I have to admit that, historically, I've not been a person that worries too much about the history and lives of the saints. It's only been recently (since going to the Benedictine Monastery) that I've felt really connected to the saints as arbiters of God's love for us.
I'm in St. Thomas Aquinas Parish, as most of you know. I've heard ad nauseum that St. Thomas didn't want to be a Benedictine because they were affluent and the Dominicans (the order he did eventually join) was still new, not well respected, and (most importantly) poor.
I listened to a podcast this morning called the saint cast (http://www.saintcast.org) and hope I learned a slightly different but nonetheless true, take on that oversimplification. The truth is that St. Thomas was born and raised a few miles from Monte Cossina, the abbey St. Benedict founded in Northern Italy. His Uncle was the Abbott of this monastery and it was assumed that St. Thomas would follow in his celibate uncle's footsteps. Also, the Holy Roman Emperor, a relative of St. Thomas, and the Pope got into a fight and divided the monastery. Both of them saw St. Thomas as a logical, intelligent Abbott who would bring together the sharply divided monastery.
St. Thomas, however, decided that he felt a call to more education, so he left for Spain. It was there that he got into contact with St. Albert the Great, an great Dominican teacher...and the rest is history.
So, what it tells me is that St. Thomas' conversion wasn't just about money and power, although you can argue that that's part of it. It was about someone evangelizing him without worrying about that. Someone finally figuring out that this man of incredible intellect and learning needed holy people around him to support him in holiness. I think we all need to learn from the simplicity of St. Thomas.
Thursday, February 05, 2009
Wednesday, February 04, 2009
Reinstating a holocaust denier
This weekend, I decided to focus on forgiveness and unity for my homily. I talked about the lifting of the excommunication of the Society of St. Pius X. I mentioned the one bishop that is nuts, I almost used an offensive colloquialism to describe him but stopped myself, thank goodness. If you wonder what I almost said, it rhymes with "cat spit crazy".
Why would the Pope want us associated with this crazy bishop? I think it has to do with the fact that, despite his insanity, he's still a validly ordained bishop of the church who is leading people. And the fact that his fellow separated bishops were so embarrassed by his remarks that they asked him to silence himself.
I connected it to the idea of authority being used to heal people. Jesus is identified in the Gospel of Mark as having authority and that's why he heals. It is also why he is threatening to the powers that be.
Ultimately, this bishop will die and his ideas will die with him. But, his followers will continue on and will do so, not separated from the church but, hopefully, reunited with the church that fully acknowledges the holocaust and hopes that it will never happen again.
Why would the Pope want us associated with this crazy bishop? I think it has to do with the fact that, despite his insanity, he's still a validly ordained bishop of the church who is leading people. And the fact that his fellow separated bishops were so embarrassed by his remarks that they asked him to silence himself.
I connected it to the idea of authority being used to heal people. Jesus is identified in the Gospel of Mark as having authority and that's why he heals. It is also why he is threatening to the powers that be.
Ultimately, this bishop will die and his ideas will die with him. But, his followers will continue on and will do so, not separated from the church but, hopefully, reunited with the church that fully acknowledges the holocaust and hopes that it will never happen again.
Friday, January 30, 2009
Moving toward #600
24 posts from now, I'll post #600. I feel like I want to do something big like suggest a new and vibrant look and direction for the blog. Oh, don't get me wrong! I'm obviously going to keep the core of what my blog is about but I feel like I need to get re energized and find a direction that will help me know how to post more. So, I'll be working on that in the next 24 posts in the hopes that I can set a direction that will help to direct posts 600-1000...or something like that.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
St. Peter Claver
On my most recent trip to the Twin Cities, I attended mass at St. Peter Claver church, an African-American church in the Twin Cities. It was so odd because I ordinarily become very annoyed when a priest routinely ignores the rite and goes their own way instead. But, in this environment, it fit perfectly. The priest didn't stay still during the entire homily. He wandered all over church in an effort to make eye contact with every person there. It reminded me that I've become too accustomed to using notes for my homily. It's so much more effective if I don't. I need to work on that.
So, this weekend, I made an effort to write out my homily beforehand (though I still haven't put it here) and just look people in the eye while I was preaching. I haven't got that much reaction to a homily in a long time. I really need to make this a reality.
So, this weekend, I made an effort to write out my homily beforehand (though I still haven't put it here) and just look people in the eye while I was preaching. I haven't got that much reaction to a homily in a long time. I really need to make this a reality.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Being in the right place at the right time...
It's been two and a half weeks since I last celebrated a mass. I'm not bragging. I'm a little ashamed, to be honest. I've concelebrated several masses in those two and a half weeks, almost daily in fact. It's really odd, however, to go that long without celebrating a mass for people. It's rather unnerving, to be honest.
This past Sunday, I took a group of students to two churches in the Twin Cities. I sent one group to St. Agnes. It was their matronal feast and I guess they have switched from celebrating the current mass in Latin to the mass as it would have been celebrated prior to 1965. The students loved it. They were in awe. They said it was like heaven and earth touched and that they felt at home.
Two years ago, when I did this same type of experience, I sent the students to a rather liberal catholic church. The students were...let's call it upset. Angry would be closer to what they were. Unfulfilled at what had taken place. So, this year, I decided to take them to the black catholic church in the cities, St. Peter Claver. I brought them into this church the day before Martin Luther King Jr. Day and two days before President Obama took the oath of office. The liturgy was good. The priest's homily was spectacular. But, what hit me was that I was praying with people who have had a lot of reasons to feel betrayed and ashamed of how they have been treated by this country. But, for some there, they were going to feel as proud of this country as they ever have before. And, they were letting me be a part of that healing. It really was a honor to give peace to people there knowing that it means something different for them. It was a dream for the man whose martyrdom they celebrate the next day and a hope fulfilled for the man who was today elected.
This past Sunday, I took a group of students to two churches in the Twin Cities. I sent one group to St. Agnes. It was their matronal feast and I guess they have switched from celebrating the current mass in Latin to the mass as it would have been celebrated prior to 1965. The students loved it. They were in awe. They said it was like heaven and earth touched and that they felt at home.
Two years ago, when I did this same type of experience, I sent the students to a rather liberal catholic church. The students were...let's call it upset. Angry would be closer to what they were. Unfulfilled at what had taken place. So, this year, I decided to take them to the black catholic church in the cities, St. Peter Claver. I brought them into this church the day before Martin Luther King Jr. Day and two days before President Obama took the oath of office. The liturgy was good. The priest's homily was spectacular. But, what hit me was that I was praying with people who have had a lot of reasons to feel betrayed and ashamed of how they have been treated by this country. But, for some there, they were going to feel as proud of this country as they ever have before. And, they were letting me be a part of that healing. It really was a honor to give peace to people there knowing that it means something different for them. It was a dream for the man whose martyrdom they celebrate the next day and a hope fulfilled for the man who was today elected.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Sorry for the long absence
I'm on retreat right now after going to a week-long conference. That's why I haven't blogged in a while. I'm hoping that things will return to normal next week.
Thursday, December 25, 2008
Good news of great joy
Dear Brothers and sisters in Christ
“For a child is born to us, a son is given us; upon his shoulder dominion rests.”
This verse from the book of the prophet Isaiah resonates deep into our soul this night of heavenly peace. We celebrate a birthday unlike any other. For most people, we only celebrate the birthdays of the living. After their death, we have a different day to remember them by. Yet, for this “Wonder-Counselor”, this “appearance of the glory of our great God and savior”, this savior born in the lineage of David, we continue the praises that began with the songs of angels to shepherds some 2000 years ago. This Son will be remembered for his life and so, each year, we feel compelled to remember when first God and Mary gave the world its redeemer.
We need to take this time because it will soon be over. It seems to me like these next two weeks pass with the speed of Santa’s reindeer. So much preparation goes into tomorrow. The children need to behave, or at least they’ll do so when mom and dad remind them that Santa’s watching. We all will (hopefully) get to sleep in heavenly peace this night but, before the last present is unwrapped, we have already started putting away the Christmas decorations that have been out since Thanksgiving day. We start our plans for New Years eve…just one short week away. Do we want to have the cheese dip in the crock pot all night and spend all New Year’s Day soaking it to get it clean? Did we remember to get a babysitter for the kids? Then, before we know it, it’s all over and the kids are still at home on their winter break while the rest of us go back to work. Or, worse yet, the kids go back to their normal lives with their own family and we remember, with fondness, that there used to be something different about this time of year, something that just isn’t different any more because we’re older. We need this night to be different.
I think of this tonight as we read this most famous passage of the birth of Christ. This passage has been immortalized by such great readers as Raymond Burr, Stephen Colbert, and even Charlie Brown. It has been dissected by scientists to prove or disprove its historical reality. But, at its core, the evangelist is trying to tell us something larger than scientific news. He’s telling “good news of great joy.” Mary and Joseph make the 90 mile trek from Nazareth in the Galilee region south to the miniscule city of David that is Bethlehem. They were going there because it was Joseph’s home town. This should have been a time of rejoicing. In a time in which travel was difficult, especially because they weren’t a family of wealth so they would have had jobs that demanded they stay in close to home, the fact that fancy pants Joseph is coming home with the woman he intends on marrying should have meant that everyone is putting on their Sabbath best and getting the best room in the house ready for their arrival. But, because of the census, everyone is coming home, all sixteen children of the sixteen children of the sixteen children. This town of limited space and resources suddenly is overpopulated such that the entire house, even the equivalent of a garage, would have been necessary for occupancy. That’s really where Joseph and Mary found themselves sleeping, in a room reserved for the animals since the rest of the house was taken. And, of course, this is when all the elements came together for the birth of Jesus. Mary wraps her son in straps of cloth and takes a deep pride in her newborn son.
Meanwhile, somewhere close by, the working stiffs of the world who had no idea what was happening, were informed by angels that they should be the first to visit the infant wrapped in swaddling clothes and laying in a manger. One wonders why the angels appear to them? These aren’t the mighty and powerful of this world. They also aren’t the poorest of the poor. They’re hardworking, middle-class folks that take a shower after work, not before. Jesus is literally surrounded by them this night in his parents, his extended family and, now, because of the message of angels, the shepherds.
It seems as though, throughout his ministry, he had a special affinity for them and people like them. He called hard-working fishermen to be his first disciples. He scorned the rich and powerful who were far too comfortable in this life calling them hypocrites. He looked with love upon the poor but never told his followers that it was their job to get rid of poverty. In fact, at points, he seemed to indicate that there will always be poor people. It’s almost as though Jesus knows that the ones who are most open to his message are the ones who most need to slow down their lives and get a view of the larger picture, the ones most in need of a Sabbath rest. The shepherds could easily get so fixated on protecting their sheep that they lose the sense of wonder and awe. Joseph’s family were so concerned with finding places for everyone and keeping everyone fed, that they lost their sense of charity. That’s the amazing thing about preoccupation: It makes it easy to neglect something important. When the chaos subsides and before you take down the decorations, take a minute or two and remember one thing. This is not a birthday party for a long-dead loved one that we just can’t quite stop remembering. This Christ mass is the birthday of the savior of the world whose birth was foretold by prophets and announced to common shepherds. It is a time for us to pause and give thanks to the God who came into this world to personally show us his love. I pray that each of you feel the song of praise the angels sang so long ago, “Glory to God in the highest and on earth, peace to those on whom is his favor rests!” May God bless each of you this Christmas Season!
“For a child is born to us, a son is given us; upon his shoulder dominion rests.”
This verse from the book of the prophet Isaiah resonates deep into our soul this night of heavenly peace. We celebrate a birthday unlike any other. For most people, we only celebrate the birthdays of the living. After their death, we have a different day to remember them by. Yet, for this “Wonder-Counselor”, this “appearance of the glory of our great God and savior”, this savior born in the lineage of David, we continue the praises that began with the songs of angels to shepherds some 2000 years ago. This Son will be remembered for his life and so, each year, we feel compelled to remember when first God and Mary gave the world its redeemer.
We need to take this time because it will soon be over. It seems to me like these next two weeks pass with the speed of Santa’s reindeer. So much preparation goes into tomorrow. The children need to behave, or at least they’ll do so when mom and dad remind them that Santa’s watching. We all will (hopefully) get to sleep in heavenly peace this night but, before the last present is unwrapped, we have already started putting away the Christmas decorations that have been out since Thanksgiving day. We start our plans for New Years eve…just one short week away. Do we want to have the cheese dip in the crock pot all night and spend all New Year’s Day soaking it to get it clean? Did we remember to get a babysitter for the kids? Then, before we know it, it’s all over and the kids are still at home on their winter break while the rest of us go back to work. Or, worse yet, the kids go back to their normal lives with their own family and we remember, with fondness, that there used to be something different about this time of year, something that just isn’t different any more because we’re older. We need this night to be different.
I think of this tonight as we read this most famous passage of the birth of Christ. This passage has been immortalized by such great readers as Raymond Burr, Stephen Colbert, and even Charlie Brown. It has been dissected by scientists to prove or disprove its historical reality. But, at its core, the evangelist is trying to tell us something larger than scientific news. He’s telling “good news of great joy.” Mary and Joseph make the 90 mile trek from Nazareth in the Galilee region south to the miniscule city of David that is Bethlehem. They were going there because it was Joseph’s home town. This should have been a time of rejoicing. In a time in which travel was difficult, especially because they weren’t a family of wealth so they would have had jobs that demanded they stay in close to home, the fact that fancy pants Joseph is coming home with the woman he intends on marrying should have meant that everyone is putting on their Sabbath best and getting the best room in the house ready for their arrival. But, because of the census, everyone is coming home, all sixteen children of the sixteen children of the sixteen children. This town of limited space and resources suddenly is overpopulated such that the entire house, even the equivalent of a garage, would have been necessary for occupancy. That’s really where Joseph and Mary found themselves sleeping, in a room reserved for the animals since the rest of the house was taken. And, of course, this is when all the elements came together for the birth of Jesus. Mary wraps her son in straps of cloth and takes a deep pride in her newborn son.
Meanwhile, somewhere close by, the working stiffs of the world who had no idea what was happening, were informed by angels that they should be the first to visit the infant wrapped in swaddling clothes and laying in a manger. One wonders why the angels appear to them? These aren’t the mighty and powerful of this world. They also aren’t the poorest of the poor. They’re hardworking, middle-class folks that take a shower after work, not before. Jesus is literally surrounded by them this night in his parents, his extended family and, now, because of the message of angels, the shepherds.
It seems as though, throughout his ministry, he had a special affinity for them and people like them. He called hard-working fishermen to be his first disciples. He scorned the rich and powerful who were far too comfortable in this life calling them hypocrites. He looked with love upon the poor but never told his followers that it was their job to get rid of poverty. In fact, at points, he seemed to indicate that there will always be poor people. It’s almost as though Jesus knows that the ones who are most open to his message are the ones who most need to slow down their lives and get a view of the larger picture, the ones most in need of a Sabbath rest. The shepherds could easily get so fixated on protecting their sheep that they lose the sense of wonder and awe. Joseph’s family were so concerned with finding places for everyone and keeping everyone fed, that they lost their sense of charity. That’s the amazing thing about preoccupation: It makes it easy to neglect something important. When the chaos subsides and before you take down the decorations, take a minute or two and remember one thing. This is not a birthday party for a long-dead loved one that we just can’t quite stop remembering. This Christ mass is the birthday of the savior of the world whose birth was foretold by prophets and announced to common shepherds. It is a time for us to pause and give thanks to the God who came into this world to personally show us his love. I pray that each of you feel the song of praise the angels sang so long ago, “Glory to God in the highest and on earth, peace to those on whom is his favor rests!” May God bless each of you this Christmas Season!
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
The role of conscience in being a catholic on good standing.
This question is, oftentimes, raised regarding several “hot button” moral issues including abortion, gay marriage, war, euthanasia, stem cell research, etc. The classic example of this is a politician who claims to have a well-formed conscience who is told by his bishop that he cannot receive Holy Communion because he legislates contrary to a church teaching. Is the church trying to impair the politician from freely doing his job? Is the bishop justified in stating that the politician’s actions have excommunicated him? The easy answer to both questions is: It depends. The difficulty comes in defining on what circumstances it depends.
First off, I feel like I need to clarify a few terms. What do we mean by “informed conscience”? One can find a great definition of a conscience in the Catechism of the Catholic Church #’s 1776-1802. To abbreviate the content of those paragraphs, the conscience is “present at the heart of a person” to help guide a person in making moral decisions. Without the conscience, a person would not be culpable for his or her actions because it would be impossible to know right from wrong. A person spends a lifetime forming his or her conscience. The Word of God is key to the formation of conscience, though the church does not restrict the Word of God to just the Bible. The Bible is part of the larger Word of God but, ultimately, “We are assisted by the gifts of the Holy Spirit, aided by the witness or advice of others and guided by the authoritative teaching of the Church.”
So, in some ways, a fully formed conscience could not be in conflict with church teaching on issues on which the church has definitively decided, since it is what guides the formation of conscience. There are times in which a person, through no fault of his or her own, may not have a fully formed conscience. If the person was incapable, at the time of occurrence, of knowing what the teaching of the church was, they cannot be held accountable. Also, related to this, there is the prospect that a person is in the process of growing deeper in his or her understanding and is simply not to the point of learning (let alone accepting) a church teaching. In those cases, it’s possible that someone hasn’t yet had the church’s teaching on same-sex marriage or euthanasia explained to them or may have had an inadequate explanation. The person has an informed conscience but is ignorant of church teaching. Of course, it is the responsibility of the individual to seek out the full explanation of church teaching and not simply rely on ignorance as a rationale for not obeying the church.
Having said all of the above, there is room for legitimate disagreement with church authority if the church has not definitively stated a position on something or if the application of moral principles in a given situation is not entirely clear. For example, it is not legitimate to say that you wholesale disagree with the church’s teaching on abortion but are still a catholic in good standing. The church has been consistently clear that abortion violates the law of love and the dignity of the human person. But, if a pregnant woman has uterine cancer and would die without removing it, there is room for legitimate moral disagreement. Some moral theologians say that you are justified in removing the cancerous uterus since you are preserving the life of the mother and not intending on committing an abortion. Others disagree and say abortion is, nonetheless, an indirect result of the action and, therefore, it should not be taken. Oftentimes, the application of moral principles in complex situations is where moral theologians will disagree.
To know if something has been definitively decided, one should look toward the Catechism of the Catholic Church and official church statements. And, remember, not every statement that a priest, bishop or educated lay person makes is definitive. As a priest, I can tell you that I have very often been saddened by priests who either are unwilling to teach what the church teaches on tough moral teachings or who seem to believe that every statement they make is definitive.
First off, I feel like I need to clarify a few terms. What do we mean by “informed conscience”? One can find a great definition of a conscience in the Catechism of the Catholic Church #’s 1776-1802. To abbreviate the content of those paragraphs, the conscience is “present at the heart of a person” to help guide a person in making moral decisions. Without the conscience, a person would not be culpable for his or her actions because it would be impossible to know right from wrong. A person spends a lifetime forming his or her conscience. The Word of God is key to the formation of conscience, though the church does not restrict the Word of God to just the Bible. The Bible is part of the larger Word of God but, ultimately, “We are assisted by the gifts of the Holy Spirit, aided by the witness or advice of others and guided by the authoritative teaching of the Church.”
So, in some ways, a fully formed conscience could not be in conflict with church teaching on issues on which the church has definitively decided, since it is what guides the formation of conscience. There are times in which a person, through no fault of his or her own, may not have a fully formed conscience. If the person was incapable, at the time of occurrence, of knowing what the teaching of the church was, they cannot be held accountable. Also, related to this, there is the prospect that a person is in the process of growing deeper in his or her understanding and is simply not to the point of learning (let alone accepting) a church teaching. In those cases, it’s possible that someone hasn’t yet had the church’s teaching on same-sex marriage or euthanasia explained to them or may have had an inadequate explanation. The person has an informed conscience but is ignorant of church teaching. Of course, it is the responsibility of the individual to seek out the full explanation of church teaching and not simply rely on ignorance as a rationale for not obeying the church.
Having said all of the above, there is room for legitimate disagreement with church authority if the church has not definitively stated a position on something or if the application of moral principles in a given situation is not entirely clear. For example, it is not legitimate to say that you wholesale disagree with the church’s teaching on abortion but are still a catholic in good standing. The church has been consistently clear that abortion violates the law of love and the dignity of the human person. But, if a pregnant woman has uterine cancer and would die without removing it, there is room for legitimate moral disagreement. Some moral theologians say that you are justified in removing the cancerous uterus since you are preserving the life of the mother and not intending on committing an abortion. Others disagree and say abortion is, nonetheless, an indirect result of the action and, therefore, it should not be taken. Oftentimes, the application of moral principles in complex situations is where moral theologians will disagree.
To know if something has been definitively decided, one should look toward the Catechism of the Catholic Church and official church statements. And, remember, not every statement that a priest, bishop or educated lay person makes is definitive. As a priest, I can tell you that I have very often been saddened by priests who either are unwilling to teach what the church teaches on tough moral teachings or who seem to believe that every statement they make is definitive.
Sunday, December 21, 2008
A first
I had to cancel the one mass I was supposed to preach at this morning because we're having extremely cold temperatures here in Iowa. I was going to preach about Mary and her important role in salvation history. I hope to slightly change it for my Christmas homily so I don't want to put it here, yet. But, I hope to have an answer I gave in my bulletin to a question of ethics and morals and such.
Saturday, December 13, 2008
prop 8 the musical
Hollywood has thrown in it's hat on the California gay marriage initiative. They released a video that you can watch here. It's really silly and totally filled with flawed logic. Here's the logic...
The world was happy when Obama was running.
The religious folks of this country convinced the world to hate gays when it was most happy.
But, if we hate gays because of the Bible, they need to implement the whole bible in the most literal fashion possible.
Jesus doesn't want that. If you pick and choose, choose love and not hate (love being defined as allowing other people to do whatever they want to one another as long as they're consenting).
And, we all should want gay marriage because it will make money.
I was initially annoyed that we were being lumped in as fundamentalist. The attacks on Catholicism in the "religious" group was obvious. There was a guy wearing a clergy shirt and a woman who made the sign of the cross. But, we aren't fundamentalist. We hold to a central teaching authority that interprets scripture. That's different from picking and choosing. Both catholicism and mormonism have that central teaching authority by the way.
Further, the illustration that they use (shell fish are forbidden in the Old Testament so you shouldn't eat them) is debunked in the new (Luke 10:8 "Whatever town you enter and they welcome you, eat what is set before you" and 1 Corinthians 10:25-27 "Eat anything sold in the market, without raising questions on grounds of conscience, for "the earth and its fullness are the Lord's." If an unbeliever invites you and you want to go, eat whatever is placed before you, without raising questions on grounds of conscience.")
Lastly, what does it say that we allow gay people to marry because they'll spend money? To me, that's like saying that we should allow women to become priests because there's a shortage or allow priests to marry because there is a shortage. It's like, "okay, now that we're desperate, we'll allow just about anyone to do this." We need money! I like making money! Allow gay people to get married and I'll make money for my church. I could charge an arm and a leg for gays to use my church to get married.
In the end, it's a video that's getting a lot of positive press coverage but I think it needed a little more thought coverage.
The world was happy when Obama was running.
The religious folks of this country convinced the world to hate gays when it was most happy.
But, if we hate gays because of the Bible, they need to implement the whole bible in the most literal fashion possible.
Jesus doesn't want that. If you pick and choose, choose love and not hate (love being defined as allowing other people to do whatever they want to one another as long as they're consenting).
And, we all should want gay marriage because it will make money.
I was initially annoyed that we were being lumped in as fundamentalist. The attacks on Catholicism in the "religious" group was obvious. There was a guy wearing a clergy shirt and a woman who made the sign of the cross. But, we aren't fundamentalist. We hold to a central teaching authority that interprets scripture. That's different from picking and choosing. Both catholicism and mormonism have that central teaching authority by the way.
Further, the illustration that they use (shell fish are forbidden in the Old Testament so you shouldn't eat them) is debunked in the new (Luke 10:8 "Whatever town you enter and they welcome you, eat what is set before you" and 1 Corinthians 10:25-27 "Eat anything sold in the market, without raising questions on grounds of conscience, for "the earth and its fullness are the Lord's." If an unbeliever invites you and you want to go, eat whatever is placed before you, without raising questions on grounds of conscience.")
Lastly, what does it say that we allow gay people to marry because they'll spend money? To me, that's like saying that we should allow women to become priests because there's a shortage or allow priests to marry because there is a shortage. It's like, "okay, now that we're desperate, we'll allow just about anyone to do this." We need money! I like making money! Allow gay people to get married and I'll make money for my church. I could charge an arm and a leg for gays to use my church to get married.
In the end, it's a video that's getting a lot of positive press coverage but I think it needed a little more thought coverage.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
liturgy done poorly
To celebrate mass is to do liturgy. Liturgy is a prescribed, ritualistic, prayer form. Usually, liturgy is very old or has roots in centuries old action.
I just did a communal penance. This is a relatively new liturgy, having been basically created at the Second Vatican Council as an alternative to what most people would call confession or individual penance and reconciliation. You have readings and music and then have an individual time to confess to a priest.
The problem with what just happened was that it was awful. Some places had a start time of 7:00 and other 7:30 so we went with the 7:30 start time. I forgot to tell the priests of the differing start times so they all showed up at 7:00. Ugh. And a congregation of about 12 were here then too. I thought about starting and just having the folks who came at 7:30 just get in line when they got there but that didn't seem to make sense. The 7:30 time was on several places. And then I just did the communal part poorly. I forgot the act of contrition and our father, for instance. I decided to "try something new"...at least new for us...of having people leave after having confessed their sins and doing their penance.
So, I started promptly at 7:30 and apologized for the time confusion. We read the readings and I preached. Then, I should have had them quietly reflect on the examination of conscience before praying the Act of Contrition and Our Father together. After that, I would have had the individual part of the ritual. Instead, after the homilet (very short reflection on the readings) I skipped the Act of Contrition (aka, the matter of the sacrament!) and the Our Father and went right to the individual penance. I realized it when the first confessor came forward to me. There was, however, no going back and not chance to do what we had forgotten since they left immediately after.
The good thing was that I had a homily prepared about not taking too seriously the rough spots of life, not getting so upset that we lose perspective. I even used that in one of the two apologies I gave. I made a mistake. It was the worst liturgy I've celebrated since becoming a priest. In a year, I'll have forgotten it. Heck, in a month I'll have forgotten it. But, the forgiveness that happened in the midst of it, the love people felt because of God, THAT will hopefully be remembered forever.
I just did a communal penance. This is a relatively new liturgy, having been basically created at the Second Vatican Council as an alternative to what most people would call confession or individual penance and reconciliation. You have readings and music and then have an individual time to confess to a priest.
The problem with what just happened was that it was awful. Some places had a start time of 7:00 and other 7:30 so we went with the 7:30 start time. I forgot to tell the priests of the differing start times so they all showed up at 7:00. Ugh. And a congregation of about 12 were here then too. I thought about starting and just having the folks who came at 7:30 just get in line when they got there but that didn't seem to make sense. The 7:30 time was on several places. And then I just did the communal part poorly. I forgot the act of contrition and our father, for instance. I decided to "try something new"...at least new for us...of having people leave after having confessed their sins and doing their penance.
So, I started promptly at 7:30 and apologized for the time confusion. We read the readings and I preached. Then, I should have had them quietly reflect on the examination of conscience before praying the Act of Contrition and Our Father together. After that, I would have had the individual part of the ritual. Instead, after the homilet (very short reflection on the readings) I skipped the Act of Contrition (aka, the matter of the sacrament!) and the Our Father and went right to the individual penance. I realized it when the first confessor came forward to me. There was, however, no going back and not chance to do what we had forgotten since they left immediately after.
The good thing was that I had a homily prepared about not taking too seriously the rough spots of life, not getting so upset that we lose perspective. I even used that in one of the two apologies I gave. I made a mistake. It was the worst liturgy I've celebrated since becoming a priest. In a year, I'll have forgotten it. Heck, in a month I'll have forgotten it. But, the forgiveness that happened in the midst of it, the love people felt because of God, THAT will hopefully be remembered forever.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
GOOD NEWS!!!
This past weekend, I noticed the word evangelium, or good news/gospel present in the first reading and gospel. In the first reading, it came after 39 chapters of warning: stop sinning! It's all your fault that we are in the straits we are. Then, the heavenly host tell Isaiah that he can stop being the prophet of doom and gloom and start giving them comfort. They, in turn, will preach good news. In the gospel of Mark, the author cites this passage and refers to the message he's going to give as that good news. I talked about how things aren't as bleak as we make them out to be. There is good news at Sts. Peter and Paul parish. The religious education is doing well both in terms of numbers and in terms of the content. The parish is doing okay financially. And we are keeping out eyes focused on being proactive for our parishioners by purchasing a defibrillator in case someone has a heart problem. I then said that, ultimately, as Christians, we take heart in good news because it reminds us of he who is Good News, Jesus Christ whose coming taught us the meaning of good news.
I had a man who never comments on the homily tell me he was very appreciative of hearing good news with all the bad news that is out there. That was good news to me.
I had a man who never comments on the homily tell me he was very appreciative of hearing good news with all the bad news that is out there. That was good news to me.
Thursday, December 04, 2008
Pushing Daisies
One day, I was looking up a few things on youtube, specifically anything with an actress named Kristen Chenowith. I came across a show called Pushing Daisies in which she sang a song. I looked up the show, figuring that it would have been years old and long-since canceled, only to discover that it's actually new and not (at that time) cancelled. I watched the Pie-lette episode (as it was called) and found it to be an interesting idea for a show. It's about a boy that discovers he can bring someone back from the dead for one minute, any longer and someone else will take their place. He can awaken them by touching them and put them back to death by touching them. It's one of those shows that adults can watch and snicker and little kids can watch and snicker but teenagers shouldn't watch it because of the sophisticated humor. I started watching the show through last season, the one that was interrupted by the writer's strike and looked forward to having a good, extremely colorful show to watch.
And then I found out that ABC has pulled the plug. I don't know how many episodes more they will do but I can guarantee that I'll miss it when it's gone. Which is weird when you think about it. It's not at all theological. It's just a story about a boy, a girl he brought back to life that is his childhood sweetheart but he can't touch or she'll die and a girl who's madly in love with him but he doesn't love back. And pies. I don't think ABC will bring it back or anything if I get everyone to watch it. The actors probably have new shows they're all involved with. But, I'm going to miss them telling this one.
And then I found out that ABC has pulled the plug. I don't know how many episodes more they will do but I can guarantee that I'll miss it when it's gone. Which is weird when you think about it. It's not at all theological. It's just a story about a boy, a girl he brought back to life that is his childhood sweetheart but he can't touch or she'll die and a girl who's madly in love with him but he doesn't love back. And pies. I don't think ABC will bring it back or anything if I get everyone to watch it. The actors probably have new shows they're all involved with. But, I'm going to miss them telling this one.
Monday, December 01, 2008
Shhhh! Watch!
Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ
Most of you are probably aware of the tragic events that took place in a department store in Long Island, New York on Friday. In case you hadn’t, on the day after Thanksgiving, a day that is almost synonymous with shopping in this country, a scenario of pandemonium erupted as approximately 2000 people waited to enter one of those discount mega-shopping stores. The crowd eventually ran out of patience for the employees to open the doors so they decided to break them down instead. When an employee tried to control them, they simply pushed him down and, literally, walked all over him. The mob of people that stepped on him eventually killed him. Now, I’m sure that there were more terrible things that happened that day in the world. All we have to do is look at Mumbai, India and the terrorist activities that happened there to see one example. To be honest, there was probably even more tragic things that happened in New York that day. What is it about this particular news item that merited the full coverage of every nation-wide news network in this country?
I have a feeling that, at part, it has to do with the sympathy effect. In other words, we can all pretty much sympathize with this poor employee getting trampled. So many of us shop on that day that store accountants hope it will make their books go from being in debt, or being in the red, to being profitable, or black. That’s why they call it Black Friday. And, I imagine that another reason why this is such a universally covered story is because it’s similar but not quite the same as you experienced. I imagine that, if you were one of the people who woke up at 5:00 in the morning to stand in line, you experienced some rude, pushy people that had to get that bargain. But, hopefully, no one was so rude and no mob so unruly that anyone got hurt. That’s the way most people deal with having to wait. We might not like it, but, still, we keep our passions in check as we grit out teeth and wait. That’s what keeps us waiting at that light at the corner of Lincoln Way and Ash, even though no one is coming and it seems to take forever to change. That’s what keeps us from pushing everyone out of the way when we’re standing in the back of a long line at a movie theater five minutes before the movie starts. For some things, we can be patient. The trouble comes when our patience runs out and we feel pressed to do something.
That’s the way Isaiah the prophet is feeling today. In our first reading, the prophet expresses frustration at the seeming absence of God. “Return of the sake of your servant! Cut open the heavens and come down. Do mighty things that our ancestors didn’t see you do. There is none who calls upon your name, who rouses himself to cling to you; for you have hidden your face from us and have delivered us up to our guilt.” The prophet feels frustrated and doesn’t know how to feel close to God again. You can almost hear the stages of grief as he goes through this…or at least the first four of them. One has to wonder what would cause a prophet to despair, a man whose job was to tell the people that they have gone too far from God and need to turn from their sin and return to God’s love. Has the pressure just become too much for him? Have the people forgotten God completely, so much so that they have forfeited salvation? The message of the prophet is clear, “RETURN! Return for the sake of your servants, the tribes of your heritage.” Come back God, We miss you and the longer you are gone, the less your people miss you. Come back before they don’t care anymore.
The answer to this comes in the gospel, a gospel that is translated on bumper stickers as, “God is coming! Look busy!” But, it’s much more profound than that. This gospel shouldn’t be a fear-based message as some preachers have made it. It should be an incredibly hopeful message about patience in waiting. In some ways, Jesus is explaining what this world is all about, waiting for something better. Waiting for a place in which suffering, pain and death have been destroyed. Waiting for a leader that will put the folks who are in charge now to shame. Waiting for the fulfillment of the grace we receive by being part of the church; in her sacraments and the other spiritual gifts that St. Paul talked about in the second reading.
Today, we begin this season of waiting, a season that tests our patience and forces us to sit still. As I said before, we know we can do it. That’s not the issue. The question is: “Are we willing”. Are we patient enough to wait to watch our favorite show because mom or dad wants to talk to us? Are we patient enough to sit down and give ourselves some quiet time to reflect on the person we are becoming? Are we patient enough to wait in line to experience the sacrament of reconciliation and learn again about God’s forgiveness? We know we can do it. The question is: Will we do it? Or are we not patient enough?
Most of you are probably aware of the tragic events that took place in a department store in Long Island, New York on Friday. In case you hadn’t, on the day after Thanksgiving, a day that is almost synonymous with shopping in this country, a scenario of pandemonium erupted as approximately 2000 people waited to enter one of those discount mega-shopping stores. The crowd eventually ran out of patience for the employees to open the doors so they decided to break them down instead. When an employee tried to control them, they simply pushed him down and, literally, walked all over him. The mob of people that stepped on him eventually killed him. Now, I’m sure that there were more terrible things that happened that day in the world. All we have to do is look at Mumbai, India and the terrorist activities that happened there to see one example. To be honest, there was probably even more tragic things that happened in New York that day. What is it about this particular news item that merited the full coverage of every nation-wide news network in this country?
I have a feeling that, at part, it has to do with the sympathy effect. In other words, we can all pretty much sympathize with this poor employee getting trampled. So many of us shop on that day that store accountants hope it will make their books go from being in debt, or being in the red, to being profitable, or black. That’s why they call it Black Friday. And, I imagine that another reason why this is such a universally covered story is because it’s similar but not quite the same as you experienced. I imagine that, if you were one of the people who woke up at 5:00 in the morning to stand in line, you experienced some rude, pushy people that had to get that bargain. But, hopefully, no one was so rude and no mob so unruly that anyone got hurt. That’s the way most people deal with having to wait. We might not like it, but, still, we keep our passions in check as we grit out teeth and wait. That’s what keeps us waiting at that light at the corner of Lincoln Way and Ash, even though no one is coming and it seems to take forever to change. That’s what keeps us from pushing everyone out of the way when we’re standing in the back of a long line at a movie theater five minutes before the movie starts. For some things, we can be patient. The trouble comes when our patience runs out and we feel pressed to do something.
That’s the way Isaiah the prophet is feeling today. In our first reading, the prophet expresses frustration at the seeming absence of God. “Return of the sake of your servant! Cut open the heavens and come down. Do mighty things that our ancestors didn’t see you do. There is none who calls upon your name, who rouses himself to cling to you; for you have hidden your face from us and have delivered us up to our guilt.” The prophet feels frustrated and doesn’t know how to feel close to God again. You can almost hear the stages of grief as he goes through this…or at least the first four of them. One has to wonder what would cause a prophet to despair, a man whose job was to tell the people that they have gone too far from God and need to turn from their sin and return to God’s love. Has the pressure just become too much for him? Have the people forgotten God completely, so much so that they have forfeited salvation? The message of the prophet is clear, “RETURN! Return for the sake of your servants, the tribes of your heritage.” Come back God, We miss you and the longer you are gone, the less your people miss you. Come back before they don’t care anymore.
The answer to this comes in the gospel, a gospel that is translated on bumper stickers as, “God is coming! Look busy!” But, it’s much more profound than that. This gospel shouldn’t be a fear-based message as some preachers have made it. It should be an incredibly hopeful message about patience in waiting. In some ways, Jesus is explaining what this world is all about, waiting for something better. Waiting for a place in which suffering, pain and death have been destroyed. Waiting for a leader that will put the folks who are in charge now to shame. Waiting for the fulfillment of the grace we receive by being part of the church; in her sacraments and the other spiritual gifts that St. Paul talked about in the second reading.
Today, we begin this season of waiting, a season that tests our patience and forces us to sit still. As I said before, we know we can do it. That’s not the issue. The question is: “Are we willing”. Are we patient enough to wait to watch our favorite show because mom or dad wants to talk to us? Are we patient enough to sit down and give ourselves some quiet time to reflect on the person we are becoming? Are we patient enough to wait in line to experience the sacrament of reconciliation and learn again about God’s forgiveness? We know we can do it. The question is: Will we do it? Or are we not patient enough?
Friday, November 28, 2008
Thanksgiving Day Homily
It wasn't great but it wasn't awful either....
Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ
This year, Pope Benedict asked us to focus on St. Paul in our prayer and studies. As I reflected on these Thanksgiving Day mass’ readings, it seemed most appropriate to do so. After all, St. Paul is, by far, the most prolific New Testament writer to use the word “thanks” in one form or another. He uses it a total of 42 out of the 67 times it appears in the New Testament, which works out to being about 63% of the time it is used. Paul uses it in every one of his works except Galatians, where he is far too angry to use it, and Titus, which seems more like a grocery list Paul left for Titus one day than a letter he intended to be kept for posterity.
The letter we heard during the second reading, Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians, contained 11 uses of this word, although, to be honest, Paul is actually using three different words when he does so. But, all can legitimately be translated thanks in english. First Corinthians is rather unique in the 11 times St. Paul uses thanks. Romans uses the term 7 times, followed by 2 Corinthians and Colossians, both of which use the term 5 times. So, it seems to make sense that if we want to understand what Paul means by thanks in order to help inform us at this celebration, we chose the right book to do so.
In our second reading, we heard Paul do one of his traditional “thanksgiving” sections which he uses to introduce a letter. We hear them so often that we may become kind of numb to what he is really saying. He begins, not with “Dear Fr. Dennis. How’s it going? I am fine…” the traditional beginning to our letters. He starts by introducing himself and saying who he is writing to. Next he gives a greeting similar to what we use at mass, “Grace and peace in God, our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ….” When that is done, Paul begins to introduce his subject matter in the Thanksgiving part. In the first letter to the Corinthians, St. Paul gives thanks that they are not lacking in any spiritual gift. It seems that, despite the presence of incredible spiritual gifts such as prophecy, healing, and tongues, the people in Corinth had forgotten that everything that they have is a gift from God. Corinth had allowed their lives to be ruled by sexual excesses, by sports, and by religious pluralism. On a day that has become synonymous with excess food, sports, and areligiosity, this message should hit home with us pretty hard. Paul is going to confront this over and over again in this letter by reminding his listeners of their need to give thanks for the spiritual gifts they have received. Since we don’t speak Greek, we kind of lose what Paul is saying. The words “give thanks” and “spiritual gift” are related “eucharista” and “charis”, the one word is the heart of the other. Paul emphasizes this idea of a gift needing to be thanked over and over again in his message. He connects it to service of neighbor, to speaking in tongues, and to the Eucharist. He seeks to cultivate a thankful heart in the community he is forming in this church because God gives spiritual gifts to those who give thanks to him.
So, on this Thanksgiving Day, it is a good day to take stock of all the many gifts we have received, as so many have as a part of their tradition. And, as we do, let us give thanks to the Lord, our God for it is right to give him thanks and praise.
Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ
This year, Pope Benedict asked us to focus on St. Paul in our prayer and studies. As I reflected on these Thanksgiving Day mass’ readings, it seemed most appropriate to do so. After all, St. Paul is, by far, the most prolific New Testament writer to use the word “thanks” in one form or another. He uses it a total of 42 out of the 67 times it appears in the New Testament, which works out to being about 63% of the time it is used. Paul uses it in every one of his works except Galatians, where he is far too angry to use it, and Titus, which seems more like a grocery list Paul left for Titus one day than a letter he intended to be kept for posterity.
The letter we heard during the second reading, Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians, contained 11 uses of this word, although, to be honest, Paul is actually using three different words when he does so. But, all can legitimately be translated thanks in english. First Corinthians is rather unique in the 11 times St. Paul uses thanks. Romans uses the term 7 times, followed by 2 Corinthians and Colossians, both of which use the term 5 times. So, it seems to make sense that if we want to understand what Paul means by thanks in order to help inform us at this celebration, we chose the right book to do so.
In our second reading, we heard Paul do one of his traditional “thanksgiving” sections which he uses to introduce a letter. We hear them so often that we may become kind of numb to what he is really saying. He begins, not with “Dear Fr. Dennis. How’s it going? I am fine…” the traditional beginning to our letters. He starts by introducing himself and saying who he is writing to. Next he gives a greeting similar to what we use at mass, “Grace and peace in God, our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ….” When that is done, Paul begins to introduce his subject matter in the Thanksgiving part. In the first letter to the Corinthians, St. Paul gives thanks that they are not lacking in any spiritual gift. It seems that, despite the presence of incredible spiritual gifts such as prophecy, healing, and tongues, the people in Corinth had forgotten that everything that they have is a gift from God. Corinth had allowed their lives to be ruled by sexual excesses, by sports, and by religious pluralism. On a day that has become synonymous with excess food, sports, and areligiosity, this message should hit home with us pretty hard. Paul is going to confront this over and over again in this letter by reminding his listeners of their need to give thanks for the spiritual gifts they have received. Since we don’t speak Greek, we kind of lose what Paul is saying. The words “give thanks” and “spiritual gift” are related “eucharista” and “charis”, the one word is the heart of the other. Paul emphasizes this idea of a gift needing to be thanked over and over again in his message. He connects it to service of neighbor, to speaking in tongues, and to the Eucharist. He seeks to cultivate a thankful heart in the community he is forming in this church because God gives spiritual gifts to those who give thanks to him.
So, on this Thanksgiving Day, it is a good day to take stock of all the many gifts we have received, as so many have as a part of their tradition. And, as we do, let us give thanks to the Lord, our God for it is right to give him thanks and praise.
Saturday, November 22, 2008
What have we done for the least ones?
A few years ago, I had the privilege of going to Conception Abbey in Conception, Missouri to spend some time learning what it means to be a monk. One of the moments that really impressed me was dinner. In the refectory, the monks sit quietly while one monk reads part of a book to them. They read the same book for several weeks at a time in order to read its entirety, although you’d be surprised at how many pages you make it through in the course of a half-hour meal. There is no talking during the meal but there is plenty of communication. In fact, the challenge I found was to eat, listen to what was being read, and pay attention to the needs of the monks surrounding you. You see, on each table there was the typical one salt shaker, one pepper shaker, one sugar bowl, and a container of sugar substitutes as well as one pitcher of water. These were to be shared with everyone sitting at the table but we had to do so without talking. So, the monks developed a series of hand signals to ask for the particular accessory to their meal. In a sense it was an ingenious way to get around the lack of verbal communication. But, it demanded that each person pay attention to the people around them and not simply put their face in their plate and ignore the other forty men sitting in that room.
The gospel today is one of the most challenging gospel passages we Americans hear. This gospel holds that, in the end, we will not be judged by what we acquire or how good shape we are in. It says that we will be judged by how well we have taken care of the least in this world. The first reading was a little more indirect about the message, in a sense, by stating that, when God comes to judge us, he will take care of the people who are the weakest. He will be like a shepherd who sees his flock and immediately goes to the injured and sick to take care of them. It reminded me of a mother who comes home from a hard day at work to a sick child. She loves all her children equally, but is probably going to go directly to the sick kid’s room to find out how bad her child feels. This makes perfect sense to me. What didn’t make sense to me was a verse towards the end of the reading. After this long passage in which the Lord is gathering the lost sheep, caring for the sick, and finding us food, it says, “…but the sleek and the strong I will destroy, shepherding them rightly.” What? At the judgment, God is going to destroy those who are sleek and strong? I’m may be in trouble! I need to go on a diet! I need to get sick! There was part of me that wondered if the prophet had taken the analogy a little too far. I mean, who gets slaughtered on a farm: the sickly runts of the litter or the fat, mature animals? But that doesn’t entirely help us understand what God is trying to get across to us in this passage. For that explanation, you have to turn to the gospel.
In it, we hear about the sheep and the goats. The sheep were the ones who cared for the little ones while the goats are the ones who only cared for themselves. It seems like the “sleek and strong” got so at the expense of the weakest among them. The goats took advantage of situations and were well provided for while the poor sheep were not at all taken care of. I think of this as we begin the Advent season and our country begins Christmas shopping season. I ran across a website the other day called advent conspiracy dot org. If you go to that website, you’ll come across the staggering figure that Jesus statement about people being thirsty and needing water is still true in several countries of this world. It would cost 10 billion dollars to fix, a figure that seems astronomical, until you think that Americans have spent, on average, 450 billion dollars for Christmas gifts in the past and we have given over 700 billion to different business in this country in order to bail them our of fiscal difficulties. Imagine the outrage that we, Americans, would feel if it was announced that we were going to use 10 billion dollars to go overseas and build wells for communities so they will have clean, drinkable water and train people locally how to do that as well. How do you think people would respond?
And, yet, we don’t have to look to other countries to find the marginalized of society. I have a feeling that we can find them right here in our midst. That’s partially why we will be celebrating the anointing of the sick in a few moments. This sacrament is one of two that is entirely for those who aren’t sleek or strong, along with the sacrament of reconciliation. Fr. Pat and I will soon invite those of you who are sick, those who will soon be receiving surgery, and those of a certain age to come forward and receive this sacrament. By doing this in this liturgy, we hope that you will feel the support of the entire body of Christ and know his healing. I encourage each of you not receiving this sacrament, to take time after mass to reach out in support of these people who need our love and support.
In the end, we will be judged on how we treated each other, Have we actually lived out the faith we profess or simply used it on Sunday and not carried it with us when we live our daily lives. Or, to put it another way, do we ever look around and see the people who are hurting or are we too busy focusing on our own plate, on the task at hand, to even care about the people around us?
The gospel today is one of the most challenging gospel passages we Americans hear. This gospel holds that, in the end, we will not be judged by what we acquire or how good shape we are in. It says that we will be judged by how well we have taken care of the least in this world. The first reading was a little more indirect about the message, in a sense, by stating that, when God comes to judge us, he will take care of the people who are the weakest. He will be like a shepherd who sees his flock and immediately goes to the injured and sick to take care of them. It reminded me of a mother who comes home from a hard day at work to a sick child. She loves all her children equally, but is probably going to go directly to the sick kid’s room to find out how bad her child feels. This makes perfect sense to me. What didn’t make sense to me was a verse towards the end of the reading. After this long passage in which the Lord is gathering the lost sheep, caring for the sick, and finding us food, it says, “…but the sleek and the strong I will destroy, shepherding them rightly.” What? At the judgment, God is going to destroy those who are sleek and strong? I’m may be in trouble! I need to go on a diet! I need to get sick! There was part of me that wondered if the prophet had taken the analogy a little too far. I mean, who gets slaughtered on a farm: the sickly runts of the litter or the fat, mature animals? But that doesn’t entirely help us understand what God is trying to get across to us in this passage. For that explanation, you have to turn to the gospel.
In it, we hear about the sheep and the goats. The sheep were the ones who cared for the little ones while the goats are the ones who only cared for themselves. It seems like the “sleek and strong” got so at the expense of the weakest among them. The goats took advantage of situations and were well provided for while the poor sheep were not at all taken care of. I think of this as we begin the Advent season and our country begins Christmas shopping season. I ran across a website the other day called advent conspiracy dot org. If you go to that website, you’ll come across the staggering figure that Jesus statement about people being thirsty and needing water is still true in several countries of this world. It would cost 10 billion dollars to fix, a figure that seems astronomical, until you think that Americans have spent, on average, 450 billion dollars for Christmas gifts in the past and we have given over 700 billion to different business in this country in order to bail them our of fiscal difficulties. Imagine the outrage that we, Americans, would feel if it was announced that we were going to use 10 billion dollars to go overseas and build wells for communities so they will have clean, drinkable water and train people locally how to do that as well. How do you think people would respond?
And, yet, we don’t have to look to other countries to find the marginalized of society. I have a feeling that we can find them right here in our midst. That’s partially why we will be celebrating the anointing of the sick in a few moments. This sacrament is one of two that is entirely for those who aren’t sleek or strong, along with the sacrament of reconciliation. Fr. Pat and I will soon invite those of you who are sick, those who will soon be receiving surgery, and those of a certain age to come forward and receive this sacrament. By doing this in this liturgy, we hope that you will feel the support of the entire body of Christ and know his healing. I encourage each of you not receiving this sacrament, to take time after mass to reach out in support of these people who need our love and support.
In the end, we will be judged on how we treated each other, Have we actually lived out the faith we profess or simply used it on Sunday and not carried it with us when we live our daily lives. Or, to put it another way, do we ever look around and see the people who are hurting or are we too busy focusing on our own plate, on the task at hand, to even care about the people around us?
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
What can we say about homosexuals?
Since the defeat of gay marriage in California, I have continually be confronted by people who want me to legitimate some sort of relationship status for gays and lesbians. I don't see any room in church teaching for such a statement, to be honest. Other than the idea that violence and cruelty are never allowed and that a person deserves his wage, I just don't see an authentic spirituality of civil unions emerging.
But, is that right? Do we need to have something more positive. For instance, do we want to flesh out the type of celibate chastity expected for homosexuals. Can we put a theology behind it? Can we connect the celibate chastity of a homosexual to the cross? Do we want to distance ourselves from the evangelical view of homosexuality being a choice that can be undone? I, personally, think we do. I think many evangelicals simply replace same-sex lust and objectification with opposite sex.
I'm starting to see a possible role I could play in articulating a theology of homosexuality that is true to church teaching. I could also see myself being excommunicated for trying to do so...hmmmm...maybe I should just keep my mouth shut.
But, is that right? Do we need to have something more positive. For instance, do we want to flesh out the type of celibate chastity expected for homosexuals. Can we put a theology behind it? Can we connect the celibate chastity of a homosexual to the cross? Do we want to distance ourselves from the evangelical view of homosexuality being a choice that can be undone? I, personally, think we do. I think many evangelicals simply replace same-sex lust and objectification with opposite sex.
I'm starting to see a possible role I could play in articulating a theology of homosexuality that is true to church teaching. I could also see myself being excommunicated for trying to do so...hmmmm...maybe I should just keep my mouth shut.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Why women can't become priests...
Our bulletin has a new segment called "question of the week" in which different members of the staff take turns answering topical questions. This week was my chance to do so. I put the short version without the first two paragraphs in the bulletin. Here's the long version of what I did.
Why can’t women become priests?
In seminary, this question was posed to me while I was sitting down to eat at a benefit for a catholic school. I started what I thought was a rather eloquent explanation from tradition and scripture similar to the one below only to be rather consistently interrupted with the ad-hominem argument that scripture and tradition are biased and outmoded. My pastor, who had been sitting next to me enjoying the exchange, finally spoke up and said what I believed (and still believe) to be the weakest explanation of them all: This is just the way it is now. Stogy, old Rome may not be willing to face the fact that things are changing, but they’re just delaying the inevitable.
This seemed to pacify my interlocutor so I decided to return to what was, up until this point, a rather enjoyable soirée. Nonetheless, this exchange haunts me to this day because of the presumptuousness of the explanation. No one knows what the future holds. If we need further clarity of this, look at this past year’s presidential election. Two years ago, it seemed clear that this was going to be the year in which we would elect the first women president in Senator Hillary Clinton. Two years later, we are, instead, on the precipice of electing the first African-American President in Barak Obama. Who saw that one coming?
The most frustrating thing that many women feel is that they, honestly, probably could do better than a number of men at some of the tasks required of prests. There are, undoubtedly, many women who could preach better, hear confessions better, anoint the sick better, administer a parish, etc. better than men. Pope John Paul II, in his Apostolic Letter on this topic entitled Ordinatio Sacertotalis wanted to be sure to affirm the gifts that women bring to the church. He said, “The presence and the role of women in the life and mission of the Church, although not linked to the ministerial priesthood, remain absolutely necessary and irreplaceable. As the (earlier) Declaration Inter Insigniores points out, ‘the Church desires that Christian women should become fully aware of the greatness of their mission: today their role is of capital importance both for the renewal and humanization of society and for the rediscovery by believers of the true face of the Church.’"
The Pope refutes those who say that Christ was handicapped by his times and biases by referring to Pope Paul VI’s encyclical letter Inter Insigniores which stated…”to the great astonishment of his own disciples Jesus converses publicly with the Samaritan woman (Jn 4:27); he takes no notice of the state of legal impurity of the woman who had suffered from hemorrhages (Mt 9:20); he allows a sinful woman to approach him in the house of Simon the Pharisee (Lk 7:37); and by pardoning the woman taken in adultery, he means to show that one must not be more severe towards the fault of a woman than towards that of a man (Jn 8:11). He does not hesitate to depart from the Mosaic Law in order to affirm the equality of the rights and duties of men and women with regard to the marriage bond (Mk 10:2; Mt 19:3). In his itinerant ministry Jesus was accompanied not only by the Twelve but also by a group of women (Lk 8:2). Contrary to the Jewish mentality, which did not accord great value to the testimony of women, as Jewish law attests, it was nevertheless women who were the fist to have the privilege of seeing the risen Lord, and it was they who were charged by Jesus to take the first paschal message to the Apostles themselves (Mt 28:7 ; Lk 24:9 ; Jn 20:11), in order to prepare the latter to become the official witnesses to the Resurrection.”
The Point the Pope seems to emphasize is that priesthood is neither a job that demands the fulfillment of certain tasks or the possession of the church. “…the example recorded in the Sacred Scriptures of Christ choosing his Apostles only from among men; the constant practice of the Church, which has imitated Christ in choosing only men; and her living teaching authority which has consistently held that the exclusion of women from the priesthood is in accordance with God's plan for his Church.” He’s saying that it is a gift given to the church by Christ to carry out Christ’s mission of salvation. And, so, the church holds no authority whatsoever to altar the gift given. Thus, Pope John Paul II states in no uncertain terms, “the constant and universal Tradition of the Church and firmly taught by the Magisterium in its more recent documents…I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful.”
John Paul II Ordinatio Sacerdotalis
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_22051994_ordinatio-sacerdotalis_en.html
Pope Paul VI Inter Insigniores
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Paul06/p6interi.htm
For more reading
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2002/0201sbs.asp
Why can’t women become priests?
In seminary, this question was posed to me while I was sitting down to eat at a benefit for a catholic school. I started what I thought was a rather eloquent explanation from tradition and scripture similar to the one below only to be rather consistently interrupted with the ad-hominem argument that scripture and tradition are biased and outmoded. My pastor, who had been sitting next to me enjoying the exchange, finally spoke up and said what I believed (and still believe) to be the weakest explanation of them all: This is just the way it is now. Stogy, old Rome may not be willing to face the fact that things are changing, but they’re just delaying the inevitable.
This seemed to pacify my interlocutor so I decided to return to what was, up until this point, a rather enjoyable soirée. Nonetheless, this exchange haunts me to this day because of the presumptuousness of the explanation. No one knows what the future holds. If we need further clarity of this, look at this past year’s presidential election. Two years ago, it seemed clear that this was going to be the year in which we would elect the first women president in Senator Hillary Clinton. Two years later, we are, instead, on the precipice of electing the first African-American President in Barak Obama. Who saw that one coming?
The most frustrating thing that many women feel is that they, honestly, probably could do better than a number of men at some of the tasks required of prests. There are, undoubtedly, many women who could preach better, hear confessions better, anoint the sick better, administer a parish, etc. better than men. Pope John Paul II, in his Apostolic Letter on this topic entitled Ordinatio Sacertotalis wanted to be sure to affirm the gifts that women bring to the church. He said, “The presence and the role of women in the life and mission of the Church, although not linked to the ministerial priesthood, remain absolutely necessary and irreplaceable. As the (earlier) Declaration Inter Insigniores points out, ‘the Church desires that Christian women should become fully aware of the greatness of their mission: today their role is of capital importance both for the renewal and humanization of society and for the rediscovery by believers of the true face of the Church.’"
The Pope refutes those who say that Christ was handicapped by his times and biases by referring to Pope Paul VI’s encyclical letter Inter Insigniores which stated…”to the great astonishment of his own disciples Jesus converses publicly with the Samaritan woman (Jn 4:27); he takes no notice of the state of legal impurity of the woman who had suffered from hemorrhages (Mt 9:20); he allows a sinful woman to approach him in the house of Simon the Pharisee (Lk 7:37); and by pardoning the woman taken in adultery, he means to show that one must not be more severe towards the fault of a woman than towards that of a man (Jn 8:11). He does not hesitate to depart from the Mosaic Law in order to affirm the equality of the rights and duties of men and women with regard to the marriage bond (Mk 10:2; Mt 19:3). In his itinerant ministry Jesus was accompanied not only by the Twelve but also by a group of women (Lk 8:2). Contrary to the Jewish mentality, which did not accord great value to the testimony of women, as Jewish law attests, it was nevertheless women who were the fist to have the privilege of seeing the risen Lord, and it was they who were charged by Jesus to take the first paschal message to the Apostles themselves (Mt 28:7 ; Lk 24:9 ; Jn 20:11), in order to prepare the latter to become the official witnesses to the Resurrection.”
The Point the Pope seems to emphasize is that priesthood is neither a job that demands the fulfillment of certain tasks or the possession of the church. “…the example recorded in the Sacred Scriptures of Christ choosing his Apostles only from among men; the constant practice of the Church, which has imitated Christ in choosing only men; and her living teaching authority which has consistently held that the exclusion of women from the priesthood is in accordance with God's plan for his Church.” He’s saying that it is a gift given to the church by Christ to carry out Christ’s mission of salvation. And, so, the church holds no authority whatsoever to altar the gift given. Thus, Pope John Paul II states in no uncertain terms, “the constant and universal Tradition of the Church and firmly taught by the Magisterium in its more recent documents…I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful.”
John Paul II Ordinatio Sacerdotalis
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_22051994_ordinatio-sacerdotalis_en.html
Pope Paul VI Inter Insigniores
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Paul06/p6interi.htm
For more reading
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2002/0201sbs.asp
Monday, November 10, 2008
I wish...
In the middle of my homily this weekend, it occurred to me what I should have preached.
This Sunday, in the Roman Catholic Church, we celebrated the feast of the building of the first official church building of the Roman Empire. Donated by the Emperor Constantine, the church of St. John Lateran in Rome is the Pope's church. The gospel was about Jesus driving the money-changers and livestock merchants.
I could have used it to talk about having reverence in church, about how our church is not the place to come in and visit. The church is a place where we encounter God and remind ourselves that we have sinned and are in need of God's mercy. Too much ancillary activity on the Temple Mount caused Jesus to get angry and we need to be mindful of the respect we have for God when we walk into this dedicated space.
Instead, I used it to talk about the typical "You are the church! We are the Church. The church is not a building!" typical homily. I wish I would have figured it out earlier.
This Sunday, in the Roman Catholic Church, we celebrated the feast of the building of the first official church building of the Roman Empire. Donated by the Emperor Constantine, the church of St. John Lateran in Rome is the Pope's church. The gospel was about Jesus driving the money-changers and livestock merchants.
I could have used it to talk about having reverence in church, about how our church is not the place to come in and visit. The church is a place where we encounter God and remind ourselves that we have sinned and are in need of God's mercy. Too much ancillary activity on the Temple Mount caused Jesus to get angry and we need to be mindful of the respect we have for God when we walk into this dedicated space.
Instead, I used it to talk about the typical "You are the church! We are the Church. The church is not a building!" typical homily. I wish I would have figured it out earlier.
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
Political Reflections
I feel like today is a good day in the United States of America. I know that Barak Obama's position on abortion is wrong. But, to be honest, I think President Bush's position wasn't much better. How many babies weren't aborted in the last eight years because George Bush was president? Any? And I think, if we were honest with one another, John McCain's would be worse. He'd push stem cell research just as far as President Obama would. But, setting all of that aside, there are other considerations.
An entire race of Americans, a people unjustly brought here to be our slaves, have hope. A group of people that are constantly told that they are "the other" see in Barak Obama someone who looks like them can become the leader of this country. I've got to believe that somewhere, an African-American child knows that there are other options than sports to get out of poverty. And, idiot racists in this country who had to learn a generation ago that there was nothing to fear from us Catholics, may start to learn the same thing about African-Americans. It's transforming. It's much easier to hate someone when you don't know anything about them. It's much harder when you have to see their smiling, hopeful face leading us through tough times.
I also have hope in this country when same sex marriage bans passed in two states (Florida and Arizona) have passed and, by all appearances, California may have passed too. I think people realize that this would so radically alter the notion of marriage that it would eventually lead to it's destruction. Americans who overwhelmingly supported President-elect Obama could see that this is bad for America. It's one thing to say violence and cruelty have no place toward gays and lesbians, it's quite another to say that marriage is their right. Americans all over the country can see it and, hopefully, we will help the rest of the world to see this as well.
An entire race of Americans, a people unjustly brought here to be our slaves, have hope. A group of people that are constantly told that they are "the other" see in Barak Obama someone who looks like them can become the leader of this country. I've got to believe that somewhere, an African-American child knows that there are other options than sports to get out of poverty. And, idiot racists in this country who had to learn a generation ago that there was nothing to fear from us Catholics, may start to learn the same thing about African-Americans. It's transforming. It's much easier to hate someone when you don't know anything about them. It's much harder when you have to see their smiling, hopeful face leading us through tough times.
I also have hope in this country when same sex marriage bans passed in two states (Florida and Arizona) have passed and, by all appearances, California may have passed too. I think people realize that this would so radically alter the notion of marriage that it would eventually lead to it's destruction. Americans who overwhelmingly supported President-elect Obama could see that this is bad for America. It's one thing to say violence and cruelty have no place toward gays and lesbians, it's quite another to say that marriage is their right. Americans all over the country can see it and, hopefully, we will help the rest of the world to see this as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)