Reflection for August 18

How can Christ set our Catholic Communities on Fire?

A Pastoral Reflection

Today's readings can be found here.

In the gospel of this Sunday’s Mass, our Lord says, “I have come to set the earth on fire, and how I wish it were already blazing!” (Luke 12:49).  As I am beginning my third year as priest in Centerville and Hilltop Lakes (also part-time in Madisonville), I would like to reflect on the ways Christ is kindling a fire in the communities I serve.  However, I would also like to suggest a few ways that can help this light to burn more brightly.

At St. Leo the Great, much has been accomplished so far in 2013.  During Lent, we undertook the renovation of our little church.  Just recently we paved our driveway with concrete.  The great news is that – thanks to your generosity – we are doing well financially and not in debt.  The aesthetic improvements are a visible sign to Centerville that Christ has ignited a great flame of faith in his Real Presence, which is the heart of our Catholic community and identity.  We look forward to the feast of St. Leo the Great on Sunday, November 10^th, and the raffle of the iPad.  At this point, now that much of the needed maintenance has been taken care of, we will be saving and planning for a church hall with classroom space.  I also plan to write the Bishop this year to ask if St. Leo’s is ready to be promoted to “parish” status.  (We’re still a mission of Crocket!).

At St. Thomas More, our new church could be paid off before the end of the year, and we look forward to new pews before Thanksgiving.  The number of families has doubled since the dedication of our church in December 2011.  At both St. Leo’s and STM, we were able to have Family Faith Formation during 2012-2013.  With the help of my deacons and catechists, I plan to continue Family Faith Formation this year.  For adult faith formation, we will be doing The Great Adventure Catholic bible study in order to gain a holistic approach to Sacred Scripture.  I also plan to ask the Bishop if STM can be officially made a “mission” of St. Leo’s.

Building projects, financial stability, and catechesis are great qualities to have in our Catholic communities, but if these strengths are not moving us to a deeper interior life and a stronger sense of mission, then we need to consider that maybe Christ’s flame needs a bit more fuel.  Perhaps we could consider a stronger commitment to devotional confession, attending daily Mass, and spending quality time with Jesus in Eucharistic Adoration.  I realize that Mass and Adoration may be difficult for some families, but I plan to work with the pastoral councils about how to encourage more participation in these spiritual and sacramental opportunities.  

Another way Christ might be wanting to ignite you is by volunteering for both the needs at the church (sacristy, floral, and liturgical ministries) and the needs in the larger community (visiting the homebound, nursing homes, pro-life activities).  I kindly ask that we all prayerfully reflect on our personal contribution to our Catholic communities.  Am I responding to Christ’s flame of faith in my heart through some form of generous giving?  Is Christ asking me to volunteer in some way?  Do I see confession, Mass and Adoration as sure ways for Christ to intensify my flame so that I can ignite Centerville and Hilltop Lakes with the love of Christ?  May the Holy Spirit guide your discernment and may Christ set you on fire to be the saint He has called you to be.

Part IV: Paul VI, John Paul II and Building the “Culture of Life”

Birth Control and the Catholic Church

On July 25, 1968, on the feast of St. James the Apostle, Humanæ Vitæ was promulgated by Pope Paul VI.  It is a relatively short encyclical and speaks of the moral threats to holy matrimony, the Magisterium's response, pastoral principles, and catechesis on the meaning of human sexuality.  In continuity with the Church’s tradition, he affirmed his predecessors’ teaching that contraception and sterilization are intrinsically disordered practices and always contrary to the ends of holy matrimony. Unfortunately, there was a great deal of fallout over this encyclical —especially among faculties of theology in many universities and seminaries.  Men training to be priests were either told to “soft-pedal” this teaching or “just don’t go there.”  Lay persons were told “birth control is just a matter of conscience despite Church teaching against it.”  Because correct teaching on the right formation of conscience was neglected in the years directly following Vatican II, this is regrettably the approach many still take in the Church today.

[Soon to be Saint] John Paul II did much during his pontificate to build upon Humanæ Vitæ and made significant contributions of his own to furthering a holistic approach to the human person, and in particular, to human sexuality.  His very life showed the contrast between a “culture of death” and the “Culture of Life,” which energized the faithful around the world to have a better sense of what it means to be Pro-Life.  Being Pro-Life does not just mean we are against abortion.  It means we are against anything that offends against human and Christian decency.  In fact, being Pro-Life is not essentially about “what we’re against.”  It means imitating the Fiat – the “Yes” – of our Lady to the call to follow God’s will, to respond affirmatively to the universal call of holiness, and to proclaim the Gospel of Life in word and action.

The Gospel of Life is essentially the message of Jesus Christ — that He came to give us abundant life (John 10:10).  Therefore the message of life is essentially evangelical.  I want my Evangelical readers to reflect on some of the prophecies that Paul VI had in his encyclical: He predicted that if artificial contraception became widespread and accepted in society, there would be higher rates of infidelity, divorce, and abortion (for abortion is the Plan B of contraception); that many men (including married men) would lose respect for women and view them as objects for selfish pleasure; and that governments would promote and enforce contraception on the weakest members of society.  These atrocities have all come true.  While there may not necessarily be a direct causal relationship, it would be absurd to say that artificial contraception has not contributed to the demise of healthy, holy human sexuality during the last 50 years.

Thankfully, there is a “New Springtime” of lay faithful who are committed to living out God’s plan for holy matrimony.  John Paul II’s “Theology of the Body” has provided a positive approach to sexual ethics.  Many practice Natural Family Planning (NFP) to space births when necessary in a way that respects marital goods and that helps spouses to communicate better and grow together.  For more information about NFP, I invite you to visit The Couple to Couple League website.  Please continue to reflect on the points I have covered the last few weeks and pray for the spread of the Gospel of Life!

Reflection for August 4

Birth Control and the Catholic Church

(Part II: The Old & New Testaments and the Early Church)

When did the debate begin in the Catholic Church on artificial birth control?  When did a Catholic’s stance on this issue become the litmus test to determine one a “liberal” or a “conservative”?  Interestingly enough, the answer is the 20^th Century, which is quite recent when one considers that the Church is nearly 2,000 years old.  Yet, even before the Incarnation of Jesus Christ, we do not see among the Chosen People a debate about birth control.  The Jewish People considered children as gifts – as blessings – from the Lord.  There is an instance in Genesis in which the Lord is displeased with a perversion of the marital act:  When Onan “wasted his seed on the ground” in order to avoid conception, God struck him down (Gn 38:9-10).  We are also aware of offenses against the 6^th and 9^th Commandments and their respective punishments throughout the OT.

With the revelation of Jesus Christ, we see marriage restored to its former luster.  Not only is the dignity and indissolubility of holy matrimony restored by Christ, but He elevates this union to the level of sacrament, which is the basis of Humanæ Vitæ (written almost 1,900 years after Christ instituted this sacrament) and which has always been the foundation of the Church’s consistent teaching on marriage and the meaning of human sexuality.  With the epistles of St. Paul (in particular Ephesians 5), we learn that holy matrimony reflects Christ’s passionate love for His bride, the Church.  There are also passages of St. Paul and of the other writers of the New Testament on marriage and love, yet the NT is silent on the issue of artificial contraception itself (even though forms of birth control were practiced in the ancient world).  It was understood that marriage is naturally ordered to an end, a purpose, and that purpose is the proliferation of children.  There is no dispute in the NT about birth control.  The Council of Jerusalem was about circumcision — not contraception.

In the early Church Fathers, we do not encounter a debate about contraception, but what we do encounter (in continuity with the NT) is a clear condemnation of all anti-life practices including euthanasia, homosexual activity, extra-marital sex, masturbation, abortion (including post-natal abortion) and any form of birth control.  Once again, there was no question that one of the principal purposes of holy matrimony was to generate human life.  St. Augustine and St. John Chrysostom might have argued over the effect concupiscence has on marital goods, but all the Fathers were in agreement that marriage is ordered to procreation.

Next we will review the contribution of St. Thomas Aquinas and the ecumenical councils, and we will look closely at Protestantism’s approach to artificial contraception and how it gradually changed.  The Catholic Church stood her ground, but Christianity at large was acutely weakened in the fight against the “culture of death” when nearly all Protestant denominations accepted birth control in the 20^th Century.  In spite of a mostly unified front against the evil of abortion, this difference of belief does affect how Catholics and Protestants (particularly Evangelicals) contribute to the Pro-Life movement.  Without threatening our Christian unity, the difference is at least worth discussing.

(Part III: Aquinas, the Reformation, and the Lambeth Conference)

The former ecumenical councils and the scholastics (4^th-14^th Centuries) continued to reinforce that the purpose of holy matrimony is the unity of spouses and the procreation of children.  Particularly with St. Thomas Aquinas, the Church developed a greater dogmatic, sacramental and moral vocabulary by which she could articulate the goods of Christian marriage.  Surprisingly, Protestantism in the 16^th Century did not challenge the Catholic Church’s position against artificial birth control.  Luther, Calvin and Zwingli – while challenging the sacramentality of marriage – never challenged Christian marriage’s natural end.  The Council of Trent in Session 24 dealing with the Sacrament of Matrimony did not see a need to issue a canon explicitly anathematizing those who use contraception.  It was simply not a point of dispute with the Protestants.  Both Catholic and Protestant countries had civil laws against the use of contraception until the 20^th Century.  Even in our own country, many states had laws in the books outlawing the sale of contraceptives until just a few decades ago.  Most of these lawmakers were Protestants.

It was not until 1930 during the Seventh Lambeth Conference that the Anglican Church approved contraception in limited cases.  This radical move prompted all Christians to begin to re-examine the ethics of family planning.  The Catholic Church quickly saw the slippery slope that had been paved by the Anglican Church for other Protestant denominations.  By the end of that year, Pope Pius XI issued the encyclical Casti Connubii – on the dignity of chaste wedlock – in which he expressed in detail the perennial teaching of the Church on the sanctity of marriage which precludes deliberate interference with the life process.  While affirming the legitimate need at times to “space births”, Pius XI condemned contraception and sterilization as a means to this end.  He declared them as “against nature and thus intrinsically evil.”  Popes Pius XII and Blessed John XXIII issued statements in subsequent decades in continuity with Casti Connubii.  However, from the Protestant side, there was very little resistance to the change of thought initiated by the Anglicans.  Many ecclesial communities – Reformed, Traditional and Evangelical – began to follow suit with the Anglicans.  The “limited cases” qualification got wider and eventually members of these Protestant communities were able to justify contraception for any reason.  Vatican II, while not issuing a document directly addressing artificial birth control, did affirm the dignity of the sacrament of matrimony in Gaudium et Spes; and in footnote 14 of that same document, part II, chapter 1, Paul VI personally intervened to quote Casti Connubii’s condemnation of contraception.

In the interim between the end of the Second Vatican Council and the promulgation of Humanæ Vitæ, there were many who thought the Catholic Church would soon change this teaching.  Moral theologians debated about the absolute ban on all contraception — whether or not there are cases in which contraception could be licit or even necessary.  Pope Paul VI created a commission of theologians and specialists who came up with a Majority Report and a Minority Report in preparation of his encyclical.  These findings were published by the National Catholic Reporter and The Tablet in 1966, but it is unclear if they were ever meant to be public.  Many thought Paul VI was going to allow contraception in limited cases (similar to what the Anglicans had done in the 1930s).  Next week, we will focus on what Humanæ Vitæ actually said, how it was received, and what it means for the Pro-Life movement today.