Blog Layout
From the Pastor - 1st Sunday in Lent
February 16, 2024
Today's readings remind us why we partake in this 40-day Lenten journey — to prepare our hearts for the resurrection of Christ on Easter.
St. Peter reminds us in our Second Reading of the blessings we receive from Christ’s passion, death, and resurrection — “Christ suffered for sins once… that he might lead you to God.” And again, “[Baptism] is… an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”
To receive the blessings more readily from Christ’s passion, death, and resurrection, we too are called to endure 40 days “in the desert.” In our Gospel, Jesus was led by the Spirit into the desert where He was tempted by Satan. Jesus was called to face trials and to confront evil. During this time, He committed to intense prayer and fasting. It was not necessary for Jesus to go into the desert so that He might be purified, but rather, to endure the temptations of man for our sake. He was fully man, and experienced temptations just like us, yet responded to them perfectly, never falling into sin.
We should strive to fully participate in this Lenten season by mirroring Jesus, the model steward by Whom we are called to imitate. Through our time in the desert, we will confront evil by weeding out the roots of sin in our lives through fasting. And we will be sustained and nourished in the desert by prayer.
Let us strive to purify our hearts so that we might be ready to receive the glorious gift of Christ and partake in the riches that pour forth from this Gift. © Catholic Stewardship Consultants, 2024
Pastoral Pondering
During my time here at the parish, I have had a few occasions when I was asked my opinion of or to give permission for various readings and devotions related to the Servant of God, Maria Piccarreta and devotion to the Divine Will. To be transparent, I have long had concerns about this devotion and have generally discouraged folks from following it and have resisted requests to allow groups to be associated with the parish.
With this in mind, a 2022 communication from the Dicastery for the Causes of Saints to the president of the French Bishops’ Conference, Bishop Benoit Bertrand, is helpful and puts into words some of my own misgivings about this particular devotion and Luisa’s writing. This information is taken from a daily publication from Pillarcatholic.com, Starting Seven: February 2, 2024:
- “I have the duty to inform you that after a detailed and in-depth examination of them, this dicastery — without prejudging the exemplary conduct of the life and exercise of the virtues of the Servant of God — concluded that it was not possible to grant the nihil obstat for the continuation of the cause of beatification and canonization,” he wrote.
The cardinal described the cause as being “on hold,” due to theological, Christological, and anthropological issues in her writings:
- “Theological: the conception of the Divine Will proposed by the Servant of God is too rigid, mechanical, and obsessive, and seems not to leave Man the possibility of exercising his free will.”
- “Christological: the doctrine of reparation and victim spirituality developed by the Servant of God does not integrate the primacy of the merciful, unmerited, and unconditional love of God, and risks canceling or at least relativizing the free and gratuitous offering of the Redeemer.”
- “Anthropological: this same spirituality is marked by a deep pessimism about human nature. There is little or no reference to the Resurrection of Christ, Christian hope, sanctifying grace, the goodness of creation, and ecclesial communion.”
In a Jan. 24, 2024, letter to French bishops, Bishop Bertrand noted that Piccarreta’s writings were spreading in several dioceses.
- Her spirituality, he said, must “be presented in the perspective of the mystery of glory and merciful love, to avoid heterodox and misleading interpretations of the Christian message.”
‘Confusion and division’ A day after Bertrand wrote his letter, Archbishop Peter Chung Soon-taick issued a decree banning a group inspired by Piccarreta’s spirituality in his Seoul archdiocese.
He withdrew permission for the God’s Will Spiritual Research Society to hold meetings and revoked a license to publish more than 10 volumes, including Piccarreta’s “The Book of Heaven.”
- He said: “In the current situation of the Church in Korea, where private revelation is spreading indiscriminately, it is very likely that it will spread false piety among the faithful, and cause confusion and division within the Church.”
UCA News noted that the Korean bishops’ doctrine committee expressed concerns about Piccarreta’s writings in 2023, urging priests and lay people to distance themselves from the group promoting her works.
When dealing with any case of Private revelation in the Church, one must always evaluate such phenomenon and writing with the Church’s Public revelation. This involves Scripture and Tradition both of which provide the foundation for the magisterium of the Church. Thankfully, we have access to the Church’s magisterial authority to guide us and keep us within the proper bounds on matters of faith and doctrine.
From the Pastor
In today’s Gospel, taken from the sixth chapter of Luke, Jesus offers a very challenging, seemingly impossible approach to daily life. “Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. To the person who strikes you on one cheek, offer the other one as well, and from the person who takes your cloak do not withhold even your tunic.” It makes one want to say, “Seriously, Lord?” And He doesn’t stop there. Jesus adds, “Give to everyone who asks of you, and from the one who takes what is yours do not demand it back.” It seems so unfair! That is, unless we look at this way of life from a stewardship point of view. Then, not only does it seem doable (though challenging), but it also actually makes perfect sense. A steward understands clearly that all he has and all that he is — his very life — is a gift from God given to him from an unfathomable abundance of love. This changes everything! This means “my” cloak, “my” tunic, “my” money, and time — all of it ultimately belongs to God. He has entrusted these things to each of us in love to use for His purposes and His glory. Does this mean we are to be passive “doormats” to anyone who wants to take advantage of us? Certainly not. Jesus explains this in the next verse of this passage when He says, “Do to others as you would have them do to you.” There is nothing wrong with loving oneself since God loves us and has made us in His own image and likeness. Jesus is simply asking that we also approach others, and the sharing of our gifts, with this same attitude. He is giving us a definition here of real love, a steward’s love! ©Catholic Stewardship Consultants, 2025 Pastoral Pondering Work is good, man is born for work, but that does not mean that we should forget that rest is good as well. A lot of times we hear the third commandment of remembering and keeping holy the Sabbath, and we think the commandment is only fulfilled when we attend Mass on that day. The commandment, of course, extends to more than that. Can. 1247 reminds us that in addition to participating at Mass on Sundays and other holy days of obligation, the faithful are to abstain from works and affairs that hinder the worship due to God, the joy proper to the Lord’s day, or suitable relaxation of mind and body. This canon, of course, is an adaptation from the 1917 code which stated explicitly that one is to abstain from servile work, judicial work, and commercial operations (1917 CIC 1248). The specific wording is not present in the recent code but it still requires us to abstain from such works or acts. Regarding the mention of work, there are 4 common ways work can distinguished: The works we hear of frequently in the third commandment are Servile works which are works that require mainly bodily activity and seek to serve the welfare of the body. It gets its name from the fact that this was work that was usually done by servants. So these would include works like digging or ploughing, and mechanical works. Servile work’s character is such that it is not determined by the worker’s intention, the fatigue of the work, nor if there is payment involved. The character is determined by the nature of the work itself. There are also Liberal works/cultural works which are works of the mind. They proceed from the soul and look to cultivate the mind. Examples are reading, writing, singing, playing instruments, drawing and painting. Theologians hold that these works remain liberal even if one is paid for it or expends a lot of energy in performing the work. A third type is called ordinary (natural) work which is done for the daily sustenance of the body. Examples include eating, hunting, driving, cooking etc. A fourth type of work is judicial and commercial work which takes place in court or in the course of public trading. Examples here include sitting in court, defending criminals, buying and selling, etc. There are other forms of work whose natures are difficult to determine, and in such cases one is guided by the common opinion of men. For example painting, rowing, exercise seem like servile work but common opinion sees acts like these as recreation and regard them as lawful. I’m inclined to call exercise an ordinary work because it can be for the daily sustenance of the body. So which ones are not permitted on Sunday? The principle that exists for this subject is that any form of servile, judicial, and commercial work is forbidden on Sundays and holy days of obligation, but cultural and ordinary work is permitted. The reason as stated earlier is that servile, judicial, and commercial work prevent us from giving sufficient attention to the Lord, because of its effect on the body, and this is what the commandment and canon law warn against. Ordinary and liberal work do not have the same effect so they are allowed. Although to this I would add that we do not let them hinder the specifications of Can. 1247. Can we be permitted to do servile work on Sunday? Yes, several causes can allow for servile work to be done on Sundays and on holy days: Dispensations , if there is a just cause, may be granted by the Pope, a bishop in his diocese, or a pastor of his Church. The Custom existing in a place could be a reason why servile work is excused, so long as the custom is permitted and has not been censured by the bishop. Charity , done as a form of relief for one's neighbor who is in need, is sufficient to excuse servile work. Some examples are taking care of the sick and the poor. Necessity excuses one from the obligation if he cannot otherwise support himself. It excuses one when one would not have food for the day if he did not work, or when a person works so as not to lose the job or certain goods. Some might be compelled to work on Sundays, and can’t refuse doing so, such would be a sufficient excuse from the obligation. As is necessary, one is welcome to perform household chores that keep the family fed and the house in proper order. Sometimes the personal necessity might exist if there is a danger of sinning because of idleness. Smallness of the matter can also excuse from violating the obligation. Servile work, if done, should not last more than two hours. And if perhaps the work is light in character, then three hours is good. Piety towards God excuses the violation of the precept. This would mean that works which proximately/directly consider the worship of God are lawful. Best examples of these could be actions that take place within the liturgy, some altar serving roles, ushering duties, working in the church to clean or decorate it. Some final thoughts. Regarding servile works, perhaps they are not the same as they previously were, i.e., the works that servants would do. But many of us are servants in a way, and so what we do on a regular basis could be the servile work that we are called to avoid on Sundays and holy days. Recognize that we should joyfully seek to give God due to worship and relax our minds and bodies. Rest is good! And what I want for us is to make sure that we are faithful to all, and not just one of the stipulations of the third commandment. — Fr. Chinonso Nnebe-Agumadu
Today’s readings speak of an essential quality for the Christian steward — hope. This is especially fitting this year, as Pope Francis has designated 2025 as a Jubilee Year with the theme, "Pilgrims of Hope." According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, “Hope is the theological virtue by which we desire the kingdom of heaven and eternal life as our happiness, placing our trust in Christ’s promises and relying not on our own strength but on the help of the grace of the Holy Spirit (CCC 1817).” In many ways, this is the very definition of a stewardship way of life — focusing on eternity as we live our daily lives and relying on God to provide for our needs and satisfy our deepest longings for meaning and happiness right now. In today’s Gospel from Luke, Jesus describes the true richness of life that is possible for those of us who are willing to live as his hope-filled disciples. We are all familiar with this passage in which Jesus reveals the Beatitudes: blessed are the poor; they have the kingdom of God. Blessed are those now hungry because they will be satisfied. Blessed are those who weep because they will laugh. Blessed are those who are hated, excluded, and insulted because they are disciples of Jesus; they will be greatly rewarded in heaven. Jesus is describing here the character of one who is living a life of hope – the life of a Christian steward whose trust is firmly rooted in God and who is focused on others and eternity. It is not always an easy life, but it is a deeply meaningful life and one that leads to eternal reward. © Catholic Stewardship Consultants, 2025 Pastoral Pondering Lately, I have had a number of folks ask me different questions regarding the Sacrament of Penance (Confession), so I thought it might be a good idea to address some of those questions that might be of interest to a wider audience. Back in 1983 the International Theological Commission issues a document encouraging a renewal of understanding the sacrament. The opening statement of the document is a beautiful reminder of what it is all about: In the preaching of Jesus, the call to conversion is connected immediately with the good news of the Kingdom of God. (see Mt. 1:14 ff.). Thus, when the Church following Jesus, and by virtue of the mission which it has received, calls to conversion and announces the reconciliation which God has worked through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (see 2 Cor. 5:18-20), it preaches a God who is rich in mercy (Eph. 2:4)...Penance must be seen in an organic relationship with the other sacraments. In the first place, it is present in all as the word of reconciliation in the comprehensive teaching of the Church. A central witness to this is the article in the creed: “I believe...in the forgiveness of sins.” (“Penance and Conciliation,” in Origins, 23 [January 12, 1984], pp. 513-524. 1. Is confession necessary for the forgiveness of sins? The two introductory canons concerning the sacrament from the Code of Canon Law answer this question. Can. 959 In the sacrament of penance the faithful who confess their sins to a lawful minister, are sorry for those sins and have a purpose of amendment, receive from God, through the absolution given by that minister, forgiveness of sins they have committed after baptism, and at the same time they are reconciled with the Church, which by sinning they wounded. Can. 960 Individual and integral confession and absolution constitute the sole ordinary means by which a member of the faithful who is conscious of grave sin is reconciled with God and with the Church. Physical or moral impossibility alone excuses from such confession, in which case reconciliation may be attained by other means also. So, grave or mortal sin, under normal circumstances, can only be absolved through the sacrament. 2. Does confession have to be celebrated in a confessional? Can. 964 §1 The proper place for hearing sacramental confessions is a church or oratory. §2 As far as the confessional is concerned, norms are to be issued by the Episcopal Conference, with the proviso however that confessionals, which the faithful who so wish may freely use, are located in an open place, and fitted with a fixed grille between the penitent and the confessor. §3 Except for a just reason, confessions are not to be heard elsewhere than in a confessional. The canon simply states the norm that sacraments should normally be celebrated in a church or oratory. A just cause can justify celebrating the sacrament outside a church or oratory, e.g. a parish office, but this is not the norm. Moreover, confessionals are to be available in accordance with the norms of the Episcopal Conference. The proper norm for the United States was promulgated in 1999: “The National Conference of Catholic Bishops, in accord with the prescriptions of canon 964, §2, hereby decrees the following norms governing the place for sacramental confessions: Provision must be made in each church or oratory for a sufficient number of places for sacramental confessions which are clearly visible, truly accessible, and which provide a fixed grille between the penitent and the confessor. Provision should also be made for penitents who wish to confess face-to-face, with due regard for the Authentic Interpretation of canon 964, §2 by the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts, July 7, 1998 (AAS 90 [1998] 711). 3. Can a priest refuse to hear confessions face-to-face? The answer to this question is addressed by the reference to the authentic interpretation noted above. It states the following: “The minister of the sacrament of penance may legitimately decide, even if there is no necessity, to hear confessions in a confessional with a fixed grill.” Hence, the general norm is that the faithful have a right to have their confessions heard. They can also request face-to-face confession; however, the priest-confessor has the right to refuse this request. This is rooted in the protection of the priest in light of situations that have arisen of false accusations made against confessors in the administration of penance. A priest is at a great disadvantage because of the sacramental seal and the inviolability of the sacrament. Therefore, some priests are more comfortable not hearing confessions face-to-face.