Blogger Priest

The Gates are Opened

Posted on September 11, 2010 by Father Joe

The story of Jesus appearing to two men on the road to Emmaus is one of the most famous of our resurrection accounts (see Luke 24:13-35). The last phrase, “. . . they had come to know him in the breaking of the bread,” speaks to us about how we encounter the risen Lord in our Eucharist. The Eucharist is Christ’s living legacy to us. No matter what age it might be, he does not abandon us. After his ascension, the Lord continues to abide in his early disciples as well. He sends them his Spirit and works his ministry through them.

We see one incident of this in Acts 3:1-10. Peter and John are going up to the temple to pray. Outside the edifice, at the temple gate, is a beggar who for years has been at the practice of begging from those who come to worship. It is interesting that he is outside the temple because as a cripple he is also outside the hearts and lives of many of his own people. He is tolerated, but looked down upon. He must beg for his sustenance. He is a man whose dignity has been tarnished by a situation beyond his control. Peter is poor in worldly riches; but, he has already begun to save up for himself treasure from heaven. He possesses Christ and he gives Christ. In the name of Jesus, he heals the crippled man and orders him to walk. In that single incident, the poor man’s dignity is restored. He would no longer be a castoff from society. He is whole again. This is the meaning of Easter. We may be weighed down by our sins, be of ill health, be lonely, or sad; and yet, Jesus offers us healing and forgiveness. We had cut ourselves off from God and from his friends by our rebellion; now we can be reconciled and aliens no longer. Our shame from the primordial rebellion is no longer imputed against us and our hearts can be turned around — making Christ our greatest treasure — living only to serve and love God.

Notice what the first act of the lame man is once he is healed. No longer merely at the gate of the temple, he walks inside the temple with them. Through the suffering, death, and resurrection of Christ, the gates of our heavenly Jerusalem are now open to us. May we be filled with the same joy as this healed lame man, entering heaven by “walking, jumping about, and praising God.”

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

Filed under: Bible, Catholic, Discipleship, Easter, Jesus, Reflection | Leave a comment »

Our Belief & Unbelief

Posted on September 10, 2010 by Father Joe

From the very beginning, there would be those who would doubt the resurrection of Christ. Indeed, even one of his disciples, Thomas, would have to be challenged by Jesus himself to touch his wounds before his skepticism could be swept away. However, the Gospel chronicles another type of rejection as well, one far more resistant to the truth (see Matthew 28:8-15). The chief priest has an inkling that the story of Christ’s coming back from the dead might bear some truth. It is this possibility which he and his cronies seek to hide behind lies. So, they bribe the soldiers to say that Jesus’ disciples had stolen the body at night.

When Jesus stood before the Sanhedrin, it was this same rigid rejection of his messiahship which catapulted him to the crucifixion. Despite the evidence of multiple witnesses, they later disregarded his resurrection. It was not so much that they doubted Jesus, but that they did not want to know who he was. His claims challenged their positions of prestige and power. His assertions about his own personhood shook their accepted norms in regard to monotheism. What did he mean when he said that he and the Father were one? What was this Spirit he would promise to send? Who was he to forgive sins, especially of those who had come nowhere near them in keeping all the precepts of the law?

Such a man was dangerous to them and had to die. And, what is more, he had to remain dead. We might ask, why did Christ not reappear immediately before the Pharisees and chief priests who had orchestrated his demise? If we look closely, this is already obvious for a couple of reasons. The first has already been mentioned; many of them were not interested in the truth of the situation. They hid it from themselves and tried to veil it from others. Back in 1977, George Burns played the deity in a film called Oh God! As proof, God appears before skeptics; but no sooner had God vanished from the courtroom that they began to explain him away as mass psychosis or illusion. Would these ancient figures have been any different? Probably not; the Scriptures would be fulfilled in their regard which says that they would not believe, even if one were to rise from the dead. The second reason is the most telling and we find it in the Gospel where John looked into the empty tomb — he saw and believed. Jesus would not appear or be present to those who did not believe in him. Even Paul, who had persecuted Christians, was only able to see Christ as a light. The reason he could experience the risen Lord at all probably had to do with the fact that he had been mislead about Jesus and yet was still a man very much in love with God. For those who had killed this love, no vision was possible and no witness credible.

The vast host of witnesses to the risen Christ in this period and the Church’s experience of the Holy Spirit throughout the ages stand for us as a most staunch underpinning to our faith. May we always be open to belief and struggle sincerely to help transform our unbelief.

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

Filed under: Catholic, Discipleship, Easter, Incarnation, Jesus, Liturgical Year, Reflection | Leave a comment »

To See More Than an Empty Tomb

Posted on September 9, 2010 by Father Joe

The cast of characters and events in John 20:1-9 fuel our hope. They include Mary Magdalene, Simon Peter, and John. But notice who is absent in our reading; although it is a Gospel and therefore about Jesus, he is neither seen nor heard. All we have is the empty tomb and some surprised disciples. The story, of course, goes on; but, the Church in its wisdom feels that this passage alone would suffice on Easter morning at Mass. Why is that? Let us look at the story.

The first to reach the tomb and to make the discovery that the stone had been rolled away is Mary Magdalene. In the long history of the Church, venerable piety would link her to the prostitute whom Jesus reformed. Although modern exegesis would place this in some doubt; she, nonetheless, stands out as one of the so-called weaker sex, a woman who in that society often possessed a third class status behind oxen and other forms of property. To the eyes of many, she would be worth nothing and invisible. And yet, this Scripture and Luke (mentioning the women), places the female first at the tomb. Maybe this honor falls upon her to demonstrate how Christ has come to raise up the downtrodden and to grant all of us an equal dignity in the eyes of God? He comes for the poor, the oppressed, and the sinful. Mary Magdalene, maybe more so in that culture than our own, would come to highlight that mission. If as a child he could be worshiped by lowly shepherds then why could he not first appear to a woman who herself was lowly in the eyes of many?

In this version of the story, she is afraid and runs to Peter with the news. The second person to reach the tomb is called “the disciple Jesus loved” and we in our tradition have discerned this to be John. But, notice what he does. Although he has outrun Simon Peter, he hesitates at the entrance of the tomb and waits for him. John is nothing if he is not humble. He knows quite well whom Jesus has placed in charge of the disciples — it is Peter. Peter is the one who first recognizes Jesus to be the Messiah, the Son of the Living God. But, remember what has happened recently. He has denied Christ three times. Unlike John, he runs and hides himself. He would not even be present at the Cross. Now, he is at the tomb. He is slowly recovering from his betrayal. With Jesus gone to the Father, it would be Peter who would be the rock of Christ’s Church. In the tomb he sees the various wrappings, but we are not told whether he discerns more. We like Peter might also sometimes find ourselves in the paradox of both betraying Christ by our sins and yet searching earnestly for him. Where is he, we might ask?

After Peter looks into the tomb, John takes his turn. With John there is no mention of the various wrappings and artifacts which the human eye can see. No, it is John this time who sees deeper than the rest. With the same eyes which witnessed the Crucifixion and somehow did not totally abandon hope, he sees and believes. He sees with eyes of faith. It is no mere empty tomb for him. Something new has happened — something unheard of — something which only a madman or a man of faith might hold — a man has risen from the grave. Notice that I say this is something new. In similar stories as with the little girl or Lazarus, a person comes back to life; but it is more like resuscitation than resurrection. Jesus would never die again. Jesus is totally transformed. Everything he is becomes something new and wonderful — beyond suffering — beyond sickness — beyond death. Suddenly the quote from Jesus, that if his temple is destroyed it would be restored in three days, makes sense. He means his very own person.

Later on the Gospels would relate episodes where the risen Lord, who is man and yet also very much God, would appear to his followers. He would greet his friends from a beach. He would appear to them in the locked upper room. He would appear to a couple of followers along the road to Emmaus and be recognized in the breaking of bread, an incident which is intensely important for us who also seek Christ in his bread of life broken for us at the Eucharist. These other incidents are wonderful treasures in our heritage from God; but we must first take seriously the initial response of John and then later the other disciples. In our own personal stories we see little more than what we find in our Gospel about the empty tomb. Jesus does not regularly manifest himself in a sensible fashion in our homes. Even in our Church, the reality of the risen Christ can only be present in the sacraments which reveal him to our eyes of faith and yet veil him to our five physical senses.

However, we like the early Church, know in our hearts that Christ is indeed risen and that his Spirit is among us right at this moment. He promises that he would never abandon us, even unto the end of the world. In my fondness for history, I recall a passage from the great French general Napoleon after his final bid for power fails. He remarks that in his very own lifetime, his followers have forgotten him and that he is utterly deserted. And yet, Jesus who lives and dies a millennium and a half earlier still possesses disciples willing to surrender their lives for him. For Napoleon, in those last years of his life, this becomes evidence that the Spirit of the risen Christ is still alive among his disciples in the Church. This continues to be the case for us. Not only is the risen Christ made manifest in the seven sacraments and especially in the Eucharist; he is also revealed in his Mystical Body — ourselves.

We are given a share of that life. In baptism, we die with Christ (Good Friday) so that we might rise with him (Easter). We do not deserve this gift. But, in return for our faithfulness, it is offered all the same. Everyone who has ever died is still alive. All those who have believed in our Lord and were faithful now possess a happiness and life we could never even imagine. In the face of death, the resurrection is our one true consolation. Otherwise, we would be tempted to complete despair. Imagine, we will one day meet Christ face to face, and in him, everyone else who has believed, whom we have lost and loved — our friends — our parents — our brothers and sisters — even our enemies, whom we sometimes ironically miss more than certain friends — all those who have at least on some level of their life held Jesus as their treasure. Every year, starting on Holy Saturday, our Easter Candle burns tall and bright once again, a symbol that after we have burned ourselves up bringing Christ’s light to those in darkness and his warmth to those in the coldness of sin, that we like him will be restored and made new.

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

Filed under: Catholic, Easter, God, Incarnation, Jesus, Liturgical Year, Redemption, Reflection | Leave a comment »

Eternal Christmas & Christ: The Meaning of It All

Posted on September 5, 2010 by Father Joe

The feast of Christmas is very important in preserving an authentic understanding of the identity of Jesus. It is for this reason that the Knights of Columbus each year promote their loyal “Keep Christ in Christmas” campaign with essay and poster contests. Of course, it has been argued that the abbreviation “X-mas” still preserves something of the truth in that the “X” is an ancient symbol for the Cross and thus, by association, for Christ, himself. Those who malign the celebration of Christmas as a religious holiday, more so than not, minimize the mission and identity of the Lord. There is a minister, nationally televised throughout the nation on Sunday mornings, who annually assaults the meaning of Christmas. He actually claims that the Jesus who walked on earth was a different individual from God’s eternal Son in heaven. Jehovah Witnesses reduce Jesus to an important prophet but sidestep the dilemma that unless he is God then the charges of the Pharisees and the Sanhedrin stick. Only God can forgive sins. Only God could save us. Another evangelist bewails the fact that at Christmas even the most sanitized Protestant worship space looks like a Catholic church with the various “idolatrous” statues of Jesus, Mary and Joseph. This is peculiar in that many of these same churches will return to repudiating such graven images come December 26 and argue that Catholicism has stripped the corresponding commandment from the Decalogue. Our view is not all that complex, although it is perfectly reasonable: the incarnation of Christ alters forever the economy of images. Jesus is the revelation of the Father and God with us. Now, the image of the creature can convey something of the dignity of God and his involvement in salvation history. Representations of Christ, the Virgin Mary and other saints are not worshipped in themselves but constitute a language in pictures that moves the mind and heart to the truth of the Gospel. A crucified figure on the Cross or any baby in a manger is recognized immediately, even by a child, as Jesus. One of the most heated debates on Internet message boards is between hard-line Seventh-Day Adventists and mainline believers over the correct Sabbath and the so-called pagan origins of Christmas. Protestant Christians are ridiculed for following Catholic institutions not mandated by the Bible. The Mormons often have very elaborate and beautiful commemorations for Christmas; however, they deny that Jesus is the unique or only Son of God the Father. This difference is critical because a denial of monotheism separates them from classical Christianity as well as from Islam and Judaism.

Technically speaking, God had already entered the human family when the Holy Spirit overshadowed Mary. However, although the proof of his existence as well as the personhood of John the Baptizer is validated in the visitation between Mary and Elizabeth; human convention places much gravity upon the moment of birth. Except for a few early episodes, we will not hear more about Jesus until he enters upon his public ministry. The life of Jesus is one of progressive revelation through significant steps. Jesus is present in the womb; then he is born and placed in a manger; later he is brought to the temple for his presentation; as a boy he is discovered teaching the teachers; many years later, he begins his public ministry and is baptized by John in the Jordan (the two meeting once more in a new beginning); and ultimately, he is fully revealed in his Paschal Mystery (passion, death and resurrection).

Looking to the date for Christmas, December 25, not all the ancient authorities were in agreement about it. Clement of Alexandria knew no certain tradition about it, asserting that some thought that either April or May 20 might be the day. St. Epiphanius and Cassian offered the Egyptian reckoning as January 6. The Greek churches did not celebrate Christmas for some time and when they did they linked it to the Epiphany. Preaching on Christmas in the year 386, St. Chrysostom told the Antiocheans, “It is not ten years since this day [December 25] was clearly known to us, but it has been familiar from the beginning to those who dwell in the West. The Romans, who have celebrated it for a long time, and from ancient tradition, have transmitted the knowledge of it to us.” St. Augustine confirmed that this was the practice of the Church in the West. Thus, we can conclude that even by the fourth century that dating was well established in earlier antiquity. [Source: The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1917.]

Such facts are interesting, but no matter what the true date is, we know for certain he was born and that Christ’s humanity was real. God became a human being so that something of God could now be found in every man and woman. Such is the significance of divine grace. Human nature is not only restored in dignity, but is complemented by the supernatural presence of God. The unity between God and man that was disrupted by sin is bridged in Jesus Christ. Christ’s redemptive work began with the incarnation and was accomplished in his saving works. The Sinless One took upon himself “sinful” flesh that sin might be conquered. The unity between God and humanity was already realized in Jesus Christ personally, even from the womb. His death and resurrection would extend this unity as a saving reality embracing others in the human family.

The Scriptures give sparse details about the daily relationships in the Holy Family. Our natural presumption, given that Jesus is God and that Mary was preserved from sin as the vehicle of the Incarnation, is that it was a peaceful home filled with harmony. Certainly there is much credit to such a view; however, we should be cautious in too quickly identifying their family life with what we hold as ideal. What evidence we do have about the relationship between Jesus and Mary is jarring to polite sensibility. Luke’s Gospel tells us that Jesus was submissive to Joseph and Mary. But, was there the tenderness that we usually associate with them at Christmas? The only polite words that Jesus addressed to his Mother, as understood today, were at the Cross. Mary, the same woman who held him in Bethlehem will hold her dead Son in her arms at Golgotha. Her devotion and faith is clear. But the recorded words of Jesus were often quite pointed and curt. Finding him teaching in the temple, after a three-day search, the boy Jesus speaks to Mary as if she were the child: “Why have you sought me? Did you not know that I had to be about my Father’s business?” (Luke 2:49). His foster father Joseph says nothing. Mary bends her will to Christ’s and Joseph moves aside for the true Father of Jesus, the Father in heaven. As a man, Mary and the brethren (cousins to Christ) followed him and were no doubt concerned for his safety. They call out for him (Matthew 12:46-50). He does not respond. Rather, he tells his listeners, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” Then looking to his listening disciples, he adds: “Behold my mother and my brothers! For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is brother and sister and mother to me.” Again, he speaks, not from the normal perspective of a son but as one who cannot be utterly contained in the human dynamic. In other words, his divinity as God’s Son always comes to the fore. Earlier, at the wedding feast of Cana (John 2:1-11), Mary makes the statement to Jesus that they have no more wine. Jesus answers, “Woman, what business is this to me. My time has not yet come.” Despite the tone, he will perform his first miracle all the same. If I spoke that way to my mother, she would probably slap me. Many women are well aware of the tough tone that Jesus takes with Mary. How often have we heard upset mothers say to their sons something like, “You must think you’re Jesus Christ!” What are we to make of this?

First, Jesus was aware, even from the womb and manger, of his identity as the Son of God. He would grow in wisdom and grace but his divine awareness and knowledge was always accessible. It may be, as some theologians suggest, that he shelved while still retaining elements of his divine consciousness so as not to overwhelm his human nature. Second, we cannot interpret in the language alone any animosity or bitterness between Jesus and Mary. Jesus had to make a demarcation between them. While he had been born of Mary, his was ultimately the role of the Creator and her, the creature. In any case, discriminating mothers know by a gentle embrace or even a look, that they are loved. Mary loved Jesus and never doubted his love for her. Full of grace, Mother Mary was always imbued with the presence of her Son. She gave physical birth to him in time, but she was always giving spiritual birth to him in faith and in her immaculate heart. The writer, Francois Mauriac, said of this: “Christ had all eternity in which to glorify his mother in the flesh. Here below, perhaps, he sometimes treated her as he still does his chosen ones whom he has marked for holiness and who, behind their grilles, in their cells, or in the midst of the world, know all the appearances of abandon, of being forsaken, not without keeping the interior certainty of being his elect and beloved” (LIFE OF JESUS, pp. 15-16).

God is on our side in Jesus Christ. God the Son, Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, and eternal Word, has made himself a son of Mary and a brother to all in the human family. The mystery of Christmas signals a new intimacy between heaven and earth. At a time when we give and receive gifts, God has given us the best gift of all.

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

Filed under: Catholic, Christmas, God, Incarnation, Reflection | Leave a comment »

A Word to Altar Girls

Posted on September 4, 2010 by Father Joe

The presence and participation of girls as altar servers has become fairly commonplace since their official introduction in the 1990’s. Just as we would hope that our young men might be inspired to consider a vocation to the priesthood; it is desired that our young ladies might give some thought toward a calling to the religious life as either a sister or a nun. While it is only “private” revelation, I have routinely shared with our altar girls the following citation from Mary of Agreda’s CITY OF GOD about the Virgin Mary’s service in the temple:

“The priest also gave Her a rule for her occupations and said: ‘My Daughter thou wilt assist at the exercises of divine praise and song in honor of the Lord with all reverence and devotion, and always pray to the Most High for the necessities of his holy temple and of his people, and for the coming of the Messiah.” . . . The most holy Child remained on her knees, while She listened to the words of the priest and then asked his blessing; . . . In the performance of works not commanded Her our Queen and Lady distinguished Herself from other maidens by asking her teacher to be allowed to serve them all. . . . By means of her infused science She understood all the mysteries and ceremonies of the temple; but She was anxious to learn them also by study and practice, as if She were ignorant of them, nor did She ever fail in any ceremony or duty, no matter how small. She was most eager for humiliation and most submissive in her self-contempt; . . .” (pp. 130-132).

If our girls and women can in some small way imitate this kind of model, then the novelty of their service should prove no problem. Notice the word “maidens” in the text? Although not translated, the Roman Canon mentions God’s servants and handmaids. Considering the political climate, such an appreciation would be a wonderful counter-cultural sign of humility, not to men, but to almighty God.

Filed under: Altarservers, Discipleship, Liturgy, Mary, Mass, Parish | 2 Comments »

Our Faithful High Priest

Posted on September 4, 2010 by Father Joe

Jesus is our High Priest. Unlike the Jewish priests, he was not given his role by human authority and neither did he have any personal sin for which he needed to make an offering. Jesus took upon himself the punishment that was rightfully ours. Certainly his death on the Cross brings immediately to mind the great offense of our sins. We did not deserve such a Savior who would make himself priest and saving victim. Looking upon the Cross should serve as a remedy for our pride and lust, unless we have desensitized ourselves to human suffering. Jesus repairs the damage inflicted by Adam and Eve. His death will render satisfaction for all the sins of their children.

The question is asked, if Jesus died for all, why do we still experience suffering and death? Why are we still punished for original and personal sin? The reason is simple. Christ has won the victory and yet in time we must become receptive of the fruits of his self-offering. It is still possible to reject the saving work of Christ. The providence of God determines who will accept the merits of Christ’s passion. As a people of faith we cry out for the blood of Christ to wash us and to make us new. Such is human freedom that we must will to be saved. We need to cooperate with Christ in breaking the bonds of our enslavement. If we fail to make use of his grace to do so, the fault is ours.

Jesus could surrender himself as a sin-offering because he had been made man; he had the authority to efface our sins because he was almighty God. A wrong against an infinite being could only find reparation from one of equal dignity. While God could have magnanimously forgiven us; he opted to fulfill the demands of divine justice. It is for this reason that in Jesus, both mercy and justice meet.

Christ suffered in his humanity while his divinity gave infinite value to his passion. This is at the heart of Christ’s identity as the God-Man. Jesus bought us back from the devil, literally redeemed us. Christ’s Cross merits all necessary graces. Just as the blood of a paschal lamb delivered the Hebrews from death; Jesus is the new Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world and gives us a share in eternal life.

Jesus truly died. He was not play acting as some contend. His soul separated from his body, although his divinity remained with both. The soul of Jesus descended to the dead, the limbo of the fathers or righteous dead of the Old Testament. As the one high priest, he does this to lead the righteous into paradise. His death had unbarred the gates of heaven and now they were free to go to their just reward. Meanwhile, Christ’s body was taken down from the Cross and placed into a borrowed tomb. We know what happens next. Jesus rises body and soul from the grave.

Jesus continues to be our one high priest and mediator to the Father. All Catholic priests participate in this one priesthood, acting at the altar in the person of Christ, head of the Church. His sacrifice is re-presented upon our altars and his grace is infused into men’s souls. Jesus is present to us, albeit invisibly, and he sits at the right hand of the Father as our eternal advocate.

Jesus has made peace to God on our behalf. This reconciliation is sealed in his blood. He has redeemed us and he pleads our cause. His one sacrifice brought with it all the sacrifices of the old law and alone appeased the throne of heaven, the almighty Father. This restoration of the primal unity between God and man will be consummated at the end of the world.

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

Filed under: Catholic, Jesus, Redemption, Reflection, Sin | Leave a comment »

Messiah, Savior and Lord God

Posted on September 3, 2010 by Father Joe

The long-awaited Jewish Messiah comes into the world (Matthew 1:1-25). The Genealogy of Jesus is traced to his stepfather, Joseph and the remaining Gospel text affirms the virgin birth. It was customary for people to marry within their tribe. Thus, if Joseph was of the line of David then Mary would be as well. Despite the fact that the conception was made possible through the intervention of the Holy Spirit, it was customary to trace the family line through the father. Again, affirming that Jesus was the promised Messiah of the line of David, Joseph and Mary go to David’s town of Bethlehem for the census (Luke 2:1-14). The story is familiar; there was no room at the inn and so the Christ-child was placed in a manger, a feed box for animals. Today, upon the manger of the altar, we again find Jesus, who makes himself a saving food for men and women. The angel makes the wonderful pronouncement to shepherds and the hosts of heaven rejoice. It is part of Christian folklore that the devil and the other fallen angels were thrown out of heaven precisely because they refused to have any part in this angelic rejoicing. He would not bend the knee or give glory to a God dressed in human flesh and made vulnerable to human caprice. The shepherds visit the nativity (Luke 2:15-20). Mary “treasured all these things and reflected on them in her heart,” an indication from St. Luke that Mary was one of his sources for the nativity narrative. The great theologian of the evangelists, John, speaks of the pre-existent Word that became flesh, the only Son of God come into the world to save us and to bring us to the Father (John 1:1-18). The Jewish Messiah is revealed as the World Savior and God come among us.

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

Filed under: Catholic, Christmas, Jesus, Redemption, Reflection | Tagged: Redemption | Leave a comment »

Invitation to the Little Ones

Posted on September 2, 2010 by Father Joe

“Father, Lord of heaven and earth, to you I offer praise; for what you have hidden from the learned and the clever you have revealed to the merest children. Father, it is true. You have graciously willed it so” (see Matthew 11:25-30).

We may remember, that long ago, when the Messiah at last came into the world, he was not all that well accepted. The stories of his rejection are numerous; indeed, they fill the entire Gospel. When he came into the world, he chose to be born like all the rest of us, as a child. In the quiet of a cold night he came, with only a small star shining above to herald this newborn king. But, if he were a king, the only mantle he wore was his swaddling clothes, and his throne, a meager manger among a court of animals. His mother and foster father were simple people, and yet a people made rich in their holiness and love for him. The first to see him were not the elite among his own people, but mere shepherds still covered in the dust and sweat of a hard day’s labor.

Perhaps they saw something of the lamb in him, in a city filled with wolves? And when the wise men or kings finally did come, they saw something akin to them in this child, for they were all strangers in an alien land. So much did they realize it that they fled instead of informing the Jewish king, Herod, of the Messiah’s presence. They did well, for Herod would be the forerunner of all those to come who would reject this child of promise. As a man, Jesus would even speak of himself as the prophet rejected in his own land. The zealots looked for a military general who would come with great blood-letting might and power. The Pharisees looked for one who would come hopefully in the distant future, one who would be like themselves and who would reaffirm their own legalism and security. It was no wonder that they were all terribly disappointed in this Jesus.

He ate with tax collectors and sinners. He associated with the poor and with the unclean. How could he really be important if he found it so easy to relate to these kinds of people. Perhaps, they thought, he was no better than the rest of the trash? He forgave sins — by what authority? He healed the sick — could it be by the power of demons? The so-called learned of Israel would charge him with this!

Messiah? How could he be? He traveled around; surrounded not by other learned scribes but by stupid men of the earth — dumb fishermen and traitoress tax collectors. The only one among them that showed some promise in his foresight and knowledge was the last to join him, that one they called Judas Iscariot. Jesus had virtually nothing more than the clothes on his back and lived essentially from the charity of others. Even the room in which he and his friends celebrated his last supper was simply on loan to them. He himself said one time that the son of man has nowhere to rest his head.

Jesus is the most shining example that just because people may have nothing, it does not mean they are nothing. His life and message has touched us like no other has.

We too need the same kind of humility. The Lord showed just how much when he reprimanded his disciples for keeping curious children away from him. Jesus told them that it was for such as these that his kingdom belonged. We need to become, not childish, but child-like in our lives and faith. It is in this kind of witness that God most brilliantly shines forth. Sometimes things like wealth, social position, and even religion (when they become self-righteous and snobbish), can get in the way of this kind of humility. Like a small child trusting his parents, no matter what — that is the trust we need in regards to our Heavenly Father. The disposition of humility makes us more aware and receptive to the needs of those who are small, weak, broken, and hurting. The irony of our faith, which shines in figures like St. Francis of Assisi and Mother Teresa, is that in Christ weakness can become strength, and adversity an opportunity for miraculous witness.

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

Filed under: Discipleship, Jesus, Reflection | Leave a comment »

Knowing & Loving in God

Posted on September 1, 2010 by Father Joe

God the Father exists of himself from all eternity. God the Son is eternally begotten of the Father. Using an analogy from human consciousness, the Father perfectly knows himself. While we have many fragmented and imperfect ideas, God has only one idea and it encapsulates the identity of God and all that is. We speak or write our ideas for others to share. God’s one idea is called the Word and it is written upon human flesh, Jesus. God’s “knowing” perfectly mirrors who he is and thus the second Person of the Blessed Trinity must by definition be divine. The Father and the Son share an infinite love which brings both mortal life and eternal life to believers. This procession or generation of “Love Personified” also perfectly reflects God’s identity and constitutes the third Person of the Blessed Trinity. We call him the Holy Spirit. This divine love is poured into our hearts. He is the Helper (Paraclete) whom Christ promises to send to assist the Church, to sanctify her, and to preserve her from error. Distinctions between the Persons can only be made according to the various relations and generations. They are joined into a perfect unity. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son with whom he is equal. The mystery of the Trinity is not easy to understand, and every analogy, including this one, becomes erroneous if taken too far. It is ultimately beyond the full grasp of finite mortals. However, we know it is true from the testimony of Scripture and the teaching Church.

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

Filed under: Catholic, God, Reflection | Leave a comment »

More Voices from the Other Side: Divorce & Remarriage

Posted on August 31, 2010 by Father Joe

This is a follow up post to a previous one focusing on “the other side” of divorce and upon those spouses who wanted to preserve their unions. The issue of Church censure, annulments and remarriage weigh heavily in the discussion. Here are a number of voices in dialogue about this important matter. The first respondent begins by remarking upon Karl’s charges against the last two popes for not doing enough.

FATHER LONE RANGER:

Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI are part of the problem? I do not think so. They have sought to address the problem of invalid annulments, but many canonists will not listen to them. The Holy Father has wanted to prevent scandal and so there is a great deal of communication that is never made privy to the general public. The issue is and was extensive dissent, not simply among ragtag theologians, but wholesale among bishops and chancery clergy.

Why does the problem remain? Liberal theologians are also often canonists and the same passivity that the Church exhibits towards politicians and morals is also revealed when facing distraught divorced people who want to erase a mistake and marry again. For all practical purposes, the Church is involved with a silent schism and the Pope knows that if he pushes too hard, the bulk of the American Church will defect, bishops and all. It will be England and Henry VIII revisited with a vengeance.

[At this point he offers a prayer for Karl.]

Dear God, we ask you to bring healing to Karl and justice to the cause that he feels so deeply. Easy divorce is a violation that attacks at the heart of the marriage bond. Vows are made and should be kept. Marriages are not ended by judicial decree or even by Church courts, but by the death of a spouse. Then and only then is a true marriage ended, and yet, even here, there is no end to the love that a husband and wife share. Bless Karl in his life, and watch over and protect his five children. The fruit of married love is real and everlasting (Holly, Mary, Margaret, Monica and Karl Michael). May the good Lord envelop Karl in his loving embrace and give him peace. Amen.

Sign the petition against No-Fault Divorce:
http://www.catholicmarriagepetition.org/index.htm

MARY:

Many of us have been abandoned by our spouses. Life is tough, Karl. But we are not living for joy & happiness on this earth. We are trying to get to HEAVEN …. There is justice after this life if not during. This is why we pray & pray for conversion in our unfaithful spouses so that their hearts will be softened and they return to Christ before their death and be able to obtain heaven. And we pray and pray for ourselves …for the grace to be faithful to God’s Law (especially that of living a chaste life, which is so very lonely) and the grace to imitate Christ in His meek carrying of His cross. And we pray for our children that their hearts not be hardened by the pain of loss they suffer or by being witnesses to bad example (most likely) from both parents.

No, Karl, life is not fair. I also lost a son in a car accident. Does this give me the right to rage against God at the injustice? To rage against others who have not lost children simple because they do not share this particular cross? …To ignore my surviving children, and my other duties because of my pain? My answer to these questions has been NO! You might be surprised how others answer these questions…peek in on a support group for bereaved parents, you may be shocked. As sad as these situations may be or should I say as sad as the sufferings we all face in life may be, we must be willing to do what we can to correct injustice on this earth without going against God’s Law (because the end never justifies the means). Then, we must accept our fate as God’s Will for us and continue to serve Him in love.

WI CATHOLIC:

Although I do not fight in the same way or anger as Karl does, I have to agree with him on nearly everything he has said about the lack of help/assistance for those of us who believe/KNOW that we ARE in a Valid Marriage no matter what a civil divorce court has said, or the world has said… OR Tribunals have said.

I have been told to “Trust the Holy Spirit” and petition the Tribunals, with the additional statements that the alcoholism is a clear indication of NULLITY, and would be adequate grounds to a Null Decision.

Point One: I do not believe alcoholism (sickness and heath, better or worse, good times and bad) are grounds for determining that our marriage was NULL on the day we appeared before God and Man and pledged our vows “all the days of my life.”

Point Two: I am not able to sign the basic forms that are needed to petition due to the fact that I must state that I believe my Marriage to have been Null from the beginning. I do NOT believe that.

Point Three: In a Church which teaches/has always taught that ALL marriages are VALID until proven beyond doubt that they were not, before a Tribunal, I cannot buy into the fact that the Tribunals are being led by the Holy Spirit when the first contact with Respondents is to call my spouse my “FORMER SPOUSE.” Sorry, but the Civil Law means nothing, and my spouse is still my spouse regardless of that decree. CIVILLY he may not be, but in my Church, he is! To me, and to many other faithful spouses who live their vows regardless of what MAN says, in obedience to what GOD says (Jesus Himself four times in the Gospel, as well as in Church teachings)–this is a slap in the face, and a clear indication where “the spirit” lies… and discernment can lead one to believe that it may well be a “false spirit of compassion” that rules the day in our US Tribunals that seems to favor those who destroy the marriage, often by adultery/divorce/civil marriage to the “lover”/and finally, a petition to annul the first marriage in favor of the second, which was based on adultery to begin with.

Point Four: Sites with an appealing name such as “Save Our Sacrament” are not pointed out to be dissident. “Internal Forum” is blatantly featured, in spite of the fact that it is NOT to be used for Marriage/Divorce, and no one in the hierarchy calls them on it publicly. No one preaches the Truth on Internal Forum in the local parishes where it is “taught” by priests, etc. It is allowed to stay online for years (as in St Anthony Messengers article by Fr John Catoir on the topic). THIS is SCANDAL.

http://www.saveoursacrament.org/

S.O.S. is a member of Catholic Organizations for Renewal (COR).

http://www.cta-usa.org/COR.html#list

Yet, the very cry of most of us who do NOT want NULL verdicts, but the TRUTH of the VALIDITY of our marriages is corrupted by this website. What is promoted there is not saving the Sacrament. It is watering down Truth to fit society’s plunge into the Pit. It is, essentially, what Henry VIII said/taught after Rome refused to grant a NULL verdict about his marriage to Catherine of Arragon.

I do love my Church, and there is no place else I would go. I could not leave Him (The Eucharist) any more than I can quit my vows. To do so would be doing to HIM what my spouse did to ME so long ago— Desertion— forced unilateral divorce— attempting to say that something that EXISTS never really did in the first place.

Yet my Church, which used to defend those of us who remain faithful till death, vehemently, has done this to us by allowing the US Tribunals to grant so many NULL verdicts and to tell us that this is “right” and “true” and “spirit-led.”

If there is a schism here in the US, it will ONLY be VISIBLE evidence of what is already happening! “My people PERISH for lack of KNOWLEDGE!” …of TRUTH. Truth needs to be preached, and to be acted on, or “the spirit of compassion” (which I firmly believe is a False spirit) will continue to overtake Truth. While the Gates of Hell will not prevail against His Church—many of the members of that Church may end up on the other side of those very Gates.

In our situation, the civil wife KNOWS the Truth, and told our children that they (civil wife and my spouse) cannot go to Communion because according to the Church, they are living in sin—her words in the very beginning of that “marriage.”

Another in our family, an in-law, was told by her priest-friend that as long as SHE knew in her heart that the first marriage wasn’t valid, she could avoid the Tribunal and still receive Communion…and she does on the rare occasion she attends Mass.

No one refutes this from any pulpit in our area (and I would be willing to bet, in few nationally). In fact, I have heard only ONE sermon on Jesus’ words on divorce (I believe they show up once every three years in the Gospel readings of Sunday Mass, though it MAY be twice) in all the years since our separation in the early 80′s! And that was watered down….

Karl has very valid points. His anger is, in many ways, justified.

Too many are willing to compromise to “protect the feelings” of those in the pews who may need to hear Truth in order to save their very souls. It is Truth that sets us free, not compromise, not justifying Sin and condoning it with an official “verdict” that is based on today’s psychiatric diagnoses.
His People Perish for Lack of Knowledge… and Hell is for Eternity.

FATHER JOE:

The bit about “sickness and heath, better or worse, good times and bad” are not in reference to things that would invalidate a marriage in the present. If you become a drunk after you are married, there are no grounds for invalidation. If you develop psychosis after marriage, you are still married. If a man has a fishing accident with a hook while on honeymoon and castrates himself, as long as there has been a consummation, he is truly married. But, if any of these things happen prior to the marriage day, then the couple is out of luck. Annulments are granted because people conceal problems from the priest and sometimes try to do so even from themselves. An annulment means they should NEVER have gotten married in the first place and that the sacrament or natural bond is not really present. There is a legal union (both in the Church and in civil society) and for that reason children remain legitimate even after an annulment.

Alcoholism can vary by degrees; however, a person who is grossly incapable of dealing with his own life can hardly make a marital commitment to another. Like paralysis, certain maladies can make the fulfillment of marital duties impossible or highly improbable. If such is the case before the vows are taken and on the appointed day for a marriage, the bond could indeed be invalidated. Indeed, if priests are aware of a problem like alcoholism, we are forbidden to marry the couple. I ask about addictions and diseases prior to witnessing marriages. If they lie to me that deceit can also invalidate the marriage. People have a natural right to marriage, but some like me freely renounce that right and others are incapable of it because of either faulty intention, dishonesty, impotence, addiction, hatred (rejection) of children, physical incapacitation, sexual corruption, or mental aberration.

A person who is HIV positive cannot be married lawfully in the Church to a non-infected person because non-contraceptive intercourse required for consummation is possibly deadly to the spouse. A paralyzed man cannot engage in the marital act and get married, with the possible exception of those with artificial intervention to restore potency. Couples who are sterilized are routinely required to attempt surgical reversals in order to have a sacramental wedding. People who are mentally deranged and/or who take drugs for mental diseases are not normally able to marry. Medication to control various mental illnesses would deform a fetus. Alcoholism or any other kind of serious drug addiction invalidates the marriage vows and bond. A heroin fiend cannot truly fulfill his vows and is lying to his beloved and the priest. The same goes for gross alcoholism. It is a sickness, but there is a moral element related to it. I knew a man who was an active alcoholic who had his prior bond annulled on the grounds that his addiction made him incapable of marriage. He then wanted to get married again but a “monitum” prohibited any priest or deacon from marrying him until a doctor certified that he had found sobriety. He remained a drunk and so he could not marry again. The last time I saw him, he was begging for money on the streets.

You write: “I am not able to sign the basic forms that are needed to petition due to the fact that I must state that I believe my Marriage to have been Null from the beginning. I do NOT believe that.” Fine and good, you should not sign them if you disagree. Indeed, if such is your conviction, you should never remarry even if the spouse does so, in or out of the Church. Marriage is a one-time sacrament. I cannot say that the Tribunals are always right about these things. The culpability is more upon them than any individuals they mislead. However, the process, while imperfect, is an attempt to protect the indissolubility of marriage while being compassionate to those who might have grounds for nullity.

I am not familiar with the website SAVE OUR SACRAMENT although I am familiar with internal forum between couples (usually elderly) and the pastor. They are required to live as brother and sister and they are not to advertise the nature of their relationship so as to avoid scandal. I worked with just such a couple many years ago who were in their 90′s. They have since passed away.

If your husband has civilly remarried, he is not in good standing with the Church. He is still required to go to Sunday Mass and to make sure that any children receive the sacraments. However, as long as he cohabitates with this other woman, the status is regarded as adultery and no personal sentiment or feeling on his part would allow him to receive communion. Indeed, he cannot receive absolution from a priest, either. He is apparently in a state of mortal sin. His in-laws are grievously wrong to tell him otherwise. They are numbing his conscience and that of his civil-wife to the fact that their eternal salvation is at stake.

I cannot speak about your case because I do not know the particulars. Since there is a civil marriage, I take it that no annulment was granted. If you felt that the first marriage was the valid one, then you are right to oppose the annulment, although they are sometimes granted despite opposition. If your husband and his civil-wife were really good Catholics, they would not want to live in an adulterous relationship. If you really loved someone, would you do something that would deprive them of the Eucharist and maybe even cost them their salvation in Christ? I asked this of a priest who left and attempted marriage. He said he loved the girl. I argued that he did not love her enough and that he was selfish. Better for a priest to suffer in his loneliness than to cost another the gift of sanctifying grace and the reception of the Blessed Sacrament. He did not know what to say. He knew I was right. He said he would get laicized. But at that time he was still married to the Church and what if she should die before laicization was granted? He would have to live with the terrible possibility that he sent to hell the person he most loved in the whole world.

I preach upon this subject of divorce and annulments, as well as upon the crisis of premarital sex and cohabitation. Not all priests are silent. I am sorry about your pain. You can pray for him and continue to witness to your vows. We all want joy, but often what we get is the Cross.

WI CATHOLIC:

I have reconciled myself to living my vows alone till one of us dies. Our civil-forced-divorce was way back in 1985, and I have long been able to praise Him and to forgive my spouse. I pray for him and for the civil wife all the time. (She and I have spoken; she has been praying for my health recently, much to the chagrin of xxxxxxxxx). My primary desire is his salvation and sobriety, as well as mine. Hers is secondary. Reconciliation at this stage is totally up to God Himself.

Yes, it is MY understanding also what counts is prior to marriage, and the wedding day itself, not what is diagnosed 10 plus years after the marriage. But that is not what happened in our area, and it is not what I have been told by at least three priests. I have been me telling THEM this fact.

I can believe that you do teach on the subject, Father Joe, because you are one of the rare ones who speaks of this topic ONLINE, too. But in most places, it is avoided like the plague.

Civil divorce is taken as proof that the marriage was not a marriage most of the time now, or “it would not have ended up in the divorce courts.” But this is not true.

We are still a largely forgotten group of very Faithful Catholics, most often looked upon as pitiable, rigid, angry, bitter… even “pus-filled.” I assure you, most of us are not. When WE plead, “Save our Sacrament,” WE are begging the Church to stand with us regarding the validity of our marriages. We are not looking for a “way out,” but help to work toward reconciliation, healing, and maintaining the validity and permanency that Jesus Himself insisted upon.

As for Internal Forum, I cannot begin to claim the education others have, but I have spent the past 25 years learning as much as possible. One source:
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Cardinal Prefect of the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), and now Pope Benedict XVI writes forcefully on the subject of the indissolubility of marriage. He concludes such a statement regarding the International Theological Commission’s Propositions on the Doctrine of Christian Marriage:

I would underscore that what is at stake in respect to the teaching of the indissolubility of marriage is nothing less than the Church’s fidelity to the radicalism of the Gospel. “The severity does not derive from a purely disciplinary law or from a type of legalism. It is rather a judgment pronounced by Jesus Himself (Mk 10:6ff). Understood in this way, this severe norm is a prophetic witness to the irreversible fidelity of love that binds Christ to His Church. It shows also that the spouses’ love is incorporated into the very love of Christ (Eph. 5:23-32).”[6]

In short, because marriage is an irrevocable covenant established by God, it is not a mere personal and private act. Marriage consent pertains to the common good and directly effects the Church. Subsequently, a mere personal and private act cannot substitute for a judgement of marriage nullity. In determining such a grave matter, only the Church herself, acting in the name of Christ, has competence to pass judgement.

http://www.cuf.org/Faithfacts/details_view.asp?ffID=54

God bless! (I can still understand Karl’s anger and frustration.)

KARL: Hang in there, WI Catholic, I do love the Catholic Church, just can’t live with her.

WI CATHOLIC: Thank you, Karl. God bless you!

Filed under: Adultery, Annulment, Catholic, Divorce, Family, Marriage, Morality, Sexuality, Sin, Uncategorized | 3 Comments »