This weekend, we celebrated the anniversary of the dedication of St. Boniface Church in October, 1865.
The readings differed from the regular lectionary, as this is a solemnity for our parish. I chose a passage from 1st Kings, recounting King Solomon's prayer as his temple is dedicated; Psalm 84, with the refrain, "Here, God lives with his people"; the Epistle was from 1st Peter, about the Living Stone that is Christ, and we are also the living stones with which Christ is building his Church; the Gospel was the meeting of Zacchaeus with the Lord as told by Luke, which I chanted at 10:30 am.
We had incense and the bell choir at 10:30 am, and began Mass with "Laudate, Laudate Dominum!" a very nice chant with English verses. Scroll down the links column to "Laus Deo" to see all the music. I chanted most of the prayers, including the Roman Canon.
I am sorry I don't have the text of my homily, but my principal points were:
> Solomon was right--God did not dwell in the temple; I described the layout of the temple and the ark of the covenant, containing the tablets of the 10 Commandments and the jar of Manna--and those have disappeared; but we have the Word made Flesh and the Bread of Life in our tabernacle--God truly does dwell here!
> These are difficult times, we are concerned about the parish, the economy, the city, the nation and the future. Recall when this church was built: the 1860s, dedicated 1865. What was our nation going through? Only our worst crisis, the War Between the States! How many parents cried over sons that would never come home? How much wealth was consumed by a destructive war? Our forebears had less than we did--and yet, they built this church. They made an act of faith, in God and in those who would follow--in us.
> Each generation has built on what they did, and we are doing the same. Some requests are out for funds, including to restore our windows--will you pray for success of that? We are making an act of faith in those who will come after us.
> We might wonder, why did God put us here--in this place, in these times? Because as St. Peter said, we are called to make Christ present. This building, strong as it is, can fall; but Christ will never fail, and we, bound together by the Holy Spirit, will not fall! We are here to be Christ to those in pain, those in need, especially in the months ahead. That's why we're here; and Christ has, as it were, made an act of faith in us!
> At 4 pm Mass, I cited Zacchaeus caring for the poor as something we can do in this community--maybe that's why we're here--but I neglected to repeat that point this morning.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Friday, October 24, 2008
A swinging night in Piqua
Wednesday night was a great night for the City of Piqua, and I had the privilege of being there.
Over the past few months, the city has been renovating and restoring the old Fort Piqua Hotel, a massive edifice in the center of the city, built in 1891, but which fell on hard times some years back, and finally sat unused and decaying for the last few years. For years people have debated what to do. The cost of simply tearing it down would have been substantial, and no one really liked that idea, but the cost of doing something else always seemed too great.
Well, the city finally pulled together enough money--about $20 million!--from federal and state funds, and private funds, to redo it top to bottom. The plan was to relocate the city library there, and rent space on the first floor for a restaurant and a coffee house, and have the ballroom and other meeting space available for rent.
Sunday, the ribbon was cut, and fireworks exploded over the city. Wednesday night, we had a gala celebration, featuring the Glenn Miller Orchestra (under new leadership) and a duo that carries on the tradition of the Mills Brothers--who, you may not realize, were from Piqua.
I was at this black-tie celebration, in a packed ballroom, along with lots of my fellow Piquans, including many of the upper crust as you might imagine. It was a very nice event, and I'm grateful for being provided a ticket.
One striking thing was that almost no one danced! If I weren't a priest, I certainly would; although the Jitterbug is the one dance I never mastered, I always managed to improvise. A bunch of high schoolers were there, splendid in tuxes and evening gowns--they were there as go-fers and helpers--but most of them didn't dance either! Too bad, because this was some of the best music ever composed for dancing. Someone told me the dance floor up front was pretty crowded with tables, and that could be, I was sitting in the back.
The ballroom at the Fort Piqua Plaza (that's what it's called now that it's no longer a hotel) will be the site of a Roast and Toast in honor of Father Angelo Caserta, on December 7, 2008, from 6-9 pm, in celebration of his 90th birthday and 64 years of priesthood. It will be a fundraiser to benefit repairs and restoration of St. Boniface Church and Piqua Catholic School. The tickets are $100, only 320 will be available, and many have already been purchased, so if you are interested, send a request for tickets to:
"Roast and Toast for Father Caserta"
c/o St. Boniface Parish
310 South Downing Street
Piqua Ohio 45356
Over the past few months, the city has been renovating and restoring the old Fort Piqua Hotel, a massive edifice in the center of the city, built in 1891, but which fell on hard times some years back, and finally sat unused and decaying for the last few years. For years people have debated what to do. The cost of simply tearing it down would have been substantial, and no one really liked that idea, but the cost of doing something else always seemed too great.
Well, the city finally pulled together enough money--about $20 million!--from federal and state funds, and private funds, to redo it top to bottom. The plan was to relocate the city library there, and rent space on the first floor for a restaurant and a coffee house, and have the ballroom and other meeting space available for rent.
Sunday, the ribbon was cut, and fireworks exploded over the city. Wednesday night, we had a gala celebration, featuring the Glenn Miller Orchestra (under new leadership) and a duo that carries on the tradition of the Mills Brothers--who, you may not realize, were from Piqua.
I was at this black-tie celebration, in a packed ballroom, along with lots of my fellow Piquans, including many of the upper crust as you might imagine. It was a very nice event, and I'm grateful for being provided a ticket.
One striking thing was that almost no one danced! If I weren't a priest, I certainly would; although the Jitterbug is the one dance I never mastered, I always managed to improvise. A bunch of high schoolers were there, splendid in tuxes and evening gowns--they were there as go-fers and helpers--but most of them didn't dance either! Too bad, because this was some of the best music ever composed for dancing. Someone told me the dance floor up front was pretty crowded with tables, and that could be, I was sitting in the back.
The ballroom at the Fort Piqua Plaza (that's what it's called now that it's no longer a hotel) will be the site of a Roast and Toast in honor of Father Angelo Caserta, on December 7, 2008, from 6-9 pm, in celebration of his 90th birthday and 64 years of priesthood. It will be a fundraiser to benefit repairs and restoration of St. Boniface Church and Piqua Catholic School. The tickets are $100, only 320 will be available, and many have already been purchased, so if you are interested, send a request for tickets to:
"Roast and Toast for Father Caserta"
c/o St. Boniface Parish
310 South Downing Street
Piqua Ohio 45356
Sunday, October 19, 2008
What our new Archbishop said about the Extraordinary Form of the Mass
Dear friends in Christ,
Last month,* The Northern Cross reported on the Holy Father’s decision to relax restrictions on the use of the Tridentine Mass, the Latin-language liturgy that predates the Second Vatican Council. Pope Benedict XVI said that Mass celebrated according to the 1962 Roman Missal, commonly referred to as the Tridentine Rite, should be made available in every parish where groups of the faithful desire it. The Holy Father’s decision was promulgated on July 7 under the title “Summorum Pontificum” and will take effect on Sept. 14, the feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross.
Over the past weeks, I have received questions about the implementation of these norms in the Diocese of Duluth. Put quite simply, of course, the response is that, on Sept. 14, “Summorum Pontificum” becomes the universal law of the church. As such, the norms must be followed in every parish and diocese throughout the world.
Practically speaking, I anticipate some challenges with implementation in the Diocese of Duluth. Primary among them is one that the Holy Father himself mentioned in a cover letter to “Summorum Pontificum,” which he addressed to the bishops of the world: “The use of the old Missal presupposes a certain degree of liturgical formation and knowledge of the Latin language; neither of these is found very often.” In order to celebrate the Tridentine Rite, or the “extraordinary form” of the Mass as it is called by “Summorum Pontificum,” a priest must be suitably qualified. This means that, for a legitimate use of the extraordinary form, a priest must have the minimum rubrical knowledge of the Mass as it was celebrated before the Second Vatican Council and the minimum linguistic ability to reverently and precisely recite the prayers of the Mass in the Latin language.
It should be remembered that the Second Vatican Council did not prohibit the use of the Latin language in celebrating the Mass. The Mass that is celebrated in our parishes today can properly be celebrated by any priest in either the English or Latin language, or for that matter in any other language, provided that the texts used have been authorized by the Holy See.
What the Second Vatican Council did do was modify some of the prayers of the Mass, allow for the priest to celebrate Mass facing the people, and promote greater participation on the part of the faithful in the celebration of the Mass.
“Summorum Pontificum” aims to provide more ready access to the Mass as it was celebrated prior to the modifications permitted by the Second Vatican Council. In addition to the Latin language and position of the priest at the altar, the difference between the celebration of the Mass as permitted by “Summorum Pontificum” (pre-Vatican II) and the celebration after the Second Vatican Council (post-Vatican II) might be summarized as displayed in the box that appears on this page.
In the cover letter to the bishops that accompanied “Summorum Pontificum,” Pope Benedict mentions what prompted him to make access to the pre-Vatican II Mass more available: “At the time of the introduction of the new Missal, it did not seem necessary to issue specific norms for the possible use of the earlier Missal. .. . Afterwards, however, it soon became apparent that a good number of people remained strongly attached to this usage of the Roman Rite. . . . [Others] desired to recover the form of the sacred liturgy that was dear to them . . . because in many places celebrations were not faithful to the prescriptions of the new Missal, but the latter actually was understood as authorizing or even requiring creativity, which frequently led to deformations of the liturgy which were hard to bear. . . . And I have seen how arbitrary deformations of the liturgy caused deep pain to individuals totally rooted in the faith of the Church.”
These latter comments of Pope Benedict XVI echo those of his predecessor, Pope John Paul II: “It must be lamented that, especially in the years following the post-conciliar liturgical reform, as a result of a misguided sense of creativity and adaptation, there have been a number of abuses which have been a source of suffering for many. A certain reaction against ‘formalism’ has led some, especially in certain regions, to consider the ‘forms’ chosen by the Church’s greatest liturgical tradition and her Magisterium as non-binding and to introduce unauthorized innovations which are often completely inappropriate.
“I consider it my duty, therefore, to appeal urgently that the liturgical norms for the celebration of the Eucharist be observed with great fidelity. These norms are a concrete expression of the authentically ecclesial nature of the Eucharist; this is their deepest meaning. Liturgy is never anyone’s private property, be it of the celebrant or of the community in which the mysteries are celebrated.. . . Our time, too, calls for a renewed awareness and appreciation of liturgical norms as a reflection of, and a witness to, the one universal Church made present in every celebration of the Eucharist. Priests who faithfully celebrate Mass according to the liturgical norms, and communities which confirm to those norms, quietly but eloquently demonstrate their love for the Church” (“Ecclesia de Eucharistia,” 52).
With these words, we are reminded that, in the churches and chapels of this diocese, the observance of liturgical norms cannot be arbitrary. If Mass is to be celebrated according to the extraordinary form, it must be celebrated by a priest who has the minimum rubrical knowledge of the Mass as it was celebrated before the Second Vatican Council and minimum linguistic ability to reverently and precisely recite the prayers of the Mass in the Latin language. In such instances, too, the congregation must participate in the Mass by observing all the liturgical norms and using prayer books that translate the prayers and rubrics for them.
When Mass is celebrated in our churches and chapels, whether according to the ordinary rite or the extraordinary rite, there are also important liturgical norms that help to raise the mind and heart to God through the sacred mysteries celebrated. Here I mention just a few, but I encourage those who are interested to give a full reading to the “General Instruction of the Roman Missal” (GIRM) promulgated by Pope John Paul II in 2001.
Before the celebration of the Mass, “it is commendable that silence be observed in the church” (GIRM, 45). The chalice and other sacred vessels are to be made from precious metals. If they are made from less than precious metals, at least the chalice and paten are to be gilded on the inside. The use of glass or ceramic chalices, patens or ciborium is not permitted (GIRM, 328-329). For the priest, the chasuble is to be worn over the alb and stole (GIRM, 337). On entering and leaving the church, all genuflect to the Most Blessed Sacrament if the tabernacle is present in the main body of the church (GIRM, 273-274). The tabernacle is to be located either in the sanctuary or in a chapel that is connected to the church and suitable for private adoration and prayer (GIRM, 315). If churches do not have a chapel that is truly distinct and separate from the main body of the church, the tabernacle is to be located in the sanctuary. During the celebration of the Mass, people “should kneel beginning after the singing or recitation of the Sanctus until after the Amen of the Eucharistic Prayer, except when prevented on occasion by reasons of health, lack of space, the large number of people present, or some other good reason” (GIRM, 43).
In his encyclical “Sacramentum Caritatis,” Pope Benedict XVI reminds us that the faithful adherence to the liturgical norms has for 2,000 years sustained the faith life of all believers (38). This is the purpose of liturgy, regardless of the language in which it is prayed and celebrated.
With prayerful best wishes, I am
Most Reverend Dennis M. Schnurr
Bishop of Duluth**
* This article appeared in the newsletter of the Diocese of Duluth, in August, 2007.
** Now Coadjutor Archbishop of Cincinnati
Last month,* The Northern Cross reported on the Holy Father’s decision to relax restrictions on the use of the Tridentine Mass, the Latin-language liturgy that predates the Second Vatican Council. Pope Benedict XVI said that Mass celebrated according to the 1962 Roman Missal, commonly referred to as the Tridentine Rite, should be made available in every parish where groups of the faithful desire it. The Holy Father’s decision was promulgated on July 7 under the title “Summorum Pontificum” and will take effect on Sept. 14, the feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross.
Over the past weeks, I have received questions about the implementation of these norms in the Diocese of Duluth. Put quite simply, of course, the response is that, on Sept. 14, “Summorum Pontificum” becomes the universal law of the church. As such, the norms must be followed in every parish and diocese throughout the world.
Practically speaking, I anticipate some challenges with implementation in the Diocese of Duluth. Primary among them is one that the Holy Father himself mentioned in a cover letter to “Summorum Pontificum,” which he addressed to the bishops of the world: “The use of the old Missal presupposes a certain degree of liturgical formation and knowledge of the Latin language; neither of these is found very often.” In order to celebrate the Tridentine Rite, or the “extraordinary form” of the Mass as it is called by “Summorum Pontificum,” a priest must be suitably qualified. This means that, for a legitimate use of the extraordinary form, a priest must have the minimum rubrical knowledge of the Mass as it was celebrated before the Second Vatican Council and the minimum linguistic ability to reverently and precisely recite the prayers of the Mass in the Latin language.
It should be remembered that the Second Vatican Council did not prohibit the use of the Latin language in celebrating the Mass. The Mass that is celebrated in our parishes today can properly be celebrated by any priest in either the English or Latin language, or for that matter in any other language, provided that the texts used have been authorized by the Holy See.
What the Second Vatican Council did do was modify some of the prayers of the Mass, allow for the priest to celebrate Mass facing the people, and promote greater participation on the part of the faithful in the celebration of the Mass.
“Summorum Pontificum” aims to provide more ready access to the Mass as it was celebrated prior to the modifications permitted by the Second Vatican Council. In addition to the Latin language and position of the priest at the altar, the difference between the celebration of the Mass as permitted by “Summorum Pontificum” (pre-Vatican II) and the celebration after the Second Vatican Council (post-Vatican II) might be summarized as displayed in the box that appears on this page.
In the cover letter to the bishops that accompanied “Summorum Pontificum,” Pope Benedict mentions what prompted him to make access to the pre-Vatican II Mass more available: “At the time of the introduction of the new Missal, it did not seem necessary to issue specific norms for the possible use of the earlier Missal. .. . Afterwards, however, it soon became apparent that a good number of people remained strongly attached to this usage of the Roman Rite. . . . [Others] desired to recover the form of the sacred liturgy that was dear to them . . . because in many places celebrations were not faithful to the prescriptions of the new Missal, but the latter actually was understood as authorizing or even requiring creativity, which frequently led to deformations of the liturgy which were hard to bear. . . . And I have seen how arbitrary deformations of the liturgy caused deep pain to individuals totally rooted in the faith of the Church.”
These latter comments of Pope Benedict XVI echo those of his predecessor, Pope John Paul II: “It must be lamented that, especially in the years following the post-conciliar liturgical reform, as a result of a misguided sense of creativity and adaptation, there have been a number of abuses which have been a source of suffering for many. A certain reaction against ‘formalism’ has led some, especially in certain regions, to consider the ‘forms’ chosen by the Church’s greatest liturgical tradition and her Magisterium as non-binding and to introduce unauthorized innovations which are often completely inappropriate.
“I consider it my duty, therefore, to appeal urgently that the liturgical norms for the celebration of the Eucharist be observed with great fidelity. These norms are a concrete expression of the authentically ecclesial nature of the Eucharist; this is their deepest meaning. Liturgy is never anyone’s private property, be it of the celebrant or of the community in which the mysteries are celebrated.. . . Our time, too, calls for a renewed awareness and appreciation of liturgical norms as a reflection of, and a witness to, the one universal Church made present in every celebration of the Eucharist. Priests who faithfully celebrate Mass according to the liturgical norms, and communities which confirm to those norms, quietly but eloquently demonstrate their love for the Church” (“Ecclesia de Eucharistia,” 52).
With these words, we are reminded that, in the churches and chapels of this diocese, the observance of liturgical norms cannot be arbitrary. If Mass is to be celebrated according to the extraordinary form, it must be celebrated by a priest who has the minimum rubrical knowledge of the Mass as it was celebrated before the Second Vatican Council and minimum linguistic ability to reverently and precisely recite the prayers of the Mass in the Latin language. In such instances, too, the congregation must participate in the Mass by observing all the liturgical norms and using prayer books that translate the prayers and rubrics for them.
When Mass is celebrated in our churches and chapels, whether according to the ordinary rite or the extraordinary rite, there are also important liturgical norms that help to raise the mind and heart to God through the sacred mysteries celebrated. Here I mention just a few, but I encourage those who are interested to give a full reading to the “General Instruction of the Roman Missal” (GIRM) promulgated by Pope John Paul II in 2001.
Before the celebration of the Mass, “it is commendable that silence be observed in the church” (GIRM, 45). The chalice and other sacred vessels are to be made from precious metals. If they are made from less than precious metals, at least the chalice and paten are to be gilded on the inside. The use of glass or ceramic chalices, patens or ciborium is not permitted (GIRM, 328-329). For the priest, the chasuble is to be worn over the alb and stole (GIRM, 337). On entering and leaving the church, all genuflect to the Most Blessed Sacrament if the tabernacle is present in the main body of the church (GIRM, 273-274). The tabernacle is to be located either in the sanctuary or in a chapel that is connected to the church and suitable for private adoration and prayer (GIRM, 315). If churches do not have a chapel that is truly distinct and separate from the main body of the church, the tabernacle is to be located in the sanctuary. During the celebration of the Mass, people “should kneel beginning after the singing or recitation of the Sanctus until after the Amen of the Eucharistic Prayer, except when prevented on occasion by reasons of health, lack of space, the large number of people present, or some other good reason” (GIRM, 43).
In his encyclical “Sacramentum Caritatis,” Pope Benedict XVI reminds us that the faithful adherence to the liturgical norms has for 2,000 years sustained the faith life of all believers (38). This is the purpose of liturgy, regardless of the language in which it is prayed and celebrated.
With prayerful best wishes, I am
Most Reverend Dennis M. Schnurr
Bishop of Duluth**
* This article appeared in the newsletter of the Diocese of Duluth, in August, 2007.
** Now Coadjutor Archbishop of Cincinnati
Saturday, October 18, 2008
The Coin & the Eucharist (Sunday homily)
It may not be obvious,
but there are a lot of politics in today’s readings.
The first passage refers to Cyrus.
Cyrus was the king of Persia,
and God calls him "his anointed"—
the word in Hebrew is "Messiah,"
the word in Greek is "Christ"!
How strange! What can this possibly mean?
It means this: God has a larger plan,
and whether he knew it or not,
Cyrus going to play a role in carrying out God’s plan.
To put in the terms of the Gospel,
even great Caesar himself, in all his pride and ambition,
ends up rendering to God, whether he wants to or not,
whether he knows it or not, because God is God.
Notice, Jesus asked for a coin.
"Whose image is this?"
Caesar gets what bears his image.
Picture the scene:
They thought they were asking just a preacher,
the way you and I ask each other,
"what do you think of the political situation?"
But they were asking the King of Kings!
All around him swirls
lust and greed and grasping for power—
and he alone has true power, in the snap of his fingers!—
What does he do?
Unnerving them with his calm, he says, give Caesar his due.
It is very hard for many of us
to remain so calm right now.
Many of us are especially focused on the issue of abortion,
so many lost children, so many wounded mothers and fathers.
It is the fundamental human-rights issue of our time.
As a result, so many have great fears
about one candidate, and repose great hopes in the other.
And then, we fear an economic storm bearing down on us—
how bad will it get?
Too many already lack work,
and many more fear they are next.
Many are fearful for the future—for our Church,
our nation, our businesses, our jobs, our parish.
"If you can keep your head
when all about you are losing theirs"—
people will get very cross with you, have you noticed?
"How can you remain calm at a time like this?"
Yet the Lord did remain calm.
The coin that bore Caesar’s image; he handed it back.
But what about what bear’s God’s image?
That’s you and me—
our body and soul, our heart, our will and our lives—
that is what belongs to God!
Many want me to tell you how to vote on Election Day.
Okay: Vote according to your Catholic Faith!
If no candidate is completely in line
with Catholic teaching, look to see who comes closest.
And remember, while almost every issue involves some moral dimension,
all issues are not of equal weight.
Some are non-negotiable, such as defense of human life,
defense of marriage, rejection of bigotry and racism,
and fundamental human dignity and human rights.
But I ask you, how are we doing on remaining calm?
Many of you know I used to work in politics—
I’ve been through a few elections,
and many of you have been more than I, and you know:
every four years we hear it: "this election, this is it!"
McCain, Obama, the judges, Congress,
will all try their best, but:
they will not have the final word!
The Lord claims what belongs to him:
the hearts of all kings are in his hands.
So, we are active, we speak out, and we vote.
But do we trust?
Do cares about Caesar and the world
tense us up even now,
as we gather in the very presence of the King?
Once again, we are about to behold the Sacrifice,
the true and only power that can and will save the world!
Considering how easily we are dismayed and distracted,
what a gift it is that he does this,
in the Mass, day after day, year after year,
until His Plan is brought to completion.
Let Caesar have his coin, his ambition;
it is all a house of cards.
We have the Eucharist:
not an image but the Lord himself—
and in Him alone do we find grace and peace.
but there are a lot of politics in today’s readings.
The first passage refers to Cyrus.
Cyrus was the king of Persia,
and God calls him "his anointed"—
the word in Hebrew is "Messiah,"
the word in Greek is "Christ"!
How strange! What can this possibly mean?
It means this: God has a larger plan,
and whether he knew it or not,
Cyrus going to play a role in carrying out God’s plan.
To put in the terms of the Gospel,
even great Caesar himself, in all his pride and ambition,
ends up rendering to God, whether he wants to or not,
whether he knows it or not, because God is God.
Notice, Jesus asked for a coin.
"Whose image is this?"
Caesar gets what bears his image.
Picture the scene:
They thought they were asking just a preacher,
the way you and I ask each other,
"what do you think of the political situation?"
But they were asking the King of Kings!
All around him swirls
lust and greed and grasping for power—
and he alone has true power, in the snap of his fingers!—
What does he do?
Unnerving them with his calm, he says, give Caesar his due.
It is very hard for many of us
to remain so calm right now.
Many of us are especially focused on the issue of abortion,
so many lost children, so many wounded mothers and fathers.
It is the fundamental human-rights issue of our time.
As a result, so many have great fears
about one candidate, and repose great hopes in the other.
And then, we fear an economic storm bearing down on us—
how bad will it get?
Too many already lack work,
and many more fear they are next.
Many are fearful for the future—for our Church,
our nation, our businesses, our jobs, our parish.
"If you can keep your head
when all about you are losing theirs"—
people will get very cross with you, have you noticed?
"How can you remain calm at a time like this?"
Yet the Lord did remain calm.
The coin that bore Caesar’s image; he handed it back.
But what about what bear’s God’s image?
That’s you and me—
our body and soul, our heart, our will and our lives—
that is what belongs to God!
Many want me to tell you how to vote on Election Day.
Okay: Vote according to your Catholic Faith!
If no candidate is completely in line
with Catholic teaching, look to see who comes closest.
And remember, while almost every issue involves some moral dimension,
all issues are not of equal weight.
Some are non-negotiable, such as defense of human life,
defense of marriage, rejection of bigotry and racism,
and fundamental human dignity and human rights.
But I ask you, how are we doing on remaining calm?
Many of you know I used to work in politics—
I’ve been through a few elections,
and many of you have been more than I, and you know:
every four years we hear it: "this election, this is it!"
McCain, Obama, the judges, Congress,
will all try their best, but:
they will not have the final word!
The Lord claims what belongs to him:
the hearts of all kings are in his hands.
So, we are active, we speak out, and we vote.
But do we trust?
Do cares about Caesar and the world
tense us up even now,
as we gather in the very presence of the King?
Once again, we are about to behold the Sacrifice,
the true and only power that can and will save the world!
Considering how easily we are dismayed and distracted,
what a gift it is that he does this,
in the Mass, day after day, year after year,
until His Plan is brought to completion.
Let Caesar have his coin, his ambition;
it is all a house of cards.
We have the Eucharist:
not an image but the Lord himself—
and in Him alone do we find grace and peace.
Friday, October 17, 2008
Cincinnati has new bishop
Email from Archbishop Daniel E. Pilarczyk this morning:
I am happy to inform you that the Holy Father has appointed Bishop Dennis Schnurr, till now Bishop of Duluth, to be Coadjutor Archbishop of Cincinnati.
I know of all you join me in offering thanks to God and welcome to Archbishop Schnurr.
That's all I have for now.
I am happy to inform you that the Holy Father has appointed Bishop Dennis Schnurr, till now Bishop of Duluth, to be Coadjutor Archbishop of Cincinnati.
I know of all you join me in offering thanks to God and welcome to Archbishop Schnurr.
That's all I have for now.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
On my way to Dayton for 'Theology on Tap'
Sorry I didn't post this sooner, but life happens.
I'll be at Oregon Express at 7 pm tonight, telling my story. I picked up a cold from someone on Sunday, so I've been coughing and sniffling, but it's not big deal really--just distracting for everyone else, sorry about that--so maybe it won't be so entertaining as the organizers hope!
They billed this as "political hack to priest" or something like that, so I expect I'll get asked more political than theological questions, since priests who answer theological questions are a dime a dozen, aren't they? More the worse for the folks tonight, because I'll have to be careful, or else they'll be exposed to my wacky political theories!
Maybe I'll see you there? It's not too late! Put down the keyboard right now!
I'll be at Oregon Express at 7 pm tonight, telling my story. I picked up a cold from someone on Sunday, so I've been coughing and sniffling, but it's not big deal really--just distracting for everyone else, sorry about that--so maybe it won't be so entertaining as the organizers hope!
They billed this as "political hack to priest" or something like that, so I expect I'll get asked more political than theological questions, since priests who answer theological questions are a dime a dozen, aren't they? More the worse for the folks tonight, because I'll have to be careful, or else they'll be exposed to my wacky political theories!
Maybe I'll see you there? It's not too late! Put down the keyboard right now!
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Stewardship
This will be brief, as I can only connect for a few minutes.
I'm in Chicago for the International Catholic Stewardship Conference, lots of good stuff. But boo to Hyatt for not providing free internet despite high room rates!
Heading home Wednesday afternoon. More later.
I'm in Chicago for the International Catholic Stewardship Conference, lots of good stuff. But boo to Hyatt for not providing free internet despite high room rates!
Heading home Wednesday afternoon. More later.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Preferential Option for the Poor (Sunday Homily)
When Paul wrote the letter to the Philippians,
he was in prison. He did not know if he’d be set free,
or if he would be executed.
He was powerless; he had no choice
but to depend on others to provide his needs.
When Scripture talks about being poor,
this is primarily what it means:
not so much about what stuff we have,
but about being powerless and dependent.
This is why the Lord said,
“blessed are the poor in spirit”—
not that it’s blessed to go hungry; rather, it’s a blessing
to understand we depend completely on God.
The illusion we have control runs deep—
especially in our country.
So when we see the financial structure
of our nation and the world wobble, we can’t believe it:
Can it all really be that fragile? Yes!
Saint Paul has exactly the right answer:
whether I am well fed or hungry, I have Jesus Christ!
Meanwhile, people out of work,
folks in danger of losing their homes,
families going without food—demand our attention.
If we are headed into a recession as it appears,
such needs will demand a lot more of our attention
during the next year or so.
One important part of our Catholic Faith is called
“the preferential option for the poor.”
I am not poor. Thanks to you,
I have all my needs supplied.
I am considered “respectable”—
if I walk into a store or a restaurant,
no one tags me as “suspicious” and follows me around.
When I go and pray in the chapel,
no one shifts around uncomfortably.
The preferential option for the poor
helps to correct for all the ways
that those who are poor and powerless
get the short end of the stick.
Let me cite an example.
On the ballot is a measure concerning “pay day loans.”
These places will lend you money against your paycheck.
But the interest you pay is extremely high,
far higher than even credit card rates.
You don’t go there unless you have no other alternative.
But if you’re already in the hole…?
On the other hand, if we outlaw these places,
people who work there will lose their jobs;
and someone less savory
will step forward to make these loans.
So what do we do?
If nothing else, we recognize that the needs of the poor
aren’t just government’s concern,
or the Bethany Center’s, or someone else’s—
but our personal concern.
We are our brother’s keeper.
As your pastor, I have an uneasy conscience about this, for two reasons.
First: I am aware of the contradictions involved
in using Bingo to raise money.
I’d love to find another way,
but I don’t want to torpedo our school in the process.
If someone has a solution, and will help make it happen?
Please let me know.
Second, I wonder if we doing enough?
Each parish has a St. Vincent de Paul fund, and you are generous.
But what do we do with that money?
Some we use for individual situations,
but most of it goes each month to
Bethany Center or Salvation Army.
They use your money to help people with food, clothes, or medicine,
and they give us an accounting each month
of how they spend the money.
But the original vision for the Saint Vincent de Paul Society
was that volunteers would take personal interest,
visiting those in need,
finding out what was going on in their lives.
Sister Joan and I have often talked about
trying to recapture that vision.
If you are interested, call Sister Joan.
Also, here are three ways you can help right now:
> The Bethany Center always needs workers.
November is St. Boniface’s month.
> The Piqua Compassion Network helps connect people in need
with a variety of sources of help.
They need people to answer the phones.
> The Sidney Women’s Center helps women in trouble,
often facing pressure to get an abortion.
They need level-headed people who can be mentors,
bringing calm and wisdom to troubled situations.
We know that Christ comes to us
in the person of the poor;
I don’t want to be guilty of brushing him off!
Christ is coming to our parishes in all those rough-edged folks
who walk up and down Broadway and Downing Streets.
What shall we do?
he was in prison. He did not know if he’d be set free,
or if he would be executed.
He was powerless; he had no choice
but to depend on others to provide his needs.
When Scripture talks about being poor,
this is primarily what it means:
not so much about what stuff we have,
but about being powerless and dependent.
This is why the Lord said,
“blessed are the poor in spirit”—
not that it’s blessed to go hungry; rather, it’s a blessing
to understand we depend completely on God.
The illusion we have control runs deep—
especially in our country.
So when we see the financial structure
of our nation and the world wobble, we can’t believe it:
Can it all really be that fragile? Yes!
Saint Paul has exactly the right answer:
whether I am well fed or hungry, I have Jesus Christ!
Meanwhile, people out of work,
folks in danger of losing their homes,
families going without food—demand our attention.
If we are headed into a recession as it appears,
such needs will demand a lot more of our attention
during the next year or so.
One important part of our Catholic Faith is called
“the preferential option for the poor.”
I am not poor. Thanks to you,
I have all my needs supplied.
I am considered “respectable”—
if I walk into a store or a restaurant,
no one tags me as “suspicious” and follows me around.
When I go and pray in the chapel,
no one shifts around uncomfortably.
The preferential option for the poor
helps to correct for all the ways
that those who are poor and powerless
get the short end of the stick.
Let me cite an example.
On the ballot is a measure concerning “pay day loans.”
These places will lend you money against your paycheck.
But the interest you pay is extremely high,
far higher than even credit card rates.
You don’t go there unless you have no other alternative.
But if you’re already in the hole…?
On the other hand, if we outlaw these places,
people who work there will lose their jobs;
and someone less savory
will step forward to make these loans.
So what do we do?
If nothing else, we recognize that the needs of the poor
aren’t just government’s concern,
or the Bethany Center’s, or someone else’s—
but our personal concern.
We are our brother’s keeper.
As your pastor, I have an uneasy conscience about this, for two reasons.
First: I am aware of the contradictions involved
in using Bingo to raise money.
I’d love to find another way,
but I don’t want to torpedo our school in the process.
If someone has a solution, and will help make it happen?
Please let me know.
Second, I wonder if we doing enough?
Each parish has a St. Vincent de Paul fund, and you are generous.
But what do we do with that money?
Some we use for individual situations,
but most of it goes each month to
Bethany Center or Salvation Army.
They use your money to help people with food, clothes, or medicine,
and they give us an accounting each month
of how they spend the money.
But the original vision for the Saint Vincent de Paul Society
was that volunteers would take personal interest,
visiting those in need,
finding out what was going on in their lives.
Sister Joan and I have often talked about
trying to recapture that vision.
If you are interested, call Sister Joan.
Also, here are three ways you can help right now:
> The Bethany Center always needs workers.
November is St. Boniface’s month.
> The Piqua Compassion Network helps connect people in need
with a variety of sources of help.
They need people to answer the phones.
> The Sidney Women’s Center helps women in trouble,
often facing pressure to get an abortion.
They need level-headed people who can be mentors,
bringing calm and wisdom to troubled situations.
We know that Christ comes to us
in the person of the poor;
I don’t want to be guilty of brushing him off!
Christ is coming to our parishes in all those rough-edged folks
who walk up and down Broadway and Downing Streets.
What shall we do?
Brazilian food orgy
Last night a friend and I had dinner at "Cena," a Brazilian churrasceria (sp?) at the Dayton Mall; given the restaurant name is Latin for dinner, and the style of serving food was--according to the menu--Roman style, and the objective of eating as much as possible was facilitated, then "food orgy" is certainly apt. (Hint: "orgy" can be used more broadly than you may think.)
Here's the set-up: the restaurant has three options on the menu: you can have the full "feast" which involves both a buffet table with lots of fillers but also some tasty delicacies, plus the roving waiters carrying skewers of varieties of roasted meat, from which they will carve you a chunk and move on. They roam around all night, and you can have as much of all this as you want. Option two is the buffet without the roving meat-bearers visiting you; option three is to order from a menu of "tapas," which were various small plates of various appetizers--I imagine one could easily make a meal of two or three of them.
I have not a clue about any of the tapas because I came for the roving meat-a-thon. It was all very tasty, but I confess I was a bit queasy this morning! (Now, I am sure you are wondering, "but father, but father! It was Friday, what about penance?" In fact, I did do penance yesterday of a different sort, precisely because of these plans.)
The restaurant is very nice, the meal was a bit pricey, although not surprising given the circumstances; unfortunately, it was not crowded. I always want new businesses to do well.
And I will say, cryptically, I had an ulterior motive in this post--I wonder if you can figure out what it is?
Here's the set-up: the restaurant has three options on the menu: you can have the full "feast" which involves both a buffet table with lots of fillers but also some tasty delicacies, plus the roving waiters carrying skewers of varieties of roasted meat, from which they will carve you a chunk and move on. They roam around all night, and you can have as much of all this as you want. Option two is the buffet without the roving meat-bearers visiting you; option three is to order from a menu of "tapas," which were various small plates of various appetizers--I imagine one could easily make a meal of two or three of them.
I have not a clue about any of the tapas because I came for the roving meat-a-thon. It was all very tasty, but I confess I was a bit queasy this morning! (Now, I am sure you are wondering, "but father, but father! It was Friday, what about penance?" In fact, I did do penance yesterday of a different sort, precisely because of these plans.)
The restaurant is very nice, the meal was a bit pricey, although not surprising given the circumstances; unfortunately, it was not crowded. I always want new businesses to do well.
And I will say, cryptically, I had an ulterior motive in this post--I wonder if you can figure out what it is?
Sunday, October 05, 2008
'How are we doing with the Vineyard?' (Homily for Respect Life Sunday)
Again, I didn't have time this week to write out my text, so I can only give you some bullet points after the fact:
> I began with the refrain from the psalm: 'the vineyard of the Lord is the house of Israel' -- since we are grafted in, this applies to the Church; since the Lord is concerned for justice (in the first reading), then we can apply it to the whole world.
> The point is clear enough: God expects us to take good care of the vineyard--of people--and insofar as this is Respect Life Sunday, we might look at how we are doing taking care of human life.
> "Justice" -- respect for human dignity, from conception to natural death, care for the poor.
> So let's ask ourselves, how are we doing?
> Both good and bad. The fact that the Catholic Church is recognized as powerful witness for human life and human dignity, opposing abortion and the death penalty for example, in our society, is something promising. We are bearing witness. How much worse things would be were we not here; we have influence out of proportion to our numbers. We are prominent. Another positive: so many parishioners do so much to bear witness.
> But the society is heading in the wrong direction. We can't be complacent. I cited the move toward euthanasia, and cited Martin Sheen's ad against assisted suicide in Washington, using his argument about how it would target the poor and weak. I cited "research" using unborn babies resulting from "in vitro" fertilization, and pointed out both candidates for president were for it and for us paying for it. This is not one of the positives.
> I also cited the younger generation is more prolife and I cited the Life Chain today and invited everyone to attend or say a prayer at the time.
> I made the point that we have a duty to bear witness and a right as citizens, contrary to those voices who say Catholics should keep their beliefs to themselves. I said it was a scandal to have Catholics in prominent positions, in office, using their power to advance abortion, and we have a duty and right to communicate directly with them, and urge them to change direction. We have to be concerned for their eternal salvation.
> I said we have no right to be discouraged, we have Christ! We have the consolation of the peace that St. Paul spoke about in the second reading. We can make a difference, we are making a difference.
> I pointed out that Respect Life Sunday began in 1972--before Roe; the bishops saw what was coming; the trends were underway.
> I said there was a prophet who warned us: Pope Paul VI, in Humanae Vitae, and that his words weren't accepted because the teaching on contraception was hard for many to accept; many Catholics do not accept it. But he said if we attempt to control the gift of life this way, governments would seek to do this, and they have; that abortion and promiscuity would follow, and it did. We should take another look at what this prophet told us because what he predicted has come to pass.
> I ended by emphasizing trust in the Lord being with us and helping us to turn things around; I'm sure I said it better but I cannot recall just how.
Sorry, have to run to the Life Chain. Please pray with confidence that the Lord will bring conversion and healing to our society!
> I began with the refrain from the psalm: 'the vineyard of the Lord is the house of Israel' -- since we are grafted in, this applies to the Church; since the Lord is concerned for justice (in the first reading), then we can apply it to the whole world.
> The point is clear enough: God expects us to take good care of the vineyard--of people--and insofar as this is Respect Life Sunday, we might look at how we are doing taking care of human life.
> "Justice" -- respect for human dignity, from conception to natural death, care for the poor.
> So let's ask ourselves, how are we doing?
> Both good and bad. The fact that the Catholic Church is recognized as powerful witness for human life and human dignity, opposing abortion and the death penalty for example, in our society, is something promising. We are bearing witness. How much worse things would be were we not here; we have influence out of proportion to our numbers. We are prominent. Another positive: so many parishioners do so much to bear witness.
> But the society is heading in the wrong direction. We can't be complacent. I cited the move toward euthanasia, and cited Martin Sheen's ad against assisted suicide in Washington, using his argument about how it would target the poor and weak. I cited "research" using unborn babies resulting from "in vitro" fertilization, and pointed out both candidates for president were for it and for us paying for it. This is not one of the positives.
> I also cited the younger generation is more prolife and I cited the Life Chain today and invited everyone to attend or say a prayer at the time.
> I made the point that we have a duty to bear witness and a right as citizens, contrary to those voices who say Catholics should keep their beliefs to themselves. I said it was a scandal to have Catholics in prominent positions, in office, using their power to advance abortion, and we have a duty and right to communicate directly with them, and urge them to change direction. We have to be concerned for their eternal salvation.
> I said we have no right to be discouraged, we have Christ! We have the consolation of the peace that St. Paul spoke about in the second reading. We can make a difference, we are making a difference.
> I pointed out that Respect Life Sunday began in 1972--before Roe; the bishops saw what was coming; the trends were underway.
> I said there was a prophet who warned us: Pope Paul VI, in Humanae Vitae, and that his words weren't accepted because the teaching on contraception was hard for many to accept; many Catholics do not accept it. But he said if we attempt to control the gift of life this way, governments would seek to do this, and they have; that abortion and promiscuity would follow, and it did. We should take another look at what this prophet told us because what he predicted has come to pass.
> I ended by emphasizing trust in the Lord being with us and helping us to turn things around; I'm sure I said it better but I cannot recall just how.
Sorry, have to run to the Life Chain. Please pray with confidence that the Lord will bring conversion and healing to our society!
Saturday, October 04, 2008
How I turned St. Francis Day into a two-day liturgical oddity
Thursday night, I prayed the Office of Readings for the following day, which is an option, and then getting up Friday, I thought, whoops, I forgot about Saint Francis! So I read the second reading from St. Francis and figured, well that'll have to do; then I offered Mass with the older schoolchildren, and told them that they couldn't understand Francis without reference to poverty--and along the way, challenged them to follow his example and make a fundamental choice to follow the Lord no matter what they might have to give up--and citing the great theologian Janis Joplin (that was for the grownups present), "freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose."
Then, last evening around 11, I finished my office for the day; and as I prayed the closing prayer for Vespers, using the prayer for St. Francis, it finally dawned on me: uh...today is October 3--not the 4th! Oops!
Well, I wonder now if all the folks in church thought I'd lost it, or did they even notice? I really thought yesterday was October 4, I'm sure I put it on every document! Then I thought: well, now I have to pray the same office over again for Saturday? I decided, oh well, I'll just reflect that much more on Saint Francis! So, I then prayed the Office of Readings (i.e., "Matins") for Saint Francis again, and will pray morning prayer for him shortly.
You may wonder if I committed a liturgical faux pas; well, not really. When you have a "ferial" day--meaning, a day on the calendar with no obligatory memorial or feast, a priest is free to choose any Mass, and any set of prayers for the office. So what I did, unwittingly, was offer a votive Mass and votive offices for St. Francis.
If any priests care to comment, have you done anything like this?
Then, last evening around 11, I finished my office for the day; and as I prayed the closing prayer for Vespers, using the prayer for St. Francis, it finally dawned on me: uh...today is October 3--not the 4th! Oops!
Well, I wonder now if all the folks in church thought I'd lost it, or did they even notice? I really thought yesterday was October 4, I'm sure I put it on every document! Then I thought: well, now I have to pray the same office over again for Saturday? I decided, oh well, I'll just reflect that much more on Saint Francis! So, I then prayed the Office of Readings (i.e., "Matins") for Saint Francis again, and will pray morning prayer for him shortly.
You may wonder if I committed a liturgical faux pas; well, not really. When you have a "ferial" day--meaning, a day on the calendar with no obligatory memorial or feast, a priest is free to choose any Mass, and any set of prayers for the office. So what I did, unwittingly, was offer a votive Mass and votive offices for St. Francis.
If any priests care to comment, have you done anything like this?
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Bailout: the people won round 1...
Congratulations, we did it!
I was surprised when the bailout of financial institutions was voted down yesterday; I feared the fix was in.
But stay tuned...they are gearing up for round 2, and it'll be a battle.
Something amazing is happening, openly, right before our eyes: our elites have joined hands and are making common cause, against us, the people. You saw it today, if you watched the news: both candidates for president are almost shoulder-to-shoulder on this. The crowd in Washington were sure they could muscle this through Congress, and they were stunned when it was voted down. But be clear what's happening right now--they are figuring out how to muscle the 12 or so members of the House they need to switch. They realize they didn't bring big enough guns the last time; they are preparing to hit them hard, with whatever threats and or blandishments they think it will take to peel off enough votes.
There is another lesson here: did you notice that those who voted this down are Congressmen facing competitive races this fall? I.e., it matters to them that the people are so strongly against this. They fear being defeated! But who was happy to go along? Those Congressmen who either have secure districts--or who aren't running again.
Now consider this: what if we had term limits? A certain chunk of these folks would be term-limited, and thus free from fear of their constituents wrath. How do you think they'd have voted then? This is why I am oppose to term limits.
Meanwhile, keep steady. I realize folks are worried about the markets, and the economy, and I am as well. There are steps Congress can take that would help that doesn't need to involve buying up vast amounts of mortgages that we're told (please note this): aren't valued by anyone else, so they can't be sold, but the taxpayers have to do it; and, we're told, this transaction will end up making us money! Now, this can be true--but it makes me, and it should make you, very concerned. Above all, it's the stampede: now, now, don't think, don't question, just give us the money and the power, NOW!
Yes, the Dow went down a lot of points yesterday--that's scary. "The worst drop ever"--in raw numbers; but nowhere near as a percentage of the total. Remember the Depression of 1987? The Market dropped 25% in one day! The economy did fine, the markets recovered. And, note, today, the Dow picked up a third of that, which surprised many, but not me.
No, I'm not saying there's nothing to worry about. I think there are real problems. But if you go to the doctor because you're sick, you need him to find the real problem and treat that--and the worse your illness, the more you need him to get it right. Congress is not, in my judgment, getting at the source of the sickness, and therefore I have no confidence in the so-called solution.
What is the source of this problem? It's very plain: the government made it policy, starting many years ago, to push banks to offer loans to high-risk borrowers, to the point that they would be punished by the government if they didn't. This is what they call "sub prime" loans. Why did the government do this? Because it wanted to encourage lots more people to become homeowners, who for various reasons hadn't become homeowners. Now, some of those was because of racism and discrimination. But a lot of it was because, well, they had bad credit--they were bad risks. This started in the 1970s, and the years go by, the more this push continued, it only stands to reason the next group to be brought in would be more and more high-risk.
This is what the government-created corporations, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, were created to help do; and they took these mortgages and packaged them as "securities" and remarketed them; and as long as the prices of real estate kept rising, you could keep it going. If a bank lends you the entire amount to buy a house (remember those "no money down" deals being promoted in TV infomercials?), and you have lousy credit, you can pull it off pretty easily, if you can count on selling that house a year or two later--or even less--for 10% more.
But what happens when real estate prices stop rising--and worse--start dropping? It only takes a little slippage to cause a real problem. And that's where we are.
So here's the question: when did Congress propose doing anything about this government policy of pushing loans to uncreditworthy people? When did they rein in Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae? None of that was in the bailout.
There's more to be said, but others are saying it better than I am. I just want to renew my insistence that you be heard by your representatives and senators, and do it now!
I was surprised when the bailout of financial institutions was voted down yesterday; I feared the fix was in.
But stay tuned...they are gearing up for round 2, and it'll be a battle.
Something amazing is happening, openly, right before our eyes: our elites have joined hands and are making common cause, against us, the people. You saw it today, if you watched the news: both candidates for president are almost shoulder-to-shoulder on this. The crowd in Washington were sure they could muscle this through Congress, and they were stunned when it was voted down. But be clear what's happening right now--they are figuring out how to muscle the 12 or so members of the House they need to switch. They realize they didn't bring big enough guns the last time; they are preparing to hit them hard, with whatever threats and or blandishments they think it will take to peel off enough votes.
There is another lesson here: did you notice that those who voted this down are Congressmen facing competitive races this fall? I.e., it matters to them that the people are so strongly against this. They fear being defeated! But who was happy to go along? Those Congressmen who either have secure districts--or who aren't running again.
Now consider this: what if we had term limits? A certain chunk of these folks would be term-limited, and thus free from fear of their constituents wrath. How do you think they'd have voted then? This is why I am oppose to term limits.
Meanwhile, keep steady. I realize folks are worried about the markets, and the economy, and I am as well. There are steps Congress can take that would help that doesn't need to involve buying up vast amounts of mortgages that we're told (please note this): aren't valued by anyone else, so they can't be sold, but the taxpayers have to do it; and, we're told, this transaction will end up making us money! Now, this can be true--but it makes me, and it should make you, very concerned. Above all, it's the stampede: now, now, don't think, don't question, just give us the money and the power, NOW!
Yes, the Dow went down a lot of points yesterday--that's scary. "The worst drop ever"--in raw numbers; but nowhere near as a percentage of the total. Remember the Depression of 1987? The Market dropped 25% in one day! The economy did fine, the markets recovered. And, note, today, the Dow picked up a third of that, which surprised many, but not me.
No, I'm not saying there's nothing to worry about. I think there are real problems. But if you go to the doctor because you're sick, you need him to find the real problem and treat that--and the worse your illness, the more you need him to get it right. Congress is not, in my judgment, getting at the source of the sickness, and therefore I have no confidence in the so-called solution.
What is the source of this problem? It's very plain: the government made it policy, starting many years ago, to push banks to offer loans to high-risk borrowers, to the point that they would be punished by the government if they didn't. This is what they call "sub prime" loans. Why did the government do this? Because it wanted to encourage lots more people to become homeowners, who for various reasons hadn't become homeowners. Now, some of those was because of racism and discrimination. But a lot of it was because, well, they had bad credit--they were bad risks. This started in the 1970s, and the years go by, the more this push continued, it only stands to reason the next group to be brought in would be more and more high-risk.
This is what the government-created corporations, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, were created to help do; and they took these mortgages and packaged them as "securities" and remarketed them; and as long as the prices of real estate kept rising, you could keep it going. If a bank lends you the entire amount to buy a house (remember those "no money down" deals being promoted in TV infomercials?), and you have lousy credit, you can pull it off pretty easily, if you can count on selling that house a year or two later--or even less--for 10% more.
But what happens when real estate prices stop rising--and worse--start dropping? It only takes a little slippage to cause a real problem. And that's where we are.
So here's the question: when did Congress propose doing anything about this government policy of pushing loans to uncreditworthy people? When did they rein in Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae? None of that was in the bailout.
There's more to be said, but others are saying it better than I am. I just want to renew my insistence that you be heard by your representatives and senators, and do it now!
Sunday, September 28, 2008
What will you give up for the salvation of souls? (Sunday homily)
This was one of those rare times I prepare a homily without writing it out; so I can only give you a summary of what I said last night and today.
> I began with the second reading, Paul's powerful description of the central fact of our faith: God gave up all his "riches" and emptied himself, becoming human, and further emptying himself, embracing death for our salvation.
> We recall this in the Creed, and we bow at a certain point--"by the power of the Holy Spirit, he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man"--and the reason we bow isn't because someone tells us to, but to express our profound awe and wonder at what we're saying in our Creed.
> But Paul says, "have this same attitude"--so in reflecting on this, the question struck me: what would we be willing to give up, to bring salvation to others?
> I am aware of all many do give up: your time to be part of the Mass; you bring others with you; you pray for them; your sacrifices for our parish and school. But the Son of God gave it all up--emptied himself--so is there more to do?
> If we knew, by giving something up, we could fill empty spots in church, we would do it, wouldn't we? What might those sacrifices be?
> One might be to give up a grudge--we make the first move to be reconciled to someone. We invite someone back. Not only tell people about RCIA, but take them along; bring people to the Bible Study, bring them to the chapel.
> Realize what Paul described in the reading is what happens in the Sacrifice of the Mass; we don't see it with natural eyes, but with eyes of faith. But that's what the Mass is. We can and should place our concerns, the people we're praying for, on the altar, so the Lord can lift them up to the Father in his great prayer.
> Realize also that in emptying himself, to make us rich--this is what he does in the Eucharist: all his wealth and glory is offered to us in the Eucharist! And Christ offers us a "deal," and here are the terms of this deal: He empties himself, of all his wealth, which he offers us, but we have to give something up: our sins, our self-will, our own way of doing things. We give up our poverty and he accepts that, and offers us his infinite glory and heaven. Wow! Wow!
> When we've received the Eucharist, the Mass soon comes to an end, and we are sent out: now we go and do as Christ did: we're rich in Christ, rich as can be, and we go into a world that is hungry for him. We go and empty ourselves.
What are we willing to give up, for the salvation of the world?
(Note: I used the Fourth Eucharistic Prayer.)
> I began with the second reading, Paul's powerful description of the central fact of our faith: God gave up all his "riches" and emptied himself, becoming human, and further emptying himself, embracing death for our salvation.
> We recall this in the Creed, and we bow at a certain point--"by the power of the Holy Spirit, he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man"--and the reason we bow isn't because someone tells us to, but to express our profound awe and wonder at what we're saying in our Creed.
> But Paul says, "have this same attitude"--so in reflecting on this, the question struck me: what would we be willing to give up, to bring salvation to others?
> I am aware of all many do give up: your time to be part of the Mass; you bring others with you; you pray for them; your sacrifices for our parish and school. But the Son of God gave it all up--emptied himself--so is there more to do?
> If we knew, by giving something up, we could fill empty spots in church, we would do it, wouldn't we? What might those sacrifices be?
> One might be to give up a grudge--we make the first move to be reconciled to someone. We invite someone back. Not only tell people about RCIA, but take them along; bring people to the Bible Study, bring them to the chapel.
> Realize what Paul described in the reading is what happens in the Sacrifice of the Mass; we don't see it with natural eyes, but with eyes of faith. But that's what the Mass is. We can and should place our concerns, the people we're praying for, on the altar, so the Lord can lift them up to the Father in his great prayer.
> Realize also that in emptying himself, to make us rich--this is what he does in the Eucharist: all his wealth and glory is offered to us in the Eucharist! And Christ offers us a "deal," and here are the terms of this deal: He empties himself, of all his wealth, which he offers us, but we have to give something up: our sins, our self-will, our own way of doing things. We give up our poverty and he accepts that, and offers us his infinite glory and heaven. Wow! Wow!
> When we've received the Eucharist, the Mass soon comes to an end, and we are sent out: now we go and do as Christ did: we're rich in Christ, rich as can be, and we go into a world that is hungry for him. We go and empty ourselves.
What are we willing to give up, for the salvation of the world?
(Note: I used the Fourth Eucharistic Prayer.)
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Tell 'em to vote 'No' on 'the Bailout' -- and do it fast
I'm in Washington D.C., wrapping up my vacation; I stopped here to do a little business for a prolife cause I care about (look for NPLA in the links) and catch up with some friends. All the business about the markets and the astonishing Bush proposal to spend $700-plus billion on a bailout of troubled financial institutions hit while I was at the beach, and I had a lot of questions.
I still do; but what concerns me most is the idea that we're so up against it that we don't have time to ask questions about this, we should just go along like good sheep.
It's time to clean the Augean Stables in Washington D.C., and that's not what this is; this is, I think, an attempt to "manage" the problem and spray a lot of air freshener around.
If you care about this--and how in the heck can you not?--you darn well better contact your Congressman, and even more, your Senators, right away.
Why the Senate? Because it may take a filibuster, requiring 41 Senators, to slow this down enough to force the tough questions and give the people time to find out what's going on. You may recall, a few years ago, some folks were advocating wrecking the filibuster in order to get judges confirmed. I think a lot of folks are waking up to what a bad idea that was, and they should thank heaven it didn't go through.
I"m sure you'll wonder why I am against this; I don't have time to write more at this point. It may be that, with further reflection, I can see the logic of this; but I'm not seeing it right now. And, anyway, there's plenty being written about all this, you don't need me to explain it all--and I'm hardly a wiz on this stuff--I think think this is all a questionable deal, and I refuse to be stampeded.
I still do; but what concerns me most is the idea that we're so up against it that we don't have time to ask questions about this, we should just go along like good sheep.
It's time to clean the Augean Stables in Washington D.C., and that's not what this is; this is, I think, an attempt to "manage" the problem and spray a lot of air freshener around.
If you care about this--and how in the heck can you not?--you darn well better contact your Congressman, and even more, your Senators, right away.
Why the Senate? Because it may take a filibuster, requiring 41 Senators, to slow this down enough to force the tough questions and give the people time to find out what's going on. You may recall, a few years ago, some folks were advocating wrecking the filibuster in order to get judges confirmed. I think a lot of folks are waking up to what a bad idea that was, and they should thank heaven it didn't go through.
I"m sure you'll wonder why I am against this; I don't have time to write more at this point. It may be that, with further reflection, I can see the logic of this; but I'm not seeing it right now. And, anyway, there's plenty being written about all this, you don't need me to explain it all--and I'm hardly a wiz on this stuff--I think think this is all a questionable deal, and I refuse to be stampeded.
Monday, September 22, 2008
Heading north to Virginia
Time for a quick post...
It's been lovely doing very little for a week here at Topsail Island, North Carolina. I did spend time at the beach, although less than you might suppose. I am one of those people who quickly sizzles in the sun--I get the highest "factor" sun goop and layer it on with a trowel. Laugh if you like, but if I don't put it on like frosting on a cake, I burn. My "tan" is a slightly dirtier shade of pale. Okay, so here's the thing: I go to the beach, I have to put on all that goop (at 6-2 and well-fed, I have a lot of real estate to keep track of); okay then, at some point, I want to go in the water; splash-splash, come out--time to put on more goop! Sit in the sun, bake for awhile, keep checking to see if another layer of sun-screen is in order. After awhile, back for a pit stop or a meal. This is a lot of trouble.
Well, someone back home gave me a good suggestion: get a beach umbrella! Good idea--so on the way down, I stopped at Wal-Mart: sorry, we don't have them this time of year, we get them in the spring. Next Wal-Mart had one, $14.95, so I bought one. When I arrived Monday afternoon, I trundled my beach umbrella, chair, towel, mini-cooler with snacks, plus sun-screen factor-kajillion in my pocket, over to the beach. I was set for the afternoon!
Only first I had to get that umbrella stuck deep enough in the sand--harder than I thought it would be. Then it turned out to be windy--the umbrella kept coming up.
Oh, and I did I mention the flies? These aren't your obsequious house flies--these bite!
The next day, I saw a couple of ladies with an umbrella that seemed cooperative--how do you do it? "Oh, you need one of these anchors"--she pointed at a plastic device around the base, stuck in the ground. They directed me to a store in town. So I got one that evening. Next day: I was armed with an anchor, plus some safari-strength bug repellant (I got the one with the highest quantity of "deet"--this stuff, called "REPEL/Sportsmen Max" is 40% Deet. Personally, I'd prefer 100% Deet, but that might kill me).
Now I have added to the ritual of slathering on the sun protection, finishing that off with a veneer of bug poison. Plus my umbrella. How did it work, you ask?
Well...it was windy again, so yes the anchor stayed anchored--but at one point, the wind pulled the umbrella out and off down the beach it went bouncing. I hadn't tightened the screw tight enough. When I did, then the problem was the umbrella getting turned inside out by the wind. So I turned the umbrella around, till it faced the wind and didn't get ruined--except that meant no longer turning it toward the sun.
Oh, and the flies? They loved "Sportsmen Max"! At first they would just hover, no doubt thinking, "uh oh, what's that I smell?" Until one of them actually landed, and called out to the others, "come on in boys--this stuff is great!" I kept spraying more on, even spraying the stuff directly on two flies who were having lunch on my ankle, bathing them in this stuff, and they wriggled around like it was the best high they'd ever had.
So, while I did swim in the ocean, and walked around a bit, I didn't spend a lot of time just sitting on the beach. Yes, it did occur to me that bringing snacks to the beach drew flies; so one time, I didn't bring snacks, and yes, the flies were somewhat discouraged. But then, one gets hungry or thirsty...
Anyway, I did enjoy myself, and I did enjoy walking on the beach, and when I could, sitting and contemplating the watery horizon. And I found myself gazing at the sea and the beach, and wondered about the past, thinking about what history transpired here during the war between the states; or about the settlers who arrived here 300 or so years ago, looking back across the same ocean, with nothing but wilderness to their backs, and every bit of civilization and comfort a long, long way away.
We are told that the ancients firmly believed the earth was flat; but aside from evidence of thoughtful people, very long ago, figuring out otherwise, one is stuck with this simple observation available to anyone: when you look out on the sea, you see not flatness, but a curve! Even if you didn't believe the earth was some sort of ball, you'd still have to believe the earth was some sort of "mound"--and wouldn't someone wonder how water could stay in that position, and not rush off to the sides to the lower places?
I mean, you can laugh at me for thinking this way, but my point is, I'm just observing what any ordinary person without any education other than lived experience could notice: the horizon is curved, and water always runs from a higher position to a lower position, and--if you walked a ways, or got on a boat, you never actually came to any change in the horizon other than land. The rounded edge always recedes. Surely anyone who took to a boat and sailed even 100 miles would have noticed this, and if even a bit thoughtful, would have deduced--at the minimum--that the world must be some sort of bowl, and we live on the outside of it. But "flat"? Only those who lived away from large bodies of water, and never met people who had seen large bodies of water, and also never walked about very far, could avoid such obvious, contradictory observations. And here's the thing--the people who wrote our Bible, and the early Greek and Roman philosohers--were not such untraveled people!
I really can't explain it, but here's the thing: I don't recall those who study the past, and tell us with certitude what those "credulous" people back then thought, raising these questions; which makes me wonder who really is credulous--the ancients, who gave us an intellectual inheritance we're still living off of, or the forgettable experts of later years?
Well, I have to finish cleaning up--the deal here is you pay little, but you have to clean your quarters, and I'm putting off the bathroom for last. Then I head to the Hampton Roads area of Virginia to meet some friends this evening, then to Northern Virginia to do the same there on Tuesday and Wednesday, then headed home.
It's been lovely doing very little for a week here at Topsail Island, North Carolina. I did spend time at the beach, although less than you might suppose. I am one of those people who quickly sizzles in the sun--I get the highest "factor" sun goop and layer it on with a trowel. Laugh if you like, but if I don't put it on like frosting on a cake, I burn. My "tan" is a slightly dirtier shade of pale. Okay, so here's the thing: I go to the beach, I have to put on all that goop (at 6-2 and well-fed, I have a lot of real estate to keep track of); okay then, at some point, I want to go in the water; splash-splash, come out--time to put on more goop! Sit in the sun, bake for awhile, keep checking to see if another layer of sun-screen is in order. After awhile, back for a pit stop or a meal. This is a lot of trouble.
Well, someone back home gave me a good suggestion: get a beach umbrella! Good idea--so on the way down, I stopped at Wal-Mart: sorry, we don't have them this time of year, we get them in the spring. Next Wal-Mart had one, $14.95, so I bought one. When I arrived Monday afternoon, I trundled my beach umbrella, chair, towel, mini-cooler with snacks, plus sun-screen factor-kajillion in my pocket, over to the beach. I was set for the afternoon!
Only first I had to get that umbrella stuck deep enough in the sand--harder than I thought it would be. Then it turned out to be windy--the umbrella kept coming up.
Oh, and I did I mention the flies? These aren't your obsequious house flies--these bite!
The next day, I saw a couple of ladies with an umbrella that seemed cooperative--how do you do it? "Oh, you need one of these anchors"--she pointed at a plastic device around the base, stuck in the ground. They directed me to a store in town. So I got one that evening. Next day: I was armed with an anchor, plus some safari-strength bug repellant (I got the one with the highest quantity of "deet"--this stuff, called "REPEL/Sportsmen Max" is 40% Deet. Personally, I'd prefer 100% Deet, but that might kill me).
Now I have added to the ritual of slathering on the sun protection, finishing that off with a veneer of bug poison. Plus my umbrella. How did it work, you ask?
Well...it was windy again, so yes the anchor stayed anchored--but at one point, the wind pulled the umbrella out and off down the beach it went bouncing. I hadn't tightened the screw tight enough. When I did, then the problem was the umbrella getting turned inside out by the wind. So I turned the umbrella around, till it faced the wind and didn't get ruined--except that meant no longer turning it toward the sun.
Oh, and the flies? They loved "Sportsmen Max"! At first they would just hover, no doubt thinking, "uh oh, what's that I smell?" Until one of them actually landed, and called out to the others, "come on in boys--this stuff is great!" I kept spraying more on, even spraying the stuff directly on two flies who were having lunch on my ankle, bathing them in this stuff, and they wriggled around like it was the best high they'd ever had.
So, while I did swim in the ocean, and walked around a bit, I didn't spend a lot of time just sitting on the beach. Yes, it did occur to me that bringing snacks to the beach drew flies; so one time, I didn't bring snacks, and yes, the flies were somewhat discouraged. But then, one gets hungry or thirsty...
Anyway, I did enjoy myself, and I did enjoy walking on the beach, and when I could, sitting and contemplating the watery horizon. And I found myself gazing at the sea and the beach, and wondered about the past, thinking about what history transpired here during the war between the states; or about the settlers who arrived here 300 or so years ago, looking back across the same ocean, with nothing but wilderness to their backs, and every bit of civilization and comfort a long, long way away.
We are told that the ancients firmly believed the earth was flat; but aside from evidence of thoughtful people, very long ago, figuring out otherwise, one is stuck with this simple observation available to anyone: when you look out on the sea, you see not flatness, but a curve! Even if you didn't believe the earth was some sort of ball, you'd still have to believe the earth was some sort of "mound"--and wouldn't someone wonder how water could stay in that position, and not rush off to the sides to the lower places?
I mean, you can laugh at me for thinking this way, but my point is, I'm just observing what any ordinary person without any education other than lived experience could notice: the horizon is curved, and water always runs from a higher position to a lower position, and--if you walked a ways, or got on a boat, you never actually came to any change in the horizon other than land. The rounded edge always recedes. Surely anyone who took to a boat and sailed even 100 miles would have noticed this, and if even a bit thoughtful, would have deduced--at the minimum--that the world must be some sort of bowl, and we live on the outside of it. But "flat"? Only those who lived away from large bodies of water, and never met people who had seen large bodies of water, and also never walked about very far, could avoid such obvious, contradictory observations. And here's the thing--the people who wrote our Bible, and the early Greek and Roman philosohers--were not such untraveled people!
I really can't explain it, but here's the thing: I don't recall those who study the past, and tell us with certitude what those "credulous" people back then thought, raising these questions; which makes me wonder who really is credulous--the ancients, who gave us an intellectual inheritance we're still living off of, or the forgettable experts of later years?
Well, I have to finish cleaning up--the deal here is you pay little, but you have to clean your quarters, and I'm putting off the bathroom for last. Then I head to the Hampton Roads area of Virginia to meet some friends this evening, then to Northern Virginia to do the same there on Tuesday and Wednesday, then headed home.
Monday, September 15, 2008
'Mother of Sorrows' on the beach
I arrived at my week's destination earlier this afternoon: I'm spending a week on Topsail Island, North Carolina, at a nice place called the Christian Family Life Center, a Marianist ministry that is, alas, set to close down in a couple of months. The idea was to have a place for families to come and spend a week -- only a short walk from the beach! -- and have some fun activities, some spiritual activities (the place has a chapel) and not spend too much money.
Sounds great, doesn't it? Alas, it seems it hasn't been doing so well, so it will soon close. I am sad about it because I have been here twice, and found it a perfect spot: a beach nearby, a chapel, a kitchen, restaurants, quiet, calm. Maybe things could turn around in the next two months? Or maybe someone reading this would like to take over the ministry and make a go of it?
Right after I arrived, I hit the beach, and prayed the office to the sound of the waves breaking. I thought about the choice of psalms for the office to our Lady, and it hit me (and this may have been obvious to you long before me): the Church chooses passages that speak glowingly of the temple, and of Jerusalem, Zion, Israel, because of how they apply to Mary. And here's how: throughout the Old Testament, the Scriptures heap praise and veneration on the temple, on Jerusalem, and on the nation of Israel, insofar as they are the dwelling place of the Most High. So then, if the temple, or if Jerusalem, is holy and precious for that reason, how much moreso the woman who was a living tabernacle?
I offer this for my Protestant and Evangelical friends who hold back from honoring Mary, and yet will be well aware of the passages I mean. Just consider how Scripture depicts the utter holiness of the ark of the covenant, and you will understand why Catholics and Orthodox give Mary such great veneration.
I don't know if I will post much this week; I'm just so happy to have the parochial vicar be a wise and level-headed priest, and to have a staff that can handle things, so I don't have to worry about things back home. The parishes are never far from my thoughts and prayers, but it is good to get a bit of a rest.
Sounds great, doesn't it? Alas, it seems it hasn't been doing so well, so it will soon close. I am sad about it because I have been here twice, and found it a perfect spot: a beach nearby, a chapel, a kitchen, restaurants, quiet, calm. Maybe things could turn around in the next two months? Or maybe someone reading this would like to take over the ministry and make a go of it?
Right after I arrived, I hit the beach, and prayed the office to the sound of the waves breaking. I thought about the choice of psalms for the office to our Lady, and it hit me (and this may have been obvious to you long before me): the Church chooses passages that speak glowingly of the temple, and of Jerusalem, Zion, Israel, because of how they apply to Mary. And here's how: throughout the Old Testament, the Scriptures heap praise and veneration on the temple, on Jerusalem, and on the nation of Israel, insofar as they are the dwelling place of the Most High. So then, if the temple, or if Jerusalem, is holy and precious for that reason, how much moreso the woman who was a living tabernacle?
I offer this for my Protestant and Evangelical friends who hold back from honoring Mary, and yet will be well aware of the passages I mean. Just consider how Scripture depicts the utter holiness of the ark of the covenant, and you will understand why Catholics and Orthodox give Mary such great veneration.
I don't know if I will post much this week; I'm just so happy to have the parochial vicar be a wise and level-headed priest, and to have a staff that can handle things, so I don't have to worry about things back home. The parishes are never far from my thoughts and prayers, but it is good to get a bit of a rest.
Saturday, September 13, 2008
Triumph of the Cross homily
In the first reading, the Lord sends “seraph” serpents: “seraph” means fiery.
Maybe that’s how it felt if you got bit by one.
The Lord sends fiery serpents as a punishment.
But stop and consider the sort of “punishment” this is.
If you’re out walking with a group,
and someone sees a snake, what happens?
Don’t you yell out, “Watch out: snake!”
Then what do you do?
Some of you will stay cool—you’ll walk away; others—you’ll run!
But the point is, you’d change direction.
That was the point: God’s People needed to change direction.
Of course, some people are hard-headed; and they got bit.
Even then, God provides a remedy:
a bronze serpent, nailed on a pole.
They only had to look at it; and it was portable—they brought it to you!
So notice: it is not we who close the distance between us and God;
it is God who always goes the extra mile,
and closes the distance between us.
He comes to us, to offer us healing.
A serpent mounted on a pole—it’s rather strange:
why would God do that?
Well, consider this.
Because it’s so strange, it would command attention.
Everyone would turn and look.
How about a man on a pole?
An innocent man, a good man, the best there ever was?
Beaten so badly it would make you throw up to see it.
And not just a man on a pole—but God!
“Behold the Man!” “Behold your God, O Israel!”
That commands the attention of the world!
“If I be lifted up,” Jesus said.
There’s another reason for putting a snake on a pole:
Everyone who got bit would recognize,
“this is about my situation—this is for me.”
And when someone suffering on the Cross—
Suffering wrongly, cruelly—
We can say, “God knows what I’m going through.”
A poor man, a powerless man—“God knows.”
But it’s also a warning: “change direction!”
The Cross is a rude reminder of what sin really is.
But remember: that man is on the cross
because other people put him there.
How much ugliness and suffering
in our world is exactly the same?
The past few weeks, a hurricane blew through Haiti,
through Florida, through Louisiana, and now Texas.
Haiti got hit the worst.
Yes, it’s true, Haiti got hit several times, but—
Even the one time was still worst for Haiti of all.
You know one reason why?
They’re poor—they don’t have our resources.
their shacks are made of garbage.
And one reason they’re poor
is the country is run by gangsters.
But here’s the thing: what do we do about it?
We sent an army half way around the world,
we’re pouring hundreds of billions into rebuilding Iraq.
But poor Haiti, lies at our door like Lazarus at the gate.
We step over Haiti every time we go all over the world--
poor Haiti doesn’t have anything we care about.
Haiti is on its cross not only because of the cruelty of some,
but also the neglect of everyone else.
Maybe that seems too remote.
People look at porn on the Internet—it’s a huge problem.
They say, “what’s the harm?”
It’s also a huge industry.
Those people in the pictures—what’s their story?
Were they desperate for money? Those pictures are forever.
Will they catch something and get sick? What will become of them?
How many people are on the cross because of the cruelty of some,
and the neglect of everyone else.
We see on the cross, a ruined, murdered man:
that’s what sin does to humanity.
Yet we call today the Triumph—the Victory—of the Cross.
Victory, because God took the worst thing,
the nightmare, and that’s where he charged in with life and hope!
We are not afraid of the crosses in our lives, because God is on the Cross with us, beside us.
We are not afraid of the power of sin, because God has offered us a remedy, hope!
How many people carry the weight of sin,
when all they have to do is come to confession,
and in a few moments, it’s all gone!
“If I be lifted up…”
As you know, I was traveling this week; I reflected on this Feast, but I was only able to write out my thoughts on Saturday. And I didn't know how to end this homily.
Well, in a sense, you will end it: the sign of the Cross is before you, what do you choose?
Maybe that’s how it felt if you got bit by one.
The Lord sends fiery serpents as a punishment.
But stop and consider the sort of “punishment” this is.
If you’re out walking with a group,
and someone sees a snake, what happens?
Don’t you yell out, “Watch out: snake!”
Then what do you do?
Some of you will stay cool—you’ll walk away; others—you’ll run!
But the point is, you’d change direction.
That was the point: God’s People needed to change direction.
Of course, some people are hard-headed; and they got bit.
Even then, God provides a remedy:
a bronze serpent, nailed on a pole.
They only had to look at it; and it was portable—they brought it to you!
So notice: it is not we who close the distance between us and God;
it is God who always goes the extra mile,
and closes the distance between us.
He comes to us, to offer us healing.
A serpent mounted on a pole—it’s rather strange:
why would God do that?
Well, consider this.
Because it’s so strange, it would command attention.
Everyone would turn and look.
How about a man on a pole?
An innocent man, a good man, the best there ever was?
Beaten so badly it would make you throw up to see it.
And not just a man on a pole—but God!
“Behold the Man!” “Behold your God, O Israel!”
That commands the attention of the world!
“If I be lifted up,” Jesus said.
There’s another reason for putting a snake on a pole:
Everyone who got bit would recognize,
“this is about my situation—this is for me.”
And when someone suffering on the Cross—
Suffering wrongly, cruelly—
We can say, “God knows what I’m going through.”
A poor man, a powerless man—“God knows.”
But it’s also a warning: “change direction!”
The Cross is a rude reminder of what sin really is.
But remember: that man is on the cross
because other people put him there.
How much ugliness and suffering
in our world is exactly the same?
The past few weeks, a hurricane blew through Haiti,
through Florida, through Louisiana, and now Texas.
Haiti got hit the worst.
Yes, it’s true, Haiti got hit several times, but—
Even the one time was still worst for Haiti of all.
You know one reason why?
They’re poor—they don’t have our resources.
their shacks are made of garbage.
And one reason they’re poor
is the country is run by gangsters.
But here’s the thing: what do we do about it?
We sent an army half way around the world,
we’re pouring hundreds of billions into rebuilding Iraq.
But poor Haiti, lies at our door like Lazarus at the gate.
We step over Haiti every time we go all over the world--
poor Haiti doesn’t have anything we care about.
Haiti is on its cross not only because of the cruelty of some,
but also the neglect of everyone else.
Maybe that seems too remote.
People look at porn on the Internet—it’s a huge problem.
They say, “what’s the harm?”
It’s also a huge industry.
Those people in the pictures—what’s their story?
Were they desperate for money? Those pictures are forever.
Will they catch something and get sick? What will become of them?
How many people are on the cross because of the cruelty of some,
and the neglect of everyone else.
We see on the cross, a ruined, murdered man:
that’s what sin does to humanity.
Yet we call today the Triumph—the Victory—of the Cross.
Victory, because God took the worst thing,
the nightmare, and that’s where he charged in with life and hope!
We are not afraid of the crosses in our lives, because God is on the Cross with us, beside us.
We are not afraid of the power of sin, because God has offered us a remedy, hope!
How many people carry the weight of sin,
when all they have to do is come to confession,
and in a few moments, it’s all gone!
“If I be lifted up…”
As you know, I was traveling this week; I reflected on this Feast, but I was only able to write out my thoughts on Saturday. And I didn't know how to end this homily.
Well, in a sense, you will end it: the sign of the Cross is before you, what do you choose?
New Site Prays for Priests
My brother priest and former instructor in the seminary (he may prefer I don't say that!) Rev. Rob Jack has created a new web site which is all about praying for priests. What a great idea, I really hope you will visit Ecce Sacerdos. Thanks to Father Jack for this; also visit his other site.
Some people think priests have a golden ticket to heaven; I truly believe it is the opposite.
Scripture makes clear that pastors and those with a prophetic or teaching role will be held to answer for whether they warned people from a path leading them to danger and eternal damnation. How many souls may end up in hell because I chose not to confront or challenge? And how can God not hold me accountable for that?
Then, when I do stand up and teach and challenge, I reprove myself! Do I practice what I preach? I certainly do not.
Priests are subject to every temptation of every other man, and a few others besides. We are tempted to misuse our power, and we are tempted to slack off. We are tempted to feel sorry for ourselves or to think our sacrifices or challenges are so much greater than others, when that is far from true. We are tempted to say and do what will win applause or will make things more pleasant. We are tempted to congratulate ourselves as being prophetic when all we're being is a pain.
So, yes, I know many people pray for priests, and I am grateful; I thought you might like some additional reasons for doing so.
Some people think priests have a golden ticket to heaven; I truly believe it is the opposite.
Scripture makes clear that pastors and those with a prophetic or teaching role will be held to answer for whether they warned people from a path leading them to danger and eternal damnation. How many souls may end up in hell because I chose not to confront or challenge? And how can God not hold me accountable for that?
Then, when I do stand up and teach and challenge, I reprove myself! Do I practice what I preach? I certainly do not.
Priests are subject to every temptation of every other man, and a few others besides. We are tempted to misuse our power, and we are tempted to slack off. We are tempted to feel sorry for ourselves or to think our sacrifices or challenges are so much greater than others, when that is far from true. We are tempted to say and do what will win applause or will make things more pleasant. We are tempted to congratulate ourselves as being prophetic when all we're being is a pain.
So, yes, I know many people pray for priests, and I am grateful; I thought you might like some additional reasons for doing so.
Friday, September 12, 2008
'Dominus Vobiscum' (Back from Chicago)
I got back from Chicago a couple of hours ago, and have been catching up on things. Sorry for no posts about the workshop on training in the Extraordinary Form of the Mass, but no real Internet access at the Cardinal Stritch Retreat House (someone told me I could go into the kitchen and use a PC there, but I figured the folks in the kitchen didn't need me bothering them).
More substantive comments will have to come another day, this post will have just brief thoughts:
> The older, "Tridentine" form of the Mass is a mystery to a lot of Catholics, including a lot of priests, and it should be noted that from the perspective of history, this is "the Mass" for most of the life of the Roman segment of the Church. This form of the Mass has not changed all that much since about the time of St. Gregory the Great, in the 600s! The rubrics and ceremonial are daunting; but don't let that deter you.
> It was enlightening to tap into this great heritage. A lot of lights about the current form of the Mass turned on. On my drive home, I thought about the Holy Father's express wish that the two forms of the Mass influencing each other, and thinking through what that might look like. There are many ways the current form of the Mass could be celebrated in a way in more continuity with the Mass of the prior 1400 years: the priest and people facing the same way, or the use of Latin and chant, or greater use of silence are three examples that come readily to mind.
> But at the same time, one can see the merit of changes that came in the wake of the Council, such as restoring the intercessions and the procession of the gifts, and the change in how the readings are proclaimed. But many have the idea that such changes represent a repudiation of the classic Mass, when in fact, they are either restoring something that dropped out along the way, or were ideals imbedded in the older Mass but not often realized. A lot of people assume is the whole of the older form of the Mass--the very quiet low Mass--is but one variation of the older Missal. But the thing is, the sung and solemn forms of the older Mass were seldom experienced; in many ways, the reform after the Council aimed to make what was experience in the rare solmen Mass far more common.
> A great bunch of guys. I met several of the priests of the Canons Regular of St. John Cantius Parish in Chicago, several brothers who are part of the community, and they were very helpful to the eight priests, from all over the country, who came for training. We had a lot of fun. But it was work--studying the rubrics of the classic Mass, and then attempting to apply them; our priest-instructors patiently walked us through the Mass, continually reminding us of various details we were slopping up. We made a lot of progress, although there will be no substitute for a lot more practice.
> So what next? I have to obtain a 1962 Roman Missal--they cost $500, so I'd be delighted to find one used or tucked away somewhere--and I still have things to learn.
> What does this mean for us in Piqua? Well, nothing sudden or surprising. Recall that Pope Benedict said priests should "willingly accede" to requests from the faithful for the older from of Mass, and that's what I am going to do. I've had one request so far (for a man's funeral), and I expect more will come in time; as they come, I'll deal with them.
> In the meantime, I believe this will help me appreciate the Mass even more and approach it with greater reverence. I think everyone would benefit from understanding the older form of the Mass, and experiencing it.
I'm back for a bit, then heading off for vacation after Mass on Sunday.
More substantive comments will have to come another day, this post will have just brief thoughts:
> The older, "Tridentine" form of the Mass is a mystery to a lot of Catholics, including a lot of priests, and it should be noted that from the perspective of history, this is "the Mass" for most of the life of the Roman segment of the Church. This form of the Mass has not changed all that much since about the time of St. Gregory the Great, in the 600s! The rubrics and ceremonial are daunting; but don't let that deter you.
> It was enlightening to tap into this great heritage. A lot of lights about the current form of the Mass turned on. On my drive home, I thought about the Holy Father's express wish that the two forms of the Mass influencing each other, and thinking through what that might look like. There are many ways the current form of the Mass could be celebrated in a way in more continuity with the Mass of the prior 1400 years: the priest and people facing the same way, or the use of Latin and chant, or greater use of silence are three examples that come readily to mind.
> But at the same time, one can see the merit of changes that came in the wake of the Council, such as restoring the intercessions and the procession of the gifts, and the change in how the readings are proclaimed. But many have the idea that such changes represent a repudiation of the classic Mass, when in fact, they are either restoring something that dropped out along the way, or were ideals imbedded in the older Mass but not often realized. A lot of people assume is the whole of the older form of the Mass--the very quiet low Mass--is but one variation of the older Missal. But the thing is, the sung and solemn forms of the older Mass were seldom experienced; in many ways, the reform after the Council aimed to make what was experience in the rare solmen Mass far more common.
> A great bunch of guys. I met several of the priests of the Canons Regular of St. John Cantius Parish in Chicago, several brothers who are part of the community, and they were very helpful to the eight priests, from all over the country, who came for training. We had a lot of fun. But it was work--studying the rubrics of the classic Mass, and then attempting to apply them; our priest-instructors patiently walked us through the Mass, continually reminding us of various details we were slopping up. We made a lot of progress, although there will be no substitute for a lot more practice.
> So what next? I have to obtain a 1962 Roman Missal--they cost $500, so I'd be delighted to find one used or tucked away somewhere--and I still have things to learn.
> What does this mean for us in Piqua? Well, nothing sudden or surprising. Recall that Pope Benedict said priests should "willingly accede" to requests from the faithful for the older from of Mass, and that's what I am going to do. I've had one request so far (for a man's funeral), and I expect more will come in time; as they come, I'll deal with them.
> In the meantime, I believe this will help me appreciate the Mass even more and approach it with greater reverence. I think everyone would benefit from understanding the older form of the Mass, and experiencing it.
I'm back for a bit, then heading off for vacation after Mass on Sunday.
Sunday, September 07, 2008
My homily today will be extremely brief.
Every year at this time I give a financial report. This year, I am doing it at the conclusion of Mass, to avoid taking anything away from the Mass itself with a report on mundane matters, and also, to allow you to ask questions.
I cannot force you to stay at the end of Mass for this report, but I beg of you to do so.
And now my brief homily:
(Sign of the Cross)
You just heard our Lord tell us how powerful our prayers and action can be.
The only limit is a hard heart:
if we place limits on what we will believe God can do,
and what we will allow God to do through us.
Christ is in our midst! The Eucharist is Jesus—and he is here now!
Harden not your hearts, and He will work miracles in our lives!
Every year at this time I give a financial report. This year, I am doing it at the conclusion of Mass, to avoid taking anything away from the Mass itself with a report on mundane matters, and also, to allow you to ask questions.
I cannot force you to stay at the end of Mass for this report, but I beg of you to do so.
And now my brief homily:
(Sign of the Cross)
You just heard our Lord tell us how powerful our prayers and action can be.
The only limit is a hard heart:
if we place limits on what we will believe God can do,
and what we will allow God to do through us.
Christ is in our midst! The Eucharist is Jesus—and he is here now!
Harden not your hearts, and He will work miracles in our lives!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)