Madness, Evangelization, Prayer, and Adultery

Media (and more) Madness

I was disappointed to see hardly any more people at 9:00 Mass this morning than an average weekday Mass (about 75-100 for weekday Mass and maybe double that at the first Mass today). Yes, there are six other Masses, it is true, but undoubtedly in normal times all would be packed. Remember when churches would add extra chairs in every available nook and cranny and still it was SRO? Now, my church still has every other pew roped off and yet still appears sparse (and undoubtedly my experience is not unique).

I put much blame on the media for this madness as well as the willingness, sometimes bordering on enthusiastic, of churches to restrict and — uniformly in this country — to eliminate access to the sacraments, at least in the early months of the pandemic, with seeming eagerness.

Of course, the pandemic is serious. Of course, vulnerable persons should take smart precautions. But, there is no way that the numbers abandoning Mass since March of last year comes close to the numbers, statistically, who are most in danger from the virus.

When trust in God falls so far behind concern for physical well-being, especially among those who have next to zero chance of being severely impacted by corona, things are bad. Instead of taking this disease as a warning salvo from the Lord, folks are far too quick to abandon the sacraments. Faith is lacking, catechesis has long been wanting, and the Church has been far too accommodating to the secular authorities and culture.

Back to the media, the hysteria they generate is over the top. Desperate for viewers and clicks, they serve up worst care scenarios, give conflicting data, and twist statistics to serve their preferred story line. Yet, far too many viewers are sucked in hook, line, and sinker. If people of faith would spend the time in which they imbibe the various forms of media, whether MSM or social, instead in prayer, contemplation, spiritual reading, and viewing wholesome, inspirational, and instructive presentations, maybe their understanding and priorities would align with what is truly important. Life here is short, life eternal is what matters.

The steady decline in Church attendance has ramped up theses last twenty or so months. Maybe what Fr. Ratzinger saw in 1969 is coming even more quickly:

From the crisis of today the Church of tomorrow will emerge — a Church that has lost much. She will become small and will have to start afresh more or less from the beginning.

Well, I want to be in that (small) number, come corona or high water or whatever else nature, man, or the devil may foist upon us.

Today’s Readings

[A[ll the ends of the earth will behold
the salvation of our God.

Is 52:10b

It strikes me that the beautiful reading from Isaiah from the Mass During the Day, is a clarion call for evangelization. God could have chosen to reveal Himself to all persons in every age in any way He wanted. Yet, He chose from ancient days an (to say the least) imperfect people to be the instruments of revealing Himself to the world. That instrument hit far too many sour notes as it was more likely to be handed over to an idolatrous culture than to transform that culture with the truth.

Well, the Lord does end up coming to us in time, to take care of us since we could not do it ourselves. But even then He graces us with His physical presence in the form of a man for only thirty-three years, leaving a motley band of eleven to “[g]o into the whole world and proclaim the gospel to every creature” (Mk 16:15).

Which brings us to the awesome prologue of John in today’s Gospel:

He was in the world,
and the world came to be through him,
but the world did not know him.
He came to what was his own,
but his own people did not accept him.

Jn 1:10-11

Certainly, far too many on this planet do not know Christ, even if they know about Him. That certainly is an evangelistic failure — a failure of Christian witness.

But, more disturbing, is that “his own people did not accept him.” Is this not even more true today? Claiming Christianity as one’s own, but not adhering to the words of the Word, indicates a lack of acceptance of Jesus.

Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven.

mt 7:21

What sort of witness do we give when we don’t believe, or at least adhere to in word and deed, what the Lord has revealed to us? What does it say about or fortitude and courage when we allow the depraved secular culture to steamroll objective morality instead of steadfastly and boldly standing firm against the prevailing, sometimes hurricane force, winds? How many persons, open to the Christian message, have rejected the Church because of the scandal given by those claiming adherence to the Faith?

My spiritual reading these days comes from the book Secular Holiness by Fr. Paul Hinnebusch. I very much like the terminology he uses for “a life lived according to God’s will”: secular worship. He goes on to say:

Secular worship, then is the expression of daily life of the inner devotion of the heart, it is a life lived in devoted acceptance and implementation of the will of God, it is a life lived in righteousness.

p. 63

Yes, walking the walk, as well as talking the talk, makes our lives a living testament to worshiping the one true God always. This is how we fulfill Paul’s exhortation to “[p]ray without ceasing” (1 Thess 5:17).

The author goes on to give us Paul in Romans 12:1 as directly tying into this concept, as well as quoting Lumen Gentium 34 at length. Both are worth pondering.

(By the way, regarding John’s Prologue, I just heard of a new book by Anthony Esolen devoted to just those eighteen verses. He is a gifted thinker and writer. Check it out.)

The Woman Caught in Adultery

I recently listened to the St. Paul Center’s “Road to Emmaus” podcast episode “Jesus and the Law.” What I would give if I could get every homilist to listen to this and preach this Gospel Passage based on it. You will be hard-pressed to find a better way to spend a half-hour of your time. You will never listen or read this story again in the same way. (The passage and commentary Dr. Hahn refers to can be found here.)

I highly recommend purchasing the entire New Testament of this series here.

What does it mean to "Pray Without Ceasing"? Is It Possible?

Have yourself a Merry (and Blessed) little Christmas now.

No longer tongue tied, Mary and baby Baptist, Fradd, and Revelation

Gospel Reading (Lk 1:57-66)

Immediately his mouth was opened, his tongue freed,
and he spoke blessing God.

v. 64

Imagine how Zechariah must have been going over and over in his mind, and maybe even writing out, what he was going to say when (and he knew it was “when” — see Lk 1:20) he was again granted the power of speech by God. We will hear his beautiful Benedictus tomorrow in direct preparation for Christmas Day, but he must have had so much more to share about his encounter with the angel some nine months earlier and the enforced silent retreat he experienced since then (note the “fear” that came upon the neighbors at Zechariah’s sudden outburst in v. 65). This blessed time gave him much opportunity to reflect on his relationship with the Lord and the need to trust Him completely. He also must have thought deeply about, and read, studied, and contemplated, the Torah during this period, particularly the prophetic books. What was this miracle child to become? We don’t know how long he lived after this, but he was certainly never the same.

I wonder about Mary in relation to this episode. The verse directly preceding today’s passage (the last verse of yesterday’s Gospel) gives the impression she left the hill country before the events related today. But this seems to me quite unlikely. We know the angel told Mary at the Annuniciation that Elizabeth was six months along and that Mary went quickly to visit her and stayed three months, so that covers at least nine months, probably a bit more. Why would she leave as Elizabeth was just about to give birth? No, it seems to me that Mary got to take all of this in, adding more to ponder in her heart. And, by the way, enabling her to relate these momentous happening to Luke when he was compiling his Gospel many decades later. I love the thought of the Virgin with Child holding the newborn John, contemplating what the future would bring for both. And if little John was dancing in the womb a few months earlier, imagine how he must have felt then, being right next to God incarnate and in the arms of His mother.

Fradd Nails It

I really appreciate Matt Fradd and wholeheartedly support his ministry. He is faithful, smart, honest, humble, and a great interviewer. Today he came out with a video that is worth watching, not only because of the New York magazine cover story that prompted it but, flowing from his opinions regarding it, what it bodes for faithful Catholics on social media and various platforms. His concerns are my concerns.

Before he even got to reading from one of Paul’s letters, the following passage was already in my brain. This entire passage falls under the heading, in the New American Bible, “Punishment for Idolaters.” When you get the first commandment wrong, the rest will quickly follow.

The wrath of God is indeed being revealed from heaven against every impiety and wickedness of those who suppress the truth by their wickedness. For what can be known about God is evident to them, because God made it evident to them. Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made. As a result, they have no excuse; for although they knew God they did not accord him glory as God or give him thanks. Instead, they became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened. While claiming to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for the likeness of an image of mortal man or of birds or of four-legged animals or of snakes. Therefore, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts for the mutual degradation of their bodies. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper. They are filled with every form of wickedness, evil, greed, and malice; full of envy, murder, rivalry, treachery, and spite. They are gossips and scandalmongers and they hate God. They are insolent, haughty, boastful, ingenious in their wickedness, and rebellious toward their parents. They are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Although they know the just decree of God that all who practice such things deserve death, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

Rom 1: 18-32

I encourage you to subscribe to his YouTube channel (before it’s too late) and other platforms, watch some of his stuff, and like & subscribe.

Revelation

Apropos of the last topic, I have been working through Revelation using the Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture. Phenomenal. If you are one of the many, like me, who is confounded by the last book of the Bible, you will not come across a better and more thorough dissection of John’s writing. Having just read chapter 13 of Revelation, similar themes as those above have come up. A frightening time awaits the faithful, as the idolaters won’t be crossed, and the idolaters, as God will not be mocked.

Zacharias Writes Down the Name of His Son (1486-1490) by Domenico Ghirlandaio

God bless.

“May it be done to me according to your word.”

Gospel Reading (Lk 1:26-38)

If we were to assign a motto to the Blessed Virgin’s life, it would be these words to the angel Gabriel. Her whole life was dedicated to the Lord, her will perfectly aligned with His from the moment of her conception. So her reply to the angel, despite her surprise and being “greatly troubled” (v. 29), would have come naturally, without effort or second thought. Virtues, like vices, become habit forming, and all of this young girl’s habits were virtuous.

In hearing the Gospel proclaimed today at Mass I particularly keyed in on the word “word.” We know from John, the beloved disciple (specially beloved not only by Jesus, but by Mary, as well, as the Evangelist became her caretaker starting at the foot of the Cross), that Jesus is the Word (see Jn 1:1-18, esp. 1 and 14). It is particularly fitting that the one who kept God’s Word perfectly in her heart now had the Word made flesh physically next to her heart. Only an immaculate heart could be granted such a privilege. Shame on anyone who denigrates Mary or her exalted place in salvation history.

Mary did not have a tombstone on which to put these words to live by, but may we all live in such a way whereby we could do so wholeheartedly.

Words of Wisdom

My Advent reading has included the first volume of Pope Benedict’s Jesus of Nazareth trilogy. Unlike the latter two volumes, I never completed the first, but now find myself one chapter away from doing so.

Today I came across this wonderful quote, refuting scholars who attempt to classify Jesus in existing categories, particularly as simply a prophet:

These various opinions are not simply mistaken; they are greater or lesser approximations to the mystery of Jesus, and they can certainly set us on the path toward Jesus’ real identity. But they do not arrive at Jesus’ identity, at his newness. They interpret him in terms of the past, in terms of the predictable and the possible, not in terms of himself, his uniqueness, which cannot be assigned to any other category. Today, too, similar opinions are clearly held by the “people” who have somehow or other come to know Christ, who have perhaps made a scholarly study of him, but have not encountered Jesus himself in his utter uniqueness and otherness.

p. 292

No wonder the people of Jesus’ time (and our time) had so much trouble believing in Jesus. The tendency from time immemorial has been to put God in a box. But God is the original out of the box thinker. Trouble arises when we place limitations on the One who is unlimited. We can never give enough credit to what the Lord can do and wished to do for us. Per today’s Gospel, Mary placed no limitations on Yahweh — neither should we.

As for scholarly study inhibiting a real encounter with the person of Jesus, it is unquestionably a real danger. Knowing about Jesus does not necessarily lead to knowing Jesus. A kneeling theology is required. Diving into Scripture, meditating upon it, praying with it, and praying to it, (that is, the Word — see the first section above), and to the one who inspired it, the Holy Spirit, are vital (in the truest sense of the word). Authentic and deep relationships only happen through conversation, which is exactly what prayer is.

Dearest Jesus, may a true conversion of hearts lead many souls (especially my own) to more full appreciate your “utter uniqueness and otherness.”

“The Annunciation” (1528) by Benvenuto Tisi

God bless.

Week 4: Leap for joy!

The Gospel Reading (Lk 1:39-45)

When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting,
the infant leaped in her womb

Lk 1:41a

Then David came dancing before the LORD with abandon…jumping and dancing before the LORD

2 SM 6:14, 16

Comparing Mary’s encounter with Elizabeth to David’s retrieving the Ark of the Covenant is not uncommon in the literature. And, certainly, comparing little John, who became known as “the Baptist,” to David in their leaps before the Lord is invariably mentioned in those same expositions. But, something I have not come across is linking John and David in their respective roles.

Both are precursors to the Messiah. Both, in a sense, prepare the way of the Lord. John more immediately, to be sure, while David 1,000 years before. David was a man after God’s own heart, Scripture tells us (see 1 Sam 13:14). Jesus, in different words says essentially the same thing about His cousin, but in even loftier terms: “Amen, I say to you, among those born of women there has been none greater than John the Baptist” (Mt 11:11a).

In David, a Christ (i.e., an Anointed One) in his own right, we see many types of his Lord (see here and here). John, the New Elijah (see here), like his prophetic forebear, attempts to ready God’s Chosen People for the advent of the Messiah. Yes, Elijah comes a couple of centuries after David, but both hold forth the promise of the Lord God intervening in history in an unexpected, but glorious way.

David had reason to dance in front of the returning ark touched by the finger of Yahweh. John had even more reason to dance in front of the new ark containing God Himself. Both anticipate the Epiphany. David fell into a different category, as Jesus explained:

Amen, I say to you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it.

Mt 13:17

But John, the last Old Testament prophet, was blessed to see and hear the longed-for Messiah in time and space. And both he and David, who pointed toward the Christ, now enjoy His presence personally in eternity.

More on Today’s Readings

Book Recommendation

The Fathers on the Sunday Gospels edited by Stephen Mark Holmes

I worked through these brief sermons, arranged to follow the current lectionary, for the last year. Pick it up if you can — it will enhance your weekly reflection on the Sunday readings. See my brief Goodreads review here.

https://brentkuhlman.wordpress.com/2018/12/23/the-baby-leaped-for-joy/

God bless.

Week 2: Advent continues

TODAY’S READINGS

[T]he word of God came to John the son of Zechariah in the desert.
John went throughout the whole region of the Jordan,
proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins

Luke 3:2b-3

With these words, Luke introduces John the Baptist. The message? Repent! Matthew (3:2), Mark (1:4), and John (1:23), all affirm this was Jesus’ cousin’s calling and ministry.

In fact, Jesus Himself begins His public preaching ministry with precisely the same message as recorded by two of the evangelists (see Mt 4:17 and Mk 1:14), while Luke is not specific about Jesus’ initial message (4:15), and John, I would argue, conveys the same message more through Jesus’ first actions than His words (2:13-16).

It seems to me that the biggest problem today is that this message is lost on vast swaths of the public, as it was on many of the Jewish religious leaders of the Baptist’s day (see Mt 3:7-10), because nobody calls it sin anymore. What is there to repent for? Actually, even more concerning, is that the poles have been reversed in modern society. Isaiah saw this over 2,500 years ago:

Ah! Those who call evil good, and good evil,

who change darkness to light, and light into darkness,

who change bitter to sweet, and sweet into bitter!

Is 5:20

And we see the effects, as did Isaiah:

Their root shall rot

and their blossom scatter like dust;

For they have rejected the instruction of the LORD of hosts,

and scorned the word of the Holy One of Israel.

Is 5:24b

And the final result:

Therefore the wrath of the LORD blazes against his people,

he stretches out his hand to strike them;

The mountains quake,

their corpses shall be like refuse in the streets.

For all this, his wrath is not turned back,

his hand is still outstretched.

Is 5:25

An age old problem about which we should not be surprised. It will get worse. But God is in charge and will render a just judgment in time and in eternity.

Through all this, our challenge is to maintain the joy the psalmist has in today’s Responsorial:

The Lord has done great things for us; we are filled with joy.

Ps 126:3

How to do this? Paul — in prison mind you — encourages this prayer today to the Philippians (and to us):

[T]hat your love may increase ever more and more
in knowledge and every kind of perception,
to discern what is of value,
so that you may be pure and blameless for the day of Christ,
filled with the fruit of righteousness
that comes through Jesus Christ
for the glory and praise of God.

Phil 1:9-11

Yes, “pure and blameless” is how we must face our “judges” on earth, without counting the cost, and our true judge when we meet Him when we are released from this mortal coil.

LUKE THE HISTORIAN (AND JESUS HISTORICAL)

I have long been fascinated by the dating of biblical events, most especially when Jesus lived. And He did live. Both videos make the point, particularly Bp. Barron, that there is no question Jesus is a real historical figure, and this is most explicit in Luke who specifies almost to the year the beginning of Jesus’ ministry (through John the Baptist) in today’s Gospel:

In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar,
when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea,
and Herod was tetrarch of Galilee,
and his brother Philip tetrarch of the region
of Ituraea and Trachonitis,
and Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene,
during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas,
the word of God came to John the son of Zechariah in the desert.

Lk 3:1-2

So, I went to my trusty commentaries and found this breakdown in the Luke volume of the great “Opening the Scriptures” series by George Martin:

  • Tiberius Caesar’s reign began, according to most scholars, in A.D. 14, so the year is 28 or 29
  • Pontius Pilate was governor from the years 26 to 36
  • Herod Antipas was tetrarch of Galilee from 4 B.C. to A.D. 39
  • Philip was tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis from 4 B.C. to A.D. 34
  • Lysanias was tetrarch o Lysanias and Abilene in the fifteenth year of Tiberius’s reign
  • Annas was high priest from A.D. 6 to 15 but retained that honorary title ongoing
  • Caiaphas was high priest from 18 until 36

It all lines up very neatly — Luke was true to his word when he says at the beginning of his Gospel that he investigated “everything accurately anew” (1:3). And since we know, from Luke again, that “[w]hen Jesus began his ministry he was about thirty years of age” (3:23), our calendar on the wall, when it tells us the year of our Lord (Anno Domini) is pretty accurate. I have seen date ranges for the birth of Jesus anywhere from 10 B.C. to 1 B.C. but 4 and 1 seem to be the most likely candidates.

JOHN AND THE WORD

A brief last note on something I only picked up on today that appears as the last words of the excerpt with which I just dealt: “the word of God came to John the son of Zechariah in the desert” (Lk 3:2b).

We know from the beginning of John’s Gospel that Jesus is the Word of God. Interestingly, John the Evangelist intersperses the John the Baptist story with the theological explanation of Jesus’ origins and the role attributed to Him (Jn 1:1-18). That may say something about my next observation.

That is, what if “the word of God” coming to John “in the desert” was Jesus Himself in the flesh? Jesus was certainly not immune from having His own desert experience (see Mt 4:1-11), although likely after John had already been in the public eye for a while. But why might He not have approached John at that earlier event? They were relatives after all. They first met in their respective wombs. And it seems unlikely to me that they would have never met afterward. But even if they did not have a personal encounter again before their respective public ministries, I would think Elizabeth would have relayed something of this first encounter to John, as Mary likely would have to Jesus (certainly the possibility exists that John’s parents kept silent, died soon after his birth, or sent him of to the Essene community at a young age). Additionally, John’s mission was clear to his father (see Lk 1:76-77) and to Jesus (see Mt 11:7-19).

Now, it might seem from later events in Scripture that John was unclear on Jesus’ identity and mission (although this is disputed, but see Jn 1:31, 33 and Mt 11:2-3 for starters). I do think it could be worked out, though, that Jesus and John still had this desert encounter.

I wish I had more time to get into it now, but it is food for thought, contemplation, and further study.

ADVENT HELPS

Week two of Barron and Hahn and Bergsma.

BOOK RECOMMENDATION

I mentioned last week that as part of my Advent reading, I would be working through the first volume of Pope Benedict’s Jesus of Nazareth. What a treasure! Not the first book on the Lord I would give to the newbie (that would be Fulton Sheen’s Life of Christ), but for anyone who loves Jesus, it is a magnificent way to enhance your knowledge of and deepen your love for the Messiah. The pope emeritus’s textual, historical, and spiritual insights are the exceptional work of a man who has been intimate with his subject over a long life.

https://images5.fanpop.com/image/photos/30700000/John-The-Baptist-Jesus-Jesus-Of-Nazareth-movie-jesus-30780530-439-335.jpg
John the Baptist and Jesus in Jesus of Nazareth (1977)

Lord willing — and He was (and is)

TODAY’S GOSPEL

Jesus said to his disciples:
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’
will enter the Kingdom of heaven,
but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven.”

Mt 7:21

The opening verse of today’s Gospel is my go to line for the “once saved, always saved” crowd. It seems to me that Jesus could be no clearer about the demands of discipleship than He is right here. And there are countless examples from His own lips throughout the Gospels backing up this admonition. There will be those who try to eisegete out of Paul a refutation of what is plain from Jesus’ own teaching, but don’t you believe it.

So basic to a Catholic understanding of how to read Scripture are three concepts. Let me take them directly from the Catechism of the Catholic Church which got these touchstones from Vatican II’s Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation:

The Second Vatican Council indicates three criteria for interpreting Scripture in accordance with the Spirit who inspired it.

112 1. Be especially attentive “to the content and unity of the whole Scripture”. Different as the books which compose it may be, Scripture is a unity by reason of the unity of God’s plan, of which Christ Jesus is the center and heart, open since his Passover.

113 2. Read the Scripture within “the living Tradition of the whole Church”. According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church’s heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God’s Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture (“. . . according to the spiritual meaning which the Spirit grants to the Church”).

114 3. Be attentive to the analogy of faith. By “analogy of faith” we mean the coherence of the truths of faith among themselves and within the whole plan of Revelation.

The first criterion is most applicable here. Anyone who tries to pit one verse against another, one book against another, or one sacred author against another, is not adhering to authentic biblical scholarship.

Its clear teaching on this and so many other matters is just another reason to love the Catholic faith.

JESUS, I TRUST IN YOU

I am on Day 22 of a little spiritual retreat based on the fine new book Jesus, I Trust in You by Sr. Faustina Maria Pia, S.V. This is a lovely little volume filled with great stories, deep wisdom, and thoughtful questions.

Anyway, today the author speaks of the Wedding Feast at Cana, drawing out allusions to Jesus and Mary as the New Adam and the New Eve. But when she mentions Mary’s words, “Do whatever he tells you” (Jn 2:5) my thoughts went somewhere they haven’t before.

Some have contended that Jesus’ response to Mary’s statement to Him that there is no more wine was a rebuke (Jn 2:3). There are plenty of commentaries that say otherwise, but one need not be a Bible scholar to know that the sinless Jesus, who kept the commandments perfectly, would never dishonor His mother, who was herself sinless.

But, more to the point I wish to draw out, doesn’t it seem a bit odd that after Jesus’ response, Mary says those five words with no further discussion? It seems very likely to me (and this is my new thought on the matter) that this was not the first time Mary uttered these words or, at least, similar ones to these. Mother and Son lived together for thirty years. No other parent or child were ever closer or knew each other more intimately. The God-Man created His own mother. The mother, the Woman of prayer, was perfectly attuned to her Son’s will. I suspect as the years went on that the understanding between the two was so great that little had to be vocalized in their interactions.

I imagine the short recommendation in question was Mary’s response to friends and neighbors looking for advice, seeking the solution to a problem, or unburdening their troubles in the home of the Holy Family. She knew Jesus could and would help those in need — especially of th request came from her. So, these last words recorded in Scripture of the Blessed Virgin are a fitting sign off for those of us who are closely acquainted with Our Lady.

Image

Advent begins

TODAY’S GOSPEL

I have never gotten too caught up in end times speculation. In His long answer to the disciples’ question, “Tell us, when will this happen, and what sign will there be of your coming, and of the end of the age?” (Mt 24:3) Jesus includes these words:

But of that day and hour no one knows, neither the angels of heaven, nor the Son,* but the Father alone.

Mt 24:36

Jesus words here have always been sufficient for me.

Quite some years ago, a Catholic preacher’s words made an impression on me that I will never forget: We don’t know when the end of the world will arrive, but we know the end of our time in this world most assuredly will come; so, be prepared! Would it be that we all live our lives with that thought in mind.

All that being said, I was struck by today’s Gospel (Lk 21:25-28, 34-36), especially the following verses:

Beware that your hearts do not become drowsy
from carousing and drunkenness
and the anxieties of daily life,
and that day catch you by surprise like a trap.

vv. 34-35

The Lord’s first two examples are not surprising, but He adds daily anxieties, as well. Uh-oh. I’m sure I am not alone in falling into this trap. Certainly, we all have responsibilities that we must attend to. And sometimes deadlines, unexpected events, and myriad other issues, do cause us to get caught up in temporal matters. But, these must not cause us to lose our peace our alter our priorities and focus regarding eternal matters. God first. If we don’t set aside time for the Lord, how can we expect everything else to work out (I’m speaking primarily to myself here)?

We don’t necessary connect anxiety and drowsiness, but Scripture sure does. Anxiety and its associated grief are said to be the cause of Jesus’ three closest collaborators inability to keep watch with Him in the Garden of Gethsemane (see Lk 22:45). Jesus admonished these men who were unable to spend an hour with Him (see Mt 26:40). Is He not doing the same to those of us who don’t set aside at least a few minutes during which we give time to Him to dedicate our day and life to the One who made us and sustains us?

Advent is a great time to start, or to renew, this obligation.

ADVENT RESOURCES

I realize there are bundles of excellent Advent resources, and I will be taking advantage of a few, but here are two that are particularly worthwhile:

A great new resource worth listening to each Sunday of Advent: https://stpaulcenter.com/the-word-of-the-lord/

As always, Bp. Barron’s weekly sermons are recommended: https://youtu.be/vNAwrhRjiok

MY READING

Aside from a couple of booklets with daily reflections, I have added two books especially for Advent:

The first I began reading when it initially came out, but never finished (I have read the two subsequent volumes), so what better time to start from the beginning and polish it off then during Advent?

The second was recommended in an article a few years back so I thought, with “Advent” in the title, why not tackle it this December?

God bless.

Agony in the Garden (c. 1460) by Andrea Mantegna

Eucharistic Sacrilege

The article below was submitted to Homiletic & Pastoral Review for publication. I was given the understanding that it would appear before the upcoming USCCB General Assembly (starting Monday, November 15) during which the bishops plan to develop a statement on the EucharistThe Mystery of the Eucharist in the Life of the Church. Since it has not been published (yet?), I thought it important to post it now in anticipation of the bishops’ gathering (if HPR does run it, I will post the link).
Since writing this piece over three months ago, I have certainly heard more about the concern over sacrilege in this matter (most notably from Cardinal Burke), but I still strongly believe this message cannot be over-emphasized or too often repeated. Thus this contribution.

Much has been written about the political implications of the current controversy regarding the reception of Holy Communion by public figures who are outspoken in their advocacy of abortion.  Of particular note in this area have been politicians — most prominently, the President of the United States.  There has been serious concern, as well, regarding the scandal to the faithful that would be caused by allowing such persons to receive the Eucharist.  The political implications should be irrelevant.  Giving scandal, on the other hand, is not at all irrelevant – it is a real worry for the Church.  But both these matters deal with the horizontal dimension of faith, that is, with human persons; vitally important, to be sure, but not the whole story — by a long shot.

Precious little attention has been explicitly placed on the vertical dimension of the Blessed Sacrament, that is, what unworthy reception of Holy Communion means to God.  Let us attempt to provide a little balance here by taking this aspect of Eucharistic theology into account.

Now, I do not mean to say that there has not been wide acknowledgement of what (or better, Who) the Eucharist actually is.  Certainly, a significant point has been raised concerning the lack of belief among many Catholics in regard to Church doctrine on the Eucharist, which tells us that it is “the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ and, therefore, the whole Christ is truly, really, and substantially contained” therein (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1374, italics in the original).  This deficit of belief, or at least of understanding, among Catholics should be a grave concern to orthodox believers and needs to be addressed, to be sure.

Rather, I mean to focus here, not on any concern about offense given to politicians, or the very real concern of offense given to the faithful, but on offense given to God.  Why this has been widely neglected, or at best given short shrift, by Catholics is puzzling.  The primary reason that this whole matter is so important is because of what the Church declares about the nature of the Eucharist, explained above.

Receiving the Eucharist in a state of mortal sin is a grave offense against God.  Scripture is clear on this matter: “whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord.  A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup.  For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself” (1 Cor 11:27-29).

Regarding the implications of unworthy reception of Holy Communion, the Catechism of the Catholic Church is clear, as well: “Sacrilege consists in profaning or treating unworthily the sacraments and other liturgical actions, as well as persons, things, or places consecrated to God.  Sacrilege is a grave sin especially when committed against the Eucharist, for in this sacrament the true Body of Christ is made substantially present for us” (2120, italics mine).

Jesus was willing to lose all His followers for the sake of the Eucharist (see Jn 6:22-71).  Confecting the Eucharist was the last act of His ministry, coming immediately prior to His Passion and death (see Mt 26:26-29; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:14-20; 1 Cor 11:23-25).  The post-Resurrection episode given the longest treatment in the Gospels, commonly referred to as “The Road to Emmaus,” ends with Jesus once again confecting the Eucharist (see Lk 24:13-35).  Is it any wonder that the Church calls the Eucharist “the source and summit of the Christian life” (Lumen Gentium, 11 as cited in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1324)?

So, if our blessed Lord was willing to do all this to give us Himself, really present, “whole and entire” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1377), in this august Sacrament of Sacraments, promising to “be with [us] always, until the end of the age” (Mt 28:20), what hesitation could the bishops, the shepherds of the Church, possibly have in ensuring, to the best of their ability, that He not be profaned by unworthy reception of the Eucharist?

This should be a wake-up call to all believers.  Unrepentant public grave sinners and those who are outspoken in their defiance of core doctrines of the faith they profess to hold by advocating for, or even advancing the cause of evil, of course should not approach the minister of Communion; but neither should anyone conscious of committing grave sin.  All such persons “must receive the sacrament of Reconciliation before coming to communion.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1385).  And they must publicly renounce positions they have espoused that are contrary to the most central doctrines of the Faith.

Is it not enough that the God-Man took on all the sins of the world for all time, suffering and dying so that we might have the opportunity for eternal life?  Must insult be added to injury by defiant reception of this same Person in Holy Communion by those who have cut themselves off from the life of grace or who have been openly hostile to Church authority on these matters?

When Jesus was arrested in the Garden of Gethsemane all His closest collaborators quickly abandoned Him.  Let us not repeat this shameful behavior today.  May we have the courage and strength to defend the Lord against all those in our day who are willing to heap blows upon Him once again through defying His body, the Church, through pride and arrogance, while embracing, promoting, and even legislating, all manner of wickedness.

The Kiss of Judas by Ary Scheffer

St. Dominic redux

Today we remember St. Dominic on the day that is normally celebrated as a Solemnity in his honor. But because it is a Sunday we do not this year. I know St. Dominic, in his humility, is happy to be supplanted by the “little Resurrection” that is our every Sunday celebration. I posted about him on August 6, the anniversary of his death, but his feast day has been moved around a bit because his heavenly birthday falls on the Feast of the Transfiguration (another event he is surely pleased to defer to). Just note this quote about the great Spanish saint from today’s National Catholic Register:

A contemporary of St. Dominic claimed, “I never knew a man so humble or who had more detachment from the things of the world. He received abuse, curses, or reproach not only patiently but with joy, as though they were precious gifts. No persecution troubled him. He went about serene and intrepid in the midst of dangers and never turned out of his way through fear.”

A good plan of life for anyone, wouldn’t you say?

I have read well over a dozen books on Dominic and Dominicana, and I could recommend many, but if you are interested here are two fantastic ones to begin with:

SaintDominic.jpg
Santo Domingo de Guzmán (1670) by Claudio Coello

God bless.