Blog # 259 Who is Jesus? Who are we?
A person's name is unique to that person. Our name may have the same spelling and sound as the name of our mother or father, uncle, aunt, or cousin, but as our name it is ours alone. A name identifies a person, tells who he or she is, all throughout a person's life.
The color of our eyes, the number of hairs on our heads, the number of our friends, the hopes and desires we hold in our hearts are all contained in our name.
So there is more to knowing a person's name than knowing the sound of it. I could go that far and no further, but that is not all there is of the possibilities. As we grow in the closeness of friendship, I could discover and share our joys and sorrows, our hopes and disappointments, our struggles fears conquests goodness and love. All of this would be discovering ever more perfectly who you are, your name.
One of my brothers has the name Thomas. I know how to spell it. I know how it sounds. What other content might it have for me? He was eight years older than I so he was already living in our house when I was born. I had no way of knowing he was my brother other than by faith, on the word of another who was present at the time I was born. He was a professional chemist, a university professor, the father of six, a very close friend.
When he died, with him at 86 and I at 78, we were well along in our experience of discovering who we were, in ourselves, and in our relationship with one another. His name had much more in it for me as I stood at his bedside and watched him die than back during World War II when I prayed God would protect him during his service in the US Navy.
Our relationship and the content of his name continues to grow even to the present day. In my memory of him I find myself inspired and encouraged in the life I am currently called to live. I find myself wanting to think and speak and do things in the way I remember Tom thinking, speaking, and doing things.
It is somewhat similar to this with Jesus. We can ask the same questions of the name of Jesus as we can ask of the names of others. He was born,lived, and died before we were born.. To know He lived we must believe, take it as true on the word of another. A Jewish carpenter and rabbi, He claims to be the fulfillment of God's promise to Adam and Eve, to Abraham and his descendants, and to all seven billion human creatures now living on earth. His name is Jesus , Savior, the name proclaimed for Him by Gabriel to Mary before He was conceived in her womb.
As time goes on we can discover more and more of the meaning of that name, in the life and teachings of Jesus in the Bible, in the Church, in history and the lives of holy people and of sinners, in our conscience, and in our everyday experiences.
Jesus claims to be the Savior of all, our personal Savior, not only as model of good living or by way of an example for us to follow, but as a source of new life for us, as God's children.
Jesus claims to be sent by the Father to teach us truth, and by sharing this truth, to send us into our world to bring His salvation there. (Jn 14: 6; 8 : 32; 20: 21) . Through faith and Baptism we are made one with Jesus. His name is to be ours! (Jn 15:5; Gal 2:20; Col 3: 10). We, with and in Him have a part to play in bringing Salvation to the world. How few these days, even among believers, seem to realize the full impact of this truth. Salvation, to ourselves, to those around us, in our homes work places schools, here wherever we are, and now.
Saturday, July 28, 2012
Wednesday, July 25, 2012
Blog # 258 More on the Mass
Blog # 258 More on the Mass
This will be the fourth in a series of blogs dealing with the subject of Catholic worship as it is experienced in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Catholic folks in my age category between the ages of fifty and eighty four will easily be able to identify significant changes in the experience of the Mass as it occurs Sunday after Sunday in our present year of 2012 and as it was thirty and forty years ago, as for example the change from Latin to the vernacular, Holy Communion under both species, the reception of Communion in the hand and in a standing position, lay readers of the first two lessons of the Mass, girl servers, permanent Deacons preaching the homilies, few people praying the rosary during Mass, more emphasis on congregational singing, use of missalettes and the entire congregation making the responses that were reserved to the altar boys years ago.
Some people had difficulty appreciating and accepting such changes. I know a few Catholics who stopped going to church because they viewed the changes as our 'becoming Protestant'.
The changes I have listed were significant but were not essential to the identity or definition of the Mass itself. They were in the category of what you saw and heard, what the Mass looked like and sounded like rather than what the Mass was. The ritual of the Mass and the Liturgical Year could be seen analogously as the wrapping in which the theological identity of the Mass was enfolded.
In the course of several recent decades of years new opinions touching upon the identity of the Mass appeared on the horizon and began to grow in popularity among some theologians and catechists. An example of this would be the common reference to the Sacrifice of the Mass both in our adult and elementary religious education programs and literature with greater and sometimes almost total emphasis on the Mass as a holy meal and less on it as a sacrifice in the context of a holy meal.
I found a typical manifestation and expression of this change in an article in a Diocesan Magazine that I had filed away about fifteen years ago. The various parts of the liturgical celebration of the Mass are identified and presented in a way that corresponds to the various elements that go into an ordinary family reunion. We agree to come together at a certain time and place, next Sunday at a nearby State park ( 10:30 Mass at St. Thomas'). We share out stories, what happened in our lives since the previous reunion ( Epistle, Second reading, Gospel). We eat our meal together (Holy Communion). We thank one another for the happy reunion and go home ( Go in peace! Thanks be to God!).
A short article in America magazine that I had filed away in March of 2000 gives evidence of a way of identifying a good fruit or effect coming from Mass attendance that should be recognized and cultivated but never to the extent of overshadowing or diminishing our awareness of the identity of the Mass as worship, directed to God alone as the primary goal and purpose of our celebration. After negatively criticizing the Bishops who had just attended their annual conference in Washington, DC and issued a document on art and architecture in the church in line with the theme of the Conference ( Domus Dei - The House of God), the author of the article I filed has this to say: "How refreshing and reassuring it would have been had some bishop stood up to say: "Jesus did not institute the Eucharist to change bread and wine into his body and blood, but to change us into his body. The Mass is not meant to transform elements, but to transform people. When he said, 'Behold I am with you always, until the end of the world,' Jesus was not referring to his real presence in the Eucharist; he was referring to his real presence in his people, the members of his body." I am well aware of and supportive of the power and intent of offering the Mass to sanctify us personally and as a community both in the experience of sacrificial worship and that of receiving Jesus into our lives in Holy Communion with the effect that experience should have in sanctifying our whole day. Both are gifts of God's redeeming merciful love and there is no conflict or competition between them. One is directed toward God alone and the other is directed toward those who offer the sacrifice and through them toward all of creation. One is in fulfillment of the first and greatest Commandment and the other in fulfillment of the second. The opinions expressed in the article I just quoted are dangerous and untenable in the light of our Catholic faith.
Another article in my file from America Magazine from May, 2003 contains ideas that are also dangerous and untenable in the light of our Catholic faith. Here is a quote from the article. " A common definition of sacrifice is "a gift to God in which the gift is destroyed or consumed". Symbolizing the internal offering of commitment and surrender to God, its purpose is to acknowledge the dominion of God, effect reconciliation with God and give thanks for blessings or petition for further blessings. That isn't bad. It may be what most people think of when they hear the word 'sacrifice'. But as a definition of Christian sacrifice, it is a disaster. Why? Because when Jesus Christ invited us into the paschal mystery he did away with this kind of sacrifice. To begin with the religions of the world in which the destruction of a gift or victim is the essential characteristic of sacrifice, and then try to verify this in the sacrifice of Christ and in Christian sacrifice - this is completely and disastrously backwards. Essentially, it is asking non-Christian sacrifice to tell us what Christian sacrifice is.." This is so clearly untrue that I would have had a very hard time imagining anyone taking it seriously and publishing it in a national Catholic periodical as an argument against the official practice of the Church recognizing the sacrifice of Calvary as an act of obedience to the Father and the greatest love for the Father Jesus could have experienced. "There is no greater love than this..."
There are several other serious errors in the article to which I am referring. If anyone 'out there' reading this blog would like further details in my thinking and response to them just drop me a comment and I will be happy to accommodate you.
One more example of what was going on in the recent saveral decades of the Church's experience and local catechesis as the percentage of Catholic regularly attending Mass went down, comes from the cover of a parish bulletin we were using in the parish where I was Pastor up in North Carolina in 1991. The brief article says: "studies show that the people who approached Mass with a positive attitude and a sense of purpose find weekend Eucharistic liturgies to be much more meaningful." The article concludes by giving five "Positive reasons for attending Mass" : a desire to find life's deepest meaning, a sense of belonging to a praying community, a hunger for the loving presence of Christ in Word and Eucharist. a need for forgiveness and healing, and a longing for renewed strength amid life's difficulties. " Worship was not mentioned among the motivating forces that give purpose and meaning to our attendance at Mass and the word sacrifice did not appear in the article! Meanwhile the percentage of Catholics who reguarly attend Mass each week continues to decline.
My concern is a question about whether and why the possible ignorance or unawareness of the nature of the Mass as sacrificial worship on the part of many in the congregation on a typical Sunday in our Catholic parishes may have come to be the actual situation throughout the country. As parishes in our large metropolitan areas have grown to memberships numbering in the thousands the role of the priest was expanded to require skills and much time and energy devoted to other forms of work than the primary identifying role of a priest, namely that of representing the people in the Eucharistic Sacrifice. At the same time qualified Catholic laymen and women began to activate their Baptismal covenant in the field of education, hospital staffing and administration, psychological and spiritual counseling, and the Church's ministry to the poor. There was a danger of the role of a priest , essentially and uniquely identified with sacrificial worship, becoming regarded as one among many roles in ministry a Catholic could choose.
The role of the priest is not to be seen as competitive or even compared with other roles of Christian ministry but in a category by itself. The meaning and value of the priesthood will be more or less depending upon a particular culture's knowledge, awareness, and response to God as the unique Creator of all that exists. To exclude or stand in ignorance or unawareness of sacrifice as the official God-given Christian method of worship would be like thinking sunshine comes from the moon!
Also there has been an emphasis on the suffering of Jesus on Calvary as plaating the wrath of God rather than on the part of Jesus our high priest as a joyful act of perfect unconditional trust and total love offered to the Father in sacrificial worship.
This will be the fourth in a series of blogs dealing with the subject of Catholic worship as it is experienced in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Catholic folks in my age category between the ages of fifty and eighty four will easily be able to identify significant changes in the experience of the Mass as it occurs Sunday after Sunday in our present year of 2012 and as it was thirty and forty years ago, as for example the change from Latin to the vernacular, Holy Communion under both species, the reception of Communion in the hand and in a standing position, lay readers of the first two lessons of the Mass, girl servers, permanent Deacons preaching the homilies, few people praying the rosary during Mass, more emphasis on congregational singing, use of missalettes and the entire congregation making the responses that were reserved to the altar boys years ago.
Some people had difficulty appreciating and accepting such changes. I know a few Catholics who stopped going to church because they viewed the changes as our 'becoming Protestant'.
The changes I have listed were significant but were not essential to the identity or definition of the Mass itself. They were in the category of what you saw and heard, what the Mass looked like and sounded like rather than what the Mass was. The ritual of the Mass and the Liturgical Year could be seen analogously as the wrapping in which the theological identity of the Mass was enfolded.
In the course of several recent decades of years new opinions touching upon the identity of the Mass appeared on the horizon and began to grow in popularity among some theologians and catechists. An example of this would be the common reference to the Sacrifice of the Mass both in our adult and elementary religious education programs and literature with greater and sometimes almost total emphasis on the Mass as a holy meal and less on it as a sacrifice in the context of a holy meal.
I found a typical manifestation and expression of this change in an article in a Diocesan Magazine that I had filed away about fifteen years ago. The various parts of the liturgical celebration of the Mass are identified and presented in a way that corresponds to the various elements that go into an ordinary family reunion. We agree to come together at a certain time and place, next Sunday at a nearby State park ( 10:30 Mass at St. Thomas'). We share out stories, what happened in our lives since the previous reunion ( Epistle, Second reading, Gospel). We eat our meal together (Holy Communion). We thank one another for the happy reunion and go home ( Go in peace! Thanks be to God!).
A short article in America magazine that I had filed away in March of 2000 gives evidence of a way of identifying a good fruit or effect coming from Mass attendance that should be recognized and cultivated but never to the extent of overshadowing or diminishing our awareness of the identity of the Mass as worship, directed to God alone as the primary goal and purpose of our celebration. After negatively criticizing the Bishops who had just attended their annual conference in Washington, DC and issued a document on art and architecture in the church in line with the theme of the Conference ( Domus Dei - The House of God), the author of the article I filed has this to say: "How refreshing and reassuring it would have been had some bishop stood up to say: "Jesus did not institute the Eucharist to change bread and wine into his body and blood, but to change us into his body. The Mass is not meant to transform elements, but to transform people. When he said, 'Behold I am with you always, until the end of the world,' Jesus was not referring to his real presence in the Eucharist; he was referring to his real presence in his people, the members of his body." I am well aware of and supportive of the power and intent of offering the Mass to sanctify us personally and as a community both in the experience of sacrificial worship and that of receiving Jesus into our lives in Holy Communion with the effect that experience should have in sanctifying our whole day. Both are gifts of God's redeeming merciful love and there is no conflict or competition between them. One is directed toward God alone and the other is directed toward those who offer the sacrifice and through them toward all of creation. One is in fulfillment of the first and greatest Commandment and the other in fulfillment of the second. The opinions expressed in the article I just quoted are dangerous and untenable in the light of our Catholic faith.
Another article in my file from America Magazine from May, 2003 contains ideas that are also dangerous and untenable in the light of our Catholic faith. Here is a quote from the article. " A common definition of sacrifice is "a gift to God in which the gift is destroyed or consumed". Symbolizing the internal offering of commitment and surrender to God, its purpose is to acknowledge the dominion of God, effect reconciliation with God and give thanks for blessings or petition for further blessings. That isn't bad. It may be what most people think of when they hear the word 'sacrifice'. But as a definition of Christian sacrifice, it is a disaster. Why? Because when Jesus Christ invited us into the paschal mystery he did away with this kind of sacrifice. To begin with the religions of the world in which the destruction of a gift or victim is the essential characteristic of sacrifice, and then try to verify this in the sacrifice of Christ and in Christian sacrifice - this is completely and disastrously backwards. Essentially, it is asking non-Christian sacrifice to tell us what Christian sacrifice is.." This is so clearly untrue that I would have had a very hard time imagining anyone taking it seriously and publishing it in a national Catholic periodical as an argument against the official practice of the Church recognizing the sacrifice of Calvary as an act of obedience to the Father and the greatest love for the Father Jesus could have experienced. "There is no greater love than this..."
There are several other serious errors in the article to which I am referring. If anyone 'out there' reading this blog would like further details in my thinking and response to them just drop me a comment and I will be happy to accommodate you.
One more example of what was going on in the recent saveral decades of the Church's experience and local catechesis as the percentage of Catholic regularly attending Mass went down, comes from the cover of a parish bulletin we were using in the parish where I was Pastor up in North Carolina in 1991. The brief article says: "studies show that the people who approached Mass with a positive attitude and a sense of purpose find weekend Eucharistic liturgies to be much more meaningful." The article concludes by giving five "Positive reasons for attending Mass" : a desire to find life's deepest meaning, a sense of belonging to a praying community, a hunger for the loving presence of Christ in Word and Eucharist. a need for forgiveness and healing, and a longing for renewed strength amid life's difficulties. " Worship was not mentioned among the motivating forces that give purpose and meaning to our attendance at Mass and the word sacrifice did not appear in the article! Meanwhile the percentage of Catholics who reguarly attend Mass each week continues to decline.
My concern is a question about whether and why the possible ignorance or unawareness of the nature of the Mass as sacrificial worship on the part of many in the congregation on a typical Sunday in our Catholic parishes may have come to be the actual situation throughout the country. As parishes in our large metropolitan areas have grown to memberships numbering in the thousands the role of the priest was expanded to require skills and much time and energy devoted to other forms of work than the primary identifying role of a priest, namely that of representing the people in the Eucharistic Sacrifice. At the same time qualified Catholic laymen and women began to activate their Baptismal covenant in the field of education, hospital staffing and administration, psychological and spiritual counseling, and the Church's ministry to the poor. There was a danger of the role of a priest , essentially and uniquely identified with sacrificial worship, becoming regarded as one among many roles in ministry a Catholic could choose.
The role of the priest is not to be seen as competitive or even compared with other roles of Christian ministry but in a category by itself. The meaning and value of the priesthood will be more or less depending upon a particular culture's knowledge, awareness, and response to God as the unique Creator of all that exists. To exclude or stand in ignorance or unawareness of sacrifice as the official God-given Christian method of worship would be like thinking sunshine comes from the moon!
Also there has been an emphasis on the suffering of Jesus on Calvary as plaating the wrath of God rather than on the part of Jesus our high priest as a joyful act of perfect unconditional trust and total love offered to the Father in sacrificial worship.
Friday, July 20, 2012
Blog # 257 The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass
Blog # 257 The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass
Blog # 256 ended with a promise of another blog that would share a few further insights focusing upon the identity of the Mass as an act of sacrifice. Blog # 256 was originally published over a week ago. I can hardly believe this but after that, on three different occasions, I actually composed a text for Blog # 257 and on all three occasions somehow or other I must have pressed a wrong key and lost the texts that I had composed, just before the words I intended to be the conclusion of the Blog ! I felt like letting the whole thing drop and get on to something else but then decided to give it one more try, so here I am at the beginning of Blog # 257 with hope it will come out OK.
The blog started out with a reference to what I had encountered in my experience of conversations with many of our typical non-Catholic fellow Christian believers as a serious flaw in the Church's presentation of the Gospel message. It is the universal Catholic practice of referring to an ordained minister as "Father". The practice is judged as wrong based upon an inaccurate interpretation of a few Biblical passages and at its worst is seen as an arrogant and haughty contradiction of the entire message of the Bible as an assumption on the part of a man of a title and identity that belongs to God alone. This is not true of course, but for anyone who thinks it is true it can be a definitive obstacle for that person in considering seriously the claims of the Catholic Church that are actually true.
There is one such claim based upon a distinctive Catholic practice that to my surprise does not seem to be offensive to our non-Catholic friends. It is the practice of identifying ordained ministers as priests. There is an apparent parallel in our Catholic practice of referring to a man as Father seen by some of our non-Catholic friends as an assumption of an identity and title on the part of a mere human creature that belongs to God alone, and in our Catholic practice of referring to a man as priest if this is seen as an assumption of an identity and title on the part of a mere human creature that belongs to Jesus alone as the sole Redeemer of the entire human race and the sole fulfillment of the promise made to Adam and Eve that a Redeemer would come who would atone for sin.
An essential difference in these two Catholic practices lies in the fact our reference to ordained ministers as Father is not an assumption of the sole identity and title we profess in reference to our sole Creator, but rather a reminder and proclamation of our heavenly Fathers love, whereas the reference to an ordained priest is proclaimed by us as giving the ordained person a new real supernatural identity AS SHARING THE IDENTITY OF JESUS THE PRIEST. As in the case of calling a man Father, this practice is not a contradiction of or in competition with the identity and title of Jesus as Redeemer. Rather in God's design and with God's authority it identifies and proclaims such a close union with Jesus and the ordained human priest we see at the altar during Mass, that the ordained priest not just guides a worshipping community in memory of what Jesus said and did at the Last Supper, quoting Jesus as it were: "Jesus said This is My Body...", but actually takes the offered bread in his human hands and proclaims "This is My Body...", referring now to the Sacramental Body of Jesus. Our Catholic practice also recognizes the ordained priest as officially identified and authorized in union with Jesus to represent the people offering the sacrifice of the Mass, one of the conditions required in the definition of an official act of sacrifice.
Underlying all that I have been saying about Calvary, the Last Supper, and the Mass is the identity of Jesus as priest and the experiences of Calvary, the Last Supper, and the Mass as experiences of sacrifice, with Jesus exercising the role of priest in all three experiences. The unconditional trust and total love that is expressed in sacrifice is referred to as worship. The definition of sacrifice is: an offering to God alone by an official representative of the people of some material gift, with the change or destruction of what is offered in recognition of God's supreme dominion and our complete dependence upon God.
We know by faith it was God's design and plan from the very first sin that was ever committed down to the last, that Jesus was is and will be the fulfillment of the Father's promise to Adam and Eve in the third Chapter of Genesis. Jesus is the sole redeemer and His the only name in whom sins are forgiven and the love of God is restored to the sinful soul. That is solid secure Catholic theology.
Sin is a turning away from God, a separation from God, a betrayal of God's love. Love that is lost by sin is restored by the love of Jesus. Since Jesus the Man and the Eternal Word of God are two names for a single person , anything Jesus said or did could be of infinite value before the Father and thus sufficient to atone for any and all sin. Yet, since there is no greater love a man can have than to lay down his life in love for another, it was most fitting that Jesus should lay down His life, once on Calvary and again at the Last Supper, and again and again and again, all around the world, every day until the end of the world in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass so that sinners need not be afraid of God but rather come to Him and receive the gift of forgiveness and a new love through the sacrificial worship of Jesus the Redeemer of all who are redeemed.
Some of this fundamental Catholic theology may seem strange and unfamiliar even to Catholics who are regular church-goers Sunday after Sunday. The music, the preaching, and the prayers we pray may be enough for them to satisfy their intention and desire to praise and thank God for His goodness to us and His merciful forgiveness in and though Jesus His Son. But if this, wonderful as it is, be so, they are missing the essence of what is going on before them at the altar during Mass.
This blog has grown long and heavy so I will end it here and hope to continue tomorrow with a few more insights. Thank You, Father! Thank You Jesus!
Blog # 256 ended with a promise of another blog that would share a few further insights focusing upon the identity of the Mass as an act of sacrifice. Blog # 256 was originally published over a week ago. I can hardly believe this but after that, on three different occasions, I actually composed a text for Blog # 257 and on all three occasions somehow or other I must have pressed a wrong key and lost the texts that I had composed, just before the words I intended to be the conclusion of the Blog ! I felt like letting the whole thing drop and get on to something else but then decided to give it one more try, so here I am at the beginning of Blog # 257 with hope it will come out OK.
The blog started out with a reference to what I had encountered in my experience of conversations with many of our typical non-Catholic fellow Christian believers as a serious flaw in the Church's presentation of the Gospel message. It is the universal Catholic practice of referring to an ordained minister as "Father". The practice is judged as wrong based upon an inaccurate interpretation of a few Biblical passages and at its worst is seen as an arrogant and haughty contradiction of the entire message of the Bible as an assumption on the part of a man of a title and identity that belongs to God alone. This is not true of course, but for anyone who thinks it is true it can be a definitive obstacle for that person in considering seriously the claims of the Catholic Church that are actually true.
There is one such claim based upon a distinctive Catholic practice that to my surprise does not seem to be offensive to our non-Catholic friends. It is the practice of identifying ordained ministers as priests. There is an apparent parallel in our Catholic practice of referring to a man as Father seen by some of our non-Catholic friends as an assumption of an identity and title on the part of a mere human creature that belongs to God alone, and in our Catholic practice of referring to a man as priest if this is seen as an assumption of an identity and title on the part of a mere human creature that belongs to Jesus alone as the sole Redeemer of the entire human race and the sole fulfillment of the promise made to Adam and Eve that a Redeemer would come who would atone for sin.
An essential difference in these two Catholic practices lies in the fact our reference to ordained ministers as Father is not an assumption of the sole identity and title we profess in reference to our sole Creator, but rather a reminder and proclamation of our heavenly Fathers love, whereas the reference to an ordained priest is proclaimed by us as giving the ordained person a new real supernatural identity AS SHARING THE IDENTITY OF JESUS THE PRIEST. As in the case of calling a man Father, this practice is not a contradiction of or in competition with the identity and title of Jesus as Redeemer. Rather in God's design and with God's authority it identifies and proclaims such a close union with Jesus and the ordained human priest we see at the altar during Mass, that the ordained priest not just guides a worshipping community in memory of what Jesus said and did at the Last Supper, quoting Jesus as it were: "Jesus said This is My Body...", but actually takes the offered bread in his human hands and proclaims "This is My Body...", referring now to the Sacramental Body of Jesus. Our Catholic practice also recognizes the ordained priest as officially identified and authorized in union with Jesus to represent the people offering the sacrifice of the Mass, one of the conditions required in the definition of an official act of sacrifice.
Underlying all that I have been saying about Calvary, the Last Supper, and the Mass is the identity of Jesus as priest and the experiences of Calvary, the Last Supper, and the Mass as experiences of sacrifice, with Jesus exercising the role of priest in all three experiences. The unconditional trust and total love that is expressed in sacrifice is referred to as worship. The definition of sacrifice is: an offering to God alone by an official representative of the people of some material gift, with the change or destruction of what is offered in recognition of God's supreme dominion and our complete dependence upon God.
We know by faith it was God's design and plan from the very first sin that was ever committed down to the last, that Jesus was is and will be the fulfillment of the Father's promise to Adam and Eve in the third Chapter of Genesis. Jesus is the sole redeemer and His the only name in whom sins are forgiven and the love of God is restored to the sinful soul. That is solid secure Catholic theology.
Sin is a turning away from God, a separation from God, a betrayal of God's love. Love that is lost by sin is restored by the love of Jesus. Since Jesus the Man and the Eternal Word of God are two names for a single person , anything Jesus said or did could be of infinite value before the Father and thus sufficient to atone for any and all sin. Yet, since there is no greater love a man can have than to lay down his life in love for another, it was most fitting that Jesus should lay down His life, once on Calvary and again at the Last Supper, and again and again and again, all around the world, every day until the end of the world in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass so that sinners need not be afraid of God but rather come to Him and receive the gift of forgiveness and a new love through the sacrificial worship of Jesus the Redeemer of all who are redeemed.
Some of this fundamental Catholic theology may seem strange and unfamiliar even to Catholics who are regular church-goers Sunday after Sunday. The music, the preaching, and the prayers we pray may be enough for them to satisfy their intention and desire to praise and thank God for His goodness to us and His merciful forgiveness in and though Jesus His Son. But if this, wonderful as it is, be so, they are missing the essence of what is going on before them at the altar during Mass.
This blog has grown long and heavy so I will end it here and hope to continue tomorrow with a few more insights. Thank You, Father! Thank You Jesus!
Tuesday, July 10, 2012
Blog # 256 Theology of the Mass
Blog # 256 Theology of the Mass
Blog # 255 focused upon the essential connection between the Last Supper and Calvary. The love offered to the Father on Calvary by Jesus,(the Word of God Among us called Jesus,) and the love offered to the Father at the Last Supper by Jesus,(continuing as the Word of God Among Us called Jesus,) is the same love.
In Jesus, identified as one of us, it is a total love. It cost Him His life. It was a gift of all that He possessed. This act of total human love would be possible for Him physically only once in the entire history of creation. Once His human life was given in the mystery of death, as for us, it was no longer His to give. ( 1 Peter 3 18; Heb 9: 11,12, 25,28; 10: 10-12 ).
We know, however, by force of our faith in the incarnation of the Eternal Word of God in Jesus, the total love that was offered the Father on Calvary was not confined to the love involved in the human death of Jesus . By force of the Incarnation the person known as the Word and the person called Jesus is the same person.
Consequently the infinite eternal love of the Word for the Father was present, and shared in the total love the crucifixion of Jesus entailed. Coming among us in the Incarnation the Word of God never did nor could cease being divine, being God. Jesus, the name given the Word come among us never ceased being God. In other words in seeing Jesus walking from Jerusalem to Jericho we see God walking there. " Phillip, if you see me, you see God."(Jn 14: 9). "I and the Father are one!" (Jn 10: 30; 14: 7; 17: 11,22).
In the light of this, the death of Jesus in its human dimension was final. However, understood in the light of the identity of Jesus and the Word and therefore in its completeness it cannot be spoken of in the past tense as if it ended on Calvary, as if Jesus and the Word were two persons and there were two deaths on Calvary rather than one, identified as human and divine. The love of Jesus for the Father on Calvary and the love of Jesus for the Father at the Last Supper was the same love, expressed in two different modes. This is similar to the way a five dollar bill and a five dollar check are both worth a certain amount of money in different modes.
Now it remains for us to identify the theological connection between Calvary, the Last Supper, and the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. In all three instances we are dealing with love. Love by its nature is an act of self-giving in response to a value we have perceived in another. The more we love, the more we give. A handshake, a smile, a birthday greeting, a letter of sympathy, cutting a neighbor's lawn when he is a patient in the hospital are all examples or expressions of responses to a loving relationship. "There is no greater love than this, that someone would lay down his life for a friend."
Since we believe in one God, our loving response to God is unique. It is a total love..." with your whole heart, with your whole soul, and with all your mind." (Mat 22: 37). It is called worship. None but God deserves such love. ( First Commandment). From as far back as Cain and Abel, the sons of Adam and Eve, through Noah, Moses, the tribe of Levi set apart by God to represent God's Chosen People as their priests, Melchizedek, Abraham, and Jesus on Calvary, the unique act that was identified, authorized, and commanded by God as the official mode of expressing our total love for God was sacrifice. The strict technical theological definition of sacrifice identifies it as an offering to God alone of some material gift by an official representative of the people with the change or destruction of what is offered in order to recognize the supreme dominion of God and our complete dependence upon God.
The death of Jesus on Calvary was a death of perfect love chosen by Jesus in obedience to the Father. Before His death on Calvary Jesus walked away from angry crowds who wanted kill Him. His 'hour', in the design of the Father, had not yet come . (Lk 22: 42; Lk 4:29 f; Jn 7:30; 8;20).
His death on Calvary fulfilled all the conditions listed in the technical theological definition of an act of worship through sacrifice. The experience of Jesus and the Apostles at the Last Supper also fulfilled these conditions. But like the Crucifixion itself, physically in history, the event of the Upper Room did happen and was experienced physically almost two thousand years ago once and for all in the entire history of creation. Either experience could be created anew, physically and in history, with new blood and new bread and wine. But that is not what our Catholic faith teaches of those events. We believe the redeeming love of Jesus on the Cross was once and for all time infinite. We believe that love was shared in the experience of the Upper Room and is shared today in the experience of the Sacrifice of the Mass.
It remains for us to connect the event of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass which we experience daily in our churches throughout the world with the previous two events two thousand years ago. All three events, the Crucifixion, the Last Supper, and the Sacrifice of the Mass fulfill the conditions listed in the definition of sacrifice, but in different modes.
The claim of our Catholic faith is that the love, unconditional and total, that Jesus presented to the Father in His bloody crucifixion and in the event of the Last super is presented to the Father in the experience of the Mass but in an unbloody Sacramental mode. The task at hand is to authorize this connection. The authorization to identify and connect Calvary and the Upper Room comes from the words of Jesus: "...my body given for you", "my blood poured out for you.". The authorization to identify and connect Calvary and the Upper Room with the Sacrifice of the Mass down through the Centuries until now comes from the simple but very clear words of Jesus at the Last Supper : "Do THIS in memory of me."
This blog is long and may seem complicated. There are further thoughts on this subject I think would be useful so I'll be back with another blog stemming from this one. May the Lord bless you!
Blog # 255 focused upon the essential connection between the Last Supper and Calvary. The love offered to the Father on Calvary by Jesus,(the Word of God Among us called Jesus,) and the love offered to the Father at the Last Supper by Jesus,(continuing as the Word of God Among Us called Jesus,) is the same love.
In Jesus, identified as one of us, it is a total love. It cost Him His life. It was a gift of all that He possessed. This act of total human love would be possible for Him physically only once in the entire history of creation. Once His human life was given in the mystery of death, as for us, it was no longer His to give. ( 1 Peter 3 18; Heb 9: 11,12, 25,28; 10: 10-12 ).
We know, however, by force of our faith in the incarnation of the Eternal Word of God in Jesus, the total love that was offered the Father on Calvary was not confined to the love involved in the human death of Jesus . By force of the Incarnation the person known as the Word and the person called Jesus is the same person.
Consequently the infinite eternal love of the Word for the Father was present, and shared in the total love the crucifixion of Jesus entailed. Coming among us in the Incarnation the Word of God never did nor could cease being divine, being God. Jesus, the name given the Word come among us never ceased being God. In other words in seeing Jesus walking from Jerusalem to Jericho we see God walking there. " Phillip, if you see me, you see God."(Jn 14: 9). "I and the Father are one!" (Jn 10: 30; 14: 7; 17: 11,22).
In the light of this, the death of Jesus in its human dimension was final. However, understood in the light of the identity of Jesus and the Word and therefore in its completeness it cannot be spoken of in the past tense as if it ended on Calvary, as if Jesus and the Word were two persons and there were two deaths on Calvary rather than one, identified as human and divine. The love of Jesus for the Father on Calvary and the love of Jesus for the Father at the Last Supper was the same love, expressed in two different modes. This is similar to the way a five dollar bill and a five dollar check are both worth a certain amount of money in different modes.
Now it remains for us to identify the theological connection between Calvary, the Last Supper, and the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. In all three instances we are dealing with love. Love by its nature is an act of self-giving in response to a value we have perceived in another. The more we love, the more we give. A handshake, a smile, a birthday greeting, a letter of sympathy, cutting a neighbor's lawn when he is a patient in the hospital are all examples or expressions of responses to a loving relationship. "There is no greater love than this, that someone would lay down his life for a friend."
Since we believe in one God, our loving response to God is unique. It is a total love..." with your whole heart, with your whole soul, and with all your mind." (Mat 22: 37). It is called worship. None but God deserves such love. ( First Commandment). From as far back as Cain and Abel, the sons of Adam and Eve, through Noah, Moses, the tribe of Levi set apart by God to represent God's Chosen People as their priests, Melchizedek, Abraham, and Jesus on Calvary, the unique act that was identified, authorized, and commanded by God as the official mode of expressing our total love for God was sacrifice. The strict technical theological definition of sacrifice identifies it as an offering to God alone of some material gift by an official representative of the people with the change or destruction of what is offered in order to recognize the supreme dominion of God and our complete dependence upon God.
The death of Jesus on Calvary was a death of perfect love chosen by Jesus in obedience to the Father. Before His death on Calvary Jesus walked away from angry crowds who wanted kill Him. His 'hour', in the design of the Father, had not yet come . (Lk 22: 42; Lk 4:29 f; Jn 7:30; 8;20).
His death on Calvary fulfilled all the conditions listed in the technical theological definition of an act of worship through sacrifice. The experience of Jesus and the Apostles at the Last Supper also fulfilled these conditions. But like the Crucifixion itself, physically in history, the event of the Upper Room did happen and was experienced physically almost two thousand years ago once and for all in the entire history of creation. Either experience could be created anew, physically and in history, with new blood and new bread and wine. But that is not what our Catholic faith teaches of those events. We believe the redeeming love of Jesus on the Cross was once and for all time infinite. We believe that love was shared in the experience of the Upper Room and is shared today in the experience of the Sacrifice of the Mass.
It remains for us to connect the event of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass which we experience daily in our churches throughout the world with the previous two events two thousand years ago. All three events, the Crucifixion, the Last Supper, and the Sacrifice of the Mass fulfill the conditions listed in the definition of sacrifice, but in different modes.
The claim of our Catholic faith is that the love, unconditional and total, that Jesus presented to the Father in His bloody crucifixion and in the event of the Last super is presented to the Father in the experience of the Mass but in an unbloody Sacramental mode. The task at hand is to authorize this connection. The authorization to identify and connect Calvary and the Upper Room comes from the words of Jesus: "...my body given for you", "my blood poured out for you.". The authorization to identify and connect Calvary and the Upper Room with the Sacrifice of the Mass down through the Centuries until now comes from the simple but very clear words of Jesus at the Last Supper : "Do THIS in memory of me."
This blog is long and may seem complicated. There are further thoughts on this subject I think would be useful so I'll be back with another blog stemming from this one. May the Lord bless you!
Wednesday, June 20, 2012
Blog # 255 Last Supper / Crucifixion
Blog # 255 Last Supper / Crucifixion
It cost me ten dollars to preach the homily at our celebration of the Feast of Corpus
Christi this year. And I thought it was well worth it. I wanted an opportunity to
focus upon and clarify the primary theological connection or relationship between
the Last Supper,the Crucifixion of Jesus the following day, and our celebration of
the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
I began the homily by calling up two people sitting in a front pew and giving one
of them a five dollar bill and the other a check for five dollars with no name as
the payee. Once I gave my five dollar bill to the first person I could not do
that again. If I had another five dollar bill I could have given that one to the
same or a different person, but the first dollar bill was no longer mine and I could
not give it away. The person who received the five dollar check received the
same amount of money, but in a different mode.
There is a very significant detail in the story of the Last Supper in the Gospel
of John. Before Jesus and the Apostles leave the upper room at the
conclusion of the Last Supper John has Jesus say : That the world will know
I love the Father, let us be on our way. And they went directly to
Gethsemani. Previously Jesus had said there is no greater love anyone can
have than to lay down one's life for a friend.
God AS GOD cannot die, cannot 'lay down' His life. In Jesus, the
Eternal Word of God, identified with Jesus as a single person, can die. That
was the experience of Calvary. But in order to guarantee and proclaim the
authenticity of the death of Jesus, and therefore its human identity with the
death of any and every other human death, we have to admit that Jesus
could die only once. We die only once. Death takes all we have. We
have no more to give. On Calvary Jesus really died. Death took all He
possessed in the humanity He shared with us. ( Heb 9 25,27
This was the way it was with the five dollar bill I gave away. It was gone,
no longer mine to give. If I had other five dollar bills I could have
given them away, but not the one I had given. So with Jesus. The Father
could have chosen the Word to have become incarnate time after time
and lay down His human life as an act of perfect love in obedience to the
Father's will. But this was not the case.
Jesus is the sole Redeemer of all who have been or will be redeemed.
"There is no other name..." In my analogy of the bill and the check several
other elements begin to surface. My gift was not about paper, though paper
was a required element of my gift. My gift was money. The check was worth
the same amount as the five dollar bill. It was in a different mode. The
death of Jesus was not all about suffering no more than my gift was all about
two pieces of paper. As my gift was about money the gift Jesus made
on Calvary was about love.
The same amount of money was offered in the check as was offered in
the bill. The five dollars could have been given in the form of five ones. I
chose it to be given in one five. The father could have chosen Jesus to
have suffered a tooth ache, a scourging, or merely to say in a response
of obedient love "I love You, Father" and any of the responses Jesus,
made united as a single person to the Word, would have been an infinite act
of love, enough to be without measure, enough for unimaginable billions
and billions of people in union with Jesus by faith and Baptism to have
what would be their unique share of the worship of Jesus on Calvary
and our Father's response to Jesus and in Jesus to us in the
Resurrection and eternal love of Heaven.
The same love Jesus offered the Father on Calvary is the same love He
offers in the Sacrifice of the Mass. Like the check and the five dollar bill
it is the same money in my analogy, and in Calvary and the Mass it is the
same love. An infinite difference lies in the fact I would soon run out of
five dollar bills and money in the bank to justify writing checks, whereas
the love of God is infinite, without measure. Jesus, as one of us, had to
believe this. He shares His same human confident faith with us who are
one with Him through faith and Baptism.
Go out to the whole world and tell the good news. Do not be afraid of
ever running out of love. There is a check waiting for anyone and
everyone with a unique space for a unique amount of love the Father
desires to bestow on each person who comes to Him in Jesus.
It cost me ten dollars to preach the homily at our celebration of the Feast of Corpus
Christi this year. And I thought it was well worth it. I wanted an opportunity to
focus upon and clarify the primary theological connection or relationship between
the Last Supper,the Crucifixion of Jesus the following day, and our celebration of
the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
I began the homily by calling up two people sitting in a front pew and giving one
of them a five dollar bill and the other a check for five dollars with no name as
the payee. Once I gave my five dollar bill to the first person I could not do
that again. If I had another five dollar bill I could have given that one to the
same or a different person, but the first dollar bill was no longer mine and I could
not give it away. The person who received the five dollar check received the
same amount of money, but in a different mode.
There is a very significant detail in the story of the Last Supper in the Gospel
of John. Before Jesus and the Apostles leave the upper room at the
conclusion of the Last Supper John has Jesus say : That the world will know
I love the Father, let us be on our way. And they went directly to
Gethsemani. Previously Jesus had said there is no greater love anyone can
have than to lay down one's life for a friend.
God AS GOD cannot die, cannot 'lay down' His life. In Jesus, the
Eternal Word of God, identified with Jesus as a single person, can die. That
was the experience of Calvary. But in order to guarantee and proclaim the
authenticity of the death of Jesus, and therefore its human identity with the
death of any and every other human death, we have to admit that Jesus
could die only once. We die only once. Death takes all we have. We
have no more to give. On Calvary Jesus really died. Death took all He
possessed in the humanity He shared with us. ( Heb 9 25,27
This was the way it was with the five dollar bill I gave away. It was gone,
no longer mine to give. If I had other five dollar bills I could have
given them away, but not the one I had given. So with Jesus. The Father
could have chosen the Word to have become incarnate time after time
and lay down His human life as an act of perfect love in obedience to the
Father's will. But this was not the case.
Jesus is the sole Redeemer of all who have been or will be redeemed.
"There is no other name..." In my analogy of the bill and the check several
other elements begin to surface. My gift was not about paper, though paper
was a required element of my gift. My gift was money. The check was worth
the same amount as the five dollar bill. It was in a different mode. The
death of Jesus was not all about suffering no more than my gift was all about
two pieces of paper. As my gift was about money the gift Jesus made
on Calvary was about love.
The same amount of money was offered in the check as was offered in
the bill. The five dollars could have been given in the form of five ones. I
chose it to be given in one five. The father could have chosen Jesus to
have suffered a tooth ache, a scourging, or merely to say in a response
of obedient love "I love You, Father" and any of the responses Jesus,
made united as a single person to the Word, would have been an infinite act
of love, enough to be without measure, enough for unimaginable billions
and billions of people in union with Jesus by faith and Baptism to have
what would be their unique share of the worship of Jesus on Calvary
and our Father's response to Jesus and in Jesus to us in the
Resurrection and eternal love of Heaven.
The same love Jesus offered the Father on Calvary is the same love He
offers in the Sacrifice of the Mass. Like the check and the five dollar bill
it is the same money in my analogy, and in Calvary and the Mass it is the
same love. An infinite difference lies in the fact I would soon run out of
five dollar bills and money in the bank to justify writing checks, whereas
the love of God is infinite, without measure. Jesus, as one of us, had to
believe this. He shares His same human confident faith with us who are
one with Him through faith and Baptism.
Go out to the whole world and tell the good news. Do not be afraid of
ever running out of love. There is a check waiting for anyone and
everyone with a unique space for a unique amount of love the Father
desires to bestow on each person who comes to Him in Jesus.
Monday, June 18, 2012
Blog # 254 Hot dogs and holiness
Blog # 254 Hot Dogs and Holiness
Most likely many or at least some of you reading this blog have heard of Coney Island. Some of you may have been there. If you ever lived in New York City as a kid I would feel fairly sure you also heard of Rockaway Beach. Each year the Pastor of our parish back home treated the whole squad of altar boys to an all-day outing at Coney Island. That was just once a year. But we went often as a family to Rockaway Beach. In addition to swimming in the ocean and building castles in the sand we always enjoyed the hot dogs at either place.
Just for a moment think of what comes to your mind when you read that first
paragraph. There are no tough words in it and I don't think there are any tough
thoughts to grasp. Yet there are special words, names of places, and the
designation of a famous American food, the hot dog.
I thought of how different my writing and reading of that paragraph must be, from someone who never heard of Coney Island or Rockaway Beach, or might have heard of these places but never went there, and also for someone who never had a hot dog at all and most especially not at Coney Island or Rockaway Beach.
Coney Island and Rockaway Beach are the primary places where I learned the power of the sun. I had not yet heard as a ten-year-old boy the distance to the sun was ninety three million miles, but I knew from experience it was hot enough to put
blisters on my back and sun burned skin really hurt almost all night and itched
like crazy when it began to heal the week after we went swimming. And I knew
there were no hot dogs like the hot dogs we had at the beach. Hot, freshly
grilled, and covered with Coney Island relish and mustard, they had no equal
for flavor. If I tried to describe them in words, I don't think you could
understand what I would say unless you had been there at the beach, tired
yourself out with hours of bucking the waves of the ocean and building your
castles in the sand as a preparation for the wonderful unique experience of a
fifteen cent hot dog at Rockaway Beach or Coney Island.
I think it is something like this for us when it comes to our relationship with
God. Psalm 34 verse 9 says it clearly: "Taste and see the goodness of the Lord.
Happy the person who takes refuge in Him." The stages we can think of in
our relationship to the hot dogs at Rockaway Beach run parallel to the
stages we might experience in our relationship with God.
Some people never heard of Rockaway Beach, or, having heard of it once or a long
time ago no longer think of it day by day. In the experience of some people we
could substitute the word God in that sentence for Rockaway Beach. Some people
may have heard the word God and can recall an image of God from years ago, but
do not know the Triune God of Father Son and Holy Spirit from an adult or current
point of view. They might be compared to someone who went to a beach,
somewhere, but not to Coney Island or Rockaway. We might very well find
ourselves unwittingly talking to one another about different hot dogs. And a
different God.
Some people may have gone to Rockaway and having heard from friends or people
like me who tell them great things about it they buy a hot dog. A problem is they
are there in winter, and in winter it is not what I experienced or described. Or
maybe they have a case of ulcers of the stomach, and that makes a difference
as well. Or maybe they just had a full course meal in Chinatown before driving
over to the beach and they have no appetite for any further food. Their hot dog
that day would not be the same as the hot dogs I enjoyed!
And maybe they do go to Rockaway in summer and the hot dogs are really great,
but they do not have the money it takes to buy one, or they do not know
how to eat one without getting sand on it while sitting on the beach. I
see the possibility of experiencing conditions similar to these on a
spiritual plane when it comes to our relationship with God. For example, the
ulcers might be interpreted as sin. The full meal in Chinatown which takes
away the appetite can be identified with a life that is so full of the desires
and distractions that come from our seeking and possession of this world's
temporary values and treasures there is little room left for the time or
energy it takes to cultivate and experience a desire and an appetite for God.
A genuine relationship with God is always identified with love. That involves a
preference for God over all that interferes with our love. Choices must be made.
There is a price to be paid for love. A good hot dog is worth something. God is
worth our all.
If ever you have dropped a hot dog in the sand you know how that goes! Without
going so far as to drop the hot dog in the sand, sometimes there is sand on your
fingers and even a little sand interferes with the pleasure of eating a hot dog.
One of the ways I interpreted sand on my hot dog as it might relate to my
relationship with God is to see the sand as whatever it is that would tempt me
away from God, make me lose confidence in God, or love God less. St.Paul
enumerated such experiences in his life as persecution, distress, hunger, etc.
borne for the sake of and in the name of his faith. (Rom 8: 35 - 38). Then he
asks the question whether any one or all of these would cause him to
cut back on his love and service of God. His answer was no.
Applied to the hot dog at the beach, this would go like saying: " Will I give
up eating hot dogs just because I am on the beach and there is so much
sand there? Rockaway and Coney Island is where the best hot dogs I
have ever found are available. So what, if there is sand all around? Does
that mean I have to get it on my hot dog? Of course not." Just so, on the
spiritual plane, I have to be aware there are temptations around and
within me, and I have to address them just as I have to address the
presence of sand at the beach. Here is an opportunity for me to be like
St. Paul.
Any conditions we place or experience in our love when it comes to our
relationship with God places us in danger of losing an opportunity of
finding obeying and loving the One Single True God. A god that is
conditioned in any way is limited by those conditions and as a result is
not the God Whom Jesus revealed to us in His unconditional
obedience and total love for the Father throughout His entire life
on earth and in His death on the cross. That is the love He invites us to
share in our quest for the happiness that can be found only in a genuine
love for God, through, with, and in Jesus.
Blog # 253 The God Who dwells in us
Blog # 253 The God Who Dwells in Us
All of our human experience, as great as it is, is limited. I drink a glass of milk, but not
all the milk there is. I see the moon, but not always. I read a newspaper, but not every
newspaper. My dictionary contains more than 142,000 words. I can use only a fraction
of them. Even if I knew them all, new words are being put into use as we discover and
define the new things we experience in our limited world.
Our limited experience of a limited world is yet open-ended. It can grow and increase
so that I get closer and closer to drinking all the milk there is, seeing the moon always
etc, even though I never arrive at this point. But with our experience of God it is totally
different. All along I am actually drinking milk, and seeing the moon. But " no one has
ever seen God." (Jn 1: 18; 4: 12).
Our experience, always limited, is of something or someone. Adjectives, adverbs,
nouns,pronouns, prepositions express it all. John is strong. Mary is wise and beautiful.
Fred is a butcher. He is Mary's husband. God simply IS. Our mind, our capacity, our
experience stops infinitely short of this. We do not know by our limited experience
what it means. "No one has ever seen God."
God's infinite love was not to be frustrated by the gap between us and our Creator.
God came among us as one of us in Jesus. Jesus believed, as we are called to
believe by human faith in a sole Creator of all that exists. Jesus as God's
messenger taught us of the Father, and the Spirit, and Himself as divine.
The Father is God. The Son is God. The Spirit is God. In our limited human
capacity we do not fully understand our faith in the Holy Trinity. However
it is God's desire that we know and love God personally, and personally
God is Father, God is the Word, and God is the Holy Spirit.
Through this faith of ours we worship the One True God, God the Father, Creator
of all, God the Eternal Word of the Father, sent among us by the Father to be
like us in all but sin and to teach us how best to receive and respond to the
Father's love, and God the Holy Spirit, eternal Love of the Father and the Son,
sent to lead us through Jesus to the Father's eternal glory.
Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit, as it was in the
beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end. Amen !
All of our human experience, as great as it is, is limited. I drink a glass of milk, but not
all the milk there is. I see the moon, but not always. I read a newspaper, but not every
newspaper. My dictionary contains more than 142,000 words. I can use only a fraction
of them. Even if I knew them all, new words are being put into use as we discover and
define the new things we experience in our limited world.
Our limited experience of a limited world is yet open-ended. It can grow and increase
so that I get closer and closer to drinking all the milk there is, seeing the moon always
etc, even though I never arrive at this point. But with our experience of God it is totally
different. All along I am actually drinking milk, and seeing the moon. But " no one has
ever seen God." (Jn 1: 18; 4: 12).
Our experience, always limited, is of something or someone. Adjectives, adverbs,
nouns,pronouns, prepositions express it all. John is strong. Mary is wise and beautiful.
Fred is a butcher. He is Mary's husband. God simply IS. Our mind, our capacity, our
experience stops infinitely short of this. We do not know by our limited experience
what it means. "No one has ever seen God."
God's infinite love was not to be frustrated by the gap between us and our Creator.
God came among us as one of us in Jesus. Jesus believed, as we are called to
believe by human faith in a sole Creator of all that exists. Jesus as God's
messenger taught us of the Father, and the Spirit, and Himself as divine.
The Father is God. The Son is God. The Spirit is God. In our limited human
capacity we do not fully understand our faith in the Holy Trinity. However
it is God's desire that we know and love God personally, and personally
God is Father, God is the Word, and God is the Holy Spirit.
Through this faith of ours we worship the One True God, God the Father, Creator
of all, God the Eternal Word of the Father, sent among us by the Father to be
like us in all but sin and to teach us how best to receive and respond to the
Father's love, and God the Holy Spirit, eternal Love of the Father and the Son,
sent to lead us through Jesus to the Father's eternal glory.
Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit, as it was in the
beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end. Amen !
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)