"Love one another as I have loved you." With these words, our Lord commands the apostles gathered in the upper room to love. The words seem so attached to His teaching of his impending 'glorification' on the Cross. But how?
It is in our love of God, neighbor, and stranger that defines us a followers of Christ and shows the world the glory of God. As necessary as right doctrine and practice is, it is love that ultimately marks us out. So often, we might reject this due to a misunderstanding of what love is. While St. Paul gives us a good explanation of love in 1 Corinthians, we still struggle. We try to define love as a feeling of affection. While true love may have that aspect, this may not always be the case. Take, for example, the parent who lovingly sacrifices a night's sleep to care for a sick child. Very little of such a situation would cause a 'feeling' of love, but the parent does love the child, even when he or she is exhausted. No, love is an action, a choice to respond to the need of the other, to put one's self after the other. This is not easy in any way.
St. Augustine was once asked what was necessary in order to live a moral life. He responded, "Love, and do what you will." Over the last centuries, what he was saying has been misinterpreted into something like "it doesn't matter what you do as long as you feel loving." This is the furtherest from his intent. St. Augustine knew and advocated an understanding of love as a response to Christ. He also knew that if one was consciously choosing to love Christ and neighbor, all actions then would follow out of a properly formed conscience and will. It is not permissiveness - it is the opposite, Love sets the boundaries. If we see someone about to be harmed, love requires us to act, to pull the person back to safety. So it is with the matters of life and faith in the Spiritual realm, we are called to love one another, to help to do what is right and just.
On a related note, St. Augustine's principle is an important one for anyone discerning a vocation to remember. We are called to love Christ and neighbor, and when we do, our vocation will become easier to understand and embrace. Love, and do whatever your well-informed conscience guides you. If we love God and neighbor, Christ will lead us to respond to our true vocation.
Sunday, May 6, 2007
Saturday, May 5, 2007
A Prayer of Gratitude for Archbishop Nienstedt
With this week's Diocesan Mailing, we are asked to pray the following prayer of Gratitude. I offer it to you for your prayers, too:
Lord, our God,
You chose your servant, John,
In the tradition of the apostles,
To be the shepherd of your flock
in the Diocese of New Ulm.
We thank you for his ministry with us
And for his spirit of courage, knowledge, wisdom, and love.
Bless him in his new duties as Archbishop.
Guide him to be a faithful teacher, a wise administrator,
and a holy priest.
May you sustain us with loving care as
we await a new Bishop,
And guide us as we continue to grow in faith,
holiness, charity, and loving service.
We ask this through Christ, our Lord.
Amen.
Thursday, May 3, 2007
The Theory of Limbo: The Report
For those interested in reading the actual report of the teaching on Limbo, Catholic Culture Library has put it online. This commission has no doctrinal weight (they provide only a theological conclusion). Pope Benedict XVI has yet to announce his final decision on this, though his willingness to allow it to be printed demonstrates his possible conclusions.
Tuesday, May 1, 2007
Why We Must Promote All Vocations
Whispers in the Loggia has a great article about certain Bishops and what they do to promote vocations.
It lists a few traits:
In quoting the CARA report on the ordination Class of 2007, it was noted that few responded to the 'posters and coasters' mentality, but again it was personal invitation, usually (up to 80%) a pastor or priest, who first planted the seed of a vocation.
The post also points out that in the speaking of vocations, we cannot reduce the discussion to just priesthood, but rather all vocations.
He also quotes Pope Benedict in an address to the Parish of St. Felicity and Her Children, where he says:
It lists a few traits:
"An involved, invested diocesan bishop"
Vocations made a first priority
"pushing towards it from the top and across the board" versus the agenda of one office
"significant personal commitment"
"concerted team effort"
"a creative approach"
"contagious enthusiasm and zeal"
In quoting the CARA report on the ordination Class of 2007, it was noted that few responded to the 'posters and coasters' mentality, but again it was personal invitation, usually (up to 80%) a pastor or priest, who first planted the seed of a vocation.
The post also points out that in the speaking of vocations, we cannot reduce the discussion to just priesthood, but rather all vocations.
He also quotes Pope Benedict in an address to the Parish of St. Felicity and Her Children, where he says:
Every person carries within himself a project of God, a personal vocation, a personal idea of God on what he is required to do in history to build his Church, a living Temple of his presence. And the priest's role is above all to reawaken this awareness, to help the individual discover his personal vocation, God's task for each one of us. I see that many here have discovered the project that concerns them, both with regard to professional life in the formation of today's society -- where the presence of Christian consciences is fundamental -- and also with regard to the call to contribute to the Church's growth and life. Both these things are equally important.
A society where Christian conscience is no longer alive loses its bearings; it no longer knows where to go, what it can do, what it cannot do, and ends up in emptiness, it fails. Only if a living awareness of the faith illumines our hearts can we also build a just society. It is not the Magisterium that imposes doctrine. It is the Magisterium that helps enable the conscience itself to hear God's voice, to know what is good, what is the Lord's will. It is only an aid so that personal responsibility, nourished by a lively conscience, may function well and thus contribute to ensuring that justice is truly present in our society: justice within ourselves and universal justice for all our brothers and sisters in the world today. Today, globalization is not only economic: there is also a globalization of responsibilities, this universality, which is why we are all responsible for everyone.
The Church offers us the encounter with Christ, with the living God, with the "Logos" who is Truth and Light, who does not coerce consciences, does not impose a partial doctrine but helps us ourselves to be men and women who are completely fulfilled and thus to live in personal responsibility and in deeper communion with one another, a communion born from communion with God, with the Lord.
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Reflection on the Fourth Sunday of Easter
This weekend is also known as Good Shepherd Sunday. The Gospel this Sunday is so short, it is published in its entirety here:
(It can be found at John 10:27-30)
We are the sheep, Christ is the shepherd who speaks to us the words of truth. In responding to the love of Christ, we can follow it as a priest, religious, generous single life, or married. Right here, right now, we are called to follow.
As a shepherd from the time of Christ and even nomadic shepherds could tell, the sheep need to be guided by shepherd's voice. They hear it, and while about the tasks at hand (for sheep, that means eating), and follow the voice. When they do, they are kept safe. Jesus, the good shepherd, promises that if we follow, he will hold us in his hands, and no one can take us out of them. But we can walk out (like so many of the hearers of the Bread of Life discourse who walked away from salvation). It is not enough to listen to the voice of Christ once, and then think that we are safe. No, we follow daily, hourly, and perhaps even every second!
(It can be found at John 10:27-30)
Jesus said:
“My sheep hear my voice;
I know them, and they follow me.
I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish.
No one can take them out of my hand.
My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all,
and no one can take them out of the Father’s hand.
The Father and I are one.”
We are the sheep, Christ is the shepherd who speaks to us the words of truth. In responding to the love of Christ, we can follow it as a priest, religious, generous single life, or married. Right here, right now, we are called to follow.
As a shepherd from the time of Christ and even nomadic shepherds could tell, the sheep need to be guided by shepherd's voice. They hear it, and while about the tasks at hand (for sheep, that means eating), and follow the voice. When they do, they are kept safe. Jesus, the good shepherd, promises that if we follow, he will hold us in his hands, and no one can take us out of them. But we can walk out (like so many of the hearers of the Bread of Life discourse who walked away from salvation). It is not enough to listen to the voice of Christ once, and then think that we are safe. No, we follow daily, hourly, and perhaps even every second!
Saturday, April 28, 2007
A Great Harvest
Whispers in the Loggia has a post on the large number of vocations from West Philadelphia High School. (The original article is found here.)
The School hosted a reunion for them, and it sounds as if it was a great success. Perhaps this is something more should do.
One thing that I found telling: it seems that everyone encouraged vocations, from the parents to the principal. The culture of vocations is definitely alive here!
Since its founding as a boys' school in 1916, and the addition of the girls' school in 1926, West Catholic has turned out more than 1,000 religious sisters, 600 priests, at least 300 Christian Brothers, six bishops, and Cardinal John O'Connor, the late archbishop of New York - Class of '38.
The School hosted a reunion for them, and it sounds as if it was a great success. Perhaps this is something more should do.
One thing that I found telling: it seems that everyone encouraged vocations, from the parents to the principal. The culture of vocations is definitely alive here!
Thursday, April 26, 2007
The Theory of Limbo
There has been lots of blog articles lately about the recent conclusion of a Vatican Theological Commission regarding Limbo. There are a number of errors and misrepresentations of the theory, and I offer the following as a corrective.
First, Limbo is not purgatory, the state of souls destined for heaven (due to faith and no unforgiven sins) but lacking in perfect love. The theory of Limbo was just that... a theory. In the theological terms, it is a theological speculation or theological opinion, not a Dogma or doctrine which are to be held definitively (such as purgatory!). Because some in the Church taught it did not make it so, and just because the recent theological conclusion said that it is a theory that is not helpful did not 'bring the walls of Limbo' down. The Pope has to accept or reject the Commission's findings. All this is to to say that those that taught it, did so without creating it, and those that say that it is not a helpful theory to continue to teach did not destroy it. The official teaching of the Church is that those who die with only original sin are not automatically condemned to hell, nor are they automatically admitted to heaven. True, though, is that the some texts refer to a state of those who die with original sin but no personal sin, but there is not an explicit, definitive teaching on limbo's existence.
As such, Limbo was not the 'in-between' of heaven and hell but a different category that taught that those babies who died without baptism were given a state of 'natural happiness', but not the state of supernatural happiness that is in heaven. While not subscribing to the theory as particularly as helpful as relying on God's mercy (though I will fully submit to the Pope were he to declare Limbo a doctrine to be held), I understand the theory of Limbo as like that of a grade school rain-day recess - lots of laughter and joy but in the classroom, not on the playground enjoying the sun and open space. Such children are lacking nothing with such natural happiness because they know nothing of God and the supernatural happiness He gives.
There is power in the Sacrament of Baptism, but it comes from Christ. Baptism is a participation in the Death and Resurrection of Christ which results in removal of sin, both original and personal, and a rejuvenation of the human being. The conclusion of the commission is that indeed God the Father can (as in 'it is possible', but not 'necessarily will') save the unbaptized by other means as well, so that they can share in the supernatural happiness of heaven. The theory of Limbo relies heavily on medieval philosophical and theological principles (all of which are sound), in such things as evil is a privation of some good that ought be present, that those with sin (personal or original) cannot enter heaven, etc. The teaching against limbo is based a more deeply developed theology of grace and mercy - that one can be saved, but only through Christ, without knowing Him explicitly or being baptized (which is not to say we should not get to know Him, or be baptized). While the Sacraments of Baptism and Reconciliation are the ordinary means of experiencing God's Grace and forgiveness, God could work outside of them as well for the forgiveness of sins (such as the case of otherwise faithful Protestants who sinned but followed a well-formed conscience could experience forgiveness). There is a warning with all of this, though: we are not to presume God's mercy, and if at all able, we need to receive the Sacraments. The Church has taught that those who desire Baptism but die without it may experience the "baptism of desire" and experience God's mercy and have one's sins forgiven, for example.
Personally, I think the reason the press and so many have jumped on this is that they see it as a sign that the Church can change any of its teaching, which they tend to lump all together. The teaching against women priests, abortion, birth control, and such, gets regarded as equally changeable as the theory of Limbo, the application of the teachings of just war and capital punishment, and perhaps even the use of mercury thermometers, as suggested by Senator Durbin's score card for Catholic politicians. He actually suggested a pro-abortion politician could be more "Catholic" than a pro-life politician because they did not support the USCCB's suggestion to limit the use of mercury or other relatively 'minuscule' promptings of the US Bishops! If the Church's stance on some things can change, it can change in all things, is the thought. This, however, is not true.
Also, I think the pro-abortion, pro-contraception mentality is affecting this hype. I have actually heard at least one pro-abortion person say that if we are serious about the unborn child as such, it is better for a child to be killed in the womb and enter heaven than to be given birth and mistreated. The theory of limbo seems more cold and distant than this 'warm fuzzy' feeling of a sort of universal salvation of even those who are murdered in the womb. Do not misread me, though. Yes, if there is no Limbo, those that are aborted could also be entered into the beatific vision, but I reject the thought that this can be used to justify abortion! Abortion has no justification. To be born is always better than to be killed in the womb, and we must do everything we can to make the life of all, born and unborn, better. As good as life is, though, Heaven is even better yet!
All summed, the teaching of the Church is that all are invited to share in the beatific vision and to be saints in heaven. We are allowed there by God's grace. We are invited, in Baptism, to place our faith in Jesus Christ our savior, but know that He can also save those, who through no fault of their own die without Baptism and live in accordance to a well-formed conscience. Even little babes, are entrusted to the mercy of Christ and may be allowed into the eternal embrace of heaven, perhaps based on the faith of the child's parents. The vocation of all is to eternal, supernatural happiness, but this is no guarantee that we will all be given the gift. Are we going to respond in such a way that God will give us His grace?
First, Limbo is not purgatory, the state of souls destined for heaven (due to faith and no unforgiven sins) but lacking in perfect love. The theory of Limbo was just that... a theory. In the theological terms, it is a theological speculation or theological opinion, not a Dogma or doctrine which are to be held definitively (such as purgatory!). Because some in the Church taught it did not make it so, and just because the recent theological conclusion said that it is a theory that is not helpful did not 'bring the walls of Limbo' down. The Pope has to accept or reject the Commission's findings. All this is to to say that those that taught it, did so without creating it, and those that say that it is not a helpful theory to continue to teach did not destroy it. The official teaching of the Church is that those who die with only original sin are not automatically condemned to hell, nor are they automatically admitted to heaven. True, though, is that the some texts refer to a state of those who die with original sin but no personal sin, but there is not an explicit, definitive teaching on limbo's existence.
As such, Limbo was not the 'in-between' of heaven and hell but a different category that taught that those babies who died without baptism were given a state of 'natural happiness', but not the state of supernatural happiness that is in heaven. While not subscribing to the theory as particularly as helpful as relying on God's mercy (though I will fully submit to the Pope were he to declare Limbo a doctrine to be held), I understand the theory of Limbo as like that of a grade school rain-day recess - lots of laughter and joy but in the classroom, not on the playground enjoying the sun and open space. Such children are lacking nothing with such natural happiness because they know nothing of God and the supernatural happiness He gives.
There is power in the Sacrament of Baptism, but it comes from Christ. Baptism is a participation in the Death and Resurrection of Christ which results in removal of sin, both original and personal, and a rejuvenation of the human being. The conclusion of the commission is that indeed God the Father can (as in 'it is possible', but not 'necessarily will') save the unbaptized by other means as well, so that they can share in the supernatural happiness of heaven. The theory of Limbo relies heavily on medieval philosophical and theological principles (all of which are sound), in such things as evil is a privation of some good that ought be present, that those with sin (personal or original) cannot enter heaven, etc. The teaching against limbo is based a more deeply developed theology of grace and mercy - that one can be saved, but only through Christ, without knowing Him explicitly or being baptized (which is not to say we should not get to know Him, or be baptized). While the Sacraments of Baptism and Reconciliation are the ordinary means of experiencing God's Grace and forgiveness, God could work outside of them as well for the forgiveness of sins (such as the case of otherwise faithful Protestants who sinned but followed a well-formed conscience could experience forgiveness). There is a warning with all of this, though: we are not to presume God's mercy, and if at all able, we need to receive the Sacraments. The Church has taught that those who desire Baptism but die without it may experience the "baptism of desire" and experience God's mercy and have one's sins forgiven, for example.
Personally, I think the reason the press and so many have jumped on this is that they see it as a sign that the Church can change any of its teaching, which they tend to lump all together. The teaching against women priests, abortion, birth control, and such, gets regarded as equally changeable as the theory of Limbo, the application of the teachings of just war and capital punishment, and perhaps even the use of mercury thermometers, as suggested by Senator Durbin's score card for Catholic politicians. He actually suggested a pro-abortion politician could be more "Catholic" than a pro-life politician because they did not support the USCCB's suggestion to limit the use of mercury or other relatively 'minuscule' promptings of the US Bishops! If the Church's stance on some things can change, it can change in all things, is the thought. This, however, is not true.
Also, I think the pro-abortion, pro-contraception mentality is affecting this hype. I have actually heard at least one pro-abortion person say that if we are serious about the unborn child as such, it is better for a child to be killed in the womb and enter heaven than to be given birth and mistreated. The theory of limbo seems more cold and distant than this 'warm fuzzy' feeling of a sort of universal salvation of even those who are murdered in the womb. Do not misread me, though. Yes, if there is no Limbo, those that are aborted could also be entered into the beatific vision, but I reject the thought that this can be used to justify abortion! Abortion has no justification. To be born is always better than to be killed in the womb, and we must do everything we can to make the life of all, born and unborn, better. As good as life is, though, Heaven is even better yet!
All summed, the teaching of the Church is that all are invited to share in the beatific vision and to be saints in heaven. We are allowed there by God's grace. We are invited, in Baptism, to place our faith in Jesus Christ our savior, but know that He can also save those, who through no fault of their own die without Baptism and live in accordance to a well-formed conscience. Even little babes, are entrusted to the mercy of Christ and may be allowed into the eternal embrace of heaven, perhaps based on the faith of the child's parents. The vocation of all is to eternal, supernatural happiness, but this is no guarantee that we will all be given the gift. Are we going to respond in such a way that God will give us His grace?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)