Corpus Christi, The Body of Christ, The Solemnity of the Most Holy Body and Blood of Christ.

Posted on June 6, 2012 by Dick

The Gospel for this feast day is taken from the Gospel according to Mark.  http://www.usccb.org/bible/readings/061012.cfm.  In the first part of the reading we are told, almost incidentally, that it was “On the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, when they sacrificed the Passover lamb …”  Later in the same passage Mark, again almost nonchalantly, tells us that “While they were eating, he took bread, said the blessing, broke it, gave it to them, and said …”  Up to this point, it is mere context, a setting of the stage as it were.  Then Jesus says, what are for me literally the most incredible words ever spoken, “Take it; this is my body.” Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, and they all drank from it. He said to them, “This is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed for many.”

What could it possibly mean for a person to say to others in the context of a Paschal meal when the Passover lamb is sacrificed …

This is my body [and I would like to add] broken for you. 

This is my blood [and again I would like to add] poured out for you.

And in that context these others were asked to eat and drink; that is, to consume, to become one with …

No one in all of human history, as far as I know, ever said anything like these words; and then to be asked to eat, to be offered, that body broken; drink that cup, poured out.  In some fundamental sense, the whole of my adult life has been in search of the meaning of this person, these words.  When I am able to attend to these words in the Eucharist, I am overwhelmed.

To get at what is going on, then and now, is to answer that question, what could this person saying these words possibly mean?  An untold number of books have been written, thousands of years have passed, millions, no billions, of lives have been lived.  And today our church asks us to pause and reflect.  This is the Good News!

I would like to focus our attention on two phases, to limit, so as to be able to reflect.

Not just any body, but my body, and not just my body, but my body broken … broken … broken.  Not just any blood, but my blood, and not just my blood, but my blood poured out … poured out … poured out. 

And why?  “For you.”  Not for my Father, not for God.  But for us, all of us, everyone one of us.

What a person!  No human life can ever be the same.  All of human life, the life of every human person that ever lived, is living, will ever live, has been placed in a totally different context by this person and these words.

And now to the “you.”  This “you” is always concrete, real, individual and personal and, might I add, messy.  Not some abstract concept.  When you gather at the Eucharist, at every Eucharist, at any Eucharist, this dynamic interpersonal, historical event is remembered – Do this in memory of me.  And that body is quite concrete.  When you gather next at the Eucharist, look around at the actual people who are gathered at that Eucharist.  Keep them in mind, all the ones that you know and most of whom you do not know.  Keep in mind that they, including the presider whether priest,  bishop, or pope have one think in common.  We are all sinners; our lives are broken, poured out.  And it is for us as that for the sake of which he offers broken and poured out, body and blood.  Not for his Father, not for God but because we need this.  We need to be saved by what is common to us all, broken and poured out.

No one has greater love than this, to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.

When next you experience life broken, poured out, remember, he too … And remember precisely when you experience life broken, poured out; your own life or the life of the other, remember we are not alone, ever, never.  And your remembering is always in the concrete, I was hungry, I was thirsty, I was sick, I was imprisoned … Be that for the other at those times and you will find as he did, resurrection – the fullness of life, now and forever!

Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.”

Posted in Culture, Scripture | Tagged , | 3 Comments

The Solemnity of the Most Holy Body and Blood of Christ

Posted on June 4, 2012 by Dick

Background – What’s in a name or A rose by any other name would smell just as sweet. 

Since at least the 13th century this feast day was entitled Corpus Christi, simply translated, that would be the Body of Christ.  The present title, The Solemnity of the Most Holy Body and Blood of Christ, is the wording chosen by the editors of the most recent, 2011, edition of the Roman Missal.  Changes such as this one, for whatever reason, have become the source of conversation,  if not consternation.  As I have mentioned elsewhere, people tend to fall into three groups, they are attracted to the new wording [it would be a mistake in this case to say the new translation], others are repulsed by it, and still others say what’s the big deal, it’s only words.  There maybe other responses too.  How does this change in the title of the Sunday liturgy strike you?

I noticed, for example, that the word “Solemnity” has been added to the previous two feast days.  Thus the Ascension has become the Solemnity of the Ascension and Holy Trinity Sunday has become the Solemnity of the Most Holy Trinity. The Roman missal has introduced many other “word” changes, the smallest portion being those that the community now says during the liturgy, whereas the dominant changes are those that priest prays during the liturgy or can no longer pray because they have been deleted.

The critical question, though, has little to do with change.  Change in and of itself is inevitable.  What matters is the direction of the change.  There are three basic directions that the concrete and particular personal, social, and cultural changes can take.  The direction can be that of development, progress, building on what is good and making it better; or the direction can be that of decline, disintegration, tearing down what is good and making it worse; and finally the direction can be that of reversal, bringing good out of what is bad, absorbing the bad so to limit its negative impact.

All of this from the fact of a few word changes to the title of this Sunday’s celebration.  Of course, I haven’t given expression to what direction I think the changes are a manifestation of.  The best clue to your own assessment is your emotional reaction.  How do you literally feel about these changes?  Keep in mind though that the most significant changes are not changes to the wording of the community but those that are the responsibility of the priest leader and some of those changes are the deletion of what he previous could pray.  It’s only with a grasp of those changes could a balanced response be given to the direction the changes are heading toward.  Right now let suffice for us to deal with ourselves.  The challenge as always is for you to rise to the level of your times; is there a challenge!

If you need to recall what you used to say and compare  them to what your are now saying / praying, this offers a comparison chart, http://www.strobert.com/PDF/assembly.pdf.  By the way do you have the same emotional reaction to each change, to some of the changes only, to change itself?

The Next Post

There will be more background and some thoughts on celebrating Corpus Christi, the Body of Christ, The Solemnity of the Most Holy Body and Blood of Christ in the next post.

Posted in Change in the Catholic Church, Scripture | Tagged , | 1 Comment

The Trinity!

Posted on June 1, 2012 by Dick

The Lectionary edition of Mt. 28:19 reads: “Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit …”

Whereas the biblical edition of the same passage reads: “Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit …”

The difference is that in the Lectionary edition the word “Holy” is capitalized whereas in the biblical edition the word “holy” is lower case.  If you don’t notice the difference, you cannot ask the question, what does the difference mean.  It should be obvious as well that reading would not reveal that difference.

So what could this seemingly insignificant difference mean?  It’s a very subtle bit of evidence that things change, even such a thing as the Holy Spirit; well not that the Holy Spirit has changed but our understanding has.  We might think that the disciples were the first persons to receive the Holy Spirit.  But they weren’t.  Jesus himself received the Holy Spirit but it’s more than that …

Let’s push at this a bit.  In the Nicene Creed that we recite at each liturgy we say of the Holy Spirit that he has spoke through the Prophets.  Prophets lived hundreds of years before Jesus and his disciples.  So what we have is an editor who changes the “holy” to “Holy” and our church in 325 saying that the Holy Spirit spoke through the Prophets who spoke more than a thousand years before they wrote the creed.

It’s just a fact that things exist long before we know that they exist and knowing that they exist may change us but not the thing.  So here are a list of things that we are, even though we may not know it, hardly ever avert to, cannot even detect it.

  1. We are the People of God
  2. We are the adopted sons and daughters of the Father
  3. We are the body of Christ
  4. We are the Temples of the Holy Spirit.

Each of these realities is a relationship that we are with God and God with us, even if we don’t know it, hardly ever avert to it, etc.  A Trinity rich in meaning, intimate in relationship.

But the larger question for us is who are the “we?”  – Take a look at our one verse again, for a clue to the answer.  Jesus intended that commission to go out to all the nations. He intends the “we” to be every one. His words make known what is present, his word gives us a meaning that we did not have before he spoke them, it is a meaning that you are invited to … Back to the Spirit – holy, Holy, before, during, and after …

The Spirit of God is alive in every single human person who every existed, who exists right now, who ever will exist.  But knowing that simple fact, if taken seriously, changes everything.  For example, we often say to account for human short comings, well we’re only human.  But that is simply wrong.  We’re human, for sure; but we are more – none of the four points above are only human, life is not only human, no human being is only human.  And it was only over time that we came to know, to say in words, that we are God’s people, the Father’s adopted sons and daughters, Christ’s body, the Spirit’s Temple.  You are blest to know who everyone is called to be and you are!!

Posted in Scripture | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

The Solemnity of the Most Holy Trinity

Posted on May 29, 2012 by Dick

The Gospel as it appears in the Lectionary – the book from which the priest will read the Gospel – http://www.usccb.org/bible/readings/060312.cfm.  Go to this site to read the passage as read in the Sunday’s liturgy.

The Commissioning of the Disciples – Mt.: 28:16 – 20.   http://www.usccb.org/bible/scripture.cfm?bk=Matthew&ch=28&v=48028016. I have copied the same passage as it appears in the bible immediately below.

16 The eleven- disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had ordered them.  17 When they saw him, they worshiped, but they doubted.  18 Then Jesus approached and said to them, “All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me.  19o, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit,  20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.  And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.

As we turn our attention to this reading chosen by the Church to celebrate the Trinity, there is one small difference in the two versions of the same passages.  That one difference is a clue to coming to some understanding of what we believe but can always understand more, that God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

So what is that small difference in the two nearly identical account?  If you find it, what could it mean?  A clue to its meaning is time, history.

In order to promote discussion, I am going to wait until someone makes an attempt at these two questions.  If you don’t find it, you can respond by telling us that.  Once someone does locate it, go back and see if their observation is correct and then attempt to let us know what you think that very small difference could mean.

We hope this week to appreciate a bit more than we do right now, the wonder, the beauty, the intimacy of God for us and for all humanity, now and for all times.

Posted in Scripture | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Pentecost Sunday

Posted on May 20, 2012 by Dick

Pentecost Sunday, John 20:19 – 23, it will take about 5 minutes to read

Background

I think a word or two about the very idea of a homily will help as we begin this Summer Fest. First and foremost, a homily is a scripturally based reflection to illuminate the ordinary life of the concrete people gathered to celebrate the liturgy.  The scripture itself is a twofold sword that both comforts and confounds, sheds light that reveals darkness, invites, if not summons us, to become more than we are in the concreteness of our ordinary life in the actual world that we live in, are part of, cannot escape from.  At its core the homily is to convey the meaning of God in Christ Jesus in this world.  As always your thoughts, questions, observations are critical for the dialogue that deepens us as church.

Our approach to the Gospel reading will follow a familiar pattern, I hope.  Prior to reading the Gospel, we will prepare to hear by asking our now familiar questions and some not so familar.  Who are the characters in the passage?  What is the “when” of the story?  Do you remember the “when” of the writer? Here is a twist on the when question, what is the “when” in your life today or to put the question in other words, what is going on in this period of your life?  Finally, what is the plot, the story line of the passage?

Let us now listen [read] to God’s word. 

Appearance to the Disciples.

19 On the evening of that first day of the week,when the doors were locked, where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in their midst and said to them, “Peace be with you.”

20 When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. The disciples rejoiced when they saw the Lord.

21 [Jesus] said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you.”

22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the holy Spirit.

23 Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained.”

One more question: Who are these “the Jews?”  Are they “the Jews” in the time of Jesus?  Are they “the Jews” in the time of the author’s writing?  Are they “the Jews” at any given time in human history?  Are they “the Jews” of today? 

A few comments 

Traditionally we think of Pentecost as the birth of the church.  Let us attend closely to this account of that birth.  We are told that it was the first day of the week, for us that is Sunday.  It was evening.  The group that gathered is identified only as disciples.  They lock the doors for fear of the Jews.

THE CONCRETE ISSUE OF FEAR

It seems to matter that we know the disciples were afraid and afraid not in some abstract way but afraid of the Jews.  In some way this fear in the passage matters.  This is why it is very important to know who “the Jews” are?

So to create an online dialogue, let everyone know who you think they are?  Why are the disciples afraid of them?  Do you think “the Jews” had names for the Johannine author?  I mean were they persons they knew?  What do you think the first gospel audience heard in the words “the Jews?”

The goal of all of these questions is to help us come to the light on “the Jews,” not as “the Jews” but as the concrete social source of fear in their lives.  So who in our society are people afraid of?  Please be concrete.  Think of the people whom you associate with as being bad?  Then think of those whom you associate with as being good?  Think of people in the news who are afraid?

HOW DOES JESUS RESPOND TO THE FEARFUL DISCIPLE GROUP?

What does he say? What does he do?  Maybe take a piece of pager and write down in order the list of actual words that Jesus says in this passage.  Do the same for what he does.

With that in front of you, how are these words and these actions a response?  If you were afraid of what some social group might do to you and your community, what would these words and actions mean? How would they comfort you?  Confound you? Summon you?  Of all that Jesus says and does, what stands out for you?  Why?

BIRTH OF THE CHURCH

Let’s wait to see how the first two phases of this reflection go before we attempt more.  I also think that the word of God is this enormous banquet, too much to eat all at once, so good as to savor every bite.  I can promise you more questions and responses to your responses.

Posted in Culture, Scripture | Tagged | Leave a comment

Session 27 – Held on Sunday, May 06, 2012

Posted on May 10, 2012 by Dick

Summer Plans – Stay Tuned!  Join In!

This was our last session for this year.  During the summer months we will focus our attention on the Gospel for the upcoming Sunday.  I plan to post some pointers no later than Tuesdays of each week and look forward to communal dialogue during the week; questions, comments, and observations.

We also will focus our attention on a deeper appreciation of what it means to be church, especially what are we doing when we gather to celebrate the Sunday Liturgy.  I hope to post some remarks on that topic again by Tuesdays of each week.

When CCD begins we will gather again and begin with Genesis Chapter 16. 

The Covenant with Abram: Gen. 15: 1 – 21. 

Before you read the passage http://www.usccb.org/bible/genesis/15, read the notes and the remainder of this and the next paragraph.  It always helps to focus your attention by asking a few basic questions that, if you’ve followed us at all, you will know.  Who, When, What.  Most importantly, pay special attention to what happens on the inside of you; even if what happens is nothing.  Whatever happens matters, because you matter.  Finally, here is the tricky part, whenever you are moved by the Spirit you are moved but not every movement is from the Spirit.  Always – evidence of the Spirit are inward, “the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law.” Gal. 5:22 – 23.  And outward: I was hungry, I was thirsty, I was homeless, I was sick, I was imprisoned and you …. Mt. 25: 35 –

This passage has two related segments v.1-6 and v.7-21, probably put together from a collection of Abram stories by our editor.  Each has the same structure: God promises, Abram questions, God responds.  The first deals with the issue of descendants and the issue of what is God going to do; the second, with land and how is Abram going to know.  Keeping the time of the story and the time of the editor in minds can be very enriching.  The events in the story take place thousands of years after the intended audience of the written account hear the story told to them.  They are very familiar with the stories.  It is about Abram but it is also about them and their history from David to the Babylonian Captivity.  It is meant to address their faith at a time in which there was trust in the Lord had been severely challenged.

Perhaps one of the most significant passages in the whole of scripture occurs in conclusion of the first segment; at least that was the case for Paul.  So we read in v. 6 “Abram put his faith in the LORD, who attributed it to him as an act of righteousness.”  What can be of enormous help is forming you answer to questions in the bible is to draw your answer from your own life experiences.  Start there.  What does it mean to put faith in someone? Have you ever put your faith in anyone?  What did you do?  Why did you do it? What is the context in which Abram “put his faith …”?  Following up whatever conversation you may have had with just yourself but especially if there was someone else reading with you the rest of the verse.  There we read, “who [the LORD] attributed it [put his faith] to him [Abram] as an act of righteousness.”  What is righteousness?  Do you ever use that word in your ordinary life?  Probably not.  It is a biblical term and more, one general source for deepening you understanding of this one word might be http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Righteousness.  Google it, read more, share what you find.

Abram’s trust, when there was little, if any evidence, summons us to some of the most disturbing moments in our life, when there is little if any evidence.  It is frankly quite easy to trust when the evidence is overwhelming.  But precisely at the time when all of the evidence was not to trust, Abram trusted.  God’s response was to “attribute”  –  look for clues to that word in your life.  “As an act of righteousness.”

Here we are taking a single verse and word by word asking, searching for its meaning; not just for Abram, not just for the Hebrew people, not just for Paul, but for me in the now of my life.  How can a book invite so much from the reader, listener?  Time to rest and listen to you.

Posted in Culture, Scripture | Tagged | Leave a comment

Session 26 – Held on Sunday, April 29, 2012

Posted on May 3, 2012 by Dick

Bible: is there substance behind the story? 

For nearly all of the first hour of our session we grappled with that question.  Not knowing that we would discuss this question, I started our session repeating what has been something of a mantra; the Bible was written by persons of faith.  It was written to persons of faith.  It was written for their faith.  To ask the Bible to be more than that is to ask the Bible to be what it is not.  That doesn’t mean, however, that the actual questions that we have are not worthy of discussion.  Nor does it mean that there are no historical facts in the bible.

Let’s begin with a few facts that may have different meanings for different folks but they remain facts.  The facts may seem obvious but they are worth keeping in mind.  The bible that we have in hand is first a book, really a library of books, extending over at least a thousand years.  So everything in it has to be mediated by the words.  As believers we believe that the Bible is the word of God but that doesn’t mean it is not also the word of human beings.  In fact, the more we understand the human words, the more fully we can appreciate the word of God.  Further, we have no extant physical books that are the original material on which the books were written.  Thus every bible stands on the shoulders of unknown numbers of persons who passed the books down.  They form a tradition, even if we think sola scriptura.  Now the Bible we have in hand is written in English, thus it is a translation and every translation has to be an interpretation, an attempt to convey to us in English what it meant to an ancient people in their time and place.  There is not one translation, but many.

For the record, the bible from which I have drawn my notes, for the most part, is the electronic version on the website of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.  The notes help us to understand what we have come to know about the historical setting in which the books were written, sometimes who wrote them, sometimes when they were written, and much more.  The notes attempt to create a context for our faith understanding of the bible.

As I listened to our group, there seemed to be two major factors out of which our question continues to be raised.  First we were taught almost from infancy that the bible is true, after all it is the word of God.  For a majority, but not all, of the members of our group true meant actual historical events.  To be exposed to historical scholarship as our study group has been is to challenge the bible as we first learned it. This is unsettling.

There seems to be a second factor which is expressed in terms of substance behind the story.  The inference maybe more nuanced but ultimately it infers that either there is substance behind the story [read actual historical events as narrated] or the story is fiction, made up, not historically true, therefore, not substantial.  The problem with this factor is that, I believe, it is a false dichotomy.  It is not either or.  It all depends on the nature of the literature.  Ancient writers simply were not aware of such distinctions.  They wrote out of belief, thus for them, nearly everything spoke of God, in ways that we find very difficult to fathom.

As I compose this segment, I realize I need to bring this down to earth.  So I will take one example, the flood.  Maybe for most of us the word “flood” means water overflowing its banks, destroying what is in its path, drowning, etc.  But it also can symbolize life, life that overwhelms us, that we can feel like we’re drowning, that we can wonder why is this happening to me, that I need help, etc.  The original author probably made no such distinctions.  The flood was both of these at the same time.

We come along thousands of years later.  Life today, maybe more than thousands of years ago, can flood over us, overwhelm us, we don’t feel like we’re in control, and we want to be in control.  Life today also presents us with a context in which we distinguish between fact and fiction, between fable and history, etc.  We live in a world in which the overwhelming evidence is that it is at least 13 billion years old, that our earth is 4 billion years old, that human beings have been on this planet for more than 100,000 years.  Etc.  Etc.  For me, the story of Noah and the Flood expresses many truths.  The first that comes to mind is that our misdeeds have consequences but not in the simplistic sense that would argue God brought Hurricane Katrina onNew Orleansbecause of the behavior of the people ofNew Orleans.  To hear such thinks saddens me because first of all it fails to understand both God and the Bible and secondly it presents an image of believer that has little or not attraction to me. For the story reminds us that God forgives, God is committed to us, that every rainbow is a reminder of faithful God.  Even more, though, as a Christian I believe that that God became flesh in the person of Jesus of Nazareth and that he is the very Word of God, God Incarnate, and so the Christian Scripture was written to tell us of him.

Well I better stop to ask you what your thoughts are, questions, observations, etc.  I will comment on the Genesis passage next week, our final week of this study year.  Remember we will change our format for the summer months, so keep in touch.

Posted in Culture, Literal Interpretation, Scripture | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Session 25 – Held on Sunday, April 15, 2012

Posted on April 19, 2012 by Dick

Summer Plans

The last meeting of the Scripture Study Group will be held on Sunday, May 6.  When CCD begins for 2012 – 13, the Study Group will pick up at the point in Genesis where we left off on May 6.  During the summer months, however, the Group was interested in using the website as a forum for ongoing discussion.  The tentative format will be my posting on Mondays of each week a commentary on the following Sunday’s Gospel reading and/or a posting on a topic of interest.  More details to follow … read the sidebar.

The Four Kings; Abram and Melchizedek – Gen. 14:1 – 24 

This particular passage is one of the more difficult passages to get our heads around and at the same time it is very rich in its suggestive meaning for the original audience of Israelites who were attempting to rebuild their nation after the Babylonian Captivity.  A first step, as always, is to read the notes http://www.usccb.org/bible/genesis/14, ponder a few questions [see next paragraph for examples], and especially pay attention to what happens inside of us as we read the passage.

Keep in mind that whatever happens inside of us is important, because it is happening to us.  We deserve attention, respect, and caring in relationship to precisely what is happening to us.  To do so we have to be able and willing to express in words what it is that is happening to us; that is more difficult than we might think. If you succeed in paying attention and are willing to express yourself, post your thoughts below.  In our group, for example, Heber responded to the reading simply by shaking his head back and forth expressing his difficulty in making any sense of the reading.  Now that is true not just for Heber …

Rather than asking the group to identify the characters in this story which has a list of names that, at best, are difficult to pronounce, we asked instead can we identify the three groups of people who were involved in the war and its sequence.  We can ask as well, what caused Abram to enter into battle? Did God talk in this passage?  If not, how was He involved?  Besides Lot, who else benefited from Abram’s intervention and what significance does that have?  It seems obvious to me, that asking and answering questions best occurs in a group setting.  The struggle is to recognize that this website is a group if we make it one!

To provide a bit more context to the story … The Israelite audience is being told a story that helps them to understand their own situation in light of their history.  For example, in the most recent primary, and whether you agree or not is not the point, Rick Santorum used a particular speech of President Kennedy to frame his own understanding of the role of religion in the exercise of government in theUnited States.  So in this passage the Israelites learn that Abraham for the sake of his nephew, Lot, is willing to take on the most power nations on earth symbolizing by the Four Kings; and is victorious.  God is a force in that victory and expresses a blessing through the King of Salem, Melchizedeck.  For the Israelite reader and/or listener to this story, Abram mirrors their own nation’s story and the role that Abram and God plaid in this story gave meaning to their life; was a source of hope and comfort.

The personal question that confronts us with this passage, really any passage, is what is that meaning for me in my life and for us in our lives. For whatever reason, as our group discussed this passage, Tim focused attention on the fact that Abram gave Melchizedeck one tenth of everything [v. 20.]  We began to discuss tithing; I probably stroked the fire by commenting that Catholics are notorious poor givers.  That lit the fire which led to discussing the notion of giving in Catholic and Protestant churches, the church asking for money, contributing in other ways besides money, etc.  Members of the group had strong feelings about this.  The passage even though it is only incidentally related to tithing, because of the actual comments and questions in the group, raised strong feelings about the church and money.  What is money’s authentic role in religion and it’s often unauthentic role?  What would be your take on our group’s getting in to this topic?  Does the passage have any other meaning for our life today?

My question, though, is of a different nature.  How to promote this website as a resource for an adult understanding of matters of faith, of religion’s role in our life as individuals, as members of our country, the world, and the church.  Any feedback?

Posted in Change in the Catholic Church, Culture, Scripture | Tagged , | 1 Comment

Session 24 – Held on Sunday, April 1, 2012

Posted on April 6, 2012 by Dick

The Sacred Triduum

Maybe Jesus’ public life lasted three years, the last three days of which are remembered and liturgically relived in Christian churches throughout the world this week.  I have been, for whatever reason, focused on few moments in those last three days.  In the garden of Gethsemane, Jesus prays, “Father, if you are willing, take this cup away from me; still, not my will but yours be done.” [Lk. 22:42]  And how does his Father respond to this prayer?  On the cross, Jesus cries out, “… in a loud voice, ‘Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani,’ which is translated, “My God,my God, why have you forsaken me.” [Mk. 15:34.]  If we stop at the crosses in our life, we’re never quite sure how God answers our prayers, but we feel as Jesus did abandoned, forgotten, God seems absent.  But how did the Father respond?  Easter is [not was but is] his response.  And Easter is for the sake of the whole world; nothing can ever be the same.  Our crosses will come and go for sure and there is Easter, the empty tomb, death overcome, life beyond anything we can possibly imagine.  And this is the Father’s response.

The Role of our Group and Social Media

At the end of Session 23 Mark and I had a brief conversation.  He mentioned discussing our Scripture Group with some of his friends and learning that they didn’t have this type of opportunity in their parish.  As we began this session we picked up on that conversation, one thing lead to the other and most of our time was devoted to use of the social media to enhance parish life.

It was important first to clarify that as far as I know there is nothing that prohibits a parish from having a scripture study group.  Adult education, however, has to be part of the vision of the parish; there has to be someone competent and willing to lead the group; and, ultimately, there has to be some level of interest among the adults.  If these criteria are met, normally some level of adult study will take place.

With the advent of the internet, almost anyone who is interested can participate even if their own parish doesn’t provide a scripture study option.  What we observed though is that, for all practical purposes, no one has engaged in our group on the website itself.  One way we’re hoping to change that is via the parish’s Facebook Page, http://www.facebook.com/staasParish.  Ken, another parishioner, and I have been asked by Fr. Tom to see what we can do along that line.  We’ll keep you abreast as things develop, hopefully.

At this point our conversation turned to attracting the youth who are probably much more active on the internet than other age groups in the parish.  Jody said that she had visited the parish Facebook page a few times but spent most of her time elsewhere because it was more interesting than on the parish Facebook page.  Her observations raised a further question what would attract the youth.  The answer came in terms of questions that youth have often are not discussed in the church and often not even in the family.  The example that came forward in our group was homosexuality.  Jody shared that at Akron University there are groups organized around this issue.  She pointed out a startling statistic that around 46% of young people who deal with this issue on a personal level attempt suicide.  She told us that many of these young people feel rejected from church, from family, and have profound personal struggles.  Obviously this is a very serious issue that invites us to dialogue.

We certainly didn’t arrive at any solution.  But, at least, we talked about it; that in itself might have been more than otherwise does occur.  Since our last gathering I learned of one website that is attempting to help parishes use the social media to help achieve their missions; if you’re interested there is a 55 minute webinar, http://www.peterandpaulministries.com/how-really-leverage-social-media-ministry, that you would be welcomed to watch and share any of your thoughts.  Our world is alive with topics that invite us to rise to the level of our times.  We [the church] have much to offer and much to learn.

Posted in Culture, Scripture | Tagged | Leave a comment

Session 23 – Held on Sunday, Mar 25, 2012

Posted on March 29, 2012 by Dick

Abram and Lot Part – Gen. 13:1 – 18

After reading the notes but before reading the passage http://www.usccb.org/bible/genesis/13, ask yourself our three basic questions: Who are the characters in this passage?  When is the time in this story?  [Do you remember the time of the author / editor?] What is the plot, the story line? Another thing to focus on might be who talks to whom and, of course, what do they say?  Questions are the answers, or the questions are more important that the answers.

Assuming that you have been faithful to some or all of the first paragraph, who are the characters in this story?  Before we began though Heber asked, where did Lot get all his wealth?  He also observed the passage never tells us that Lot had a wife.  Now here are a couple of other things to reflect on, the passage doesn’t really answer Heber’s question.  So it is a real question for Heber in his world but it isn’t a concern for the author in his world.  This is history.  Does this fact raise any questions, comments, thoughts for you?

Ken asked a different kind of question, he wanted to know why the author included the reference to Sodom.  I reminded the group that Sodom and Gomorrah, even to this day, are symbols of wicked men doing evil things; however adequately we understand that story.  The towns had a similar symbolic meaning for the audience of the editor, the Israelites of the 5th c BC.  As Carol was to mention later in the discussion, Lot got the better real estate but in the words of Michael, Lot was moving into a bad neighborhood.  Something of this type of meaning probably was being conveyed to the original audience as it did to us, the contemporary audiences of the text.

Returning to our task at hand, Annette led the way by reminding us of the presence of the Lord but it will help also to recall when in the story does the Lord appear, to whom does he talk, and what does he have to say? [More questions.] In rapid succession the following characters were identified: Abram, Lot, Herdsmen, Canaanites and the Perizzites, the inhabitants ofSodom.  (In some versions, the Canaanites and the Perizzites, occur within parenthesis.)  It is quite clear that the original authors did not place these names in parentheses. The editors of our version did though.  Why?  Again evidence of history, the words were judged by a later person not to have been part of the original text. inserted later by someone else.  Why was this done?  How did we figure this out?  I raise these questions to help you realize the nature of the text you have in front of you; there’s more there than meets the eye.

Before we move to the plot [next week] our group made some observations about the story itself.  Mark made a keen observation that Abram, as he did in the previous passage, anticipated a problem developing and responded to it before it got out of hand; a clue to one of the many sides of Abraham’s character.  His observation also reveals the power of a group studying the bible together.  You may not have observed that but Mark did.

I suggested that in a nomadic culture land conflicts are common and separation is a common way to resolve them.  After all, they didn’t have surveyors with GPS devices laying out the coordinates of their property, recording in at the county seat, etc.  To state the obvious, they lived at a different time in a different world.  We have to keep these facts in the forefront of our thinking so that we can more easily hear God’s word which emerges out of these concrete settings but transcends them to speak to us today.  Such is the very power of the word of God.

The question to confronted us next week will be what does this story say to us who are immersed in the 21st c., at least 25 centuries later than the audience to whom the story was originally written and maybe another 10 centuries more for the time of the story itself.  History matters if we are  to hear what is being spoken then and now.

As always, our site is filled with questions but the real thing that matters are your questions, comments, etc.

Posted in Culture, Scripture | Tagged , | Leave a comment