Solemnity of the Body and Blood of Christ

By Caravaggio 1606

“They recognized Him in the breaking of the bread.”
Lk 24: 31

Solemnity of the Body and Blood of Christ, June 26, 2011
Deuteronomy 8:2-3, 14b-16 1 Corinthians 10:16-17 John 6:51-58

Second reading from 1 Corinthians

Brothers and sisters: The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because the loaf of bread is one, we, though many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf.

The Word of God
Thanks be to God
Alleluia, alleluia.

A reading from the holy Gospel according to John
Glory to you, Lord.

Jesus said to the Jewish crowds: "I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world." The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?" Jesus said to them, "Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in Me and I in him. Just as the living Father sent Me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on Me will have life because of Me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever."

The Gospel of the Lord.
Praise to you, Lord Jesus Christ.

----------------
Introduction
Still God-with-us

In His ascension into heaven Jesus promised He would not leave us orphans but would be with us to the end of time. (Jn 14:14) He kept His promise by sending us the Holy Spirit on Pentecost. He kept it also by giving us the Eucharist -- His abiding presence among us. Though ascended into heaven, Jesus is still Emmanuel – still God-with-us.

Dramatic changes

With a bit of nostalgia older Catholics recall the solemn celebration of the feast of Corpus Christi. It was, indeed, a big production. The Blessed Sacrament, encased in an elaborate monstrance and under a portable canopy, solemnly made its way through villages in valleys and hamlets on hills. Three times the procession stopped along the way for benediction with the Blessed Sacrament.

Corpus Christi is no longer the big production it used to be. With Vatican II (1959-1962) dramatic changes have taken place in Catholic Eucharistic life. Older Catholics remember the pre-Vatican days when on a Sunday morning only 20 to 30 people out of a packed congregation would rise to receive Communion. They were the ones who considered themselves in the state of “Sanctifying Grace” after making a sacramental confession. The rest of the faithful, (those who had not confessed their `mortal sins,’ or who were divorced and remarried, or who hadn’t fasted from every speck of food and drink from midnight on, or who weren’t Roman Catholics) remained nailed to their pews at Communion time. All that has dramatically changed; now a whole congregation of sinners rises to receive Communion. It’s a new day in Eucharistic theology; Communion is not considered to be a reward for saints but food for sinners on the human journey.

Older Catholics remember also the super-sacral approach to the Eucharist of pre-Vatican days. Only the consecrated hands of an ordained priest were permitted to touch the Blessed Sacrament. Now the faithful receive Communion in their hands, and from the hands of Eucharistic ministers who aren’t ordained! Some of them aren’t even males! Now also some of the faithful carry the Sacrament home after Mass to bring Communion to a sick member of the family. Yes, indeed, for older Catholics especially, Vatican II seems to have changed everything concerning their Eucharistic faith. At the end of the day, however, nothing fundamental has really changed: the Eucharist remains central to Catholic faith.

Emphasis on `present in the bread’

One theologian characterizes the dramatic changes in Catholic Eucharistic life saying: “In the old days, the emphasis was on Jesus present in the bread. In this new day, the emphasis is on Jesus present in the breaking of the bread. That’s more than just semantics.”

In pre-Vatican days, the emphasis was on Jesus present in the bread. At the elevation of the Mass, the consecrated bread was raised on high, and a bell was rung to make sure everyone was awake and was looking at Jesus present in the bread[1]. There was a kind of salvation in gazing upon Jesus in the bread held on high -- very much like the salvation that came upon the Israelites when they gazed upon the bronze serpent fashioned by Moses and held on high by him. (Num 21:4-9; Jn 12:32) We remember also how on big feast days Mass was `climaxed’ with benediction with the Blessed Sacrament , as a kind of `frosting’ on the cake.[2] The Eucharist encased in the monstrance was held on high, so all could gaze upon Jesus present in the bread.

Emphasis on ‘the breaking of the bread’

In this new day, emphasis is on Jesus present in the breaking of the bread. On that first Easter morning when two of the disciples were on the road to Emmaus, they met a Stranger. At dusk they looked for lodging, and invited the Stranger to stay and supper with them. At table, He took bread and blessed it, broke the bread and gave it to the disciples. At that moment, Scripture says, the eyes of the disciples were opened, and they recognized Jesus in the breaking of the bread. (Lk 24:13-35)

Bread not broken at a first Communion

Karl Jung, the father of modern psychology, describes the day of his first Communion.

I awaited the day with eager anticipation, and the day finally dawned. There behind the altar stood my father in his familiar robes. He read prayers from the liturgy. On the white cloth covering the altar lay large trays filled with small pieces of bread which came from the local baker whose goods were nothing to brag about. I watched my father eat a piece of the bread and then sip the wine which came from the local tavern. He then passed the cup to one of the old men. All were stiff, solemn, and it seemed to me, uninterested. I looked on in suspense, but could not see nor guess whether anything unusual was going on inside the old men. I saw no sadness and no joy in them. Then came my turn to eat the bread which tasted flat, and to sip the wine which tasted sour. After the final prayer all the people swiftly pealed out of church, neither depressed nor illumined with joy, but with faces that seemed to say. "Well, that's that." In a minute or two the whole church was emptied.

In the course of the following days it dawned on Jung that nothing had happened on the day of his first Holy Communion; bread had not really been broken, and Jesus had not been recognized in the breaking of the bread. Jung found himself saying, "Why, that is not religion at all. It is, in fact, an absence of God. I must never go back there again. It’s not life but death that’s there.” (Memories, Dreams, Reflections) Jung’s very first Communion was fatal; it turned out to be his very last Communion!

Bread not broken at funeral

Years ago I concelebrated at the funeral Mass of a friend who died on the operating table, as his loving wife and I were anxiously waiting outside the operating room. At the funeral Mass everything went off well enough until Communion time. Then, out of the blue, the pastor announced, “Catholics may now come up and receive Holy Communion!” That was a very disingenuous way `to disinvite’ all non-Catholics from the Eucharistic banquet. The pastor had turned the Bread of unity into a rock of division, as he divided the congregation before him into Catholics and non-Catholics. At the end of the day, bread had not been broken, and Christ had not been recognized in the breaking of the bread. Only the congregation had been broken into “Catholics who may now come up and receive Holy Communion” and those who may not!

A great bread-breaker

Bishop of Saginaw, Michigan, Kenneth Edward Untener (1937- 2004) was a great bread-breaker. His first words as bishop to the people of his diocese were: "My name is Ken, and I will be your waiter for a long, long time.” Then Bishop Untener proceeded to wait upon his people and break bread. He sold the bishop's mansion, and for the next 24 years lived in 69 rectories. The trunk of his car became his office. On the 25th anniversary of Pope Paul VI's encyclical letter Humanae Vitae in 1993 (reaffirming the Church's stand against artificial birth control) Untener used the occasion to keep his promise to be a waiter serving his people. He invited his Church to reopen an honest and transparent discussion on birth control. (His invitation was not well received.) On the issue of divorce, Untener said, “I am not here to condemn divorced people, nor am I here to condone them. I am here to help them. Jesus did not come to condemn or condone the woman caught in adultery; He came to help her.” Untener especially comforted his priests and challenged his fellow bishops.

On the day of his episcopal consecration Untener promised the people of Saginaw that he would be their waiter. He did such a wonderful job of breaking bread and of revealing Jesus in his bread-breaking that a throng of 1,800 people attended his funeral Mass. The service evoked tears and laughter, audible `amens’ and a standing ovation. What an utter contrast that was from Jung’s first Communion day, when after the final prayer all the people swiftly pealed out of church, “neither depressed nor illumined with joy, but with faces that seemed to say. `Well, that's that.’"

Conclusion
Present in both

Is Jesus present in the bread or is He present in the breaking of the bread? Catholic faith says He is present in both. Whenever bread has been truly broken (whether at a first Communion or a funeral or a Sunday Mass) Jesus is present in that bread-breaking, and the faithful don’t peel out of church saying “Well, that’s that!” Rather, they linger on with “tears and laughter, audible `amens’ and a standing ovation.” And very much like Peter on the Mount of Transfiguration the faithful cry out, “Oh how good it was for us to be here at Mass this morning!” (Mt 17:4)

But Jesus is present also in the Bread carried solemnly in a Corpus Christi procession or quietly reposed in a tabernacle. It is Jesus present in the tabernacle which makes great cathedrals and small chapels welcomed rest spots (`Jacob’s wells’)[3] for us weary wayfarers. Sanctuary lamps in cathedrals and chapels, glowing gently and faithfully in the dusk, assure us that we’re not alone in the wearisome human journey before us.

[1] In many churches a bell is no longer rung at the elevation
[2] In this new day, Benediction immediately following Mass is now forbidden.
[3] John 4:6

Trinity: Christians Trying to Fathom God

Father, Son and Holy Spirit

Trinity: The Christian’s Attempt to Fathom God

June 19, 2011, the Solemnity of the Most Holy Trinity
Exodus 34:4b-6, 8-9 2 Corinthians 13:11-13 John 3:16-18

The second reading from 2 Corinthians

Brothers and sisters, rejoice. Mend your ways, encourage one another, agree with one another, live in peace, and the God of love and peace will be with you. Greet one another with a holy kiss. All the holy ones greet you. The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with all of you.

The Word of God
Thanks be to God

Alleluia, alleluia.
A reading from the holy Gospel according to John
Glory to you, Lord

God so loved the world that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him might not perish but might have eternal life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. Whoever believes in Him will not be condemned, but whoever does not believe has already been condemned, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.

The Gospel of the Lord.
Praise to you, Lord Jesus Christ.

----------------
Introduction
Liturgical cycles

The Nation’s liturgical cycle begins with Memorial Day summoning us to the fun of summer after the fury of winter. It explodes and peaks with the Fourth of July. The cycle starts to wane with the falling leaves of Labor Day, and is finally covered with a blanket of snow, as “over the river and through the woods to grandmother’s house we go” to celebrate Thanksgiving.

The Church’s liturgical cycle begins with the Father sending the Son in the Advent-Christmas season. It continues with the Son returning to the Father in the Easter-Ascension season. The cycle peaks with the Father and the Son sending the Holy Spirit on the feast of Pentecost. So today’s feast of the Mystery of the Trinity is well-positioned here at the end of the cycle.

Theological humility

Mystery in theology is an honorable and respected word. It doesn’t mean `conundrum’ or `riddle’ or `puzzlement.’ Rather, mystery in theology refers to something so great that the finite human mind can’t fully fathom it. Theology, on the other hand, is the human attempt to fathom the unfathomable God. So there is Islamic theology: the Muslim’s attempt to fathom God. There is Jewish theology: the Jew’s attempt to fathom God. And there is Christian theology: the Christian’s attempt to fathom God.

There’s an obvious tug of war between mystery and theology. Mystery says God cannot be fully fathomed. Theology, on the other hand, says, “That might be true, but let’s try anyway.” St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274), who theologically ruled the Church from the 13th to the 20th century, tried to fathom God, as he penned one volume after another in Latin about the ineffable God. But at the sunset of his life, he looked back upon his voluminous writings, and overcome with theological humility he exclaimed of his writings: “Mihi videntur ut palea.” “They seem like straw to me.”

Swiss Reformed theologian Karl Barth (1886-1968) was one of the most important Christian thinkers of the 20th century. Like Aquinas he, too, had theological humility. Though he had for his bottom line “Deus totaliter aliter” (“God is totally other” than what we say, think, or write about Him) Barth proceeded anyway to pen volume after volume about his “totally other God.”At the sunset of his life, however, Barth, too, made sport of his pretentious volumes saying: "The angels are laughing at old Karl Barth.”

Theological pride

To such theological humility is contrasted theological pride. That’s the pride which pretends to have God down pat. That’s the pride which destroys His Mystery (the very best thing God has going for Himself). When we pretend to have God down pat on issues like birth control, homosexuality, divorce and remarriage, or on issues like priestly celibacy or male-only-priests, we destroy God’s Mystery (the very best thing God has going for Himself). When preachers pretend to have God down pat, as they proclaim AIDS to be divine pay-back upon immoral sinners, they destroy His mystery (the very best thing God has going for Himself).
A God whom we have down pat is also the best thing we have going for ourselves. Such a God is, indeed, convenient: we have Him obeying us, instead of us obeying Him!

Bin Laden had his God down pat.

The world’s most wanted terrorist, Usama bin Laden (b. March 10, 1957), was shot and killed on May 2, 2011, inside a private residential compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. His body was buried at sea. Bin Laden’s theology proclaimed Saudi Arabia to be holy ground, because it contains the two sacred cities of Mecca and Medina. [1] But that holy ground, bin Laden complained, was desecrated by the feet of Western infidels working in the oil industry of Saudi Arabia. His theology even declared Jihad (`Holy War’) against the Western infidels. Accordingly, in the name of “Allah, Most Merciful” he and his operatives sent two 747s crashing into the World Trade Center in Lower Manhattan on 9/11, bringing down the famous Twin Towers (signature symbols of Western greatness), and murdering three thousand innocent infidels.
Bin Laden had his God down pat; God was no mystery at all to him. His God, in fact, was `an obedient God.’ Bin Laden’s God obeyed him, instead of him obeying God. And bin Laden cherished such a God as a father cherishes an obedient son.

Rev. Phelps has his God down pat.

The Rev. Phelps, who claims to believe in God as Father, Son and Holy Spirit, also has his God down pat. Matt Shepard was a gay student from the University of Wyoming, whom two skinheads beat to a pulp and chained to a wooden fence out in the country, leaving him to die there, bathed in his tears and blood. Inflamed with the same homophobic hatred Rev. Phelps and his operatives picketed Shepard’s funeral with a sign which read, “God hates fags and buries them in hell—Romans 9:13.” At the end of the day, Phelps and his operatives do not believe in a God who is a trinity of Persons loving one another, and inviting us into that circle of love. They believe only in their own agenda, which they place in God in order to endow it with divine and deadly authority.

Phelps has his God down pat; his God is no mystery at all to him. His God, in fact, is `an obedient God.’ Phelps’ God obeys him, instead of him obeying God. And Phelps cherishes such a God as a father cherishes an obedient son.

A parish has its God down pat.

Some years ago I assisted in St. Michael the Archangel Parish, deep in the heart of Texas. In the vestibule of the church was positioned a huge muscular statue of the Archangel. The gospel that Sunday was about Jesus making the apostles fishers of men. In the homily I suggested the possibility of solving the acute shortage of priests which has been afflicting the Church for decades, by ordaining married men as fishers of men. I even suggested the possibility of ordaining women. Those `wild’ suggestions made many deeply unhappy. There ensued, I was told, a flood of fifty plus telephone-calls to the parish office, complaining about the preacher. The fury caused by the `wild’ suggestions to solve the acute shortage was characterized as similar to the great rumble which happened in that parish when Vatican II first broke upon it. The `peace’ of that parish had been greatly disturbed, and I was notified that it would have to be the parish’s way or the highway. I knew it would have to be the highway. As I look back now, I see that huge muscular statue of St. Michael the Archangel as protecting a God whom that parish had down pat.

St. Michael the Archangel parish, deep in the heart of Texas, under the watchful supervision of its pastor, had its God down pat; He was no mystery at all. He was, in fact, `an obedient God,’ whom that parish with its pastor cherished as a father cherishes an obedient son.

A mystic doesn’t have his God down pat.

Theological pride delights in the pretense of having God down pat. On the other hand, theological humility, delights in not having God down pat -- delights in simply not knowing -- delights in God’s mystery. Theological humility makes the strange claim that the very best thing we have going for God is His mystery. Meister Eckhart (1260-1328), a philosopher, theologian and mystic, did not have his God down pat; mystics never do. Eckhart was, in fact, a devoted `apostle of the Mystery of God.’ A friend writes:

Eckhart had an insight which most Catholics and worshippers of all types fail to grasp. The insight was that God is MYSTERY. When it comes to God we simply do not know. That stance, however, is beyond the ken of most people. It thwarts their desire for certainty. It pains them not to be certain about and cozily comfortable with an easy list of the things to believe. Anybody who insistently calls attention to God’s mystery will be hated by those who need to have their God down pat. You know what they did to Meister Eckhart[2].

At the end of the day, Eckhart was a mystic, and mystics specialize in not having God down pat. (What a strange specialization!) What a blessing it is when a parish specializes in not having God down pat. What a blessing it is when a parish specializes in God as Mystery!

Conclusion
Trinity: a good attempt

At the end of the day, Trinity, the Christian attempt to fathom God, is a good attempt. It has rich overtones. It speaks of God as a Father who loves and forgives us His wayward children. That lays an axe to the mean and revengeful god whom the Rev. Phelps has invented to hate `fags’ as he hates them. Trinity also speaks of God as a Son who in the fullness of time was born into the human condition and became Emmanuel – became God-with-us. Such a God stands in direct contrast to the gods of ancient Rome and Greece, who very often were not-with-us but against us. Trinity also speaks of God as a Holy Spirit who abides within us, and consoles us with the thought that on the long and arduous journey of life we are not lonely travelers.


[1] Mecca, the birthplace of the Islamic Prophet Muhammad, is the holiest city of Islam and a pilgrimage site for all devout Muslims. Medina, the burial place of Muhammad, is the second holiest city in Islam.
[2] Mystic Meister Eckhart was tried as a heretic in 1327. Before the verdict was handed down Eckhart disappeared!