Come Let Us Worship the Lord: Homily for 4th Sunday Ordinary Time

Dt 18:15-20

Ps 95

1 Cor 7:32-35

Mk 1:21-28

 

"A prophet like me will the Lord, your God, raise up for you from among your own kin; to him you shall listen." 

 

The short reading from Deuteronomy establishes the role of the prophet. Christianity came to understand these verses as promising a single prophet to come at the end of time, a Messiah, the Messiah, Our Lord Jesus.  For this reason we hear Philip refer to these verses when he tells Nathaniel, "We have found him of whom Moses spoke in the law, Jesus of Nazareth . . . "  Acts of the Apostles quotes this passage from Deuteronomy directly in referring to Jesus.  It is an important reading that ends with God giving two harsh warnings.  The first warning is to the people: Whoever will not listen to my word which the prophet speaks in my name will answer to Me for it.  The second to the prophet:  If a prophet presumes to speak in my name a prophecy that I have not commanded him to speak, or speaks in the name of other gods, he shall die.  

 

The short second reading is fascinating. It frequently comes up in discussions of vowed chastity for both male and female religious as well as in discussions of celibacy for secular priests. One is more available for the things of God if not also preoccupied with concerns for a family and all that goes with being a spouse and a parent.  Paul is not suggesting that vowed chastity or celibacy is a superior state; far from it.  However, he is pointing out the differences between the two states of life and the individual's availability.   The last verse is significant. There is clearly no question of trying to deceive anyone by encouraging him or her to enter into a way of life for which he or she is unsuited.  This is true not only for the life of the spirit but also for the life of the mind of the person as a whole.  Entering a profession because one is being forced by the expectations of parents, friends or social pressures, choosing a way of life because it is perceived as prestigious or highly remunerative is a bad idea that may result in profound unhappiness or, in worst case scenarios, lead to disaster. 

 

As the Gospel of Mark is proclaimed throughout this coming liturgical year, we will hear the words, amazed, astonished, astounded, frightened, awed, and other synonyms around 35 times.  Astonishment is the frequent reaction to Jesus' teaching.  Part of the astonishment was driven by the sense that He was teaching with authority rather than in the manner of the scribes. This particular Gospel comes at the very beginning of Jesus public ministry. It is difficult to know exactly what  Mark meant  when he described that Jesus taught "not as the scribes."  However, this marks the beginning of the scribes' opposition to Jesus, an opposition that proved lethal.  

 

The scribes were not necessarily a homogeneous group. Rather they fulfilled multiple functions, mostly in government and in the synagogue, as teachers, interpreters of scripture, and even as lawyers.  Today we might call them bureaucrats.  They quickly became enemies of Jesus, perhaps because he taught in a way that was not theirs with an authority given Him by the Father or perhaps because they saw him as a threat to their own power and authority.  One commentator notes that the scribes' opposition to Jesus was far greater and much more dangerous--the commentator described it as "more fatal"-- than that of the Pharisees.  In the end It was the Jerusalem scribes, along with the elders and high priests, who were the chief instigators of Jesus trial.  What exactly did the people recognize in Jesus' teaching that was absent from the teaching of the scribes? 

 

After Jesus cast out the unclean spirit we hear again that all were amazed.  Imagine the murmuring of those who witnessed this casting out.  Imagine the murmuring of those to whom it was reported.  "What is this?"  "What is going on?" "Who is this man?"  "He even has authority over unclean spirits!"  One can imagine how quickly the word spread throughout the region. 

 

Jesus taught with authority.  He cast out evil spirits with authority. That same teaching, that same authority guides us today if we allow it to.  We can only respond to that authority by heeding the words of the psalmist:

 

"Come let us sing to the Lord 

and shout with joy to the rock who saves us 

Let us approach him with praise and thanksgiving

and sing joyful songs to the Lord."

________________________________________________

The chandelier in the Sanctuary of Loyola.  The light was perfect.  I enhanced it with some manipulation on the computer.  I need to use my passport agaian soon although at the moment I would settle for getting two states away from Boston. 

 + Fr. Jack, SJ, MD

 

 

 

 

Right to Life Weekend: Protection for the Ill Elderly and Unborn

This past Friday was designated the Day of Prayer for the Legal Protection of the Unborn.  The annual March for Life is this coming Friday January 29.  It will be a very different march compared with previous years.  It will be much smaller, lacking the usual thousands of marchers, and much of it, such as the associated conferences, will be held virtually.  One hopes for normalcy next year.

 

The March for Life weekend is an extraordinary event.  Students from all over the country came to Georgetown, sometimes camping out in the dorm rooms of friends.  Georgetown was the center for many of the associated conferences.  In January 2012 I led the holy hour, benediction, and rosary at Georgetown the day before the 13th Annual Cardinal O'Connor Conference for Life.  It was a heartening experience to see Dahlgren Chapel filled with young people praying and preparing to march for the protection of the unborn.

 

Though initially restricted to the first trimester we have reached a sad point as revealed in an article from the Washington Post dated February 1, 2019.  It read: "This week in Virginia, Delegate Kathy Tran (D-Fairfax) admitted that, yes, her bill would allow a doctor to perform an abortion after the mother had gone into labor."  Equally disturbing was the following sentence noting that Gov. Ralph Northam, a pediatric neurologist by training, defended Miss Tran's position in a radio interview.  A man charged with treating very ill children was coming out in support of killing infants while their mothers were in labor.

 

While the March for Life has focused primarily on the rights of the child in the womb there is increasing urgency that there be a focus as well on the rights of the vulnerable at the other end of the age spectrum, the ill-elderly (and sometimes not so elderly) as well as those in the end stages of dementing disorders.  What was known as euthanasia back in the late seventies, and then physician-assisted suicide, is now being billed as physician prescribed death, a rather stunning euphemism. 

 

In his encyclical Evangelium Vitae (The Gospel of Life) St. John Paul II, condemned "therapeutic interventions--which accept life only under certain conditions and reject it when it is affected by any limitation, handicap, or illness."  He went on to decry masking the horror of crimes against life by describing them in euphemistic terms. 

 

Back in the spring of 1978 I was fortunate to spend six weeks as visiting registrar or resident with Dr. Cicely Saunders who founded London's St. Christopher's Hospice in 1967.  She was very much responsible for the spread of the hospice movement to and through the U.S.  Dame Cicely was a fierce opponent of euthanasia.  She said in an interview:  "Impending death is no excuse for ending life. Rather than rushing to kill the dying in the name of their suffering, we should focus on practical measures for alleviating their pain and spiritual means to make their final moments worth living."

 

Perhaps it is the devaluation of human life in U.S. society that allowed  hospitals and other institutions to force many elderly to die alone and terrified, bereft of even one designated family member at the hospital or nursing home bedside due to irrational fears of contagion.  

 

Medical schools have been complicit. 

 

What is called the Hippocratic Oath at med school graduation today is nothing more than the kind of pledge Calvin and Hobbes would make in their club.  The revised oath is unrecognizable compared with the original.  Indeed, it should not even be called the Hippocratic Oath.  

 

The promises that are no longer pronounced include, : 

 

"I will not give a lethal drug to anyone if I am asked, nor will I advise such a plan." 

 

"I will not give a woman a pessary to cause abortion"

 

"Into whatever homes I go I will avoid any voluntary act of impropriety or corruption, including the seduction of women or men, whether they are free or slaves."

 

We pray for the conversion of our country and the politicians charged with enacting laws, that they will return to valuing the lives of the most vulnerable at both ends of the age spectrum.  And we pray that American society will come to understand that human life matters more than the lives of dogs, cats, and other animals.  

________________________________________________________________

All of the photos below are from Loyola, Spain the last time I left the country in July 2019.  One hopes it will be possible during the summer of 2022. 

+ Fr. Jack, SJ, MD

 

Don't Mess With It: Homily for the The Baptism of the Lord

10 January 2021

 

Her seven sacraments are the lifeblood of the Catholic Church.  Without the sacraments there is no church. They define the Church and those who are part of it. Everything else about the Church grows out of and is secondary to her sacraments.  Baptism is the first and definitive sacrament of the Catholic Church. It can never be repeated.  It can never be undone. It can never be overturned or revoked.  One can reject the graces of baptism.  One can live in a way that attempts to deny it.  But, once baptized, one remains baptized, indelibly marked as having died and risen in Christ.  

 

Baptism is the door through which all must enter to partake fully of the Church’s life.  Without baptism there is no spiritual life.  Without baptism there is no light of Christ. Without baptism there is no partaking of the Eucharistic banquet.  Without baptism there is no forgiveness of sin or reception of the Holy Spirit.  Without baptism there is no hope.  Baptism is not simply a naming ceremony complete with photo opportunities.  Like all of the Church's sacraments it must be administered according to proper form, using proper matter for the sacrament, and with the proper intention on the part of the priest administering it and the one receiving it.  

 

Form.  Matter.  Intention. 

 

Each sacrament has a unique form consisting of words and ritual actions. The  form combined with the necessary matter:  water, bread, or sacred oils, are the visible signs of invisible grace.  Baptism is the first and the sine qua non.  

 

The defining moment of baptism is the pouring on of--or immersion in--water with the spoken formula:  "I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."   There can be no variation in the formula if the baptism is to be valid.  There can be no variation in the formula if the stain of original sin is to be removed. 

 

Recently the press was abuzz with the story of a young priest whose ordination was declared invalid because at his baptism the deacon--I am tempted to modify the word deacon by idiot--chose to baptize him using an invalid formula by saying, "WE baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" so as to create an artificial sense of community.  

 

Further beneath contempt are those pervert the formula even more and baptize in the name of a creator, a redeemer, and a sanctifier so as to avoid nouns that suggest gender.  Those baptisms are also invalid as the Boston Paulist Center and Boston's now defunct Jesuit Urban Center discovered a number of years ago. 

One can only describe baptismal formulae along the lines of, 'the mother, the father, the godmother, the godfather, we all baptize you' as pathetic and bizarre, raising questions about both the motivations and sanity of the one administering the sacrament.

 

The sacraments are not to be trifled with. The sacramental formulae are never to be reworded or changed so as to be politically correct, 'gender sensitive' (whatever that may mean),  or a reason to make everyone feel good about being there.  One's presence witnessing a sacrament, baptism, marriage, or ordination, for example, is itself a grace, it need not be specifically acknowledged as in the introductions to some bad banquet speeches.

 

In response to reports of liturgical abuses in which children are baptized with formulae that are gender-free, all-inclusive, or other transgressions of the form of the sacrament, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith ruled in August of 2020 that baptisms using a modified formula are, and were, invalid requiring that the sacrament be administered according to valid and proper form.  

 

The document went on to explain that modifying the sacramental formula on one’s own initiative is both a severe liturgical abuse and a wound inflicted upon the communion of the Church. 

 

Violating the integrity of baptism through rewording or reworking it represents the height of narcissistic arrogance in the one who chooses to do so. Jesus himself gave the formula for baptism in the final two verses of Matthew's gospel, important verses that include three commands and a promise:  

 

The first command is: Go and make disciples of all nations. 

 

The second command is:   Baptize them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit.  

 

The third is: Teach them to observe all that I have commanded you. 

 

Matthew's Gospel concludes with a promise: "And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.”

 

No priest, no liturgical committee, and no special interest group has the right to change the baptismal formula so as to suit delicate sensitivities or bizarre social trends.  That Jesus was baptized is indisputable. All four Gospels give accounts.  The importance of Jesus’ baptism is not how it was performed, or at what exact spot in the Jordan He was baptized. The importance of Jesus’ baptism is its significance for us.  There are three understandings of baptism to explain that significance.  

 

The most obvious is washing, which is the literal meaning of the Greek roots of baptism.  For us, washing includes the remission of original sin.  But sin was the only human trait.  Jesus did not share with us.  He united Himself with us sinners to redeem us from sin but He Himself was free of sin.  Then why was He baptized? 

 

Another New Testament understanding of baptism is dying and rising.  The prayer for the blessing of the water in the ritual highlights this understanding:  "We ask you, Father, with your Son to send the Holy Spirit upon the water of this font.  May all who are buried with Christ in the death of baptism rise also with Him to newness of life."  As Jesuit theologian Xavier Leon-Dufour explained, “Baptism kills the body in so far as it is an instrument of sin and confers a share in the life of God in Christ.”  

 

A third understanding is that of  birth in the Spirit, a very Pentecostal theme that is a homily in and of itself.  

 

While it is possible to conduct a semester-long seminar on the sacrament of baptism,  its meaning, significance, and ritual,  there is one fact which unites all understandings of baptism, without which there is no share in the life of Christ. 

Whether understood as cleansing from sin, dying and rising to new life, or new birth in the spirit, Jesus Christ is the agent.  Jesus is present at that sacrament.  In the only valid formula: "I baptize you in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit" the priest or deacon, is NOT acting in his own name, in the name of the Church, in the name of the parents, siblings, godparents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, close friends, and the old lady down the street.  

 

As the words of baptism are intoned it is Jesus who is present and welcoming the child or adult into His life. That is more than sufficient.  No other presence need be recognized.

____________________________________________________

The photo is an example of right place, right time, and having the camera on one's person.  It was taken in the late afternoon while I was wandering through the Jesuit Residence in Lyon, France the day I arrive.  The chapel is to the viewer's left and a meeting room to the right.  The light show lasted about five minutes.  Given my miserable sense of direction it would have taken longer than that to find my room in the large and rambling former monastery (Visitation Nuns).  

+ Fr. Jack, SJ, MD

Feast of the Epiphany of the Lord

Is 60:1-6

Ps 72:1-2, 7-8, 10-13

Eph 3:2-3a, 5-6

Mt 2:1-12

 

It is difficult to avoid at least some element of personal sentimentality at Christmas.  The ghosts of Christmas past always figure in at some point.  I grew up in a town populated by Poles, Slovaks, Lithuanians, Ukrainians, and a few Irish and Welsh.  The town was overwhelmingly Catholic.  Each ethnic group held to the traditions it brought over from Old Country, including when and how the feasts were celebrated.  For us Poles the wigilia complete with opłatki and pierogi, was critical.  Each parish featured hymns and carols in the language of the parish's ethnic group.  The four RC parishes were Polish, Slovak, Lithuanian, and Irish--I think the Irish sang in English.  Not all of the Catholics in Plymouth, PA celebrated Christmas on the same day, at least not back then. 

 

My family home was one yard, one garage, and two houses away from Sts. Peter and Paul Ukrainian Catholic Church. I attended many Divine Liturgies there as a kid primarily because it was close.  My brother noted that   the closeness was offset by the length of the Divine Liturgy and the fact that it was in Church Slavonic, although, in my brother's case, Latin was as much of a mystery to him as Church Slavonic was to both of us.  Every year in high school our Ukrainian Catholic classmates got "Russian Christmas" off.  It wasn't even a question  of them being in class on January 6 and 7. It was routine. The difference was because the Ukrainian Church still used the Julian Calendar where dates are thirteen days after the same date in the Gregorian calendar. Thus, December 25 is January 8 for adherents of the Julian Calendar. Epiphany in the Roman Church almost coincided with Christmas in the Eastern Rites and Orthodox Churches.  Epiphany in the Eastern Churches wasn't until mid-January.

 

No matter the calendar, the Feast of the Epiphany of the Lord is celebrated twelve days after the Feast of the Nativity of the Lord, traditionally on January 6 for the Roman Church and January 18 for the Eastern Rite. However, in its sometimes bizarre thought processes, some episcopal conferences have translated  the Feast of the Epiphany to the Sunday between January 2 and January 8. One benefit is that more people attend Mass on Sunday than they do on a weekday. The change in the date of the observance  does not diminish its importance. 

 

Epiphany derives from Greek roots that mean:  to show forth, to reveal, to open up.  Dictionaries define an epiphany as," a sudden intuitive realization of the essence or meaning of something, . . . ."  One could ask if we didn't already celebrate that sudden realization on Christmas. The answer is both yes and no. This is where the three gift bearers come in.

 

The word "kings" does not appear in Matthew's Gospel.  Those who bore the gifts were called magi, wise men or astronomers.  They were not monarchs. The word kings and their names only came into use around the sixth century.  Their number is another problem.

 

Matthew used the plural in his gospel but did not give a number. There could have been as few as two or many more than three.  Because the gifts were described as gold, frankincense, and myrrh, tradition holds that there were three magi.  Despite the custom calling them Kasper, Melchior, and Balthazar they were not named in scripture. 

 

In the end, the number of magi, their names, their ethnicity, and their kingly or non-kingly status, is an irrelevant distraction from their true importance.

 

The magi are important because they represent the first Gentiles to recognize and worship Jesus.  They represent the first Gentiles who realized that Jesus was the Messiah for whom the world had waited.  They were also part of a mostly unacknowledged dimension of the Nativity of Our Lord. that dimension is the underlying threat, danger, and violence hovering over our celebration. 

 

"When King Herod heard of this he was greatly troubled and all Jerusalem with him."  

 

Herod's jealousy and the duplicity underlying his conversation with the magi gets closer to the reality of Christmas than do the lyrics of  "O Little Town of Bethlehem"  or the interminable song "We Three Kings of Orient Are."  In Herod's malevolence and evil desires we see the first shadow of the cross, we can make out the road that led to Calvary.

 

"Go and search diligently for the child.  When you have found him, bring me word, that I too may go and do him homage."  

 

Imagine this request from a crazed megalomaniac whose potential for brutality was unlimited. Who can trust a sociopath who executed several members of his own family?  Who can believe the equivalent of a late-term abortionist who ordered the killing of all male children under the age of two in the vicinity of Bethlehem. 

 

The first reading from Isaiah told Jerusalem that the glory of the Lord would shine upon her.  In the context of Isaiah's prophecy the reading from Ephesians is consoling because it reassures the Gentiles that they are included in the promise.  

 

In an increasingly secular culture, Christmas is interpreted as a celebration of  peace, love, light, and innocence.  They are goods in themselves.  But the Nativity is also a story of suffering, danger, hardship, threat, and persecution.  It reflects real life as most of us live it.

 

Once we wash away the sloppy sentimentality we can begin to understand the true meaning of Christmas.  Once the treacle is gone we can begin to understand that the "Christmas story" did not end when the magi returned home.  We can then see the truth of Dag Hammarskjold's words when he wrote:

 

On Christmas Eve, Good Friday

was foretold them

in a trumpet fanfare.  

 

Christmas is not magic.  It is not just for children. It is for all people.  It does not need a celebration of food, booze and consumer insanity.  It has nothing to do with a holiday; it has everything to do with a holy day.

 

We hear of the gold, frankincense, and myrrh, the gifts brought by the magi. Those gifts are heavy with meaning:

Gold:  the symbol of kingship.

Frankincense: the fragrant smoke of which is the symbol of offering to God. 

Myrrh: an embalming oil symbolizing the death that Jesus would undergo for our sakes.

 

We cannot separate the wood of the manger from the wood of the cross.  Christ did not come to Earth as a feel-good Hallmark movie.  Jesus came to earth and lived as part of a violent and heart-wrenching drama. The Light of Christ is meant to illuminate the darkness that dwells within the human heart, if we allow it to do so. The gift of love manifested in the Child Jesus came at great cost.  And because of that cost, much is demanded of us.

______________________________

 The photos are of the creche at the Abbey of Regina Laudis. It is identical to the one on exhibit at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. It is one of two made in Naples dating back to 1720. It has been restored and, in normal times, is on view in a climate controlled barn on the property. I've taken many shots of it over the years. No comment or description necessary on them.

The display is huge, the width of a two-car garage. It depicts all peoples of the world. The workmanship on the garments and the ceramic faces etc. is impeccable. The artist captured a sense of movement. During normal times it is open to the public from Easter to about Epiphany. At the moment, it is closed to the public, as is the rest of the Abbey.

+ Fr. Jack, SJ, MD