Eucharist | Blogger Priest

Preaching, the Liturgy & the Faith

Posted on February 13, 2011 by Father Joe

Why Does the Fire Go Out?

People have their reasons, but there is no good reason for leaving the Church. The majority in the area where I reside are probably Baptist and/or Evangelical. Some of these communities target Catholics and many Catholics marry non-Catholics. Not understanding their own tradition, many Catholics are inordinately moved by the music and preaching in Protestant churches. Catholic reformed rituals might not be regarded as very entertaining. Much of the music we sing is criticized as trite and unmoving. When we borrow Protestant hymns or sing Gospel, it is usually a pale imitation of what our separated brethren have to offer. Music enshrines preaching. Particularly in the African-American community, services can go hours. The importance of the minister is measured by his musicality and his effectiveness as a preacher. Our gravity is upon the formulae of liturgy, not upon preaching.

Masolino_Peter_Preaching2

Preachers and Priests, No Comparison?

Many priests were trained to keep homilies or sermons to ten minutes or less. That is about the length of two or three MTV videos. Time-wise, it cannot compare to the formation of the media or to the teaching sermons of our separated-brethren. I knew one old man who went to Mass on Saturday night and to his wife’s Baptist church on Sunday. He told me that he went to Mass for Holy Communion and to the Protestant church for good preaching. This is a rather sad state of affairs. Are we fully feeding our people? Preaching outside the Catholic Church may be dynamic and meaningful; however, it is also fraught with religious error.

Sermons or Homilies?

I recall from preaching seminars that the priest should offer a homily based upon the Scriptures of the day. This focus was understandable but I found the focus too narrow and absolutist. The priest or deacon can preach upon the readings, the liturgical prayers themselves, upon the feast or memorial, or upon what his people (at that time and place) need to hear. I had a vigorous dispute with a liturgist when I suggested catechetical sermons. It was and remains a contention of mine that many people stray to other faith communities because they really do not understand Catholicism and the full significance of the Eucharist.

Can Father Talk Too Long?

How long should the priest or deacon preach? This depends upon many factors:

1. What is the type of liturgy?

2. What has to be said to make the message worthwhile?

3. What is the capacity in patience and in comprehension of the listeners?

Given that Catholic sermons are usually shorter than Protestant counterparts, the priest might be able to amplify his instruction by linking his sermons from week to week. He can also use the parish bulletin, special adult education and bible study, and invite people to use the cycle of readings themselves with missals they can take home. If people look at the readings before Mass, their experience will not be cold when the priest or deacon speaks about them. Instead of merely thinking about what Protestants have that we don’t, let us utilize our own strengths, the missal and the cycle of predetermined readings.

Catholics might also do well to getting used to longer liturgies. Of course, this runs counter to the Roman Rite tradition, known for being curter and more to the point than Eastern Rite liturgies and certain Evangelical Protestant services. There is a basic dilemma with longer sermons, and that is the balance and rhythm of the Mass. A long homily and a short Eucharistic prayer seems to switch the gravity away from the sacrament to the Word which is intended to dispose us for the sacrifice and Holy Communion.

I am concerning myself essentially with the Sunday homily. Given work concerns and strained time issues, weekday Masses would probably have to remain little more than basic exhortations. Such exhortations are similar to aspirations: Jesus, Mary, Joseph save souls! Do good and avoid evil! Keep faith and hope alive! Lord, have mercy on us! God will not abandon you!

Messages Should Comfort and Challenge

Homilies more strictly revolve the Readings; however, sermons can touch upon all sorts of relevant topics. Sermons might be moral exhortations, catechetical moments, inspiration rhetoric and stories, etc. However, they should always connect the lesson, whatever the source, to the lives of the people listening. The congregation should not be passive to the preaching but actively engaged. A topic is explored, the message is ordered for coherence, examples or illustrations are made, and there is the immediate appliance.

The words used in preaching vary upon the setting. When the clergyman marries a couple, he speaks about the joy and hopes of the couple. He might also challenge them to keep the marital act free from the corruption of lust and artificial contraception. However, many Catholic ministers are afraid to rock the boat. When a priest or deacon officiates at a funeral, his words emphasize the consolations of faith to those who mourn, the promises of Jesus our gentle shepherd in regard to eternal life, and the need to go on with our lives. Again, many Catholic ministers are afraid of the conflict that comes with challenging the congregation to see the death as a warning about their own mortality and the need to reform before it is too late. Even evil men are temporarily canonized and little is said about Purgatory. A number in the pews no longer even believe in Hell. Sunday homilies are often pampering and grossly approving because many clergy are afraid of alienating the numbers in the pews and depleting the money gathered into collection baskets.

Need for Courage and Trusting Providence

I knew a priest in the South who tried to integrate the two churches he pastured, one white and the other black. White parishioners complained to the bishop and the man found himself stripped of his parish, reprimanded for making trouble, and reassigned to a teaching position in a college far away. Decades later he was still not allowed to return to parish ministry. But God writes straight with our crooked lines. This priest ended up teaching seminarians. He inspired another generation of men in ministry to struggle for social justice.

How often have we heard certain priests speak about artificial contraception, abortion, divorce and remarriage, or even about fornication and cohabitation? Some men in ministry are afraid. But what chance do God’s people have when their shepherds are passive and fearful? The late Pope John Paul II echoed our Lord’s words of wisdom, “Be not afraid.”

It may be that the priest shortage and the clergy scandals have drained the energy resources and joy of our priests. This needs to be remedied. The core message of the Gospel is not exhausted or angry. Priests who show enthusiasm or excitement about the Catholic faith and Gospel are the most effective. It is also a mentality which breeds vocations. Young men do not want to join a confraternity of tired old men who only go on because of cold duty and obligation. We have to be on fire with the faith if we want those in the pews to ignite! It is very hard for a priest to give what he does not have. God’s servants should be so in love with God that this love spills over in their service of others. Preaching should reflect a life of prayer and a drive to save souls!

The preaching should move God’s people to greater faith and acts of service to our Lord and neighbor. It assists everyone to better understand the Eucharist and disposes us to receive the Blessed Sacrament. We take what we have been given in Word and sacrament as we go out in mission to the world around us.

Filed under: Bible, Catholic, Church, Discipleship, Eucharist, Faith, Homily, Liturgy, Mass, Preaching, Prophets, Sacraments | 10 Comments »

Women Priests & Our Girl Jesus

Posted on February 13, 2011 by Father Joe

Mary gave birth to a baby boy and named him Jesus. Jesus grew up and he picked more boys to be his apostles. They in turn ordained still more boys to be bishops, priests and deacons. The priesthood is the ultimate boy’s club. But radical feminists act as if it is a woman-hater’s club… it is not. We all benefit from the ministry of priests. Not all men are worthy of this vocation. Women are called to other vocations, like religious life and motherhood. Except for a misguided sense of egalitarian equality, a disproportionate focus upon one element of social jusitice and feminists hungry for power, there is little that commends a move to ordain women. These dissenters would not only refashion the ministries but also Jesus would be remolded to their liking. He would become an abstraction, a model for their agenda but not the historical Savior. If God is not neutered, then he is likely made feminine. Jesus becomes Jessica or the Kristi who hangs upon the cross, raped and defiled by male machismo. They talk about equality; but this is a lie. They seek dominance and payback for what they regard as past subjugation and oppression.

I just read an article by Greg Archer over at THE HUFFINGTON POST entitled, “Roman Catholic Female Priests Growing in Numbers: An Insider’s Perspective.” I feel compelled to make a few comments. It is important that good Catholics not be confused by dissent on women priests or priestesses. There simply is no such creature within the Christian context. Christ has never given the Church the authority to ordain women. While our Lord counted women among his disciples, only men were selected to be his apostles. Jesus proved time and time again that he was willing to break the stereotypes of his day; however, upon this matter he retained a male leadership or hierarchy.

Many are surprised to find out that Catholicism only has one High Priest— Jesus Christ. Every man ordained to service is configured to Christ and participates in his one priesthood. The ordained priest is a living and breathing icon for Christ. His very flesh and his manhood resonate with that of Christ— making our Lord and his saving work present for the community. Historically, the Gnostic heretics had priestesses because they rejected matter as evil and denied the full incarnation of Christ as the God-Man. Catholics and/or orthodox Christianity take the incarnation seriously. Matter is not evil. Indeed, human nature is elevated and divinized by the coming of God among us as our brother. While the soteriological implications transcend gender, in baptism and faith all can know the gift of redemption; the parameters of sacerdotal ministry were clearly laid out. Only men could be bishops and priests. This did not deride the role of women. Holiness is available for all. It is just that God has intended that we fulfill differing roles.

Some have argued that the male-only priesthood gives balance to God’s life-giving love. Just as only women can physically conceive and give birth to a child; only a man (who is a priest) can spiritually confect the Eucharist and give us the bread of life. The Church also offers us the marriage analogy that passes down from Scripture. The priest signifies Christ who is the divine bridegroom; the congregation at Mass signifies the Church, his bride. Many of the centrist advocates for priestesses hate this analogy because it makes the notion of a woman priest into a kind of sacramental lesbianism. Of course, the more liberal critics might like this analogy in that they also support the gay and lesbian lifestyle.

The article started off by mentioning Victoria Rue, a lady who “attempted” ordination back in July 2005. Although the author claims to be “an insider” he refers to the precious blood as a wine chalice. This might be Episcopalian terminology; but, it is not how informed Catholics would speak about the cup. In any case, his point is that she is only one of a quickly growing number of women who are becoming “priests”. I have to stop at that point and insist that he is wrong to assume that these women are truly priests. They can play dress up, but as far as the true Catholic Church is concerned, they are only posturing.

He pokes fun that the Vatican would solely acknowledge “those sporting an XY chromosome” and yet he fails to realize that gender is more than an accidental. Too many people have bought the lie that the sexes are interchangeable or essentially the same. Gender is more than facial hair and muscles; it is a core element of human identity. The saints in heaven will still be both men and women, not neutered monstrosities. The resurrected and glorified Christ was still a man. Mary, our Blessed Mother, is still a woman. Gender has more purpose and meaning than genital expression. It is who we are.

Seven women tried to become priests three years earlier on the Danube River, seeking to avoid canonical sanction from the immediate archdiocese. However, by January 2003, they were all rightfully judged excommunicated. He also mentions Christine Mayr-Lumetzberger and Gisela Foster of a group called Womenpriests. They make a claim to ordination because their renegade bishop had apostolic succession. However, a woman constitutes “invalid matter” and cannot be ordained, even if the form is correct. They also like to confuse the issue of a celibate clergy (a discipline in the Church) with that of proposed women priests (which is doctrinally impossible).

Other women are also slowly joining the ranks of excommunicated wannabe priestesses. Rue claims that the Vatican has become quiet because they do not want an escalation. I suspect the real reason is because the Church has already made its position clear. There might also be an element of pity for these poor women who want something so desperately that they cannot have. The article gives the impression that this is all a game of strategy. But this is only the opinion of the dissenters. The Church is not playing. There is no game. It is a done deal. There can be no change… not today, not tomorrow, not ever.

These so-called women priests are really just creating their own church. They are Protestants with a few Catholic trappings. Some have gravitated toward the Episcopal communities that allow priestesses. As far as many of us are concerned, this movement is rather mute. Anglican orders, even for men, are probably largely invalid. Women priests merely represent the last nail in the coffin for a church that is no longer even Christian in its values. Adultery is routinely accepted. Fornication is excused. They welcome openly gay men and lesbians! What is left? When mortal sin is regarded as a virtue, Satan has won the day!

The author cited a 2006 NATIONAL CATHOLIC REPORTER survey of U.S. Catholics that said 62% of those responding favored women priests. An AP poll in 2005 found about 65% supported the change. But the AP is hardly sympathetic to Catholicism and such numbers make good news. As for the NCR, it is a liberal rag that gets the answers it wants. Traditional Catholics would likely not even respond to such garbage surveys. Further, who are these Catholics? Are we talking about NCR readership? Just because someone was baptized or went to Catholic school does not make a person a “real” or “practicing” Catholic. Only a quarter of our people still go to Mass. The rest are victims of modernity with its secular humanism, materialism, hedonism, and ignorance of faith. In any case, the truth and Church teachings are not open to polls. The Church is not a democracy. Christ is king and still in his heaven. The Pope is his vicar on earth.

While the 1975 report of the Pontifical Biblical Commission noted “no scriptural objections to ordaining women,” this summation is somewhat misleading. All it means is there is no direct statement from Christ about it. However, we do have the Scriptural teachings about Christ’s relationship to the Church (see St. Paul) and his example in appointing only men as his apostle-bishop-priests. Further, Catholicism is NOT a “sola scriptura” religion. We also have Sacred Tradition. There we do find explicit statements against women’s ordination. The early council of Nicea forbade the laying on of hands upon women (ordination).

Rue asserts in the article that there is archeological and Scriptural evidence for priestesses, but this is not true. She and her organization Womenpriests put a spin on dubious materials that cannot be substantiated. Conveniently for her, too much so, she complains that there was more evidence the Church destroyed and that the canonist Gracian wrote them out of the Church’s legal books and history. Her organization also sometimes fails to distinguish early heretical groups from the orthodox. They try to argue that boyish icons of priests are really females. They grab for straws and the author of the article swallows it uncritically.

And who is this know-it-all Victoria Rue who functions as his chief source? She is an ex-nun, seduced by militant feminism and angry with the Church. She left the Catholic Church. Her theological training was at a Reformed Protestant school in New York. She studied Liberation Theology, inherently Marxist in regards to its dialectic analysis of poverty, but she pursued it under the umbrella of radical feminism and lesbianism. She also studied at the GTU in Berkeley, California, a so-called ecumenical school known for its adherence to religious indifferentism and relativism, even in regard to blatantly and/or pagan non-Christian religions. She, along with other Womenpriests, are deceitful to gullible Catholics about their standing. As a teacher of propaganda in “women studies” and “comparative religious studies” she feigned being a real priest and offered a “weekly Catholic Mass” at San Jose State University. We are told that the diocese in 2006 rendered this statement:

Rue is not a validly ordained priest of the Roman Catholic Church. Members of the Roman Catholic Church should not participate in celebrations of the sacraments that are conducted by Victoria Rue, as those celebrations are not in union with the local or universal Church.

The fact that she regularly celebrates so-called Masses at an Episcopal church in San Francisco says it all. They might be in communion with her but she is not in communion with the bishops of the Catholic Church. She is a Protestant. All priestesses are either Protestant or pagan (understood as a reference to the old religions prior to Christ). Some of them even say that they worship the goddess. There is a popular crucifix with a naked woman upon it. However, Kristi is a model of the divine that has no place in genuine Christianity. It is Jesus Christ who offers the saving sacrifice and who forgives sins, not Kristi suffering with a bad hair day.

At the end of the article we are told that Rue is a lesbian who has lived with her partner for many years— big surprise— NOT!

Scriptural prohibitions against homosexuality and lesbianism mean nothing to her. She cites psychological views to the contrary. Of course, the American Psychiatric Association once referred to perversion as a disease. It was only when gays poured into the field that this verdict changed. Divine positive law and natural law take precedence over human whim. Rue says that her sexuality is important to her identity as a priest. This is an interesting statement, given that she renounced the Church’s prohibition of women priests based upon the importance of male gender as an element of identity in the priest.

The article concludes by telling us that there are now five RC bishop gals and almost 100 priestesses in the U.S. This is hardly a number about which the Church needs to be worried. Few practicing Catholics take these ladies seriously. Many of them are also quite advanced in years. They will not be around for long. Meanwhile, the numbers of young men entering legitimate seminaries are on the rise. Nice Catholic girls and women are entering religious orders with traditional charisms and structure. Rue traded in her habit for a collar. But the former she prized too lightly and the latter does not belong to her.

The article ends with the acclamation, “Hail, Mary!” But Mary would not be pleased. She is about bringing us to her Son. These women are preoccupied about themselves and power. In reality, the priesthood must always be about humility and obedience— servanthood. However, Mary must indeed be brought into the equation. All these wannabe priests should repent and come home to the true Church.

“Holy Mary, Mother of God, Pray for Us Sinners!”

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Apologetics, Bible, Catholic, Church, Discipleship, Eucharist, Evangelization, Faith, God, Jesus, Liturgy, Marriage, Morality, Priests, Sacraments, Sexuality, Sin | 2 Comments »

Response to an Anti-Catholic on John 6 & More

Posted on January 22, 2011 by Father Joe

One anti-Catholic apologist declared as blasphemy the claim that Catholics “eat” Jesus. In the same breath, he contended that popes forbade bible reading as illegal. Both statements are inexact and misleading. Catholics receive in Holy Communion the sacrament of Christ’s real presence and do so by the Lord’s command. As for the Scriptures, the prohibition was not against reading Scripture but against those translations and texts of the reformers which distorted the true Word of God. Remember, even Martin Luther inserted his own theology into the sacred texts and omitted books (from both the Old and New Testaments) which he found disagreeable. Viewing the Church and the civil society as two sides of the same coin, both Catholics and Protestants alike sometimes exerted undue force in maintaining the ranks and orthodoxy. Exaggerations of anti-Catholics regarding such coercion are not to be taken seriously. Further, the Church herself, then as today, was often incapable to stay the hand of civil authority intent upon using religion as an excuse for intolerance and brutality. Incidents of murder and torture by “unholy Romish priests” are rarely documented; in any case, there is something demented in referencing incidents which happened centuries ago as if they happened last Tuesday.

The Catholic Church is the source for the Scriptures: members from her community were inspired in their authorship and by her own authority she determined the canon. The proliferation of bibles throughout the world was not the fruit of Reformation-Protestantism but of the mechanical printing press. Rome has encouraged the reading of the Bible and has long offered a special indulgence to those who do so every day. Unlike the anti-Catholic fundamentalist, the entire Bible (without deletion of books) is offered her people. Further, her use of a lectionary system for liturgies has resulted in a greater variety of biblical passages than what is usual in Protestant services. The Catholic faith is affirmed by an honest and comprehensive understanding of Scripture while the anti-Catholic resorts to biblical fragments, out of context and ignorantly misinterpreted. One anti-Catholic bigot notes that John 6 is frequently used against him by so-called “idolatrous” and “pagan” Catholics. He cites John 6:51,53-58:

“I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world. Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him. Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever.”

The anti-Catholic bigot argues that Catholics neglect verse 63 which illustrates, so he says, that Jesus did not mean what he said literally: “It is the spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life.”

In other words, until verse 63, Jesus is lying? Sorry, I do not think so. Our Savior is not fickle in his teachings. He would not deliberately mislead and anger the Jews; he meant what he said about the Eucharist. This verse becomes clearer if we look at the one which follows it: “But there are some of you who do not believe.” This resonates with verse 52, conveniently omitted by the anti-Catholic apologist: “The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, ‘How can this man give us [his] flesh to eat?’” Did the critic purposely omit this line, knowing that he found himself associated with the disbelieving Jews? It sure seems that way. The Jews are murmuring because they do not like what they hear. Some of their number walk away. They know full well that Jesus means what he says. Their sensibilities, especially regarding blood are offended. They will have none of it. It is a mystery that requires supernatural faith to accept. Verse 63 is not a reference to Christ’s Eucharistic body but is used as it was previously in John 3:6-7. We read: “What is born of flesh is flesh and what is born of spirit is spirit. Do not be amazed that I told you, ‘You must be born from above.’” “Spirit . . . flesh” is a Hebraic form of speech which does the very opposite of what the anti-Catholic bigot claims. It affirms the truth of Christ’s Eucharistic teaching and that to accept it we must be given the gift of faith by his heavenly Father.

We need to pray that the anti-Catholic bigot will be given a greater share in the true faith. He is usually filled with much anger and hate. He can only measure his own religion in reference to that which he opposes. I would fathom to guess that were there no Catholic religion, he would have no faith at all– or perhaps I should call it an anti-faith? He is quick to judge and to damn Catholics even though there is no consideration that if he is wrong then he has blasphemed the work of the Holy Spirit.

The anti-Catholic may also sin by presumption of God’s saving grace. We live in the “sure and certain hope” of our salvation, leaving our eternal destiny to divine providence. The Lord says, “Therefore, by their fruits you will know them.” While the fruits of Christ’s presence and loving ministry are manifested in the life of the Church, the anti-Catholic critic contends that Jesus shall respond to us with the words from Matthew 7:23, “I never knew you. Depart from me, you workers of iniquity!” Many of our Protestant brethren, with whom we would differ on points of doctrine and manners of worship, work alongside us in the promotion of the Gospel of Life. However, the anti-Catholic bigot contends that these groups are contaminated by their association with Catholics and thus are also lost. What can we say to such a critic? If all he understands are isolated bible texts, then let him pay heed to this one: “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. By their fruits you will know them” (Matthew 7:15-16).

Every Catholic needs to remember the anti-Catholic and the fallen-away Catholic each time he receives Holy Communion. We need to dedicate our Holy Hours to prayer on their behalf and make reparation for their insults against Jesus, his Mother, and the Church. May our prayer rise like incense to heaven and be found pleasing to Almighty God.

For more such reading, contact me about getting my book, DEFENDING THE CATHOLIC FAITH.

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Apologetics, Bible, Catholic, Church, Discipleship, Eucharist, Faith, God, Holy Communion, Liturgy, Mass, Sacraments | Leave a comment »

The Father Cutie Scandal

Posted on January 12, 2011 by Father Joe

cutie9 Given the recent publication of Fr. Cutie’s self-justifying book, I thought it worthwhile to publish these revised reflections at my BLOGGER PRIEST site:

There are some critics who contend that the scandal in Miami with Father Alberto Cutie is providential. While God can certainly write straight with our crooked lines, I would stress that he never directly intends evil. There I have said it. I have used the big “e” word, EVIL. I am not judging anyone’s soul. However, I can make a judgment upon scandal and the actions of people in the public square that might lead good Catholics astray. I am not entirely sure what happened with Father Alberto Cutie. He appeared on the news with details we did not need but which have further confused and complicated matters. Now he writes a “tell all” book which attacks the teachings and disciplines of the Catholic Church.

He insisted that for twenty-one years he absolutely preserved his celibacy intact and was not sexually intimate with anyone. That is fine and dandy. But then, what happened? During one TV interview he said he “believes” he has fallen in love. He said he “believes” that God might be calling him to marriage. He said he “believes” that celibacy is a good thing and does not want to be the poster boy for married priests. He denied a sexual relationship, told one interviewer he had been intimate with the woman in the photographs, but not sexually and yet he apparently said in another news program that he had been sexually intimate with her. He said that he did not go out of his way to make trouble for the Church. He said that he and the woman he cared about were almost alone on the beach and that they were not there long. But the compromising photos were taken, despite attempts at stealth. Okay, but still he sought to hide a romantic relationship to which he had long ago given up any right to have.

He preached and gave one message in his parish and on radio and television; but he lived another. Had he been an ordinary parish priest, there would have been a local scandal, but it would not be international news. It would not be the stuff of tabloids and anti-Catholic videos. After he was censured, this priest continued to speak about the matter in public. The problem grew. He gave countless interviews in both English and Spanish. He just would not stop talking. He still has not stopped.

A Reflection on Celibacy

What can we say to the enemies of compulsory celibacy for priests? Priestly celibacy is not outdated. It is a powerful sign of contradiction that neither the devil nor the hedonists of the present age can stand. They malign it as a fantasy or cover-up for hordes of homosexual and/or pedophile clergy. Priests forgive the sexual transgressions of other men and women all the time. However, if a priest should fall, there is only recrimination and exile.

There is nothing wrong with men and women expressing love to one another. It is natural and beautiful. But sexual congress belongs to the state of marriage alone. Priests like all men can make mistakes; but, unlike most men, the majority of priests in the Roman Rite are pledged to a lifetime of celibate love. Yes, while celibacy is a discipline, it is also a manner of loving others, albeit in a single-hearted way. The celibate priest knows a special solidarity with the brokenhearted, the poor, the suffering and those who are alone. His celibacy says that he belongs to the people he serves, without reservation or distraction. He does not belong to another person or even to himself. He belongs to the Church in which he serves. He demonstrates his love for God in how he pours out his life for others.

One early interview was particularly disturbing when it was asked if he would stay or leave the Catholic Church. He admitted that he was currently weighing his options. I was saddened. I thought to myself, if a charismatic priest, regarded by some as the Oprah of the Church, should defect, the harm he would inflict upon the Church could be enormous. He had been instrumental in drawing many people back to the practice of their faith. This scandal could further explode and cause an exodus of souls from the true Church.

He was handsome and seemingly filled with vigor and love of the Church. Such things are contagious in a good way. But hero-worship of any sort, particularly with celebrities, has a dangerous flip-side. They can do much good. But, they are also capable of terrible wrongs and damage. Younger people who easily related to him might now view the rules of the Church as arbitrary and heartless. They might say to themselves, if someone like Father Cutie can no longer tolerate the Church, then why should I?

Critics contend, “Isn’t the Father Cutie scandal just further evidence that it is wrong and dangerous for Catholic priests to suppress their natural desires for sexual intimacy with women?”

The priest in question admitted he had a long-standing serious struggle with his sexuality and need for a wife and family. It may be that he sought ordination without open full deliberation and resolution of this concern with those to whom he was entrusted for formation. He may have been chaste in his behavior for many years but failed to surrender dreams and hopes for a family of his own. The man who would be a priest must let these things go. His hopes and aspirations should revolve instead around his prayer life and his goals and service as a pastor of souls. Men in seminary must also be realistic about their drives. As St. Paul reminds us, it is better to marry than to burn. Priests must also be very wary of their fantasies regarding choices not made and how other men might live. The grass might seem greener on the other side of the fence; but priests must not trespass where they do not belong. They freely embraced celibacy so as to enter into holy orders and become priests. Had they become married deacons, they would still be clergy in the Church. They could have lived saintly lives as laymen. But they made a choice. They made promises. These promises should be kept. Before ordination is the proper time for deliberation and soul searching, not afterwards.

The business about Father Cutie should have no meaning beyond this one poor priest, himself. He is not representative of the thousands of other priests in the United States who have never compromised their promises or their celibacy. The impression from the question is that men cannot be expected to have any semblance of self-control. This is silly and shows just how far our society and its views have been contaminated and distorted by excessive nudity, immodesty, and eroticism. We even dress our little girls like whores and then wonder why there is child abuse. Teenagers have their bellies exposed and shorts up to their crotches. Parents sometimes object but then cannot find decent stuff in stores. Television and movies celebrate fornication and give us scene after scene of simulated sex acts. Pornography has gone main stream and sexual gratification is viewed as a necessary rite of passage. It is into this mix that we find the celibate priest. Mothers want their sons married because they cannot see how a man might otherwise be happy. Fathers want their sons married because otherwise everyone will think they are gay. The truth is that celibacy can be very rewarding and liberating. Celibacy is not a denial of love but a special way of loving.

The priest promises perpetual celibacy but even married men promise a fidelity to a spouse which will require periodic chastity. Those who follow Natural Family Planning would understand how one must be creative in love, perhaps reverting back from time to time to the romantic and chaste acts of courtship during fertile periods. Celibacy is not merely a matter of priests suppressing their sexuality; rather, it is redirected to a love of God and a love of neighbor in sacrificial service. Priests, who say their prayers and stay busy, have neither the time nor the interest to pursue an exclusive relationship. If men in general cannot be expected to control themselves, then what happens when a spouse is sick or incapacitated or away? If the husband has military duty abroad or the wife has to travel back home to care for an ailing parent or there is an extended business meeting, would the man control his sexual urges or be compelled to commit adultery? If his wife is sick and cannot have sex with him, does he necessarily turn to her pretty nurse as a proxy? An over-sexed society suffering from an epidemic of fornication, perversion, adultery, pornography, prostitution and child endangerment can hardly speak in a credible way about priestly celibacy and marriage. The trouble with these fallen priests is not the Church but the fact that they themselves are formed and affected more by the fallen world around them than by the Gospel. Secularists and hedonists criticizing priestly celibacy are like inebriated boozers telling teetotalers to take a drink.

Where Does a FIRED Catholic Priest Go?

Before he made his jump, I read one critic who argued that Father Cutie could defect to the Episcopalian Church, get married and continue his parish and media ministry. I wrote: “Yes, he could do this, but he might forfeit his soul in such a move. The moral state of people who were raised in the Episcopal or Anglican Church is one thing; the state of those who abandon Catholicism to join their ranks is another.”

The original Protestant reformers may have paid a terrible price in their break from Rome. They should have known better. The same cannot be said for those who were raised in the Protestant traditions. This is all they know. Those elements of Catholic faith preserved after the break may very well be meritorious for our Protestant brothers and sisters. However, those very same elements may convict former Catholics who were supposed to remain steadfast within the body of the Church and in the profession of all that we believe as true. Ignorance of the truth does provide some measure of excuse. Catholics in general and priests in particular, would have a more difficult time. They were one with the true Church. They professed its faith and received its sacraments. The conviction from the Fourth Lateran Council, Trent and in the margins of Vatican II cannot be escaped: there is no salvation outside the Church. Those who know, perfectly well, that the Catholic Church is the true Church, and then refuse to join or leave its ranks, might lose their place in the heavenly kingdom. In addition, the Holy Father has insisted that Protestant churches are ecclesial communities but not churches in the full Catholic sense. The Anglicans like to see themselves as a branch of Catholicism, but this sentiment is not shared by the successor of St. Peter. There are serious questions about apostolic succession and its priesthood and Mass. Non-Catholic communities suffer from many dire errors in teaching. Yes, the Episcopalians have married priests, but they also have openly gay clergy and (women) priestesses. They tolerate abortion, sodomy, fornication, contraception, divorce and remarriage, etc. I doubted Father Cutie could stomach such a so-called church for long; I guess he is proving me wrong.

Father Alberto Cutie Defects to Episcopal Church

I grieve for the Church. It was bad enough that Father Alberto Cutie was living a secret life. He seemed more apologetic about being caught than about having his scandalous doings with his lady-friend photographed on a Florida beach. But next we are told that he joined the Episcopal Church. My heart droped at the news.

The wayward priest spent his designated “retreat” time hanging out with his girlfriend. He did not even try to reform. We have all been deceived. While he asked forgiveness and said that he did not want to be the poster-boy for married priests, he has abandoned the true Church entirely. He has done the very thing which he promised he would not do. He has brought both Church doctrine and discipline to ridicule. He has hurt the faith of simple people. Given his popularity as a pastor and as a widely-known media priest, the danger of his defection is incalculable. Who knows how many will follow him out of the Catholic fold?

The Episcopal Bishop Leo Frade should be deeply embarrassed by his disrespect to the priest’s legitimate bishop, Catholic Archbishop John Favalora. Bishop Frade was not Father Cutie’s true spiritual father, but rather of a robber who came to steal from the flock. In this case, he did not get away with sheep but with the shepherd. Ecumenism was dealt a serious set-back. I was surprised not to see lightning bolts from heaven about this travesty. The good Archbishop would have us pray for his prodigal son in the hope that he might return to the fold.

Quickly defecting after the news of his infidelity broke, he was unwilling to give the matter the proper amount of time and distance for sober reflection. I have to wonder how much of this was premeditated. There was even speculation that his girlfriend may have had some prior involvement with the photographer on the beach. But I think it is reaching to suppose he was setup to force his hand. Regardless of the machinations behind the scenes, the blunt of the blame must be borne by Father Cutie.

Although supposedly orthodox in his teachings, this latest act shows quite the opposite. He broke trust with his bishop and brother priests but now refers to Episcopalian priests as his “many brothers… [who] serve God as married men and with the blessing of having their own families.” This act sickens me. Episcopalian priests may be good Christians, but he sees no difference between the authentic priesthood of Catholicism and the empty shell of Anglicanism. He is not the first. But, almost every one of them abandoned Roman Catholicism, not for deep-seated doctrinal reasons, but because of the desire to bed a woman and still retain a public or ministerial persona as a spiritual guru.

Catholicism receives many Episcopalian priests into her ranks, but they are drawn by doctrinal permanence over fluctuating instability, moral absolutes over relativism and humility coupled with obedience to God and his Church over a selfish and earthbound liberalism. Those who become Catholic often sacrifice much in the way of salary, standing and home. While a few married Episcopalian priests have been ordained in the Catholic Church; many have sacrificed their ministries entirely to be a part of the Catholic family. They placed a higher premium on divine truth than upon a capricious religion easily swayed by the fads and fashions of the day.

How could he give advice about faith and relationships to others on television, radio and in writing when he was so personally messed up? People came to him for life-giving water; but he was really an empty well. Many of his supporters seemed more “on his side” than in harmony with the mind of the Church. He made disciples, inadvertently I suppose, less for Christ and his Church and more for himself. Sometimes I think the Church should rotate clergy in media settings. Left too long in front of the camera or on the radio– and a personality cult frequently develops. We should not hero-worship our clergy. If a popular priest should fall, he might take many souls with him. This business with Father Cutie has re-ignited the married priest debate even though most active priests prefer the status-quo in favor of compulsory celibacy. Who knows how dire this will continue to be for the Church in Miami?

A television station showed parishioners of St. Francis de Sales Parish marching around their church in support of their former pastor. Evidently they did not care that their pastor had broken his promises and had lived a lie. When interviewed they compared Father Cutie’s transgressions favorably against the terrible crimes of pedophiles. The real comparison is with good and faithful celibate priests.

The situation was intensely precarious. Later it became a great deal worse. The woman was identified as Ruhama Canellis. She stood by his side at Trinity Cathedral where they both entered the Episcopalian church. The Episcopal bishop and priests in attendance dressed up for the event. They pulled all the stops. Even priestesses were in attendance. He was planning to marry his lover and to become an Episcopalian priest. He has now realized these aspirations. I suppose it is fitting. King Henry VIII stole the English people from the Catholic Church so that he might divorce and remarry. Canellis is a divorced woman. Did Father Cutie miss the class in seminary on basic Christian morality? Are not fornication and adultery still sins? This should matter to them both. In addition to these concerns, he is now a renegade Catholic priest. If he accepts Protestant teaching, and plans to expound upon it, then he will be a heretic as well. He is digging a big hole for himself. My fear is that thousands might fall into it with him.

Well, it is a sad thing, but if the Episcopalian church wants our rejects then that is their trouble. Look how quickly they grabbed this fallen priest. We would have taken more time with one of theirs. His legitimate Catholic bishop was not even notified about his reception into the Episcopal “church.” That shows how little respect Father Cutie had for him and the ROMAN Catholic Church. The Episcopal diocese should be ashamed of itself. But given the current fragmented status of the Episcopal communion, are they even capable of shame? This was all quite sleazy and I suspect it was in the works for some time. I have no respect for men who do such things.

Father Cutie described his new faith affiliation as “a new family” and yet we do not subscribe to any form of religious relativism. Father Cutie disowned his family. That should be the real headline. All churches are not the same. The Holy Father was clear. The Catholic Church is the true Church; Orthodoxy is a defective church; and all Protestant groupings are ecclesial communities, but not properly CHURCH. Many Protestant communities claim no priesthood or Eucharist; Episcopalians claim both but the Catholic Church judged their orders invalid and their Eucharist as false.

SEE APOSTOLICAE CURAE (Pope Leo XIII, 1896)

They are not a branch of Catholicism but a foreign misbegotten creature that has delusions of grandeur while feigning a pedigree it does not really possess.

What clouds the issue is the presence of former Catholic priests in the Episcopal community. They are still priests, even if in mortal sin and excommunicated. Father Cutie says that he will continue to proclaim God’s Word; but what is a Catholic priest apart from the Catholic Church? Will he preach the Word of God or the word of Cutie? Father Cutie is rejecting the Pope, the authority of his lawful bishop, the seven sacraments as clearly defined by Catholicism, our view of priesthood, our moral teachings on sexuality and marriage, the prohibition against divorce and remarriage, and the basics of Catholic ecclesiology. Will he be happy? Can he close his mind and heart to the many differences we have with Episcopalians? He will be obliged to accept women priests, gay bishops and same-sex unions, a tolerance for abortion, artificial contraception and divorce with remarriage. He is leaving the Church of commandments for the church of anything goes. He says, “I will always love the Catholic Church.” But, he did not love her enough. The Church was his bride. Now he has traded her for two paramours: the divorcee and the mistress church of Henry VIII and Cranmer the despoiler.

Filed under: Adultery, Anti-Catholicism, Catholic, Celebrities, Church, Commandments, Contraception, Discipleship, Eucharist, Faith, Forgiveness, Marriage, Morality, Pope, Priests, Sacraments, Sexuality, Sin | 5 Comments »

Share Your Bread with the Hungry

Posted on November 30, 2010 by Father Joe

“Share your bread with the hungry, shelter the oppressed and the homeless; Clothe the naked when you see them, and do not turn your back on your own. Then your light shall break forth like the dawn, and your wound shall quickly be healed” (see Isaiah 58:7-10).

“You are the light of the world” (see Matthew 5:13-16).

These passages are very meaningful and challenging, maybe more so than is immediately evident. In the seminary I was a member of a social justice committee and such passages as found in Isaiah inspired us. We really are called to share our bread with the hungry, to shelter the oppressed and homeless, to clothe the naked, and definitely NOT to turn our back on our own. But even if we were to be advocates of all the social justice platforms offered today, this alone would not make us faithful to this passage or a true light to the world.

Jesus and Jesus alone is the true light. Apart from him any flicker of light we might offer to others would be swallowed by the shadows. Sharing your bread with the hungry is a noble task, but the trouble is, the one given bread today will be hungry again tomorrow. We have many good-natured fellows who make others dependent upon them, unable to stand up for themselves with full human dignity. Or, we have just the opposite, those who feed their brothers and sisters once and feel no further obligation. And, on top of all this, we can forget the real hunger that is out there– that needs to be fed– that can only be satisfied in Christ. Christ comes to us in the bread of life, the Eucharist; he transforms us into himself, a bread which must be broken if it is to be given to others. It is not enough simply to care for the hungry; we have to LOVE them– some of whom are in our very families or groups of friends. Not all the hungry are on the street. They know who they are. Some may be in our midst right now. Do any of you sense it? Is there emptiness inside you? Is the belly of your soul crying out for nourishment? Don’t be afraid to ask for help, come– be fed– there are priests and other Catholics waiting to hear from you– to help you, come. Christ is waiting.

Isaiah also speaks of sheltering the oppressed and homeless. That is what the house of God is about. Sometimes when I am in church, I imagine I can feel an external oppression. I envision it pressing upon the outer walls. When our values of action and of belief are openly ridiculed and distorted, then we are oppressed.

Our Church is a shelter from all the wiles of a world intent upon our destruction. There are hurts out there– come in and be healed. There are lies out there– come in and hear the truth. There is violence out there– come in and receive peace. There is coldness out there– come in and be warmed by the flame of Christ’s love. There is darkness out there– come in and become a part of that light which is the Lord.

It is sad when someone hears the call of Christ and misinterprets it or only goes part way. There was a man in Washington, DC, who generously devoted his life to the care of the homeless. That is to be applauded. But, like so many, I have to wonder if he heard the call clearly. Why? He sold all he had, gave up his job, and did things reminiscent of what our Lord asked of the rich man in the Gospel. However, he also abandoned his wife and family to enter upon his crusade. He was my friend, but this always bothered me. Can we renounce one responsibility for another? Can we exchange one set of mouths to be fed for others? Can we cause homelessness in order to give a home for others? I do not want to judge anyone, but the very Scriptures which speak of so many deeds of mercy also remind us not to turn our back on our own. In Christ, and only in Christ, you are the light of the world. When does this light shine? It shines when a husband and wife love each other unselfishly, open to the gift of new life. It shines when a brother tells his sister, “I’m sorry, forgive me.” It shines when a father welcomes his alienated son back home. It shines when a couple loves each other so much that they discipline their love in chaste giving. It even shines when one friend gives another a scarf or sweater for Christmas. Done in Christ, all things great and small make the light of Christ shine all the brighter.

For more such reflections, contact me about getting my book, CHRISTIAN REFLECTIONS.

Filed under: Bible, Catholic, Charity, Discipleship, Eucharist, Forgiveness, God, Jesus, Reflection, Repentance, Social Justice, Uncategorized | Leave a comment »

Do Not Let Sinful Men Drive You Away

Posted on November 27, 2010 by Father Joe

It happens that sometimes people leave the Catholic Church because of issues of divergent faith. I still find this sad but can respect the integrity of such people who do not want to live a lie like so many dissenters who remain to tear down the Church from within.

However, I frequently caution my congregation not to allow the weakness and/or foolishness of the preacher to drive them away. I am not about making converts to me but to Jesus Christ. If we believe in the promises of Christ and the sacraments of the Church, then we should remain steadfast.

We can cooperate with God’s grace by studying the Catechism and the Bible. We should not leave the Church because of sinful men. This includes both among the shepherds and the sheep. I am often reminded of Peter’s response to Jesus when so many mumbled and walked away (over the issue of the Eucharist). Our Lord asked if his apostles would abandon him, too. Peter answered for the Church of the ages, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life” (John 6:68).

Filed under: Bible, Catholic, Church, Discipleship, Eucharist, Evangelization, Faith, Holy Spirit, Jesus, Mass, Pope | Leave a comment »

Our True Treasure

Posted on October 29, 2010 by Father Joe

A few years ago, I recall watching a re-run episode of the old series, The Twilight Zone, which I think might help us to appreciate God’s Word. In it, three robbers made an incredible heist of gold bars. It was worth a fortune. However, the gold was too hot to handle. So, one of the men, being a scientist, devised a way for them to go into suspended animation or sleep, to wake up healthy and rich a hundred years hence. They bet their lives on this proposition for wealth. A hundred years later, they awaken from their slumber. Sometime during their stasis, a rock had fallen and had broken a glass cylinder containing one of their friends. He was dead. There were only two left; so much the better. They would be richer for it — they thought. The remaining two men exited their cave in the desert with their loot. The sun was hot. Civilization was no longer where it used to be. The truck they had counted upon broke down. They fought with each other. Greed set in. The water became scarce. A tussle broke out and suddenly, there was only one man left. He laughed. He was rich beyond avarice. He carried the heavy bars in the hot desert sun. Just when he thought he was finished, he met a couple of people in some kind of futuristic hot-rod. He fell to the ground. “Water, water,” he begged, “Give me some water and I’ll make you rich beyond your dreams!” He held out the gold. One of the people whom he met pitied the dying man but found him very curious. For everyone knew that in the latter twenty-first century, gold was easily accessible and virtually worthless.

The story may be science fiction, but the plight is one which has always faced us. It is the need for the proper priorities in our lives — and in the case of the Scriptures, the rightful place of God. Reading Isaiah 55:1-3, the question is asked, “Why spend your money for what is not bread; your wages for what fails to satisfy?” We can be like Midas and have everything we touch turn to gold, but if that is our only treasure, we’ll starve and die. We as Christians also believe that unless the body and blood of Christ nurtures us as our spiritual food, our souls will weaken and possibly die. Isaiah uses the image of our natural need for food and drink to make more clear how we need the life-giving nourishment of God. Without him, we are nothing. Without him, our other treasures are valueless. Without him, we cannot be totally the people we are called to be. Without him, we are deranged ants going nowhere, fools without a purpose. Without him, no amount of food or water will keep us alive, for death comes for us all.

In Romans 8:35,37-39, the theme is continued, Paul shows in his questions how absurd it should be that anything might separate us from Christ. Christ, unlike gold or earthly wealth — Christ, unlike power or prestige — Christ, unlike fads and fashion — Christ does not lose his value for us. Paul says that neither death nor life, neither human nor angelic power, neither present nor future, neither persecution nor hunger — shall separate us from the love of God that comes to us in Christ Jesus.

We are called to him, to drink and eat of the presence of his love. But, do we always accept the invitation? We might ask ourselves a lot of questions to find out. When we travel, do we attempt to locate churches where we might fulfill our obligation for Sunday Mass? Do we faithfully fulfill it at home? If we have children, have they received the sacraments, learned their prayers, and studied their catechism? When we go to Mass, are we in a state of grace to receive communion or might we still need Confession? Do we needlessly avoid communion when we might be permitted to receive it? Do we pray at home? Do we share our faith with friends? In the day-to-day living, do we live lives of charity to help clothe and feed others — not only materially, but spiritually with Christ? All these things and more are among the questions we might ask. I think a sign of Christ’s priority in our lives is revealed in how readily we want to share him with others. Some people might be more willing to offer a cigarette or a piece of gum than Christ. That shows sometimes just how low on the list we place him. The irony is, that each and every one of us is on the top of Christ’s list. He underwent all the pains of our treachery for each and every one of us personally. By name he calls us. By name he dies for us. By name, he now calls us forward and even offers his own flesh as our food and his blood as our drink.

We notice in Matthew 14:13-21 the multiplication of the loaves and fishes; it says that everyone ate their fill. No one was forgotten. So it is at our altar table. We might try to bring someone to Mass who has been away for awhile or who is searching for meaning and might find it in the midst of the Church community.

For more such reflections, contact me about getting my book, CHRISTIAN REFLECTIONS.

Filed under: Catholic, Discipleship, Eucharist, Faith, Jesus, Morality, Reflection, Sacraments, Sin | Leave a comment »

The Sacrifice of Jesus and the Church

Posted on September 23, 2010 by Father Joe

The Old Testament prophet speaks about the restoration of Zion and Jerusalem (see Isaiah 62:1-5). His words are quite eloquent and filled with hope. Remember that the people of God had been dispossessed and their nation and its temple destroyed. Such a testimony would seem like foolishness to many. It is no wonder that at the end of their exile, if not of their subjugation, they rebuilt the temple and expected the eminent coming of the Messiah. However, a few years after the crucifixion of Christ, Jews and Christians alike found themselves persecuted with vigor by Rome and the temple was destroyed. Along with it the Jewish priesthood and their ritual sacrifices came to an end. Non-Catholic Protestant fundamentalists and certain Jewish authorities view the political restoration of Israel today as the beginning of a more complete fulfillment of the ancient prophecy. Indeed, the Scriptures were publicly cited when the United Nations recognized the re-establishment of Israel. “You are to be a crown of splendor in the hand of the Lord, a princely diadem in the hand of your God; no longer are you to be named ‘Forsaken,’ nor your land ‘Abandoned,’ but you shall be called ‘My Delight’ and your land ‘The Wedded,’ for the Lord takes delight in you and your land will have its wedding” (Isaiah 62:3-6).

As Catholic Christians we do not associate the state of Israel with the promised restoration of God’s nation. Instead, the New Zion or Jerusalem is the Church. Corinthians 12:4-11 recognizes that there are differing roles in the Church and varying gifts of the Spirit. The old sacrifices of the temple are replaced by the one oblation of Jesus who is both priest and victim. We renew and make present his saving covenant by celebrating the Lord’s Supper— in other words, the Mass— in our churches.

Every Christian priest participates in the one priesthood of Jesus. Every Mass is a re-presentation (in an unbloody but real and spiritual way) of the sacrifice of Calvary. Just as Hosea and others in the Old Testament used the marriage analogy between God and his people, Christ is the bridegroom and the Church is his bride. The Mass is a participation in the heavenly wedding banquet that finds mention in Isaiah. St. Paul will speak eloquently about how a husband should love his wife as Christ has loved his Church. The Jews were right in their hope two thousand years ago for a Messiah; the tragedy is that only a few recognized him when he came. When he comes again, he will not forget his own— either in the Church or among the first people chosen by God.

John 2:1-11 carries forward the general theme of marriage with the wedding feast at Cana. Note the intercessory role of Mary, even after Christ’s objection, “Woman why turn to me?” There is no argument. Joseph is gone and Jesus is the head of her household. She brings concerns to him and he takes care of them. He provides. Her answer is a command to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.” Jesus had said that “My hour has not yet come,” and yet, the power of her faith moves him to freely comply. Jesus would later tell his listeners that if they had faith the size of a mustard seed, they could move mountains. There is no competition or tension between Jesus and Mary. This marriage feast was obviously for dear friends, maybe even relatives, and nothing should spoil its joy. Jesus turns water into wine. This is the first of his signs. At his own wedding banquet, he will turn wine and bread into his body and blood.

For more such reflections, contact me about getting my book, CHRISTIAN REFLECTIONS.

Filed under: Catholic, Church, Discipleship, Eucharist, Forgiveness, God, Holy Spirit, Incarnation, Jesus, Liturgy, Mass, Reflection, Sacraments | Leave a comment »

To Share Food is to Share Life

Posted on September 13, 2010 by Father Joe

You may have noticed how often the resurrection appearances are linked with meals. I have already mentioned the story of the two men on the road to Emmaus who recognized Jesus in the breaking of the bread. Jesus also took and ate a fish to demonstrate that he had actually risen from the dead.

In John 21:1-14, he directs his disciples to throw their net into the sea and there is a miraculous catch. When some of it is cooked, he “came over, took the bread and gave it to them, and did the same with the fish.” The Eucharistic themes are unavoidable. He makes himself present to us when we gather in his name and eat the bread of life. The symbol of the fish, because of its recurrent use, has also become a signature of sorts for the presence of the risen Lord. Indeed, in the midst of persecution, Christians would often draw a fish upon the ground as a secret sign that it was safe to speak, that they were all among friends.

It is no accident that the Lord uses the occasion of the meal to repeatedly reveal himself to his friends. It is an ancient maxim that to share food is to share life. What better sign could there be then for the resurrection to be seen in its greatest glory. The disciples recall all the past times when they would gather with their master and share nourishment. We can imagine that these were occasions of great intimacy and bonding. When the Christian community was exiled from the synagogues, and we can see such friction as this in Acts 4:1-12, the meal they celebrated in common upon the following day increased in importance. In the early days of the Church, this agape or love feast included a regular banquet where they recalled the stories of Jesus and was followed by the commemoration of the Lord’s Last Supper with his friends — the Eucharist. As time passed, and the first meal became unwieldy, it was dropped and the celebration of the sacrament became the principal meal that Christians celebrated as a family. It is still in this spiritual food that the risen Jesus is made present in our midst. He gives it to us and it is he. Just as we need food for physical nourishment; so too do we need the Eucharist to nurture us and to keep us spiritually alive in faith.

For more such reflections, contact me about getting my book, CHRISTIAN REFLECTIONS.

Filed under: Catholic, Eucharist, Jesus, Mass, Reflection | Leave a comment »

Our Pro-Life Commitment

Posted on August 28, 2010 by Father Joe

The Cemetery of the Innocents

Here is a picture of me and the Knights of Columbus who set up 721 crosses that represent the children lost to abortion in one hour of one work day. This MEMORIAL OF THE INNOCENTS was set up at Holy Family Church in Mitchellville in 2009 and every year since then. We often have it up until the annual March for Life in Washington, DC. We received a lot of support although there were a few complaints. One lady argued against putting such a thing up at Christmas time. I explained that Advent and Christmas was the perfect time. During Advent we recall the Christ-child in the womb and on Christmas he is born. We are reminded that every child is a reflection of the Christ-child. Another person argued that it was insensitive as she was a pro-choice Catholic. I told her that she was deceived. There is no such thing as a pro-abortion Christian; abortion attacks the central mystery of the Incarnation. Abortion is murder and as such it is a repudiation of Christ’s Gospel of Life.

One of my favorite memories is working with the American Life League back in 2005 and the CRUSADERS FOR LIFE. Here is a reposting of the news around that event at my old parish, Holy Spirit Church:

A.L.L. Crusaders Come to Washington 2005

A dozen young people from colleges across the country walked from Augusta, Maine to Washington, DC in “Defense of the Catholic Church” and to spread the message that you cannot be Catholic and pro-abortion. Nevertheless, while many have applauded young people for taking up the “right to life” cause, this group of remarkable crusaders was purportedly banned from speaking in churches by several dioceses like Philadelphia and Baltimore.

Myself, Dr. Grier & a Crusader

The American Life League ran a series of stinging ads challenging the American bishops to enforce canon law and to protect the Eucharist from sacrilege when pro-abortion politicians and others (who have made such “public” stands) take it upon themselves to receive Holy Communion. The young people have shown no spite or anger, only sadness that some of the nation’s shepherds have chosen to remain on the sidelines. One priest remarked that the ads in protest were so severe that the American Life League owed the leaders of the Church an apology. However, others thought that these good men should at least have shown the same respect and hospitality to the young marchers for life as they have in the past to the high profile anti-life politicians. While they were able to find lodging in the city, they attended 9:00 AM Mass at Holy Spirit Church on Friday, July 30 and were invited to say a few words afterwards. I contacted the archdiocese’s Pro-Life Office several weeks earlier about the matter to insure a level of approbation and to insure proper discretion. (Although the ads pained him, to his credit, Cardinal McCarrick did not formally forbid the young people to speak in his churches. Throughout, nothing the young people said violated the archdiocese’s rules against participation in partisan politics– they did not name politicians by name, did not tell people for whom they should vote, and spoke with respect in regard to the Church’s shepherds.) Following the celebration, a reception was held in the Parish House were the young people had a hearty breakfast and got to meet parishioners. Also in attendance was SK Reginald Grier, a parishioner, a fourth degree Knight of Columbus and volunteer member of the archdiocesan Office for Black Catholics. John Stakem, a Knight of Columbus from St. Pius X Council, and past parishioner was present, too. John Stakem and Joseph Markauskas were long-time pro-life volunteers and were involved with the local pregnancy center. Joe and Betty Markauskas had even offered to give the young people housing while in town. We were very pleased that the director for the Forestville Pregnancy Center was present, Chyllene McLaughlin, along with her assistant. We wanted to communicate to these young people that they were not alone. Holy Spirit Parish, the Knights of Columbus, and the Pregnancy Center in the larger pro-life community, was very much behind them.

ALL Crusaders at Holy Spirit Parish

May God bless them for their sacrifices and may their witness bear fruit.

DISCUSSION

FRANK: News releases indicate that the Church after Vatican II had converted the Kennedys and other Catholic politicians into believing that the liberal backing of the culture of death is acceptable.

FATHER JOE: What news releases were these? Cite them; I would like to read further. As far as I recall, John Kennedy was chastised by churchmen for his liberal response about how little his faith would inform his work as president. As for the other Kennedys and the issue of abortion, I fail to see how Vatican II can be blamed for their pro-abortion stances. I have read and studied all the Vatican II documents and post-conciliar documents. Nothing comes to mind that would condone such thinking against the Gospel of Life. Are we throwing mud again? Give me specifics, please.

FRANK: Having attended the seminaries after Vatican II where the divinity of Christ was challenged, as well as the papacy, and all that was to be infallible before the “Catholic reformation” of 1962-1965; what is your take on recent developments and the continued blasphemies to this day condoned by the Church where the USCCB still can’t come to a consensus to deny our Lord to baby-killing Catholic politicians?

FATHER JOE:

Certainly there was a heightened stress upon the humanity of Christ in many theological schools after Vatican II. However, I do not recall ever being taught that Jesus was not a divine Person.

Fr. Patrick Granfield taught my class on the papacy at Catholic University and his lectures defended the Holy Father’s authority with a great deal of explanation.

Those things that were changed were not deemed infallible but rather mutable accidentals. This thinking was even shared by Pope Pius XII prior to Vatican II on matters like the prehistoric generation of human beings and the liturgy.

A revision of the liturgy was in the working stages going back to the 1930′s and 40′s. The reformed liturgy we have now has lasted a few decades and will probably remain for many more, although with the old liturgy alongside and with continuing adaptations by the Holy See. We have had to suffer the experimental phase, but Pope Benedict XVI said that such has come to an end.

As for the passivity of churchmen in reference to Holy Communion and the standing of pro-abortion politicians, such is also not attributable to Vatican II. The Church has gone through periods in the past where it was the lackey for parliaments, kings and queens. The Popes made clear statements from the 1600′s onward that slavery was detestable and should be abandoned. However, Catholics owned slaves in the colonies and later in the United States of America. The Jesuit landowners of Maryland had slaves. Bishops were often mute on the subject, except for admonishing their baptism in the faith. Dissent is not something new but something very old.

PADRE XYZ:

Father Joe, Your welcome to the pro-life young people did not go unnoticed. I know it cost you personally. I think you can be rude and you definitely lack tact, but it did take some nerve to stand virtually alone and make the challenge against silence or business as usual. You honestly shared your heart to the bishops and your brother priests.

You asked…

Would you give communion to Nazis who promoted the murder of Jews?

Would you give communion to White Supremacists who incited the lynching of Blacks?

Why should we prize the life in the womb any less or their murders as somehow less grievous?

Silence befell all the big guns. You lost a lot of friends that day. If you had career hopes in the church, they were suddenly shattered. Hushed and whispered voices were the only response, “How do we shut this priest up?”

You became an embarrassment. I could not do what you did. You angered a lot of people. You took a promise of obedience and you were reprimanded for your slight as an act of betrayal. Some of us witnessed it, although you were left unnamed.

You changed after that, became quiet, even sullen. It was as if something died in you. You gained weight.

I know you were disappointed in me. But to be frank, I was afraid. Who are we to question the shepherds over us? What happens if we tell the majority of Catholic politicians they are no longer welcome at the altar?

Take care of yourself.

FATHER JOE: I was going to erase this comment. I still might. If you are who I think you are, email me. Peace!

(I am not really brave. I speak my mind and I love the Church. When all is said and done, I do as I am told. I am the Church’s man. Some would contend that I am too conservative or right wing. But how can we be too committed to the Gospel of Life? Every day I work to control my temper. As long as I can remember, I have been very passionate about our faith and its values. Am I ambitious? Like most priests, it is nice to know that one is appreciated and that one’s talents are acknowledged. However, by comparison to most priests that I know, my rating would be very low. It is not false humility but the truth when I say that I count myself as the least of my brothers. As for the bishops, it must be a frightful responsibility they carry. Who would want it? They are criticized from every side. It is easy for us to judge, but we do not walk in their shoes. Pray for priests and pray, especially for our bishops. They are Christ’s apostles in the world today.)

DR: I nominated you for a pro-life blog award (FATHER JOE Blog).

JOHN: Fr. Joe, abortion is murder. These babies can’t speak for themselves. Other bishops have stood up and said priests should not give communion to pro-choice politicians as they have the power to stop the murder (Bishop Burke-former bishop of St. Louis archdiocese and Bishop Finn of Kansas City diocese, for instance.) I’m glad priests like you and Fr. Frank Pavone speak out on this issue. It’s a serious matter and it should be treated as such. Thanks for all you do.

LENBER:

“President Bush has had a very cozy relationship with the Vatican, and set a presidential record by meeting with the Pope six times.”

Very cozy indeed, sometimes for the good, and at other times for utterly and criminally contra-productive [things], such as siding with Bush in Criminal Wars (for the Vatican just Abortion is a Crime) or siding with Israel on their Criminal Occupation of Palestine.

All Thanks to Vatican II Double Crossers.

FATHER JOE: I am not sure I would coin the Bush Doctrine or International efforts in such negative terms. However, as for the Pope, you seem to be terribly deceived. The Vatican opposed the invasion of Iraq. Tarek Aziz (the former president) was a Catholic. He made a retreat in Rome and saw the Pope (John Paul II) the week prior to the invasion. The state of Israel is also not entirely happy that the Vatican, again and again, sides with Palestinians (who are largely Islamic but include an ancient Christian community). Formal recognition and diplomatic ties were held up because of Vatican concerns for the Palestinian people. The late Arafat, at the end of his life, remarked that he saw the Vatican as his ally in the conflict for Palestinian rights. Zionism was condemned by both the UN and by the Church. Arafat used to attend the Christmas Mass in Bethlehem with his wife (who is a Christian). The Catholic Church is no one’s stooge, not for Bush and not for Israel. The Holy Father (both JPII and BXVI) has spoken to President Bush, (he meets a lot of people) and they share much in regard to the unborn, however on matters like the Middle East and capital punishment, there is a great divide.

MICHAEL:

Tomorrow marks the 36th anniversary of Roe v. Wade.

Think of the millions of lives that were snuffed out in this “free” country.

May God have mercy on us!

GENUS LILIUM:

I am completely against abortions. I have children and I have learned that some vaccinations are grown off of human diploid cells from aborted fetal tissue, not to mention all the other chemicals, heavy metals, and animal products. That seems like it might be a problem to me. Now that I know this, would it be wrong for me to continue to vaccinate my children? Is it just a money scheme? I really don’t want that stuff in my kids.

Filed under: Bishops, Catholic, Church, Conscience, Discipleship, Eucharist, Morality, Politics, Priests, Pro-Life, Right to Life, Sacraments, Sexuality, Sin, Social Justice, Youth | Leave a comment »