"A [preacher] who does not love art, poetry, music and nature can be dangerous. Blindness and deafness toward the beautiful are not incidental; they are necessarily reflected in his [preaching]." — BXVI
01 November 2013
31 October 2013
3,000 a year!
These numbers are a bit unsettling!
The secretary of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life
and Societies of Apostolic Life said in an October 29 address that over
3,000 men and women religious leave the consecrated life each year.
In the address – a portion of which was reprinted in L’Osservatore Romano
– Archbishop José RodrÃguez Carballo said that statistics from his
Congregation, as well as the Congregation for the Clergy, indicate that
over the past five years, 2,624 religious have left the religious life
annually. When one takes into account additional cases handled by the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the number tops 3,000.
The prelate, who led the Order of Friars Minor from 2003 until his April
2013 curial appointment, said that the majority of cases occur at a
“relatively young age.” The causes, he said, include “absence of
spiritual life,” “loss of a sense of community,” and a “loss of sense of
belonging to the Church” – a loss manifest in dissent from Catholic
teaching on “women priests and sexual morality.”
The article goes on to explain the difficulties caused by the cultural shift from modernity to post-modernity in the West, specifically, the current emphasis on radical individuality.
Post-modernity is best described as the cultural manifestation of a prolonged adolescence brought on by the failure of the Baby Boomers to hand on our family's philosophical, spiritual, and theological traditions.
___________________Follow HancAquam or Subscribe ----->
29 October 2013
This is not the pope you are looking for. . .
Wait.
I'm very confused. . .(and so are a lot of other Catholics).
___________________
Follow HancAquam or Subscribe ----->
I thought Pope "A New Wind is Blowing" Francis was going to take us back to the Rainbow and Felt Butterfly days of 1973. . .
. . .and yet, he appoints Bishop Leonard Blair to the archbishopric of Hartford, CT.
. . .the archbishop-elect is best known on the wider scene as a linchpin player in the Holy See's controversial doctrinal probe of the LCWR, the principal "umbrella-group" for the superiors of the nation's religious women. In 2009, Blair was tapped by Rome to conduct the initial inquest into LCWR's adherence to certain aspects of church teaching, at whose conclusion he became one of two bishop-assistants to the delegate for the CDF's ordered five-year "reform" process, Archbishop Peter Sartain of Seattle.
I'm very confused. . .(and so are a lot of other Catholics).
___________________
Follow HancAquam or Subscribe ----->
27 October 2013
Made Just By God Alone
30th Sunday OT
Fr. Philip Neri Powell, OP
Our Lady of the Rosary, NOLA
Sirach
assures us that the “Lord is a God of justice, who knows no
favorites. . .[He] is not deaf to the wail of the orphan, nor to
the widow. . .The one who serves God willingly is heard. . .The
prayer of the lowly pierces the clouds.” Paul assures Timothy that
as he, Paul, reaches the end of his life: “. . .the Lord stood by
me and gave me strength. . .And I was rescued from the lion's mouth.
The Lord will rescue me from every evil threat. . .” Both Sirach
and Paul assure us all that our God is faithful to those who live
their days in humility, in humble service to the proclamation of the
Word. He hears and answers the prayers of the lowly and rescues those
who serve His will. How do we become lowly? How do we bind ourselves
to His will and serve out our days in His service? Jesus offers a
parable. Two men go to the temple to pray. One is a Pharisee; the
other a tax collector. The Pharisee believes himself to be righteous
by his deeds. The tax collector knows himself to be a sinner and
cries out for God's mercy. Which one leaves the temple justified,
made just by God?
The
question here is not: which one is a righteous? The Pharisee is
self-righteous; the tax collector is made-righteous. The question is:
which one leaves the temple justified; that is, which one is made
just in his humility
before God? My question gives away the answer. You see, we already
know that the Pharisee's prayer in the temple is useless. First, to
whom does he pray? Jesus says, “The Pharisee took up his position
and spoke this prayer
to himself. . .” He
offers his praise and thanksgiving to himself. He is his own god.
Second, how does he pray? He praises himself for not being a sinner;
he gives himself thanks for “not being like the rest of
humanity—greedy, dishonest, adulterous.” And lastly, how does he
think that he made himself righteous? “I fast twice a week, and I
pay tithes on my whole income.” Works. He believes that pious
works—w/o mercy, humility, or love—makes him righteous. Now, we
know that the tax collector leaves the temple justified. Instead of
praising himself for not being like other men, the tax collector does
the only thing a truly self-aware sinner can do: he throws himself
into the hands of God and cries out, “Have mercy on me, Lord, a
sinner!” Whoever exalts himself will be humbled; whoever humbles
himself will be exalted.
And
why should that be the case? Why are the humble exalted and the
self-exalted humbled? Is God so paranoid about His status as Lord of
the Universe that He can't take a little human competition for
exaltation? Is He so worried about not getting His due that He has to
rub our faces in how dependent we are on Him? I mean, come on,
getting holy is no joy ride; it's not easy or quick. Getting to
holiness takes a lot of determination, dedication, and plain ole
hard work. Why shouldn't we be allowed to pay ourselves on the back
when we achieve righteousness? Seems only fair! Fair or not, we can
do nothing good w/o God. Every good thing we achieve, every good word
we utter is motivated and sustained by the goodness of God, sustained
by Him for our benefit. He gets nothing out of our good works.
Nothing.
All the benefits of mercy, love, forgiveness; all the profits from
our holy labors, all of it accrues to us, enriches us, and brings us
closer to His perfection. And all this happens—the goodness of our
works and the benefits they accrue—b/c we are created to be made
perfect in divine love. God wills that we use the gifts He gives so
that His love might be perfected in each one of us. Accepting this
truth is the beginning of humility.
So what then obstructs our
growth in humility? We know the vice that opposes the virtue of
humility is pride. What is pride? Pride isn't about taking pleasure
on one's achievements, or claiming that one's nation, state, or team
is particularly wonderful. Being proud of your children for academic
and athletic awards isn't the sort of pride that thwarts humility.
True Pride—the sort our ancestors put in first place on the list of
Deadly Sins—is the erroneous belief that we do not need God; that
we do not require His help b/c we are perfectly capable of saving
ourselves from sin and death; that we are not only capable of saving
ourselves but that we prefer to save ourselves. Pride leads us to
believe that working for social justice and equality will save us;
that holding the right beliefs and attitudes will save us; that
saying the right prayers in the right order the right number of times
will save us; that giving money to the Church, to charity will save
us. Pride insists that we are each self-sufficient, independent, and
absolutely alone. And that with these superlative qualities, we can
become god w/o God. The serpent says to Eve, “when you eat [the
forbidden fruit] your eyes will be opened and you will be like gods.
. .” That serpent's name is Hubris, Pride.
Pride
leads us away from God, so how do we overcome it? Like the tax
collector at prayer in the temple, there's only one way to triumph
over the self-righteousness that pride instills in us: throw yourself
on God's mercy! Why is this the only way? B/c only God Himself can
make you righteous; only God Himself can bring you out of sin and
death and restore you to your rightful place in His Holy Family. He
gives us His only Son, Christ Jesus, as the only means, the only Way,
back to Him. And with the Holy Spirit pushing us toward perfection,
pouring out for us and into us gift after gift after gift, we
accomplish all that God commands us to accomplish for His greater
glory. The Pharisee's good works are just that: his good
works. Yes, tithing and fasting and praying are all perfectly
wonderful spiritual exercises. But before a spiritual exercise can be
efficacious, there must be a relationship of love established btw the
human heart and Love Himself. Fortunately for us, God Himself
initiated this relationship at the instant of creation, installing
into every human heart and mind the gnawing need to seek Him out and
live with Him forever. To think that I can satisfy this need for
myself is Pride distilled into the darkest, deadliest poison.
Luke
tells us that Jesus addresses his parable to a very specific
audience: “. . .to those who were convinced of their own
righteousness and despised everyone else.” We can't help but
make the connection btw self-righteousness and hatred.
Self-righteousness—born, bred, and nurtured in pride—rejects the
necessity of loving others; it leads us to deny the need for mercy,
forgiveness, trust in others. If I can make myself righteous, why do
I need you? Or God? Or the Church? If my social justice causes and
good works and charitable donations are enough, why bother with
humility? Why bother with all that “love your neighbor” nonsense?
Why bother? Sirach answers: “The one who serves God willingly is
heard. . .The prayer of the lowly
pierces the clouds.” Paul answers: “I am already being poured out
like a libation. . .I have competed well; I have finished the race; I
have kept the faith.” How do we answer? We throw ourselves on the
mercy of God, confessing our sins, knowing that the Lord hears the
cries of the poor—the poor in spirit, the truly humble, those most
in need of His care, and those most willing to take into the world
His re-creating love.
_________________
26 October 2013
Are We Fools?
NB. A little Vintage Fr. Philip ca. 2008 for your Sunday. . .
30th Sunday OT: Ex 22.20-26; 1 Thes 1.5-10; Matt 22.34-40
Fr. Philip Neri Powell, OP
Convento SS Domenico e Sisto, Roma
Though we often fail love, Love never fails us. Remember: who needs for love to never fail more than he for whom Love is God?
______________________
Follow HancAquam or Subscribe ----->
30th Sunday OT: Ex 22.20-26; 1 Thes 1.5-10; Matt 22.34-40
Fr. Philip Neri Powell, OP
Convento SS Domenico e Sisto, Roma
St.
Paul, ever the romantic(!), writing in his first letter to the
Corinthians, insists that “love is patient, love is kind. Love is not
jealous, is not pompous; it is not inflated; it is not rude; it does not
seek its own interest [. . .] but rather rejoices with the truth”(1 Cor
13). He goes on to write that love bears, believes, hopes and endures
all things; and finally, he declares, as if he has never grieved a
betrayal or lost his heart to passion: “Love never fails.” The
romantic whispers, “Yes!” The cynic scoffs, “Bull.” The pragmatist
asks, “Really? Never?” The Catholic exclaims, “Deo gratias! Thanks be to
God!” Who needs for love to never fail more than he for whom Love is
God? This is why Jesus teaches the Pharisees that the spiritual heart
of the Law is: “You shall love the Lord, your God, will all your heart,
with all your soul, and with all your mind [. . .] You shall your
neighbor as yourself.” Listen to Paul again, “Our Lord is patient, He
is kind. He is not jealous, is not pompous; He is not inflated; He is
not rude; He does not seek His own interest [. . .] but rather Our Lord
rejoices with the truth.” Though Paul is writing to the Corinthians to
show them how we must love one another—patiently, kindly, selflessly—we
cannot, cannot love at all except that Love Himself loves us first.
Therefore, with the Lord and because of the Lord, we love Him, one
another; and we rejoice with His truth.
Now,
that we must be commanded to love says everything that needs to be said
about the weaknesses of the human heart, soul, and mind. That we must
be commanded to love tells us that we do not eagerly enthrone love in
the center of our being, making all we do the children of charity. That
we must be commanded to love tells us that we do not love as a way of
giving thanks for our very existence, for the gift of being alive. That
we must be commanded to love tells us that we do not reason with the
grace of God’s wisdom, with the deliberative power granted to us as
creatures created in His divine image. That we must be commanded to
love tells us that we are not God but rather creatures imperfect without
God, longing for God, grieving our loss yet yearning for the peace and
truth of His Being-with-us.
Think
for a moment of the ways we have struggled in our past to find some
small portion of peace and truth. Moses returns from Mt. Sinai to find
his people giving themselves over to the idols of their former masters
in slavery. Paul admonishes the Corinthians for turning to “worldly
philosophies” for their much-needed wisdom. He lashes them for rutting
indiscriminately in the flesh, surrendering body and soul to disordered
passion and vice. Jesus teaches against the legalistic blindness of the
Pharisees; he calls them “white washed tombs,” beautifully, lawfully
clean on the outside but stuffed with rotted meat on the inside. In our
long past we have turned to idols, pagan philosophies, debauchery and
license, and taken an easy refuge in the dots and tittles of the law.
Each of these reach for the peace and truth we long for, but none grasp
the love we need.
Think
for a moment of the ways you yourself have struggled in your past and
struggle even now to find some small portion of peace and truth. Do you
look to the idols of power, wealth, possessions, or Self to find your
purpose? Do you scratch your itchy ears with the wisdom of the world?
With the profound systems of material science, the occult mysteries of
New Age gurus, the glittering gospels of prosperity and celebrity?
Perhaps you search for and hope to find some peace in your body, your
flesh and bones. Do you worship at Gold’s Gym, Kroger and Target,
Blockbuster, or CVS, searching for peace in a perfectly sculpted body, a
full belly, a house full of things, a visual distraction, or
over-the-counter cures for the nausea and headache of a life that will
not love God? Or, perhaps in this election season, you look to parties
and politicians to give you hope and security. Do you look to the
Democrats to give you the ease of a well-funded government entitlement?
Or perhaps you look to the Republicans to secure your place near the
top of the economic food-chain? Do you think Obama will give you hope?
Or that McCain will give you security? When we reach down for higher
things, we grasp the lowest of the low and in our disappointment we name
the Lowest the Highest, and then, in our pride, we pretend to be at
peace. To do otherwise is to confess that we are fools fooled by
foolish hearts, that we are stubborn mules needing the bridle and bit.
And
perhaps we are fools. Perhaps this is why Jesus finds it necessary to
command us to love God and one another. Why command what we would and
could do willingly? In Exodus our Lord must command that we not molest
the foreigners among us. That we must care for the women who have lost
their husbands and children who have no family. He must command us not
to extort money from the poor or strip them of their modest possessions
for our profit. We must be commanded not to kill one another, not to
steal, not to violate our solemn oaths, not to worship alien gods. Why
doesn’t it occur to us naturally to care for the weakest, the least
among us? To help those who have little or nothing? Why must we be
commanded not to destroy the gift of life, not to lie or extort, not to
surrender our souls to the demonic and the dead? We must be commanded
to love God, to hope in His promises, to trust in His providential care
because in our foolish hearts we believe that we are God and that we
have no other gods but ourselves.
Are
we fools? Probably not entirely. But we are often foolish, often
believing and behaving in ways that give lie to Paul’s declaration,
“Love never fails.” God never fails, but we often do. When we make the
creature the Creator, giving thanks and praise to the bounty of our own
wisdom, we reach down for the higher things and convince ourselves that
we have grasped truth. We do this when we believe that it is not only
sometimes necessary but also good to murder the innocent; when we
believe that it is right to murder the inconveniently expensive, those
whom the Nazis called “useless eaters,” the sick, the elderly, the
disabled. We reach down for higher truths when we create markets for
housing in order to exploit for profit the homelessness of the poor.
We are foolish when we raise impregnable borders around the gifts we
have been given , gifts given to us so that we might witness freely to
God’s abundance. We do foolish things because we believe we are God,
and so, we must be commanded by Love Himself to love. But surely this
is no hardship. Difficult, yes. But not impossible. With Love all
things are possible.
What
must we do? To love well we must first come to know and give thanks to
Love Himself. He loved us first, so He must be our First Love.
Second, we must hold as inviolable the truth that we cannot love Love
Himself if we fail to love one another. Third, love must be the first
filter through which we see, hear, think, feel, speak, and act. No
other philosophy or ideology comes before Love Himself. This mean
obeying (listening to and complying with) His commandments and doing now
all the things that Christ did then. Fourth, after placing God as our
first filter, we must surrender to Love’s providential care, meaning we
must sacrifice (make holy by giving over) our prideful need to control,
direct, order our lives according to the world’s priorities. Wealth and
power do not mark success. Celebrity does not mark prestige. “Having
everything my way” does not mark freedom. Last, we must grow in
holiness by becoming Christ—frequent attention to the sacraments,
private prayer and fasting, lectio divina,
strengthening our hearts with charitable works, sharpening our minds
with beauty and truth in art, music, poetry, and while being painfully,
painfully aware of how far we can fall from the perfection of Christ,
knowing that we are absolutely free to try again and again and again.
______________________
Follow HancAquam or Subscribe ----->
Miscellany
Blogging's been light this week, I know.
Several seminary-related duties converged simultaneously this week: individual preaching tutorials; formation advisee meetings; homilist at NDS Mass; helping out at St Dominic's. . .
AND I choose this week to get a cold. Over it now.
Today is more or less a Free Day: run to WalMart; lunch with fra. David (if he's awake before noon!); and the rest of the day reading: got some nifty books in the mail yesterday and Friday. Thank God for kind and generous Book Benefactors. . .who are always on my personal intention prayer list, btw. :-)
Speaking of books. . .I'd like to hear what HA Readers think of Amazon Prime and Amazon VISA.
Are they worth the price of admission?
_______________Follow HancAquam or Subscribe ----->
23 October 2013
Catholic Theological Society confesses leftist bias
NB. I am pleasantly surprised (really surprised!) to see this report. The Catholic Theological Society of America is publicly confessing to its anti-conservative bias. My long experience with academic bodies like the CTSA tells me that ideological blindness is a permanent condition. Somewhere along the line, someone at the CTSA must've been healed of this particular malady.
II. Observations/Problems
A. Many CTSA
sessions, both plenary and concurrent, include jokes and snide
remarks about, or disrespectful references to, bishops, the
Vatican, the magisterium, etc. These predictably elicit derisive
laughter from a part of the audience.
B. Many CTSA members employ demeaning references. For example, the phrase “thinking Catholics” is sometimes used to mean liberals. The phrase “people who would take us backwards” is sometimes used to mean conservatives.
C. Resolutions are a significant problem because an individual member can bring to the floor of the business meeting a divisive issue that not only consumes important time and energy but exacerbates the ideological differences that exist among theologians, typically leaving conservatives feeling not only marginalized but unwelcome. (CTSA members who have trouble understanding this as a problem might ask how they would feel if they were part of a professional society that passed resolutions criticizing a theologian they hold in high regard or endorsing views they reject.)
D. In recent decades, conservative theologians have only rarely been invited to be plenary speakers and respondents.
E. In CTSA elections, there is a general unwillingness of many members to vote for a conservative theologian. Scholarly credentials seem often outweighed by voters’ partisan commitments.
F. Some conservative theologians have experienced the feeling that a number of other members “wish I wouldn’t come back” to the CTSA.
G. In sum, the self-conception of many members that the CTSA is open to all Catholic theologians is faulty and self-deceptive. As one of our members put it,the CTSA is a group of liberal theologians and “this permeates virtually everything.” Because the CTSA does not aspire to be a partisan group, both attitudes and practices will have to shift if the CTSA is to become the place where all perspectives within Catholic theology in North America are welcome.
B. Many CTSA members employ demeaning references. For example, the phrase “thinking Catholics” is sometimes used to mean liberals. The phrase “people who would take us backwards” is sometimes used to mean conservatives.
C. Resolutions are a significant problem because an individual member can bring to the floor of the business meeting a divisive issue that not only consumes important time and energy but exacerbates the ideological differences that exist among theologians, typically leaving conservatives feeling not only marginalized but unwelcome. (CTSA members who have trouble understanding this as a problem might ask how they would feel if they were part of a professional society that passed resolutions criticizing a theologian they hold in high regard or endorsing views they reject.)
D. In recent decades, conservative theologians have only rarely been invited to be plenary speakers and respondents.
E. In CTSA elections, there is a general unwillingness of many members to vote for a conservative theologian. Scholarly credentials seem often outweighed by voters’ partisan commitments.
F. Some conservative theologians have experienced the feeling that a number of other members “wish I wouldn’t come back” to the CTSA.
G. In sum, the self-conception of many members that the CTSA is open to all Catholic theologians is faulty and self-deceptive. As one of our members put it,the CTSA is a group of liberal theologians and “this permeates virtually everything.” Because the CTSA does not aspire to be a partisan group, both attitudes and practices will have to shift if the CTSA is to become the place where all perspectives within Catholic theology in North America are welcome.
The whole report is available here.
___________________
Follow HancAquam or Subscribe ----->
22 October 2013
Living a Life of Departure
Blessed
John Paul II
Fr.
Philip Neri Powell, OP
Notre
Dame Seminary, NOLA
Two
weeks before petitions for solemn vows were due and two months before
my class was scheduled to take solemn vows, I find myself sitting in
the student master's office for yet another Come to Jesus talk. These
talks had become a regular feature of my three years of studium
formation; and this time, Fr. Michael, the Student Master, was really
not happy with me. After six semesters, three summers, and countless
dinner table conversations, you'd think that by now he would've been
used to my peculiar sense of humor. But looking across at his pinched
face and gritted teeth, I could tell that his training as a tax
attorney and Patristics scholar had done nothing to prepare him to
deal the weirdnesses of an over-educated 38 year old redneck-convert
from Episcopaganism. I knew before he spoke a word what the topic of
this exhortation would be: my complete lack of docility. I was
unprepared to embrace the life of departure that every Dominican
friar must be willing to live. In other words, I would not gird my
loins nor would I light my lamp. The master would return from the
wedding and find me sound asleep, snoring loudly.
What
is a life of departure*? What does it have to do with remaining ready
for the master's return? A life of departure is a life lived in
constant readiness to move, a sort of perpetual vigilance against
getting too settled in, too snug and comfy with who we are and where
we are serving. As itinerant friars, Dominicans live lives of
departure quite literally. I've been professed for 13 yrs and I've
lived in five provinces, three countries, and nine or ten cities here
and abroad. In one academic year, I logged almost 60,000 miles of air
travel! That's Dominican life. But what would a life of departure
look like for the laity, or for diocesan clergy? Notice the tension
in our gospel story. The servants are girded. Lamps are lit. They
wait for the knock on the door. Even though they aren't doing much,
they are wound up to spring into action when called. Just being
ready, always ready to answer God's call is holy work. Being ready to
snap into sweat-inducing labor at a moment's notice means that we
cannot rest too long or too soundly; we cannot dig down our roots too
deep; we cannot let yesterday's work haunt us nor tomorrow's work
worry us. Whatever comes next when God calls is what we are charged
with doing. A life of departure is a life lived right at the edge of
expectation, right at the brink of just letting go of everything for
the love of Christ.
In
fact, a life of departure is a life lived by just letting go of
everything—everyTHING—for the love of Christ. For the sake of his
name, and in his name, to be constantly ready to jump at his Word, we
let go of our long-range plans; our packed schedules; our assessments
of failure and success; our competitive comparisons with peers. We
cannot properly gird ourselves or light the lamps if our hands are
busy with the work we think is vital. Now, of course, we need plans,
schedules, assessments, etc., but they cannot be allowed to become
the measure of our availability to serve. Patience, perseverance,
docility—all of these are not only better measures of service, they
are also better tools for serving the Master. A life of departure, a
life of constant service is a life lived in the eternal shade of
God's wisdom. Who can honestly say, “I know it all already”? Or
even worse, “I know enough to get the job done.” Knowing is not
serving. And knowing just enough and no more rewards ignorance. To
serve—in Christ's name—means letting go of what we think we know,
and being ready—always ready—to be moved by divine wisdom from
the comfy pretense of Knowing All to the hard reality of Loving
Others.
As
servants, we wait upon the return of our master. Loins girded. Lamps
lit. When he returns, he will serve us. And from his service, we will
learn what it is to die. . .to die for love of him.
*I borrowed this phrase from Hans Urs Von Balthasar.
_________________
Follow HancAquam or Subscribe ----->
21 October 2013
Catholic Priesthood ca. 1964 (ft. Dominicans!)
One of my preaching students at NDS brought this vid to my attention. . .
1964! Ah, a good year. . .
_____________________
Follow HancAquam or Subscribe ----->
1964! Ah, a good year. . .
_____________________
Follow HancAquam or Subscribe ----->
20 October 2013
With the stubbornness of a rented mule
29th Sunday OT
Fr. Philip Neri Powell, OP
St Dominic/Our Lady of the Rosary, NOLA
Pray
always. Pray always without ceasing. Pray always without ceasing, AND
do not grow weary. Is there anything we can do always and without
ceasing that doesn't make us grow weary? Even those things that
we love to do will eventually grind us down, exhaust our reserves,
and cause us to crash and burn, so why should prayer be any
different? Why wouldn't a ceaseless conversation with God wear us
out? The intense focus required: brow creasing, eyes squinting, lips
running. Your mind flipping through catalog after catalog of
petitions, names, causes, needs, and wants. Memory stoking conscious
thought with prayerful fuel: pious phrases; exhortations; the names
of interceding saints; useful titles for Mary and the angels. Fingers
counting out beads, or shuffling through stacks of holy cards; eyes
picking out the details of a statue, a station, or a crucifix.
Bowing, kneeling, standing, maybe even crawling, only to stand again
and genuflect. Why doesn't a ceaseless conversation with God wear us
out? Maybe it should. But it doesn't. Perseverance in prayer—always,
without ceasing—cannot weary us b/c prayer is our direct line to
the source and summit, the center and ground of our very being: God
who is Love Himself.
Pray
always, without ceasing and do not grow weary. Be persistent,
persevering in prayer. That sounds good. It sounds like the sort of
advice we want to hear from the pulpit. We want to hear our preachers
exhort us to be persistent, to be persevering, but let's be frank
with one another. Words like “persistent” and “perseverance”
are just the polite substitutes we use to disguise a vulgar truth: a
successful prayer-life requires a bull-headed stubbornness. I mean
something akin to the sort of stubbornness that we expect from a
rented mule*; or the iron will of a two year old refusing her nap
time. We're talking about a level of determination and dedication
that would make an Olympic gold-medalist blush with shame at his own
laziness. If you will live a life in God's blessing, weariness is not
an option. Why not? B/c the stakes are too high. B/c the costs of
laxity are too great. Consider: prayer does nothing to change the
mind of God. Prayer changes the pray-er. If we cannot or will not
recognize the blessings that God has poured out for us, it's likely
b/c we have failed to be stubborn enough in using prayer to open our
eyes to see. His gifts never stop coming; they never cease flowing.
If we will to see and receive His gifts, our prayer can never cease.
Gratitude must always be on our lips.
The
Catechism teaches us: “Prayer is both a gift of grace and a
determined response on our part. It always presupposes effort [b/c]
prayer is a battle. Against whom? Against ourselves and against the
wiles of the tempter. . .” (2725). Prayer would be a burden if it
were not a gift. But b/c it is a gift, it is not only not a burden
but a necessary weapon, a weapon against temptation and our own
obstinate disobedience. As we daily receive the gift of prayer and
use it stubbornly, our disobedience is muted; the chains of sin are
loosened; and find ourselves freer and freer to pursue the holiness
we were created to pursue. The CCC says, “We pray as we live,
because we live as we pray. . .The 'spiritual battle' of the
Christian's new life is inseparable from the battle of prayer”
(2725). Don't balk at the image of the Christian life as a battle, or
the idea that prayer is a weapon in that battle. We are in a
fight—don't doubt it—a fight against ourselves, the world, and
the Enemy of Life itself. That direct line to the source and summit,
the center and ground of our being—Love Himself—feeds and
nurtures us in this fight. To let it go, to surrender this life-line
to our Strength is dangerous; I daresay, suicidal. In the middle of a
fight for your life, your eternal life, you do not abandon your only
means of victory.
Writing
to his disciple, Timothy, Paul urges, “Remain faithful to what you
have learned and believed. . .I charge you in the presence of God and
of Christ Jesus. . .proclaim the word; be persistent. . .” Remain
faithful; be persistent. Why this focus on endurance, tenacity?
Aren't we called as Christians to be tolerant and flexible? Aren't we
supposed to be willing to compromise in conflict? That's what “love
your neighbor” is all about, right? I mean, how do we love others
and at the same time remain faithful to what we have learned, if what
we have learned conflicts with Christ's command to love? When we love
our neighbors, we participate in Love who is God Himself. He is also
Truth and Goodness, so we can only love in the presence of the True
and the Good. Paul's admonition to remain faithful and to persist in
the Truth is a warning to us not to forget that we are vowed to
proclaim the Word, the Word who became flesh and bone and died for
us. We can only fulfill our vow if we stubbornly refuse to surrender
our direct line to Love Himself, only if we tenaciously guard against
the temptation to compromise what we have learned and believe.
How
do we keep the weapon of prayer honed and well-oiled? By using it,
daily using the gift. What happens when we become distracted in
prayer? Those aren't distractions you're experiencing. That's the
Holy Spirit showing you who and what needs prayer. What about those
dry periods when it appears that God isn't hearing us? He always
hears us. Dryness comes when we aren't listening. The surest way of
ending a dry-spell is to turn your prayer to gratitude. Gratitude
grows humility and humility unplugs the ears. What about finding the
time to pray? If you are still breathing, there's time to pray. Talk
to God about washing the dishes; driving the kids to school; paying
the bills; cooking dinner; mowing the yard. Keep a running
conversation going about whatever it is you're doing. What if we grow
weary of prayer? Ask yourself: am I tired of being loved? Am I
exhausted by being forgiven? If you grow weary of prayer, then tell
God that you are weary and give Him thanks for being alive to feel
weary! If all you have to say to God is “O Lord! I am so weary!”
then say that. Say it until you're no longer weary and then give Him
thanks for the gift of being able to tell Him so.
I
urged you earlier not to doubt that your life as a Christian is a
battle and not to forget that prayer is your greatest weapon. Let me
add: prayer is not a technique or a method. It takes no special
training, no weekend seminar, or bookshelf full of How-To guides. You
don't need to learn how to pray b/c God taught you to pray the moment
you were conceived. He engraved into each one of us an indelible
desire to seek Him out and live Him forever. In other words, in the
great game of life, God made the first move and He continues to make
the first move with every breath we take. If we're to be stubborn in
prayer, then all we need to do is make each and every breath an
exhalation of thanksgiving and praise. Breath in His gifts, breath
out our gratitude. If you grow weary of prayer, then I must ask: have
you grown weary of breathing? We live, move, have our being in the
enduring presence of Love Himself. Prayer is no more difficult than
seeing, hearing, touching, feeling His presence as we live and move.
Stubbornly refuse then to be moved from His loving-care and just as
stubbornly give Him constant thanks.
*I was asked by a City Boy last night after Mass why a rented mule would be considered particularly stubborn. The idea came from the saying, "They work me like a rented mule," meaning, they worked me hard b/c they do not own me and will therefore not lose anything of value if I were to die while working. A rented mule would be especially stubborn b/c he is usually worked too hard.
*I was asked by a City Boy last night after Mass why a rented mule would be considered particularly stubborn. The idea came from the saying, "They work me like a rented mule," meaning, they worked me hard b/c they do not own me and will therefore not lose anything of value if I were to die while working. A rented mule would be especially stubborn b/c he is usually worked too hard.
________________
Follow HancAquam or Subscribe ----->19 October 2013
Christ is not who we want him to be. . .
From 2008: Hmmmm. . .this one seems particularly relevant these days. . .no worries: there will be a new one tomorrow, one for the readings for Year C.
29th Sunday OT: Isa 45.1-4-6; 1 Thes 1.1-5; Matt 22.15-21
Fr. Philip Neri Powell, OP
Convento SS. Domenico e Sisto, Roma
Fr. Philip Neri Powell, OP
Convento SS. Domenico e Sisto, Roma
The
Pharisees show Jesus a Roman coin and ask whether or not they should
pay Caesar’s taxes. Matthew tells us that “knowing their malice, Jesus
said, ‘Why are you testing me, you hypocrites?... ‘Whose image is this
and whose inscription?’ They replied, ‘Caesar's.’ At that he said to
them, ‘Then repay to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what
belongs to God.’" Much has been made of this infamous distinction
between what is God’s and what is Caesar’s. And even more could be made
of it during this tense political season. I have preached before that
ultimately the distinction is meaningless because everything belongs to
God, including Caesar himself. I will not belabor the point. Rather,
this morning the more interesting moment in this story is the moment
Jesus calls the Pharisees out for questioning him, or more precisely,
for “testing” him. According to Jesus, the Pharisees test him out of a
malicious hypocrisy; that is, a hateful insincerity, a spiteful
duplicity. Their apparently sincere question about paying taxes is
really a contrived event to catch him up, a staged incident,
choreographed and scripted to force Jesus into either treason against
Rome or blasphemy against God. Jesus skillfully dodges the trap with an
ultimately meaningless answer, but Jesus teaches his lesson
nonetheless: “I am not who you want me to be, Pharisees.”
Let’s get down to the question: who do you want God to be? Father, Mother, Santa Claus, mischievous elf, mythical Ego, Jungian archetype, Ground of Being? Spiritual direction often starts with a question about one’s image of God. Our prayer life tells us volumes about how we understand who God is for us. In desperate times, an image of God emerges. Suffering carves out of us a hard figure of God. When we reach beyond ourselves, beyond the possibilities of easy helps and cheap fixes, we usually reach out toward heaven and call on our God for His care, His rescue. And this is exactly what we ought to do. There is nothing so humbling and spiritually purifying as a moment of desperation, a flash of weakness, or damaging stupidity that drives us to God’s comfort. But we must be careful: “Why are you testing me, you hypocrites?” Our God is not our student, every ready to be questioned, every ready to be tested.
Obviously, like most politicians probing an opponents weaknesses, the Pharisees are trying to trip Jesus up by asking him the “are you still beating your wife?” sort of question. No answer is good, any answer will be vacuous in the end. The point of the exchange is not to find the truth but to expose a hated enemy as worthy of one’s hate. Jesus calls this attempt malicious and hypocritical. Malicious because their intent is evil and hypocritical because they know that they are not asking a real question but setting a trap. Their insincerity is poisonous. But only to themselves. Who do they need him to be? Or perhaps the best question: who do they hope he turns out to be? Given their institutional investments and political commitments, no doubt the Pharisees hope he turns out to be little more than a madman from Nazareth.
Given your institutional investments and political commitments, who do you hope Jesus turns out to be? Jesus says to give to Caesar what is his and give to God what belongs to Him. Of course, this means that we give all things to God in the end b/c all that belongs to Caesar really belongs to God. For a while, while we walk around on the dirt, we give Caesar his due—his taxes, our obedience to his laws within our duties to God, our civic participation. But in giving Caesar his due now our hearts must always be inclined to a longing and a goal well beyond Caesar’s temporary crown; focused fiercely, permanently on the Crown of Heaven. The Pharisees hope to use this apparently split allegiance to force Jesus into a political-religious quagmire. They need for Jesus to be a madman or a traitor or a blasphemer, so they test him in their malicious hypocrisy, rigging the test to give them the result they hope for; and in getting the hoped-for answer, relieving them of any duty to preach his message, teach his word, or offer him their obedience as the Messiah promised by the prophets.
Rather than giving them what they hope for, Jesus says, in essence, “I am not who you want me to be.” Jesus is not a traitor or a blasphemer. Nor is he a revolutionary or an institutional cog. He is not a preacher of flaccid tolerance nor a fire-breathing demagogue. He is neither Democrat nor Republican; he is not Obama nor McCain. He is the Prince of Peace who comes with a death-dealing sword to deal death to our sin. He is the Lamb of God who comes with a scourge to beat the unfaithful faithful for their hypocrisy and out of his temple. He is the Final Judge who died for us, making us clean before the Father’s throne. He is the Lion of David’s House who gently shepherds, protects, and provides. He tells Isaiah: “I am the LORD and there is no other, there is no God besides me. It is I who arm you, though you know me not, so that toward the rising and the setting of the sun people may know that there is none besides me. I am the LORD, there is no other.”
And no other is the LORD! Not the state, not a political party, not an institution, not a person or an idea or a theory. Nothing made can save us. Nothing passing can give us eternal life. If it can die, it cannot give Life. If it can change, it cannot impart perfection. If it can fail, it cannot gift us with goodness. That we want a man, a party, a system, or an idea to save us, to give us life, to grant us goodness is a sin as old as Eve’s yes to the serpent’s gift. Like the maliciously hypocritical Pharisees, don’t we often find ourselves testing Jesus to see who he will be for us today? Just poking him a bit to see if he will budge on a favorite issue or yield a bit on a favorite sin? Recently, I watched a youtube video of a Catholic rally for Prop 8 in CA. A woman approached the young men and screamed at them: “Jesus preached tolerance!” Since Prop 8 is designed to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman, we can assume that the woman—shown in the video harassing the men—believes that the first-century Jewish rabbi, Jesus, would “tolerate” a marriage among a man, another man, and the first man’s sister. You are either tolerant or you’re not. Tolerance tolerates no intolerance.
Let’s conclude here with this: Jesus fails the Pharisee’s test. Turns out that he is not who they hope he is. He is not the traitor, the blasphemer, the arch-heretic they had hoped for. Neither is he the hippie-dippy feminist peacenik, nor the fiery-eyed God of Righteous Vengeance Come to Smite Our Enemies, nor the sagacious prophet with a stoical temper. He is the Judge, the Lamb, the Prince, the Child, the King, the Seed, the Vine, the Word, the Spirit. He is the LORD. And there is no other and no other is the LORD.
Let’s get down to the question: who do you want God to be? Father, Mother, Santa Claus, mischievous elf, mythical Ego, Jungian archetype, Ground of Being? Spiritual direction often starts with a question about one’s image of God. Our prayer life tells us volumes about how we understand who God is for us. In desperate times, an image of God emerges. Suffering carves out of us a hard figure of God. When we reach beyond ourselves, beyond the possibilities of easy helps and cheap fixes, we usually reach out toward heaven and call on our God for His care, His rescue. And this is exactly what we ought to do. There is nothing so humbling and spiritually purifying as a moment of desperation, a flash of weakness, or damaging stupidity that drives us to God’s comfort. But we must be careful: “Why are you testing me, you hypocrites?” Our God is not our student, every ready to be questioned, every ready to be tested.
Obviously, like most politicians probing an opponents weaknesses, the Pharisees are trying to trip Jesus up by asking him the “are you still beating your wife?” sort of question. No answer is good, any answer will be vacuous in the end. The point of the exchange is not to find the truth but to expose a hated enemy as worthy of one’s hate. Jesus calls this attempt malicious and hypocritical. Malicious because their intent is evil and hypocritical because they know that they are not asking a real question but setting a trap. Their insincerity is poisonous. But only to themselves. Who do they need him to be? Or perhaps the best question: who do they hope he turns out to be? Given their institutional investments and political commitments, no doubt the Pharisees hope he turns out to be little more than a madman from Nazareth.
Given your institutional investments and political commitments, who do you hope Jesus turns out to be? Jesus says to give to Caesar what is his and give to God what belongs to Him. Of course, this means that we give all things to God in the end b/c all that belongs to Caesar really belongs to God. For a while, while we walk around on the dirt, we give Caesar his due—his taxes, our obedience to his laws within our duties to God, our civic participation. But in giving Caesar his due now our hearts must always be inclined to a longing and a goal well beyond Caesar’s temporary crown; focused fiercely, permanently on the Crown of Heaven. The Pharisees hope to use this apparently split allegiance to force Jesus into a political-religious quagmire. They need for Jesus to be a madman or a traitor or a blasphemer, so they test him in their malicious hypocrisy, rigging the test to give them the result they hope for; and in getting the hoped-for answer, relieving them of any duty to preach his message, teach his word, or offer him their obedience as the Messiah promised by the prophets.
Rather than giving them what they hope for, Jesus says, in essence, “I am not who you want me to be.” Jesus is not a traitor or a blasphemer. Nor is he a revolutionary or an institutional cog. He is not a preacher of flaccid tolerance nor a fire-breathing demagogue. He is neither Democrat nor Republican; he is not Obama nor McCain. He is the Prince of Peace who comes with a death-dealing sword to deal death to our sin. He is the Lamb of God who comes with a scourge to beat the unfaithful faithful for their hypocrisy and out of his temple. He is the Final Judge who died for us, making us clean before the Father’s throne. He is the Lion of David’s House who gently shepherds, protects, and provides. He tells Isaiah: “I am the LORD and there is no other, there is no God besides me. It is I who arm you, though you know me not, so that toward the rising and the setting of the sun people may know that there is none besides me. I am the LORD, there is no other.”
And no other is the LORD! Not the state, not a political party, not an institution, not a person or an idea or a theory. Nothing made can save us. Nothing passing can give us eternal life. If it can die, it cannot give Life. If it can change, it cannot impart perfection. If it can fail, it cannot gift us with goodness. That we want a man, a party, a system, or an idea to save us, to give us life, to grant us goodness is a sin as old as Eve’s yes to the serpent’s gift. Like the maliciously hypocritical Pharisees, don’t we often find ourselves testing Jesus to see who he will be for us today? Just poking him a bit to see if he will budge on a favorite issue or yield a bit on a favorite sin? Recently, I watched a youtube video of a Catholic rally for Prop 8 in CA. A woman approached the young men and screamed at them: “Jesus preached tolerance!” Since Prop 8 is designed to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman, we can assume that the woman—shown in the video harassing the men—believes that the first-century Jewish rabbi, Jesus, would “tolerate” a marriage among a man, another man, and the first man’s sister. You are either tolerant or you’re not. Tolerance tolerates no intolerance.
Let’s conclude here with this: Jesus fails the Pharisee’s test. Turns out that he is not who they hope he is. He is not the traitor, the blasphemer, the arch-heretic they had hoped for. Neither is he the hippie-dippy feminist peacenik, nor the fiery-eyed God of Righteous Vengeance Come to Smite Our Enemies, nor the sagacious prophet with a stoical temper. He is the Judge, the Lamb, the Prince, the Child, the King, the Seed, the Vine, the Word, the Spirit. He is the LORD. And there is no other and no other is the LORD.
___________________
Choose: life or death
Ss. John de Brébeuf and Isaac
Jogues
Fr. Philip Neri Powell, OP
St Dominic Church, NOLA
Fr. Philip Neri Powell, OP
St Dominic Church, NOLA
Acknowledge
Christ, and he will acknowledge you; deny him, and he will deny you.
What's at stake in this choice btw acknowledging or denying Christ?
Nothing less than our eternal lives. While we still roam around here
on Earth, the stakes may not be eternal but they are no less dire.
Choosing btw acknowledging Christ or denying him sets us on a razor's
edge, carefully balancing our spiritual lives over a great chasm.
Think in terms of light and darkness; purity and impurity; health and
disease. Think in terms of good and evil; love and indifference; hope
and despair. We are constantly being assaulted by the minions of our
decadent culture to give up this silly idea that our choices are so
black and white; that there are natural consequences to our actions;
that we can know right from wrong. And there is some small truth
here. Most of our daily choices aren't so clear-cut. Most of what we
have to do to survive and thrive sorely tests our ability to
distinguish good from evil. However, one choice—the cardinal
choice—molds our hearts and minds into a holy pattern: acknowledge
Christ or
deny him.
This
cardinal choice must be made every hour, every minute of the day,
every day for as long as we live. Every choice we make, every
decision we take is either an acknowledgment of Christ or a denial of
Christ. Let your Yes be Yes and your No be No b/c the choice—every
single time—is a choice btw Life and Death. Between life and death
eternal. If you choose a life with Christ, there's no guarantee that
the life you live here and now will be miraculously easier. In fact,
just the opposite is true. Those who choose to live with Christ are
promised anything but an easy life. Christ's command to love and his
commission to preach his Good News to the nations guarantees a life
lived under a sword, a life lived at the very edge of violence and
persecution. Why? Because our public witness to God's mercy to
sinners is poison to the body of the world, and the world will fight
us like an infection. The Enemy hates forgiveness, reconciliation,
and hope. He hates the light of Truth and will fight those who shine
this light on his lies. When you choose to acknowledge Christ, you
choose martyrdom. You choose to die—before you die—as a witness,
as one who bears testimony to the saving power of God and loving
sacrifice of Christ on his Cross.
___________________Follow HancAquam or Subscribe ----->
A Parable/Thought Experiment
Instead of working on this morning's homily. . .
A passenger jet carrying about 250 people is forced by a hurricane to crash land on a remote island.*
Most of the passengers and the flight crew safely evacuate to the beach to ride out the storm.
After a couple of days, the
hurricane abates and three members of the flight crew climb the small
mountain back to the crashed jet in an attempt to contact help with the
cockpit radio.
The crew is gone for two days.
In the meantime, another hurricane hits the island. When the three crew
members fail to return after four days, a small party of passengers
climb the mountain and discover that the storm has caused an avalanche
and killed the three crew members. The radio has been destroyed as
well.
The passenger-rescue party find
three notebooks bound together with a rubber-band and sealed in a
heavy-duty plastic bag. They take the notebooks back to the beach and
begin trying to decipher the scribbled notes. Soon, all agree that the
crew members were taking notes on a proposed rescue plan. But it is
unclear whether they themselves were planning a possible rescue
scenario, or if they were taking notes on a plan proposed via radio by
authorities on the mainland.
The notes indicated that the
stranded passengers and crew would have to undertake several arduous
tasks in order for any rescue attempt to succeed. In fact, these tasks
would not only deplete their limited food and water reserves, but also
place all of them in danger of injury and death.
Two groups quickly formed around
two possible interpretations of the three notebooks. One group, the
Rescue Realists (RR), argue that the notes themselves indicate that the
crew had been in contact with the mainland and that they should do
everything necessary to complete the tasks in order to be rescued.
The Rescue Anti-Realists (RAR)
argue that the notes indicate nothing more than a plan to be proposed by
the crew to make sure that the stranded people worked together as a
cohesive group in order to maintain civilized behavior and the hope of
rescue. Given the obvious tentative tone of the notes, the more
dangerous tasks are interpreted as merely brainstorming suggestions
rather than requirements to be met for rescue.
Since the radio had been
destroyed, there was no viable means of verifying the RR
interpretation. However, the RR camp argues that to ignore the plan
would be tantamount to suicide, so the whole group should immediately
begin the tasks so as to maximize their chances of rescue.
The RAR argue that since there
is no way of verifying the RR interpretation, it would be wiser to
ignore those tasks that directly threaten their limited resources and
focus only on those tasks that would keep the group together as a
community until they were rescued, if they were rescued.
The following are givens:
1). There is no viable, external means of verifying either interpretation.
2). Both interpretations would work to keep the group together as a community.
3). Neither interpretation
guarantees rescue, injury/death, or an unusual depletion of resources.
Though everyone agrees that the RR interpretation is more dangerous and
likely to deplete supplies more quickly.
Given all of this, which interpretative group would you join and why?
Given all of this, which interpretative group would you join and why?
*This parable is adapted
from one proposed by Paul Moser to explain the difference between
theological realism and theological anti-realism. He sees the difference as primarily one of epistemology, that is, what can we know about God and how?
____________________Follow HancAquam or Subscribe ----->
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)