Managing side effects

I recently watched a clip of an interview with Jerry Seinfeld where he was asked why he left his most popular show while it was at the top of the ratings.  He said all productions hit a peak in quality and eventually start to taper off.  He wanted to end his show while it was at its best and before it began to lose appeal.  He related that even the best standup comedians may hold an audience for an hour and fifteen minutes, but they can cross that line where people begin to wonder when this is going to end.  At that point, the entire effort suffers.

 

Our most recent parish Synod presentation was on the Mass.  Unbeknownst to anyone, our pastor decided to show a two hour-long DVD at an evening meeting that most parishioners expected to last an about an hour. He seemed amused at how many in attendance actually fell asleep at their tables.  What positive effects, if any, came from this experience?  These were all older Catholics who had already been attending Mass for many years.  At the end of a long day, any lengthy presentation must be interesting to hold attention.  Once that inevitable fatigue line is crossed, there is no going back. 

 

The fact that most in attendance were likely wishing they had not come will make them less inclined to attend in the future.  The length and quality of previous meetings had already affected me personally as I elected not to attend this one.  It was the first Synod monthly meeting I had missed in the three years we have been doing this.

 

These programs for faith formation are beneficial if done properly.  When they become a boring chore, they are counter-productive.  We sometimes fall into a trap where we know we need to do something to help people grow in faith but we simply phone in the effort.  Yes, the parish put on a two-hour presentation on the Mass.  It looks good on the record when we report to the diocese, but have we really connected with anyone?  Have we turned people off?

 

I appreciate the effort.  Is it better than nothing?  I suppose so.  Maybe someone is inspired to do better.  The problem is we are not reaching those in most need of spiritual help.  It’s always the same old parishioners that come.  Somehow, we need to do better.  Our guests should leave wanting more, not wishing they had not come. 

 

Homilists should take note.  How often I have heard a priest make a great point in a homily only to have it lost by dragging his talk on forever.  I think we all prefer quality over quantity.  Some speakers may not realize that excessive quantity can destroy quality.  Always try to leave your audience looking for more instead of their watches.

 

In a time when Mass attendance is sporadic for some, the homily takes on special significance. The homily may determine whether a person desires to come back regularly or maybe never again.  This is especially important now that we are into Lent when some lapsed Catholics may be drawn back to the Church.  A priest who likes to use his homily as a public rant on the status of civilization will not gain favor with his audience even among those who may commiserate with him.  Extending the rant beyond twenty minutes seals the exasperation.  If a person decided to attend that day looking for hope or comfort, he will leave feeling worse than when he came.  

 

I am not saying a priest needs to tell us everything is peaches and cream.  A priest can use the same tough words with a tone of empathy and an occasional smile.  Try a friendly voice.  We can hear you without yelling.  He is more likely to get a positive response if people do not feel like they are being chastised for everything wrong in the world.  Some people take criticism very personally even if it was not directed at them.  Quality, length and tone are all critical elements of any effective presentation.  Homilists should ask themselves, is your message getting through if your demeanor turns people off or drives them away?

Class update

Leading an OCIA group can be a challenge.  Our class began with only six attendees.  Sounds simple enough, but all have varying Christian backgrounds.  Ages range from 20 to 80.  We have a lapsed Catholic and her Lutheran husband, a baptized Catholic who was never catechized in the faith, a grandmother who resents the strict Apostolic Christian household in which she was raised, a fundamentalist Baptist with some anti-Catholic ideas, and a young woman with no Christian upbringing at all.  Designing a lesson plan that meets the needs of everyone can be somewhat difficult when those needs vary from person to person.  A few are well versed in the Bible and others completely unfamiliar.   It’s a bit like teaching arithmetic and calculus in the same class.  

 

Complicating matters is the fact that we are now meeting two in our group remotely, not by Zoom or Facetime, but rather by cell phone on speaker audio.  They are wintering some 1500 miles away for the next two months.  Travel, foot surgery, and even a heart attack has limited attendance of others at times.  Only the young woman with no Christian background has been faithfully present every class.  She has been a blessing with her new-found enthusiasm for the Catholic faith.  

 

Despite everything, our group has been doing great, or so I thought.  Today, our fundamentalist woman sent me a text message right before class time saying she was dropping out.  Her attendance has been spotty and I sensed she had reservations about the whole process.  She said after reading the book on Catholicism, she could not bring herself to join.  I assume she was referring to Trent Horn’s book, Why We’re Catholic, which we had given each participant on the first day.  

 

I responded to her text, thanking her for her honesty.  I also asked if she would mind listing a few of her objections to the Catholic faith to help me prepare my classes in the future.   She gave me two main objections, those being praying to dead saints and confessing sins to a priest.  Now we had covered both topics in our sessions, but she was not always present for those discussions. Both topics were also covered in Trent Horn’s book, which she either didn’t read or didn’t understand.  Her response indicated she believed the priest determined the “wages or punishment” for sins by the amount of penance he assigned.  She said, “Only God can forgive/punish not man.”  Obviously, she has misconceptions about the sacrament.  

 

Wanting to answer her objections in a friendly brief text, I sent her a link to an article by Father Mitch Pacwa titled The Bible supports praying to saints.  Any hope of convincing her of Catholic belief would have to come from the Bible which she claims to read every day.  I also asked her how she interprets John 20:23 where Jesus gives his apostles the authority to forgive and retain sins.  She replied, “What john 20:23 says to me is that we are given the holy spirit from Jesus, and because we have the holy spirit, Jesus forgives us of our sins.  We don't need a man of any cloth we only need Jesus.” 

 

I am encouraged that we have a little discussion going now.   I answered by saying, “But in speaking to his apostles, and this is after his resurrection, he says whose sins YOU forgive are forgiven, and whose sins YOU retain are retained.  Jesus has given this ministry to his earthly representatives (or men of the cloth!).  How would they know what those sins are if they were not told?  And how would anyone know whether his sin was forgiven or retained unless his sin was absolved by a minister acting under the authority of Jesus?”

 

It has been a couple of days, and I have not received another response from her.  I am hoping she will give it some thought.  Some folks are so ingrained with their beliefs that any challenges to those beliefs are blindly rejected.  No evidence is convincing enough to change minds when those minds are not open to change. If I were in her position, I might act the same way.  She at least had the courage to approach a Catholic Church and begin an exploration.  I will keep praying for her and allow the Holy Spirit to take the lead.  

 

Watching my watch

As many priests do these days, our pastor serves two parishes.  He is seventy-five years old and recently eliminated one Mass from the weekend schedule leaving four to be celebrated.  When it comes to Holy Days of Obligation, he likes to schedule a morning Mass at each parish one hour apart, plus a Vigil Mass and another on the Holy Day evening. 

 

Considering the seven-mile drive between the parishes and his penchant for long homilies, the second morning Mass seldom starts on time.  On the Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception, Father had an 8 AM Mass at our parish and a 9 AM at our sister parish that I attended, something I wouldn’t normally do but for some scheduling conflicts of my own.  I arrived about 8:55, knowing the Mass would likely be a few minutes late beginning.

 

Everyone sat in the pews waiting patiently.  By 9:10, still no priest.  I noticed several men, myself included, glancing at their watches.  I found myself getting a little perturbed, the same feeling one gets sitting in the waiting room at the doctor’s office well past the time of the appointment.  Doesn’t he value our time?   Why does he schedule a certain time when he knows he will be late?

 

Then, I came to my senses.  I looked around the church.  The average age of those in attendance was probably mid-seventies.  Here I was sitting in front of the tabernacle in the presence of Our Lord.  Instead of taking advantage of the opportunity to pray, I was thinking of what else I could be doing rather than waiting on a tardy priest.  Truth be known, I had nothing better to do.  What better is there to do than be in the presence of Our Lord?  I suddenly felt foolish.  

 

I wish I could say I spent the next few minutes totally focused on the tabernacle in conversation with Jesus.  I did make the attempt, but I glanced at my watch again when Father rolled in at 9:17 and again at 9:20 when Mass actually began.  What I got was a lesson in patience and humility.  Who am I to think my time is more important than anyone else’s, especially that of a priest?  I want to remember this next time I have to wait on anyone, be it a priest, a doctor or service in a restaurant.  Maybe they have a reason for being delayed.  Give them a break.  It’s okay.  Sure my time is valuable, but despite Father’s tardiness, I was only about twenty minutes late getting back to my recliner.

Magisterial mayhem

The outspoken Bishop of Tyler Texas, Joseph Strickland, was removed from office by Pope Francis after he refused to resign at the request of the Pope on November 9.   Bishop Strickland had been critical of Pope Francis in his social media posts.  Nonetheless, outright removal of a diocesan bishop is an unusual occurrence.  

 

Bishop Strickland may have sealed his fate when he publicly referred to Pope Francis’ “program of undermining the Deposit of Faith.”  That is a serious allegation, one better made inhouse behind closed doors rather than social media.  While Strickland may have justifiable concerns about the Pope’s stance on some moral issues, airing those concerns can cause needless divisions and polarization among Catholics.  

 

We trust the Holy Spirit to guide the Church to all truth in matters of faith and morals.  Even if Pope Francis should express ideas that would seem to challenge certain Catholic long-held beliefs, we should remain confident that his opinions are not infallible declarations. 

 

Bishop Strickland has a conservative following on social media that extends far beyond the boundaries of his former diocese.  Similar to the political climate in our nation right now, the Church has its conservative and liberal factions.  Some may call it traditionists and modernists. The traditionalists may call it orthodox versus heterodox.  I doubt that Pope Francis intends to undermine the Deposit of Faith.  I believe one can be orthodox and still explore conservative or liberal theological opinions.  This may be where Francis and Strickland clash.  

 

So, I blame both sides for this public dust up.  Strickland should have kept his problems with Francis out of social media and Francis should have handled his disciplinary actions privately. To Strickland’s credit, during his November 11 interview with LifeSiteNews, he encouraged those upset by his dismissal to pray for the Pope and not to leave the Church.  Meanwhile, the rest of us are left to wonder if we should be taking sides. 

 

That's an Order!

A few weeks ago, I was beginning to think we would not have anyone in our RCIA class this year.  There were no prospects on the horizon.  I was disappointed but also somewhat relieved that I might get a little break after doing this for a number of years.  Nevertheless, I posted an announcement on the sign in front of the church inviting people to explore the Catholic Faith and that classes would begin soon.  

 

Fast forward to the present and we have six people attending our weekly sessions.  That may not sound like a large number to most people, but for our small parish, it’s a record!  Calls began coming into the parish office from a variety of people from various backgrounds and circumstances.  We have a young mother who was baptized Catholic, but never raised in the faith.  We have a married couple, the wife who was raised Catholic some sixty years ago but fell away, and her husband who was raised Lutheran but has not practiced.  We have a widow who was raised Methodist and now has a grandson who is a Catholic priest.  We have a woman with a Baptist background who has many questions.  And we have a young college-age woman who has no faith background at all.  

 

I have never considered myself a good teacher and having to facilitate a group with such diverse experiences is especially challenging.  My wife has been a public school educator for some fifty years so I recruited her to help me.  She has never taught religious education, but she certainly knows how to organize a lesson plan better than I do.  Between the two of us, we hope to meet the needs of everyone in the class. 

 

One of the problems we face is how to make our sessions interesting for everyone involved when their faith backgrounds are so different.  Some are quite familiar with Jesus and the scriptures while others have very little knowledge of God at all.  We risk boring some or losing others.  I encourage everyone to stop me and ask questions at any time.  It is easy to assume someone is familiar with certain terminology when in fact they may not be.  

 

Although I have worked with RCIA for many years, I have never done it the same way twice.  It has been a constantly evolving process depending on the needs of those in the group, resources available, and my own experimentation.  Last year, I used the Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.  I might have done the same thing this year but I suddenly found copies hard to come by.  I did find a couple of used books on Amazon, but I needed six.  What I did have in abundant supply was Trent Horn’s book Why we’re Catholic.  Using it as a starting point for the inquiry phase is working well so far. 

 

Even the name of the program is actually different now.  RCIA, the Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults, is now called OCIA, the Order of Christian Initiation of Adults.  This was apparently done to improve the English translation from the Latin word Ordo.  Aside from the name change, there is really no difference for us working in the trenches.  In fact, we tend to continue using the old term since it is common in much of our materials.  Old habits are hard to break.  

Matthew 16:13-20

 

The Gospel on the 21^st Sunday in Ordinary time  (Year A)  August 27, 2023

 

Mt 16:13-20

Jesus went into the region of Caesarea Philippi and
he asked his disciples,
"Who do people say that the Son of Man is?" 
They replied, "Some say John the Baptist, others Elijah,
still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets." 
He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" 
Simon Peter said in reply,
"You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." 
Jesus said to him in reply,
"Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. 
For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. 
And so I say to you, you are Peter,
and upon this rock I will build my church,
and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. 
I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. 
Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven;
and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." 
Then he strictly ordered his disciples

to tell no one that he was the Christ.

 

In a world that rejects much of which the Catholic Church teaches, this is one of my favorite gospels because it tells us precisely where the Church gets her authority to speak for God.  Whenever our pastor speaks on Matthew 16:13-20, his emphasis is usually on Peter’s confession, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Much of his homily consists of talking about various misconceptions about who Jesus was.   All well and good, as they say, but as an amateur apologist, I always feel like he is missing an opportunity to explain why it is imperative that we listen to and obey the teachings of the Catholic Church.

 

Today the Catholic Church is one of the few remaining institutions that takes a strong moral stand on the tough issues such as abortion or same-sex marriage.  A devout Catholic firmly grounded in the faith has no trouble accepting those beliefs.  We call these non-negotiables.  Yet, many non-Catholic Christians and even some Catholics, acquiesce under social pressure.

 

When it comes to seemingly less stringent teachings or disciplines imposed by the Church, many Catholics turn a blind eye.  Eating meat on Fridays during Lent, or using artificial birth control, or missing Mass every Sunday are all sins that many Catholics do not take seriously.  That brings me to the question that is answered in Matthew’s gospel.  Why should all Christians obey all of the teachings of the Catholic Church, even those that may seem inconsequential?

 

Matthew’s gospel documents Jesus giving Peter, the first Pope of the Catholic Church, the keys to the kingdom of heaven.  “Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”  As an analogy, I equate this to someone giving a babysitter authority over their household while being away, telling the children to do whatever the sitter says to do or not to do.  If the sitter says go to bed, you go to bed.  If the sitter says you can have a snack, you can have a snack.  The sitter is given complete control and the parents back it up.  

 

A parallel passage from the Book of Isaiah was also read at Mass on the same twenty-first Sunday.  A steward over the household named Shebna has his authority taken away and given to another named Eliakim.  “And I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David; he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.” (Isaiah 22:22).  The job of the steward is to act as the prime minister, ordering the day to day operation of the kingdom.  The message seems clear that God-given authority is to be taken seriously.

 

Jesus is not someone who would say something and not really mean it.  He is the incarnate man of His Word.  He granted earthly authority to Peter and His Church, and therefore, we should all be listening to what the Church tells us.  When someone says to me, “Do you really think God would send me to hell for eating a hamburger on Friday or missing Mass to play golf on one Sunday?”, I remind them that the fall of man happened because someone ate a piece of fruit they weren’t supposed to eat.  God sends no one to hell.  We go there by the choices we make. 

 

Yes, we fail at times.  God is merciful.  That is why He gave His Church authority to forgive sins.  (John 20:23).  When judgement day comes, don’t be the one standing before Our Lord saying, “Gee, I didn’t think you were serious about that!  It didn’t seem like a big deal to me!  I didn’t know you were going to bind us to EVERYTHING the Church said.”  Listen to the Church and beware.