Catholic Church sex abuse scandal

I'm going to repeat what I've said before, and I will continue to say this every time that I am asked.

I believe that anyone who mishandled sexual abuse within the Church, sexual abuse being both a devastating crime and a sin, should resign their office, whether as a cardinal, bishop or parish priest. I don't really care about the circumstances of whether it was a "minor" or "major" involvement in the mishandling because all of that corrodes faith, whether by small bits of rust and tarnish or large egregious lack of good sense and/or integrity. If it was mishandling and not actual participation in the abuse, I believe that upon resigning the office that these cardinals, bishops and priests should dedicate themselves within religious orders that are contemplative and filled with prayer.

There is supposed to be no "ego" in serving the Lord God, and thus any cardinal, bishop or priest should be gratified to relinquish their offices and in turn become one hundred percent dedicated to the life of prayer, particularly addressing prayer for both the victims of the abuse and for renewal of the priesthood.

People, listen to me carefully, whatever your faith (or not) or beliefs. For decades humanity has teetered on the brink of a total meltdown into depravity. These priest sex abuse cases are, in the sense of showing the incurable addiction of lust and depravity, no different from what we are seeing in society as a whole. I know you want to say, "Hold on, how can that be? Priests are supposed to be different!" Yes, in an ideal world they are supposed to be different, but look at the world today. Are not mothers "supposed to be different?" Yet every week we read about mothers who sell and trade the sexual innocence of even their infants for money, car payments, access to drugs, or some other trivial transaction. Are not teachers supposed to be "different?" Yet every week we read about teachers with child pornography and those who seduce and/or molest children they have access to, in that position of "trust." Are not "those who have been abused themselves" supposed to be "making sure what happened to them never happens to other children?" Yet we know that many of the most violent criminals use the excuse of their own, often horrifying, suffering of child abuse, and far from being protective, they enact their rage on other innocent adults and children. Are not police supposed to be "better than that?" Yet pressuring sex trade workers is a long going problem among police, so long that it has even been the stuff of jokes.

EVERYONE is supposed to be "better than that" but NO ONE IS anymore.

Catholic priests are just as subject to falling into the pit of depravity and vice as anyone else. I know that it seems out of proportion, but hear me now and believe me later. If you start looking at how many children have been molested by their own parents, or baby mama's "boyfriend," and by purveyors of porn, soon we will have a population that has more saying "yes" they've been abused than "no." Abuse has become the "new normal."

You'd have to be living under a rock to not realize that this society has fallen further and further into filth and depravity, and no "group" is "should be better at being pure" than anyone. I've seen some think that married priests or "more women" in the "church hierarchy" will "help." I'd laugh if this was not such a dire, world and soul killing problem. Yeah, women, such pillars of virtue, as they teach their kids to pole dance, wear thongs, offer them for sex to get themselves money or drugs, seduce their male students, etc. So please do not trivialize a worldwide soul destroying crisis of monumental proportion by suggesting this is a "celibate male" problem.

I marvel that God has not burned down this filthy depraved world already. Then I guess you would not have to worry about those priests, huh?

Victims, I know what you have been through as I've been abused, but not by priests, but by those who mettle with sorcery. But victims, I urge you to not be victimized twice. Do not let the outrageous scandal of the Catholic priest sex abuse problem cause you to also lose faith in the Church and in God. If you do, you will be victimized twice and God will not, I repeat, not understand your abandonment of God and his church.

I am not being harsh but realistic. What do you think was done to the early Christians of the Church? Do you think they were not abused and tormented in every way possible, including children? Yet they hung on to their faith to the end. God and the Church remain, no matter what individuals do, both within and outside of the Church. Running away does not make God go away, nor does it invalidate the Church. You can deny all you want but remember, human beings put to death the only pure and sinless man, Jesus Christ, and he proclaimed God with his last breath on the cross.

I will give you an analogy to help. Suppose you read in the paper that someone drowned while swimming in the ocean. Bad ocean, bad water. We no longer believe in water because it drowned someone. Stop bathing and showering. Stop drinking water. Tell everyone you know that water is "bad" and you "no longer believe in water." What will happen? You die of thirst in a matter of days.

No matter what the pain of life it is simply insane and not at all "understandable" that someone "lose their faith in God or the church." It's an unhealthy coping mechanism to think that because one is a victim of bad human behavior that suddenly the overall truth of the world (God and the Church) "no longer mean anything to you." That, my children, is being victimized twice. God will not nod his head in your meeting with him at personal judgment when you perish and say, "Hey, I know, a really bad thing happened to you, so it's A-OK with me that you 'lost your faith' and 'stopped believing in Me' or 'decided my Church was invalid.' Sure, I know that I, God, and my Church are not worth staying and fighting for, even through the pain."

Children, God is pure Truth. If you get only one thing about God in this particular message, understand that God is pure and total truth. God cannot be anything but the sum total of all that is true, that ever will be true, and ever could be true. When you grasp that you realize that God never changes and that while he cares very much for each person, when a person denies God no matter what the reason, they are in danger of not entering heaven at all, because being God's dwelling place, heaven is also pure truth.

The way to healing and to sanity is by embracing more truth, not less.

I hope that you find this helpful.

Today's thoughts about the priesthood

Regular readers know that one of my constant prayer intercessions are for increased vocations, specifically for priests.

While reading another cautiously optimistic article about increased enrollments in seminaries and a new tide of young people who are giving serious thoughts about becoming priests, I thought of another way to explain the joy of the calling to what many perceive to be a thankless (or even unnecessary) "job."

For a Christian, acknowledging Christ as both Lord and Savior is a lifelong endeavor. One does not "Savior insurance policy" one's way into making Christ truly the Lord of their life. So the analogy I thought of just now is that a priest provides continual soul maintenance and "preventative medicine."

We know in the field of medicine that "preventative medicine" is both essential and also neglected, perceived as being not glamorous or profitable. However, those of all religions who are called to their faith's vocations understand that they are like maintenance people/preventative medicine experts rather than glamorous surgeons who operate one time to save a life. Christians are, and should be, no different. Even if one has that moment of committing to Christ and thus, as many evangelicals call it, "being saved," to hold only that view is to believe that one surgery fixes all of a person's medical problems for life. We know that it obviously not true in real life. Likewise, as we read in the Bible the Old Testament priests were there for the ongoing health of each person's soul, which does stumble often during life, if one is honest. Sin, temptation, bad thoughts and bad behavior abound. Also, just as in a marriage, one's connection to God must be constantly demonstrated and renewed, or it is suspect as being hollow and taking the "marriage" partner for granted.

So I often think of priests as, yes, those who save souls for God, the way evangelicals think of the Great Commission, but day to day I think of priests as the preventative medicine guys, the ones who carry the burden of continual maintenance (which any corporate employee can tell you is the least glamorous but most essential job in a company). Many individuals witness and bring people to God, if Christian, through Christ. But the priests maintain the sacraments, the methods that Jesus provided through his example, in order to keep the relationship with God flowing and growing, helping their flock to avoid the dangers and pitfalls, and helping them in the stumbles that many take throughout life.

I hope that this reflection has been helpful and ask you to join me as I pray for and support growing vocations, and the young men who are called to be deacons and priests. Likewise too I never forget the women and men who are called to consecrated religious life in communities, and I pray too for their increase in both numbers and their fervor for God as he really is, ever present in all the people.

A word to priests

On Good Friday we contemplate, among other things, how very alone the Lord was in his suffering.

While many attend services during the Easter celebration, and while many vibrant parishes exist year around, we know that there is a crisis of faith around the globe. In particular westernized countries have seen a drop in church attendance as people seem to start to feel that they "don't need" to go to church to "honor God" or to be 'spiritual,' that good intentions (and even total neutrality) are enough.

I am thinking with particular desire to comfort those priests who look out and see only a handful of parishioners at Mass.

I know that all of you know that there is never a "wasted" Mass, even if you are the only one celebrating Mass and the only person in attendance. I also know, better than you realize, though, how acutely saddening and distressing that it is to think about all those who jeopardize their salvation and, at the very least, their own spiritual comfort and reality, by no longer attending or valuing Mass. So I'd like you to think about the following.

When you celebrate Mass to a near empty church, imagine it filled with the people who would desperately want to attend Mass, if only it were available where they are, in oppressed, impoverished, or under-served parts of the world. Dedicate as personal intentions in your mind that each available seat is offered up for those people.

Also, think of those who would attend if only they believed. Likewise, have faith that if you also dedicate those empty seats as intentions for those of little or no faith, through the Holy Spirit it will do a powerful amount of good, and also be of great comfort to you.

It is my most frequent personal prayer intention, to pray on behalf of those who will not or cannot pray for themselves, and I find it a great comfort and know it to be efficacious (though results are frustratingly slow to see, I know). This is why I had the idea that if priests as personal intentions dedicate their "empty seats" to those who cannot be there or who are yet in denial and refuse to be there, each Mass, indeed, will be very full.

I hope that you have found this to be helpful. In Christ.

Saddened so many bishops have died in February

I have not missed the sad numerics of how many Catholic bishops have died in the past twenty days in February:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Joseph_O%27Donnell Retired, 77.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ant%C3%B3nio_dos_Reis_Rodrigues Retired, 90.

Cipriano Calderón Polo, 81, Spanish Bishop of Thagora (1989–2003).

Sefafín Vásquez Elizalde, 86, Mexican Bishop of Ciudad Guzmán.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Kim_Sou-hwan 86.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Tsien_Chih-ch%27un Retired 83.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jerome_Welsh 87.


***
Yes, it is true, these were for the most part retired men blessed in their length of life.

But it is a good time to remember that few people work harder than a priest, a bishop. They rarely have "time off," say nothing of a weekend, or a holiday. For all the slagging that the Catholic Church has gotten over the few and the terrible involved in abuse and cover-up, it would be a shame to not remember that many bishops still worked tirelessly to their deathbeds, and even if retired, often celebrated Mass and constantly prayed for everyone, Christian and not, believing and unbelieving. Two of the retired bishops who passed were American.

So in twenty days seven bishops have died.


It is a good time to pray for all who have vocations, pray for more to be called to vocations, and have some thankfulness for the good priests and bishops, especially the elderly, who served with very little in return of a material nature, or of respite from the day to day responsibilities for souls. I'm not even listing here the priests and men and women religious who have died this month, but the news there is sad too, especially as a Spanish priest in Cuba was murdered, and eight nuns died (and a ninth seriously injured) in a bus crash where brakes failed, in Indonesia. Prayers for all who give so much all their lives, even when it is cut short. But today I want to especially point out those who never really had a single "day off," the elderly bishops who have served their entire lives for God and for the flock.

Understanding faith in God via Catholic topics (2)

This next topic is so vast and important that I’m going to present it in easy to understand sections that build upon each other. The topic is the Catholic priesthood, and understanding what it is to be a priest.

First I must make the point that I am, as I explained in my introduction, using Catholic doctrine as the basis for this tutorial. This does not imply that only the Catholic Church contains the practices I describe throughout this series, as different Christian denominations maintain, or not, differing components from the mother Church. However, with the exception of the Orthodox Church, the “eastern tradition,” all Christians up until the Reformation had the common doctrine and furnishings of worship as I describe here in this series.

What is the priesthood, and what does it mean to be a Catholic priest, and where does the current structure of the priesthood come from? First, let me address a modern misconception that the priesthood is an “elite” position with a “job description.” That concept has never been true, and is wrong for two reasons. One is that under Catholic doctrine all the faithful are considered priests, called the “baptismal priesthood.” The second reason this is wrong is that the “ministerial priesthood” is not a job description to which one attains, but has its roots in the priesthood of the Old Covenant, which has the purpose of offering sacrifice.

So that you don’t have to believe me, but read the actual words of the Catholic Church, here are readings from the “Catechism of the Catholic Church.” The correctness of the Catechism is, by the way, a responsibility of the Pope, one of his “job responsibilities!” This means that the Pope “signs off” on the Catechism of the Catholic Church and all updates and clarifications. This is not a work of the Pope’s “infallibility” per se; it is, rather, one of his responsibilities as Bishop of Rome and Vicar of Jesus Christ to ensure accuracy and “quality control.” The Catechism of the Catholic Church is, to quote Pope John Paul II in his introduction, “a compendium of all catholic doctrine regarding both faith and morals… a point of reference for the catechisms or compendiums that are prepared in various regions.” This means that the Catechism is a statement of doctrine that the Church has always maintained and guarded, but assembled into one reference book so that local churches can have the complete set of doctrine from which to draw upon as a resource locally. Pope John Paul II even calls it a “reference text.”

Thus, here is the Catholic doctrine regarding the priesthood of all the faithful.

Two participations in the one priesthood of Christ

1546 Christ, high priest and unique mediator, has made of the Church, “a kingdom, priests for his God and Father.” The whole community of believers is, as such, priestly. The faithful exercise their baptismal priesthood through their participation, each according to his own vocation, in Christ’s mission as priest, prophet, and king. Through the sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation the faithful are “consecrated to be…a holy priesthood.”

Let me explain. Far from demeaning parishioners, the lay people, and “reserving priesthood for the elite hierarchy,” Catholic doctrine has always maintained that all the faithful are members of the priesthood. This is called the “baptismal priesthood,” and each member carries out their participation in the priesthood of Christ according to their vocation. I cannot tell you how annoyed I have been with non-Catholic Christians who blatantly lie, willfully or out of ignorance, that the Catholic priesthood is somehow elitist and separating of the people from Jesus Christ, when the opposite is true. In fairness in the crisis of faith that affects all Christians in this society, Catholics themselves of the past two generations have lost track of the realization that they, through Baptism and Confirmation, have been initiated into the very real priesthood of Jesus Christ. They are then speechless when non-Catholics criticize them, quoting from scriptures the very basis that yes, indeed, Catholic doctrine agrees, which is the priesthood of the faithful. I sigh in extreme exasperation and get headaches of annoyance, and my blood pressure rises, I won’t hide those facts from you.

While leaving discussion of infant Baptism and the sacrament of Confirmation to later tutorials, let me make this pertinent point. I’ve explained it before in posts under the tag of Baptism, but now you probably understand it more easily. Baptism of infants is a continuation of the washing and swaddling that Israelite infants received after their birth to bring them to the Temple and be initiated into their faith. John the Baptist did not “invent” baptism and he didn’t “mean for it to be for adults.” John the Baptist recognized that a new baptism will be needed when the Messiah comes; that no longer the washing of the infant, the putting of the infant in new swaddling clothes, and taking the infant to the Temple with the appropriate sacrifice made one a member of the faithful that the Messiah will call. John the Baptist, called by Jesus the greatest born of human woman, understood that a new Baptism is needed, of water and Spirit. This Baptism was given, obviously, to adults as the shift from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant took place, with the coming of Jesus Christ. But the Catholic Church always understood that infants are to be consecrated to God at their birth, just as had been true of the Israelite infants. This is the Baptismal origin of both the practice of baptizing infants and the Catholic doctrine that upon their baptism they are part of the “baptismal priesthood.”

Recognizing that infants cannot have a vocation other than to be infants, the active period of the “baptismal priesthood” of children commences at their thirteenth birthday when they receive the sacrament of Confirmation. Again, without preempting what I want to explain about this sacrament in future tutorials, I will make some simple points. At thirteen in the Israelite tradition of the Bar and Bat Mitzvahs, children are viewed as being adults regarding their responsibility to God and their faith. Confirmation is a continuation of that understanding and, again, it is where the Old Covenant meets the New Covenant. This is why the Catechism section that I have just quoted calls the priesthood of the Christian community, the laity, a “baptismal priesthood” but one where the faithful are fully “consecrated” “through the sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation.”

Yes, you Catholic parents who are reading this and who have either not baptized your child or had them receive Confirmation; this is why there is a problem. It is not the Catholic Church being “mean” but rather, these are the steps one takes to be consecrated, to be made a sacred member of the priesthood of Jesus Christ, exactly as when in the Jewish faith, the Bar Mitzvah boy must actually study and do his Bar Mitzvah to be the Bar Mitzvah boy; just thinking good thoughts and going to synagogue is not the same.

So this directly addresses the dignity of the laity. The Catholic laity is not only dignified, it is priestly and each and every person, male or female, married, single or divorced, straight or gay, rich or poor are a member of the “baptismal priesthood” and are “consecrated” “in Christ’s mission as priest, prophet, and king” if they have received Baptism and Confirmation, period. From the point of those sacraments onward, throughout one’s life, it is “each according to his own vocation” that the baptismal priest exercises their priesthood. Here is further explanation.

1547 The ministerial or hierarchical priesthood of bishops and priests, and the common priesthood of all the faithful participate, “each in its won proper way, in the one priesthood of Christ.” While being “ordered one to another,” they differ essentially. In what sense? While the common priesthood of the faithful is exercised by the unfolding of baptismal grace-a life of faith, hope, and charity, a life according to the Spirit-, the ministerial priesthood is at the service of the common priesthood. It is directed at the unfolding of baptismal grace of all Christians. The ministerial priesthood is a means by which Christ unceasingly builds up and leads his Church. For this reason it is transmitted by its won sacrament, the sacrament of Holy Orders.

Notice that rather than being an upward hierarchy, “the ministerial priesthood is at the service of the common priesthood.” Thus the “ministerial priesthood” serves the baptismal priesthood, the common priesthood. To summarize:

1591 The whole Church is a priestly people. Through Baptism all the faithful share in the priesthood of Christ. This participation is called the “common priesthood of the faithful.” Based on this common priesthood and ordered to its service, there exists another participation in the mission of Christ: the ministry conferred by the sacrament of Holy Orders, where the task is to serve in the name and in the person of Christ the Head in the midst of the community.

1592 The ministerial priesthood differs in essence from the common priesthood of the faithful because it confers a sacred power for the service of the faithful. The ordained ministers exercise their service for the People of God by teaching (munus docendi), divine worship (munus liturgeicum), and pastoral governance (munus regendi).

1121 The three sacraments of Baptism, Confirmation, and Holy Orders confer, in addition to grace, a sacramental character or “seal” by which the Christian shares in Christ’s priesthood and is made a member of the Church according to different states and functions. This configuration to Christ and to the Church, brought about by the Spirit, is indelible; it remains for ever in the Christian as a positive disposition for grace, a promise and guarantee of divine protection, and as a vocation to divine worship and to the service of the Church. Therefore these sacraments can never be repeated.

I’m going to wrap up this segment of discussion here, even though I know it raises even more questions! But I want to keep this a “one topic at a time” approach as much as possible. Therefore my summary point of this section is that Christians should understand that Catholics, through Baptism and Confirmation, are considered of the priesthood of Christ and that while this differs from the ministerial priesthood, there is a dignity of vocation that if anything is under-recognized and under utilized among Catholics themselves. Rather than agitating an erroneous belief that the Catholic “hierarch” somehow “keeps down the dignity” of the laity, everyone needs to understand that Catholic doctrine most clearly states as it has from Apostolic times that the opposite is true. When I write later about the apostolic basis for the understanding of the sacrament of Confirmation, you will see that even more clearly. I honestly have been disappointed with many Catholics at their lack of understanding of the dignity and the calling of the baptismal priesthood.

I hope that you have found this helpful.

Vocations story: pro soccer player to be priest

What a wonderful young man! Bless him and his family. Prayers for vocations continue.

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0803771.htm

Building on previous post, more re loving God

Here are a few more thoughts, building on my previous posting about vocations.

One of the reasons that God sent Jesus Christ was to bring God’s love to humans, in person. One of the afflictions of the age during which Jesus was born was that the Israelites had lost much of their love of God. By love of God, I mean the personal relationship of love dialogue, as I described in my previous posting in this blog.

I know that many of you assume that a personal love of God is something that really did not exist in the Old Testament times, but you would be wrong. I can explain this in several ways. One is to point out the obvious love of God that is expressed in books such as the Psalms, the Song of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, Wisdom, and Isaiah and in many other places. You can distinguish the fervor of love from the feelings of fear of God. So many of the faithful did indeed feel a fervor of personal love for God, although it was not the focus of the law and obligations for worship as documented in the scripture. You have to read between the lines a little bit to understand where the authors are swept away in the grandeur of God, and in appeal to him for justice, or fear of his wrath, from the contemplations of the wonders of his work and also their sense of personal love for him.

Second, love tended to be expressed in parent and child terms during those times. There really is no way to describe to modern humans exactly the love between a father and his first born son, for example. So much of the personal love dialogue that I speak of is cloaked in the depth of love that a father and first born son have for each other, rather than ardent friendship, shepherd, and consoler that Jesus brought in person. So you have to remember that love for God was just as personal and ardent during Old Testament times, but tended to be expressed and felt in much more of the treasured father-first born son as it was back then. In fact, readings for the Mass from this week indicate times when God is frustrated with the hypocrisy of their ritual worship of him while at the same time sinning. It is not that the sinning “makes God mad” so he “doesn’t care about the sacrifices,” but rather, when one sins one does not love God. Sin is the expression of not-love of God. So you have to understand that from “God’s point of view,” when one sins one is acting in a way that is not indicating love of God. Trust me, people did not obey God just because he cracked the whip and threatened them with punishment or hell. Many, MANY people in Old Testament times had a fervent personal love relationship with God, but it was perceived as something that did not have to be preserved in scripture as a special point. The many allusions to father-first born son love was really the way the people of that time felt, in its nearest equivalent, their personal love relationship and dialogue with God. It has wrongly been portrayed as a time of when fear wrung obedience out of the people, but as I said, the fervent and personal love of God is evident but in a much more subtle way throughout the Old Testament.

A third point to make is that when Jesus was born there were many “distractions” from a person’s love relationship with God, much as today. The Roman occupation, the secular temptations and the corruption of the money changers and much of the priesthood were all interferences between the faithful and their personal love relationship with God. Some of it was understandable, as they kept “waiting” for God to “do something,” in the miraculous fashion to impact the political or military situation. Impatiently tapping one’s foot at God expecting an army of angry angels to whoop the butts of the Romans is not exactly conducive to the love and adoration of God, and this had a very corrosive effect on the faith of the Israelites and the fervent love of God that their forefathers had. So this is another reason that in the beauty and, to humans, mystery of God’s perfect plan, he sent “his Son.” The people still well understood the father-first born son devotion that was culturally historic, as I describe above, and so remained relevant and a way to make God again “accessible.” Through Jesus God opened that door to re-personalize the mutual love that had been blocked and corroded by the dire condition of the Israelites. This is why you can read in the Gospel that thousands responded over and over to the obvious “magnification” of God’s love onto the people through Jesus. Jesus allowed the people to overcome the corrosive times, the cynicism, and the oppression of pagan conquerors, plus their own priests’ corruption, and once again connect to God using a love metaphor that they understood of father and first born son. Jesus never had to declare God his Father to the flock who listened to him, or that he is the Son, for this love metaphor to work. You see, Jesus was acting as the loved “agent” of God, just as the first born son would for his father in family business or work. Jesus explained God to the people, demonstrated his obvious love and obedience to God in all things, and magnified his love for God so that the people could see through unspoken example. This is why people did not run around trying to worship Jesus himself on the spot. When people left one of Jesus’ “sermons,” they left feeling more fervent love for God.

This is why it is perfectly alright to love Jesus with one’s whole heart and soul, and to focus one’s love on him. However, it is not being one hundred percent true to either Jesus’ intentions or what he actually accomplished when he was here on earth to have the love “stop at Jesus” and not extend through to God. If one truly wants to imitate those who heard Jesus in person and who believed, then you must come away from an encounter with Jesus loving him, yes, but recognizing that your love is really extending through Jesus to loving God, and feeling his love in return, himself. I do worry very much about this pious generation and the parts of Christianity who have forgotten this, or never realized it. Why is it that people, even as Jesus performed incredible miracles, did not throw themselves at his feet in organized worship on the spot? Because, obviously, it was their faith in God and love of God that was refreshed and restored, and that is exactly what Jesus wanted. Jesus came in order to be the Savior and the Messiah, but this does not mean that he was not “bringing God” to the people, but only himself. I often repeat how Pope Benedict XVI wisely phrased it in his book “Jesus of Nazareth,” that he, Jesus, “brought us God.” When the son represents the father, and is his agent, for the Israelites (and many cultures of the land, including what would become the Muslim people), the son speaks for the father, and has the authority “as if the father himself is there.” But that does not mean that the son wants people to only “deal with him” and forget about the father and his authority. Jesus made God, the Father, more accessible, restoring the love dialogue between the people and God, and between the individual and God. And then he died, resurrected and “returned to the Father.” If you want to imitate “how the Church really was” “in Jesus’ time” then one must understand that exposure to Jesus resulted in more fervent and personal love of God himself.

I hope that you find this helpful. It is a source of great concern for me, especially regarding Christians who are outside of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church in its liturgy retains more of the continuity of devotion to God and this is why I am not quite as worried about those within the Church as I am for those outside of it. Here is a practical example of how to reflect on what I mean. How often does one feel an experience of loving God very deeply in gratitude for sending Jesus, compared to how often one focuses all of one's love on Jesus? I'm not talking quantity here, but giving you an exercise to see if you are truly "loving God through Jesus" or if you have stopped feeling the "follow through" through Jesus all the way to God, and thus do not really contemplate your love for God and fully extend and receive the dialogue in return from God in his fullness.

Addressing priests, bishops, & called to vocations

While commenting on a blog about the status of vocations as it pertains to the level of bishops, I was able to put into words some of my views on vocations, and why priests deserve much more credit than they receive. My comments might also be helpful to those starting in on their vocations, or even long time priests who have reached a period of spiritual aridity, or have been too afflicted by the pressures of the world.

Most everyone understands that when one first thinks about being a priest, in the very early stages, they describe it as hearing a call or an attraction to vocation. The first thing that the potential future priest may feel, often as a youngster, is a pull to the vocation itself. It is the “job” that is what seems to be the voice that God uses to call them with. So I do not mean that they view it just as a secular job but one that serves God, far from it. But what I mean is that the language of inner, interior dialogue, the invitation, that God extends tends to center around “what the priest would be doing for God,” as in the specifics of the service. The young proto-priest often envisions himself performing priestly roles, and may admire priests in his parish, or long distance role models such as the Holy Father in Rome.

But what these proto-priests, who first hear the call to vocation, don’t realize is that a second dialogue that is much more subtle is taking place. That is, to hear an invitation from someone who loves them dearly to love them in return. At the same time that God is extended the “call to vocations” by framing the dialogue as being about having a “job” that is in service to God and his flock, there is a second conversation which is, especially if one is a youngster, the first spiritual invitation to love and be loved.

I would explain to you, even though most priests probably could not explain it themselves this clearly, that their formation is not just learning the “job” of priesthood, but understanding and developing their personal love relationship with God. We all know priests who are marvelous, while others struggle. Some of this is a matter of how much they are able to take the love they freely exchange with God and now magnify God’s love onto their parish, or whatever their assignment or religious community. The most successful and serene priest is the one who is not the most “hip” or the most “modern” or the most “popular,” but the one who can authentically magnify the love he has learned about with God onto his flock.

A bishop, then, finds an even greater challenge, which is why it is so daunting to some, but welcome to others. Just at a time when one must bear an extra burden of secular administration types of responsibilities, one must also magnify their learning of God’s love onto and throughout their entire diocese or archdiocese. They are literally the interpreters of their personal “love dialogue” with God for now tens of thousands of people, or even a million. It is an enormous challenge for the consecrated clergy at all levels, but one must have special appreciation for this part of their vocation that they themselves often do not recognize, understand, or give themselves credit for. This is one reason why the Blessed Virgin Mary loves the priesthood and prays continually in God’s presence for their intentions. This is because she well knows, and indeed foretold that, “My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God, my Savior” (Luke 1:46-47).

With those words, Mary essentially wrote the first lines of the job description of future Catholic priests and bishops. Just as her purpose was to “magnify” the Lord, with “rejoicing,” it is the vocation of priests and bishops to magnify their personal love dialogue with God so that it is visible and easily attained by their flock. THAT is their number one task, in addition of course to the sacraments, most especially the Sacrifice of the Mass, though obviously that is the shared expression of worship of God’s love for his flock.

Priests and bishops also have much more serenity with the personal sacrifice, including chastity that they have made through their vocations when they mindfully deliberate and promote this magnification of God’s love. As a priest is formed, and then throughout his maturing, he must constantly work on, and benefit from, his personal dialogue of love with God. In some ways it is like any love relationship in that there is potential for miscommunication, aridity, or the competition of outside forces. Recommitting and refreshing oneself in one’s personal dialogue with God is only enhanced when one recognizes that he must “magnify” this love dialogue for his flock. Magnification means to make visible what the eye cannot see without assistance. A priest who can take the love dialogue he feels with God and now “display” it through his works, words and feelings onto his flock is “magnifying.” Likewise, the bishop does the same although the day to day activities differ from that of a parish priest.

I have to emphasize that I do not mean to rack up a longer list of charitable works in the name of Jesus. And I do not mean that the flock must be made happier because "you" love them. What I mean is to display the depth of love that you have with God in public, magnifying it, just as a spouse who is with someone he or she adores does so automatically with just a look. A priest cannot be serene and totally fulfilled in his calling if he is not continuing, even through periods of aridity, to be "in love with God" on a personal level and in dialogue. It is that love of God that YOU feel that should translate into your demeanor, works, and deeds, as naturally as rain falls. You are not magnifying your personal feelings toward the flock in imitation of Christ, you are magnifying the love dialogue that you have with God himself onto your flock. (And no, this does not mean you tell them your secret prayers to God! :-)

When one learns how to dialogue with God in his love, he is truly accessing something that is infinite and immeasurable. It is a source of refreshment, rather than a burden. Unlike activities that place a physical, intellectual or emotional strain on a person, increased access to God’s love and the sharing of it with others only refreshes and sustains, rather than depletes. This is one of the unspoken but obvious ways that the Blessed Virgin Mary endured what she did during her life, and two thousand years later, continues to touch the hearts of millions through her intervention and understanding. It is not her power that she wields, but instead, she continues to magnify her love dialogue with God onto all of those who believe and listen.

So I hope that those in the priesthood, bishops, those in formation, and those considering vocations take these words of illumination, explanation and encouragement to heart, and God bless all who serve him.

Profiles of seminarians to be priests on June 14

A really interesting article interviewing some of the men who will be ordained priests this Saturday in Rockville Centre New York. Blessings to them all and their families for their vocation.

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/ny-liprie0613,0,7066204.story

Can't someone make needed donations?

I really think that Catholic individuals and/or organizations need to get some emergency funding here. If we can't keep our seminarians from literally starving doing vocations, what will Christ say?

http://allafrica.com/stories/200806060878.html

snip

A Catholic major seminary in Makurdi in central Nigeria is facing the stark choice of closure as a result of the worldwide food crisis.

The rector of the seminary, Fr Kenneth Enang, said the institution has already been forced to ration the food on account of "astronomical prices." The seminary could be closed in two weeks, he said.

Makurdi Major Seminary has some 520 seminarians from 15 dioceses around the country preparing for the priesthood.

Fr Enang told the German-based international Catholic pastoral charity, Aid to the Church in Need, that the crisis had worsened the seminary's inability to meet its most essential costs.
An additional problem is electricity supply, provided by a diesel generator for which the diesel has to be purchased. Within just one week the price of diesel had risen by a third.

Since the beginning of the food crisis in April, the seminary has already had to take out credit in order to function at all. As a result, the rector said, he could be forced to close down the institution, before the students start to suffer malnourishment and the debts pile up.

Plans to expand the seminary because of increased enrolment have been put on hold. Fr Enang described the seminary as a "bridge" between the north and south of Nigeria.

The rector said the growth of the Catholic Church in Nigeria is "phenomenal". Yet despite growth in vocations, there are still too few priests, especially in the rural areas.

***
Lord, this is shameful. Will someone please get adequate funding to this seminary? Does someone have contacts with the organization "Aid to the Church in Need?" Are they planning to do something? Good grief.

Awesome Jesuit video on YouTube

Check out this video, Jesuits: Holy Boldness:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eqw4UHHf-Ys

It's great witness and reminds everyone what it's really all about.