|
When each of us was
growing up, the phrases “Aw, com’on, Mom, pleeeeeeze” and “why do I have
to do that, Daaaaaad” probably flew across our lips more times than we
might wish to remember and, especially, to have our parents remind us
about now that we’re a bit older and, hopefully, a whole lot wiser.
At the time, our self-serving justifications made practical, if not
eminent sense. We knew that we were right and our parents were wrong.
And, no matter what our parents said, we wouldn’t let our minds become
confused by the facts, if only because we already had made up our
minds...and, besides, our friends and most of the media were telling us
that we were right
and our parents were wrong.
My own parents still remind me practically
every time I visit them about how generous they were to tolerate my
years of promoting liberal Democrat causes. They could do so because
every time I would open my mouth they would tell me that, if I wasn’t a
liberal Democrat by the time I was twenty, I didn’t have a heart. And,
of course, they were certainly happy that I had a heart. But, they
would continue, if I wasn’t a conservative Republican by the time I was
forty, then I wouldn’t have a mind. And, of course, they certainly
wanted me to have a mind, especially by the time I was forty. Each time
I heard that lecture, I would gag at the thought of being a conservative
Republican; after all, I was George McGovern’s local campaign manager.
For many of us, thank God, our parents didn’t tolerate us doing many of
the things that made such practical and eminent sense to us back then
and which now, in retrospect, we recognize how our parents were correct
more oftentimes than we were. If fact, as we now find ourselves
advancing in years—slowly
but surely and decade by decade—we
oftentimes find ourselves sounding more and more like our parents,
especially when we have to impose the wisdom we have learned through
hard experience upon those for whom we bear responsibility and who have
not yet had the benefit of learning the lessons that harsh reality
teaches kids and young adults when they don’t pay attention to their
elders. Hearing the phrases, “Aw, com’on, Mom, pleeeeeeze” and “why do
I have to do that Daaaaaad,” serves to remind us adults of those days
when we were so cocksure that we knew all of the answers. But now,
having the comfort of time and a wealth of experience to provide
perspective, we now recognize how far from the truth we really were.
I
remember clearly, beginning in the mid- to late- 1960s (although some
argue that it all began with rock and roll) and throughout the 1970s,
how lots of very bright people argued so convincingly that living
together before marriage was a very good idea. You heard the arguments
practically everywhere and in the media, in particular. The guy
and the girl would get to know each another better, discover whether
they were compatible and, then, if and when they would make a permanent
commitment, they’d be in a much better position to do so than would
those who had ventured into marriage without the benefits of having
lived together. “Besides,” many people also asserted, “why pay two
rents when they’d only have to pay one?”
These arguments made eminent sense, especially to those couples who wanted
to live together and didn’t want a “no escape” codicil appended to the
bargain.
But, in the mid-1980s, social science researchers from secular
universities began to discover that the logic was faulty. Data from
research collected by the Rutgers University National Marriage Project,
for example, found that cohabitation not only harms couples thinking
about and preparing for marriage but also corrodes the sacredness of
marriage, that is, if the couple enters into a marriage. The authors of
the report on cohabitation put it succinctly, “Living together before
marriage may seem like a harmless or even a progressive family trend
until one takes a careful look at the evidence.”
So, consider these facts:
· A
University of Wisconsin survey found that marriages preceded by living
together have a 50% higher rate of separation and/or divorce than
marriages without premarital cohabitation.
· A
1997 study found that living together before marriage actually increased
the couple’s acceptance of divorce as a fait accompli whereas
other independent living situations did not.
· Research
using the Premarital Personal and Relationship Evaluation inventory
found that two-thirds of cohabiting couples had low scores, predictive
of divorce. In contrast, only one-third of couples living apart scored
similarly.
· The
British charitable agency, CARE, discovered that unmarried women living
with male partners are more likely to suffer from depression and anxiety
than married women.
· A
1992 Justice Department study said that cohabiting women are 62 times
more likely to suffer assault from their partner than are married women.
· The
National Institute for Healthcare Research reported that both men and
women who lived together before marriage experience less satisfaction in
their marriage than those who did not live together prior to their
marriages.
· Research
indicates that if someone is willing to have sex outside of marriage
before marriage, then there exists a higher probability that they will
do the same after marriage.
Although the tide of
public opinion argues that living together before marriage is a good way
to prepare for marriage, secular statistics have shown it to be one of
the worst ways to prepare for marriage. As the authors of the Rutgers
University Report concluded, “Despite its widespread acceptance by the
young (and, I would add, with the grudging if not sometimes affirmative
acquiescence of parents), the remarkable growth of unmarried
cohabitation in recent years does not appear to be in each spouse’s,
their children’s, or in society’s best interest. The evidence suggests
quite the opposite, namely, that it has weakened marriage and the
intact, two-parent family and thereby damaged our social well-being,
especially that of women and children.”
I
raise these findings not to focus primarily upon the issue of
cohabitation before marriage but to use it as an example about how easy
it is for young Roman Catholic adults (and their parents, too) to fall
into the trap of making up their minds up about important matters that
have to do with faith and morals without listening to Scripture and
Church teaching and understanding what both are attempting to
communicate based upon centuries of experience. Had young Roman
Catholics (and their parents, too) listened to Scripture and Church’s
teaching about cohabitation before marriage, they and the children of
these marriages might have been saved from learning what now are, in
retrospect, some very harsh, if not brutal and tragic lessons.
During the 1960s and 1970s, many very bright people also asserted that
birth control was a very good thing for building strong and stable
marriages and families. Inside of a marriage, for example, birth
control would allow couples to regulate family planning. Parents, then,
would want each child and would also be able to provide each child
everything they wanted for their kids. Outside of a marriage, too,
birth control would prevent unwanted pregnancies and slow, if not
eliminate, sexually transmitted diseases. Advocates of the use of birth
control confidently asserted that the number of divorces would decline
as would the number of abortions. And, many parents and educators alike
confronted those who thought the birth control ideology wrong with the
question, “Since kids are going to do it anyway, why not provide them
the protection they need?” It all made such great sense.
But, with
several decades of experience to reflect upon, research now indicates
that the birth control ideology is, in fact, a failed, empty, and
vacuous ideology, one leading not to the promised Utopia of sexual
license with no consequences but to the dissolution of marriage and
family life. In fact, divorce is not down, but up and not only
significantly but exponentially. The notion that “more sex would
build better marriages” appears, in retrospect, to have been as shallow
as a saucer. So, too, as the number of children in families has
declined, so has the quality of family life. Two children may be
great, but it’s not quite the same as having lots of sisters and
brothers and, once everyone has grown up, to have bunches of aunts,
uncles, and cousins at family picnics and holiday feasts,
as many “designer kids” have learned and now have decided to have
families of four and five children of their own.
These two phenomena aren’t related? Well, maybe they're not.
But, what designer kid proudly proclaims “I am thankful to be a choice?”
A choice? Compared to what? A new vacation home at the
shore? A new luxury automobile? A flat screen television
with surround sound and a DVD player? No child is a “choice” and
no child wants to be a choice. A child is a “gift of God” and
every child has the God-given right to experience two parents who deeply
love each other and their child as a gifts of God. Furthermore,
and despite all of the sex education classes as well as the distribution
of condoms in public high school and college cafeterias across the
nation, sexually transmitted diseases have grown with such virulence
over the past three decades that the National Center for Disease Control
has called some sexually transmitted diseases “epidemics.” And,
sadly, there is no doubt that the number of elective abortions have
risen exponentially over the past four decades. All of this, in
what was to be the Utopian society characterized by “safe sex.”
Once again, I raise these facts not to focus primarily upon birth
control but, rather, as an example about how easy it is for young Roman
Catholics (and their parents, too) to be swayed by public opinion and to
fall into the trap of making up their minds up about important matters
having to do with faith and morals without listening to Scripture and
Church teaching and trying to understand what they are attempting to
communicate about what has been learned through centuries of sometimes
very harsh and tragic experience. Had young Roman Catholics (and their
parents, too,) listened to the Church’s teaching during the past three
decades, they might have been saved and have saved our society as well from learning what they now know
are, in retrospect, some very harsh, if not brutal and sad lessons, not
only for themselves, but for other human beings, too, many of whom
didn't have the opportunity to see the light of their first day.
Contrary
to what many believe, religion is not a matter of feelings but a matter
of the mind. Cardinal John Henry Newman put it best in the mid-19th
century when he stated that religion does not concern how I feel about
“me and my relationship with God” but instead concerns the decision a
person makes to listen to what Scripture and the Church teach and to put
these lessons into practice in daily life. In fact,
Newman converted from Protestantism to Catholicism because he correctly
saw—and
wrote eloquently about—how
a religion based upon feelings cannot be a true religion at all.
Today’s first reading from the prophet Isaiah suggested that the tenants
of the vineyard felt close to God and, so, they would not suffer any
consequences for their failure to follow God’s law. As Isaiah reminded
the Israelites, God had given them everything they needed. All that God
asked of the Israelite people was “judgment”—that
is, to decide what was required of them as the recipients of God’s many
blessings—and
“justice”—that
is, to do the right thing. But, the Israelites believed they knew
better and, now, the result of their free choices was the harsh reality
of “bloodshed” and “outcry.” And, having forsaken all of God’s
blessings, the Israelites even had the audacity to demand, “Why would
God allow this to happen to us?”
In today’s gospel, Jesus relates a similar message in the parable of the
tenants who believed that there would be no consequence for showing no
respect to the landowner’s representatives. “Surely,” the tenants
reasoned, “we can seize the land and, after having killed everyone
including the landowner’s son, enjoy its fruits for ourselves." But, in
the end, Jesus teaches: “Therefore, I say to you, the kingdom of God
will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its
fruit.”
Whether we like it or not, there are consequences for not listening to
the collective wisdom of our forebears in the faith and for succumbing
to the temptation to listen only to the voices of public opinion and of
those who promote fleeting fancies that offer the false promise of
making us feel good. We even know this from our own experience. But,
for Roman Catholics, in particular, listening to the collective wisdom
of our forebears in the faith also requires understanding not only what
Scripture and Church tradition teach but also, and perhaps more
importantly, strengthening our power of will to resist the temptations
that endeavor to allow our pride to keep us from listening to and
understanding why Scripture and Church tradition are teaching what they
teach. It is much easier, isn’t it, to justify ourselves by pointing to
all sorts of alleged “experts” whose answers tickle our current fancy?
It is much harder, isn’t it, to accept the discipline that our parents
and our grandparents, too, that Scripture as well as the Church
challenge us to make a part of our lives?
I
thought of this in the early 1990s when I attended a conference in
Chicago where the research findings of the first National Marriage
Project at Rutgers University were being presented. As stunned by
the findings as I was, I was more stunned when one of the presenters
read the last line of her paper. She concluded, “It’s as if our
parents, grandparents, and the Church were right.” And that coming from
a social scientist!
The story is told about how Satan found himself poring over his books
and the numbers didn’t lie, even to the great Deluder himself. Hell was
losing ground and heaven was gaining. Virtue was on the upswing and
vice was on the downswing. Being that the annual convention of
devils was near, Satan put the topic on the agenda. The theme of
the convention was, “Gaining more souls for Hell?”
When the convention convened, the vast number of demons assembled
brought up every kind of suggestion. Some said to offer human beings
more riches and greater wealth. Others said that offering power would
do the trick. Still other demons suggested practicing greater trickery
and treachery, perhaps through easy access to drugs and alcohol.
Another group of demons opined that enticing human beings into sex
promising that there would be no responsibility would do the trick. The
list of suggestions about how to increase the number of souls in Hell
was seemingly endless, but nothing really stood out as a truly novel way
that would entice more souls to choose the pathway to perdition.
Chairing the convention, Satan had grown increasingly despondent, that
is, until one devil offered what proved to be the last suggestion and,
as Regis Philbin always asks contestants in Who Wants to be a
Millionaire?, “Is that your final answer?”
The conventioneers were reduced to utter silence after the last of the
demons stood up and spoke out. All of their heads turned as this
particular insightful deceiver said to the assembly, “After all of this
debate, getting more souls into Hell is actually a much easier project
than you are all making it out to be.” The body of assembled demons
sneered, snickered, and some even laughed out loud.
Raising his hand, Satan demanded of the assembled demons, “Silence!”
And, then, the he asked cynically, “If it is so easy to get more souls
into Hell, how do you propose that we do it?”
The demon responded to the Prince of Darkness, “Convince human beings
that there is no hell.” Satan thought for a minute, sit back in his
chair, and smiled.
God has given us everything we need. We forsake those gifts when we
freely choose not to steep our judgments upon Scripture and Church
teaching. It was Jesus who noted, “Did you never read in the
Scriptures: The stone that the builders rejected has become the
cornerstone; by the Lord has this been done, and it is wonderful in our
eyes? Therefore, I say to you, the kingdom of God
will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its
fruit.” Now, that truly would be Hell.
The pathway to the peace of God’s kingdom that St. Paul speaks about in
today’s epistle is found only as we stand guard against the tide of
public opinion that seeks only distract us from allowing God to stand guard over
our minds and of being able to “rejoice in the Lord” who is our sure
foundation. When we do that,
St. Paul promises, “the God of peace will be with you.” The eternal,
immutable invincible, triune God will be with and within you. “Then,
the peace of God that surpasses all understanding, will guard our hearts
and minds in Christ Jesus.”
In the decades
following the turbulent 1960s, many Catholics have struggled very hard
to follow Scripture and Church teaching. Maybe not completely
understanding why Scripture and Church teaching advocate the more
difficult, demanding, and arduous pathway of self-sacrifice, these
Catholics have subordinated what they want to what a higher authority
has challenged them to consider as the Way, the Truth, and the Life.
There are the many couples who dated and considered marriage and decided
that sexual relations and cohabitation before marriage are neither a
good nor proper means to prepare themselves for the spiritual covenant
required in a sacramental marriage. Likewise, many married couples
have practiced Natural Family Planning (NFP) and have not only limited
the number of children but remained open to God's initiative in blessing
them with the gift of a new life, sometimes more children than they had
planned to have but each one of the loved as a gift of God.
And, what is it that
these Catholics received for remaining faithful to Scripture and Church
teaching from their family, friends, and acquaintances?
Strange looks.
Ridicule. Estrangement.
Yet, even in the midst
of these forms of rejection by the worldly wise, these Catholics
experienced the peace of God's kingdom that St. Paul says
“surpasses all understanding.”
Even when difficulties confronted them, this peace guarded their hearts
and minds, especially when their fidelity to Scripture and Church
teaching was called into question and rejected because these Catholics
experienced God as present and active in their lives, marriages, and
families. These are the real saints silently seated in our midst,
who have given witness to Scripture and Church teaching as they
subordinated what they wanted to what a higher authority challenged them
to consider and what they now know is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.
|
HOMILY
