Father Dylan's Sermons

No sermon this week

2012-01-29T20:30:00.001Z

There is no sermon text this week because we had a visiting appeal from the APF

3rd Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year B, Shaftesbury

2012-01-22T00:48:00.003Z

Mk 1:14-20; 1 Cor 7:29-31
I’ve been thinking this week about some of the things I need to give up if I am to follow Jesus better.
We just heard of the call of the first Apostles, and that account indicated the things that they "gave up" in order to follow Jesus. They were fishermen, and yet we heard how they "left their nets" in order to follow Him. They had family, and yet St Mark specifies that they "left their father" in order to follow Him.

I want to focus on one aspect of "following" the Lord, namely, the vocation to love. I want to think about why being free to love needs to involve letting go, continually “leaving things behind”.
One of the things that stops me loving other people, even when I might have a general emotional and effective disposition in my FEELINGS to love somebody, one of the things that stops me loving other people is my disordered ATTACHMENTS.
For example, even when with a friend and planning to spend some time together to relax together, it's easy to have my attachments to my preferences stop me being free and to love my friend in a way that gives preference to my friend’s preferences. If sitting down with some alcohol is high on MY list of priorities then I can fail to see the things that my friends needs for HIM to relax. So, my attachment to alcohol, even my attachment to small amounts of alcohol, can stop me being free to love.

Attachment to the things of this world is something we find the saints of the Church repeatedly warning us against. They speak instead of the importance of a spirit of "detachment".
There are, of course, many different types of attachments. In my affections I can have an attachment to individual people, and this can be the kind of properly ordered affection that can remain even in heaven.
But my affections can also attach me to THINGS. I can be too attached to my car, to my favourite seat the sitting room, to my most comfortable shoes. When my affections attach me to such THINGS I have the very real danger that my affections therefore lack their proper affection in love for people and for God.
And, as I've already indicated, my attachment to my personal preferences can prevent me from being free to serve the preferences of other people.

BREAKING our disordered attachments, acquiring that saintly spirit of "detachment", is not an easy thing to do. When we "give things up" for Lent, and in small acts of self-denial, particularly on Fridays, this is one way we can grow in detachment. But sometimes the opportunities to grow in detachment are not things that we choose, they are in things that are thrust upon us, they come in the daily crosses that we do not choose for ourselves, but we can nonetheless choose to accept with good grace, to carry with good grace in our following of the Lord.

To take an example from my own life this week, from one of those things that are so mundane and unexciting and yet unavoidable. Every week I print out my sermon on my computer printer. This week, however, I was not able to print out my sermon on my computer printer, because my computer told me that the printer that has been attached to it for the last four years it no longer "recognises". So I disconnected and reconnected the leads, I uninstalled the software, I reinstalled the software, I uninstalled again, and reinstalled it again, and yet the computer STILL told me that the printer was not there. The end of all this was a lot of wasted time. My point, however, is how this wasted time related to my plans and my preferences and my attachments. Like so many of us, I very easily get attached to my plans for what I'm going to do with my day, with my time, with my energy. And I can let my attachment to my plans prevent me from being open to seeing what else I should be doing, to seeing how else I should be serving my neighbour, my parishioner, my Lord. But, when I find my daily life bringing me up against my attachments, when I find my daily cross denies me those things that I'm attached to, then I find myself in a situation to gain, and sometimes to re-gain, my inner freedom. The freedom I need if I'm to love.

And what is the ultimate value of so many of these worldly things we are attached to? As we heard St Paul remind us in our second reading, “the world as we know it is passing away”(1 Cor 7:31), and so are all the things that our disordered attachments are made of.
If we would follow the Lord, as those first Apostles followed the Lord, then just as they left behind their fishing nets and family, we too must leave behind the disordered affections and attachments.

2nd Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year B, Shaftesbury

2012-01-15T00:14:00.002Z

Jn 1:35-42
For those of you using your "rustle-ette" sheets during the reading of the gospel, you will have noticed that the translation that Deacon Michael just read to us was not the translation on your sheet -it was the RSV translation, which is another of the approved translations for use at Mass, though not as frequently used. I chose to have us use it today because it very directly parallels the new translation the Mass. (The translation of the Bible that we use in our lectionary is supposedly the next task the translators are working on, and maybe in a decade, maybe sometime before I’ve died, that too will change -but not soon.)

The verse I want to draw your attention to is the phrase, "Behold, the Lamb of God!"(Jn 1:35). This verse has John the Baptist repeating what he had said in a longer form the day before, when he baptised Jesus, and declared, "Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world”(Jn 1:29).

Now, why is this significant?
These words are the words that John the Baptist chose to use to identify WHO the Lord Jesus was and is. John the Baptist was the one who had the task to "prepare the way"(Mk1:2, c.f. Jn 1:23) for the long-awaited Jewish Messiah. And when, while John was performing his public baptising ministry, and saw Jesus publicly approaching him for all the people to see, the words he chose to describe Jesus are obviously words that must have been important. The most obvious thing we might have EXPECTED him to say was, "Behold, the long-awaited Messiah”.
However, John the Baptist did NOT say that. Instead, he gave Jesus a title that the people were not expecting, a title indicating a ROLE that they were not expecting. Most of them were expecting a Messiah who would be a military leader to free them from the Romans. But John the Baptist indicated that He came to free them from something much more fundamental, He came to free them and free us from our sins.

The title "Lamb of God" would have meant something to the Jews who heard him, even though they would have been unlikely to appreciate what EXACTLY John the Baptist meant by it. THE Lamb of sacrifice they would have been familiar with would have been the Passover lamb, the lamb whose sacrifice heralded the freedom of the Israelites from their captivity in Egypt. There would have been another lamb they would have been familiar with, actually a goat, the scapegoat of Leviticus over which the priest would lay his hands and cast the sins of the people onto the goat and then cast the goat out into the wilderness so that, as the book of Leviticus says, “the goat will carry on itself all [the people’s] sins to a remote place”(Lev 16:22). And, even more likely, they would have thought of the prophecy of Isaiah that refers to One on whom the sins “of us all”(Isa 53:6) were laid while He was to be led out like a lamb to be slaughtered.

So, not a military Messiah, but One who was “the Lamb of God”, the sacrifice “who takes away the sins of the world”(Jn 1:29). THIS is who Jesus was for the Jews, and who Jesus is still for us.

All of us, whether we admit it or not, need a saviour to take away our sins.
Similarly, all of us, whether we admit it or not, need a saviour who will spiritually feed and nourish us, who will satisfy the hunger within.
The same Saviour does both. In the book of Revelation we are given the image of a huge wedding banquet, a feast to satisfy, and this is described as “the supper of the Lamb”(Rev 19:9).
This is He who comes to us in Holy Communion. This is our Eucharistic Lord. And this is what the priest declares in the Mass.

The words of John the Baptist declaring who Jesus was were words full of meaning, but only for those who could come to understand.
As we hear those words spoken in the Mass let us pray for the grace to likewise fully understand:
“Behold the Lamb of God,
behold him who takes away the sins of the world.
Blessed are those called to the supper of the Lamb.”

Epiphany, Shaftesbury

2012-01-08T00:53:00.001Z

Isa 60:1-6; Mt 2:1-12
Today we keep a feast of light with the Epiphany. I was considering this during the week as I was pondering a question I often get asked as a priest, “Do you think we’re living in dark times?”
This question usually gets prompted by some recent news report. Maybe yet more grim economic news, forecasting a whole generation of coming economic austerity. Or yet more reports indicating the state of family breakdown in Britain, or the increase in drugs or alcoholism. Or, with the state of religion in our society -the loss the practice of the Faith, and of course the various scandals within the Church herself.

So, are we living in dark times?
If I remember correctly, St Augustine made the observation that there are people in every age who think they are living in "dark times", people in every age who think that things are worse now than they were in their grandparents’ time. He made this observation in the context of the collapse of the mighty Roman Empire, and with it the collapse of civilisation. Surely, that would be a time to think you were living in "dark times".

Today's feast of the Epiphany can remind us of what truly makes a time dark or not. You are living in true darkness when there is no light shining. Yet, today's feast of the Epiphany speaks to us of the shining light of Christ, of the Messiah who HAS truly come.
As our first reading from Isaiah put it, “Arise... Jerusalem, for your light has come... though night still covers the earth and darkness the people. Above you the Lord now rises and above you His glory appears”(Isa 60:1-2)
So, even though darkness remained, there was a light shining that was more significant than the darkness.
That shining light is the coming of God Himself, coming born as a little child in Bethlehem, manifested this day to the nations, to the wise men who came from afar “to do Him homage”(Mt 2:2).

Thinking of the darkness that was still over the Jewish people, we too, all of us, have our problems, and no doubt will have at least some moments this coming year when we will feel some sense of "darkness". Today's feast of the Epiphany reminds us that God has manifested Himself, manifested Himself as present among us, manifested Himself as the light in darkness, the light that darkness could not overpower (Jn 1:5).

The word ‘Epiphany’ is a Greek word referring to the "manifestation, striking appearance", the showing forth of something, as the baby Jesus was shown forth to the wise men from the East. Although this word is not used commonly today it is nonetheless sometimes used to refer to that sense of realising something, realising something we didn't know before. So I might say, "I had a little epiphany this week, I realised that...”
Concerning today's feast, the thing that we need to realise, the thing that we need to have repeatedly manifested to ourselves, is that Christ has come, God does dwell among us, and that He is waiting for us whenever we turn to Him, He is at our side whenever we need Him, and He is a light that is greater than the darkness, the light that the darkness tried to overpower but failed.

So, are we living in "dark times"?
Any time is dark when it fails to see Christ.
Our own lives are dark when we fail to see Christ.
But often it is in the midst of darkness the shining light can be most clearly seen.
And like the star that shone in the night sky to lead the wise men, when we feel in the midst of darkness we should remember to turn to Christ, for He is the Light of the World.

Our Lady: Mary, Mother of God, Shaftesbury

2012-01-01T00:16:00.002Z

Today is a day of new beginnings. On one hand, today is New Year’s Day. But, for the Church, today is also a day of new beginnings because of the feast of Our Lady that we celebrate today. And this connection is not accidental.
It's very rare for this feast date for Sunday, once every seven years, and so this is a rare opportunity for the whole of our normal Sunday congregation to be together to focus on the symbolism of this feast.

Today's feast of Our Lady, of her as "Mary, Mother of God", is a very ancient feast. One of those feasts that is so ancient that scholars struggle to be certain when in the early centuries it began to be celebrated. Today's feast celebrates "the part played by [Our Lady] in [the] mystery of salvation" that we celebrate at Christmas (Paul VI, Marialis Cultus). And that part was the part of being the Mother.

But we celebrate this feast of Our Lady today not merely because of the proximity of Christmas but because of the symbolism of the start of the New Year. Our Lady is the one who brought the One who is "new life" itself into the world, and so in celebrating her divine motherhood we celebrate her role in bringing new life not merely into the world 2000 years ago, but through her ongoing role of maternal intercession, praying for us POWERFULLY in heaven, we celebrate her ongoing role in bringing the new life of grace into our souls.

But if we wind the clock back before Christmas we can see that there is yet another reason to think of Our Lady as the one we associate with the new life -because she's the one in whom the new life of grace was FIRST manifested. The Archangel Gabriel hailed her as "full of grace" because grace was already operative in her, in a special anticipation of the merits that Christ would win (for her and for us) on the Cross. She lived a life free at every moment from sin, free from sin because the new life brought by Christ was operative in her already. And in her sinless perfection we see manifested the new beginning for redeemed humanity that WE can all hope for.
She is therefore the "new dawn", THE sign of the hope of new life that redeemed humanity can aspire to.

I want to draw this together by seeing how what was shown forth in the Mother of God can be applied to ourselves, applied to ourselves in terms of making a new beginning, especially at the start of this New Year. In three simple points:
First, as I have already indicated, Our Lady is the new beginning because she was "full of grace". This is a sign to us that whenever we seek to make a new beginning we must seek to do it not by our own strength, but by the strength that comes from the Lord, that comes from grace. And the triumph of that grace in Our Lady is a sign that grace can be powerful in us too.
Second, Our Lady shows us that if we wish to make a new beginning we need to do so by cooperating with God's plan for us. The Lord had a plan for her, a plan for her to be the Mother of God, a plan that led to her glory even though it also took her to suffer at the foot of the Cross. The new beginning and the new triumph that we see manifested in her were not by herself but by her cooperation in the plan the Lord had for her, “Let it be done to me according to your word"(Lk 1:38). For ourselves, that means that in all of our working and striving we need to be seeking to cooperate with His plan, we need to be seeking His Will for us. And, like Our Lady, we need to trust that He does have a plan for each one of us.
Thirdly, and finally, Our Lady shows us that cooperation with God's plan also involves ACTIVITY on our part –“letting God act” does not just mean sitting back and doing nothing. The first thing Our Lady did when the angel left her was to head out to visit and take care of her pregnant cousin Elizabeth -activity.
I mention this aspect of activity particularly today on New Year's Day. Today is a day when people across our land will be making many new resolutions, and this is a good practice for us to take part in also. Keeping special times, special seasons, and special resolutions, like New Year’s Resolutions, is a very sacramental thing, a very Catholic thing. So, if you've not made a resolution yet I'd encourage you to do so, and to do so thinking of the new beginning manifested in Our Lady.

To sum up. New Year’s Day is a day of new beginnings, and this is what we see in Our Lady, the Mother of new life, the Mother of God, the mother of us.

Christmas 2011, Shaftesbury

2011-12-25T00:38:00.002Z

I had a little crisis this week. I was putting up Christmas decorations in the presbytery, and I was assembling all the pieces of the crib set that I have. I put out the shepherds, the donkey, the cow, some sheep, the Blessed Virgin and St Joseph. And that's when I realised my problem: I couldn't find the baby Jesus. I had everything else right about the crib scene, but no Jesus!
And it struck me that this is a perfect image of what all the frantic busyness of Christmas can be like if we don't have Jesus -without Jesus everything else is there, but it's lacking the key thing, and without Him it's empty, without Him it's just hard work

If we think for a moment about that first crib scene in Bethlehem 2000 years ago. Without Jesus, there would be nothing to make it different from any other stable. It may well have been cold, damp, smelly, and dark.
But with Jesus present there the scene was utterly transformed. Christmas cards rightly show us images of light radiating from the child Jesus, radiating to CHANGE that crib scene.
If we think of St Joseph and the Blessed Virgin, having struggled all the way from Nazareth to Bethlehem, having been offered no room at the inn, and yet, theirs was not a labour without reward -they had Jesus, the Messiah, God Himself among them.
Our Christian faith tells us that the Lord God entered this world, was born as a weak child in this world, in order to transform this world, transform our lives in this world, transform our lives by being WITH us in this world.

But, back to life without Jesus, to the crib without Jesus:
Life, as we all know, has plenty of difficulties, plenty of work, plenty of busyness. But the question that surely arises in thinking of life with or without Jesus, must surely be, amid all the busyness of life is there a purpose? Is there a direction? Is there a goal?
Life without Jesus can easily be work without a reward, labour without rest, and be a life where we feel left alone with our problems.
This week I've had a number of moments where my life has felt like that empty crib scene. I've had lots of labour, lots of building of ‘the crib’, but I frequently had moments when I had forgotten what this busyness is truly aiming for, namely, to bring Jesus here.
And I've had to periodically stop myself, and refocus myself.

When we refocus ourselves on Jesus then we are refocusing on the One who is our companion in our difficulties, who is our light in darkness, and our strength in weakness.
So often when we feel alone it's because we forgotten that He is with us.
So often when we feel that we are busy with no purpose it is because we forgotten to offer our work and our labour and our strife to Him.
Even today, amidst joyful Christmas celebrations, is Jesus there?
Even today, when the turkey is finished, and the dishes are being washed, is Jesus there?
If I offer my joys to Jesus then my joys are increased because they are united with their ultimate source.
If I offer my work to Jesus then my burden is lightened because it carried with Him.
So let's remember to keep Jesus in the ‘crib’ of our lives.

Back to my crib scene decorations in the presbytery, I eventually found the baby Jesus. It turned out that He was there all along, I just hadn't seen Him. If we want to get the most out of Christmas, then let’s not forget Him.

4th Sunday of Advent, Year B, Shaftesbury

2011-12-18T00:14:00.002Z

Lk 1:26-38; 2 Sam 7:1-5.8-12.14.16
We’re now in the final stretch before Christmas –just one week to go. Some of us have already sent all our Christmas cards, and some of us haven’t. Some of us have already bought our presents, and some of us haven’t.
But, as it won’t surprise you to hear me say, none of these things are what Christmas is truly about.
Today, the final Sunday of Advent, the Church always turns to thoughts to Our Lady, each year with a different aspect of the Christmas narrative that involves her in a key moment. And the Church turns our thoughts to Our Lady in order that she might prepare us for Christmas, and I want to focus on two things we see in her that are important for us to imitate: her obedience, and her listening.

In our first reading we heard about the Ark of the Covenant, and how King David planned to build a fitting dwelling place for the Ark. King David, however, was told that he was not worthy to build the dwelling place for the Lord. That can stand as a sign for us that we also need to be properly fit if we are to be, ourselves, a dwelling place for the Lord at Christmas, if He is to come to us. Jesus wants to come to everybody Christmas, but not everybody seeks to make Him welcome.
The person, above all, who is placed before us as the image of being ready for the coming of the Lord is Our Lady. One of the titles that is given to Our Lady is that she is the "Ark of the Covenant", she is the place where He comes to dwell.

If we look at how the Blessed Virgin responded to what the Archangel Gabriel told her, there are two things we see. We see her being attentive to what the angel said i.e. we see her listening. We also see her being obedient, "I am the handmaid of the Lord, let what you have said be done to me”(Lk 1:38). If we imitate these two virtues ourselves we will likewise enable the Lord to come to us this Christmas.

If we consider this particularly in a family setting, it is very easy for family gatherings to be occasions where there is a continual conflict of wills. I want this, I want that, he wants something else, and she wants something else again.
Our Lady was fit to have the Lord come to her because she bowed her will to that of the Lord. We, similarly, need to bow our will to that of the Lord, and most of the time that is manifested by bowing my will, surrendering my preference, to that of what other people would prefer. This is a simple fact of living out love, living out the love that involves the Lord’s coming. And so if we would be ready for Christmas then we need to be getting into the habit of compromising, and not being too attached to our own preferences.

But we can only surrender our will, we can only surrender our preferences to others, we can only do this if we have first HEARD what other people's preferences are. And so we need to listen, just as the Blessed Virgin listened to the angel. For ourselves, that listening doesn't just mean not talking, it needs to also involve being attentive enough to others to see what they are thinking what they are wanting. And amid the rush of Christmas activity that can take an effort –but its essential if Christmas is to be happy, if it to be what Christmas is truly about.

So, if we want to get ready for Christmas, if we want our hearts and our lives to be fit dwellings for the Lord, then let us imitate the one to whom the Lord came most completely, let us imitate Our Lady, let us listen as she listened, and having heard, let us obey.

3rd Sunday Advent, Year B, Shaftesbury

2011-12-11T00:34:00.002Z

Jn 1:6-8.19-28
I’d like to say a few words today about two things: rejoicing, and about how God is hidden from us even though He is among us.

Today, the third Sunday of advent, is the day that the Church calls "Gaudete Sunday”, and this word means "rejoice". And this is important for us for two reasons.
First, and most fundamentally, the Church calls us to rejoice halfway through Advent is a sign of the fact that even though Christian existence is characterised by this season of waiting for the Lord to come, of being in continuous expectation of Him coming, nonetheless, in other forms He is already here among us -and so we should "rejoice".
Second, at a simple human level, I always think it's important that we have this reminder to rejoice as we are preparing for Christmas. We live in the midst of a very materialistic world, and many of our preparations for Christmas can similarly be materialistic, and hard work, and stressful, and so it is important to be reminded that there is a reason to "rejoice" even while we are getting ready Christmas. And of course, in different ways, many of us will have particular reasons why Christmas may be a difficult time, or a lonely time, or a time that can crystallise together many weighty issues in our life at the moment. And that too means that it's important to recall the reason that the Church tells us that we have to "rejoice" -to rejoice even in the midst of difficulty.

Our Faith tells us that the end of time Christ will come again in glory, and for those judged to be with Him, all will be well, and there will be rejoicing without end, because we will be with Him who will give us every reason to rejoice, who will give us happiness beyond imagining.
But the Lord whose very presence will bring happiness, He is already with us here today. The problem, however, with rejoicing in His presence is that there is something about His presence that remains hidden.

Let us turn to the scriptural comparison we find in today's gospel. St John the Baptist told the crowds who were coming to him, told the crowds who were responding to his call to "prepare a way for the Lord", he told the crowds that the one they were preparing for was already there, that He “stands among you –unknown to you”(Jn 1:26).
And something of that same truth holds for us today: the Lord is among us, that He is somehow hidden from us, that we somehow do not see Him.

Of course, He is not completely unseen, He is not completely hidden. We have His promise that He is with us in His sacraments, we know too that He is with us in the reading of Sacred Scripture, and that He is with us in the love of friends and family.
And yet, in none of these ways is He with us in the fully visible form He took as a child at Bethlehem, and in none of these ways is He with us as He will be in glory at the end of time.

Why is He unseen to us? Well, we might consider the fact that in as much as He is pure spirit God is beyond being seen –our eyes are not up to the task of seeing spiritual realities. We might also consider the fact that His workings, His providential plan, at the level of our individual lives, part of the reason we cannot see this and cannot see His hand at work in this, is not that He is not present, but rather that His workings are too complex, at too many levels for us to clearly perceive.

Nonetheless, Scripture assures us that He is among us. And most of us have particular moments in our lives when we are more able to look back, look back to earlier events in our lives, and see that the Lord was there all along. Much as the old "Footprints" poem puts it http://www.wowzone.com/fprints.htm: I can look back in my life and see my problems, see times when I felt like I was most alone, see times when it seems that the Lord abandoned me, and yet, it was then that the Lord carried me. I thought I was alone, but I only survived at all by His help, by His carrying me.
And so to remember that the Lord is with me, to remember that the Lord promises that He is with me, to remember that it is a repeated pattern in the Sacred Scriptures that He is there even when He is unseen, to remember this gives us a reason to "rejoice" on this Gaudete Sunday.

So, to conclude. As we as are moving closer to Christmas, and as we find in whatever different ways difficulties and pressures upon us, let us remember that the Lord is with us, His presence is with us, and His strength is with us, and therefore let us "rejoice".

2nd Sunday Advent, Year B, Shaftesbury

2011-12-04T00:21:00.003Z

Mk 1:1-18; Isa 40:1-5.9-11
Last Sunday, the first Sunday of Advent, I was asked a very good question by one of the children, I was asked why I was wearing purple –isn’t purple the colour of Lent, she said? Lent and Advent have a number of things in common, not just their colour. In a general sense we can say that they are both sombre seasons that prepare for the joy that follows, so that white is worn at both Christmas and Easter. But there is something else that unites both Lent and Advent and that is their focus on sin. Each of these two seasons is concerned with sin, but each in a somewhat different way. Lent has a slightly more backward looking approach to sin in that it calls us to do penance for the sins we have already committed. Advent's focus on sin is different: Advent is oriented to the coming of Christ, and Advent is concerned with sin because our sins obstruct His coming. A prayer at Mass this week, on the Thursday of the first week of Advent, expresses this very beautifully when it says that “our sins impede” His coming.

We need to turn away from our sins if we are to enable the coming of the Lord: our 1st reading spoke of how, at past time, the people had atoned for their sins and so the Lord would come to them (Isa 40:1-5.9-11); and our Gospel text has John the Baptist’s call to repentance to “prepare a way for the Lord”(Mk 1:1-8).

The joyful coming of the Lord will not happen unless we first ready ourselves by being purified of our sins. That’s why this is season is particularly important for going to confession, and is why we’ll be having our usual penitential service this Friday night with 4 visiting priests here to hear your confessions.

But in order to confess our sins we first need to see our sins, and this is always a problem. Comfort and complacency and self-deceit all prevent us seeing our sins accurately, and that’s why it takes an effort to examine our consciences, and that’s why we need help to do so, and is why I’ve given you again a copy of a sheet I handed out a year or so ago. I was asked recently about a question on that list, “Have I gone to sleep on time?” Someone wanted to know how that could be a sin, so let me try and explain –because it illustrates a great many other things.

Going to sleep -Of course, some things are beyond our control in terms of getting sleep, like illness or needing to care for a child. But nonetheless we do have a great deal of control, and therefore a great deal of responsibility, for planning and achieving our amount of sleep. Getting a good night’s sleep is important in order for us to be able to function the next day.

But let me amplify this further in saying why it is important, and important to God, that you're able to function during the day. The point that we all need to have clear before ourselves is that our life is not our own -my life belongs to God and your life belongs to God. As the parable of the talents that we heard not that long ago reminded us, what we have is on loan to us from God, and we will have to render an account to Him of how we used what we have been loaned:
how we have used our abilities, how we have used our time, how we have used our opportunities, how we have used our initiative -whether we have failed to look to see the many ways that we could be helping others, the ways we could volunteer our time and service to others.
And none of these things happen by accident, they take planning and thought, which is why there are other questions on examination of conscience making that very point.
As Scripture puts it, “you have been bought and paid for”(1Cor 6:20), and so we each need to be living a life that is worthy of being offered to God as “a living sacrifice” (Rom 12:1).
There is another aspect to this too: our lives and the details of our lives have a vastly increased dignity because they belong to God. Even what might seem like small mundane things have actually a great DIGNITY and value, a value because they have value in GOD’s sight. So, something like washing the dishes, which I never get excited about doing, I can resolve to do this well, resolve to do this with dignity, and OFFER it to God, as part of being a “living sacrifice” offered to Him.

Sometimes, maybe when we’re alone and being a bit scruffy, simply picking ourselves up, using the day the best we can, sometimes just doing a single thing with quality and effort, and then OFFERING this to the Almighty, this very fact can give dignity and meaning to our lives -as well as simply doing the more basic thing of using the talents that God has given us as a living sacrifice to Him.
But none of this, none of this using our time and abilities well, none of this can be done if we we’re not rested –thus the duty to get a good night’s sleep.

To come to back where I began. The purple of Advent signifies a preparation for the white of Christmas. And to prepare a way for the Lord we must purify ourselves of sin. We must see our sins, confess our sins, and being reconciled the Lord will leave us ready for His coming, a coming that “only our sins delay”.

The examination of conscience referred to in the sermon can be viewed at:
http://fatherdylanjames.blogspot.com/2009/03/examination-of-conscience-based-on-7.html

and as a Word document at:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/36289758/Examination-of-Conscience-for-Parish-2009

1st Sunday of Advent, Year B, Shaftesbury

2011-11-27T00:17:00.003Z

If you've been following the news, and in particular if you are a follower of science, you will probably noticed a big controversy recently. Supposedly, scientists have sent a little particle called a neutrino travelling at faster than the speed of light, which is something that Einstein and his theory of relativity said wasn't possible.

I've heard it said that there are only three people in the world who understand the theory of relativity, I’m not one of the three, so please don't expect me to explain it to you today! However, I do want to offer you a reflection on the question of time, particularly as it relates to Advent. The theory of relativity, if I remember it correctly, states that every measurement of time is relative, depending on the position of the observer, and in particular depending on the velocity an observer is moving at relative to another observer. Philosophically, this raises the question of whether there is really such a thing as universal time at all, and philosophers have tied themselves in knots about this ever since Einstein.

What, however, does this have to do with you and me, and Advent?
Advent is a season of the Church's year, more than any other time of the year, when we think about TIME: we think about the past and the future and how they affect us in the present. We think about how, in the past, there was a preparation for the first coming of Jesus in His birth. We think about the future, about how Christ will come the second time in glory, as we heard Him referring to in our gospel passage today (Mk 13:33-37). And, we think about how this affects the present, in how we need to make Christ present here today.

Many philosophers have remarked about how Christianity, more than any other religion, has a linear notion of time, of there being the connection between the past and the future, of there being a direction, a linear direction, a goal to which all of creation is heading, namely, the time of the Second Coming of Christ, what we heard St Paul refer to as "the day of our Lord Jesus Christ"(I Cor 1:9).

If what Christ claims is true, namely, that the cosmos was created through Him, that it was created in order that He might enter it, that His first coming was prepared for in a particular way in the events of the Old Testament, and, that all of creation awaits with eager longing for His Second Coming in glory. If this is true, then the point with respect to which all time is relative is Christ.
So, what gives meaning to my life in the present, what gives meaning to my experience of time today, is my relationship to Christ. In particular, my relationship to how His first coming is being made effective in my life, effective in my life in my reception in His sacraments, effective in my life in my living Divine charity, effective in my life in such a way that my life is a preparation for my being ready for His Second Coming. How I live in relationship to the past and the future gives meaning to my today.

Let me explain this with a simple illustration. Many children are already counting the days until Christmas. Many of these children are yearning not so much Christ but for the presents under the tree. The whole of December can be a state of longing for those Christmas presents. But there are two ways that a child can be excited about Christmas presents. There is a type of OVER-excitement that are so focused on Christmas that they fail to enjoy today, and that obviously would be a loss. But there can be another type of excitement where the anticipation of Christmas brings a whole season of joy and expectation that gives greater meaning to the days preparing for Christmas. That manner, of expectation of the future changing how we live in the present, is exactly how we are supposed to make the Second Coming change how we adults live our present every day.

To come back to where I began: I don't know whether a neutrino really has travelled faster than the speed of light, I don't know whether Einstein's theory of relativity has been disproven. But even if all time is relative at the subatomic level, at the cosmic level there is such a thing as a universal measure of time, because there is one event that all time is measured in relation to, and that event is the coming of Christ. And it is the preparation of that event that this season of Advent aims to bring about.

Christ the King, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-11-20T00:56:00.002Z

Mt 25:31-46
I want to say a few words today about something important, something the importance of which I was reminded of just this week, namely, the fact that it is not you or I who decides what is right or wrong but God. And it is because of that that He is the one who will judge us.
At the end of time, as we heard in that gospel passage, the Son of Man will return in glory, escorted by the Angels, sit upon His throne, and He will judge the nations and judge us before Him.

Now, being judged is not a very modern egalitarian image of Christ to have. If we approach this from the contemporary perspective we might well expect somebody to say words to the effect of fifth, "What right does He have to judge us?" What right does He have to tell us what we should do? What right does He have to tell us what we should have done? As the popular phrase goes, "You're not the boss of me. No one is the boss of me. I'm the boss of me."
I was thinking about this in particular this week when I gave a talk to a group of people, a talk about knowing the difference between right and wrong, and it soon became clear that most of them thought that it was entirely up to them to decide what was right and what was wrong. The thought that God had already established but was right or wrong hadn't really occurred to them.

The Lord Jesus will judge us according to our behaviour, according to whether we have done right or whether we have done wrong. He will judge us according to what HE says is right or wrong, and His claim to have the right to do this is that it is HIS world that we live in. God has created this world, made it according to His Wisdom and plan, and the fulfilment of everything in this world, including you and me, the fulfilment of every action depends on being in accordance with His Wisdom. If I say that something is "right" when in fact it is contrary to His Wisdom, contrary to what He says, then I'm wrong.
And, He hasn't made it difficult for us to know what is right or wrong, He has given us the gift of reason to discern His Will, in addition, when He came down from heaven to earth He gave us His example to show us what is right and wrong, and He also gave us His teaching to show us those same truths.
So, to consider the example that this gospel passage focused on, namely, care for those in need, the hungry, the thirsty, etc. Reason alone can deduce that my needy neighbour is made in the same image as I am and has a claim to be treated as I wish to be treated myself. The example of Jesus shows us that He cared most especially for those who are most in need. And His teaching told us that we must do the same.

The Lord Jesus has made it clear to us what we must do, how we must live, what is right and what is wrong. But let me make this further point, He has told us how we must live not so much for His benefit as for ours. It is for our good, our purpose, our fulfilment, that we live according to His Wisdom, according to what He says is right or wrong.
And His judgement at the end of time will simply manifest and proclaim what we have made ourselves to be by our own actions, by our own doing or not doing what is truly right or wrong. If we have been selfish and not caring then His judgement will manifest that this is the kind of person we have become. Conversely, if we have been loving and caring, and have fulfilled ourselves in His image, by His grace, then His judgement will manifest that that is what we have become.
And for some of us this manifestation will come as a surprise: the human capacity for self deceit and pride, to lie to ourselves about what we truly are, perhaps even to give to poor but with bad motives, means that we cannot presume to know how we will be judged. It is His world, He made it, and He will judge it and us within it.

There are those who say there is no God, that there is no one who has established the world, that there is no purpose to life other than what we make of it, that there is no one who has established what is right and wrong, that there is no King who will come to judge. While today's feast of Christ the King, and the portrait of Christ is judge in today's gospel, is one with stern consequences, is also one to give thanks for, because His role as King and judge is what gives solidity, purpose and direction to our lives and the lives of all humanity, if we will but turn to Him.

Remembrance Sunday, 33rd Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-11-13T00:32:00.002Z

Mt 25:14-30
We just heard the parable of "the talents". Its message is very simple: that we must use the gifts that God has given us, and use them well.

Let me start with a comparison: I've been thinking a lot about the martyrs of ancient Rome recently. As most of you know a group of 20 of us recently went to Rome on our parish youth pilgrimage, and we saw many of the sites of ancient Rome, and chief among them for a Christian are the sites where the early Christians were martyred, put to death: the Colosseum, the Circus Maximus, and so forth. Each of those martyrs sacrificed the greatest "talent" that they'd been given by God, namely, their very lives. They chose to be martyred rather than deny Christ. Many of those martyrs were martyred at a very young tender age, an age when what they were sacrificing would have seemed it all the more poignant –they had not lived long enough to use their lives for anything in particular.
And yet, the point I want draw your attention to is that the early church CELEBRATED their deaths, celebrated their martyrdoms, rejoiced that they had put their lives to this use. They had taken their lives, that “talent”, and laid it down in martyrdom.

Human existence is full of examples of people who manifested the truth that often the greatest use we can make of our life is to lay down in sacrifice for someone else. Today, being Remembrance Sunday, is a day when we recall in a particular way those who have lost their lives in warfare, and those who have lost their lives in many DIFFERENT ways in warfare. Most typically, we recall those who died bravely sacrificing themselves for others. Those who took the "talent" of life and used it to the full.
But we also recall those who had the “talent” of life taken from them in violence.
And both such types of death call on us who live to use our lives well, to use our talents well, to not waste them, to not fritter them away by doing nothing in particular.

Today’s gospel parable of the “talents” is given to us by the church for this Sunday on a cycle that is quite independent of the fact we keep Remembrance Sunday in England today. Nonetheless, it seems to me that this is a fitting connection.

We all have talents, and yet we all know it is easy to waste our talents. We can tell ourselves, like the man in the parable who had only one talent not 10, we can tell ourselves that our talents are not enough to be worth using. And yet, the very obvious point that the Lord is making to us is that it does not matter how GREAT our talents are, what matters is how FULLY we use them –not least because it is for this that will be rewarded in the next life.
Today's parable gives us a rather frightening motivation to use even our small talents -the fact that will be held accountable for how we use or fail to use them. But we would do well to remember also the lesson of the widow’s might, of the woman that Jesus praised for being more generous than others even though all she had to give were her last few coins.

As we recall today on Remembrance Sunday the great loss of life in warfare, let us ask ourselves how well we are using our talents, how much we are laying them down in service to others, whether we are living our lives as worthy of being offered to God as "a living sacrifice"(Rom 12:1).

32nd Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-11-06T00:05:00.002Z

1 Thess 4:13-18
This time last week I was still in [or only just returned from] ‘the Eternal City’ of Rome, with our parish youth pilgrimage. While we were there we saw many things, and one of the important things we saw was the ancient catacombs, and I want to say a few words to you about them, for 2 reasons. First, we’re now in the month of November, the month the Church calls us on us to remember the dead, and second, as an example of what we heard St Paul refer to in our second reading, of how to mourn those we have lost, but mourn them with hope and faith, not mourn them with the lack of hope that characterises those without faith.

Back to the catacombs. For those of you who don’t know, the Roman catacombs are the ancient long tunnels in which people were buried. The tunnels are very long: we visited those of St Callistus which consists of 12 miles of tunnels, with half a million graves, each consisting of a niche in the wall, originally covered with marble slabs. Some of these graves were in rooms with elaborate frescos painting religious images conveying their Christian faith in the resurrection. More than this, however, the catacombs were also places where the Christians went to pray –to pray for those who had died, to offer Mass for them. A good number of the ancient martyrs, like St Callistus himself, were actually captured while at Mass in the catacombs, at prayer, and we had the privilege of similarly offering Mass down there.

The point I want to make is this: these elaborate efforts made surrounding death reflected what they believed, and reflected their hope for those who had died.
Most of the pagan Romans did not bury their dead –they cremated them, their ashes scattering as symbol of their dissolution into nothingness in death. For the pagans who did believe in life after death, they typically believed it to be a place of shades, shadows and darkness, a lesser place than this world –most certainly not a place of hope, most certainly not a place you want to go to
In contrast, though the Christian catacombs are dark tunnels they nonetheless proclaimed a confident faith in a place of light and victory beyond death.

It is worth thinking for a moment about our own attitudes to death. Is it something we view with fear of the unknown? Is it something we view with superstition, so that we would be afraid to walk through a cemetery at night? –such attitudes were said to characterise the pagan Romans, unlike the Christian Romans who did not fear to go down into the catacombs.
For ourselves, in as much as we have a definite faith in what death involves, it should not be something of superstition. Whereas, in as much as our faith is vague, then death will be a matter of superstition for us too.

A key part of keeping our faith definite is by making our PRACTICE definite, and in this I would return again to the witness of the Early Christians praying for the dead. To add a personal note, one of the things for which I am very grateful is that my mother and grandparents instilled in me a regular practice of praying for those who had died. I would mentally name and pray for them at Mass, deceased neighbours, deceased family. And this practice gave me a clear sense that I was still united with these people, that my prayers helped these people: helped them by imploring mercy in the Judgement, and helped them by both strengthening them in the midst of their purifications in Purgatory and by helping speed them through those purifications to Heaven. And that definite practice of praying for the dead helped form my faith in what death is about.
And, to come back to those words of St Paul, about grieving with hope, and not “like those other people who have no hope”. Of course we grieve when loved ones die, we grieve because we have been physically separated from them, at least for a time. But to grieve with hope is very different to grieving without hope –and it is hope that we are called to.

So, to return to what those catacombs teach us. They teach us respect for the bodies of those who have died, because we believe that they will rise again to the resurrection of the body. They teach us to pray for those who have died, to aid them on their way. And they teach us about that destination we hold in view –a place of light and refreshment, the light of faith even amidst the dark tunnels of the catacombs.

31st Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-10-30T00:24:00.001+01:00

on Mt 23:1-12
One of the cattiest insults that can be hurled at us is the accusation that we, that you or that I, are "two-faced". That what I say to one person is not the same as what I say to someone else. That I pretend to some people to be one thing, and I pretend to other people to be something else. And, of course, one way of being two-faced is being a hypocrite -not living out the beliefs that I pretend to. Hypocrisy is something that the Lord condemned very frequently, as we just heard an example.

The opposite of being two-faced is being one-faced. Having one face, my real face. And this one face being the same face that I show to everyone. It is the same face because it is the face that reveals the same real me.
To achieve that, my life needs to be a consistent unity. I must be the same person in everything that I do. I can't pretend to be one kind of person when I'm doing one thing, or with one group of people, and really be something else.
Which means that I must strive to possess the virtue of integrity.

To consider for a moment what that would look like in practice:
Although I must be the same person in everything that I do, this doesn’t mean that I cannot do different things. I can be the same consistent person and still act differently in different situations. In a hospital I must be able to rejoice with the mother of a new baby, and still be able, the next minute, to be sad with someone who has just lost a loved relative, and, yet I must also be the same person who enjoys a drink in the pub.

I can do different thing in different places, as the need calls for. But I am still called to be the same person in all the different things that I do.
I am called to be a WHOLE person.
The alternative is to have a split personality, one face on Sunday, another face the rest of the week. To be a person that is made up of several conflicting parts that only just about hang together. And in as much as that it true of us it produces internal conflict. Conflict arising from the different needs of the different personalities within me. It produces stress. Stress that arises from our insincerity, our lack of integrity.
So, being insincere is bad for us.

Conversely, by seeking sincerity, I am not only obeying our Lord's command to practice what I preach, I am also acting for my own good.
When I am consistently the same person, rather than several different people inside me, then I will be naturally rewarded with peace of soul. The kind of internal peace that was enjoyed by Jesus Christ, and by the Blessed Virgin Mary. Peace that results from the absence of sin. Peace that results from the absence of hypocrisy, from not being two-faced.

This internal peace is a gift that we can only receive from Jesus Christ. As He said to His disciples, "Peace I leave you, my own peace I give you, a peace which the world cannot give"(Jn 14:27). The peace of Jesus comes with the gift of His grace. Grace which makes us a whole united person. Which binds together the conflicting parts within us. Making us one person, with one face.

So, in as much as we feel that conflict within us, feel that being a different person with different people, let us bring our dividedness to the Lord, let us ask for His grace to help us practice what we preach, to be people of integrity, people with one face, not two.

30th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-10-23T00:55:00.000+01:00

Mt 22:34-40
Last week’s sermon was very interesting for me, and you know, sometimes a sermon can be more interesting to the preacher than to the congregation! It was interesting to me because although I thought it was not interesting, nonetheless, judging from people’s attention and comments afterwards it was something that at least many of you the congregation found interesting.
I preached last week about “rendering unto God what is God’s”, and about justice in general, and about how there are various things that we OWE in justice to God, to the poor, to our family members.
Two interesting questions were put to me afterwards, one asked, If we are acting in justice, where does that leave love? And another asked, if we’re acting out of justice, does that give any joy?
Which isn’t a bad introduction to today’s Gospel with the command of love.

Now, it sometimes happens that we can bristle at the sound of a “command” to love? Surely, it might seem, we love someone simply because we love them, not because we are commanded to love them.
This, actually, takes me to a very important point: There are different kinds of love.

I can love with a very minimal love, a love that renders unto another what I owe him, but does not go beyond what I owe him. This is the love of justice. And it is possible to have a minimal but nonetheless real love.
St Thomas Aquinas makes the point that God has given us the ‘precept’, the COMMAND to love because there IS a level of love that we owe in justice (ST II-II q44 a1). My point in last week’s sermon was to indicate that there are many things that we OWE in justice, in this first degree of love.
It has often been said: The reason why the Ten Commandments are mainly specified in a negative format, “Do not...”, is because they point to the lower limit of love (c.f. Pope John Paul II, Veritatis Splendor (1993) n.13). Love has a lower limit, when we fail to love, but there is no upper limit –we cannot love too much, though we can love in a disordered way.

But there is also another degree of love, a love that goes beyond what I am required to give, and gives even more. Gives more time, more effort, more care, more money, and so forth. This is a love beyond justice, a love which fulfils justice even as it transcends it.

There are some other things that we associate with love, however, and chief among them are joy and reciprocity.
When we are in love there is a natural overflow of JOY that we experience, be it in love of spouse, of friend, or of God. Joy is an effect of charity (ST II-II q28 a1).
But, probably most characteristically of all, we think of love, and of ‘being in love’, in terms of a love that is returned. This is not the only form of love –we can love an enemy. But it is what we most associate with love. This is what Aristotle called the ‘love of friendship’ when we not only will good to someone, not only have them will good back to us, but we each know that this goodwill is reciprocated. (Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics, Bk VIII, chpt 2, 1155b30, c.f. Aquinas, ST II-II q23 a1)

This, precisely, is the form of love that the Lord Jesus invites us to. To have the love of friendship with God. (c.f. ST II-II q23 a1)
This includes certain basic things, like what justice demands in the various acts of religion, like coming to Mass each and every Sunday.
But, the love of friendship, to love God as a friend, seeking not merely to avoid falling below the minimum set in the Ten Commandments, means to love Him “with our whole heart, and soul, and strength”, such that we love all things that He loves, such that we love our neighbour, our spouse, everyone, even more than we would love them otherwise.

29th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-10-16T00:53:00.002+01:00

Mt 22:15-21
We just heard the Lord Jesus tell us that we must, "render unto God what is God's"(Mt 22:21). I want to say a few words today about how prayer, and different kinds of prayer, are part of what we owe to God. When I last preached on this gospel text, when at last came up three years ago, I preached about our duty to “render unto Caesar”, and the interrelationship between God and Caesar, the state. And there are many important points that can be made about this text, but today I want to focus on the primary point, namely, rendering to God what is God's.

As I just said, prayer is one of the things that we must "render unto God". And I say this because it can be a useful reminder of something that we often forget, namely, that there are things we OWE to God. The virtue of ‘justice’ consists in the ready inclination of rendering unto others what is due to them (Aquinas, ST II-II q58 a1; Catechism 1807). I owe it to ‘Caesar’, and through him to the wider society around me as it is served by various state institutions, I owe it to my neighbour that I pay my taxes, that I declare my income honestly, that I don't try to fiddle all my books. And there are all kinds of things that, as a matter of JUSTICE we owe to others. Within a family a father or mother OWES a duty to care for their children. Further, we owe it as a duty that we should give ‘charity’ to those in need -the poor have a claim of duty on the wealth of the rich, and even on those who not ‘rich’, it is not merely a matter of generosity from those who have to those who have not (the word ‘charity’ can sometimes disguise this truth).

The additional point I wish to remind us of today is that there are, similarly, things that we owe to God as a matter of justice. What the saints classically grouped as the virtue of ‘religion’ includes all of those things that we owe directly to God as a matter of justice to Him.
Now, why am I wanting to make a point about this? Well, because I think most of the time when we get around to praying, we tend to think that we are doing something special, that are doing something unusually generous, and we often forget that actually this is just something that we OWE to God as a matter of justice.

For example, when my alarm went off at six o'clock, and when I stumbled out of bed and down the stairs to the church to pray, it may well have been that I wasn't thinking to profoundly about much at all! But my point is that I frequently neglect to think that my struggling down to the church to pray is not merely some kind of super generous act on my part, but is simply something that I owe to God.
Part of the reason, I think, why we tend not to think about prayer as a DEBT of justice is that it is easy to tell ourselves that there are so many DIFFERENT WAYS that we can pray during the day that for most people they could tell themselves that none of these PARTICULAR forms are an obligation of justice. And yet, the rendering of SOME form of REGULAR daily prayer IS a debt of justice we owe to God. And, the commitment to some form of a regular PLAN of prayer is likewise a debt of justice that we owe Him.

And, of course, there are certain forms of prayer that are so essential to our Christian living that they are, for all of us, not something for us to choose but a debt of justice we must pay. Most particularly, the obligation to attend Mass each and every Sunday. "On Sundays and other holy days of obligation the faithful are bound to participate in the Mass." "The precept of participating in the Mass is satisfied by assistance at a Mass which is celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite either on the holy day or on the evening of the preceding day." (CCC 2180) The Mass is THE definitive prayer Christ gave us, saying “do THIS in memory of me”; Sunday Mass is THE prayer that has defined Christian practice down the centuries, it is THE practice that the martyrs risked death rather than fail to attend, to quote one example: "Without fear of any kind we have celebrated the Lord's Supper, because it cannot be missed; that is our law” (Martyrs of Abitina, quoted by John Paul II, Encyclical Dies Domini, n. 46). See also: http://community.babycenter.com/post/a24657251/the_pain_of_mortal_sin_for_missing_mass

So, in conclusion, the next time we pray, let us remember that this is not just some super generous act on our part before God, but this is something that we owe Him in justice. He has given us life and breath and everything we have, and prayer is just one of the things we owe Him if we are to, "render unto God what is God's"(Mt 22:21).

28th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-10-09T00:41:00.002+01:00

Mt 22:1-14; Isa 25:6-10a
Sometimes I’m good, but sometimes I can’t be bothered, and I think this is a phenomenon that most people would recognise in themselves.
I make this observation because we heard in the gospel today the Lord Jesus give the parable in which an invitation was made to something great, and yet most of those were invited could not be bothered. Some of those were invited reacted violently, but others, and I would suggest to you that if this is a model of real life, then this was the majority, of the majority of the others it doesn't say that they REJECTED the invitation, it doesn't say that they despised the person who gave it, it just says, "but they were not interested: one went off to his farm, another to his business"(Mt 22:5) and so forth.
And so the Church gives us readings today to reissue this invitation to us, with two rather different reasons as to WHY we should respond to this invitation: from the New Testament, a threat of punishment of those who do not respond, and from the Old Testament, a reminder of the beauty and promise that awaits those who do respond to the invitation.

The parable that Jesus gave uses a common scriptural image of the wedding feast. The symbolism inherent in this is that the wedding is between God and His chosen people, which in the new covenant means the Church, means that body of people that you and I belong to.
The banquet, as we had spelt out in that text from the Prophet Isaiah, the banquet is not just about food. Yes, the satisfaction food gives is offered to us as a symbol, but a symbol of a much deeper satisfaction, including the satisfaction that will come when all of the suffering and limitations of this world are removed: “He will remove the mourning veil covering all peoples... He will destroy Death forever. The Lord will wipe away the tears from every cheek”(Isa 25:7-8). And the destruction of Death is the ultimate symbol of the destruction of all that is wrong with this life.

It is perhaps something of an understatement to say that it is hard to imagine anything greater that we could be invited to. And yet, so often we can be slow to respond.
As the Lord Jesus said in that parable, invitations were sent again and again, just as the prophets were sent again and again to the chosen people of Israel, and down the centuries the saints have risen up in the Church calling us to repentance again and again, and as the Pope today travels to country after country repeating the invitation again and again.

According to the parable, those were originally invited failed to respond, as Jesus put it "those were invited proved to be unworthy"(Mt 22:8). They were destroyed, and others were invited in their place.
In the early Church they would've had a profound awareness of how they had replaced the Jewish people, however, the final part of the parable is addressed to any feeling of complacency that might exist in the Church: we need to have a wedding garment if we are to enter the feast. In the Jewish tradition the wedding garment was supposedly a symbol of the good works that the faithful clothe themselves with. If we would enter that perfection, if we would feast in that banquet, then we need to clothe ourselves the wedding garment of the virtuous life.

As I started by saying, sometimes I’m good, and sometimes I can’t be bothered.
If we want to ‘be bothered’ then let us remember who is inviting us, and the greatness of what we are being invited to. Otherwise, the words spoken by our Lord might apply to us, “many are called, but few are chosen”(Mt 22:14).

27th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-10-02T00:27:00.004+01:00

Isa 5:1-7; Ps 79; Phil 4:6-9; Mt 21:33-43
“The vineyard of the Lord is the House of Israel”(Isa 5:7; Ps 79:9) –I want to say a word today about how that phrase can apply to me, to you, and to the Church as a whole.

I am the Lord’s “vineyard”. I’ve if been thinking about this concept this week with respect to various difficulties I’ve had. “Pride goeth before the fall”(Prov 16:18), and maybe I’ve been overly content with many things in my life and many things in this parish, and maybe the Lord thought it is time to bring me down a peg. Maybe the Lord is pruning and disciplining me, as Scripture tells us He did to His vineyard Israel.

We heard in our first reading in the Prophet Isaiah about how the Lord loved and cared for His vineyard Israel, His chosen people the Jews, lavished great things upon them, and yet that vineyard produced nothing but “sour grapes”. So, what was the Lord going to do next? He was going to bring devastation upon His vineyard as punishment.
Now, we know elsewhere from Scripture, and it's a crucially important truth to remember, we know that God never DIRECTLY wills any evil. He created the world perfect, He did not create evil or suffering, and even now He never directly wills them.
Yet, it is also a truth of Scripture that the evil He permits to happen is somehow part of His plan. And with respect to His “vineyard”, it is part of His CARE for His vineyard. As the Lord Jesus Himself said, the vine dresser PRUNES His vine (Jn 15:2) –not out of spite, but to make it yield fruit. And as St Paul says, “the Lord disciplines every son He receives”(Heb 12:6) –BECAUSE He loves the son.

Pruning is never something that we readily accept, just as no child readily accepts discipline. And yet the vine that is not lovingly and caringly pruned will not properly grow, and the child that is not disciplined will likewise grow into something much less than he could have been.
It is always a risky venture to attempt to read the mind of God, to attempt to know WHY God has allowed THIS particular thing to happen to me, now, in these circumstances -while we live in this world there are many things we simply do not know.
I might think that God has allowed certain failures, certain difficulties, certain things I have got wrong, in order to humble me -but there may be other reasons, and so while it is always good, anyway, to learn humility, the Lord probably has other things He's working through this too, and I should be wary of restricting my own interpretation of events.

Nonetheless, to repeat, it is an important truth of the Faith to know that the Lord DOES have a plan, that He does know what He is about, and that therefore we should ENTRUST ourselves to Him.
When we entrust ourselves to Him it means that we face difficulties in a different way. It means that we face them in the confidence of what Scripture says: "all things work to the good for those who love the Lord”(Rom 8:28).
It means that I don't allow the disappointments of this life to leave me in a spirit of dejection.
It means that I keep my eyes on the prize, Heaven, life with Him.
And that I do this knowing that I'm somehow “chosen” by God as His special "vineyard", as someone He is cultivating and working on, leading me from imperfection to opportunities to move beyond those imperfections, beyond my sins –to not not yield “sour grapes” but “deliver produce to him”(Mt 21:43).

So, as St Paul reassured us in our second reading, "There is no need to worry; but if there is anything you need, pray for it, asking God for it with prayer and thanksgiving,... Then the God of peace will be with you"(Phil 4:6-9).

26th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-09-25T00:52:00.000+01:00

Phil 2:1-11
I'd like today to share a thoughts with you about one of the reasons why I think the human “personality” of the Lord Jesus must have been so attractive, namely, why His humility is one of the most attractive things about Him.

Whenever we meet someone there are certain things about that person that will attract us and certain things that will not -and key among the attractive things is a person’s humility.

There are, of course, a number of things that characterise humility, but I don't today wish to dwell on its technical definition. But rather to think about that aspect of lowliness, of willing to be low, that is characteristic of humility.
If you think of the opposite of humility, namely pride -this is a deeply unattractive thing to see and someone. The proud man has a high opinion of himself, his thoughts revolve around himself, and he's not thinking about YOU, and your needs, and your interests.

In contrast, the humble person is willing to allow himself to be low down, lowdown on other people's priorities, low down even on his own list of priorities. The humble person has his thoughts revolved not around himself but around the needs of OTHER people.
And, when we meet such a person, when we meet a person who is so habitually thinking of others that he is therefore also thinking of YOU, this is a deeply attractive thing to see in someone.

Now, to return to Christ. St Paul, in our second reading from the letter to the Philippians, was commending to them certain attitudes and dispositions that they should cultivate, certain things that he said we find in the Lord Jesus. He said that we should be "self-effacing" that we should "always consider the other person to be better than yourself, so that nobody thinks of his own interests first that everybody thinks of other people's interests instead”. And this is exactly what he pointed out we see in Christ Jesus:
"His state was divine,
yet He did not cling to His equality with God,
but emptied Himself to assume the condition of a slave,
and became as men are;
and being as all men are,
He was humbler yet, even to accepting death, death on a cross"(Phil. 2).

There is no greater example of putting other people’s interests before your own than that of the Lord Jesus Himself.
The self-effacing nature of Jesus is perhaps even more clearly seen when we realise that, as God, He has no "interests" at all. He is perfectly self-sufficient and content within Himself, in His infinite and eternal perfection, He has no “needs”. There is no sense at all in which He "needed" us to love Him, “needed” us to come back to Him, “needed” us to be saved. He did it all for OUR benefit, not His.
And this, I think, manifests the depth of His self-effacing lowliness more than anything else.
So, when the crowds flocked to Jesus one of the most attractive aspects of His “personality” that must have shone out to them would have been the way He thought not of His own interests but of theirs.

And what should we conclude from this?
Surely, that this is a way of life worth emulating, that we can be truly attractive as He was.
And ironically, lowering ourselves, thinking of the needs of others before our own, is ultimately in our own "interests" anyway -because we will be raised up as Christ was raised up to the extent that we lower ourselves as He lowered Himself.
Therefore, as St Paul said, "let the same mind be in us as it was in Christ Jesus".

Harvest Festival, 25th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A, 18th Sept 2011, Shaftesbury

2011-09-18T00:59:00.001+01:00

Mt 20:1-16; Isa 55:6-9
Today we are keeping our annual "harvest festival" when we give thanks to God for the gifts we received in the harvest, and, through that, for all the gifts we have received.
This year, in particular, I want to make reference to the warning we received in the words from our Lord, the warning against envy -envy of what others have received their harvest.

Most of us are quite aware that many of the things we receive in life we receive as a result of our labours. And yet, we can often also be aware that we do not receive the same amount as other people who seem to do the same amount of work. Sometimes we can feel just like those labourers mentioned in today's gospel: that we have worked long and hard, that we have worked under the heat of the sun, and yet we have little or less than others we see.

How should this make us feel? One way that it CAN make us feel is ENVIOUS. Envy, according to the definition of the great St Thomas Aquinas, who is quoted by the catechism on this point, "envy is sadness at the sight of another's goods" (CCC 2553; ST II-II q36): I see my neighbour has something that I do not have, and I feel SAD that he has it, because I somehow imagine that the fact that he has something means that I therefore do not have that same thing. All of us, if we are honest, have had this feeling at least sometimes.

I want to point out two things about envy. First, envy is a very destructive thing in that it gives birth to a whole plethora of other sins, thus envy is called a ‘capital’ sin. At its worst, envy of my neighbour leads to hatred of my neighbour. Second, I want to point out the envy does not bring us happiness: this SADNESS at the good of another only increases within us if we do not attempt to restrain it, and this sadness does us no good.

There are two alternative ways that I can respond to seeing that my neighbour has some good that I do not have. If I love my neighbour, I can rejoice for his sake that he has this good thing –even if I do not. Also, to come back to the point the Lord made in today's gospel, I can remind myself that everything I have I have only because of the generosity of the Lord. Even those things that I have as a consequence of my labours, even those things I only have because I have used the things that were first GIVEN to me, and more: my very work I only do thanks to the grace from the Lord that gives me the strength to do it.
ALL is gift; we have no ability to make claims on God. And this is something we need to remind ourselves of again and again and again.

This said, we are THINKING beings, and we do so easily let our thoughts churn away at imagining how WE think God should do things. At such times, we can do well to repeat to ourselves the words we heard in our first reading from the prophet Isaiah, that that "my thoughts are not your thoughts... my thoughts [are] above your thoughts”(Isa 55:9). In this context, what I mean by this is that it is good to remember that the Lord DOES have His reasons –we shall see them fully in the next world, and even in this world it is good to remember that often someone who SEEMS to have more actually has less, or has less of other things, or has less of the things that matter MOST -like the spiritual goods last forever.

So, as we recall the harvest today, let us give thanks to God for the gift of the harvest that WE have, and, let us not look at what OTHERS have, and if we do look, let us not give way to envy, let us not be sad at our neighbour’s good, rather let us rejoice with our neighbour in the good that he has.

Friday Abstinence and Mortal Sin

2011-09-16T12:59:00.019+01:00

On May 14th the Bishops of England and Wales announced that they are re-establishing the requirement to abstain from meat on Fridays, effective 16th September 2011. As indicated below, this means that it is now a sin, and sometimes even a mortal sin, to eat meat on Fridays. As our own Bishop Christopher Budd has explained in his Ad clerum of July 2011, this is now a matter of “precept”, i.e. a legally established moral obligation.

The following is an edited version of a magazine article that has been produced by a number of people, due to be published.

This blog post will focus on the question of sinfulness, a matter that has been less noted in recent discussions. More general postings on the topic of Friday abstinence are viewable on this blog here; a post on what exactly does and does not constitute ‘meat’ here; and on how a parish priest can dispense someone from the law here. There is similarly a useful post at Fr John Boyle’s blog here and at CUF here (though the CUF post concerns the American context where Friday abstinence is recommended but not obligatory). There are also some Lenten comments on the benefits of 'giving things up' here, here, here, here, and here.

Local Variation
The Church law concerning abstinence from meat on Fridays is a matter that can be determined locally by each national Bishops’ Conference for the Catholics of that region: Post-Vatican II, canons 1251 and 1253 gives each Bishops’ Conference the authority to substitute the universal law of Friday abstinence from meat with another local practice for the Catholics of that region. In 1985 the bishops of England and Wales (along with a number of other countries) determined that each person was to be allowed to decide for themselves which particular Friday penance they wished to perform, and this determination held until the present change:
At the May 2011 meeting of the Bishops' Conference the bishops made a series of resolutions including one that re-established that the canonical Friday penance is to be fulfilled by abstinence from meat: “the Bishops' Conference wishes to remind all Catholics in England and Wales of the obligation of Friday Penance. The Bishops have decided to re-establish the practice that this should be fulfilled by abstaining from meat. Those who cannot or choose not to eat meat as part of their normal diet should abstain from some other food of which they regularly partake.” This resolution returns Catholics in our countries to the universal practice envisaged as normative in canon law. To consider the sinfulness of failing to observe Friday abstinence it is thus necessary to look at the universal law, a law which many of us are no longer familiar with because it has not been in force in England and Wales in recent years.

But what of mortal sin?
Before considering mortal sin with respect to Friday abstinence it’s important to briefly recall what holds for any mortal sin: For a sin to be sufficiently serious that it is ‘mortal’ there are three conditions that must hold: the matter itself must be grave (i.e. when considered in the abstract, apart from the person acting, the thing itself being done must be serious), the person acting needs to fully know what he or she is doing, and the person acting needs to give deliberate consent to what they are doing (CCC 1857). When sins are referred to in the abstract as ‘mortal’ it is always the matter of the sin that is being discussed.

Friday Abstinence and Grave Matter
In our modern society, and in the contemporary Church, the notion of penance has almost entirely faded from the popular consciousness. As a consequence, it is difficult for us to appreciate just how gravely important the pre-modern Christian Tradition considered penance to be. Yet, even a casual reading of saints and pre-modern scholars indicates a different set of priorities, and the pre-Conciliar teaching that breaking the law of Friday abstinence was 'grave matter' for mortal sin is something that can be found in any of the older Manuals of moral theology: The Manualists argued that the seriousness of the Christian obligation to do penance, combined with its specification by Church law, means that this is a matter of mortal sin. This said, they also argued that the matter of this sin is such that the quantity of meat eaten and the frequency with this is done would affect whether the sin concerned was a matter of venial sin or mortal sin. To consider another example, the sin of theft is also a mortal sin and one that similarly admits of what is called ‘parvity of matter’, i.e. if you are only stealing something small like a grape then the matter is not substantial enough for it to be the grave matter that constitutes a mortal sin. Concerning Friday abstinence, however, there was no consensus among the Manualists as to how much meat, or with what frequency, constituted 'grave matter' for mortal sin.

Post-Vatican II Reaffirmation
In the post-Conciliar period, the 1966 constitution Paenitemini (III.II.1) of Pope Paul VI re-affirmed that failure to make "substantial observance" of the law of Friday abstinence is grave matter, i.e. constitutes a mortal sin. Clarification was then sought in a dubium as to the meaning of “substantial”, resulting in a decree from the Sacred Congregation of the Council in 1967. The clarification interpreted “substantial” in such a manner that indicated that it was not just a matter of how much meat was eaten, or on how many days, but also a matter of such things as the differing significance of different days of penance, for example, eating meat on Good Friday would be more serious than eating meat on a regular Friday. The clarification stated that "one sins gravely against the law, who, without an excusable cause, omits a notable part, quantitative or qualitative, of the penitential observance which is prescribed as a whole” (24 February 1967; reprinted in Canon Law Digest, vol. 6, pp. 684-85). The Latin text of this dubium can read here and an analysis in Canon Law Abstracts here. It might be noted that the Council's response does not give a precise answer to the question of ‘how much’ constitutes grave matter but it would seem to exclude a single Friday constituting a mortal sin, and also, by referring to a spectrum of quantity and quality, helpfully re-affirms the appropriateness of considering the above-mentioned principle of ‘parvity of matter’ to be relevant to Friday abstinence.

Can the Church ‘create’ sins to impose on us?
Before concluding, some comment needs to be made about the ability of the Church to create a law that binds us under pain of sin. Many people can accept the notion that the Church makes laws to regulate Church life, just as any society or club makes laws that govern its members. But does the Church really have the authority to ‘make’ a sin by establishing a law that it imposes on us? In short, yes, and this is what we see if we look back at the history and origins of the Church. In general, we can observe a pattern that holds for any Church precept: Divine Revelation gives us a general law that is made particular and concrete by a specific Church law in a particular time and place. Concerning fasting and abstinence, Divine law establishes the general precept that we need to do penance, a general precept this has been specified by particular Church precepts in varied ways through the Church’s history. The earliest post-Biblical record of the Church’s life is found in the late 1st century-early 2nd century document The Didache (‘The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles’) and it records how the Church imposed on the early Christians the obligation to fast on Wednesdays and Fridays. What this manifests is the fact that the early Church understood itself to have received from Christ the authority to command like this. As the Lord Jesus said to St Peter and the Apostles, “Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven”(Mt 16:19; 18:18), and, “He who hears you hears me; he who rejects you rejects me”(Lk 10:16). This ‘binding’ is imposed on us to lead us to salvation because we need concrete laws to guide us.

And so it that today the Catechism gives clear expression to the traditional “five precepts of the Church”, of which the fourth of these is “You shall observe the days of fasting and abstinence established by the Church (CCC 2043)”.

Confusing Episcopal Guidance
Finally, and with all due respect, the incoherence of some recent episcopal-level comments on this topic needs to be noted. Despite the Bishops’ Conference having decided to “re-establish” the law of abstinence in its normative state in canon law, and despite many of the bishops being on record as saying that this is now a matter of “precept” rather than advice, it seems that at least some of those in positions of authority are now backing off from admitting that breaking the “re-established” law of abstinence is a sin. What is to be made of this?

First, it is important to note that the opinions or interpretations of individuals or committees are not determinative of whether or not breaking this canon law is a sin. Whether or not it is a sin is a matter of canon law itself -because the Bishops’ Conference, the body deemed authoritative in this matter by canon law, has determined to “re-establish” that law as in force in our countries. Thus even if any individual says otherwise, be it a bishop or a general secretary, it would not change the fact that the Bishops' Conference as a whole has returned us to the universal precept of Friday abstinence from meat.

Second, what of the coherence of the episcopal statements themselves? The statement that seems to be being most frequently quoted is that issued by the office of the General Secretary of the Bishops’ Conference. It should be noted that almost all of the guidance is excellent and beautifully conveys the value of Friday penance and abstinence. Concerning the matter of sin, however, which is the focus of this article, it must be respectfully pointed out that his guidance is misleading. It cites the above-mentioned 1967 statement of the Sacred Congregation of the Council which indicates that sometimes eating meat on Friday is a venial sin not a mortal sin. The statement then leaps to the unwarranted conclusion that, “Failure to abstain from meat on a particular Friday then would not constitute a sin” (Q11). This statement simply does not follow as a conclusion of what precedes it. The fact that it has been issued by an office of the Bishops’ Conference does not change the fact that the guidance is incoherent.

For instance, the guidance seems to imply that the “grave” nature of what is being dealt with here arises from the general Divine precept to do penance and the general ecclesial precept to do penance on Friday, rather than from the further specification in the precept that this penance should take the particular form of abstinence from meat. However, this attempted distinction avoids recognising that the making of a new specifying precept brings an accompanying new obligation to keep it. The gravity of all such disciplinary specifications of divine precepts arises from the Church’s power “to bind and loose”. If the Bishops have re-established a precept, rather than just made a recommendation, then they have also re-established an obligation to keep it, a matter of sin.

Third, to return to the first of these three points, the fact that the authority for the new discipline now rests in the universal Canon Law and not in the local Bishops’ Conference is confirmed by both by the bishops’ use of the word “re-establish” and the fact that the General Secretary’s answer to Q11 offers a specific (though questionable) interpretation of Canon Law and not an interpretation of the Bishops’ Conference statement.

Summary of the Law
To conclude, the following summarises the re-established law as in now stands in England and Wales: “The law of abstinence forbids the eating of meat [i.e. mammals and birds], but eggs, milk products, and condiments [i.e. seasonings] made from animal fat may be eaten. Fish [including shell fish] and all cold blooded animals may be eaten, e.g., frogs, clams, turtles, [snails] etc” (Paenitemini, III.III.1 (1966)). Unlike the pre-1966 legislation, meat-derived products and meat broth may be eaten –though a meat soup with large chunks of meat would seem to move from the category of broth to that of meat. The law of Friday abstinence from meat binds all those who are age 14 and older (Canon 1252) -unlike the law of fasting there is no upper age limit when the law of abstinence ceases to apply. The law of abstinence does not apply when a Solemnity falls on a Friday (canon 1251). "In individual cases, for a just reason", a parish priest can dispense one of his parishioners from the Friday abstinence (canon 1245).

In summary, eating meat on Friday is a sin (excluding Solemnities or serious grounds for exception such as illness), but whether it is a mortal sin or a venial one will depend on many factors, including the quantity of meat, the number of Fridays in question, and the significance of the particular Fridays in question.

Sources
Concerning the present legal situation:
“The days of penitence to be observed under obligation throughout the Church are all Fridays and Ash Wednesday, that is to say the first days of "Grande Quaresima" (Great Lent), according to the diversity of the rites. Their substantial observance binds gravely.” (Pope Paul VI, Paenitemini (1966), III.II.1).
A 1967 decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Council interpreted the above cited statement of Pope Paul VI saying that the 'grave' obligation applies to "the whole complexus of penitential days to be observed . . . that is, one sins gravely against the law, who, without an excusable cause, omits a notable part, quantitative or qualitative, of the penitential observance which is prescribed as a whole" (24 February 1967; reprinted in Canon Law Digest, vol. 6, pp. 684-85). This decree is published in full here, with a canonical analysis in Canon Law Abstracts here.
Concerning the analysis in the pre-conciliar manuals:
“This precept binds under pain of grave sin, but a violation of it would not be a mortal sin unless an appreciable quantity of unlawful food were taken. Theologians are not agreed on what quantity is necessary to constitute grave matter, but, in the opinion of some, two ounces would be necessary and sufficient.” (Thomas Slater, A Manual of Moral Theology, Vol. 1, 4th edition (New York: Benzinger Brothers, 1918), p.572.
“This law binds per se under pain of mortal sin because its matter is objectively important; but it admits of parvitas materiae.” (Antony Koch, A Handbook of Moral Theology, Vol. IV, 3rd ed, edited by Arthur Preuss (London: B. Herder, 1928), p.377).
“The laws of fasting and abstinence in themselves obliged gravely. Slight violations of them are only venial sins.” (Heribert Jone, Moral Theology, 15th edition, trans. Urban Adleman (Cork, Ireland: Percier Press, 1956), p.264).
“The obligation to abstain binds under pain of grievous sin but it admits of slight matter –equal to the size of a walnut = about four grammes.” (Dominic Prummer, Handbook of Moral Theology (Cork: Mercier Press, 1956), p.227)
“The violation of the law is in itself a grave sin...” (Henry Davis, SJ, Moral and Pastoral Theology Vol 2, Heythrop Series II, 4th edition (London: Sheed and Ward, 1945), p.437)

Friday Abstinence from Meat re-established in England and Wales

2011-09-16T12:57:00.001+01:00

Bishops Re-Establish Friday Abstinence from Meat

On May 14th the bishops of England and Wales announced that they are re-establishing the requirement to abstain from meat on Fridays.
As our own Bishop Christopher Budd has explained in his Ad clerum of July 2011, this is now a matter of “precept”, i.e. a legally established moral obligation.

Why are the bishops of England and Wales re-establishing abstaining from meat on Fridays?
The bishops have given 3 reasons:
(1) First, Catholic identity. By all doing the same penance, even if it is a small penance, we are doing something together and establishing a common identity. The bishops “recognise that the best habits are those which are acquired as part of a common resolve” and that this will give Catholics “a clear and distinctive mark of their own Catholic identity”.
(2) Secondly, witness. This practice will be a “common witness” to our secular world about what we Catholics believe and practice, namely, the value of self-denial and of union with Christ on the Cross.
(3) Thirdly, and most importantly, this will help increase our general awareness of the importance of doing penance, especially Friday penance. In this regard it’s important to note that abstaining from meat is the minimum we are being called to do. All of the other voluntary Friday penances that were previously recommended to us are still things for us to consider (in addition): abstaining from chocolate, or a dessert, or TV etc. Or, the type of penance involved in sacrificing our spare time to help others. Or, adding additional prayer to our Friday routine. In Lent we die and rise with Christ by our self-denial in ‘giving things up for Lent’. Friday penance carries some of this spirit and some of this benefit into the rest of the year.

Why the reversal?
After a quarter of a century of experiencing the effect of permitting us to eat meat on Fridays it seems that the bishops feel that the effect wasn’t what they intended: they didn’t intend the loss of Catholic identity and witness, and, more directly, they didn’t intend the change to be misinterpreted in the way that many of us did: many of us took the permission to eat meat on Fridays as a sign that we no longer needed to do any penance at all on Fridays, whereas, the intention was that we should all choose a variety of different penances but still do penance. Now, we have a basic penance of not eating meat that is required of us and we can choose additional penances as is suitable.

What will this mean for us in practice?
Not eating meat on Fridays will involve a significant shift in many of our habits. For one thing, we’ll have to plan to have non-meat food in the house for Fridays, i.e. a vegetarian option or fish. Also, if you’re being invited to dinner at a friend’s house on a Friday you’ll need to say that you’ll need a non-meat dish (this is something that vegetarians have to do all the time). Similarly, at public gatherings like buffets, there may well be occasions when we find that a non-meat dish isn’t provided and we’ll have to do the penance of just have more vegetables etc.

Does the Church really have the right to impose a law on us?
In our modern world we’re often used to thinking that no-one has the right to tell us what to do. However, by being Catholics we’re buying into a different way of thinking. Or course, any society has rules that organise its members, for their good and for the common good of the society. In the Church, the source of authority comes from Jesus Christ who appointed St Peter and the Apostles saying, “Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven”(Mt 16:19; 18:18), and, “He who hears you hears me; he who rejects you rejects me”(Lk 10:16). Thus, the apostles (and their successors the bishops) made laws, and in the early Church, we can read a First Century record of how such laws included the requirement for the early Christians to fast on Wednesdays and Fridays (The Didache 8).

What exactly does the new law require?
As of Friday 16th September 2011 Catholics in England and Wales will be required to abstain from meat on Fridays. This means we will be re-joining the normative practice of the universal Church law (c.f. Paenitemini, III.III.1). The law of abstinence forbids the eating of meat (of mammals and birds). However, eggs, milk products, fish, shell fish, and all other cold blooded animals may be eaten, e.g. snails. Similarly, small quantities of condiments (i.e. flavourings) made from animal fat may be eaten, as may meat broth, gelatine made from animal products, and meat extracts that have lost the taste of meat. (It would seem obvious that a thick meat soup with large chunks of meat would move from the category of broth to that of forbidden meat.)
The law of abstinence binds those who are 14 and older (Canon 1252)-unlike the law of fasting there is no upper age limit when the law of abstinence ceases to apply.
The seriousness of the Christian obligation to do penance is such that the Church teaches that disobeying this now re-established precept is a grave matter, i.e. a matter of mortal sin (Paenitemini, III.II.1).

______________________________________
What counts as ‘meat’?
Many of us have forgotten how meat is defined with respect to abstinence. A simple summary of how theologians and the Church authorities have specificed this is viewable at this post: "Friday Abstinence: What counts as 'meat'?"

Breaking the Law of Abstinence is a Mortal Sin
The seriousness of the Christian obligation to do penance is such that the Church teaches that disobeying this now re-established precept is a grave matter, i.e. failure to make "substantial observance" of this law is not only a sin but is a mortal sin (Pope Paul VI, Paenitemini, III.II.1).
A post describing this matter is more detail is viewable at this post: "Friday Abstinence and Mortal Sin"

Friday Abstinence: Dispensations
A blog post describing how your parish priest can dispense you, for a just cause, from the obligation is viewable at this post: "Friday Abstinence: Dispensations"

______________________________________

Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales
Plenary Resolutions, Spring 2011

The Bishops of England and Wales have met to discuss their priorities for the next 3-5 years. At an announcement at the end of their bi-annual meeting in Leeds from the 9-12 May the bishops outlined their resolutions for the next few years including stating the desire to re-establish the practice of Friday penance by giving up meat on Fridays.
The resolutions are outlined below:
...

Catholic Witness - Friday Penance
By the practice of penance every Catholic identifies with Christ in his death on the cross. We do so in prayer, through uniting the sufferings and sacrifices in our lives with those of Christ’s passion; in fasting, by dying to self in order to be close to Christ; in almsgiving, by demonstrating our solidarity with the sufferings of Christ in those in need. All three forms of penance form a vital part of Christian living. When this is visible in the public arena, then it is also an important act of witness.
Every Friday is set aside by the Church as a special day of penance, for it is the day of the death of our Lord. The law of the Church requires Catholics to abstain from meat on Fridays, or some other form of food, or to observe some other form of penance laid down by the Bishops' Conference.
The Bishops wish to re-establish the practice of Friday penance in the lives of the faithful as a clear and distinctive mark of their own Catholic identity. They recognise that the best habits are those which are acquired as part of a common resolve and common witness. It is important that all the faithful be united in a common celebration of Friday penance.
Respectful of this, and in accordance with the mind of the whole Church, the Bishops' Conference wishes to remind all Catholics in England and Wales of the obligation of Friday Penance. The Bishops have decided to re-establish the practice that this should be fulfilled by abstaining from meat. Those who cannot or choose not to eat meat as part of their normal diet should abstain from some other food of which they regularly partake. This is to come into effect from Friday 16 September 2011 when we will mark the anniversary of the visit of Pope Benedict XVI to the United Kingdom.
Many may wish to go beyond this simple act of common witness and mark each Friday with a time of prayer and further self-sacrifice. In all these ways we unite our sacrifices to the sacrifice of Christ, who gave up his very life for our salvation.

From “Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, Plenary Resolutions, Spring 2011” http://www.rcdow.org.uk/diocese/default.asp?library_ref=4&content_ref=3355 accessed 14/5/11

Friday Abstinence: What counts as 'meat'?

2011-09-16T12:56:00.001+01:00

Friday abstinence from meat has been re-established for Catholics in England and Wales, effective 16th September 2011.
Current Church law specifies 'meat' as follows:
The law of abstinence forbids the eating of meat (of mammals and birds). However, eggs, milk products, fish, shell fish, and all other cold blooded animals may be eaten, e.g. snails. Similarly, small quantities of condiments (i.e. flavourings) made from animal fat, other meat-derived products, and meat broth may be eaten –though a meat soup with large chunks of meat would seem to move from the category of broth to that of forbidden meat.

Note: some argue that Paenitemini III.III.1's statement that "the use of meat" is forbidden thus maintains the pre-Conciliar prohibition of meat broth, gravy, meat juice, bone marrow, fat, blood, lard, soup cubes made from meat products etc (though gelatine made from animal products, and other meat extracts that have lost the taste of meat were always considered permitted). These just-mentioned products were forbidden in the old Code of Canon Law and are thus listed as forbidden in the older Manuals. However, as Jimmy Akin convincingly argues, and as indicated further below, given that the opinion that these items are still forbidden can only be seen as a law of dubious validity, such an opinion it does not bind: " A doubtful law does not bind" being a standard principle of classical Manualist morality, as still expressed in Canon Law 14.

Sources:
“The law of abstinence forbids the eating of meat, but eggs, milk products, and condiments made from animal fat may be eaten. Fish and all cold blooded animals may be eaten, e.g., frogs, clams, turtles, etc”. In Latin:"Abstinentiae lex vetat carne vesci, non autem ovis, lacticiniis et quibuslibet condimentis etiam ex adipe animalium." (Pope Paul VI, Paenitemini, III.III.1 (1966))[This text of Pope Paul VI is cited as currently in effect by Eds. John Beal, James Coriden, Thomas Green, New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law (New Yrk: Paulist Press, 2000), p.1447, John Huels, The Pastoral Companion. A Canon Law Handbook for Catholic Ministry, 3rd ed (Quincy, Ill: Franciscan Press, 1995), p.325, and Eds. E.Caparros, M.Theriault, J.Thorn, Code of Canon Law Annotated (Montreal: Wilson & Lafleur, 1993), p.772.]
“By Condiment is meant that which is taken –whether liquid or solid –in a small quantity with food to make it more palatable.” [Henry Davis, SJ, Moral and Pastoral Theology Vol 2, Heythrop Series II, 4th edition (London: Sheed and Ward, 1945), pp.435-6].

Concerning the argument that meat broth is permitted on days of abstinence:
In the old 1917 Code of Canon Law meat broth and other things derived from meat were prohibited by the phrase 'ius ex carne' or 'iureque ex carne'. The 1966 regulation Paenitemini, III.III.1 removed this phrase and thus seems to permit meat broth and other meat-derived products.
Describing what was forbidden by the 'ius ex carne' clause in the 1917 code, Cameron Lansing writes, "Canon 1250 of the former code (1917) stated that the law of abstinence prohibited meat (carne) and soup or broth made from meat, but not however of eggs, milks, and any sort of condiment derived from animal fat. (Abstinentiae lex vetat carne iureque ex carne vesci, non autem ovis, lacticiniis et quibuslibet condimentis etiam ex adipe animalium.) Ius ex carne is broth or soup made from boiling meat or bones (with marrow flesh). Bouillon crystals or cubes are made in this way. So both broth and reconstituted bouillon would be prohibited. Condimentum ex adipe (from fat) is a seasoning. Fat is distinct from from flesh tissue. The use of beef lard in cooking biscuits or various matas would have been permitted in my opinion. (The use of lard in preparing fish and vegetables at all meals and on all days was allowed by indult, 3 August, 1887.) Jello involved the boiling down of hooves and bones, so it would have been permitted. A gravy of chicken fat would also have been permitted. Clearly carne includes the flesh of mammals and poultry. It does not include amphibians, reptiles and insects."
Jimmy Akin's blog convincingly argues here and here that meat broths are allowed in the new code.
"The law of abstinence forbids the eating of meat, but not of seasonings made from animals fat or meat broth... The law of abstinence obliges all who have completed their fourteenth year until the end of their life (canon 1252)"( Karl H. Peschke, Christian Ethics, Vol 2, revised edition (Evesham: John F. Neale, 1997), p.178, Pechke cites an article to justify this opinion about broth).
T.Cunningham argues that "The prohibition of meat soups on Friday is revoked by the Constitution Paenitemini, interpreted in the light of cn 22 [concerning the manner in which new law surplants old, numbering of 1917 code]. The Constitution covers anew the whole field of legislation on fast and abstinence, and, while repeating verbatim the law of cn 1250, omits the phrase 'iureque ex carne'" (T. Cunningham: Meat Soups on Friday, as summarised in Canon Law Abstracts 19 n.1 (1968),p.71). Although Cunningham states that 'meat soup' is permitted he seems to actually be referring to meat broth. Meat broth is made from meat but no longer actually contains meat: Jimmy Akin thus talks of "soup from meat" as being permissible rather than saying that "meat soup" is permissible. Many if not most non-English countries have much thinner broth-like soups than we enjoy in this country and so the permitted soup probably does not envisage a thick meaty British stew-type soup, or a chili-con-carne soup, both of which would have large chunks of meat and would thus, in my opinion, not be permissible on a Friday.
None of the above commentaries argue for on the permissibility of meat soup with chunks of meat in it.

What was forbidden in the 1917 Code but not the 1966 Constitution:
As already noted, the 1966 Constitution Paenitemini gave a less restrictive abstinence law to the one that was found in the 1917 Code. As Jimmy Akins explains, the 1917 Code forbade the use of many meat derivatives as well as the use of meat itself. As a consequence the older Manuals of moral theology forbade many things, as follows:
“By flesh meat is meant... blood, lard, broth, suet, the marrow of bones, brains, kidneys [but not] condiments made from animals fats]”[Dominic Prummer, Handbook of Moral Theology (Cork: Mercier Press, 1956), p.226].
“The prohibition extends only to the flesh of mammals and birds, including the fat, blood, marrow, brains, heart, liver etc. Lawful foods are fish, frogs, turtles, snails, mussels, clams, oysters, crabs etc. ... Likewise lawful are margarine, and meat extracts that have lost the taste of meat or broth, e.g. gelatine; likewise gelatine products of animal origin, but not soup cubes that contain meat ingredients.” [Heribert Jone, Moral Theology, 15th edition, trans. Urban Adleman (Cork, Ireland: Percier Press, 1956), p.264]. Meat soup, meat juice, and gravy are forbidden by abstinence from meat [Ibid; T.Lincoln Bouscaren SJ and Adam Ellis SJ, Canon Law. A Text and Commentary (Milwaukee: Bruce Pub, 1946), p.636].
“By Condiment is meant that which is taken –whether liquid or solid –in a small quantity with food to make it more palatable... Jellies which are made from animal bones are not meat. Lard... dripping, and also suet” can be condiments, but a quantity of suet that is large enough that it can no longer can be properly seen as a condiment is thus excluded [Henry Davis, SJ, Moral and Pastoral Theology Vol 2, Heythrop Series II, 4th edition (London: Sheed and Ward, 1945), pp.435-6].
Note: Modern ‘stock’ (whether labelled vegetable or meat) varies as to whether it is actually vegetarian or made from those parts of animals flesh that would have qualified it as ‘meat’ in the 1917 Code -regardless, stock is now permitted in the current Code.

Concerning fasting rather than abstinence, note: "[Tag-At] comes to the surprising conclusion that liquids which have nutritive effect (such as milk, broth, eggs) break the Good or Ash Wednesday fast, but alcoholic drinks do not"(D.Tag-At: Questions on Fasting and Abstinence, as summarised in Canon Law Abstracts 79 n.1 (1998),p.72).

Friday Abstinence: Dispensations

2011-09-16T12:50:00.000+01:00

"In individual cases, for a just reason", a parish priest can dispense one of his parishioners from the Friday abstinence (canon 1245).

In addition, an illness requiring meat sustenance could dispense someone from the Friday abstinence, however, if non-meat food could also adequately nourish then the exemption would not hold. Similarly, if it is 'physically or morally impossible' to fulfil the law then the law does not bind (this being a standard principle of moral theology). Obviously, an overly slack application of this principle would be an abuse rather than a 'just cause'.

Article summary: On the grave matter of Friday Abstinence

2011-09-16T12:27:00.000+01:00

The following is taken from Canon Law Abstracts:

[Review of:] ST 7/68, 529-531: E. F. RegatiIlo, S.J.: Materia grave en la violaciόn del ayuno y abstinencia (S.C.Concilii, 24/2/67, A.A.S. 59-229). (Article.)

The S.Congregation was asked: (1) whether the substantial observation of days of penance which in the Apostolic Constitution "Paenitemini" n. 11, §2 (17/2/66: A.A.S. 58-183) bind gravely, refers to each single day to be observed obligatorily in the whole Church; or (2) refers rather only to the whole complex of days of penance with their imposed penances. The S. Congregation replied (with the approbation to His Holiness, Pope Paul VI): Negatively to (1) and affirmatively to (2), so that he sins gravely against the law who either quantatively or qualitatively omits a notable part of the law without any excusing cause.

The law of penance for the whole Church is (l) the days of fasting and abstinence are Ash Wednesday and Good Friday; (2) days of abstinence are the Fridays of the whole year (3) all the faithful over 14 years of age are bound by the law of abstinence; to the law of fasting are bound all over 21 years of age up to the age of 59; (4) the substantial fulfilment of the law binds gravely.

There was a divergence of opinion on this question of the substantial fulfilment of the law: some thought that omitting it on a single Friday would constitute grave sin; others held that only an habitual violation of the law would be a grave matter. What, therefore, constitutes a grave violation of the law? One cannot discern the obligation of the moral law in numbers or millimetres. Two things have to be considered in this matter, the number of days, and the kind of day. There are three kinds of penitential days as are seen above. Hence R. Concludes: (1) it would be a grave sin to omit all or a greater number of the Fridays of the year outside Lent, because this is an habitual disregarding of the law, and therefore he sins substantially against the law; (2) it is a grave sin to omit abstinence on all the Fridays of Lent; (3) likewise by reason of the kind of day it would be a grave sin not to fast and abstain on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday. It is noted that according to the prescriptions of various Episcopal Conferences, the faithful can commute abstinence to some other form of penance.

Above taken from: Canon Law Abstracts. A Half-Yearly Review of Periodical Literature in Canon Law by members of the Canon Law Society of Great Britain No.22 (1969 n.2), pp.72-73.

see also post: Dubium concerning grave matter for Friday Abstinence

Dubium concerning grave matter for Friday Abstinence

2011-09-16T12:12:00.000+01:00

ACTA SS. CONGREGATIONUM
SACRA CONGREGATIO CONCILII

DUBIUM

Quaesitum est:
I) Utrum substantialis observantia dierum paenitentiae, quae in Constitutionis Apostolicae “Paenitemini” parte dispositiva, n. II, par. 2, (17 februarii 1966, cfr. A.A.S., LVIII, p.183), graviter tenere declaratur, referenda sit ad singulos dies paenitentiae obligatorie in tota Ecclesia servandos;
II) an potius ad complexum dierum paenitentialium cum impositis paenitentiis custodiendum.
Sacra Congregatio Concilii, adprobante Summo Pontifice Paulo VI, respondit:
Ad I) – Negative;
Ad II) – Affirmative, seu eum graviter contra legem peccare, qui, observationis paenitentialis complexive praescriptae partem, sive quantitative sive qualitative notabilem, absque motivo excusante, omiserit.

Datum Romae, die 24 februarii 1967
+ Petrus Palazzini, a Secretis
Florentius Romita, Subsecretarius

Above taken from: Acta Apostolicae Sedis Vol LIX (31March 1967), n.3, p.229.

See also article reproduced in post: Article summary: On the grave matter of Friday Abstinence

Bishops' Conference 2011 Resolution Re-establishing Friday Abstinence from Meat in England and Wales

2011-09-16T12:05:00.000+01:00

Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales
Plenary Resolutions, Spring 2011

The Bishops of England and Wales have met to discuss their priorities for the next 3-5 years. At an announcement at the end of their bi-annual meeting in Leeds from the 9-12 May the bishops outlined their resolutions for the next few years including stating the desire to re-establish the practice of Friday penance by giving up meat on Fridays.
The resolutions are outlined below:
...

Catholic Witness - Friday Penance
By the practice of penance every Catholic identifies with Christ in his death on the cross. We do so in prayer, through uniting the sufferings and sacrifices in our lives with those of Christ’s passion; in fasting, by dying to self in order to be close to Christ; in almsgiving, by demonstrating our solidarity with the sufferings of Christ in those in need. All three forms of penance form a vital part of Christian living. When this is visible in the public arena, then it is also an important act of witness.
Every Friday is set aside by the Church as a special day of penance, for it is the day of the death of our Lord. The law of the Church requires Catholics to abstain from meat on Fridays, or some other form of food, or to observe some other form of penance laid down by the Bishops' Conference.
The Bishops wish to re-establish the practice of Friday penance in the lives of the faithful as a clear and distinctive mark of their own Catholic identity. They recognise that the best habits are those which are acquired as part of a common resolve and common witness. It is important that all the faithful be united in a common celebration of Friday penance.
Respectful of this, and in accordance with the mind of the whole Church, the Bishops' Conference wishes to remind all Catholics in England and Wales of the obligation of Friday Penance. The Bishops have decided to re-establish the practice that this should be fulfilled by abstaining from meat. Those who cannot or choose not to eat meat as part of their normal diet should abstain from some other food of which they regularly partake. This is to come into effect from Friday 16 September 2011 when we will mark the anniversary of the visit of Pope Benedict XVI to the United Kingdom.
Many may wish to go beyond this simple act of common witness and mark each Friday with a time of prayer and further self-sacrifice. In all these ways we unite our sacrifices to the sacrifice of Christ, who gave up his very life for our salvation.

From “Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, Plenary Resolutions, Spring 2011” http://www.rcdow.org.uk/diocese/default.asp?library_ref=4&content_ref=3355 accessed 14/5/11

Old 1985 Friday Abstinence Statement of Bishops of England and Wales

2011-09-16T12:00:00.000+01:00

Though the following has now been superseded by the the 2011 resolutions of the Bishops' Conference, the following may remain of relevance as a matter of historical interest. At present this statement is at the Bishops' Conference website but it may well be removed in due course as no longer in effect.

Fasting and Abstinence
1985 Statement from the Bishops of England and Wales on Canons 1249-1253
1. The new code of Canon Law reminds us that all of Christ’s faithful are obliged to do penance. The obligation arises in imitation of Christ himself and in response to his call. During his life on earth, not least at the beginning of his public ministry. Our Lord undertook voluntary penance. He invited his followers to do the same. The penance he invited would be a participation in his own suffering, an expression of inner conversion and a form of reparation for sin. It would be a personal sacrifice made out of love for God and our neighbour. It follows that if we are to be true, as Christians, to the spirit of Christ, we must practise some form of penance.
2. So that all may be united with Christ and with one another in a common practice of penance, the Church sets aside certain penitential days. On these days the faithful are to devote themselves in a special way to prayer, self-denial and works of charity. Such days are not designed to confine or isolate penance but to intensify it in the life of the Christian right through the year.
3. Lent is the traditional season of renewal and repentance in Christ. The New Code re-affirms this. It also prescribes that Ash Wednesday and Good Friday are to be observed as days of fast and abstinence. Fasting means that the amount of food we eat is considerably reduced. Abstinence means that we give up a particular kind of food or drink or form of amusement. Those over eighteen are bound by the law of fasting until the beginning of their sixtieth year, while all over fourteen are bound by the law of abstinence. Priests and parents are urged to foster the spirit
and practice of penance among those too young to be the subjects of either law.
4. Because each Friday recalls the crucifixion of Our Lord, it too is set aside as a special penitential day. The Church does not prescribe, however, that fish must be eaten on Fridays. It never did. Abstinence always meant the giving up of meat rather than the eating of fish as a substitute. What the Church does require, according to the new Code, is that its members abstain on Fridays from meat or some other food or that they perform some alternative work of penance laid down by the Bishops’
Conference.
5. In accordance with the mind of the universal Church, the Bishops of England and Wales remind their people of the obligation of Friday penance, and instruct them that it may be fulfilled in one or
more of the following ways:
a) by abstaining from meat or some other food;
b) by abstaining from alcoholic drink, smoking or some form of amusement;
c) by making the special effort involved in family prayer, taking part in the Mass, visiting the Blessed Sacrament or praying the Stations of the Cross;
d) by fasting from all food for a longer period than usual and perhaps giving what is saved in this way to the needy at home and abroad;
e) by making a special effort to help somebody who is poor, sick, old or lonely.
6. The form of penance we adopt each Friday is a matter of personal choice and does not have to take the same form every Friday. Failure to undertake this penance on a particular Friday would not constitute a sin. However, penance is part of the life of every Christian and the intention to do penance on Friday is of obligation. We are confident that the faithful of England and Wales will take this obligation to heart in memory of the passion and death of Our Lord.
Bishops of England and Wales
24 January 1985

24th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-09-11T00:55:00.000+01:00

on Mt 18:21-35; Ecc 27:30-28:7
Forgiveness is one of the hallmarks of our Christian religion. Not only that we can receive forgiveness from God, but that we must grant it to others too. And we are constantly confronted by the NEED to forgive people: because we all have people sin against us. In big things and in little things. From injustice in the workplace, or some sort of abuse in a friendship or marriage, down to the daily little slights we receive from others, like people pushing in front of us in the checkout line at the supermarket.

And we know that we can allow these things to build up, to make us bitter, to nurse these grievances until all that is left in our heart is a nasty festering mess of hatred. All because of what OTHER people have done to us, not because we've gone out to do wrong to others. And often it doesn't seem fair. After all, sometimes we don't want to forgive, what we want is JUSTICE.

We are reminded in today’s parable that if we demand justice from others, then we can only expect justice ourselves. And because we, ourselves, have sinned against GOD, if it is justice we demand, then the justice we will receive, is that we will be condemned and “handed over to the torturers”(Mt 18:34). Because God does not give us justice, He gives us mercy.

Mercy isn’t always easy. Most of us go through some time in our lives when we find it almost impossible to forgive. Sometimes every emotion in our heart, and every bit of logic in our head, screams out at us saying that this person does not deserve our forgiveness.

And the truth is that they don't deserve our forgiveness. But we also do not deserve the forgiveness that our heavenly Father gives us. And if we accept forgiveness from Him, how can we refuse to give it others? As we will soon pray in the Our Father: the forgiveness we ask for from God, depends on us forgiving the trespasses of those who trespass against us. God puts forgiveness before us as a moral obligation: We must forgive, or else we will not be forgiven.

But we know that must also forgive for our OWN sakes, because it is the only way to heal the bitterness that can otherwise possess our hearts. Even though mercy is difficult, not having mercy brings us even more difficulty, it leaves us with a wound in our heart that can eventually destroy us.

When forgiveness is especially hard, we’d do well to remember that it wasn’t easy for Christ either -it led Him to the Cross.
Sometimes, when forgiveness is particularly difficult, and it only comes with TIME, it has to be the result of a long SLOW process, of a long way of the cross.
Sometimes we need to carry our injuries as part of our own Cross, in union with Our Lord, as we walk the way of the Cross, until we are able to join Him in forgiving, just as He forgave His executioners from the Cross.
With the GRACE that comes to us from the Cross, and the EXAMPLE of Jesus on the Cross, we CAN find the strength to forgive others.

There is no peace except in the cross, no peace except in forgiveness. So let us think today of those times when we have failed to forgive others, and ask the Lord for the help and grace to be able to forgive as generously as He has forgiven us.

New Translation of the Mass, Shaftesbury

2011-09-04T00:20:00.003+01:00

As is pretty obvious by this stage in the Mass, we’re now using the new corrected translation of the Mass. I, and other parish priests, have been referring to this for some time now, in the newsletter and in a series of parish meetings we had earlier in the year, and we had the letter from all the English bishops that was read at all Masses across the nation on the 29th May this year, but I’ve not yet SPOKEN to you all about it. Like any change, not everyone wants it and not everyone is going to think it’s a good idea. And, like any change, it’s going to be hard work –we’re going to find ourselves saying the old words we were familiar with for a LONG time! The reason I’ve been using it on week days before starting with it on Sundays is because I too have been struggling to change. And our bishops have given us between September and Advent to get used to this –so it will be used in different parishes in different ways in that time, though in all of North Dorset all the parishes are doing the same thing and changing all the PEOPLE’s parts of the Mass at the same time, because that seemed simplier than having different cards every Sunday.

Today, I want to say a few words about why I think this change is a good thing for us, what this change is about, and what was wrong with the old translation. Well, the new translators have been keen to say that they are not so much calling the old translation ‘wrong’ as the new translation ‘better’. The old translation, which was issued in 1973, that we have been using for the past 38 years, was produced in something of a rush after the Second Vatican Council, and it was always planned that it should be revised and improved. It’s taken a while for that to happen, and, as the handout I gave you earlier in the year indicated, the new translation uses new principles for translation rather than the old ‘dynamic equivalence’ theories that were in fashion in the 1970s. But, what does this mean in practice, and how can it be said to be ‘better’? I want to offer you 3 examples to show this.

First, the new translation aims to more clearly manifest the link between the liturgy of the Mass and Sacred Scripture, the Bible. For example, before the congregation get ready to receive Holy Communion the priest raises the host and in the old 1973 translation we have been saying, “Lord, I am not worthy to receive you”. Instead, the new translation says, “Lord, I am not worthy to have you enter under my roof”, clearly quoting the words of the Centurion to our Lord (Mt 8:8).

Second, the new translation aims to be more precise in its accuracy, which will include the restoring of words that were lost in 1973 translation. The “I confess” or Confiteor in the introductory rite gives two examples of this: Whereas the 1973 translation had the phrase, "I have sinned”, the new 2010 translation says, “I have GREATLY sinned”. In addition, whereas the 1973 text said, "through my own fault", the new 2010 text restores the threefold repetition that is in the Latin text, “through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault”.

A last example I’d like to give you also relates to the matter of accuracy. I saw a very clear example of this when I was going over the Latin and English in Lent this year, the kind of example that occurs again and again in the new texts. In one of the weekday Masses, Thursday of the 2nd week of Lent, the Latin of the first line of the opening prayer reads, “Deus, innocentiae restitutor et amator”. The out-going 1973 translation rendered this as “God of love”, a ‘translation’ that bears no resemblance to the original Latin! In contrast, the new 2010 translation translates the text as “O God, who delights in innocence and restores it” –that new version is not only more accurate but actually says a lot a more and reveals that there is more going on in the liturgy.

Now, all of these changes might possibly seem very slight. But the net effect of all of them taken together will be considerable. One of these effects should be a better sense of a sacred ‘FEEL’ to the Mass. In the Mass we are addressing God, not mere humans, and the feel of the language we use should reflect that there is something special, something sacred, going on. The official version of the universal Missal is Latin, and the Latin prayers that the English is translated from mainly date from a time when Latin was a living language, and there was a specific style of Latin that was used for prayers, a ‘sacred’ style, and this is what the new translation will hopefully convey to us in the new English too.

Finally, I want to make a general point about how this change can remind us about something that the liturgy is: the liturgy is something we RECEIVE as a congregation -it is not something we invent for ourselves –just as whole church received and receives it from the Lord Jesus (c.f. Joseph Ratzinger, The Spirit of the Liturgy (2000), pp.159-170). Jesus gave us the Mass at the Last Supper, the ritual and form for this are handed on to us from those who first received them, with some organic growth and development, but nonetheless as something RECEIVED –to be accepted as a precious gift. The form we receive is thus not something to be altered at whim, and it is something we need to be seeking to say in continuity with the sacred Tradition that as preceded us –and accuracy in translating the original Latin is a part of this.

So, the new translation will be a big change, it will take a long time for us to get used to it, but it has a purpose, and its purpose is to better express what the liturgy is about. And, for ourselves, our accepting it is part of our accepting the manner in which the Mass is a gift we receive, receive from Christ THROUGH the Church, and a gift to be grateful that we have.

The newsletter handout from earlier this year can be viewed at:
http://newtranslationfatherdj.blogspot.com/2011/04/why-we-need-new-translation.html

Friday Abstinence from Meat, 22nd Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-08-28T00:13:00.018+01:00

Mt 16:21-27
I eat almost any and all food, but there are a few things I don’t like: I don’t like lentils, I don’t like chick peas, and I don’t really think it’s fair to call to tofu ‘food’ at all! However, I’m doing to be eating a more of these in the future, eating them as Friday penance, and I want to say a few words to you today about the new law on Friday abstinence from meat.

As many of you will have heard in the media reports earlier this year, and in the parish newsletter, on May 14th of this year the Bishops of England and Wales announced that they are re-establishing the requirement for Catholics in this country to abstain from meat on Fridays, a law which comes into effect on Friday 16th Sept. Some of you many not welcome this news, but I think it’s a good think, and whether or not we think it’s a good thing it will DO us good.

‘Friday abstinence’, i.e. not eating meat on Fridays, is a small way of doing penance, a small way of ‘carrying our cross’. As we heard Jesus say in today’s gospel: every Christian has to follow our Lord in carrying the cross. For Jesus, the road to the Resurrection, the road to new life, the road to heaven, went though the road to the Cross. For His followers, for us, it’s the same: we can only be born to new life if the old life dies within us, is crucified in us, and that means voluntarily carrying our cross. We do this in a special way in Lent when we ‘give things up’, and we’re called on to do this every Friday, the day Jesus died, to carry that Lenten spirit and Lenten benefit into the whole year.

But, you might be wondering, why this new law? Surely, some might be thinking, didn’t we do away with that after Vatican II? Well, there was a profound mistake that many of us made, a mistake that I grew up with as a child thinking: After Vatican II, the bishops of England and Wales decided to replace the law requiring everyone to abstain from meat on Fridays by instead encouraging us all to choose a different penance for each us. Most of us, however, thought this meant that Friday penance was dropped altogether –which isn’t what was intended.

So, our bishops are re-introducing the requirement to abstain from meat on Fridays, with 3 intentions. First, the general intention to re-emphasise, in general, the need for us to do penance on Friday. In this respect, let me point out that there are many other small penances that we might add to not eating meat, like not having chocolate –and let me also point out that not eating meat doesn’t mean you have to eat fish -you might eat only vegetables, or even that tasty tofu and lentils!
Second, our bishops have said that by all, together, doing the same penance of not eating meat, this will help bond us better together in a common Catholic ‘identity’ –something that many people have said we’ve lost in recent decades. And third, this common identity will enable us to give a better ‘witness’ in our world –in a world that is over materialistic, over-fed, and not self-restrained, Friday abstinence witnesses to self-restraint and the existence of values higher than food or self-indulgence.

I’d also like to point out to you what this will mean in practice: it will mean a new way of planning our eating, like planning to have non-meat food in the house for Fridays. Also, if you’re being invited to a friend’s house for dinner on a Friday you’ll have to say that you can’t eat meat –which is something that vegetarians have to say all the time. Similarly, at things like public buffets we’ll find ourselves being the ones not eating the meat dishes.

Finally, I want to say a word about why the Bishops have a right to require us to do this. Because we live in a world where we’re used to thinking that no-one has a right to tell us what to do, and who are these Bishops to say one thing after Vatican II and another thing now? Well, as Catholics, we’re part of a society, the Church. And any society has rules that govern its members, for the good of those members and the good of that society, and any such society has ways in which such rules are made. In the Church, Christ appointed His Apostles to make such rules, “whatever you bind on earth is bound in heaven”(Mt 16:19; 18:18), He told them. In the early Church, the very earliest record we have after the Bible records a whole series of regulations called the Didache (n.8), The Teaching of the Apostles, which regulated the lives of the early Christians. And those regulations include very particular regulations on fasting: that Christians were to fast on Wednesdays and Fridays. Today, the legal minimum that our bishops are asking of us is much less, merely to abstain from meat on Fridays. But our bishops are making these rules with the same authority from Christ that the Apostles had, and they are making it with the same desire to lead us to salvation.

To end where I began: As Jesus told us in the Gospel, we cannot be His disciples unless we take up our Cross as He did, we cannot follow Him to heaven except by the Royal Road of the Cross, and Friday abstinence from meat is a simple practical way that we are, now again, being required to do penance.
_____________________________________________________________________

This week's newsletter handout, containing explanations and comments about this is viewable at this post: "Bishops Re-Establish Friday Abstinence from Meat"

There is also guidance at http://caritasveritas.blogspot.com/2011/08/friday-penance-and-english-welsh.html

______________________________________
What counts as ‘meat’?
Many of us have forgotten how meat is defined with respect to abstinence. A simple summary of how theologians and the Church authorities have specificed this is viewable at this post: "Friday Abstinence: What counts as 'meat'?"

Breaking the Law of Abstinence is a Mortal Sin
The seriousness of the Christian obligation to do penance is such that the Church teaches that disobeying this now re-established precept is a grave matter, i.e. failure to make "substantial observance" of this law is not only a sin but is a mortal sin (Pope Paul VI, Paenitemini, III.II.1).
A post describing this matter is more detail is viewable at this post: "Eating Meat on Fridays is a Mortal Sin"

Friday Abstinence: Dispensations
A blog post describing how your parish priest can dispense you, for a just cause, from the obligation is viewable at this post: "Friday Abstinence: Dispensations"

______________________________________

Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales
Plenary Resolutions, Spring 2011

The Bishops of England and Wales have met to discuss their priorities for the next 3-5 years. At an announcement at the end of their bi-annual meeting in Leeds from the 9-12 May the bishops outlined their resolutions for the next few years including stating the desire to re-establish the practice of Friday penance by giving up meat on Fridays.
The resolutions are outlined below...
Catholic Witness - Friday Penance
By the practice of penance every Catholic identifies with Christ in his death on the cross. We do so in prayer, through uniting the sufferings and sacrifices in our lives with those of Christ’s passion; in fasting, by dying to self in order to be close to Christ; in almsgiving, by demonstrating our solidarity with the sufferings of Christ in those in need. All three forms of penance form a vital part of Christian living. When this is visible in the public arena, then it is also an important act of witness.
Every Friday is set aside by the Church as a special day of penance, for it is the day of the death of our Lord. The law of the Church requires Catholics to abstain from meat on Fridays, or some other form of food, or to observe some other form of penance laid down by the Bishops' Conference.
The Bishops wish to re-establish the practice of Friday penance in the lives of the faithful as a clear and distinctive mark of their own Catholic identity. They recognise that the best habits are those which are acquired as part of a common resolve and common witness. It is important that all the faithful be united in a common celebration of Friday penance.
Respectful of this, and in accordance with the mind of the whole Church, the Bishops' Conference wishes to remind all Catholics in England and Wales of the obligation of Friday Penance. The Bishops have decided to re-establish the practice that this should be fulfilled by abstaining from meat. Those who cannot or choose not to eat meat as part of their normal diet should abstain from some other food of which they regularly partake. This is to come into effect from Friday 16 September 2011 when we will mark the anniversary of the visit of Pope Benedict XVI to the United Kingdom.
Many may wish to go beyond this simple act of common witness and mark each Friday with a time of prayer and further self-sacrifice. In all these ways we unite our sacrifices to the sacrifice of Christ, who gave up his very life for our salvation.

From “Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, Plenary Resolutions, Spring 2011” http://www.rcdow.org.uk/diocese/default.asp?library_ref=4&content_ref=3355 accessed 14/5/11

Eating Meat on Fridays

2011-08-22T13:41:00.029+01:00

Friday abstinence from meat is about to be re-established for Catholics in England and Wales, effective 16th September 2011.

An expanded and updated version of this post is viewable at: Friday Abstinence and Mortal Sin

21st Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-08-21T00:07:00.001+01:00

No sermon this weekend because Fr Dylan is on holiday

20th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-08-14T00:11:00.000+01:00

No sermon this weekend because Fr Dylan is on holiday

19th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A, Shaftesbury and Blandford 9am

2011-08-07T00:10:00.001+01:00

I’ve just had a very busy week –away with 11 of the parish youth at the Faith Summer Session. And most of us feel we live busy lives. I know that even retired people, like my parents, find the day rushes by despite what they had planned to do with it. Everyone seems to be overworking.
What do we need to do when we have too much to do?
Well, in today’s Gospel, we see Jesus give a rather unusual example: He sent the crowds away. Those crowds were probably full of people who all wanted a little bit more of His time, but He sent them away, and “He went up into the hills by Himself to pray” (Mt 12:24). He didn’t always send the crowds away, but we do hear of Him repeatedly telling His apostles that they needed to come away for awhile.

The key point, however, is WHAT Jesus went up the mountain to do.
He didn’t go up there because there was a fine restaurant there.
He didn’t go up there because there was a good pub or a nice teashop.
He went up the mountain to show us the importance of putting aside time to pray.
And those of us who live on this Shastonian hilltop might well recall that Scripture repeatedly writes of the mountaintop as the place to be with God. I’m sure that King Alfred had significant military reasons to build the Abbey here, but the hilltop location is also a traditional place to feel closer to God.
Thus our first reading recounted how Elijah was on Mt Horeb when God came to him not in thunder, or noise, not in the hustle and bustle of busy life, but in silence, the “small breeze”. And it was also up the mountain that God appeared to Moses (Mt Sinai indentified as the same mountain as Horeb).

So Jesus, even though He was busy, busier even than you and me, went aside to pray. And this should remind us that we need to do the same. We need to give TIME to God in prayer.
Now, this is a difficult thing to do, especially when life seems busy enough already.
But, actually, the busy-ness of life is very much one of the reasons we SHOULD pray, not why we should not!
The great Pope John Paul II wrote on this when he said, “Do not be afraid to give your time to Christ!... Time given to Christ is never time lost, but is rather time gained, so that our relationships and indeed our whole life may become more profoundly human.” (Dies Domini (1998), n.7)
When we give time to Christ we give Him a chance to enter our lives and give us what we need in them, and we give ourselves the chance to re-focus our activity.

Our presence at Sunday Mass in a minimum, but it does not exhaust what we need to give God in prayer. While there may not be a specific command of WHICH prayers we should pray daily, we DO have a duty to pray to Him daily. Things like:
A morning offering –in which we briefly offer the day ahead to the Lord, for His glory, according to His will, and ask His help to live it.
A night examination of conscience –in which we briefly close our day as we will close our lives, being examined on how we lived: asking God for forgiveness for our failings, resolving to live better tomorrow, and asking His help to do so.
Aspirations –to make brief prayers to Him during the day: “thank you that the supermarket line is not long today”, or, “help me be patient as I wait in this line”.
Daily Mass –I know I’m not always here to provide Mass for you, but usually I am, and that it is a true privilege, a real opportunity: to unite ourselves with the perfect prayer Christ left us, to join ourselves to the eternal sacrifice of the Mass.
Eucharistic Adoration –every week our Lord is exposed on this altar for an hour to be adored. There are great graces available then. He wishes to speak to your heart.
Tabernacle -Visits to the Blessed Sacrament: the porch is open every day, to come and visit the Lord present. On your way to and from shopping or work.
Rosary –after every weekday Mass, even if you can’t get to Mass. Its the prayer our Mother has repeatedly asked of us.

There are a lot of retired people in Shaftesbury, and even though retirement can be full, I’d encourage you to fill it a little more with God.
We have but ONE life in which to get to know the Lord, and after this comes the judgement. And when He asks ‘Do you love me?’ He will be asking ‘Did you love me?’ Did you spend time with me?
So, we need to pray. We need to go up the mountain with the Lord.
“Do not be afraid to give your time to Christ!... Time given to Christ is never time lost, but is rather time gained” (Dies Domini (1998), n.7).

18th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-07-31T00:41:00.001+01:00

Mt 14:13-21; Rom 8:35.37-39
This week I've had a problem, and five days I've fretted about it, it was something that I had to do for God, and for the parish, but I couldn't see HOW to achieve it.
Then, suddenly, I remembered to turn to the Lord about it
-not just rely on my own power
-not act FOR Him but by myself
-but, asking Him to help.
And, instantly, my problem was solved.

Now, we ALL have problems, and today's gospel of the feeding of the 5000 shows us how to address them. I want to take you through this by thinking about a ‘who’, a ‘what’, and a ‘how’.

First, ‘who’ -who must we turn to when we have a problem. Obviously, I'm going to say that we need to turn to the Lord. And yet, if it is so obvious, why is it that we so easily and so often FORGET to turn to Him?
In the feeding of the 5000 the Apostles realised that they had a problem, realised that the people were hungry. They also realised that they needed to turn to the Lord Jesus for a solution to their problem. And Jesus did solve their problem.

Second, ‘what’ -what we must we do when we have a problem. It is not enough simply to say to turn to the Lord, it is not enough simply to turn to the Lord in prayer. I'd suggest to you that the example in today's gospel points out to us that we need turn to the Lord in activity AS WELL AS in prayer: the Apostles brought what they had to Jesus, they brought the five loaves and two fish, they didn't just say we have a problem, rather, they said they had a problem AND they offered what they had TOWARDS a solution, they offered it to God.
Similarly, in our struggles and difficulties we need to not only pray to God, we also need to bring our efforts, our talents, our plans, our everything -we need to bring it to God.
Turning to God for help does not mean failing to use the ‘talents’ that He is given us, rather, turning to God is about the proper way of using the talents He has given us.
We might take another example from the Mass itself, from what we will do in just a few moments: we will bring forward the bread and wine, our offerings, which are symbols of the offering of our whole lives and talents and plans, and He will transform that offering into something we could hardly have imagined: His very self in the Eucharist.

Finally, ‘how’ -how God helps us. I want to point out that God does not always help us in the way that we expect, the way we plan, and sometimes not even in the way we want –but He does help us.
When the Apostles brought the five loaves and two fish to Jesus I very much doubt that they were expecting Him to do something He had never done before, namely, I very much doubt they were expecting Him to suddenly multiply food to feed the 5000. They knew enough to bring the problem to Him, but surely couldn't have known HOW He would resolve it. This, I would suggest to you, is a good illustration of the fact that we never know how He will resolve the problems we bring to Him.
But, we know that He will resolve our problems, and will do so in abundance, just as He not only fed the 5000 but fed them so much that there were "12 baskets full" left over.
He is a good God, He cares for us, He has the power to aid us, and the Church gives us the account of the feeding of the 5000 as one of so many examples of how He has done so in the past, and will do so in the future -if we just bring to Him our problems.

As we heard St Paul remind us in our second reading, though we do have problems these are not things that separate us from the Lord but are the trials in which He will aid us:
"Nothing can come between us and the love of Christ, even if we are troubled or worried... or lacking food or clothes... For I am sure of this: ...nothing can come... Between us and the love of God made visible in Christ Jesus our Lord.”(Rom 8:35-39)

17th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-07-24T00:47:00.002+01:00

Mt 13:44-52; 1 Kgs 3:5-12
If you're wondering where I was last week, I was on holiday in Wales, and had a nice summer break.
While I was on holiday I visited an abbey of Cistercian nuns at Whitland, and while they showed me around the abbey I was very struck by the simplicity, the holy poverty of their setup. And it reminded me of the poverty I’ve seen lived by so many Religious in other places too. When I was a teenager I can remember visiting a young woman I knew who had entered the Community of the Beatitudes, and I was very struck then by the way that every member of the community had a bedroom that had the same regulation bed and furniture, and even the very same alarm clock. I’ve visited Poor Clares and been amazed at their ability to survive without heating. Mother Teresa's Missionaries of Charity amaze me even more, by their living out of poverty in depending on holy Providence to bring them their food, often not knowing what tomorrow's meal will be.
Now, if you put me in any one of those scenarios I fear that I would not be happy man, I would be looking back to what I used to have, I’d be thinking about what I had not: not having central heating, not having my choice of food etc. And yet, my repeated experience of Religious is that they are the happiest people I know -to live in Holy Poverty does not bring misery but rather brings happiness.

Those who live what we call "Religious Life”, taking vows of poverty, chastity and obedience as nuns and monks, live out in a very dramatic way what we heard Jesus speak about in today's gospel. Jesus said that the kingdom of heaven is like a pearl of great price, a pearl so precious that it is worth giving everything else away in order to have that precious pearl.
A similar illustration was given to us in our first reading, when we heard the famous example of Solomon, and how the Lord appeared to him and offered him anything he might choose, and yet he didn't choose selfishly but he asked for the gift to be able to discern between good and evil.
The "pearl of great price" is of course Jesus Himself, He is, as the ancient Fathers put it, the Kingdom-in-person (Origen, c.f. Benedict XVI, Jesus of Nazareth (NY: Doubleday, 2007), p.49).

As I said, those who have given up everything to be with the "pearl of great price" have put themselves on the path to the greatest happiness. Joy is the fruit of real love, especially love of God. And as St Thomas Aquinas very simply explains, the more the heart cleaves the one thing the less it must cling to another, and so holy poverty enables us to love God more by detaching us from the goods of this world. “It is abundantly clear that the human heart is more intensely attracted to one object, in proportion as it is withdrawn from a multiplicity of desires. Therefore, the more a man is freed from solicitude concerning temporal matters, the more perfectly he will be empowered to love God.” (St Thomas Aquinas, De Perf. Spirit. Vitae., ch. 6)

For ourselves, who live in the midst of the word, not in the cloister or the enclosure, how are these truths to be applied to ourselves? The growth in freedom to love that is enabled by holy poverty, that is enabled by voluntarily choosing to detach ourselves from the things of this world, and the growth in interior joy that accompanies the growth in love, these things can be something we aspire to in our daily living EVEN IF we are not called to the vowed life of the monk or nun.
In everything I possess I need to continually strive to possess it in such a way that I am willing to let go of it, to possess it in such a way that I remember that I exist in this world as a wayfarer, a pilgrim seeking to journey THROUGH this land to our true home of heaven (c.f. Phil 3:20-21).
And in every priority I establish in my life, my happiness in this world and my happiness in the next, depends on God being the first priority in my life. St Augustine famously said, "You have made us for Yourself the Lord, and our hearts are restless until they rest in You" -our attitude to our possessions is a powerful test of what our hearts are attempting to rest in.

If the Lord appeared to us in a dream this night, and offered you a choice of anything you might desire, how many of us have recognised the "pearl of great price" sufficiently to be content to say: You Lord, you are what I desire.

17th July 2011

2011-07-17T00:18:00.001+01:00

There is no sermon this week because Fr Dylan is on holiday

15th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-07-10T00:17:00.000+01:00

Mt 13:1-23; Rom 8:18-23; Isa 55:10-11
We just heard the parable of the sower, and the parable of the sower is one that most of us probably think that we know so well that we don't really need to listen to it at all -which is kind of ironic because the parable is all about people not listening!
Yet, if someone asked you WHY, in that parable, why it was that Jesus said that people didn't listen, I suspect most of us wouldn't know the answer.

The Lord Jesus gave His various detailed descriptions of how people failed to respond to the Word of God, failed to properly listen, like saying that thorns choking the growing seed are like the worries and riches of this world choking the Word,
however, preceding all of these detailed descriptions He gave a more fundamental reason why the people failed to hear:
they didn't WANT to hear
and the reason they didn't want to hear is that they were AFRAID.
They didn’t listen “for fear they should see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their heart"(Mt 15:13 quoting Isa 6:10).

Now fear might strike us at first glance as an unlikely reason why we should fail to listen to the word of God.
And yet the more I have been pondering this issue this week the more it seems to me that, dare I say it, I think the Lord Jesus is right!
Because there are many things I can see within myself that make me wary, make me fearful of truly being open to hear the Word of God.

The basic reason why we don't wish to hear the Word of God is that what He has to tell us may involve change, “fear [that they] be converted"(Mt 15:13).
Some of us may feel that our life is uncertain enough already, that we have enough burdensome difficulties already, that I'm only just about hanging on, and the last thing I need right now is to hear God telling me something MORE that I need to be doing.
Others of us might feel the reverse, that our life is pretty good right now and I don't want anything to disturb it, so I don't want God telling me something that might unsettle that.
And of course, many of us feel that although we are not perfect we are pretty much content to stay the mediocre selves that we are, so, again, we don't want God telling us something that will inconveniently stretch us to be something more.

But surely, haven’t we already heard and seen enough of the truths of the Gospel, enough to realise that God wants what is ultimately for our good, so that we should trust Him, trust Him enough to listen to what His Word is telling us?
Whatever "something more" that the Lord is asking me, it is only with the promise of an even greater "something more" that He will offer me terms of the grace and strength to carry it out, and the reward of a hundredfold (Mt 13:23) for doing so.
The words of the Lord Jesus that we heard said that the Word is preached to us that we might "be converted" but not merely that we might be converted but "be converted and be HEALED by me”(Mt 15:13) -this is for our benefit not merely for our obligation.

In our second reading, from St Paul to the Romans, we heard another reminder of how God is seeking what is for our good. St Paul spoke about the "glory, as yet unrevealed, which is waiting for us"(Rom 8:18), glory so great that "all creation is eagerly waiting" for its revealing.
And yet, we “fear”, we fear to trust God enough to listen to what His Word is calling from us.
If, instead, we listen: in prayer, in regular reading of the Bible, in attentiveness in the Mass, then that small seed will produce a great reward of the hundredfold (Mt 13:23) within us.

14th Sunday Ordinary Time, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-07-03T00:57:00.001+01:00

Mt 11:25-30
I’m going to be brief today –because we have an appeal at the end of Mass and I know that your time is limited.

I want to make a simple but significant point today, to point out that humility and meekness is not about being a wimp.

We just heard the Lord Jesus tell us that we should “learn” (Mt 11: 29) from Him, and it is often noted that this is the only place in ALL of the Gospels where we hear Him tell us to "learn" directly from His example.
And the thing He tells us to learn from His example is His meekness and humility.

Now I just said that meekness and humility is not about being a wimp. And this is something we see in the Lord Jesus when we look at how He lived. He was quite capable of being strong when it was appropriate:
He rose from the dead,
He healed the sick,
He raised Lazarus,
and, perhaps more significantly, He drove the moneychangers out of the Temple -He manifested in that action are holy anger, a holy zeal, not to defend Himself but to defend His “Father's house"(Jn 2:13-18).

And yet, this Lord and Messiah, who was capable of being strong when He needed to be, was also willing and able to defer to the needs of others, to put others before Himself.
Allowing Himself to suffer and die for our salvation meant humbly and meekly putting others before Himself.
That took strength.
And every action that chooses to not be selfish but put others before ourselves, every such action requires strength
-a strength that we do not have of ourselves but that is we can have by calling on His grace.

Being humble and being meek requires strength on our part, and this is the example that our Saviour has left us:
“Learn from me for I am meek and humble of heart"(Mt 11:29)

26th June 2011, Mission Week

2011-06-26T00:49:00.000+01:00

There is no sermon text today because the sermon was from our Mission Week preacher, Fr Francis Maple OFM Cap

19th June 2011, Mission Week

2011-06-19T00:47:00.000+01:00

There is no sermon text today because the sermon was from our Mission Week preacher, Fr Francis Maple OFM Cap

Pentecost, Shaftesbury

2011-06-12T00:40:00.002+01:00

Acts 2:1-11
I recently got a new gadget for my birthday: a smartphone that includes a calendar with all my schedules, task lists, and even the priestly prayers of the Breviary that I need to say.
The guy in the shop who showed it to me said it would change my life, which is rather odd, because I didn’t actually ask for my life to be changed –I was rather happy with it the way it was, thank you.
Like many such gadgets, it’s supposed to make my life easier.
And, I’ve been reflecting recently on how many aspects of modern life are supposed to make our life easier, and yet, modern life seems more and more complicated; time seems more and more pressured; expectations get higher and higher, and ‘stress’ is often described as one of the defining characteristics of modern life.

Today, on Pentecost, I want to briefly remind you about an ‘app’ you can’t download on your iphone, but it nonetheless the best download available to beat stress: the Holy Spirit.

For most of us, a deepest root of stress lies in feeling that we are ALONE with our problems, that there is task to do that I can’t do alone, and yet I somehow feel alone in attempting it.
At Pentecost we should remember that Jesus told the Apostles that He would send them another helper. The word 'Paraclete' that Jesus used when He promised the Holy Spirit, that word has a number of meanings, including helper, protector, and support. In all of them what is clear is that there is another PERSON being offered to us as a help to us. We were not created to carry our burdens alone. We were created to have the person of the Holy Spirit helping within us.

It is easy to see in the Bible, that the Spirit changes the character of those in whom He comes to dwell, He re-creates them, and we heard a clear example in our first reading (Acts 2:1-11). Before Pentecost the apostles were afraid, they couldn't cope, they hid in the Upper Room. I imagine that they suffered from some form of stress: They had already received the command to go and preach the Gospel to all nations (Mt 28:19) but were fearful and in hiding, powerless to go and do what they'd been told to do. However, when the Spirit came upon them they went forth into the streets and preached courageously. What they were unable to do by themselves, they were able to do with the strength of the Helper sent to them by Christ.

If we want to live in Third Millennium in a life that is free of the stress that overpowers and destroys so many, then we need to make use of the Helper that Jesus promised to send us. And if we want to make use of that Helper then we will need to pray to Him to ask Him to come, and as well as praying, we will need to make room in our hearts for His action and will.

There is, however, a certain irony that is involved in having the help of the Holy Spirit:
We have to first put in the effort and time involved in connecting with Him.
To put your life on a new footing, to pray, takes time.
And that might well seem like another burden to your stressed life.
But it’s a burden that ultimately lifts its own weight.

An example of the spiritual investment of time that we benefit from making lies in our parish mission next weekend. If you are to benefit from what is on offer, you need to invest the time to attend the events. A whole week of sermons might seem like a lot of lost time, but as the great Pope John Paul II put it, time with God is never time lost, but time re-gained (Dies Domini, n7).

In the shop, the guy selling the smartphones said I’d have to learn how to use it, I’ve have to invest the time and effort, but that it would then save time and save effort.
Whether or not that’s true for an iphone, its certainly true of the one who Jesus called 'the Helper' –the most important ‘app’ for any of us to download

Ascension Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-06-05T00:21:00.000+01:00

Acts 1:1-11; Eph 1:17-23
One of the defining aspects of today’s feat of the Ascension is the question of ‘hope’.
We heard St Paul refer to ‘hope’ in our second reading when he spoke of “what hope His call holds for you”(Eph 1:18).

I want to illustrate the question of what we should be hoping for, by indicating not what the early Christians hoped for, but what the Jews hoped for –which is the same thing as what the disciples of Jesus hoped for BEFORE they understood what Jesus was teaching them. And I want to make this point by referring to the issue of the “kingdom”.

For the Jews of the Old Testament, "the kingdom" referred to the glory days of the Jewish people: it referred to the time when King David and his descendants ruled Israel as a wealthy and independent nation. After the Jewish people were conquered and taken into captivity in Babylon it was the hope of the RESTORATION of “the kingdom” that was the defining hope of the Jewish people. Because even when they were released from captivity in Babylon and they were allowed to return to the Promised Land, they were not independent, they were not a "kingdom" –they were ruled by other kingdoms.
So, the defining hope that animated the Jewish people was the hope of the restoration of "the kingdom". It was this that they were expecting the Messiah to do for them.

The disciples of Jesus, when they first began to follow Jesus, had this same expectation and the same hope of what "the kingdom" was about.
It seems that all through the time when Jesus walked among them and taught them they still maintained this very political hope of a restored "kingdom". And so it is that we heard them ask, before the very moment that He ascended up to heaven, "Lord, has the time come? Are you going to restore the kingdom to Israel?"(Acts 1:6).

What happened at that Ascension radically changed what it was they hoped for, and radically changed their whole notion of what "the kingdom" was about. Their hope became a hope of heaven rather than a hope merely for a restored political kingdom on earth.
We can see an indication of this in something as simple as the number of times that the word "kingdom" is used in the Bible:
Before the Ascension, Jesus uses the word "kingdom" 105 times in the Gospels (according to my word count using www.biblegateway.com, excluding 14 uses of the word in other contexts http://www.biblegateway.com/keyword/?search=kingdom&searchtype=all&version1=31&bookset=4).
After the Ascension, the later books of the new Testament use the word "kingdom" only 32 times (excluding 4 uses of the word in other contexts http://www.biblegateway.com/keyword/?search=kingdom&version1=31&searchtype=all&spanbegin=51&spanend=73).

That word count indicates SOMETHING of the shift in understanding that occurred, but the word count alone fails to reveal the even deeper shift in the meaning and interpretation that was put on the concept of "kingdom":
"the kingdom" that they hoped for was no longer a restored political empire but “the kingdom of heaven”. And, once they understood this central truth that Jesus had spent so long trying to explain to them, the language and metaphor of "kingdom" became much less significant, and so they used the word "kingdom" much less.

Now, very simply, for ourselves, we need to be sure that our hopes are likewise affected by today's feast of the Ascension. Jesus has been taken up into “glory” and this is the same "rich glory He has promised the saints will inherit"(Eph 1:18). And everything else that I hope for as I live in this passing world needs to be a hope that is relative to that true hope of heaven. Where He has gone, we hope to follow.

National Pastoral Letter from the Bishops of England and Wales

2011-05-29T00:43:00.001+01:00

This Sunday there is a pastoral letter from the Bishops of England and Wales to be read at Mass in every church across the land. The letter concerns the new translation of the Mass:

http://www.catholic-ew.org.uk/Catholic-Church/Media-Centre/press_releases/Press-Releases-2011/National-Pastoral-Letter-on-the-New-Translation-of-the-Roman-Missal

5th Sunday of Easter, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-05-22T00:23:00.002+01:00

Jn 14:1-12
I'm only going to offer a brief for today because we have an appeal at the end of Mass on behalf of the Bishop’s new fund for training seminarians.

The thought I want to offer you today is the reason why the gospel text we heard today is given to us to consider during the Easter season.
“Do not let your hearts be troubled, trust in God still and trust in me"
Now, the reason why this is an issue, the reason why a question could arise in your head, is that the words of the Lord that we heard in that gospel text were not words He said AFTER He rose from the dead on Easter Sunday -in that sense, they are not words that belong to the EASTER season. He said these words before He died, at the Last Supper.
And yet, the church calls on us to reflect on these words NOW in the Easter season.

So, why did it make sense to reflect on these words in the light of His Resurrection?
And the simple answer is that the power of these words takes on a new significance when they are read in the context of His Resurrection.
What the Resurrection manifests to us is that He has the power to do what He said. He has the power to lay down His life and take it up again (Jn 10:18), as He said.
And so, if we return to the words He said before He died, if we return to though promises He made when He seemed to be in weakness, looking at those words again in the light of the Resurrection should mean that we have confidence in His promises.

He HAS the power to fulfil His promises. He has shown that "the Father and I are one"(Jn 10:30). And so we should have a renewed sense of comfort in hearing His words, “Do not let your hearts be troubled, trust in God still and trust in me".

4th Sunday of Easter

2011-05-15T00:11:00.001+01:00

No sermon text this Sunday because the Mass was by a visiting priest.

3rd Sunday of Easter, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-05-08T00:05:00.001+01:00

Lk 24:13-35
In all of our Easter Gospels we hear of a great deal of movement and running. In today's we heard about how the two disciples, after a long walk, and despite the fact that it was then nighttime, and no doubt dangerous to travel, hurried all the way back to Jerusalem. In each of the recorded appearances of Our Risen Lord, His appearance produced a radical change in the persons He appeared to. And the question of what exactly that change was, is a question of great importance if we are to understand the relevance of these appearances for us today.

One thought that can help to focus us on the nature of that change, is to think about the one great person that Gospels do NOT record Jesus appearing to, and that is His mother Mary. And it is particularly relevant for us to do so in this Month of May, the month dedicated to Our Lady.

Most Catholic saints and scholars down the ages have argued that, even though the Gospels don't record it, Jesus did actually appear to Our Lady, and did so before He appeared to anyone else, and I think that would be only natural. Any mother would want her son to appear to her, and being the perfect son, I'm sure that Jesus did appear to His mother.

But others argue that there was no NEED for Our Lord to appear to Our Lady, because her faith was so strong that she knew He would rise from the dead, she didn't NEED to see Him the way that the others did. And Pope John Paul II refers to this theory in his book, Crossing the Threshold of Hope. The Blessed Virgin Mary had solid hope, she had pondered everything in her heart (as the Gospels repeatedly tell us), and she KNEW He would rise again.
One thing we can be certain of, if Our Lord did appear to her, it was an appearance unlike the other encounters: An event of great joy, but not one that radically changed Our Lady.

In contrast, the appearance to the two men on the road to Emmaus had a dramatic effect. We heard their own words of where they had placed their own hopes: in a worldly political messiah who would save them in a worldly way. Christ had to explain the whole of the prophets to them in order to make it clear what He had REALLY come to do.
Their hope was changed by the appearance of Our Lord, to a hope in something greater still. The eternal hope of Our Lord Himself.

For ourselves, that should raise the question of where it is that we put our own hope. Do we live for day to day hopes of passing worldly pleasures? Or is the hope of our lives underwritten by the everlasting and eternal hope of Christ? Because the society we live in today still looks to a fulfilment and hope that is oriented around this world alone, as if this world alone could satisfy our desires.

Our Lady knew better. From the moment that the Angel Gabriel appeared to her and asked her to be the Mother of God Himself, she knew that true hope was to be found in the child that she was called to bear, and it was pondering on that that enabled her to keep faith and hope even at the foot of the Cross.

The example of Our Lady shows us what the Risen Lord had to explain so fully to the men on the road to Emmaus, shows us the dramatic change of worldview that happened in each person that Jesus appeared to: the change to realising that the true hope of the world is to be found in Christ Himself.
He Himself is the one that fulfils every promise and prophecy and expectation of the human heart. Our faith and hope in the person of Christ, God among us, our true salvation, the one who triumphs over sin, evil and suffering, is the only hope that puts all other hopes into a true perspective.

And that same Christ, the one who is still our hope today, who came to those disciples in the breaking of bread, will come us here today in the Eucharistic sacrifice of the Mass.

1st May 2011, Beatification of John Paul II, Divine Mercy Sunday, 2nd Sunday of Easter

2011-05-01T00:28:00.003+01:00

The royal wedding has been the big news item of the week. As Catholics, however, we have our own big news item this week, this Sunday in fact, but it's possible that you might not have heard about it in the news: Pope John Paul II is being beatified in Rome this Sunday (beatification being the penultimate step on the road to being formally declared to be a saint) -it is already six years since Pope John Paul II died.

I'm too young to remember it myself, but in 1978, when the young Polish Cardinal was elected as Pope John Paul II, his first words to the world from the Papal balcony were, "Do not be afraid". These words repeated one of the Easter greetings that Our Lord used to His disciples after He rose from the dead (Mt 28:10), a greeting that characterised Pope John Paul II’s Easter faith.

The risen Jesus greeted His disciples with the words "do not be afraid" because He knew that they WERE afraid. This greeting of Jesus, however, is about much more than the specific fear of seeing a man that they thought was dead. Rather, the greeting of the risen Jesus is a greeting that tells us something about how we should respond to ALL of the things in life that PREVIOUSLY had been causes for fear –because by Jesus's triumph over death, suffering, and evil, He has given us a reason to not have fear.

Fear is our reaction to some future evil (St Thomas Aquinas, ST I-II q41 a2) –because we recognise that it will bring us suffering and pain.
And there are a great many things in this life that we know can bring us suffering.
But surely, underneath all of these causes of fear, is the deeper fear that somehow we are ALONE in the face of what confronts us, that somehow we are powerless to overcome the evil that confronts us, that somehow the existence of evil signifies that God is not active in our lives, or at least that He is not active in the face of this evil that assails us.

The historical event of the Resurrection of Jesus from the dead, and, more specifically, of the guiding hand of the Almighty working through the tragedy of the Crucifixion in order to achieve not only our salvation but the further glorification of the Son,
this event gives us reason to hope that the same God who was active in that suffering will be active in our own suffering too.
And so the Easter greeting of the risen Lord, "Do not be afraid", is a greeting that is meant to resonate at the level of every single fear that lies within us.

Of course, we all know that it is not easy to have faith rather than fear when we face suffering. But this, I want to point out to you today, is one of the ways in which we see the greatness of John Paul II.
John Paul II, who the church now calls "Blessed John Paul II", was a man who had experienced the evil that this world has to offer. He had lived through the wartime Nazi atrocities wrought on his beloved Polish homeland. He had endured seeing these be supplanted by the afflictions of the atheist tyranny of Soviet communism.
We might well expect such a man to have a rather timid and persevering sort of attitude, however, his faith was such that he came to experience the reality of God's power being manifest PRECISELY IN human weakness, precisely where it is needed the most, precisely in the face of evil.
And it is the triumphant Resurrected power of the Lord in the midst of weakness that the great Pope John Paul II identified as the action of "mercy" (c.f. Dives in misericordia, nn.7-8).
It was because He recognised the action of God in weakness as “mercy” that He responded to the apparitions of St Faustina to have this 2nd Sunday of Easter declared to be “Divine Mercy Sunday”,
and it is the recognition of this connection between mercy in weakness and the Resurrection power in the face of weakness that led Pope Benedict to chose to beatify Blessed John Paul II on this very day.

The application of this to our own lives is a transforming act of Resurrection faith that we need every time we experience fear in the face of some evil before us. Let us remember the victory of Christ, and remember His resurrection greeting, "Do not be afraid".

Easter Sunday, 24th April 2011, Shaftesbury

2011-04-24T11:00:00.002+01:00

Jn 20:1-9
We gather here today to celebrate the feast of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. As we know, many people do not celebrate the Resurrection, many people treat it as just some kind of myth. So, if we are to celebrate today's feast with conviction then it's worth recalling some of the many reasons why we can be certain that Jesus rose from the dead. I want to do this using not some of the traditional arguments (for that see handout sheet http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2011/04/16/how-easter-killed-my-faith-in-atheism/) but I want, instead, to note a couple specific arguments contained in Pope Benedict's new book –the book which I have quoted from in a number of our Easter Triduum services.

The Pope, very obviously, starts his reflections on the resurrection by referring to the Empty Tomb. And he makes the point that the emptiness of the Tomb was "a necessary condition for Resurrection faith"(Jesus of Nazareth, Vol 2, p.254). When the disciples went about Jerusalem proclaiming that Jesus had risen from the dead their statements would have been meaningless, and instantly contradicted, if someone had pointed to the body of Jesus lying dead in the tomb.
And it's an important point to note that nobody in antiquity, none of the Jewish high priests and Pharisees who opposed the early Christians, none of these people ever disputed that the tomb was empty. Nobody ever claimed to know some other place where his body was.

But the emptiness of the Tomb does not in itself prove the Resurrection. We know of the Resurrection because of an additional factor: the fact that Jesus, in His resurrected state, APPEARED to His disciples. They saw Him, they “ate and drank” with Him, as we heard St Peter say in our first reading. (Acts 10:41).
Pope Benedict makes the point that "for the disciples the Resurrection was just as real as the Cross"(p.245) –both events were experienced by them as something definite, tangible, and this is the key point: as something life changing, the way your life changes is the result of a real experience, not an illusion.

The Pope points to 2 significant things that indicate the reality of that experience, things that we might be so familiar with that we mistakenly take them for granted: the fact that Christians meet on Sunday, and the fact that the early Christians said that Jesus rose on the "third" day.
For us, it might not seem a big deal that we meet on Sunday. But we need to remember that the first Christians were Jews, they observed the Sabbath, on Saturday, and this was a practice that made them different to all the peoples roundabout them, this was a practice that defined their Jewish identity. So, they would only have abandoned that practice on the basis of something definite and solid and important. And it is only reasonable to conclude that the only reason they did this was because of the truth of their claim that their Lord Jesus Christ had Risen on a Sunday.
This is a powerful indication that their claim to have met the risen Christ was a tangible experience.

Pope Benedict makes another interesting point when he reflects on the fact that the disciples were clearly NOT EXPECTING the Resurrection to happen. He notes that just as nobody expected the Messiah to come in the form of a CRUCIFIED Messiah, similarly, no one was expecting a bodily Resurrection(p.245). While the many passages in the Old Testament prophesying the Messiah seem clear to us in retrospect, it's nonetheless significant that there were no rabbis at the time who were teaching about and expecting a Crucified Messiah and a Risen Messiah. So, for example, although the New Testament says that Jesus "was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures"(1 Cor 15:4), there is no word-for-word Old Testament reference to a "third day" (p.257). Why then did the early disciples insist repeatedly that it happened on the "third day"? Surely, only because their experience of the event connected it to that day.

What have I been saying? In summary, that the Gospel accounts of the resurrection appearances of our Lord are historically credible because there are so many aspects of the early Christian Church that only makes sense if those first disciples had experienced an encounter with their Risen Lord as profound, real, and unexpected as they claimed it was.
And for us today that means we can celebrate the Resurrection, despite the scoffing of some sceptics, we can celebrate the Resurrection with confidence as a historical reality.

Easter Vigil, Baptism, 23rd April 2011, Shaftesbury

2011-04-23T21:00:00.003+01:00

Tonight we have someone, Catherine, being baptised. Which means that it’s a useful time to reflect on the significance of being baptised, and on baptism’s connection with the death and resurrection of Jesus.
I want, in particular, to suggest that we each consider a particular question: what difference does being baptised make to how you attempt to live? Or, do you live as if you hadn’t been baptised?

For example, to return to the “new commandment” I preached about on Thursday night, do you attempt to live that commandment (to love) by your own power, or, by the power of Jesus in you?
Because, if you’re just trying to do it by your own power then you’re acting as if you hadn’t been baptised.

Baptism gives us a new power but it’s a power we can ignore, or, a power we can habitually use.
Baptism gives us a power that those who are not baptised do not have.
Of course, the Church teaches that God gives His grace even outside the Church, as an old priest I knew used to put it, “God is not a snob”. But, nonetheless, His grace is particularly effective in those incorporated into Him in Baptism, incorporated into His death, and resurrection, and the pouring of the Holy Spirit –because this is what baptism is all about.

Baptism, of course, is an event of such colossal and fundamental significance in the Christian life that there is not just one but a great many different, interrelated, truths that are contained within it. That's why we have a whole plethora of different symbols in tonight's baptismal liturgy. But rather than attempt to explain all the symbols tonight I want to point to what connects the two most fundamental realities that underlie them: purification from sins and the new birth in the Holy Spirit (Catechism 1262).
These two things, however, are meaningless without each other: the washing of water would have no supernatural effect if it was not for the Holy Spirit; and the Holy Spirit can hardly come in us unless that dwelling within us involves u changing from our present state of sin to being something that is worthy of being a Temple for Him to dwell within.

Baptism washes us clean of sin; it involves a commitment to renounce sin, with a profession of faith in the One who claims the power to forgive sins.
Baptism brings new life, but the new life that Jesus promised, the new life that His Spirit brings, this new life involves such a drastic change within us that it must involve a death within us. As St Paul classically put it: the Old Man Adam must die that the New Man Christ may live (c.f. Rom 5:12; 6:4).

But how can such new life come about in us? The answer to that question takes us to the heart of why it is that we celebrate baptism on this most holy of nights, on the night of the Easter Vigil, on the night when Christ Himself passed from death to life:
we can only pass from death to life by being incorporated into the One who, for our sakes, freely chose to pass through death to life, who passed from death to life to make us new.

And we pass from death to life, we are incorporated into Christ, not by our own power but by the power of His Holy Spirit, poured into our hearts, poured into our hearts in baptism.
The relationship between the Holy Spirit and baptism was first most publicly manifested in the baptism of our Lord Himself, when as He came up from the waters the heavens opened and the Holy Spirit descended upon Him in the form of a dove.

To return to where I began, what does this mean for those of us who have already been baptised, as well as for Catherine who is about to be baptised? It means that we have a new power dwelling within us. A new power that we can, inasmuch that we open ourselves to avail of it, a new power that can make us a new creature that is able to do we cannot do alone: a new power that even means we can keep the "new commandment" to love as He first loved us.

Good Friday, The High Priest, 22nd April 2011, Shaftesbury

2011-04-22T15:00:00.004+01:00

We have just heard the horror of Jesus’s death, and it is worth our while to take a moment to contemplate WHY this should matter to us, WHO He is TO US, why we should care, why we should even be glad on this "Good" Friday.
To consider "who" Jesus is to us we can consider the many titles that Jesus has, and one of those titles, as we heard in our second reading from the letter to the Hebrews, is that He is our "high priest". And I want to reflect on this using, again, some thoughts from Pope Benedict's new book.

It might seem, at first glance, that the title "priest" doesn't seem significant enough for Jesus. It might be possible to think, "why do I really want or need a priest?"
Well, the reason that the priesthood of Jesus is so significant in terms of who He is, is largely because of the TYPE of priest that He is.
A priest is someone who represents men in their relations to God (Heb 5:1). And, in particular, a priest represents us precisely in those parts of our lives that are most in need of being represented to God: those things by which we are separated from God. And the thing by which we feel most separated from God is our weakness, our weakness in two respects: our weakness in sin, and, in our general frailty -both of these are things whereby we feel separated from the Almighty.

But Jesus is not just ANY sort of priest, He is the perfect priest, the "high priest" of high priests. He is the one best able to represent us in our weaknesses because, as we heard in that letter to the Hebrews, because of His experience of suffering and weakness He is therefore capable of feeling our weaknesses with us (Heb 4:15).
He is therefore able to hold up to the Almighty the anguish of human existence and so bring man to God (Jesus of Nazareth, vol 2,.164).

It was precisely to be such a high priest for us that "Christ came into the world"(Heb 10:5).
It was precisely to be such a high priest for us that Christ started His public ministry, in which His destiny to make “vicarious atonement” for our sins "constituted the most profound content of [His] mission”(p.172).
It was precisely to be such a high priest that He "consecrated Himself"(Jn 17:19), as He said in the prayer that is called His “high priestly prayer” at the Last Supper -using a Greek word that made clear that this "consecration" was dedicating Himself to be the sacrifice(p.87).
And, it was precisely as such a high priest that He been foretold by the Prophet Isaiah as we heard in our first reading, that He might be both priest and victim: as priest by "surrendering Himself to death" (Isa 53:10); that the Lord might burden Him "with the sins of us all”(Isa 53:6) (p.81), as victim.

This said, however, let us not imagine that this suffering was something that came easily to Him.
Let us not forget the battle He experienced within His very self in the Agony in the Garden. It was there, as He beheld the horror of sin, as He contemplated the suffering He was about to undergo for our sakes, it was there that in His human will He prayed "let this cup pass me by” (Mt 26:39). Now, Jesus is truly God and truly man, He has both a human will and a divine will (pp.156-61), and I say this to acknowledge that it is impossible for us to know what it feels like to have two wills, to know what it feels like to be God. But, we do know that the horror of confronting sin and the horror of the death that awaited Him, this horror was so profound that it was a struggle –He sweated blood (Lk 22:44).

And yet, He obeyed, for our sakes.
He obeyed as the high priest, for us, His obedient "yes" brings disobedient mankind to God(pp.163-4, c.f. pp.233-5).
As we heard in the letter to the Hebrews it was by obeying through suffering that He was "made perfect" (Heb 5:9) -and the Pope notes that this phrase “made perfect” (that might well sound strange to us in English, how can the sinless perfect One be “made perfect”?), this phrase is another technical Greek phrase referring to priesthood: to "make perfect" is a phrase “used exclusively to mean ‘consecrated as priest’”(p.164).

Jesus prayed as our priest. The old Jewish high priest would pray firstly for himself, secondly for his house, and thirdly for all of Israel (p.78). The Lord Jesus likewise prayed firstly for Himself (that He might do the work He came to do), secondly for the Apostles, and thirdly for all who would believe (Jn 17:20).
Jesus died as priest. The old Jewish high priest wore a long seamless garment (p.217). Jesus went to His death, as we heard in that gospel account (Jn 19:23), wearing a long seamless garment that the soldiers cast lots for rather than tear.
And Jesus lives now as a priest, as OUR priest having gone before us "through to the highest heaven" (Heb 4:14), carrying with Him all of our human weakness.
It is precisely in our weakness that we can turn to Him, the priest and victim, the perfect high priest who has known our weakness.
"Let us be confident, then, in approaching the throne of grace, that we shall have mercy from Him and find grace and we are in need of help"(Heb 4:16).

Holy Thursday, The New Commandment, 21st April 2011, Shaftesbury

2011-04-21T19:00:00.002+01:00

Jn 13:1-15
Tonight I want to say a few words about the symbolism of the washing of feet, the washing of feet as done by Jesus as we heard in that gospel passage, which will be symbolically reenacted when I wash feet in a few moments time. And, I want in particular to explain the significance of this using the comments of Pope Benedict in his new book (Jesus of Nazareth, vol 2,p.63ff) [which I also cited in my Palm Sunday sermon].

Pope Benedict comments on the significance of the foot washing done by the Lord Jesus Christ in terms of the question of the "new commandment". The Lord Jesus, as we know, gave what He called a "new commandment": "love one another, as I have loved you" (Jn 13:34). While we didn't hear these words in tonight's gospel, these words, this commandment, was uttered by the Lord in the verses that followed Him giving this example of washing His disciples feet in profound humility. In washing those feet, as we just heard, He gave "an example so that you may copy what I have done to you" (Jn 13:15).
At a superficial glance therefore it would seem as if the "new commandment" was simply to follow the example of Jesus Christ. Pope Benedict, however, notes that the new commandment is about much more than just the example of Jesus.

Now, this is an important point, because there are many people throughout the world today who think that Christian morality is about nothing more than following the example of Jesus Christ. They think that Jesus was a great man, a great teacher, a great MORAL teacher. Many, however, mistakenly think He was ONLY a man and so they think that His new commandment consists ONLY in His example.
This notion, however, the notion that Jesus is just a good man, that all that Jesus gives us is an example, even if possibly a perfect example, this notion fails to understand the very “essence” of Christianity -and this is Pope Benedict's concern.

The "new commandment" says that we must love “as I have loved you", and it is possible to misread that in such a way that we think that loving as Jesus would have us love is simply about a more extreme moral EFFORT. That Jesus loved a huge amount, Jesus loved so much that He died for us, and that to love "as I have loved you" is to love with such a huge effort.
But, such a notion reduces the essence of Christianity to just being about external behaviour, it fails to grasp the type of INTERNAL change that Christianity involves.
To love "as I have loved you" includes a more extreme moral effort, but much more importantly it includes something else: it means loving IN and WITH Jesus, it means having Jesus inside of us doing the loving. It means the Spirit of Christ dwelling within us, forming us inside into the image and likeness of Christ, such that Christ is loving in us, such that “it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me”(Gal 2:20).

This is Pope Benedict’s point, this is what he refers to as concerning the "essence" of Christianity. And in saying this he is drawing on the wisdom of the saints and ancients who have gone before him: for example, the great St Thomas Aquinas, in explaining the nature of the "new law" teaches that “the New Law is chiefly the grace itself of the Holy Spirit, which is given to those who believe in Christ” (St Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I-II q106 a1 http://www.newadvent.org/summa/2106.htm).

But, there is an even deeper truth that penetrates to the core of this new commandment, that concerns the "essence" of Christianity, and this deeper truth indicates why Jesus gave the new commandment on the night before He died:
Possessing the new life of Jesus Christ within us consists in participating in the new life He won for us, consists in participating in His own suffering, death, and resurrection.
The only way that we can live the new commandment, the only way that we can receive His Holy Spirit and grace in faith, is by the All Man Adam dying within us and the New Man Christ coming to live within us. And so the giving of the new commandment looks ahead to the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ and the outpouring of His Holy Spirit that flows from it.
All of this is what the new commandment, the external manifestation of which is shown in the humble loving service of the washing of feet, all of this is what is on display for us tonight.

Palm Sunday, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-04-17T00:46:00.003+01:00

"His blood be on us and on our children" (Mt 27:25)
-I want to say a few words today about the meaning and significance of that verse. I want to say a few words about why we should WANT His blood to be upon us. In particular, I want to explain the interpretation of this verse given to us by the Holy Father in his new book. This is a horrific image. But it is a horrific image that conveys an incredible truth, a truth that fundamentally changes our relationship with the Almighty.

The Pope builds on the letter to the Hebrews (12:24) where the epistle makes a comparison between the blood of Able in the Old Testament and the blood of Jesus Christ. Able was murdered by his brother Cain, and the Bible tells us that Able’s “blood cried out” for vengeance and punishment upon the brother who murdered him. In this sense, to say, "let his blood be on us", is to invoke a curse upon yourself, and as these words were originally said by the crowd to Pontius Pilate they must have been said with contempt and dismissal of Jesus, dismissal of the significance of such a curse.
However, the blood of Jesus is different -it does not cry out for vengeance. As the Holy Father explains (Jesus of Nazareth. Part 2, p.187), the blood of Jesus Christ was not poured out AGAINST anyone, but rather was poured out FOR many, for the nations.
The blood of Jesus brings not a curse, but redemption.
The blood of Jesus brings the purifying power of His blood.

Let us consider for a moment how we would stand before the Almighty WITHOUT the blood of Jesus. Let us consider what would be the status of our relationship with the Almighty.
I stand before the Lord as a sinner. Daily, and hourly, I commit fresh sins against the Lord: laziness, wasted time, selfishness, impatience – continually failing in my sins to be the better person that God would have me be.
How then do I stand before the Lord? I stand separated from the Lord. And, my sins cry out for vengeance against me, as truly as the blood of Able cried out for vengeance.
What I need, is a new basis of my relationship with my heavenly Father.

What does the blood of Jesus do?
Scripture tells us, that the Christian stands "washed in the blood of the Lamb” (Rev 7:14 c.f. 1:5). Washed clean from our sins. Washed so that I have a new basis for my relationship with the Almighty.
And, the words of the Lord Jesus tell us something else about the basis, the new basis, for Christian’s relationship with the Lord: His is the blood of a "new covenant".

Now, the word "covenant" is not a word that we use in our modern language. But it is a concept that has similarities with the notion of a "contract" – it involves a commitment between two people, and establishes the basis of the relationship between those people. In particular, in the ancient near East a "covenant" typically established a bond, a relationship between a king and his people.
In the Old Testament, under the old covenant, the people of Israel had the basis of their relationship with the Almighty established by their faithfulness to the Law that He had given them. That covenant was established and sealed with blood (Ex 24:3-8): the blood of sacrificed bulls was scattered upon the people AND upon the altar -as a sign of being upon the Lord. The sacrificial blood sealed the relationship between them.
But, given that that relationship was broken again and again by the people by their unfaithfulness to the Law, by their unfaithfulness in sin, there was a need for a prophesied "new covenant"(Jer 31:31 c.f. Heb 8:6-13) -a new covenant built on a new basis.
The new covenant that Jesus brings is the covenant in His blood. And this is what we need. His is the blood of the new sacrifice, better than the blood of sacrificed bulls. His is the blood that we need to have upon us as the blood of the old covenant was on the people of the old covenant.
THIS IS THE POINT: the old covenant relationship was established by the blood of the sacrificed bull being cast “upon” the people; the new covenant relationship we now enjoy is likewise established by the blood of Jesus being “upon” us –even though that happens spiritually and not physically.

So, in conclusion, where does this leave me now? How do I stand, if I stand with His blood is "on" me? How do I stand if I stand washed in His blood?
I stand washed clean.
I stand washed clean, as often as I return to be washed again and again in the blood of the Lamb.
I stand in the midst of a transformation:
the blood that had been a thing of horror, and death,
the blood that had been the thing of a curse
that blood, has become a blessing,
the tree of death has become the tree of life
the blood of curse has become the blood of blessing and forgiveness and new life.

And so we would do well to take the words of the people long ago and make them into a prayer for ourselves, "His blood be on us and on our children" (Mt 27:25).

Glory be to Jesus,
Who, in bitter pains,
Poured for me the lifeblood
From His sacred veins!

Grace and life eternal
In that blood I find;
Blest be His compassion,
Infinitely kind.

Blest through endless ages
Be the precious stream
Which from endless torments
Doth the world redeem.

Abel's blood for vengeance
Pleaded to the skies;
But the blood of Jesus
For our pardon cries.

Oft as it is sprinkled
On our guilty hearts,
Satan in confusion
Terror struck departs.

Oft as earth exulting
Wafts its praise on high,
Angel hosts, rejoicing,
Make their glad reply.

Lift we then our voices,
Swell the mighty flood;
Louder still and louder
Praise the precious blood!

5th Sunday Lent, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-04-10T00:48:00.003+01:00

Jn 11:1-45
I want to say a few words today connecting some thoughts about faith, about forgiveness, and about hope -all in the light of Lazarus being raised from the dead.

I think that one of the startling things about that gospel narrative we just heard, is to listen to the depth of faith in Martha. Even after her brother's death, she said to Jesus, "I know that even now, whatever you ask of God, He will grant you."

Deep faith is a great thing, and one of the ways we can deepen our faith is by recognising WHERE our faith comes from. Where is it that we RECEIVE our faith from?
I refer to the language of "receiving" faith in part because today we are having a deeply symbolic act of faith: the catechumen in our parish, Catherine Simmonds, who is preparing for adult baptism, will be presented with the Creed. This is a sign of how all of us "receive" our faith. How is it that we know about Jesus Christ? How is it that we know the truths that are contained in the Scriptures? How is it that we know about the reality that we experience in the sacraments?
We only know these things because we have been told them. We only know these things because these truths have been passed on to us, because we have received these truths. We have received these truths from the Church -and this is an intrinsic part of what faith, true faith, is about.
That is what will be symbolised in Catherine being presented with the Creed, receiving it by listening to us profess it. And she will make her formal assent to that faith as she professes it herself before her baptism at the Easter vigil.

To return to the account about Lazarus.
There are truths of the faith being offered to us in this account about Lazarus.
And we will only "receive" those truths of the faith if we approach them with the spirit of faith, open to the Holy Spirit deepening our faith.
So, in terms of those truths in that narrative:
We might note the compassion and care of our Lord that is manifested in human emotions in this passage in a way that is more obvious than perhaps anywhere else in the Gospels: it is here that we have the brief statement that, "Jesus wept". It is here that we have the phrase, "Jesus said in great distress with a sigh that came straight from the heart, ‘Where have you put him?’" It is here that we have the Lord's loving but powerful command, "Lazarus, here! Come out!” Followed by the deeply symbolic words, "unbind him, let him go free".

For us, in the holy season of Lent, the holy season when, as I preached last week, we should be feeling sorrow for our sins, and might even be feeling dejection and despair as we contemplate our failure, for us in this holy season those words that were addressed to Lazarus can be seen as profoundly symbolic of how the Lord wishes to raise us up, raise us up from our sins.
Jesus “weeps” for our sins. He "sighs" for our sins. And when we are imprisoned in our sins He too says to us, "Here! Come out!" And though our sins bind us He wishes that the forgiveness He offers may come to us and that we may be "unbound" from our sins.
And, if we receive these truths in faith, then these truths of faith will give us hope.
But, these truths of faith will only give us hope we "receive” them. "If anyone believes in me, even though he dies he will live, and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?"

4th Sunday Lent, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-04-03T00:45:00.001+01:00

Jn 9:1-41
I'd like to put a question to you today: When did you last weep for your sins?
Or, maybe if you're not the crying type: When did you last come NEAR to weeping for your sins?

Lent is a time when we should be thinking about our sins and weeping for our sins. And I would like to point out that this is actually yet another way in which Lent can become a season of joy.
I've spoken previously about how our fasting, our "giving things up the Lent", can make Lent a time of joy because this fasting opens us more to the everlasting and deeper joys of heaven.
But there is another way in which Lent can become a season of joy, and that is by following the path from sorrow for our sins to rejoicing in being forgiven for our sins.

Catholics, at least English Catholics, are perhaps not stereotypically associated with deep outward displays of emotion in our repentance for our sins. Perhaps we would be more likely to expect an American evangelical on the TV to be gushing forth in tears as he publicly proclaims his sins, and then publicly rejoices in the fact that Jesus has forgiven him. However, regardless of how it is outwardly displayed, the experience of knowing that we are sinners, feeling deep sorrow for our sins, but then feeling an even deeper joy in experiencing the forgiveness of the Lord -this should be part of the experience of each one of us. That’s why the saints of old had a special prayer asking for the gift of "holy tears".

However, in contrast with “holy tears”, quite often I will have people say to me: I know I'm not perfect, I know that I must have sinned since my last confession, but I honestly can't think of anything in particular that I’ve done, I can think of any sins I’ve committed.
Such a statement is a good starting point in that it realises there is a problem. But I need to be honest with you and point out that this is nonetheless a SERIOUS problem, a problem that needs to be addressed.
If we think back to that gospel passage that I just read out, Jesus condemned the Pharisees because of their spiritual blindness, because of the fact that they did not see their sins.
“If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us... If we claim we have not sinned, we make God out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives.”(1 Jn 1:8;10)
If we think that we are not sinning then this is not a sign that we are better than other people, rather, it is a sign that we are worse because we are spiritually blind like the Pharisees.

So, how can we come to see the sins that we presently do not see?
This is a question that we all need to address: those of us who cannot think of any sins, but also those of us who can think of some sins -because there are almost certainly other sins we need to see also.
How can we come to see them?
First, we must pray, that the Holy Spirit will enlighten us. The Spirit gives the gift of joy but He also gives us the gift of sorrow for our sins –a sorrow that leads to joy afterwards.
Second, we must examine ourselves. A good written examination of conscience can be a great help in this regard: a written list of sins can be like a mirror that we gaze upon and see the features, not of our face, but of our fallen lives.
If we are not familiar with doing this it will be hard work at first. But like so many things in life the more often we do it the easier it becomes, and the less burdensome it becomes, and the more it can become what I started by saying it should be, namely, a path to joy. In terms of familiarity and regularity, the practice of a nightly examination of conscience is an important tool in the spiritual life. And, of course, all of this should lead towards regular use of the sacrament of confession -and anything less than monthly confession will make it very difficult for us to remember our sins.

There have been no jokes in today's sermon. Sin and spiritual blindness are not a laughing matter.
Nonetheless, to quote from that same passage, “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins”(1 Jn1:9). And the experience of knowing forgiveness brings a greater joy than the sorrow that precedes it -but we will only have that joy if we are open to recognising those things in our daily life about which we need to have sorrow. When did you last weep for your sins?

A link to a examination of conscience on the seven deadly sins is available here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/36289758/Examination-of-Conscience-for-Parish-2009

A link to an examination of conscience for teenagers is available here:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/52085545/Examination-of-Conscience-for-Teenagers-2011

3rd Sunday Lent, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-03-27T00:23:00.001Z

Jn 4:5-42; Ex 17:3-7; Rom 5:1-8
I want to share with you something that I’ve been thinking about this last week, something that may come as bad news for some of you. And the thing is this: there is not going to be chocolate in heaven. Now, some of you may hear that and think that you've ALREADY given up chocolate for Lent, and you are already counting the days until your next chocolate bar on Easter Sunday morning, and yet NOW you hear me say that there will be no chocolate in heaven either! Of course, there are some of you who have not given up chocolate, and are not particularly upset about this because you've given up BEER for Lent, however, to you my news is that there will be no beer in heaven either!

I make this point to highlight something being taught in all three of our readings today, because our readings focus on the question of what will truly satisfy this, on the question of what it is that we hope for. Our first reading (Ex 17:3-7) referred to the thirst of the people of Israel as they wandered in the desert, and how God satisfied that thirst with water flowing from the rock. But that satisfaction of thirst was a symbol of the deeper SPIRITUAL thirst that only God can satisfy, that neither chocolate nor beer can satisfy. There will be neither chocolate nor beer in heaven because what will satisfy us in heaven will be God Himself, in His fullness. This spiritual thirst is what we heard Jesus referring to in our Gospel text, the thirst that Christ said He Himself would satisfy: "anyone who drinks the water that I shall give will never be thirsty again" (Jn 4:14). This water will become "a spring inside... welling up to eternal life"(Jn 4:14). And what is this water, this spring? It is the life of the Holy Spirit.

The pouring of that Spirit into our hearts was referred to in our second reading from St Paul to the Romans. He spoke also about how a Christian must be “looking forward”(Rom 5:2) not to things of this world but to the ultimate glory. And he said that "this hope is not deceptive"(Rom 5:5) . Referring to the Holy Spirit, and making yet another reference to something being "poured" out, he said that this “hope” of future glory was not deceptive "because the love of God has been poured into our hearts" (Rom5:5).

Now, the "love of God" is something that we need to have a profound grasp of if we are to appreciate what Heaven will be like.
There are two senses in which we can speak of the "love of God": (1) the love that He has for us, and, (2) the love that we have for Him. Both of these produce an effect in us, a transforming effect, the transformation of complete joy. We all know, even in this life, something of the relationship between love and joy. Concerning love “for us”, the experience of knowing that somebody else loves us is an experience that fills us with joy. Similarly, the experience of loving someone else, especially the experience of loving someone else who we know loves us, this experience fills us with joy.
And, the deeper that love the deeper the joy.
And, Heaven is the place where this experience will exceed anything we now know because it will be an experience not at our finite human level but an experience of the INFINITE love of God.
In the face of such an experience the pleasures of chocolate and beer will be left behind.

To bring this to a conclusion, why are we talking of this in Lent?
In part, because people across the world, and someone in our own parish, are preparing for Easter baptism in this season, baptism that will bring them that outpouring of that regenerating water, with the Holy Spirit.
But, for all of us, the season of Lent is a season to purify and test what it is that we have our "hope" set upon, to test what it is we are attached to. The fasting and self-denial of Lent, the giving something up for Lent, should help purify us of an excessive attachment to the pleasures of this world and remind us of the "hope" of spiritual joy, and of the hope of that joy in life eternal, such that we “will never be thirsty again”(Jn 4:14).

2nd Sunday Lent, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-03-20T00:52:00.003Z

Mt 17:1-9; Gen 12:1-4; 2 Tim 1:8-10
Most people like to know where they are going, and I'm one of them. I might tolerate being blindfolded on my way to be shown a surprise, but, generally speaking I like to see where I'm going. The simple point I want to make today is that God does not leave us blindfolded in our following of Him: He has shown us where we are going, and that is a major part of what the Transfiguration was all about, as we heard in today's gospel.

The Transfiguration happened at a very significant moment: Our Lord was heading to Jerusalem where crucifixion and death awaited Him, and He had predicted to His disciples that He was going to die. Obviously, if they had understood Him, this would have been a deeply discouraging prediction. To remedy this discouragement Our Lord took three of His chosen disciples, Peter, James, and John up the mountain and showed them Himself in His transfigured glory. The sight of that glory was given to sustain them through the suffering of the crucifixion. The sight of that glory was to give them a foretaste of the glory that awaited Christ in His resurrection. And, the sight of that glory was to give them a glimpse of the glory that awaits every follower of Christ if we follow Him in carrying our cross, if we follow Him in our own personal crucifixions in life.

Back to my opening point: I said a moment ago that God does not leave us blindfolded in our following of Him. Now, there is another sense in which, as St Paul says, "we walk by faith and not by sight" (2 Cor 5:7): there are many details of what will happen to us in life that we simply do not know, we do not know the exact manner of our Lord's presence and support to us in our life.

But, I want to illustrate the point that God does not leave us blindfolded in our following Him, He does enables us to see our way and does so in at least three ways:
First, as I just said, in the Transfiguration and His Resurrection, and the revelation of Heaven, He has shown us the glorious DESTINATION that lies ahead for those who are faithful in following Him.
Second, we have His PROMISES to encourage us to set out in following Him. In our first reading we heard the example of God's promise to Abraham (Gen 12:1-4), when Abraham was called upon to leave behind the country and people he knew and head off for a distant land he did not know, and what he was given to enable him to make that departure, what he was given was the Lord's promise, a promise that we know the Lord was faithful to –that included the promise of BLESSINGS to help him on the way. The New Covenant that we belong to likewise promises even more blessings and strength to us on our pilgrim way towards Heaven.
Third, the Lord enables us to see the way we must follow Him by the fact that he has shown us the WAY OF LIFE that we must lead: He has shown us the virtues, the commandments, and, the particular focus in this LENTEN season, He has shown us that we need to carry our cross.

All of the ways in which the Lord shows us how we are to follow Him, the promises we have to support us in our following of Him, and the goal that our following Him is heading towards, all of these things have a greater importance when we are in difficulty, when we are in hardship. And, that holds especially for the hardship of discipleship, which includes the hardships of being faithful to our Lenten resolutions. As we heard in our second reading (2 Tim 1:8-10), there are many "hardships" involved if we are to pursue the holiness that we are "called" to achieve. But that same St Paul reminded St Timothy that we do not do this by our own strength but we do it "relying on the power of God".

So, to conclude, Lent is a time for purification, a time for struggling against sin, at time of employing the remedies for sin: prayer fasting and almsgiving. To strengthen us to endure these hardships today's readings remind us of God's promises to us of the destination, and of the transfigured glory of that final state. God shows us the way, He does not leave us blindfolded.

Giving Up Joyfully! 1st Sunday of Lent, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-03-13T00:25:00.007Z

Mt 4:1-11; Gen 2:7-3:7
We’re starting Lent now, when the Church fasts and prays in a particular way, and when we typically express this in small acts of “giving something up” for Lent. Today, I want to say a few words about why ‘giving things up’ should make us happy not sad.
I was thinking about this recently because a parishioner said, “You’ve given up so much for us as a priest, the opportunity of a decent salary, of a wife and children.” I could have responded by adding a few other things I’ve given up to be a priest! But instead I said what first came to my mind, which was that I don’t live my life feeling like I’ve given up much at all, I think I’m the happiest person in the parish, and there is no-one here I’d rather be.
Now, no doubt someone is going to come up to me at the end of Mass and say, “Father, you’re not the happiest person in the parish –I am!” And maybe we can have a competition to determine who is the happiest! But regardless, my point is that I’M certainly not miserable. And I want to take this as an illustration of how we shouldn’t expect that “giving things up” should make us unhappy.

I want to take a step back, however, and note that there is fear that sometimes lurks within us whereby we somehow think we can out-do God in generosity. That you might give up something, you might give Him this thing and He would respond without being even more generous to you.
Well, let’s remember the promise of Scripture, that “whoever sows generously will also reap generously”(2 Cor 9:6).
And this applies to Lent also.

That same passage of Scripture says, “God loves a CHEERFUL giver” (2 Corinthians 9:7). When we give things up for God in Lent we need to try to do so with a light and cheerful heart not with a heavy heart –with a heart that trustfully and happily expects to get more back from God than we give.
For example, one of the things I’m off for Lent is alcohol. It is more than possible that at 9pm on Saturday night I might find myself starting to reach for the bottle, but then stop myself and crabbily say to God, “Oh, alright then, if it really matters that much to you, then I won’t have a whisky tonight!” That would not be cheerful giving!

But HOW do we give cheerfully? After all, in the short term any act of self-denial is hard. Well, there are a number of things we need to bear in mind, and to make as part of a small prayer each time we are giving something up:
First, to recall the many promises of Scripture that show He will not be out-done in generosity.
Second, to recall that He is with us in this act of self-denial. After all, we are doing this 40 days of Lent to go with Him into the desert as He went into the desert for 40 days of prayer and fasting. We have Him, and His strength, with us.
Third, we need to have the long-term goal before our eyes. The long-term happiness:

The goal of Lent is to take us to Easter. The goal of Jesus dying on the Cross was to bring us the new Resurrected life of Easter. That journey wasn’t easy for Him, and it’s not easy for us. To have the Old Man of sin (Adam) die and the New Man (Christ) live in us is a struggle. Our first reading outlined how Adam and Eve fell in sin, and we go into the desert of Lent to gradually have grace transform us from that fallen state to that of Christ. It’s a long road, the Royal Road of the Cross, but Lent leads us to a Resurrection –if we enter into it properly.

To bring this to a practical conclusion. The Catholic tradition offers us the 3 remedies for sin in this holy season: prayer, fasting, and almsgiving –and we should seek a least a little of each of these 3.
(i) “Giving something up for Lent” is a small act of fasting –compare that with the way Muslim fast in Ramadan, or the way Catholics in the past fasted more vigorously. If you want some suggestions for things to give up for Lent look in the list of suggestions in the newsletter (as copied below this sermon);
(ii) Prayer needs to be the spirit with which we do this “giving up”, but is also something important in itself. Maybe add as little as extra Hail Mary each day in Lent. Or, especially for the many of you who are retired: attending weekday Mass at least one extra day per week in Lent would bring you many graces. Stations of the Cross on Friday evenings would also be very valuable. Maybe a decade of the Rosary. Resolve on one!
(iii) Finally, Almsgiving –giving to the poor, to others, in some form. Following our Ash Wednesday fasting we have a retiring collection today, that’s one way of giving. But maybe also some little act around the home or for our neighbour.

Lent is supposed to change us: it should make us generous in almsgiving. But, back to where I began, it should not make us miserable, it should make us joyful in Christ. Joyful enough that we should all strive to say, “What I’ve given up has left me the happiest person in the parish!”
_______________
from this week's newsletter:
Giving Things Up For Lent
The season that the prayers of the Church call "this joyful season" started last Wednesday. Have you thought yet about what to give up this Lent? How about one or more of: meat, alcohol, TV (maybe for one day a week at least), dessert, chocolate, unnecessary internet surfing, coffee, tea, computer games, cheese, your favourite TV soap opera, crisps, your favourite snack food, reading blogs, facebook, eating at restaurants, give up or restrict your use of your favourite radio station, limit yourself to one coffee per day. Why is Lent "joyful" when we are giving things up? Because it helps us orient ourselves to our true joy in God in heaven.

Why is it good for us to 'give things up for Lent'?
The practice of ‘giving something up for Lent’ is an important way of fasting. Fasting is good for us for five reasons: First, at a human level, like dieting, fasting disciplines our desires. Second, at a supernatural level, more than mere dieting, fasting is a prayer. It thus needs to be offered to God; ‘offer your very bodies as a living sacrifice acceptable to God’ (Rom 12:1). In particular, fasting is something we can offer in reparation for our sins. Third, fasting (and any form of penance) is also a means of detachment from the things of this world and attachment to the everlasting realities of the next. Fourth, fasting can free up our hearts to better enable us to love others. One way we do this is by the traditional Lenten practice of giving to the poor. Fifth, and most importantly, fasting unites us to Jesus: Jesus went into the desert and fasted and prayed for us for 40 days, in Lent we go into a spiritual desert to be with Jesus for 40 days of fasting and praying. Uniting ourselves to Jesus's suffering unitesus , above all, to His suffering on the Cross which is the path to the new life of the Resurrection, the new transforming life of grace within us.
Finally, this can be summed up by noting the Church’s threefold Lenten remedy for sin: prayer, fasting, and almsgiving (giving to the poor). These three should all go together, not in opposition, i.e. it’s not enough to say, ‘Oh, I’m not giving up things, I’m doing something positive!’ Each of us would do well to add a small part of each of these three to our Lenten season: add a small prayer to your usual daily or weekly routine, give something up for Lent, and give some money to a good charity.

Giving Things Up For Lent: Why? With suggestions of what to give up for Lent

2011-03-12T09:20:00.003Z

Giving Things Up For Lent
The season that the prayers of the Church call "this joyful season" started last Wednesday. Have you thought yet about what to give up this Lent? How about one or more of: meat, alcohol, TV (maybe for one day a week at least), dessert, chocolate, unnecessary internet surfing, coffee, tea, computer games, cheese, your favourite TV soap opera, crisps, your favourite snack food, reading blogs, facebook, eating at restaurants, give up or restrict your use of your favourite radio station, limit yourself to one coffee per day. Why is Lent "joyful" when we are giving things up? Because it helps us orient ourselves to our true joy in God in heaven.

Why is it good for us to 'give things up for Lent'?
The practice of ‘giving something up for Lent’ is an important way of fasting. Fasting is good for us for five reasons: First, at a human level, like dieting, fasting disciplines our desires. Second, at a supernatural level, more than mere dieting, fasting is a prayer. It thus needs to be offered to God; ‘offer your very bodies as a living sacrifice acceptable to God’ (Rom 12:1). In particular, fasting is something we can offer in reparation for our sins. Third, fasting (and any form of penance) is also a means of detachment from the things of this world and attachment to the everlasting realities of the next. Fourth, fasting can free up our hearts to better enable us to love others. One way we do this is by the traditional Lenten practice of giving to the poor. Fifth, and most importantly, fasting unites us to Jesus: Jesus went into the desert and fasted and prayed for us for 40 days, in Lent we go into a spiritual desert to be with Jesus for 40 days of fasting and praying. Uniting ourselves to Jesus's suffering unitesus , above all, to His suffering on the Cross which is the path to the new life of the Resurrection, the new transforming life of grace within us.
Finally, this can be summed up by noting the Church’s threefold Lenten remedy for sin: prayer, fasting, and almsgiving (giving to the poor). These three should all go together, not in opposition, i.e. it’s not enough to say, ‘Oh, I’m not giving up things, I’m doing something positive!’ Each of us would do well to add a small part of each of these three to our Lenten season: add a small prayer to your usual daily or weekly routine, give something up for Lent, and give some money to a good charity.

9th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-03-06T00:57:00.004Z

Mt 7:21-27
I’m only going to preach a short sermon today because Paul Bowe, our chairman of the parish finance committee is speaking at the end of Mass.
You may never have thought of this fact, but, it is much harder to preach a good short sermon than to preach a long one.

Today we heard the conclusion of the Sermon on the Mount, which concludes our 6 weeks of sermons on this topic.

Jesus concluded His Sermon on the Mount with the well-known parable of the man who built his house on sand, and the man who built his house on rock. Rock is obviously a better thing to build on, and “everyone who listens to these words of mine and acts on them” (Mt 7:24) will be building his life on such a solid and reliable foundation.

I want to pose one simple question today: why would anyone build their house on sand? It sounds so obviously foolish.
The answer, however, is that doing what is easy and quick always has a certain attraction –even when we know it won’t be as good, or as good for us.
If we apply this to the Lord’s moral teaching, which is what His Sermon on the Mount focussed on, we know that many elements of His teaching are tough: His more complete and fulfilled Law is a tougher law, as I noted a couple weeks ago.

But such toughness is only tough in the short term. The man who built his house on rock struggled in the building, but his life was better off afterwards.
If we make the effort to live the moral code Jesus gave us then we too will be better off, better able to withstand the storms and difficulties of life:
“Rain came down, floods rose, gales blew and hurled themselves against that house, and it did not fall: it was founded on rock” (Mt 7: 25).

"Chocolat" Lent Course Concerns

2011-03-03T10:28:00.003Z

Some comments by Fr Dylan James, 1st March 2011

A number of parishioners have expressed concern about the fact that this year’s ecumenical Lent groups are using a book based on the film Chocolat. The course book, Christ and the Chocolaterie. A Lent Course, by Hilary Brand, notes that, “Chocolat could easily be seen as an anti-Lent film” (p.15) because it pits traditional Lenten restraint against chocolate indulgence. The book also notes that, “The film’s philosophy of indulging yourself... very much taps into the spirit of our age”(p.9). It should be noted, however, that the book seeks to use the film as a series of discussion points, and can be usefully used to do this –the book does not aim to use the film as a blueprint for indulgent moral living. Nonetheless, having read the book carefully I think I should note a couple of seriously misleading statements and attitudes it contains:

(1) Jesus and the Apostles taught us to fast
The book makes the misleading claim that, “Christ never commanded his followers to fast... and neither did the apostles”(p.10). Such a statement misrepresents the words and example of Jesus and ignores what history and the Bible record as the practice of the Apostles.
(i) First, Christ taught us to fast by His example:
He fasted for 40 days in the desert (Mt 4:2)
(ii) Second, Christ not only showed us the importance of fasting but taught us how to fast:
“ ‘When you fast, do not look sombre as the hypocrites do, for they disfigure their faces to show others they are fasting. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you fast, put oil on your head and wash your face, so that it will not be obvious to others that you are fasting, but only to your Father” (Mt 6:16-18)
(iii) Third, the Gospel shows us that prayer and fasting go together:
“this kind can only be driven out by prayer and fasting” (Mk 9:29)
(iv) Fourth, people sometimes confuse the fact that although Jesus did not have His disciples fast while He was among them He did nonetheless teach that they would fast later:
“Then John’s disciples came and asked him, ‘How is it that we and the Pharisees fast often, but your disciples do not fast?’ Jesus answered, ‘How can the guests of the bridegroom mourn while he is with them? The time will come when the bridegroom will be taken from them; then they will fast.’” (Mt 9:14-15)
(v) Fifth, the New Testament shows us that the disciples actually did fast after Jesus’ Ascension:
“after they had fasted and prayed, they placed their hands on them and sent them off” (Acts13:1-3)
“Paul and Barnabas appointed elders for them in each church and, with prayer and fasting, committed them to the Lord” (Acts 14:23)
(vi) Sixth, we know from historical records outside of the Bible that the Early Church fasted a great deal:
The late 1st Century record of the practice of the early Christians, The Didache [The Teaching of the 12 Apostles], required Christians to fast on many occasions, especially to “fast on Wednesdays and Fridays” (Didache 8). This gives us a clear record of how fasting was very common among the early Christians, and so should be common among us too!

(2) The book and film attack the Church by presenting it as a negative caricature of itself
The film and book repeatedly portray and describe the Church as “traditional, hierarchical and authoritarian” (p.28; 29-30). What neither the book nor the film show us is that the Church and its traditions can be life-giving and the place of our encounter with Christ. Far from tradition being something we should shy away from, the Bible tells us that our Christian “traditions” are something to which we should “hold firm”(2 Thess 2:15). Given that my experience of the Church, her life, and her traditions has been something that has beautifully enabled me to tap into all the riches of 2000 years worth of experience about how to live and about how to know and meet Christ, I am rather saddened to see the Church presented in caricatures like this.

(3) The book’s chocolate recipes for meetings risk introducing self-indulgence into Lent!

If these 3 points are born in mind, and a bit of related common sense, then the course book topics can serve as a useful starting point for discussion –and this is the main intention of the course book.

8th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-02-27T00:35:00.001Z

Mt 6:24-34
We just heard in today’s Gospel text a beautiful example of Our Lord’s intimate and compassionate knowledge of our human nature. We heard Him speak about worrying –that thing that we can spend so much time and effort doing.
Over these past weeks we’ve heard Our Lord’s teachings in the Sermon on the Mount: Sometimes we hear Our Lord’s words uttered as words of authority, of command, sometimes we hear Him speak hard words that we know are not easy to follow. But today, as I said, we hear this same Lord, who was and is both fully God and fully human, we heard Him speak very human words to us:
words about worrying, words that show He knows exactly what we are like.

Most of us have at least some occasions when we worry. Many of us will have nights when we lie in bed worrying about things. And worrying is an odd thing: it’s not like planning or decision making when we actually achieve something, when we actually become better able to deal with what we must do. No, worrying does not help us in any way. As Jesus beautifully put it, “Can any of you, for all his worrying, add one single cubit [or hour] to his span of life?”(Mt 6:27)

And yet, we do worry, and we often spend great energy worrying.
So, how can we avoid worrying? Perhaps in addressing this question Jesus’s words do get a little more pointed and challenging, because He directly turns His focus onto WHAT it is that we so typically worry about, i.e. as to whether it is selfish or materialistic worrying, or whether it is actually concern about heavenly things, “you cannot be the slave of two masters... of both God and of money [mammon]” (Mt 6:24).

Most of us have probably had moments when we realise that so often when we worry about something we worry about it because of how it will affect ME, not about how it will affect others -that even when we worry about family our worries can we filled with anxiety not for their sake but because of some way in which we fear matters will affect us: affect our time, our reputation, or something else. This is one aspect of worry that the Lord calls on us to identify within ourselves and to seek to “let go”, to detach ourselves from our selfish attachment, and to attach ourselves instead to God: “see ye first the kingdom of God” (Mt 6:33).
So, one cause of worry is materialism and the remedy to this is to remind ourselves that “life means more than food and the body more than clothing”(Mt 6:25).
A deeper cause of worry is our selfishness, and the remedy to this is to be bold enough to seek to love others first, and love God first and foremost, because when we do this our worries often take on a much reduced significance.

There is, however, yet another cause of worry, and that is our lack of trust in God. And here Jesus berated His disciples for being “men of little faith” (Mt 6:30). He pointed out that God cares for the flowers of the field and the birds of the sky, and yet God loves us much more than either of these.
This type of worry can often we rooted in a sort of mistaken attempt to do everything ourselves and by our own power. And the remedy to this is to call of God’s grace, trust in His strength, and trust in His plan for our welfare.

“So do not worry about tomorrow”, and as more literal translations put it in a beautiful parody of our own worrying: “tomorrow will worry about itself” (NIV) “tomorrow will be anxious for itself” (RSV), “Each day has troubles enough of its own”.

Clergy are not immune from worry, as I’m sure you’re aware. Popes are not immune from worry. As Pope John XXIII supposedly used to pray each night as he pondered the problems in the Church, “It's your Church, not mine, Lord. I'm going to sleep now”.
If we seek to put God’s things first, we use our talents as He has given them and work, plan, and make our decisions, then we should be able to take the good pope’s attitude for ourselves:
it’s His world, His problems, and we can entrust them to Him.

7th Sunday in Ordinary time, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-02-20T00:42:00.003Z

Mt 5:38-48; Lev 19:1-2.17-18
The Lord Jesus, as we know, had a great many questions that people put to Him. Like, for example, the question, “What is the greatest commandment?”, or the question relating to the commandment to love our neighbour, "Who is my neighbour?"
Perhaps, a more interesting question would have been for someone to ask Him, "Who is my enemy?"
I have days when I think that I could answer that with quite a long list! It's a question I could answer quite easily, but I might need a lot of ink in my pen to do write them all down!
You too probably have days when you could draw up quite a list for that one as well.

However, nobody asked Jesus the question, "Who is my enemy?"
If they had I think I might dare to venture and tell you what answer I think that Jesus would have given: I think this would have been another example of an answer where Jesus would have turned the question on its head.
If Jesus was to answer the question, "Who is my enemy?", I think He would have answered NOT by describing who treats us as our enemy, but rather, but how we should treat the person who is our enemy, namely, the answer I think He might have given is this:
"Who is my enemy?"
“Your enemy is your neighbour” –because Jesus took the command to love our neighbour and said that we must love our enemy too.

Now, of course, pretty much by definition, my enemy does not SEEM to be my neighbour, does not seem to be the person I should love.
Jesus, however, taught the crowds and teaches us the fundamental reason why my enemy and I are on an equal footing:
the same good God loves both of us.
The same "Father in heaven... causes His sun to rise on bad men as well is good, and His rain to fall on honest and dishonest men alike”(Mt 5:45)
and we might add that Jesus died out of love for those who killed Him just as truly as He died for those who followed Him. He died for Caiaphas and Pilate as much as He died for Peter, James and John.
So Jesus concluded, "You must therefore be perfect just as your heavenly Father is perfect"(Mt 5:48), i.e. love your enemy just as your heavenly Father loves him.

"Who is my enemy?"
I could answer that by saying: he is the person who frustrates my plans, he is the person who speaks ill of me, he is the person who stops me having an easy life.
Or, I could answer by saying: he is someone made by the same God who made me, he is someone made in the image of God just as truly as I am in the image of God, he is someone that God wishes to save just as truly as He wishes to save me.

And finally, HOW do I love my enemy? After all, for some reason he IS my enemy. What does loving him mean practically?
To love someone means to seek his welfare, his good (c.f. St Thomas Aquinas, ST I-II Q28 a3 ad3).
Sometimes that involves correction, involves pointing out where he has wronged me.
But always it involves me doing this, and other things, for HIS benefit, because it is good FOR HIM. This is love. This is love for my enemy.

If I would love the good God who loves me,
if I would love those whom the good God would have me love,
then I must love not merely the brother who is agreeable and pleasant to me,
I must love not merely the neighbour who is at least not un-pleasant to me,
but rather, I must love my enemy .

6th Sunday Ordinary Time, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-02-13T00:11:00.004Z

Mt 5:17-37; Ecc 15:15-20; Ps 118; 1 Cor 2:6-10
I want to say a few words today about why the law that we Christians follow is a better law, a law that we should be happy to follow.
Now, it may be that you don't think of yourself as following a "law”, but actually, every way of life has some form of "law" that embodies it:
a golfer plays golf according to the rules of golf, according to its laws;
the driver drives his car according to “The Rules of the Road”, or Highway Code;
within every family: every family has certain ways of doing things, places that things get kept in the kitchen, chores that are either shared or the responsibility of a certain individual -and if you visited, or if you live in, a house where there seem to be no agreed "rules", then that is actually a way of living, a "rule" in itself!

But some sets of rules are more important than others. In particular, religious rules. Every religion embodies a different philosophy, a different way of living, or, as we heard St Paul say in our second reading, a different "wisdom"(1 Cor 2:6). Some religions express the way of life they call for in very precise rules, while some do not. We know that the Jews of our Lord's time had very precise rules about ritual washing: “For the Pharisees, and all the Jews...when they come from the market place, they do not eat unless they purify themselves; and there are many other traditions which they observe, the washing of cups and pots and vessels of bronze”(Mk 7:3-4) etc.

What governs the rules that we Christians live? The answer to this question is what we heard articulated by the Lord Jesus in today's gospel. We know from other occasions and other texts that He was very critical of the Pharisees, that He was critical in particular of their approach to the law. The Pharisees had surrounded the Law of Moses with a great many other laws, laws that Jesus condemned because He said they actually AVOIDED the purpose of the law (c.f. Mk 7:1-13).
Jesus said that He had come to "complete" or “fulfil” (Mt 5:17) the law. The virtue that He calls us to is one that He says goes "deeper"(Mt 5:20) than that of the Pharisees. And He illustrates this with a series of examples. In each example He quotes a law and then indicates a "deeper" more fulfilled practice of the law. “You have heard it said of old... But I say to you...”.

I want to make an observation, however, about the greater depth that Jesus calls us to: the greater depth He calls us to is a TOUGHER law to follow, but a BETTER law, a law we should be even HAPPIER to follow. There are many ways of life, many philosophies of this world, many sets of rules, that claim an easier way of life, but they are ultimately not as convincing as the "rules" that Jesus calls us to.
Jesus says it is not enough to not “kill” your neighbour, you must not be "angry" with him either. He says it is not enough to avoid physically committing "adultery", you must avoid “looking” with lust. And further examples that He gave in the Sermon on the Mount and that we will hear in following weeks all point to an "deeper" living of the purpose of the law.

Obviously, in the short term, to avoid killing is much easier than to avoid anger.
Obviously, what Jesus is calling us to is something tougher.
But, it does not take much reflection to see that what He is calling us to is exactly what He says it is: a more "complete", “deep”, “fulfilled” living of the purpose of the Law.

To return to my opening observation: every way of life is embodies in some form of "law". But the law that Jesus calls us to is a better law, a law we should be happy to follow.

5th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-02-06T00:58:00.004Z

on Mt 5:13-16.
I don't know what you think when you hear that phrase in today's gospel, "You are the light of the world". I'm sure some people think, "Yes, I'm a lamp burning brightly", but I often feel more like a dead light bulb, or a candle flickering in the wind. Because I know I'm a sinner, and that my sin obscures my ability to be a light.

But Jesus knew we were sinners when He called us to be the light of the world.
Jesus said in the gospel that we must be light, "so that, seeing your good works, they may give the praise to your Father in heaven", and I think that it is in this we see a key as to how we are to be light to the world:

If people were supposed to see us do good actions and think that we were great ourselves, then maybe we'd have to give up. But the fact that the credit for the good is supposed to go to God, reminds us that it is actually from God, and from Him alone, that all grace and goodness comes.

Many of us will know times when we've been surprised at the good that has been done by someone we might not have expected, we can sometimes even be surprised by the good we do ourselves -and this is one of the ways that we can see that there is a source of goodness that comes from outside of us, from God.

People that see us and know us, know that we are weak, know that we are sinners.
So hopefully, when they see us doing good they may realise that the strength to do so comes from God, and they may be led to a greater faith in God.
And so our good deeds should not be self-glorifying, but God-glorifying.

If we think that we are weak, then we'd do well to look at the Scriptures.
Time and time again we see in the Bible, how when God chooses people, He chooses weak people. And He chooses weak people because it in them that His power can be more obviously seen as God's power and not human strength.
Moses was so inarticulate that he had to get his brother Aaron to speak for him, and yet through God's power he led the Children of Israel to freedom.
David was the youngest and smallest of his brothers, and yet through God's power he defeated Goliath and became a great leader of his people.
The 12 apostles were constantly making mistakes, slow to understand. Peter himself denied Jesus three times. And yet through them God established His Catholic Church across the world, the longest lasting institution in human history.

In our own day we too have had great examples of God working through weak people. Take Mother Teresa of Calcutta. Physically she was no-one at all, and yet few would deny the great goodness worked through her. It was largely through seeing the action of God in her that the famous Malcolm Muggeridge came to have faith. And there are many less famous examples, people, I am sure, that we have known ourselves.

God has chosen US too, He wants us to be His witnesses, His light.
The title that Christ gives us is one of great honour because it is one He uses of Himself, He said, "I am the light of the world". And by giving us that title Jesus was identifying us with Himself. He is calling each one of us to become other Christs, to become Christ Himself.
While we know we don't have the strength to be such lights ourselves, we do have the strength in Him.
As scriptures says, his grace is sufficient for me; and with His grace we can do all things, we can even be light to the world.

4th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-01-30T00:32:00.001Z

Mt 5:1-12
If someone was to say to you, "You're a Christian, How does Jesus tell me I should live?"
That would obviously be a big question. Many of us might wonder where we would begin to answer it. I imagine that most of us would start by saying, "Jesus said that you must love God and love your neighbour". However, the point I want to make to you today, is that this is NOT what Jesus said -this is not how Jesus started His explanation of how we should live.

We just heard in today's gospel text how Jesus started His great moral discourse: The great Sermon on the Mount. Over the past few weeks our gospel readings have been telling us how Jesus began His ministry; today our gospel gave us the beginning of Jesus’s Sermon on the Mount –the long moral discourse He gave near the start of His ministry; and over the next few weeks we are going to hear some of the details of that moral discourse, of that description of how we are to live.
But my point to you today is that Jesus started His moral discourse by addressing the question of happiness: How and where do we find happiness?
And Jesus did this because for two reasons :
First, He wants us to be happy;
Second, He knows that people are easily mistaken about WHAT happiness is and about HOW happiness is found -that was true 2000 years ago and it is true today.

When Jesus first said those words I just read out, namely the Beatitudes, the people who first heard Him must have been as puzzled as many of us today, because the people that Jesus calls "happy" would seem to include people that are not “happy” in a worldly way at all: those who mourn, those who hunger and thirst, those who persecuted.
The answer to this difficulty lies in the question of what true happiness is. True happiness, "blessedness", consists in sharing the very life of God, seeking God and becoming what St Peter called “partakers in the divine nature”(2 Pet 1:4). This is the glorious end that we are called to, and it is in as much as we possess this that we possess happiness.
This is the happiness we are called to in this life, and in its fullness in the life to come.

Of course, many people seek happiness in very different things: money, comfort, alcohol, and so forth. But none of these things, not even when taken together, none of these things is worthy of us. Only God is worthy of being the end and goal of human life. Only friendship with God is something that can satisfy us. Only friendship with God, the divine lover, can bring a joy to the soul that is more enduring, more profound, and more satisfying than the joy of any earthly lover.

And how does this come back to the Beatitudes? The Beatitudes not only address the question of happiness but they also point out how we should live: they commend to us humility, gentleness, purity of heart. But the way that they point us to live has an even deeper dimension: they point us to live in union with Christ, to live as Christ lived. As Pope Benedict has put it,
“In truth, the blessed par excellence is only Jesus. He is, in fact, the true poor in spirit, the one afflicted, the meek one, the one hungering and thirsting for justice, the merciful, the pure of heart, the peacemaker. He is the one persecuted for the sake of justice. The Beatitudes show us the spiritual features of Jesus and thus express his mystery, the mystery of his death and Resurrection, of his passion and of the joy of his Resurrection. This mystery, which is the mystery of true blessedness, invites us to follow Jesus and thus to walk toward it.” (Pope Benedict, Homily for All Saints, 1st Nov 2006)

So, to come back to the opening question: How did Jesus start His explanation of how we should live?
He started it by addressing the universal desire for happiness. And He taught that that happiness is to be found in values that turn the world on its head. He taught that happiness is to be found in Him alone.

On Unity and the Mass, 3rd Sunday in Ordinary Time, Shaftesbury

2011-01-23T00:08:00.003Z

Today we are halfway through the week of prayer for Christian Unity, and in our second reading we just heard that famous appeal for unity that was made by St Paul (1 Cor 1:10-13.17). And I would like to say a few words today about a couple things that non-Catholic Christians take issue with in our Catholic practice, 2 inter-related things: the centrality of the Mass, and our refusal to practice inter-communion with non-Catholics. Both of these things concern the vision of unity that Catholics aspire to. And while it might seem somewhat pointed to refer to what divides us while we are praying for unity nonetheless we can only aspire to TRUE unity if we face the truth, including the truths that divide us -and these are the truths that people see and question precisely on a day like today.

Concerning the first point, the centrality of the Mass, while we are gathered here today for Mass, all the other Christians in Shaftesbury have cancelled the services they normally have in their own churches and are meeting together for a united service. Many of them, perhaps unsurprisingly, take umbrage with the fact that we Catholics won’t cancel Mass and join them -and I want to articulate at least part of the reason why this is the case. While the reason has many levels profundity to it, it is not a complicated reason:

We Catholics celebrate Mass each and every Sunday, we Catholics hold that each and every Catholic is morally obliged to attend Mass each and every Sunday, because we hold that the Mass is not just one prayer among many but is rather THE defining prayer for Christians, THE prayer that we should offer the Lord to observe the 3rd Commandment and keep the Lord’s Day holy. It was this prayer about which Jesus said, “Do THIS in memory of me”(Lk 22:19). It was this prayer that the early Christians, from the very beginning of the Church, gathered to celebrate every week. And it is a simple historical fact that it was the unanimous and continual practice of all Christians from the beginning of the Church right up until the Protestant Reformation to gather to celebrate the Eucharist every Sunday.

Now, at the Protestant Reformation those who became Protestant claimed that the Christians who had gone before them, i.e. the Catholics, had got it wrong. Classical Protestantism denied that the sacraments were instituted by Jesus Christ [denied this is the sense that they no longer understood either the nature of the sacraments, the number of them, or the significance and meaning of their institution in the manner that Catholics did and do acknowledge them], denied that the Eucharist is truly the Body and Blood of the Lord, and similarly most Protestants denied that the Eucharist needs to be THE prayer that Christians celebrated every Sunday. So, it is hardly surprising that so many non-Catholic Christians today should be happy to cancel their normal Sunday service and meet together to celebrate something that is not the Eucharist. But, for them to expect us to join them would be, in effect, for them to expect us to become Protestant -and I think very few of them realise that that is what is implicit in their call for us to cancel Sunday Mass.

But, more briefly, there is a second point that non-Catholic Christians take umbrage with: Why is it that Catholics will not allow non-Catholics to receive Holy Communion at a Catholic Mass, and why is it that Catholics will not receive Communion at a non-Catholic Eucharistic service? In brief, the reason for this is that receiving Communion implies being in communion, being in unity, being in that unity that St Paul spoke about in our second reading: United in "belief and practice"(1 Cor 1:10). Sadly, Christians today are not united in belief and practice. Concerning the Mass itself, Catholics recognise the truth of what Jesus said about the Eucharist, namely that it is His Body and His Blood, while most non-Catholics say that this is just symbolic. And how could it make sense to share in Communion if we do not share a common faith in what Communion is? Further, even among those who recognise the truth of the Real Presence, sharing Holy Communion needs to also involve sharing the common life of the Church in the sense of recognising the common authority that holds that community in being, namely the Pope as the Vicar of Christ. To seek to be in communion with Christ but not be in communion with the Church that is His body would bring a contradiction into receiving Holy Communion. That, briefly summarised, is why Catholics don't practice inter-communion with non-Catholic Christians.

To come back to where I began, all of this may seem odd to talk about and we are praying for unity. And yet it is precisely when we remember to pray for unity that we remember what it is that divides us. And, as Catholics we have to say that these things are not small differences but very big ones, ones that go to the heart of the question of what true unity, true communion is about: true communion brings us to the Mass, flows from the Mass, and has to involve a shared belief in what the Mass is about.

2nd Sunday of Ordinary Time, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-01-16T00:42:00.003Z

Jn 1:29-34
At every Mass, the priest raises the consecrated host and we say, "Lord, I am not worthy to receive you", and I imagine that many of us can say those words without thinking about what they mean -which would be a great shame, because they are profound words that today's gospel has much to tell us about.

What must a non-Catholic think as he hears us say those words. He might see that we are getting ready to go to communion, and what do we say? "Lord I am ready?" No! We say the very reverse, AND YET we go and receive anyway.

And the reason we do so lies in the very nature of WHO it is that we are receiving, who it is that the priest declares the host to be.
The priest says the words we heard spoken by John the Baptist, "This is the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world", because the host is one and the same Jesus Christ who John identified 2000 years ago.

The phrase "The Lamb of God", might seem a bit obscure to us, but it was very significant to the Jews that John was speaking to. They knew the role that the lamb had played in their history and still played in their religion, and to call Jesus THE Lamb of God was to proclaim His saving role from sin.

When Moses and the Jews were enslaved in Egypt, it was the blood of the sacrificed lambs, posted on their doorposts, that caused the angel of death of recognise and spare them. Every year they commemorated this in the sacrifice of the Paschal Lamb in the Temple (Dt 16:5-6), recalling (1) their liberation from Egypt, and (2) the covenant God formed with His people, and (3) the communion this gave between God and His people. The Lamb was THE most significant Old Testament animal of sacrifice.

Jesus is the true Lamb of God, because His sacrifice on the Cross is the complete and total satisfaction for our sins. This sacrifice (1) liberates us from the slavery of sin, (2) restores our union with God, the union broken by sin, and (3) this new union is completed by our receiving Jesus in Holy Communion –a pattern that was also present in the consuming of the Old Testament sacrifices.

This is what we should recall in the Mass. We, as a congregation, the say the prayer, "Lamb of God, you take away the sins of the world, have mercy on us...", and at the same time the priest breaks the host. This is a symbol of Christ's body being broken on the cross, of His being the eternal sacrifice for sins. It is because HE is the one who takes our sins away that we are able to receive Him, even though we ourselves are not worthy of Him.

(Pause)
We know too that the question of worthiness does have practical consequences, and that if we wish to have the benefits of the forgiveness that Christ's sacrifice can give us, then we must repent of our sins. St.Paul tells us that those who eat the Lord's supper unworthily are eating condemnation upon themselves (1 Cor 11:28): If it is a serious sin in question, as the new Catechism(1457) and the Law of the Church(916) reminds us, we must go to confession before we receive Holy Communion.
Because we cannot acknowledge Him to be the lamb who takes our sins, if we do not also desire to have our sins taken away.

But ultimately, it is because of who He is that we are able to receive Him. Because we will never be worthy on our own grounds, we can never repay Him what we owe Him. We can receive communion because of the love He has lavished on us, and His sacrifice for us, a sacrifice that can HEAL those who turn to Him, "Lord I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word, and I SHALL be healed".

Baptism of the Lord, Year A, Shaftesbury

2011-01-09T00:56:00.002Z

Mt 3:13-17
I’d like to share with you something I saw my little niece do, something that illustrated to me a point about identity –because today’s feast reminds us that our identity is revealed in baptism.

For Christmas I got my two little nephews costumes to wear: a Batman costume for one, and Darth Vader costume for the other, both kitted out from head to toe complete with masks and flowing capes. And they were a big hit! My niece is only two years old, and she didn't get a costume, but she observed the behaviour of her brothers quite closely, and when the opportunity arose she would grab bits of the costume to wear herself. However, she hadn't quite grasped the significance of the different costumes, and so we were treated to the sight of a child in a Batman mask repeatedly making the sinister heavy breathing noises appropriate for the Darth Vader character in the Darth Vader mask. She had failed to grasp the significance of the identity she was clothing herself in –and this is the point I’d like to relate to today’s feast.

One of the mistakes we can make as Christians is to fail to accurately realise what is involved in the identity we have taken on as a Christian.
One of the things that today's feast of the Baptism of the Lord reminds us is that it was at His baptism that He was first PUBLICALLY identified, reveals to the world for His public ministry. He had no need of baptism for Himself, as we heard Him and John the Baptist discussing, and yet to fulfil "all righteousness", He chose to be baptised, and when He did so the voice of the heavenly Father publicly declared, identified, who He was: “This is my Son, the Beloved”.
There are many things that are important about Jesus Christ, there are many things that are part of His identity, but there is nothing that is as central to his identity as His one-ness with the divinity, as His being THE Son of God.
He is a descendent of David, He is a Jew, He was a carpenter, but while these and other things were important, none of these or other things compares to the significance of His one-ness with the divinity, of His being THE Son of God.

Most of us here have been baptised, and in our baptism we have died and risen in Christ (Rom 6:4), in our baptism we have gone down into the water, down into the tomb, and arisen to a new life and a new identity: by baptism we have become “sons in the Son”, by union with Christ we have become adopted children of the Father.
So, of the many things that identify me, none are as important as this relationship I have with the Father due to my union with Christ in baptism.
I was born in England, the son of two teachers, I have blue eyes and light brown hair, but none of these things are what give me my REAL identity: I am a son of God, a son in the Son.

And yet, what are the things that we define ourselves by? All too often we define ourselves by things that are ultimately of little significance: our appearance, our talents, our job, our money, our schooling, or some such thing.
But what TRULY defines my identity is my relationship with God.
All humanity relates to God as “Lord”, either accepting His Lordship or rejecting it.
But it is only those who have been adopted, become “sons in the Son” in baptism, that have this as our identity.
And if this is our identity then it should pattern our behaviour, direct our hopes and longings: “If then you were raised with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God.”(Col 3:1).

To come back to my little niece. She didn’t know whether she was taking on Batman’s identity or Darth Vader’s. If we know more than a 2 year old, then we need to recall the identity we have taken on. We are “sons in the Son”.

Feast of the Holy Family, Year A, Shaftesbury

2010-12-26T00:46:00.005Z

Mt 2:13-23
On today's feast of the Holy Family I’d like to say a few words about God's help to us in family difficulties.

Every year today's feast of the Holy Family comes immediately after Christmas. Christmas, for many of us, is a time when families gather, and so we think of what it means to be a family, and the birth of our Lord in Bethlehem reminds in particular of the family of “the Holy Family” of Jesus, Mary, and Joseph.
When the Church urges us to think of the life of the Holy Family we have set before us both an EXAMPLE of happy family life, and, and an ENCOURAGEMENT to value family life in a way that sadly too few people in our society today do.
But just because the Holy Family is set before us as a role model that doesn't mean we should either imagine or pretend that their life was not a family life with difficulties.
This year, with the snow, many of us have not been able to meet up with family in the way that we had planned and wanted. And this perhaps is one of many examples of the difficulties we can have in family living.

Thinking of the difficulties faced by the Holy Family it is worth noting the fact that even though the Gospels tell us relatively little about the life of the Holy Family much of what they tell us concerns the difficulties that family faced:
First, there was the unusual nature of Jesus Christ's conception –something that the gospel tells us troubled Saint Joseph.
Second, there was the difficulty of His birth: there was no room for them at the inn, and He was born in poverty, in a stable, and laid in a manger.
Not long after, King Herod tries to kill the boy Jesus, and the Holy Family had to flee to Egypt (Mt 2:14).
Then, when Herod died and they attempted to return to Judaea, they heard that Herod's son had become king there, and so they had to go to live in Nazareth.
Finally, the last difficulty of this period was when the child Jesus was lost for three days in the Temple, a time that must have been of great anxiety for Our Lady and St Joseph.
Our Catholic Faith tells us that family life is to be valued, but does not promise that it will be easy, and it was not easy for the Holy Family.

What our Faith does promise us for family life is divine assistance, and this is also something we see clearly in the life of Holy Family:
In the unusual circumstances surrounding the Lord Jesus's birth, St Joseph and Our Lady were each assisted by dreams and visions.
Though the childbirth was in poverty, messages from angels, adoration from shepherds, and gifts from wise men in the East accompanied it.
Though they had to flee from King Herod, St Joseph was nonetheless warned to do so by another dream. And in a similar manner, it was by yet another dream that he was warned to avoid returning to Judaea.
In summary: Repeated divine assistance in the midst of the difficulties that came upon the Holy Family.

Perhaps the greatest divine assistance, however, must simply have been in their daily living. What must it have been like for St Joseph to have raised such a perfect child? What must it have been like to have had such a perfect sinless wife?
The abiding presence of God among them, the fruitfulness of the inner life of grace in them, the strength of such grace to help them for every difficulty
-this is surely what stands before us as a SIGN of how God is present in EVERY family, and His grace will strengthen and bear fruit in every family, just as long as we turn to Him, and seek Him, the way that St Joseph was attentive and responsive to the promptings of the Lord.

So, on this feast of the Holy Family, let us take inspiration from the life of that family. As we see in the life of that family, family life is not promised to be easy, but we are promised to have the presence and help of the Lord, just as truly as the Lord was present and active in the life of the Holy Family of Nazareth.

25th Dec 2010, Christmas, Shaftesbury

2010-12-25T00:21:00.002Z

I recently asked one of our 10-year-olds in the parish whether he was enjoying the snow. And he said, "Actually, I'm a little bored of it". And I don't think he's the only one! Which is rather odd because for as long as I can remember I've heard people talking about how nice it would be to have a "White Christmas" -after all, isn't that what Bing Crosby sang about? And yet, it turns out that a white Christmas is rather awkward.
As the saying goes, “Be careful what you wish for: it may come true!”

Christmas is a good time to think about getting what we wish for, about whether what we get matches up to our hopes and expectations. I don't mean this about the size of our Christmas presents, but rather, about the coming of Jesus Christ Himself.
The simple point I want to make is that the coming of Christ exceeds anything we could wish for, hope for, or expect. But in many ways His coming is so different from what we expect that many people fail to recognise it, and even we who profess to be Christians can fail to truly appreciate it.

If we think back in history to shortly before Jesus Christ came, we know that the Jewish people had been awaiting the coming of the Messiah. For many centuries they had the promises of God telling them that the Messiah would come. But, they didn't know what the Messiah would be like when He came. Most of them were expecting a worldly king, who would freedom from their bondage to the Roman Empire. And their notion of the salvation that He would bring was almost entirely focused on the material world, much as people today easily make Christmas too much about presents, about food and feasting, and so forth –these are part of celebrating Christmas but they are not Christmas itself.

When the Messiah came the manner of His coming was not what the Jews were expecting, even though He fulfilled all of the prophecies to the letter, and the salvation He offered was not what they expected either.
They expected the Messiah to come as a conquering king. In reality, as our Christmas readings remind us, He came as a little child, born in poverty in a stable and laid in a manger. And when, many years later, He was proclaimed king it was as He hung on the wood of the cross (Jn 19:19).
They expected that the Messiah would bring them instant material abundance. In reality, He came in poverty and simplicity, and taught us the way to heaven by showing us a wiser way to use the things of earth. Heaven is a place of happiness so vastly superior to the material happiness that this world promises that as long as our eyes are fixed on this world we will fail to comprehend the happiness of heaven, and fail to properly order our lives to achieve it.

Heaven consists of life with the loving God, the love of God whose very presence awakens a joy in the soul that surpasses our presence comprehension.
If heaven consists of life with the loving God, then it is not surprising that the way to heaven consists of living with the loving God even while we are in this world. And Jesus, the Lord God Himself, came among us in order that He might always be among us, to lead us to the fullness of life with Him in heaven.

His coming will exceed all our wishes, our hopes, and our expectations.
But He can only do this for us if we recognise His coming.
He came to us 2000 years ago born as a little child;
He comes to us still today, in the Mass, and in the hearts yearning to receive Him;
He comes to lead us to heaven, which exceeds all we wish for, even a white Christmas.

4th Sunday Advent, Year A, Shaftesbury

2010-12-19T00:05:00.002Z

Mt 1:18-24
There are just five shopping days left before Christmas and, like many people, I have a slight feeling of panic. I still haven't sent all my Christmas cards. I fear that the light sabres I have bought for my nephews, while they be good enough for them to hit each other with, may not be quite the right brand of light sabres they were supposed to be. And as for my 2½ year old niece's doll, well, getting that right would be anybody's guess. And that's not to begin to start thinking about my Christmas PRIESTLY duties: there is much to worry about!

And I know that I'm not alone in thinking that this last week before Christmas is a time to worry. So, I'd like to point out how the figure of St Joseph that the Church gives us this year on this last Sunday of Advent teaches us a number of things to help us not worry, and to help us properly focus ourselves to celebrate Christ's birth.

As our gospel passage indicated, St Joseph had much to worry about, because "before they came to live together [Our Lady] was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit". Now, that's not a very normal thing to happen in a marriage, it's not a very normal problem for a husband-to-be to face, and the gospel does not tell us much detail about how St Joseph FELT about all this.
The gospel does tell us, however, that, "the angel of the Lord appeared to [ St Joseph] in a dream", appeared to him, explained to him who this child would be, and told St Joseph "do not be afraid".

The key point to learn from this is not what the angel said to him but rather how he RESPONDED to what the angel said to him. He responded with faith; he believed what the angel told him; he didn't even ask "how" this was to happen, he just got on with doing what he had to do, he got on with doing what was his part, and he left the details to God's care.
We, of course, can see with hindsight how right he was to trust in God's care because in the difficulties that unfolded before him in the years that lay ahead God continued to guide him through them: for example, when Herod sought to kill the child Jesus, St Joseph was warned in a dream to flee to Egypt.

Faith consists of our response to what God has told us, and for us today, that means that faith consists in believing what God has revealed to us in Jesus Christ: in His Bible, and in the teaching of His Catholic Church.
A person of faith is a person who listens more to the promises of God than he does to the things of this world. In contrast, there are many things this week that are not of faith that we can listen to: we can listen to the television, we can listen to the cravings of our belly yearning for the food luxuries that abound at Christmas, and, we can listen to the worries and panic of the next week.

If we take St Joseph is our role model then we will spend this next week not focusing on our worries, not focusing on the distracting peripherals, but focusing on the things of faith, focusing on what God has made known to us and what God has promised to us:
He has made known to us his love and care by coming among us born as a little child;
He has promised to remain forever in hearts that will receive Him.
Let us, like St Joseph, be people of faith who listen not to our worries but to the words of God, and entrust the details of the outcome to Him.

3rd Sunday Advent, Year A, Shaftesbury

2010-12-12T00:45:00.002Z

Mt 11:2-11; Isa 35:1-6.10
Today’s Gospel starts by asking a question about who Jesus is. In our modern Britain it might well seem that people are more infested in who Santa Claus is than in who the baby in the crib was. But the question of “who” He was was a question that was uppermost in the minds of everyone who met him 2000 years ago.

You don’t need to know every detail of the Christmas accounts to know that it was a question people asked as Jesus was born. The shepherds who were told to go and see Him by the angels on the hillside must have wondered –because the angels didn’t give them any details. The Kings who came out of the East saw His star, and must have realised He was important, but they also didn’t know fully who He was. “And all who heard it wondered at the things which were told them”(Lk 2:18).

And the same was true with the other major figure in today’s Gospel, in the birth of John the Baptist: there were signs and miracles there too. His father was struck dumb for his lack of faith, and then given back his speech. “All who heard these things took them to heart, saying, ‘What, then, will this child be?’" (Lk 1:66). The question of the “who” of the child John and of the child Jesus were very much linked. John the Baptist came to make Christ known.

We just heard Jesus say that John the Baptist was the greatest “of all children born of women”(Mt 11:11). He was the last of the prophets of the OLD Testament, the final voice calling the people to prepare for the coming of the Messiah. But we also heard Jesus say that “the least in the kingdom of heaven”(Mt 11:11), the least of US, is greater than John –because they are not just born of the flesh, “of women”, but born of God.

That kingdom of heaven can only be found in the person of Jesus Christ, and that’s why John spent his whole life trying to make Christ known. John wanted his disciples to follow Christ, and that’s why he sent them to Jesus with this question: “Are you the one who is to come, or have we got to wait for another?”(Mt 11:3)

“Are you the one?” The answer Jesus gave was more than just saying “yes” –He pointed to all the wonderful signs that would accompany the coming of the Messiah. The Jews knew that many promises had been made, and we heard some of those promises in our first reading in that prophecy from Isaiah (Isa 35:5-6). And that’s why Jesus said,
“Go back and tell John what you hear and see;
the blind see again, and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear,
and the dead are raised to life and the Good News is proclaimed to the poor;
and happy is the man who does not lose faith in me”(Mt 11:4-6).

Jesus not only proved that He was the Messiah, He also proved that the kingdom of heaven had begun to reign here on earth. We’ve been thinking the last couple of weeks about the Second Coming of Christ, in glory and power, and it is only then the reign of heaven will be fully established. But even now that reign of heaven is present.
Because He came as a little child in Bethlehem He can come to our hearts now –come especially in Holy Communion. Come to work is us all the things He worked so publicly long ago. Healing for the wounded heart, peace for the troubled mind, rest for the weary soul.

Jesus, the wonder-worker, proved Himself to be the answer to the Jews hopes and prophecies. And if we would have those same hopes and prophecies be real in us today, then that is the baby we must prepare our hearts for this Christmas.

2nd Sunday of Advent, Year A, Shaftesbury

2010-12-05T00:48:00.004Z

Rom 15:4-9
I want to say a few words today about hope. Hope is one of the defining characteristics of the season of Advent: in Advent we look forward hopefully to Christmas, and, in particular, in this first part of Advent we look forward, in hope, to the Second Coming of Christ.

It may be that you've never thought that much about what "hope" is, but it’s something that has been greatly analysed by the saints and theologians of the Church, and it is important because it concerns what moves us ONWARD in our activity.
Many people today, if they think of hope at all, think of hope as being just sort of ‘feeling’, however, the saints speak of hope as being something much more definite, and much more important.

St Thomas Aquinas defines hope has that movement of the will (ST I-II q62 a3) by which we direct ourselves towards “a future good, difficult but possible to attain”(ST II-II q17 a1). As such, hope is something we can have on both a natural level and on a supernatural level.
For example, with natural hope: someone who buys a house and gets a mortgage has "hope" that he will pay off the mortgage, not today not tomorrow but as a “difficult but possible” future good. And he measures and directs his present activity towards that possible, difficult, but important future good.
Supernatural hope directs us to the ultimate good of heaven, “by means of the Divine assistance”(ST II II q17 a1).

In our second reading today we heard St Paul writing to the Romans about hope, he said, "Everything that was written long ago in the Scriptures was meant to teach us something about hope from the examples Scripture gives of how people who did not give up were helped by God”(Rom 15:4).
So, in the Old Testament, we read about how the people of Israel wandered for 40 years in the desert, 40 years before they finally entered the Promised Land. And they serve as an example to us because they "did not give up". Further, they serve as an example to us because they were "helped by God" as they struggled on: God gave them manna from heaven, quails to eat, cures for the bite of a fiery serpents, and help in battle. Finally, because they "did not give up" they achieved that “difficult but possible” good because they were finally allowed to enter the Promise Land. They “did not give up” and they “were helped by God” to that goal.

For ourselves, St Paul gives a much more immediate and concrete example of how we must apply this to our lives. He notes that it is possible for us to "give up" in the struggle to be good to our neighbour, to be "tolerant with each other". But he encourages us by urging us to set our hope on the good that is both present and future, namely, the mercy of the Lord. The mercy of the Lord that is tolerant with us in our weakness and sin and inadequacy. And the mercy of the Lord that continues to give us His grace and strength in order that we might do good. Yes, it can be difficult to be tolerant and loving and giving to friends, family, to those we daily live with a brush up against, but he urges us to "to treat each other in the same friendly way is Christ treated you”(Rom 15:7).

This aspect of hope has a simple but twofold application to our lives. On one level it orients us towards the Second Coming and towards that ultimate "difficult but possible" good of heaven: if we persevere in being loving to others then God will be loving to us and give us the reward of heaven. And, in the much shorter term, thinking of Christmas coming: if we persevere in being loving to others then Christmas will be a more loving, pleasant, joyful experience; and Christ will find a place to come to us this Christmas.

To come back to where I began, the nature of hope: hope is what sets us towards that difficult but possible ultimate good, relying on God’s help. Let us prepare ourselves in this Advent season by deepening our hope, by deepening our focus on that good which is beyond ourselves, that good which is possible to attain because we, like the examples given to us in the Scriptures, will be "helped by God”(Rom 15:4).

1st Sunday of Advent, Year A, Shaftesbury

2010-11-28T00:10:00.001Z

Mt 24:37-44; Rom 13:11-14
Today’s readings remind us of the End of the World, in particular, about the Second Coming of Christ, “when the Son of Man comes”(Mt 24:39).
There are 2 matters of humour that I often think of when I think of the Second Coming:
The first is a bumper sticker I’ve seen on cars: “Jesus is Coming. Look Busy!”
The second is a comedy sketch from the old Spitting Image series in the 1980s. It featured a priest rushing in to tell the Pope that Jesus had just returned. And, Spitting Image, irreverent as always, had the Pope reply: “Quick! Sell the popemobile and buy a Skoda –I want Him to think I’ve been suffering!”

What both of these comic images have in common is the notion that there is something that we think we can keep hidden from God. And it is right that the thought of trying to hide something from God should be a matter of humour, because God by definition is the one being that we cannot hide anything from.
Of course, many of the things in life that we laugh about are things that people do all the time, are things that WE do all the time. And when we laugh about things that people do all the time part of the reason we laugh is because we can recognise the ridiculousness of it when someone else does it, even if we fail to see the foolishness of our own behaviour in the same regard.

In our second reading today (Rom 13:11-14) we heard St Paul speak about how the coming of Christ will be the coming of "daylight" so that the "night” will be over. As St Paul indicated one of the things that the coming of daylight does is that it shows up all the things that cannot be seen at night. He gave the particular example of people sins: sins will be publicly exposed and seen in the coming of the light of Christ. And he draws a very simple conclusion: if our deeds are going to be exposed to the light, if our deeds are going to be exposed for all to see, then: "Let us live decently as people do in the daytime”(Rom 13:13).

Now, I imagine that many of us might hear the items, the sins, on St Paul's list and think, “Well, I don't do those things” –they are, after all, a list of the most serious sins, the things you would probably LEAST like to have exposed to the daylight.
Maybe, you don't commit any of those sins. Maybe, you don’t need to sell your equivalent of a popemobile because already drive a Skoda.
However, I think we all have little sins that we would be embarrassed to have brought to light: little acts of selfishness, little acts of laziness, uncharitable thoughts about other people, critical judgements, and so forth.

Every year the Church starts our season of Advent by reminding us of the Second Coming of Christ. We prepare to celebrate His birth at Christmas by remembering WHO that baby was and is: the child who was born in Bethlehem is the same God who will come as Lord and Judge at the End of Time.
For the world in general, and for us as individuals with our own particular death, “you do not know the hour”(Mt 14:44).
And so, let us remember that, “Jesus is Coming.” So, “Look Busy!” And let us not only ‘look’ busy but be busy in fact, let us repent and be "busy" with things that He would have us do.

AIDS, Condoms, and What the Pope Really Said

2010-11-27T08:22:00.002Z

AIDS, Prophylactics, and What the Pope Really Said, by Fr Dylan James, Moral Theologian, Wonersh Seminary

A document file version of this is avaialble at this link: http://www.scribd.com/doc/44131403/Condoms-Aids-B16

Last weekend saw many inaccurate media reports claiming that the Pope said that condoms were sometimes permissible in the fight against AIDS. This is not what he said. Below I have briefly quoted him and explained his comments in the light of his previous comments. If we want to understand him we need to read him in the context of other things he has said and in the context of the standard Catholic moral theology he is articulating.

(1) The Pope said that condoms are not “a real or moral solution”[1] to the fight against AIDS:

(a) Condoms are not a “real” solution because they are not effective at a simple practical level

While condom use can reduce the risk of infection it does not prevent it. As Durex themselves warn: 'No method of contraception can give you 100% protection against pregnancy, HIV or sexually transmitted infections.' As a consequence programs that distribute condoms may slow the spread of AIDS in a population but do not prevent the spread of the disease.
AIDS campaigns that promote the use of condoms frequently mislead people into thinking they can ‘safely’ engage in promiscuous sexual lifestyles when in fact they are exposing themselves to risk. In addition, such campaigns encourage sexual promiscuity among the youth at a younger and younger age and thus hasten rather than slow the spread of a great many sexually transmitted diseases. For example, 1 in 10 young people in Dorset are affected by Chlamydia.[2]
Telling people that they can safely engage in promiscuous sex is a lie. Promiscuous sex, with or without a condom, is not ‘safe’ even though a condom reduces the risk.

(b) The Church has a real solution it offers: abstinence and faithfulness

Any ‘real’ solution is not going to be easy and what the Church notes is the only effective way to avoid infection involves discipline and self-restraint –something that the modern world avoids. The only way to safely avoid sexually transmitted diseases is to abstain from sex if you are single and be faithful to your spouse if you are married. Thus the Pope said in his 2009 trip to Africa: "The traditional teaching of the church has proven to be the only failsafe way to prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS."[3]
Those countries in Africa that have promoted abstinence programs instead of condom programs have statistics that show their success.[4] “Recognition of the value of promoting abstinence, instead of just relying on condoms, came in a commentary published in The Lancet Nov 27 [2004]. Written by a group of medical experts, and endorsed by a long list of health care experts, the article noted that when campaigns target young people who have not initiated sexual activity, ‘the first priority should be to encourage abstinence or delay of sexual onset, hence emphasizing risk avoidance as the best way to prevent HIV and other sexually transmitted infections.’”[5]

(c) The Church does a lot of work caring for AIDS sufferers

Did you know that 25% of AIDS care worldwide is provided by Catholic organisations?
As the Pope said in his recent interview: “Someone had asked me why the Catholic Church adopts an unrealistic and ineffective position on AIDS. At that point, I really felt that I was being provoked, because the Church does more than anyone else. And I stand by that claim because she is the only institution that assists people up close and concretely, with prevention, education, help, counsel, and accompaniment. And because she is second to none in treating so many AIDS victims, especially children with Aids.
“I had the chance to visit one of these wards and to speak with the patients. That was the real answer: The Church does more than anyone else, because she does not speak from the tribunal of the newspapers, but helps her brothers and sisters where they are actually suffering. In my remarks I was not making a general statement about the condom issue, but merely said, and this is what caused such great offense, that we cannot solve the problem by distributing condoms. Much more needs to be done. We must stand close to the people, we must guide and help them; and we must do this both before and after they contract the disease.”[6]

(2) What then did the Pope say about condoms that was mistakenly claimed to be ‘new’?
The Pope spoke about what can sometimes be a “first step” towards moral living, even when this first step is something that is nonetheless still sinful. He said “perhaps when a male prostitute uses a condom, where this can be a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility, on the way toward recovering an awareness that not everything is allowed and that one cannot do whatever one wants. But it is not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection. That can really lie only in a humanization of sexuality.”[7]
When the Pope was asked in response, “Are you saying, then, that the Catholic Church is actually not opposed in principle to the use of condoms?” It was then that the Pope said, “She [i.e. the Church] of course does not regard it as a real or moral solution” but only a possible “first step” towards a moral life.
In noting that the “first step” towards morality is often something that is still sinful the Pope is articulating standard Catholic moral theology. In commenting on the Pope’s words the moral theologian Professor Janet Smith used the example of theft to illustrate what the Pope is saying: “If someone was going to rob a bank and was determined to use a gun, it would better for that person to use a gun that had no bullets in it. It would reduce the likelihood of fatal injuries. But it is not the task of the Church to instruct potential bank robbers how to rob banks more safely and certainly not the task of the Church to support programs of providing potential bank robbers with guns that could not use bullets. Nonetheless, the intent of a bank robber to rob a bank in a way that is safer for the employees and customers of the bank may indicate an element of moral responsibility that could be a step towards eventual understanding of the immorality of bank robbing.”[8]

(3) Why then has the media misinterpreted the Pope’s words?
Different reports have said very different things and have no doubt done so for very different reasons. Some seem to have imagined that the Pope said what they wished he had said rather than what he actually said. Others have misinterpreted the Pope because they are unfamiliar with his other writings and unfamiliar with Catholic moral theology.
Regardless, nothing the Pope said is new and nothing he said changes the fact that, as he said, condoms are not “a real or moral solution”[9] to the fight against AIDS.

Footnotes:
[1] http://www.ignatius.com/promotions/light-of-the-world/excerpt.htm accessed 26/11/2010
[2] http://www.chlamydiascreendorset.co.uk/faq.html accessed 23/11/2010
[3] http://www.ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=60827 accessed 23/11/2010 . To see some other secular reports backing the science of what the Pope has said about abstinence and faithfulness being the only effective way to prevent the spread of AIDS, follow links at: http://www.tldm.org/News13/AIDSexpertReaffirmsPope%27sCommentOnCondomsWasRight.htm accessed 23/11/2010
[4] http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/227110/saint-peters-square-harvard-square/kathryn-jean-lopez, among many other reports on this point see: http://www.lifesitenews.com/?/news/harvard-aids-expert-says-pope-is-correct-on-condom-distribution-making-aids accessed 26/11/2010
[5] http://www.ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=60827 accessed 23/11/2010
[6] http://www.ignatius.com/promotions/light-of-the-world/excerpt.htm accessed 26/11/2010
[7] Ibid
[8] http://www.catholicworldreport.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=220:pope-benedict-on-condoms-in-qlight-of-the-worldq&catid=53:cwr2010&Itemid=70 accessed 23/11/2010
[9] http://www.ignatius.com/promotions/light-of-the-world/excerpt.htm accessed 26/11/2010

Vigil for Nascent Life, 27th November 2010

2010-11-22T09:08:00.002Z

Prayer Vigil For Unborn Life
5.45pm-6.15pm Saturday evening, 1st Sunday of Advent, 27th Nov 2010

There will be a half-hour of prayer immediately after the evening Mass.
Our Bishop has encouraged us to respond to the Holy Father’s “unprecedented request” for Catholics throughout the world to join him in observing a “Vigil for All Nascent Human Life”. The purpose of this prayer vigil is “is to ‘thank the Lord for his total self-giving to the world and for his Incarnation which gave every human life its real worth and dignity,’ and to ‘invoke the Lord’s protection over every human being called into existence’.”

Opening Hymn while the Blessed Sacrament is incensed
Soul of my Saviour sanctify my breast,
Body of Christ, be thou my saving guest,
Blood of my Saviour, bathe me in thy tide,
wash me with waters gushing from thy side.

Strength and protection may thy passion be,
O blessèd Jesus, hear and answer me;
deep in thy wounds, Lord, hide and shelter me,
so shall I never, never part from thee.

Guard and defend me from the foe malign,
in death's dread moments make me only thine;
call me and bid me come to thee on high
where I may praise thee with thy saints for ay.

Prayer (said by priest)

Rosary

LITANY FOR LIFE
Please join in the responses in bold print
Lord, have mercy - Response: Lord, have mercy
Christ, have mercy - Christ, have mercy
Lord, have mercy - Lord, have mercy
Christ hear us - Christ, graciously hear us

God the Father, Creator of the world, Response: Have mercy on us
God the Son, through whom all things were made,
God the Holy Spirit, Lord and Giver of Life,
Lord Jesus, the Beginning and the End,
Lord Jesus, the Resurrection and the Life,
Lord Jesus, Eternal Word of Life,
Lord Jesus, living in the womb of the Virgin Mary,
Lord Jesus, Lover of the poor and weak,

For the gift of new life, Response: We thank you, Lord
For those who cherish and support life,
For all those in healthcare,
For mothers who welcome new life,
For those who support new mothers,
For fathers who accept their responsibilities,
For those who help provide alternatives to abortion,
For those who promote adoption,

For parents fearful of their responsibilities, Response: Aid them, Lord
For mothers with unplanned pregnancies,
For weak and sick unborn children,
For doctors caring for life in the womb,
For unborn children under threat,

For every sin against life, Response: Forgive us, Lord
For experimentation on human embryos,
For profiteering in human experimentation,
For the sin of abortion,
For mothers and fathers pressured to have abortions,
For all doctors & nurses who perform abortions,
For the silence of Your people,
For our own complicity in failing to defend life,

Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world,
Response: spare us, O Lord.
Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world,
graciously hear us, O Lord
Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world,
have mercy on us.

Let us pray,
Almighty and ever-living God, You have created all things through Your Son Jesus Christ. He hallowed life in the womb by His incarnation in the womb of the Virgin Mary. May all who acknowledge You promote the sacredness of life and always serve You faithfully, through the same Christ our Lord. Amen.

(Litany adapted and shortened from the “Litany in Response to Abortion” by Fr Frank Pavone, http://www.priestsforlife.org/prayers/litanyinresponsetoabortion.html accessed 20/11/2010)

Prayer (said by priest)

Hymn:
Tantum ergo sacramentum
Veneremur cernui;
Et antiquum documentum
Novo cedat ritui;
Praestet fides supplementum
Sensuum defectui.

Genitori genitoque
Laus et jubilatio,
Salus, honor, virtus quoque,
Sit et benedictio;
Procedenti ab utroque
Compar sit laudatio.Amen.

Benediction with the Blessed Sacrament.
Reverently bow your heads while the congregation is blessed by Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament.

Divine Praises (repeat each line after the priest)

While the Blessed Sacrament is reposed into the tabernacle we will sing the following refrain three times:
O Sacrament Most Holy, O Sacrament Divine, all praise and all thanksgiving be every moment Thine

Final hymn to Our Lady:
As I kneel before you, As I bow my head in prayer,
Take this day, make it yours and fill me with your love.

Refrain:
Ave Maria, Gratia plena, Dominus tecum, Benedicta tu.

All I have I give you, Every dream and wish are yours,
Mother of Christ, Mother of mine, present them to my Lord.

As I kneel before you, And I see your smiling face,
Ev'ry thought, ev'ry word, Is lost in your embrace.

Pastoral letter from Bishop

2010-11-21T00:55:00.002Z

There was no sermon this week because there was a pastoral letter from the Bishop. This will be available at the Diocesan website:

http://www.plymouth-diocese.org.uk/

23rd Sunday Ordinary Time, Remembrance Sunday, Shaftesbury

2010-11-14T00:36:00.001Z

Lk 21:5-19
Today in Britain we keep Remembrance Sunday when we think of those who have died in the wars: we thank God for their labours and sacrifice, and pray to God for them.

This year I would like to spend a moment recalling a virtue that we associate with soldiers, a virtue that is typically defined with respect to soldiers, namely, fortitude, and its related act: endurance.
The Latin word for fortitude, which gives us the ancient meaning that saints and philosophers assigned to it, combines both strength and courage.
The ancient philosopher Aristotle and St Thomas Aquinas both write at great length about fortitude and they describe it as THE soldierly virtue, the virtue that faces fear (Summa Theologica II-II q123 a3) and faces death (a5). In particular, St Thomas considers what is the DEFINING act of fortitude, and says that it is endurance, because it is endurance that enables a man to stand firm in the face of fear and death (a6).
And, in this, the soldier models something that all of us need to live.

The soldier endures despite discomfort and difficulty before the battlefield, the soldier endures despite fear and uncertainty in the midst of a battle, and the soldier endures despite the attack of the enemy.
For us as Christians, Scripture explicitly describes Christians as "soldiers of Jesus Christ”(2 Tim 2:3) and describes us as such in the context of saying that we must "endure suffering".

In today's gospel we heard the Lord Jesus also speak about endurance and about suffering: he spoke in particular about the sufferings that would accompany the end of the world: nation will rise against nation and kingdom against kingdom, there will be earthquakes and plagues and famines and fearful signs from heaven. Worse still, for Christians, there will be persecution.
And what must the Christian do in the midst of all this? What is it that will gain the Christian eternal life? Jesus says, “Your ENDURANCE will win you your lives"(Lk 21:19).

The endurance I have just described is perhaps most obvious in the face of the dramatic sufferings Jesus indicated. However, there are many other forms of endurance that characterise Christian living: to love others often requires simple endurance in the form of patience with other people; to love others in obedience to Christ's command requires a further form of endurance in that it requires endurance in the form of maintaining our hope in the promised reward for loving others; and loving others include endurance in the form of patience with the difficulties of life so that we don't allow our illnesses and difficulties, our personal crosses, to make a so disagreeable that we fail to love. To be a Christian is to endure.

So, to come back to where I began, as we think today of the many soldiers who died in the wars, let us think too of the way in which soldierly fortitude, and its principal act of endurance, models the endurance that we each need to be manifesting in our daily Christian lives.

Mass Intentions

2010-11-07T02:25:00.005Z

From the newsletter this week:

The month of November is a time when people particularly remember to have Masses offered for the dead, especially for family and friends. There are brown ‘Mass Offering’ envelopes in the porch for this purpose: please write your intention on the outside of the envelope, enclose your Mass stipend donation, and place the envelope in the collection plate or in the presbytery letterbox.

The practice of offering Masses for the dead is the Christian fulfilment of the Jewish practice of having sacrifices offered in the Temple for the dead “so that they might be released from their sins”(2 Macc 12:45). The Early Church celebrated the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass as the sacrifice that superseded the Old Testament Temple sacrifices and it was for this reason that the writings of the Early Church Fathers record how the Mass was offered for the dead. For example, Tertullian writes in the 2nd Century about a widow who had Mass offered for her deceased husband: "Indeed she prays for his soul, and requests refreshment for him meanwhile, and fellowship with him in the first resurrection; and she offers her sacrifice on the anniversaries of his falling asleep". Similarly, many of the Fathers echo the sentiment expressed by St Gregory the Great, "Let us not hesitate to help those who have died and to offer our prayers for them." While St. John Chrysostom encourages us by saying, "If Job's sons were purified by their father's sacrifice, why would we doubt that our offerings for the dead bring them some consolation? Let us not hesitate to help those who have died and to offer our prayers for them."[1]

But what does it mean to have a Mass offered ‘for’ something or someone? In answering this question it is important to differentiate between the general and particular intentions in the Mass: Every Mass is offered with the general intention that is articulated in every Eucharistic Prayer: for the glory of God and for the needs of the Church and the world as a whole. In addition, each individual member of the congregation brings his or her own particular intentions in his or her prayers that are united to that Mass. There is a third type of intention brought to the Mass, however, and it is this intention that is referred to when people speak of a ‘Mass Intention’, namely, the specific intention for which the priest celebrant offers the Mass: The priest’s intention specifies the “special fruit”[2] for which that particular Mass is being offered. It is in this sense that someone asks a priest to offer Mass ‘for’ something or someone.

Mass Stipends
Linked with the above is the ancient practice of Mass Stipends: a financial offering to accompany the offering of your prayer, a specific donation to accompany the specific request. While the amount donated for a Mass is at the discretion of the individual there is a standard rate set in each diocese and for many years our Bishop has set this at £10. In this parish the donation goes to the parish funds (in contrast, most other places continue the ancient practice of the Mass offering going to support the priest).

Other Intentions
The Mass is the greatest prayer we have since it is the sacrifice of Christ Himself. It is therefore important to remember that we can have Mass offered for many intentions: for the living as well as for the dead, for family difficulties, for sickness, as well as in thanksgiving for graces received etc.

Announcing the intention?
In some parishes the intention of each Mass is published in the weekly newsletter or on the notice board. Sometimes a priest may announce the intention. It is worth noting, however, that the offering of the Mass for that intention does not depend on it being publically voiced but on it being specified in the priest’s personal prayers. Similarly, if a priest announces that “I am offering this Mass for [such and such an] intention” he does not thereby require the rest of the congregation to pray for that intention or to make their own lay-offering of the Mass to be for that intention.

Footnotes:
[1]Fr William Saunders, “What does it mean to have a Mass ‘offered’ for someone?”,
http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0812.html accessed 2/11/2010
[2]Pope Pius VI, Auctorem Fidei (1786), cited in Aidan Nichols, The Holy Eucharist (Dublin: Veritas, 1991), p.100.

32rd Sunday Ordinary time, Year C, Praying for the Dead, Shaftesbury

2010-11-07T00:23:00.001Z

2 Macc 7:1-14; Lk 20:27-38
We're now in the month of November, the month of the year when the Church in a more focused way remembers the dead. In particular, we remember to PRAY for the dead. And we pray for the dead not because we despair for them but rather because of the opposite: because of what we HOPE for them. Our first reading and gospel both remind us very clearly of what it is that we hope that the dead: the resurrection of the body.

In the gospel we heard the Lord Jesus say something about the resurrection that His hearers probably found a little unexpected: while He spoke of the resurrection of the body He nonetheless indicated that the body will not be like our bodies are at present. At present, our bodies are prone to sickness, to suffering, to all sorts of limitations -but it will not be so in Heaven. This point is elaborated on in many places elsewhere in the New Testament where it speaks of the changed transfigured glory of the resurrected body. For example, in St Paul’s 1st letter to the Corinthians he says that we "we shall all be changed... the dead will be raised imperishable... because our present perishable nature must put on imperishability and this mortal nature must put on immortality”(1 Cor 15: 52-53).

But it is not only our bodies that will need to change: our souls also will need to be transformed from sinful imperfection to sinless perfection. Heaven is a place of perfection, and it could hardly remain so if imperfect people were allowed into it. So, the logic of the perfection of heaven requires that we be purified before we enter it. And this purification, this purging of our sins, is what happens in the place called Purgatory.

Now, I want to make a point about change: Change is never easy. There are many things in my character now that I try to change, many little bad habits that I try to break, and many new good habits that I try to acquire, and any change is difficult. I say this to make a comparison with the change, the purgation, that we must undergo in Purgatory -that change will be even more dramatic and thus even more difficult. The traditional images used for Purgatory all speak of it in terms of fire and pain, and such images conjure up an image of the difficulty that must be involved in this change.

There are two things, however, that ease the pain of those in purgatory. First, the pain and difficulty of Purgatory is greatly eased by the fact that Purgatory is a place of great hope because those who are there know that they are already guaranteed a place in the joy of heaven, it is only a matter of time for them –by sending them to Purgatory the Judgement has spared them of Hell. Second, and this takes me back to where I began, the difficulty of those in Purgatory can be helped by the prayers of those of us who live.

So what do we pray for when we pray for the dead? We pray that God will have mercy on them in the judgement. We pray that God will speed the through their passage in Purgatory. And, we pray that God will ease and comfort them while they make their purgation. And the Tradition and countless private revelations to different saints have shown us that the prayers of the living are of great help to those who are dead, a point more definitively taught by Scripture itself which says, "It is a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead that they may be loosed from sins"(2 Macc 12:46).
And I would commend three particular practices to you as prayers for the dead: have a Mass offered for those who have died - and I've included an insert in this week's newsletter about Mass intentions; pray the Rosary for those who have died -it is a prayer particularly beloved by our Blessed Mother; and say the Divine Mercy Chaplet –a prayer particularly suited for calling upon God's mercy.

To come back to where I began: Why do we pray for the dead? We pray for them because we have hope for them, hope of the glory of the resurrection. And because we have hope we pray that that hope will be realised with the aid of our prayers.
As St. Ambrose so beautifully put it in the 4th Century, "We have loved them during life; let us not abandon them in death, until we have conducted them by our prayers into the house of the Lord."