|
|
|
Were our Hearts Not Burning? (Lk 24:32)
Reply to a question
Q. Why did you preach about hell? (cf. Homily on hell)
R. N, in Christ, Thanks for taking the time to write me. I understand discussing hell has made you uncomfortable for the reasons you mention. Please give me a chance to simply offer an explanation, as upsetting you is the last thing that I would seek to do on purpose, I hope you will concede me at least that expression of my good intentions. And as you took the time to write down your concerns, I will correspond and take the time to reply, as I take what you say very seriously. Realize also that some expressed how glad they were to hear the Church’s doctrine on this teaching expounded, and how they felt encouraged to fight against sin. So there are others in the parish who had a very different reaction to this. And so we all have different reactions, and that’s OK, as long as we allow ourselves in our thoughts, words and deeds to be guided by right reason and the Catholic faith. Before I reply to your individual points, just a note. I realize that discussing hell is not the most popular thing in the world, but in my seven years of apostolic experience, some as a religious, some as a deacon and now as a priest, I have a responsibility before God, the Church and the World to speak about very unpleasant things from time to time. Just for starters, you might wish to peruse Ez 3:17-21 and 2 Tim 4:1-5 for starters; please, please take a moment to read these, so you see precisely what I mean. Also, in the homily itself, I gave an explanation of why we had to talk about hell, and you don’t seem to refer to that in your note. Perhaps you missed that part, for I admit that part was brief (lest the homily be too long; 15 min. isn’t too long).
1. I didn’t give a “talk” about hell, but a “homily,” an office a priest exercises in explaining the Gospel in the name of God and his Church. I am familiar with the nature and objectives of a homily as specified in Canon Law, and they were fulfilled. I refer to the canon that says, “Can. 767 §1 The most important form of preaching is the homily, which is part of the liturgy, and is reserved to a priest or deacon. In the course of the liturgical year, the mysteries of faith and the rules of christian living are to be expounded in the homily from the sacred text.” When we read a Gospel text of Jesus – who discussed forgiveness in that passage one time less than I did – who discussed a sinner who went to hell, what he went through in hell, and how we are to avoid it, I think that I would have not fulfilled the objectives of the homily, for I would not have then been speaking about the sacred text discussing the mysteries of faith etc.
2. You will remember that a baby was screaming his or her little head off at mass. Babies do that, I understand, so I didn’t and don’t reproach anybody, that’s life. I got very loud at that point so I could be heard. Today at the golf outing someone mentioned how hard it was to hear at that moment because of the baby. You will notice that I lowered my voice after that episode passed, until the end of the homily. Voice volume, of course, is principally a rhetorical technique to make it easier and less laborious for the hearer to pay attention. You will notice I changed spead, pitch, and volume, as I always do when I preach. Please don’t read more into it than that, I think it’s not a big deal for most of the parishioners, judging by the comments people give me on my homilies.
3. Without replying to any of my proofs in the homily, you say no one, at least no one in our congregation at mass that morning, is a candidate for hell. I suspect many people believe this, and that’s why I detained myself on that point, so I’m glad you caught it. I don’t blame anybody, this is a false impression often conveyed in the catechesis we have received and now pass on to the next generation. Indeed, to say no one is a candidate for hell contains a small heresy with huge implications. It is enough for us to sin and not repent, and this is something we can all do (cf. Lumen Gentium 48, Mt. 25, 2 Cor 5:10, Jn 5:29, Catechism of the Catholic Church 1033-1037; and any text of these documents will supply many more leads for you to look into this yourself). But if you simply reject it, in contradiction to scripture and tradition as the Church give these to us, no amount of argumentation will ever convince you; if one enters into heresy by an act of will, ONLY an act of will can get one out. The danger is that you may think that hell is not an possibility for you, in flagrant contradiction to the teaching of the Church. It’s a possibility for all of us. A very serious one. And I love you so much, I am willing to preach to you this unpleasant fact in a homily, so that you don’t fall into that trap of the devil. Remember, the devil is a liar, and a very intelligent angel; we must be on our guard lest he convince us of things that are detrimental to our salvation. But indeed, salvation is a labor of love, it doesn’t happen on accident, and God won’t save you without your collaboration. The alternative is hell. Note that to assume we will not go to hell is the sin of presumption (see CCC 2091-2092). Of course I do not accuse you or anyone of this sin, especially if you never thought about this before, but perhaps it’s materially there: I mean, sin requires knowledge, and maybe you never thought of it like this, so don’t be disturbed by any scruple.
4.
You mentioned I did not cite Vat. II. I hope you don’t misinterpret it as
cynicism if I ask you how often you complain to priests when they don’t cite
Vatican II. In my many years of Catholic life, I lament to note that I almost
never heard the documents of Vatican II being cited. I find it curious that
since I did not, it is suddenly an issue. Now, the Church does not repudiate any
of the previous councils when the next one comes out. We are the Church of
Vatican I, of the Council of Florence, of Chalcedon, of Trent, of Ephesus, of
Nicea (indeed, we pray the Nicean creed every Sunday!). It’s a sad thing that no
one has passed on to you the beautiful treasures that the previous 22 councils
contain (Vatican II is the 23rd); I don’t blame you, I just regret that
catechists weren’t more diligent in helping you know and love these other
beautiful moments of the Church.
5. Yes, I use scripture a lot in my homilies. Many are edified by it, if you are not. St. Paul explains that this is one use scripture has, in 2 Tim 3:16. The homily is about expanding on sacred scripture, so I can’t get away from it, it’s not an option I have.
6. I recommend confession for the reasons I said in the homily, none of which you mentioned in your note. It is a sacrament that is necessary for salvation, unless you have the Immaculate Virgin Mary’s gift of never sinning. The rest of us are sinners. And it is for our salvation! You may wish to re-read the parts in the CCC on confession. I’m a bit worried, with the affection of a brother, that recommending this sacrament disturbs you. A Catholic should simply love this sacrament, eager to receive the graces it contains (cf. Paul VI’s Paenitemini, JP II’s Reconciliatio et Poenitentia, which you can find for free on line surely).
7. As for the name of this sacrament, you are correct in saying it is called “reconciliation and penance,” and the Catechism supports you in this claim (paragraph 1423, 1424). The Catechism says it is ALSO called the “sacrament of conversion” (1423) and the sacrament of forgiveness (1424). But the FIRST name the Church assigns this sacrament in paragraph 1424 is CONFESSION. It’s not an either/or, but a both/and. You may have some preferences that it be referred to with one name or another, and that’s perfectly fine, in no way do I attempt to dissuade you: follow the movings of the Spirit in your heart on that one.
I regret that many Catholics never receive a sufficient catechesis, as Jesus Christ in the Gospels and as the Church in her documents delivers and prescribes, on some of the “harder” topics. These include hell, sin, demons and Satan, original sin, Judas, the Antichrist, purgatory, and so forth. Other priests like me come filling in the gaps that others should not have left, and occasionally that causes pain and misunderstandings to surge forth. It is possible that other priests, clergy and catechists never touched these teachings or passed them on due to the unpleasantness of it all, but as you see, shying away from the hard truths was no service to anybody. But with malice towards none and charity towards all, let us press onward prayerfully meditating upon all these teachings of our Lord. I commend you for your long lasting membership at St. Paul’s. I appreciate the time you took to articulate the lamentable disturbances that my homily may have caused you. I hoped my message, Christ’s message concerning hell, would stoke in your hearts true movements of love and repentance, courage and resolution, and above all the freedom of being alive in God and free from sin; indeed, this is the result it had in some others. If you would like to discuss this in person, please feel free to call me, and if I’m not there, I’ll always get back to you within 24 hours, and we can agree upon a time to meet. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Love of God, and the Fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you. In Christ, Fr. Paul Ward |