Wednesday, V Easter
(Acts 15)
Many years ago Cardinal Avery Dulles wrote an instructive book titled Models of the Church. The work answers the question, what is the Church? Is it an institution with organizational offices and a clear line of authority? Or is it a vehicle of announcing the divine offer of salvation? Or perhaps it is servant to the world caring for the weak and instructing the powers regarding their responsibility? Maybe it is a sacrament, that is a sign of God’s ongoing presence among humans?
Although Cardinal Dulles indicates a preference for the sacrament model since it suggests a spiritual core, he concludes that the Church encompasses all the given models. It is not that the Church would not be all that it is without having an institutional structure, without preaching the Good News, without caring for the people, and without dispensing the grace of Christ. It is that without each of these identities it would lose its reason for being.
In the first reading today we see how from the beginning the Church has had an institutional face. Some people may sneer at Church bureaucracy hinting that it is not what Christ intended. But certainly during Apostolic times as well as today questions regarding Church order and doctrine were brought to the proper authorities – we see here the apostles and presbyters – for decision. Peter seems to have the preeminent role as head apostle although James, as chief elder of the Jerusalem flock, also has a significant voice. The institution has been modified through the centuries. Today’s structure of pope and curia with dioceses and religious institutions is not set in stone. But we can be assured that the Church will always be – out of identity as well need -- a visible institution.
Homilette for Wednesday, May 9, 2007
Wednesday, V Easter
(Acts 15)
Many years ago Cardinal Avery Dulles wrote an instructive book titled Models of the Church. The work answers the question, what is the Church? Is it an institution with organizational offices and a clear line of authority? Or is it a vehicle of announcing the divine offer of salvation? Or perhaps it is servant to the world caring for the weak and instructing the powers regarding their responsibility? Maybe it is a sacrament, that is a sign of God’s ongoing presence among humans?
Although Cardinal Dulles indicates a preference for the sacrament model since it suggests a spiritual core, he concludes that the Church encompasses all the given models. It is not that the Church would not be all that it is without having an institutional structure, without preaching the Good News, without caring for the people, and without dispensing the grace of Christ. It is that without each of these identities it would lose its reason for being.
In the first reading today we see how from the beginning the Church has had an institutional face. Some people today sneer at Church bureaucracy hinting that it is not what Christ intended. But certainly during Apostolic times as well as today questions regarding Church order and doctrine were brought to the proper authorities – we see here the apostles and presbyters – for discernment. Peter may have the preeminent role as chief apostle although James, as chief elder of the Jerusalem flock, also has a significant voice. The institution has been modified through the centuries. Today’s structure of pope and curia with dioceses and religious institutions is not set in stone. But we can be assured that the Church will always be – out of need -- a visible institution.
(Acts 15)
Many years ago Cardinal Avery Dulles wrote an instructive book titled Models of the Church. The work answers the question, what is the Church? Is it an institution with organizational offices and a clear line of authority? Or is it a vehicle of announcing the divine offer of salvation? Or perhaps it is servant to the world caring for the weak and instructing the powers regarding their responsibility? Maybe it is a sacrament, that is a sign of God’s ongoing presence among humans?
Although Cardinal Dulles indicates a preference for the sacrament model since it suggests a spiritual core, he concludes that the Church encompasses all the given models. It is not that the Church would not be all that it is without having an institutional structure, without preaching the Good News, without caring for the people, and without dispensing the grace of Christ. It is that without each of these identities it would lose its reason for being.
In the first reading today we see how from the beginning the Church has had an institutional face. Some people today sneer at Church bureaucracy hinting that it is not what Christ intended. But certainly during Apostolic times as well as today questions regarding Church order and doctrine were brought to the proper authorities – we see here the apostles and presbyters – for discernment. Peter may have the preeminent role as chief apostle although James, as chief elder of the Jerusalem flock, also has a significant voice. The institution has been modified through the centuries. Today’s structure of pope and curia with dioceses and religious institutions is not set in stone. But we can be assured that the Church will always be – out of need -- a visible institution.
Homilette for Tuesday, May 8, 2007
Tuesday, Week V
(John 14)
Jesus says that his peace is different from the peace the world gives. We are tempted to think that our concept of peace – universal harmony – is conceptually faulty. No, in as much as we work together with our brothers and sisters to produce a society that enables each person to develop his/her talents, there is real peace. This is exactly what Jesus means by shalom. Unfortunately, people do more talking about peace than living it. This is the reason for Jesus’ disclaimer for the world’s peace.
Of course, many people in our country are protesting for peace in Iraq today. They mean that the United States should withdraw its forces. No doubt, they are aware that there would still be much bloodshed. But they would argue that hostility is a given in Iraq with or without the U.S. presence. They would conclude that American military just ups the ante causing more violence. How would Jesus respond?
We can’t say and no one should appeal to him as the clincher for his/her argument. For sure, however, he wants all men and women to dialogue, not to fight over their differences. He would seek mutual understanding and compromise as much as truth allows. Finally, he would have opposing sides stand side-by-side in vigilance that the terms of disengagement be implemented. Such peace is not what the world gives but approximates very closely Jesus’ peace.
(John 14)
Jesus says that his peace is different from the peace the world gives. We are tempted to think that our concept of peace – universal harmony – is conceptually faulty. No, in as much as we work together with our brothers and sisters to produce a society that enables each person to develop his/her talents, there is real peace. This is exactly what Jesus means by shalom. Unfortunately, people do more talking about peace than living it. This is the reason for Jesus’ disclaimer for the world’s peace.
Of course, many people in our country are protesting for peace in Iraq today. They mean that the United States should withdraw its forces. No doubt, they are aware that there would still be much bloodshed. But they would argue that hostility is a given in Iraq with or without the U.S. presence. They would conclude that American military just ups the ante causing more violence. How would Jesus respond?
We can’t say and no one should appeal to him as the clincher for his/her argument. For sure, however, he wants all men and women to dialogue, not to fight over their differences. He would seek mutual understanding and compromise as much as truth allows. Finally, he would have opposing sides stand side-by-side in vigilance that the terms of disengagement be implemented. Such peace is not what the world gives but approximates very closely Jesus’ peace.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)