Sunday, October 18, 2020

 THE TWENTY-NINTH SUNDAY IN ORDINARY, October 18, 2020

(Isaiah 45: 1.4-6; I Thessalonians 1: 1-5; Matthew 22: 15-21)

No one will argue that it has been a very strange year. The pandemic has made almost everything different. Many do not go to work but work at home. Those who go to the office, store, or workshop wear masks. This year will be remembered as rare also for the American elections. Two very different men have been named as candidates for the presidency. One attends mass every eight days and carries the rosary in his pocket. However, he does not adhere to one of the highest values ​​of the Catholic faith - the need to protect the human person from conception. The other candidate does not present himself as religious. In fact, some of his actions seem unchristian. But for his appointment of three justices to the Supreme Court he will possibly be known as the president who has done more for the unborn than anyone else. We are fortunate to have this gospel of Caesar's coin to reflect on these unique choices.

The Pharisees and Herodians come together to trip up Jesus. In their time these two parties are as different as Democrats and Republicans today. However, because they see Jesus as a common enemy, they combine their forces to punish him. They approach Jesus, the teacher of the ascending law, with a burning question. They ask for his judgment on whether it is lawful to pay the tax, which is tribute, to Rome. To many Jews the tax seems like supporting a pagan dynasty that suppresses the kingdom of God in the promised land.

Jesus avoids answering their question directly. He realizes the insincerity of his adversaries. They do not want his wisdom but his humiliation before the people. But Jesus is smarter than they are. He asks them for the currency to pay the tax. The fact that they have it shows that they are more willing to pay the deplored tax than he is. Then he gives his judgment: "’ Give… to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's. "

Now some want bishops to come out in favor of candidates and parties in the elections. Their motives are often as selfish as those of the Pharisees. They want political backing for their candidates from respected people. However, bishops like Jesus in the gospel are not directly answering the question. There are a couple of reasons for this approach. In the first place, if the bishops support a candidate or a party, they are putting the Church in financial danger. In the United States, religious entities do not have to pay taxes if they do not get into politics. Second and most important, the bishops do not claim to be experts on political matters. They recognize that their expertise is personal morality and not the management of the common good.

However, as Jesus recommends that we give Caesar what is Caesar's, the bishops have some advice for the faithful in elections. Above all, they ask voters to form their consciences according to the moral tradition of the church. This tradition urges us to consider the character of the candidate. We want public officials who will not deviate from righteousness in an environment full of pride, money, and lust. Tradition also recommends that we look for candidates capable of meeting your goals. Nor do morals overlook the fact that rulers should be people of high principles with: respect for human dignity, conviction to solve most problems at the personal or family level, sense that the common good sometimes requires personal sacrifices, and finally, as Pope Francis has just reminded us, understanding that we are all brothers and sisters to each other.

Elections sometimes discourage us. We feel that the elect are not the most preferable people. In these cases the first reading can help us. Isaiah says that with Cyrus, a pagan king, God achieves his goal. God often takes advantage of unjust people to form a better people. That is why we have to keep praying to God. Let us ask him to form, with his infinite ways, a society where the dignity of all is respected, even the unborn. Let us pray that he enlightens our consciences to make sacrifices for the good of all.

Friday, June 1, 2012

Memorial of St. Justin, martyr

(I Peter 4:7-13; Mark 11:11-26)

The title “Good Samaritan” will always belong to the protagonist of Jesus’ parable about the man who helped a foreign stranger in need. But St. Justin is also worthy of the distinction. Born in Samaria with a hunger for truth, he converted to Christianity which he found capable of satisfying his need. He died a martyr when he was given the choice of worshipping idols or giving up his life. Justin’s life conforms well to the admonitions in today’s first reading.

Peter’s letter warns its readers to be “serious and sober-minded.” Nothing is to interfere with their attention to God and their love of neighbor. It mentions a “trial by fire” for peace-loving Christians indicating that their exemplary behavior will escape neither the world’s envy nor its contempt.

In an election year we must remain vigilant. There are many issues on which we are to evaluate candidates. We will be scorned for not giving central importance to bread and butter questions like how the economy may best serve our personal interests. Like Justin, however, we turn to Christ who will satisfy our need for what is true.

Homilette for Friday, October 10, 2008

Friday of the Twenty-seventh Week in Ordinary Time

(Luke 11:15-26)

Every election cycle candidates court the people’s favor by distributing T-shirts and, if they are incumbents, putting “sweeteners” in legislation. Like the crowd in the gospel wondering if Jesus casts out demons because he is in league with Beelzebub, the voters should question such freebies.

Jesus knows the thoughts of the people and tries to calm their anxieties. First, he uses logic. Beelzebub would be working against himself, he says, if he cast out demons. It would as foolish as cutting off your nose to spite your face. Then Jesus makes a comparison. He casts out demons no differently than local healers. If they suspect him, should they not also question the motives of the village exorcist? Finally, Jesus proposes a challenge. They might accept his marvelous deeds as a sign that the Kingdom of God has finally come. “Wouldn’t that be wonderful!” he seems to tell them.

But Jesus does not avoid the fact that the coming of the Kingdom will entail effort on the part of its beneficiaries. People have to convert to its standards of intellectual honesty, moral integrity, and love for all. If not, the vacuum created by the removal of the evil spirit will invite an even more precarious situation. We might think of a household that has exterminated all the mice that inhabited it. Unless protections and safeguards against pests are put in place quickly, mice and perhaps rats are likely to come in force.

Homilette for Tuesday, June 3, 2008

Memorial of Saint Charles Lwanga and his companions, martyrs

(Mark 12:13-17)

Jesus may have had only taxes in mind when he told the Pharisees and Herodians to pay Caesar his due, but certainly obligations to government extend beyond that. We should take interest in public affairs, obey laws, take our turn serving on juries, and vote with conscience. In this election year citizens let us reflect a moment on this last responsibility.

To quip, “Don’t vote; it only encourages them,” is perhaps as old as teens are rebellious. We have a civil if not a sacred duty to participate in elections. There may be times when not casting a ballot demonstrates one’s unambiguous intentions. But such a voter strike is normally well-organized and called to confront serious political disorder like the current outrage in Zimbabwe.

We should vote for candidates we think will best serve the common good. This means that we look beyond those who promise us the most reward financially to those who will best contribute to a just society. Character – a life dominated by virtue – is an important indication of candidates’ potential as are their positions on issues and their past performance.

Candidates this year will debate many critical issues. Their ideas on how to improve the broken immigration system and the hemorrhaging health care system deserve attention. But two other issues take priority because of their profound negative consequences on society. We should give preponderant weight to how candidates will stop the destruction of prenatal life and will preserve the understanding of marriage as a sacred relationship between a woman and a man. These are emotionally-charged questions so we need leaders with sensitivity as well as effectiveness. But above all they have to do what is right and convince the public of the justice for their actions.