Father John,
I've heard many people repeat some version of the "God never gives you more than you can handle" phrase. I know the fuller concept is that God provides us the graces to handle anything.
However, if we are each so grace gifted, how then do we explain those people who have, obviously, been unable to cope with some burden in their life. Those who take their own lives in despair, the mothers who leave their family when the stress becomes too great, the infidelities that occur when one partner feels overburdened and turns elsewhere?
Are people sometimes given more than they are capable of handling? (And, if so, are we all the way back to that whole "God dropped this in your lap to test you" scenario which so annoys me?)
Thanks for your thoughts!
Amanda
______________________________________________
Dear Amanda,
When I read your question earlier this afternoon, I thought, "There are no coincidences in God's plan. Amanda's question fits in with the topic of today's Scripture readings." I'm not going to repeat my entire homily here, but you, or any other reader can find it on my other blog "Bear Witness to the Light".
Jeremiah had been called by the LORD to be a prophet from his infancy. Now, he is an old man, tired of preaching to people who block their ears, shut their eyes, and turn their backs. At this point, he's had it!
In his distress, he talks back to the LORD:
You deceived me, LORD, and I allowed myself to be deceived. You were too strong for me, and you got the best of me. Every day of my life, people laugh at me, and make fun of me.
I feel compelled to cry out, but whenever I do, people are insulted and outraged. I speak the LORD’s word, and the people insult me and get angry with me.
I say to myself: I will stop talking to the people about the LORD. I will never mention his name again. But then it starts to burn like fire in my heart. I cannot hold it in. I have to speak what the LORD tells me, even if it kills me.
Last Sunday, Jesus asked his disciples "Who do people say that the Son of Man is?" They replied “Some say John the Baptist, some Jeremiah, or one of the other prophets.” Then he asked “Who do you say that I am?” Peter answered: “You are the Messiah, the Son of God.” Today, when Jesus starts to explain the disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, where He will be put to death as a criminal, because of what He says - not about God, but about the Pharisees, Teachers, and Doctors of the Law.
Peter interrupts him: "God forbid, Lord! I am not going to let that happen to you!"
There is nothing gentle about Jesus' response: "Get behind me, you Satan! You are not thinking as God does, but as people do.”
Peter did not want to offend Jesus, but what he was suggesting would have meant abandoning God's plan for Jesus -- the redemption of humankind, and our reconcilation with God.
Jesus makes his meaning quite clear in the last part of today’s gospel:
If you want to come with me, you must deny yourself, and follow me. If you want save your life in this world, you run the risk of losing eternal life. But if you are willing to lose your life for my sake, you will find it again in the heavenly kingdom. What good is it for someone to gain the whole world, with all its pleasures, its profit, and its power, but forfeit his life in God’s kingdom?
Allow me to rephrase Jesus' words in a more timely perspective:
Not long ago I was speaking to a teacher in a school for students who don't fit in regular classroom programs:
Father, I feel so frustrated! I don't want go back to school on Monday.
Why not?
I am angry with Johnny. I want Jesus to take away my anger.
I don't believe Jesus is going to take away your anger, Thomas. But I believe He will give you the grace to deal with it.
I don't want to deal with it, Father. I want it to go away!
Let's get back to the topic question, Amanda. Allow me to answer the question from the bottom up, rather than the top down.
God never gives anyone more than they can handle.
Jeremiah didn't get any more than he could handle in prophesying to the people of ancient Israel; but he certainly blew off a lot of steam at the LORD because no one paid attention.
Peter didn't get more than he could handle when Jesus promised him the Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven after He returned to the Father. But, in the meantime, it seems that he tried to protect Jesus from his mission; and when push came to shove, he denied that he even knew Him. Still, by the end of his life, he accepted crucifixion in the name of Jesus, but insisted that they place the cross upside down, because he felt unworthy to imitate the Lord so closely.
Amanda, I cannot "explain those people who have, obviously, been unable to cope with some burden in their life. Those who take their own lives in despair, the mothers who leave their family when the stress becomes too great, the infidelities that occur when one partner feels overburdened and turns elsewhere?"
I cannot explain it; I cannot excuse it. I can absolve it, if someone approaches me -- and the LORD can forgive it. Before the story of Peter ends, he falls asleep in the Garden of Gethsemane; he slices off the ear of a servant of the High Priest; he denies Jesus three times in Pilate's courtyard.
But, when all is said and done, Peter came to understand the true meaning of the Cross. When it came time for his own crucifixion at the hands of the Romans, he asked to be crucified head down, because he did not feel worthy to imitate Christ.
In conclusion: God will not give you any more [grief, anguish, temptation, etc.] than you can handle. The Adversary [the real Satan, not folks like Simon son of John who sound like him sometimes] will make sure that you will never be subject to any less than you can handle.
Count on that, Amanda! And count on me and other people who know you and your situation to support you in prayer.
It ain't ever going to be easy. But it will work out positively, in the end.
And the end is when you appear before the Throne for judgment. Don't worry about whether or not you're going to get there. Trust HIM to give you the graces to get you there. And follow His direction!
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
On Perfection, Eternity, and Immortality
Hi, Father,
Thank you for your response. I will spend some time studying it. However, this jumped out at me -- humans are created, and have a beginning -- but I thought that because we have an immortal soul, we will have no end -- that we will continue for all eternity, either in heaven or in hell.
Could you elaborate on how we will have an end, even if we are with God in heaven?
Brian
Brian, I'm delighted that you intend to read my answer to your previous question over again, and study it further. If you do, I trust you will find, as I do, that it is a very good question: How can we have an end, even if we are with God in heaven?
Let's start at the very beginning [a very good place to start!]. A seed is planted, a plant sprout, a flower blooms, and finally, the plant withers away. A sperm cell unites with an egg cell, the body grows, matures, ages, and eventually dies.
All created life ends in death. That is not an imperfection of created nature, but an aspect of created life, whether vegetative, animal, or human. This brings us back to the question you raised: if human life is mortal, ending in death, how is it that we live forever in heaven [or elsewhere]?
The principle of life that animates animals [both words come from the Latin anima, which English translates as soul]. It comes into existence at the beginning of life, when the seed is planted, and it vanishes at the end of life, when the plant or animal dies. From a philosophical perspective, there is no reason why the same should not be true of human life, if the soul were merely natural.
Earlier, I mentioned that Aquinas used a new word in reference to the divine nature; he called God's being supernatural, beyond the nature of living beings in the natural world: plants and beasts. According to Christian belief, the human soul is not merely natural, but supernatural; it is a participation in the very life of God, and thereby, it is immortal, not eternal: human life begins at conception, but it will not end in death.
Thank you for your response. I will spend some time studying it. However, this jumped out at me -- humans are created, and have a beginning -- but I thought that because we have an immortal soul, we will have no end -- that we will continue for all eternity, either in heaven or in hell.
Could you elaborate on how we will have an end, even if we are with God in heaven?
Brian
Brian, I'm delighted that you intend to read my answer to your previous question over again, and study it further. If you do, I trust you will find, as I do, that it is a very good question: How can we have an end, even if we are with God in heaven?
Let's start at the very beginning [a very good place to start!]. A seed is planted, a plant sprout, a flower blooms, and finally, the plant withers away. A sperm cell unites with an egg cell, the body grows, matures, ages, and eventually dies.
All created life ends in death. That is not an imperfection of created nature, but an aspect of created life, whether vegetative, animal, or human. This brings us back to the question you raised: if human life is mortal, ending in death, how is it that we live forever in heaven [or elsewhere]?
The principle of life that animates animals [both words come from the Latin anima, which English translates as soul]. It comes into existence at the beginning of life, when the seed is planted, and it vanishes at the end of life, when the plant or animal dies. From a philosophical perspective, there is no reason why the same should not be true of human life, if the soul were merely natural.
Earlier, I mentioned that Aquinas used a new word in reference to the divine nature; he called God's being supernatural, beyond the nature of living beings in the natural world: plants and beasts. According to Christian belief, the human soul is not merely natural, but supernatural; it is a participation in the very life of God, and thereby, it is immortal, not eternal: human life begins at conception, but it will not end in death.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
On Perfection
Hi Father John,
In your answer to Mary's question, you said that only eternal things are perfect. Are you saying that what God creates is less than perfect? Are those joined with God in heaven less than perfect, because they are not eternal (as they had a beginning)?
Brian
Brian, let me start with an ancient definition of perfection, which goes back to the Greek philospher Aristotle. He distinguishes three levels of meaning in the concept of perfection.
A being is perfect :
1. If it is complete, containing all the requisite parts; or
2. If it is so good that nothing of its kind could possibly be better; or
3. If it fulfills the purpose for which it exists.
Those first two definitions are really aspects of the same reality since nothing can be the best of its kind if it is incomplete, and lacks some requisite parts. But there is a real distinction to be made between a being which is complete in itself, and a being which fulfills the purpose for which it exists. The first, is perfection of substance; the second, perfection of purpose.
Moving from philosophy to theology, we turn to Saint Thomas Aquinas, who said: There is only one being absolutely perfect in substance, that is God, because no other being is eternal. All created being has a beginning and an end; therefore all created being is imperfect of substance when compared to God.
Aquinas resolves the philosophical conflict with Aristotle in a rather novel manner. He creates a neologism [a new word] "supernatural", in reference to God, and to the grace which God imparts to his human children. Using Thomistic vocabulary, we might say: "All creation is natural, and every creature is capable of the perfection of nature; only God is supernatural, and the perfection of divine nature is "super-perfect". [That last is not a Thomistic term!]
As God's children, all human beings are called from the first moment of our existence to strive for perfection according to our nature. To assist us in that quest, God grants us grace: sanctifying grace, which is given to us through the sacraments: Baptism, Eucharist, Confirmation, Penance, Holy Orders, Matrimony and the Sacrament of the Sick; and actual grace, which is defined as "the supernatural assistance of God for salutary acts granted in consideration of the merits of Christ." In simpler terms, actual grace is special help from God for a particular moment, or a certain act. One theologian writes, "Think of actual graces as zaps from God that enable to do something salutary." Perform an act of charity, or resist a particular temptation, for instance.
In your answer to Mary's question, you said that only eternal things are perfect. Are you saying that what God creates is less than perfect? Are those joined with God in heaven less than perfect, because they are not eternal (as they had a beginning)?
Brian
Brian, let me start with an ancient definition of perfection, which goes back to the Greek philospher Aristotle. He distinguishes three levels of meaning in the concept of perfection.
A being is perfect :
1. If it is complete, containing all the requisite parts; or
2. If it is so good that nothing of its kind could possibly be better; or
3. If it fulfills the purpose for which it exists.
Those first two definitions are really aspects of the same reality since nothing can be the best of its kind if it is incomplete, and lacks some requisite parts. But there is a real distinction to be made between a being which is complete in itself, and a being which fulfills the purpose for which it exists. The first, is perfection of substance; the second, perfection of purpose.
Moving from philosophy to theology, we turn to Saint Thomas Aquinas, who said: There is only one being absolutely perfect in substance, that is God, because no other being is eternal. All created being has a beginning and an end; therefore all created being is imperfect of substance when compared to God.
Aquinas resolves the philosophical conflict with Aristotle in a rather novel manner. He creates a neologism [a new word] "supernatural", in reference to God, and to the grace which God imparts to his human children. Using Thomistic vocabulary, we might say: "All creation is natural, and every creature is capable of the perfection of nature; only God is supernatural, and the perfection of divine nature is "super-perfect". [That last is not a Thomistic term!]
As God's children, all human beings are called from the first moment of our existence to strive for perfection according to our nature. To assist us in that quest, God grants us grace: sanctifying grace, which is given to us through the sacraments: Baptism, Eucharist, Confirmation, Penance, Holy Orders, Matrimony and the Sacrament of the Sick; and actual grace, which is defined as "the supernatural assistance of God for salutary acts granted in consideration of the merits of Christ." In simpler terms, actual grace is special help from God for a particular moment, or a certain act. One theologian writes, "Think of actual graces as zaps from God that enable to do something salutary." Perform an act of charity, or resist a particular temptation, for instance.
Does My Daughter Commit A Sin If She Misses Mass While Staying With Her Non-Catholic Grandparents?
Dear Father John,
My daughter made her first confession and first communion this year. Now that we're in the midst of summer, her grandparents often take her to a campground for a few days at a time. Many times this includes a Sunday. I'm not aware of a Catholic church around there, and my in laws are Protestants.
Does my daughter fall under pain of mortal sin for missing mass on these Sundays? Are we, her parents under mortal sin for allowing her to be away on Sundays?
Thanks for any info you can provide.
Sincerely,
Jennifer
Dear Jennifer,
According to the teaching of the Catholic Church, three conditions are necessary for a person to be culpable of a mortal sin: The action [or omission] involved must be seriously offensive to God; the person who commits the action must give sufficient reflection to the gravity of the offense against God, and the consequences of committing it [the loss of heaven and the pains of hell, to quote the traditional Act of Contrition]; the person must give full consent of the will to committing an action which will cost the loss of heaven and the pains of hell, and commit the action in spite of the cost.
Children are admitted to the Sacrament of Penance [Reconciliation] when they have reached "the age of reason", that is, when they can tell the difference between right and wrong in a very basic sense. "Knowing the difference between spilling the milk while reaching for a slice of bread and throwing the contents of a glass of milk at your brother", as one of my favorite priests would say. But having the maturity of conscience to commit an act which might cost the loss of heaven and the pains of hell requires a maturity of judgment that cannot be present until adulthood. And even then, as a confessor, I believe that very few of the folks whose confessions I've heard over nearly four decades have the maturity of judgment to decide to do what pleases them at the cost of eternal salvation.
According to Church law, Catholics are not held to the obligation of Lord's Day Mass if there is no church within a reasonable distance from where they are staying [a hotel, a campground, etc.] So, to be brief, your daughter does not commit a sin by staying at the campground with her grandparents. You don't commit a sin by allowing her to stay with her grandparents.
Finally, thank you for asking the question. For every person who asks a question on a blog like this one, there are ten or twelve who have the same question, but don't ask.
God Bless You and Your Family
My daughter made her first confession and first communion this year. Now that we're in the midst of summer, her grandparents often take her to a campground for a few days at a time. Many times this includes a Sunday. I'm not aware of a Catholic church around there, and my in laws are Protestants.
Does my daughter fall under pain of mortal sin for missing mass on these Sundays? Are we, her parents under mortal sin for allowing her to be away on Sundays?
Thanks for any info you can provide.
Sincerely,
Jennifer
Dear Jennifer,
According to the teaching of the Catholic Church, three conditions are necessary for a person to be culpable of a mortal sin: The action [or omission] involved must be seriously offensive to God; the person who commits the action must give sufficient reflection to the gravity of the offense against God, and the consequences of committing it [the loss of heaven and the pains of hell, to quote the traditional Act of Contrition]; the person must give full consent of the will to committing an action which will cost the loss of heaven and the pains of hell, and commit the action in spite of the cost.
Children are admitted to the Sacrament of Penance [Reconciliation] when they have reached "the age of reason", that is, when they can tell the difference between right and wrong in a very basic sense. "Knowing the difference between spilling the milk while reaching for a slice of bread and throwing the contents of a glass of milk at your brother", as one of my favorite priests would say. But having the maturity of conscience to commit an act which might cost the loss of heaven and the pains of hell requires a maturity of judgment that cannot be present until adulthood. And even then, as a confessor, I believe that very few of the folks whose confessions I've heard over nearly four decades have the maturity of judgment to decide to do what pleases them at the cost of eternal salvation.
According to Church law, Catholics are not held to the obligation of Lord's Day Mass if there is no church within a reasonable distance from where they are staying [a hotel, a campground, etc.] So, to be brief, your daughter does not commit a sin by staying at the campground with her grandparents. You don't commit a sin by allowing her to stay with her grandparents.
Finally, thank you for asking the question. For every person who asks a question on a blog like this one, there are ten or twelve who have the same question, but don't ask.
God Bless You and Your Family
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
Mental Reservation During the Premarital Inquiry
Father John,
Why would someone tell a priest that he wants a marriage that lasts "until death do us part", or that he wants to have children, or that he intends to be faithful, unless he means it at the time? I don't understand men that make such promises and then don't keep them. From your years at the Marriage Tribunal, can you shed some light on this issue?
Thank you,
Mary
Mary, in my three decades in Tribunal Ministry, I've dealt with many cases where a husband or a wife said things they don't mean at the time they were getting married. And I've also dealt with many cases in which they meant well, but were not mature enough to understand the commitments they were making, and still other cases where they did understand their commitments, but were not capable of fulfilling them.
But, after all these years, I still can't tell you why such things happen, except to say that God didn't create any perfect people. Even the Mother of the Son of God was preserved from original sin at the moment of her conception. But the very fact that she was conceived at a particular moment in time. Therefore, according to the philosophers of ancient Greece, she was not a perfect being, since only an eternal being, which has neither beginning nor end, is truly perfect.
Why would someone tell a priest that he wants a marriage that lasts "until death do us part", or that he wants to have children, or that he intends to be faithful, unless he means it at the time? I don't understand men that make such promises and then don't keep them. From your years at the Marriage Tribunal, can you shed some light on this issue?
Thank you,
Mary
Mary, in my three decades in Tribunal Ministry, I've dealt with many cases where a husband or a wife said things they don't mean at the time they were getting married. And I've also dealt with many cases in which they meant well, but were not mature enough to understand the commitments they were making, and still other cases where they did understand their commitments, but were not capable of fulfilling them.
But, after all these years, I still can't tell you why such things happen, except to say that God didn't create any perfect people. Even the Mother of the Son of God was preserved from original sin at the moment of her conception. But the very fact that she was conceived at a particular moment in time. Therefore, according to the philosophers of ancient Greece, she was not a perfect being, since only an eternal being, which has neither beginning nor end, is truly perfect.
Monday, August 4, 2008
Mental Reservation
Hi, Father John,
What is "mental reservation", and how is that different from lying?
Brian
When I was about five or six, the phone rang, and because I was closest, I went to pick it up. My dad said, "If that's for me, tell them I'm not home". So, I picked up the receiver, and said, "Hello". A man asked, "Is your dad there?" "He told me to say he's not home", I answered.
Expressions such as "He's not home" are called "equivocations", or "mental reservations". When there is a good reason for using them, they are admissible. If the person asked for was at home, but did not wish to talk to the caller, the meaning of the phrase, "He's not home", is restricted by the mind of the speaker to this sense: "He's not home to speak to you". Equivocations are commonly called "mental reservations", or more specifically "broad general reservations". A more serious use of a broad mental reservation is the case of the confessor who is asked about sins made known to him in confession. He should answer, "I don't know". Such words, used by a priest, mean "I do not know apart from confession, and I can't talk about what I hear in the confessional", or "I have no knowledge about that matter which I can communicate."
Besides the "broad mental reservation" there is a "strict mental reservation". One instance is the man who is sitting in the parish office for a pre-marital interview. He is asked, "Do you understand and intend to grant to your wife the right to a faithful, fruitful and permanent partnership of life, according to the laws of God and of His Church?" He says, "Yes, I do", but if he really does not intend to be faithful, or else to remain married until death, or else to have children, God willing, then his strict mental reservation is a lie, and if he marries with that intention, his marriage is invalid.
What is "mental reservation", and how is that different from lying?
Brian
When I was about five or six, the phone rang, and because I was closest, I went to pick it up. My dad said, "If that's for me, tell them I'm not home". So, I picked up the receiver, and said, "Hello". A man asked, "Is your dad there?" "He told me to say he's not home", I answered.
Expressions such as "He's not home" are called "equivocations", or "mental reservations". When there is a good reason for using them, they are admissible. If the person asked for was at home, but did not wish to talk to the caller, the meaning of the phrase, "He's not home", is restricted by the mind of the speaker to this sense: "He's not home to speak to you". Equivocations are commonly called "mental reservations", or more specifically "broad general reservations". A more serious use of a broad mental reservation is the case of the confessor who is asked about sins made known to him in confession. He should answer, "I don't know". Such words, used by a priest, mean "I do not know apart from confession, and I can't talk about what I hear in the confessional", or "I have no knowledge about that matter which I can communicate."
Besides the "broad mental reservation" there is a "strict mental reservation". One instance is the man who is sitting in the parish office for a pre-marital interview. He is asked, "Do you understand and intend to grant to your wife the right to a faithful, fruitful and permanent partnership of life, according to the laws of God and of His Church?" He says, "Yes, I do", but if he really does not intend to be faithful, or else to remain married until death, or else to have children, God willing, then his strict mental reservation is a lie, and if he marries with that intention, his marriage is invalid.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
