The Exaltation of the Cross

Spes unicaToday the Church celebrates the feast of The Exaltation of the Cross. You’ll also hear the feast called, The Triumph of the Cross. Whatever we say, today recalls Saint Helena’s finding the True Cross of the Lord. A gift of the Church is to incrementally teach and live the various mysteries of the faith. And there is a wisdom in this method because we slowly come to incorporate ourselves into the Divine Life.

One of the antiphons for the sacred Liturgy says,

“We should glory in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, for he is our salvation, our life and our resurrection: through him we are saved and made free.”

As Pope Francis said this morning at Mass, this mystery can only be approached from the stance of prayer and tears.

The words spes unica come to mind. I learned these words when I was a student of the Brothers of the Holy Cross. They are the same words that the tradition of the Church indicates with the the phrase used when making the Stations of the Cross: We adore you O Christ and we bless you. Because by your holy cross you have redeemed the world.

So, what do Christians mean in this feast, in exalting an object of Roman torture? The Cross is the key that unlocks true nature of love; the cross shows us that redemption is a serious matter; God’s work of redemption through the passion and death of Jesus on the cross is the greatest work of the Trinity in that death leads to resurrection –death is defeated by death itself– and communion with God is now possible again. Second, the Cross reminds us that God the Father is directly involved with our human history; it is not an abstract event; God knows us and walks with us.

Saint John Chrysostom: learn to honor Christ as he wants honor

John Chrysostom detailToday’s saint of the Eastern Church, Saint John Chrysostom (c. 347-407), a fourth century bishop and Doctor of the Church, known as an eloquent speaker and teacher of the faith hence beings nicknamed the golden tongue of the faith. His homilies, as you will note below, are insightful. Because of the tensions with the political leaders John was exiled several times and ultimately died of exhaustion. Among the churches, Saint John has four different feast days.

One his meditations on the Gospel of Matthew found in the Office of Readings follows:

Would you honor the body of Christ? Do not despise his nakedness; do not honor him here in church clothed in silk vestments and then pass him by unclothed and frozen outside. Remember that he who said, ‘This is my Body’, and made good his words, also said, ‘You saw me hungry and gave me no food’, and, ‘in so far as you did it not to one of these, you did it not to me’. In the first sense the body of Christ does not need clothing but worship from a pure heart. In the second sense it does need clothing and all the care we can give it.

We must learn to be discerning Christians and to honor Christ in the way in which he wants to be honored. It is only right that honor given to anyone should take the form most acceptable to the recipient not to the giver. Peter thought he was honoring the Lord when he tried to stop him washing his feet, but this was far from being genuine homage. So give God the honor he asks for, that is give your money generously to the poor. God has no need of golden vessels but of golden hearts.

I am not saying you should not give golden altar vessels and so on, but I am insisting that nothing can take the place of almsgiving. The Lord will not refuse to accept the first kind of gift but he prefers the second, and quite naturally, because in the first case only the donor benefits, in the second case the poor gets the benefit. The gift of a chalice may be ostentatious; almsgiving is pure benevolence.

What is the use of loading Christ’s table with gold cups while he himself is starving? Feed the hungry and then if you have any money left over, spend it on the altar table. Will you make a cup of gold and without a cup of water? What use is it to adorn the altar with cloth of gold hangings and deny Christ a coat for his back! What would that profit you? Tell me: if you saw someone starving and refused to give him any food but instead spent your money on adorning the altar with gold, would he thank you? Would he not rather be outraged? Or if you saw someone in rags and stiff with cold and then did not give him clothing but set up golden columns in his honor, would he not say that he was being made a fool of and insulted?

Consider that Christ is that tramp who comes in need of a night’s lodging. You turn him away and then start laying rugs on the floor, draping the walls, hanging lamps on silver chains on the columns. Meanwhile the tramp is locked up in prison and you never give him a glance. Well again I am not condemning munificence in these matters. Make your house beautiful by all means but also look after the poor, or rather look after the poor first. No one was ever condemned for not adorning his house, but those who neglect the poor were threatened with hellfire for all eternity and a life of torment with devils. Adorn your house if you will, but do not forget your brother in distress. He is a temple of infinitely greater value.

700th anniversary of the Divine Comedy, Dante’s masterpiece

commedia medalTruly one of the world’s great texts is the Divine Comedy by Dante. Next year and in subsequent years, we’ll hear about the honoring of Dante by bestowing annual award for artistic genius dealing with

The Best Digitally-Produced Rendition of Any Aspect of Dante’s Divine Comedy

The first recipient of the Commedia Medal will be announced on 1 December 2014 and it will be award annually until 2021.

The image of the award is posted here. It’s the creation of Dom Gregory Havill, a Benedictine monk of Portsmouth Abbey and a teacher in the Portsmouth Abbey School.

Dante published the Inferno in 1314, the Purgatorio in 1315 and the Paradiso in 1321. Dante died in 1321. What a terrific way to acknowledge cultural icon by having a Benedictine monk create an artistic piece for an award of excellence and beauty! Benedictines have always had their fingers (and their hearts and minds) in matters of faith, reason,and art to communicate the Divine Mystery.

Interested in the competition, visit the website here. Dr Sebastian Mahfood is organizing the competition.

Remembering Melissa Ann Morrissey

Melissa Ann MorrisseyToday, I had the sad privilege to join my voice with many others in praying for God’s mercy and abundant love on a longtime friend, Melissa Ann Morrissey. The Mass of Christian Burial was offered at our home parish, Our Lady of Pompeii Church, East Haven.

Melissa, 42, died a week ago today of a heart attack after a few days of feeling unwell. She unexpectedly died.

In the hours following the news of Melissa’s death, the 4th neighborhood young person to have died in the last 5 years, had me pondering the meaning of this terrible event. No words can make sense of Melissa’s death; no act of kindness can restore her life. Only the mystery of death coupled with the Divine Mystery can assist and give comfort in the fact that Melissa’s humanity had given meaning, hope and life.

As my mom said several times since the news broke, it’s not supposed to be that parents bury their child. Indeed, I can’t imagine the grief of Joann and Pat and Melissa’s brother Pat. I can only hope that Our Lady of Sorrows will wrap them all in her mantle relating the real experience of a child’s death.

In friendship let us call out to God with the words of the Mass,

Show us, Lord, the immense power of your goodness, that, as we weep for our sister Melissa, we may be confident that she has passed over into your eternal company.

Eternal memory.

Seeing clearly

Seeing clearly is evidently a Christian method for being a mature disciple given today’s gospel reading at Mass (Lk 6:39ff). The images of disciple/teacher revolve around the notion of discipline? What might the New Testament mean with regard to discipline? It means that we have good energy, stability, focus, appreciation for learning, training, the ability to center on wonder and awe, and the capacity of listening. Discipline also means that you test, verify and assent to objective truth.

An atheist gets a response from Pope Francis

As you know Pope Francis wrote a letter to an Italian journalist, Eugenio Scalfari, who claims to be an atheist; the letter was printed in the Italian daily, La Repubblica. To make a generalization, this newspaper is a left-leaning publication. This letter is now widely read by people across the globe because even the rabid anti-Christian people are interested in Pope Francis these days. AND this is a good thing. The money quote for me from the Pope’s letter to Doctor Scalfari is when  the Pope said, “For me, faith began by meeting with Jesus.” The Pope does what we serious Christians ought to be doing, that is, engaging the non-believer, helping the believer who is wavering in faith and doing the hard word ourselves. There is no new doctrine here, there is no new advantage gained in printing this letter; there is, however, great charity and fraternal concern. There is no such thing as a part time Christian. We good witnesses more than teachers in the faith. Will the witnesses present themselves?

BTW, you may want to refresh your memory with Lumen gentium, 16. 

The Pope’s letter follows.

Dear Doctor Scalfari,

Pope points upwardI would cordially like to reply to the letter you addressed to me from the pages of La Repubblica on July 7th, which included a series of personal reflections that then continued to enrich the pages of the daily newspaper on August 7th.

First of all, thank you for the attention with which you have read the Encyclical Lumen fidei.” In fact it was the intention of my beloved predecessor, Benedict XVI, who conceived it and mostly wrote it, and which, with gratitude, I have inherited, to not only confirm the faith in Jesus Christ, for those who already believe, but also to spark a sincere and rigorous dialogue with those who, like you, define themselves as “for many years being a non-believer who is interested and fascinated by the preaching of Jesus of Nazareth.”

Therefore, without a doubt it would seem to be positive, not only for each one of us,  but also for the society in which we live, to stop and speak about a matter as important as faith and which refers to the teachings and the figure of  Jesus.

In particular, I think there are two circumstances which today cause this dialogue to be precious and necessary. This is one of the principal aims of the Second Vatican Council, convened at the behest of John XXIII as well as by the Apostolic Ministry of the Popes who, each with their own sensibility and help have since then continued in the course traced by the Council.

The first circumstance  -that refers to the initial pages of the Encyclical-  derives from the fact that, down in the centuries of modern life, we have seen a paradox: Christian faith, whose novelty and importance in the life of mankind since the beginning has been expressed through the symbol of light, has often been branded as the darkness of superstition which is opposed to the light of reason. Therefore a lack of communication has arisen between the Church and the culture inspired by Christianity on one hand and the modern culture of Enlightenment on the other. The time has come and the Second Vatican has inaugurated the season, for an open dialogue without preconceptions that opens the door to a serious and fruitful meeting.

The second circumstance, for those who attempt to be faithful to the gift of following Jesus in the light of faith, derives from the fact that this dialogue is not a secondary accessory in the existence of those who believe, but is rather an intimate and indispensable expression.  Speaking of which, allow me to quote a very important statement, in my opinion, of the Encyclical:  as the truth witnessed by faith is found in love  -it is stressed-  “it seems clear that faith is not unyielding, but increases in the coexistence which respects the other.  The believer is not arrogant; on the contrary, the truth makes him humble, in the knowledge that rather than making us rigid, it embraces us and possesses us.  Rather than make us rigid, the security of faith makes it possible to speak with everyone” (n.34). This is the spirit of the words I am writing to you.

For me, faith began  by meeting with Jesus. A personal meeting that touched my heart and gave a direction and a new meaning to my existence.  At the same time, however, a meeting that was made possible by the community of faith in which I lived and thanks to which I found access to the intelligence of the Sacred Scriptures, to the new life that comes from Jesus like gushing water through the Sacraments, to fraternity with everyone and to the service to the poor, which is the real image of the Lord. Believe me, without the Church I would never have been able to meet Jesus, in spite of the knowledge that the immense gift of faith is kept in the fragile clay vases of our humanity.

Now, thanks to this personal experience of  faith experienced in Church, I feel comfortable in listening to your questions and together with you, will try to find a way to perhaps walk along a path together.

Please forgive me if I do not follow the arguments proposed by you step by step in your editorial of July 7th. It would seem more fruitful to me  -or more congenial-  to go right to the heart of your considerations.  I will not even go into the manners of explanation followed by the Encyclical, in which you find the lack of a section specifically dedicated to the historical experience of Jesus of Nazareth.

To start, I will only observe that such an analysis is not secondary. In fact, following the logic of the Encyclical, this means paying attention to the meaning of what Jesus said and did and after all, of what Jesus has been and is for us. The Letters of Paul and the Gospel according to John, to which particular reference is made in the Encyclical, are in fact created on the solid foundation of the Messianic Ministry of Jesus of Nazareth which culminated in the pentecost of death and resurrection.

Therefore, I would say that we must face Jesus in the concrete roughness of his story, as above all told to us by the most ancient of the Gospels, the one according to Mark. We then find that the “scandal” which the word and practices of Jesus provoke around him derive from his extraordinary “authority”:  a word that has been certified since the Gospel according to Mark, but that is not easy to translate well into Italian. The Greek word is “exousia,” which literally means “comes from being” what one is. It is not something exterior or forced, but rather something that emanates from the inside and imposes itself. Actually Jesus, amazes and innovates starting from, he himself says this, his relationship with God, called familiarly Abbà, who gives him this “authority” so that he uses it in favor of men.

So Jesus preaches “like someone who has authority,” he heals, calls his disciples to follow him, forgives… things that, in the Old Testament, belong to God and only God.  The question that most frequently is repeated in the Gospel according to Mark: “Who is he who…?”, and which regards the identity of Jesus, arises from the recognition of an authority that differs from that of the world, an authority that aims not at exercising power over others, but rather serving them, giving them freedom and the fullness of life. And this is done to the point of staking his own life, up to experiencing misunderstanding, betrayal, refusal, until he is condemned to die, left abandoned on the cross. But Jesus remained faithful to God, up to his death.

And it is then -as the Roman centurion exclaims, in the Gospel according to Mark- that Jesus is paradoxically revealed as the Son of God. Son of a God that is love and that wants, with all of himself that man, every man, discovers himself and also lives like his real son.  For Christian faith this is certified by the fact that Jesus rose from the dead:  not to be triumphant over those who refused him, but to certify that the love of God is stronger than death, the forgiveness of God is stronger than any sin and that it is worthwhile to give one’s life, to the end, to witness this great gift.

Christian faith believes in this:  that Jesus is the Son of God who came to give his life to open the way to love for everyone.  Therefore there is a reason, dear Dr. Scalfari, when you see the incarnation of the Son of God as the pivot of Christian faith. Tertullian wrote “caro cardo salutis,” the flesh (of Christ) is the pivot of salvation. Because the incarnation, that is the fact that the Son of God has come into our flesh and has shared joy and pain, victories and defeat of our existence, up to the cry of the cross, living each event with love and in the faith of Abbà, shows the incredible love that God has for every man, the priceless value that he acknowledges. For this reason, each of us is called to accept the view and the choice of love made by Jesus, become a part of his way of being, thinking and acting.  This is faith, with all the expressions that have been dutifully described in the Encyclical [Lumen fidei].

* * *

In your editorial of July 7th, you also asked me how to understand the originality of Christian Faith as it is actually based on the incarnation of the Son of God, with respect to other religions that instead pivot on the absolute transcendency of God.

I would say that the originality lies in the fact that faith allows us to participate, in Jesus, in the relationship that He has with God who is Abbà and, because of this, in the relationship that He has with all other men, including enemies, in the sign of love. In other words, the children of Jesus, as Christian faith presents us, are not revealed to mark an insuperable separation between Jesus and all the others:  but to tell us that, in Him, we are all called to be the children of the only Father and brothers with each other. The uniqueness of Jesus is for communication not for exclusion.

Of course a consequence of this is also  – and this is not a minor thing-  that distinction between the religious sphere which is confirmed by  “Give to God what belongs to God and give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar,” distinctly confirmed  by Jesus and upon which, the history  of the Western world was built. In fact, the Church is called to sow the yeast and salt of the Gospel, and that is the love and mercy of God which reaches all men, indicating the definitive destination of our destiny in the hereafter, while civil and political society has the difficult duty of expressing and embodying a life that is evermore human in justice, in solidarity, in law and in peace. For those who experience the Christian faith, this does not mean escaping from the world or looking for any kind of supremacy, but being at the service of mankind, of all mankind and all men, starting from the periphery of history and keeping the sense of hope alive, striving for goodness in spite of everything and always looking beyond.

At the end of your first article, you also ask me what to say to our Jewish brothers about the promise God made to them:  Has this been forgotten? And this  -believe me-  is a question that radically involves us as Christians because, with the help of God, starting  from the Second Vatican Council, we have discovered that the Jewish people are still, for us, the holy root from which Jesus originated. I too, in the friendship I have cultivated in all of these long years with our Jewish brothers, in Argentina, many times while praying have asked God, especially when I remember the terrible experience of the Shoah. What I can say, with the Apostle Paul, is that God has never stopped believing in the alliance made with Israel and that, through the terrible trials of these past centuries, the Jews have kept their faith in God. And for this, we will never be grateful enough to them, as the Church, but also as humanity at large. Persevering in their faith in God and in the alliance, they remind everyone, even us as Christians that we are always awaiting, the return of the Lord and that therefore we must remain open to Him and never take refuge in what we have already achieved.

As for the three questions you asked me in  the article of August 7th.  It would seem to me that in the first two, what you are most interested in is understanding the Church’s attitude towards those who do not share faith in Jesus. First of all, you ask if the God of the Christians forgives those who do not believe and do not seek faith. Given that  -and this is fundamental-  God’s mercy has no limits if he who asks for mercy does so in contrition and with a sincere heart, the issue for those who do not believe in God is in obeying their own conscience. In fact, listening and obeying it, means deciding about what is perceived to be good or to be evil. The goodness or the wickedness of our behavior depends on this decision.

Second of all, you ask if the thought, according to which no absolute exists and therefore there is no absolute truth, but only a series of relative and subjective truths is a mistake or a sin. To start, I would not speak about, not even for those who believe, an “absolute” truth, in the sense that absolute is something detached, something lacking any relationship. Now, the truth is a relationship! This is so true that each of us sees the truth and expresses it, starting from oneself: from one’s history and culture, from the situation in which one lives, etc. This does not mean that the truth is variable and subjective. It means that it is given to us only as a way and a life. Was it not Jesus himself who said: “I am the way, the truth, the life”?  In other words, the truth is one with love, it requires humbleness and the willingness to be sought, listened to and expressed. Therefore we must understand the terms well and perhaps, in order to avoid the over simplification of absolute contraposition, reformulate the question.  I think that today this is absolutely necessary in order to have a serene and constructive dialogue which I hoped for from the beginning.

In the last question you ask if, with the disappearance of man on earth, the thoughts able to think about God will also disappear.  Of course, the greatness of mankind lies in being able to think about God.  That is in being able to experience a conscious and responsible relationship with Him.  But the relationship lies between two realities.  God  –  this is my thought and this is my experience, but how many, yesterday and today, share it!  –   is not an idea, even if very sublime, the result of the thoughts of mankind.  God is a reality with a capital “R”. Jesus reveals this to us  – and he experiences the relationship with Him –  as a Father of infinite goodness and mercy.  God therefore does not depend on our thoughts. On the other hand, even when the end of life for man on earth should come  –  and for Christian faith, in any case the world as we know it now is destined to end, man will not finish existing and, in a way that we do not know, nor will the universe created with him. The Scriptures speak of “new skies and a new land” and confirm that, in the end, at the time and place that it is beyond our knowledge, but which we patiently and desirously await, God will be “everything in everyone.”

Dear Dr. Scalfari, here I end these reflections of mine, prompted by what you wanted to tell and ask me.  Please accept this as a tentative and temporary reply, but sincere and hopeful, together with the invitation that I made to walk a part of the path together. Believe me, in spite of its slowness, the infidelity, the mistakes and the sins that may have and may still be committed by those who compose the Church, it has no other sense and aim if not to live and witness Jesus:  He has been sent by Abbà “to bring good news to the poor…to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor” (Luke 4: 18-19).

With brotherly love,

Francesco

(Translated from Italian by Sara Cecere)

Endogamous discrimination in the Syro-Malabar Church?

Many times when Catholics think of inculturation they mis-identify the term by saying that the Church just needs to lighten up its rule and fit to the local culture. Others will locate the philosophical and missionary effort inculturation in the liturgical sphere. Inculturation matters are a very contentious matter that gets people in crosshairs. Adapting or in some way making changes to a system  of living so that you can “fit in” is an external fact and is not the method the Catholic Church uses to bring Lord’s Good News to other peoples, that is, those who outside the European and North American context. The Catholic Church tends to focus on the interior life of the person; externals are secondary and may change in time.

There is, however, a more precise way of understanding inculturation deals with adaption in saying that it is “the incarnation of the Gospel in autonomous cultures and at the same time the introduction of these cultures into the life of the church” (John Paul II’s 1985 encyclical Slavorum Apostoli, or his address to the Pontifical Council for Culture plenary assembly on Jan. 17, 1987). It is also understood that inculturation is, as John Paul II said in his 1990 encyclical Redemptoris Missio, “an intimate transformation of the authentic cultural values by their integration into Christianity and the implantation of Christianity into different human cultures.”

As Redemptoris Missio said, “By inculturation, the church makes the Gospel incarnate in different cultures and at the same time introduces peoples, together with their cultures, into her own community” (52). And yet the Church speaks of a interpenetration of the Gospel into a given, that is, a particular socio-cultural context which  “gives inner fruitfulness to the spiritual qualities and gifts proper to each people …, strengthens these qualities, perfects them and restores them in Christ” (Gaudium et spes, 58). More on this issue here.

This is a long way to introduce the sticky issue of Indian Catholics retaining their customs of endogamy and not truly inculturating the Gospel. Judge for yourself: do the adherents to Knanaya customs cause a philosophical and theological problem here is that if we use the definitions noted above, or are we being “too Western” in wanting others to conform to a radical way of thinking which may weaken a culture? How would Christ judge the situation? Who bears the standard? How are the demands of the gospel really lived in this Christian caste? Who has ultimate authority, the Syro-Malabar Catholic Church, the Holy See, or the persons involved? Can endogamy be tolerated for a greater good?

The story of alleged discrimination among the Syro-Malabars can be read here.

Is Jesus too demanding?

Today’s gospel (Lk 6: 27ff) might well be the among the most challenging (difficult?) teachings of Jesus. Discipleship with Jesus is not easy for the average person; at least for the average person who doesn’t have the grace needed to live according to his command. And hearing from saints like Benedict that the sun ought not set if angry feelings persist, isn’t any consolation on some days.

The type of judging and condemning that the Evangelist Luke speaks of means, “Stop using yourself as the measure of things.” Or, “Stop determining another’s activities/agenda.” Or, “Stop acting like a pharisee,” against a fellow Christian (or family member or friend. Ok.

Not sure if you are similar, but loving an enemy is not easy for me. It is, though, the thing Jesus has commanded me to do. A Benedictine friend of mine frequently says, “Jesus told me to love that person, but I don’t have to like her.” Right, love is not understood as a sentiment; loves is having concern for another’s destiny, that is, heaven. Life as a Christian is knowing that the journey we walk is just that, a process. And, I am not finished yet.

A concrete example may be the former Yale seminarian of 35 years ago who wanted to give good example of loving an enemy when he offered a grave, next to his mother in Hamden, CT, to the Mr Tsarnaev, one of the two Boston bombers killed. His offer was roundly rejected. Loving your enemies is not socially acceptable.

Anglican-Orthodox Dialogue in Agreement on the nature of Marriage: between a man and a woman

This morning I saw this headline and eye-catching paragraph on the Pro Ecclesia site:

The International Commission for Anglican-Orthodox Dialogue Just Came to an Important Agreement on the nature of Marriage:

Continuing its focus on Christian anthropology, specifically what it means to be a human person created in the image and likeness of God, the Commission devoted significant efforts to the review of the draft of its joint theological work on the subject. Reflection on the theology of the glory of creation and the uniqueness of humanity in the created order drew the Commission into deep discussion. Further, the Commission worked at length on the specific expression of image and likeness, considering the thematic components of the subject, with particular attention to its scriptural basis. As part of the discussion of human relationships, the Commission observed that it is the teaching of all the Orthodox and Anglican churches that marriage is between a man and a woman.

The first part doesn’t surprise me as much as the last sentence: that the Anglican churches understand marriage to be between a man and woman. The Anglican communion is not known for its consistent and coherent formulation of a Christian doctrine these days. That is, they tend to be at odds with mainstream Christianity (not only Catholics, but some Lutheran, Evangelical and Baptist communities). Certainly the Anglican openness to allow for contraception and in many places gay marriage and women’s ordination raises the question of what is happening herein.

Read the entire press release here.

The desire of the joint commission which met 4-11 September 2013 at the invitation of Serbian Orthodox Patriarch Irinej was to study the nature of man and woman being made in God’s image and likeness from a perspective of theological anthropology. This is a weighty and yet necessary conversation that needs to be investigated with a telos in mind, God’s telos, that is. Knowing particulars of what it means to a human person can’t be overlooked, dismissed or rearranged because of ideology.

Seductive philosophy will not lead to Christ

Duccio Washing the feetWe have a vocation, we are called by the Lord, to be in His service. Some are married and others are consecrated religious, some are single and others are priests, some are professors and others are store managers and machinists and domestic engineers. Some are film makers, others write music. We all have a personal gift (a charism) for God’s service and for personal sanctification. Jesus calls all people.

In the first reading we hear today from Paul’s letter to the Colossians has this first paragraph:

As you received Christ Jesus the Lord, walk in him, rooted in him and built upon him and established in the faith as you were taught, abounding in thanksgiving. See to it that no one captivate you with an empty, seductive philosophy according to the tradition of men, according to the elemental powers of the world and not according to Christ.

Several weeks ago the readings at Mass spoke of being disciplined, that is, instructed, taught, having a solid formation, as children are (at least that’s the hope!), in the ways of Christ and the Good News He proclaimed. And for several days following there were indications in Scripture that having a solid formation, having the needed discipline in Christ would lead you to everything promised by God: the hundredfold, eternal life, peace, happiness, etc. Sadly, too often we dismiss the advice to be disciplined in the Lord.

Too much of what society gives today is competing advice: do your own thing, “do it your own way,” what matters is what you think and feel. The exclusive use of secular philosophy will not open the heart and mind to God; Kant, Descartes, Schleiermacher, Mills, Hobbes, Heidegger, and Caputo will not lead to your personal redemption. Therapeutic attitude displaces heavenly teaching. Don’t get me wrong, therapy is crucial to better health, but it never replaces God’s revelation. Saint Paul and the whole of sacred Scripture doesn’t adhere to a secular line of thinking. The Apostle to the Gentiles speaks of testing, verifying and experimenting with what’s given by God.

When we verify the Truth we meet God. When we live according to His plan we have happiness. So, the exhortation given in today’s first reading: be skeptical about what you hear from secular leaders because their teaching may not lead you to heaven. Test everything, says Paul in another place.

Good, solid, disciplined adult faith formation is crucial to our life in Jesus Christ. Beg for this in your parish community.

I think we have to ask ourselves, Do we, as the Rule of Benedict instructs, prefer nothing to the love of Christ? Do we know that Jesus, the Son of God, wants our happiness? Do we expect everything from Jesus Christ?

The gospel reading from Luke (6:12-13) tells us that Jesus “called his disciples to himself, and from them he chose Twelve, whom he also named Apostles….” Do you know the names of the 12? Are you aware that the 12 are a different category that the category of apostles and disciples? Do we know how to connect the dots between what happens here and the Last Supper, the foundation of the Church, and the proclamation of the Kingdom? Do you see yourself as called by the Lord? What is your particular charism for the good of the Church?

We know that being called, that is, having been given a vocation by the Lord is not insignificant. Not to follow that vocation may very well to rejecting a gift God has given. Consider for a moment how you have, or are in the process of discovering the pathway to love God through your personal gifts? Have you discovered through prayer to God and made an offering of yourself to the people today by the witness of your life, by your preaching and by a substantial mission revealed in contemplation?

Pope Benedict XVI in a Wednesday Audience on 15 March 2006 said,

With their very own existence, the Twelve -called from different backgrounds- become an appeal for all of Israel to convert and allow herself to be gathered into the new covenant, complete and perfect fulfillment of the ancient one. The fact that he entrusted to his Apostles, during the Last Supper and before his Passion, the duty to celebrate his Pasch, demonstrates how Jesus wished to transfer to the entire community, in the person of its heads, the mandate to be a sign and instrument in history of the eschatological gathering begun by him. In a certain sense we can say that the Last Supper itself is the act of foundation of the Church, because he gives himself and thus creates a new community, a community united in communion with himself.