PATIENCE IS A VIRTUE

Please bear with me and read this extended quote from John W O'Malley's A History of the Popes:

By 1968 five years had passed since John XXIII established the [secret] commission on birth control.  The very fact of the commission's existence indicated a reconsideration of Pius XI's prohibition in [his encyclical] Casti Cunubii, and the passing of years without a definitive statement on the matter from the Holy See seemed to suggest that a change was in the wind.  For most Catholics, including probably a majority of bishops, the silence indicated consent.  On July 25, 1968, however, [Pope] Paul [VI] issued Humanae Vitae, his most famous and controversial encyclical, in which he renewed the prohibition.
...The encyclical, more often criticized than studied, is a rich meditation on married love.  What the world seized upon, however, was the reiteration of Pius XI's strictures [against artificial contraceptives].  The reaction was fierce.

I write this because there are many, many comments about what was discussed in the recent Extraordinary Synod on the Family.  By turns the report of the conversations has been either praised or vilified--even though it is not only a preliminary presentation of the discussions, but also (even in any "final form") simply a prelude to the actual synodal Round 2, not to be held until October of 2015.

In other words, to reckon that change is "in the wind" (either rejoicing in or lamenting the possibility) is utterly premature.  Let the other shoe fall first, and that won't happen until some time after the October 2015 Synod, in fact.  Hopes and fears need not be very high at this point...

I will make one final observation about the Synod, Round 1:  the negative comments of bishops like Raymond Burke and Charles Chaput are simply to be expected.  They are playing Alfredo Ottaviani and Marcel Lefebvre to Pope Francis' St John XXIII and Bl Paul VI. 

It's all OK:  life goes on, and the Holy Spirit (thankfully) is ultimately in charge.

PATRIARCHS AND POPES

Having just received word from the government of Turkey of an official invitation to visit, Pope Francis is set to make a pilgrimage to the ancient city of Constantinople (modern-day Istanbul), the seat of the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew.  The timing of this visit is wonderful:  it will fall across the marking of the patronal feast of the Orthodox Church, that of St Andrew, on 30 November. 

For years now delegations have been sent back and forth to commemorate this feast and that of Ss Peter & Paul, the Latin Church's equivalent.  This time, Pope Francis himself will lead that delegation.

It is a beautiful counterpoint to the meeting of these two great figures in the Holy Land, marking the 50th anniversary of the first such encounter, between (Blessed) Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras, with the follow-up presence of Bartholomew at the prayer-service for peace in the Vatican Gardens, attended by Presidents Peres and Abbas.

At the end of the Extraordinary Synod on the Family, Pope Francis held a consistory of cardinals in which he addressed the crisis of anti-Christian persecution in the Middle East.  It strikes me that with the warm friendship between Francis and Bartholomew, with the real possibility of openness in dialogue and even in theological reflection that ecumenical teams are producing, and with the overwhelming needs of Christians especially in Iraq and Syria, there is an opportunity truly golden to begin to achieve unity of the Churches of Greek and Oriental Orthodoxy with the Church of Rome--to stand together in the face of this persecution.  When we stand in solidarity with our brothers and sisters, guns pointed at our heads, sometimes what we thought were "life-or-death" issues turn out to be questions more of style than substance of the Faith. 

The Holy Father has been clear from the beginning that the universal catholic Faith is first and foremost about lived proclamation of the mercy of God in Jesus Christ.  We are not a monolith of uniformity but an organic body in communion.  There is scheduled for Pope Francis' visit the signing of a joint declaration--as God is a God of surprises, these great leaders of the Church are also leaders of surprises.  I wonder what might be included in this declaration?  We hope and pray and watch.  These are difficult times to be Christians, but they are also exciting times. 

ON GRADUALITY

The idea of "graduality" was raised in discussions during the Extraordinary Synod on the Family--it expressed the thought that we can lead people step by step to a full moral life, and in the meantime understand and accept that they are not "perfect" just yet.

The idea has been regarded by others in the Synod as a sellout of moral principles and an accommodation with relativism.

What can one say, pro or con, about this idea?  Let me offer the thoughts of CS Lewis on the topic.  In responding to the idea that divorce should be freely granted, he insists that promises made should be respected and kept:

To this someone may reply that he regarded the promise [of marital fidelity and permanence] made in church as a mere formality and never intended to keep it.  Whom, then, was he trying to deceive when he made it?  God?  That was really very unwise.  Himself?  That was not much wiser.  The bride, or bridegroom, or the 'in-laws'?  That was treacherous.  Most often, I think, the couple (or one of them) hoped to deceive the public.  They wanted the respectability that is attached to marriage without intending to pay the price: that is, they were imposters, they cheated.  If they are still contented cheats, I have nothing to say to them: who would urge the high and hard duty of chastity on the people who have not yet wished to be merely honest?

                                     --Mere Christianity, Book III, chapter 6

Are many of us not also in situations where we struggle to do better, yet have not attained "perfection"?  How should we be affirmed in the struggle while still having held out to us the goal of "more," of "better"?  Is all moral reflection intended to be 100% or 0%, with no other possibility?  These are the questions that graduality is attempting to think through.  It wants to reject moral relativism while also avoiding the attitude (condemned by Jesus--Matthew 23:4) of holding others to harsh standards with no concrete help to meet those standards.

                                                            

PRAY FOR THE PEACE OF JERUSALEM

I was asked to offer a prayer for peace.  Please forgive me if I preach and pray as a Christian, for that is what I am…

Our Sacred Scripture reveals to us: 

“God is Love” (I Jn 4:16)

“In this is love, not that we have loved God, but that God has loved us and sent his Son as expiation for our sins” (I Jn 4:10)

“No one has greater love than this, to lay down one’s life for one’s friends” (Jn 15:13)

“Who is my neighbor?  …  Who showed himself neighbor to the robbers’ victim?  The one who treated him with mercy.  Go and do likewise.” (Lk 10:29, 36-37)

“So I say to you:  love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your heavenly Father…” (Matt 5:44-45)

God and Father of the human family, you have made us in your image and likeness; you have blessed us with dignity as your adopted sons and daughters. 

Help us to recognize that dignity in those we love and those who do not love us.  Help us to embrace the path of peace, of reconciliation, of forgiveness, of mercy, of healing.

May bombs and mortars and rockets cease forever! 

In our lifetime, from Mohandas Gandhi to Martin Luther King to Archbishop Desmond Tutu and Nelson Mandela to Pope Francis, we have heard (and sadly ignored) the prophetic words that violence breeds only more violence; it never breeds the peace for which we long.

 Why must differences breed fear, which breeds bigotry, which breeds hatred and violence?  Why, O Lord, why?

Alle Menschen werden Bruder…  When, O Lord, when??

May we drop the weapons, drop the ego, drop the self-righteousness, drop the proper pride, drop everything we clutch so tightly that it keeps us from extending a hand of reconciliation to those we regard (and who regard us) as enemies.

God our heavenly Father, make us people of peace!  Make us people of love!  Make us people of healing and reconciliation!  Make us your true children!  Now, O Lord, now!!

 

GETTING NEARER AND NEARER

Once there was on The Mickey Mouse Club TV show a day called "Anything Can Happen Day."  We are living in such a "day" right now-- with Patriarch Bartholomew and Pope Francis together in the Holy Land, who knows how the Spirit might be poured out?  Who knows what the Spirit might (literally) inspire?
In celebration of this historic meeting between the successors of the brothers Peter and Andrew, and in the light of the Gospel promise (as read this weekend), I offer a musical tribute to our Eternal Advocates, to our temporal spiritual leaders, and to the Love that must bind us all together. 

THOUGHTS ON THE CANONIZATIONS

I have been hearing tremendous praises for the upcoming canonizations of Popes John XXIII and John Paul II.  But I have also been hearing reservations from some quarters on a couple of counts:  first, the waiving of a 2^nd miracle in the case of John XXIII; and second, remembering some dubious judgments on the part of John Paul II. 

For myself, I am not convinced that any kind of miraculous interventions should be the primary criterion for sainthood, though I fully understand the historical context that underlies it.  Who honestly thinks, for example, that we should have to wait for miracles for the formal canonization of Mother Teresa?  What I think far more important is an evaluation of the overall life of the person.  Was it marked by “heroic sanctity”?  Is it a life worth being held up as a model of holiness?  Here is the real acid test. 

Was John XXIII a wonderful man and truly “Good Pope John”?  I think so, without a doubt, including considering his record in rescuing Jews during World War II and his role, behind the scenes, in helping de-fuse the Cuban Missile Crisis.

When Pope John Paul II died in 2005, the crowds immediately started chanting Santo subito! [“Sainthood immediately” is one way to translate it].  He was recognized for his holiness of life, especially in the last years, with the sufferings he endured with the Parkinson’s, and for his evangelical desire to bring Jesus Christ to the world.  The joke was that the difference between Pope John Paul II and God is that God is everywhere; John Paul has been everywhere.

Yet there were flaws of judgment in Pope John Paul (I choose this phrase deliberately).  His staunch opposition to Marxism made him unfeeling toward the plight of the poor in Central America and the attempts by Catholic clergy to defend their rights and lives.  This was especially true in the way Archbishop Oscar Romero was treated—in a dismissive, almost unfeeling, way—by the Vatican.  Again, the pope’s support of Msgr Maciel Degollado as exemplary came back badly (though after John Paul’s death) when the truth about his scandalous lifestyle finally was made public.  It is hard to believe that the Holy Father was not at least told some of the truths about the founder of the Legionnaires of Christ; if so, clearly he chose not to believe them.  He saw the Legion (and Opus Dei) as the true spirit of the Jesuits, in whose loyalty he had lost confidence.

“Flaws of judgment,” I said.  It marks for me the distinction between holiness and perfection, between being devoted to and attached to God and being always correct.  The former is the criterion for sainthood, not the latter.  If you like, it is a parallel to the distinction between a pope’s formal ex cathedra infallible proclamations on the one hand and his personal theological perspectives on the other—these last being important but not definitive and final.  Outside of his exercise of the extraordinary infallible magisterium, a pope can indeed make a mistake.

Consider that only 2 other popes in the last 500 years have been canonized:  Pius V and Pius X.  Both were personally holy and both found themselves in the See of Peter in times of crisis:   finishing the Council of Trent and implementing its reforms for Pius V, and in the headlong series of political events that triggered World War I for Pius X.  Both also were capable of making what I would call errors of judgment.  For Pius V, expulsion of the Jews from most areas of the Papal States (and their being confined to ghettos in Ancona and Rome), and the excommunication of Elizabeth I of England, were at the very least ill-advised.  In the case of Pius X, in his desire to quash “Modernism,” he demanded, for example, the exclusion from teaching positions of anyone showing “a love of novelty in history, archeology, or biblical exegesis, and authorized “Vigilance Councils” for all dioceses to report on those suspected of the heresy.  This amounted to a sort of “secret police” structure.  [For a fuller discussion, see John W O’Malley, A History of the Popes]

Were they personally holy and saintly?  Did they also do great good for the Church?  Were they utterly convinced their actions were good and necessary?  Yes, to all three questions.  And so we honor them.  I’m not aware of too many parishes called “St Pius V,” but here in the Mobile Archdiocese we have St Pius X. 
 
Errors in judgment show the humanity of the Church—the “gory glory of the Body of Christ,” as one priest once expressed it.  Through it all, the love of God in Jesus Christ is reflected.  And so we celebrate saints:  men and women in love with God—even when they are not perfect as God is.

HAPPY EASTER--SORT OF

A series of curious events has triggered this post. 

I was given a year's subscription free to St Anthony Messenger for a book I'd purchased, and in a current issue there was a feature by a Franciscan writer I admire a great deal--Fr Murry Bodo.  We have in fact also had him as a speaker for Christus, some years ago.  He was writing about a young Franciscan in Assisi with a great voice who makes recordings and does concerts.  And so I bought the CD:  Friar Alessandro.
On it is a setting of Ave, Maria that I would dearly love to sing one day:  it is based on the "Intermezzo" of Pietro Mascagni's opera Cavalleria Rusticana (which I would freely translate as "Redneck Revenge," but that's another issue).

The story is set in Sicily on Easter Sunday, but it is a story of lust, seduction, adultery, hatred and murder.  Is there a greater complex of contradictions possible??

Still, in the course of the story there is the beautiful, heart-breaking "Intermezzo"--excuse me if I say that this is extraordinarily "sincere" music--as a prelude to the horrific end of this "verismo" opera.  And it is this music that Friar Alessandro sings so wonderfully.

I encourage you to get his CD.  It includes other features, in Latin, Italian, English, Spanish and French (a great mix), and among its selections is the more famous Schubert Ave, Maria, Panis Angelicus, and other wonderful pieces.

Below, please enjoy the instrumental interlude of Mascagni on its own terms, and (in spite of the operatic context)-- "Happy Easter to all!"  [PS--please skip the imbedded ad that I can't seem to delete...]


http://youtu.be/9MqTvfXIzug