|
As a result of this
teaching, many of Jesus’ disciples returned
to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him.
Simon Peter answered him, “Master, to whom shall we go?
You have the words of eternal life. We have come to believe
and are convinced that you are the Holy One of God.”
(John 6:66-68)
We are so
privileged to live in an era of amazing change, one presenting so many
heretofore unthought-of choices. There are many choices like: paper or
plastic at Giants, Genuardi’s, or Acme; a desktop or laptop Mac or PC; a
fuel-efficient KIA or a behemoth Nissan Armada; cable or satellite
television with more than 200 channels to choose from; and, wired,
wireless, or Internet telecommunication. Even these “little” seemingly
insignificant choices can have moral significance in the sense that, as
we contemplate making a choice, we can factor into our decision-making
process the question, “What’s the right thing to do?”
There are also many
more substantive choices that confront us because we live in an era of
such amazing change. We can know the sex of a child long before birth;
we can test an unborn child for in utero diseases and defects; we can
perform surgery on an embryo; we can map genes to determine whether or
not a human body is more likely to act as a receptor and host to
potentially deadly cancerous cells; and, we can measure electrical
charges in the brain to determine the degree to which it is
functioning. Likewise, we are seeing changes in gender relations,
composition of the workforce, and sexual mores. People want to redefine
marriage while others claim that sexual differences are culturally
imposed. These substantive choices have grave moral significance in the
sense that, as we contemplate a choice, we absolutely must process the
question, “What’s the right thing to do?”
Oftentimes,
however, we can’t be quite sure what the right thing to do is because we
find ourselves walking on very unfamiliar terrain. Furthermore, not
having previously trod the landscape of these very difficult kinds of
life choices, we’re not quite sure not only of which direction to choose
but we’re also confused because the ground beneath our feet isn’t quite
as firm as we’d like. This terrain is a little more muddy, our stance
isn’t as solid, and walking feels more like “slogging through” rather
than “taking sure steps.” The atmosphere is also more murky than we’d
prefer. Wouldn’t greater clarity be better if we are going to chart a
good course by doing the right thing?
When Catholics
find themselves in this type of moral terrain, some will ask to talk
with a priest. And, when they do, what is it they looking for and what
do they want? Furthermore, how does a priest envision his role in these
circumstances? Is he to represent the Church or to be sensitive and
responsive to peoples’ desires?
I have a
priest-friend who is a pastor in the Archdiocese of Washington, DC.
Whenever I happen to travel to the nation’s capital and have an
opportunity to visit him, the first question my friends always asks is:
“So, how many people have you alienated from the Church since the last
time I saw you?”
I don’t take his
question personally or as an affront. You see, we both know that he has
already categorized me as a theological “conservative.” He believes
that what he calls my “doctrinaire,” “dogmatic,” and “rigid” views are
out-of-step with the majority of American Catholics, or, at least in so
far as I can tell, the majority of those parishioners who attend Mass in
his suburban DC parish. My priest-friend has no doubts about where I
stand on matters of faith and morals and thoroughly enjoys peppering me
with questions like: “Okay, what would you say to a couple who is living
together and want to get married?” [Answer: “Live separately prior to
the wedding. The data correlating living together with spousal
abuse and divorce present a very different picture than that presented
by public opinion.”] “Would you refuse communion to a gay person living
in a committed relationship?” [Answer: “No. But, assuming I did know,
I’d visit with the person—just as I would any person living in a
committed relationship who comes to Holy Communion—and speak honestly
about the deceit involved in living together outside of the Sacrament of
Marriage.”] “Do you really think birth control is a moral evil?”
[Answer: “Yes, I do. And, I have become more convinced of this looking
at the data that have been gathered since the 1960s: the number of
divorces among those who likely used birth control and whose children
use birth control has spiraled; young people—especially males—not raised
by their fathers evidence serious behavioral problems; and,
out-of-wedlock births and abortions are beyond imagining as are the
number of extremely virulent sexually transmitted diseases that are
becoming increasingly difficult to heal. I thought birth control was
supposed to lead to happier marriages, psychologically healthier young
people, and fewer abortions, not to mention greater sexual
responsibility!] He already knows my response to his questions and
regales when I lay out my responses. What fascinates him is that I am
not one whit embarrassed for being what he considers an unpastoral,
unapologetic, and heartless Vatican sycophant who doesn’t care if “the
people in the pews” don’t love him.
I like it when my
friend peppers me with those questions because it gives me the
opportunity to push him up against the wall. After all, he and I both
know that I have already categorized him as a theological “liberal”
whose views are in-step with the majority of American Catholics. I know
that he fears the fallout he certainly will have to deal with if he were
to challenge his parishioners by upholding Scripture and Church
teaching. As a pastor, I believe my priest-friend views his role as
that of a “compassionate companion” along the Way not the “chief
teacher” of his flock. And, for my part, I really do relish watching an
utterly stupefied look grow on his face as I take on his challenges one
by one and respond to each point by point.
I know I’ve got
him on the run when he starts with “You really don’t believe that, do
you?” and “How can you possibly believe that?” And, when I respond
affirmatively and jump back into my evangelist’s pulpit all over again,
my priest-friend grows increasingly incredulous. Then, I know I’ve
really got him on the run when he starts rationalizing how I can believe
what I am saying but he cannot. “That’s fine for you priests in the
Ivory Tower. But, in a parish, that would never work. Alienating
people isn’t what Jesus was all about!”
“Gotch-ya!” I say
to myself. And, to him, I ask rhetorically: “So were you ordained to
serve the Church by speaking with one, clear voice or to be a politician
who builds consensus by talking about of both sides of one’s mouth?”
Then, I raise the question Peter asked Jesus in today’s gospel, “So, to
whom shall your parishioners go? You are supposed to have the words of
eternal life.”
Don’t
think any of this is new in the life of the Church. Paul and James
didn’t see eye-to-eye on very much. But, both were tremendous
apostles!
Well, my
priest-friend is accurate, on at least one count. Many Catholics today
don’t want to hear to what Scripture and Church teaching have to say
because many of them have already made up their minds. What they really
want are to be assured that whatever they have decided is “okay with the
‘Big Guy up in the Sky’.” With their minds already made up and
primarily seeking to be affirmed, if a priest relates Scripture and
Church teaching, most don’t become angry. No, they become very
angry. And, when a priest doesn’t back down in the face of some
extremely harsh judgments and blatant threats, it is not unusual that
these people throw the gauntlet down by leaving the church, proclaiming
as they exit through the door many uncharitable things about priests and
the Church, in general, and that “out of wedlock” priest in particular.
Now you
understand why my priest-friend asks me each time we meet how many
people I have alienated from the Church since the last time we’ve seen
each other. People who take offense when a priest—like
me—reiterates Scripture or Church teaching are quite likely to run to
another priest or pastor—like my priest-friend—seeking succor because
their feelings were wounded.
I estimate that
there are two general types of Catholics who, when they find themselves
caught in the horns of moral dilemmas, become disappointed and even take
great offense when a priest upholds Scripture and Church teaching.
The first are
those who believe they are “in charge” of their lives and that universal
truths and intrinsic evils don’t exist. They mitigate as “extremes”
categories like good and evil as well as right and wrong. For these
people, how they feel is the sure standard for decision
making because, in their view, their circumstances are unique and no
norms exist that can possibly challenge their inalienable “right to
choose” given their idiosyncratic and uncontestable circumstances.
These people want a “teddy bear” who is warm and fuzzy, not a surgeon
who exposes to the light of day the spiritual malignancy threatening, if
not already present in, their souls.
The second are
those who believe a priest, as a representative of the Church, should
give them the answer they want to hear irrespective of Scripture or
Church teaching. These people know that there is good and evil as well
as right and wrong, but they want the priest to redefine those terms in
a personally acceptable way, namely, the way they’ve already defined
those terms. These people also want a priest to lift from their
shoulders any responsibility not only to inform their consciences but
also to be obedient by acting in accord with Scripture and Church
teaching. For them, a good priest is one who enables them to explain
away Scripture and Church teaching not one who speaks with a clear
“prophetic voice in the wilderness” by casting the ever-challenging
light of truth on the moral dilemmas in which these people find
themselves.
When we find
ourselves in the horns of a moral dilemma, as emotions become highly
charged, and we find ourselves increasing anxious, to whom do we go
as Roman Catholics? to whom do we listen as Roman Catholics?
and to whom do we look for guidance in the midst of these and other
terribly complex and weighty moral challenges as Roman Catholics?
As I tell my
priest-friend, the Church exists to provide the human family the words
of eternal life. The Church does so as theologians and bishops examine
very carefully the changes in culture and society to determine what
Scripture and Church teaching have to say about these changes. The
issue is what these mean for eternal life not to keep people in
the pews, not to increase collections, and not to make people happy.
No, as Pope John Paul II wrote in the encyclical Veritatis Splendor
(“The Splendor of Truth”),
As Teacher, [the
Church] never tires of proclaiming the moral norm….The Church is in no
way the author or the arbiter of this norm. In obedience to the truth
which is Christ, whose image is reflected in the nature and dignity of
the human person, the Church interprets the moral norm and proposes it
to all people of good with, without concealing its demands of
radicalness and perfection. (#95)
As St. Paul told
the Ephesians in today’s Epistle, the Church is subordinate to Christ
not vice-versa. Possessing a wealth of experience—two millennia, in
fact—the Church has formulated moral principles that are fully in accord
with Scripture. These principles—what constitute a treasury of wisdom
far beyond my ability to grasp—are time-tested and timeless as well.
Furthermore, they are logically consistent so long as people approach
these principles with open hearts not closed minds. That is why, as new
moral challenges arise in successive generations, the Church doesn’t
formulate new principles simply because people demand it. No, the
Church—through the prayerful work and collaboration of theologians and
bishops—studies and applies its traditional principles to new concrete
situations with all of their new complexities. Then, it is up to
priests to communicate those principles in a convincing and compelling
way.
As we heard in
today’s first reading, we all know that the Israelites said to Joshua at
Shechem: “Far be it from us to forsake the Lord for service to other
gods….[we] will serve the Lord, for he is our God.” But, despite their
protestations to the contrary, we also know that it wasn’t going to be
all that very long before the Israelites would turn their backs on all
that God had done for them—including to free the Israelites from slavery
in Egypt—and return to idols of their own making. Despite the promise
the Israelites made to Joshua, they turned back to their former way of
life.
That’s why I
oftentimes remind my priest-friend from the Archdiocese of Washington,
DC, that priests are not “freelancers” who dispense advice based upon
what they feel people need to hear. Instead, priests are ordained by
the Church to speak on its behalf. Our role is to state and to restate
Scripture and Church teaching so that Jesus’ disciples in this
generation will hear what the Church has to say as its members face very
challenging moral dilemmas, to consider the guidance the Church offers,
and to use that guidance as they form their consciences.
That’s when the
stupefied look begins to appear on his face and I insist that we priests
do people absolutely no good by telling them that whatever they do is
fine. Instead, I say, people have a right to know what Scripture and
the Church teach about an ideology, a behavior, or a matter about which
they must decide. “They have a right to know the truth,” I tell him,
“and armed with this truth, they will then have the knowledge to know
what to do or not do, with conscience as a guide. After all, they
are the ones who will bear responsibility for the choices they freely
make. The priest’s role is to help people form good consciences!”
That’s when the
incredulous look comes across of his face. And, that’s when I tell him
that priests shouldn’t fear being rejected by people for proclaiming
Scripture and Church teaching. “Didn’t they do the same to Jesus?” I
ask rhetorically.
When we read
today’s gospel, it’s easy and convenient to overlook why Peter asked
Jesus, “Master, to whom shall we go?” The simple fact of the matter is
that Jesus had been teaching his disciples and many who were listening
said, “This saying his hard; who can accept it?” Then—just like their
forebears in Shechem—as they thought about what Jesus was teaching, many
disciples we are told turned away and went back to their former way of
life.
What the Church
proposes—coming directly from Jesus Christ, the Word of God made
flesh—isn’t easy today or in any generation. Perhaps the fact is that
many Catholics don’t want to know what the Church teaches because
they’re already made up their minds, would rather not confuse their
issues with the truth, and are looking for priests to make Scripture and
Church teaching easy to swallow. But, the simple fact is that none of
us will grow in holiness unless we embrace the truth and allow it to
change how we think and how we act.
For example, in
today’s Epistle, we heard St. Paul teach the Ephesians:
Defer to one another
out of reverence for Christ. Wives should be submissive to their
husbands as if to the Lord because the husband is head of his wife just
as Christ is head of his body, the Church, as well as its savior. As
the Church submits to Christ, so wives should submit to their husbands
in everything. Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the Church.
He gave himself up for her....Husbands should love their wives as they
do their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.
“This saying is
hard; who can accept it?” the disciples asked Jesus. The issue is not
that Scripture and Church teaching are hard to understand. The issue is
that they are hard to accept because Scripture and Church teaching
require us to change how we think and act. That is why so many
disciples, with their minds already made up, have turned away from
Jesus!
Yes, Scripture
and Church teaching propose a very difficult and radical way of life
today just as they did in Jesus’ day.
Consider this: If
wives were submissive to their husbands, this would require many women
to change how they think and act. Furthermore, if husbands loved their
wives as they do their own bodies, what would a woman have to fear?
Would not love, honor, and obedience be the bond between a husband and
wife? And, where this is the case, wouldn’t many marriages be in a far
better state than they are today?
So, why do so
many wives allow the world and the power of evil to beat them down and
make them feel like they are not good enough unless they stop being
submissive to their husbands? Furthermore, why do so many young
women believe that fulfillment is found in a career, first, and
possibly, in a marriage, second?
And, why is it
that so many husbands love themselves more than they love their wives?
Furthermore, why do so many young men believe it isn’t wrong to “use” a
woman yet so much fear committing themselves mind, heart, and body to a
woman?
What is going on
in our culture and society that makes the word “submission” so offensive
that we immediately dismiss any mention of it in scripture as somehow
out of touch with reality or, worse yet, a lie?
I’ll tell you one
thing: the problem hasn’t to do with scripture. It has to do with
our closed hearts!
The question
scripture poses is: As we confront substantive moral dilemmas in this
generation, will we find Scripture and Church teaching hard to accept
and, as a consequence, turn our backs on the word of God? Or, will we
find in Scripture and Church teaching the words of eternal life that we
allow to change how we think and act?
A brief
commercial break...
Each
year, the people at Magnificat® produce a companion edition for the
season of Advent. Similar to a what older Catholics may remember
as a "prayer book," the companion edition contains all sorts of prayers,
readings, reflections, art, and activities for every member of the
family to prepare each day of the season of Advent for the coming of
Christ at Christmas.
Grandparents might consider purchasing a copy for themselves and copies
for each of their grandchildren. Confirmation sponsors might consider
purchasing a copy for themselves as well as the person they sponsored in
the faith. Spouses might purchase a copy for themselves and use it for
daily prayer during the season of Advent. Parents might purchase a copy
for the family and use it to lead prayer before dinner each evening.
At a
price of $3 for 1-4 copies plus $1 shipping/handling, $2 for 5-9 copies
plus $3 shipping/handling, and $1.10 for 10-49 copies (plus $5
shipping/handling), the companion edition makes a perfect and very
affordable opportunity to prepare for the coming of Christ at Christmas
as well as an Advent gift to spur family, friends, and colleagues toward
greater spiritual growth during the season of Advent.
The
companion edition has a limited press run that sells out each year.
Furthermore, orders are filled in the order received. So, place your
order early.
To place
an order for the 2006 companion edition of Magnificat® for the season of
Advent, call 1-970-416-6670 or email specialissue@intrepidgroup.com for
ordering information.
|
HOMILY
