Finally!

Thank God the election is over.  The barrage of annoying political ads have finally ceased, at least for a while.  I often wonder how stupid the candidates must think we are.  Unfortunately, they may be right.  People make bad choices every day.  Those same people help choose our leaders.    

I must say I was surprised by the result of the presidential election.  As I have stated before, the abortion stance is a litmus test for me.  While it may seem inconsequential for determining a candidate’s qualifications to develop foreign and domestic policies, I believe it is a strong indicator of one’s moral compass.  While I saw many more Trump signs in our conservative Indiana, I was also very aware of a strong dislike for him personally.  Several women I know view him only as a sexual predator and convicted felon.  I viewed the election as a choice between two platforms and how they aligned with my own ideals.  The candidate’s character, though important, was less important.

As a Catholic, I could not vote for someone who refused to place any limits on abortion.  In fact, I fail to see how any practicing Catholic could still consider themselves a Democrat these days.  Nonetheless, I know Catholics in my own family who voted Democratic.  They have their reasons.  I just disagree.  

The day after the election, my wife and I had lunch at a local café.  An elderly woman who works there part time was lamenting the fact that Trump won.  She brought up all the pro-choice talking points, rape, incest, and all the women who are going to die because they can’t get an abortion.  Another Mexican friend who has been an American citizen for many decades supposed that he would be deported.  So sad that so many people latch onto the incessant fearmongering. 

My wife was moved by the story of the Texas woman who died when doctors said they could not intervene in her miscarriage due to strict anti-abortion laws in the state.  She says she is against abortion but believes these decisions should be left to the woman and her doctors.  I might agree in the rare situations where the death of the woman or her child is imminent.  The problem, aside from the fact that the baby has no say in this decision, is doctors will protect their own interests.  They want to make sure the patient is aware of every possible bad outcome in a higher risk pregnancy even when those chances are minimal.  They are less likely to face a wrongful death lawsuit from the unborn baby than from the mother. Even in relatively routine minor surgeries, someone on the medical team will often make the patient aware of rare unintended consequences.  

My wife said she was disappointed in our citizens who would elect a convicted felon to the presidency.  Personally, I believe his conviction was politically motivated.  Maybe Trump inflated his property values to obtain loans, but his lenders are no fools.  They knew with whom they were dealing and were undoubtedly comfortable doing so.  His wealth and demeanor make him disliked by many, but it is hard to argue with his success as a businessman.

As a pro-life Catholic, I am encouraged by the conservative outcome on election day.  Yes, I wish the executive branch was manned by someone a little less egocentric, but no candidate is perfect.  Should vacancies appear on the Supreme Court, I am confident the Republicans will nominate justices who support the constitution rather than an ideology.  The next four years will be interesting.  I remain optimistic.  

Public prayer

October is the month of the Holy Rosary.  A few members of our parish take the opportunity to hold an outdoor Rosary Rally at a prominent intersection in our town.  Our pastor asked that everybody attend at noon on Saturday.  He said it is important that we be seen.   A question arose concerning whether such rallies held in the public square violate Jesus’ admonition in Matthew 6.

 “And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by men. Truly, I say to you, they have their reward.”  Matthew 6:5  RSVCE

The next verse says, “But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.”  A footnote in the RSVCE says, This does not, of course, exclude public worship but ostentatious prayer. Merriam Webster defines ostentatious as attracting or seeking to attract attention, admiration, or envy often by gaudiness or obviousness.

Why is the Rosary Rally held in public view?  The warning in Matthew 6 seems to be directed to those who wish to attract attention to themselves.  I doubt that any of those saying the Rosary in public are doing it for their own aggrandizement.  Yet, why not then pray the Rosary in the church in front of the Blessed Sacrament?  There must be some purpose to praying in view of the public.  

Praying the Rosary in front of an abortion clinic in an effort to dissuade a woman from killing her unborn baby is a situation where being seen would be necessary.  Obviously not every instance of praying in public is prohibited by Matthew 6.  We need to read this passage in context.  The culpability of the person praying in public depends on intent.  Jesus was condemning men who were seeking praise for themselves.  

Getting back to our parish Rosary Rally, it seems those in attendance need to understand their reason for being there.  Is it possible some may come only hoping to be seen by their friends or neighbors?  It’s possible.  Our motivation can be disordered at times.  Is the rosary more efficacious prayed on a public street corner than in the church?  Does Matthew 6 say otherwise?  Is the answer yet to be seen?

Our rally had about a dozen people in attendance, including two priests.  They displayed a large banner from an organization called America Needs Fatima that says, “Pray the Rosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary asking God to save America.”  The photo on the banner is the Our Lady of Fatima statue.  It is likely that most spectators passing by were non-Catholic.  If the rally somehow inspires someone to investigate the rosary prayer, that would be wonderful.  I fear it is more likely to reinforce the false protestant belief that we Catholics worship Mary more than Jesus.

Public displays of worship certainly have a place in our Catholic faith.  We have large open-air Masses on special occasions, Eucharistic processions of the Blessed Sacrament, even the Easter Vigil Mass begins outdoors in public view.  In those events, the larger numbers make individual identification less likely thus diminishing the opportunity for any hypocritical behavior.  Perhaps the most critical point here is that we not question the motives of others and continue praying, no matter where we are.  

 

Future Angst

I am very fortunate to be in relatively good health for my age.  In a few days, I will begin my seventy-fifth year on the planet.  I have all original parts minus one gall bladder.  My wife, on the other hand, had a hip replaced three weeks ago.  Taking care of her since then has given me a glimpse of what lies on the horizon for people my age.  Watching a once vibrant energetic woman hunched over a walker, grimacing as she tries to sit down or get into bed, has suddenly made me feel like an old man.  The guy in the mirror has aged significantly since earlier this summer. 

I have heard people say that age creeps up on you.  A sudden pain or an awkward fall can change one’s life in a heartbeat.   We avoid focusing on impending mortality until some episode brings it to the forefront.  Even if I live another ten years, much of that time could be spent alone in a nursing home or hospital.

Last month, we had a new roof put on our house.  I was interested in getting one of the new metal roof systems that look like conventional asphalt shingles.  They are durable and less likely to shed the little granules that tend to plug up my leaf guard gutter shields.  The downside is the cost, considerably higher than asphalt shingles.  I asked the salesman to price both types of roofing for the purpose of comparison.  The asphalt roof comes with a thirty-year warranty while the metal roof has a fifty-year warranty.

When it came time to deciding which way to go, I was set to choose the metal roof, but the salesman said, “Can I be honest with you?  Go with the asphalt shingle.  At your age, why spend the extra money for a fifty-year warranty?”  Ouch!  Of course, there could be reasons for doing so if the house will eventually be handed down to a family member, but that is no certainty.  I thought about it and agreed.  We now have a new asphalt shingle roof and a thirty-year warranty that will last until I am one hundred and five.

I have come to acknowledge my mortal existence.  While making plans for living is most desirable, we really need to prepare for dying.  Time passes so quickly and there is no going back.  Always be ready for that judgement day that may come unexpectedly.  

Speaking of an uncertain future, I watched the recent debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris.  We are not talking Lincoln Douglas material here.  This was difficult to watch.  Who ever dreamed that a candidate in a presidential debate would bring up an unfounded rumor of Haitian immigrants eating dogs and cats in Springfield Ohio?  You can’t make this stuff up.  On second thought, I guess somebody did.  How incredulous can a person be!

Pope Francis said sometimes we have to choose the lesser of two evils when voting in an election.  As Americans, we should never have to choose between two people so completely unfit to lead our nation.  Both parties should be ashamed.  One of these two will likely be President of the United States for the next four years.

I have said this before, but my litmus test for a presidential candidate is his or her stance on respect for human life.  Harris is so completely pro-abortion that I could never vote for her.  Trump claims to be pro-life, but is also pro IVF which tells me he does not understand what true respect for life entails.  Unnaturally creating embryos, many of which will be frozen and never allowed to grow, is inconsistent with respecting life from conception to natural death.  

In elections like this one, I wish there were a way to cast a negative vote.  I may not want to vote for either candidate, yet I know which candidate is the lesser of two evils.  If I do not vote at all, I risk allowing the greater evil to prevail.  If I vote for the lesser evil, I am still voting for evil which violates my conscience.  By casting an anti-vote for the greater evil, my disapproving vote goes against the greater evil without violating my conscience.  Unfortunately, we don’t have that option.  

On election day, I often see people wearing those little stickers with the American flag that say, “I Voted!”  Similar looking stickers available on the internet say, “I Vomited”.  I may need to place an order!

Do you have life within you?

During this month of August, the Year B Lectionary is digressing from the Gospel of Mark at Sunday Mass.  Beginning on the 17th Sunday in Ordinary Time and continuing for five weeks until the Twenty-first Sunday, we hear John, chapter 6, which includes the Bread of Life Discourse.  When instructing catechumens in the Real Presence of the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus in the Eucharist, John 6 is one of the go-to scriptural references. 

John 6:52-58

The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying,

"How can this man give us his flesh to eat?" 

Jesus said to them,

"Amen, amen, I say to you,

unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood,

you do not have life within you. 

Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood

has eternal life,

and I will raise him on the last day. 

For my flesh is true food,

and my blood is true drink. 

Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood

remains in me and I in him. 

Just as the living Father sent me

and I have life because of the Father,

so also the one who feeds on me

will have life because of me. 

This is the bread that came down from heaven. 

Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died,

whoever eats this bread will live forever."

I have never understood how Bible-alone believing Christians can read this passage and not take it literally.  How much more emphasis could Jesus have placed on His words?  I pose this question to our Protestant brothers and sisters: Do you have life within you if you do not eat His flesh and drink His blood?

The sacrifice of the Mass is a re-presentation of the same once and for all sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross.  Jesus is the sacrificial Lamb of God.  Like the animal sacrifices offered under the Old Covenant, this perfect sacrifice in the New Covenant must be offered by a ministerial priest.  Where else besides the Catholic Church can one find a continuous line of ministerial priests to act in the person of Christ in offering the bread and wine that become the body and blood?

Normally when the bread and wine are consecrated in the sacrifice of the Mass, the accidents or appearances remain while only the substance changes into the body and blood.  The Church calls this change transubstantiation, the change of substances.  Last week in our OCIA (RCIA) class, we examined some of the rare occasions where the appearance or species of the host also changed.  Where those miracles have occurred and could be scientifically examined, the bloody substance was determined to be heart tissue from a heart that had suffered damage, the blood type AB.  Think about that next time you receive Holy Communion!

(See the Eucharistic Miracles of Buenos Aires, Lanciano, and others.).

Shifting gears

Since 2022, our parish has participated in a synod process ordered by our then bishop, the purpose of which was to evangelize Catholics, specifically those who had strayed away from the Church.  Our synod committee would meet once a month to plan a presentation to be given to our parishioners.  The monthly presentations usually consisted of a video on various topics about our faith, followed by discussion.  To entice attendance, there was always food and beverages provided.  

After taking a break during June, our committee met last week to assess our progress and plan for the future.  In doing so, we all agreed that we are no nearer our objective than when we started.  Oh, the monthly sessions were fairly well attended, usually by the same crowd that already attends Sunday Mass faithfully, along with whoever was assigned to bring the refreshments that day.  Pressed to name one Catholic who returned to the Church as a result of our efforts, we came up empty.

Someone then mentioned the often-used definition of insanity, doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.  We all decided to stop doing what we have been doing.  While those attending our presentations were benefitting, we were not reaching those who needed to hear the message.  It just was not working. 

One committee member said we need more person to person contact.  True, but how do we approach people about their faith?  Frankly, most of us Catholics aren’t very good at evangelizing.  Our pastor suggested something called the Friendly Visiting Guidebook.  I would cite the website he provided to us, but it seems to no longer exist.  A few days following our meeting, he gave me a printed copy of the Guidebook.  This is a program for building a relationship with the elderly.  Most of us on the Synod Committee are ourselves elderly!  Building such relationships is a great idea, but I still doubt it will help meet our goal.  

I believe the best strategy is to keep people from leaving the Church in the first place.   Keeping people involved is the secret to making them feel connected.  We need community.  We are social beings. The Catholic faith is very focused on Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist.  The catechism calls the Eucharist the source and summit of our faith.  When we walk into church, we address the Blessed Sacrament to the point of ignoring others worshippers around us.  Our worship experience is vertically oriented as opposed to the more horizontal social element of many non-Catholic denominations.  While this is a good thing, it doesn’t always lend itself to social interaction with our fellow worshippers.  A weak social structure can result in individuals feeling detached or alienated.

That is why parish organizations are very important.  This sense of community develops when people work with others to achieve a goal.  Ironically, the Synod Committee itself was beneficial to those on the committee because it provided an opportunity to work together in a social setting, even though the goals of the committee were never realized.  We have a very active Society of Saint Vincent DePaul Conference in our parish.  I cannot envision anyone in that group ever leaving the Church.

Our pastor started a men’s group in our parish several years ago.  It doesn’t even have a name; they just call it the men’s group.  At the synod meeting, Father said he never expected the men’s group to be as successful as it has been.  The guys get together once a month to study the faith and socialize.  There might even be a little alcohol involved.  

Knights of Columbus, Christian Mothers, Sodalities, Choirs, these are all organizations that can provide cohesiveness among parishioners.  The secret is to make these groups inviting, to ask outsiders to join or assist with a project.  I am reminded of the Charlie Brown Christmas cartoon where Lucy tells a depressed Charlie Brown that he needs involvement. We all need to be involved.  Growing in faith and commitment will naturally follow. 

God, please RSVP!

My internet news feeds overwhelm me with information every single day.  Rarely do I watch network newscasts anymore.  Email inboxes are filled each morning.  I spend way too much time just reading headlines and hitting delete.  One article did grab my attention this week.  The title read, “Wedding dilemma for many couples:  Should God be invited to the marriage celebration?”

My first thought was, how sad that modern day couples would consider such a question to be a dilemma.  How did marriage become so secularized to the point where God’s involvement is an afterthought?  Further evidence that our society no longer understands the true meaning of a marriage covenant. 

Fighting my impulse to hit delete, I did open the article and was pleasantly surprised.  Written by Fox News correspondent Lauren Green, the article cites family therapist Doctor Roxanne Louh who refers to marriage saying, “If you don’t have God at the center of that, holding you accountable to something much greater than your own feelings, then your feelings can become quite divisive.”  Doctor Louh is married to a Greek Orthodox priest, Father Nicholas Louh.  He is also quoted in the article saying, “You’re not a random act in history.  God has a purpose for you, whether you’re married or single.  And so, is that person in my life going to help me fulfill, or work toward the purpose that God has for me?”  

Last Sunday was Father’s Day.  In his homily, our priest reminded us that our most important job as fathers is to help our families get to heaven.  When God is not present in the marriage, the relationship can be fragile. Too many children are growing up without fathers in the home.  

It is refreshing to occasionally come across a secular source that expresses support for God-centered marriage.  For many young people, marriage is a relationship void of any religious significance.  The wedding has become a social event to put on a display.  I am glad the Catholic Church requires Catholic weddings to take place in a Catholic Church.  There is a good reason for marriage vows to be exchanged in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament.  How much more God-centered could a wedding be?