Showing posts with label building the Kingdom of God. Show all posts
Showing posts with label building the Kingdom of God. Show all posts

Friday, July 05, 2024

Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano - What is the meaning of his excommunication by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith in the Vatican? Friday, July 5th, 2024

My purpose in these posts is to bring a variety of Christian witnesses and writers in reflecting on life, encounters, and various situations, in a desire to enhance our understanding of what it means to be a missionary disciple of Jesus Christ at the service of the common good and directly or indirectly give glory to God and extend the Lord's work of salvation to all of humanity. G.S.

----------------------------------------------------------------


How do we handle conflicts?

People in authority in the Church and in society are much like you and me.

In the face of a difficult situation, we generally want to give other people the benefit of the doubt.

If it's serious enough or it keeps happening, then, we must take a closer look, and even investigate the situation ourselves or ask someone else to do it. This may or may not lead to clarity and to appropriate action. The more complicated the situation, the more time and effort are needed to clarify it and take steps toward the most desirable resolution. 

When complaints accumulate against a person, or when we ourselves come to a well deliberated conclusion that we must intervene, that's usually when we do it.

Each case is unique and there aren't really any cut and dry policies in our lives, and it's pretty much the same with our Church. At certain times in the past, Church authorities deemed it necessary to make judgments and excommunications more frequently, because there were open attacks on the Church or the truths of the Gospel and the Word of God, or the Church itself as the living organism founded by our Lord Jesus Christ on Peter and the Apostles. 

There have been eras in history when people looked at issues more in a black and white perspective, but with the extremely rapid development this past century in the social sciences, as well as the pure sciences, this has enhanced our understanding of the complexities of human life and behaviour. As a result, the Church now tends to be more circumspect and cautious, rather committed to investing more time and focused attention to details, and even reluctant to be shooting off frequent condemnations. In our lifetime, the shooting off of condemnations hasn't been anything resembling common practice; so, this latest excommunication seems unusual, but it really isn't.

Sooner or later, we must all render accounts, and those who make more noise are likely to attract more attention. There is another dimension to this; the personal dimension. So far, we've really only considered the issues, right and wrong, truth and falsehood.

The difference between the ways of the Lord and those of the enemy of humankind

There is also the difference between the ways of the Lord and the ways of the enemy of humankind, which of these we have been integrating into ourselves, and by which of these we live our lives and relations with others.

The enemy makes everything black and white, cut and dried, with no room for nuance, and quick to assign blame and condemn. It is the way of war and the culture of death.

The ways of the Lord reflect the awesome attributes of the Most Holy Trinity. There is truth, but also goodness and beauty. There is justice, but also mercy. God is never quick to judge, but always slow to condemn and eager to save.

When Church authorities, especially those of the Vatican, approach someone against whom there have been complaints or who stands out in criticizing the Pope or the Church itself - as Archbishop Vigano has consistently done since his retirement - the authorities are interested not only in the issues to be clarified, but equally in the attitude, words, behaviour, and actions of the other person.

Will the other approach peacefully, openly, with a docile spirit and willingness to accept the authority of the Church and manifest eagerness to obey and do the will of God? Such a person manifests a soul that is integrating the ways of the Lord into their own life, a life of holiness; a soul that is living in the Kingdom of God.

On the contrary, a person who is belligerent, condemning others left and right, accusing everyone, giving the impression that only THEY have the truth, and that everyone should be obeying THEM; well, such a soul is manifesting itself as caught up in the ways of the enemy of humankind, and the kingdom of this world, and most likely under the influence of the prince of this world; the same one who tempted Jesus in the desert.

What exactly is an excommunication?

Jesus declared that the only sin that cannot be forgiven is the sin against the Holy Spirit, which simply put, is the sin of a soul setting itself up against God, accusing God, closing itself off from God, pushing God aside and trying to take God's place as it were. As long as the gates of the mind, heart, and soul are closed to God, then it stands to reason that his grace, mercy, forgiveness, and love cannot enter into such a soul. It is basically condemning itself.

So, a declaration of excommunication is simply the Church declaring that such a soul has already cut itself off from God and the Church. Therefore, it would be sacrilegious for them in their rebellion to take the sacraments, because they are not in a proper disposition of soul. The excommunication is not a condemnation but an act of justice and mercy that is made in the hope that it will shake the person up and open them up to repentance and conversion.

Secular society, which has adopted the closed perspective of the enemy, sees everything in black and white; therefore, it is almost incapable of understanding the above dynamic and how the Church is ever seeking to help souls open themselves up to the truth, the goodness, the beauty, the justice and mercy of God, and to give God the first place in our lives; rather than setting ourselves up on any kind of personal throne or chair of authority.

Being ordained a deacon, priest, or bishop, or being appointed archbishop or cardinal, is a heavy burden of responsibility which only God's grace can help us carry. It is the same with the daily grace of Marriage. Those who accept daily their grace of vocation are able to carry themselves with humility before God, and are eager to show everyone else kindness and understanding, patience and goodness, mercy, forgiveness, and love, unconditionally; just as God shows each of us all these graces unconditionally and liberally. 

So, you can see from all this, that we are very much in need of having sympathy for one another, of showing kindness and understanding to one another, but also of standing up for the truth, for goodness, for beauty, for justice and mercy. We also need to do this with a calm and peaceful disposition, with only love towards those who disagree with us or cause trouble of any kind. For this we need the grace of God, the power, presence, and action of the Holy Spirit within us, enabling us to stand fast against any and all attacks against God and his purposes in the world and in Creation.


----------------------------------------------------------------

My purpose in these posts is to bring a variety of Christian witnesses and writers in reflecting on life, encounters, and various situations, in a desire to enhance our understanding of what it means to be a missionary disciple of Jesus Christ at the service of the common good and directly or indirectly give glory to God and extend the Lord's work of salvation to all of humanity. G.S.

----------------------------------------------------------------

© 2004-2024 All rights reserved Fr. Gilles Surprenant, Associate Priest of Madonna House Apostolate & Poustinik, Montreal  QC
© 2004-2024 Tous droits réservés Abbé Gilles Surprenant, Prêtre Associé de Madonna House Apostolate & Poustinik, Montréal QC
 

+ + + + + + + + + + + +  

Monday, September 21, 2020

The Covid-19 Pandemic - an excuse to strangle the practice of religion?

My purpose in these posts is to bring a variety of Christian and other writers in a desire to share significant writings that in my estimation contribute to the common good and directly or indirectly give glory to God and extend the Lord's work of salvation to all of humanity. G.S.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Thursday, September 24th - 6:40 p.m. 

So the meeting will be tomorrow between the reps of the Table Interreligieuse du Québec and the Directeur de la Santé Publique. You know, we many not often say it, but we consistently pray for our governors, for those who hold public office and serve the common good. Well should we pray for them for their burdens of responsibility are often very heavy when they are not crushing. Saint Paul made it clear that, while we have been given a true belonging to the Kingdom of God initiated by Jesus; we nevertheless live in this world and for this reason we have a serious burden of responsibility to daily pray for those who govern us, our families and our communities. So, if you haven't already been doing it, please, join us in praying with sincere minds and enthusiastic hearts for the health, prosperity, and wisdom of our governors and the welfare of their families, not only tonight and tomorrow, but every day let us heartily pray for our political leaders and civil servants in our city, province, and nation. Peace to you and your families. 

Wednesday, September 23rd - 4:20 p.m. 

Well, many people have used up considerable quantities of ink and saliva these past few days about all these developments here in Québec. Finally, there is to be on Friday a meeting of the director of public health in Québec with representatives of the interreligious table in Québec. This will be the first time that a member of our provincial government will exchange words directly with representatives of the R.C. Church in Québec, the AEQ, the Assembly of Bishops of Québec since I don't know when, at least in the last six months. Yet, as Cardinal Lacroix recently explained, since the beginning of the outbreak of the Pandemic in Québec the bishops have tried to speak directly with the government but without success, without so much as a reply to their calls, and messages, and all attempts to communicate.

The proof came a few days ago with the government's unilateral decision to reduce the limit of the number of people to be allowed to gather for religious services from 250 to 50 and in orange zone to 25 despite the fact that until now no case of infection or contagion has been documented as a result of church Sunday services anywhere in Quebec in any of our churches. If the government had taken into account the actual measures in fact put into place everywhere in Québec in all of our churches they would have realized that there continues to be no danger of propagation in our churches themselves. For them to take it out on the churches and Sunday gatherings is a flagrant injustice and frankly a decision that is incomprehensible.

We acknowledge with gratitude the sense of social responsibility demonstrated by our government since the beginning of the outbreak of the Covid-19 Pandemic in Quebec. We listened and watched with great interest and assiduity the daily televised conferences by the director of public health and his colleauges. We sympathize with the social pressure that once again weighs heavily on their shoulders and wish to continue to support them as responsible partners. Besides, the bishops and all our churches were among the first to not only follow the public health protocols but in some instances we even anticipated them or surpassed them.

We call on our governors to target the actual active hot spots of contagion of the virus. If there is some concern over spontaneous gatherings that might take place after certain religious events; well then let's target those and leave Sunday services alone. None of our churches have had after Mass coffee since before the Pandemic outbreak. Since March our churches have actually forbidden such gatherings as those that might take place after Baptisms, weddings, funerals, Confirmations, first Confession, first Communion, and so on. Until recently these religious events were indefinitely postponed.

So since March there have been no such gatherings neither in our churches nor in our halls or even outside, neither planned nor spontaneously. Until the recent deconfinement our churches rather looked like places haunted only by ghosts where only priests, a few staff and volunteers dared to venture in order to set up and transmit on social media a Sunday or weekday Mass. As for the deconfinement itself, it was done gradually to the point that some churches still haven't reopened. We have only just begun in some places to plan for and allow funerals, weddings, and other sacraments. In any event, whenever such events are held it is always with rigorous implementation of public health protocols.

Furthermore, each person welcomed into our churches are met by carefully formed volunteers who assure they sanitize their hands and then explain to them where to go and how to maintain social distancing and keeping on their mask at all times while moving about or replying to the few dialogues during the Liturgy, walking in the aisles only in the direction indicated by the arrows on the floor, avoiding the closed benches, only members of the same household being able to sit together, and so on. 

Unlike bars and brasseries and restaurants, our churches don't welcome people who just spontaneously decide to go or who plan to go once in a while. Sunday Mass is an obligation and a necessity of faith for catholic christians because it is an integral part of their life as believers, as it is no doubt also for those who are believers in other religious traditions. The practice of the faith is not a private activity for our citizens but it is an integral part of their social life and of their belonging to our society. Any and all actions which forbid or render impossible the practice of the faith is a serious prejudice against the human and civil rights of every citizen. 

We sincerely and energetically want to cooperate with our governors, but please no longer take any measures which would have as direct effect making it impossible for citizens to practice their faith and, by the same token, strangle to death our churches instead of properly targetting the actual hot spots of the virus and its propagation.

Monday, September 21st, 2020 - 7:12 p.m. Montreal. Greetings dear Reader. By now you are no doubt aware of the measures taken yesterday and today to put severe restrictions on religious assemblies all over the province. This morning, in a state of shock, I first wrote my reflections in French on my blogue of that language in order to give expression to the anger if not rage that I felt under the effects of that shock. 

Before I give free rein to my thoughts in English, you may want to read - if you haven't already done so - the media statement of the Assembly of Québec Bishops - AEQ - released this morning. It catches the general sense of grave injustice created by the public health's severe restrictions on religious assemblies just published and intended to take immediate effect. Practically speaking, the Bishops of Québec are united in declaring that no changes will be made by any of the churches under their jurisdiction in the direction of further restrictions. They are quite satisfied with the already sufficiently drastic health measures that have so carefully been put into practice in all their churches; that they deem no further restrictions are necessary and that the hot spots of contagion are to be found elsewhere than in churches.

First, before going any further, let it be eminently clear that we generally are extremely grateful to our governments at all levels, to all our public servants, and to all those at the service of the general population for their devoted service and considerable efforts in promoting and defending the common good and the good health of all citizens in this land. We especially wish to thank and affirm the various agents of the public health system and the provincial leadership for public health for their untiring efforts since the outbreak of this Pandemic in Québec. To all of you, and you know who you are, THANK YOU! 

However, the fact remains that this latest policy of the public health leadership to further restrict religious assemblies throughout the province is a glaring act of public injustice to the point of being scandalous! 

Consider for a moment the general behaviour of citizens in our western democratic societies. Where do you expect to find the greatest contempt for the regulations published by public health authorities? In bars and brasseries or in churches, synagogues, and mosques? After sports events at the emptying of arenas or after religious services at the emptying of places of worship? I have nothing against bars and brasseries or sports arenas and fields as such, having frequented such establishments and places myself.

The fact remains that no emptying of a church has generated riots in which crowds smash windows and loot businesses as has happened more than once in this city after Canadiens' hockey games. No religious service in western religious traditions keeps people in worship longer than around 60 minutes, unlike the 1 to 3 hours people will generally spend in a bar or brasserie or sports event. No one leaving a place of worship after attending and participating in religious worship is at risk to leave intoxicated or in any other way debilitated or likely to pose a threat to public order and security.

Since the start of the Pandemic and the subsequent deconfinement you will no longer see gatherings around the coffee urn to chat and share news in the parish hall - there are no longer any spontaneous gatherings - in contrast to the many liberties taken by many citizens all over the province on sports fields and in all kinds of scheduled, planned and spontaneous events, coinciding with the upspike in cases of Covid-19 infections in Québec. In fact our religious leaders are still laboring over when and how to permit funerals, weddings, baptisms and other ESSENTIAL religious celebrations in the lives of people whose only "crime" is to have the audacity to have no choice but be different from general trends by wanting to practice their faith and religion.

I will be so bold as to declare my sincere belief that no gathering of citizens has imposed the public health measures with more rigour than the religious gatherings for worship of God in our churches since the beginning of the deconfinement: sterilization of hands on entering and leaving and before receiving Holy Communion; wearing of the mask during the entire celebration except for consuming the host; social distancing in the pews and also while moving around; no boiserous singing but only muted singing behind the mask; and no touching of others at the sign of peace. In short, worship has become very muted and subdued in comparison to before the Pandemic. 

A dear friend of mine is on the organizing committee of a Protestant church and, early on before the actual deconfinement was fully implemented everywhere, asked me to send him the protocols drawn up by the Diocese of Montreal, knowing as he did from experience how thorough and stringent our leaders have been in the past and continue to be today; even to the point of going beyond what is expected. He knew that with our protocols his local church would be ahead of the game and find itself well placed to put into place their own protocols for deconfinement.

As for Catholic parishes in the Diocese of Montreal, I have heard that some churches allow people to remove their mask while seated quietly in their pew, knowing full well that some people - especially the elderly but also those with respiratory restrictions - will breathe more easily without their mask. The only condition very clearly explained and enforced is that people put their mask back on for speaking their parts of the few dialogues during the service and before moving out of their pew for Communion or to otherwise move around.

From the sanctuary, very well distanced from the assembly, the priest, deacon if any, the reader(s), and singer remove their mask in order to be heard and then put it back on especially when about to move towards others, such as for the distribution of Holy Communion.

Altar servers have been banished from the sanctuary altogether and the priest alone prepares the offerings and accessories at the altar, first washing his hands before touching anything. The hosts to be distributed as Holy Communion after the consecration are placed before Mass at the end of the altar and far from where the priest will be standing; so that his breath will be a good meter away and not land on them. 

Despite all these measures carefully and strictly observed in our churches, in the past 24 hours or so civil authorities to all appearances casually targetted religious institutions as though churches and other places of worship had been deemed to be burning furnaces of contagion and the hotbeds of irresponsible and revolutionary behaviours. Where are the reports of misdemeanours on the part of any churches which supposedly might have failed to observe the protocols of public health? Where are the facts concerning the infection of members of churches or their personnel or volunteers? Which are those churches that, if they had cases of infection among their members or personnel or volunteers did not immediately put them in quarantine? Where are the data to substantiate this drastic claw back in deconfinement drastically reducing the limits for religious assemblies from 250 to 50 and even 25?

This situation is simply illogical. How are we to understand these restrictive measures targetting with no proven justification all places of religious worship without showing any effort to report facts and draw intelligent conclusions? Is there actual medical surveillance evidence clearly identifying churches as hotbeds of contagion? If not, then on what basis have these restrictive measures been taken? Could there be some hidden, even dark, agenda at work, perhaps even without the overt knowledge of the civil authorities or perhaps subconsciously determined to target and strangle the very practice of religion as such? Such an agenda would be dark indeed.

One can understand and grant how people for whom the practice of religion might be strange and incomprehensible could in their eyes see the practice of religion as a relic from the past when humanity was given to ignorance and superstition. It may even be that for such a person the practice of religion as such might be considered a dangerous rival to the institution of government for the attention of the population. In other words, certain people might conceive of the practice of religion as a threatening competitor for power in society, or even as an obstacle to governance, as a sort of threat to the effective unfolding of political and social power to govern. 

Notwithstanding some historical social abuses often quoted by the opponents of religion - and these aberrations were for the most part abuses that took place in the political and economic spheres when populations looked to church leaders to protect them from the excesses of exploitation by kings and princes and emperors - the historical record in fact shows that in Christianity - especially in Catholic Christianity - nothing could be further from the truth. Of course wherever you have people you will find differences of opinion. 

However, the fact remains that people who legitimately practice their religion - not those who simply claim to do so while practicing all manner of crime and abuse and violence while claiming to do so in the name of the deity - but those who are actually practicing their religion, and most especially those who are following Jesus and putting into practice his teachings and commands; well, such people are generally among the first to serve public order and peace. Many such people gave their lives during the declared wars of the 20th century and many of their names adorn memorials on the walls of their places of worship. 

We who are citizens of our country here would therefore we well situated to expect from those who hold power and govern the common good to take into account all these facts, the actual facts, and the actual behaviour of all those who continue to have the audacity to practice their faith and religion. Let them abstain from "taking it out on" and targetting religious assemblies of worship in what can only appear to be a vain and misguided attempt to contain the latest new outbreaks of Covid-19 infection. 

The actual causes of new cases of infection are most certainly to be found anywhere else than in our churches on Sunday mornings or Saturday afternoons or even during the week. I cannot speak for synagogues and mosques, but I suspect that their leaders and members could probably have the same assurance. So please, stop picking so randomly and unjustly on your fellow citizens who have the audacity and temerity to insist on practicing their faith and religion.

Here was the end of my first reflection in French this morning. Then, after a good lunch, conversation with fellow residents, and the opportunity to "take a step back", I added a few more thoughts which follow here below.

13:45... having taken a step back...

 If you don't already know it, dear Reader, please let me assure you that we Catholic Christians are pacifists. This morning while still in shock I wrote my consternation at these sudden restrictive measures specifically targetting churches and other places of religious worship. Failing the presentation of any factual evidence to support such restrictions which the public authorities could very well have provided, I could only ask myself a great number of questions on what possible motives might have spawned these drastic measures. 

Normally, the Catholic Christian outlook will give the benefit of the doubt when trying to understand the perplexing behaviour of others before questioning their intentions. At this point there appears to be no reason to believe that the cause is ignorance regarding the reality or identity or nature or behaviours of those folks who dare to practice their faith and religion. 

Having put aside ignorance, at this point we might also put aside malice as potential motivation for these restrictive measures; that is, the deliberate intention of strangling the civil rights of ordinary folks who dare to practice their faith and religion. 

So if it isn't ignorance or malice, one might conceive of unconsciousness or forgetfulness. It could just be an error of perspective, since churches are so many and so different one from the other. Under normal circumstances churches would welcome anywhere from 25 to over 1,000 people at any one time for a single religious service. This might cause churches as such to be a general category that might be difficult to define without giving it greater attention, observation, time, and care. One could see how it might seem easier when under great pressure to just sweep them all away with a single stroke, and "BAM!" Let's impose more restrictions on them all.

Now, without passing judgment on anyone's intentions, the fact remains that these sudden new restrictions  on assemblies for the purpose of religious worship remain incomprehensible, unjust, negatively discriminatory, and indefensible. They are nothing short of a public scandal. However, as it is a normal faculty of human beings to make mistakes from time to time; one can expect institutions governed by human beings to also make mistakes.

For this reason, we fully expect the public health authority to realize the unintended effects of these sudden and baseless restrictions to limit the number of people to be admitted to worship assemblies, and that it is highly desirable to rescind these new restrictions as soon as possible, even before we get to the days for worship this coming weekend: Friday for Muslims, Saturday for Jews, and Saturday afternoon and Sunday for Christians.

Here then is a sincere and good hearted plea to all levels of our public health institutions and all of their leaders - particularly at the provincial level - to make a public show of wisdom and solidarity with all of their fellow citizens who dare to practice their faith and religion and whose only "crime" is to insist on practicing their faith and religion publicly and not merely in the privacy of their homes. 

To retract these measures publicly will in no way be an admission of weakness on the part of public health authorities, but on the contrary, will be plainly seen as evidence of wisdom and humility, those qualities that are without doubt most desirable for every person at the service of the general population. Your public stature in our eyes will not be diminished in doing so, but on the contrary, will be greatly enhanced.

----------------------------------------------------------------

My purpose in these posts is to help spread the contributions of a variety of Christian and other writers in a desire to share significant writings that in my estimation contribute to the common good and directly or indirectly give glory to God and extend the Lord's work of salvation to all of humanity. G.S.

----------------------------------------------------------------

© 2004-2021 All rights reserved Fr. Gilles Surprenant, Associate Priest of Madonna House Apostolate & Poustinik, Montreal  QC
© 2004-2021 Tous droits réservés Abbé Gilles Surprenant, Prêtre Associé de Madonna House Apostolate & Poustinik, Montréal QC
 

+ + + + + + + + + + + +  

Wednesday, June 24, 2020

Abortion is a failure of manhood more than a woman's choice


My purpose in these posts is to bring a variety of Christian and other writers in a desire to share significant writings that in my estimation contribute to the common good and directly or indirectly give glory to God and extend the Lord's work of salvation to all of humanity. G.S.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Are you shocked? I don't think any thinking person should be shocked by such a statement, at least no Christian or human being familiar with Christianity should find it shocking. Why is that?

From a Christian perspective on pregnancy

Today Roman Catholics and others observe the solemn memorial of the Nativity or Birth of John the Baptist. Of what significance might the birth of a baby boy two millennia ago be for humanity today?

True, his pregnancy was a pleasant surprise, even considered miraculous, because his mother Elizabeth was "getting on in years"... in other words, she was old, even elderly, well beyond child-bearing years. God had to send the Archangel Gabriel with a message for Elizabeth's husband, the priest Zechariah, while he made the offering of incense in the Temple in Jerusalem. The message is that God was granting him and his wife a favorable answer to their lifelong prayers for a child.

Because they were both beyond child-bearing years, Zechariah reacted with scepticism to the angel's message; as a result Gabriel struck him dumb until the day God's promise would be fulfilled.

When Mary, the bride of Joseph of Nazareth (they had not yet come to live together to seal their union), visited her cousin Elizabeth, who was now 6 (lunar) months pregnant, the child in Elizabeth's womb "leaped for joy" and Elizabeth was "filled with the Holy Spirit" and she proclaimed Mary blessed, for she too was now pregnant with a child by God's direct intervention.

Fine, but those women wanted to get pregnant and have a baby

True. Elizabeth had long wanted a child but was found to be barren; while Mary (Myriam) was too young to have even thought much about having a child. Tradition is though that she very much wanted God to grant Israel the long-awaited and promised Messiah who would save his people.

Granted that "ordinary" women today may not necessarily have any interest in having a baby at any time soon or even ever. That is the situation in the developed West but not necessarily elsewhere or at any other time in history. Why is that?

Let's recap historically relations between women and men / between men and women 

Throughout history, women have considered childbirth as coming to the fulness of their womanhood and that children were the "glory of woman" and having more children was simply adding to their wealth. It was a woman's joy, serenity, and satisfaction to have a man who respected her and prized her for all that she brought to their joint family.

To the extent that her man did not rise to the occasion, then to that extent did the woman suffer and was deprived of that satisfaction and blessing. If her man was not a good father, then the burden of parenting fell heavily on her shoulders alone, and the children were deprived of proper fathering.

Male adult human beings who rose to the occasion and became truly men manifested respect for all women and particular devotion and loving service to their own wife, whom they cherished for her own self and all the more for the children she bore to him to grow their family.

Such a man taught his children, both girls and boys, to respect their mother as he did his wife, and to show her nothing but love, obedience, and grateful attachment.

Saint Pope John Paul II on women (and by extension on men)

In 1995, in anticipation of the Fourth World Conference on Women to be held that September in Beijing, Pope John Paul II wrote his "Letter of Pope John Paul II to Women" addressed to all women in the world and to every woman. He acknowledged with regret all that has been done historically to deprive women of recognition of their own proper dignity and to exploit them in various ways and so to make their lives miserable and to hinder them from fully developing themselves and making their full contribution to human society. In particular, he wrote:
"9. Progress usually tends to be measured according to the criteria of science and technology. Nor from this point of view has the contribution of women been negligible. Even so, this is not the only measure of progress, nor in fact is it the principal one. Much more important is the social and ethical dimension, which deals with human relations and spiritual values. In this area, which often develops in an inconspicuous way beginning with the daily relationships between people, especially within the family, society certainly owes much to the "genius of women". 
Here I would like to express particular appreciation to those women who are involved in the various areas of education extending well beyond the family: nurseries, schools, universities, social service agencies, parishes, associations and movements. Wherever the work of education is called for, we can note that women are ever ready and willing to give themselves generously to others, especially in serving the weakest and most defenceless. In this work they exhibit a kind of affective, cultural and spiritual motherhood which has inestimable value for the development of individuals and the future of society."
Earlier in his text he recalled how it is related in the Book of Genesis that God created woman after he had created man; so that she could be a helper to him, and he to her. There is a profound truth told here that we human beings are created in God's image and likeness, and that we exist and live in God's image and likeness precisely in our complementarity as male and female, female and male.

It might be a startling deduction to say that whenever we act exclusively as male or exclusively as female - without the active complementarity of the other - then we can be expected to be and to act "less humanly" or "with less humanity". Men need to "make room" for women in order to develop, become, and act "more humanly"; just as women need to "make room" for men in order to develop, become, and act "more humanly".

A perspective on humanity - man and woman - uniquely shared by Jews and Christians

Even from an aesthetic, literary, and anthropological point of view, it is significant to note that the creation account relates how it was that during the 6 days of creation, God at each stage looked upon all that He had made "and God saw that it was good". It was only after the Creator had "created humankind in his image", creating them "male and female", and after having commissioned them to have dominion over all of creation - that is to assure order and proper development among all living and inanimate creation - and after having shown them all that they had to eat; that
"God saw everything that he had made, and indeed, it was very good." 
It can be said that woman - especially in light of chapter two of Genesis - was God's final creation, and from a certain point of view, his masterpiece. Pope John Paul II appreciates woman from this very point of view in coining the phrase "genius of women" to portray women's unique and irreplacable capacity and determination to give life and nurture life, especially with those who are the most vulnerable and needy.

There is an expectation, then, which is not specifically spelled out but which follows of necessity and logically, which is an expectation that men would rise to the occasion and acknowledge, first of all, this "genius of women" and, secondly, in deep gratitude show women the utmost respect and support with all affection of heart, respect of intellect, and generosity of soul. After all, only a fool would neglect or discard his most valuable treasure, only a brute would treat his treasure with contempt, and only a pirate would treat his treasure as a commodity to be sold, bought, or traded.

Sadly, men have all too often behaved towards women precisely as fools, brutes, and pirates; hence all the sad human history of the abuse and mistreatment of women and the inevitable consequences of impoverishment of the whole society. To the extent that male and female infants are abused with such harsh treatment; to that extent they are deprived of their full right and possibilities to become fully man, fully woman, and fully human.

How does this "truth" about humanity revealed by God shed light on our current situation?

It is logical and honest to derive from human history the conclusion that, left to her own devices, a woman would want to experience the fullness of her femininity, of her womanhood, and bear one or more children to a loving man, her husband, and in this way to make her unique contribution to build their family and help to develop society.

I would submit, then, that whenever a girl or a woman is inclined to reject this dimension of her being; it is very likely that this is primarily because she has been deprived of sufficient or even of any fully developed men in her family of origin. She has not known any man strong enough, developed enough, loving enough to assure her that as his daughter she is fully wanted, loved, appreciated, safe, and free to breathe, move, live, develop, rejoice, and have her being as woman. She has probably not known any brother with similar dispositions towards her. She may even have been abused in any number of ways, overtly or in hidden but equally damaging ways.

Why would such a woman, cut off from anything beneficial in her society, want to have children, only to have them share in the miserable conditions which she has known and in the despair of ever finding anything better?

Human society's criminal neglect of respect for the proper dignity of women

On the basis of this study, then, I would like to submit that the current trend of abortions worldwide is a true plague, a worldwide pandemic, far more serious than Covid-19. The various agencies that keep track of abortions publish a conservative estimate that there are some 40-50 million induced abortions (separate from miscarriages) worldwide each year, which translates to 125,000 to 137,000 daily.

Why would so many woman, who by their very nature would want to bear their children into the world and see them live and prosper; why would they submit themselves to the extremely violent procedure of having their baby poisoned by chemicals, or sucked out and shredded live by vacuum, or killed by means of any other equally violent procedure?

The facts speak for themselves. Rarely does the man who impregnated that woman accompany her to the abortion clinic. He may not even accept to take responsibility for his part in the conception of the infant. Even if he does take his responsibility and does accompany her, he still does not understand or refuses to acknowledge the violence of the abortion procedure, and failing to do so, he also fails in his role and responsibility to protect his woman from experiencing any harm to herself or her baby.

A further fact, which is undeniable due to the sheer volume of documentation and social tracking, is the growing absence of men in families and households: men are increasingly conspicuous by their absence as husbands and by their absence as fathers. The result is that the girls they have conceived are much more likely to experience lifelong abuse and misery, and the boys they have conceived are far more likely to die young by a violent death or sink into a miserable life of crime and violence. It is a vicious circle that begins and ends with men's failure to respect their women, from their mothers and sisters to those with whom they engage in irresponsible sexual relations.

This situation is "the human condition" and not just the crime of one generation

In God's self-revelation to the people of Israel, the Creator manifested his sympathy with all human suffering, and in particular, with this failure to connect in love and respect between the generations.
23 "Lo, I will send you the prophet Elijah before the great and terrible day of the Lord comes. 24 He will turn the hearts of parents to their children and the hearts of children to their parents, so that I will not come and strike the land with a curse." Malachi 3
It is clear, then, from this prophetic word given by the prophet Malachi in the 5th century B.C. that God renders the diagnosis that human society will remain "cursed" until and only until the hearts of parents turn to their children and the heart of children turn to their parents. The only effective remedy and prescription for this "dis-ease" can only come from God when He sends Elijah again to his people. Jesus acknowledged that John the Baptist was indeed Elijah come again to turn human hearts back to God and, consequently, back to each other.

So where to we go from here?

Since we are given to understand that, left to herself with true men in her life, any woman would want to bear to term and to life any child she would conceive, rather than destroy it; it remains, then, for us men to rise to the occasion and become those men God intended us to be and for our society to manifest in all that we say and do the utmost respect for women, all women, regardless of their state or condition in this life.

Every woman is God's masterpiece, the one most likely to make visible the Creator's generous giving and sustaining of life; for this reason alone she deserves every support to fully realize the fullness of her womanhood, whether or not she elects to have children of her own. It is only with the full support of the men in her life that, even in the face of an unwanted pregnancy, any woman would follow her own feminine nature and bring that life to term in order to allow it to live and have its opportunity to develop and have a life. It is then the responsibility of society to assure that any unwanted child find a home where it will be wanted, cared for, and loved for its own sake and not for exploitation.

There are many, many woman now on record who, having once been staunch defenders of women's rights to abort unwanted pregnancies, now have come to reverse their views with the conviction that the abortions they had were truly violent procedures that had lasting negative impacts on them, not to mention the deadly impact on the infant of ending its life. It is through faith in God that many of these women have experienced forgiveness and peace and were then able to forgive themselves and all those who failed to support them. Only with forgiveness were they able to experience deep healing in their own person and in their womanhood.

It is our place to acknowledge these women and be grateful for their courageous testimony in the face of aggressive opposition from those still committed to the defence of what they call women's right to choice. They don't realize the incongruity of their stance in denying the equal value and right to the choice to refuse abortion and instead choose to nurture life to birth and beyond.

As men fail to fully develop their manhood, they simultaneously hinder womanhood to develop

It is ironic but understandable that there is such opposition in our human society and culture and such aggressive resistance and even violent action against the Judeo-Christian Scriptures and convictions about the "culture of life". The "Ten Commandments" and all ethical thought related to them are said to put unfair limits on human beings' rights to choose and enjoy life. The evidence is in by now that the rejection of this "religious anthropology" results in the most dire consequences and misery. There is no such thing as "free sex" or "free enjoyment" of anything, because to every action there are all the inescapable consequences.

Human ingenuity and industry created "the pill" in 1961 to help regulate irregular cycles experienced by some women, but then it was found that it also acted as an abortifacient. It interrupted conception or the process of conception. Humanity embraced it with reckless abandon.

In 1968 Saint Pope Paul VI published for his encyclical "Humane Vitae" to everyone in the Church and to all people of good will, which was an eloquent reflection on the beauty of human love and family, he warned that to try to exert control over the human process of conception with artificial means of birth control would have dire consequences. He was ridiculed, as most true prophets usually are. Sadly, subsequent events demonstrated only too truly how right he had been.

When people claimed to have mastery over their fertility and "their own body", they simultaneously rejected God's authority and mastery over their mortal lives. The results have been catastrophic and uncontrolled separations and divorces, all time low respect for women by men, the reduction almost exclusively of woman to sexual objects, astronomical numbers of abortions, abandoned children, absent husbands and absent fathers, unfathered generations of children, increased crime rates among those unfathered children, increased rates of homelessness among children and youth as well as of prostitution and other crimes, increased rates of human trafficking and of the slave trade, especially for the purpose of sexual exploitation, increased rates of self-mutilation and suicide, increased desire for euthanasia or medical assistance in dying... and the list of woes goes on and on.

What if a woman really does want to be free to enjoy sex without consequences?

Human nature being what it is, I don't deny that a woman might indeed want to taste what appears to be the freedom from consequences with which some or even many men seem to enjoy their sexual pleasure. However, in such a case, I don't think it would be defensible to claim that such a stance may be an advancement, progress, or elevation for the woman; rather, it would be a step back, a descent into depravity, the kind that tragically far too many men for far too long have perpetrated, dragging down with them their unfortunate spouses and families.

The only men who can in any way enjoy sex without consequences would be those who ignore or silence their consciences, or who have so often trampled on them as to render them inert and unable to rouse them to better motives and higher goals. The killer may feel badly after the first murder, but with each successive one he will feel less and less badly about it and may end up justifying himself with the thought that their victims "deserved what they got". So too the thief may feel justified to take from the rich in order to alleviate his own poverty or that of others.

The impulse to "enjoy sex without consequences or responsibility" can only cause a person to change and become depraved, one who is more and more inclined to objectify others and use them as objects for their own pleasure, separating those others in their mind from any reality of being persons in their own right with a unique life, personal feelings, permanent value, and a proper destiny of their own.

Whichever of us, woman or man, still has a sense of what is right and what is wrong before God, then that one has a responsibility to care for oneself but also care for the other by resisting the other's plea to do what is wrong - however attractive that thing may appear to be or may be represented to be, or however frightening the right thing may appear to be. If one doesn't stand for what is right, then one becomes responsible not only for one's own downfall, but also for the downfall of the other. Like it or not, we're literally all in this together, and we either navigate or sink together.

South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem is defending women from pressure to abort

Elected in 2019 as the first woman Governor of South Dakota, Kristi Noem has signed several pieces of legislation to come to the defence of pregnant mothers and of unborn children, not least of which is a piece to criminalize pressure put on pregnant women / mothers to abort their child. Her personal and political priority is to defend and promote the family as the most important unit of society. This is a kind of socially responsible leadership that our world needs but has sadly been lacking far too long.

Governor Noem deplores the lack of serious commitment in her country overall to value the family, and worse, the apathy that allows any and all other considerations and motives to undermine and erode the family, in particular by failing to support the parents as well as the children. Governor Noem is certainly taking the lead among U.S. politicians and is truly setting an example for all of us, not just politicians, to emulate and to follow.

In light of the tragic reality of the unequal and unjust burden of responsibility left to be carried alone by women - especially when there is an unexpected pregnancy - it's high time for all of us to stop the accusatory and aggressively divisive rhetoric and for each of us take our responsibilities seriously, roll up our sleeves, and support and accompany pregnant women rather than dump the entire burden of responsibility for them to carry alone. It's time for men to "man up" and for women to "circle the wagons" and for men and women together to "bite the bullet". We'll all be better for it.

God's offer of forgiveness and life is still valid and on the table. It is up to each of us to accept.

From a strictly human point of view - in light of the inherent weaknesses in us due to the human condition - there at first appear to be no solutions in sight for any of these social ills, which are rapidly disintegrating the fabric of our society. The only truly effective solution ever devised is the one offered by God and clearly revealed for all of humanity to discover, consider, and welcome.

He sent his divine Son into this world with the indispensable help of a woman - his mother Myriam - to take on a human existence by which He came to be known as Jesus of Nazareth, son of Myriam of Nazareth and of Joseph the carpenter of Nazareth. By the manner of his life, ministry, signs and miracles, then by his passion, death, and resurrection, Jesus revealed and demonstrated the quality of God's stable and unrelenting love as that of the Father's unconditional love for us.

It is a love that desires to enter into a mutually loving relationship and therefore asks for a true return of love, and we can only return God's love in a true, honest, and transparent way. This requires that we admit the ways in which we have failed women, failed men, failed our children, failed our society, failed each other, and failed ourselves. We need to repent and seek forgiveness, but it is a wondrous forgiveness that has already been given to the last drop of Jesus' human blood.

God the Father's forgiveness and his offer of a relationship of love through his Son Jesus Christ, is a wondrous transformation that can only happen within us by the intervention and power of the Holy Spirit, and it is a gift ever awaiting our wanting it, our consent, our confession. Authentic love that seeks the good of the other is like true friendship - it cannot be forced or demanded - and like true friendship, it can only be freely given as a gift without strings attached. So it truly is up to each of us.

----------------------------------------------------------------

My purpose in these posts is to help spread the contributions of a variety of Christian and other writers in a desire to share significant writings that in my estimation contribute to the common good and directly or indirectly give glory to God and extend the Lord's work of salvation to all of humanity. G.S.

----------------------------------------------------------------

© 2004-2021 All rights reserved Fr. Gilles Surprenant, Associate Priest of Madonna House Apostolate & Poustinik, Montreal  QC
© 2004-2021 Tous droits réservés Abbé Gilles Surprenant, Prêtre Associé de Madonna House Apostolate & Poustinik, Montréal QC
 

+ + + + + + + + + + + +  

Sunday, September 22, 2019

Canadian Federal Election Guide for Roman Catholics and Other People of Good Will

My purpose in these posts is to bring a variety of Christian and other writers in a desire to share significant writings that in my estimation contribute to the common good and directly or indirectly give glory to God and extend the Lord's work of salvation to all of humanity. G.S.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Roman Catholic Public Election Guide

(Intended for use in Canada for federal and provincial elections)

Is voting for a pro-abortion, pro-euthanasia party a mortal sin?

It is clear that to talk or write about abortion or euthanasia must be done with great sensitivity, because the action of ending a pregnancy or ending a human life are very serious and poignant issues that have profound impacts on those struggling with them. When people face an unexpected or unwanted pregnancy or face a pregnancy that is wanted but comes at an inopportune time; there can be great anxiety felt by those directly concerned. All too often, the pregnant woman may find herself alone and without any support, and fear alone may pressure her to end her pregnancy, or the pressure to do so may be put on her by others around her and at times even from health and social service agents. The same kind of pressure may be felt by those who suffer from disability, chronic or prolonged pain and feel like a burden.

These are culture of life issues, and there are many others, not the least of which are newly developing trends around human gender. These are perhaps the most important issues in our federal election because they have direct bearing on life itself for every citizen. Catholics and other people who treasure the sanctity of life are the only people who can publicly manifest this importance. The election is a prime opportunity to do this.

As you may or may not know, the Diocese has posted on its website "Let'sVote Responsibly" – a message from the AEQ for the 2018 provincial election which in many ways makes points applicable in this federal and indeed any federal or provincial election. A link to the CCCB's Federal Election Guide will lead you to further links to several statements by the CCCB on various moral and ethical issues facing Canadians, most notably abortion, euthanasia, and the right to life and dignity. Ours are very challenging times, but we have a new opportunity every day to put our trust in God and to give witness to the truth which is always good news. The CCCB Election Guide makes this important point:

"Exercising the right to vote means making informed and discerning judgments about the options available. There are times, however, when making a decision about who to vote for may prove very difficult. The Church reminds us that “in this context, it must be noted also that a well-formed Christian conscience does not permit one to vote for a political program or an individual law in which the fundamental content of faith and morals is replaced by the introduction of proposals differing from this content or opposing it.”

The implication is that a Catholic could not vote for parties that have explicit pro-choice and pro-euthanasia policies in their platform. This does not mean that a person needs to only vote for parties that do not endorse abortion or euthanasia. While these may not wish to bring these issues up or allow caucus members to bring them to the Commons, they may at least allow MPs or candidates to hold pro-life views and vote accordingly.  The Campaign Life Coalition (CLC) advice is that a Catholic (or other person who shares culture of life values) would check to see what candidate in their riding has pro-life views and vote for that person. 

A key point here is that abortion and euthanasia are not morally equivalent to any other election issue, e.g. foreign policy, economy, etc... The right to life is the first human right from which proceed all other rights... While our society and culture may comfortably hold views that fail to consider the unborn as human beings; from the earliest days Christians have always held abortion in abhorrence, according the unborn respect for their human dignity. The basic human right is the right to life; then come liberty and well being.

Once life is assured, the next right is liberty. Once life and liberty are assured, the next right is to seek and assure well being or happiness. One person’s right to liberty cannot trump another person’s right to life; nor can one person’s right to well being trump another person’s right to liberty, and certainly not their right to life. Our culture has acquired an intense repugnance for pain and suffering, to the point that freedom from pain and suffering has come to be considered by some to be more important than the value of life itself. This is so in spite of the abundance of evidence that for human beings, meaning and purpose are not contained in what happens to us; rather, human beings have a capacity to give meaning and purpose to what happens to us.

Christians have always held that life and death belong to God. Human beings are not wise enough to determine when a life should end. Taking it upon oneself to put an end to one’s life or to the life of another is unwise and usurps the rights and authority of our Creator God. He made us and our lives belong to Him. Our reluctance to trust in God is the primary cause of much human suffering and many destructive human decisions and behaviors. It is an act of love to provide the dying with palliative care, to help pregnant women, and to take interest and accompany on their journey any who suffer.  

There are 100,000 abortions a year in Canada. The Catholic Organization for Life and Family (COLF), co-sponsored by the CCCB and Knights of Columbus Supreme Council, noted “Canada, with China, North Korea, and Vietnam are the only countries which have no restriction in law with regard to abortion.” Most of the major parties support abortion over the full term of the pregnancy until birth.  President Trump stopped U.S. international funding to abortion organizations but the Liberal government now funds Planned Parenthood and other organizations to perform abortions around the world. 

Canon Law does not define what is or is not a mortal sin, distinct from the discipline of theology, and defers to her in matters of moral theology. Canon Law is inspired by the Church’s theology, forbidding abortion from the earliest days, and its statutes clearly reflect this. In law we speak of delicts (a.k.a. as crimes), and these are very precisely defined.  Note that a delict MUST be clearly and explicitly defined as such in canon law. With regard to those who directly procure an abortion, the law imposes several restrictions or imposes penalties: 

Canon 1041: irregularities impeded ordination – actually procuring an abortion makes a person irregular for the reception of orders
Canon 1398: latae sententiae ex-communication of anyone who effectively procures an abortion, “the killing of the foetus, in whatever way or at whatever time from the moment of conception”.

On a more local level, a bishop does have the authority to decree statutes and laws that apply to his diocese, and may impose penalties in this manner.  With regard to abortion, the legal landscape varies from place to place. The document “Forming consciences for faithful citizenship” was issued by the USCCB as a guide for Catholics in the US which states: http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/faithful-citizenship/upload/forming-consciences-for-faithful-citizenship.pdf      

34. Catholics often face difficult choices about how to vote. This is why it is so important to vote according to a well-formed conscience that perceives the proper relationship among moral goods. A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who favors a policy promoting an intrinsically evil act, such as abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide, deliberately subjecting workers or the poor to subhuman living conditions, redefining marriage in ways that violate its essential meaning, or racist behavior, if the voter’s intent is to support that position. In such cases, a Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in grave evil. At the same time, a voter should not use a candidate’s opposition to an intrinsic evil to justify indifference or inattentiveness to other important moral issues involving human life and dignity.

35. There may be times when a Catholic who rejects a candidate’s unacceptable position even on policies promoting an intrinsically evil act may reasonably decide to vote for that candidate for other morally grave reasons. Voting in this way would be permissible only for truly grave moral reasons, not to advance narrow interests or partisan preferences or to ignore a fundamental moral evil.

In the U.S.A. during the 2004 presidential campaign Cardinal Ratzinger stated that voters would be "cooperating in evil" if they voted for a political candidate precisely because of their permissive stand on legalized abortion or  euthanasia. He further stated that voting for these candidates for other reasons of commensurate gravity in spite of their stand on abortion / euthanasia was justifiable in principle. Ratzinger… supported the denial of Holy Communion to these politicians… but bishops should only withhold communion after meeting with, teaching and warning politicians first.

So, to answer your question – voting for a pro-choice or pro-euthanasia candidate may be considered a mortal sin if the intent of your vote is to specifically advance the cause of abortion or euthanasia.  If not, then it will not be considered a mortal sin. Voting for a candidate who supports the value of human life from conception to natural death is a just way to promote public consciousness of the inherent value of human life and also honours the rights of our Creator God. 

----------------------------------------------------------------

My purpose in these posts is to help spread the contributions of a variety of Christian and other writers in a desire to share significant writings that in my estimation contribute to the common good and directly or indirectly give glory to God and extend the Lord's work of salvation to all of humanity. G.S.

----------------------------------------------------------------

© 2004-2021 All rights reserved Fr. Gilles Surprenant, Associate Priest of Madonna House Apostolate & Poustinik, Montreal  QC
© 2004-2021 Tous droits réservés Abbé Gilles Surprenant, Prêtre Associé de Madonna House Apostolate & Poustinik, Montréal QC
 

+ + + + + + + + + + + +  

Tuesday, October 09, 2018

On a Mission... Together!

My purpose in these posts is to bring a variety of Christian and other writers in a desire to share significant writings that in my estimation contribute to the common good and directly or indirectly give glory to God and extend the Lord's work of salvation to all of humanity. G.S.

----------------------------------------------------------------


I have been an active priest in Montreal for over 35 years now. We have done many things, initiated many programs, served many generations of people of all ages. Even at our worst and weakest, God still manages to do good things and to bless people through - and sometimes despite - our efforts.

I find it very encouraging that our Archbishop and his Pastoral Team are calling on all of us to "put our minds and hearts together" before we "put our hands to the plow together", because we are "On a Mission... Together!". So, here are some personal observations and thoughts about those observations.

I think we have often suffered in the past, and I believe we continue to suffer a sense of failure, often, and I believe it is in part because our goal is to "fill the church" again or for the first time.... We keep trying to throw a large net to "catch as many people as possible" all at once. Depending on our parish situation, this impulse to "rope in as many people as possible" may become very desperate indeed. Jesus was motivated and his heart pressed Him, but He was never desperate.

Of course, it is necessary and good that we address large crowds, as we do on the Lord's Day, and as Jesus Himself did in his Sermon on the Mount and before He fed the multitudes with a few loaves or loaves and fishes, or when He taught in the Temple in Jerusalem. This is normal for us - clergy and evangelists - to address large crowds whenever we have them, but it is part of living our faith; as Jesus and his apostles and disciples went to synagogue and to the Temple in Jerusalem.

However, large crowds are not the primary or most effective way of sharing the good news with people. Yes, Jesus did teach large crowds, but He evangelized in a personal way, one person or family at a time. When the Gospels mention people's lives being changed and them deciding on the spot to follow Jesus from that point on, it was usually after an intimate one on one encounter with Jesus. At WYD's when young people were with Saint Pope John Paul II or Pope Benedict or now Pope Francis; Jesus is there touching them, but their lives really change when they have a personal encounter with Jesus such as during Confession or encounters with other youth or with adults.

None of our programs or approaches work very well or for very long, in the end, primarily I believe because we keep trying to catch "large bunches of people", whether it is the families who come for sacraments or whomever, without applying ourselves sufficiently to one on one evangelization. We find one on one listening and caring very troublesome and tiring, when we are not convinced it is a waste of our time and energy. People's and families' lives are messy and whenever we get "too close" we find it difficult, unsettling, and distracting us from our many duties and tasks and projects.

We may often be impatient with people who are irritating or troublesome, but Jesus would have welcomed them, listened to them, asked them what they wanted, and then He would have given thanks to his Father before blessing them, and then God the Father always did something marvelous for them, whether it was forgiving their sins or healing or whatever. God the Father touched people through Jesus' caring and loving as He gave the impression that He had all the time in the world for those who came to Him.

Then, when Jesus "breathed on his apostles and disciples" and poured the Holy Spirit into them, He enabled them to do as He had done and showed them how to do. When we were baptized and then confirmed, Jesus also "breathed on us and poured into us his Holy Spirit". However, we may have trouble believing in the reality of the Father's love, in the reality of the Holy Spirit's power, and in the reality of Jesus' trust in us and his commission to us to do as He has done and showed us.

I believe a serious flaw in our thinking and in our approach is that we keep skipping this most basic, fundamental, and essential step; that is, the step that Jesus Himself took, which is one to one evangelization. Jesus walked the roads and streets looking for opportunities to encounter people. As He encountered people, one person at a time, one family at a time, He proclaimed the good news and left them free to respond right away or not; He even left them free to walk away.

We don't want people to walk away, and when they do, we get frustrated and feel a failure or even feel a false kind of guilt based on whatever it was that we thought our goal was.... It doesn't take much to discourage us and we quit or try something else, going from one approach to another, one program to another, one idea to another, one event or activity to another, but we don't value the people, the persons we meet along the way. They come and they go, but we don't let them move us as Jesus allowed them to move Him with compassion for them; as when he wept over them because they were like sheep without a shepherd, or when He wept over Jerusalem for having rejected Him.

Jesus evangelized one person at a time, and He taught his disciples to evangelize one person at a time. That is what God is doing, and we need to "get with the program." What God calls us to do is not Jesus' commission only to clergy, religious, parish or diocesan staff, or key volunteers, but it is Jesus' commission to each and every single baptized and confirmed person and believer.

Of course we will never proclaim this to people if we do not believe it ourselves. We will find it difficult or impossible to practice Jesus' approach if we do not even try. Imagine, though, what it would be like if we did begin to employ Jesus' approach, without fear of failing, leaving people free to walk away if they are not quite ready yet to follow Jesus. If even one tenth of church goers began to do that, parish congregations would double every year or even more frequently....

Peace to you and your family. Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit.... 

----------------------------------------------------------------

My purpose in these posts is to help spread the contributions of a variety of Christian and other writers in a desire to share significant writings that in my estimation contribute to the common good and directly or indirectly give glory to God and extend the Lord's work of salvation to all of humanity. G.S.

----------------------------------------------------------------

© 2004-2021 All rights reserved Fr. Gilles Surprenant, Associate Priest of Madonna House Apostolate & Poustinik, Montreal  QC
© 2004-2021 Tous droits réservés Abbé Gilles Surprenant, Prêtre Associé de Madonna House Apostolate & Poustinik, Montréal QC
 

+ + + + + + + + + + + +