon which all else will be built. And it was presented in today’s Gospel for the first day in “”Ordinary Time” (tempus per anum in Latin). And what are those opening words? Today’s gospel from Mark supplies them:

Jesus came to Galilee proclaiming the Gospel of God: “This is the time of fulfillment. The Kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the Gospel.” (Mark 1:34)

Now these three utterances of Jesus are rich in meaning and we do well to examine them and also to rescue them from often flat and surface understandings.

  1. This is the time of fulfillment– Now the translation here lacks a little precision since the Greek (πεπλήρωται ὁ καιρὸς) says more literally “The time is fulfilled.” It is time itself that is fulfilled or completed not just that these are fulfilling times. It is true that many things are being fulfilled (prophecies, longings, expectations) but so is time itself. Why does this matter? In a word: URGENCY. The time is now. THIS is the time. This is a critical moment and don’t let this moment pass you by. Consider perhaps if we were waiting for a train. And finally it comes! But this arrival is also a critical moment. Time to get on board! Time to act. Time to move. The time is now here. What we have waited for is present. But simply admiring the moment is not enough. Something is now expected of us. We have to act now. So this first sentence is one of urgency. Over and over again Jesus will tell parables building on this theme reminding us again and again that we know not the day or the the hour. That we must be ready (e.g. Luke 12:40; Mk 13:37; Matt 25:13, among many others). Now there is an old preacher’s story that goes like this: Three demons met with the devil to discuss their plans to bring large numbers to Hell and to be chosen head demon. The first demon said, “I will tell them there is no God.” But the devil said, “You will not get many that way for most know deep down that God does exist for he wrote His name in their hearts.” The second demon said, “I will tell them there is no hell.” But the devil said, “You will only get a few since most know deep down that hell exists and many have already made visits here.” So the third demon said, “I’m going to tell them there is no hurry!” And the devil smiled and said, “You’re the one!”    And so it is that the time is fullfilled. The long expected moment when God would act is now. It’s decision time. So choose, now. Tomorrow is not promised.
  2. The Kingdom of God is at hand – A kingdom is a place where the will of a king is manifest. Where what he says is done and is made so. A kingdom is a place where resources are directed to implementing the will of the king.  Therefore the Kingdom of God is that place or condition wherein the will of God is manifest.  It is a place where God’s power and will are tangible, real, and where resources are dedicated to carrying out God’s will. Now note that the text says it is “at hand.” It is not merely in some far off heaven, or in the distant future. It is breaking in now and is available to you and me right now. We are now able to reject the prince of this world, Satan, and enter into the Kingdom of God. A completely new life is available to us because a new ruler, Jesus, can begin to take authority over our lives if we let him. And he will begin to break the bonds of sin and this world and make us free. He will put sin to death and bring forth grace upon grace. And we will be completely transformed. This is now at hand, this is available to us. Too many people today think of holiness as “unreasonable” or “too demanding” and “unrealistic.” But Jesus simply says that a completely new life is available to us right now, a life in a new Kingdom, ruled not by the prince of this world but by the Lord Jesus Christ. We access this by faith and its effects reach us through the grace of the sacraments, prayer, the life of the Church, and the teaching of the Apostles (cfActs 2:42).  Too many Christians have lost the notion that a completely transformed and radically different way is now available to them. They are resigned to mediocrity and have low expectations about what their relationship with Jesus Christ can do for them. Perhaps too there is slothful aversion to real transformation. But Jesus died on the cross to make this kingdom available to us. Is mediocrity, worldliness, bondage to sin and spiritual boredom the best that the death of the Son of God can do? Surely not! He has given us full access to a kingdom where every virtue and, glory, joy and perfection are available to us. Enter it with high expectations! It is at hand and available!
  3. Repent– The Greek word translated here as “repent” is μετανοεῖτε (metanoeite). Now more literally this means to come to a new mind or a new way of thinking. Most people think of repenting as adopting better moral behavior. Surely μετανοεῖτε includes this but it is far richer and deeper. In scripture the “mind” is a far greater concept than the “brain” or even the intellect. The mind in scripture is the deepest part of the human person where we, think, experience, consider, have memories, deliberate and decide. Ultimately it is where we “live” where that aspect that we call the “self” IS. So the Lord is inviting us to do far more than behave well. He is calling us to a complete inner transformation of our very self, of how we think, of how we experience the world,  of how we understand the meaning of things. Clearly this will affect our beavior as well for behavior begins with thought: Sow a thought, reap a deed, sow a deed, reap a habit, sow a habit, reap a character, sow a character, reap a destiny. It all begins in the mind, that deep inner part of us. St. Paul links the beginning of transformation to the renewing of our minds: Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. (Romans 12:2). What a glorious gift to accept from God, a transformed mind! I have greatly rejoiced in what God has done to my mind in the past 25 years. I think so much more scripturally, perceive differently, rejoice in the truth, have better priorities, love more, have greater confidence, more joy, more patience, more! Thank you Lord for the renewing of my mind! May you who have begun a good work in me bring it to completion (cf Phil 1).
  4. and believe the Gospel–  The word “Gospel” is not merely good news because it conveys good or pleasant information: The Gospel is not just informative speech but performative speech— not just the imparting of information, but action, efficacious power that enters into the world to save and transform (Pope Benedict XVI in Jesus of Nazareth, p. 47) So Jesus is teaching us to accept this performative and transformative word, to believe it’s power by basing our lives on the reality it both teaches and conveys. Belief always involves more than mere intellectual adhearance to revealed truth. It is also involves the response of the will, it brings forth real decisions from us to base our lives on its truth.

So here it is, the Gospel in Miniature. Jesus is teaching us in the opening words of his public ministry to come to accept and believe the good news that a new Kingdom and new life, and a new mind  are now available to us. We must believe and allow its in-breaking power into our lives now, not later.  If we do this we can expect remarkable and on-going transformation of both our moral life and our inner life for, as St. Paul puts it, the Gospel is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes (Rom 1:16).

This song says, “A Wonderful change has come over me. He Changed my life completely….I’m not what I want to be, but I’m not what I used to be….A Wonderful change has come over me.

I am aware that not all of you like performance  Gospel Music, but the message of this song is too strong to ignore.

Posted on

The Didascalia: A Sometimes Humorous Look at the Liturgy of the Early Church

duraAs you may know the Catholic Faith was illegal in the Roman Empire prior to 313 AD when the Emperor Constantine issued the Edict of Milan permitting the Christian Faith to publicly flourish. Prior to that time Church buildings as we know them today were rare. Mass was usually celebrated in houses.

Now careful here. These “houses” were usually rather large, with a central courtyard or large room that permitted something a little more formal than Mass “around the dining room table.”  I remember being taught (incorrectly) that these early Masses were informal and emphasized an informal communal quality and were celebrated facing the people. Well that isn’t really true. People didn’t just sit around a table or sit in circle, not at all. They sat or stood formally and everyone faced one direction: East.

In the drawing  above right you can see the layout of an ancient House Church from the excavated 3rd Century House Church at Dura Europos (Syria). Click on the picture for a clearer view. The assembly room is to the left and a priest or bishop is conducting a liturgy facing east at and altar against the east wall. A baptistery is on the right and a deacon is guarding the entrance door. The lonely looking deacon in the back of the assembly hall is there to “preserve good order” as you will read below. The Picture below left shows the baptistery of the Dura Europa House Church.

What is remarkable about these early liturgies is how formal they were even though conducted under less than ideal circumstances. The following text is from the Didiscalia, a document written in about 250 AD. Among other things it gives rather elaborate details about the celebration of the early Catholic Mass in these “House Liturgies.” I would like to print an excerpt here and make my own comments in RED. You will find that there are some rather humorous remarks in this ancient text towards the end.

Now, in your gatherings, in the holy Church, convene yourselves modestly in places of the brethren, as you will, in a manner pleasing and ordered with care. [So these “house liturgies were NOT informal Masses. Good order and careful attention to detail was essential].  Let the place of the priests be separated in a part of the house that faces east. [So, even in these early house Masses the sanctuary, the place where the clergy ministered was an area distinct from where the laity gathered. People were not all just gathered around a dining room table.]  In the midst of them is placed the bishop’s chair, and with him let the priests be seated. Likewise, and in another section let the lay men be seated facing east. [Prayer was conducted facing to the east, not facing the people].  For thus it is proper: that the priests sit with the bishop in a part of the house to the east and after them the lay men and the lay women, [notice that men and women sat in separate sections. This was traditional in many churches until rather recently, say the last 150 years.] and  when you stand to pray, the ecclessial leaders rise first, and after them the lay men, and again, then the women. Now, you ought to face to east to pray for, as you know, scripture has it, Give praise to God who ascends above the highest heavens to the east. [Again note, Mass was NOT celebrated facing the people as some suppose of the early Church. Everyone was to face to the east, clergy and people. Everyone faced one direction. The text cites Scripture as the reason for this. God is to the East, the origin of the light.]

Now, of the deacons, one always stands by the eucharistic oblations and the others stand outside the door watching those who enter [Remember, this was a time of persecution and the early Christians were careful only to allow baptized and bona fide members to enter the sacred mysteries. No one was permitted to enter Sacred liturgy until after having been baptized. This was called the disciplina arcanis or “discipline of the secret.” Deacons guarded the door to maintain this discipline], and afterwards, when you offer let them together minister in the church. [Once the door was locked and the Mass begin it would seem that the deacons took their place in the sanctuary. However it also seems that one deacon remained outside the sanctuary and maintained “good order” among th laity.] And if there is one to be found who is not sitting in his place let the deacon who is within, rebuke him, and make him to rise and sit in his fitting place…also, in the church the young ones ought to sit separately, if there is a place, if not let them stand. Those of more advanced age should sit separately; the boys should sit separately or their fathers and mothers should take them and stand; and let the the young girls sit separately, if there is really not a place, let them stand behind the women; let the young who are married and have little children stand separately, the older women and widows should sit separately. [This may all seem a bit complicated but the bottom line is that seating was according to Gender and Age: the men on one side, the women on the other, older folks to the front and the younger ones to the back. Also those caring for young children should be in a separate area. See – Even in the old days there was a “cry room!”] And a deacon should see that each one who enters gets to his place, and that none of these sits in an inappropriate place. Likewise, the deacon ought to see that there are none who whisper or sleep or laugh or nod off. [Wait a minute! Do you mean to tell me that some of these early Christians did such things! Say it isn’t so! Today ushers do this preserving of good order but the need remains!] For in the Church it is necessary to have discipline, sober vigilance, and attentive ear to the Word of the Lord. [Well that is said pretty plain and the advice is still needed].

One of the oldest House Churches was the House of Peter in Capernaum. There is evidence of a House Church where early masses were celebrated going back to as early as the 1st Century. Wall writings from that period were found. Over time the House Church was enlarged. After the Edict of Constantine a Byzantine Church was built on the site. But it was destroyed after the Byzantine period in the wake of Christian/Muslim conflicts. The whole area  of Capernaum lay buried until the 1940s when it was rediscovered. Unfortunately in the 1960s a terribly ugly Church was built atop the ruins and it looks like a space ship that has landed on these ancient ruins. Here are a couple of videos that discuss the House and later House Church of St. Peter in Capernaum.

Posted on

Wood and Water Work Wonders!

Many years ago Simon and Garfunkel sang a song about a “Bridge Over Troubled Waters.”  What a blessing it would be to find a bridge over troubled waters! But there is another song, an old spiritual that says something quite different, something far less appealing, something calling for courage. The song says, “Wade in the water children! God’s gonna trouble the water!”

What strange advice! And yet it is rooted in deep biblical tradition, and like so many biblical themes it is rich in paradox. Truth be told, God often troubled the water in biblical times and his troubling of the water usually evoked fear and bewilderment. It challenged God’s people to step out in faith and trust, to wade into troubled waters. And guess what? There was always a blessing on the other shore. But first you had to wade in, first you had to trust God.

And there is this additional feature, (almost as though God were giving us something with which to float to safety).  God doesn’t just bring the blessing through troubled waters, but rather through wood and water. It is not water only, but wood and water.  Maybe you know where I am going with this but for now just wade  in the water with Jesus on this the feast of his Baptism watch how wood and water work wonders!

First let’s consider some of the following Biblical examples of this tradition of wood and troubled waters bringing blessing.

  1. Cleansing Flood– One of the most terrifying stories of the ancient world is the flood. The world had grown so wicked and sin so multiplied that God concluded he must literlly wash it clean. And you think its bad now! God went to a man named Noah and told him that He was going to trouble the waters and that Noah had to be ready. Build an Ark of Gopher wood  Noah! Now this was not a small project. The Ark was the length of one and a half football fields (150 yards), it was 75 feet wide and 45 feet tall. Now you have to really trust God to do all that work. And then gather the animals two pairs of unclean animals, 7 pairs of clean animals. More trust more time and lots of wood. But then God troubled the waters and the waters of the flood made an end of wickedness and a new beginning of goodness. From troubled waters came a blessing. But first Noah had to wade on in. Through the wood of the ark and water God worked wonders!  (cf Gen 6-9)
  2. Trouble at the Red Sea– Pharaoh had relented and the people were leaving Egypt for the Promised Land. But fickle Pharaoh has once again changed  his mind and pursues them. With the Red Sea before them and Pharaoh behind them the people were struck with fear. But God would win through for them. How? By troubling the waters: God told Moses to take up the wooden staff and to trouble the waters with these words: And you lift up your staff and with hand outstretched over the sea, split the sea in two… So Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the LORD drove the sea back by a strong east wind all night, and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided. (Ex 14:16, 21) Now you and I know the end of the story but the people that day did not. With water like two walls on either side they had to go forth, they had to wade, if you will, in the waters. They had to trust God that the waters would hold. And God brought them through and they went out of slavery and into freedom. Are you noticing a pattern? God troubles the water and there is a blessing that follows. But you gotta wade, you gotta trust that with God, wood and water work wonders. The wooden staff and troubled waters bring forth freedom.
  3. Trouble in the Desert – It is a fine thing to be free but thirst has a way of making itself known. When they came to Marah, they could not drink the water of Marah because it was bitter; therefore it was named Marah. And the people murmured against Moses, saying, “What shall we drink?” And he cried to the LORD; and the LORD showed him a tree, and he threw it into the water, and the water became sweet  (Ex 15:23) So once again, God troubled the waters, called the people to trust and there came forth blessing! And God did it through wood and water. The wood of the tree and the troubled waters of that spring brought the blessing of survival.
  4. More Trouble in the Desert! But yet again as they journeyed further more thirst. And God said to Moses: Go over in front of the people holding in your hand as you go the staff with which you struck the sea, …Strike the rock and the water will flow from it for the people to drink. (Ex 17:5-6).  From troubled waters came forth blessing. With God, wood and water work wonders. The wood of the staff troubled those waters and they came forth with the blessing that  preserved life in the desert. St. Paul would later say that they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ. (1 Cor 10:4)
  5. At the River Jordan– After forty years of wandering in the desert the Israelites are finally ready to enter the promised land. But the Jordan is in flood stage, impossible to cross. But once again God had a plan and was going to trouble those waters. He instructed Joshua to have the priests place the ark on their shoulders  and wade in the water. Now the Ark was a box made of Acacia wood and covered in gold. In it were the tables of the Law, the staff of Aaron and a ciborium of the manna. The also knew and believed that the very presence of God was carried in that ancient wooden box, even as in our tabernacles today: And when those who bore the ark had come to the Jordan, and the feet of the priests bearing the ark were dipped in the brink of the water the waters coming down from above stood and rose up in a heap far off people passed over opposite Jericho (Joshua 3:15) So again, God troubled the waters and the promised Land was reached. And how did God do it? Wood and water work wonders! The wooden box of the ark troubled the waters and they parted bringing the blessing of the promised land.

OK, we’re almost done. Today is the Baptism of the Lord. Jesus wades in the water. But the Baptism of John can’t bring blessing it can only symbolize repentance and point to blessing.  Why can’t it bring blessing?  No wood, at least not yet. But Jesus whom Isaiah called a “shoot from the stump of Jesse” (Is 11:1) will soon enough take up an old rugged wooden cross and and trouble the waters of his own body and soul and from those troubled waters flowing from his wounded side on the wood of the cross will come forth the greatest blessings of all: salvation, cleansing, holiness, adoption, membership in the Body of Christ, a heavenly inheritance, a transformed life, Grace upon Grace and the very gift of the Holy Spirit. Listen to how John describes the troubled waters of baptism coming forth from the side of Christ:

When [the soldiers] came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus’ side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water. The man who saw it has given testimony, and his testimony is true. He knows that he tells the truth, and he testifies so that you also may believe. These things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled: “Not one of his bones will be broken,”and, as another scripture says, “They will look on the one they have pierced.”  (John 19:33-37)

John wants to make sure you know that it wasn’t only blood that came from his side but also water. And that water is the water of our baptism and the giving the Holy Spirit (cf John 7:37-39) And what water was more troubled than these waters? Who ever suffered more than Jesus? And these waters bring blessing because they are troubled and because of the wood of the cross. These waters still flow in your baptism and mine. When we were baptized, God troubled the waters of the font and they brought forth blessing by the power of the cross. You see, wood and water work wonders. So wade in the water Children, (don’t build a bridge over it!) God’s gonna trouble the waters!  And by the wood of the cross he’ll see you through.

Posted on

Hmm… Scientists Say that Dolphins Should be Treated as”non-Human Persons”

The article below appeared in the Times Online (UK Edition) reports that some scientists are now designating dolphins as “non-human persons” that should have both moral standing and rights. I’d like to present excerpts from the article here and then comment below. The article is available by click the title just below:

Scientists Say Dolphins Should be Treated as “Non-Human Persons.”

Dolphins have been declared the world’s second most intelligent creatures after humans, with scientists suggesting they are so bright that they should be treated as “non-human persons”. Studies into dolphin behaviour have highlighted how similar their communications are to those of humans and that they are brighter than chimpanzees. These have been backed up by anatomical research showing that dolphin brains have many key features associated with high intelligence.

The researchers argue that their work shows it is morally unacceptable to keep such intelligent animals in amusement parks or to kill them for food or by accident when fishing. Some 300,000 whales, dolphins and porpoises die in this way each year. “Many dolphin brains are larger than our own and second in mass only to the human brain when corrected for body size,” said Lori Marino, a zoologist at Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, who has used magnetic resonance imaging scans to map the brains of dolphin species and compare them with those of primates.

“The neuroanatomy suggests psychological continuity between humans and dolphins and has profound implications for the ethics of human-dolphin interactions,” she added.

…Marino and Reiss will present their findings at a conference in San Diego, California, next month, concluding that the new evidence about dolphin intelligence makes it morally repugnant to mistreat them.  Thomas White, professor of ethics at Loyola Marymount University, Los Angeles, who has written a series of academic studies suggesting dolphins should have rights, will speak at the same conference. “The scientific research . . . suggests that dolphins are ‘non-human persons’ who qualify for moral standing as individuals,” he said.

A few thoughts of my own:

  1. Beware –The title of the article is poor. Beware of titles that begin “Scientists say…” Ok, how many? One, few, thousands? What kind of scientists? What is their standing in the scientific community?  etc. The full article which you can read gives us little of this information. We only hear of several scientists by name, along with some admittedly fascinating findings.
  2. How is the word “person” understood here? I am not a very good philosopher but I remember Boethius’ definition of a person: “an individual substance of a rational nature.”  Now to demonstrate intelligence is not the same as to to demonstrate rationality or the capacity to reason. However, arguments could go on forever as to how to define rationality even if the moderns accepted Boethus’ definition. But it might help if these scientists could give us their working definition of “person.”
  3. Humans have a dignity that transcends mere intelligence – But let’s just say for the sake of argument that we accepted the point that they were some how persons. We already accept the existence of “non-human persons” since angels (who are not human) are persons. But from a Christian point of view this would still not change the fact that human persons have a special dignity that transcends our brain power. We are not special merely because we’re so smart and have these big brains. We are special because we are made in the image and likeness of God. Scriptures grants to man this very special prerogative. For example, when God made Adam it said that God took dust  from the earth, formed the man and then breathed into his nostrils so that man became “a living being”  (cf Gen 2:4ff) Adam (and later Eve) carried the very breath (Spirit of God) within them. This is never said of any other creature. Further, to no other creature did God ever say, “Let us make him in our image.”(Gen 1:26). Indeed God goes further to distinguish the human person from other creatures when he says: “Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth,  and over all the creatures that move along the ground.” (Gen 1:26-27).  Hence, beyond the question brain power or perceptible intelligence, the human person has a special dignity. This is made even more significant at the Incarnation of Jesus: “For to which of the angels did God ever say, ‘You are my Son…‘ (Heb 1:13). Now I understand that these Scripture quotes will hold no weight in a science discussion.  I only mention them here so that we Christians do not  go running off in silly directions following merely the word of scientists. There is more to human dignity than intelligence or our ability to socialize. We have special dignity due to the prerogatives and distinctions  God has given us.
  4. Rights for Dolphins? How about Duties? Now, if it is true that Dolphins are “persons” with “rights” does it not also follow that they have responsibilities? Can we fine them for bad behavior? Can we punish or imprison them if they kill unjustly. There ARE stories of dolphins getting violent. Should we arrest them and bring them to trial? How rational are they really? After all some like to claim thay are “even smarter than humans!” It is true that we do not hold every human person responsible for what they do even if it is wrong. For example a three year old child would not be brought up on charges even if they slug their playmate in the eye. However, we do punish them in age appropriate ways. Some argue that dolphins have brains just as well developed as a three year old child.  Hence, should we school (oh, bad pun) dolphins and punish them in certain ways when they get out of line? Just asking. But I am not merely being flippant (oops another pun!). I am asking for distinctions to be made and for us to be a bit more careful before we run off and effusively pour forth titles upon animals.
  5. Careless thinking – Indeed, we ought to think through what we are really saying and be a bit more careful in how we speak. We live in rather silly times really and it seems we have lost touch with basic principles of philosophy and the fact that words mean things. If you ask me, we lack intellectual discipline in many areas and are very careless in how we speak, use words and grasp ancient philosophical and theological principles. Dolphins are smart seemingly social creatures. I like dolphins. The are magnificent creatures. (They are cute too since they seem to have a permanent smile on their face). But a dolphin is just a dolphin. For all their “brilliance” they do not build cities, write poetry, discuss philosophy, debate morality, collect art, build temples or worship God. They are dolphins after all.
  6. I’ll go you one better! As for their rights, I am not sure. I know this however, we do well to respect these creatures which do seem to live at a kind of higher stage than many animals. But respecting them isn’t about their rights, it’s about me being human. And while we’re talking about being human, let’s get around to protecting  baby humans in the womb before we worry about conferring rights on dolphins. “Save the Dolphins?” How about “Save the Baby Humans!”

Ok Your Turn. Comments are open and ready! Remember, I am not good in philosophy so some of you philosopher types might be able to help. But remember, use English!

Posted on

Latest From the Bishops’Conference on Healthcare Reform

I have avoided posting on the health care debate since I feel unqualified as to the details of this matter and also how the Bishop’s have chosen to weigh in. However, some one called this article to my attention  by Sr. Mary Ann Walsh who is director of Media Relations for the US Conference of Catholic Bishops. The Original Article appears at the Washington Post Website. You can read the Original Article here: Politics of Healthcare Reform Can Make You Sick

 Here is the Basic Text of the Article which summarizes the Bishops the concerns rather succinctly:

Politics of Health Care ‘Reform’ Can Make You Sick

By Sister Mary Ann Walsh U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

The Catholic bishops have urged the government to reform our ailing health care system for decades. To do this, the House and Senate have now passed bills with this aim, bills that must be reconciled into one final bill. But the present state of affairs is enough to make you sick. The gamesmanship in Congress relates more to politics than health and has created serious problems. Despite the bishops’ desire for health care reform, the proposed bills could turn the bishops from allies into opponents. So far, health care reform it is not.

Problem # 1. Paying for abortion. The bishops have argued for an “abortion neutral” bill, so that no one can use health care reform to put money into elective abortions. The bishops appreciate the Hyde Amendment on abortion funding, which precludes using federal dollars for elective abortions or health plans that cover such abortions; they want similar language in health care reform legislation. Hyde, which passed first in 1976, tries to ensure what is becoming more and more understood in America, that no one should be forced to pay for another person’s abortion and that the government should not be in the abortion-funding business. The Stupak Amendment in the House bill said it well when it declared in reference to elective abortions, that no funds authorized or appropriated by the House health care reform legislation “may be used to pay for any abortion or to cover any part of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion.”

Problem # 2. Conscience rights. Under both the House and Senate bills, employers such as the Church, may be forced to provide for services that directly violate their teachings. There is no way that the church should be required, within its own house, to purchase insurance plans that include procedures the Church opposes. Similarly, health care facilities and health care personnel have the right to operate according to their value systems. Among other things, the final bill needs language like that found in the Weldon Amendment, passed in 2004, that prevents federal and state governments from discriminating against hospitals, physicians and nurses that do not perform, refer for, or pay for abortions. Health care facilities and health care personnel have the right to operate according to a value system honoring each human life.

Problem # 3. Basic fairness. Both House and Senate bills leave in place a policy that prevents legal immigrants, that is, people who are on the path to citizenship and pay taxes, from access to health services available to other taxpayers. These are men and women who, though they can fight in the Army, are still ineligible for Medicaid for the first five years of their U.S. residency. It is appalling that we can ask people to risk their lives to defend the nation, but cannot let them access to the country’s basic health care. Legislators should ensure that any final bill provides equitable access to health care for legal immigrants and their families.

Problem # 4. Risk to overall health. The Senate bill does not allow undocumented persons to buy insurance with their own money. This position not only smacks of unfairness – if people want to buy insurance, why not let them? – it is bad economics. The more people in the insurance pool the better. The position also threatens the overall public health. Right now, many undocumented persons have to rely on the emergency room for basic medical care – the most expensive ordinary care there is – to deal with matters as simple and contagious as strep throat and tuberculosis. If as many as possible had access to decent health care, including care that prevents serious disease or treats it early, keeping the spread of disease in check would have a chance of becoming the rule.

Problem #5. Affordability. As written now, a family of four earning $29,500 would have to pay four percent of its income for health insurance premiums and would have inadequate protection on high deductibles and co-payments. That’s almost $2,000 dollars a year.

Out-of-pocket expenses on health care could be near twenty percent of their income. Look at the cost of food, housing, transportation, and clothing and do the math. It is heartless to force people to have to choose rent over health care or medical treatment over minimum financial solvency.

We need health care reform in America and we’re close to attaining it, but if decent health care becomes a matter of politics over the public good, we’ll all lose. That’s enough to make you sick.

Sister Mary Ann Walsh is a Sister of Mercy of the Americas and director of Media Relations for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. 

The Following Video also features concerns of the Bishops expressed by Richard Dorflinger Asscoicate Director Of Pro-Life Office for the USCCB. He is referring here to an earlier version of the Bill as it came out of the House but the concerns still remain in the latest Senate version.