What happens when we complete our Lenten Journey this year? We are called to make some changes, to live a new way, and try to avoid returning to old sinful ways. Christ got is so right during his agony in the garden when He said “Watch and pray that you may not undergo the test. The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak. (Mt 26:41 & Mk 14:38)”

Even St Paul recognized how difficult this faith journey will be. He acknowledges his own propensity to sin and fall short, even after his dramatic conversion experience. He sums up his faith journey and his struggles in part in Romans 7: 14-25. He says in Verse 15: What I do, I do not understand. For I do not do what I want, but I do what I hate. He goes on to state in verses 18-20: For I know that good does not dwell in me, that is, in my flesh. The willing is ready at hand but doing the good is not. For I do not do the good I want, but I do the evil I do not want. Now if (I) do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me.

Our examination of our lives should be an ongoing process. To aid in that I want to share some resources with you. The first is from a friend who finds the following helpful.

MEDITATION OF THE DAY
Evils From Within

Nothing makes more visible how much he hates sin than what he has done to destroy it. Is it not too much to say that he wanted to descend from heaven and die himself to wipe it out?. . . The Son of God has hated sin as far as to want to die in order to destroy it. . . .
I speak of the faults that Christians who live in half-heartedness are accustomed to commit deliberately and of which they make for themselves habits that they hardly bother to correct. Such are the minor angers, the minor swipes, the words of contempt, the slight gossip, the mockery, the lies, the irreverence and the voluntary distractions in prayer, the desire to please people, the humorous talk that can produce nasty thoughts, the curious looks, too great a love of neatness in dress, laziness, the minor overindulgence in drinking and in eating, the negligence in things that pertain to duty, as in the instruction of servants and in the education of children; in a word, all sins of whatever kind they may be, when the issue is slight or there is more lack of consideration than malice. I say. . .that these faults, above all when they are actual–when one often falls back into them, when one neglects to mend one’s ways from them, when one counts them for nothing–I say that these are the greatest evils.
Of many reasons that present themselves in order to prove this, I choose not but one sole of them, which will be the whole subject of our discussion. The little sins are great evils because they are great dispositions to the greatest sins; they are all mortal in this sense that they lead to the death of the soul, that they dispose to mortal sin; they dispose to it, both from the side of God whose graces they deplete, and from the side of the individual whose forces they exhaust. ———-Saint Claude La Colombiere

http://www.worldwisdom.com/public/viewpdf/default.aspx?article-title=The_Spiritual_Direction_of_Saint_Claude_de_la_Colombiere.pdf

That is why it is so important to go to the Sacrament of Reconciliation regularly. Venal sins are like an infection. If left untreated they can grow into something far worse.
While there are many guides even apps for the examination of conscience, I thought I would share this one found on pages 10 & 11 of, Kingdom of Happiness; Living the Beatitudes in Everyday Life, by Fr. Jeffery Kirby, STD.

• Do I acknowledge that my happiness comes from God and His blessings?
• Do I let myself fully understand how great is my need for God and His grace in my life?
• Do I actively participate in Mass and seek ways to revere God and his majesty?
• Am I ungrateful to God and those around me?
• Do I blame situations or other people for my misery?
• Do I accept sufferings as opportunities to mature and deepen in my desire for happiness?
• Do I believe myself to be better than or superior to others?
• Do I engage in flattery or gossip?
• Do I overspend, live beyond my means, cheat others, or live in a needlessly frugal way with myself or others?
• Am I temperate in my use of food, alcohol, medication. And the treatment of my body, or the body of another?

And last but not least, there are the Ten Commandments.
There are many guides available from many sources which are based on the commandments. Do not hesitate to avail yourself of one of these.

http://www.divinemercysunday.com/pdf/ConfessionGuide2.pdf

http://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/sacraments-and-sacramentals/penance/upload/Bulletin-Insert-Penance-ENG.pdf

Have a blessed Lent.

In Lent as we reflect on our lives and how to improve our relationship with the Blessed Trinity, we also reflect on our relationship with others.   This article is in the most recent issue of Homiletics and Pastoral Review.  I think it is a good read and is definitely thought provoking.  It provides some good insights and helpful things for dealing with anger.  I admit that when I read the article several points struck home with me.

Having a short temper especially under certain circumstances has been one the thorns in my side, my angel of Satan that gets control of me sometimes.

Understanding Anger in Those We Care For
FEBRUARY 24, 2018 BY DR. JOHN BURI
A friend of mine conducted an informal survey of priests in the Archdiocese of Minneapolis and St. Paul to find out which sins were heard most often in the sacrament of reconciliation. No surprise that #1 transgression for men involved sexual immorality—pornography, masturbation, lustful thoughts, etc. [It should be noted here that several priests commented that the confession of sexual sins has also been increasing for women.] The #2 transgression confessed by men, and the most-frequently confessed sin for women, was anger.
In many ways, this should not be surprising. As one marriage therapist stated, “Marriage and family living generate in normal people more anger than those people experience in any other social situations in which they find themselves.” In fact, we know that anger is one of the primary reasons why couples seek marriage counseling. Furthermore, research has revealed that parental anger is common—the authors of one study summarized their findings this way: “Two-thirds of parents reported feeling anger to the point of shouting or screaming at their children an average of five times per week…and the majority had an intense anger episode nearly every day.” Family is meant to be a place of affection, trust, and emotional support, but unfortunately, angry spouses and angry parents often create emotional and psychological turmoil for those they love.
Obviously, many individuals are inclined to protest: “I’m not an angry person. I’m just like everyone else—I might get mad sometimes, but I’m not an angry person.” Admittedly, there’s some truth to such protests—it is the rare individual who is angry all the time. But I would like to make a case (by way of personal anecdote) that we should strive to eliminate virtually all angry outbursts. My wife and I have six children (five sons and a daughter). I grew up in an alcoholic (and at times abusive) home, and as a result, I had some “anger issues” as a young man. I had worked diligently to eliminate anger in my life before we had any children, and I had made quite a bit of progress, but on Christmas Eve (when our daughter was about 7 or 8 years old) I messed up. I exhibited an angry outburst, and I regret it to this day. All our daughter was trying to do is be helpful, but she slipped and ended up breaking several bowls filled with our dessert for the Christmas Eve meal. I got mad. Needless to say, I ruined her Christmas. I apologized and told her I was sorry, but the damage had been done.
As I reflected on that unfortunate event, the words of Gregory the Great—in his insightful book titled, Pastoral Care—came streaming into my consciousness:
“Anger drives the mind where it does not wish to go. In its agitated state, it acts as if it did not know what it was doing, only to feel regret when later it realizes what it has done… When [the angry] do not resist their turbulence, they upset the good they may have done when the mind was tranquil, and by their sudden impulse they undo what with protracted labor they have built up” (p. 107).
Most parents work diligently to provide the nurturance, love, and care that their children need, but as I painfully learned that Christmas Eve, one angry outburst can undo so much that was accomplished through years of arduous and painstaking effort.
Owning Anger
Over the years, as I have gotten to know numerous couples and individuals who have struggled with anger, I have noticed that most people are hesitant to admit it when they’re angry. Instead, most people prefer to use terms like “annoyed, irritated, exasperated, aggravated, upset, or disturbed” (to name a few). One man I know would get “irritated” with his children, “annoyed” by his co-workers, “exasperated” with his wife, and “perturbed” with other drivers, but he insisted that he was never “angry.” My personal favorite early in our marriage was “miffed.” My wife would gently say, “Dear, you seem angry that I said that. Are you angry?” My typical response was: “I’m not angry. I’m a little miffed right now, but I’m not angry.” A big problem with this lack of anger admission is that if we don’t identify anger for what it really is, and own it, then there is very little hope that anger in our lives will ever change.
Why would I ever repent for “miffed-ness?” The evidence is clear—if we want the destructive effects of anger in families to decrease, then we are going to have to help those we care for (and about) to acknowledge, and to take ownership of, the reality of anger in their lives.
The Anatomy of Anger
When it comes to understanding the anatomy of anger, most experts agree: a response of anger is precipitated by adrenocortical arousal. The firing of the amygdala and the adrenal glands, with their accompanying cascade of catecholamines into the bloodstream, set the stage for anger. It is these neural and hormonal activities that create the arousal we experience when we are angry. However, arousal alone does not allow us to distinguish one emotion from another—arousal alone does not explain why we get angry.
Years ago, I decided to take my wife on a surprise dinner date. I knew she had a meeting in the late afternoon at a location near campus, so I figured I would make it special by hiding on the floor in the back seat of her car. It was a beautiful evening, and just as the sun was setting, my wife came out and got into the car. As she started the engine, I suddenly jumped up from the floor of the back seat. As you might guess, my wife experienced adrenocortical arousal—and with it, a flood of emotions. First, she experienced fear. Then, once she realized that it was me in the back seat [rather than some (other) deranged man], she experienced anger. Ultimately, once she was able to appreciate all that I had done to make the evening special, she experienced joy.
Arousal is an important part of our emotions, but arousal alone is not sufficient to signal any specific emotion. We also need our thoughts—that self-talk we use to explain each event as it is happening. This inner dialogue allows us to make emotional sense of each situation as it is happening. As the cognitive therapist, Aaron Beck, put it: “It is not a situation, in and of itself, that determines what people feel, but rather, how they construe a situation.” When it comes to the emotion of anger, it is often our thoughts of injustice that give rise to an angry response. In other words, when we interpret an event as unjust or unfair, then anger is most often going to be the emotional outcome.
Injustice and Anger in the Family
Sometimes anger arousal in the family context is in response to a true injustice—for example, infidelity, verbal or physical abuse, repeated instances of dishonesty and deceit, etc. In such instances, anger is an appropriate and justified response—after all, an injustice has occurred. Such instances, however, will not be the primary focus of this article. Let me simply say that in those situations in which anger is truly justified, Aristotle’s apt advice still applies: “Anybody can become angry—that is easy, but to be angry with the right person, and to the right degree, and for the right purpose, and in the right way—that is not easy.”
Unfortunately, anger often erupts within families when such instances of overt injustice have not taken place. Certainly, the person experiencing the anger feels justified in his or her interpretation of injustice, but it is arguable the case that often such an interpretation is not supported by reality. Over the years, as I spent many hours with couples and individuals discussing their angry reactions to various circumstances, I slowly began to identify six different thought patterns that frequently serve to activate anger. Each of these six thought patterns is unique in terms of triggering events that typically give rise to anger. Furthermore, each of these six is unique in terms of the thought patterns involved. However, what all of them have in common is this—they all have their origin in a personal sense that an injustice has been done.
In the remainder of this article, I would like to explain each of these six patterns of thought that give rise to anger. As we cover each one, consider how families often provide a rich environment for these thought patterns to be activated. Furthermore, as we discuss each one, I would encourage you to consider the extent to which each of them entails an actual injustice that has occurred.
1. Desire for Ease / Comfort
I was giving a talk to a group of about 150 Christian men, and during the talk, I used the analogy of a barge to describe a good man—for example, a barge doesn’t try to be flashy, it is patient, it’s never in a rush, and its function is to carry a lot. A couple days after the talk, I received an e-mail from a man who wanted to have breakfast. I had known this man for years, and we had even in the past discussed his anger issues, but a new realization occurred to him during this talk—he understood the source of his anger in a new way. What he told me is that he has never had any interest in living as a barge, but instead, his view for his life has been that of a cruise ship. He had come to realize during this talk that anytime his wife, or one of his children, did something that disrupted his peaceful cruise, he responded with anger. That was the primary source of his anger—his desire for ease and comfort.
How often does a mere inconvenience set a person off? Think of all the inconveniences that occur in a typical day in a family—the spilled milk, the toys strewn around the house, a missing remote, the bike left out in the rain, the ball accidentally thrown through the window, the fender bender that needs repair, the bowl that breaks as it’s accidentally dropped on the floor, the shoes left by the front door that you trip over, the dirty socks left next to the hamper, the misplaced keys, the lost purse. Mere inconveniences.
How often do people get angry with a slow computer, or a jammed copy machine, or an MP3 player that has stopped working, or a traffic jam, or a car that won’t start? Mere inconveniences. And what about all those repetitive, routine, and mundane tasks that are an inherent part of family living—vacuuming, dusting, garbage, mowing the lawn, dirty diapers, dirty dishes, dirty bathrooms, etc.? Mere inconveniences.
Even a brief trip to the grocery store provides numerous opportunities for anger: the grocery cart has a defective wheel, someone leaves their cart in the middle of the aisle, the lines are long because there aren’t enough checkers, the person in the express lane in front of you has too many items, someone pays with a check. Mere inconveniences.
When we get angry, it’s because of a perceived sense of injustice. When an inconvenience occurs, our self-talk essentially says:
• “Why is this happening to me?
• I don’t want to have to deal with this.
• This isn’t fair.”
These automatic thoughts trigger the anger, but underneath these thoughts is a desire for ease and comfort—the thought pattern that life should be easy (or at least, easier than it is). When we believe that a life without hassles is what we deserve, then we are primed for anger—the everyday frustrations, annoyances, and setbacks are sure to set us off.
One additional clarifying point about inconvenience-based anger. Many people who get angry at mere inconveniences are inclined to use exaggerated terms to describe an event—for example:
• “This situation is awful.
• The circumstances of my life are terrible.
• I can’t take it anymore.”
The use of such “awful-izing” and “terrible-izing” terms act as kindling, ready to be ignited by an inconvenience. It is true that hassles are inconvenient (and, at times, even unfortunate), but they are normally not horrible.
2. My Way
Children will sometimes get angry when they don’t get what they want. Whether it’s a cookie, or one more cartoon show, or the desire to stay up later, they essentially want what they want, and if they don’t get it, it’s as if an injustice has been done. The same sort of thing can happen with us as adults. We can get a sense of entitlement—“I am entitled to a laid-back, relaxing evening”—and then, when a man’s wife has made other plans for the two of them, or his children need help with their homework, or the water heater goes out, he can go into a hissy-fit. Or imagine a night on which a husband has been anticipating making love with his wife, only to find out that she has had an especially difficult day—often such a situation will be met with a response of anger. As the English writer, Samuel Johnson, put it:
“Justice is my being allowed to do whatever I like. Injustice is whatever prevents my doing so.”
In fact, research evidence has indicated that this sense of entitlement is at the core of people’s anger with God. As we have all experienced, there are times in life when things don’t go the way we think they should, or the way we expect them to, or the way we want them to—for entitled individuals, such circumstances serve as a signal that an injustice has been done, and anger toward God will often follow.
There is another way in which this “My Way” pattern of thinking can trigger the onset of angry outbursts. This can be seen among those individuals who believe that they know what is best. Their thinking is sprinkled with “shoulds,” “oughts,” and “musts.” They are certain that they know how you should conduct yourself / how others ought to behave / how things must be done:
• “When I get home, you should give me time to unwind before you add one more thing to my day.”
• “People ought to get their children to behave in church.”
• “When you leave a room, you must turn off the lights.”
Such individuals essentially believe that they have a unique market on the truth, and if people in their life (e.g., their spouse, their children, people at work) would simply listen to them, then everything would go so much better. They really do believe that they know what is right, and when people contradict them / when people don’t listen to them / when people don’t do it the way they want it done, then obviously an injustice has been done.
3. Pride Is Pricked
When I was 40, I was coaching a junior high basketball team. In one of the games (in fact, a game on my birthday), my team was significantly on the short end of the score. As my frustration grew, I began to complain to the referees about the job they were doing, and as I did, one of the refs came over and said to me (in no uncertain terms):
• “Coach, you need to shut up. Now, get over there to your bench, sit down, and shut your mouth.”
Needless to say, I was upset, and as I got up in his face, I proceeded to respond:
• “If we are ever going to have a civilized society, then we are going to have to learn how to speak to each other in more civilized ways.
And I think we need to start with you. The way you spoke to me is not appropriate—that is no way for one human being to speak to another.”
I got a technical foul—in fact, by the time it was over, I had gotten two technical fouls, and I was summarily kicked out of the game. (Yes, I was a university professor and chair of the psychology department, and I got thrown out of a junior high basketball game—ouch!)
After the game, it took me a little while to settle down, and as I began to reflect on my response to this referee, I realized that at the heart of the issue was not that this “is no way for one human being to speak to another,” but rather, “this is no way for you to speak to me.” My pride had been pricked.
Unfortunately, this is a common trigger for anger in the family. Imagine the teenage son who questions his father’s authority, and receives this reaction from his dad:
• “How dare you speak to me like that! Who do you think you are—challenging me that way? You have no idea who you’re dealing with, do you? Well, I’ll show you who’s boss around here!”
Or imagine the anger-activating thoughts that can occur during a heated discussion between a husband and a wife:
• “She has no right to talk to me that way!”
• “How could he say that to me—I don’t deserve to be treated like that!” “Who put her in charge? I don’t have to answer to her!”
• “I’m done taking his crap. I’ll show him—I’m just not going to take it anymore!”
• “If she interrupts me one more time, I swear, I’m gonna blow!”
In each of these instances, pride has been pricked—and anger has been triggered. While all the instances of anger that we have discussed thus far involve self-love, it is this type of anger that is especially rooted in our love of self. And as you might guess, this type of anger—an anger that is the result of pricked pride—is very resistant to change. When people feel disrespected or demeaned, it seems obvious to them that an injustice has been done, and therefore it seems only reasonable that a response of anger is warranted: “What else are you supposed to feel when someone disses you like that?”
Admittedly, there are cases in which something has been said (or done) that is truly unjust. However, when it comes to pride, we are especially inclined to interpret situations in our favor. As a result, when pride might be involved, special care is needed as we perceive, interpret, and respond to events in our lives.
4. Order / Peace
A woman I know, Lisann, grew up in a home that was in perpetual disarray. As she described it:
“Clothes were lying around everywhere, people were always late, the kitchen was a clutter of half-eaten food and dirty dishes left in the sink, the living room was a labyrinth of objects left where someone had dropped them, and the bathroom was a jumbled array of body wash, tooth paste, shampoos, hair treatments, and make-up. Everywhere I turned, all I found was disorder and chaos.”
Lisann was always quick to add (lest I get the wrong impression), “It was not that my family was in any way neglectful—it was actually a very loving home to grow up in—but it was just the continual clutter and disorganization that got to me.”
I have known several women (and men), like Lisann, who have grown up in what they have described as a chaotic environment. Many of these individuals have expressed to me their longing for a sense of contentment and peace. They have felt that because of the disorder that seemed to envelop their lives when they were young, they have been deprived of a calm and tranquility that they feel should have been theirs. I found that for many of these individuals, they came to associate peace with order—in other words, they came to believe that if they could get order in their lives, then they would find the peace for which they so badly longed.
I have affectionately nick-named such individuals “Ducks-in-a-Row” people—they work diligently to get all their ducks in a row and to keep them there. If all the ducks are in a row, then there will be order, and if there is order, then there will be peace. The problem is that in families (as well as in life), “ducks” are often inclined to get out of line—children don’t always keep their bedrooms neat and tidy, a wife may be negligent in getting out of the office on time, and ends up being late for dinner, children might leave the peanut butter and jelly on the counter, or a husband might leave his dirty dishes next to the couch when he heads off to bed.
One of the ways in which you can get the “ducks” back in line—and establish order—is with anger. If you simply get angry enough, people will get back in line, and the sense of injustice will be rectified, and what you believe is your rightful sense of peace will once again be restored.
There is a group of people who are especially vulnerable to “Ducks-in-a-Row” anger. They are the ones who have a “disease to please”—they struggle to say “no” to the many requests for their time and energy. Whether it’s because they want others’ approval, or they don’t want people to be disappointed in them, or they feel a need to earn affection, such individuals have not learned to set appropriate boundaries. As a result, they often feel out of control in the face of the many demands that are vying for their time and energy. “This isn’t fair” is their lament, as they try to restore a sense of order to their lives. Unfortunately, such situations often emerge from a chaos of our own making.
5. Emotional Bruises
Imagine that someone begins to pound on your thigh with his or her fist. Imagine that this happens not just a few times, but a hundred times, and as it continues, the result is a massive black and blue bruise covering much of your thigh. Reasonably, this bruise would be very sensitive to the touch, so much so that even an accidental hit could trigger a very strong reaction. Emotionally speaking, this is exactly what has happened to innumerable people during their lives.
Mitch was a man who longed for his father’s approval and affirmation. In Mitch’s words, “No matter what I did, I could never seem to please my father. He was always criticizing me for one thing or another. Whenever I did my chores around the house, he never seemed to appreciate what I did well—all he could do was point out the ways in which I could have done things better. I was a good athlete and a good student, but it never seemed to be good enough for him. Once when my report card showed five As and one A-, he wanted to know why I didn’t get straight A’s.”
Mitch ended up with a “bruise”—he never felt good enough, never felt appreciated—and the resulting emotional sensitivity nearly destroyed his marriage. Mitch regularly over-reacted to situations in his marriage—for example, each time Mitch’s wife would suggest that he do something differently, it was as if she had hauled off and clobbered him. Understandably, given his emotional bruise, Mitch would react with anger. First, he would lash out in an angry tirade, and then he would be cold and distant for the next several days. As a result, Mitch and his wife found themselves in a troubled marriage that alternated between superficial conversations and periods of angry reactions.
For most people, it is in our most intimate relationships (especially family) that we hope to feel respected, appreciated, cared for, good enough, safe, and lovable. It is here that we hope to have these needs fulfilled, and, therefore, we are inclined to open ourselves to another in new ways. Unfortunately, since there are no perfect partners (even though we sometimes idealize them), the presence of a “bruise” can trigger painful feelings of being dismissed, ignored, neglected, deficient, vulnerable, and unlovable.
It is typically not the case that a loving partner sets out to hurt his or her spouse, but the presence of an emotional bruise can make it seem that way. A mere inadvertent event can trigger a sense of injustice. In each of the three cases that follow, anger is triggered by a spouse’s behavior. In each of these cases, the anger is real, and given the emotional bruises involved, the anger may even be a reasonable response. But in each case, the question can be asked: Is the anger legitimate? In other words, has a true injustice been done?
Jane had been preoccupied for several weeks because of all the demands of her high-stress job. It was not intentional, but nonetheless, her husband, Robert, felt that he was as unimportant to her as he had been to his parents when they divorced years earlier. He was hurt—and angry. Patrick had for years experienced demeaning and disparaging comments from his older siblings. In his marriage, even mild negativity from his wife triggered deep pain—and anger. Mary’s father had been an alcoholic. He was gone most of the time, and when he was home, he was not present to the family. Mary grew up feeling unloved, and unlovable. These feelings—along with pain and anger—were frequently triggered by her husband’s lack of attentiveness.
6. Cynical Hostility
Some individuals who struggle with anger are quick to jump to a negative evaluation of others. An event will occur, and they will immediately go to a global and pejorative assessment of the people involved. For example, the woman who finds herself in a long line at the checkout counter begins to think:
“It must be a bunch of incompetent half-wits running this place. If this is the best management can do, no wonder our society’s going to hell in a handbasket.”
Or imagine that the weather forecaster has predicted a small chance of precipitation, but nonetheless, the long-awaited family get-together is rained out:
“What an idiot. His forecasts are worthless. Why do they continue to pay a guy who’s that inept?”
Such individuals struggle with cynical hostility. They have a jaundiced view of others. They are inclined to question the competence, sincerity, and/or integrity of other people, and when they do, a cynical—and angry—reaction is predictable. They are quick to conclude that they are married to “a lazy, uncaring, and inconsiderate slug,” or that their neighbor is “a crude and thoughtless scumbag,” or that their child is “a lazy, shiftless free-loader,” or that their wife is “a selfish and self-indulgent witch,” or that the guy who just cut them off is “a rude and careless jerk.”
Cynical hostility is a cognitive trait that often intersects with each of the previous thought patterns associated with anger we have discussed. In other words, the global negative evaluations characteristic of cynical hostility could be triggered by an inconvenience, by not getting what one wants, by having one’s pride pricked, etc. In each case, cynical hostility will tend to exacerbate the perceived severity of the event, resulting in an angry reaction that is more extreme than is warranted by any actual injustice.
Pastoral Advice
Understanding the thought patterns from which anger often springs can assist us in giving appropriate advice to those we care for. Too often people who struggle with anger are encouraged to use anger management techniques. For example, they are encouraged to go for a walk and settle down. Such techniques only treat the external manifestations of anger, and they are notoriously ineffective. (I can tell you from personal experience that early in my marriage, such walks only served to fuel my anger—I became more convinced that an injustice had been done.)
Gregory the Great (in Pastoral Care) said:
“In vain is [anger] cut away from the outward branches, if it is retained in the root within, to shoot up in more ways than ever before” (p. 110).
Merely working to decrease the angry outbursts won’t be effective. If a person doesn’t also understand the roots from which their anger springs, then little real change in his or her anger will ever be realized. If we want to see anger decrease in the lives of those we care for (as well as in our own lives), then understanding the roots of anger needs to be initiated. And ultimately, the thoughts that feed anger need to be replaced with thoughts closer to those of our model, Jesus.As Teresa of Avila suggested:
“To the truly humble person, no injustice could be done to him.”
FILED UNDER: ARTICLES TAGGED WITH: MARRIAGE, PASTORAL ISSUES, THE

The Spirit drove Jesus out into the desert, and he remained in the desert for forty days, tempted by Satan. He was among wild beasts, and the angels ministered to him (Mark 1:12-13). These are the opening lines of the Gospel reading for the First Sunday of Advent. So, begins Jesus’ ministry. Over the next three years He journeys around Israel proclaiming: “This is the time of fulfillment. The kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel Mark 1:15).” It is no accident that these words are used when we receive ashes on Ash Wednesday marking the beginning of our Lenten Journey.

Lent ends with the Easter Vigil. We can say that during these forty days we are journeying with Jesus to Jerusalem to undergo His passion, death and resurrection. We say this because this period is supposed to help us prepare to the greatest of all Christian feasts. Just as Jesus experienced hardships and even rejection on His journey, we can, in some small way, share in that hardship and rejection through our fasting and abstinence.

Let’s examine Jesus’ last journey to Jerusalem as depicted in Luke’s Gospel verse 51 and following. “In Bible times, a journey was a big deal and an ordeal. Overall, Luke’s gospel disproportionately focuses on Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem — the journey takes up nine of 24 chapters. The “travel narrative” begins at Luke 9:51 and climaxes in 19:41 with Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem (Abbot, n.d.).”

The New American Bible states that “he resolutely determined to journey to Jerusalem.” Some scholars have used the term “set his face like flint” recalling the words of the prophet Isaiah who said The Lord GOD is my help; therefore, I am not disgraced; I have set my face like flint, knowing that I shall not be put to shame (Isaiah 50:70). For both Christ and Isaiah these words attempt to convey the firmness of their conviction to carry out the mission God had given each of them.
With these words “he resolutely determined to journey to Jerusalem (Luke 9:51)” there is a clear break in Luke’s gospel narrative. This dramatic statement signals a new direction in Luke’s gospel and the direction of Jesus’ final earthly journey (Abbot, n.d.).

We could say that with Ash Wednesday we too have a “clear break” in our normal lives. We begin a period of fast and abstinence. Just a Jesus “set His face” indicating a clear change in attitude and direction. We presented our face, specifically our foreheads to have a change, a visible mark, imposed on us with ashes. Many do this during the normal work day and spend the day showing to the world that something has changed for us today. We may even spend some time answering the question “What is that on your head?” Maybe it is our way of proclaiming “This is the time of fulfillment. The kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel.”

Entering the Forty Days of Lent, we have begun our own journey with Jesus up to Jerusalem. Our journey may be filled with pitfalls, stumbles, getting off track, and other faux paus. Even Jesus’ journey was not exactly a straight line. For example, He went to visit Martha and Mary in Bethsaida .  He was rejected as he tried to enter Samaritan territory, so he had to go by a new route (Luke 9:52~56).  The route through Samaria to Jerusalem was shorter but, as the people would not receive him, he turned eastward and went through Perea, the “Judea beyond the Jordan (Phillips, 1962)”.

Even the Apostles were not always enthusiastic about the journey. Consider one such side trip on this last journey. Jesus went to the house of Martha and Mary after hearing of the death of Lazarus (John 11). Knowing that that the authorities were wanting to kill Jesus, they tried to dissuade Him (John 11:8). He went forward anyway. It is here Thomas, called Didymus, recognized the futility of arguing with the Master when he “said to his fellow disciples, ‘Let us also go to die with him’ (John 11:16).”

At the outset of our journey we voluntarily impose some hardships or trials. We call these sacrifices. This may include things that we will give up during Lent, and/or extra things we will do during Lent, extra Masses, rosaries, etc. When we encounter obstacles, such as we forget to do something, do we resign ourselves to “shake off the dust” and journey on or do we say just forget about it? We know what Jesus did.

A word for contemporary readers of Luke. Life centered on following Jesus is a journey. On this journey we discover more about what a relationship with Jesus entails, and what life in his kingdom will involve (Abbot).

Where does Jesus want us to journey with him not just 2,000 years ago, but today and tomorrow? Are we ready to be Jesus’ followers, whatever it takes and wherever it leads us (Abbot)? Are we ready to be like Thomas and “go die with Him”, even if all that means is we die to our own selfish interests for a short forty-day period? So, in our imagination, let’s leave 21st-century transportation with planes and cars and put on sturdy, comfortable sandals as we begin this long walk with Jesus (Abbot). Here we go!!!!!
Works Cited
Abbot, M. (n.d.). Lectio:Guided Bible Reading. Retrieved February 17, 2018, from Seattle Pacific University: http://blog.spu.edu/lectio/beginning-the-journey-to-jerusalem/

Phillips, J. (1962). AN OUTLINE OF THE STORY OF JESUS USING MAPS. Retrieved February 17, 2018, from Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL): https://www.ccel.org/bible/phillips/CN160-TRAVELS.htm

The following is from e-priest.com.  It is an electronic publication of the Legion of Christ.

Time of Fasting 16 February 2018
February 16, 2018 (readings)
Friday after Ash Wednesday
Matthew 9:14-15

The disciples of John approached Jesus and said, “Why do we and the Pharisees fast much, but your disciples do not fast?” Jesus answered them, “Can the wedding guests mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them? The days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast.”

Introductory Prayer: Lord, you know how much I need you and depend on you for everything. You know my weakness and my faults. I put all my confidence in your love and mercy. I wish to trust in your power, your promise, and your grace every day. Today I intend, with your help, to follow you along the way of the cross with love and generosity to draw close to you.

Petition: Lord, let me learn to embrace sacrifice as the way of reparation and purification.

1. These Are the Days: Jesus said the time would come when his disciples would fast. Now that the Lord has returned in glory to the Father, it is up to us to continue the work of salvation, “what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church” (Colossians 1:24), as St. Paul says. We join our sacrifice to that of Jesus to imitate him and bring grace to ourselves and others. Every Christian life must incorporate a healthy spirit of sacrifice and self-denial.

2. Feel the Hunger: The hunger we experience when we fast is a symbol of the deeper spiritual hunger we should feel for God and heaven. This world often makes us all too comfortable, and we easily forget that this is not our true home. We are pilgrims traveling through a foreign land, far from our final resting place. Fasting reminds us of the longing a traveler has to reach his destination safely and finally to rejoice in being home for good. The true Christian looks forward with hope toward heaven, where he will rest with God forever in true happiness. He knows that all the good things this world offers are only shadows of the wonderful things God has planned for those who love him (cf. Romans 8:28).

3. Hunger for Souls: From the cross, Jesus said, “I thirst.” That thirst was for all people to be reconciled to the Father. It was a thirst for souls to return to the love of God and find their way to the heavenly Kingdom. Voluntary sacrifice and self-denial, if we offer it for the conversion of the hearts of others, bring the grace they need to change and turn back to God. No one can convert himself, and no one in serious sin can merit his way to the grace of God. We need to intercede using our prayer and sacrifice to gain others the supernatural grace they need to overcome their obstacles. The greatest act of charity we can perform and the greatest joy we can experience is to bring a soul back to the Lord. How many souls are waiting for our prayer and sacrifice?

Conversation with Christ: Lord, make me generous and joyful in sacrifice, knowing that sacrifice unites me closer to you and wins the grace of conversion for so many souls you love and for whom you died.
Resolution: I will choose one person I know who needs God’s grace and offer all my sacrifices today for them.

________________________________________
© 1980-Present. The Legion of Christ, Incorporated. All rights reserved. Reproduced with Permission of Copyright Owner.

People need to be reminded more often than they need to be instructed –
Dr Samuel Johnson

We enter the forty days of Lent, which does not include Sundays. Before He began his public ministry, Christ fasted and prayed for forty days in the desert (See Matt 4:1-2; Mark 1:12-13; and Luke 4:1-3). In imitation of Christ we enter a time, which is marked by fasting, praying and almsgiving, as well as reflection on how we live out our beliefs through our words and actions.

These practices are the building blocks of a sound Lenten spiritual experience. They help us in at least two ways: First they help us clear the clutter from our lives, clutter that distracts us from God. This helps us create more space in our lives for God. Second with the creation of space in our lives for God, God’s grace has more room to take root, grow, and enrich our lives.

Fasting is an ancient spiritual practice and it is not unique to Christianity. All major religions recognize the value of fasting. Fasting can mean more than simply eating less or not eating our favorite foods. It can mean taking more quiet time to pray and listen to God (fasting from conversation). It can mean reading scripture rather than watching our favorite T.V. show (fasting from entertainment). It can mean only shopping for necessities, food clothing and the like (fasting from spending on unnecessary things).

In prayer we turn to God, listen to his voice, and let him fill our hearts and guide us. We take time to deepen and broaden our prayer life by spending more time with Jesus and expanding our prayers to include others like our RCIA class, the ill, the homebound and maybe even that person we don’t like very much. We could make a commitment to pray regularly such as one minute when you first wake up and one minute before you go to sleep every day.
Almsgiving does not always mean money. We can donate time at a soup kitchen or help with our own food drive (feed the hungry). We can show hospitality to those in need (give drink to the thirsty). We can be welcoming to strangers or newcomers in our parish, city, or neighborhood (welcome the stranger). We can donate clothing to the Center of Concern, Salvation Army, or various shelters (clothe the naked). We can visit the homebound, the hospitalized, or those in a nursing home (visit the sick). We can join a Kairos team, jail ministry team, or sign up to pray for a jail retreat weekend (visit the prisoner). We can visit a cemetery, take time off work to attend a funeral, attend a vigil, pray for the dead and their families (pray for the dead). We can come out of ourselves and give part of ourselves to others.

Lent can also be a time to remember and to reaffirm our belief in the presence of the risen Christ in the Eucharist.
One of the shocking facts is how many Catholics do not believe in the real presence, that Jesus Christ is really, truly, and substantially present in the most blessed sacrament, body, blood, soul and divinity. The Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate (CARA) of Georgetown University Studies have affirmed that there are significant numbers of Catholics who either do not believe in the real presence. The numbers range from 9% for those who attend Mass weekly to as high as 60 per cent for those who attend Mass occasionally. Even if the number were only .00001 % that is too many.

One thing Lent can do is allow us to look at how we conduct ourselves in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament. Gandhi, who was a Hindu, is quoted as saying that if he truly believed that what was presented at the Mass was God, he “would be on his face.”

A lack of reverence can be expressed in many ways. Not genuflecting or bowing when you first come into the church and enter the pew. Not having a reverential attitude or respecting those praying before mass. Not paying attention during the Eucharistic prayer and during the consecration. Talking, looking around, instead of looking at the Body and Blood of Jesus at the elevation. Not making a sign of reverence when receiving the precious Body and Blood. A slight bow of the head is all that is called for. Also, when the Minister says the Body or Blood of Christ, the proper response is Amen, before you receive. This response needs to be spoken loud enough so the minister can hear you. Thank you is not the proper response.

Something I must constantly remind myself about is insuring I keep my voice down as I greet others before Mass. It helps if I confine my pre-mass conversations and greetings to the Narthex away from the doors into the nave.
How we dress communicates our attitudes as well. Now I’m not advocating suit and tie, even though that was the tradition when many of us grew up. However, beach wear or dressing like we are going to a night club presents a certain image as well. Do we come to church dressed in a manner that we would never consider wearing at our place of employment or going out to a nice dinner? Now there are times when dressing up is not possible, but, dressing modestly and appropriately is always possible.

Lent provides a very special time for some in-depth self-examination. To reflect on where we are with our faith and how we practice that faith. To reaffirm and refresh for ourselves what our Church teaches us. Reflect on how we deeply and reverently we live that teaching in or daily lives. Wearing a medal or crucifix is great, but we all must strive to live our faith in every facet of our lives every day.

I believe that outward actions reflect inward attitudes. Reverence begins in the heart. If we have reverence for this most precious gift the Lord left us, the gift of Himself, truly present in our midst, in our hearts, our reverence will manifest itself in our outward signs. We don’t have to speak a word because our actions will tell others how we feel and what we believe.

All of us who are adults can never forget that our actions communicate far more than our words ever will. The world around us often judges the Catholic faith by one person’s actions. Especially never forget young eyes and ears are watching our every move and listening to our every word.

Posted by Bishop Robert Barron on Word on Fire

Two Deadly Errors of Liberal Catholicism
by Bp. Robert Barron – June 13, 2015

Kerry Kennedy, a daughter of Robert and Ethel Kennedy, has written a book that has made it onto the bestseller list a few years ago. It is called Being Catholic Now: Prominent Americans Talk About Change in the Church and the Quest for Meaning.
It features brief reflections from thirty-seven men and women, largely though not exclusively, drawn from the left-side of the Catholic spectrum. Though it’s always difficult to generalize when dealing with such a variety of contributors, I would like to draw attention to two themes that come up with great, and I must say, disturbing regularity in this book.
Pitting Personal Faith vs. the Hierarchy
The first is the favoring of “the faith” or “spirituality” over the institutional church, and the second is the reduction of Catholicism to the works of social justice. In her preface to the text, Kennedy evokes, movingly enough, her intensely Catholic childhood, which involved frequent prayers, personal devotions, Bible reading, immersion in the lives of the saints, celebrations of the liturgical seasons, and regular attendance at Mass. But then she recounts the process by which she became gradually disillusioned with pompous bishops and out of touch priests.
She tells us how her mother, if offended by an insensitive or long-winded homily, would simply get up and lead her brood of children out of church. The conclusion she draws is starkly stated: “I learned from her to distinguish between my faith and the Institutional Church.”
Now, I know all about priests and bishops who sometimes say stupid things, and worse, sometimes do harmful things. I agree with Kennedy and many of her collaborators in the book that the clergy sex abuse scandal, in all of its ramifications, represented the prime example of this distortion of speech and abuse of power.
But this acknowledgment should never lead one to conclude that the faith is divorceable from the hierarchical structure of the church, as though the Catholic faith could float free of the pesky interference of priests and bishops. The church is neither a philosophical debating society nor a political party, but rather a mystical body, hierarchically ordered in such a way that authentic teaching and sacraments come through the ministrations of the ordained.
What I saw in the image of Ethel Kennedy walking out of church in response to an offensive sermon was the Donatism of the left. In the fourth century, St. Augustine battled the Donatist heresy which held that only morally praiseworthy priests could legitimately administer the sacraments and preach. The great saint insisted that the power of word and sacrament does not come (thank God) from the personal worthiness of the minister but from Christ who works through them. So even today, the “faith” cannot be severed from the “institution,” even when that institution is represented, as it always is, by deeply flawed people.
Catholic Social Teaching vs. the Gospel
The second theme that disturbed me could be found in almost every essay in the book. In reflection after reflection, we hear that Catholicism amounts to a passion for service to the poor and the marginalized.
Again and again, the contributors said that what they prized the most in their Catholic formation was the inculcation of the principles of inclusivity, equality, and social justice. The Church’s social teaching comes in for a great deal of praise throughout the book. But in the vast majority of the pieces, no mention is made of distinctively Catholic doctrines such as the Trinity, the Incarnation, redemption, original sin, creation, or grace. For the most part, it would be very difficult to distinguish the social commitments of the contributors from those of a dedicated humanist of any or no religious affiliation.
The problem here is that the social teaching of the church flows necessarily from and is subordinated to the doctrinal convictions of classical Christianity. We care for the poor precisely because we are all connected to one another through the acts of creation and redemption. More to it, we worry about the marginalized precisely because all of us are cells, molecules, and organs in a mystical body whose head is Christ risen from the dead. And our work on behalf of social justice is nourished by the eucharist which fully realizes and expresses the living dynamics of the mystical communion.
The great Catholic advocates of social justice in the twentieth century—Dorothy Day, Peter Maurin, Romano Guardini, Reynold Hillenbrand, Thomas Merton—were all deeply immersed in the doctrinal and liturgical traditions. No one would have mistaken any of them for a blandly secular humanist. My fear is that a Catholicism reduced to social justice will, in short order, perhaps a generation or two, wither away.
Being Catholic, now as at any other time, must always involve a living relationship with both the hierarchical church, made up as it is of flawed individuals, and with the doctrines and sacramental practices that flow from and refer to Christ Jesus. Without these connections, it loses its soul.
Originally posted on Word on Fire

Brothers and Sisters,

If you happen to use the St Joseph’s Guide for Christian Prayer you will see that today is a Day of Prayer for the Legal Protection of the Unborn. Since Roe V. Wade it is estimated that more than 60M children have been lost to abortion in the United States alone. It has been estimated by local pro-life leaders that the abortion clinic on Sparkman Dr in Huntsville, AL does approximately 1,300 a year. It is estimated that the abortion center in Tuscaloosa routinely performs the most abortions in the State on a yearly basis.

While overall, thanks be to God, it appears abortions are decreasing, we still must work, fight, and above all pray to end this scourge.

During an address to the Italian Movement for Life in April 2014 Pope Francis declared: “Human life is sacred and inviolable. Every civil right is based on the recognition of the first, fundamental right, the right to life, which is not subject to any condition, of a qualitative, economic and certainly not of an ideological nature.” https://cnsblog.wordpress.com/2014/01/21/top-13-quotable-quotes-by-pope-francis-on-sanctity-of-life/

The sacredness of life was affirmed in the Encyclical Letter EVANGELIUM VITAE a summary of which is available at http://priestsforlife.org/magisterium/evvatsummary.htm
From the summary document:
The first chapter of the papal document is devoted to an analysis of the lights and the shadows of the present-day situation with regard to human life.
First there is a denunciation of the proliferation and increased intensity of threats to life, especially when life is weak and defenseless at its very beginning and at its end: abortion, immoral experimentation on human embryos, euthanasia. There is a clear description of the unprecedented and specific features of these crimes against life: At the level of public opinion they are claimed to be rights based on individual freedom; there is a trend toward their recognition in law; they are carried out with the help of medical science. This involves a distortion of society’s nature and purpose and of the constitutional state itself: Democracy, if detached from its moral foundations and linked to an unlimited ethical relativism, risks becoming the pretext for a war of the stronger against the weaker; the roles of health care personnel tend to be subverted: Instead of respectful service of life, they lend themselves to actions which bring about death.

From an article in Patheos On-line Magazine.

How to Explain Purgatory to Everyone
OCTOBER 17, 2017 BY K. ALBERT LITTLE

One of the most responding, human impulses that St. Paul describes in his letters to the early churches is the idea of wanting to do what he doesn’t do.
“For what I want to do, I do not do,” Paul writes in his letter to the Romans.
In this, Paul captures something so profound that scholars and poets alike have spent the last two millennia working to unpack it.

The want to do something other than what we do and, sometimes, the mere want to want.  Purgatory is like this.

I’m reading a book right now by Reformed philosopher and theologian James K.A. Smith called You Are What You Love. In it, Smith takes a decidedly Catholic approach to orienting our lives towards God. In the course of the book, he refers to a 1979 Russian film called The Stalker. It’s an admittedly obscure film depicting the journey of three men in a post-apocalyptic world, trying to reach something called The Room—a place in which their innermost desires will be fulfilled.

After a harrowing journey the three stand on the cusp of The Room in a place called The Zone and, suddenly, have what Smith describes as some serious reservations.  What if what we really desire in our hearts isn’t what we should desire?  What if what lies behind that door, in The Room, uncovers our secret, hidden wishes? The true call of our heart that we didn’t even realize was there?  Because The Room reveals to us—gives to us—what we desire most; what we love the most.  Even if we don’t know it.

This is a picture of purgatory.

In the teaching of the Catholic Church, we believe that God doesn’t simply wave a magic wand when we die and make us fit to live, with Him, in Heaven.  In Heaven no imperfection can exist—nothing but perfect love—and, with that, no remorse, no wishful thinking, no hesitation or changing our mind.

Our loves and desires are perfected and oriented towards God. The Ultimate Perfection. The Ultimate Love.

Enter purgatory.

In the Catechism of the Catholic Church, purgatory is described as this,
All who die in God’s grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven (1030).
Purgatory is that which makes us fit for Heaven.

Like our characters’ hesitation to complete their journey and reveal the true loves of their heart in The Stalker, we too pause at the precipice of Heaven—we must—before we can charge the gates because when we die we’re not perfect, despite the very real sacrifice of Christ.

While we’re certainly saved, by Christ alone, we still have our hurts and hang-ups, don’t we? We still sin, and become frustrated, and like St. Paul, do things we do not want to do.  And we want to do better.  And, sometimes, we simply want to want to do better, and on those days when I’m a miserable, sorry mess, I’m absolutely unfit for Heaven even if my salvation—my faith in Christ—remains utterly unshaken.  I surely want to be perfect, but I’m not.
If I were to die on one of those days, or even on a good day, would God simply wave a magic wand and make all my insecurities and struggles vanish the second I kicked the bucket?  The Catholic Church says no.

This is purgatory: What St. Paul, and the Church, calls a kind of slow burning fire to purify us of whatever we’re still hanging on to.  To orient our desires fully to Christ—to ensure that what we really love is God and when we open the door to The Room it’s God on the inside.

Ultimately, how we explain purgatory is simple.  God can never bend our will. He refuses to wave a magic wand and change who we are because that would negate our ability to exercise free will. Instead, God designed a process to help slowly and surely transform us into images of Himself. This is life; this is the goal of our everyday existence on earth.
And this, too, is the purpose of purgatory.

A way to finish the job, on the precipice of Heaven, so once we enter into those lofty gates what we love is, ultimately, what we should love and we can enjoy eternity in the presence of God without hang-ups, hurts, or hesitation.

Read more at http://www.patheos.com/blogs/albertlittle/explain-purgatory-everyone/#yVdM9MrtRR62FhcW.99

“Truth does not become more true by virtue of the fact that the entire world agrees with it, nor less so even if the whole world disagrees with it.” ― Maimonides, The Guide for the Perplexed
I do not know how many people read the column in the January 5, 2018 One Voice about the position taken by the Bishops from Kazakhstan concerning the questions raised by the publication of the Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia and the subsequent publication of guidelines. Amoris Laetitia has passages of great wisdom and beauty on marriage and on family life. And it has other passages that have caused some obvious controversy regarding the readmission of Catholics who are divorced and remarried to the Eucharist (Chaput). The article in the One Voice addresses a lot of the questions raised. Now no one or two-page article is going to fully address all the issues, but my hope is to shed some light on the matter and provide some information which I hope you find useful.

Why does the Catholic Church teach that marriage is indissoluble when there are so many divorces today? To answer this question, we must first look at exactly what the Church teaches. This is summarized in paragraph 1061 of the Catechism of the Catholic which states: “The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament.” This has been carried over into Canon Law. Canon Law states: “The essential properties of marriage are unity and indissolubility, which in Christian marriage obtain a special firmness by reason of the sacrament.” (Code of Canon Law 1056) It is a relationship in which the two people, by mutual consent; give themselves freely and totally to the relationship in an “irrevocable covenant”. (Code of Canon Law 1057 §2)
There are a number of key words here: “covenant”, “partnership of the whole of life” and “sacrament.” So, let’s examine each of these.

Let’s examine the phrase “partnership for the whole of life.” What is a partnership? Merriam-Webster’s on-line dictionary has this definition: a relationship resembling a legal partnership and usually involving close cooperation between parties having specified and joint rights and responsibilities. Whole of life which means well, “until death do us part” to put it in the most common phrase we hear today.

Rather than a business partnership in which there is a contract the Church says that it is a covenant, a solemn agreement between human beings or between God and a human being involving mutual commitments or guarantees (CCC Glossary). This covenant, this sacrament, this marriage covenant involves such an intimate binding of two beings that this is image that God Himself favored, through the Scriptures, as the one which most imitates or emulates the sign of His covenant with His people. A covenant is still binding even when one of the partners tries to sever the partnership. Reconciliation through the sacrament of Penance can be granted only to those who have repented for having violated the sign of the covenant and of fidelity to Christ, and who are committed to living in complete continence (CCC 1650).

Marriage is a sacramental sign of God’s love for His people as it is testified to in both the Old and New Testaments, the act itself must accurately reflect that love. It must be faithful, monogamous, indissoluble, and fruitful. This is the foundation of all traditional Christian sexual morality. This is the image presented to us by God when he created them male and female (Genesis 1:27). This is what Christ taught as recorded in the Gospels in Matthew 19: 1-9 and Mark 10:1-12 where Jesus himself declared marriage as indissoluble. The two become one and no “human being” must try to break them apart. It is in this proclamation that Christ raises marriage to the level of a Sacrament.
What has happened in our time is this idea of being married to the same person for life is not seen as the norm but rather as an “ideal.” Christian marriage is never simply an “ideal.” Describing it as an “ideal” tends to open the door to excusing and then normalizing failure. The current number of marriages that end in divorce, especially in today’s world of institutionalized selfishness, shows that many people do fail (Chaput). I would venture to say that all of us know someone or several someone’s who have had a marriage that ended in divorce.

There are many myths out there about what the Church holds and teaches about marriage such as you should stay together no matter what. Again, that is not true. When a situation arises, which makes living together a practical impossibility the Church permits the physical separation of the couple and their living apart. The spouses do not cease to be husband and wife before God and so are not free to contract a new union (CCC 1649).

But of course, all of us fail many times every day. Being divorced or separated does not mean you are barred from the sacraments. This occurs only when a person attempts remarriage by entering into a civil union or attempt marriage in another denomination. In fidelity to the words of Jesus Christ – “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.” Consequently, they are contravening God’s law and therefore cannot receive Eucharistic communion as long as this situation persists (CCC 1650).

Today there are numerous Catholics in many countries who have recourse to civil divorce and contract new civil unions. It is the duty of the Church to reach out in mercy to those who have separated themselves from God’s grace and try to lead them back to communion. It’s a living expression of God’s goodness. But mercy does not abolish God’s law or His justice any more than it can soften or adjust the demands of truth in order to be more congenial to our weaknesses, to our culture, or to our times (Chaput). This is the heart of the controversy centers around how the Church reaches out to those who are is such situations and how the Church goes about restoring them to communion with the Church and with God’s law? This debate is far from over.
References:
Chaput, Charles OFM, Cap. Archbishop. Amoris Latetia and the Nature of Mercy. 8 11 2017. Article. 2 12 2017. <http://archphila.org/archbishop-chaputs-address-at-the-national-assembly-of-filipino-priests-usa-amoris-laetitia-and-the-nature-of-mercy/>.

USCCB. Catechism of the Catholic Church. Second. Washington: United States Catholic Conference, 1994. Book.

An article from our parishioner Eric Hawkes.

The New Perspective on Paul
By: Eric Hawkes

Unknown to most Catholics, even most Catholic theologians, recent Protestant research on Paul’s letters has led to a major break-through that has the potential to bridge the Catholic-Protestant divide.

The research began following World War II. After the world became aware of the terrible treatment of the Jews during the holocaust, Christian theologians sought to remove any anti-Semitic bias from their theology. The Catholic Church published Nostra Aetate, which condemned the view that God had rejected the Jews and chose Christians in their place. Protestants re-examined their assumptions regarding the Jewish religion. Some of these assumptions went from as far back as the Church Fathers, to include St. Augustine himself.

Augustine’s seminal work, The Confessions, was a spiritual masterpiece. However, theologically speaking, it understood Paul’s writings within the question of, “how can I appease my guilty conscience and be righteous before God?” This line of thinking resonated with both St. Augustine and Martin Luther as each of them struggled with personal sin and “earning God’s mercy as a sinner”. At the time that Augustine wrote Confessions, he was defending the faith against the heresy of Pelagianism, which taught that salvation could be earned through good moral works, apart from grace. By reading Paul in this light, Augustine could use Paul’s writings to defeat his contemporaries, the Pelagians.

But was answering the question, “how are we justified by God?” actually Paul’s purpose in writing his letters? The Protestant scholar Krister Stendahl didn’t think so. In his essay “Paul and the Introspective Conscience of the West”, Stendahl argues that this reading misses Paul’s point. In fact, Stendahl goes so far as to state that Paul would not be interested in that question at all. Rather, Stendahl sees Paul’s letters centered on the question, “how are the promises of God to Israel fulfilled in both Jews and Gentiles?” Stendahl argues that since Augustine, the West had badly misinterpreted Paul, especially Romans and Galatians. He concludes that it was this wrong interpretation of Paul that led to the Reformation.

At the same time, another Protestant scholar, E.P Sanders, published Paul and Palestinian Judaism. Based on newly available Dead Sea Scrolls, the 5th century B.C. Judaism was not at all like how Augustine and later theologians had envisioned it. They saw Judaism as a works-righteouness religion where good works and living according to the law was rewarded with salvation.

Sander’s study of the Dead Sea Scrolls convinced him that in the 5th century B.C, Judaism did not, in fact, teach a form of “proto-Pelagianism”. His work showed that Jews believed membership in God’s covenant was a grace and not something earned. The law was to be kept as a sign of those in the covenant. Sanders called this theology “covenant nomism” as opposed to the “works-righteousness” that more modern readers thought Paul was opposing.

Sander’s historical research into ancient Judaism along with Stendahl’s fresh take on Augustine motivated James Dunn, another Protestant scholar, to coin this new way of thinking about Paul, “the New Perspective of Paul” (NPP), as opposed the old, Augustinian view of Paul. This new view contends that Paul was not arguing how we are saved, (i.e. is it by faith or by works?), but rather, Romans and Galatians were intended to explain how Jews and Gentiles could be in the same Church. Paul’s answer is that it is through faith that we are justified in Christ (or as Catholics would say “in the Church”), not by circumcision, avoiding meat, or any other specifics of the law.

Proponents of NPP ask the question, “what is the mystery kept secret for all of history that is suddenly revealed by Jesus Christ?” Paul’s answer, his ‘gospel’ if you will, is that the secret kept hidden from mankind and revealed by Jesus is that the promises that God made with Israel are now available to Jews and Gentiles. Reading from Ephesians, “the Gentiles are co-heirs, members of the same body, partakers of the promise in Jesus Christ through the gospel (Eph 3:5-6).” Paul, as a former Jew, must have been very excited about this revelation from God. It was a reason for great joy and Paul knew that this message must be spread to the whole world at any and all cost. This was the good news that the world desperately needs to hear; Jews and Gentiles are now united in Christ, a first in the history of the world. Could God be so generous as to put Gentiles on the same footing as His own chosen people, Israel?

This is also why Paul spends a great deal of time in his letters trying to resolve disputes within the Church. Reconciliation is not simply about being reconciled to God (Rom 11:12; 2 Cor 5:21) but being reconciled to one another in the body of Christ (Eph 2:16; Col 1:21-22). 1st and 2nd Corinthians were largely meant to reconcile disparate factions of the Church in Corinth, just as Galatians and Romans were meant to restore unity between Jewish and Gentile parties. Paul’s gospel was about God, through Christ, uniting the human race as His ultimate divine plan. All are invited to His divine Sonship. That was the mission of His Son, Jesus Christ. The Church had to be a showcase of this reconciliation for the gospel to have any practical meaning. Truly, the Church had to ‘catholic’, which is Greek for universal.

This is why Paul tells us, for instance in Galatians, that he had earlier gone to Jerusalem to present the gospel he preached, bringing Barnabas and Titus with him (Gal 2:1-2). Barnabas and Titus were not randomly chosen companions; the fellowship between Barnabas, the Jew, and Titus, the Gentile, in Paul’s mind, was the gospel.

Although many Protestant theologians have trumpeted the NPP, other Protestant scholars are more cautious. They recognize that if Stendahl, Sanders, and Dunn are right, the historical basis for the Reformation, Sola Fide, can be resolved. Paul was never trying to tell us how we are saved (Faith vs. works), but that Paul was trying to explain how we are united as sons and daughters of God, Jews and Gentiles alike. In that context, the schism between Catholics and Protestants is the ultimate slap in the face to Paul, who was writing to unite everyone in Christ, not to divide us.

The New Perspective on Paul is a major step forward in healing the Protestant-Catholic divide. It is also an excellent starting point for future progress with Protestants as well recognizing our common “covenant nomism” found in ancient Judaism. Unlike past attempts, it is not a Catholic attempt to “win a debate” with Protestants, but Protestants reading the bible in a new light and finding a biblical interpretation that just happens to resolve old difficulties.