Time to Man Up! Of Dads and Fathers

This morning I got to talking with a parishioner after Mass (yes, a Saturday morning Mass...they still happen) and our conversation was mainly about two things: A pregnancy crisis center that is opening soon here and about the state of priestly witness.  We were talking about how in the Center that was opening we had to follow the example of other centers we had been exposed to and be sure that we had something that reached out to the dads of these children in giving them the tools to be good dads. Both of us sit on the Board for this center. My parishioner is a lawyer and related how he sees the detrimental effects of men being absent in duty or negligent in duty as dads; how that is passed from generation to generation.  We are hoping that among the things we do in this center, is be a voice who calls these men to step and be the dad these children are going to need.   The dad being the best man he can be, the best dad he can be, and growing into a man of faith are all part of an equation that we know can and will stem the tide present in this culture of fatherlessness.  We know children with good fathers are afforded a better life that those who don't. 

This will take some work.  Our young men today are been largely emasculated and taught to be numbed: their role is to play video games, have sex, and complain about  how unfair life is. Our culture has tricked them into accepting little, killing ambition, and becoming destructively self centered.   Calling them beyond themselves and into nobility is so important and necessary for a healthy culture.  That behavior needs to be modeled. A dad with little ambition will train his children to be the same.  A dad who finds anything that makes him move beyond himself (faith, responsibility) troublesome and unworthy of his time will train his children to be the same.  A man who numbs himself through obsessive behaviors or sinful behaviors will pass the same down to his kids.  To reverse trends will require men to get off the couch, put down the gaming control, and get about the business of being a man.

 

You'll notice though, there were two subjects this morning; I have not forgotten the other.  They are intimately tied together.   They are tied so closely together because the same dynamic is in play within a parish: the faithful witness or lack thereof will resonate in a parish, either producing great good and engendering great harm.

 

Just as the leadership of the dad in a family is central to the passing on of faith, so the leadership of the priest, called father for a definitive reason, is central to passing on of faith.  There are a few places worthy of reflection here.  First, does the priest actually believe that he is, by the grace of God and power of the Holy Spirit, confecting the Body and Blood of Christ?  Does the way he celebrates Mass, touches the sacred Species, and shows reverence give a witness to profound belief?  If it doesn't, how, then, will those sitting in front of him come to belief themselves?  Yes, we can point out ex opere operato (essentially, if the correct form and matter are used, the sacrament becomes what God  designs regardless of the personal holiness of the priest), but if the witness of the priest to the reality of the Eucharist is not present, how then can we engender belief and devotion?  Does the priest give ample access to his parishioners in time and energy; making himself available to them through confession and getting out among them in pastoral visits?  If the only time his parishioners are given any consistent access is for that 1 hour at Mass, what does that say?  

 

 I believe the way we constrict times for confession is the equivalent of taking a bullhorn out and saying, "It's not important!"  Wow.  The central reason for the Christ even is the forgiveness of sin and the reconciliation it brings about.  We will hide behind the words, 'by appointment' which largely deny the penitent the option of anonymity and largely say. 'if you can get ahold of me, we'll do it.'  Imagine that dynamic within a family.  It would be destructive.  Face time, though, is not limited to confession and  Mass.  Most priests have actual degrees in theology; do we share that wisdom and learning with our parishioners?  Do we darken the doors of classrooms and classes?  When we  are silent on the passing on of the faith, we have only ourselves to blame for the lack of faith.  Many priests will point to the 2002 scandals as why they do not go around teens and children.  Let's be honest, it wasn't like most priest delegated the kids off the a legion of nannies in the form of youth ministers to do their job completely for them.

 

There is much more I could write on this.  Perhaps someday I'll write that book.  However, ponder this.  We know that the lack of dads will engender the next generation of men to not see marriage and being a dad as connected with sex.  It will be pleasure in the moment; a woeful cancer spread.  By the same token, a priest who is not a father to his parishioners will leave the possibility of young men in his parish entertaining the possibility of priesthood almost dead.  Dads and Fathers, our belief matters.  Our presence matters.  Our interaction with those placed in our care matters.  If we hope for change in the problems that plague our parishes and homes, it will begin with men stepping up and being the dads, the husbands, the priests, and the men we are called to be.  If it seems I am being a bit demanding of men, trust me, it is the standards I hold myself to.  I don't always achieve them, but they are the goals, day in and day out.  So, it is doable, hard but doable.

 

 

The Death of Shame and Guilt

Guilt and shame are like warning lights on a car dashboard.  They signal us that something is wrong and needs to be fixed.  Like our cars, ignoring, denying, or suppressing our acknowledgement of these warning lights, it doesn't make the problem go away and in fact only makes the problem worse.  Guilt and shame inform us that we have done something we should not have done or have not done something they should have done.  They are warning lights from the engine that is our conscience.

 The conscience, as defined by the Church, is "Conscience is a judgment of reason whereby the human person recognizes the moral quality of a concrete act that he is going to perform, is in the process of performing, or has already completed. In all he says and does, man is obliged to follow faithfully what he knows to be just and right. It is by the judgment of his conscience that man perceives and recognizes the prescriptions of the divine law" ( Catechism 1778)  The conscience is that part of our human mind and soul that distinguishes between right and wrong, between good and evil.  It is not a finished product at birth, but must be formed. 

The general directionality of the conscience in a responsible human being is supposed to move from self-centered to other-centered.  There are psychological disorders where this does not happen: narcissism, sociopathic disorders, and psychotic disorders.  Part of the formation of the conscience is shame and guilt.  Shame alerts us we should express remorse or sorrow for our actions that were wrong.  Guilt helps us to understand we need to make restitution for our actions which have harmed others. Both force us to see that our actions bear consequence not merely on myself but on others as well!  They are signals that our actions and our conscience are not in sync.  To achieve equilibrium, shame and guilt should be addressed by the positive steps of contrition and reconciliation.  When these warning light go unaddressed, it is to the detriment of both the individual and everyone around them.

However these two warning lights aren't merely being ignored, we are trying to snip the wires connecting them to the engine. If we can deaden guilt and shame, we can live in a world where I am always right and owed.  How are we doing this?  Remember, the conscience must be molded.  We are doing this by actually preventing the move from self-centered to other-centered.  When we do things like  giving everybody rewards for merely participating in an activity, even if the participation was little more than breathing, we do not encourage drive to excellence.  We do not give an impetus for forward movement.  We protect from failure.  This is dangerous.  If I see no reason to change a course for betterment, than why try?  If failure is not a possibility, why try?  If I simply will be handed reward without effort, why try?  Why change?  If the world is simply going to change for me, why should I change to accommodate anyone else?  We encourage a stunting of growth which will spread like a cancer throughout the person.  It is a very short trip between 'why try' to 'I am owed.'

In the spiritual life, this is fatal.  Because everything is about me, all of my actions and words can be justified as protecting the most important thing: me! What happens then to shame and guilt?  It turns very quickly into resentment and anger.  Any entity that challenges me is now the enemy.  Any entity that doesn't cater to me, pat me on the head, tell me how good I am, and make me feel special is now the enemy.  It breeds hubris.  It breeds universalism, a heresy (false teaching) that everyone goes to heaven.  Heaven becomes the ultimate participation trophy! Anyone who believes that makes themselves fit for hell.  

When we look at our society, we see the fruit of the seed planted: young adults who want everything free and immediate, no comprehension of the consequences of their choices, a clear vision, however, of the consequences of other people's choices on them,  cruelty, and an ends justifies the means.  Anger and resentment are now the defining characteristics we see so very often.

The anger and resentment are a direct result of the attempted murder of guilt and shame.  If we wish to reverse course, it will be reconnecting the wires between the conscience and the warning signs of guilt and shame.  Guilt and shame are properly addressed with remorse and repentance.  It is not God's will for us to live in either a state of guilt and shame nor in a state of anger and resentment.  In the Catholic Church we have the sacrament of Reconciliation to address these head on.  Is it any wonder in a society where the wires are snipped that Confession lines dwindle? We need to get back to the correct formation of conscience; confession is an integral part of this forward motion. It gives a place for shame and guilt to not only go but to find resolution.  If we want the anger and resentment to subside, then we can no longer avoid addressing guilt and shame; in fact, we must let them out of their tombs and be the warning lights they are meant to be. 

Precepts of the Church 5: Reception of the Eucharist

    The next precept of the Church may come as a bit of shock to most practicing Catholics:  “All of the faithful, after they have initiated into the Most Holy Eucharist, are bound by the obligation of receiving Communion at least once a year.  This precept must be fulfilled during the Easter Season unless it is fulfilled for a just cause at some other time of the year.” (Canon 920)  Does not the Church already have a precept that al faithful Catholics must attend Mass on all Sundays and Holy Days?  It does.  Whereas in the USA, we equivocate Mass with the reception of Communion, the Church does not.  In fact, the frequent reception of Communion is a fairly recent (from Catholic Church standards). 

    To give a little history, frequent reception of the Eucharist seemed to be the rule; whether that reception was once a week on Sunday, or every day.  For strange reasons, the reception of Communion fell off to the point where the Church has to mandate at the 4th Lateran Council (1213) that Communion had to be received at least once a year.  Daily communion fell of until the latter 19th Century, when Popes Bl. Pius IX, Leo XIII, and finally St. Pius X all pushed for the idea of receiving Communion whenever one went to Mass.  This was contingent, of course, on a person being in a state of grace (free of mortal sin).  While frequent Communion is recommended, the teaching of Lateran IV still stands in that a Catholic in good standing must receive Communion once a year, ordinarily in the Easter Season. 

    The reason for this precept is quite simple:  Referring again to John 6, where Jesus says, “Unless you eat my Flesh and drink my Blood, you have no life within you”, it is clear that regular consumption of the Blessed Sacrament is necessary for life in Christ.  The Church has always seen Jesus’ words in John 6, “For my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink, “ (John 6:55) as instructive to the necessity of the reception of Communion as necessary to growth in the life of Christ.  Only when one was physically unable or in a state of mortal sin, it was seen as odd to exempt oneself from the reception of the Eucharist.  For those who were in a state of mortal sin, that could be easily remedied through Confession.

    That the Church states one should receive the Eucharist at least once a year (keeping in mind that one still has to go Mass on Sundays and Holy Days), is stating a minimum, not a maximum.  St Pius X encouraged the frequent reception of Communion.  In Sacra Tridentina, written in 1905, he says,

“1. Frequent and daily Communion, as a practice most earnestly desired by Christ our Lord and by the Catholic Church, should be open to all the faithful, of whatever rank and condition of life; so that no one who is in the state of grace, and who approaches the Holy Table with a right and devout intention (recta piaque mente) can be prohibited therefrom.

2. A right intention consists in this: that he who approaches the Holy Table should do so, not out of routine, or vain glory, or human respect, but that he wish to please God, to be more closely united with Him by charity, and to have recourse to this divine remedy for his weakness and defects.

He reiterates a belief from the beginning: namely, that the reception of Eucharist, for a person in a state if grace (not in a state of mortal sin) is spiritual nourishment and preventative medicine for those seeking to grow in a life of holiness.  The Eucharist, though, is not magic.  It is not a good luck charm or talisman meant to replace the confession of sin.  In fact, reception of the Blessed Sacrament, even once a year, requires both belief and freedom from sinfulness.  This is why a person in a state of mortal sin and/or disbelief should NOT receive Communion.  For one to do so is to invite the wrath of God for sacrilege of the Body and Blood of His only Son (see I Corinthians 11: 27-29).  The reception of the Eucharist must always be done in a state of grace and belief even if that Eucharist is received only once a year!  St Paul goes even further in I Corinthians 11:30 in stating that the ill health in soul they feel is a direct result of their unworthy reception of the Blessed Sacrament.  The very same medicine given to help us live a life a holiness can be our undoing if received unworthily.

    It is rare that people withhold from the reception of the Blessed Sacrament,  Normally, if they do, it is because they have issues with marriage and divorce.  A person in a invalid marriage cannot receive Communion until such a situation has been rectified.  Pride should not get in the way of seeking to rectify this situation.  Pride is the root of all sin.  It ostracizes us from God.  If an unwillingness to resolve marriage issues is what keeps you from the reception of the Blessed Sacrament, you are spiritually starving yourself.  While not all issues can be resolved (a valid marriage is a valid marriage), one should try to resolve them.  Do not let pride rob you of the medicine Christ gives us to not only make us holy, but that is necessary for the divine life we need for the Kingdom of Heaven.  While I will cover the precept of the Church on Marriage in two weeks; if you find yourself in an sacramentally invalid marriage, let’s work on that.  Call me.  Set up an appointment.  Don’t wait.  Don’t let pride get in the way.

    Finally, as you read this, ask yourself whether I am receiving the Eucharist in such a way that it can bring life and healing?  Am I free of mortal sin?  Do I believe?  These things are necessary for the proper reception of the Blessed Sacrament.   It is worth noting, that whether a person believes the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Christ has no effect on the fact that it does indeed become the Body and Blood of Christ.  Jesus gives us this so we might have life.  He gives us it as much as we need.  Let’s be honest, we need the Eucharist.  We need the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ.  We do.  To navigate this world, all its temptations, all its fallacies, all its agonies, we need the Blessed Sacrament.  To build up the Body of Christ, we need to consume the Body of Christ!  Let us do what is necessary to ensure that the frequent reception of the Body and Blood of Christ is life giving and the preventative medicine we need to avoid sin and cling to the good and holy.

The Troubling Voice of Jeremiah

The figure of the prophet Jeremiah sits painted on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.  He is portrayed as a downcast old man who has seen the fall of Jerusalem, the destruction of the Temple, and the destruction of the  Kingdom of  Judah.  With the fall of Judah, the promised land had been taken away from the people of Israel.  On either side of him stand two mourning women, mourning the fall of both the Kingdom of Israel and the Kingdom of Judah.  Jeremiah's sadness, no doubt, fueled by the insistent rebellion of the People of Israel and Judah.  His warnings went unheeded.  His pleadings only got him in trouble.  God had sent him to warn the people of Judah that they were now in danger, having pushed His hand away from them.  The people of Judah had embraced every sort of depravity and evil.  They engaged in the sin of syncretism: they worshipped the God of Israel on the Temple Mount and went into the Valley of Hinnom and worshipped multiple idols even though to do so was to break faith with God.

One might argue that Jeremiah was too late.  Things had gotten so bad, that his words of warning from God went unheeded.  I wonder if his words weren't meant for those who did hear and listen, even if they were a minority.  I wonder if his words weren't kept so that when Israel had finally been returned back to their land, they would remember and stay away from their former ways

I wonder if we are not in such a time ourselves.  Is there no perversion or sin not embraced by this society?  This did not happen over a small time, but over decades. We drove God from the public square and roundly mocked anyone who does believe in Him.  We have so devalued human life and family that we are watching butchery of unbelievable proportions in this country that we turn a blind eye to the trafficking of human baby parts.  The family is falling upon hard times through economic pressures, constant redefinition, and being treated as irrelevant.  Religion has been treated as a purely private matter that can be molded into whatever is comfortable.  Anyone who points this out is reviled and dismissed as a intolerant relic of days best forgotten.

Are things too far gone?  I don't know, but the troubling voice of Jeremiah needs to be ringing out again; calling us back from the brink of insanity.  That voice needs to be heard with clarity no matter how unsettling it is. 

Precepts of Church 4: Confession

    As we continue through the precepts of the Church, I wish to just remind people of the purpose of these columns.  After teaching for 25 years in classrooms at various levels, it has been apparent to me that it is human nature that people will avail themselves to the lowest standard set.  The job of those who are in authority is to set the standard high AND help those placed in their care to get there.  The Church understands this well and in having these precepts, they are setting a standard of criteria of what is the minimum of someone to call themselves Catholic.  These precepts are not a checklist, but items to be indicative of someone who wants that relationship with God.

    Since our Catholic Faith is primarily about a relationship with God, our Catholic family, and the human race, any and all aspects familiar to us regarding relationships come into play.  Those relationships will have times where harm has been done; we call that sin.  Sometimes those sins will hurt the relationship, sometimes those sins will destroy the relationship.  For the relationship to go forward, there must reconciliation.  Hence, the Church also addresses this reality.

    In the Code of Canon Law, it is stated: “After having attained the age of discretion, each of the faithful is bound by obligation faithfully to confess serious sins at least once a year.” (Canon 989)  The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) handles this from 1440-1470.

 Let’s break this down:

“After having attained the age of discretion”  Classically, this age had been determined to be 7 to 8 years old.  The age of reason is that moment when there exist a level of understanding of the difference between good and evil/ right or wrong.  This is important as there are three criteria for a mortal sin to be a mortal sin: a) Serious matter, b) full knowledge, c) full use of free will. ( see CCC 1857-1859) Once one can understand on a necessary level these, then sin that can sever the relationship with God can happen.  When one or two of these criteria are not in play, then venial sin has been committed. (CCC 1862) Venial sin damages but does not sever the relationship with God.  However, it does need to be forgiven as well.  There are times in Mass where these sins are addressed and forgiven.  However, once mortal sin has occurred, then confession becomes necessary before any other sacrament can be done.

“Each of the faithful”  Those who have passed the age of reason  and are baptized are those counted among this group.

“is bound by obligation”  Because baptism enters us into a relationship with God, there are certain obligations that would be endemic of a good thriving relationship.  Among those, would to be honest when harm has been done to the other in that relationship. The gravity of mortal sin destroys our relationship with God.  It cannot ignored nor left unattended.  To die in a state of mortal sin is to die having forfeited heaven.  Hence, reconciliation must take place if we are to be restored into that relationship.  Using our human relationships as an example, when we have been deliberately hurt by one we love, can we simply ignore it?  If no sorrow is expressed to us, regardless of our desire to forgive, then full reconciliation cannot take place.  Our sorrow and  mercy act as balms to heal that damage done.  If we love the other, then we will readily want to heal the damage done by our choices and seek to show mercy to those who have harmed us.  The obligation existent in the relationship to mutually love each other would drive us to seek reconciliation. 

“to faithfully confess serious sins”   Serious sin, also known as mortal sin, must be confessed.  The first criteria for mortal sin, grave matter, is specified by the 10 commandments: honoring one’s mother and father, prohibition against the taking of innocent human life, theft, lying, adultery (any use of human sexuality outside of the bonds of marriage), lust , and coveting. When a person has crossed these line knowingly and full use of free will, they have willfully severed that relationship with God by pursuing activities that God has said gravely offend Him and His plan. These are moral issues; whether a particular society finds them legal or preferable changes nothing of their reality nor effects.  Seriousness is not dictated by society nor government, but by God.

“at least once a year”  Notice, first, it says ‘at least’ and not ‘at most’.  This is connected to  another of the precepts, to be dealt with later, that one must go to Communion at least once a year.  The bottom line is, though, that one is not to receive the Eucharist in a state of mortal sin.  To receive the Eucharist in mortal sin is itself  the mortal sin of sacrilege.  It is to act as if a relationship is there when it is not; it is an act of deceit.  Relationships thrive on truth.  They need the activity of mercy and sorrow to bind harm.  No more than I hope one would only apologize to a spouse or loved one once a year, would I imagine a person who wants that relationship with God would simply allow separation to fester until that time of the year came around.

    The most common objection to confession is the protestant belief that I don’t need to confess my sins to a priest; I can just tell God I am sorry and be done with it.  We start with that this is not biblical.  In the Old Testament, the Book of Leviticus is clear that the priest acts as an intermediary or intercessor in the sin offering.  That a priests would act as a conduit of the mercy of God is clear.  In the Gospel of John, after the Resurrection, Jesus says to the eleven “As the Father has sent me, so I send you”.  Jesus was sent for the forgiveness of sin and the reconciliation with the Father that was now possible through His death and Resurrection.  They were to now share in this mission. Furthermore, he breathes on them (a sign of the life of God) and says, “Receive the Holy Spirit, If you forgive men’s sin, they are forgiven them, if you hold them bound, they are held bound.” (John 20:21-23)  These men and their successors were given a new authority they did not have before.  They were to be those who acted as intermediaries who forgive or withhold forgiveness (let that sink in for a second); they are the new priests.  If we were to merely say in our own hearts, “God, I am truly sorry”, then such a gesture would be unneeded.

    In fact, since the forgiveness of sin and reconciliation with the Father is only possible by the working of the Holy Spirit (see above passage again), only those to whom the authority given to the Apostles and their successors (also known as bishops) can extend this forgiveness in the manner that Jesus Himself set up!  At ordination to the  levels of priest and bishop in the sacrament of Holy Orders, the same Holy Spirit that was given to the eleven is given to these men for the same exact reason.  Bishops can delegate the authority of reconciliation to only priests.  By the way Jesus set things up after the resurrection, one most certainly does need the sacrament of Reconciliation to be restored to a relationship with God that has been severed by mortal sin.

    Remember this precept exists for one reason: to keep us in a eternal relationship with God.  It gives us multiple opportunities to seek His grace for conversion. It isn’t an imposition, but a blessed relief so that we can allow healing to take place

Do You Trust God?

This morning's homily from our deacon has been in my head all day.  The central question was "Do you trust God?"  We had two stories of widows in the Scriptures today: the story of the widow of Zarapeth and the widow in the temple.  Both find themselves in difficult straights.  We know nothing of the widow in the temple other than she gave two small copper coins, all she had,  as a thanksgiving offering to God.  The widow of Zarapeth, we know, has a child.  They have been hit hard by a famine brought on by a drought.  She has enough food left for a small meal for the two of them after which she has consigned herself that her and her son will die of hunger after this last meal.  Elijah, after being told of her plan, tells her if she will instead give him a small meal, that God would provide for her and her son.  Think of what he ask: Please give me the last of your food and God will provide for you.  What faith she has in doing it!  God follows though on the promise. The same with the widow in the temple: what an act of faith she makes in trusting God's care for her even if she is willing to give what little she has left as an thanksgiving offering.  These stories litter Scripture: trust in God and live.

 

That's awful hard though.  It certainly is counter intuitive.  In a world that tells us that we get out of live what we take and what we control, trusting in something we cannot see seems foolhardy.  Anti-theist will mock it as blind foolishness in a sky fairy.  We will be told to be practical and self-preserving. 

 

However, we have to dig a bit deeper.  Not only does God want to be trusted, a curse is laid upon those who won't.  He lets them trust in other things.  The other things always let them down. The people of Israel were told to trust in God for their sustenance and safety.  When they did, things went well.  When they didn't, things collapsed.  When they people of Israel trusted in God their kingdom became strong.  When they started to trust in other gods, wealth, military alliances, and power, things deteriorated and collapsed.  Their false gods could not save them.  Their wealth made them targets.  Their military alliances turned on them.

 

Look to our own age.  We are taught to trust science, power, wealth, and self-determination.  Anything of God that is trusted is roundly mocked by the elites; the same elites who will blame the failure of these very things  on God or proof the God doesn't exist.  The world routinely mocks sexual abstinence and lauds promiscuity (with birth control of course...because birth control will save us!).  However if people trusted God in the use of their sexuality the scourges of STD's would almost non-existent, abortion almost non-existent, the scourge of pornography as well...not to mention that relationships would be greatly strengthened and divorce increasingly rare.  We are told now to accept cohabitation as the new norm.  Facts be damned as far as to the long term damage done!  Well meaning people trusted and got burned.  We trusted the world and human life and dignity got massively cheapened, family life collapsed, and a plethora of diseases killed, permanently maimed, sterilized, or harmed millions.

 

We are taught, above all, to trust in our own desires.  If my desires are strangely oriented towards the help of other, then good for you.  However if my desires are towards accumulation of wealth, power, and honor for me, then good for me.  To delude ourselves into trusting such, a thick layering of bogus self-esteem is lathered.  What we end with are angry individuals, precious snowflakes, unable to operate.  If they are able to operate, they accumulate and consume like locusts never finding a lasting satisfaction.

 

If we think about 99% of the problems we have and this world has, is it not a direct result of trusting in those 'sensible' things instead of God?  God doesn't want us to trust him because he is on some divine ego trip; he wants us to trust Him so he can provide for us.  Unlike the nonsense espoused by charlatans in the health and wealth gospel (neither of which God promises), God gives us what we need even if it isn't what we want.

 

So many young men refuse to even entertain the possibility of priesthood because of the immense amount of trust required.  So many young women don't entertain religious life for the same reason.  So many young couples don't trust God and cohabitate, injecting a venom into their relationship which more often than not will kill it.  This lack of trust does not serve us well.  Furthermore, it doesn't have to be this way! 

 

God doesn't ask us to trust him so that he may destroy us.  He doesn't ask us to trust him so as to watch us suffer.  He asks us to trust Him as an acknowledgement that He loves us and that nothing of this world can offer more than He can.  Whether that lack of trust comes in withholding the thanksgiving sacrifice, compromising with our sexuality, running away from a vocation, we need to stop running and start trusting.  We will never know until we start to trust.  If the world has a problem with that, tough!  What the world wants from you is to use you not love you.

 

These are things rolling around my mind right now.  Do I trust God?  Completely?  What holds me back?  What ill-fated alliances am I making as a back up plan? What compromises do I make? All food for spiritual thought and prayer.  

Precepts of The Church 3: Tithing

 

 Normally, I have an obnoxious need to do these things in order, but as the Gospel is the Widow’s Mite this week (Mark 12:38-44), I will tie in this precept of the Church with the readings for this week.  The Code of Canon Law states: “The Christian Faithful are obliged to assist with the needs of the Church so that the Church has what is necessary for divine worship, for apostolic works and works of charity and for the decent sustenance of ministers.  They are also obliged to promote social justice and, mindful of the precept of the Lord, to assist the poor from their own resources.” (Canon 222, cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church 2043.2)

    Before the canon is broken down, it is important to understand from where this comes.  In the Old Testament, there were two basic types of sacrifice: the sin/peace offering and the thanksgiving sacrifice.  The sin/peace offering was always the best of one’s herds or flocks and was done to seal a covenant (peace) or because of sin.  The Sacrifice of Jesus of the Cross ended the need for such a sacrifice to be redone and every Mass is a direct participation in this one sacrifice. The thanksgiving offering was the offering of the first fruits of one’s labors as an act of thanksgiving.  The tithe was holy to the Lord (holy meaning set apart for God‘s use) (see Leviticus 27:30), was to be dispersed between the needy and for the sustenance of those whose duty it is to serve God (see Deuteronomy 14:22-29). So evil was it to withhold the tithe that the Prophet Malachi refers to it as stealing from God (Malachi 3: 9-11), an act which carries a curse with it.  While the sin/peace offering was abrogated by the sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross, the thanksgiving sacrifice was not.  The New Testament refers to alms-giving multiple times as an act of mercy that benefits both the receiver and the giver.  Alms-giving is an act of mercy that reflects the love of God being actively mimicked by His followers.

    Let us break down the code:

“The Christian faithful (those baptized) are obliged to assist with the needs of the Church”.  This speaks to a larger fact that mercy is not a special addition to the life of a Christian, but a core identity.  This also speaks to the fact that the Church has a mission and duty which must be assisted.  To both ensure these things are done and those who do it are given what they need, the Church, building upon the Scriptures themselves, keep consistent the call for the thanksgiving sacrifice (tithe) for the same exact reason as seen in the Bible.

1. “for divine worship” The Christian Faithful are obliged to assist in those things necessary for worship.  This is a long list that includes buildings, vessels, vestments, bread, wine, and so on that are used in the worship of God.  In this would also be the upkeep of said items.

2. “for apostolic works”  These would refer to the things a parish is to do: educate, evangelize, form, and provide spiritual opportunities for spiritual growth for both her parishioners and the community at large.  Our school, education programs, evangelization efforts, and things of this nature would fall under this category.  Again, the Christian faithful are obliged by the giving of time, talent, and treasure, to ensure the work gets done.

3. “and works of charity”  The help of the poor and those who are in need are also to be tended to by one’s tithe and volunteering.  The Church and each of her members are always supposed to be actively looking to the needs of others in the same exact way the Jesus did.  The Catholic Church is still the biggest giver of charity and assistance in the world.  It was the Catholic Church that brought us and invented institutions such as hospitals, colleges and universities, hospice, orphanages, and other institutions that are hallmarks of western civilization.  We are not allowed to be the rich man who ignores Lazarus at the gate.  The giving of our resources and time so as to help those in need are seen as central to the Catholic life.

4. “and for the decent sustenance of ministers”  While no one should grow rich working for the Church (and in this country they do not), the wages of those who work for the church are taken from the tithe.  Why?  I, as a priest, am supposed to give myself completely over to the service of Church; I, and all other priests, are forbidden to own businesses or take secular jobs.  The same is true for all clerics.  Furthermore the execution of the apostolic works requires staff (teachers, administration, for example).  The ability of the parish to properly staff so as to execute these duties well is wholly dependent upon what comes in with the tithe.

    When the tithe is withheld, it constrains the ability to the parish and diocese to go about the mission of the Church.  Many will say that parishes are in trouble because they spend too much.  This is not true.  Most parishes are in trouble because the tithe is routinely withheld.  This cripples the parish in the ability to engage fully in the mission of the Church.

     Finally the Canon says, “They are also obliged to promote social justice and, mindful of the precept of the Lord, to assist the poor from their own resources.” To promote social justice is more than to vote for people who do good things or whom we will delegate our own responsibilities; it is to look to the good of the society and to realize it is not someone else’s duty to show mercy; it is ours.  The taxes we pay are not in lieu of the tithe.  Mercy is not something we delegate away, but something we always actively engage in.

    The tithe or support is an obligation.  It is about the first fruits and not the scraps.  So grievous was the withholding of the tithe or giving scraps instead of first fruits, that God withheld his blessings from those who withheld their tithe.  I can say from my own experience that money problems and withholding the tithe always seem to go hand in hand.  By the same token, tithing and financial stability have always gone hand in hand as well.  I know it doesn’t numerically add up, but for some reason it works.  Perhaps Malachi isn’t off base. It wasn’t as if my income changed.  We cannot expect financial stability by taking from God what is His.

    For me, it is simple:  I take my income, divide it by 10.  That amount is then split three ways: half of it goes to the parish to help in its work, a tenth goes to the diocese to help it in its work, and the other 40% goes to whatever charities I wish to give it to so as to enable them to do what they need to do.  This would be the standard that is recommended across the board.  This is a baseline, I usually give more to each of these as needed; not because I am a good guy or a wealthy guy, but because I understand the immense blessings God has given to me and I show  thanks by sharing that abundance with others.  As God is never to be outdone in generosity, we should be generous.  The widow’s mite was all she had to give.  Her action showed a profound trust in God’s benevolence and love.  As with the other precepts,  God does not ask what He does so as to destroy us, but so that we have life in abundance.  The tithe isn’t merely about paying bills, it is so much more.  It is about a basic disposition of trust, or mercy, and of compassion.  To withhold it is to actively thwart the ability of God’s people to do the mission to which His Son set us.  Like the other precepts, we will have stand before God and answer.