ISSUES |
VOL. 4 = THE CHRISTIAN’S STATE OF LIFE
Sermon by Fr. Francis Hunolt
SIXTH SUNDAY AFTER PENTECOST
The Usefulness of Alms-Giving For the Temporal Welfare
of Parents and Children
“From whence can any one fill them here with bread in the
wilderness.”— St. Mark 8: 4.
Thus did the disciples speak to Christ. We are nearly in the same position.
We are bound by the divine and natural law to help the poor and needy with
alms. How can we help them all, is the question that some ask; there are
such numbers of poor nowadays. And so none of them are helped. The question
of others is: Who can give alms in the desert? That is, in such bad times
that one has enough to do to provide for himself? And thus very little Christian
mercy is shown to the poor, or it is not shown as generously as it should
be. That is a clear sign of a want of faith and confidence in the providence,
power, and goodness of God. But almsgiving does not lessen, but increases
our wealth.
If you have many children and a small income, yet you can, and even must,
give generous alms to the poor; for thereby your worldly possessions will
be increased in this life.
A merchant gives up his business because he has a large family, and he wishes
to keep his money; you tell him there are many rich people who are willing
to borrow from him at five per cent interest, and to give him security worth
ten times the money advanced to them; but he is not moved. He sticks to his
former resolution, and says: I will keep my money to support myself and my
children, and I will leave them what is over after my death; otherwise I
might lose all and become poor. But you would say to him, have you lost your
wits? What is the good of allowing your money to lie idle in your coffers?
It will grow less every day, and never increase. Lend it at interest, and
it will bring in more for you every year. Invest it, if you want to make
anything for yourself and your children; for in twenty years you will receive
the whole value of your capital in interest alone, and your heirs can receive
five per cent for it after your death. What is your opinion of this man?
Do you think he acts for the best interests of his children?
But you must form the same opinion of those who are hard and stingy toward
the poor, on the pretext that they want their money and bread for their children
and their families. What is an alms given to the poor? It is the seed that
is cast into fruitful ground, and brings in a hundred-fold. What is an alms?
It is money lent at interest, nay, even a divine interest, which returns,
not five for a hundred, but a hundred for five. “He that hath mercy
on the poor lendeth to the Lord” (Prov. 19: 17).
It is God, the Owner of all things, who comes to you in the person of the
beggar and the poor man; it is God who takes the alms from you, as a capital
borrowed at interest, nay, at usurious interest. Could you find a richer,
safer, or more faithful Lord to whom to lend it? Could you have the least
fear of being at a loss through him? Can any one be richer than he, of whom
God says that he is his Debtor? Do you, perhaps, doubt that? Certainly you
do not see the person of God marked on the poor man’s forehead. But
hear what the Lord says: “Amen, I say to you, as long as you did it
to one of these my least brethren, you did it to me” (St. Matthew 25:
40); and what you refused them, you refused me.
Christ is in want when you see a poor person; it is Christ who is hungry
and thirsty, who is a beggar and naked. He stretches out his hand for an
alms, and even if you give him only a penny, a piece of dry bread, or a drop
of cold water, he will not refuse it, but will receive it with gratitude.
Jesus Christ cries out at your door: Give an alms, for God’s sake, to
this poor man; I will take it from you by his hand. I do not ask from you
as much as I have given you. I have shed every drop of my Blood for you,
and all I ask of you in return is to give a drink of water to my brethren
when they are thirsty. I give you my Body as your food, and I will be satisfied
with a piece of bread from you, when my brethren are hungry. I have freed
you from the prison of hell, and now I ask you to visit and console me when
my brethren are in prison. I have saved you from death, and given you life;
do you in turn visit me when my brethren are sick. How powerful with God
is the love of the poor, or rather the pleasure he has in almsgiving! “God
rejoices in heaven” when a poor man receives a piece of bread on earth,
although the poor man is filled with shame at receiving it.
I am not surprised, now, that there were kings and queens who visited on
foot the poorest of the sick, fed, washed, and attended to them with their
own hands, and served them even on bended knees. Nor am I astonished that
many other persons of high position were not ashamed to walk publicly through
the streets carrying in their hands a napkin containing food and drink from
their own table, that they were bringing to the sick poor; nay, that they
were not ashamed to beg for the poor from door to door.
If we had only a little real faith, if we could only see, as they did, what
a great Lord is concealed under the persons of the poor, we should not wonder
at all this! And who amongst you, if he saw Christ himself standing at the
door begging for alms, would not look upon it as the greatest honor and happiness
to give him what he would ask for?
He would even share the last piece of bread, the last penny in the house
with his Redeemer. Nor would he allow a servant to do it; he would run at
once to the door himself and bareheaded, and with the greatest respect would
give his alms to Christ. Is there one amongst you who would send Christ away
from his door, with the customary “God help you,” under the pretence
that he cannot afford to give alms, or that he wants all he has for himself?
I do not think that any Christian could be so hard-hearted. And yet our faith
assures us that Christ comes in the person of the poor, and that he receives
whatever is given to them. Who, then, should not joyfully embrace every occasion
of giving alms that presents itself?
Listen, now, ye of little faith, who are hard and stingy to the poor, through
fear of being at a loss by them! “He that hath mercy on the poor lendeth
to the Lord, and he will repay him” (Prov. 19: 17). “He that is
inclined to mercy shall be blessed; for of his bread he hath given to the
poor” (Prov. 22: 9). “He that giveth to the poor shall not want”
(Ibid. 28: 27). “Honor the Lord with thy substance; and thy barn shall
be filled with abundance, and thy presses shall run over with wine”
(Prov. 3: 9). “Give, and it shall be given to you” (St. Luke 6:
38). What shall be given to you? “Good measure, and pressed down, and
shaken together, and running over, shall they give into your bosom.”
Could any promise be plainer or more certain than this? I need not go any
farther, for we have experience itself before our eyes to convince us, if
we only wish to learn from it. Tell me, have you ever heard any one complain
of being poorer, or of having greater difficulty in providing for his children,
on account of alms-giving?
Go through the whole world, ask, if you can, all the poor, what is the cause
of their poverty. Do you think you will find a single one who has been reduced
to poverty through practicing the works of mercy? You will find illustrious
houses decayed; respectable families ruined; those who inherited great wealth
now begging their bread; but I need not tell you why. Nay, many a one is
reduced to poverty by the very means that he used with a view of enriching
himself. But I never hear of any one becoming poor through alms-giving. Show
me a single instance in which a prudent man can complain that he has been
deceived in this respect; show me, if you can, children who have been
impoverished by the charities of their parents.
On the contrary, I can tell you of numberless cases in which temporal goods
have been increased even miraculously, and without the possessor’s
knowledge, in the hands of those who gave charity to the poor. Do you wish
to hear of miracles? I venture to say that at all times, almost, and in all
places, miracles have happened on account of generous alms-giving!
Read the Lives of the Saints, and you will find instances enough in which
they, after having given away all they had to the poor, have sometimes found
their barns full of corn, their cellars full of wine, and at other times
their coffers full of money, although they knew that a short time before
they had neither corn, wine, nor money.
It is related in the life of St. Germanus that when he once met some beggars
on a journey he told his deacon to share amongst them all the money he had
left, which consisted of three dollars. The deacon, not wishing to give it
all away, kept one piece back and divided the other two amongst the beggars.
On the same evening Germanus received two hundred dollars as a present. See
he said to the deacon, let this be a warning to you to lay aside your avarice
and to put your trust in God; you have not done faithfully what I told you
to do today; if you had kept back nothing we should now be a hundred dollars
richer, and should have received three hundred instead of two.
But, you think, these are miraculous things that happen only to holy people!
But, I say they are miracles that occur almost daily, as they who are constantly
charitable to the poor experience, for they are blessed in a special, though
natural manner. For instance, they get a legacy that they never dreamt of.
Their business prospers, or they are freed from losses and misfortunes. They
recover lost goods, or get back what was taken from them unjustly, and so,
in different ways that they hardly notice, God rewards them for their charity
to the poor. Yes, alms-giving is the most profitable business! Nor can it
be otherwise: our God is most faithful, and the promises he makes on this
head are plain enough. Even if that were not the case, he is most noble and
generous, and will not allow any man to outdo him in generosity. If you do
not believe me, try it yourselves. Engage in that business for a time, with
a lively confidence that God will repay you with interest. “Try me in
this, saith the Lord, if I open not unto you the flood-gates of heaven, and
pour you out a blessing even to abundance” (Malach 3).
But if you do not wish to try it, and if you reject my proposal through fear
that you and yours might suffer loss thereby and be brought to poverty, then
I tell you, in the name and on the infallible authority of God himself, that
you can find no more certain means of incurring the danger you dread—that
is, of suffering losses and poverty—than by being hard-hearted or niggardly
toward the poor. “He that giveth to the poor, shall not want; he that
despiseth his entreaty, shall suffer indigence” (Prov. 28: 29).
Sometimes people wonder and complain that with all their labor and trouble
they cannot get on; that they fail in business, and suffer losses and
misfortunes. How does that happen? I could easily discover the cause of it
with some. I should ask them: Are you generous to the poor? Oh, they would
say, how can we give much? We want all we have for ourselves. See, that is
the reason of it all. When people are niggardly toward God, and refuse to
give a penny to a poor man, they lose elsewhere, through the hidden decrees
of the Almighty, much more than they save. There can be no luck nor grace
where the poor are sent away empty-handed: “He that despiseth his entreaty
shall suffer indigence.”
What becomes of your excuses now, Christian parents? You say: I have a large
family and a small income, and I cannot give alms. What, have you many children?
Then you are in all the greater need of prosperity and temporal wealth and
blessings, in order to support and provide for them; is it not so? Invest
a part of what you have, so that it may bring you in good interest. You do
that sometimes, in spite of your large family, with men who can deceive you.
Do you think that God is not able to repay you, if you give your money to
him in the persons of his poor? Does he, who is the Creator and Lord of all
things, who has so often and so solemnly promised to reward you a hundredfold
for your charity and generosity, enjoy less credit with you than a mere mortal?
Could you place a better Guardian and Father over your children than the
Almighty God? Do you think that he cannot, or will not, protect you and yours,
although he protects the ravens and the sparrows, that reap not? Give to
God generously in the persons of his poor. “Make over to him the property
that you are keeping for your heirs. Let him be the Guardian and Protector
for your children.
The inheritance that is protected by God is in safety. That is the way to
provide for your children’s future.” Have you two children? Then,
according to St. Augustine’s advice, adopt Jesus Christ as the third,
and feed him at your table. What an honor it will be for you to be the
foster-father of the Son of God, to whom you owe everything! What a
happiness for your children to have Jesus Christ as their companion, and
to be his brothers and sisters by a new title! Do not turn him away; give
him to eat and drink, as if he were really amongst the number of your children.
It is not necessary for you to give all you have to the poor, and to keep
nothing for yourself. But let Christ have his share. “That is the way
to provide for your children’s future.” Only try it; I assure you,
nay, God assures you, that neither you nor yours will suffer any loss by
it. The saying still remains true: “Alms-giving never brings poverty.
It is the most profitable business of all.”
I am ashamed to think that I must exhort Christians to be charitable to the
poor, by such a wretched motive as temporal gain; as if I wished to make
alms-giving a sort of money-making trade. Our thoughts must rise far
higher. If everything in the world were lost to us, the eternal reward of
heaven ought to be more than enough for us! And now I conclude with the
beautiful, oft-quoted exhortation that the elder Tobias made on his deathbed
to his son: “Turn not away thy face from any poor person, and the face
of the Lord shall not be turned away from thee. According to thy ability,
be merciful. If thou have much, give abundantly; if thou have little, take
care, even so, to bestow willingly a little. For thus thou storest up to
thyself a good reward” (Tob. 4: 7-10) in this world and in the next,
which I wish you from my heart. Amen.
THE PEOPLE AT THE CROSS, AND THE PEOPLE OF TODAY
At Golgotha, in sight of the temple and city of Jerusalem, in the presence
of two or three millions of Jews, who had come to the city from all lands,
Jesus, the Son of God, hung upon the cross, an expiatory sacrifice for mankind
burdened with all manner of sin.
Near the cross of her dying Son stood Mary, His mother, filled with grief;
by her side John, the beloved disciple, and kneeling at the foot of the cross
almost insensible from sorrow and anguish, convulsively winding her arms
around the wood of the cross, was Mary Magdalen, the penitent.
On a cross at the right hand hung a penitent thief turned towards the Saviour;
at the left hand on another cross groaned another criminal of impenitent
heart, blaspheming the Holy One of Israel.
Around the agonizing Saviour stood the Scribes and Pharisees, that hypocritical
class of practiced miscreants, who hated and persecuted the innocent Lamb
Jesus, even in death, who blink to all the predictions of the prophets whose
books they had read, blind to the actual miracles which Jesus had wrought
before their eyes to prove His divinity and His mission, filled with envy
and hatred, reviled the dying Redeemer.
At a distance stood a crowd of curious, indifferent people, who had come
to Jerusalem to attend the feast of the Passover, and having heard of Jesus
were present at His crucifixion. Not far from them the rough soldiers and
executioners lay around, dividing among themselves the Saviour's clothes
and casting lots for His seamless garment.
This was the society that surrounded the Son of God and Redeemer of the world
bleeding on the cross, and in their different phases they are types of the
men of today.
Only few were there who clung to the Saviour in unwavering faith and true
love, ready to die with Him, and for Him. There were few who suffered all
taunts and sneers all revilings and blasphemies, and departed not from the
cross.
Of these three were especially faithful, viz. Mary, John, and Magdalen. Those
who like Mary and John are pure and innocent, or like Magdalen are weeping
for their sins, who confess Jesus with their heart and lips, cling faithfully
to Him, and permit neither persecution nor death to separate them from Him,
are like the faithful three at the cross.
As then by the cross, so today, the number of the faithful is small, and
great is the number of those who, like the careless spectators of the
crucifixion, are not decided enemies of Jesus crucified, nor yet His firm
friends.
They have indeed been baptized in the name of Jesus, they remain externally
with the Catholic Church, which Christ founded, but they are sunk in
lukewarmness, have no living faith, and are wavering to and fro like a reed
between the world and Jesus.
They fear the sneers of the so-called learned and enlightened, many of whom
are well represented by the Scribes and Pharisees, who, having no faith in
Christ themselves, bear in - their hearts only hatred and contempt for His
Church; they shun the cross, because it is too heavy for their sensuality;
they do not, it is true, commit public crimes, they prize highly a good name,
occasionally observe the law of the Church, but are accessible to every error;
their ears incline to every blasphemy against the religion of Jesus and His
ministers, the priests.
Instead of standing fearlessly and boldly for Christ, for the holy faith
He has taught, and which the Church teaches, they turn away, are silent,
even go with the Church's enemies that they may not be sneered at.
They are neither hot, nor cold, so that the words of the Scriptures are verifled
in them: Because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold, nor hot, I will begin
to vomit thee out of my mouth. (Apoc. III. 16.)
The Lord casts away from Him these lukewarm, indifferent Christians, as nauseous
saliva, and leaves them to their destruction.
The true Pharisees of our day are those who purposely close their eyes to
the light of truth, who have put aside faith in Jesus, and are no longer
disposed to receive instruction.
Their pride, their egotism has blinded them, with their poor reason they
wish to understand the mysteries of the Almighty, with their weak intellect
to fathom His ways, even seek to be equal to God; they deny every revealed
truth, they deny the existence of heaven and hell, they propose to live like
the animals, without God, — but their end is, ruin!
Few of them, having seen their error, as the thief on the cross at the right
hand of Jesus, turn repentingly to the Redeemer; obdurate as the robber and
murderer at His left, the Pharisees of our day cease not to blaspheme the
Crucified, and to revile His holy Church.
These are assisted by the apostates and unbelievers, who, like the soldiers
and executioners, divide among themselves His clothes, and cast lots for
His seamless garment. Those clothes which the soldiers divided among themselves,
are the truths which the apostates and heretics yet retain after their apostacy
from the Church.
They have divided these truths, for they have separated themselves into thousands
of sects, and possess only portions of the one truth, which Jesus has laid
down in. His Church, whole and complete. “Upon my vesture they have
cast lots.”
This seamless vesture of Christ is His holy Church that cannot be separated
or divided, she is one, and must remain one to the end of time. Concerning
this one true Church, the sects all quarrel, all want to be the true Church
without considering that, as but one soldier, by the lots, received Christ's
seamless garment, so only one association of men can be the true Church,
and that is the association which Christ has chosen.
Thus we find at the cross on Golgotha the different classes of people of
our day represented, namely, the pure and innocent; the repenting sinners,
firm adherents of Jesus and His teachings; as also the lukewarm, wavering,
nominal Christians; obdurate heretics, professed infidels and apostates.
So today mankind is divided into like parties.
To which party do you belong, O Christian soul? To which do you wish to belong?
Choose! The time of the division is near. The Lord already holds in His hand
the winnowing shovel to clear His floor. If you are not a firm adherent of
Jesus and His Church, in the storm that is gathering you will be blown like
chaff.
If you remain with the small group at the cross, in persevering courage,
you will stand firm, and on the day when the cross shall appear in the clouds
of heaven, you, with Mary, the mother of the faithful, with John and with
Magdalen, will triumph forever, as a victorious knight of the cross. Decide!
-- Fr. Leonard Goffine
From
Catholic
Conservation
Motu Proprio Implemented
No more permission needed for Latin Mass, Cardinal says
Rome, Sep. 14, 2007 (CWNews.com)
With the formal implementation of Summorum Pontificum, the Pope's motu proprio
providing wider access to the 1962 Roman Missal, diocesan priests do not
need permission to celebrate the Latin Mass, a top Vatican official has stated.
Cardinal Dario Castrillon-Hoyos-- the president of the Ecclesia Dei commission,
which supervises Vatican outreach to traditionalist Catholics-- says that
"from this point, priests can decide to celebrate the Mass using the old
rite, without permission from the Holy See or the bishop."
In an interview with Vatican Radio on September 13, broadcast just before
the motu proprio officially took effect, Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos explained
that Pope Benedict's motu proprio affirms the right of any priest to use
the "extraordinary form" of the Latin liturgy. "It is, therefore, unecessary
to ask for any other permission," he said.
Some diocesan bishops have cautioned their priests against using the 1962
Missal without explicit permission from the diocese. But the president of
the Ecclesia Dei commission-- which would hear any appeals regarding the
new liturgical rules-- contradicted that notion in his Vatican Radio appearance.
While affirming the bishop's authority to resolve any liturgical conflicts
within his diocese, the Colombian cardinal said that the bishop should exercise
that power "without negating the right that the Pope has given to the entire
Church."
Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos said that the motu proprio involves "no big change"
in the liturgy of the Roman Church, since the older liturgy was never banned.
Vatican II affirmed the freedoms of the faithful, he said, and one such freedom,
which Pope Benedict has now confirmed, was access to the older liturgical
form.
"Nothing is imposed on anyone" by Summorum Pontificum, the cardinal said.
In allowing for greater use of the old Missal, he explained, Pope Benedict
is merely "opening a possibility to the faithful who request it."
Or as it says on the counter to the left of this post,
0 days, 0 hours, 0 minutes, 0 seconds.
No more obstructions from Bishops please! Such obstructions divide rather
than unite the Church.
Abortion is
Back -- in 2008
by Patrick J. Buchanan
Partial birth abortion is a grisly and revolting procedure.
An unborn baby is brought halfway out of the birth canal, then has scissors
rammed into its skull and its brains sucked out for easier passage. Sen.
Pat Moynihan called it "infanticide." Seventeen Senate Democrats defied the
feminist fanatics to vote to outlaw it.
Now the Supreme Court, five to four, agrees that outlawing this barbaric
method of aborting an unborn child does not interfere with what has been
for 34 years a woman's constitutional right to rid herself of an unwanted
child.
This is being hailed as a victory for President Bush and the pro-life community.
And it is, though outlawing the procedure only means that if a woman, late
in her pregnancy, wishes to be rid of her unborn baby, she and her abortionist
now have to find a nicer way to kill it.
The partial birth abortion ban is a little like the state outlawing the beheading
of innocent people, while approving of their execution by more humane means.
While the ban is most welcome, it remains but a limited victory for those
who believe in the sanctity of all human life.
Politically, however, the court decision is portentous, and bad news for
Democrats in 2008. For several reasons.
As Robert Novak reports, a 2006 Fox News poll found that the nation, by 61
percent to 28 percent, favored outlawing partial birth abortion. Yet not
only did all the leading Democratic candidates for president vote to keep
the horrific procedure legal, all denounced the Supreme Court for upholding
the law that bans it. To pander to the social radicals who vote in Democratic
primaries, Hillary, Barack Obama and John Edwards all paddled far outside
the American mainstream.
Consider the latest poll in the pro-choice vs. pro-life debate.
According to Sunday's New York Times, 23 percent of Americans want all abortions
outlawed. Another 41 percent believe there should be greater restrictions
on abortion. Thus, 64 percent of all Americans, almost two-thirds, feel abortion
laws are too liberal already and want more restrictive laws.
Among young voters 18 to 29, 20 percent want abortion outlawed. Fifty percent
want greater restrictions. Thus, 70 percent of young people want more protections
for the unborn, while Hillary, Barack and Edwards all want none.
Look for Right to Life groups to run ads linking the Democratic nominee to
this barbaric and now criminal procedure, which even the high court agrees
can be treated as a felony, justifying two years in the penitentiary for
any abortionist who performs it.
If the Democratic presidential nominee can be credibly portrayed -- in Iowa,
Minnesota, Wisconsin, Ohio or Pennsylvania -- as seeking the return of this
pagan practice, it could be decisive.
Also, the five-to-four decision, with Justice Anthony Kennedy in the majority,
indicates the "health of the mother" no longer trumps all other arguments
in the debate. Even more crucial, it puts the Right to Life movement within
one vote of overturning Roe.
While neither of the Bush II justices, John Roberts or Sam Alito, has specified
whether he would vote to overturn Roe, most observers believe that, given
the right case, they will drop Roe into the same dumpster with Dred Scott.
With Sandra Day O'Connor gone, the four-to-four liberal-conservative split
on the court, with Kennedy as the decider, also means the composition of
the court will again be a major issue in 2008.
And, again, this is to the advantage of the Republicans. For when the issue
is framed as to whether voters prefer justices to be strict constructionists
of the Constitution or liberal activists, Republicans win. Antonin Scalia
gets you more votes than Ruth Bader Ginsberg.
The court decision aids Republicans in another way. While the party is
increasingly divided on Iraq, free trade and immigration, on the issue of
new justices in the tradition of Scalia, Thomas, Alito and Roberts, there
is unanimity. It was not the Democratic left but the Republican right that
reunited to sink Harriet Miers.
The Republican candidate least served by the Supreme Court decision, though
he welcomed it, is Giuliani. Until lately, Rudy has been 100 percent pro-choice
on abortion, even opposing the ban on partial birth.
While he is committed now to appointing Justices like Scalia, he will be
hard pressed on whether he wishes to see Roe overturned and whether he would
use tax dollars to fund abortion.
Moreover, as a pro-choice Catholic, Rudy faces possible censure by the hierarchy
of his church, as did John Kerry. And this time, the indulgent Cardinal McCarrick
is gone from Washington, and Cardinal Egan may be gone from New York by November
2008.
With last week's decision, the Roberts court has put the life issue front
and center in the politics of 2008, and it is hard to see how this is not
bad news for the Democrats.
The only worse news would be for George Bush to get the chance to name a
third justice -- to fill one of the four liberal seats.
That would set the cat down among the pigeons. |
NEWS |
Facing their convent's closure
Spencer Weiner / LAT
Sister Margarita Antonia Gonzalez reacts to a discussion of a plan by the
Archdiocese of Los Angeles to close the Sisters of Bethany's convent in Santa
Barbara and sell it to help pay for its $660-million settlement of priest
sexual abuse cases. Gonzalez lives and works at the convent with two other
nuns.
L.A. Archdiocese plans to sell the Santa Barbara site to help pay its priest
abuse settlement. The nuns will likely have to leave the city where they've
served the poor.
By Rebecca Trounson, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
SANTA BARBARA -- For 43 years, Sister Angela Escalera has lived and often
worked out of her order's small convent on this city's east side, helping
the area's many poor and undocumented residents with translation, counseling
and other needs.
Now retired and partly disabled at 69, the nun thought she would live out
her days here, in the community where she is still an active volunteer and
in the dwelling that was built for the order in 1952.
Nuns Evicted
But she and the other two nuns at the Sisters of Bethany house recently received
word that their convent, which is owned by the Roman Catholic Archdiocese
of Los Angeles, will be sold to help pay the bill for the church's recent,
multimillion-dollar priest sex abuse settlement.
The nuns have four months to move out, according to a letter from the
archdiocese. The notice, which was dated June 28 but not received until the
end of August, asked the women to vacate the property no later than Dec.
31 -- and noted that an earlier departure "would be acceptable as well."
Signed by Msgr. Royale M. Vadakin, the archdiocese's vicar general, the letter
offers the nuns no recourse but thanks them for their understanding and
cooperation during a difficult time.
"We're just so hurt by this," Escalera, the order's local superior, said
this week. "And what hurts the most is what the money will be used for, to
help pay for the pedophile priests. We have to sacrifice our home for that?"
Tod M. Tamberg, spokesman for the archdiocese, said Thursday that the decision
to sell the Santa Barbara property was difficult but necessary.
In July, the archdiocese announced a record, $660-million settlement with
the victims of hundreds of clergy abuse cases. At least $250 million and
up to $373 million of the total will be paid directly by the archdiocese,
with the rest coming from insurers and various religious orders.
The archdiocese has said it will sell up to 50 non-parish properties, including
its administrative headquarters on Wilshire Boulevard in Los Angeles, to
cover the bill. Apart from those central offices, the Santa Barbara convent
is the first property to be publicly identified as among those to be sold.
"The pain is being spread around," Tamberg said. "We're losing our headquarters
here, and none of the employees got a pay raise this year. This is just part
of making it right with the victims, and we all have to share in the process
even though none of us -- the nuns, myself -- harmed anybody. All of us as
a church have to pay for the sins of a few people."
But in Santa Barbara, where the beige stucco convent and its veiled nuns
in navy blue habits have long been fixtures of the east-side landscape, the
news was trickling through the community this week, sparking concern and
some anger.
On Wednesday morning, as Escalera spoke with several visitors, a woman knocked
at the door. Carmen F. Torres, who lives nearby and attends the Catholic
church adjacent to the convent, said she had just heard the news.
"I didn't want you to feel abandoned," Torres told the nun in Spanish, adding
that she was hoping to raise money for the sisters by renting a small home
she owns in Texas.
"We need to see what we can do to help you."
Torres called the decision to sell the convent unjust, given the nuns' long
history of care and service to their low-income community. Other supporters
spoke even more strongly.
"It's outrageous," said Sally Sanchez, a community activist who added that
she had known Escalera since 1964, when each had just arrived in Santa Barbara
from the Los Angeles area. "Why should [the nuns] pay for the sins of the
morons who did this? Why can't they sell something else?"
Tamberg said the nuns had lived rent-free in the archdiocesan-owned building,
which he said was a fairly unusual arrangement, with most religious orders
nowadays owning their own houses. He -- and the nuns -- said that if they
had to leave Santa Barbara, they would probably move into their order's convent
in Los Angeles, which is not owned by the archdiocese.
Although they do not pay rent, the three women have largely supported themselves,
using the money they earn from outside jobs and disability income to pay
for their utilities, for maintenance on their home and for their food and
other needs. They and other sisters of their order were honored for their
years of service to the community at a June luncheon that was attended by
Santa Barbara Mayor Marty Blum.
Escalera, whose energy belies her years, is a former notary public and social
worker who retired from Catholic Charities in 2003 but still works as a volunteer
each afternoon, mainly assisting residents with immigration and translation
problems. A diabetic who has developed balance and other health problems
in recent years, she uses a walker and receives a state disability stipend.
Sister Consuelo Cardenas, 55, is a native of Colombia who works full time
as a religious education coordinator for a nearby parish, Our Lady of Sorrows,
in Santa Barbara. She has lived at the convent about 25 years, a span broken
briefly by a return to Colombia.
The third nun, Sister Margarita Antonia Gonzalez, 49, was born in El Salvador
and has lived at the Santa Barbara facility about four years. She is the
sisters' housekeeper and cook and assists with Mass at the adjacent church,
Our Lady of Guadalupe.
The convent, which looks much like an ordinary house from the outside, has
a warren of small rooms and sits on about a quarter of an acre. It includes
a living room, dining area and chapel. Its bedrooms each have room enough
for a single bed, a desk and a wash basin. The front garden, with an avocado
tree and a stone fountain, was a surprise gift to the sisters from community
members many years ago.
The Santa Barbara County assessor's office lists the property's value at
$97,746, although it seems likely to sell for more, if a sale goes through.
Even the small, older homes near the convent start at about $700,000, according
to the Zillow real estate appraisal website.
As she sat this week in the convent's simple living room, where paintings
of biblical scenes and framed photographs of the order's founders line the
walls, Escalera said she was still wrestling with her feelings about the
letter, shifting between pain, anger and resignation. She said she remained
upset that the archdiocese had not contacted the nuns directly but had chosen
instead to send a letter to the convent in Los Angeles, which then notified
the Santa Barbara sisters.
"We're not even worth a phone call," she said. "That's one of the things
that hurts so much."
She and the other sisters said that they were grateful for the support from
many in the community, but that they knew they could not afford to pay for
a rental in Santa Barbara on their own, making it likely that they would
be forced to leave the area.
Escalera, looking weary after a stream of visitors, said, however, that she
could not consider the future yet.
"I'm not ready right now," she said. "I'm still trying to think it through.
I do trust in God and I will accept his will. . . . But if something happens
to change this, that would be wonderful."
rebecca.trounson@latimes.com |
This Sunday's Lesson |
VOL. I = THE BAD CHRISTIAN
Fr. Francis Hunolt
EIGHTEENTH SUNDAY AFTER PENTECOST
Blasphemy
“He blasphemeth.” St. Matthew 9: 3
On other occasions, influenced by hatred and envy, the Jews had called him
a disturber of the people, a drunkard, a sorcerer who drove out devils in
the name of the devil, but all these accusations were as nothing compared
to that of being a blasphemer—that is, one who assails the Almighty,
who is worthy of infinite honor and glory, with curses and injurious
expressions. I will take occasion from the Gospel of today to speak
of this fearful sin, which is so common unfortunately, in order to inspire
you with such a horror of this crime that you will be shocked at the very
name of it.
I.What is blasphemy?
II. What a terrible sin it is.
I. Curses are often uttered in anger and impatience which ignorant people
sometimes look upon as blasphemies, but wrongly; and there are many expressions
in vogue which seem to be pious, but in reality are blasphemous. To be able,
then, to make the necessary distinction, we must first answer this question:
In what does the sin of blasphemy consist? It consists in using injurious
or dishonoring expressions toward God, which assail any of his essential
perfections, or affirm of him something unworthy of his supreme majesty,
or attribute to creatures what belongs to him alone.
The first kind of blasphemy is committed by those unfortunate, miserable
and wretched men who, on account of losses, accidents, trials, and miseries,
murmur against divine Providence, and break out into the following
or similar complaints: Oh, there is no justice in heaven any more; God has
forgotten me; he seems to take a pleasure in tormenting me; he cannot cause
me greater torment that he is causing me now. What have I done that he should
treat me so cruelly? I have not sold Christ, at any rate; I have more to
suffer than I deserve. Things have come to such a pass with me now that God
can no longer help me. I will not pray any more, nor do any good works, for
God will not hear me in any case. All expressions of this kind are grievous
blasphemies, because they attack the infinite wisdom, power, goodness, mercy
and justice of God. There are others whose blasphemous tongues assail the
all wise and inscrutable arrangements of God’s Providence. Why,
they think or say, should God look after me always? He has enough to do without
taking such interest in me and my belongings. God has not made a fair
division of worldly goods; he gives one too much, another too little, and
nothing at all to a third; one must suffer hunger, while another has abundance
of everything. God is not just in allowing that good and pious man to suffer
so many afflictions, while he neglects to punish that worthless and wicked
fellow. It seems that he who serves the devil is better off and happier than
he who is faithful to God. It is easy to say that I must abandon myself to
the arrangements of God’s Providence; if I do not make my own
fortune I need not expect much from them. People who indulge in blasphemy
of this kind appear to think that they can govern the world better than the
Almighty; like the wicked king Alphonsus, who used to say in his foolish
pride: “If I had been God’s counselor in the creation, I could
have suggested many improvements to him.”
2. To the second class of blasphemers, that is, to those who attribute something
false or unbecoming to God, belong those who say, for instance, when it thunders:
Now God is playing skittles; or, the drums are beating in heaven; or, heaven
is falling to pieces. Such people say sometimes to one who is praying:
Oh, you are annoying God; let him have a little rest; he has something
else to do besides hearing what you have to say. If one is anxious about
the future, they say, oh, leave it to God; he had a wise mother. To the same
class belong those who attribute to creatures what belongs only to God or
to his Saints; this is done by way of showing affection, when some miserable
creature is called by another his god, his divinity, his chief treasure,
his adorable; or in the expressions, as true as God lives, as true as Gospel,
I am as innocent as the Virgin Mary. Although these latter expressions
may be excused from blasphemy, still they are not becoming, and they
are injurious to God, because they affirm a human and fallible truth with
a certainty that belongs only to divine truth.
3. To the third class belong those who, in cursing others, wish that they
may be destroyed and ruined by what God has appointed for our welfare and
eternal salvation. For instance, may the Blood of Christ, or the Death of
Christ, or the Sacrament strike you dead. In a word, all expressions
that contain contempt of God or of divine things, whether they are true or
false; as, for example: The man above is not of that kind; God is a good
man; God is a cunning politician; God knows me well, and he will not do anything
to me; the weather-man above must give us a good season. Again, there are
people, such as half-atheists and desperate characters, who say: I will believe
and live as I will, and then God must give me the place in heaven that
I wish to have; St. Peter and I are well acquainted; he will not fail to
let me in when I knock at the gate of heaven what have I to do amongst the
beggars and other low people in heaven? I will find far more respectable
company in hell. All these expressions are disrespectful to God and to divine
things. In this, then, consists the sin of blasphemy. And what sort of a
sin is it? The most fearful of all.
II. We can deduce the grievous malice of a sin from three circumstances:
1. When we consider who it is who is thereby attacked and offended;
2. Who it is who offers the offence;
3. Why is it that the offence is offered? From these three circumstances
we shall see that blasphemy is a fearful sin.
1. Who is thereby attacked and dishonored? It is no other than the God of
infinite wisdom, power and goodness, who is worthy of all honor and reverence,
in whose honor thousands of happy princes of heaven, Cherubim and Seraphim,
with faces veiled through respect, sing their song of praise: “Holy,
holy, holy, Lord God, the heavens and the earth are full of thy glory.”
This God is attacked, dishonored and insulted by the blasphemous tongue.
And the insult is offered to him directly. God is dishonored by every sin,
as St. Paul says: “Thou, by prevarication of the law, dishonor
God.” Oh, man! Do you think of what you do when you commit a sin, no
matter what it is? You dishonor God, because you refuse to do as he wishes
you to do.
But there is a great difference between blasphemy and other sins. Other vices
are confined, so to speak, to God’s creatures. Pride is a great
vice, by which one arrogates to himself praise and honor that do not belong
to him, and looks down haughtily on others. Injustice is a great sin, for
by it the property of others is stolen and kept. Impurity is a great sin,
which defiles both body and soul. Drunkenness is a great sin, by which a
man deliberately deprives himself of the use of reason. Anger, hatred,
envy, revenge, persecution, injuring others, detraction, cursing and swearing,
all these are great sins, by which one gives vent to his ill feelings against
the servants of God. But it still remains true that all these sins appear
small when compared to blasphemy, for that is the only most terrible sin
which attacks God himself directly and dishonors him.
2. Who is it that dares to offer it? I might ask, like the Pharisee: Who
speaketh blasphemies? It is a poor mortal, a worm of the earth. Yes, he who
is rottenness, and the son of man is a worm (St. Luke 5: 21). He who is utterly
powerless, and who must depend on God for everything, dares to open his insolent
mouth against heaven, and to use the tongue which he cannot even move without
God’s help in cursing and reviling the Almighty! And what kind of men
are they who are guilty of such a grievous crime? Are they Turks, heathens,
or idolaters? It would be less intolerable on the part of such as those.
“If my enemy had reviled me, I would verily have borne with it,”
is the complaint that our Lord makes by the Psalmist: “And if he that
hated me had spoken great things against me, I would perhaps have hid myself
from him” (Ps. 54: 13). But they are Christians, brought up in the house
and true Church of God, who have been consecrated in Baptism as friends and
children of God, relations and brethren of Jesus Christ, who often eat the
bread of Angels, his flesh, at the table of the Lord, and who are called
to be heirs of the kingdom of heaven. They are Christians who, in preference
to all other people, receive abundant graces and benefits every day,
every hour, every moment, from God. And I ask, must Christians revile God,
blaspheme him and curse him? The Turks are severely punished if they mention
even the name of their prophet Mahomet in anger; nay, although they are sworn
enemies of the Christian religion, they dare not curse by the name of Jesus
Christ, whom they reverence as a great prophet. But Christians, who adore
Jesus Christ as their God, who uncover their heads and bend the knee whenever
his Holy Name is mentioned, treat that Name so disrespectfully, revile
and blaspheme it, whenever they get in the least passion, or anything is
said or done to vex them!
3. And why should we give way to blasphemy? Oh, my God! Says St. Augustine,
with bitter tears, how is it possible for a man to be so wicked as to seek
nothing by sinning but to sin against and offend Thee? Is a man given to
the lusts of the flesh? Alas, there is nothing wonderful in that! Corporal
beauty and sensual pleasure are very powerful attractions that offer a gentle
violence to the human heart. Is a man given to avarice and injustice? He
is blinded by a love of riches, which will help him to supply all his wants.
Is a man ambitious? The mind is easily captivated by the praise of others
and by the desire of their esteem. And yet, although we are born with those
inclinations, not one of them should be sufficient to induce us to
sin. But alas, it is for the purpose of satisfying those inclinations that
sin is committed! Ask one who has killed another why he has done so. Either
to get his money, he will answer, or through fear of being injured by him,
or through desire of revenge and having satisfaction for an insult.
If he were to say that he knows not why he killed the man, unless it was
to have the pleasure of killing him, we should hardly believe him.
Such are the words in which St. Augustine bewails the sin of theft that he
committed in his youth by stealing berries out of a garden, not through
fondness for them, but through sheer love of mischief. And it is in that
way, but very much worse, that blasphemers act whenever they speak so as
to dishonor God; for there is nothing whatever to impel them to such a sin
but a desire of reviling and insulting the Almighty. Tell me, blasphemer,
what pleasure or profit do you find in speaking so disrespectfully of God,
in cursing by the holy Sacraments, or by the Blood and Death of Jesus
Christ, in treating the divine Majesty so contemptuously, or in making such
a profane use of the Word of God? Do you find any bodily pleasure in
it? Does it make you richer or more influential in the world? You gain nothing
of the kind. What, then, induces you to commit such a fearful sin? Nothing
but your more than diabolical malice in venting your anger against your
Creator.
Wretched mortal, what harm has your Creator done you? Has he ill-treated
you that you thus revile him and insult him? “Oh, my people,” he
asks by the prophet Micheas, “what have I done to thee, or in what have
I molested thee? Answer thou me.” Dear Christians, whom I have purchased
with my precious Blood, what harm have I done you? Have I ever given you
the least cause to be angry with me, that you now attack me and my name so
fiercely? Have I not given you countless proofs of the most tender, fatherly
love? I never cease doing good to you for a moment, and, ungrateful mortals
that you are, you repay my benefits by such shameful injuries. “For
seventy years,” says St. Polycarp, when his persecutors tried to induce
him to deny God, “God has done me nothing but good; why should I deny
him?” Blasphemous Christians, how many years of your lives are now past,
during which you have been enjoying the benefits bestowed on you by God?’
How can you dare to blaspheme his holy Name? No tyrant threatens you with
torture, there is neither wheel, nor gallows, nor sword, nor lance, nor rack,
nor gridiron to force you to forswear your God and curse him; there is no
one in the world who threatens you with death, no one who promises you either
pleasure or profit; there is nothing that can compel or induce you to blaspheme,
and yet you insult God so grossly! Your sin, then, can only proceed from
sheer diabolical malice. Nay, from more than diabolical malice, for the devils
tremble at the name of Jesus. It may be that the demons in hell are always
blaspheming God; still the blasphemies of men are more wicked and less to
be excused. For when the demons blaspheme, they do it only in thought and
desire; while you, oh, man, do it with thought and word! The reprobate curse
God on account of the severe tortures they have to suffer; and there is pity
for the wretch who is impaled alive, or broken on the wheel. But you, oh,
Christian, who have received nothing but benefits from God, what reason have
you to offend him by your blasphemous tongue? Amen.
VOL. I = THE BAD CHRISTIAN
Fr. Francis Hunolt
SIXTEENTH SUNDAY AFTER PENTECOST
To Find Fault with, and to Interpret in a Bad Sense, the Actions of Others
Is a Great Injustice
“They watched him.”— Luke 14: 1.
The Pharisees, being filled with hatred and envy of our Lord, kept a close
watch on everything he did. They desired to see or to hear something from
him which they could have found fault with, so as to make him odious to the
people. For this reason alone “they watched him.” How many critical
observers of the same kind can be counted in our days, who examine, watch,
and pry into the actions of others, put a wrong interpretation on and criticize
them, make them the subject of rash judgments and groundless suspicions,
and thus talk of and condemn their faults and failings! A vice which,
alas! Is very common among all classes of people, and is especially
Opposed to the charity we owe our neighbor, whether that meddling on our
part arise from malice or from imprudence.
1. Everything that comes from passion is opposed to fraternal charity; for
we can easily imagine that, when we have a bitter feeling toward another,
we are not likely to think or speak well of him when he is made the subject
of conversation. Anything that we hear, see, or suspect him of to his
discredit we cannot keep secret; we must speak of it at the first opportunity,
and we are more inclined to exaggerate than to lessen it. We say: “do
you know what happened lately? Such and such a one acted most shamefully;
his villainy has been discovered; I cannot trust him any longer; I thought
that man knew better; he pretended to be very clever, but now he has made
a grievous blunder.” But they who thus give way to hatred of their neighbor
are not always willing to make known their feelings; much less do they wish
to incur the blame of trying to injure another’s character, and therefore
they endeavor to conceal their motive as well as they can. It is a well-known
fact, they say, otherwise I would not mention it; I am sorry for the poor
man; it is a great pity he has such a fault. Oh, hypocrite! Are you really
sorry for him? If so, why do you not try to conceal his faults, that
he may at least have a chance of retaining the esteem of others? Why do you
bring further disgrace on him by relating his faults? It is a well-known
fact; otherwise I would not mention it! If it is so well-known, then what
is the use of your saying anything about it? You are merely wasting your
words. Suppose I said to you: “Two and two make four; today is Sunday;
these are well-known facts, otherwise I would not mention them;” would
you not think me mad? We know these facts already, you would say; there is
no necessity for you to repeat them to us; tell us something that we do not
know. It is a well-known fact; otherwise I would not mention it! To whom
is it known? To yourself, and not to others? Then you are evidently guilty
of injuring your neighbor’s character; you act against the right he
has to his good name, and you are alone to blame for making known his faults.
If his faults are known to many in the town, but not to those to whom you
speak of them, you still cannot be excused from a breach of charity, since
you spread still further what is disadvantageous to his good name. If Christian
charity and not ill-feeling prompted you to speak, you would find in the
same person many good qualities that redound to his praise; but as it is,
you say not a word about them. You are like a spider; you seek the poison,
and leave the honey behind, because your heart is full of ill-will against
your neighbor.
2. There is still a worse consequence of that fault-finding and criticizing
when it comes from hatred and envy; for not only are the faults and failings
of another noticed and talked of, but even his good qualities are misinterpreted;
because, when the heart is once filled with hatred of another, it is very
hard to look with a favorable eye at anything he does. The envious Pharisees
were not satisfied with criticizing what they imagined to be faulty in Christ
and his disciples; they found fault even with what they should have praised
and approved of. Such is the complaint our Lord makes in the Gospel of St.
Matthew: “John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say: he
hath a devil. The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say: Behold
a man that is a glutton and a wine-drinker, a friend of publicans and
sinners” (Matt. 11: 18, 19). If I drive out devils, they say I do
it in the name of Beelzebub, the prince of devils; if I heal the sick and
teach the people, they cry me down as a disturber and a raiser of sedition.
Such Pharisees are still to be found in great numbers amongst Christians.
If one whom they do not love is really humble of heart, they call him a
hypocrite; if he is patient and a lover of peace, he is looked on as a coward;
if he frequents respectable company, he is accused of being fond of
the pleasures of the table; if he avoids company, he is called a misanthropist;
if he does his duty without any regard to human respect, he is looked on
as an unmannerly boor; if he is friendly and polite to every one, he is
considered a flatterer and a deceiver. This hatred and ill-will finds something
sinful and faulty even in virtues, and when a man forms a judgment of that
kind, of course it comes out in conversation with others.
Nay, what adds to the malice and injustice of these hostile criticisms is
that when nothing in a person’s outward life and actions can be found
fault with, his secret thoughts and intentions, although known only
to God and himself, are made the object of attack, and bad motives are imputed
to him; his words and actions and behavior are carefully studied, in order
to find in them some proof that his intentions are bad. Thus they say: that
priest goes so often to that house and visits such and such a person, he
cannot mean anything good by it; that woman, that girl is always well dressed
when she appears in church, she can hardly come for devotion’s sake
alone; she never paid for that dress out of her own pocket; I have seen those
two talking together for a long time, and could see by their manner
how they are affected toward each other; did you not notice what a face so
and so made? I can easily guess what he is thinking of; did you hear what
he said, on that occasion? I know what he means well enough. Do not people
very often talk in the manner spoken of by St. James in his Epistle,
although in a different sense: “Do you not judge within yourselves,
and are become judges of unjust thoughts?” (James 2: 4.)
3. How do you know that what you say of that person is true? I have seen,
or heard it, you answer. And that is generally the only foundation
of the criticism: I have seen, or heard it! That is the judgment-seat before
which the virtues are summoned to receive their sentence. Has not God given
us to understand clearly enough that we must not trust such treacherous witnesses
as our eyes and ears? “He shall not judge according to the sight of
the eyes, nor reprove according to the hearing of the ears” (Is. 11:
3). how many there are whom these senses deceive! “I have seen it!”
What have you seen? “What that man did, where he went, how he
behaved.” And is that all? Have you seen his heart? Have you seen
the intention he had in acting as he did, in going to that place, in behaving
in that way? For it is certain that the goodness or malice of an outward
act depend principally on the intention one has when performing it. “For
what man,” asks St. Paul, “knoweth the things of a man, but the
spirit of a man that is in him?” (1 Cor. 2: 11.) If you were to see
a young woman, splendidly dressed, going through a hostile camp to the tent
of a general whose licentiousness is well known, and spending the night in
it, what would you think? Oh, certainly, you would say, she has lost her
virtue, and is a bad woman. And yet that was done in the Old Law by one of
the most chaste of women, Judith, whose purity was untarnished.
“I have heard it.” Indeed? And must it be true therefore? If we
are to take all we hear as Gospel, there will be no lies in the world any
longer. If everything people say is true, hardly any one will have a good
character, and we must look on Susanna and Joseph as guilty of adultery,
and our Lord himself as a drinker of wine, a disturber of the people, a
blasphemer, and a deceiver. Susanna was accused on oath by the two elders,
and all the people believed the accusation, and were about to stone her;
Joseph was accused by the wife of Putiphar, and was cast into prison; Christ
himself was publicly accused by the high-priest, the scribes, and nearly
all the Jewish people, and was condemned to death and nailed to the
Cross; yet all these accusations were wicked calumnies. How often have you
not been deceived by reports you have heard, so that you have afterwards
found to be false what you at first believed? How often do not people
interpret a thing in a wrong sense, either because they do not understand
what is said, or because some important word has escaped their ears? How
often does it not happen that an exaggerated or an imperfect report of a
thing makes it look quite different from what it really is?
4. Supposing even that what you say is literally true, and that many are
already aware of it—nay, more, supposing that no harm is done to any
one by your talking of it—yet you can hardly avoid violating Christian
charity even then. For you act in direct opposition to the rule of charity:
“do unto others as you wish them to do unto you.” Consider the
matter fairly, and acknowledge the truth to your own conscience; would you
be satisfied if others spoke of you in that way? If you were painted in such
black colors; would you like other people, to whom you are not at all answerable,
to pry into your concerns, to watch all your actions, to keep a list
of the persons with whom you associate, the places you visit, the
conversations you hold, to interpret your behavior, your faults and
failings according to their own ideas, and to make sport of them with others,
to laugh at and ridicule them? Even if your faults are known to many, would
you like to have them frequently spoken of, so as to keep them fresh
in people’s memories? But if you do not wish that to be done to
you, you must be careful not to do it to others.
5. “Judge not, that you may not be judged; for with what judgment you
judge, you shall be judged, and with what measure you mete, it shall
be measured to you again” (Matt. 7: 1,2) If you wish to give your neighbor
his due, and to practice the charity you owe him; if you wish to be friends
and followers of Jesus Christ; if you wish to stand well with God at
the judgment-seat, then you must never judge ill of another, and much less
say anything to his detriment. Do not meddle with the affairs of others.
If curiosity should prompt you to inquire what this or that person has said
or done, if the slippery tongue is on the point of criticizing others, restrain
it, reprove it in the words in which Christ reproved Peter when the latter
was too anxious to find out what was to become of John: “What is it
to thee? Follow me.” What hast thou to do with the faults of others?
Art thou created for no other purpose but to criticize them? Look after yourself
and your own soul; that is all that God requires of you. Thus you should
criticize your own actions, and see whether they are good or bad,
praiseworthy or reprehensible. According to the beautiful exhortation of
St. Paul: “Let every one prove his own work, and so he shall have glory
in himself only, and not in another” (Gal. 6: 4, 5); that is a matter
that concerns us all, but we have nothing to do with the actions of others,
for whom we are not responsible to God. “For every one shall bear his
own burden;” every one will have to give an account of his own works,
and according to them he shall be either punished or rewarded.
Let us act like the Apostles at the Last Supper, when Christ told them that
one of them was about to betray him. “And they, being very much troubled,
began to say: Is it I, Lord?’ (Matt. 26: 22.) Not one asked, is it my
neighbor? Is it Peter, Andrew, or Judas? But each one was afraid that he
himself might be the unhappy traitor. “Is it I, Lord?” Oh, if every
one were to attend to himself and to his own faults and sins, how much would
he not find to blame and condemn! He would soon see that he is like a traveler
who is carrying a bag on his back, and who can see only what is before him,
but not the load of sins he himself is carrying. You know how Christ acted
when the Pharisees brought before him the woman taken in adultery, and said
to him that she should be stoned: “Jesus, bowing himself down, wrote
with his finger on the ground” (John 8: 6); that is, he wrote on the
ground their secret sins. “When, therefore, they continued asking him,
he lifted himself up and said to them: he that is without sin among you let
him first cast a stone at her” (John 8: 7). How astonished they must
have been when they heard of this! They slunk away one after the other, like
thieves caught in the act; not one of them dared to cast a stone at the guilty
woman. Oh, if that same finger were to write down the sins and daily faults
of each one of us, so that we could see them, then indeed we should be
silent about others, and not he so ready to find fault with and to
cast stones at our neighbor; we should then leave him in peace, and try to
rectify our own misdeeds!
6. If you sometimes hear talk of that kind in company, act as if you did
not know what the talk is about; for if you listen to it, and show that you
take pleasure in it, you co-operate in the sin and in the injury done to
charity. Therefore, if you have any authority over those who are finding
fault with their neighbor, you must exercise it, and say to them with a holy
zeal: What is that to you? If they are not subject to you, although
they are your inferiors, you must modestly say to them: What is that to me?
I know nothing about the matter, nor do I concern myself with the affairs
of other people; or else you may say: If you wish to praise another in my
hearing, I will listen to you; but I have no ears for fault-finding.
Finally, you who are exposed to the criticisms and fault-finding of
others, be not disturbed at it; let people think and say of you what they
please; if you are guilty of what they accuse you, humble yourselves, acknowledge
that you deserve to be found fault with, and resolve to amend. If you give
reasonable grounds for suspicion or for unfavorable judgments of your conduct,
you are bound in conscience to remove that stumbling block out of the way
of others. If you are innocent, then be comforted! You are not the only one;
you have countless companions who must bear patiently similar criticisms
of their conduct; the saint who is free from them has yet to be born. Continue,
then, to live as true Christians; say confidently with St. Paul: “But
to me it is a very small thing to be judged by you,” or by any other
man’s day; it does not trouble or concern me in the least that men should
condemn me; I seek not their favor, nor do I fear their displeasure; “but
he that judgeth me is the Lord” (1 Cor. 4: 3, 4). He can see into my
heart, of which men know nothing; they may now condemn my actions behind
my back, but by and by they will not be my judges; there is One who will
judge me, and he will judge them, too, and their talk. To him I appeal; to
him I entrust my cause; if he does not speak against me, then my affairs
are prospering, even if the whole world were to look on me as the greatest
malefactor. Amen. |
|
|
el Alcázar de Toledo 
