DECEMBER 2001

Knowing

the Holy Trinity

By John Young

The moral life in

biblical perspective

By E.J. Echeverria

homiletic

&

pastoral

review

Does God really love us?

By John M. McDermott

Thanksgiving after
Holy Communion

By Edwin Gordon

Catholic Revolution

IP House ad

[pickup from Aug/Sept ’01 issue]

DECEMBER 2001

1

DECEMBER 2001

Editor
Kenneth Baker, S.J.
Managing editor
Charles F. Harvey
Contributing editor
Msgr. Wm. B. Smith
Advertising manager
Elizabeth Schmitz

Homiletic & Pastoral Review
(ISSN 0018-4268) is published by
Ignatius Press, 2515 McAllister St.,
San Francisco, CA 94118
Advertising inquiries may be sent
to this address.

HPR appears monthly, except bi-month-
ly for August-September, and is avail-
able on Microfilm through University
Microfilms, International, 300 North
Zeeb Rd., Ann Arbor, MI 48106.
Periodical postage paid for at San Fran-
cisco, Calif., and at additional offices.

© Ignatius Press 2001.
Address all editorial materials to
Kenneth Baker, S.J.
50 S. Franklin Turnpike, P.O. Box 297
Ramsey, NJ 07446

Rates: US: $26-1 year, $48-2 years.
Canada: surface mail US$35.82-1 year,
US$67.36-2 years; airmail US$44.82-1
year, US$85.36-2 years. All Canadian
rates include GST. All other countries
surface mail US$34-1 year, US$64-2
years. Mexico airmail US$43-1 year,
US$82-2 years. All other countries air-
mail: US$61-1 year, US$118-2 years.

Single copies available at $4.00
per copy postpaid.
Address service requested.
Postmaster send address changes to:
Homiletic & Pastoral Review,
P.O. Box 591810, San Francisco, CA
94159-1810

New Orders and Renewals:
1-800-651-1531
Customer Service: 1-800-353-2324

Publication No. USPS 889-740

Volume CII, No. 3

homiletic

&

pastoral

review

2 Worth noting

3 Letters from our readers

7 Does God really love us?

By John M. McDermott
The cross proves God loves us.

18 Thanksgiving after Communion

By Ed Gordon
Our response to Communion should be gratitude.

22 Knowing the Holy Trinity

By John Young
The Trinity is the sina qua non of our Faith.

28 The moral life in biblical perspective

By Eduardo J. Echeverria
Jesus came to fulfill the Old Testament.

33 Homilies on the liturgy of the Sundays and feasts

By Wade L.J. Menezes

50 Story of a parish

By Elizabeth A. Wittman
Good parishes are worth the effort to find.

57 St. Philip Neri: Model for renewal

By Marc B. Caron
St. Philip’s model for holiness is time-tested.

61 On evangelization and peace movements

By Ansgar Santogrossi
Worldly peace is not heavenly peace.

67 My favorite priest — Called to the other side

By James Flint

69 Questions answered by Wm B. Smith

72 Book reviews

80 Jesus and the dignity of man — Editorial

2

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

DOES GOD REALLY LOVE US? . . . Since Vatican II many who call themselves
“Catholic” have been bitterly criticizing the Church for being dogmatic
and legalistic. This reflects a type of subjectivism in both philosophy and
theology which is closely related to what has been called “transcendental
philosophy.” It tends to locate truth in the judgment and to dehistoricize
the facts of salvation history contained in the Bible and in the Tradition of
the Church. This month Fr. John M. McDermott, S.J., points out some of the
weaknesses in the transcendental approach and also reminds us that our
faith is based on the deeds and words of God—not on some philosophical
theory of knowledge.Yes, God does love us and he proved it by dying for us
on the cross (p. 7).

THANKSGIVING AFTER MASS . . . Recently more and more people have
complained to me about talking and laughing in church; there is also a
problem of casual dress and casual conduct, men and women dressed in
shorts and scanty sportswear. One result of this casual approach to God is
that now, in many parishes, it is almost impossible to make a quiet thanks-
giving after receiving Holy Communion. In this issue Fr. Edwin Gordon
addresses this serious problem. He analyzes the source of the problem
and offers some suggestions on how to remedy it (p. 18).

ONE GOD—THREE PERSONS . . . The fundamental mystery of our Catholic
faith is that of the Holy Trinity. The word “trinity” means three in one, that is,
God has revealed himself as one in nature and three in persons. In this issue
Mr. John Young, who has had much experience in teaching the Catholic
doctrine on the Trinity, gives us a brief and clear explanation of what the
Church understands by the mystery of the Holy Trinity.We who are priests
should preach on this matter and explain it to our people, at the very least
on Trinity Sunday. For if our people do not have a basic knowledge of the
Trinity, they cannot understand who Jesus Christ is (Second Person;Word
of God) (p. 22).

THE BIBLE AND MORALITY . . . The homosexual lobby bombards us with
arguments from many areas, including the Bible, in their vain effort to try to
prove that homosexual acts are not sins but perfective of human love. In this
issue Professor Eduardo J. Echeverria shows that attempts to use the Bible
do not hold up under scrutiny. He demonstrates that a distinction must be
made between the moral demands of the Old Testament and the cultic/legal
prescriptions. Jesus came to fulfill the OT as the perfect sacrifice for sins, so
the cultic/legal laws of the OT were abolished. But the Ten Commandments
remain (p. 28).—K.B.

worth noting . . .

DECEMBER 2001

3

letters

from our readers

Hopefully optimistic

Editor: I am writing this letter simply to

thank you for all you have done to make Hom-
iletic and Pastoral Review the finest Catholic
magazine on the market. I have always known
HPR to be a professional magazine for priests
and deacons and other religious, but for a
layperson as myself it has been a godsend. St.
Basil the Great said the activity of the mind
can move in two directions, towards fantasy
and towards truth and it is the movement to-
wards truth that leads to the likeness of God.
Since the late seventies in my experience
down here in Alabama, the control of the
Church from my vantage point in the congre-
gation appears to have been one of constant
hostilities waged by battle or propaganda be-
tween the liberal or progressive Catholics who
have turned the truth into fantasy and the char-
ismatic Catholics who have turned their fan-
tasies into the truth, each having the same re-
sult with the only difference being a matter of
taste. The tragedy is the Body of Christ con-
tinues to bleed. Your magazine has helped me
see the plight of both the religious and the lay-
men who have been stonewalled by the con-
fusion and din set up by these two groups who
constantly seek to divide and conquer. Some-
times when I’m ready to give up, your maga-
zine arrives with its courage and intelligence
but most of all its hope.

I have recently become hopefully opti-

mistic at seeing the new priests who have been
ordained in our diocese. Wholesome and man-
ly, they are a real challenge to those spoiled,
supercilious and distant priests of my own
baby boomer generation. And when I am priv-
ileged to read the incisive and analytical work
of a young seminarian, Brother Michael
Callea, “Human Sexuality: God’s Plans vs. a

Modern Alternative, August-September 2001
HPR), which slices through the current babel
and contrasts and differentiates the gospel of
the post modernist (the sixties crowd and their
descendants) with the gospel of Christ, I know
that hope is not in vain or one of foolish opti-
mism. Then above the cacophony so preva-
lent in the Church congregation at present, I
can hear Christ say: The gates of hell shall not
prevail against my Church.

Thanks again, to you, Fr. Baker, and thanks

to HPR. You bring great honor to the Society
of Jesus.

Edgar Wyatt Stephens

Montgomery, Ala.

Loaded with Catholic truth

Editor: The article by Michael Vere is

so poignant, so practical, so insightful. The
August-September issue of HPR seemed to
be loaded with Catholic truth; congratula-
tions!

May I add one item of discernment of the

Holy Spirit’s mind for each of us? Make a re-
quirement in each diocese that every postu-
lant for the priesthood, nay for religious life,
do what St. Ignatius required of those wish-
ing to enter the Society of Jesus—the Thirty
Day Retreat, the entire Spiritual Exercises.
Life will be successful for every one of us if
we follow God’s Will. And what better method
to find that Will than through the Spiritual
Exercises?

Also, trust in God’s providence will come

through the Exercises; the money will follow.
If it is God’s Will that one follow Jesus as a
member of the Third Class of Men and of the
Third Kind of Humility, the means will cer-
tainly be given.

4

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

Prayer, of course, must follow; we need to

depend totally upon God; we cannot persevere
without prayer and sacrifices. I know: I
stopped praying for a time.

John C. Morris, M.D.

Orinda, Calif.

Praise for minor seminaries

Editor: As I read Michael Vere’s article

“Rethinking Financial Policies Regarding
Vocations” (August-September 2001). I
couldn’t help but think of the wisdom of the
past, the Veterum Sapientia, in having High
School Seminaries for young men thinking
about a vocation to the priesthood. In these
seminaries the students could really focus on
whether God was calling them to be priests.
At the same time their education for life, be it
as a priest or as a laymen was well provided
for. I taught in such a seminary for nine years
(1963-1972). I have never heard a student
complain about or belittle the education he
received; in fact the opposite is true.

When I entered such a seminary in 1943,

the tuition was 25.00 per month, if one’s par-
ents could afford it. Ability to pay the tuition
was never a factor in admitting or retaining a
student.

From the forty-two that entered our class

in 1943 nine became priests and two became
Franciscan brothers. The class the year before
had a similar enrollment of about 40, and nine
of them became priests. Admittedly the rate
of perseverance for later years became much
less. The class of 1960 started with 105; four
are now Franciscan priests, one is a diocesan
priest, and one is a Benedictine priest. One
became a Franciscan brother. But at least we
were getting some vocations. The Cincinnati
province of Franciscans went from 1991-1998
without a single ordination! (During that same
period about 55 died and 20 quit for other
reasons.) Certainly a few vocations are better

than none!

Attending a High School Seminary was

not the financial burden which modern day
seminarians face. Students at such a seminary
lost nothing academically; in fact they gained,
even though there may have been a concen-
tration on such subjects as Latin, Greek, and
other languages.

I don’t know what the rate of perseverance

is in contemporary seminaries. One would
expect it to be somewhat higher because of the
presumed greater age and maturity of the stu-
dents. One can’t help but wonder if the possi-
ble financial difficulties do not deter some
from even giving it a try.

One of the first major projects for the Fran-

ciscans coming to Cincinnati from Tyrol, Ger-
many in the 1850s was to start a High School
Seminary, a Gymnasium as it was called in
those days. That certainly was a major reason
why before Vatican II the Cincinnati Francis-
can Province numbered over four hundred
priests, and over one hundred students in
Philosophy and Theology. Those days are
probably gone forever. It’s a good thing we
don’t have to attribute infallibility to decisions
made by the powers that be. But I am sure that
no student who ever attended our High School
Seminaries is now burdened with financial
debts because he decided to discontinue his
studies for the priesthood. Can we say any-
thing else, except, O Veterum Sapientia?

Fr. Valentine Young, O.F.M.

Rapid City, S.D.

Aiding the incarcerated

Editor: As usual, the articles in Homiletic

& Pastoral Review are excellent, but I do want
to especially commend Mr. Russell L. Ford
for his article in your August-September issue.
What an erudite and common sense article in
every way. Mr. Ford’s comments were cogent,
thoughtful, charitable and directly to the point.

DECEMBER 2001

5

I wish him well always, and may the Lord
bless his ministry in every way, and help him
and all like-minded succeed in aiding both the
incarcerated, and those of us who often times
do not think about this subject as fully as we
should.

Nicholas Falco

Bronx, N.Y.

Discerning private revelations

Editor: I write in response to Donal Fo-

ley’s article “Marian Apparitions: Some Les-
sons from History” in the June 2001 number
of the HPR. While I appreciate Dr. Foley’s de-
clared intentions in writing the article, I find
it lacking in offering clear foundations for
those who are seeking enlightenment on “ap-
paritions unapproved by the Church.” Further,
a number of his assumptions seem to me quite
questionable.

First, he doesn’t even deal with first prin-

ciples, i.e., the difference between public and
private revelation nor does he deal with the
Church’s criteria for discerning the latter. Ef-
fectively he proposes the eight apparitions
which he cites on p. 10 and which span from
1830 to 1933 as a “canon” of accepted private
revelations with Fatima as their centerpiece.
(Please note that I do not question the authen-
ticity of these apparitions nor the central im-
portance of Fatima.) He does this without even

recognizing that Knock was never officially
approved by the local bishop and only re-
ceived equivalent “official” approval when
Pope John Paul II went there and presented
the golden rose on the centenary of the appari-
tion! That should have alerted him that the
matters with which he is dealing are not quite
as simple as he would have us believe. Like-
wise his treatment of the question of the al-
leged apparitions to Ida Peerdeman leaves
much to be desired in the way of objectivity.

The very fact that Mr. Foley says that “it is

possible to argue that God is actually obliged,
in a certain sense, to stop giving prophecies,
writings or apparitions once a certain point is
reached, for fear of confusing people” mani-
fests a profound lack of understanding of
God’s ways of dealing with men by means of
both public and private revelation. The latter
never present “new” truths, but keep calling
to mind aspects of the public revelation that
are often overlooked, forgotten or unexplored.
Further, there is abundant evidence that the
Mother of God has manifested her maternal
concern in calling her children to a deeper
understanding of the truths of the faith, includ-
ing that of her own maternal mediation, from
the earliest days of the Church. Gottfried
Hierzenberger and Otto Nedomansky provide
an enormous amount of documentation, even
if it was not always possible to assess it by
modern historical criteria, that Our Lady has
shown her care for her children in every era

A

POLOGETICS

B

OOKS

,

T

APES

,

D

EBATES

,

AND

S

EMINARS BY

Patrick Madrid

800-553-6869

•

w ww.surprisedbytruth.com

6

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

of the Church’s history and that countless
shrines testify to this (cf. Tutte le apparizioni
della Madonna in 2000 anni di storia trans.
Vincenzo Noja, Casale Monferrato: Edizioni
Piemme, 1996, pp. 518).

Should we assume that God will stop inter-

vening in the lives of his people and that Mary
will stop manifesting her motherly solicitude
just because there are already too many “false
apparitions”? I believe that the pattern already
established indicates the contrary. Should we
be concerned about the Church’s judgment
about such interventions? Of course. If the
Church does not issue an “official” judgment
or even issues a negative one, is the matter
simply finished? No. The Holy Office issued
a negative judgment about the writings of St.
Faustina Kowalska which was reversed 20
years later. As the Bishop of Gikongoro has
just reminded us in rendering a judgment
about the apparitions of Kibeho, “The recog-
nition or negation of the authenticity of an
apparition does not guarantee infallibility: it
is based on proofs of probability more than on
apodictic arguments.”

I do not deny that there is much need for

discernment regarding the many apparitions,
prophetic words and writings of supposed
“mystics” which seem to be abounding in
our day, but I don’t believe that Mr. Foley’s
article has offered much in the way of clari-
fication.

Msgr. Arthur B. Calkins

Pontificia Commissio “Ecclesia Dei”
Vatican City State

Eulogies at a funeral Mass

Editor: I read with interest the article by

Father Michael P. Orsi on “Changing Litur-
gical Rites” in July’s HPR. I have never seen
a “Unity Candle” and the blessing of children
at Communion does not happen in my parish.
However, Father Orsi’s comments on eulogies

rang a bell.

A few weeks ago, a prominent public ser-

vant died in my community. The local news-
paper carried a full report of the funeral. It
included the fact that two local politicians, a
Congressman and an Assemblyman, gave the
eulogies at the funeral Mass. Both of these
men have long and consistent records as pub-
lic supporters of abortion.

I was not at that funeral, but I attended

another a few years ago. One of those same
two men mounted the pulpit of a Catholic
church and gave a eulogy. The feeling of shock
and dismay is only surpassed by that of see-
ing someone like that march up the aisle to
Communion.

Father Orsi would like to restrict the eulo-

gy at the Mass. I would like to see it com-
pletely omitted in the Mass. Let it be done at
the funeral home. This will take a lot of heat
off the pastor.

Thomas J. Fitzgerald

Kingston, N.Y.

Signs instead of symbols

Editor: The time has come to think about
having signs in church instead of symbols.
Symbols were used when people couldn’t
read. The saying of a saint, tastefully done,
would be much more helpful than mere
symbols.

The businesses in stores use signs every-

where. They are effective or merchants
wouldn’t use them. They are sharp and know
they work.

An example of a sign or two: “We should

not accept in silence the blessings of God,
but return thanks for them,” St. Basil. “With
Christ victory is certain. St. Bernard.” These
could be changed monthly. Something to
think about.

Fr. Rawley Myers

Colorado Springs, Colo.

DECEMBER 2001

7

■ Recently a seminarian returning from a
conference on evangelization reported to me
his dismay at the attitudes of many religious
whom he met there. It seemed that they were
full of spleen against the Church, and frustra-
tion was expressed especially by those who
had spent time in the “missions.” The Church
was constantly being criticized for not adapt-
ing herself and her message to the needs of the
people, even if that “adaptation” would in-
volve changing what the seminarian had
learned to be the official dogmatic and moral
teachings of the Church. It was painful to the
seminarian that the very pope who called for
the renewed evangelization and himself is the
world’s greatest preacher of Christ should be
reviled by many. That the institutional Church
which contributed mightily to the formation,
education, and financial support of the work
of so many religious missionaries should be
reviled as a hindrance to evangelization seems
contradictory. Yet a similar negative reaction

was manifested after the Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith issued Dominus Iesus,
an elenchus of central points of Catholic
teaching in danger of being overlooked by
some in their desire for ecumenical under-
standing.

Why have the Church and the pope come

to be seen in various quarters as an obstacle to
evangelization? Such a negative attitude dif-
fers vastly from the support which the insti-
tutional Church and the pope enjoyed in my
youth before Vatican II, a council which Pope
John XXIII called to renew the Church but
which seemed to sow confusion among many
Catholics and has led to the need for renewed
evangelization. Whence arose this discord?
How can it be overcome?

Back to basics pre-Vatican II

While many of the changes in American

Catholic consciousness can be assigned to

As divine Love incarnate, Jesus alone can assure
us of love’s reality
not just in words but in convincing deeds.

Does God really love us?
Reflections on ecclesial life

By John M. McDermott

8

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

sociological trends: the economic and social
assimilation of Irish and German Catholics
into the American mainstream, Dr. Spock and
the anti-authoritarian revolt of the ‘60s, the
nuclear family and its breakdown, the con-
sumer model of living, the acceptance of rad-
ical intellectual pluralism and post-modern
individualism, etc., one must admit that the
changes came from within the Church by peo-
ple offering ideological justifications for their
behavior. Hence it is from the theological
viewpoint that the changes just described are
more easily explained, even if the following
analysis must per force rely on somewhat
broad strokes.

1

Previous to Vatican II the dominant theol-

ogy relied on a conceptualist interpretation of
St. Thomas. At the most basic level being is
grasped in a concept; if being can be concep-
tualized, however analogously, then it is the-
oretically possible to conceptualize all beings
that make up reality. This conceptualization
of reality implies that the realities so concep-
tualized can be clearly distinguished from
each other: one concept is not another, hence
one reality conceptualized is not another. The
conceptual distinction is nowhere so clear as
between natural and supernatural orders.
While the proportionate object of human intel-
ligence is the essence of a material reality and

God’s existence can be known analogously by
the analysis of finite beings in motion, the
interior life of God must remain hidden until
it is revealed. The divine legate entrusted with
this task was, of course, Jesus Christ. Reveal-
ing supernatural truths, i.e., truths surpassing
the intellect’s natural grasp, Jesus called men
to faith. Even though men cannot understand
the interior reasons for the supernatural truths,
men’s salvation depends upon their accep-
tance.

The imposition of these supernatural truths

was justified by an appeal to man’s hapless
state. No one lives as he wishes to live, in
accord with morality. All sin. Society has al-
ways been torn by dissention and the lust for
power, possessions, and pleasure which exists
in institutional structures as well as in indi-
vidual hearts. A brief look at the world or even
at the newspaper headlines confirms the plight
of sinful humanity. And an honest look at
one’s own heart reveals guilt and the impos-
sibility of overcoming it on one’s own. When
St. Paul described “indwelling sin,” he touched
the heart of the problem:

I find it to be a law that when I want to do right,
evil lies close at hand. For I delight in the law of
God according to the inner man, but I see in my
members another law at war with the law of my
mind and making me captive to the law of sin
which dwells in my members. Wretched man that
I am! Who will deliver me from this body of
death? (Rom. 7:21-24)

The misery of this existential plight is

heightened when one realizes that man’s life
continues beyond death and he will be judged
according to his works. Life would be intol-
erable were it not for Jesus Christ who prom-
ised forgiveness, grace, and eternal life to
those who believe in him.

Lest faith dissolve into an irrational leap

motivated by hope of spiritual gain, historical
arguments are offered for accepting Christ’s
message. Through the prophecies Jesus ful-
filled and the miracles he worked God testi-
fied to the veracity of Jesus’ claims. Once

Jesus’ authority is accepted, his message can
be securely believed. Although even in faith
the content of the message cannot be com-
pletely comprehended, the revealed proposi-
tions allow a certain analogous understand-
ing. So theologians occupy themselves with
drawing analogies between truths naturally
known and those supernaturally revealed as
well as by illuminating the connection of the
revealed truths among themselves and with
man’s final end, the beatific vision (DS 3016).
But insofar as analogous knowledge cannot
be precise in dealing with truths transcending
the human mind, for times of crisis the need
of a magisterium to preserve, interpret, and
define Christian belief, as entrusted to it in
Scripture and tradition, is self-evident. For
that reason Christ established an institutional
Church build on Peter and the other disciples.

Such a Church was very authoritarian from

the pope down to the local pastor, and believ-
ers were reluctant to criticize office-holders
who preserved mysteries beyond their ken.
Yet anyone who experienced the pre-Vatican
II Church must confess that believers were not
constantly groaning under the weight of au-
thority, bemoaning their lot, nor criticizing the
stupidity of priests and bishops. While no
priest or religious could ever live up to the dig-
nity of his or her calling, on the whole Ameri-
can clergy and religious were admirable in
their lives of dedication to the Church and her
people. There was also a great joy in that
Church, as was witnessed by the great num-
bers of young people who flocked to enter the
priesthood and religious life. Life was hard
and living consecrated lives certainly de-
manded sacrifices, but the reason for joy was
great: in a sinful world God offered through
his Church forgiveness, grace, and mission.
Where most “moderns,” even before “post-
modernism,” were wallowing in confusion,
Catholics possessed a meaning for their lives.
As children of God, they were called to spread
Christ’s message and kingdom, and in bear-

ing the toils and disappointments of life they
did not expect a better fate than their crucified
Lord. Indeed, they could rejoice because their
sufferings were less than his, yet a share in his
eternal glory was promised to them.

2

Being a

Catholic in the fullness of truth and grace was
a great blessing for which Catholics were eter-
nally grateful, and they thanked the institu-
tional Church for its mediation of salvation.

The theological metamorphosis

Such a positive view of the Church, which

I still carry from my youth, cannot easily be
discerned in the spate of Church-bashing
books and plays that spurted from Catholic
and ex-Catholic pens after the Council. Surely
the pre-conciliar Church was not without
faults, but much of the wounded spite derives,
I suspect, from disappointment with the ap-
parent failure of the claims of the conceptual-
ist theology and then from the imposition of
novel, foreign norms of judgment upon the
pre-conciliar institutional Church.

At Vatican II the conceptualist theology,

in which the vast majority of bishops were
trained, did not simply prevail.

3

A “new the-

ology” influenced the course of the Council
and led to the rejection of the first schemata
proposed and their drastic revision. With dif-
ferent emphases it rewrote in more “pastoral
language” the conceptualist proposals. But it
is ridiculous to imagine that this “new theol-
ogy” completely carried the day. The bishops
were hardly beardless revolutionaries anxious
to jettison their previous training when still
unaware of the storm that would threaten the
Church in the coming generations. A com-
promise of the two theologies came about, a
vision which Paul VI and John Paul II have
sought to maintain and promulgate. Their dif-
ficulties were many. Even though the faith
cannot be reduced to a simple philosophy, a
truth which the “new theologians” reiterated
in their initial plea for toleration, the human

DECEMBER 2001

9

10

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

mind is constantly tempted to rationalize its
basic faith and draw apparently “consistent”
conclusions from first premises. The better
“new theologians” recognized the limits of
their philosophical foundations, but many
self-proclaimed disciples employed the new
insights as an ideology and wrought havoc in
the Church.

4

The “new theology” has been dubbed

“transcendental Thomism” because it tran-
scends the conceptualist categories of the
older theology in relying on the existential
judgment to put the mind in contact with real-
ity and so uncover the conditions of possibil-
ity for all thought.

5

“Truth is in judgment.” By

privileging judgment these thinkers thought
it possible to assimilate the turn to the subject
which modern philosophy had undergone
without losing the mind’s contact with objec-
tive reality. This would encourage dialogue
with the modern world and by adapting eccle-
sial language to current thought categories
facilitate modern man’s acceptance of Catho-
lic truth. For judgment involves the active
involvement of the intellect, which, referring
the concept back to the concrete reality from
which it is abstracted, comes to a reflective
judgment about reality with the concomitant
awareness that truth has been attained.

There is a danger in privileging existential

judgment. For the judgment transcends the
concept, which is only a part of the judgment.
Hence, it might be argued, the concept does
not grasp reality adequately and is relativized
through the further judgmental act. The con-
cept’s relativization threatens to destroy the
sharp distinctions of conceptualist thought.
Nowhere is that more apparent than in regard
to the natural-supernatural distinction. If the
mind’s activity carries it beyond the concept,
what must be its goal? Nothing finite can
ground the mind’s movement; for once any
finite reality, conceptualized or otherwise, is
recognized as finite, the mind immediately
transcends it. Only the infinite God can satis-

fy the mind’s innate desire for truth. This ful-
fillment of desire is not accomplished by a
concept of God, for a concept of God, qua
finite, would be transcended. Only God’s es-
sence can serve as the termination of the
mind’s desire. But to see God in his essence
constitutes the beatific vision, a supernatural
mystery. Transcendental Thomists appeal here
to Thomas’ doctrine of the natural desire for
the beatific vision, but they admit that the doc-
trine is “paradoxical.” In order to be itself,
nature has to be more than nature.

6

Such a paradoxical doctrine has amazing

consequences. Since God directly calls each
person to salvation, man’s every intellectual
and voluntary action is oriented to the beatif-
ic vision, the gift of grace. Wishing to save all
men (1 Tim. 2:4-6), God offers them grace
interiorly in their initial free act. Insofar as no
one can please God without faith (Heb. 11:6),
the free, positive response to grace must in-
volve the acceptance of faith. Such a faith
need not be expressly formulated in concep-
tual propositions—millions have never heard
of Christ—nor need it be mediated by the
Church’s magisterium. Such a faith must be
“athematic,” i.e., implicitly contained in a
“transcendental experience” mediated only
by the subject’s natural spiritual dynamism in
responding to God, who makes himself pre-
sent to all as final cause. As K. Rahner wrote,
“The entire content of the Christian message
of faith is given in a transcendental experi-
ence.”

7

Faith has become a personal encounter

between man and the self-revealing God.
This transition to a non-conceptual faith de-
rives from several theoretical presuppositions.
Because the judgment is a reflexive act, man
must somehow be aware, however unthemat-
ically, of what is occurring in himself. More-
over, because grace is understood primarily
as uncreated grace, God’s self-giving, man
must be aware, however unthematically, of
God’s presence in his soul. Such an intellec-
tual awareness of God involves God’s self-

revelation, and insofar as faith involves the
response to God’s revelation, faith can occur
implicitly in the depth of the human being
even without exterior, ecclesially authorized
preaching. Thus the basis for “anonymous
Christianity” is laid. Ecclesial preaching is to
presuppose faith in its “pagan” audience and
only aims to lead to explicit formulation the
faith already believed. Such a theory also
grounds an ecclesiology whereby believers
come to the Church as the necessary, full ex-
pression of their faith and a theory whereby
sacraments are effective signs of grace ex
opere operato insofar as they are final causes
and expressions of grace already received.

8

It

likewise explains how the development of
dogma can proceed from an initial global
awareness of the Christian mystery to later,
explicit formulations in dogmatic definitions.

9

Such a theology avoids any impression

that Christian faith is imposed arbitrarily from
without. Instead Christianity is seen as the ful-
fillment of human nature, the plenitude to
which all are called. As an added benefit it
shows that Christian belief involves not mere-
ly an intellectual assent and the fulfillment of
abstract moral principles but a commitment
of the whole person to God. Nonetheless the
emphasis on interiority and the continuity of
natural and supernatural orders can have dev-
astating consequences in ecclesial Catholic-
ism. Everyone is as close to God as everyone
else and God wishes to save all equally. Since
abstractions, necessarily employed in dog-
matic formulations and moral prohibitions,
cannot be ultimate, one’s personal experience
of God tends to become the norm of all doc-
trines and codes of moral behavior. Lonergan
identified the subjective authenticity of the
converted theologian as the norm for judging
doctrine, and many proponents of propor-
tionalism have declared that the free subject
is ultimately responsible for selecting the
moral norms appropriate to his circum-
stances.

10

The norm of converted subjectivi-

ty can admittedly be quite amorphous, and
everything can apparently be included in it.
For if God is infinitely transcendent, he is also
infinitely immanent—there are no bounds to
infinity—and all positive reality is dynami-
cally oriented to union with him. If the refer-
ence to subjectivity is absolutized, the portals
are thrown wide open to subjective arbitrari-
ness. I remember one official speaker at a
province meeting assuring the young people
in formation that the institution was intended
to help them attain self-fulfillment. Thus all
finite reality, the ecclesial institution includ-
ed, becomes relativized not only to God but
also to the finite subjectivity in immediate
contact with God. In this way the utter tran-
scendence of God can be reduced to a means
of effecting human self-fulfillment and the
whole sense of historical mediation can be
lost.

Without doubt the foremost transcenden-

tal theologians: Rousselot, Marechal, de Lu-
bac, Rahner, and Lonergan, took precautions
against reducing all to human subjectivity.

11

They sought to maintain the validity of the
concept of being and the reference to histori-
cal mediation. Rahner and Lonergan, for in-
stance, postulated Christ as the perfect expres-
sion of grace in history and the norm for all
other free responses to grace. Jesus realized
in a preeminent manner what all are called to
become.

12

But given the distance in time be-

tween Jesus and modern graced “disciples” as
well as the recognition that not all ecclesial
structures are permanently valid nor are
Church doctrines irreformably formulated, it
becomes easy to criticize perceived deficien-
cies in official Church positions. Certainly as
formation programs in seminaries and reli-
gious houses adapted to the times by im-
porting Rogerian psychology, which encour-
ages developmental self-expression in myriad
ways, a non-judgmental, therapeutic ideal of
open-ended tolerance began to proliferate.

13

Those holding to universal principles were

DECEMBER 2001

11

12

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

derided or dismissed as hopelessly “rigorist”
whereas those more flexible on matters of
principle were promoted. The general themes
of cultural adaptation supported by Vatican II
(Sacrosanctum Concilium 37-40; Perfectae
Caritatis 2-4; Ad Gentes 22) was extended to
adaptation to the individual needs of every
person, sometimes quite bizarre. Clinical psy-
chology programs, allegedly preparing peo-
ple for pastoral ministry, stressed empathetic
encounters with deep, non-judgmental con-
cern for others over sacramental objectivity.
The small, warm community of equal “friends
in the Lord” became the model of Christian
living, and its nurturing ideal dominated for-
mation. Together a community discerned
God’s present will for them. Clearly the demo-
cratic norms of comfortably affluent, upper
middle-class American, liberal academia had
ousted the traditional ascetical standards that
had previously defined the struggle against the
world, the flesh, and the devil in religious for-
mation. Instead of compelling the audience to
adapt themselves to the gospel, the gospel was
adapted to the perceived needs of the preach-
ers and hearers The lukewarmness of benev-
olent toleration replaced the stringent de-
mands of conversion. The young people
subjected to such formation either rejected it
as madness or let themselves be formed. The
former either left seminaries and religious life
or supplied the basis of the current reaction in
favor of traditional orthodoxy. But those ac-
cepting “transcendental formation” were pre-
destined to feel frustration when the institu-
tion itself, being limited, could not fulfill their
felt needs and especially when institutional
office-holders, like the pope, insisted on stan-
dards in faith and morality. If their frustrations
had not led them to abandon religious and
priestly life previously, they were the ones
expressing their ecclesial grievances to the
seminarian mentioned at the beginning of this
article. Since he had been brought up in tradi-
tional Catholic piety, formed according to

ecclesiastical norms, and loved the institu-
tional Church as the ordinary mediator of sal-
vation, his perplexity was inevitable.

Toward a solution

Obviously the Church cannot survive over

the long run, much less flourish, with frus-
trated, disaffected clergy and religious func-
tioning in authoritative positions. Something
has to change in Christ’s Church. Admittedly
not much change can be expected from the
older generation of the disaffected who re-
belled against the formation of their youth. To
expect them to admit their mistakes after years
of ideological rebellion flies in the face of
ingrained habit, as is confirmed by the expe-
rience of those who try to dialogue with them.
Much better to let them pass from the scene
and consign them to the mercy of God. But
among the younger adherents of the ideology
theological dialogue might be possible. Not
having experienced the authoritarian Church
against which the older generation is still pro-
testing, they do not evince the same animus
against it. Admittedly many of the younger
ideological adherents have not been well
formed theologically due to the upheavals of
the ’60s, ’70s, and ’80s, which gutted the in-
tellectual requirements of formation pro-
grams, and it is always comfortable to fall
back upon an ideological “consistency” or
argument rather than to put everything into
question. But they must notice that their ide-
ology is not being accepted by the upcoming
generation, which seeks stability and a
concrete referent to which they can dedicate
themselves wholeheartedly. They may be open
to dialogue and to such spirits the following
reflections are offered.

One can agree with the founders of tran-

scendental Thomism that no one theology
exhausts the Christian mystery. After all,
God’s plan of salvation is a free decision
based upon his love alone. Christianity is nei-

DECEMBER 2001

13

ther an ideology nor a philosophy, however
much it might employ philosophical tools in
articulating itself. The truth of Christianity is
tied to the “fact” of the resurrection which
chosen disciples experienced in time (Acts
11:41). However much difficulty post-mod-
ern intellectuals may have with the notion of
“fact”—they have difficulties with everything
conceivable—the original witnesses knew
that they had encountered the risen Jesus, and
as a result their whole lives were changed.
They dedicated themselves to the proclama-
tion of the gospel and the mediation of salva-
tion, and they did not have to worry about
“conditions of possibility” for the perception
of the miracle of the resurrection. They knew
that Jesus is alive and wishes to communicate
his life to all men.

One may accept their account or not, with

or without submitting it to all the akribeia
(critical stinginess) of historical investigation,
which itself is very limited and time-condi-
tioned. Believers accept it and have accepted
it through the centuries, but those who do not
accept it face insoluble problems about the
meaning of human existence. Like classical
theological liberalism,

14

transcendental Thom-

ism presupposes a meaning accessible to all
men under a benevolent God, who makes it
rain on the just and unjust (Matt. 5:45). “As a
spiritual person man affirms implicitly, in
every knowledge and deed, absolute Being as
his real ground and affirms it as mystery.”

15

But how does man know that God is accessi-
ble to him? Looking around in this world,
before very long one comes face to face with
rejection, war, oppression, exploitation, ram-
pant injustice, and all types of suffering. Does
such a world reflect God? Does such a tran-
scendental theory, in which all experience is
explained in terms of subjective intelligibili-
ty, really touch the mystery of existence? Or
the mystery of man caught up in a permanent
concupiscential conflict with himself? Before
the fractured ambiguity of existence what

man can assure the rest of us that there is an
ultimate, integrating meaning to our exis-
tence? Whose experience can assure mankind
that the individual survives death? Indeed it
is impossible for human intelligence to make
any sense out of evil, much less to overcome
it, and only a purblind fool would deny the
reality of evil. Philosophers may try to avoid
the problem by defining evil as a privation,
but they never explain how one can know-
ingly choose a lack. Insofar as evil is what
should not be and an explanation involves dis-
covering the necessary causal link between
effect and cause, evil cannot be explained. An
explanation would render evil necessary, and
a completely immoral universe would result.
Certainly the freedom on which moral evil
depends can itself never be subjected to a full,
necessary explanation; much less can the evil
freely chosen be explained. Most philoso-
phers have rightly regarded evil as irrational,
yet it intrudes itself into every human life.
Who then can explain the evil that is part and
parcel of human existence? Who can save us
from evil and ourselves?

16

The radicalness of such questioning

reveals man’s desperate need for an answer
which surpasses his experience. Only God
can supply such an answer in a way surpass-
ing all human fragility and fallibility, yet it
must be provided in a way intelligible to men.
Clearly the incarnation of God’s only Son is

from J.S. Paluch Company, Inc.

Integrating Tradition with Technology to

Serve the Catholic Community

For more Information, visit us at

e-Paluch.com or call toll-free 877.Paluch1

14

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

required if men are to find any hope of liber-
ation from evil. As divine Love incarnate, he
alone can assure us of love’s reality not just in
words but in convincing deeds. By his death,
freely accepted for love of us, and by his res-
urrection he has demonstrated that Love is a
reality stronger than death and sin. For to the
friends who betrayed him the resurrected Lord
offers peace and grace, a sharing in his own
divine life of love. More than a doctrine, love
is a reality shared by personal communication
accepted in freedom. Those who accept Jesus
and commit their lives to him, follow him and
are one with him in love, one in the freedom
that most defines themselves yet most close-
ly binds them to him. For the one who loves
lets himself be ruled by his beloved with a
fidelity even unto death. So St. Paul wrote,
“For me to live is Christ and to die is gain”
because “Now live no longer I, but Christ lives
in me” (Phil. 1:21; Gal. 2:20). Thus the mys-
tery of sin is overcome by the mystery of
divine love, which convicts of sin and for-
gives. Though the answer to man’s question
about the meaning of life must come from
without—man must be told in word and deed
that he is loved—this love is not foreign to
him; it touches the depths of his being and
transforms him. It is what he most deeply
craves in his personal center even before he
can put it into words. It alone allows him to
integrate his life and live for a reality greater
than himself.

The condition for accepting Christ is con-

version: one has to turn to Christ from one’s
own selfishness. Not without reason were the
first words of Christ’s public life a call for con-
version and penance (Mark 1:15; Matt. 4:17);
the first sermons of St. Peter and the other dis-
ciples echoed the demand for repentance
(Acts 2:38-40; 3:17-20;.26; 4:11f.; 5:31; etc.);
surely the awareness of sin and the need for
repentance was built into the very texture of
St. Paul’s gospel (Rom.1:18-3:28; 1 Thes.
1:10; etc.) and he did not hesitate to rebuke
even Christians, the “saints,” for their sins (1
Cor. 1:2-15; 3:1-6:20; etc.). However uncom-
fortable the reminder of sins may be for the
American bourgeoisie, who use Church insti-
tutions for worldly success,

17

and New Age

gurus in the Church, who insist that only the
positive should be emphasized, guilt is deeply
implanted in the human conscience and the
subconscious. Simply to ignore it or brush it
aside is to blind oneself spiritually, and disci-
ples of such gurus, the blind led by the blind,
will wind up blaming their frustrations and
failures not upon themselves, but upon insti-
tutions, which they cannot control; they will
be rendered forever miserable.

Without doubt the neglect of preaching the

need for repentance has led to the neglect of
confession. But does anyone seriously think
that sin has diminished after the Council in a
society awash with drugs, alcohol, pornogra-
phy, materialism, public infidelity, abortion,
spin doctors, pecuniary politicians, fornica-
tion, tax-evasion, divorce, youth killings and
suicides? Are the songs of youth romantic,
hopeful, or even sane? If the just man falls
seven times (Prov. 24:16), “all fail often” (Jas.
3:2), and even the saints have to pray daily,
“Forgive us our trespasses” (Matt. 6:12; cf.
DS 229, 1539), how can we forget the fights
and squabbles which occur in even the best of
families? Have we not dealt with the children
of broken homes who consider themselves
guilty for their parents’ parting? And how
must the parents feel? If for the past forty

For to the friends who betrayed him

the resurrected Lord offers peace and

grace, a sharing in his own divine life

of love. More than a doctrine, love is

a reality shared by personal com-

munication accepted in freedom.

DECEMBER 2001

15

years guilt has been derided and scorned as an
imposed “trip,” has the number of psychia-
trists and psychologists shrunk? Have the
soul-doctors abolished guilt and rendered
their patients happy? By no means. Now the
goal of therapy has become not “cure,” but
“coping,” i.e., survival. Guilt remains as a part
of the fallen human condition and all our
attempts to whitewash it and render it innocu-
ous are doomed to failure. At best we apply a
cosmetic to a gangrenous sore that suppurates
under the surface, becomes more pernicious-
ly infected, and skews our perception of real-
ity. Any religion that cannot face up to sin and
guilt does not deserve to survive. Is it any
wonder that as mainline Protestantism has
bought into theological liberalism, its church-
es have emptied? Yet Fundamentalism, with
all its drawbacks, has been attracting people,
even Catholics, to its message. It takes sin and
guilt seriously. It is not afraid to tell people
that they are sinners, even while telling them
that they are loved and saved. Many people
desperately need such a message of hope, a
message that touches human reality.

Such a message belongs inherently to the

very structure of Catholic Christianity. As
long as a crucifix hangs above the altar and
our Eucharistic Lord is present in the taber-
nacle, all entering a Catholic church or chapel
know that he died for our sins and rose for our
justification, that he continues to offer him-
self to the men who crucified him. Full shar-
ing in Jesus’ resurrected life demands con-
version and entrance into the Church. Nothing
else should be expected. As Jesus gives his all
to men, body and soul, humanity and divini-
ty, so men cannot be expected to give less in
return. Otherwise love would not be respond-
ing to Love, and the omnipotence of God’s
love would not be recognized. So the Chris-
tian response must be total, body and soul,
understanding and freedom. The union estab-
lished with Christ must be corporeal as well
as spiritual. The Body of Christ includes nec-

essarily a structured, visible component pro-
viding a crucial point of decision where there
become manifest all implications of submit-
ting oneself to Christ, not to a subjectively
constructed image of Christ. In this visible
Church Christ is found concretely in the Eu-
charist, the assurance of prevenient grace
and guarantee of the Church’s perpetuity.
There the mystery of love is shown to be
more profound than the mystery of sin. For
in Christ’s Church his forgiveness is given
and life bestowed.

The nurturing model was attempted in

Eden and it proved insufficient; it will hardly
suffice in a fallen world. No longer should we
look for self-fulfillment or the perfect com-
munity. Now the sole path leading back to
Paradise passes over Golgotha. This truth is
harsh and it repulses “modern man” and in-
deed every man who wishes to consider him-
self a basically “good guy” and revel in the
“I’m O.K., you’re O.K.” version of New Age
spirituality. But the truth liberates from such
pitiful self-justification. Only when sin and
the radical need for conversion are properly
preached can believers know the great joy that
springs from being loved undeservedly and
flowers in everlasting gratitude. However
much “modern Catholics” may mock the pre-
Vatican II Church for its “rigid rules” and
“inculcation of guilt,” that Church had the
great benefit of recognizing sin, preaching the
need of repentance, and offering forgiveness
in Baptism and Penance. And it was a joyful
Church, for the more deeply men recognize
the horror of sin, the greater is their joy at their
redemption. Such a perspective prevents Je-
sus from being reduced to an example of hu-
man faith or a mere “symbol” of God’s love.
Only God can save us from sin, and that God
should render us lovable is the cause of our
joy. The wrath of God against sin was mani-
fested on the cross when the Father made his
Son “sin” for our justification ( 2 Cor. 5:21)
and accepted us as sons in the Son (Eph. 1:5-

16

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

8). Does God love us? The answer to that
question can only be perceived against the
background of God’s wrath. God loves us so
much as to sacrifice his only Son for us.

■

1

The following section is a summary from J.

McDermott, S.J., “Faith and Critical Intelligence
in Theology,”Excellence in Seminary Education,
ed. S. Minkiel et alii (Erie: Gannon U., 1988), pp.
71-75; —, “The Methodological Shift in Twentieth
Century Thomism,” Seminarium 31 (1991), 245-
253.

2

For a summary of the conceptualist morality

and spirituality cf. J. McDermott, S.J., “The Con-
text of Veritatis Splendor,” Prophecy and Diplo-
macy, ed. J. Conley and J. Koterski (New York:
Fordham U., 1999), 115-123, 127-140 (unfortunate-
ly this article is not always precise since, without
even informing the author the publisher changed
the original text for the sake of alleged “inclusive
language,” which really excludes women from
mankind), and “Spiritual Theology and Religious
Life before and after Vatican II,” to be published in
Josephinum Journal of Theology 8, n. 2 (2001), pp.
52-56.

3

This has been described in many books: e.g.,

R. Wiltgen, S.V.D., The Rhine Flows into the Tiber
(1967; rpt. Devon: Augustine, 1978); Y. Congar,
O.P., Report from Rome II, tr. L. Sheppard (Lon-
don: Chapman, 1964); E. Schillebeeckx, O.P., The
Real Achievement of Vatican II, tr H. Vaughan
(New York: Herder and Herder, 1966); T. Schoof,
O.P., A Survey of Catholic Theology 1800-1970, tr.
N. Smith (Glen Rock: Paulist, 1970), pp. 228-258.
The conflicts have been emphasized in the recent
History of Vatican II, ed. G. Alberigo, Eng. ed. J.
Komonchak (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1995) of which
the first three volumes have been published.

4

The term “new theology” was really coined by

its opponents, like R. Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P., “La
nouvelle theologie ou va-t-elle?” Angelicum 23
(1946), 126-145. The “new theologians,” like de
Lubac and Bouillard, actually claimed to be restor-
ing the more ancient theology of the Church. For a
good account of the debate cf. G. McCool, S.J.,
From Unity to Pluralism (New York: Fordham U.,
1989), pp. 203-230. His account of the Maritainian
position has to be nuanced. Maritain’s thought

developed far beyond Degrees of Knowledge: cf.
B. Ritzler, Freiheit in der Umarmung des ewig Lie-
benden (Bern: Lang, 2000). Cf. also Schoof, pp.
201-209.

5

K. Rahner, S.J., Grundkurs des Glaubens

(Freiburg: Herder, 1976), pp. 31f.; McCool, pp.
106-111; O. Muck, S.J., “Die deutschsprachige
Marechal-Schule: Transzendentalphilosophie als
Metaphysik,” in Christliche Philosophie im katho-
lischen Denken des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts, ed.
E. Coreth et alii, II (Graz: Styria, 1988), pp. 590-
622, esp. 590-594, 616-619. For the content of this
section cf. McDermott, “Faithful,” 75-81, and
“Methodological,” 253-265.

6

P. Rousselot, S.J., L’Intellectualisme de saint

Thomas (Paris: Beauchesne, 1908), p. 182-188;
for a long list of leading transcendental thinkers
who consider this central doctrine a paradox: J.
McDermott, S.J. “The Theology of John Paul II:
A Response,” in The Thought of Pope John Paul
II, ed. J. McDermott, S.J. (Rome: Gregorian U.,
1993), pp. 63f., n. 36.

7

K. Rahner, “Überlegungen zur Methode der

Theologie,” Schriften zur Theologie 9 (Einsiedeln:
Benziger, 1970), 122.

8

K. Rahner, S.J., Church and Sacraments, tr.

W. O’Hara (New York: Herder and Herder, 1963),
pp. 11-40, 63-74.

9

K. Rahner, S.J., and K. Lehmann, “Geschicht-

lichkeit der Vermittlung,” in Mysterium Salutis, ed.
J. Feiner and M. Lohrer, I (Einsiedeln: Benziger,
1963), 727-782, esp. 756-776.

10

B. Lonergan, S.J., “Lonergan Responds,” in

Foundations of Theology, ed. P. McShane (Notre
Dame: U. of Notre Dame, 1972), 233; —, Method
in Theology (New York: Herder and Herder, 1972),
pp. 331f.; J. McDermott, S.J., “Tensions in Lon-
ergan’s Theory of Conversion,” Gregorianum 74
(1993), 122-124, 128-132; —, “Context,” 123-127,
140-160; —, “Spiritual Theology,” pp. 67-75 sec-
ond half.

11

I have attempted to show this in various

works: Love and Understanding (Rome: Gregor-
ian U. 1983); “The Analogy of Knowing in Karl
Rahner,” International Philosophical Quarterly 36
(1996), 201-216; “Dialectical Analogy: The Oscil-
lating Center of Rahner’s Thought,” Gregorianum
75 (1994), 675-703; “De Lubac and Rousselot,”
ibid. 78 (1997), 735-759; “Tensions,” 101-104; on

DECEMBER 2001

17

Marechal cf. D. Moretto, Il Dinamismo Intellet-
tuale davanti il Mistero, to be published in the near
future by Glossa of Milan.

12

Rahner held that Jesus is not in any way dif-

ferent than other men and that his nature is a desire
not only for the beatific vision but also for the hy-
postatic union. In fact there seems to be, in his
theology, no appreciable distinction between the
hypostatic union and the perfection attained in the
beatific vision: K. Rahner, S.J., “Jesus Christus,”
Sacramentum Mundi, ed. K. Rahner et alii (Frei-
burg: Herder, 1967), II, 930, 941f., 944f.; J. Mc-
Dermott, S.J., “The Christologies of Karl Rahner,”
Gregorianum 67 (1986), 106f., 121f., 300-303,
311-316. Cf. also Lonergan, Method, pp. 118f.; —,
Philosophy of God and Theology (London: Dar-
ton, Longman, and Todd 1973), pp. 10, 20, 67; —
, “The Ongoing Genesis of Method,” A Third Col-
lection, ed. F. Crowe (New York: Paulist, 1985),
161; McDermott, “Tensions,” 136-138; C. Krenes,
“Lonergan’s Metaphysics: Ontological Implica-
tions of Insight-as-Event,” International Philo-
sophical Quarterly 24 (1984), 409.

13

Cf. W. Coulson, “Wir zerstörten ihren Tra-

ditionen, wir überwanden ihren Glauben,” Theolo-
gisches 24 (1994), 275-287, who describes how
Rogerian psychology was employed by himself
and others to destroy the traditions and discipline
of the IHM nuns in California.

14

H.R. Niebuhr’s description of liberalism in

The Kingdom of God in America (1937; rpt. New
York: Harper and Row, 1959), p. 192, is still worth
citing: “A God without wrath brought men with-
out sin into a kingdom without judgment through
the ministrations of a Christ without a cross.”

15

K. Rahner, S.J., Grundkurs des Glaubens

(Freiburg: Herder, 1976), p. 85.

16

J. McDermott, “Metaphysical Conundrums

at the Root of Moral Disagreement,” Gregorianum
71 (1990), 713-742, and “Faith, Reason, and Free-
dom,” to be published in the proceedings of the
conference “Faith and Reason: Friends or Foes in
the New Millennium?” held in Melbourne, August
11-13, 2000 by the Australian Catholic University.
For an answer to the problem cf. J. McDermott,
S.J., The Bible on Human Suffering (Middlegreen:
St. Paul Publications, 1991) and “Sofferenza,” Di-
zionario di teologia fondamentale, ed. Latourelle
and R. Fisichella (Assisi: Citadella, 1990), 1154-
1160 (unfortunately the English language version
changed the original text of the article, without
informing the author, for the sake of “inclusive lan-
guage” and thus introduced errors and attributed a
heretical opinion to him).

17

This is not all the American Catholic middle-

class. Some continue loyally to sacrifice to send
their children to Catholic schools even when a edu-
cation specifically Catholic is not being offered.
Fortunately the question of truth in advertising is
being forced by Ex Corde Ecclesiae.

Reverend John M. McDermott, S.J., after teach-
ing eleven years at Fordham University and
twelve years at the Gregorian University in Rome,
is currently Laghi Chair Research Professor
at the Pontifical College Josephinum in Colum-
bus, Ohio. He has published more than ninety ar-
ticles in various biblical, theological and pastoral
journals and dictionaries. His latest book is The
Bible on Human Suffering (Middlegreen: St. Paul
Publications, 1991).

18

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

■ The dismissal prayer at Mass, Ite missa est,
which is often translated as “Go, Mass is
ended” or “Go to love and serve the Lord” is
interpreted by the majority of the faithful as a
command to leave the church as soon as pos-
sible. Inestimabile Donum, the document pub-
lished by the Sacred Congregation with the
authority of the Pope, emphasizes the impor-
tance of adoration and prayer after Holy
Communion.

The faithful are to be recommended not to omit to
make a proper thanksgiving after communion.
They may do this during the celebration with a
period of silence, with a hymn, psalm or other song
of praise, or also after the celebration, if possible
by staying behind to pray for a suitable time.

1

The reason is that Our Blessed Lord, true God
and true Man, is present under the form of the
Eucharistic Species and for as long as the Eu-
charistic Species last. He is there Body, Blood,
Soul and Divinity in all the tabernacles of the
world as the prayer taught to the children of

Fatima emphasizes and especially in the liv-
ing tabernacle of those who have received him
in Holy Communion. St. Philip Neri under-
stood this when he sent two acolytes with can-
dles to accompany a member of his congre-
gation who had left the church without any
adoration after Mass. If this practice were to
be followed today, I doubt if there would be
enough candles or acolytes in any church to
do this.

Professor Anscombe, the eminent Cam-

bridge philosopher and convert to the Faith,
who died recently is quoted by the London
Daily Telegraph as follows:

When one says “transubstantiation”, one is saying
exactly what one teaches the child in teaching it
that Christ’s words, by the divine power given to
the priest who uses them in his place, have changed
the bread so that it isn’t there any more (nor the
stuff of which it is made), but instead there is the
body of Christ. I knew a child”, she [Elizabeth
Anscombe] continues, “close upon three years old
and only then beginning to talk, but taught as I

Adoration and prayer after Holy Communion give us
the strength and grace we need
to make Christ present in our daily lives.

Thanksgiving after
Holy Communion

By Edwin Gordon

DECEMBER 2001

19

have described, who was in the free space at the
back of the church when the mother went to com-
munion. ‘Is He in you?’ the child asked when the
mother came back. ‘Yes’, she said, and to her
amazement the child prostrated itself before her. I
can testify to this as I saw it happen.

2

Forty years ago, the reality of that presence

was seen by the large number of people who
remained after Mass in adoration and prayer
and also those who came before Mass to pre-
pare themselves to celebrate this great mys-
tery of Faith and indeed of love.

What is the reason for this decline in ado-

ration and reverence to the Blessed Sacra-
ment? I think that, fundamentally, the heresy
of “activism” is one of the principal causes.
This is the feeling that, unless we are doing
something, we are not doing anything.

The story of Martha and Mary shows us

how Our Blessed Lord values that silent ado-
ration and contemplation more than all the
other activities: “Martha, thou art busy about
many things but Mary has chosen the better
part, which shall not be taken from her.” The
modern world would more than likely dis-
agree with Our Blessed Lord, but the fact is
that contemplation and adoration come first
in any work of evangelization, Contemplata
aliis tradere—the disciples passed on to oth-
ers that which they had heard from Our Lord,
that which they had contemplated.

Another important reason is the decline in

the sense of the Sacred, the blurring of the dis-
tinction between the Sacred and the profane.
Of course we can adore Our Lord anywhere
and no doubt as the psalmist tells us, “the
heavens proclaim his glory,” but adoration of
Jesus in his Sacred Humanity, as God made
Man to save us, as the very same Jesus who
walked this earth and talked to his disciples,
is unique to the Holy Eucharist. Moreover, the
presence of Our Blessed Lord in his Sacred
Humanity in the soul of the communicant is
even more intimate than the presence of Our
Lord when he was preaching to the multitudes
or explaining in parables, his teaching to the

disciples. He is present as food for the jour-
ney. In chapter 6 of St. John’s Gospel we are
told that “He who eats my flesh and drinks my
blood abides in me and I in him.” His hearers
understood exactly what he meant, that is why
many of them ceased to follow him and Our
Lord turned and said to them, “Will you also
leave me?” To which Peter replied, “Lord to
whom shall we go? You have the words of
eternal life.”

It is true, that after receiving Our Lord in

Holy Communion, the communicant can feel
dry and arid. A help can be to ask Our Blessed
Lady who first adored Jesus in her womb and
then in the manger in Bethlehem, to adore
Jesus in the manger of our hearts. We can
adore him and love him through that Immac-
ulate Heart of Mary, which knew no sin or the
stain of sin.

A suitable prayer pronounced through the

Immaculate Heart of Mary can be that taught
by the angel in Fatima; “O my God, I believe
in you, I adore you, I hope in you, I love you.
I ask pardon for all those who do not believe,
do not adore, do not hope, do not love you.”
At the same time we realize that we do not
adore him enough, that we do not believe in
him sufficiently, that we do not love him as he
ought to be loved, but at the same time,
through the Immaculate heart of Our Lady, we
know that we can give him sufficient adora-
tion and honour and she can make up for our
deficiency.

Prayers such as the Adore te devote recit-

ed slowly and meditatively can be a great
help. Again the traditional prayer of the
Church, recited slowly, can be of great value.
As we kneel before Our Lord, true God and
true Man truly present in the manger of our
hearts, we can offer him, through Mary, true
contrition for our sins, thanksgiving for his
gifts and particularly for the gift of the Bread
of Life; supplication, putting before him all
our needs and asking Our Lady to show these
needs to her Son as she did at the marriage

20

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

feast of Cana when she said to Jesus, “Son,
they have no wine.”

How often it is that we lack that spiritual

wine of consolation and the strength we need
to persevere in following him. Our Lady’s
words to us are the same as the words to the
steward, “Do whatever he shall tell you.”

Another reason for the decline in adoration

and prayer after Holy Communion is the fact
that there is often very little preparation before
Mass. Prayers such as the one of St. Thomas
Aquinas: “We come to you Father as poor and
needy to the Lord of heaven and earth as sick,
to the physician of life, as blind to the light of
eternal truth . . . “ or the prayer of St. Ambrose,

“Lord Jesus Christ, I approach your banquet
table in fear and trembling, for I am a sinner,
and dare not rely on my own worth but only
on your goodness and mercy. I am defiled by
many sins in body and soul, and by my un-
guarded thoughts and words. Gracious God
of majesty and awe, I seek your protection, I
look for your healing. Poor troubled sinner
that I am, I appeal to you, the fountain of all
mercy . . .” or other prayers can help us to real-
ize the tremendous mystery of faith and love
that has taken place before us in the Holy Sac-
rifice of the Mass. Very often today, the hymns
and other activities within Mass can detract
from the real meaning of the Mass as a sacri-
fice and as the victory of Our Lord on Easter
morning.

These hymns and activities often provide

a parallel liturgy that in fact do not help us to
realize what has taken place. The words of
Pope St. Pius X show this very clearly when
he wrote:

“Characteristic of modern theatrical church
singing is the constant repetition of a theme, which
goes on and on ad nauseam with regular beats
which cause the toes to tap on the floor and the
heart to thirst for distracting novelty rather than for
the love of God. Otherwise there is some soothing
melody which lulls to sleep or wafts the mind on
its gentle breezes over a garden of delightful rem-
iniscences or sensuous desires. In place of the
solemn chants of the Church, ballroom ditties are
taken and twisted rather than adapted to the sacred
words by some makeshift dabbler in the ‘science’
of harmony, without art and in most cases without
even intelligence. By this means the liturgical
functions, rich in meaning and significance, are
lowered to the level of worldly shows, and the
mysteries of faith are so profaned as to deserve the
reproach of Christ: ‘My house shall be called the
house of prayer to all nations, but you have made
it a den of thieves’ (Mark 11: l7)

3

Imagine that you are watching a beautiful

sunset. Words could distract the mind and one
would feel like saying, “Don’t speak, because
this is something that is too beautiful for
words.” Perhaps silence and inner reverence
would be more precious than words, as we

How often it is that we lack that

spiritual wine of consolation and the

strength we need to persevere in fol-

lowing him. Our Lady’s words to us

are the same as the words to the stew-

ard, “Do whatever he shall tell you.”

DECEMBER 2001

21

meditate on that which has taken place before
us.

The Holy Father in the Eucharistic Con-

gress in Seville spoke about the importance
of silent adoration of Our Blessed Lord and
the value to the Church. He quotes from the
Catechism of the Catholic Church: “. . . to
deepen faith in the real presence of Christ in
the Eucharist, the Church is aware of the
meaning of silent adoration of the Lord pre-
sent under the Eucharistic Species”; he went
on to insist, saying, “If only this form of ado-
ration would continue, so that in all the parish-
es and Christian communities the some form
of adoration of the Eucharist might take
root!”

4

How much more is this not the case when

the soul is intimately united to our Eucharistic
Lord after Holy Communion? Adoration and
prayer after Holy Communion give us the
strength and the grace we need to make Christ
present in our daily lives in what we say and
do. A suitable meditation after Holy Com-
munion could well be the words of Simeon
when he held the infant in his arms:

Now O Lord thou dost dismiss thy servant, accord-
ing to thy words, in peace because my eyes have

seen the salvation which thou hast prepared before
the face of all nations, a light to the revelation of
the gentiles, the glory of his people, Israel.

5

The words of Simeon to Mary remind us

that the cross is not far away from our daily
lives “a sword shall pierce thy soul.” We also
have to face a cross as Our Lady had to face
the cross; but she is at the foot of our cross as
she was at the foot of Our Lord’s cross.

In the dismissal prayer, Ite missa est, the

word missa is part of the Latin word to send
(mitto, mittere, misi, misum), perhaps a suit-
able translation, could be “Go, this is the ‘send-
ing forth’ of the faithful to bring the gospel to
the world.”

■

1

Para. 17, Inestimabile Donum, 17 April 1980.

2

Christopher Howse, “Sacred mysteries,”

London Daily Telegraph 31 January 2001, follow-
ing to the death of Elizabeth Anscombe.

3

H. Del-Gal “St Pius X”; Trans. T.F. Murray;

Gill & Son, Dublin, 1954.

4

Pope John Paul II, Address in Seville, June

1993.

5

Luke 2:29-32.

Reverend Edwin Gordon graduated in law at the
University of Bristol in 1956 before he began his
studies for the priesthood. He has spent many
years in pastoral work in England and is now a
parish priest at St. Joseph’s, Nympsfield. He is the
author of Upon This Rock (1985), which presents
an outline of the creed, sacraments and beati-
tudes. His last article in HPR appeared in March
2000.

22

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

■ It is a sign of friendship to share secrets of
one’s inner life. This is what God has done in
revealing the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. This
is the apex of his Revelation; it is the most
sublime truth he has revealed—indeed, the
most sublime he could reveal, for it is the
greatest of all realities.

Without the doctrine of the Trinity, Chris-

tianity collapses, because it becomes impos-
sible then to know who Jesus Christ is, or to
understand him when he speaks of his Father
or of the Spirit. But it is also the most difficult
doctrine, and so we tend to avoid thinking or
talking about it. I once heard a homily on Trin-
ity Sunday where the priest spent most of his
time talking about how difficult it is to gain
any understanding of this mystery.

It is true of course that our understanding

of this truth must fall infinitely short of the
reality, but that is no reason to ignore it. Aris-
totle points out that a little knowledge of the
greatest things is of more value than extensive
knowledge of lower things.

Further, there is a fascination about this

most profound mystery of the Faith. Frank

Sheed used to speak on it to outdoor audiences
in London’s Hyde Park and the other venues
of the Catholic Evidence Guild, and he found
unbelievers attracted by the doctrine. How
much more, then, should Christians be drawn
to God’s revelation of his inner life: a revela-
tion which the light of faith illuminates and
makes more real to us.

Modalism and tritheism

In the early centuries of Christianity nu-

merous heresies arose concerning the Trinity,
and we are not free from them yet, despite the
careful formulations of doctrine by the Ecu-
menical Councils. Take two current errors,
one more often believed explicitly, while the
other is implicit.

The explicit error is modalism: that is, the

view that the terms Father, Son and Holy
Spirit don’t signify real distinctions, but are
simply different ways in which we view God.
For example, when he is thought of as Creator,
we call him Father; when we think of the
divine knowledge, we speak of the Son or

Divine assistance will be given to all who ponder
prayerfully the sublime mystery
of God’s inner life—Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Knowing the Holy Trinity

By John Young

DECEMBER 2001

23

Logos; while the name Holy Spirit denotes
God as giving us his grace and love.

This heresy is held more often by so-called

theologians than by the non-academic.
Scholars affected by modernism find the con-
cepts of person, nature and relation unconge-
nial. They easily fall into the trap of placing
the distinction of divine Persons in the minds
of believers instead of in reality. Then they
continue to use traditional terminology while
rejecting its orthodox meaning.

The implicit error is tritheism. I became

more aware of it in a discussion with a group
of Protestant students in a theological college,
most of them pastors in churches. One of them
put the question: How accurately do our peo-
ple understand the doctrine of the Trinity? In
the discussion that ensued there was general
agreement with the statement that most of
their parishioners were tritheists, not trinitar-
ians. They didn’t mean explicit tritheists; they
meant people who proclaimed the Trinity—
three Persons in one God—but whose practi-
cal apprehension implied three Gods.

On reflection, I think most Catholics are in

the same classification. They believe in the
Trinity, but the way they see it implies, when
taken to its logical conclusion, the existence
of three Gods very closely united. To say these
people are believers in three Gods would be
untrue and unjust. But what we can rightly
say, I believe, is that an implicit tritheism lurks
in the way they view the doctrine.

We are all prone to this tendency, so it is

important that we clarify our thinking. This is
done by looking carefully at the dogma. Let
us start by considering the simplicity of God.

Infinite perfection

Created things are complex. My hands and

feet and head are all distinct parts joined in a
totality. Even an angel is complex, with pow-
ers distinct from his essence and from one
another, and with an existence distinct from
his essence. Were God like that he would not

really be God; he would be a limited being,
for one part would have qualities and a per-
fection lacking in other parts. Instead of pure
and infinite being possessing all perfection,
he would be a being with perfection scattered
through his composite makeup.

Even when it is a question of intellect and

will, the divisions found in lower beings are
absent from God. I have an intellect and I also
have a will; they are two powers, not one. And
I have a nature in which these powers exist.
But God, because he is infinite, transcends all
divisions and simply is all perfection, in one
undivided reality. As the Fourth Lateran
Council and the First Vatican Council teach,
his nature or substance is absolutely simple,
i.e., not compound.

1

At first glance, God’s infinite perfection

appears to rule out a Trinity of Persons, for it
seems that three Persons would introduce
complexity into the divine nature. In fact, his
infinite perfection is the reason there are three
Persons. Infinite perfection means perfection
without limitation, without any admixture of
the imperfect, without any inadequacy. In
regard to his knowledge, it means his knowl-
edge has no deficiency, no falling short, no
failure to understand fully. His knowledge is
perfect.

Contrast his knowledge with ours. How

does his self-understanding compare with my
self-understanding? I have a collection of very
imperfect ideas of myself, ideas falling far
short of what I fully am. God’s understanding
of himself is perfect, lacking nothing of the
reality it expresses.

This means that instead of many inade-

quate ideas, he has but one idea which ex-
presses exactly what he is. But he is infinite.
So no finite idea (no limited idea) can express
him exactly as he is; every such idea must fall
short. The idea that expresses him fully must
be infinite, just as he is. It must have every-
thing he has and as perfectly as he has it; oth-
erwise it would be an imperfect idea of him,

24

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

and he cannot understand himself perfectly in
an imperfect idea.

His idea of himself is an infinite act which

perfectly expresses what he is. It is a divine
thought which is as real as its thinker: eternal
as he is; spirit as he is; infinite as he is; a
Person as he is. It is the Logos or Son, the sec-
ond Person of the Blessed Trinity. As St. John
says in one of the most profound statements
ever written: “In the beginning was the Word,
and the Word was with God, and the Word
was God.

2

The Greek noun he uses, Logos,

conveys a richer meaning than we associate
with the English “Word.” It is found among
the Greek philosophers as denoting much
more than a spoken or written word, for it
refers also to the concept or idea in the mind
of a thinker, but implies in addition a “going
forth” from the thinker. It contains both the

notion of immanence (or inwardness to the
thinker) and that of being present and opera-
tive beyond the thinker.

he teaching of Scripture about God the Son

was developed more explicitly by the Fathers
of the early centuries; and in the fifth century
we have St. Augustine’s statement: “The
Father generated by uttering his Word who is
equal to him in all things.”

3

The Catechism of the Council of Trent ex-

plains: “Of all examples which are adduced
with a view to the explanation of the nature
and manner of this eternal generation, that
appears to most nearly approach the matter
which is taken from the intellectual activity of
our soul, for which reason St. John calls the
Son of God the ‘Word.’ For just as our spirit,
knowing itself, produces a likeness of itself,
which theologians have called a ‘word,’ so
God also, insofar as human can be compared
to divine, understanding himself, generates
the eternal Word.

God not only knows: he also loves. And

this is the reason there is a third divine Person.

Love is a kind of self-giving, but in our

case is always imperfect: we give imperfect-
ly, and what we have to give is limited, for we
are limited beings. God, however, loves per-
fectly, and his boundless perfection makes
him infinitely lovable. What is the result, then,
when the two divine Persons, Father and Son,
love? That infinite love they express is not a
psychological state, as our love is. Their mutu-
al love is a full expression of what they are, a
total giving of themselves. It is the total giv-
ing of the infinite, and therefore is itself infi-
nite. It lacks nothing of what Father and Son
are, for they have put themselves totally into
it. Their love is as real as they are, which
means it is an infinite reality: in fact the same
reality that they are. Their love is eternal; it is
a Person; it is God.

The third Person of the Blessed Trinity,

who proceeds by way of love, is the Holy
Spirit.

DECEMBER 2001

25

Person and nature

We need to examine the terms person and

nature. A clue can be obtained from expres-
sions we use. We can say: “I have hands,” or
“I have emotions,” or “I have a mind.” To
what or whom are we attributing these pos-
sessions? Are we attributing them to our
human nature? If the attribution went no fur-
ther than that, we would not say, “I have a
human nature,” yet if we say this it makes
sense.

The fact is that each one thinks of himself

as the possessor of all the parts and aspects
that go to make up what he is—and even as
the possessor of his individual human nature.
He thinks of himself, is aware of himself, as
an ultimate “I.” He is the ultimate subject to
which everything of himself is attributed. He
is the “owner and exerciser” of his existence.

In the expression, “I have a human nature,”

the word nature refers to what is possessed,
the word “I” signifies the person who pos-
sesses it. The person (or supposit) is the ulti-
mate subject, unique and incommunicable.

We are made in God’s image,

5

and so we

are persons; but our personality is only a shad-
ow of what personality means in God. Any
person has powers of knowledge and love, but
in God alone knowing and loving are Persons.
Each of us is one “I” with a singular nature;
God is three “I’s” with one nature.

In his Credo of the People of God, Pope

Paul VI repeated the teaching on the unity and
Trinity of God which Councils of the Church
have defined. “We believe that this only God
is absolutely one in his infinitely holy essence
as also in all his perfections, in his omnipo-
tence, his infinite knowledge, his providence,
his will and his love.” In speaking of the
Trinity, the Pope says: “We believe then in the
Father who eternally begets the Son, in the
Son, the Word of God, who is eternally begot-
ten, in the Holy Spirit, the uncreated Person
who proceeds from the Father and the Son as
their eternal love.”

Imagination can easily mislead us into

viewing the three Persons as three distinct
substances, so we need to be clear about the
oneness of the divine nature. The Fourth La-
teran Council emphasized the truth that each
Person is identical with the divine substance.

6

There are not three Persons plus a divine sub-
stance. Each Person is the substance, without
any real distinction whatever. Yet each Person
is really distinct from the others.

The Council of Florence stated that in God

all is one “except where opposition of relation
stands in the way.”

7

In general, relation means

order or reference to something else. It may
be merely conceptual, as the relation of a red
light to danger. Or it may be real, as the rela-
tionship of parent to child. In the Trinity the
relations must be real, otherwise there would
be no real distinction of Persons.

Take the relation of Father to Son in the

Trinity. The Father really generates the Son;
the Son is really generated by the Father. Like-
wise, the Holy Spirit is totally spirated by the
other two Persons.

Each Person is distinct in reality from the

others (not just in our way of thinking). For
“generate” is not the same as “be generated”;
and “active spiration” (that is, the love of
Father and Son for each other) is not the same
as “passive spiration” (the Holy Spirit who
proceeds from the other Persons). But why
isn’t active spiration a Person? Because as we
said earlier, every person (whether human,
angelic or divine) is incommunicable: it is the
ultimate subject, not part of something else.
But the relation of active spiration is common
to the Father and Son, and therefore cannot be
a Person.

In created things, a real relation is distinct

from the substance in which it inheres; but this
is impossible in God, for he is not composite.
So relation in him is subsistent; that is, it exists
of itself and is identical with the divine es-
sence. The distinction of Persons, as the Coun-
cil of Florence indicated in the words quoted

26

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

above, is in the opposition of relation between
paternity, sonship and procession.

The Trinity and ourselves

God revealed the Trinity because of his

love for us, his desire that we should be his
friends. We should respond by entering more
fully into the life of the three divine Persons.

One image of God sees him as dwelling in

solitary splendor on top of some distant
Olympus, inactive and alone forever. The doc-
trine of the Blessed Trinity provides a correc-
tive for that fancy. God is the eternal life of
three Persons. His life is at once the purest
expression of personality and the purest ex-
pression of community. Today the importance
of personality and of community is often
stressed; but it is usually forgotten that the
Trinity is the ideal expression of both, and
should be the exemplar for our imitation.

When we pray, do we think of God as three

Persons? Which of them do we pray to? Do
we pray to all three without singling out any
one? Some people pray especially to one of
the Persons: the Father or the Son or the Holy
Spirit. With some it depends on the prayer; for
instance, they tend to pray to the Spirit to
increase their love, because he is the very love
of God. Others usually just pray to God with-
out thinking of one Person rather than anoth-
er. Doing that stresses his unity and the truth
that all three are identical with the divine na-
ture itself; but if one always prayed like that,
the distinction between the Persons would
become blurred in one’s spiritual landscape.
If we vary our prayers, we make God’s unity
more real to us, yet develop a living aware-
ness of each Person.

What of the divine action in the world?

Does one Person act sometimes, and another
on other occasions? In chapter two of the Acts
of the Apostles St. Luke describes the Holy
Spirit coming down on the disciples and giv-
ing them the power of speaking in tongues.
Was the Spirit acting alone in doing this?

Again, Christ told us to pray “Our Father who
art in heaven”; which may suggest that the
first Person of the Trinity is the one who cre-
ated us (and so is our Father), rather than the
Son or the Holy Spirit.

The answer is in the Church’s official

teaching. The Fourth Lateran Council defined
that all three Persons are “one principle of all
things.”

8

The Council of Florence repeated

this: “The Father and the Son and the Holy
Spirit are not three principles of creation, but
one principle.”

9

Every action in the world which proceeds

from God’s divine nature is the action of all
three Persons. The Father alone did not cre-
ate; all the Persons did. It was not just the Holy
Spirit who came down at Pentecost; it was
equally the Father and the Son. The divine
nature is not like a car shared by three mem-
bers of a family, one driving it at a time. When
the divine nature acts in the world, it is all
three Persons acting.

What, then, is to be made of the numerous

instances—as in Scripture and the liturgy—
where one Person is said to do something?
This is called appropriation. Something com-
mon to all three is said of one, without men-
tioning the others.

10

Appropriation brings more clearly to mind

the distinction of one Person from another, to
make us aware of each distinctly. God wants
his revelation of the Trinity to really mean
something in our spiritual lives, not to be just
so many words. Appropriation helps in this.

By appropriation we take an activity of the

divine Persons equally, and think of it in re-
lation to a particular Person. The choice of
which one we associate with the action is
based on the relationship of the Persons to
each other in the Trinity. For example, God
the Father generates the Son, so the making of
things is often appropriated to him, as in the
Creed: “I believe in one God, the Father Al-
mighty, maker of heaven and earth.” The Holy
Spirit is the eternal love of Father and Son, so

DECEMBER 2001

27

works associated with love are often appro-
priated to him: for instance, the giving of
grace and spiritual gifts.

11

I mentioned earlier the prevalent tendency

towards tritheism. This arises partly from hav-
ing a mental image of God as complex. We
know he is absolutely simple, but our imagi-
nation inevitably pictures him as complex,
and this can mislead the intellect. Only too
easily, then, can the three Persons be pictured
as three beings; which will lead, if we are not
careful, to intellectual confusion.

A second reason for the inclination to

tritheism is that the word person is subcon-
sciously taken in its modern psychological
sense, instead of ontologically. That is, per-
son is thought of as a center of consciousness,
having its own intellect and will—distinct
from those of any other person—and operat-
ing independently of anyone else.

The Trinity is not three Persons each hav-

ing his own unique intellect and will: there
is but one divine intellect and will, and these
are identical with the divine essence.

How do we counter the tendency to trithe-

ism in ourselves? We must purify our under-
standing of God; and the best way of doing
this in the natural order is with the help of the

philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas. We need
to see as clearly as we can the meaning of per-
son and relation. The definitions of the Coun-
cils should be pondered and made a part of our
thinking.

How is the priest, catechist or writer to

assist people to understand more accurately?
If one’s own thought becomes clearer, the
greater clarity will tend to be transmitted to
those one talks to or writes for. And we must
never forget that divine assistance will be
given to all who ponder prayerfully the sub-
lime mystery of God’s inner life.

■

1

DS 800, 3001.

2

John 1:1.

3

De Trinitate, XV, 14, 23.

4

III, 9.

5

Gen. 1:27.

6

DS 804.

7

DS 1330.

8

DS 800.

9

DS 1331.

10

Cf. St. Thomas: Summa Theol., I, 39, 7-8.

11

Cf. 1 Cor. 12:4-11.

Mr. John Young, B.Th., is associated with the Car-
dinal Newman Catechist Centre in Marrylands,
N.S.W., Australia. He has taught philosophy in
four seminaries and published many articles. He
is the author of Reasoning Things Out (Stella
Maris Books, Fort Worth, Texas), an introduction
to philosophy. His latest book is The Natural
Economy (Robert Schalkenbach Foundation,
New York), a study of what the economic order
should be. His last article in HPR appeared in the
August-September 2000 issue.

28

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

■ Honoring the authority of the Holy Bible as
the foundational court of appeal in moral mat-
ters is an ancient truth of the Christian faith.
Yet, the Bible’s moral authority is rejected by
many today with the objection that appealing
to its moral authority is selective and arbitrary.
But is using the Holy Bible in moral matters
arbitrary? In this article, I will both answer this
question and at the same time outline the con-
tours of the moral life in biblical perspective.

The objection is that Christians selective-

ly appeal, for example, to God’s prohibition
against same-sex relations in Lev. 18:22
(“You shall not have intercourse with a man
as you would with a woman. It is an abomi-
nation.”), but ignore the punishment of death
for same-sex relations (see Lev. 20:13). They
find scriptural warrant in the sixth command-
ment for rejecting adultery as wrong (Exod.
20:14), but ignore the scriptural warrant that
the punishment for committing adultery is
death (see Lev. 20:10). The fourth command-

ment tells us that we should honor our parents
(Exod. 20:12), but Exod. 21:17 says: execute
a son who swears at his father. Christians read-
ily cite scriptural warrant for parental author-
ity but none accept execution as a punishment
for disrespecting parents.

The point of this objection to using scrip-

ture in ethics is clear—Christian appeal to
scriptural warrant is selective and arbitrary.
Yet, in my judgment, the objection fails to per-
suade. The use of Scripture as morally author-
itative, though selective, is not arbitrary. There
is some basis in Scripture itself for regarding
the ceremonial laws, civil laws, including the
penal code, as no longer binding.

The Gospel of Christ is “a law of freedom,

because it sets us free from the ritual and jur-
idical observances of the Old Law” (Cate-
chism of the Catholic Church, no. 1972). Civ-
il, criminal, and cultic (ritual) Old Testament
Laws are no longer binding for us. Laws re-
garding temple sacrifices, ritual cleanliness,

Jesus’Sermon on the Mount challenges us to find
true happiness by practicing the
Gospel virtues, from humility to purity of heart.

The moral life
in biblical perspective

By Eduardo J. Echeverria

DECEMBER 2001

29

and diet, like forbidding unclean meats, whose
point is holiness and forgiveness of sins, have
been fulfilled by the sacrificial death of Jesus
on the cross. His atoning death both perfect-
ed and transformed the OT sacrificial system,
because he makes a full and perfect sacrifice
for sin on our behalf. “We have been sancti-
fied through the offering of the body of Jesus
Christ once for all . . . For by one offering He
has perfected forever those who are being
sanctified” (Heb. 10:10, 14). Again:

But Christ came as High Priest of the good things
to come, with the greater and more perfect taber-
nacle not made with hands, that is, not of this cre-
ation. Not with the blood of goats and calves, but
with His own blood He entered the Most Holy
Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemp-
tion. For if the blood of bulls and goats and the
ashes of a heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifies
for the purifying of the flesh, how much more shall
the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit
offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your
conscience from dead works to serve the living
God? And for this reason He is the Mediator of the
new covenant, by means of death, for the redemp-
tion of the transgressions under the first covenant,
that those who are called may receive the promise
of eternal inheritance (Heb. 9:11-15).

Is the biblical prohibition against homo-

sexuality to be classified along with the other
temporary ceremonial laws that are no longer
binding because of Christ’s perfect sacrifice
for sin on our behalf? Some critics of using
Holy Scripture as morally authoritative claim
that prohibiting homosexuality today would
be like forbidding unclean meats, and since
we don’t accept the latter prohibition, it would
be inconsistent to accept the former. This
argument is not persuasive.

First, the ceremonial laws of the OT point

to or prefigure Christ and these laws have
been fulfilled by Christ’s obedience. The
same cannot be said for the biblical prohibi-
tion against homosexuality. Second, the death
penalty demanded for homosexuality puts it
in the moral realm and not in the ceremonial
laws. The primary character of the holiness

code is moral, prohibiting incest, adultery,
child sacrifice, oppression of the poor, slan-
der, hatred, unjust weights and measures, and
these precepts are still binding today. In sum,
as Greg L. Bahnsen correctly argues:

Christ himself appealed [to the contents of Lev.
18-20] as summarizing all the law and the proph-
ets (Lev. 19:18; cf. Matt. 22:39-40) . . . The de-
fender of homosexuality must produce a viable
criteria for distinguishing between moral and cer-
emonial laws, or else consistently reject them all
(contrary to the emphatic word of Christ). We have
the New Testament warrant for discontinuing obe-
dience to the sacrificial system (Heb. 10:1-18) . . .
However, the Scriptures never alter God’s re-
vealed law regarding homosexuality, but leave us
under its full requirement (cf. Deut. 8:3; 12:32;
Matt. 4:4). Indeed, the Bible repeatedly condemns
homosexuality, the New Testament itself stress-
ing that it is contrary to God’s law (1 Tim. 1:9-10),
bringing God’s judgment and exclusion from the
kingdom (Rom. 1:24ff; 1 Cor. 6:9-10). Therefore,
the prohibition against homosexuality cannot be
viewed as part of the ceremonial system prefigur-
ing Christ or as temporary in its obligation.

Furthermore, the penal code of the Mosaic

Law no longer possesses juridical authority.
This code stipulates capital punishment for
more than twenty crimes like disrespecting
parents, adultery, and homosexuality (Lev.
20:9-10, 13). But it was directed toward the
civil society of Israel and thus this criminal
code, not the moral principles behind it, lost
its validity when Israel ceased to be a theo-
cratic nation. Hence the OT penal code is no
longer binding for us. Moreover, as leading
Dutch theologian Jochem Douma correctly
notes, “Christ is directing His teaching not
toward the external civil order, but toward the
internal spiritual and moral meaning of the
law.”

Yet, Christians still accept the binding

nature of the moral command prohibiting, for
example, adultery, homosexuality, and disre-
specting parents. The moral laws, whose core
is the Ten Commandments, retain their direct
and unchanging validity, but even these com-
mandments receive a new foundation in the

Gospel. “The Law of the Gospel ‘fulfills’, re-
fines, surpasses, and leads the Old Law to its
perfection” (Catechism, no. 1967).

Indeed, the key to understanding what hap-

pens to the whole law (cultic, civil and moral)
of the Old Testament is Jesus Christ. Jesus
said, “Do not think that I have come to abol-
ish the Law or the Prophets; I have come not
to abolish but to fulfill” (Matt. 5:17). On the
one hand, Christ’s fulfillment of the law means
that we are free from the law as a system of
salvation. Because of sin, which the law can-
not remove, it remains a law of bondage from
which Christ sets us free. Thus, we are justi-
fied through the saving work of Jesus Christ.
We are no longer under God’s law, but under
his grace. On the other hand, a radical separa-
tion of law from gospel does not follow from
the law’s fulfillment in Christ. We are freed
from bondage to the law as a way of salvation.
Yet, the moral law remains God’s will for the
life of the Christian.

This last point is clear because both Jesus

and the Apostles appeal to the Ten Command-
ments (Matt. 19:18ff.; Rom. 13:9; Eph. 6:2f.;
James 2:11). The moral law retains its mean-
ing as, in St. Paul’s words, “holy law” and as
“holy and just and good” (Rom. 7:12). Thus,
on the one hand, Jesus fulfills the law cannot
mean that Christians can break with the moral
law. On the other hand, as Joseph Cardinal
Ratzinger correctly explains, “universalizing
of the Torah by Jesus, as the New Testament
understands it, is not the extraction of some
universal moral prescriptions from the living
whole of the God’s revelation. It preserves the
unity of cult and ethos. The ethos remains
grounded and anchored in the cult, in the wor-
ship of God, in such a way that the entire cult
is bound together in the Cross, indeed, for the
first time has become fully real.” Thus, as the
law’s fulfiller, Jesus takes up the Law into his
death and brings it to its deepest meaning by
perfecting and transforming it:

The Law of the Gospel fulfills the commandments
of the Law. The Lord’s Sermon on the Mount, far
from abolishing or devaluing the moral prescrip-
tions of the Old Law, releases their hidden poten-
tial and has new demands arise from them: it
reveals their entire divine and human truth. It does
not add new external precepts, but proceeds to
reform the heart, the root of human acts, where
man chooses between the pure and the impure,
where faith, hope, and charity are formed and with
them the other virtues. The Gospel thus brings the
Law to its fullness through imitation of the per-
fection of the heavenly Father, through forgive-
ness of enemies and prayer for persecutors, in
emulation of the divine generosity (Catechism, no.
1968).

Jesus fulfills the law by bringing out its

fullest and complete meaning. He fulfills it
also by bringing the finishing or capstone rev-
elation—He radicalizes the law’s demands by
going to its heart and center, which is that we
love God above all and our neighbors as our-
selves (see Catechism, no. 1968). In Matthew
22:40, Jesus says, “On these two command-
ments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”
That is, as God’s expressed will, love of God

30

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

DECEMBER 2001

31

and love of neighbor is the root of the Ten
Commandments.

As John Paul II explains, “Jesus brings

God’s commandments to fulfillment . . . by
interiorizing their demands and by bringing
out their fullest meaning. Love of neighbor
springs from a loving heart.” Because the love
of God has been poured out in our hearts by
the grace of the Holy Spirit, given to us
through faith in Christ (Rom. 5:5), not only
does his love now dwell in, and act through,
us, but God’s law is placed within our hearts
(Jer. 31:33f.; Heb. 10:16).

Because love of God and neighbor is the

heart of the law, Jesus shows that the com-
mandments prohibiting murder and adultery
mean more than the letter of the law states.
Jesus is not an ethical minimalist, but rather
an ethical maximalist. Obedience to the com-
mandments is a moral and spiritual journey,
in Christ and through the grace of the Holy

Spirit, toward perfection, shown in faith
working through love (see Col. 3:14). In this
light, John Paul adds, “the commandment
‘You shall not murder’ becomes a call to an
attentive love that protects and promotes the
life of one’s neighbor. The precept prohibit-
ing adultery becomes an invitation to a pure
way of looking at others . . . ‘You have heard
that it was said to men of old, You shall not
murder, and whoever murders will be liable
to judgment. But I say to you that whoever is
angry with his brother shall be liable to judg-
ment . . . You have heard that it was said, You
shall not commit adultery. But I say to you that
whoever looks at a woman lustfully has
already committed adultery with her in his
heart’ (Matt. 5:21-22)” (Veritatis Splendor,
no. 15).

According to Jochem Douma, biblical rev-

elation functions in a variety of ways as a
moral authority—it functions as guide, guard,

32

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

compass, and example. First, Scripture func-
tions as a guide telling us specifically and
concretely what is good and evil. There are
commands against murdering my neighbor,
against stealing or lying, or against commit-
ting adultery, and disrespecting parental
authority in the family. These commands are
meant to safeguard respect for persons. They
are universal—they are always and every-
where valid, because it is true of all men that
they should not kill, steal, lie, dishonor their
parents, or commit adultery. Of course not
all men heed these commandments, but all
men should. Yet, while these commands
stand above cultural relativities—children
should obey their parents is universally
valid—some specific applications of these
commands—executing a son who swears at
his father—are not accepted now as binding.

Biblical revelation also functions as a

guard. This is especially the case when a direct
appeal to Scripture is not possible because of
the difference in situation between the bibli-
cal time and now. We’re all aware of, and have
been influenced by, cultural developments
that have led to changes in, for example, the
relationships between husbands and wives,
parents and children, government and citi-
zens. For instance, we cannot directly appeal
to Scripture to justify the rise of human rights,
democracy, freedom of religion, and better
forms of government. In other words, Scrip-
ture cannot function as a guide (in the above
stated sense) on these and other related mat-
ters. This is not to say that the biblical revela-
tion is irrelevant, say, for the notion of human
rights.

Clearly, the biblical revelation played a

crucial and authoritative role as guard for var-
ious cultural changes and developments in
human rights issues like the abolition of slav-
ery, child labor, and colonialism. That man is
created in the “image and likeness of God”
(Gen. 1:26-27) is an inherent indication of
human worth and, with it, personal dignity.

Furthermore, the Biblical insistence that jus-
tice be done for the powerless, especially the
poor, widows, orphans, and strangers, sug-
gests that respect is due to them on the basis
of their inviolable dignity. Moreover, the sav-
ing revelation of the Father’s love in Jesus’
death on the cross reveals to man, as John Paul
II says, “not only the boundless love of God
who ‘so loved the world that He gave His only
Son’ (Jn. 3:16), but also the incomparable
value of every human person” (Evangelium
Vitae, no. 2). As Douma rightly says, then,
about the function of Scripture as guard:
“Scripture is . . . a guard that warns against
corrupt developments. Old Testament proph-
ets left behind no blueprint for political and
social relationships, but they certainly de-
nounced abuses where God was not being
honored and people were not being respected.
Scripture does not choose for or against
democracy and other matters that we today
value highly. But the Bible does sharpen our
vision for seeing where people are abused and
oppressed, regardless of political or econom-
ic system.”

Biblical revelation also functions as a com-

pass indicating the general direction we
should go for finding an answer to the ques-
tion of what is good or evil in a specific situ-
ation. For example, even without appealing to
the valid Scriptural prohibitions against ho-
mosexual relations (see Rom. 1:21-27; 1 Cor.
6:9-10), Scripture can serve as a compass for
dealing with the question of the biblical valid-
ity of such relations. Consider the biblical
account of God’s original creation of sexual
differentiation from the beginning (“male and
female he created them” states Gen. 1:27), of
his ordaining sexual relations to be in the form
of male-female union, because man and wom-
an were created for one another in full com-
plementarity (Gen. 2:18-23), of man and
woman—Adam and Eve—becoming “one
flesh,” one reality (Gen. 2:24), and last but not

(continued on page 47)

DECEMBER 2001

33

homilies

on the liturgy of the Sundays and feasts

by wade l.j. menezes

Making resolutions
with Mary

Solemnity of Mary, Mother of God—January 1

Readings (ABC): Num. 6:22-27 • Gal. 4:4-7 • Luke 2:16-21

Title: Mary, the Example of Mature Christian Living

Purpose: (1) to look well at the Lord’s Mother as we start another year
of life; (2) to imitate her prayerfulness, fidelity, energy, sinlessness.

■ It’s that time of year again! January 1st, to be exact, when self-
imposed “New Year’s Resolutions” make us hopeful of living better
Christian lives—both spiritually and bodily—for the next twelve
months. We’ve all heard it (or promised it to ourselves) before: to make
more time for daily prayer and spiritual reading, to eat more healthily or
to take on an exercise program and remain faithful to it. The list could
go on.

To be successful, the spiritual and temporal resolutions listed above

require a Christian’s prayerfulness, fidelity, energy and detachment from
sin. As we embark upon a new year, then, we do well to look to Our
Lord’s Blessed Mother—the perfect Christian disciple—to aid us as we
start another year of life and to ask God’s blessing upon it just as the Lord
commands Moses in today’s First Reading.

As the perfect Christian disciple, Mary is the example of mature

Christian living, of harmonizing both the spiritual and temporal demands
of daily living. In order that we, too, may mature as Christians, we should
look to imitate Mary’s prayerfulness, fidelity, energy and sinlessness as
we strive to live rightly and virtuously as Christians in the modem world.

It’s time for

resolutions!

34

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

Mary’s prayerfulness. Today, we celebrate the Solemnity of Mary,

Mother of God (Theotokos), a title proclaimed dogmatically by the
Council of Ephesus in 431. Mary derives this title from her divine
maternity as the mother of Jesus Christ, the incarnate God-man. He is
a divine Person (the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity) with two
natures: human and divine. Jesus is God and Mary is his mother: she is
the “God-bearer.”

Mary’s prayerfulness is linked with her divine maternity. Lumen

Gentium, the Second Vatican Council’s Dogmatic Constitution on the
Church, states that after her Son’s Ascension, Mary “aided the begin-
nings of the Church by her prayers” (LG 69). In her association with
the Apostles and holy women, “we also see Mary by her prayers
imploring the gift of the Spirit, who had already overshadowed her in
the Annunciation” (LG 59).

Mary’s prayerfulness and role in the Church are inseparable from her

union with Christ and flows directly from it. Since Christ established the
Church, he is its Head and we are its members. The Catechism teaches
that from the Church, the Christian “learns the example of holiness and
recognizes its model and source in the all-holy Virgin Mary” (2030).

Mary’s fidelity. To discuss Mary’s fidelity is to discuss Mary’s faith.

The word “fidelity” is derived from the Latin fides, meaning “faith” or
fidelis, meaning “faithful.” Mary was a woman of great faith: she was
alone at prayer, for example, when the Archangel Gabriel appeared to
her at the Annunciation, the time of our Lord’s sacred Incarnation.
These events are alluded to in today’s Second Reading from St. Paul to
the Galatians.

Christians should remind themselves that only a strong faith can

embrace fully the mysterious ways of God’s almighty power, and that
such faith glories in human weakness in order to draw to itself the
power of Christ (cf. 2 Cor. 12:9; Phil. 4:13). According to the
Catechism (273), “The Virgin Mary is the supreme model of this faith,
for she believed that ‘nothing will be impossible with God,’ and was
able to magnify the Lord: ‘For he who is mighty has done great things
for me, and holy is his name”’ (Luke 1:37, 49).

Mary’s fidelity is rooted in the fact that she constantly united her will

to the will of God. This truth is witnessed to during the more tumultuous
times of Christ’s own life. For example, Mary saw the will of God in the
person of Caesar Augustus, who made her travel to Bethlehem with St.
Joseph during her pregnancy for the census. She saw the will of God in
the person of Herod, who made her flee to Egypt with St. Joseph and the
Christ Child. She saw the will of God in the person of Pontius Pilate, who
condemned her Son to death; and she saw the will of God in the execu-
tioners and soldiers who crucified her Son.

Mary’s energy. Mary’s energy is given witness to in her Apostolic

zeal and fervor which is made evident immediately following the

Mary is the

God-bearer

The Blessed Virgin

is the supreme

model of faith

DECEMBER 2001

35

Annunciation when she “proceeds in haste” through the hill country to a
town of Judah to visit her cousin, Elizabeth, who is pregnant with John
the Baptist (cf. Luke 1:39-56). Although hidden, Mary also remains
active in following her Son throughout his public life. She intercedes for
the newly wedded couple at Cana (John 2:1-12) and is referred to by
Jesus as one who is faithful to his teachings beyond the ties of mere
blood relations (cf. Matt. 12:46-50; Mark 3:31-35; Luke 8:19-21).

Mary’s energy may be said to be most active even today, as she

stands as an intercessor before God through the mediation of her Son
(cf. Catechism, 969, 970). Lumen Gentium states that by her manifold
intercession, made possible through the merits of her Son, Mary “con-
tinues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation” and is therefore
“invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper,
Benefactress, and Mediatrix” (LG 62).

Mary’s sinlessness. Mary’s sinlessness, like her intercession, is tied

to the merits of her divine Son. This is a doctrine that all persons
should find great comfort in. In 1854, Pope Pius IX solemnly defined
the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception which stated that “the most
Blessed Virgin Mary, in the first instant of her conception, by a singu-
lar grace and privilege granted by Almighty God, in view of the merits
of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race, was preserved free from
all stain of original sin” (Ineffabilis Deus, 29).

According to this doctrine, Mary was conceived in the state of per-

fect justice (just as Adam and Eve were created), free from original
sin, and all its consequences and penalties, in virtue of the redemption
won by Jesus Christ on the Cross. Mary, like us, needed to be
redeemed. But whereby the rest of humanity benefits from the Cross
after the Cross, it may be said that Mary benefited from the Cross
before the Cross.

The Catechism, quoting both Ineffabilis Deus and the Council of

Trent (held from 1545-1563), states that Mary is the “new Eve” and
that she “benefited first of all and uniquely from Christ’s victory over
sin: she was preserved from all stain of original sin and by a special
grace of God committed no sin of any kind during her whole life”
(411). This dogmatic teaching presented nothing new for the Church,
as the perfect sinlessness of Mary had, since Apostolic times, been
taught by the Fathers of the Church. For the rest of humanity that is
conceived in original sin, each one must remember that the salvation
God willed for Mary is the same salvation he wills for us: heaven for
all eternity! (cf. 1 Tim. 2:4).

So, as we begin a new year on this great Solemnity of Mary, Mother

of God, we are reminded to place God first in our lives; we must give
him the glory as do the faith-filled shepherds in today’s Gospel. God
watches over us and cares for us in our earthly needs by giving us the
strength to endure bravely whatever may come our way. As baptized

Mary always

“proceeds in haste”

to do God’s will

Mary is the

“new Eve”

36

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

Christians, we must believe this wonderful truth (cf. Phil. 4:19) and
look to Mary, God’s own mother, as our model of Christian maturity.
We must renounce any attachment to sin and acknowledge that we
need God’s help—and the help of his holy Mother—for it is not one-
self, but rather God, who, “in his good will toward you, begets in you
any measure of desire or achievement” (Phil. 2:13).

Suggested reading: Catechism of the Catholic Church, 487, 491-495,
963-965, 971, 2617-2619.

Redeeming all
nations

Solemnity of the Epiphany of Our Lord Jesus
Christ—January 6

Readings (ABC): Isa. 60:1-6 • Eph. 3:2-3, 5-6 • Matt 2:1-12

Title: Evangelization: Proclaiming the Gospel to All Nations

Purpose: (1) to explain Epiphany as the Gospel moving our to all
nations; (2) to encourage personal attitudes and programs that are
evangelistic.

Stop and think how easy it is to become impressed by gatherings or

events that feature a host of international figures! Whether it be the
opening ceremonies of the Olympics, a royal wedding or an interna-
tional peace summit being broadcast live on the news, there is some-
thing special about the “calling forth of all nations” to a particular
cause. Even the state funeral for Mother Teresa of Calcutta, held by
the Government of India, was impressive; at it were numerous digni-
taries and government officials from around the world. Papal trips
across the globe, too, have their international significance and instill
within a person a certain sense of awe and wonder: the Vicar of Christ
on earth visiting my home region! Imagine!

Today, the Church celebrates on her universal calendar the Solem-

nity of the Epiphany of Our Lord which commemorates the visitation
of the three wise men to the Christ Child at Bethlehem: intellectuals
from far away lands who came and fell on their knees in adoration of
the Incarnate God-man. Because the Epiphany is an historical event as

Mary is our

spiritual mother

Christ manifests

himself to all nations

DECEMBER 2001

37

told to us in today’s Gospel from St. Matthew, this great Solemnity
ought to instill in every Christian the importance of ongoing evange-
lization: the proclaiming of the Gospel to all nations.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church states clearly that the Epiph-

any “is the manifestation of Jesus as Messiah of Israel, Son of God and
Savior of the world. The great feast of Epiphany celebrates the adora-
tion of Jesus by the wise men (magi) from the East. . . . In the magi,
representatives of the neighboring pagan religions, the Gospel sees the
first-fruits of the nations, who welcome the good news of salvation
through the Incarnation” (528).

It is a doctrine of our Catholic faith that Jesus Christ came to call all

people to himself (cf. John 12:32). He wills that everyone be saved
and that all come to the knowledge of truth through him (cf. 1 Tim.
2:3). The fact that pagan wise men came to Jerusalem “in order to pay
homage to the king of the Jews shows that they seek in Israel, in the
messianic light of the star of David, the one who will be king of the
nations” (Catechism, 528). This truth is alluded to beautifully in
today’s First Reading from the prophet Isaiah.

In short, the visit of the three wise men proves to us that all people

from all nations can discover Jesus and worship him as “Son of God
and Savior of the world. . . .” St. Paul is clear about this in today’s
Second Reading to the Ephesians. Clearly, “the full number of
nations” (Catechism, 528) is called to the truth that Jesus Christ is the
Way, the Truth and the Life since “there is no salvation through any-
one else, nor is there any other name under heaven given to the human
race by which we are to be saved” (Acts 4:12).

The word “epiphany” means simply to appear or to show; a verita-

ble manifestation, as it were. Through his Sacred Incarnation, this is
exactly what the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity did: he mani-
fested himself to the corporeal world he created! (cf. John 1:1-5). In
other words, the Creator become a creature. Without diminishing his
divinity, he increased the dignity of our humanity. In the same way, the
Gospel, too, must appear, show and manifest itself to all humanity.
The very nature of the Gospel demands its promulgation. Jesus’ life
and words to us are not to be confined to first century Palestine. The
Gospel, by nature, is transcendent: its messages of Christ’s life and
his words to us are applicable to all times and all places. The Gospel,
then, by nature, moves out to all nations. This truth is brought to light
in the words of today’s Responsorial Psalm: “Lord, every nation on
earth will adore you.”

Given these truths, all Christians, in virtue of their baptism, are

called to be cooperators with God in the task of evangelization, of the
spreading of the Gospel to all corners of the world. This is an awe-
some task, especially when one considers the fact that it is also one of
the signs that is to be fulfilled before the time of Christ’s Second

Jesus calls all

to himself

The Gospel goes

out to all nations

38

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

Coming (cf. Matt. 24:14; Mark 13:10, Luke 24:47). With the advent of
computer technologies like the internet, one wonders just how far off
we really are from spreading the Gospel to “all corners of the world.”

To carry out this awesome task as mandated by our Redeemer (cf.

Matt. 28:19-20), all Christians are, in virtue of their Christian baptism,
sharers in their own particular way in the priestly, prophetic and king-
ly offices of Christ. According to Church teaching, it is within the
“prophetic” office that the task of evangelization is carried out,
whether one be a bishop, priest, deacon, religious or member of the
lay faithful. In discussing just how this is so with the laity, the
Catechism (quoting the Second Vatican Council) states that lay people
“fulfill their prophetic mission by evangelization, ‘that is, the procla-
mation of Christ by word and the testimony of life.’ For lay people,
‘this evangelization . . . acquires a specific property and peculiar effi-
cacy because it is accomplished in the ordinary circumstances of the
world”’ (905).

Precisely because evangelization is to be carried out by all Chris-

tians, each one according to his or her proper state in life, the task is
one which naturally encourages personal attitudes and programs that
are in themselves evangelistic. Whether one is single, married, in a
religious state approved by the Church or an ordained priest, all are
called in both word and deed to evangelize the Gospel message to the
modem world: “the true apostle is on the lookout for occasions of
announcing Christ by word, either to unbelievers . . . or to the faithful”
(Catechism, 905).

The opportunities to encourage personal attitudes and programs

that are evangelistic are endless! Inviting a house guest to pray the
rosary with you and your family, joining the Legion of Mary or the
Knights of Columbus, getting active in the pro-life movement, putting
a Scriptural quote on your next batch of business cards, giving a holy
card to a store clerk, going on retreat with your spouse or writing your
government legislators to help counteract anti-family and anti-life leg-
islation are just a few examples of how persons can individually or
collectively join forces with others and become more involved in
making Christ’s Gospel teachings and principles better known—and
lived—in the modern world.

Christians have a moral duty and responsibility—each one accord-

ing to his or her proper state in life—to be an evangelizer in his or her
own sphere of influence. If each one of us does this, all the while ask-
ing Almighty God for his grace and guidance, then the Gospel mes-
sage will indeed spread like wildfire to all corners of the globe.

Suggested reading: Catechism of the Catholic Church, 422-429, 528,
897-913.

Christians share in

the offices of Christ

Be pro-active!

DECEMBER 2001

39

Come to the waters

Feast of the Baptism of Our Lord Jesus Christ—
January 13

“A” Readings: Isa. 42:1-4, 6-7 • 10:34-38 • Matt. 3:13-17

Title: Jesus Is Baptized and Is Commissioned to Work

Purpose: (1) to explain the importance in the four Gospels of the
Lord’s Baptism; (2) to encourage our similar mission of holiness,
prayer and service to others.

The fact that Jesus’ baptism in the Jordan River is given an account

of in all four Gospels tells us that this Christ-event is of great importance
(cf. Matt. 3:13-17; Mark 1:9-11; Luke 3:21-22; John 1:29-34). But
what, exactly, is this great importance? The answer to this question lies
in truth that “our Lord voluntarily submitted himself to the baptism of
St. John, intended for sinners, in order to ‘fulfill all righteousness”’
(Catechism, 1224, emphasis added; cf. Matt. 3:15). In short, Jesus’ ges-
ture of voluntarily submitting himself to baptism “is a manifestation of
his self-emptying” (Catechism, 1224; cf. Phil. 2:7).

As the “gateway” Sacrament (cf. Catechism, 1213; Canon 849), a

person must ordinarily receive baptism before receiving any of the other
six Sacraments. But Jesus, the Word Incarnate—the Second Person of
the Most Holy Trinity—is the very Author of the Sacraments. As the
Author of the Sacraments, he is not bound or confined by them any
more than an architect is bound or confined by a house he has designed
and is building. The architect is always free to “work around” or even
“change” his plans and designs. Yet, Jesus willed himself to be baptized,
voluntarily setting an example for all mankind—the mankind which he
came to redeem and save (cf. 1 Tim. 2:3).

To show forth the wonderful continuity between all of salvation his-

tory and that of Christ’s self-emptying example, the Catechism of the
Catholic Church (1223) states that “all the Old Covenant prefigurations
find their fulfillment in Christ Jesus. He begins his public life after hav-
ing himself baptized by St. John the Baptist in the Jordan. After his res-
urrection Christ gives this mission to his apostles: ‘Go therefore and
make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father
and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I
have commanded you”’ (Matt. 28:19-20; cf. Mark 16:15-16).

The Gospels themselves contain the very words of Christ spoken to

us. These words are transcendent, applicable to all times and places. The
fact that Jesus’ baptism is recounted in all four Gospels should teach us

Jesus’ baptism is

of great significance

Jesus willed to be

an example for us

40

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

that, as God, he not only became “like his brothers in every way, that he
might be a merciful and faithful high priest before God to expiate the
sins of the people” (Heb. 2:17), but that he also willed, by example, to
show us the very way to be saved, that is, by receiving the gateway
Sacrament himself, having the Holy Spirit descend upon him and pleas-
ing his Heavenly Father all the while. Indeed, Jesus’ baptism is a trini-
tarian event, as all three Divine Persons are present: “The Spirit who
had hovered over the waters of the first creation descended then on the
Christ as a prelude of the new creation, and the Father revealed Jesus as
his ‘beloved Son”’ (Catechism, 1224).

Of great importance, too, is the fact that it is Christ’s own baptism

which officially begins his three years of public ministry: his very mission
among men. Because it begins his mission, Jesus’ baptism must somehow
be linked to his entire mission, that is, to the entire Paschal Mystery: his
Passion, Death, Resurrection from the dead and Ascension into glory.

Explaining this link, the Catechism states clearly that “Jesus’ public

life begins with his baptism by John in the Jordan. . . . The baptism of
Jesus is on his part the acceptance and inauguration of his mission as
God’s suffering Servant (alluded to in today’s First Reading from the
prophet Isaiah). He allows himself to be numbered among sinners; he is
already ‘the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world.’
Already he is anticipating the ‘baptism’ of his bloody death. Already he
is coming to ‘fulfill all righteousness,’ that is, he is submitting himself
entirely to his Father’s will: out of love he consents to this baptism of
death for the remission of our sins. The Father’s voice responds to the
Son’s acceptance, proclaiming his entire delight in his Son. The Spirit
whom Jesus possessed in fullness from his conception comes to ‘rest on
him.’ Jesus will be the source of the Spirit for all mankind. At his bap-
tism ‘the heavens were opened’—the heavens that Adam’s sin had
closed—and the waters were sanctified by the descent of Jesus and the
Spirit, a prelude to the new creation” (Catechism, 535-536).

In virtue of our own baptism, each one of us, too, has a share in these

wonderful truths made possible by our God becoming man and assum-
ing a nature like our own in all things except sin (cf. Heb. 4:15). Put
simply, each one of us is called to become a “new creation” in Jesus
Christ, to become an adopted son of the Father through the redemption
Christ won for us. This should encourage us to follow—like Jesus—a
similar mission of holiness, prayer and service to others.

The Church teaches that “through Baptism the Christian is Sacramen-

tally assimilated to Jesus, who in his own baptism anticipates his death
and resurrection. The Christian must enter into this mystery of humble
self-abasement and repentance, go down into the water with Jesus in
order to rise with him, be reborn of water and the Spirit so as to become
the Father’s beloved son in the Son and ‘walk in newness of life’”
(Catechism, 537).

Jesus begins his public

ministry at his baptism

We are each called to

be a “new creation”

DECEMBER 2001

41

In today’s Second Reading, we witness St. Peter pursuing his own

mission of holiness, prayer and service to others by preaching to the
centurion Cornelius and Cornelius’s entire household. Soon after this
scene, Sacred Scripture reports that “the Holy Spirit fell upon all who
were listening to the word . . . (and Peter) ordered them to be baptized in
the name of Jesus Christ” (cf. Acts 10:34-49).

The salvation offered to Cornelius and his entire household is offered

to each one of us. Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, set the
example by letting himself be baptized. Our job is to follow Jesus so
that we, too, may become adoptive sons of God. All of this is stated
beautifully by St. Hilary of Poitiers in connection with our baptism in
Christ: “Everything that happened to Christ lets us know that, after the
bath of water, the Holy Spirit swoops down upon us from high heaven
and that, adopted by the Father’s voice, we become sons of God”
(Catechism, 537).

Suggested reading: Catechism of the Catholic Church, 456-460, 470,
504, 523, 535-536, 556, 565, 606-607, 1223-1225,1084.

Mission sent

2nd Sunday of the Year—January 20

“A” Readings: Isa. 49:3. 5-6 • 1 Cor. 1:1-3 • John 1:29-34

Title: The Baptism of Jesus and Our Baptism

Purpose: (1) to explain what happened when we were baptized; (2) to
present our Baptism as a commitment for life to live in Christ and in
his grace.

Most people, whenever they are commissioned for some special

work, appreciate knowing exactly what it is they are called to do so as to
carry out the task properly and accordingly. On a natural level, this is
just part of human nature: the desire to perform well and produce
expected results, whether it be for a boss, a loved one or for one’s legiti-
mate superior.

On a supernatural level, the Sacrament of Baptism, which incorpo-

rates each Christian into the Body of Christ, also commissions every
believer for a special task, that they may do it properly and accordingly,
so as to please the greatest Boss, Loved One and Legitimate Superior of
all: Almighty God. In short, Baptism is a commitment for life to live in

Salvation is

offered to all

Baptism is a spiritual

commission

42

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

Jesus Christ and in his grace. Baptism commissions us to be staunch
heralds of the Gospel message of Christ and his Church to all peoples
and nations so that Christ’s “salvation may reach to the ends of the
earth” as foretold to us in the First Reading from the Prophet Isaiah. To
understand how this can be, it is necessary to know what happens when
one receives the Sacrament of Baptism.

We believe that “Holy Baptism is the basis of the whole Christian

life” (Catechism, 1213). It is “the gateway to life in the Spirit . . . and the
door which gives access to the other Sacraments. Through Baptism we
are freed from sin and reborn as sons of God; we become members of
Christ, are incorporated into the Church and made sharers in her mis-
sion: ‘Baptism is the sacrament of regeneration through water in the
word”’ (Catechism, 1213).

According to the Church’s time-honored doctrine concerning this

“gateway” Sacrament (cf. Catechism, 1213; Canon 849), “Baptism, by
imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man
back toward God . . .” (Catechism, 405). Original sin is what every
human being inherits from the Fall of our first parents, Adam and Eve.
Just as the whole human race is in Adam as one body of one man, so are
all men implicated in Adam’s sin by the very unity present in the human
race (cf. Catechism, 404).

But just as all are implicated in Adam’s sin, so are all implicated in

Christ’s justice. The words of St. Paul to the members of the Church at
Corinth should ring out clearly in this regard: “Since death came
through a man, the resurrection of the dead came also through a man.
For just as in Adam all die, so too in Christ shall all be brought to life . .
.” (1 Cor. 15:21-22). Through Baptism, God takes away not only the
original sin which we inherit from our first parents, but also any person-
al sins committed after the age of reason, should the Sacrament of
Baptism be received in adolescence or adulthood.

Precisely because we are baptized, we can proclaim boldly the accla-

mation from today’s Responsorial Psalm: “Here am I, Lord: I come to
do your will!” And today’s Second Reading from St. Paul’s First Letter
to the Corinthians promises us that if we carry out our Lord’s will faith-
fully and accordingly throughout our lifetime, we possess a well-found-
ed hope that we are numbered among those “who are called to take their
place among all the saints everywhere who pray to our Lord Jesus
Christ.”

Given these beautiful teachings, each and every Christian should

come to view their Baptism as a commitment for life to live in Christ
and in his grace. Whether baptized as an infant, an adolescent or an
adult, the Sacrament of Baptism “sheds off the old man and puts on
the new” in Christ Jesus: “This Sacrament is called Baptism, after the
central rite by which it is carried out: to baptize (Greek baptizein)
means to ‘plunge’ or ‘immerse’; the ‘plunge’ into the water symbol-

Baptism enables us

to herald the Gospel

“I come to do

your will, Lord!”

DECEMBER 2001

43

izes the catechumen’s burial into Christ’s death, from which he rises
up by resurrection with him, as ‘a new creature”’ (Catechism, 1214).

St. Basil the Great (d. 379) explains all of this in his work titled On

the Holy Spirit: “This, then, is what it means to be born again of water
and the Spirit: we die in the water, and we come to life again through
the Spirit. To signify this death and to enlighten the baptized by trans-
mitting to them knowledge of God, the great Sacrament of Baptism is
administered by means of a triple immersion and the invocation of each
of the three divine Persons.”

Baptism, then, is a Trinitarian event, for it invokes and involves all

three divine Persons: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Even at Jesus’ own
Baptism in the Jordan River, the Father’s voice is heard from the heav-
ens and the Holy Spirit descends upon Our Lord in the form of a dove.
The reality of all this is proclaimed to us in today’s Gospel from St.
John. Like all divine worship, Baptism directs one to the Father, through
the Son, in the Holy Spirit. This “to, through, and in” formula should
be the very blueprint for every Christian’s prayer life.

Because of the indelible character it leaves on the soul, the Sacrament

of Baptism is received only once: “Incorporated into Christ by Baptism,
the person baptized is configured to Christ. Baptism seals the Christian
with the indelible spiritual mark (character) of his belonging to Christ.
Given once for all, Baptism cannot be repeated” (Catechism, 1272).

This baptismal seal “enables and commits Christians to serve God

by a vital participation in the holy liturgy of the Church and to exercise
their baptismal priesthood by the witness of holy lives and practical
charity” (Catechism, 1273).

Although no sin can erase the indelible mark given at Baptism, sin

can prevent Baptism from bearing the fruits of salvation (cf. Catechism,
1272). This is precisely why the Sacrament of Reconciliation (Penance
or Confession) is viewed as a “second baptism.”

The Church has always taught that Baptism does not abolish “the

frailty and weakness of human nature, nor the inclination to sin that tra-
dition calls concupiscence. . . .” (Catechism, 1426). Although frailty,
weakness and concupiscence still linger within human nature, with the
help of God’s grace received from a good, holy, worthy and frequent
reception of the Sacrament of Reconciliation—our “second baptism”—
Catholic Christians can “prove themselves in the struggle of Christian
life. This is the struggle of conversion directed toward holiness and
eternal life to which the Lord never ceases to call us” (Catechism,
1426).

Suggested reading: Catechism of the Catholic Church, 404-405, 683,
790, 798, 838, 855, 931, 977-978, 1210-1222, 1253-1274, 1425-1429,
2520.

Baptism is a

Trinitarian event

No sin can erase

the mark of Baptism

44

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

Why I am here

3rd Sunday of the Year—January 27

“A” Readings: Isa. 8:23—9:3 • 1 Cor. 1:10-13. 17 • Matt. 4:12-23

Title: The Purpose of Your Life

Purpose: to show life’s purpose as (1) to know God; (2) to love God;
(3) to serve God in this world and so to be happy with God for eternity.
To encourage living by that supernatural purpose or end.

If anyone ever asks you “What is the purpose of life?”, your reply

should be the same as the answer given in the Baltimore Catechism
when it poses the question “Why did God make you?” Simply put, the
answer to both of these questions is: “To know, to love and to serve God
in this world, so as to be happy with him forever in the next.”

The Beatific Vision—that of beholding God face-to-face for all eter-

nity—is the goal of every human person. This is because every human
person is made in the image and likeness of God (cf. Gen. 1:26-27).
While the Beatific Vision can be attained only in the next life, “faith
makes us taste in advance the light of the Beatific Vision, the goal of our
journey here below” (Catechism, 163). According to the Church’s
teachings, “faith is already the beginning of eternal life” (ibid.).

St. Basil sums all this up quite nicely when he states: “When we con-

template the blessings of faith even now, as if gazing at a reflection in a
mirror, it is as if we already possessed the wonderful things which our
faith assures us we shall one day enjoy” (ibid.).

Faith, then, is precisely what spurs us on to know, love and serve God

in this life. Faith beckons us to live rightly. By participating actively in the
Sacramental life of the Church, Catholic Christians are steered toward
right living and moral conduct. Because the Beatific Vision is itself the
supernatural purpose or end of life, we likewise need supernatural
means to help us attain it. The Sacraments aid the soul in this regard.

The Sacraments of Eucharist and Penance are of great help, especial-

ly, as they are the only two Sacraments that can be received both repeti-
tiously and frequently. The other five Sacraments hold stipulations
regarding their amount of reception. While Baptism, Confirmation and
Holy Orders can only be received once because of the indelible spiritual
mark or character they imprint on the soul, Matrimony and Anointing of
the Sick can be received repetitiously but not frequently (one can marry
again, for example, but only if one’s former spouse dies; the Anointing
of the Sick can be received only when one begins to be in danger by rea-
son of illness or old age [Canon 1004]).

We are made in

the image of God

We seek to be

with God forever

DECEMBER 2001

45

As the Sacraments are “supernatural tools” which God uses to dis-

pense his graces, so do they aid us in living a supernatural life during
this life, making us actual participators in the divine life of God (cf.
Catechism, 1127), thus giving a foretaste of the ultimate and supernatur-
al life to come: heaven.

The Beatific Vision is also the fulfillment of all man’s longing. “De-

sire for true happiness frees man from his immoderate attachment to the
goods of this world so that he can find his fulfillment in the vision and
beatitude of God” (Catechism, 2548). This makes perfect sense when one
stops to think that the word “beatific” is derived from the Latin beatus
which means “happy.” Christ’s calling of four of his Apostles in today’s
Gospel is the beginning of a journey which will lead them ultimately to
eternal happiness.

To know, love and serve God in this life so as to be forever happy

with him in the next also means keeping his Commandments and living
the spirit of the Beatitudes. While the Ten Commandments are part of
the Old Law and the Beatitudes part of the New Law, both sets of these
divinely revealed truths were given to the people from atop of moun-
tains. This illustrates for each Christian their exaltedness in God’s eyes.
The Ten Commandments and Beatitudes serve as guideposts for right
living and moral conduct.

The Church teaches that “the Beatitudes respond to the natural desire

for happiness. This desire is of divine origin: God has placed it in the
human heart in order to draw man to the One who alone can fulfill it”
(Catechism, 1718). As put so aptly by St. Augustine: “We all want to live
happily; in the whole human race there is no one who does not assent to
this proposition, even before it is fully articulated” (ibid.).

The Beatitudes “reveal the goal of human existence, the ultimate end

of human acts: God calls us to his own beatitude. This vocation is
addressed to each individual personally, but also to the Church as a
whole, the new people made up of those who have accepted the promise
and live from it in faith” (Catechism, 1719).

For Christians, then, it should come as no surprise that “faith” finds

itself back in the equation which sets out to discover answers for the
purpose of life and the reason for personal existence. Life itself is a
precious gift, and each human life is unique, precious and unrepeat-
able. As taught by the Church: “Human life is sacred because from its
beginning it involves the creative action of God and it remains for ever
in a special relationship with the Creator, who is its sole end”
(Catechism, 2258).

As Christians, we couple these truths with the truth that each and

every human person is called to the Beatific Vision, and so one has a defi-
nite reason not only to live, but to live rightly according to the dictates of
an informed conscience which is served by sound faith which rests upon
Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition and the Sacred Magisterium. In this

“Beatific” refers

to happiness

Human life

is sacred

46

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

way, Christ’s faithful remain united in faith which is what St. Paul ex-
horts all of us to in today’s Second Reading.

Today’s First Reading from the prophet Isaiah states, “the people that

walked in darkness has seen a great light.” As Christians, we boast that
Christ’s light of Truth has been manifested to us through his Church.
This boasting is done by our knowing the purpose of life, the reason for
our personal existence and by our striving to live good, holy and upright
lives. In doing so, we are able to proclaim boldly—and mean it—the
acclamation of today’s Responsorial Psalm: “The Lord is my Light and
my Salvation.”

Suggested reading: Catechism of the Catholic Church, 153-165, 1127,
1716-1729, 1820, 2258, 2548-2550.

■

Reverend Wade L.J. Menezes, C.P.M., is a member of the Fathers of Mercy, a
missionary preaching religious order based in South Union, Kentucky. He
earned his dual M.Div.-M.A. degrees in theology from Holy Apostles Seminary
in Cromwell, Conn. He is currently serving as the Chaplain in residence at
the Shrine of the Most Blessed Sacrament of Our Lady of the Angels Monastery
in Hanceville, Alabama. This is his first series of homilies in HPR.

Christ is the

Great Light

DECEMBER 2001

47

least, the procreative openness to new life that
is divinely enjoined, “be fruitful and multi-
ply” (Gen. 1:28) .

The creation account in God’s Word pre-

sents the constant principles for sexual activ-
ity that remain valid in every age—sex be-
longs within the context of marriage, marriage
is exclusively heterosexual in nature, whose
rationale is the full complementarity of the
man-woman relationship as well as procre-
ative openness to new life. This creation ac-
count is reaffirmed in the New Testament by
Jesus Christ (Matt. 19:4-6), as well as St. Paul
(Eph. 5:31), as the original design of the
Creator. Thus, in light of creation, there is no
biblical defense for homosexuality, because
it belongs to the realm of man’s fall into sin
and not to the divine order of creation. The
Bible gives us, then, constant principles that
help us to discover what we should think and
do, and in this sense it can be used as a com-
pass. But the Bible also provides, lastly, the
example that Christ and others have given.

As a model, we have the lives of the saints

in the Old and New Testaments (Luke 4:25ff.;
1 Cor. 10:1ff.; Phil. 3:17; 2 Thess. 3:9; Heb.
6:12; Heb. 11-12:1ff.; James 5:17f.). No doubt,
following Christ, who is our great example, is
even more essential to the Christian moral life
(Matt. 16:24; 19:21; John 13:15; 1 Cor. 11:1;
1 Peter 2:21). Following Christ involves hold-
ing fast to his very person, indeed it is abiding
in a living relationship with him. Thus, fol-
lowing Christ is not an outward imitation, but
the existential reality of being in love with
God, because Christ dwells by faith in the
heart of the believer (cf. Eph. 3:17). In short,
following Christ means being conformed to
Him, which is the effect of grace, of the active
presence of the Holy Spirit in the believer’s
life (cf. Veritatis Splendor, nos. 19-20).

Thus, being in love with Christ moves us

to live differently than unbelievers. In the
words of Jochem Douma, “The Christian
must walk differently from the pagan, not
(only) because the Ten Commandments re-
quire this of him, but because he has learned
to know Christ (Eph. 4:20). He must have an
attitude of forgiveness, even as God in Christ
has forgiven him (Eph 4:32). He must find out
what is pleasing to Christ (Eph. 5:10). In their
marriage, husband and wife must reflect the
relationship between Christ and His church
(5:22ff.). Christians must flee fornication
because their bodies are members of Christ
(1 Cor. 6:3ff.).”

Yet, there is more. The Sermon on the

Mount and, with it, the Beatitudes (Matt. 5:3-
12), are at the heart of Jesus Christ’s moral
teaching. The Beatitudes reveal the perfect

THE MORAL LIFE IN BIBLICAL
PERSPECTIVE
(

continued from page 32)

TM

Attendance Down?

Contributions Up!

e-Contributions

only from

a Division of J. S. Paluch Company, Inc.

call toll-free 877.Paluch1

or visit us at

www.e-Paluch.com

The creation account in God’s Word

presents the constant principles for sex-

ual activity that remain valid in every

age—sex belongs within the context of

marriage, marriage is exclusively het-

erosexual in nature, whose rationale is

the full complementarity of the man-

woman relationship as well as procre-

ative openness to new life.

48

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

charter for the Christian life, which includes
the moral life—thus the Fathers of the Church
like St. Augustine, the great medieval Chris-
tian thinkers like St. Thomas Aquinas, and
most recently, John Paul II. The Beatitudes are
poverty of spirit, humility, docility before the
Word of God, sorrow for sin or penitence,
hunger and thirst for justice, the practice of
mercy, and purity of heart.

St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas saw

the Sermon on the Mount as the heart and cen-
ter of the New or Evangelical Law, perfecting
and fulfilling the Old Testament Law of
Moses for Christians. Recall that the Old Law
is not abolished by Christ (see Matt: 5:17); it
is maintained in its essentials, with its best ele-
ments conserved and brought to perfection.
The New Law, at its core, is an interior law
that God has placed within our hearts (Jer.
31:33f.; Heb. 10:16); it is not a law written on
tablets of stone or on paper, like the Ten Com-
mandments. As Aquinas puts it, “It is the grace
of the Holy Spirit, given through faith in
Christ, which is preeminent in the Law of the
New Covenant and that whereby its power
exists. So before all else the New Law is the
very grace of the Holy Spirit, given to those
who believe in Christ.”

In the Beatitudes, we find the goal of hu-

man existence, the ultimate end of human life,

which is to know, to love, and to serve God in
this life and to be happy forever with Him in
the next. God calls us to His own beatitude—
the supernatural reality of eternal life, which
the holy Bible express as the Kingdom of
God, the joy of the Lord, God’s rest, and the
vision of God. “Blessed are the pure in heart,
for they shall see God” (Matt. 5:8; see 1 Jn. 2;
1 Cor. 13:12). God’s own Beatitude is a gift of
His grace to us, and the Beatitudes of the Ser-
mon on the Mount are God’s answer to man’s
natural desire for happiness. In the words of
leading Belgian moral theologian, Fr. Servais
Pinckaers, O.P., “Linked with the desire for
happiness, the teaching of the Sermon pene-
trates to our inmost souls and responds to our
deepest aspirations, purifying them and direct-
ing them to the crowning happiness of the lov-
ing vision of God.”

But what is the connection of the Sermon

on the Mount with the moral life? Well, the
moral life is not just about obligations or com-
mandments, about do’s and don’ts. Unmis-
takably, God commands us to respect our par-
ents, and prohibits adultery, homosexuality,
stealing, lying, and so forth. Yet, at one and
the same time and inseparably, the moral life
is, in light of man’s final end, about a loving
union with God. Our final end is to become
co-lovers with God, entering by grace into the
eternal exchange of love of Trinitarian com-
munion, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Cate-
chism, no. 221). This love is God’s own love
flooding our hearts through the Holy Spirit
given to us through faith in Jesus Christ (Rom.
5:5; 8:9). Hence the moral life is relational in
this way. And so there is no opposition be-
tween the commandments and the Beatitudes,
because both aspects of the moral life are
about happiness, about the deliberate order-
ing of our moral actions to God, to eternal life.

As John Paul II correctly explains:

The Beatitudes are not specifically concerned with
certain particular rules of behavior. Rather, they
speak of basic attitudes and dispositions in life and

St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas

saw the Sermon on the Mount as the heart

and center of the New or Evangelical

Law, perfecting and fulfilling the Old

Testament Law of Moses for Christians.

Recall that the Old Law is not abolished

by Christ (see Matt: 5:17); it is maintained

in its essentials, with its best elements con-

served and brought to perfection.

DECEMBER 2001

49

Professor Eduardo J. Echeverria teaches philos-
ophy and is chairman of the philosophy depart-
ment at Conception Seminary College in Concep-
tion, Mo. He is also a weekly columnist for “The
Maryville Daily Forum.” His last article in HPR
appeared in February 2001.

therefore they do not coincide exactly with the com-
mandments. On the other hand, there is no sepa-
ration or opposition between the Beatitudes and
the commandments; both refer to the good, to eter-
nal life. The Sermon on the Mount begins with the
proclamation of the Beatitudes, but also refers to
the commandments (cf. Matt. 5:20-48). At the same
time, the Sermon on the Mount demonstrates the
openness of the commandments and their orien-
tation toward the horizon of the perfection proper
to the Beatitudes. These latter are above all prom-
ises, from which there also indirectly flow nor-
mative indications for the moral life. In their orig-
inality and profundity they are a sort of self-portrait
of Christ, and for this very reason are invitations
to discipleship and communion of life with
Christ (Veritatis Splendor, no. 16).

In short, God is the supreme good in

whom man finds his full and perfect happi-
ness. And both the Ten Commandments and
the Beatitudes give us the way to fulfill this
desire for happiness. “This desire is of divine
origin: God has placed it in the human heart
in order to draw man to the One who alone can
fulfill it” (Catechism, no. 1718).

Of course God does not desire our unhap-

piness. Yet, the promises revealed by the
Beatitudes make clear that God’s happiness
does not come without a spiritual struggle;
they refer to life’s trials, overturning many of
our human ideas about happiness. For exam-
ple, says Fr. Pinckaers, “The beatitude of the
poor runs counter to a concept of happiness
based on the pursuit of sensible goods, riches

and honors. The beatitude of the meek coun-
tervails the idea that happiness is to be found
in the gratification of the irascible passions,
anger and the instinct to dominate. Thirdly,
the beatitude of those who mourn reverses the
theory that happiness consists in pleasure and
sensual delight.” So Jesus’ Sermon on the
Mount challenges us to find true happiness,
beyond false appearances, by practicing the
Gospel virtues, from humility to purity of
heart. And the heart and center of Gospel
morality are these promises of happiness and
of the joy of the Trinitarian life expressed by
the Beatitudes.

“The beatitude we are promised confronts

us with decisive moral choices. It invites us to
purify our hearts of bad instincts and to seek
the love of God above all else. It teaches us
that true happiness is not found in riches or
well-being, in human fame or power, or in any
human achievement—however beneficial it
may be—such as science, technology, and art,
or indeed in any creature, but in God alone,
the source of every good and of all love”
(Catechism, no. 1723).

In biblical perspective, then, the Magna

Charta of the Christian moral life is the
Sermon on the Mount. In short, living the
Beatitudes, which is faith working through
love, is the pursuit of happiness—but God’s
way.

■

50

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

■ When I was heading out to college 25 years
ago, I asked people for advice. Most people
gave me such unremarkable advice as: “stay
sweet” and “work hard” with one notable ex-
ception. A nun I knew gave my hand a squeeze
and confided, “Always make the sacrifice to
go to a good priest.” At the time, I thought Sis-
ter’s advice was a bit odd, because I figured
the Mass was the Mass, but I never forgot her
words to me.

Once married to a career military officer,

and after suffering through my share of shall
we say “creative” liturgies, I started taking
Sister’s words to heart. As my husband and
I hop scotched across the USA, we always
searched for the most orthodox parish near
each new assignment, and as a result, often
drove 30-40 minutes for Mass on Sundays.
Through it all, we have been part of many re-
markable parishes, and have known some
truly outstanding priests. However, the full
import of Sister’s words has been vividly
brought home to me over the past 4 years.

When the time came for my husband’s fi-

nal assignment and retirement, we jumped at

the chance of moving to the Arlington diocese,
even though it would mean a long commute
to work. Because of my husband’s long com-
mute, we decided to choose the better of the
two closest parishes. The parishes were quite
similar, with somewhat progressive pastors
and very solid associates. We made the choice
for our future parish because it had a crucifix
and the tabernacle in the sanctuary (although
the tabernacle was to the side), whereas the
other parish featured the “risen Christ” instead
of a crucifix in the sanctuary, with the taber-
nacle reserved outside the main body of the
church. At that time, our new church was a
very typical parish from what we’d seen
across the country. It was a large parish, newly
built, and located in an up-scale neighborhood
complete with a young, upwardly mobile con-
gregation. Although there was a small group
of dedicated parishioners who attended daily
Mass, the parish as a whole appeared lax. Sun-
day Masses were casual; the communion lines
were long, and confession lines were short.
Additional devotions such as the Stations of
the Cross during lent were sparsely attended.

The first thing Father did upon arriving at the
parish was to move the tabernacle to the
center of the sanctuary, directly under the crucifix.

Story of a parish

By Elizabeth A. Wittman

DECEMBER 2001

51

Even the social events of the parish, such as
coffee and donuts after Mass or parish fairs,
attracted very few. The parish had only exist-
ed 7 years, most people didn’t know each
other, and to top it all off, the parish had a 5
million dollar debt. It wasn’t the ideal parish,
but the rubrics were generally followed and
the two associate priests were excellent.

Two years after we joined the parish, it was

announced that the pastor was retiring. When
word came out about his replacement, the
rumor mills started grinding. Whatever else
our new pastor would be, it was obvious that
he was not someone that people felt neutral
about, although no one questioned his basic
orthodoxy. We all wondered whether and how
he would change the parish, but no one could
have anticipated the metamorphosis the parish
was about to undergo.

The very first thing that Father did upon

arriving at the parish was to move the taber-
nacle to the center of the sanctuary, directly
under the crucifix. Besides making the taber-
nacle the focal point of the church, it also
brought it into view from all spots of the
church. This change alone made a huge dif-
ference. The liturgy was centered, balanced
architecturally. It felt so right, like Jesus was
where he belonged—directly in the place of
honor.

It was a joy to visit the parish over the next

year and see each change that Father put in
place. The sanctuary was soon resplendent
with lovely linens and candlesticks. Votive
candles were set up in front of the statues of
Our Lady and St. Andrew. Father placed a
statue of St. Joseph and the Child Jesus in the
sanctuary, and statues of St. Therese of Lis-
ieux and the Sacred Heart elsewhere in the
church. A beautiful painting of the Last Sup-
per was placed above the tabernacle and the
effect was striking. The sanctuary that had
been sparsely decorated was now a place of
beauty, and more formal; it was now palpably
a place for prayer. Financing the improve-

ments to the church was done by offering the
parishioners the chance of memorializing the
various “upgrades,” whether candle sticks,
nativity figures or hymnals. In addition, Fa-
ther erected a shrine to Blessed Padre Pio in
the vestibule, and on the church grounds he
built a wayside Marian shrine, complete with
benches and flowers.

In short order the church was transformed

into a place a beauty, but I wondered how the
people themselves could be changed in any
significant way. Judging strictly by appear-
ances, it was clear that it would take more than
new altar linens to bring about a renewal in
peoples’ faith.

On the spiritual level, Father introduced

many devotional practices to daily use. His
first change was to introduce daily adoration
of the Blessed Sacrament. He recited the Ang-
elus while processing into Mass; he established
the practice of reciting the Divine Mercy
chaplet and the daily rosary before and after
daily Mass, and introduced the prayer to St.
Michael the Archangel on a daily basis. Not
unexpectedly, most people didn’t know these
prayers, so, with the help of the Knights of
Columbus, Father had laminated prayer sheets
placed in all the pews. Now, after 2 1/2 years,
most people, even at Sunday Mass, can recite
these prayers.

Father also introduced the use of Latin.

Every Wednesday evening there is a Latin
Novus Ordo Mass followed by a Holy Hour.
Additionally, Father uses Latin for a “High
Mass” on Sundays at 10:30. This Mass, with
choir and organ, uses many of the classic
Latin hymns, but for those who prefer a folk
Mass, there is one offered every Sunday as
well. The Latin was a real adjustment. Father
brought in the Adoremus Hymnal, which con-
tains the Latin and English words of the Mass,
and over the course of several Sundays, before
Mass, Father methodically explained the
meaning and pronunciation of the Latin re-
sponses. Once again, the general response of

the congregation has been amazing. Where I
had once stumbled along on the Confiteor or
the Pater Noster the words began to flow more
easily. It has been a blessing to be able to pray
in the official language of the Church.

Father has used his pulpit well. He has

preached on such wide-ranging topics as the
importance of reverence in church, proper
dress, guidelines for reception of communion,
the truth of the Real Presence, and how to
make a good confession. His sermons have
been timely; for instance, when the papal doc-
ument Dominus Iesus made the news Father
spoke at all the weekend Masses explaining
the Pope’s teaching in a reasonable, clear way,
so as to counter the spin the national media
had put on it. Controversially “taboo” subjects
such as contraception and abortion, divorce
and remarriage, the fundamental disorder of
alternative life styles, and the distorted sex
education offered in the local public schools
were dealt with clearly at Sunday Mass in

accordance with Church teaching.

The parish’s catechetical program was put

in the hands of a dedicated, orthodox DRE
who brought in Ignatius Press for the core cur-
riculum. A concerted effort was made to re-
cruit and train catechists to educate the chil-
dren enrolled. Catechist enrichment days dealt
with topics from moral theology to church his-
tory. As the months went by it became appar-
ent that the children were beginning to evan-
gelize their own parents in the faith. A small
example: I taught 3

rd

graders one year whose

homework assignment included writing where
the Pope lives. One little girl told me after-
wards that she wasn’t able to remember, so
she asked her parents who didn’t know. The
student said she then recalled learning it in
class so she exclaimed to them, “Oh, I know,
Mom and Dad! The Pope lives in Rome!” It’s
a beginning.

It was a beginning, but the fruits are appar-

ent. A catechist I know has been preparing 8

th

graders for their Confirmation for over 10
years. She has seen a marked improvement
this past year in her students’ enthusiasm,
knowledge of and interest in the faith. Also,
contrary to past experience, this was the first
year every one of her students continues to
attend weekly religious education classes ,
even after having been confirmed in late
spring. My friend attributes this to the fact that
these students are showing benefits of the con-
tent-rich religious education offered in recent
years, and that with knowledge of the faith
comes love for the faith.

The priests themselves personally under-

took the religious education of the high school
students and those enrolled in the RCIA pro-
gram. A weekly Holy Hour format provided
the time for adult catechesis in the form of a
series on the Catholic Catechism and a bible
study. Currently Father is preaching on the
spirituality of St. Francis de Sales, and its
practical application in daily life. Other
avenues for education in the faith are semi-

52

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

DECEMBER 2001

53

annual parish pilgrimages and an extensive
audiovisual lending library, stocked with
videos and tapes on saints, miracles and liv-
ing the Catholic faith, as well as family style
entertainment.

Above all, it must be said that Father and

his two associates lead primarily by example.
It is not unusual to see one or another of the
priests praying before the Blessed Sacrament
prior to Mass. I would characterize the three
of them by saying their hearts are in what they
do, they love their vocations, they aren’t afraid
of hard work and they all have a sense of hu-
mor. It also requires courage; perhaps it was
with us in mind, poised at the dawn of the 3

rd

millennium, that Our Lord exhorted his
followers so frequently, “Be not afraid.” Al-
though initially Father did receive a lot of
flack, overall the response has been positive.

1

The effects of this concentrated effort have

been amazing to witness. Daily Mass atten-
dance has easily tripled. The confession lines
are long and times have been extended to ac-
commodate the penitents. The enthusiasm and
faith of the parishioners is truly inspiring. The
parish has been blessed with multiple voca-
tions to the priesthood and religious life. It has
been such a transformation that it is obvious
grace has been at work.

The Pope has written often about the new

springtime in the church, and I feel that I have
been privileged to witness an inkling of what
God is willing to do if we make the effort.
Although I have focused on the changes at my
parish, I have noticed many of our neighbor-
ing parishes have instituted similar reforms,
particularly in the promotion of daily adora-
tion, strengthening of religious education, and
reintroduction of Latin in the liturgy, with sim-
ilar results. It is very encouraging to see.

Some years ago, while discussing the state

of the Church with a priest friend of mine, he
stated grimly: “The Church in America is
dead. I don’t say that the Church is dead; I say
the Church in America is dead. There have

been whole countries in the past that have lost
their faith, and we are going to be one of them.”
It was dismaying to hear that from a faithful
priest, but there is no denying the state of the
crisis we are presently in. In his latest apos-
tolic letter, issued in January 2001, the Pope
frankly admits that the “reality of a ‘Christian
society’. . . is now gone,” even in those coun-
tries that have been historically Christian for
generations.

2

The truth is that Christianity has

The effects of this concentrated effort

have been amazing to witness. Daily

Mass attendance has easily tripled.

The confession lines are long and times

have been extended to accommodate

the penitents. The enthusiasm and faith

of the parishioners is truly inspiring.

Liturgical Design

1 col. x 4”

[p/u from Nov. ’01, pg. 59]

been rejected on a worldwide scale, and that
the typical approaches used to present Catho-
licism for the past 35 years have failed miser-
ably. The silver lining in all this, I suppose, is
that it is no longer necessary to leave the com-
forts of home in order to be a missionary!
Priests can now practically say with St. Paul:
“It has been a point of honor with me never to
preach in places where Christ’s name was al-
ready known, for I did not want to build on a
foundation laid by another” (Rom.16:20).
Certainly one had better be careful what sort
of foundation is built. Without a doubt, this
will all be for God’s glory some day.

So what should the response be? Is it time

to institute a new program for renewal? Do we
need to retool the canned reforms of the past
few decades, or at least try harder with inclu-
sive language, toleration and relevance and
continue to soft pedal truth and revelation? Do
we really want the rehashed version of the felt
and burlap banner approach?

Pope John Paul, writing in his apostolic

letter Novo Millennio Ineunte, makes it clear
what his solution is:

Conscious of the risen Lord’s presence

among us, we ask ourselves today the same
question put to Peter in Jerusalem immedi-
ately after his Pentecost speech: “What must
we do?” (Acts2:37). We put the question with
trusting optimism, but without underestimat-
ing the problems we face. We are certainly not
seduced by the naïve expectation that, faced
with the great challenges of our time, we shall
find some magic formula. No, we shall not be
saved by a formula but by a person and the
assurance which he gives us: I am with you!
It is not therefore a matter of inventing a ‘new
program.’ The program already exists: It is
the plan found in the Gospel and in the living
tradition; it is the same as ever (emphasis
mine). Ultimately, it has its center in Christ
himself, who is to be known, loved and imi-
tated so that in him we may live the life of the
Trinity and with him transform history until

its fulfillment in the heavenly Jerusalem. This
is a program which does not change with
shifts of times and cultures, even though it
takes account of time and culture for the sake
of true dialogue and effective communication.
This program for all times is our program for
the third millennium.

3

Fr. Benedict Groeschel, in his book The

Reform of Renewal, writes “Christian reform
will come when our attempts are solidly
established on the rock of Jesus Christ as He
is presented to us by the Scriptures and the
Tradition of the Church and her dogmas and
theological teaching. One thing that is not
being tried in any particularly enthusiastic
way by people who call themselves Catholics
is Catholicism.”

4

Interestingly enough, Fr.

Groeschel is not discouraged about the pre-
sent situation. “There is nothing sad about a
time of reform. Reform is fascinating, inter-
esting, vital and energetic. Paradoxically,
going along with the tide and floating along
wherever things go can be very boring and de-
humanizing and ultimately degrading to the
individual.”

5

The Pope has once again pointed out the

way as we launch into the 3

rd

millennium. In

Novo Millennio Ineunte, the Pope gives us his
vision for the new millennium. He tells us:
“Now is the time for each local church to
assess its fervor and find fresh enthusiasm for
its spiritual and pastoral responsibilities”

6

and

that “what awaits us therefore is an exciting
work of pastoral revitalization”

7

in particular

“stressing holiness.”

8

The Pope tells us that

training in holiness is training in prayer. It is
“wrong to think that ordinary Christians can
be content with a shallow prayer that is unable
to fill their whole life. Especially in the face
of the many trials to which today’s world sub-
jects faith, they would be not only mediocre
Christians but ‘Christians at risk.’”

9

The pon-

tiff emphasizes the importance of liturgy, es-
pecially Sunday Eucharist, Confession and
scripture study, and the pastoral care of young

54

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

DECEMBER 2001

55

Clergy Seminar

April 2-4

♦

Cincinnati, OH

“Engaged couples today need the guidance of the Church’s
teaching to sustain a lifelong marriage. This seminar is an ideal
way to build up the Church by building up the family.”

— Fr. Greg Konerman

(previous seminar participant)

CCL: Helping to build

Holy Catholic Families

since 1971…by teaching

Natural Family Planning.

Natural Family Planning

Future Clergy Seminar:

November 5-7, 2002

Presentations by clergy, doctors and lay faculty that will

raise the level of knowledge and understanding of the Church’s
teaching on sexuality. Also, how to better explain Natural Family
Planning to your engaged and married couples.
Seminar $125 (includes all materials and most meals).

For registration and information call 513-471-2000.

Or write: Couple to Couple League, PO Box 111184, Cincinnati,
OH 45211. See us on the web:

www.ccli.org

56

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

people and families. He urges us not to “set-
tle for a life of mediocrity marked by a mini-
malist ethic and a shallow religiosity.”

10

It is time to take the Pope’s words to heart.

We cannot afford to ignore them for another
20 or 30 years. I can witness to the effect of
giving Catholicism free rein. It works. It can
be done. It must be done. It’s time to raise the
sails and see what God can do!

I conclude with the pope’s words from

Novo Millennio Ineunte:

“At the beginning of the new millennium

. . . and a new stage of the church’s journey . . .
our hearts ring out with the words of Jesus,
when one day, after speaking to the crowds
from Simon’s boat, he invited the apostles to
‘put out into the deep’ for a catch: ‘Duc in
altum’ (Lk 5:4). Peter and his first compan-
ions trusted Christ’s words and cast the nets.
‘When they had done this, they caught a great
number of fish’(Lk 5:6). Duc in altum! These
words . . . invite us to live in the present with
enthusiasm and to look forward to the future
with confidence.

11

Let us go forward in hope!

A new millennium is opening before the
church like a vast ocean upon which we shall
venture, relying on the help of Christ. The Son

of God, who became incarnate 2,000 years
ago out of love for humanity, is at work even
today: We need discerning eyes to see this and
above all a generous heart to become the in-
struments of his work.”

12

■

1

In retrospect it is understandable why Father’s

reputation on coming to the parish was such a
mixed bag. In the words of Susan B. Anthony,
“Cautious, careful people, always casting about to
preserve their reputation and social standing, never
bring about a reform.”

2

Apostolic Letter Novo Millennio Ineunte for

the Closing of the Jubilee of the Year 2000, by Pope
John Paul II, Origins, CNS Documentary Service,
vol. 30: no. 31, p. 501.

3

Ibid., p. 499.

4

Benedict Groeschel, The Reform of Renewal,

(San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1990) p. 59.

5

Ibid., pp. 60-61.

6

Apostolic Letter Novo Millennio Ineunte p.

491.

7

Ibid., p. 499.

8

Ibid., p. 499.

9

Ibid., p. 500.

10

Ibid., p. 500.

11

Ibid., p. 491.

12

Ibid., p. 507.

Mrs. Elizabeth A. Wittman is a wife and mother,
writing from Northern Virginia where she lives
with her husband and four children. Her last
article in HPR appeared in the October 2000
issue.

DECEMBER 2001

57

■ The four hundredth anniversary of the death
of St. Philip Neri (1515-1595) several years
ago sparked a resurgence of interest around
the world in this jovial Florentine who was
hailed by his contemporaries as the “second
Apostle of Rome.”

1

On March 12, 1622, the

date of Philip’s canonization by Gregory XV
along with Ignatius Loyola, Francis Xavier,
Teresa of Avila, and Isidore the Farmer, the
Roman crowds in attendance were said to
have quipped that the Pope had canonized that
day “four Spaniards and a saint.”

2

At the con-

clusion of the recent General Congress of the
Confederation of the Oratory, the communi-
ty of secular priests inspired by Philip, held
last year in Rome, Pope John Paul II ex-
pressed this desire: “I hope that the revisiting
by your Congress of the sources of St. Philip’s
spirituality and work will instill in each con-
gregation a renewed awareness of the value
and timeliness of your founder’s ‘missionary
method’ and make a significant contribution

to the task of the ‘new evangelization.’”

3

While Philip spent his entire life in the throes
of the Reformation and the Counter Reforma-
tion, his approach to the priestly ministry of
secular priests remains perennially valid in the
light of the need of the new evangelization
sparked by the Second Vatican Council. Along
with St. John Mary Vianney of more recent
times, St. Philip Neri stands as a model of sanc-
tity for the secular clergy of our own day and
an inspiration to ever greater pastoral charity
on the part of the Church’s ministers.

Philip’s vision of priestly life
and ministry

Philip’s formula for ecclesial renewal was

rather simple. In order to renew the Church,
he began by reforming the clergy.

4

He would

in turn reform the clergy by the sheer force of
his own example above any other method of
persuasion or rebuke.

5

And so, beginning with

The phillipian qudrilateral—humility, charity,
prayer and joy—is a worthy program
for any priest seeking to make Jesus known and loved.

St. Philip Neri:
Model for renewal

By Marc B. Caron

58

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

himself, Philip urged devotion to the daily cel-
ebration of the Mass (which at times was pro-
longed for hours by the ecstasies he experi-
enced), daily service in the confessional,
adoration of the Blessed Sacrament (espe-
cially during Forty Hours Devotions), sim-
plicity of life (including the wearing of cleri-
cal attire), and group spiritual direction of the
laity (especially young people). Soon, Philip
gathered around himself a community of sec-
ular priests and laymen attracted by his infec-
tious example of zeal for souls, vibrant joy,
and personal holiness.

In particular, the group spiritual exercises

Philip called “the Oratory” were the source for
many of the priestly vocations which eventu-
ally clustered around him. The Oratory took
place each weekday afternoon in Philip’s own
church, the Chiesa Nuova. It consisted in three
or four sermons on some spiritual topic taken
from the Scriptures, from Church history, or
from the life of a saint, preached by one of the
priests of the community or even by one of the
lay participants. (This feature eventually drew
the ire of the Inquisition which suspected
Philip for a time, unjustifiably so, of holding
Lutheran tendencies.

6

) These sermons were

interspersed with the singing of hymns and
litanies, the praying of intercessions, and with
dialogue between the participants. Often, the
sessions of the Oratory ended with the partic-
ipants praying Vespers and Compline togeth-

er or by making pilgrimages on foot to the
famed Seven Churches of Rome or to one of
the catacombs.

7

It was not Philip’s intention to found a com-

munity of priests. Rather, it can be said that
the community grew up around him as his
boundless joy attracted numerous followers
to the Chiesa Nuova. He and his confrères
lived together as a community of secular
priests, completely without vows, oaths, or
promises, sharing the pastoral ministry which
centered around the Eucharist, confessions,
pastoral care of the sick, and the daily conduct
of the Oratory for young people.

8

This com-

munity of priests and laymen became the ori-
gin of the present Confederation of the Ora-
tory, a loose grouping of autonomous houses
of secular priests living together without vows
for the sake of the ministry. Philip’s Congre-
gation of the Oratory at the Chiesa Nuova was
the first of what would later be called societies
of apostolic life, a form of community life for
clerics. Philip’s innovative approach greatly
influenced such subsequent founders as St.
Vincent de Paul, Cardinal Bérulle, St. Francis
de Sales, St. John Leonardi, and St. Camillus
de Lellis. The recent growth of the Oratory
throughout the world, and indeed in the United
States and Canada, where houses now exist in
Rock Hill, SC, Pittsburgh, PA, Brooklyn, NY,
Pharr, TX, Monterey, CA, Metuchen, NJ,
Philadelphia, PA, and Toronto, is perhaps a
sign that Philip still speaks to secular priests
of our day in ways that they find both appeal-
ing and inspiring, just as John Henry Newman
and Frederick William Faber of the nineteenth
century found Philip’s model of priestly life
attractive.

Designated superior for life, Philip was

once asked how it was that his fellow Ora-
torians were so obedient to him. He answered
wryly, “If you wish to be always obeyed, give
few commands.”

9

Mutual concern and respect

for others in a fraternity of priests who are
committed to each other’s vocations and to the

DECEMBER 2001

59

common ministry are the hallmarks of Philip’s
Oratory. In the end, the Oratorians since
Philip’s day have been able to maintain this
ideal through no bond other than charity itself
and the desire to remain together until death.
Numerous studies of diocesan priests today
indicate the longing for some form of mutual
support and encouragement in the ministry.
Perhaps Philip’s approach to community life
for secular priests can be one way of respond-
ing to this felt need.

The clarity of focus of Philip’s ministry

can also be helpful to diocesan priests in set-
ting priorities for their lives. Philip’s own min-
istry, as varied and as dynamic as it was, re-
volved around daily celebration of Mass,
availability for Confession, preaching in a
popular style, and the formation of lay lead-
ers. This same kind of focus is especially
important in our day when the average parish
priest can be preoccupied with so many con-
cerns, some worthy, others less so, which dis-
tract him from what is essential to the priest-
ly ministry.

Philip and young people

Philip’s accent on evangelization as the

overarching theme of the priest’s primary
work—evangelization of young people and,
in particular, evangelization in an urban set-
ting—it especially relevant today. Philip rec-
ognized that young people in particular are in
need of special attention by the Church’s min-
isters because they are in the greatest danger
of making rash mistakes which can have con-
sequences for a lifetime. Left to themselves,
they are easily influenced by the prevailing
culture of the times. Group activities, com-
munal support, physical exercise, joyful com-
radery, together serve as a counterweight to
seductions of the age which can draw young
people away from their call to holiness. In-
creasingly, as Pope John Paul II has pointed
out, the new evangelization does not demand
a new message, but an effort at communicat-

ing the Gospel which will be new “in ardor,
methods, and expression.” As such, the new
evangelization of the third Christian millen-
nium should be marked by a “serious effort to
inculturate preaching in such a way that the
Gospel is proclaimed in the language and the
culture of its hearers.”

10

This is particularly

true for young people who, in many respects,
experience a culture of their own in the midst
of mainstream society. Philip’s approach to
the evangelization of young people, namely,
taking seriously the spiritual questions they
themselves raise, using an idiom combining
word and music which is already familiar to
them, and grounding the entire effort in a deep
friendship with young people, this approach
cannot but bear fruit in our own time as well.
Young people of every time and place desire
to know the Truth. Philip’s insight was to pre-
sent the Truth who is Christ to them by means
of a supportive community of peers, and by
challenging them to grow in holiness by fre-
quent recourse to the Sacrament of Reconcil-
iation and group spiritual direction. Most im-
portantly, Philip gave the young people who
came to him daily contact with livings exam-
ples of holiness, drawn form his own com-
munity, to inspire them in fulfilling their bap-
tismal vocation.

Urban evangelization

Philip accomplished this program of evan-

gelization in a distinctly urban setting. As a
young man, he had thought he might join St.
Francis Xavier and the nascent Society of
Jesus in the missions of the Far East. Reas-
sured by a saintly Trappist that Rome itself
was to be his Indies instead, Philip set out with
the same missionary spirit to evangelize an
entire city.

11

He did so by very publicly man-

ifesting his faith, as in the group outings or
processions he led. Philip’s expression of faith
was played out literally in the public square.
His sessions of the Oratory were known to
attract followers from all walks of life, the

60

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

greatest to the least, the nobility of the city to
its humblest laborers. All strata of society
were welcome to participate on an equal basis
and to experience God’s merciful love for
them.

Philip Neri in the 21

st

century

Certainly, sixteenth century Rome is not

twenty-first century America. However, the
resemblances between the decadence of late
Renaissance Rome and our own highly secu-
larized, neo-pagan urban centers are not few.
Christian humanist, inveterate joker, passion-
ate preacher, dedicated confessor, Philip re-
formed the Eternal City and the Curia by his
own humble example of generous goodness
to the priests with whom he lived, by his devo-
tion to his penitents even on his deathbed, and
by his zeal for inviting everyone, regardless
of station in life, to the holiness which Chris-
tian baptism demands. The philippian quadri-
lateral—humility, charity, prayer, and joy—
is a worthy program for any priest seeking to
make Jesus Christ known and loved to the
people of our secular cities.

12

For as Pope Paul

VI taught, “the men of our day are more
impressed by witnesses than by teachers, and
if they listen to these it is because they also

bear witness.”

13

At the dawn of this new cen-

tury, Philip’s ideal can continue to be the basis
for a life in community among priests who are
not bound to each other by vows in any way,
but rather united in a common commitment to
living the priestly life more intensely togeth-
er for the sake of those who have been entrust-
ed to their pastoral care.

■

1

Paul Turks, Philip Neri: The Fire of Joy, (Sta-

ten Island, NY: Alba House, 1995), pp. 35, 101.

2

Ibid., p. 142.

3

John Paul II, Address to the General Congress

of the Confederation of the Oratory of St. Philip
Neri, L’Osservatore Romano (English edition), 18
October 2000, p. 6.

4

Turks, p. 101.

5

Ibid., p. 70, 101.

6

Ibid., p. 64.

7

“L’Oratoire philippin,” in Dictionnaire de Spir-

itualité, (Paris: Éditeurs Beauchesne, 1982), Tome
XI, 862-876.

8

Turks, pp. 80-86.

9

Ibid., pp 70, 109.

10

John Paul II, Post-Synodal Exhortation Ec-

clesia in America, no. 111.

11

Turks, p. 39.

12

Ibid., p. 166.

13

Paul VI, Evangelii nuntiandi, no. 41.

Msgr. Marc B. Caron was ordained in 1989 and
now serves as Chancellor of the Diocese of Port-
land, Maine. He holds an S.T.L. in Liturgy from
the Catholic University of America. He was
named a Chaplain to His Holiness in 2000. He
has published articles on liturgical topics in The
Jurist, Worship, and Catechuminate. This is his
first article in HPR.

DECEMBER 2001

61

■ Two years ago, the Southern Baptists pub-
lished a series of booklets with which they
wish to pray for global evangelization. The
suggested prayers ask God for the evange-
lization of followers of major world religions.
Although the vast majority of Americans pro-
fess at least nominal adherence to Christianity,
the Southern Baptists recognize that there are
Buddhists in America who need to hear the
gospel of Christ. So that Christians can speak
with them, the pamphlet gives a very objec-
tive presentation of Buddhism, pointing out
the profound divergences but also the ethical
convergences between this human tradition
and the divine teaching of Christ.

These pamphlets can be useful for Chris-

tians this year in Portland, Oregon. The
archdiocese of Portland has just launched an
evangelization initiative in 2001, and by coin-
cidence the Dalai Lama, the world’s most vis-
ible Buddhist, was featured here in May at a
World Peace Conference.

While everyone in post-modern Portland,

Oregon favors peace and brotherhood, it is
questionable how many really believe human
beings are capable of an amount of spiritual
“compassion and forgiveness,” as the Con-
ference brochure puts it, sufficient to bring
about world peace. Since the advent of the
peace movements of a few decades ago, fo-
cused as they were on the threat of nuclear an-
nihilation, people have seen the nuclear arms
race give way to explosions of wars, torture and
terrorism all over the world, among distant,
unheard of peoples with unpronounceable
names. We can be more sure that the people
attending a peace conference with a heavy
Buddhist presence—the Dalai Lama himself—
will be convinced of the value of “spirituality,”
if not the real possibility of world peace.

Need for evangelization

There is a definite need to preach the gos-

pel when events like this World Peace Con-

A spirit crying “Peace and security” instead of
“The Kingdom of Heaven
is at hand” is not the Spirit of God.

On evangelization
and peace movements

By Ansgar Santogrossi

ference appeal to gospel-oriented themes like
peace with God, forgiveness, compassion, and
spiritual principles. Why? Because these
ideals are presented at such conferences as a
type of law which human beings are presumed
capable of achieving, whereas faith in the Gos-
pel brings the New Law, the Holy Spirit of Je-
sus moving the hearts of the baptized to live
in divine charity.

Reliance upon mere law is inevitable at

a conference conducted along more or less
Buddhist lines. Buddhists explicitly reject the
existence of God the self-existing Creator, and
they are more accurate than they know when
they name their spirituality “dharma,” “law,”
since it cannot recognize the grace of God
who is other than man. This is why Buddhist
“prayers” are not addressed to God; they are
simply wishes for the good of all beings. A
New York monsignor who was in the receiv-
ing line for the Dalai Lama in St. Patrick’s
Cathedral, shortly before His Holiness John
Paul II visited in 1979, recalls a telling inci-
dent. When he came up to the monsignor, the
Dalai Lama gazed intently into his eyes and

asked him, “Father, do you know what the dif-
ference is between you and me?” “No, Your
Holiness,” the monsignor replied, discon-
certed. “You believe in a personal God and I
don’t.”

Events like Portland’s World Peace Con-

ference, by their silence about God or their
defining him so vaguely as to say almost noth-
ing at all, rely on human nature s presumed
resources for moral renewal. Presuming the
goodness of human nature, the conference’s
brochure says people want peace with each
other, with the environment and with God.

But according to the Holy Spirit speaking

through Christ’s apostles, people by nature
deserve God’s wrath (see Eph. 2:3). This is not
because people desire conflict and war. Hard-
ly anyone desires conflict and war! St. James
writes in his epistle, “Where do the conflicts
and disputes among you originate? Is it not
your inner cravings that make war within your
members? What you desire you do not obtain,
and so you resort to murder. . . . You do not
obtain because you do not ask. You ask and
you do not receive because you ask wrongly,
with a view to squandering what you receive
on your pleasures. O you unfaithful ones, are
you not aware that love of the world is enmi-
ty with God? A man is marked out as God’s
enemy if he chooses to be the world’s friend.
Do you suppose it is to no purpose that Scrip-
ture says, ‘The spirit he has implanted in us
tends toward jealousy’” (James 4:1ff). It is
clear from experience and from this passage
of St. James that few people desire to be unjust
and aggressive; everyone would naturally
desire peace, at least on their own terms. Con-
flict does not often occur because people do
not want peace, but because they love their
desires for pleasure, comfort and prestige
more than they love the good of others. Until
the human heart is detached from pleasure,
comfort and excessive admiration of oneself,
human beings will desire peace but make con-
flict and wars.

62

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

DECEMBER 2001

63

Truly, as St. James reminded us, the human

heart and “spirit he has implanted in us tends
toward jealousy.” We should not forget at a
world peace conference how all such efforts
in the past have failed to bring world peace,
despite their high ethics and spirituality. Lib-
eral Protestant clergy were strong supporters
of the failed League of Nations. The Catholic
philosopher Jacques Maritain, drawing on his
integral humanism, contributed to the uni-
versal declaration of human rights of the
United Nations. Many promoters of a united
Europe were Catholics, and Paul VI called the
United Nations the last hope for peace. “War
never again,” he cried before the applauding
General Assembly. In the meantime, India and
Pakistan, Iran and Iraq have fought wars, mil-
lions have died in Cambodia and Rwanda, and
for forty years a UN Security Council mem-
ber, the Soviet Union, violated the UN human
rights declaration on a massive scale. Our nat-
ural skepticism about the chances for defini-
tive peace on earth this side of history is con-
firmed by the words of Jesus on wars and the
second coming: “You will hear of wars and
rumors of wars. Do not be alarmed. Such
things are bound to happen . . .” (Matt. 24:6).
And St. Paul foretold, “Just when people are
saying ‘Peace and security,’ ruin will fall on
them” (1 Thess. 5:3). Christ never promised
peace on earth this side of history; the virtue
of hope is fixed on the beatific vision of heav-
en to be attained by faith and charity.

Why Buddhists need evangelization

It is true that Buddhism wishes to moder-

ate and even extinguish selfish desires which
can lead to wars. But in so doing it wishes to
extinguish the human self itself! Nirvana
means going out like a candle burning out. As
Henri de Lubac’s classic book on Buddhism
informed Christian readers, Buddhist com-
passion for the other flows from the convic-
tion that, ultimately speaking, one’s self and
one’s distinction from other selves are illuso-

ry. No possibility for the grace of God upon
his human creature, no possibility for the re-
turn of love from man to God who is wholly
other, eternal, necessary and yet freely mer-
ciful.

So if the human spirit tends toward jeal-

ousy, and if the Buddhist Dharma-Law extin-
guishes the human self, the image of God who
freely created though he could be all that there
is, it is clear that Christians must recall St.
Paul who wrote to the Romans that “justice is
not through the law, but through faith in Jesus
Christ . . . . But now the justice of God has
been manifested apart from the law, that jus-
tice of God which works through faith in Jesus
Christ for all who believe . . . . Through his
blood, God made him the means of expiation
for all who believe . . . , that he might be just
and justify those who believe in Jesus.” The
Buddha and the Dalai Lama were not excep-
tions from the “we” when St. Paul wrote: “It
is precisely in this that God proves his love for

Koleys

Replating

1 col. x 4”

[p/u from November ’01, pg. 67]

64

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

us that while we were yet enemies, Christ died
for us.” The heart of man under the wrath of
God cannot be detached from itself and fixed
on God, so as to be justified, without faith in
Christ, for without the spirit of “life and
peace” we cannot fully “keep the just de-
mands of the law.” That Spirit of peace is ours
through faith in the crucified-glorified One,
the Anointed One without whom there is no
Spirit and no peace. “There was as yet no
Spirit because Jesus had not yet been glori-
fied.” The Spirit they were to receive who
came to believe in him (John 7:39).

So Christians must say to world peace con-

ferences, If you want peace, work for justice,
and justice is not through the dharma but
through faith in Jesus Christ. If you want
peace, seek Christ who is our peace, the eter-
nal peace of the beatific vision and charity of
God. “Now that we have been justified by
faith we are at peace with God through our
Lord Jesus Christ.”

Spirituality, but which spirit?

The Portland World Peace Conference re-

fers to a “spiritual approach” and the “spiritu-
al dimension.” But we need to remember that
not every spirituality comes from the Holy
Spirit: we are bid to be on our guard against
the spirits in the world: “Beloved, do not trust
every spirit but test the spirits to see whether
they belong to God, because many false
prophets have gone into the world. This is

how you can know the spirit of God: . . . every
spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus does
not belong to God. This is the spirit of the
antichrist that, as you heard, is to come, but in
fact is already in the world” (1 John 4:2-3). It
was with this passage in mind that St. John of
Damascus, a Father of the Church, wrote that
Islam was antichrist since the Koran of the
“Prophet” Mohammed denies the mystery of
divine charity, the Son of God come in the
flesh to make the atonement for our sins.

Paul speaking to all Corinthian Christians,

including the leaders, shows how easy it is for
Christians to be corrupted by another spirit:
“For if someone comes and preaches another
Jesus than the one we preached, or if you re-
ceive a different spirit from the one you re-
ceived or a different gospel from the one you
accepted, you put up with it well enough” (2
Cor. 11:4). A spirit crying “Peace and securi-
ty” instead of “The Kingdom of Heaven is at
hand” is not the Spirit of God. And St. Bene-
dict in his Rule reminded us of the word from
Scripture: there are ways which appear right
to a man but which lead to perdition. Satan
himself disguises himself as an angel of light
(2 Cor. 11:14).

Because of the false light of human proph-

ets and religions, many of their followers who
hear the gospel word of God’s kingdom do not
understand it, and the evil one comes and
steals away what was sown in their mind (cf.
Matt. 13:19). This is not to say that religions,
tissues of ideas in human minds created by
God, can’t contain certain truths about God,
truths which grace can take as occasions for
inspiring an implied saving faith in God’s Son,
in the hearts of chosen persons whom cir-
cumstances of history and upbringing prevent
from believing the Gospel explicitly. But our
point is to recall that Jesus did not say to the
apostles, “Go forth into the whole world and
discover the truth in the world’s religions.
Whoever believes in these religions can be
saved by me.” No, he said, “Go forth and make

It was with this passage in mind that St.

John of Damascus, a Father of the

Church, wrote that Islam was antichrist

since the Koran of the “Prophet”

Mohammed denies the mystery of divine

charity, the Son of God come in the flesh to

make the atonement for our sins.

DECEMBER 2001

65

disciples of all nations. Baptize them in the
name of the Father and the Son and the Holy
Spirit.” Insofar as they prevent people from
believing the Gospel, the world’s religions are
obstacles to salvation, as the instruction Do-
minus Iesus expressed it.

It is clear that the Buddhist denial of God

as existing in himself is an obstacle to salva-
tion, for there can be no saving grace of God
to man, no friendship between God and man,
in such a metaphysics. The combination of
Buddhism and the culture of world peace
conferences can easily end up promoting a
secularized version of the Pelagian heresy of
self-salvation—the assumption that we can
create a world of peace by mere “spirituali-
ty” or through the Buddhist law (dharma).

For a dialogue of conversion

The Dalai Lama and his Tibetan “flock”

are among the Gentiles who, according to the
prophets and the apostle Paul “sacrifice to
demons and not to God” (1 Cor. 11:20).
Not that Tibetans flying their prayer flags nec-
essarily intend to worship or propitiate spirits
of evil. But God’s Word does mean that any
worship of spirits or gods “who in their nature
are not gods” (Gal. 4:8) is a diabolical decep-
tion, to use St. Justin Martyr’s expression, a
deception which satisfies the demons who in
their hatred of God want human beings to be
deceived.

The Dalai Lama and Buddhists are among

those to whom the apostle Paul was sent with
these words: “I have appeared to you for this
purpose, to appoint you as a servant and wit-
ness of what you have seen and what you will
be shown. I shall deliver you from this people
and from the Gentiles to whom I send you, to
open their eyes that they may turn from dark-
ness to light and from the power of Satan to
God, so that they may obtain the forgiveness
of sins and an inheritance among those who
have been consecrated by faith in me” (Acts
26:16-18).

There is a drama of divine charity which

wants to save the Gentiles: God will have to
deliver his messengers from the very people
to whom he sends them. In this drama, the
Gentiles are in darkness and God wants,
through the preaching of the Savior by the
Church, to shed his light in their souls. And
yet having free will, they can accept or reject
the testimony, believe in the light or remain in
darkness. Some are attracted and seek more
light, eventually coming to faith, while others
disbelieve. It has all been foreseen by God
when he sent his Church to evangelize the
Gentiles. The Church for her part is called not
to be successful, but faithful.

There is much precedent for evangelizing

Buddhists and therefore our contemporaries
of post-modern America who flock to hear the
Dalai Lama. Evangelists from the Assyrian
Church of the East were probably in Tibet
sometime during or after the 6th century; we
know they established churches in China. We

Loome Booksellers

Highest Prices

1 col. x 4”

[p/u from November ’01, pg. 79]

have fascinating accounts from missionaries
who entered Tibet during the golden age of
the Missions Étrangères de Paris. Some came
very near to converting the ruler of Tibet; had
this conversion not been discouraged by the
Buddhist monks who made themselves an
obstacle to Christ’s gospel at the last minute,
it may have led to extensive spread of the light
of Christ in this land.

As seen in the words of the Dalai Lama to

the New York monsignor, the Buddhism so
frequently put forward as an influence for
earthly peace denies a personal God and con-
sequently peace itself—the peace between
man and God. Now each man speaks from his
heart’s abundance: “A good tree does not pro-
duce decayed fruit any more than a decayed
tree produces good fruit. Each tree is known
by its yield. Figs are not taken from thorn-
bushes, nor grapes picked from brambles. A
good man produces goodness from the good
in his heart; an evil man produces evil out of
his store of evil. Each man speaks from his
heart’s abundance (Luke 6:43-45).

The falsehood the Dalai Lama speaks from

his heart tells us he needs desperately to be
converted. This is part of what is meant by

Dominus Iesus when it says that non-Chris-
tians are in a condition of objective grave defi-
ciency. The fact that human beings can have
some morally good attributes, such as efforts
to be compassionate and promote peace, does
not change the fact that as long as they labor
outside the true Church they are in a state in
which they cannot be sure of their eternal sal-
vation, as Pope Pius XII of blessed memory
compassionately warned the world in his
encyclical on the Mystical Body.

When Christians speak the truth in love to

those who do not know or believe the Gospel,
it is not mere talking into the air. It is our hope
with St. Paul that the other is either convert-
ed, by God’s grace, or reduced to silence, to
God’s honor. When the apostle Paul visited
synagogues, it happened that “many Jews and
devout Jewish converts followed Paul and
Barnabas” (Acts 13:43). And if some did not
convert when Paul would “proclaim in the
synagogues that Jesus was the Son of God,”
he nevertheless “reduced the Jewish commu-
nity of Damascus to silence with his proofs
that this Jesus was the Messiah” (Acts 9:20,
22).

■

66

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

Brother Ansgar Santogrossi, O.S.B., is associate
professor of philosophy at Mt. Angel Abbey and
Seminary in St. Benedict, Oregon. In 1998 his
doctoral dissertation was accepted and he was
granted a Ph.D. degree. His last article in HPR
appeared in February 1999.

DECEMBER 2001

67

■ In a monastery with dozens of admirable
members, some living, some dead, it is diffi-
cult to speak in terms of a “favorite” priest.
But I would like to say something about one
confrere, whose life and death made a lasting
impression, and not on myself alone.

I knew Fr. Charles W. Kolek, O.S.B., only

in his final decades. The young Texan had
come in the early 1920s to Lisle, Illinois, to
study in the schools conducted by St. Proco-
pius Abbey. Though intending to become a
diocesan priest, he was impressed by the
Benedictine community and decided to stay.
Monastic vows were professed in 1931, and
he was ordained seven years later.

Over the next five decades, Fr. Charles

taught German and Religion, and served as a
U.S. Navy chaplain during the Second World
War, as Subprior of the monastery, as man-
ager of the community’s Czech-language
press, and as pastor of an inner-city Chicago
parish. He was not renowned as an extraor-
dinary teacher, preacher, or administrator. But
in every assignment, he was beloved. Why?

Simply because he was a good priest. It

showed, in his concern for those to whom he
ministered, in his eagerness to minister bet-
ter. He was well into his fifties when that
inner-city parish began to change in ethnic
identity from Czech to Mexican. No one
would have blamed him had he withdrawn
from the scene, too old to acquire a new
language.

But that was not his way. He took up the

study of Spanish. When he died, nearly a
decade after returning to the Abbey, the pa-
rishioners demanded that his body be
brought back to their church for a crowded
and heartfelt vigil service and memorial
Mass.

Retirement did not mean inactivity for Fr.

Charles. For several years, he commuted each
weekend to the Chicago parish, helping the

You are invited to contribute to this series by
sending in an account of a priest whom you
admire. Articles should not exceed 800
words. The best of these will be printed. Send
to “My Favorite Priest,” c/o Homiletic &
Pastoral Review, 50 S. Franklin Turnpike, P.O.
Box 297, Ramsey, NJ 07446. If you have a
good photo of the priest, please send that also.
Enclose a stamped self-addressed envelope,
if you wish to have your article returned . . . .
Fr. James Flint, O.S.B., lives at St. Procopius
Abbey, Lisle, Ill.

—Editor

M Y F AV O R I T E P R I E S T

Called to the other side

By James Flint

68

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

new pastor however he could. He then found
a closer parish, still a forty-minute drive,
which needed a priest to offer Mass in Span-
ish. During the week, he made himself con-
stantly available to drive monks to medical
appointments. When we celebrated his sixti-
eth anniversary of profession, the Prior cited
Fr. Charles as a model of uncomplaining obe-
dience.

In early November 1991, Fr. Charles

learned that he had a rare and untreatable
form of leukemia. The doctors gave him six
weeks to live. So he asked permission to pre-
side at the Conventual Mass on November
11, the feast of St. Martin.

Fr. Charles began the homily by announc-

ing that he had received his marching orders
and was about to go off to a far country. He
thanked the community for having put up
with him (many of us were in tears, by that
point!). He thanked God for life, for his par-
ents, and for his vocation. He offered a few
reflections on faith, which ought not to be a
“maybe” faith, but a faith which covers our
whole being, deeds as well as words. He con-
cluded with the hope that, sharing in faith, we
would all be reunited in the true land of the
living.

Over the next weeks, Fr. Charles wrapped

up his affairs. God had granted him a rela-
tively painless illness, the main symptom
being weakness as his blood count deterio-
rated. Several transfusions briefly revived his
strength and allowed him to keep on concel-
ebrating Mass and attending the Divine Of-
fice. A newspaper reporter, composing an ar-
ticle on the Abbey, interviewed him in early
December. Fr. Charles stated that he was ask-
ing just one favor from God, that his life be
extended beyond Christmas, lest his funeral
conflict with the community’s enjoyment of
the feast.

His prayer was answered. Only in the sec-

ond week of January did his health collapse.
I visited him in the hospital on January 15,
accompanied by his nephew, Br. Raphael Ko-
zel. Fr. Charles’s own entrance into the com-
munity was followed by the coming of about
a dozen youngsters from his little communi-
ty of Hostyn, Texas, to join the monks, the
nearby Benedictine Sisters, or a community
of Oblate Sisters.

I asked Fr. Charles if he had any message

for the community. He asked that we pray
for him, as he was praying for us—and soon
would be praying for us “from the other
side.”

The next morning, Fr. Charles announced

that, since he would not live to see another
sunrise, he would return to the Abbey to die.
He came home about noon, accepting short
farewell visits that day from a number of
friends. He died in the early hours of Satur-
day, January 17, 1992, attended by Br. Ra-
phael.

I have often thought back to Fr. Charles

in those weeks, preparing with little fuss for
his final journey. His life had been devoted
to obeying God’s will. When God’s will re-
quired that he come “to the other side,” he
found it nothing strange, nothing burden-
some to accept calmly and peacefully the
summons. Could there be a better definition
of a happy death?

■

Fr. Charles W. Kolek, O.S.B.

DECEMBER 2001

69

Dissent on Condoms

Question: The use of condoms to prevent or lessen
the transmission of AIDS keeps returning. I some-
times read that the Vatican has changed, or a
Bishops’ Conference somewhere or any number
of theologians. Has the Church changed this teach-
ing?

Answer: The short answer is “no”. Clearly,
the Vatican has not changed this teaching but
some dissenting theologians are all over the
place on this.

This calendar year (2001), there was a

Special Session of the General Assembly of
the United Nations in New York (25-27 June)
to examine various aspects of the HIV/AIDS
problem. For this purpose, the Pope, John
Paul II, wrote a formal letter (6/21/01) to Mr.
Kofi Annan, the Secretary-General of the
U.N.

Archbishop D. Martin, the Holy See’s Per-

manent Observer to the World Trade Organi-
zation presented (6/20/01) in Genoa the Holy
See’s position to ensure an adequate supply of
urgently needed drugs at reasonable prices.
Further, Archbishop Lozano Barragan, Presi-
dent for the Pontifical Council for Health Care
Workers addressed (6/27/01) the U.N. Special
Session on HIV/AIDS supporting efforts that
honestly reflect a vision of health care that is
truly holistic.

On June 27th, the Holy See’s delegation

had to issue (in English) a final statement to
the U.N.’s final conference document. While
the Holy See supports positive steps to ad-
dress the needs of those who have been rav-
aged by this disease (AIDS), the Vatican del-

egation had to express moral reservations
where sexual health and reproductive health
do not refer at all to a holistic concept of
health. Also, the U.N. statement had no men-
tion of spiritual and psychological maturing
in sexuality nor the mutual love and decision-
making that characterize the marital relation-
ship. Lastly, there was no discussion nor any
mention of irresponsible, unsafe and high-risk
behavior in the final U.N. document.

Within those stated reservations, the Holy

See’s delegation stated explicitly: “The Holy
See wishes to emphasize that, with regard to
the use of condoms as a means of preventing
HIV infection, it has in no way changed its
moral position.”

“. . . The Holy See also regrets that irre-

sponsible, unsafe and high-risk behavior were
not adequately discussed and addressed in
preparing this Declaration. Finally, the Holy
See continues to call attention to the undeni-
able fact that the only safe and completely reli-
able method of preventing the sexual trans-
mission of HIV is abstinence before marriage
and respect and mutual fidelity within mar-
riage. The Holy See believes that this is and
always must be the foundation of any discus-
sion of prevention and support” (L’Osserva-
tore Romano [Eng. ed.] [7/11/01], p. 10).

Thus, as to the first part of your question,

the Vatican has not changed its teaching;
indeed, it has reaffirmed its teaching in forums
both national and international.

As to your second question—theologians

and others who claim otherwise—there is a
problem in print. Perhaps the most provoca-
tive and publicized was an article in America

questions answered

by wm. b. smith

70

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

magazine (v. 183, #8 [9/22/00]) by J. D. Fuller,
S.J. and J. F. Keenan, S.J., titled “Tolerant Sig-
nals,” subtitle: “The Vatican’s new insights on
condoms for HIV prevention.” The gist of that
effort was to assert that the Rev. J. Suaudeau
of the Pontifical Council for the Family pub-
lished an article in the L’Osservatore Romano
(4/19/00) that if people can’t “prevent” the
transmission of HIV/ AIDS, they could at
least “contain” it via condoms as a so-called
“lesser evil.”

This allegation did not go unnoticed by the

Vatican or the author. Indeed, Fr. Jacques
Suaudeau published a repudiation of “erro-
neous interpretations” of his prior article (OR
[9/27/00] p. 2) making three points: (1) any
interpretation of his article that casts doubt on
the Church’s official teaching has “absolute-
ly no foundation”, (2) the use of condoms can-
not be proposed as a solution because “it is
always an intrinsic objective moral disorder”;

and, (3) his use of the term “lesser evil” was
strictly in the medical sense of public health
and not a moral mention or moral judgment
at all. It is unusual, to say the least, for Vatican
office-holders to publish corrections in the
L’Osservatore Romano of misinterpretations
of their own published works. But, the Fuller-
Keenan spin seemed to require this personal
correction by the author.

For reasons that are not clear to me, Fr.

James Keenan, S.J. (Professor of Christian
Ethics at the Weston Jesuit School of Theol-
ogy) has become the point man for the advo-
cacy and justification of condoms to prevent
HIV/AIDS. In an aggressively unapologetic
letter to The Tablet (London) he argues that he
has surveyed the writings of all Catholic mor-
al theologians who have addressed HIV pre-
vention methods in general and condom dis-
tribution and needle exchange in particular. “I
found that all agreed that the promotion of
these methods is morally licit” and that almost
all of the same authors demonstrate no com-
promise with Church teaching (Tablet 254
[7/29/00] p. 1017).

In fact, he has co-edited a book on the sub-

ject: Catholic Ethicists on HIV/AIDS Preven-
tion (NY: Continuum, 2000) with J. D. Fuller;
Lisa S. Cahill; and Kevin Kelly. This collec-
tion was favorably reviewed by Charles E.
Curran of Southern Methodist University in
Theological Studies 62:2 (2001) pp. 403-405.

Fr. Curran deftly notes that the authors

(Keenan-Fuller-Cahill-Kelly) come
from what he calls the “progressive” or
“liberal” wing of moral theology (p. 404)
since none of them defend Church teaching
here. Nevertheless, Curran wonders whether
Keenan et al. want “to have it both ways” (p.
405) since they maintain that Catholic moral
tradition can and should contribute positive-
ly to alleviating HIV/AIDS but they argue
at the same time that the Catholic “tradition
has to change its own sexual teaching” to do
so.

Fathers of Mercy

Parish Missions

1 col. x 4”

[p/u from November ’01, pg. 74]

DECEMBER 2001

71

St. Therese

and

Her Family

Paper Dolls!

HPR12/01

• 14 ten-inch dolls

• 45 authentic

costumes

• 4 pg. story

• All in English

& French

New Hope Publications

1-800-764-8444

ONL

Y

$10.95

+S&H

Whatever the status of Fr. Curran’s many

well-publicized dissents, he is more candid
than most and does not shy away from saying
that the Pope is wrong or the Church is in
error. The Keenan-Fuller-Cahill-Kelly school
of dissent is much less candid. Up front, they
are very slow to say explicitly that Church
teaching is wrong; rather more often they do
not affirm Church teaching and then quote
health care workers, pastoral workers and
other dissenting voices who advocate a dif-
ferent and contradictory practice.

This softer dissent is then couched in

terms of “listening”—listening to disparate
voices; listening to prudent counsel. Then
comes the suggestion that hesitant bishops,
curial officials (cf. America [9/23/00] p. 7)
and perhaps even the Pope should “listen”
to the views and voices selectively arranged
and edited by the Keenan-Fuller school. To
some extent, it makes no real difference
what the official teaches or how often that

teaching is repeated.

This is close to the Frances Kissling school

of advocacy by endless repetition. Ms. Kiss-
ling collects the views and voices of some
Catholics who support abortion, advocate its
extension and favor its public funding. If you
don’t agree with her collected voices, you are
not listening! As a personal favor to you, she
will repeat her collected voices until you do
listen, i.e., agree with her views and voices.
Of course, if you do listen to her (i.e., agree)
you cease to hold Catholic teachings.

That’s why above I suggest it makes no

real difference to the dissenting schools how
often or how clearly the Church states and
repeats her own teaching—they are simply
unprepared and unwilling to accept any teach-
ing that does not endorse their own.

Please address questions to Msgr. Wm. B.
Smith, St. Joseph’s Seminary, Dunwoodie,
Yonkers, N.Y. 10704.

■

72

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

book reviews

Heading for a crash

THE DEMOGRAPHIC CRASH: From Fa-

talism to Hope. By Michael Schooyans;
translated by John H. Miller, C.S.C. (Cen-
tral Bureau, 3835 Westminster Place, St.
Louis, MO 63108, 2000), 141 pp. PB
$10.00.

In the words of a Canadian wag: “The year

is 2020, and retirees are very plenty. I didn’t
know old folks could multiply!” The problem
that looms twenty years from now, however
is quite the opposite—the lack of multiplying
by the young. In fact, as the author informs us,
with a mass of data and a plethora of charts
and tables, we are headed for a “crash.” Fer-
tility rates are down worldwide to the extent
that “we can indeed speak of a crash.” The
author is enlisting our assistance in reversing
this decline and provides us with “a detailed
plan for lobbying on behalf of life.”

Schooyans gives us an abundance of rea-

sons for this precipitous descent. People
marry later and less often. Women have fewer
children and are fearful of conceiving after
age 35. Social forces collaborate to penalize
couples for having children while at the same
time urge them to prefer material goods and
pleasures. “Couples want to enjoy life but are
afraid to transmit it.” Fear has a way of cast-
ing out the love and hope that a pro-natal atti-
tude requires.

Then, of course, there is the pandemic

of contraception, sterilization and abortion.
Thirty-seven percent of the world’s female
population has been sterilized (as of 1995).

The author points out the grim consequen-

ces of this global decline in fertility: the dis-

proportionate number of elderly people, the
collapse of the Social Security system, in-
creased pressures for euthanasia for the elder-
ly, and many other unattractive scenarios.

Schooyans gives us a thumbnail sketch of

the main intellectual contributors to our pre-
sent demographic problem. Malthus, Galton,
Sanger, Stopes, Osborne and the New Age
ideologues have conspired to terrify people
into deciding against having children. The ide-
ology shared by such people has been adopt-
ed by the United Nations and has been pro-
moted vigorously, relentlessly and heedlessly
in its international conferences. We are given
summaries of these conferences from Rio in
1992 to The Hague in 1999. The UN, to its ut-
ter disgrace, has become a most effective in-
strument in helping the rich and less populat-
ed countries of the North to war against the
poor and more heavily populated countries of
the South.

Particularly disturbing among the many

disturbing revelations contained in this book
is the rise to power of nongovernmental orga-
nizations. Among these NGOs are Interna-
tional Planned Parenthood (the most impor-
tant), the Population Council (sponsored by
the Rockefeller Foundation), the Ford Foun-
dation, the Women’s Environment and De-
velopment Organization and the Worldwatch
Institute. These NGOs have enormous re-
sources and influence. Yet they lack any rep-
resentative mandate. They become, in effect,
unelected, unauthorized dictators. The unhap-
py result is that their association with the
United Nations gives that organization more
and more control over nations. “Henceforth
nations won’t control the UN; the UN will
control them.”

DECEMBER 2001

73

This little book is power-packed, like dy-

namite. Schooyans wastes no space in minc-
ing words. The promoters of the “culture of
death” do not hesitate to resort to deception,
disinformation, discrimination and coercion.
“The UN’s programs in the area of human life
reflect the aggressive materialism and the
spiritual and religious desert of the present
world, especially the world of the rich.” The
battle lines are clearly drawn. Advocates of
the “culture of life” must become first of all
informed. To this end, he provides us with a
list of important websites. Beyond that, there
is much we can do. Schooyans supplies a long
and helpful list of what this is as he assembles
pro-life, pro-natal, pro-justice strategy.

The Demographic Crash is an eye-open-

er, a heart-thumper, and a foot-starter. It in-
forms us, arouses us, and outlines our intel-
ligent response. It is an exemplary work of
social justice. It informs without preaching,
arouses without rhetoric, and motivates
without pleading. I cannot recommend it
strongly enough.

Donald DeMarco, Ph.D.

St. Jerome’s University
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

Practical wisdom

CHRISTIAN SELF-MASTERY. How to

Govern Your Thoughts, Discipline Your
Will, and Achieve Balance in Your Spiritual
Life. By Basil W. Maturin, (Sophia Institute
Press, Box 5284, Manchester, NH 03108,
2001), 224 pp. PB $15.95.

In an age which exalts the Self, when so

many books are written about self-fulfillment,
self-expression, and self-esteem, it is refresh-
ing to find a book on self-discipline. Christian
Self-Mastery is a reprinted and abridged edi-
tion of a work that was originally entitled Self-
Knowledge and Self-Discipline and that was

published in 1939. The author, Basil Maturin
(1847-1915), was a Catholic priest and con-
vert who was originally ordained in the Ang-
lican Church. Not only was he renowned for
his preaching and for his ability to counsel
souls, but he spent the last moments of his life
on the sinking Lusitania giving absolution to
other passengers after the ship was attacked
by a German submarine.

Christian Self-Mastery is a book on ethics

which offers readers a general program to
achieve self-discipline. The author, who was
clearly influenced by Aristotle and St. Thomas
Aquinas, does not prescribe a detailed regi-
men of specific exercises and prayers. Rather,
he analyzes the effects of original and actual
sin upon man’s moral faculty, for example, the
refusal of the will to submit to the intellect,
and he describes the steps which one must fol-
low in order to bring all aspects of one’s per-
sonality under the control of reason so that
one might achieve his ultimate end of salva-
tion. Fr. Maturin proposes nine steps to self-
mastery, which are also the titles of the book’s
nine chapters: develop self-knowledge, dis-
cipline yourself, abide by the laws of the spir-
it, train your will, control your thoughts, strive
for balance, govern your body, sacrifice the
good for what is better, and persevere.

These prescriptions have a wonderfully

old-fashioned sound to them, yet they are not
just intellectual curiosities from a bygone age.
They are sensible, time-honored axioms which
used to be an important part of our culture’s
moral code because they worked and, indeed,
they will still work today. For example,
Fr. Maturin advises the reader to control his
thoughts because they color a person’s view
of the world and influence his actions. They
are, in fact, the soul’s most intimate compan-
ions. He writes that the time to dismiss bad
thoughts is when they first appear, not after
one has repeatedly dwelt upon them since one
soon becomes habituated to choosing them.
Furthermore, he says it is futile to try to empty

74

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

the mind of evil thoughts. “In the moral life,
there is no intermediate state of vacuum pos-
sible in which, having driven out the evil, you
begin to bring in good” (p. 125). Rather, one
must occupy the mind with good thoughts be-
cause “As the good enters, it expels the evil”
(p. 125). Similarly, he exhorts the reader to
train his will because all of one’s choices af-
fect one’s character. The person who indulges
his whims, even in small matters which are
neither good nor bad in themselves, will not
be able to resist the temptation to sin. In all of
these steps, Fr. Maturin urges the reader not to
rely solely upon his own efforts but to seek
God’s grace because “the remedies that God
supplies are supernatural, and if we are to be
restored at all, we will have to rise higher than
we could by nature” (p. 56).

These are just a few examples of the prac-

tical wisdom which fills this book and make
it a reliable, Catholic guide to self-discipline.
Furthermore, the author’s skillful use of figu-
rative language makes the difficult subject of
ethics interesting and understandable to the
average reader. Christian Self-Mastery is a
self-help book that truly lives up to its name
and Sophia Press is to be commended for
bringing it back into print.

Mary R. Schneider

Cleveland, Ohio

A daughter pays tribute to
her father

LIFE IS A BLESSING: A BIOGRAPHY OF

JÉRÔME LEJEUNE. By Clara Lejeune;
translated from the French by Michael J.
Miller (Ignatius Press, P.O. Box 1339,
Ft. Collins, CO 80522, 2000), 156 pp. PB
$12.00.

Life is a Blessing is a memoir and an acco-

lade from the pen of the youngest of his four
daughters and five children. There can be no

more touching tribute for a father than to be
praised by his children, especially by a daugh-
ter. “How does one write a book about one’s
father?” Clara asks in her Preface. “His life is
at the same time too near and too far for the
solemnity of the usual biography. Too near
because affection can scarcely maintain a crit-
ical point of view; too far because his story is
not ours, even though we are, from a certain
moment on, intimately involved in it.”

Clara’s account of her father’s life and ded-

ication to the sick and the handicapped is told
from the heart, as it should be, coming from
his daughter. But there is a second reason for
the appropriateness of the heart. Lejeune,
although a scientist of world-class distinction,
fully understood the importance of the heart.
“Our intelligence is not just an abstract ma-
chine,” he wrote, “it is also incarnate, and the
heart is as important as the faculty of reason,
or more precisely, reason is nothing without
the heart.”

That Lejeune’s heart was never dissociat-

ed from his scientific intelligence is a leitmo-
tiv that characterizes the essence of his life.
Lejeune carved his niche in history’s pantheon
of science when he discovered the genetic
cause—trisomy 21—of Downs Syndrome.
One day a popular television program in
France, Un dossier de écran (“On Screen
Dossier”), aired a debate on the question of
aborting unborn children who had trisomy 21.
The debate put terror in the hearts of both
Downs Syndrome children as well as their
parents. The next day, a ten-year-old boy with
trisomy arrived at Lejeune’s office for con-
sultation. He was crying inconsolably. As his
mother explained, “He watched the debate last
night.” The child threw his arms around Dr.
Lejeune’s neck and said to him, “They want
to kill us. You’ve got to defend us. We’re just
too weak, and we don’t know how.” “From
that day on,” Clara reports. “Papa would untir-
ingly come to the defense of the pre-born
child.”

DECEMBER 2001

75

Lejeune’s commitment to the unborn

remained passionate and unswerving for the
rest of his life. It required great courage, how-
ever, and exacted many personal sacrifices.
On one occasion, during a debate at the Mu-
tualité, he was hit in the face with raw calves’
liver and tomatoes. Another time he took the
podium at the United Nations and decried
their professed sympathy for abortion. “Here
we see an institute of health that is turning it-
self into an institute of death.” That evening,
writing to his wife, he confided, “This after-
noon I lost my Nobel Prize.” Political correct-
ness, to be sure, held absolutely no attraction
for Lejeune.

But his pro-life commitments created prob-

lems for his family members as well. Clara
recalls that when she was twelve or thirteen
years of age, she and her sister, when riding
their bicycles past the walls of the medical
school, were horrified to find the following
ominous threats painted in black letters:
“Tremble, Lejeune! The MLAC [a revolu-
tionary student movement] is watching.” “Le-
jeune is an assassin. Kill Lejeune.” “Lejeune
and his little monsters must die.”

Lejeune never descended to the vulgarity

of fighting people. “I am fighting false ideas,”
he would say. If he was fighting at all, he was
fighting for people. Yet that was enough to
make him the target of angry attackers. He
became, as his daughter tells us, “the object
of unconscious fury on the part of those who
set themselves up as the apostles of toler-
ance.” The litany of persecutions and dis-
criminations he suffered was extensive, and
yes, to use that tired word, “incredible.”

Clara and her siblings bore the stigma of

being the children of Professor Jérôme Le-
jeune. They learned, rather painfully, that “we
have to live with labels that don’t define us.”
It was, as Clara describes it, a new kind of
“original sin.”

Dr. Lejeune maintained his deep concern

for the suffering even when he, himself, was

near death and suffering acutely from both the
cancer that finally killed him and the massive
chemotherapy he was undergoing. As his
daughter testifies, he would answer the
telephone while exhausted, between bouts of
vomiting, in order to discuss a therapeutic
hypothesis with a colleague. “His suffering
was intolerable at times,” writes Clara, “but
he was always considerate of others; he put
himself in their place.”

During his last days, when what little

strength he had was ebbing from his body,
he identified with the motto of the Roman
Legionary, “Et si fellitur de genui pugnat”
(And if he should fall, he fights on his knees).
For Lejeune, life, compassion, and service
were all inseparably intertwined.

He passed away, in accord with a presen-

timent he had, on Easter Sunday, April 3,
1994. Pope John Paul II delivered a eulogy the
next day in which he referred to “our brother
Jérôme,” and stated that “If the Father who is
in heaven called him from this earth on the
very day of Christ’s Resurrection, it is diffi-
cult not to see in this coincidence a sign.”

Lejeune and the Holy Father were close

friends. Professor Lejeune and his wife had
enjoyed lunch with the Pope on that near fatal
day of May 13, 1981 when an assassin’s bul-
let rang out in Vatican Square. That very night,
Lejeune experienced stomach pains so severe
that he was taken by an ambulance to a hos-
pital. “No one understood what was wrong,”

Standing with Peter

Fraternal Support

[pickup from Oct., 01, pg. 69]

76

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

writes his daughter, “and he experienced the
pain of the Pope’s wound.” He would have
surgery, as did the Holy Father. Their temper-
ature curves were similar, and they left the
hospital on the same day. Was it a coinci-
dence”? Was it a “God-incident”? Or was it
the result of a powerful bond between spiritu-
al brothers that passes understanding?

Lejeune could never do enough for his

patients. Two images provided him with re-
curring guidance and inspiration. The first is
the final line from Brahms’Requiem: “Blessed
are those who die in the Lord. For their works
follow them.” Lejeune’s compassionate work
continues under the auspices of “La Founda-
tion Jérôme Lejeune” which was established
in his name to continue his research into the
causes and treatments of mental handicaps.
The second is St. Vincent de Paul’s reply when
the Queen asked him, “What must one do for
one’s neighbor?” “More!”

Life is a Blessing is itself a blessing, a need-

ed light and inspiration to counteract our dark-
ening world. Clara Lejeune, worthy of her
name, provides that light which is also eter-
nally young.

Dr. Donald DeMarco

St. Jerome’s University
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

Defenders of the faith

THE 33 DOCTORS OF THE CHURCH. By

Christopher Rengers, O.F.M.Cap. (TAN
Books and Publishers, P.O. Box 424,
Rockford, Ill. 61105, 2000), 692 pp. PB
$33.00

There are 33 Doctors of the Church—from

St. Athanasius in the 4th century to St. Therese
of Lisieux in the 19th. Three of them are
women, St. Catherine of Siena and St. Teresa
of Avila; they were proclaimed Doctors by
Pope Paul VI in 1970. The last one is St.

Therese who was so named recently by John
Paul II.

There are many more Fathers of the Church

than there are Doctors. The three require-
ments for this elevated title are: 1) holiness of
life, 2) importance and orthodoxy of writings,
and 3) official recognition by the Church. So
a Father of the Church like Origen (ca. 185-
254) is not called a Doctor of the Church be-
cause of doubts about his orthodoxy on some
points.

The 33 essays on these great Catholics by

Fr. Rengers read like short stories or short
novels. His writing style is warm and down-
to-earth. He points out the virtues of the Doc-
tors, but at the same time he does not omit
pointing out their faults, such as the fiery tem-
per of St. Jerome. The author says he spent
one to three months in the research and writ-
ing on each Doctor; for a few of the men and
the three women, he spent from six month to
a year doing the research and the writing.

What I like about the book is that the 33

essays are not only informative in the sense
that they tell you what each Doctor wrote and
why he or she is important, but the essays also
try to catch the spirit of the Doctor. In other
words, there is a sense of warmth to the essays
—they are inspiring. They not only move the
intellect to know, but they also move the will
to love God—Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Here is the basic outline of each essay: the

author states the basic biographical facts of
the Doctor, plus anecdotes illustrating the
Doctor’s personality, character and devotion-
al life. Then he gives a few quotes to set forth
the Doctor’s place in history, literature and
theology. Next, as he says: “Definite attention
was given to the major writings of the Doctors
and to what called them forth to meet the
crises of their own age, to the import they have
had over the centuries, and to what applica-
tion they may have for our times” (p. 20.)

The essays I found particularly interesting

were the ones on St. Athanasius, St. Jerome,

DECEMBER 2001

77

Pope St. Gregory the Great, St. Bonaventure,
and St. Peter Canisius. Ten of the Doctors
lived and wrote in the 4th century which was
a century of theological turmoil, like ours, and
century of great theological advances. Five of
the Doctors lived in the 16th century—Saints
Teresa of Avila, Peter Canisius, Robert Bella-
rmine, John of the Cross and Lawrence of
Brindisi.

The Doctors of the Church are distin-

guished both for their learning and for their
holiness of life. They explained the truth of
the Catholic faith in response to the errors
and problems of the age in which they lived.
We find in each one of them a complete unity
between faith and life. In addition to know-
ing the faith and explaining it to others, they
also lived it in a heroic way. That is why they
are all saints.

I recommend this book highly to all who

want to know more about their faith and the
Tradition of the Church. Each essay stands by
itself so they can be read in any order. Also,
there is abundant good material here for
priests who like to give a short homily each
day at Mass on the saint of the day. Here you
will find excellent material for 33 good
homilies.

Kenneth Baker, S.J.

Ramsey, N.J.

Clerical continence

CELIBACY IN THE EARLY CHURCH. By

Stefan Heid (Ignatius Press, P.O. Box 1339,
Ft. Collins, CO 80522, 2000), 375 pp. PB.
$19.95.

Stephan Heid recognizes that from the be-

ginning of Christianity there were three class-
es of candidates for major orders: the married,
the widowed and the celibate. He produces
convincing evidence, however, that from the
day of his ordination to the deaconate, a cler-

ic—whether he belonged to the Greek East or
the Latin West—was bound to practice conti-
nence.

Of special importance is his analysis of

the identical formula (the husband of one
wife) found in three passages of the pastoral
epistles (1 Tim. 3:2, 12; Tit. 1:6). Since “the
wife of one husband” is one criterion for
placing widows on the Church’s roll (cf. 1
Tim 5:16), husband of one wife must mean
that the candidate for orders could not have
entered a second marriage. If he was not
obliged to continence, then the prohibition
against a second marriage is unintelligible.
This is the same point made by Pope Siricius
in his decree dated January 6, 306 : “Yet
(Paul) did not say this (i.e., “husband of one
wife”) so that (a cleric) might persist in his
desire to beget but rather for the sake of fu-
ture continence.”

Heid’s research reveals that no candidate

for major orders could have been married
twice (Tertullian, who was born in 160, knows
of twice married men who were deposed
from office) and that his wife could not have
been married before (a regulation in the west
from the end of the fourth century forbade
ordaining a candidate married to a widow).
Moreover, Hypolytus (d. 235) mentions for
the first time the general prohibition against
the marriage of higher clerics.

In 691 the Second Council of Trullo with

evident animus toward Rome ruled that only
bishops must observe perpetual continence;
it allowed deacons and priests to have con-
jugal relations except on days when the
Divine Liturgy was celebrated. This was a
clear departure from the Codex Justinianus
which had obligated the Byzantine Church:
“. . . only those men”, the Code legislated on
March 16, 535, “should be ordained a dea-
con or priest, who practice continence or
who are not living together with a wife or
else who were once or still are the husband
of one wife—and she should be continent

and virginal prior to marriage. For nothing is
so much sought after with respect to holy
orders as continence, the source and founda-
tion of the divine canons and of all other
virtues.”

In 377, more than a hundred and fifty years

before the Code of Justinian, Epiphanius of
Salamis bore witness to a binding celibacy
discipline which was valid throughout the
Church. In his work entitled Panarion he
writes: “But the man who continues to live
with his wife and to sire children is not admit-
ted by the Church as a deacon, priest, or bish-
op, even if he is the husband of an only wife;
(only) he who (abstains from relations with
his first wife) or is a widower; (this is ob-
served) especially where the ecclesiastical
canons are exact.”

Despite its scholarly Greek and Latin foot-

notes, this is a lively book which reads well in
Michael J. Miller’s translation from the orig-
inal German. The arguments the author uses
against his opponents’ interpretation of criti-
cal passages, too intricate to detail in this
review, are brilliant.

The range on subject matter (i.e., the attack

on clerical celibacy in Spain, the controver-
sies of Jovinian and Vigilantius, Origen’s and
Jerome’s questioning of the digamy law be-
cause of their insistence on clerical conti-
nence, so called spiritual marriages) is wide
and enlightening. Eye opening is Heid’s re-
port that in 1968 “Friedhelm Winkelman, a
Byzantine specialist in East Berlin unmasked
the story of Paphnutius,” found in Socrates’
Historia Ecclesiastica, as a fifth century leg-
end. (According to Socrates, because of the
intervention of Paphnutius, the bishops of
Nicea did not impose clerical continence on
higher clerics.) This disclosure makes a late
introduction of obligatory celibacy unten-
able.

Celibacy in the Early Church, which I can-

not recommend too highly, provokes one
question. Since the Church in times past so

valued celibacy that she deprived of their
office higher clerics found guilty of fornica-
tion and adultery, why does she now retain in
office so many priests found guilty of pedo-
philia?

Rev. James Buckley, F.S.S.P.

Our Lady of Guadalupe Seminary
Denton, Nebr.

Anthology of church music

BRIGHTESTAND BEST By George William

Rutler (Ignatius Press, P.O. Box 1339, Ft.
Collins, CO 80522, 1998), 230 pp. PB
$15.95.

A collection of 100 traditional Christian

hymns from the early Patristic period to the
twentieth century, this anthology of church
music provides biographical information, his-
torical background, musical history, anecdo-
tal commentary, and erudite knowledge about
each piece of music from “O come, O come
Emmanuel” to “Sing of Mary, Pure and Ho-
ly.” In a rich, substantive one-page commen-
tary that accompanies each selection, Father
Rutler captures the human story that sets the
hymns in their particular cultural and person-
al framework. Offering a potpourri of engag-
ing information on each song—the lives of the
composers, the customs of the time, and the
political events of the day—the book lends a
living, down-to earth quality to a body of
knowledge that might appear inconsequential
and disconnected.

For example, the commentary on “Now,

my tongue, the mystery telling,” by St. Thomas
Aquinas, explains that the famous words in
Latin, “Pange, lingua, gloriosi,” are a quota-
tion from Venantius Fortunatus. From this
hymn comes the classic prayer, “Tantum er-
go,” that forms part of the devotion to the
Blessed Sacrament in Exposition and Bene-
diction. Along with this basic factual infor-

78

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

DECEMBER 2001

79

mation Father Rutler adds a most telling story:
an acquaintance, a Calvinist professor of the-
ology, converted to the Catholic faith because
of experiencing adoration at Benediction—a
powerful testimonial that “nothing is more
evangelical than Benediction, which has so
wrongly been the puzzlement of self-pro-
fessed Evangelicals.” Integrated with Aqui-
nas’s sources for his hymn and Father Rutler’s
personal reminiscence is the larger historical
context about the Feast of Corpus Christi
instituted by Pope Urban IV in 1264 and the
miracle of Bolsena: “A German priest on pil-
grimage to Rome had his doubts about the
Real Presence resolved when, in the Umbrian
church of Santa Cristina, blood flowed from
the Host and marked the corporal.”

A painting of Raphael in the Vatican gives

glory to God for this miracle. While explain-
ing the background for the Feast of Corpus
Christi and Aquinas’s profound spirit of ado-
ration, the discussion of the hymn also notes
the Church of England’s prohibition of Eu-
charistic Benediction in Article XXVIII of
the Articles of Religion: “The Sacrament of
the Lord’s Supper was not by Christ’s ordi-
nance reserved, carried about, lifted up or
worshipped.” Father Rutler, however, recalls
that such sentiments do not proceed from
saints whose adoration of the Blessed Sacra-
ment naturally inspires them to exalt Christ
by lifting him. The attitude of St. John Vian-
ney is typical: “He who has carried me all my
life will give me strength to carry him.” Thus
in a succinct summary of the important facts
about this hymn, Father Rutler supplements
historical information with theological in-
sight, compelling stories, and human drama.
All this fund of knowledge transforms the
hymn from a composition of notes and words
into a living monument that echoes the ages
and connects the past to the present.

The remarks on the popular children’s

hymn “All Things Bright and Beautiful” offer
not only historical truths and biographical

background related to the music but also
charming stories and heartwarming humor.
Written by Cecil Frances Alexander, wife of
the Anglican bishop of Armagh, a woman
with a touch of “dottiness” in her condescen-
sion to the poor but also blessed with “a wide-
ly generous heart,” this song, according to
Father Rutler, deserves its high rank because
“the creaturely delight of the song should be
a gift to children everywhere,” and the refrain
(“Each little flow’r that opens, / Each little
bird that sings, / He made them their glowing
colors, / He made their tiny wings”) applies
to all adults who “intend to be child like
enough to inherit the Kingdom of Heaven, /
Where God is King and needs no lord lieu-
tenants and has no rivals.” As a comic aside
to the composition of this hymn, Father Rutler
recalls an episode when the Protestant wife of
the Viceroy of Ireland secretly paid a visit to
the pope without informing her husband:
“When she called on the cardinal, she found
Mrs. Alexander playing his hostess and pour-
ing tea.” This is the spirit of the book—a
unique blend of theology, history, biography,
and storytelling that makes sacred music hu-
man and natural as well as sublime and rev-
erent.

Mitchell Kalpakgian, Ph.D.

Magdalen College
Warner, New Hampshire

ADVERTISE

Apostle Advertising

1-800-801-0893

www.apostleads.com

homiletic

&

pastoral

review

80

HOMILETIC & PASTORAL REVIEW

Jesus and the dignity of man

■ One of the basic principles of our Holy Father’s theology and writings is the dignity of the
human person because he is made in the image of God (Gen. 1:26). This truth he announces to
Christians and non-Christians alike.

For Catholics and Christians of the New Testament there is another dimension to the dignity

of the human person. That new dimension is the Incarnation of the Word of God
in Jesus of Nazareth which we celebrate in a special way at Christmas. After the
ineffable mystery of the Holy Trinity, the next greatest mystery of our Catholic
faith is the truth that God became man in Jesus Christ. Since he assumed a human
nature in the womb of the Virgin Mary, he is truly human just as we are. This means
that he is one of us, that he belongs to our tribe, as it were. In fact, it means that he
is our Brother (see John 20:17).

If Jesus is God Almighty and became our Brother, then human nature has been

elevated to a very high level indeed. So after the Incarnation 2000 years ago, the
dignity of the human person is measured not only by the fact that he is made in the
image of God, but also by the fact that one of us, namely Jesus, is God Almighty,
the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity.

The truth that God became man enhances the dignity of every human person. For it means

that God thought so much of the human race that, in order to save men for eternal life, he chose
to humble himself, to empty himself and become one of us for our salvation. It would be like a
man freely choosing to become a dog in order to bring special benefits to all dogs.

The thought of John Paul II surely includes this idea but normally he does not give expres-

sion to it because he is speaking to the whole world, not just to Catholics. But this truth should
motivate us Catholics to have high regard for all human persons, no matter what their physical,
mental or moral state might be.

We should never forget that Jesus identifies in a special way with those who are baptized and

believe in him. We should recall here what Jesus said to St. Paul when he was knocked to the
ground on the way to Damascus, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting ME?” (Acts 9:4). Saul
was persecuting Christians but Jesus was in them so he was also persecuting Jesus. Mother Teresa
of Calcutta is justly famous for her charitable works; when she picked up dying Hindus on the
streets of Calcutta she did it because she saw Jesus in each one of them.

In this regard we might examine ourselves to see whether or not we see Jesus in our fellow

men. Jesus is a brother to all men and he came for their salvation (1 Tim. 2:4). This refers to
the universal salvific will of God. But by his sanctifying grace he is present in our fellow
Catholics in a special way; and not only is he present, but the Father and the Holy Spirit are
there too. This stupendous truth is included in the words of Jesus in John 14:23, “Whoever
loves me will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make
our dwelling with him.” So the divine indwelling includes the Father and the holy Spirit along
with Jesus.

The Incarnation actually took place at the Annunciation which we celebrate on March 25. But

that was hidden from the eyes of men. The Incarnation became visible at Jesus’ birth which we
celebrate on December 25. Then he was seen with human eyes by his Blessed Mother, by Joseph,
by the shepherds, and by the Magi. He remained visible for about thirty-three years until his
Resurrection and Ascension into heaven. When we kneel before the crib this Christmas let us
thank him for becoming our Brother and saving us so that we might one day rejoice with him in
the heavenly Jerusalem with all the angels and saints.

—Kenneth Baker, S.J., Editor

Editorial

Books of Wisdom and Holiness

IP HOUSE AD

COVER 3