Today the Church commemorates the slaughter of the Holy Innocents, those children 2 and under who were slaughtered by Herod in an attempt to stomp out the Christ child.
Evil is flipping what is true on its head, evil is, then, the anti-truth. And could there be anything more opposite the Truth than to FEAR children? To see children as a THREAT?
And yet, in our world today, in our western culture, we have slaughtered hundreds of million through abortion and countless HUNDREDS of million through the use of the contraceptive pill which also causes abortion as well.
To see children as a threat is the surest sign that a person is under the influence and is listening to the Evil One.
And so if contraception and abortion are agents of the Evil One, then where ought we to look for resistance to the Evil One - - - ONLY the Catholic Church has held the line that abortion and contraception are always and everywhere MORALLY EVIL.
+++
When I was a teenager, I read over a letter my Dad had written to a brave and awesome Protestant missionary who was putting his life on the line preaching the Gospel in Turkey.
My Dad was sharing with his friend that one of the main things that convinced my Dad of the Truth of the Catholic Church was that it alone had not caved on the issue of contraception and abortion.
+++
But here's the thing. As Pope Paul VI said, the world doesn't listen to teachers, it listens to witnesses. I see on Facebook a lot of people saying "I wish priests preached on contraception/abortion more!"
I understand the frustration, but at the same time, I think we need to realize that while priests could and sometimes SHOULD be stronger/clearer on the issue, the REAL opportunity for converting our society and helping them realize they are no better than Herod is to have the LAITY PREACH TO THEIR FRIENDS/FAMILIES/COWORKERS about this important issue, because a bunch of celibate, unmarried men talking about it doesn't sway the hearts of the larger society much anymore.
I've been to the March for Life many times, and THE most powerful element to the March, BY FAR, is the hundreds of women near the front who march carrying signs that say "I regret my abortion" - seeing those women is more powerful than ANY homily against abortion or contraception that has ever been delivered. People only listen to witnesses. Will you witness to those who are waiting to hear from you?
You may say here - "But I've used contraception before" or "But I've had an abortion in my past"...all the more are you now able to speak about your own experience - you can tell people "I used to use contraception, and I regret it" or "I had an abortion, and I regret it"...we need your voices too!!!! Your past sins do not exclude your voice, they lend it even more authority today!
+++
Innocents are being slaughtered on a massive scale daily in our Western Society. Are we speaking up to the world, or are we sitting around blaming our priest for not saying more while we refuse to talk with our fellow parishioners/family members/coworkers?
Holy Innocents, pray for us, that we may have the courage to speak out against the slaughter that is continuing today, and may our culture stop viewing children as a threat.
Every year at Christmas Masses Catholic priests look out into the congregation and see lots of people who they do not recognize. As a pastor, you know some of them are friends and family from out of town, and some of them are people who are checking out Catholicism, maybe for the first time, but there are also faces you recognize but haven't seen for months (maybe even since last Christmas), the faces of those who have fallen away from the Church and are no longer practicing their Faith.
There are two thoughts that run through your head as a pastor in the midst of the Masses:
1) You are happy that people are there hearing the Word of God and you tell yourself "A person can't be at Mass and NOT encounter God, whether it is the beauty of the music, being in the presence of the Eucharist, hearing the Word of God proclaimed, etc."
2) On the other hand, you as the priest are asked to reach out and help bring EVERY PERSON in your parish boundaries to Christ. And so a part of you knows that one Mass a year is not sufficient to sustain those that know better. So, out of love, you want to challenge people to do something closer to the minimal hurdles the Church puts forward for people to clear in order to be practicing their Faith.
And, let's be honest, there is, among those who know they ought to be coming weekly, a hypocritical thing going on when one attends a Christmas Mass; a pretending that things are in right order that are really not.
Our society recognizes that it is weird to come to a party or a wedding reception if you don't actually know the people for whom the party is being celebrated. But aren't people doing that when they come to Christmas Mass and that's their "Catholicism" for the year?
And we hear a Gospel about this. Everyone is invited to a wedding reception. But when Christ comes to the person and it is clear that they are in attendance but not prepared to authentically celebrate, they are thrown out. Similarly in Luke's Gospel we hear:
"You will say, ‘We ate and drank in your company and you taught in our streets.’ Then he will say to you, ‘I do not know where you are from. Depart from me, all you evildoers!’ 28
Yes, we're glad for every soul that is at Mass, but if you genuinely love someone do you let them persist in a deception, even if they are deceiving themselves? NO!
If someone was raised in the Faith, was brought up in the Faith, and should know better, is it "pastoral" to pretend that there's nothing wrong with a person ignoring the call to practice their Catholic Faith 364 days a year?
So, in the midst of one of the most beautiful times of year when people not asked to help save people in a particular geographic region simply want to sit in the peace and joy of the season, pastors wrestle with the question "How do I celebrate this feast and yet try to throw a life preserver to the people who I may not see again for another year?"
If somebody writes a blog post or an article about how it is really simple for priests to just think about the positives of increased Christmas Mass attendance without thinking about what it means in a negative sense, they are not a person who has been asked to try to work for the salvation of every soul within a particular parish boundary.
You can't have what Canon Law calls "care of souls" and NOT wrestle with this question
And this question is really a microcosm of being a pastor in general - "How do you invite people to a life that is completely full of joy and peace and yet warn people of the perils of not heeding the call"?
There are several things that the Catholic Mass is criticized for. It is these same things that Christmas is
actually typically LOVED for.
The Catholic Mass has a bunch of trimmings (vestments, incense, chant,
altar, Churches, etc.) that have become attached to it that are a far cry from
the original event (Last Supper)
Christmas has a bunch of trimmings (electric lights, trees, wreaths,
ornaments, presents, etc.) that have grown up around it that are a far cry from
the original event (Bethlehem stable)
The Catholic Mass has a particular style of music that is appropriate
to its celebration (chant)
Christmas has a particular style of music that is appropriate to its
celebration (canon of Christmas music.
There is no such thing as folk/rap/heavy metal Christmas music)
The Catholic Mass continues to reread the same readings over and over
again
At Christmas we continue to reread/watch the same readings over and
over again (A Christmas Carol, Grinch, Home Alone, It’s a Wonderful Life, ‘Twas
the Night Before Christmas, etc.)
The Catholic Mass is surrounded by lots of statues (Saints, Joseph,
Mary, Angels)
Christmas is surrounded by lots of statues (Joseph, Mary, Angels,
Nativity scenes)
The Catholic Mass calls forth and prays for the dead
Christmas is a time that reminds us of our deceased
family/friends/loved ones
The Catholic Mass has a bunch of rituals that look strange to outsiders
Christmas for many families involves lots of rituals that look strange
to outsiders
The Catholic Mass often has bells ringing at interesting times
Christmas celebrations and music often have bells as part of the
Christmas season
The Catholic Mass has the strange but intriguing smells of incense
Christmas has the strange but intriguing smells of pine in people’s homes
A central aspect to the Catholic Mass is the centrality of a meal
Christmas for most people sees a meal as being a central part of the
celebration
The word “Christmas” is two words put together – “Christ’s Mass” – what
we love about Christmas is available at every Mass because EVERY Mass is
actually “Christ’s Mass”.
One of my ministry assignments is a university, and so I follow fairly closely the types of things being discussed in university settings.
In addition to the much-publicized "safe space" and "trigger warning" phenomena, many university-types speak often about "cultural appropriation"
"Cultural appropriation" is Culture A takes elements of Culture B and incorporates it into Culture A without really acknowledging the original Culture B setting of said element
Most commonly you hear things like "white culture appropriates rap music into its own culture" or "white people appropriate Indian outfits on Halloween" etc. The guilty party, as far as I can tell, seems to typically be white people
I would say it is important for academic think tanks concerned with appropriation to acknowledge the greatest victim of cultural appropriation: the Catholic Church
At the outset it is important to acknowledge that there have been countless instances of missionaries utilizing pagan cultural customs and giving them a religious dimension. That is not cultural appropriation as it was never being done in that instance by a dominant culture. Trying to explain the Christian faith by missionaries through the use of local symbols, pagan or otherwise, is not cultural appropriation. White people stealing inner city cultural elements is not white people trying to explain white culture to black people.
A couple of the major examples of how Catholicism has been completely appropriated by our larger secular culture:
1) Christmas. Christmas is made up of two words - "Chirst's Mass". Our American culture has taken Christmas and murdered both the "Christ" part and the "Mass" part. Beyond the mainstream secular culture, a smaller subset of our culture has kept the "Christ" part but still jettisoned the "Mass" part.
Today many people are upset that our world doesn't say "Christmas" enough. I say the opposite. I say our culture says "Christmas" WAY too much! No one should really say "Christmas" unless they are talking about the celebration of "Christ's Mass" on December 25th.
I highly encourage those who have appropriated Christmas to stop immediately, and, if they seek to get rid of both "Christ" and "Mass" to find some alternative phrase like "Season's Greetings"
I highly encourage those who have appropriated Christmas, but want to keep the "Christ" part to immediately begin using a phrase along the lines of "Merry Christworshipservice"
2) Halloween.
I recently heard a national talk show host say, the day after Halloween: "Halloween needs to be a day that gets moved year to year so that it is always part of a three day weekend."
If it is possible to have something Catholic more culturally appropriated than Christmas, Halloween would be it.
"Halloween", like Christmas, is a Catholic word and celebration. Hallows Eve - the night before All Hallows Day or All Saints Day. That's what Halloween is. People dressed up like saints the night before to celebrate the great holy day the next day.
To dress up as nurse-prostitute or a demon or a bloody horror film star and to speak about a desire to move Halloween to a more convenient day so that a person can drink and stay up later partying seems to be the zenith of cultural appropriation and a swallowing up by one culture of another and, while keeping the name the same, spitting something out that is its exact opposite.
All Hallows' Eve in its proper cultural context. Stop "appropriating" our celebration!!!!
A GREAT IRONY EXISTS: One of the greatest moments that sends liberals into "cultural appropriation accusation spasms" is Halloween - because so many college students dress up for Halloween parties in culturally appropriated outfits (rappers, native American Indians, Mexicans, etc.) BUT THE CONCEPT OF HALLOWEEN ITSELF HAS BEEN APPROPRIATED BY THE APPROPRIATION POLICE THEMSELVES!!!
All I'm really lobbying for here is just acknowledgement at this point. I'm not sure I'm ready to go to war over these particular issues, and I don't think fixing these two particular instances (among many) will actually fix the deeper issues of our society. All I'd like at this point is for those that feel so violated by cultural appropriation at least acknowledge Catholicism as its greatest victim.
This is a phrase I've heard often, and I agree wholeheartedly. When I was in the seminary we regularly pleaded for accounting/HR/managerial classes. We didn't get much of it despite us asking for help.
There have been movements to help priests get properly trained, and thanks be to God! Without ever having had a business class, I was asked to take over a situation where I manage $600,000 annually, and oversee 13 employees.
Jeff Cavins and renowned business speaker Patrick Lencioni sent all priests a book recently which beautifully spoke to the need that so many priests need to develop and grow, and they are offering a lot of resources in that regard.
In my own Archdiocese, we have received a grant to help develop our priests in certain business competencies.
I APPRECIATE ALL THIS AND AM TAKING ADVANTAGE OF IT
BUT......
All this talk about the need we have for priests to develop their business acumen has me thinking...
DIOCESES NEED A LOT OF THE SAME WORK.
I want to note two specific areas where it seems a lot of dioceses could REALLY use an injection of some business sense.
If you told Pepsi Cola or some other Fortune 500 company - "Hey, you guys are losing SEVENTY FIVE PERCENT of your customers at the age of 18. They stop using your product. You will not see them again until they are 30 years old."
Let me tell you what would happen. The CEO would pull the fire-alarm, get on the pa, and call an emergency meeting and tell everyone "STOP immediately what you are doing, and report to an emergency meeting in 4 minutes. Everything else stops until we put together a plan for how we are going to solve this."
But the Catholic world in the United States seems to recite the statistic of 75% of our young people leaving as a sort of "Shucks, oh well, I hope it doesn't happen to MY kid, but if it does, well, it happens."
A second area. Vocations to the priesthood.
Again, imagine a Fortune 500 company finding out that they can only choose plant managers from a selected pool of people, and that the pool is shrinking rapidly WHILE AT THE SAME TIME the number of retiring managers is going to be huge over the next 10 years.
Again, it would be a "four-alarm-every-single-person-to-the-board-room-and-we're-not-leaving-until-this-is-solved"
And yet most Catholics barely seem to concern themselves with nurturing vocations, recruiting vocations, supporting vocations, etc.
WHAT ARE WE DOING?????
This issue of vocations isn't something that falls to one or two vocation directors - this is a CATHOLIC CULTURAL thing - it needs to be everywhere, in our homilies, talked about in our homes, affirmed by parishioners (hey Billy, you'd make a great priest) it needs to be talked about by our bishops, it needs to be a part of every Catholic school, we need to support programs that are proven to nurture vocations. Not just TRY them. Mandate them. From the top.
I know I need more business skills. But pardon me if it rings a little hollow at the moment when I'm asked to become more business savvy when the Church at the diocesan level across the country doesn't seem to be incorporating those same business-minded principles themselves.
The Boston Red Sox had not won the World Series since 1918. The Chicago Cubs had not won the World Series since 1908.
People wondered aloud if the franchises were cursed.
One man came in and provided first the Red Sox and then the Cubs with franchise make-overs that led to the Red Sox winning World Series championships in 2004 (and again in 2007) and the Chicago Cubs winning it all in 2016.
How did Theo Epstein do it?
Each baseball franchise has several teams beneath it that feed into the Major League team. Epstein emphasized player development and rebuilt both franchises' farm systems
EVERY general manager TALKS about nurturing talent, but most do not actually execute it or have a plan that doesn't work.
Essentially, Epstein made this choice - TO GROW AND DEVELOP TALENT FROM A YOUNG AGE KNOWING THAT SPENDING ENERGY ON HUNDREDS OF PLAYERS WILL LEAD TO A FEW OF THEM BECOMING MAJOR LEAGUE PLAYERS NO ONE SAW COMING
I think as a Church in the US it seems we take the same approach as most major league baseball teams - we TALK about developing our young people, but our plan isn't actually working and we seem to be okay with that.
I think a lot of times we wait for young men to call us and say "hey, I want to be a priest" or "hey, I want to get married"
What we need to be doing is really fostering the notion of vocations from a young age, and DEVELOP THAT TALENT WITH EFFECTIVE PROGRAMS THAT ARE WORKING
Priests and parents and bishops need to get together and put together a SYSTEMATIC approach that says WE ARE NOT NURTURING OUR CHILDREN, WE ARE NOT NURTURING VOCATIONS, WHAT SPECIFICALLY CAN WE DO DIFFERENTLY???
Whether it is marriage, consecrated religious life, or priesthood, our farm system IS IN SHAMBLES
We reap what we sow, and so we shouldn't be surprised that we are struggling to develop young people committed to marriage, nor should we be surprised that a lack of young people are interested in the priesthood or religious life
We need to have a real serious talk about what we can do to help develop our young people into saints. We need to reexamine our farm system, and I think a lot of what we are doing needs to be burned down and rebooted
I have no idea how a Catholic could possibly pull the lever for Hillary Clinton
I know the Church's teaching: you can vote for someone who puts forward intrinsic evils as long as you aren't voting for those intrinsic evils. So technically you could vote for a politician whose platform is 99% evil as long as you don't intend to vote for the 99% but only the 1% that is good.
But my goodness
What is she right on?
She's for partial birth abortion. The Church is against it
She is for abortion. The Church is against it.
She's for same sex "marriage". The Church is against it.
She's for the American welfare. The Church is against it.
She's for the contraceptive mandate of the ACA. The Church is against it.
She has been caught in lie after lie. The Church is against lying.
She is against Religious freedom. The Church is for it.
She is for open borders. The Church says countries have the right to have borders.
She says you should have the right to physician assisted suicide. The Church is against it.
She is against subsidiarity. The Church is for it.
We could go on and on here. As a person not voting for Trump either, I have NO IDEA how a practicing Catholic goes into the booth and casts a positive vote for Hillary Clinton.
And remember, if no one votes for Trump, he won't be president. If no one votes for Clinton, she won't be president.
Muslims and Jews rightly seem to have no problem requesting off work/requesting to leave early/come in late for binding religious observances and for their important worship services...and bosses are happy to let that happen unless they desire to be sued for billions of dollars.
Catholics should model that devotion! Tomorrow, November 1, is a holy day of obligation. There are lots of Masses tonight and there are Masses all day and night tomorrow all over the country.
Catholics should go in to their boss/professor/principal and let them know that they need to leave a bit early tonight/come in a bit late tomorrow morning/leave a bit early tomorrow.
Parents - what a WONDERFUL OPPORTUNITY to show your children that Catholicism matters. "Kids, we are going to Mass tomorrow, so call your coaches/bosses/etc. and let them know we won't be able to come tomorrow evening because we'll be in Church."
I talk to a lot of parents who lament their children leaving the Catholic Faith behind as young adults. A great question to ask - did you instill in them at any point that Catholicism has some non-negotiable things that EVERYthing else takes a backseat too? If not, then why in the world would anyone expect them to grow up and think of Catholicism as anything other than a cultural decoration?
For those who do not attend a holy day Mass tonight or tomorrow, remember that you must confess that sin before receiving Holy Communion again (unless you are sick or caring for someone who is sick). But that is NOT the reason to go - go because it actually does our souls good to worship and praise God a few times a year outside our normal cycle of weekend Mass!
What can we do? How do we ensure that we are not being
consumed by the deadly sin of pride?
1)Can I be alone
with myself – do I pray regularly and go off to be alone with God?
2)Go to confession
regularly – Why Jesus set it up this way – GOOD TO SAY IT OUT LOUD!
3)Do I bend Church
teachings to me or do I bend my will to Church and Scriptural teachings?
4)Ask for others to
evaluate you regularly with honest feedback
5)Spiritual
direction
6)Our lady of humility
7)Worship – the
Mass – is a statement and reminder that we are not God – the desert fathers
were early Christians who fled to the desert to live a life of prayer – regular
battle – Devil had no knees
8)Live integrally –
Jesus on the Apostle Nathanael: “here is a true Israelite. There is no
duplicity in him”
So each week I teach a class on line for our high school religious ed students. As Providence would have it, the class topic in the textbook this coming week is on the hierarchy of the Church, including the role of cardinals...the same week Archbishop Tobin was designated to become a cardinal in just over a month!
For those who are curious, here's the class explaining in some detail to my high school students how the hierarchy of the Church is structured and how it functions
I doubt anyone who reads this blog is waiting on me to endorse/review Bishop Barron's new DVD series "Catholicism: the Pivotal Players"...but just in case...it is literally MUST SEE TV!
The saints of the Church are catechisms in the flesh - people who show us what it means to follow the call of the Gospel, and so our souls, looking for nourishment and inspiration, should never tire of hearing.
This sequel to the unbelievably amazing Catholicism series by Bishop Barron is a six-episode exploration of six major players in the Catholic Faith.
I love that the lineup includes 3 saints, one blessed, and two "nothings":
St. Francis of Assisi
St. Thomas Aquinas
St. Catherine of Sienna
Blessed John Henry Newman
G.K. Chesterton
Michelangelo
I learned so many interesting facts - such as the role Notre Dame University played in the life of G.K. Chesterton and SO MANY other interesting tidbits.
"The Pivotal Players", like its predecessor, is shot with amazing skill, the music is perfectly on point, and the series is such a synthesis of Truth, Beauty and Goodness! It is a must-see and I can't recommend it highly enough.
Parish's should watch it
Teachers should watch it
Parents should watch it with their children
and on and on
Bravo to Bishop Barron and the Word on Fire team! Here's the trailer. Pick up your copy today!
Primer: In the run-up to the preparatory and actual synod on the family, Pope Francis was rumored to prefer extending the Eucharist to the divorced and remarried who had not received an annulment from the Church.
That preference was pretty well stifled and shot down by those at the Synod. The Pope's synod wrap-up document, however, left the door open, and, last week, a letter was leaked whereby the Pope told some bishops that they were right to interpret his document as indeed affirming the distribution of Holy Communion to the divorced and remarried who did not get their first marriage annulled even though their first spouse is still living.
Okay. That's out of the way.
A couple observations, then, over this battle within the Church
1) I do not have a doctorate in moral theology, but based on what I've read in the seminary and afterwards in my own personal study, I believe it is wrong to extend the Eucharist to the divorced and remarried who have not received an annulment even though their first spouse is still living.
My opinion is of no real consequence here, I just want to divulge my position up front
The following are my three main points:
2) We can disagree with the Pope, and we can debate these issues, and we can do this publicly. As I mentioned in a previous post, Peter was leaning towards requiring all those joining the Church to get circumcised and follow Jewish dietary laws. He was rebuked by Paul. Was Paul wrong to go confront Peter? If he hadn't, the Easter Vigil would be MUCH more painful for men joining the Church, and no Christian would be eating bacon.
3) I can disagree with the Pope while not having to think he is the anti-Christ. Some in the Church seem to see the Pope and his pretty obvious preference for how this question should be settled as proof that he is a horrible person in general.
If we commit this error, however, then we are just as guilty of committing the crime we charge secular atheists with in our culture - the crime of equating a person's belief TO that person. I can disagree very passionately with the Holy Father's stance, particularly since it has not been formally promulgated in any way, but I don't have to walk around thinking poorly of the man Pope Francis.
Peter and Paul disputed over central teachings of the Church. That doesn't mean St. Paul went around grumbling and hating Pope Peter I.
GK Chesterton and George Bernard Shaw could not have been at two more opposite ends, theologically. Chesterton was a committed Catholic and Shaw a committed secular atheist. They went back and forth in the papers regularly arguing and debating each other through their columns...and yet they would get a beer together and were friends.
So many in our own day will take our position on homosexual "marriage" and equate it to us. They hate our argument (obviously) but they ALSO HATE US. We're asking them to start by not hating us.
It seems only fair, then, that those who disagree with the Holy Father should start by not hating him, even when they disagree on this issue that is still, nonetheless, extremely important.
4) We should also avoid the cataclysmic talk about how this is a sign that the Church is getting ready to get ripped in half, its the apocalypse, etc. The Church has been here countless times before, and was in this position almost right from the start.
We've been here before, and we shouldn't lose our minds over this.
This question of "Communion for the divorced and remarried who have not received an annulment even though their first spouse is still alive" is an important argument, it is an important discussion, but we should learn from our past with regards to how to handle this moment in the Church's history, and start acting more like we've been here before, because we have been. Many times
In
regards to the struggles we see in our nation, some today advocate for big
government to fix problems and injustices of our world. Others believe that
corporations and businesses, if left essentially alone, will fix the injustices
of our world. But what is the Church
for? Does the Church recommend bigger
governmental structures? The Catholic
Church advocate for large corporations fixing our social ills? In short – the answer is neither.
One
of the most refreshing and interesting concepts for me as I began to teach CST –
subsidiarity. Subsidiarity, briefly, is
the idea that things in our society should be left to the lowest level
possible. Buying and selling should be
done as locally as possible, politics should be done as locally as possible,
schools should be run as locally as possible, etc. etc.
First
of all, let’s look at subsidiarity defined as what it is against. “Subsidiarity
is opposed to certain forms of centralization, bureaucratization and welfare
assistance and to the unjustified and excessive presence of the state”
Compendium
So,
let’s first look at the problem with big things. Big government. Big corporations.
1)First of all big things tend to see people as
objects because people are not being dealt with as individuals. Many of the most heinous acts in the history
of civilization, the Communist Regime, The Nazi Regime, the proliferation of
abortion etc. are/were done under the thought of “helping save the world” on a
large scale – lots
of people have tried to help humanity and in the process harmed humanity. As a villain in The Brothers Karamozov put
it, “I love mankind. But I find to my
amazement the more I love mankind, the less I love individual people.” How true.
When we view human beings as a whole, and when someone comes with a man
made plan or program to “help humanity” history shows us you better run!
2)It leads to the mistreatment of individuals by
putting distance between various people that are part of the system. For example: – I have never met the person
who makes my shoes, who makes my clothes, nor have I met the person who picks
my fruit nor the person who helps in any phase of the food I eat besides the
person at Kroger who swipes my purchases.
Nothing I own have I ever met the person who made it or grew it. And so we hear in the first reading: “Hear this, you who trample upon the needyand destroy
the poor of the land!”…the scale at which things are done allows
others to trample on the needy for me and for me to plead that I had nothing to
do with it.
But
I’m much less likely to watch my neighbor work in a sweatshop. I’m much less likely to watch my neighbor go
hungry from poverty if I can’t tell myself that there is some massive
government structure that is supposed to take care of them so that I can excuse
myself – like Ebeneezer Scrooge – are there no workhouses? In our day, we might ask – aren’t there
government programs to help you? But the
social doctrine of the Church says the permanent welfare state robs me and the
poor. It robs me of the dignity that I
would have obtained from helping my neighbor and it robs the poor of their
dignity by treating them more as a statistic
3)In the economic sense, the larger corporations
get, the more we view our consumption in scientific terms and less in moral
terms. For example, we are taught, in
order to be good Americans, we must buy as much stuff as possible and ALWAYS
ALWAYS ALWAYS buy the cheapest option. In
fact, we were told that in order to help our economy flourish, we ought to buy
as much as we can for as cheap as we can
So we work overtime, we scrape
and kick and leave our family behind and miss out on family dinners and a walk
in the woods and taking some time to breath and relax and read a book or talk
to a neighbor because we want to own 50 dresses or 20 suits and 5 watches and a
television and a computer – we are always on the edge of a nervous breakdown
because as long as we buy the logic that people are telling us we will never be
happy – we will just keep throwing stuff at our problems – more stuff, more
food, more consumption, and we’ll never be happy because we can never have
everything
4)Impact
on environment – larger corporations are less likely to be concerned with the
local environment
We also see a problem with all of
the shipping/packaging/production that comes from large corporations in our
consumeristicly dominated way of doing things.
Looking at food as an example, instead of local food, Most food is
harvested by people I’ll never meet in a way that I will never know in a place
that is far away. It will then be
shipped a great distance, using up fuel, packaged somewhere, using energy and
material, and then shipped again a great distance to me. Vs. my neighbor picking corn, walking across
the street, and selling it to me.
So
we see lots of problems from large systems – whether they are corporate or
governmental, and the Church has long recognized and spoken out about this
Although
there are lots of issues when things in our society get too big, there is a lot
of reasons for hope.
1)It is something that our larger society has
awoken to, and so we have this big moment to stand up and say “Hey, this whole
grass fed local beef thing, this whole organic food movement, this whole shop
local thing, this whole find someone local to do the job thing, our Church has
been talking about this since 1892!!!!
Not only is it just a social fad, we have a theological reasoning behind
why it is so important.
Some of our greatest writers and
thinkers over the last 120 years have championed this as THE issue of our time.
Hillaire Belloc’s book on the
topic “THE CRISIS OF CIVILIZATION”!!!
GK Chesterton was a jolly and
witty English writer whose writings are loved still today for their humor and
levity – I’ve read most of his stuff and he has a huge following. His tone changes completely when talking
about two things – birth control and subsidiarity. He describes this attempt to dig out from
under large governmental and corporate structures as THE BATTLE of our time.
Another pivotal Catholic, JRR Tolkien,
said that this concept was precisely the reason he write his Lord of the Rings trilogy, with the
simple hobbits as the ideal society under the Catholic world view, and those
who were evil seeing only more things to produce, build, pollute, and
dominate.
So
a culture that is hostile to many things in our Church, I think we are missing
this great opportunity to point out this one great moment. Even
those that don’t profess Christ to be their savior have recognized the
importance of this key Catholic teaching.
And so we have a perfect illustration of what we hear in our Gospel - “For
the children of this world are more prudent in dealing with their own
generation than are the children of the light”
We’re the ones that should be talking about subsidiarity as a key issue,
but it is those who often don’t profess to follow Christ who are leading the
charge here.
2)People are recognizing that the pace, size,
materialism, consumerism etc. are not making people more sane, they are driving
people insane.
3)Economists and even the average person in
America today is recognizing that even from purely economic science, people recognize
the impact of the different ways in which we purchase things. I can buy something for 8 dollars on Amazon
and maybe the person in Greencastle or Brazil is selling it for $12. If I buy it off of Amazon, though, those 8
dollars are gone from our community, and they’re never coming back. If I buy the item for 12 dollars locally, it
costs more, but now my neighbor has that money, and he/she can spend it locally
and it begins to snowball locally as opposed to having money shipped out of the
local economy never to come back. This
is understanding of the value of keeping money locally as much as possible is
something more people are becoming aware of
So,
in thinking about subsidiarity, how do we put it into action? How do we catch up to those who have already
begun to make this a priority, how do we work to ensure that the needy are NOT
trampled on, whether they are my neighbor or working in Thailand?
1)Some before making this leap, want real
specifics. What will it look like, how
will it work, etc. etc.
St.
John Paul II - “The Church has no models to present; models that are real and
truly effective can only arise within the framework of different historical
situations, through the efforts of all those who responsibly confront concrete
problems in all their social, economic, political and cultural aspects, as
these interact with one another. For such a task the Church offers her social teaching as an indispensable and ideal
orientation,
We
put forward not a definitive system but new principals to think about our
government, our assistance to the poor, how we purchase things, how we interact
in our local communities
2)Start asking myself, as Pope Francis has been
challenging us, am I guilty of a consumerist mindset? Do I believe that to be patriotic, I must buy
as much as I can, as conveniently as I can for as cheap as I can? Or can I get by with less stuff? Is the amount of stuff I have, is the way I
consume things actually making me MORE miserable, stressed, etc.
3)As
we think about purchases and our local economy, Hillaire Belloc, a great
Catholic thinker, pointed out that “No mononpoly comes into existence save by
the acceptation of those who submit to it.” – CRISIS OF CIVILIZATION. G.K. Chesterton said “The rush to the big
shops is the thing that can most easily be stopped, by the people who rush
there”
4)We believe if things are freed, they will begin
to recover – if we put subsidiarity into practice, things will begin to heal. Chesterton
was once asked about all this “so you don’t think our form of capitalism nor
communism nor socialism will save England but you think subsidiarity
will?” His response. No. I
think English men and women will save England
We will answer for the treatment
of the poor. We have a great concept
that our Catholic Faith holds out to us as a path out of this cultural moment
we are in. May we recognize what those
around us seem to be recognizing – that subsidiarity – leaving governance,
decision making, economies, etc. at the lowest level possible – will immediately
begin to help heal our culture from many of the things that make it sick at the
moment
The first Pope in the history of the world, Saint Peter, had his own personal opinions about how the Church should approach both circumcision and dietary laws.
WHILE he was serving as Pope, he was rebuked by others in the Church
"Pete, I love you like a brother, and you are the Pope, but you are wrong on this one" - St. Paul
When it came time to issue definitive statements on the topics, the first pope did not end up teaching what he had personally held to be best before he was rebuked by his fellow leaders in the Church.
Pope Benedict also made it quite clear in the introduction to his Jesus of Nazareth series - these are the personal thoughts and musings of mine...not the definitive statements of the Pope.
Until they are blue in the face people can tell me the personal beliefs that Pope Francis holds, the personal opinions he has shared on airplanes, the personal opinions he has shared in private letters. I don't care.
When something is taught definitively and unambiguously as the teaching of the Church. Let me know. Until then, I don't care.
WASHINGTON—Archbishop William E. Lori of Baltimore, chairman of the U.S. bishops' Ad Hoc Committee for Religious Liberty, responded to a statement issued last week by the chairman of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights upon the issuance of its report on "Peaceful Coexistence."
Archbishop Lori's statement follows:
Faith and the Full Promise of America
For the current Chairman of the United States Commission on Civil Rights, religious liberty is reduced to "nothing except hypocrisy," and religion is being used as a "weapon… by those seeking to deny others equality." He makes the shocking suggestion that Catholic, evangelical, orthodox Jewish, Mormon, and Muslim communities are comparable to fringe segregationists from the civil rights era. These statements painting those who support religious freedom with the broad brush of bigotry are reckless and reveal a profound disregard for the religious foundations of his own work.
People of faith have often been the ones to carry the full promise of America to the most forgotten peripheries when other segments of society judged it too costly. Men and women of faith were many in number during the most powerful marches of the civil rights era. Can we imagine the civil rights movement without Rev. Martin Luther King, Fr. Theodore Hesburgh, and Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel? In places like St. Louis, Catholic schools were integrated seven years before the Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education. Jesus taught us to serve and not to count the cost.
Our record is not perfect. We could have always done more. Nevertheless, we have long taught that the one God, maker of heaven and earth, calls each and every individual into being, loves every individual, and commands believers to love and show mercy to every individual. The idea of equality, which the Chairman treats as a kind of talisman, is incomprehensible apart from the very faith that he seeks to cut off from mainstream society.
Today, Catholic priests, religious and laity can be found walking the neighborhood streets of our most struggling communities in places abandoned by a "throwaway culture" that has too often determined that quick profits matter more than communities. We are there offering education, health care, social services, and hope, working to serve as the "field hospital" Pope Francis has called us to be. We wish we were there in even greater numbers, but we are there to humbly offer the full promise of America to all. Rest assured, if people of faith continue to be marginalized, it is the poor and vulnerable, not the Chairman and his friends, who will suffer.
Catholic social service workers, volunteers and pastors don't count the cost in financial terms or even in personal safety. But, we must count the cost to our own faith and morality. We do not seek to impose our morality on anyone, but neither can we sacrifice it in our own lives and work. The vast majority of those who speak up for religious liberty are merely asking for the freedom to serve others as our faith asks of us. We ask that the work of our institutions be carried out by people who believe in our mission and respect a Christian witness. This is no different from a tobacco control organization not wishing to hire an advocate for smoking or a civil rights organization not wanting to hire someone with a history of racism or an animal rights group wishing to hire only vegetarians.
In a pluralistic society, there will be institutions with views at odds with popular opinion. The Chairman's statement suggests that the USCCR does not see the United States as a pluralistic society. We respect those who disagree with what we teach. Can they respect us? We advocate for the dignity of all persons, a dignity that includes a life free from violence and persecution and that includes fair access to good jobs and safe housing. People of faith are a source of American strength. An inclusive and religiously diverse society should make room for them.
A sociological
study was released last week that I’ve been reading. The study looked at people who were raised in
a religion but now don’t practice it anymore.
Interestingly
a very small % left over doctrine – things like contraception, teachings on
marriage between a man and a woman, abortion, etc.
By far the
largest category said they left the Faith they were raised in because of
science.
One sample
response from the study, “I’m a scientist now, and I don’t believe in
miracles.”
This study
confirms, once again, that many see a great contest taking place in our world
between science and religion, particularly science and Catholicism. Of course people point here to the Galileo
controversy as proof that the Church hates science and hopes to wipe it
out. Of course what most don’t realize
is that it was a personal rift between the Pope and Galileo that caused the controversy,
nor do many know that, scientifically speaking, we now know that both the
Church AND Galileo were wrong, nor can anyone point to any OTHER instance of the
Church coming after a scientist…but none the less there we have it…the Church
hates science and Galileo is proof of it.
Maybe you know
people who are like the majority in the study – people who say “I left my Catholic Faith behind because I
believe in what I can measure and test and study – I believe in the observable.” Maybe part of YOU wrestles with that? I know at times growing up Catholic I wrestled
with that question
And so as I
was reading through some of this report, it came across my Twitter feed that
Pope Francis addressed scientists this week.
I’m sure this address of the Holy Father was lined up months ago, but
for me the timing was providential.
One
of the things Pope Francis said was “Openness to the Grace of God, an openness which
comes through Faith, does not weaken human science, but rather leads it to move
forwards”
His point is
one that has been made many times – Our Catholic Faith does not COMPETE with
science. Science, when done without an
agenda, seeks to know what is true.
Faith, when pursued without an agenda, also seeks to know what is
true.
Of course a
problem arises here: Faith and science can both be done WITH an agenda. The Catholic Faith has been practiced with an
agenda and a pretext for advancing personal interests. We can also hopefully recognize that
sometimes science is practiced with an agenda and a bias as well. I am reading a book right now on
Cyberpsychology, and it amazes me how quickly the author switches back and
forth between science and personal opinion, but in the mind of the author – she
views her opinions as science, and that is very dangerous.
Pope Francis
also addressed this challenge with scientists this week saying “Every scientist
needs to be watchful for the toxins which poison the mind’s pursuit of truth
and certainty, and admit that every scientist has their own history, their own
way of being and thinking, their own background, their own beliefs which can
spill into their work.
Here I think
we get some help from our readings. The first reading today tells us: “scarcely
do we guess the things on earth” – this is a beautiful and true admission –
THERE’S SO MUCH WE DON’T KNOW ABOUT WHAT WE SEE ON EARTH! That is not a taunt to science, it is simply
stating something very true. There’s a
lot in our world that we can’t explain just with science. I love science shows, I loved studying math,
I love sociological studies, I love studying psychology, physics and
electricity still boggle my mind but I love trying to understand it. Biology and the study of plants is so
exciting to me, as a person who hikes and spends my free time outdoors. I’m still completely humbled/amazed thankful
for the science that led to my brother being able to survive cancer and the
chemotherapy ---- I love science and the study of the observable. It has given us so much! Water purification, the ability to connect
with people all over the world, surgery, healing, the ability to increase the
productivity of our land 1,000 times more productive than land was a few
hundred years ago. The list goes
on. While saying that we love science,
we still should be able, at the end of listing all that great stuff, say
exactly what our first reading says – scarcely do we guess the things on
earth! There’s so much we still don’t
understand, that we will never be able to observe.
Are all the
things we see in the world – war, violence, abuse, terrorism, slavery,
bullying, suicide, greed, destruction of the environment, aborting children and
even killing them after they’re born…is it all explainable by chemistry? Is it all explainable through
psychology? Is it all explainable by the
theory of Relativity? And the other side
of that coin – is all the goodness that we see, the acts of kindness, the
sacrifices people make for others, the charity, the love..can Mother Teresa,
who is canonized a saint this weekend – can all the goodness we see be
explained using electrons, photons, or behavioral psychology or a brain study?
Pope Francis
answered this question yet again this week when he reminded scientists: “the
sciences alone, however, are not sufficient to understand the mystery contained
within each person”. We all can admit
that, I think, with just a wee bit of humility.
There’s a lot going on in the world that we will never be able to
explain no matter how far science progresses.
The first reading notes that the wisdom that God gives through the
Spirit completes the picture of
what we see when we look around the world.
The things we learn about the world through our Faith fill in the gaps,
the rather LARGE gaps, of all the things that we can’t measure nor study in a
test tube.
Scarcely do
we understand the things on Earth – this raises a great point as well. What is your estimate for the things of the
world that science CAN explain? Again,
if we think about all the things we experience in a day – how much of it does
science explain? I think the word from
the reading is very accurate – Scarcely do we understand.
Some say, of
course, “well, science hasn’t given us an answer to everything just yet, but it
will eventually.” But here it is really
important to note something – this statement is a complete act of Faith and is
as unscientific as saying there are three persons in one God. To say that science will eventually explain
everything is completely unscientific, because science HASN’T explained
everything yet, so that person is putting their hope in something that no one
has ever observed, thus committing the very crime they accuse the person of
Faith of – believing something can be true that hasn’t been observed.
As a person
who loves and is amazed by science, biology, math, physics, astronomy, psychology,
oceanography, etc. my experience has been one in which the study of science has
been the exact opposite of a THREAT to my Faith. The more I’ve learned about science, the more
I observe trees growing, the more I observe children growing in the womb
through the power of ultrasounds, the more I learn about the universe, and the
stars and the northern lights and the human body the CLOSER it has brought me
to my Catholic Faith and to God – science has deepened my Faith, not drawn me
away from it.
As St. John
Paul II noted, Faith and Science are two wings by which we come to know the
Truth. May all those who see a conflict
between the study of the observable and the pursuit of the Truth through Faith
once again recognize that for all those pursuing the truth of the world,
studying the observable truths of our world shouldn’t lead us away from the
Faith. Faith and science, if both are
pursued in honesty and humility, help us see and appreciate the entirety of
what we see when we look around our lives.
May we never
lose sight of the infinite number of miracles that we see each day.
