• Editorial - Op Ed
• Bulletin Board, Announcements, Calendar
• Welcome and Website Protocol
• Article Archive

Print this page

Article Categories

• Book Reviews
• Open Letter
• Editorials
• Notes, Quotes & Comments
• Pastor's Study
• Project Millstones
• Sidebar Comments
• Weekly Message

Links

AMERICA Magazine
A balanced Catholic weekly magazine published by the jesuits of the United States for an intelligent Catholic readership. Go online to subscribe.

Liturgy
This link will keep 'parishioners-at-large' in touch with current creative liturgy sources and resources that respect a variety of 'traditions' within the Church.

Voice of the Faithful
A 'movement' of lay Catholics 'inspired' by the abuse scandal calling for greater accountability of bishops to 'Catholics in the Pew.'

Survivos' Network for those Abused by Priests or Religious
A National Network of self-help support groups for people abused by clergy or religious.

Bishop Accountability
Vital information about the disclosure of sexual abuse and related issues affecting Catholics in the pew and the manner in which Bishops continue to exempt themselves from accountability

National Catholic Reporter
A national Catholic lay newspaper covering events not usually covered or presented with a clerical bias in the local diocesan press or but of concern and interest to Catholics.

COMMONWEAL Magazine
A 'lay' Catholic weekly publication with an accent on an intelligent analysis and commentary on curent issues, trends and concerns of interest to Catholics.

Search

Daily Scripture

+ 5th Week in Ordinary Time

It still has meaning.

1 Kings 8:1-7, 9-13 Psalm 132:6-7, 8-10 Mark 6:53-56

The priests brought the ark of the covenant of the Lord to its place beneath the wings of the cherubim in the sanctuary, the holy of holies of the temple. There was nothing in the ark but the two stone tablets which Moses had put there at Horeb, when the Lord made a covenant with the children of Israel. [1 Kings 8:6, 8]
_
In recent years there has been much discussion in liturgical circles about the proper location of the tabernacle in the worship space. The directives implementing the Constitution on the Liturgy by the Second Vatican Council prescribed that the tabernacle be located in prominent location in the church or chapel, preferably in a chapel dedicated to the reservation of the Blessed Sacrament and appropriate for veneration. In any case, it was not to be located on the altar table used for the celebration of the Eucharist. As a result in many churches renovations, the tabernacle was moved to the ‘side altar’ previously used for the veneration of the Blessed Virgin or St. Joseph and in some churches, it was placed on the old altar previously used for Mass. In situations the old altar was replaced with a permanent pedestal on which the tabernacle was placed.

In liturgical matters, nothing is simple. Those of a more conservative disposition insisted that the location of the Tabernacle on the side altar reduced the status of the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist thereby diminishing its meaning in the devotional life of the faithful. Others of a more liberal persuasion opined that in fact, the location in a separate chapel within the church assigned to the sacrament greater prominence thereby increasing the devotional aspect. Moreover, in as much as an emphasis of the ‘action’ of the Mass as the repetition of the “Lord’s Supper” was promoted by the Council, it seemed to liturgists that the location of the tabernacle in the main sanctuary behind the free standing Eucharist table would compete with the ‘action’ of the Mass as a sacred meal.

The most recent prescriptions in the United States provide that the tabernacle be located in the main sanctuary on suitably ornate pedestal. It is ironic that in the major basilicas including the basilica of St. Peter in Rome, the tabernacle is located on a side altar that is not very prominent.

Whatever the location, it should not be a bone of contention worthy of a liturgical battle. The public and private devotion to the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist is rooted in the long tradition of the Church and should not be disparaged. In the same way in which the tablets of stone on which the Ten Commandments was symbolic of God’s presence in the temple, so too, the reservation of the Eucharist Bread has been one of the longest-standing practices of the devotional life of Catholics. It is intended to extend the meaning and the effects of the Eucharistic celebration into the life of the faithful who continue to spend time in prayerful meditation on the mysteries of the life of Jesus not the least of which is his faithfulness unto death on the cross for the salvation of the world. The two aspects of Eucharist need not be in competition. The ‘Mass’ continues to be considered a “sacrificial” meal. But we need to be clear that its connection with the passion and death of Christ even as the lamb of God is not to suggest that his death was mandated to satisfy and angry God. That in my opinion is not an appropriate application of Old Testament sacrifices. No, Jesus sacrificial death was the completion of his entire sacrificial life of unqualified and indiscriminate love in the same way as the sacrificial love of partners in marriage offer their sacrificial love to one another or in the manner that Mother Teresa offered her live in sacrificial service to victims of poverty in the streets of Calctta. It is in this sense that devotion to the Eucharist in the tabernacle takes its extended meaning.

During the celebration of the Eucharist, we become what we eat. Through our devotion to the Eucharist reserved in the tabernacle, we are reminded that the Eucharistic presence in our mind, heart and soul extends into all the good works of our lives with the hope that we too will always think and act with the same sacrificial love as did Jesus in his earthly life.

Twenty-Third Sunday in Ordinary Time 'C'

Sunday September 5, 2010

To Know Jesus is to Live Jesus

Today’s Gospel brought back memories of my days in the seminary in the foothills of the Ramapo Mountains in Mahwah. They were very different times, to be sure. As with those preparing for a commitment to monastic life, young men destined even for the ‘secular’ priesthood were expected to live apart from the world in a quasi-monastic setting.

The seminary was often referred to as a spiritual ‘boot camp.’ Some cynics called it ‘Alcatraz!’ No food allowed in the room; no carpets on the floor, no secular pictures or even family photos on the wall. Contact with family and friends was limited to what we now call ‘snail mail.’ Phone calls were permitted for emergencies only and never without explicit permission. There were no weekly visits from parents, sisters and brothers or ‘outsiders’ of any kind and our only trip beyond the seminary gates was a walk to the cemetery on All Souls Day and a ride to the voting polls on election day. Newspapers or secular magazines were the property of professors who sometimes left them in a disposal container at the end of the hall where we would snatch them up for a clandestine peek.

The daily schedule was clearly defined; nothing left to chance or choice. We were being trained to “love God with all our minds and hearts and souls and our neighbor as ourselves” though our neighbors were limited to our fellow students and instructors, the latter making it very difficult at times to love them.

This may all sound quirky to you and I can assure you it does to me as well in hindsight. But believe it or not, they were to a great extent, carefree days. There was security in that axiom, “You keep the rule, and the rule will keep you!” But is this wisdom or naivete? Perhaps they were happy because we were happily ignorant of the world around us. This type of detachment from reality was not healthy.

There is no doubt that the seminary lifestyle was intended to prepare us to live in the world as true disciples of Christ — the same Christ that we meet in the Gospel. Perhaps seminary discipline was based on a literal interpretation of today’s text from Luke which is even stronger than Matthew’s narration of the same teaching: “Whoever comes to me and does not hate father and mother, spouse and children, brothers and sisters, yes, even life itself, cannot be my disciple.”

The difficulty is not that you and I reject the literal meaning of this text; we certainly do! The problem is that we are tempted to cast it aside as having no application whatever to our lives and our life-style. Was it Mahatmas Ghandi who said, “It is not that Christianity has been tried and found wanting; it’s just that it has never been tried.” As the words of Jesus in today’s Gospel, it is an overstatement to be sure but not without merit or application. The line between exclusive love for Jesus and religious fanaticism is very thin. We live in an age of religious fanaticism. We find it among Christians and even among some Catholics who revel in rules and regulations and in the minutiae of rubrics and rituals while neglecting the rule of love. To love Jesus exclusively is to love others inclusively!

Just as one person cannot be “trained” to know and love another in preparation for marriage, so too the seminary could not “train” candidates to know and love Jesus in preparation for a life-long commitment to him and to his teachings. Couples fall in love; faith in Jesus is caught and love for him not learned from books but experienced through association. The disciples of Jesus journeyed with him. In fact, Luke’s portrayal of Jesus life is a journey from Nazareth to Jerusalem, in the course of which his disciples came to know him as ‘the way, the truth, and the life;” for them, the only way, the only truth, and the only life.

As in a healthy marriage, when the relationship is solid, we do whatever we need to do protect it, to nurture it, and to live it faithfully. We become preoccupied with the other and the other energizes us overtly and subliminally. So it is in our relationship with Jesus. We do whatever we need to do to remain faithful. Jesus becomes the center of our lives. In the words of the psalm hymn: “O Lord, you are the center of my life; I will always praise you, I will always serve you, I will always keep you in my sight.”

Indeed faith is caught not taught; love is experienced by hanging out with people who know Jesus and who love as Jesus loved.

A young boy was in the habit of coming home from school late. There was no good reason for his tardiness and no amount of discussion seemed to help. Finally in desperation the boy’s father sat down with him and said, “The next time you come home late from school you are going to be served bread and water for your supper — and nothing else. Is that clear, son?”

The boy looked straight into the father’s eyes and nodded. He understood perfectly. However, the next day he arrived home later than ever.

That night when they sat down together at table, the boy’s heart sank to his feet. His father’s plate was filled with food; likewise his mother’s plate. But the boy’s own plate contained only a single slice of bread. Next to his plate was a lonely glass of water.

The boy’s eyes stared first at the bread, then at the glass of water. This was the punishment his parents had warned him about. To make it worse, he was absolutely starving.

The father waited for the full impact to sink in, then quietly took the boy’s plate and placed it in front of himself. He took his own plate and put it in front of the boy.

The boy understood what his father was doing. His father was taking upon himself the punishment that he, the boy, had brought upon himself by his own behavior. Years later, that same boy recalled the incident and said, “All my life I’ve known what God is like by seeing what my father did that night.”

This is in effect what Paul did for Onesimus, the slave of Philemon in ‘adopting’ him as his son and it is what God had done for us in Christ.

All our lives we may have been wondering what God is like and then we met Jesus.

The next step is for us to be for others what Jesus has been for us.