Lost Echos, Voiceless Mountains - Elegy to 2016

Weep for Adonais - he is dead

In a few hours, The Year of our Lord 2016 will pass into eternity. The history books a hundred years from now will record this as the year of one of the most bizarre U.S. presidential elections of all time. This most unpredictable, volatile campaign for the White House is at least partially credited with driving up the number of web searches for the term "surreal," to the point that Merriam-Webster has designated it its "Word of the Year." I'm sure these twelve months will be also noted for the continued rise of ISIS, the related terrorist attacks in Europe and the U.S. and, the Fall of Aleppo. There is the ongoing refugee crisis, Brexit and any number of other events that I'm sure that I'm forgetting, that the text books will mention. 

That the children of the early 22nd Century will learn that 2016 was the year David Bowie, Prince and George Michael died, let alone know who those people even were, is highly debatable. As Carrie Fisher, who passed this week put it once, "Celebrity is just obscurity biding its time." Having grown up in a show business family, she had witnessed the slow and steady decline of her mother's career before experiencing her own ups and downs, and so knew going in that fame is ephemeral. That her mother, Debbie Reynolds, died a day after Fisher, was a heavy emotional blow, even for a detached observer of the entertainment industry like myself. While theses celebrity deaths may not be as historically consequential as the Syrian Civil War, they represent so many more slings and arrows of outrageous fortune that earned 2016 the descriptive title of surreal.

For Baby Boomers and Gen-Xers, though, the passing of so many top musicians who came to prominence in the 1970's and '80's is significant. For better or worse we do associate with singers and musicians, as well as actors and athletes of our youth. They represent a more innocent time, a time of discovery. Back then we didn't know what came before, and for the most part we didn't care. This was our time, and the world began when we were born. No matter what the latest thing will be in 2017, for many of us who are middle aged and above, no one will sing better than George Michael, be as cool as Bowie or as all around awesome as Prince. In sports No quarterback will be as good as Joe Montana and no pitcher will compare to Nolan Ryan. When we were kids the movies were better, the bands rocked harder and the athletes were the real deal. The Lilliputians out there today are pretenders who'd never have hacked it back in the day. I mean autotune? steroids? You gotta be kidding me!

The emotional attachment can be so strong that their passing can be a great blow. It can be like a member of the family has died. In the U.S. celebrities, especially those who are on the mythical "A List," have assumed a place once reserved for the aristocracy. How many times have Debbie Reynolds and Carrie Fisher been called "Hollywood Royalty," in the media reports of their deaths this week? I remember when Jimmy Stewart died in 1997. I was working summer camp, and one of our brothers in formation from South Korea picked up the copy of the New York Daily News that was sitting on a table in the staff cafeteria. The cover had a full page photo portrait of Stewart, with a headline that said something like, "It was a Wonderful Life." Br. John turned to me and asked, "Was he a president?" I said, "No, he was an actor." He didn't respond, but I got the feeling that he was a bit perplexed as to why an actor was getting the attention that, to his mind, should go to a head of state. Yes, we hold these pop culture icons up as, well, icons, if not idols. The adulation is too much, but I'll save that discussion for another day.

I guess, what I do what to say is that as we mourn, we need to remember to keep a certain perspective. There is a temptation to want to gloss over the more uncomfortable details of these celebrities lives and deaths. I certainly don't think now is the time to highlight scandals and bad behavior. But, at the same time, I'm not sure it's the time to look for lessons, or gain inspiration either. Some of those who died passed directly from drug abuse, others we will never really know how past drug use and struggles with addiction contributed to their deaths. Some suffered mental illness. There's no shame in that. But I'm still not sure what we can learn from how they "handled" their addictions and emotional traumas. This isn't because they were bad people or worse off than others, but they were different and their situations unique. 

They were, in general, sensitive, artistic people caught in an industry that demands profits. They were the "talent," the commodity, and the movies, shows and music they produce are the product. Keep the customers coming, buying tickets, or move on down the list, from A to B to "what's ever happened to?" I do believe that there is such a thing as an artistic personality, and those who are especially creative - geniuses, for lack of a better term, often border on madness. They see the world in a different way - not necessarily better or wiser - but at a different angle. They pick up other shades of meaning, dig deeper into a lyric, or find a nuance of a line that even the screenwriter may not have thought of. This is a glorious gift, but it can also be a curse, especially if you're the only one who seems to see things in that particular way. 

The popular artist can also suffer from great bouts of self doubt that expresses itself in perfectionism. That constant striving can be a great creative catalyst, but also a motive for self destructive behavior. Anyone who makes it is show business has to work incredibly hard, make tremendous sacrifices. Then, if they're lucky, they make it. Some can't handle the fame, others can't handle it when their star fades and the public recognition slips away. All these pressures can (but don't always, of course) contribute to whatever emotional instability or addictive tendencies they have. 

When I say that I'm not sure that there are lessons for the average person to learn from the plight of show business folk, it's not an insult or a personal judgment on the celebrity in question. Its just to say that the popular actors, singers or musicians face temptations and pressures that most of us can't begin to understand. We should appreciate their talents, be grateful that they shared their gifts. But see the big picture, not just the emotional connection, when trying to make sense of their lives. 

As for the historical big picture, the sad truth is that as time goes by the memories of the beloved figures will fade, and be replaced by new generations of stars. While technology has made it possible for their performances to be preserved for posterity, the entertainment industry is in constant need of new commodities, even as they seem obsessed with remaking the same product (again, a topic for another day). Don't blame 2016 for killing our heroes - some of it is the natural passing of time, some of it is the cruel reality of what happens when art, commerce, and cult of personality intersect with one another. 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just a few random notes

While celebrities die every year, it does seem like 2016 has seen more than the normal quota of musicians, in particular, who have left the building permanently. Some have claimed that the number of 2016 celebrity deaths is actually down from previous years. Others have argued that the American and British Idols of the '70's and '80's are getting to the age when death comes to most, so we should get use to it. Two years ago an Australian researcher concluded that pop stars live, on average, 25 years less than the average person. 

This string of doomed musicians, ranging in age from roughly 45 to 75, actually began at the end of 2015,when on December 3 Scott Weiland, 48, singer for Stone Temple Pilots and Velvet Revolver passed. His death was followed on the 28th by the legendary frontman and bass player of Motörhead, Lemmy Kilmister, 70. Then on January 10 the first real bomb of 2016 hit when David Bowie died at the age of 69. Later in the month Glenn Frey, 67, of the Eagles passed away. I'm not going to go through the entire list, but it seemed like every few weeks another pop music figure from the '70's or '80's was winding up dead.

We can argue science and actuary tables all we want, the number of big time rock stars dying does seem unusually high. In 1977 Elvis and Bing Crosby died two months apart, and in 1997 Frank Sinatra passed in May and Jimmy Stewart and Robert Mitchum passed a day apart in July. But 2016 definitely takes the cake. 

No Myth: A Reflection on the Feast of St. John

John and Peter approaching the Empty Tomb in fear and trembling

Contemporary culture abhors a myth. It is losing patience with fiction. We may tolerate legends, only because these quite often contain a seed of "truth" that the fantastic springs from. In general, though, our scientific age wants verifiable truth born from facts and data. This insistence on realism extends to our entertainment. Countless movie trailers today boast that the film being previewed either "IS the true story of" such and such, is "based on a true story," or at the very least is "inspired by true events," whatever that's supposed to mean. Producers are convinced that audiences are more interested in seeing "true stories" instead of fiction, which are increasingly regarded as well crafted lies - the very modern definition of a myth. 

In the area of literature, we had the James Frey controversy a decade ago, when the author tried to pass a work of fiction off as a memoir. As one commentator at the time put it, it only got published because the editors thought it had to be true, it was, in his opinion, such awful fiction: and it was only the idea that it was "all true" that got the book promoted by uber-taste maker Oprah Winfrey. 

I never read A Million Little Pieces, the book in question, but I did read, and appreciated greatly, Khaled Hosseini's The Kite Runner. The 2003 novel about an Afghan refugee's journey from his home country to the U.S. after the Taliban takeover, reads like a memoir. In fact many confuse it for autobiography, though the author wasn't trying to deceive anyone on that point. Truth be told, I was about a quarter of the way through before I figured out it was a novel. Knowing that this wasn't a "true story" didn't keep me from finishing and enjoying the book, but in subsequent years I've heard more than one person mention that they loved The Kite Runner because it "really happened." Not one to burst bubbles, I keep my mouth shut at these encounters. But such an attitude does reveal  the prejudice of our age - that truth can only be conveyed through works of nonfiction, be they documentaries, docudramas or some form of journalistic or confessional prose. 

The truth is that all works of fiction, to one degree or another, are based on true events, or at least the perceptions of the author are drawn from lived experience. All fictional characters are based on someone, or a combination of personalities of people who walked planet earth. All historical works, even the most rigorous, are influenced by the point of view of the author. Most documentarians begin their work with a thesis, and build a case that supports it using their skills as film makers. Very few begin thinking one thing about their subject, and then have their mind changed radically by what they encounter during the course of production. They are advocates trying to sway an audience, not necessarily truth seekers on a journey. In other words, all fiction, at least all good fiction, communicates truth. All nonfiction, even the most well meaning and straightforward, will contain some lies, even if unintentionally so. 

This brings me back to the idea of myth. Today the word is used pejoratively. Myths are to be uncovered and rejected, in favor verifiable, scientific truth. But this negative judgment on myths is of relatively recent vintage. Up until about 1830 myths were simply defined as stories of the gods. The pre-Enlightenment mind had no problem with them. Not that people back then thought that myths were necessarily true in the scientific-historical sense, but that they contained a different truth about reality than what could be seen and measured. They took into account the spiritual realm of which the material world is a shadow. 

When we go back 2,000 years, we see that the Apostles and Evangelists came directly out of a world drenched in myths and legends. While they didn't share the negative attitude of the post-moderns, in their writings they anticipated the objections that many of our contemporaries make concerning the Gospel accounts of Jesus's life, death and Resurrection. Far from being well crafted myths, John tells us in his First Letter that:

Beloved: What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we looked upon and touched with our hands concerns the Word of life—for the life was made visible; we have seen it and testify to it and proclaim to you the eternal life that was with the Father and was made visible to us—what we have seen and heard we proclaim now to you, so that you too may have fellowship with us; for our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. We are writing this so that our joy may be complete. (1 Jn 1:1-4)

John goes to great lengths to stress that what he and his companions are sharing are things that they saw, heard touched and, experienced directly. There is no doubt that the Gospel accounts are well crafted, and they aren't constructed with an eye toward chronological accuracy - at least not until we get to the Passion and Resurrection narratives. They do have a point of view, and a bias: that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah, the Son of the living God who was incarnated, lived among us, died and rose from the dead. But this isn't something they made up, it was something they saw, heard touched and lived - now they are passing these experiences on so we may come to belief as well. 

Elsewhere, in 2 Peter 1: 16, we read the Apostle state quite directly that, "We did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we had been eyewitnesses of his majesty." 

On the Feast of St. John the Gospel passage proclaimed at Mass describes Peter and John inspecting the Empty Tomb on the Sunday of the Resurrection. (Though contemporary scholars believe they are separate people, the Church traditionally identifies John the Apostle, the Evangelist and, the Beloved Disciple as the same person. For the sake of clarity, I'll do the same.) What should strike the the reader is that John - as in the other accounts - only records what he actually saw. We get no description of the actual Resurrection, because he wasn't there to see it. All he knows is that the last time he saw Jesus he was literally dead and buried. Now the tomb is empty, the burial cloths folded neatly. Mary Magdalene told them so, but they had to see for themselves. In Mark Mary tells the Eleven that she had seen the Lord, but they don't believe her, due to the prejudice of the age against women as reliable witnesses. But he does see the tomb empty, and later he does see the risen Jesus when He enters the upper room through the locked doors. He reports what he sees. Nothing more, nothing less.

I have no problem with myths, as long as we understand that that's what they are. Like any form of communication, be it writing or art, the truth is transmitted in different ways, and understanding the form being employed tunes us in on how to take it in and analyze it. Myths, lab reports, social science studies, epic poems and haikus can all convey truth or spread lies. We can grasp this if we have eyes to see and ears to hear. Jesus used parables to communicate His teachings, and no one worried about if the Good Samaritan, the Prodigal Son or Lazarus and the Rich Man were real people, but Christ's listeners understood the truth when they heard it.

I admit that there are portions of Scripture that raise questions, like the stories of Jonah or Tobit. Are these parables, like Jesus would have told, or meant to be taken as historical fact? What is more important for me in such situations is the theological truth God wants to communicate more than worrying about historical accuracy. But the Gospel accounts are very clear in their intentions: 

"Since many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the events that have been fulfilled among us, just as those who were eyewitnesses from the beginning and ministers of the word have handed them down to us, I too have decided, after investigating everything accurately anew, to write it down in an orderly sequence for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may realize the certainty of the teachings you have received. (Lk. 1:1-4)

So no, my faith is not based on myths. Myths, legends, parables fables, and whatever other kinds of folktales there are are ok with me. But just in case you're wondering, I believe because I believe the witnesses. I believe because of what they saw, what they touched, which is what they testified to with their lives. Faith is a gift, a grace we don't merit, true. But we still wouldn't know what faith to ask for if it wasn't for John and Peter, Mary Magdalene and Luke, who passed the stories on. What they testify to is no myth, neither in the ancient sense, nor in its modern corruption. What they testify to is the Truth: the Word made flesh, who made His dwelling among us, dying to redeem us, rising in Glory. 

Bishop Barron on Christmas and the Prologue of John

Many priests choose to take the Gospel passage for Christmas Day Mass from either the Midnight Mass or from one of the other options; anything but the one actually designated for the Mass during the Day. This is because we're supposed to hear the Prologue of the Gospel according to John. It's a beautiful piece of poetry, which is also a dense theological reflection on the Incarnation. There aren't any shepherds, stars or Magi mentioned, never mind the Holy Family. It can be confusing to people, and a chore for the preacher to have to expound on. Add to that, he probably had to preach the night before, and it can be challenging enough to prepare an engaging, prayerful homily during such a hectic week, let alone trying to prepare two. I'm one of those stubborn ones who does proclaim the Prologue when I celebrate Christmas Day Mass. The other passages tell us what happened, John tells us what it means, and it shouldn't be passed by too lightly. 

For those of you who will hear the Prologue, here's a video from a few years back from Bishop Barron to help you prepare. For those who won't, at least you'll know what you're missing. 

Bishop Barron on The Genealogy of Jesus

Today begins the Great Days of Advent, which corresponds with the Christmas Novena. Up until now the Liturgy has concerned itself mainly with Jesus' future Second Coming, presenting themes of repentance and preparedness for that "great and terrible day," as the Old Testament prophets referred to the time of the Lord's appearance. Today the focus shifts to the events leading up to Jesus' birth. We will still hear from the Prophets, but the passages will refer to the coming Messiah who would redeem Israel, as opposed to the Lord's visitation at the end time. 

Today's Gospel passage is the genealogy according to Matthew. It's strange, hard to pronounce names and seemingly endless string of "begot's" can be off putting, and more than a few priests chose to proclaim the short form of the reading that omits Jesus' lineage. This is a great shame. Matthew knew exactly what he was doing when he included this list. As Bishop Barron (still "Father" at the time this video was produced) points out, the eternal Son entered into our history, filled with saints and sinners alike, and even the saints often had plenty of skeletons (do I have to give a run through of King David's foibles?) 

The Evangelists knew that Jesus' double claim of messiahship and divinity would be challenged because of the rouges gallery back in His family line. So he, and Luke, chose to put the issue on the table right from the start. Yes, Jesus had great heroes and patriarchs in his family - but also murderers and thefts - qualities sometimes embodied in same person. But it was into this human mess that the Second Person of the Trinity entered, not to judge it, but to redeem it. Bishop Barron says it better than I do, so I'll stop there and invite you to listen to his words of wisdom.

Parish Bulletin Letter: 4th Sunday of Advent 2016

This will appear in the December 18 St. John Bosco Parish Bulletin 

We have now entered into the final days leading up to Christmas, called the “Great Days of Advent.” Until December 17 we had been reflecting in a general way on the Second Coming of Christ and the need to repent in order to accept the Kingdom of God. Now our attention turns to the events leading up to Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem. This great mystery, called the Incarnation, is celebrated to remind us that God loved us so much he actually took on human flesh (in caro in Latin), sharing in our human nature. 

In today’s reading Joseph is faced with a grave dilemma. He has heard that Mary, his soon to be wife, is with child. He knows that he isn’t the father, and he doesn’t know how to react. The law said that he had to right to dismiss her, exposing her to public shame, and possibly stoning. His heart tells him to break off the engagement, but not say why, protecting Mary from public condemnation. In doing this Joseph would look like a scoundrel who abandoned his wife and child. He, who was innocent in this affair, was willing to take the blame to protect someone else. God showed Joseph a different way. He enlightened his heart to accept the call to be foster father to the Savior. Joseph had faith to see that the child born to Mary was no ordinary baby – He was the Son of God who was to save the World. Because Joseph believed when it was difficult, and acted on that belief, he has received a place of honor among the Saints as patron of the Universal Church. As he was protector of the Baby Jesus on earth, he is now proctor of the Church on earth. 

We live in trying times, and knowing the right thing to do can be difficult. In Joseph y we see the proper attitude. First off, Joseph sought the merciful path, even when it would have cost him his reputation. Secondly, he was open to the voice of God that led him to see another way.  We need to allow God into our hearts to see the possibilities. So here we have the two keys to understanding the true meaning of Christmas: to show mercy to others, as God has been merciful to us, and to trust God, especially in the difficult moments. 

Star of the New Evangelization - Our Lady of Guadalupe from Apostleship of Prayer

A Detailed Study of Our Lady of Guadalupe by Fr. Luis Fernando Castañeda Monter - Reposted

I posted these videos two years ago, and am posting them again, because the Feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe is coming up on Monday, and this gives a rather detailed analysis of the religious and anthropological meaning of our Lady's apparition, and the image she left behind. You'll need time to watch them, but, whether you decide to binge watch or view them in segments, they're worth it. 

Feast of the Immaculate Conception from the Apostleship of Prayer

Parish Bulletin Letter: 3rd Sunday of Advent 2016

This Letter will appear in the St. John Bosco Parish Sunday Bulletin on December 11, 2016

During Advent we meditate on two extraordinary figures from sacred Scripture: John the Baptist and the Blessed Mother. As we listen to the Scriptures during Mass we must keep in mind that we are not only being asked to look backward at historical events. We are being asked above all to think about what those events mean for us today, and what they could mean for the future. If you’ve noticed, we’ve completed two full weeks of Advent and have yet to hear about the events that led to Jesus’ birth: these will come after December 17, when we enter into the “Great Days of Advent.” Right now the readings speak to us of John the Baptist, and how he prepared the way for Jesus’ public ministry. Tomorrow (December 12) we will celebrate the Feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe, which comes four days after the Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception. In these observances we are reminded of the how the Blessed Mother prepared the world for the coming of the Savior at His birth, and continues to prepare her children for the coming of Jesus into their hearts.

John the Baptist is a bit of a mysterious figure. Even though Luke tells us that he is Jesus’ cousin, the Gospel according to Matthew simply has him appearing in the desert, seemingly out of nowhere, preaching repentance. He must have been a very charismatic man, since so many came out to hear his words and be baptized. He had great powers of persuasion, but he didn’t use his gifts to promote himself. He had a mission to prepare the way for Jesus. He warned people that before they could enter the Kingdom of God they needed to reject sin and follow God’s way. His message of repentance is just as vital for us today as it was back then. Advent is a time to make an examination of conscience and celebrate the Sacrament of Reconciliation so that we can be renewed in the Spirit and live more fully the Kingdom that Christ has placed within us.

The Virgin Mary was also given a great mission by God. She was able to say “yes” to God’s call because she was conceived without the stain of original sin. This singular gift of grace freed her to follow God’s will in a unique way. Because we still suffer the effects of our first parents’ disobedience it can be hard for us to do what God wants, even when we know what that is. Mary was able to say yes to God, even though it was hard to, because her intentions and will were pure. Mary continues her mission in the Church. Just as she gave birth to Jesus 2,000 years ago, she gives birth to Jesus spiritually to the world. At Tepeyac she appeared to St. Juan Diego as a pregnant woman ready to deliver her child. It was a sign to the people of Mexico that the faith in the true God was coming to their land. While John gave a stern warning to repent, Mary proclaimed a message of hope that the people did not have to live in fear: Jesus came to save them, not condemn them.

Both the Blessed Mother and John the Baptist have important messages for us today. We do need to turn from our sins, as John warns us, that we may live in God’s Kingdom of light. We should also be open to the God who loves us, as our Blessed Mother asks us, and be not afraid to accept the merciful Jesus into our hearts. May these two messages guide us on our journey through Advent.

In Glory: An Advent Reflection from the Apostleship of Prayer (12/2/16)

The Fragile Persistence of Time: An Advent Reflection

Albert Einstein, Edwin Hubble and Walter S. Adams observe the expansion of the universe, and of Einstein's mind

Time has been flying. I’ve heard it said that as we age we tend to perceive time differently than when we were children, with the weeks and months passing by at an increasingly rapid rate as the years progress. Even taking this possibility into account, I feel as if time is passing with a preternatural swiftness. A little while ago I was speaking to one of our secretaries, who was minding the daughter of one of our other secretaries as she did her work in the office, about this very fact. The girl is thirteen years old, and I remembered that it seemed like I was 13 for ever, and turning 14 would never happen. Maybe because it was during my 8th grade year, and I found my junior high school years particularly awkward — unpleasant even, that time dragged on. Once I did turn 14, though, I could feel the years speed up. Now, like many, I'm well ensconced in middle age and it's hard to believe that my school years were so long ago. I've known people in this 90’s who say the same thing. This doesn't change the fact that there does seem to be a speeding up — and whether this is a natural result of aging or some spiritual sign, I can't say.

We are at the point in the year — the last weeks of Ordinary Time and, now, the first weeks of Advent — when the Church asks us to meditate on time in a particular way: specifically on the reality that time has an end. An objective of many scientists over the years, including Einstein, has been to prove that matter is eternal, the universe stable — without beginning or end. With that theorem proved it would mean that God was truly an unneeded hypothesis. Yet Einstein looked through a telescope one day and saw that the universe was expanding and so, bright fellow that he was, he understood that the Almighty couldn't be dismissed quite so easily. Whether he came to believe that time had an end, I can not say, but he clearly knew in that moment that it had a beginning. That time having a beginning necessitates that it has an eventual end, I'm not enough of a philosopher to argue, but Faith tells us that indeed it does. Such thoughts often fill us with dread, since time is all we know. While the words of Jesus on these matters rightly give us pause, we should emerge from our meditation with a sense of hope rather than fear.

We should also walk away from any meditation on the End Times aware that there is no date set on the calendar for when the world as we know it will come to an end. I believe that it was St. Augustine who wrote that the Lord allows all eras to believe that they are, or at least may be, living during the apocalypse so that they may stay ready and alert. If we knew that Jesus’ return wouldn't happen until 2525, to pick a random date, it would change our entire way of dealing with both heavenly and earthy realities. My guess is that we would both put off conversion, in spite of the knowledge that our own personal end is certain though it's timing unknown, and leave the injustices of the world to sit, since we would know for certain that the Lord would be back to put it all aright. But we don't know if this is the time of Visitation, so we are more likely to stay ready. We do (or should) concern ourselves with the commonweal, since the odds are we will be filling out the totality of our days in the world as it is, as will our children — and we want this to be the best world it can be for us and for future generations. If the Lord does return, he will want to see faithful stewardship. 

Strangely, many people seem to be more easily preoccupied over the End of Days than over their personal end. The odds against this being the time of the Lord’s return are incalculable, while the the chances that we will die are certain. What these two events have in common is that we can't say for certain when either will take place. Another similarity is that we shouldn't be morbidly curious about either. Maintaining a healthy awareness — yes, but idle curiosity or getting caught up in esoteric speculations are a waste of time. 

There is another extreme, promoted by some contemporary spiritual writers, that says that we shouldn't think about these things at all, especially about Jesus’ return and what Heaven will be like. We need to be completely invested in this world while we are in it, and any thoughts of the world to come are a distraction from the vital works of justice and peace that we should be performing in Jesus’ name. This attitude is essentially a tip of the hat to Marx, and his critique of religion as escapist narcotic. Well, I never thought much of Marx, and never understood why we need to answer him — or, more precisely, placate him and his disciples. The beauty of Catholicism is that it isn't nearly as black and white as her critics, and it would seem even some of her practitioners, would claim. Being invested in this world doesn't have to mean ignoring the World to come. Jesus certainly talked about it enough, while also making it clear that we are to be proactive members of our earthly society. The two realities are actually linked, with how we dedicate our self to justice and peace here and now effecting how we will live in eternity. 

We shouldn't get side tracked by fantasizing of the world to come, true. At the same time we are given these times of the liturgical year to pay special attention to the deeper, unseen realities. Advent, Lent and Easter are like little transfigurations that are meant to give us glimpses of the future. These glimpses are meant to give us hope. Our work in this world can seem hard and unproductive. We can put blood, sweat and tears into a project, just to see it fail. We can be frustrated like the apostles at the bottom of Mount Tabor who struggled unsuccessfully to exorcise a demon. Jesus and the chosen three had just come down from the mount of Transfiguration, Peter, James and John having seen the Lord in His glory. After the brief ecstasy came the return to the hard, drawn out slog of life. In this particular case, they returned to see the disciples fighting with one another over what was going wrong. But with that glimpse of Jesus with Moses and Elijah on either side, they could see that  all the sacrifices would be worth it. They saw that we don't live in a closed in system, and all the efforts, even the failures, lead to something greater if we put our trust in Christ.

While our hope is in eternity, we do still live in time. Advent is given to us as a glimpse of the future, but also a reminder that the moment is now to respond to God’s call. In these first weeks of Advent we meditate on John the Baptist’s call to repentance. It is a call that is time sensitive. More on this giant figure of the Baptist and his warning to repent now, while there is still time, coming soon.

Parish Bulletin Letter: 2nd Sunday of Advent 2016

During Advent we are remembering and preparing. We are remembering the events that led to the birth of Jesus, and what the Word becoming flesh means for the world and us. We are also preparing for Jesus’ return at the end of time. Jesus’ first coming into the world happened in secret, with only a few people understanding what was happening, and even then Mary, Joseph and the Magi really didn’t fully grasp what His birth meant. When Jesus returns in His glory, there will be no doubts: everyone will understand that the King has returned to judge the world. The second part of Advent, which leads into the celebration of Christmas, is dedicated to a meditation on the Incarnation and Nativity of the Savior. These first days focus us on Jesus’ Second Coming, and the need to prepare spiritually for this event.

To help focus us on what we need to do to prepare for Jesus’ return, this week and next the Church offers us readings about John the Baptist. John is the last of the Old Testament prophets, who came in the spirit of Elijah, to prepare the way for Jesus’ public ministry. In the reading we hear today from the Gospel according to Matthew, John warns the people sternly that they need to repent if they are to enter the Kingdom of God, which is now at hand. This means rejecting sin and turning back to God. But this repentance can’t be just lip service: they need to perform good works that serve as signs of their repentance. To repent means to turn away from our old way of life and turning back to God.

It’s true that the Kingdom is here, and we enter into it when we accept Christ and are baptized. But we are always in need of renewal. This means that it’s important that we examine ourselves, not just to number our sins and vices, but to also ask how we can be more faithful to our calling to live the Kingdom now. If we aren’t living a life of prayer, participating in the Sacraments, practicing the works of mercy as signs of our faith, then we aren’t really ready for the Kingdom that is to come with Jesus’ return, because we aren’t living the Kingdom here and now. That is what Advent is about. More on what this means next week.

Bishop Robert Barron on Satellites and Praying to the Saints

This comes a little late for Solemnity of All Saints, but an interesting reflection on the Communion of Saints from Bishop Barron. 

Some Thoughts as the Year of Mercy Comes to an End

As I write these words members of our parish are getting ready for one last pilgrimage to pass through the Holy Doors before the Jubilee Year of Mercy comes to an end on the feast of Christ the King - which is tomorrow. We're truly blessed, because the nearest doors are just over a mile away at St. Ferdinand Parish, so we'll be walking it. The only question is the weather: after a spiring like autumn, winter decided to show up, quite literally, last night - uninvited if not unexpected. The temperatures are in the 30's, so the relatively short walk is appreciated. In general we've been busy during evening confessions this week, mainly with the task of servicing these, and other pilgrims eager to take advantage of the graces being offered. I'm sure the Lord will smile on them even more because of the harsh weather that we will have to endure.

Now that the extraordinary jubilee is almost over, there is speculation about what comes next. The relationship between the Year of Mercy and the private revelations of St. Faustina seemed to be more implied than clearly drawn in how the Church promoted the year. Nonetheless the connection has always been there, even if only passingly. Those who are far more familiar with diary of the Polish seer than I am have pointed out that Jesus told her that first He would come as a merciful Savior, but those who didn't accept Jesus' mercy would later experience Him as a just judge. Is the time of mercy ending and one of divine judgment beginning?

Pope Francis has warned us time and again to avoid "prophets of doom," who bemoan our times and predict a shower of fire and brimstone from the Almighty at any moment. No, the physical doors of mercy may be closing, but the spiritual doors of the merciful heart of Jesus will remain open. The question is, not will Jesus close off the gateway of His mercy, but will we close off the doors of our heart to Him? God is ever respectful of our freedom. He will knock, pound even, but He won't break the door in. He wants us to accept Him in love. He'll even accept us out of our fear, though that's not his preference, because he just wants us to be His. 

I'm not sure if we are entering into an age of judgement, but we are entering into a new age. There is uncertainty, doubts and fears that are hanging over us; but we need to be sure not to let these things actually take hold of us. I've been writing a lot about politics lately, so I'll make it clear that this condition is independent of who the president is. Part of the problem is that we have put too much faith in a combination of big government, big business and big media. In this new age our trust needs to be in God, not in purely human institutions. That said, putting trust in God means being obedient to his Word. While the Holy Father hasn't spoken of judgment, he has spoken clearly about living mercy in our lives. By living mercy, performing the Works of Mercy, both spiritual and corporal, as well as being ready to forgive and reconcile with others we are signs to others that the Kingdom is indeed here. For those who live the Kingdom of Light, there is no darkness. There is no moral law against charity, there is no negative judgment to be feared against mercy - and His mercy endures forever. 

One More Commentary on the Election, Then No More Politics Until 2020 - I Hope

When I first started this little venture almost seven years ago (hard to believe it's been that long) my mother warned me not to get political. Sound advice, really, but since life can't be so neatly compartmentalized, faith and politics will intersect now and again, to put it mildly. That being said, I desperately don't want this site to devolve into "Fr. Tom's Washington Week in Review," so I'll give my wrap up to this latest, and most hotly contested election season, and then move on to other things.

There's been a lot of talk about abolishing the Electoral College in light of Hillary Clinton's win in the popular vote. My take, in a nutshell, is that it wasn't the Electoral College that subverted democracy, as some critics claim, it was the nomination process that left us with two beyond flawed candidates. I gave my views on the electoral system the last time out, and am in agreement with David French that to assume that Clinton would have automatically won a popular vote election is absurd, because the rules for such a contest would be different, the campaign strategies employed would be different - such as how the "get out the vote" ground game would be organized, so most likely the outcome would be different, and not necessarily in Secretary Clinton's favor. But beyond the pro's and con's of direct versus indirect democracy, the problem this year was the choice the electorate was given by the major parties, not the rules under which the general election was conducted. 

In Secretary Clinton and Donald Trump, we weren't given two candidates who offered contrasting political or economic visions to be debated and tired by the people. It was a clash of personalities and identity over real substance. And the system that left them as the major party nominees was rigged from the outset. 

The Democrats, if they had allowed an open primary, would have had Vice President Joe Biden and possibly Senator Elizabeth Warren competing with Clinton and Senator Bernie Sanders, and I don't think Clinton would have stood a chance. Whatever you may think of their politics, each of her potential competitors has ideas, vision and come across as genuine and empathetic. The only argument Clinton had for being elected was her gender and that it was "her turn." She has said that she has public and private positions on issues, which, needless to say, only further fortifies her reputation for dishonesty. She also exudes an almost Nixonian discomfort with being in her own skin. And it comes across, with only her most ardent supporters unable to see it. For whatever reason, and I'll leave that surmising to others, the DNC decided to treat Clinton with the deference usually accorded an incumbent president. The result was the Dems putting up a candidate with poor political skills and instincts, who wasn't particularly likable to boot. She had a hard time shaking Sanders (who was allowed in the race only because no-one thought he would actually compete) in the primaries and was unable to put away Trump, who should have been politically dead at least five times since Labor Day alone.

On the Republican side the party establishment did not want to see Ted Cruz be their standard bearer. While the Texas senator is loathed by progressives, he's almost equally disliked by his colleagues within the GOP caucus. Yet Alan Dershowitz, not exactly a conservative, called him one of the most intelligent students he ever had at Harvard Law School. Again, I'll leave the why's of the matter to others, but the party bosses wanted anyone but Cruz, and they got it. Instead of limiting the number of contenders like the Democrats, they flooded the field with 17 candidates, allowing the culling process to drag on. Trump never had the majority of support from the GOP electorate, but was able to gain enough of a plurality among an overcrowded field to win the nomination. The GOP establishment didn't want Trump either, but in an antiestablishment year, they weren't going to get who they wanted, which was probably Jeb Bush. Instead of exerting some reasonable control over the process they let it run wild, and got the ultimate outsider who refused to be bridled. 

Understand something, both parties are private organizations who can choose their nominees any way they want. If they want to draw lots in somebody's basement or meet in a 7-Eleven parking lot at one in the morning to duke it out, there's no federal law stopping them. But both parties have chosen to open the process up, allowing a public vote to, at least, partially determine who will represent them in the general election. That they rigged the outcome isn't even the bad part, it's that they rigged it so stupidly. The Democrats should have allowed a more open process, where the GOP would have benefitted from a bit more control. If the parties had approached the process differently we might have ended up with Biden or Warren going up against Cruz or possibly Marco Rubio. We would have had an election rooted in contrasting visions of the nation, run on competing ideas, not simply an election to determine who the American people dislikes less. 

___________________________________________________________________________________

I'll offer one further reflection. I understand that elections, even in less contentious years than this has been, can be emotionally draining. For those who really support a candidate, losing can easily bring on a bout with depression, even if it isn't of the clinical variety. But the reaction to Clinton's defeat and Trump's victory by her supporters and his detractors (they aren't necessarily the same people) is beyond the beyond. Whether you like the Electoral College or not, those were the rules both sides operated under, and each side constructed their campaign strategy to get to 270 votes first. The popular vote is a beauty contest, plain and simple, and everybody involved in the campaigns knew that. That's why Secretary Clinton conceded before the popular vote outcome was certain. But I don't think the ongoing public demonstrations or the initial emotionally overwrought response has to do with constitutional issues. It has to do with a lack of perspective. We have to regain the understanding that politics isn't life, and the losers will have another chance sooner than they think. Stephen Colbert summed up our need to get things into perspective well on election night. 

No, politics isn't life. And, more importantly, politics isn't religion. But so many today, in our increasingly secular society, have nothing transcendent to keep them grounded. Some place their trust in material things - they'll camp out over night for a new cell phone or obsess over the latest video game. Others become engrossed in modern mythologies, learning Klingon and dressing up like Batman in public. I'm no kill joy - there's nothing wrong with hanging out at Comic Con or making a hobby of technology. There's nothing wrong with fun. Again, it's about perspective and, proportion. There are Star Wars fans who will argue over who shot first in the cantina, Han Solo or Greedo, like theologians once did over transubstantiation. This seems to be the product of a culture that's lost perspective and a healthy sense of proportion. 

Secularism has cut us off from the transcendent, but in our human need to reach out for something beyond us we are increasingly latching on to earthbound, limited gods in which to place our faith and devotion. What many people have chosen to make important in their lives, in extreme cases, make their personal organizing principles, aren't real at all but are products of pure fantasy. Many in the current generation, which has rejected Biblical faith in large numbers because they question its historicity, will fight like champions over the proper film adaptation of a comic book - whose contents they know isn't real. What is true and what is fake have become confused. What is important and what is trivial are now indistinguishable to our minds. Ironically, this irrationality is permeating society at a time when science and rationality have claimed victory in the culture wars.

The more "rational" among us have chosen politics as their god. Reality is viewed through the prism of economic and, or political ideology. There are even religious people who have come to judge their faith by how it comports with their political ideology rather than the other way around. Because reality is politics, and voting is morality, losing an election becomes the end of the world. Voting for a particular candidate becomes either a virtue signal or a mortal sin, depending on our political faith. There is no perspective, that in the U.S. system, anyway, we'll have congressional elections in two years, and another go at the White House in four. There is no perspective that republics, like empires, rise and fall, and ours will be no different. We do the best we can, in the light of faith, to form the most just society we can, knowing that we will never get it right. The political junkies make the same mistake that the fanboys make - only instead of really believing that there's such a thing as kryptonite, they believe in utopia, and that its creation is within their grasp. Both propositions are false, both are irrational fantasy. Both point to a lack of perspective and proportion.

We are seeing things totally backwards right now. It is only by being rooted in the transcendent that this "concrete" world will make any sense.  It is the eternal that is unchanging. This physical reality is constantly in a state of becoming. History will not end by humans willing it. It is only in Christ that history will have, not simply its end, but its fulfillment. All our human politics must be formulated and lived with this in mind if it will be truly lasting, and adaptable in the midst of this temporal reality.

To sum up, I believe that everything is allowed to happen for a reason. We would have lost no matter who won last Tuesday, we would have just lost in a different way. We are being called to gain perspective; to see that human power will not save us. We are being called to put our faith in God and not in political systems, no matter how just they seem. We are being called to judge our candidates by their ideas seen in the light of the Gospel, not choose them based on their personalities or charisma - or even their party affiliations. We have made God an afterthought in our political lives, and we are paying a steep price. God has allowed this election cycle so that we may come to see the futility of putting our faith in princes, our hope in a system. He wants us to regain a sense of perspective and proportion, that the Kingdom we serve is not based on earthly power or human ideology. These only corrupt and eventually fail. 

As for me, I will move on from politics. There will be no more political analysis for its own sake. I'll only touch on these topics in so far as how they effect the Church. For all of us, I advise, be informed, be aware, be engaged, but don't be obsessed. If you didn't like the outcome of this election, there will be a next - or maybe not. It will all depend on our keeping perspective and proportion.