Through the Middle Ages, the Cathedral was the true skyscraper of most ancient cities. It could be seen for miles and dominated, not only the skyline, but occupied the central square of the town. As the Renaissance set in, palaces and government buildings began to dominate the central square and even the skyline as the churches shrunk in stature and moved to the side streets. Today, our great cities such as New York and Chicago have skylines dominated by great buildings of commerce and industry. The Cathedrals of these great cities would be hard to find by most visitors. What does all this say about our culture? How are we known by our buildings? What are the priorities and central focus of our time?
Now, all that said, I suppose it would be silly to build a 150 story church. At some point a church serves its purpose at 100 feet. And, buildings for people to live and work in can serve practical purposes at higher and higher levels. Still, the poet in me says, love should soar highest. So the poet and dreamer in me says, what if the tallest of our buildings were places that served the poor, cared for the sick, or were places where people crowded in to make spiritual retreats and study God’s Word? I know, absurd! Call me a dreamer. Call me inefficient, and say that we don’t need taller spiritual buildings, just more of them. Perhaps. But there’s something about a tall building that says: “prominent,” “important,” “significant” and “preeminent.” The dreamer in me suspects that if our spiritual values were more central, our skylines would announce it to any passerby: “Here is a city whose God is the Lord!” (Psalm 33:12). Just dreaming!
Here’s another dreamer, Fr. Robert Barron, who, in this video, makes an interesting observation in the renaming of the Sears Tower to the Willis Building about 2 years ago. It now appears that the three tallest buildings in Chicago are all named for, and owned by’ Insurance Companies…go figure! And while you’re at it, ask, “What does this say?” It seems to say, that the more affluent we become, the more anxious we become. With all our stuff we have much more to protect, much more to insure, much more to be anxious about!
And in whom do we trust to bring us this protection? Surely God, you will say! Ah, but look again; by our buildings you will know the answer! Jesus saves, but, “just in case He can’t come through,” man insures. Or so our culture would seem to say.
To be sure, there is nothing evil about insurance, but our buildings tell us we are quite anxious about many things and that insuring and ensuring looms large in our culture.
Yes, we who have much, have much to lose. And our anxiety about that sticks out; it looms large, and stands tall, very tall.
On Sunday we heard a Gospel about two men, who finding a treasure and a pearl, went and sold all that they had to have those treasure. Of course the treasure and the pearl were images for the Kingdom of Heaven. Thus selling all they had was a sign of radical freedom from attachments to this world. For most of us, attachments are THE struggle that most hinders our spiritual growth.
But what are attachments, and what are they not? Are there ways we can distinguish attachments from ordinary and proper desires? What are the signs they we are too attached to some one or something? To address questions like these, I want to turn to a great teacher of mine in matters spiritual, Fr. Thomas Dubay. Father died a little over a year ago, but he left us a great legacy of teaching through his books, audio recordings and programs at EWTN. In addressing these questions I would like to summarize what he teaches in his spiritual classic Fire Within in which he expounds on the teachings of St. Teresa of Avila and St. John of the Cross.
Here then are some excerpts (pages 133-135). Father’s teaching is in bold, black italics. My own poor remarks are in plain text red. You may wish to read only Fr. Dubay’s text to begin with, and only read my additions it you think you want elaboration.
I. WHAT ATTACHMENT IS NOT – for sometimes it is easier to say what a thing is not prior to saying what it is. In this Fr. Dubay disabuses us of wrongful and sometimes puritanical notions that are neither biblical nor Catholic since they reject as bad what God has made as good, and as a blessing. Scripture says, God created [things] to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth. For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving (1 Tim 4:3-4).
1. First of all, attachment is not the experiencing of pleasure in things, not even keen, intense pleasure. The complete avoidance of pleasure is neither possible nor advisable in human life…..There is no doubt that the pleasures of the five senses easily lead to a selfish clinging to them for their own sakes, but nonetheless, the pleasures themselves are not blameworthy. God made them, and they are good.
The remarks here are very balanced. Of itself, taking pleasure in what God has made is a kind of thanksgiving and surely an appreciation of what God has created and given.
Yet, due to our fallen nature, we must be sober that our experience of pleasure, like all our passions, can become unruly, improperly directed and take on a life of its own. Pleasures can divert our attention from the giver to the gift alone, if we are not mindful to look beyond the gift to the giver and the purpose He intends.
Consider that a husband properly enjoys intense pleasure in his intimate experiences with his wife. Properly understood, there is little way he can NOT enjoy this, other things being equal. But these intimate moments have a meaning beyond themselves. They summon him to greater intimacy, appreciation and love for his wife, and ultimately, for the God who created her. Further these moments draw him to share his love and appreciation through an openness to the fruit this love will bear in his children.
Hence the gift of intimacy is wonderful and to be enjoyed to the top, but it is not an end in itself. When it becomes its own end, and exists in our mind only for its own sake, we are on the way to attachment and idolatry.
2. Nor is possessing or using things an attachment to them. We must all make use of things in this world to accomplish what God has given us to do. God is surely pleased to equip us with what we need to do his will, to build the Kingdom, and to be of help to others.
3. Nor is being attracted, even mightily attracted, to a beautiful object or person an unhealthy attachment. As a matter of fact, we should be drawn to the splendors of creation, for that is a compliment to the supreme Artist. Saints were and are strongly attracted to the glories of the divine handiwork and especially to holy men and women, the pinnacles of visible creation.
A gift to pray for is the gift of wonder and awe, wherein we appreciate and are joyful in God’s glory displayed in the smallest and hidden things, as well as the greatest and most visible things. We are also summoned to a deep love, appreciation and attraction to the beauty, humor and even quirkiness displayed in one another.
But here too these things are meant to point to God, they are not ends in themselves. And it sometimes happens that we fail to connect the dots, as St. Augustine classically describes: Late have I love you, O Beauty, so ancient, and yet so new! Too late did I love You! For behold, You were within, and I without, and there did I seek You; I, unlovely, rushed heedlessly among the things of beauty You made. You were with me, but I was not with You. Those things kept me far from You, which, unless they were in You, would not exist. (Confessions 10.27)
So, once again, to be attracted by beauty is, of itself, good. But it is not an end. It is a sign pointing to the even greater beauty of God and his higher gifts.
II. WHAT ATTACHMENT IS – St John of the Cross [observes] that if anyone is serious about loving God totally, he must willingly entertain no self-centered pursuit of finite things sought for themselves, that is, devoid of honest direction to God, our sole end and purpose. St. Paul makes exactly the same point when he tells the Corinthians that whatever they eat or drink, or whatever else they do they are to do all for the glory of God….. (1 Cor 10:31)
St John of the Cross explicitly states that he is speaking of voluntary desires and not natural ones‚ for the latter are, little or no hindrance‚ to advanced prayer as long as the will does not intervene with a selfish clinging. By natural desires the saint has in mind, for example, a felt need for water when we are thirsty, for food when hungry, for rest when fatigued. There is no necessary disorder in experiencing these needs….to eradicate these natural inclinations and, to mortify them entirely is impossible in this life.
Of course even natural desires can become unruly and exaggerated wherein we seek to overly satisfy them and they become ends in themselves. Fr. Dubay makes this point later. St. Paul also had to lament that there were some whose god was their belly and who had their mind set only on worldly things (cf Phil 3:19)
[More problematic and] especially damaging to normal development are what John calls, “habitual appetites,” that is, repeated and willed clingings to things less than God for their own sake. And here we come to some critical distinctions.
[W]e may ask when a desire becomes inordinate and therefore harmful. I would offer three clear signs.
1. The first is that the activity or thing is diverted from the purpose God intends for it. And this is very common today with sex and with many matters related to the body.
2. The second sign is excess in use. As soon as we go too far in eating, drinking, recreating, speaking or working, we show that there is something disordered in our activity. We cannot honestly direct to the glory of God what is in excess of what He wills. Hence, a person who buys more clothes than needed is attached to clothing. One who overeats is clinging selfishly to food.
Yes, beer, for example, is a sign that God loves us and wants us to be happy. A couple of beers is gratitude, ten beers is a betrayal. God gives in abundance to be sure, but more so that we can share with the needy and the poor, than that we should selfishly cling to it our self as though it existed as its own end.
Sharing spreads God’s glory, as St Paul says, All this is for your benefit, so that the grace that is reaching more and more people may cause thanksgiving to overflow to the glory of God. (2 Cor 4:15) And again, You will be made rich in every way so that you can be generous on every occasion, and through us your generosity will result in thanksgiving to God (2 Cor 9:11). Thus the abundance of God is directed to the spreading of his glory and to the widening of thanksgiving, NOT as an end itself, that we should hoard it. God’s gifts point back to Him not to themselves.
3. The third sign of attachment is making means into ends. We have one sole purpose in life: the ultimate, enthralling vision of the Trinity in glory, in our risen body. Everything else is meant in the divine plan to bring us and others to this final embrace with Beauty and Love. …As soon as honesty requires us to admit that this eating or that travel, this television viewing or that purchase is not directly or indirectly aimed at Father, Son and Spirit, we have made ourselves into an idol. We are clearly clinging to something created for our own self-centered sake.
This is often the hardest of the three to discern but I think the heart of the difference between a thing becoming an end rather than a means, is the question of gratitude. How consciously grateful are we to God for the things and pleasures we enjoy? Do they intensify our gratitude or do they merely distract us from thinking about God?
Further, do they help me in my journey upward to God or do they merely root me more deeply in this passing world?
Another (scary) question is, “How easily could I give this up if I discovered that it was hindering me from God or that God no longer wanted it in my life?” This is hard, because we really enjoy certain things. But the key question is not that we enjoy them, but whether they honestly lead us to God. And we must be honest about this, avoiding puritanical notions, but also avoiding self justifying ones.
Here too, an important thing to seek from God is not that we merely give up things with a sour face and bad attitude, but that we actually start to prefer good things in moderation over distracting things in excess. If we let God go to work, the good begins to crowd out the bad in an incremental, growing way.
[Therefore:] an attachment is a willed seeking of something finite for its own sake. It is an unreal pursuit, an illusory desire. Nothing exists except for the sake of God who made all things for Himself. Any other use is a distortion.
Here’s a short excerpt by Fr. Dubay. Please be careful with this clip. It is not a critique of liturgy (new or old) per se. It is about interiority and integrity in the spiritual life.
I remember my first experience of being the topic of discussion on the Internet. It was about a year before I was asked by the Archdiocese to be a blogger for this Blog of the Archdiocese. I had been on the cover of US News and World Report. The photo was taken of me celebrating the Traditional Latin Mass. (See photo at right). The photo circulated on some of the Blogs at that time and while the reaction was, overall, positive, I was quite surprised by some of the highly critical and personal nature of the negative remarks:
Look he’s not using canonical fingers (I was).
He’s leaning back too far (maybe)
He’s holding the chalice too high and looks far too dramatic (maybe, but I was praying, not counting inches of altitude).
Why’s that deacon touching the altar – he no right to do that! (because he’s older and needed to steady himself).
Why are those vestments so modern? (What ever)
The Burse should have been on the gradine, not the mensa (oh what a wretch am I!)
Why does that Monsignor have a red (actually it was fuchsia) pom on his biretta? (seen in another photo). Who does he think he is, some prelate? (Actually I didn’t know any better, and was given the biretta by an older Msgr to wear who had it from the days before 1970 when the norms for vesture changed. I have discontinued the pom).
US News should have sought out the Fraternity or the Institute for a better picture (sigh….yes!)
Etc.
One kind lady finally intervened and said, “Stop! You’ll make it so no priest ever wants to celebrate the old rite.” She was right and I have been told by a lot of younger guys who love the Traditional Mass that they are “scared” to celebrate it. There are various reasons but one of them is the lack of breathing room for honest mistakes and the need to learn by experience. Some of them have experienced that this that doesn’t seem offered by some of the very few (but sadly vocal) rubricists in congregations, and more on the Internet who seem to want to demonstrate their knowledge of some of the most arcane details, at the expense of others.
The experience for me was a kind of wake up call to the nastiness that sometimes sets in on blogs where people interact with people they don’t really know. There is, thus, little appreciation for the feelings or the personal dignity of the ones with whom they disagree or critique.
As I have I now been blogging for over two years, I have become accustomed to difficulties the Internet can sometimes present to civil discussion. The vast majority of commentators here are kind, and willing to engage in mutually respectful conversation in the comment threads. I am able to post most of the comments that come in without any concern.
I DO appreciate vigorous and honest discourse and am undisturbed that disagreements are frankly aired. But there comes a line that, when crossed, makes me hit delete, or post the comment, but with a blow of the referee’s whistle.
Recently however, I am getting more comments that are just plain rude, mean or unnecessarily personal. I have had to press the delete button more than I’d like. It is not just the use of profanity that is alarming (and that too is becoming more common), but it is the excoriation of one’s opponents with dismissive labels and terms which either question their orthodoxy, or their love of the poor, label them as rigid or as communists, etc.
There is also the unnecessary ridicule of positions. And most of these comments come in the context of a discussion outside dogmatically defined issues, where reasonable people, reasonable Catholics, can differ and terminology may have more than one meaning, where the presumption of good faith and the celebration of the Catholic faith ought to be presumed. Gentle corrections are appreciated, but making a person look foolish is usually unnecessary.
The most nasty remarks often center around liturgy and the social doctrine of the Church.
As for liturgy, while there are norms to which we must submit, there is also legitimate diversity permitted by the Church. It is alright to have and state preferences, and even advocate for them. But too often various “camps” hurl stones back and forth and look down on others who are merely exercising legitimate options. The lovers of the Traditional Latin Mass have spent years in exile and been treated very poorly. Others who prefer more charismatic forms of the Mass are also ridiculed by some. And both these communities can also dish it out. But to be clear, as long as we stay inside the guard rails of the norms, there are various and legitimate lanes, whatever your preference. A little mutual respect please.
As for the social doctrine of the Church, here too there is a wide variety of understanding as to the application of those teachings. Catholics of different political backgrounds will differ on how best to apply some of the norms in caring for the poor. Further there has been the division of the Church along certain lines, the life and moral issues on one side, and the social issues on the other. To be sure, we need a division of labor. Everyone can’t do everything. Those who advocate for the poor ought to be glad that others are working to end abortion. And those in the pro-life community ought to be glad, and see as partners, those in the Church who advocate for, and serve the poor. We should value one another as the basis for any discussion. There may still be differences on details and emphasis, but the over all demeanor should be one of grateful appreciation for the work of the other. That should set the tone for the discussion.
Even in the necessary corrections where a commentator, or the blog author, has strayed from doctrinal accuracy, it is healthy to presume good will on their part, and that they did not wish or intend to stray from Catholic teaching. Further it is helpful to assume that terminology can and does often have technical uses, and more colloquial uses as well. This is not a blog for highly trained theologians, it is for the ordinary faithful who often speak in manners that are more relaxed and less technical. Rushing to accuse others of “error” or “heterodoxy” or humiliating them for the terminology of their comment may win the argument, but discourage a member of the faithful from ever evangelizing again, or being “out there” with their faith. Here too, gentle correction and distinction can be helpful, but with love. We are all brothers and sisters.
As for those outside our faith some of whom may initiate with a hostile tone, I will often call them on it and encourage them to stick to the issue. But here too, we who respond ought to try and stick to the issue.
Some helpful advice was recently posted at The New Liturgical Movement regarding comments and, while the subject at hand was artistic criticism, I have the adpated the advice for our context. Please consider what David Clayton says:
It seems to be an aspect of human nature that criticism flows more easily than praise, and this is never more apparent in the comments at the bottom of blogs! However, some subjects particularly seem to attract the ire of readers…I always hold my breath. I know it will attract a hail of criticism from people who worry that it does not conform to what they believe to be the standard…Criticism and differing opinions are not bad things in themselves. After all, we are trying to re-establish a culture of beauty in the West and beauty by its very nature it is difficult to pin down precisely. One should expect differing reactions and ideas of what is good. So please, let’s have them. However, I would like to make some points about the nature and tone of some of the criticisms made.
First, a request: if you are stating opinions, please do so in the spirit that concedes that others may have other perfectly valid opinions. Like email, blog comments seem to be a forum in which it is difficult not to express things abruptly and so appear rude. It’s not always easy I know, to make sure that what we write has a gentle manner. I would ask us all to try. [People] must expect critique of their position, but they should not have to put up with rudeness. ….
If you can explain why you think as you do, that would be helpful, especially if you don’t like something. If you do not, then what you are giving us [seems] just a subjective opinion….[And] if they are opinions, let’s make it clear that this is all they are rather than presenting them as indisputable truths….
Archeologism: the comments of some seem to stem from an assumption that culture existed in a perfect form at some point in the past and that the work of man over time has caused it to degenerate. The main concern for those who believe this, therefore, is a strict conformity to the past glorious (sometimes arbitrarily assigned) age. Working from tradition, in contrast, is more nuanced. It respects the past and does not seek change without good reason, but always seeks to understand why something was done in a particular way. It accepts that sometimes we must develop and reapply the core principles in response to contemporary challenges or if there is a need to communicate something new. Sometimes this development will be so great that a new tradition is established…..
Dealing with imperfection: even if something is partially wrong or in error or even just disliked, it doesn’t mean that we can’t learn something from it……
As a general principle, given that we are in a process of re-establishing a culture of beauty, I would generally advocate a conservative approach to what goes in our churches at the moment. However,…. flexibility and adaptability underpinned by good discernment is the source of richness and vigor in Christian culture. …No doubt along the way there were innovations … that were rejected as a whole, but nonetheless contributed something to what eventually became … acceptable.
A final disclaimer. I do not claim I get the balance and the tone perfectly. This post is not written from on high, from one who is perfect, to those who are not. Rather this is for “us” who interact on this relatively new medium of the Internet where the face and person on the other side of the screen are not seen. Yet those with whom we interact ARE human persons. In recent months I have been increasingly bothered at the tone of some incoming comments, most of which I had to delete, and you never saw. Some of them were just plain unkind, others hypercritical, still others rude and riddled with personal attack. Some others were clearly only an attack, and not a request for real discussion. Some were directed personally at me, others at some of the commentators here. Still others were mean-spirited attacks at the bishops, those who prefer other permitted liturgical forms, or those who come from a different theological tradition within the Church than they.
I will say that some of these comments cause me great personal grief, whether for myself or those who are unfairly or excessively attacked. So for us all, whom Christ loves, and for whom he died, let’s consider that the one on the other side of the screen is a human person, worthy of respect. And to be clear, most of us don’t need this post in an absolute sense, but just as a gentle reminder. God bless you.
The Gospel today asks a most fundamental question: “What is it that you most value?….What is it that you most want?” Now be careful to answer this question honestly. We tend to answer questions like this as we “should” answer them, rather than honestly. But when we’re with the doctor, (and Jesus is our doctor), the best bet is to answer honestly, so we can begin a true healing process. And the fact is, we all need a heart transplant. That is, we need a new heart, one that desires God and the things waiting for us in heaven, more than any earthly thing.
So let’s take a look at this Gospel that sets forth, in three fundamental movements, the “what” and the “worth” of the Kingdom of God, along with a “warning” that reminds us, we have a choice to make.
I. What – The Gospel uses three images for the kingdom, two of which we will look at here, and the third of which we will look at later. The first two images are that of the buried treasure and the pearl. Both these images have some significance elsewhere in the scriptures and studying them will be helpful in fine tuning our understanding of the gift of the Kingdom Jesus is discussing.
A. Buried Treasure – The concept of treasure (here buried treasure) is mentioned elsewhere by Jesus:
Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also. (Matt 6:19-21)
Hence this image of treasure that Jesus uses today, is an image for the heart and for our deepest desires, for our treasure is linked to our heart. One of the greatest gifts that God offers us is the gift of a new heart. One of the most fundamental prophetic texts of the Old Testament announces what Jesus has fulfilled:
Oh, my people, I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your impurities and from all your idols. I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws. (Ezekiel 36:25-27)
Thus, the great treasure of the Kingdom of God gives us a new heart, for by choosing this treasure, our heart is changed. To have a new heart is to see and experience our desires change. We are less desirous and focused on passing worldly things, and more on the lasting treasure of the Kingdom of heaven. We begin to love what, and who, God loves. We begin to love holiness, justice, chastity, goodness, righteousness, and truth. We begin to love our spouses, family members, the poor, even our enemies more as God loves them. Our hearts become alive with joy and zeal for the Kingdom of God and an evangelical spirit impels us to speak what we believe and know to be true.
Yes, the buried and hidden treasure of the Kingdom of God, unlocks our heart and brings new life coursing through our veins and arteries, through our very soul. In choosing this treasure we get a new heart. For where our treasure is, there also will be our heart.
B. Pearl – The second image of the pearl is from the wisdom tradition where holy Wisdom is likened to a pearl. And here too is described one of the most precious gifts of the Kingdom of God: the gift of a new mind through holy Wisdom. And what is the new mind? It is to begin to think more and more as God thinks, to share in his priorities and his vision. It is to see, increasingly as God sees and to have the mind of Christ (cf 1 Cor 2:16). With this new mind, we see through and reject worldly thinking, worldly priorities and worldly agendas. We come to rejoice in the truth of God and to grasp more deeply its beauty and sensibility. What a precious gift the new mind is, to think with God and to have the mind of Christ.
So here are two precious manifestations of the Kingdom of God: a new heart and a new mind, which is really another way of saying, “a whole new self.” This then leads to the next movement of the Gospel.
II. Worth – What are these offerings of the Kingdom worth and what do they ultimately cost? The answer is very clear in this gospel, they cost, and are worth, EVERYTHING. Regarding the hidden treasure and the pearl, the text says that both men went and sold all they had for these precious offerings. They were willing to forsake everything for them.
Now, be careful not to reduce this Gospel to a moralism. Notice that these men were eager to go and sell, forsake, everything else. They did this not because they had to, so much as they wanted to. And they wanted to pay the price and were willing to do so, even with eagerness, because they were so enamored of the glory they found. And here is the gift to seek from the Lord, a willing and eager heart for the Kingdom of God, so eager that we are willing to forsake any, and everything for it.
For ultimately the Kingdom of God does cost everything, and we will not fully inherit it until we are fully done with this world and its claims on our hearts.
But the gift to seek from the Lord is not that we, with sullen faces and depressed spirits, forsake the world as if we were paying taxes. No! The gift to seek is that we, like these men, be so taken by the glory of God and his kingdom that we are more than willing to set aside anything that gets in our way, that we should be so eager for the things of the Kingdom that the world’s intoxicating and addictive trinkets matter little to us and the loss of them means little.
Do you see? This is the gift. The reception of heart that appreciates the true worth of the Kingdom of God, such that no price is too high. Scriptures says elsewhere:
<>
What is more, I consider everything a loss compared to the surpassing greatness of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them rubbish, that I may gain Christ (Phil 3:8)
For this light momentary affliction is preparing for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison (2 Cor 4:17)
I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us. (Rom 8:18)
No eye has seen, no ear has heard, no mind has conceived what God has prepared for those who love him (1 Cor 2:9)
But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus (Phil 3:13-14).
<>
Yes, the Kingdom of God is more than worth any price we must pay, and ultimately we will pay all. Pray for an eager and willing spirit that comes from appreciating the surpassing worth of the Kingdom!
III. Warning – The final movement contains a warning about judgment. For, ultimately regarding the Kingdom of God, we either want it or we don’t want it. Hence the Lord speaks of a dragnet that captures everything (and this is the summons all have to come to the judgment). And those who want the Kingdom and have accepted its value and price will be gathered in. And those who do not want the Kingdom of God and do not accept its value will be escorted off.
For there are some who do not value the Kingdom. They may desire heaven, but it is a fake heaven of their own making, not the real heaven of the fullness of the Kingdom of God. The true heaven is the Kingdom of God in all its fullness and the Kingdom of God includes things like, forgiveness, mercy, justice, the dignity of life, love of the poor, chastity, God at the center (not me), the celebration of what is true, good and beautiful, and the love, even, of one’s enemy.
Now there are many who neither want nor value some or most of these things. When the net is drawn the decisions are final. And though we may wish a magic, fairy tale ending where suddenly the opponents of the Kingdom love it, God seems clearly to say that, at the judgement, one’s decision for or against the Kingdom is final and fixed forever.
An old song says, “Better choose the Lord today, for tomorrow, very well might be too late.” Thus we are warned, the judgment looms and we ought to be earnest in seeking a heart from the Lord that eagerly desires the Kingdom and appreciates its worth, above all others, and all things. In the end you get what you want. You will have either chosen the Kingdom or not.
So pray for a new heart, one which values the Kingdom of Heaven above all else. We ought to consider ourselves warned.
A Gospel today about we truly value in three movements.
This song says, You can have all this world, just give me Jesus.
Imagine yourself in those years, some 25 years ago or before. Cell phones were not yet common.
Now imagine the deep winter months in rural North Dakota. The temperature can dip to 30 below and blizzards and snow-squalls can set in quickly. What if you are driving from one town to another and you car breaks down? Sometimes it is forty miles to the next town. If it’s 30 below with wind or blowing snow, walking even a short distance can kill you.
All you can do is wait for help to drive by. Remember there are no cell phones, this is rural North Dakota, and, especially in bad weather, help might not come for a long time. With a broken down car, no heat, and the temperature so cold, death could come soon.
My North Dakota friend told me that his mother often asked him in winter as he would leave in the car, “Do you have candles with you?!”
People in that region, in those years, and I suppose some today as well, used to carry a box of votive candles with them in the car, and some matches too. On frigid day, if the car broke down, or got stuck in the snow, lighting even one candle and cracking the window just slightly (for ventilation), could mean the difference between life and death.
Just one candle, maybe two, could warm the car enough to stave off death. And Catholic votive candles were the perfect choice.
What are votive candles if not a symbol of our prayer, our hope in God. They also are a burnt offering, and an memorare of our prayer burning before God.
And if one candle can save a life, how about one prayer?
In most cases the full power of prayer is hid from us here. But I suspect one of the joys of heaven will be that we will see what a remarkable difference our prayer really made, even our distracted and poorly executed prayers. Perhaps someone in heaven will come to us and say, “I am here because you prayed.” Perhaps we will see how our prayers helped avert war, turn back violence, save children from abortion, and convert hearts. We will know that our prayers helped open doors, brought blessings, and contained damage.
Just one prayer. Just one candle.
Do you have candles with you? Have you prayed? You never know, you might save a life in this cold world.
Here is a sermon I preached at the White House about five years ago on the power of prayer.
Years ago, in seminary, one of my brother-seminarians from North Dakota gave me an image of prayer. It occurs to me to tell this winter story in the midst of the heat wave that has most of the U.S. in its grip.
Imagine yourself in those years, some 25 years ago or before. Cell phones were not yet common.
Now imagine the deep winter months in rural North Dakota. The temperature can dip to 30 below and blizzards and snow-squalls can set in quickly. What if you are driving from one town to another and you car breaks down? Sometimes it is forty miles to the next town. If it’s 30 below with wind or blowing snow, walking even a short distance can kill you.
All you can do is wait for help to drive by. Remember there are no cell phones, this is rural North Dakota, and, especially in bad weather, help might not come for a long time. With a broken down car, no heat, and the temperature so cold, death could come soon.
How will you survive?
Candles.
My North Dakota friend told me that his mother often asked him in winter as he would leave in the car, “Do you have candles with you?!”
People in that region, in those years, and I suppose some today as well, used to carry a box of votive candles with them in the car, and some matches too. On frigid day, if the car broke down, or got stuck in the snow, lighting even one candle and cracking the window just slightly (for ventilation), could mean the difference between life and death.
Just one candle, maybe two, could warm the car enough to stave off death. And Catholic votive candles were the perfect choice.
What are votive candles if not a symbol of our prayer, our hope in God. They also are a burnt offering, and an memorare of our prayer burning before God.
And if one candle can save a life, how about one prayer?
In most cases the full power of prayer is hid from us here. But I suspect one of the joys of heaven will be that we will see what a remarkable difference our prayer really made, even our distracted and poorly executed prayers. Perhaps someone in heaven will come to us and say, “I am here because you prayed.” Perhaps we will see how our prayers helped avert war, turn back violence, save children from abortion, and convert hearts. We will know that our prayers helped open doors, brought blessings, and contained damage.
Just one prayer. Just one candle.
Do you have candles with you? Have you prayed? You never know, you might save a life in this cold world.
Here is a sermon I preached at the White House about five years ago on the power of prayer.
A few weeks ago when the Gospel from today’s Mass was proclaimed on Sunday, someone asked me a series of questions regarding the sower. We are told by Jesus that the sower is the Son of Man, Jesus himself. Hence, why would the Lord, who knows everything ahead of time, sow seed he knew would not bear fruit?
Let’s review the text:
“A sower went out to sow. And as he sowed, some seed fell on the path, and birds came and ate it up. Some fell on rocky ground, where it had little soil. It sprang up at once because the soil was not deep, and when the sun rose it was scorched, and it withered for lack of roots. Some seed fell among thorns, and the thorns grew up and choked it. But some seed fell on rich soil, and produced fruit, a hundred or sixty or thirtyfold. Whoever has ears ought to hear.” (Matt 13:1-9)
Now, a human sower can have little control over the destiny of the seeds he sows. But in this parable Jesus, who is God is the sower and he has the capacity to sow seeds only in perfect soil. Why then waste any seed on rocky or thin soil, or the path? This is the question I was asked.
Perhaps a series of possible “answers” is all we can venture. I place “answers” in quotes since we are in fact touching on some mysteries here of which we can only speculate. So, here are some “answers.”
1. God is extravagant – it is not just seed He scatters liberally, it is everything. There are hundreds of billions of stars in over 100 billion galaxies, most of these seemingly devoid of life as we understand it. Between these 100 billion galaxies are huge amounts of, what seems to be, empty space. On this planet where one species of bird would do, there are thousands of species, tens of thousands of different sorts of insects, a vast array of different sorts of trees, mammals, fish etc. Extravagant barely covers it. The word “extravagant” means “to go, or wander beyond.” And God has gone vastly beyond anything we can imagine. But God is love, and love is extravagant. The image of him sowing seeds, almost in a careless way is thus consistent with the usual way of God.
This of course is less an answer to the question before us than a deepening of the question. The answer, if there is one, is caught up in the mystery of love. Love does not say, what is the least I can do? It says “What more can I do.” If a man loves a woman, he does not look for the cheapest gift on her birthday, rather he looks for an extravagant gift. God is Love and God is extravagant.
2. Even if the failed seed represents those who ultimately reject him, God loves that seed anyway. Remember, as Jesus goes on to explain, the seeds that fail to bear fruit, are symbols of those who allow riches, worldly preoccupation, persecution and other things to draw them away from God. But, even knowing this, does not change God’s love for them. He still wills their existence. Scripture says elsewhere, But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous (Matt 5:44-45).
Yes, God loves even those who will reject him and will not, knowing ahead of that rejection, say to them, “You cannot exist.” He thus scatters even that seed, knowing ahead of time that it will not bear fruit. Further, he continues to send the sun and rain, even on those who will reject him.
Hence this parable shows forth God’s unfailing love. He sows seeds, even knowing they will not bear the fruit he wants. He wills the existence of all, even those who he knows ahead of time will reject him.
3. That God sows seeds and allows them to fall on bad soil is indicative of our freedom. The various places the seed falls is indicative of human freedom, more than illustrative of the intent of God. For one may still question, “Why would God “allow” seed to fall on the path, or among thorns, or in rocky soil?” And the only answer here is that God has made us free. Were He to go back and place the seed in good soil, this would, by way of the analogy of the parable, veto our choice, and we could only bear good fruit. In other words, there could be no other outcome than to bear fruit. But this is not freedom, for there is no real choice. Thus, that God sows seeds and allows them to fall on bad soil is indicative of our freedom.
So, permit these “answers.” God sows seed he knows will bear no fruit because he is extravagant, because he loves and wills the existence even of those he knows will reject him, and because he respects our freedom.
As with all reckoning about the interaction of God’s sovereignty with our freedom, these “answers” limp a bit. There are mysteries here caught up in time, in providence, freedom and the sovereignty of God. These answers are thus submitted with humility and should be read with humility.
I interpret this video to mean that God will never withdraw his offer, not that he is trying to force a solution. For though he wants to save us, he respects our freedom to let go.
The times in which we live are often described as “secular.” This word comes from the Latin “saecula” meaning “world.” Hence in saying our age is secular is another way of saying our times are worldly.
We may think it has always been so but such is not the case.
To be sure, it IS the human condition to be a little preoccupied with the world. But previous times have featured a much more religious focus than our own. The Middle Ages were especially known for way in which faith permeated the culture and daily experience. The Rose window to the right presents a typically Medieval Notion: Christ (the Lamb of God) at the center and everything surrounding Him.
In those days the holidays were the HOLYdays and one’s understanding of the calendar and the time of year centered around the Church’s calendar of saints and feasts. It wasn’t Winter it was advent, and then Christmastide. Even the word Christmas was ChristMASS. Halloween was the “Een (evening before) all Hallows (All Saints Day). Three times every day the Church bells rang the “Angelus” calling Catholics to a moment of prayer in honor of the incarnation. The Bells also rang summoning Catholics to Mass and vespers. In a previous article in this blog (By Their Buildings You Will Know Them) it was noted that even the architecture of the Middle Ages placed a large church at the center of every town.
Those days were not perfect days but they were more spiritual and the Christians everywhere were constantly reminded of the presence of God by the culture in which they lived. Seldom so today. Many people today almost never hear of God on a day-to-day basis.
But the truth is, God is everywhere. He indwells his creation and sustains every aspect of it. The Scriptures say that Jesus holds all creation together in himself (Col 1:17). Most people think of creation as a sort of machine or closed system in which we live. But that is not the case. Creation is a revelation of and experience of God’s love and providence. Not one leaf falls to the ground without God leading it there. Not one hair of our head is unknown and provided for by God. We are enveloped by God, caught up into his presence.
It is especially sad for young people today. Some of us who are a bit older remember a time when God was more recognized. I remember that we prayed every day in my PUBLIC school until I was in 6th grade.
I remember my 4th grade teacher often reminding me when I got out of line: “God is Watching!” SHe also kept a copy of the King James Bible on her desk and the worst thing a student could do was to put anything on top of the Bible. Within seconds Mrs Hicks would scold: “Don’t ever put on top of God’s Word….!” To this day I have a deep instinct never to place anything on top of a Bible. In that same public school we began each day as our Principal, Mr. Bulware read from the Bible, usually the New Testament, and then we prayed the Lord’s Prayer, then followed the Pledge of Allegiance….One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
I remember when Christmas (not “winter holidays”) in School was actually celebrated and that we sang religious songs even in public school well into my High School years. I remember our public high school choir singing “O Come All Ye Faithful” and many songs with religious subjects. Can you imagine a public school choir singing today “O come let us adore Him, Christ the Lord” ? Gone are the days.
But we need to teach and help our young people get in touch with God’s presence. Families out to pray grace at meals with their children and have numerous religious images. There ought to be family prayer and observances of the various feasts and seasons of our Church.
Question For Readers: What are some of the websites you might know that are helpful in families staying focused on God? Perhaps there are some devoted to helping Children and Teenagers experience the faith and the cycle of the Church’s year? Perhaps a few of you can also recommend sites that are helpful in this regard.
But the point is that we have to be intentional about placing reminders of God’s presence in our lives and those of our children.
Here too is a video for young people reminding them that God is near, not far. It’s a toe-tapper with a message:
