God is Holy so Love Others -- A Lectionary Meditation

Leviticus 19:1-2, 98-18



1 Corinthians 3:10-11, 16-23


Matthew 5:38-48

God is Holy so Love Others

“You shall be holy, for I the Lord your God am Holy.” That is the way the passage from Leviticus 19 begins. In Matthew 5, as this week’s passage from the Sermon on the Mount concludes, we read this admonition: “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (vs. 48). Are these two words of admonition all that different? Indeed, if you look closely, both passages cover similar ground. Both passages speak as well to loving one’s neighbor. In fact, in Matthew, Jesus extends this beyond the neighbor to the enemy. Paul’s word to us may not seem in line with these two admonitions, but perhaps his word concerning building a proper foundation comes into play. The wisdom of God is this: God is holy, so you must love that which is by God’s decree, deemed holy. We belong to Christ, and therefore his life and his witness is our guide to living life fully in the presence of God.

Too often we separate love and holiness from each other. God is either holy or God is loving, but not both. Our problem may be that we interpret one attribute as being open and the other restrictive, but since both are lifted up in Scripture as defining God’s nature, perhaps we need to consider how they might be related. And maybe the call to be holy and perfect in imitation of God, something that may run counter to human wisdom, could be closer in spirit than we may think.

We begin with this word from Leviticus 19, a set of teachings designed to equip the people to live holy lives. This is in essence a summary of Torah, and it is rooted in the premise that since God is Holy, God’s people should be holy. So, what does it mean that we should be holy?

The lectionary drops off a section that speaks to honoring parents, keeping the Sabbath, the worship of idols, and dietary guidelines. Then the text turns to other aspects of the call to holy living that speak to the way we interact with each other. The passage begins with a word to the farmers in our midst. When you harvest your grain, leave the grain on the edges of the field alone, and don’t gather the gleanings – but leave them be. And the same goes for the vineyard, don’t strip the vines bare and don’t pick up the grapes that fall to the ground in the harvesting process. Instead, whether it’s grain or grapes – leave them for the poor and the alien (the foreigner). Why? Because “I am the Lord your God”! I need to stop for  a moment to dwell on this admonition concerning the call to provide for the alien at a time when anti-immigrant fever is running high.  God doesn't distinguish between illegal or legal, for if the foreigner/alien is in need then the God who is holy says provide for their needs.

From there the text moves to matters of theft, dealing falsely, lying, and false oaths, stay clear of these for “I am the Lord.” Yes, and don’t defraud your neighbor or keep for yourself the wages of the laborer until morning – pay them promptly. And don’t revile the deaf or put obstacles in the way of the blind (pay attention to the ADA laws!) Why? Because “I am the Lord.” The text moves on to an admonition to treat everyone equitably, whether poor or rich. So, it is with justice that you should deal with your neighbor – don’t hate your kin, take vengeance, or bear a grudge. Instead, “love your neighbor as yourself.”

Each admonition in Leviticus, including the final one concerning love of neighbor begins with God’s holiness and the call for us to imitate that holiness. And as Ron Allen and Clark Williamson note, for the Rabbi’s the holiness of God that is illustrated in this passage is defined in Exodus 34:6.

The Lord, the Lord, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness. . .

From this powerful reminder as to the nature of God’s holiness we move to Paul’s meditation on God’s wisdom. As we have seen in earlier chapters of 1 Corinthians, Paul is concerned about worldly wisdom. God’s wisdom is rather different, sort of like God’s sense of holiness. He begins, however, with a word about foundations. He has, he suggests, laid a foundation upon which others have built (likely those in whose name members of this congregation were setting up parties). Ultimately, however, the point isn’t the builder but the foundation, and that is Christ. Starting with this foundation, he moves to the superstructure – the Temple of God. The Temple isn’t a building, but us. I’m wondering here if the word is given to us as individuals or to us as community. It’s not that I don’t believe that God inhabits us as individuals, but Paul seems pretty clear throughout 1 Corinthians that he is speaking to the community. Thus, it’s the community of the faithful who carry within itself the Holy Spirit of God. It is the community that is holy as a result! So don’t boast in our human leaders – ancient or modern – for everything belongs to the community itself because the community belongs to Christ, who belongs to God. Let us, then, embrace the wisdom of God, a wisdom that leads to holiness and love of neighbor.

Finally we come to the words of Jesus as found in Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount. There is a certain symmetry between this passage and Leviticus, as it should be. Jesus was not rejecting Torah nor does he suggest we should reject Torah – there is but one Word of God, even if it comes in two parts (and even that might be a debatable point).

The first half of the passage deals with matters of retaliation. While it has been said that taking an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth is appropriate, Jesus says – no instead don’t resist the one who would treat you in this way. Indeed, if someone strikes you on the right check, then offer the left. If someone takes your coat, offer your cloak. And, if someone forces you to go one mile, then go two. Now, the reality is this – such things might occur in the life of a person, especially if they were living under an occupying army that could pretty much do as they please. But, don’t take matters into your own hands, but instead leave it all to the hands of God. Such words of teaching have never found much of a hearing in the Christian community, and it’s no wonder. If you follow Jesus’ teaching your liable to experience being run over. It is a rather radical ethic, but it is rooted in the admonitions in Leviticus – be holy as God is holy. Do what is right and good, not because it is Law but because this is the way of God.

From this set of admonitions Jesus goes to the issue of love. Love of neighbor is a good starting point, Jesus says, but it’s not the end point. Instead, love your enemies and pray for the ones who persecute you (and that doesn’t mean praying that they’ll be taken out – what some call an imprecatory prayer that is possible in certain Christian circles). After all, the hated tax collectors take care of family and friends. Jesus’ ethic pushes further and deeper. In this context he is pushing us to embrace the form of love we know as agape, a form of love that according to Tom Oord involves “intentionally respond[ing] to promote overall well being when it encounters that which produces ill-being” (Oord, Nature of Love, p. 121). But remember, as you consider the admonition to love your enemy as well as your friends that God makes the sun rise on evil and good, and sends rain upon righteous and unrighteous.

Jesus wants people to understand that the ethic that permeates the realm of God moves us beyond normal behavior – what Paul might call worldly wisdom – to something different, something transformative. And that means being holy or perfect as God is holy and perfect. Jesus is our mentor, our guide, and our model, for what life looks like in the Realm of God. So why should we be holy and loving? The answer is simple – “For I am the Lord Your God!”

An Old Testament God?

I was preparing for our study of Islam, which I'll be leading tomorrow.  We're using Adam Hamilton's Christianity and World Religions (Abingdon) as our foundation (has video and leaders guide).  My point is not to talk about the series, but to raise a point (Hamilton is a centrist United Methodist in theology).

Hamilton does something -- something I hear Christians do fairly regularly -- and that is distinguish between the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament (of Jesus).  In his discussion of Islam, which is really quite fair when it focuses on the teachings of Islam, he suggests that the Muslim view of God is a step backward toward the God of the Old Testament.  That is, the Old Testament portrayal of God is one that, unlike the NT, is more violent and less loving.  He uses God's command to Elijah to slaughter the priests of Baal.  Jesus doesn't do this (though Hamilton and many other Christians forget about what happens in the Book of Revelation). 

The problem here is one that has plagued Christians almost from the beginning.  We want to see ourselves improving upon Judaism.  We may not go as far as Marcion, who suggested that the Creator God was a "demiurge," a lesser God than the God of Jesus, who is the God of love.  Marcion went so far as to create a truncated canon of Scripture that would support his claims.  

But what are we who are Christians saying when we say that the God of the OT is a more violent God than the God of the NT?  Obviously there is doctrinal development in the OT and the NT.  Both testaments come out of particular contexts, but is the Christian understanding of God better than that of Judaism?  And is Muhammad's view a step backward to a Jewish view?   Or, would it not be best to say that all three religions give different perspectives on God, some more violent and some more peaceful? 

I end with this word from Disciple theologian Clark Williamson:

In their post-Shoah teaching documents, the churches affirm that the God whom Christians worship is the living God of the Bible, the God of Israel, worshiped by Jews.  They assert that Christians have come and still come to know this God in Jesus Christ -- that in, through, and by means of Jesus Christ Christians are again and again confronted with the promise and command of the God of Israel.  That the God of Israel was incarnate in Jesus Christ, the Jew from Nazareth, is a claim that further makes it clear that the God of Israel "is not an isolated God without relationships, but a God who turns toward humankind and who is affected by human destiny."  God, who dwells not only in transcendence but in the midst of God's people is subject to distress and persecution "as Lord, Father, Companion and Redeemer." The covenantally related God of Israel, whose covenant love (hesed) involves God in interacting with all God's creatures and particularly with God's people, is here asserted against the church's tradition of construing God as in all respects unrelated to and unaffected by events in the world.  (Williamson, A Guest in the House of Israel, p. 202)

The quote is to a German Roman Catholic document from 1979.  Clark Williamson asserts that the God of Jesus is the God of Israel?  If Jesus is understood as the incarnation of that God revealed in our Old Testament, how can we make such a distinction between the God of the OT and the God of the NT?

Sunday Sermon: The Voice of God

Let's not duck the obvious challenge to the main theme of this version of the Sunday Sermon series. "Follow the Voice of God" brings with it the possibility that any particular individual will get it wrong. It won't be the true "Voice of God" that they are hearing, but instead may be a hallucination brought on by anything from an abused substance to a mental or physical illness.

That said, there is no doubt in my mind that not only famous individuals throughout history, but also ordinary men and women every single day, receive messages directly from the Almighty. Sometimes these are specific lucent and palpable words and phrases of command. More often they are whispers of direction.

When you as a normal, rational, thinking human being feel yourself being consistently and repeatedly guided by what you might simply describe as "something inside me" towards a certain path, be it in your familial relationships or career choice or general life direction, you should seriously consider that this may very well be that 'Voice of God' whispering into your mind and soul.

God has many important things that he wants done in our world. I believe that he repeatedly has used the actions of human beings who have accepted his message and direction, have listened to it fully, understood it correctly, and not been afraid to embrace it and follow through on it in their lives in order to make a difference to humanity in large and small ways.

Today is the anniversary of the beginning of the trial of Saint Joan of Arc in 1431 at the English-occupied city of Rouen in Normandy, France. Joan was a young girl at a point in history when that was a particularly difficult time for someone of her age and sex to be taken seriously. But Joan heard the 'Voice of God', listened to it fully, overcame doubt and fear, took His message to action, and changed the course of world history.

Joan was born and raised at a difficult time for her home country of France. The historic rivals in England had taken advantage of a number of internal French leadership tragedies and political problems to conquer and control large portions of the country. At around age 12, Joan was alone in a field when she experienced a vision
in which Saint Michael, Saint Catherine, and Saint Margaret appeared to her and told her that she must drive out the English and return the King of France to power in a coronation at Reims.

At around age 16 she first attempted to make contact with the French ruling aristocracy in order to discuss the visions that she was continuing to receive, but was laughed off and turned away. She returned a few months later and managed to convince some influential men with the passion and intensity of her testimony. After a prediction that she made of a military battle came true, she was finally granted an audience with the French royals.

Charles VII of France, also known as Dauphin Charles, was out of options and likely felt that it was just a matter of time before he lost the entire land to England. Historians make little other sense outside of complete desperation of his willingness to allow a simple peasant girl who came from nowhere with nothing but a self-proclaimed 'Voice of God' message to don the armour of a knight and take a place at the head of the French military forces.

Within a short time of her arrival at the battle front, the tide began to turn for the French. She inspired the army with her religious fervor, and led it to victory through both her tactical expertise and her aggressive leadership from the front. Joan's repeated victories led to Charles eventually appointing her command of the full army. She was wounded at different points by an arrow to the neck, a cannon shot to her helmet, and a crossbow bolt to her leg, but continued leading by example from the front of the troops. Reims was eventually taken, and the coronation of Charles given her as a her mission by the Saints finally took place.

While leading troops during a skirmish with English troops in May of 1430, Joan was finally captured and imprisoned. After many political negotiations involving her imprisonment and attempts at escape by Joan herself, she was finally put on trial in the seat of the English occupation government at Rouen for the charge of heresy due to the religious nature of her claim that it had been that 'Voice of God' having guided her actions.

During the trial, no evidence could be found to convict her, and so a theological trap was set for her. The prosecution asked her whether she knew that she was in God's grace. The trap is in the answer. Were she to answer "yes", she would be a heretic, because the Church taught that no one can be sure of being in God's grace. If she were to answer "no" then she would be admitting her guilt in her very answer.

The notary at the proceedings later stated that her interrogators were "stupefied" by her actual reply: "If I am not, may God put me there; if I am, may God so keep me." At bottom line, none of her testimony nor the fact that no real evidence against her could be proven mattered. Evidence was manufactured against her, she was found guilty, and was burned at the stake on May 20th, 1431 at the age of just 19 years. Her body was burned three times so that no trace remained for collection as relics, and her executioner later stated that he "greatly feared to be damned."

What became known in history as 'The Hundred Years War' continued for 22 more years, with France using Joan's tactics to maintain control of their land. At the end of the war, Joan was posthumously retried and cleared during proceedings in which she was described as actually having been a martyr. She was finally beatified by the Church in 1909, and was canonized as a Saint by Pope Benedict XV in 1920. She is the patroness of France and of all soldiers everywhere.

The story of the true life of Jeanne d'Arc, the teenage peasant girl from eastern France who followed the 'Voice of God', changed the course of world history, became inspiration for an entire nation and finally a Catholic Saint should be example enough for all of us. It doesn't matter your age or your sex. It doesn't matter the times in which you live or the difficulty of the task ahead. What matters when you receive a true message from God is that you have the courage and perseverance to follow His voice.

NOTE: this is the continuation of the regular 'Sunday Sermon' series, all entries of which can be enjoyed by clicking on that label below this entry at the www.mattveasey.com website

Teens Flood Summer Youth Conference

Father John Amsberry, pastor of St. Joseph the Worker Parish in Portland, Ore., paused halfway across the stage and looked out at the young audience.

"It's 2:58 p.m. and ...?" he asked.

"We are loved!" they yelled back.

More than 1,700 teens piled onto Franciscan University's campus for the first High School Youth Conference in Steubenville to hear the Gospel, sing with Bob Rice and his band about God's love, and encounter Christ in word and sacrament.

The teens came from 14 states, from as far away as Oregon and South Dakota, and as close as Michigan, Ohio and West Virginia. Participants also included youth ministers, parents, chaperones and priests

Twenty teens participated in a weeklong Leadership, Evangelization and Discipleship retreat held prior to the June 18-20 conference, which had as its theme "The Word Became Flesh."

Throughout the weekend, the retreat-goers testified to their fellow teens about the power of confession and Eucharist, of finding God in the church's ancient rites and sacraments.

"It is all about you and me receiving the blessing of the Father. How many of us are dying for a word of approval from our heavenly Father?" Deacon Ralph Poyo told the teens.

Founder of New Evangelization Ministries in Steubenville, the deacon described getting married and learning to give himself to his wife, and then his daughters, totally, sacrificially, to help them to heaven.

"How awesome it is to share in life together," he said. "At some point, we have to realize we're all about relationship. It's what we're designed for. It's what we are made for.

"I'm here to tell you one very important thing. Jesus died for you. Jesus came for you. Jesus loves you. Why would he choose to become man? For you and for me," he said.

"He knows everything that we've done. He was there—he saw it. And you know what? He doesn't leave you. He chose to die for you anyway. He loves you anyway," Deacon Poyo added.

Speaker Tammy Evevard challenged the teens to discover the truth about themselves, to know who it is that God loves.

"You were not made for comfort. You were made for greatness."

She went through some assumptions often made in the broader culture.

"There's a continuous stream of people telling us over and over how the world is. They teach us to say,

'What I see around me is normal. This is the best I'm going to get.' It's a lie. "If we are made in the image and likeness of God, then we deserve better than the new normal. We can live in God's freedom," she said.

Evevard emphasized that both men and women were created in the image and likeness of God, who described them as "very good." "Men and women are equal in dignity, and value, and purpose."

Conference workshops covered practical ways of living the Catholic faith. Topics included "Genuine Prayer," "Sharing Christ over Coffee" and "The Holiest Place on Earth: Praying the Mass."

"The greatest thing in life," said Father Amsberry at his workshop, "is our sacred friendship with Christ and sharing that relationship with others. We become a place where people encounter paradise in this world. "We are the daughters and sons of God. The more we incarnate that, the more attractive we become," he said.

To live life as sons and daughters of God, said author and musician Chris Padgett, people have to know the God-bearer. "In order for you to be the saint you are called to be, you must be Marian," he explained. "God calls us all, and he knows ahead of time that we are weak and broken," he said in his keynote talk.

"Our problem today is not that we don't have enough information, or that we don't want to say yes. The real question is how can we be saints with all the crap in our life?" he asked.

The answer, Padgett said, is God's mercy. "If we confess our sins, he will cleanse us from all unrighteousness. We know Jesus will take us and embrace us and strengthen us. It's not information, but transformation we need."

Franciscan University is sponsoring 19 youth conferences in 14 locations across the United States and Canada this summer.

WRITTEN BY: the Catholic News Service with original article available at American Catholic by clicking on the title of this entry

The Declaration of Independence

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.

He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.

He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:

For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing taxes on us without our consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:

For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:

For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule in these colonies:

For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:

For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.

We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

Death, Blood, Sex, Corruption

There, now that I have your attention with that headline, time to disappoint you, because I am just seriously sick and tired and fed up. I'm sick and tired of the incompetence of President (sic) Obama and his incompetent Democratic Party cronies. I'm sick and tired of all the blood and gore and sex on television, in music, and in movies. I'm sick and tired of all the negativity constantly bombarding my home via the mass media.

For too long, I've even been a part of the problem in some ways. This little blog of mine has talked politics, society, religion, education, philosophy and other topics in the news or of general interest, and has often taken on it's own cynical or negative tones. Hell, it's right there in the first paragraph. Go back and re-read in case you missed it.

Well, it's over. I's done had me all's I can take, and I can't takes me no more. This whining and bitching and moaning and crying over negativity and the disturbing, disgusting, revolting, lying hate-mongers that push it constantly is over and done with as of the end of this article.

From now on, this blog is going to be all sunshine and light and happiness. That's right, and if you can't stand it, go turn on your TV and tune in to CNN, or surf your web browser out to Huffington's Post, or Google a speech by Al Gore or Obama, or buy a copy of the New York Times. Plenty of places for you to find bad news and get your fix.

But this blog of mine is changing it's tone and tenor, knowingly, willingly and intentionally. From now on, you can turn here when all the rest of the crap is just too much. When the market is down, the pols are lying to you, the pseudo-stars are self-destructing, wars are raging, crime is running rampant, the blood is spilling, and the talking heads are blah-blah-blahing about it all, and you need a refuge, this is where to turn.

After this entry, I am going to begin regularly posting stories of a generally positive nature. There will be human interest. There will be comedy. There will be food, fun and frivolity. There will be heroism and simple neighborliness. And most of all, there will be the two things without which there is no reason to live: family and faith.

There will still be the occasional political commentary when that is most appropriate, right around election times. But that commentary will be to the positive regarding individuals and ideas that I feel are important and uplifting, and will be presented in that light. No attacking, no mocking, no sabre-rattling here any longer. Just real ideas and real opinions and honest evaluation presented for the hoped-for betterment of our neighborhoods, our town, our nation.

The stories that I present here at the blog will not always be my own. Whenever I find something of interest out on the web and it fits the new theme of positivity, then I will share it as much in it's entirety as fits comfortably on this blog, with a link to any continuation at the original site, and with an appropriate acknowledgement of the original writer.

If there is anyone out there who decides to write something of their own that fits this positive, uplifting spirit, something involving family or faith or culture or humor or life, and who wishes to share it with others, feel free to submit the item to me here at the blog, and I will consider it for print. If anyone wishes to contribute regularly, let me know that too. My work and family time don't always enable me to come up with original postings as regularly as I would like.

Don't worry about murders, rapes, assaults, drug overdoses, celebrity misbehavior, political scandal, divorce, disaster, destruction, and death. They'll still be going on, and everyone from the local news to Entertainment Tonight will keep you informed if that is what you are looking for at any point.

But when you want to smile, to laugh, to learn, to be uplifted, come here to this blog and replenish your soul and your spirit. We need a place like that, a place that guarantees it on a daily basis. Hell, I need it, and so I am going to provide it to myself, for myself, and for anyone else who feels the same and who could use something good in their lives.

As I type this, the sun is shining. It's one of the most beautiful days around here in the past few weeks. Temperatures are moderate for early summer, humidity is low, a light breeze floats through the air. There is a sense of peace and serenity around me at this particular moment, and of refreshment and renewal. A lightness of being and a song in my heart. All that, and God is in His heaven. And that's just how we're going to keep it, at least around here.

Can I get an 'Amen'?

The Catechism of the Catholic Church

A good household will inevitably include within it an area for a good library, a book shelf, table books, or some combination of these. And in every single one of those homes the one indispensable 'must-have' book is a good, readable copy of the Bible, the very Word of God.

In every Catholic household, and in fact in any home that wishes to explore an even deeper study and understanding of the Bible and the teachings of the Church, there is one more book that is also important to own. That book is the official "Catechism of the Catholic Church", which has now been available for more than a decade.

On September 8th, 1997, Pope John Paul II promulgated changes to the 2nd Official English Edition of the book in order that it might conform to changes made to the Latin version on that same date. In the end, what currently stands is intended to be a 'universal catechism', one to be used as a resource or reference point for all other such efforts within the Christian Church at large.

The modern Catholic Catechism is in John Paul II's own words "a full, complete exposition of Catholic doctrine, enabling everyone to know what the Church professes, celebrates, lives, and prays in her daily life."

In 1985, the Catholic Bishops recommended that the effort should be made, particularly with the many changes to Church practices in the decades since Vatican II, to explain more fully, clearly, and substantively the Church official teachings on the many and varied topics for which it is responsible.

The following year, John Paul II appointed an official 'Commission of Cardinals and Bishops' to study the matter and develop a compendium of Catholic doctrine. This commission was to be led by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI. Their results were packaged and sent out around the world in 1989 to all Bishops of the Church for their amendments and suggestions.

Over 24,000 such amendments were received, and all were studied closely and considered carefully resulting in numerous alterations to the volume originally circulated. By 1991 the commission was ready to present their official version to the Pope for his evaluation and approval. On June 25th, 1992, John Paul II gave his approval, and on December 8th made it official with an apostolic constitution.

The new Catechism was then first formally published in French in 1994, and subsequently translated into many languages. On August 15th, 1997, the Pope formally proclaimed the Latin version as definitive. This version contained a few changes from that first French-issued version, and thus an official 'Second Edition' was released in other languages that year, including the current English version.

Let's cover what the Catechism is not. It is not at all like the Bible. It is not meant to be a history of existence or of the world. It can not be read cover-to-cover almost like a story. It in fact does not contain the Bible, nor any of it's stories and teachings directly in God's own words. It is not 'readable' for many youngsters, and would not be necessarily interesting for those looking to 'read' a book.

What the Catechism is intended to be is a resource, the definitive resource of the teaching of the Church relating to all matters of faith. It is particularly aimed at the Bishop's, the Church's most influential teachers of the faith, but it is also made available to the body of the Church faithful as a tool for appropriately guided individual education.

There is no way in the space of a short article to explain or describe every area that the Catechism covers. Suffice it to say that the Catechism refers to Holy Scripture, as well as the teachings and positions of the Church Fathers and Ecumenical Councils, themselves inspired by the Holy Spirit, to explore and explain all positions and beliefs of the Universal Church.

Among the important topics covered in the Catechism are 'The Profession of Faith', also known as the 'Apostles Creed', which has been in existence and utilized as a basic profession of faith in Jesus Christ since the early centuries of Church development after his death.

The 'Celebration of the Christian Mystery' is also covered here. This includes public worship in the Catholic Mass, as well as God's active participation through Grace in the sacraments of Confirmation, Baptism/Christening, Holy Eucharist/Communion, Penance/Confession, the Anointing of the Sick/Extreme Unction, Holy Orders, and Matrimony/Marriage.

Christian Prayer is an important topic that is covered, which includes an exploration of the Lord's Prayer, also known to many as the 'Our Father' prayer. First offered by Jesus Himself at his Sermon on the Mount, it is by far the most well-known and widely used Christian prayer in history. I personally learned to say this prayer in Latin as an act of faith and a New Year's resolution a few years ago during a time of personal struggle, and do so now every night before going to sleep.

The Catechism also covers life in Christ, particularly by exploring the Ten Commandments. These most vital religious and moral rules were validated by Christ, and are accepted by well over half the population of the entire planet. Handed down by God Himself to Moses and subsequently to all of God's people, these are God's own basic precepts for mankind.

There is much falsehood and uninformed or ignorant commentary out in the world today regarding the teachings and practices of the Catholic Church. If you are genuinely interested in learning the truth regarding Catholic doctrine, or are already a believer and simply wish a reference material with which to more deeply explore the Church teachings, the "Catechism of the Catholic Church" (Second Edition) is a must.

NOTE: this is a contuation of the 'Sunday Sermon' series presented here on many Sunday mornings. All articles in the series can be viewed by clicking on to that 'label' below the original article at www.mattveasey.com

Thanks Mom?

My mother was a very good woman, of that I am as certain as anything I have ever known in this life. She loved God, loved her family, and despite being overwhelmed by a debilitating illness that robbed her of much of her life's full enjoyment, she never ceased to express that love to either.

My mom mattered. She mattered in my life, the life of my brother, the lives of my children, and the lives of a great number of other friends and family members. She touched us all in a way that will always be with us. But for as much as she was to everyone else, what she was to my brother Mike and I was extra special. But did she choose life for us? Roe did not exist then, should it have, should we have been her 'choice'?

This is an important idea to discuss, as yesterday was the awful anniversary of the 'Roe v Wade' court decision that made abortion a legal medical procedure here in the United States. What 'Roe' effectively did was lead to the mass slaughter of more than 50 million American babies over the next three and a half decades.

Supporters of that decision would argue that had 'Roe' been in effect in 1961, my birth would not have been the miracle from God that it was considered at that time, but instead it would have been a medical 'choice' made by my mom. And it would have been a 'choice' that she could make regardless of what my dad wanted.

Of course her 'choosing' to nurture and birth me out into the world should probably be something that would make me happy, right? What is better, to be considered just some random accident of nature, or something forced on her by God, or a conscious choice made by one's mother or parents together?

The fact of the matter is that having been born, in the end my own 'choice' has to be that I would rather my mom did not have such a one herself. For with that 'choice' comes the possibility that hers could have been different. Play a little game with me here.

Had my mother made the choice to not have me, I would never have been born in the first place. Without even considering myself as anything special in the grand scheme of existence, it is a simple fact that the world would never be the same. My brother either would not have been born either, or his life would also be completely different if for no other reason than his growing up without my interactions.

Anyone with whom I came in contact over the course of my life would be different, particularly if there was anyone: a friend, girlfriend, co-worker with whom I interacted and made some even small difference in their lives. My children would not have been born, nor my grandchildren. Generations would not exist. What could their contributions have been to the world?

What about her own mother? What if her mother had chosen not to have my mom? What if somehow there was a test that could have told my grandmother that my mom would end up as sick as she was? Would that have been a legitimate reason to 'choose' to terminate the pregnancy, to kill my mom? Was my mom's life worth less somehow because some illness would eventually overwhelm her?

For those who consider 'choice' as a woman's natural 'right', have you ever bothered to take a minute to consider the 'right' of the unborn child to actually have a life? You know, the life that is enabling you to read this posting right now? The gift of your life is not a gift of your mother's choice. It is a gift from God Himself, to your parents, your family, your friends, and to you.

The arguments on behalf of abortion always come down to a handful: saving the life of the mother or terminating a pregnancy that happened due to rape or incest. These arguments simply do not hold up under close examination. The fact of the matter is that abortion is used as birth control.

In both 1987 and 2004, the AGI (Alan Guttmacher Institute) surveyed women who had actually had abortions as to the reasons that they did it. Feel free to do the research yourself as to the validity of the organization or their methods, but you will find that they are professional, reputable and scientifically sound.

In 1987, only 1% of respondents had an abortion due to rape or incest, and only 3% due to some medical condition of the mother. Even taking into account the 3% additional who claimed that some fetal health issue was the reason, this means that 93% of those who had abortions did so simply because it would make their lives easier. They killed their child so that things would supposedly be easier on them.

In 2004, the respondents only claimed that rape or incest was the reason in less than half of one percent of the cases. Mother's health was the reason in 4%, fetal health issues in 3%. So once again, roughly 93% of respondents gave reasons for their 'choice' that boiled down to making their own lives easier at the cost of the life of the baby.

Women who support a 'right' to a 'choice', who are you kidding? The only 'choice' that you want to be able to make is to reverse the effects of some decision to have unprotected sex that you made in an irresponsible moment. That is the simple fact for more than 9 out of 10 women who walk into an abortion clinic or hospital to take this action.

It would be easy for you to get mad at me and say that my position is easy for some man to take. But the fact of the matter is that those who fight for life include tens of millions of women and girls, so save that attack for someone who will be intimidated. If you are 'pro-abortion' then you have made the decision to support the killing of babies so that irresponsible people can have supposedly easier lives. Live with it, or change.

Of course the fact is also an ironic one, that a large number of women who do have abortions simply do not have easier lives. Survey after survey reveals that many women suffer for years, decades, even the rest of their lives due to the effects of the guilt feelings that follow this 'choice'. Why would that be so? Is it just that society makes them feel guilty, or do they know inside that their 'choice' was morally bankrupt?

These are harsh words for some to hear, but when more than 50 million babies have been slaughtered across the United States of America for reasons that end up not being valid in the end anyway, that is nothing short of a holocaust. The unknown and untold loss of their lives and what they may have brought to their individual families and to humanity in general will never be known or measurable, but they are indeed missed, and their lives while in the womb are indeed worth fighting over.

The babies that should have been born in the most painful situations and under the most awful circumstances could have been given up for adoption, or could have been kept, raised, nurtured lovingly, and become the very blessing that would have made an intolerable and impossible situation into a healing and healthy one.

There is always another side to every story. For too long the side of the baby has been silent. The baby cannot speak for itself. Anyone who has ever had a child, held a fragile young infant in their arms, especially one that they themselves have given birth to or whom they have loved knows this instinctively. Someone needs to stand up and speak for their right to live.

If you have ever had an abortion or been a party to one, it is not too late for you to ask for forgiveness, to seek your own healing, and to begin to join the fight for life. If there is one thing that Jesus Christ taught us it was that the reason He died for us all on the cross was for the forgiveness and healing of our sins. You can make that 'choice' right now.

So in the end, I thank my mom for many things. For the good woman that she was in her life. For her love of God and family that rubbed off on me and eventually helped to make me the man that I am today. But one thing that I do not thank her for is my life. That life was given to her, to me, by God. It is all of our responsibility to stand up for life, not as a 'choice', but as every human beings real natural right.

NOTE: this is a continuation of the regular 'Sunday Sermon' series, all articles of which can be read by clicking on the link below this article at the www.mattveasey.com website

Britt Hume's Advice to Tiger Woods

Everyone pretty much knows the story of Tiger Woods' recent fall from grace. It became public that the mega-star athlete and corporation head was a serial adulterer. The married Woods is the father of two kids in diapers and cashed in greatly not only on his golfing acumen, but also on a squeaky-clean family man image.

Since the numerous affairs began to become public at Thanksgiving following a late night domestic incident and auto accident at his home, Woods' sponsorship deals have disappeared and his golf career put on hold as his family disintegrated in public.

Into this mess last Sunday waded Fox News political analyst and veteran newsman Britt Hume. On the program 'Fox News Sunday', the network's key Sunday news offering on major events, the panel participants were commenting on the big stories in the coming year. In the category of sports, Hume decided to tackle the immediate future of Tiger Woods, opining that Woods would indeed recover his golfing career this year.

However, Hume did not stop there. He went on to add that though Woods, who is believed to be a follower of Buddhism in his religious leanings, would indeed regain his golfing status, he might have a more difficult time in battling and overcoming his personal moral demons. Here is the full, exact quote by Hume at it's relevant point:

"My message would be to Tiger..turn to the Christian faith, and you can make a total recovery and be a great example to the world."

Uh oh, take cover, Britt Hume! Head for the hills! Here come the leftists and atheists with their pitch forks! A Christian daring to go on national television and expound that the best course of action for a fallen human being to take would be to turn to Jesus Christ for forgiveness and redemption? An outrageous scandal in the making!

The responses from the liberals was fast and furious this past week. A perfect example was Huffington Post blogger Eve Tahmincioglu, who termed Hume's commentary "bigotry" and further stated she could only "loosely" call him a journalist. Hume has worked for UPI, has been ABC's chief White House correspondent, and has been in the industry for 40 years, having twice been named 'Best in the Business' by the American Journalism Review.

But that is what liberals do best when their ideals, or lack of them, are challenged. Rather than express their own positive messages that extol their own ideas, liberals attack and smear, taking a page from their Saul Alinsky bible. As Britt Hume showed last Sunday, mainstream America is no longer afraid of these fringe radical attacks on American traditionalism and religious freedoms.

The fact is that the U.S. Constitution does not include any references whatsoever to any 'separation of church and state', and in fact makes numerous references to God, as do numerous other documents including the Declaration of Independence. Rather than stifling or eliminating references to religion, the Constitution simply protects the right of Americans to freely express their religious beliefs without being forced to embrace a state-sponsored particular religion.

For decades now, Christians have been under attack by left-wing radicals who embrace atheist concepts as a part of their socialist or communist agendas. It has been particularly Christians who are attacked because Christianity is far and away the leading religious belief system in America, and because our nation was founded largely by Christians acting on the principles that were espoused by their belief system.

All that Britt Hume did last Sunday was give public utterance to the exact teachings of Jesus Christ Himself. Christ taught "Everyone who acknowledges me before others I will acknowledge before my heavenly Father. But whomever denies me before others, I will deny before my heavenly Father." It just doesn't get any clearer than that.

What Tiger Woods did was to sin, plain and simple. Sin has been called "the greatest evil, being the root and source of all evil." Tiger needs to acknowledge his sin for what it is, he needs to seek forgiveness from his God for that sin, and he needs to seek redemption in the only way possible by believing in and accepting Jesus Christ as his personal Lord and Savior.

Now many believers in other religious systems would take umbrage to that statement. They might believe that there is some other path that Tiger Woods can take to ask for forgiveness and to receive his redemption. Whatever you believe, that isn't the point. The simple point is that Britt Hume, and the nearly 80% of Americans who are also Christian, legitimately believe what he said is plain and simple truth, and that they have a Constitutionally protected right to express that belief.

Expect further attacks from the liberal media including newscasters from other networks, comedians, politicians, and members of other faith systems. At the same time, it is long past time for the more than 200 million Christian Americans to stand up for ourselves and for Christ in a public manner. If they want a fight, it's time to make it a two-sided brawl, for there is nothing more important to humanity or to individual men than the salvation of our immortal souls.

It is not only truth that Jesus Christ is the only way to true redemption for your sins, for Tiger Woods sins, but it is also truth that you will undeniably and absolutely find the peace of mind and the wholeness of self that all human beings seek if you simply do what Britt Hume advised Tiger Woods to do: "turn to the Christian faith", to Jesus Christ and his Word.

NOTE: This is a continuation of the regular 'Sunday Sermon' series, all entries of which you can view by clicking on that label below this aritcle at www.mattveasey.com

Jersey Gets Same-Sex Marriage Right

All across the United States and all across the spectrum of ideas, liberals and progressives have been attacking traditional American values for the better part of a century now. These attacks have gained momentum in recent decades thanks to persistent, pervasive, and often subversive campaigns by leftist organizations.

One of the most recent attacks came in the State of New Jersey, where a bill that would legalize same-sex marriage was being pushed through the legislature and being vocally supported by ultra-liberal Governor John Corzine. In today's editions of the Philadelphia Inquirer, Corzine actually implied that gay marriage is a "fundamental human right" and to deny it would be a violation of civil rights and liberties.

Thankfully, the New Jersey Senate did not see it that way. They voted by a solid 20-14 majority yesterday to protect marriage as solely between a man and a woman, as God intended. The vote comes on the heels both of New York's rejection of the idea and the electoral victory of Chris Christie over Corzine in November. Christie will take over the Governor's office in 10 days and had promised to veto such a measure should it have passed.

The 'gay marriage' (sic) issue is yet another in a surge of issues over these last few decades that liberals and progressives simply could not win in referendums at the ballot box, and so they have resorted to pressuring and bribing politicians, infiltrating the media, and bringing law suits in jurisdictions where the courts are known to be solidly liberal in their rulings.

Traditional Americans are beginning to both understand these threats and to grasp the seriousness of their nature when taken individually and as a whole as threats to our society. True mainstream America has begun to fight back and win. In November 2008, California passed 'Proposition 8', which put an end to court-backed gay marriages begun months earlier and recognized marriage as only between a man and a woman. Maine voters then followed suit in November of last year.

The issue, of course, is not one of whether or not some State or Commonwealth may come up with some type of civil union legislation allowing couples of the same sex to reap the same civil benefits as opposite-sex couples. The issue is the protection of a particular type of union called 'Marriage' or 'Matrimony' the basis for which was established by God Himself as being between a man and woman at the creation and which has been in existence for millenia.

If there are men out there who wish to insert their penis in another man's anus or mouth and call that a normal, loving, sexual experience with a straight face, that is their business within the privacy of their own home. But for them to foist such an idea on the rest of society as something that we should all embrace as a normal, human act to be celebrated and sanctioned under the moral umbrella of 'marriage' is ludicrous on it's face.

Marriage about morality? You bet it is. How does that jive with the legality of divorce and the practice of adultery? It doesn't, frankly. Having gone through them myself, I can tell you that divorce and annulment are serious processes that should not be entertained, supported, or granted frivolously, and that certainly have no business being celebrated. And adultery may be the dumbest and most hurtful thing in which any married person could ever engage.

The marital ceremony is about bringing together a man and a woman as one, as were Adam and Eve by God. Marriage is about a loving celebration on a daily basis between a man and woman, husband and wife, in the course of developing more fully their own relationship with one another and with God, and in attempting to build a family. If you are not a man and a woman committed to these concepts, then you shouldn't be married or entertaining the idea.

I am extremely fond of my dog, Petey. He is a good dog. Loyal, faithful, fun. We have lots of great times together. In fact, I would say that I care more about Petey than some gay people care about their partners. Should I be allowed to marry Petey? I mean, I love him, and would love to have society pay for his veterinarian bills. If I have to pay for the medical bills of some gay person's 'partner' then why shouldn't they pay for Petey's vet bills?

Once men can marry men, and women can marry women, would we move next to allowing such further obscenities to the institution of marriage as me marrying my dog, or some farmer marrying his cow, or some shepherd marrying his sheep? What about a computer programmer marrying his computer-generated, life-like, animated, 3D female character? Where does it end?

Think that is stupid, inane, ridiculous, trivial? Well that is exactly how many of us in normal society sees the idea of men marrying other men, and women marrying other women. It has nothing at all to do with hate, or fear, or discrimination against gay men or lesbians. It is about protecting a particular God-given institution and Sacrament that is meant solely to be between a man and a woman. There is no Biblical or historical basis for, or constitutional right to gay marriage.

Currently there are 39 of the 50 U.S. states already fully and specifically prohibiting gay marriage with laws modeled after or pre-dating the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, including Pennsylvania, which thankfully despite the ultra-liberalism of the Philadelphia area actually remains the most socially conservative state in the northeast region.

We can no more make a gay person straight than we can make a stone come to life. Gay people were created that way by God. It is something with which they will have to go through life dealing. We don't need to hate, we need to be compassionate. But compassion does not extend to supporting every action of an individual. It also does not mean surrendering our most cherished institutions and our God-given Sacraments to the ideology of a tiny minority.

The State Senate of New Jersey got it right yesterday when they voted to hold back the abomination of same-sex marriage. They also got it right a couple of months ago when they tossed Corzine out on his typical high-taxing, low-morality, America-hating can. Here's to hoping that Americans continue to awaken to what has been going on in our country and continues to take it back, as New Jersey may have begun.

Resolve to Come Back to Church

In these first few days of the New Year many of us are struggling with beginning resolutions to improve our lives. For many this involves losing weight and getting in better physical shape. For some it involves straightening out their financial lives. No matter what your particular resolution, deciding to go back to Church, or perhaps even to go to Church regularly for the first time in your life, would be the single most important and rewarding for yourself and your family.

Going to Church requires taking care of a few formalities first, such as which Church to attend. There are many 'fly-by-night' operations out there disguised as churches. There are also any number of churches run by a strong pastor wholly dependant on that one person, always a dangerous proposition.

At the risk of alienating some, I am going to make a very brief case for you to give the Roman Catholic Church a try. Most of you probably already know which Catholic parish in which you live. If you don't just visit the Archdiocese website at archphila.org or give them a phone call at 215-587-3600.

The Catholic Mass is one of the most solemn and comforting services that you will ever experience. The solemnity comes from it's respect and reverence for the experience of worship. There is rarely any jumping around or hollering or dancing here. Prayer, scripture, and sacrament are the highlights of a Catholic Mass.

When you attend a Catholic Church service you are getting virtually the same general Mass service being experienced by hundreds of millions of Roman Catholics the world over on any given Sunday. There is a structure to the Mass involving two main parts: the Liturgy of the Word involving scriptural readings from both the Old and New Testaments, and the Liturgy of the Eucharist involving the preparation for and receiving of the Body of Christ.

In the Liturgy of the Word there are three readings. The first is always going to be by a lector and will come from the Old Testament, giving a teaching or passage from the traditional books of the Bible familiar to both Christians and Jews. The second is also from a lector and is going to be from the New Testament, usually from Paul's mission and that of Jesus' disciples in the aftermath of his death. Finally there will be a reading by the Priest from one of the four Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke or John relating to some incident directly involving Jesus Christ.

In the Liturgy of the Eucharist the priest will present and bless the bread and wine, and with God's help will turn it into the body and blood of Jesus Christ in a process known as Transubstantiation. During this portion of the Mass there will be traditional praying of the Lord's Prayer, the 'Our Father', a greeting among the community in offering one another a Sign of Peace, and then the actual receiving of the Lord in the Eucharist or Communion ceremony.

The entirety of the normal Catholic Mass service will take up about an hour of your time on any particular Saturday evening or Sunday morning. Depending on the size of the parish, Mass is offered 3-4 times on Sunday mornings. Also at many Catholic churches the Mass is offered in a 5pm or 6pm service on Saturday evenings for those who have to work or otherwise cannot make it to church on a Sunday morning.

As far as financial responsibilities, there are collections taken up as 'offerings' to the Church. Usually there is one main collection that will be for the support of your particular parish. There may be a 2nd collection directed towards a particular purpose, such as supporting the Church in a particularly difficult area of the world.

If you become a registered member of a parish, which you can and should do once you determine to which you belong, you will receive weekly envelopes in which to place your collection offering. There are guidelines suggested, but give as little or as much as you feel you can afford. If you cannot afford a formal offering on a regular basis, go to the Church anyway, and perhaps find some other small way to support the efforts, including through your prayers.

The Roman Catholic Church is the largest Christian denomination in the world with more than a billion members made up of 1/6th of the planet's population. By joining the Church you join that support system in an institution tracing it's origins directly back to the Apostle Peter, Christ's hand-picked choice as "the Rock upon which" the Lord's Church would be built.

There are some usual criticisms that you will hear about the Catholic Church that usually come across in four usual challenges by non-believers or advocates of other churches. These challenges involve staleness or blandness of the Mass ceremony, the priest sexual abuse, praying to statues or images, and the Papacy.

First, Catholics do not ever pray to statues or paintings or any other image. We put no image above or in place of God. What we will do regularly is ask for the intercession of Jesus' mother Mary or the holy men and women from the Church's past known as 'Saints' to pray to God on our behalf. We can and do pray directly to God, and believe that the intercession by these other holy individuals can help as well.

Secondly, where one man or woman might find the Mass boring many others find it beautiful, and I am firmly in that second group. Within that one short hour you get many opportunities to participate in group prayer, personal reflection and prayer, sacramental participation, and the singing of hymns. One Priest will indeed be more dynamic or personally charismatic than another, but it is the content of the Mass that is most important, not the individuals making the presentation.

Where the Priest abuse scandals are concerned, they are a fact of Church history that would be a mistake to ever ignore or deny. That denial and cover up went on for far too long, and no one is more ashamed or angered by that fact than Church members. Here I always point out an old saying to critics: "Don't throw the baby out with the bath water." There are many, many thousands of good men around the world today serving God as Catholic Priests who have no taint of personal scandal, and who deserve our admiration and respect for giving up a worldly life in service to God and our community.

The Church is much more than the actions of rogue, degenerate men in Priestly garments. We are the community of God's people, and we will overcome this challenge and defeat Satan the same way the Lord's people have always done, by learning from mistakes and strongly addressing them, and by standing together and leaning on prayer and on the Word of the Lord in moving forward.

Finally, those outside the Church simply are wrong when they say that we the Pope is the "head of the Roman Catholic Church" and that we place the Holy Father above Jesus or put him right along side God. The fact as all Catholics know is that Jesus Christ is the head of the Catholic Church. The Pope is the spiritual leader of the Church, and has himself lived a life guided by and inspired by God.

Just as with any large and historically established institution, there will always be critics of the Church. Don't let their easily defeated challenges influence your decision to join or come back to the Catholic Church. Pray for your own personal inspiration from God, set aside one hour for a few weeks and actually come to Mass, and open up your heart and mind to the opportunity. I personally have experienced the power of returning to the Church myself and can tell you without hesitation that it will be the most rewarding resolution that you can keep this New Year.

Time, Talent, and Treasure

This morning for the first time I processed up the main aisle and on to the altar, and then stepped up to the lectern in front of my fellow parishioners at the 7:30am Mass at St. Christopher's Church in Somerton to present the first reading from the Old Testament.

The selection was from the 1st book of Samuel, one of the 'Historical Books', and told the story of how a barren woman named Hannah prayed to God for a son and promised that if the Lord so gifted her she would turn the child over to the priesthood. God granted her desire, and she kept to her promise after weaning Samuel as a small child.

God had given Hannah a gift, and Hannah responded in kind by sharing her gift with the Lord. It was this very gifting process that led me to the lectern on Sunday morning through a 'Stewardship' program beginning to spread through the Catholic church and other Christian denominations as well.

Stewardship is the process of realizing that all that we have and all that we are is a gift from God. This makes us 'stewards' of these gifts in that we manage them on behalf of the Lord during our time here on earth.

In managing these gifts we are not only encouraged but are expected to share them with the body of the Church. In evaluating exactly how each of us can best share our gifts we should examine in our own lives the opportunities that we all have to give of our time, our talents, and our treasure.

The first opportunity, to give of our time, can take on many forms. The very least amount of time that we should be giving is that 1 hour each week to attend Mass. The normal 7-day week consists of 168 hours. God only asks that you come to His house for one of those. The very least you can do is give Him that hour and keep holy the Sabbath.

Of course what we are really talking about in Stewardship is giving more than the minimum. So more than the minimum of your time might involve some other activity on behalf of the Church. You could volunteer to help clean the church building prior to Christmas or Easter. Every parish or church community has volunteer opportunities ranging from smaller commitments to larger ones.

Another way to increase your Stewardship would be to share your talent. For some that might be a physical gift. Perhaps you are good with carpentry or plumbing and could volunteer to help your church in those areas. I am a police officer and a teacher with a great deal of public speaking experience, thus my decision to become involved in sharing that talent as a lector.

Not everyone is cut out to be a lector. Many people have a fear of speaking in front of large crowds, or just simply are not very good readers, or both. Neither of those has ever been a problem for me. But where tools are concerned, I'm lucky that I can even screw in a light bulb. Every one of us has some type of talent or career experience that we can share. Again, your individual church will have opportunities available for you to help.

Finally, you can share your treasure. This means exactly what it sounds like it means - money. You can do this through direct giving, increasing even slightly the amount that you place in a church envelope or collection, for instance. It could also mean bequething property or valuables to the church on your passing.

There are many skeptics when it comes to giving money or valuables to what they perceive to be an entity as large as the Catholic Church. Keep in mind that every individual parish runs largely on it's own resources. Your directed gift or increased contributions will go directly to help the church that services your very own communities spiritual needs.

You don't have to do anything. You can just keep going along the way that you are right now. Many Catholics and other Christians, and members of other faith systems, have drifted away from church almost entirely. Many Christians joke of becoming 'Chreasters', where they attend services only on Christmas and Easter. Others say things flippantly such as "I'm good with God, me and Him talk directly to one another."

Jesus turned to Peter and told him that he would be the rock upon which "I will build my church, which will overcome all the evil forces arrayed against it." Jesus also taught that "Wherever two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." In these specific but in many other example of his teachings and his living he showed the importance of gathering as a church community.

Personally, I have decided to begin with the small steps of volunteering with my church Lector Society to do the readings at Mass. My wife and I have decided to slightly increase our Sunday collection offerings. I am going to begin to look for other opportunities, and we will continue to build our own stewardship role with our church over time.

God calls each of us to the role of Stewardship, the sharing of those gifts which He has given to us in this life. It is up to each one of us to more closely examine our lives and our abilities, to get in touch with our own church, and to find an opportunity to present and share those gifts of time, talent, and treasure in honor of the Lord.

NOTE: This is the final 'Sunday Sermon' entry of 2009, a regular series of which all previous entries can be read by clicking on to the label below this posting at www.mattveasey.com

The Nativity Story

On December 1st, 2006, one of the most underrated Christmas movies of all-time was released, and if you have never had a chance or made the time to watch "The Nativity Story" you should make this the year. I've noticed that it is playing a few times in the coming days.

The movie features a starring performance by Keisha Castle-Hughes, the young Australian actress who was just 16 years old at the time of filming. She delivers a commanding yet understated performance as Mary, the mother of Jesus, in a manner that anyone familiar with her story would find credible.

Guatemalan actor Oscar Isaac takes on the Joseph role well here, but perhaps the strongest male acting performance is turned in by Irish actor Ciaran Hinds, familiar to many from his starring role as Caesar in the HBO epic series 'Rome'. Hinds gives perhaps the finest performance of Herod to ever grace the silver screen.

Brought to life here by 'Twilight' director Catherine Hardwicke, 'The Nativity Story' is, as always, all about the story itself. As one of the film's taglines tells it, the story is about "a message foretold in the heavens...a prophecy that would threaten an empire...a miracle that would change the world."

There is nothing overly dramatic about that tagline. It is the simple truth. No matter what your view in your own life towards Christianity in particular or religion in general, there is no valid way to argue the fact that the life and death of Jesus Christ and the message that he delivered has changed and shaped the entire world over the ensuing two millenia.

This film and the whole of the Nativity story covers that period in the life of Mary and Joseph from the time of their engagement on through to the birth of their child. The story is far from comfortable. Mary is a teenage girl from the small town of Nazareth who is forced into an unwanted engagement with a much older carpenter whom she barely knows.

During the time of their engagement and while still a virgin, Mary is visited by the angel Gabriel who tells her that God has chosen her to bear His Son. Mary is also told that her cousin Elizabeth, believed far too old to bear a child, is also pregnant. Both pregnancies ending up coming to fruition.

Joseph becomes understandably angered by the fact that his young fiancee, with whom he knows he himself has not had relations, has turned up pregnant. Prepared to set her aside quietly, he is also visited by an angel who tells him of God's special purpose in their lives. In staying together despite the scandal, both are ostracized by their community.

During this same time, King Herod, who had been appointed as the Rome-backed ruler of the small Jewish nation of Judea, was fearing the realization of an ancient Jewish prophecy. This prophecy revealed that a ruler would emerge from the lineage of the ancient King David. Herod decided to command a census of all people in which they must return to their ancestral homes in the hopes that he could sort out the identity of this future challenger to his rule.

Joseph was from the town of Bethlehem, known as the City of David, and so was forced to return there for the census. He took Mary along with him, and during the trip she began to appreciate him for his good nature and their affection for one another grew. On arrival at Bethlehem they can find nowhere to stay thanks to the increased population due to the census, and they are forced to stay in what amounts to a cave-like stable.

While Herod is fretting and Mary goes into contractions, three 'Magi' or wise kings arrive from Persia at Herod's court in Jerusalem. They have been studying the prophecy and also believe that the time is at hand for the birth of this special king. Learning from them that the king is a child to be born and not a grown man, Herod orders the murder of all babies in Bethlehem.

As we all well know, Herod's plan is unsuccessful. Mary gives birth in the stable, laying her boy child in a manger and naming him Jesus. Shepherds tending their flocks nearby have been told of the miraculous birth by an angel, and they show up to greet the newborn. They are quickly followed by the Magi, who come bearing gifts for the young king and the family.

Just as Herod's troops arrive and begin their unimaginable slaughter, Joseph is again visited in a dream by an angel who warns him of the pending attack. Joseph rouses Mary from sleep, they gather the infant Son of God, and make their way out of Bethlehem just ahead of the wave of death falling across the city.

This is the story of the birth of the baby Jesus, who would grow to become the Christ, the saviour of mankind, a great king as foretold in the prophecies. A king not of this world, but of a higher kingdom ruling over all mankind based on God's laws and His own teachings of love and peace.

It is the story of Mary and Joseph saying "Yes" to God's calling, and overcoming numerous obstacles placed in front of them by family, community, and royalty to bring Jesus into the world. It is simple and yet commanding and compelling. It is 'The Nativity Story', the beginning chapter in the greatest story ever told.

Oh Christmas Tree

For many people the world over there will be a new addition to their homes in the coming days and weeks, if that addition has not already arrived. As homes are decorated for the season a large number of families will haul an evergreen tree inside, continuing the tradition of the Christmas tree. But what is the origin and meaning of this grand holiday tradition?

There are many people who will try to tell you that the tree goes all the way back to early pagan cultures, or to the ancient Druids, or to the Roman seasonal celebration known as Saturnalia. But in actuality the Christmas tree dates back to the early years of the 8th century and the life mission of a man born as Winfred in the year 672, but who has become known in history as Saint Boniface.

Winfred was born into a wealthy family, and had to overcome the protestations of his family when he received a calling and entered the Benedictine monastery in late 7th century England. In 802, he became an ordained priest and took the name Boniface, becoming a teacher. Years later, and after previous attempts, he undertook a mission to convert the people of Frisia, an early Germanic tribe that lived along the North Sea.

The Frisians had an ancient symbol known as Thor's Oak which was dedicated to a pagan god. The location of this tree was the main point of veneration for the early Germanic people. In the year 723, Boniface approached this tree and stated his intention to chop it down, an attempt which the tribes believed would cause his death at Thor's hands.

Boniface began to chop at the tree, calling on Thor to strike him down if the tree actually held any power or symbolism. As Boniface chopped a great wind came along and helped topple the massive tree. When the tree fell and no harm came to Boniface, the Germanic people began to believe him and thus began their conversion to Christianity.

There was a fir tree growing in the roots of the former oak, and legend has it that Boniface claimed this as a new symbol saying "This humble tree's wood is used to build your homes: let Christ be at the centre of your households. Its leaves remain evergreen in the darkest days: let Christ be your constant light. Its boughs reach out to embrace and its top points to heaven: let Christ be your Comfort and Guide."

Subsequently the earliest actual references to a specific seasonal tree trace their roots to the Germanic people. Church records from the year 1539 at the Cathedral of Strasbourg mention the erection of a Christmas tree. Also during this time many guilds, or union houses, maintained a custom of preparing Christmas trees in front of their guild houses by decorating them with apples, dates, nuts, and paper flowers.

After hundreds of years as a custom in the Germanic towns, the Christmas tree slowly began to spread as a tradition into the more rural areas, ultimately moving into the aristocracy and spreading east into Russia, Austria, and into France by the mid-19th century. The British royal family also began to help celebrate the holiday season with a Christmas tree during this 19th century period.

During the 1850's, a popular ladies journal in America known as 'Godeys Ladies Book' published a picture of a family gathered around a Christmas tree with presents laid underneath. By the end of the decade the picture and its popularity had caused the tradition to begin and spread in the United States. By the 1870's, putting up a Christmas tree had become the norm here in America.

In its original tradition, the Christmas tree was brought into the home and setup with decorations on Christmas Eve, not to be taken down until after the traditional '12th day' on January 6th, which was the eve of the Epiphany, the day celebrating the 'Magi' or 'Three Wise Men' adoring the Christ child. It was the commercialization of the Christmas season that resulted ultimately in trees being erected at earlier points.

In celebrating the final Christmas of his life in 2004, Pope John Paul II spoke of the true meaning and purpose of the Christmas tree calling it "an ancient custom that exalts the value of life." He pointed out that the evergreen remains unchanged throughout the harshness of winter, and further stated that it represents "the tree of life, a figure of Christ, God's greatest gift to all men."

In past years it had become a tradition in our own family that my family would get together with my brother Mike's family and a few others. We would travel to the area around New Hope, Pennsylvania to a tree farm where we would select and cut down the tree for our respective families. We would then stop for a nice lunch or dinner on the ride home. We abandoned this long ride and tradition when our kids got older, but it remains a nice shared Christmas memory for our family.

My wife and I took part in this now wide-spread tradition in the way that has become customary in our home when we took a drive out yesterday and went to find our home Christmas tree. After making our selection with one of the many tree sales locations that spring up this time of year, we brought our tree home. We will put it up in it's stand today in our living room, let it 'settle' for a day, and then begin to decorate it tomorrow night.

As we decorate we will play Christmas music, enveloping our living room in the Christmas season. And as we do so we will look on the beauty of its lights and decorations and ornaments and we will be reminded of the light and joy that was brought into our world with the birth of Jesus Christ two thousand years ago. As you put up and admire your own Christmas tree this season, remember to consider that light of Christ, the true meaning of the tree and of Christmas itself.

A Good Catholic Boy

During the course of our lives most of us are going to have any number of labels placed upon us by others. Some we will wear with pride: hard worker, strong willed, high energy. Others will cause us to reevaluate ourselves: lacks effort, undisciplined, tardy.

Recently, someone hung on me the moniker of being a "good Catholic boy" based on limited knowledge gathered by my writings and commentary at this blog. I believe that it was meant to be somewhat complimentary, but it also has caused me to evaluate whether or not it is actually true.

The only way to figure out if I am indeed a 'good Catholic boy', in fact if anyone can be described in such a manner, is to determine what exactly that phrase means. To do that, I think we need to break it down, word by word. What does it mean to be good, to be Catholic, to be a boy? And then we need to figure out if, taken together, those words would constitute a compliment. Would they be something of which to be proud?

Let's start off with being 'good', a virtue the meaning of which most of us could probably agree. Webster's primary definition of 'good' states "of a favorable character or tendency", and secondarily as "virtuous, right, commendable". Sounds 'good' to me. But do I personally fit the bill?

Examining the totality of any American citizen's life is going to reveal specific incidents of what most of us would consider 'good' actions and 'bad' actions. It is not only possible, but it happens in fact that people who are good the majority of the time, good in their nature, do sometimes commit bad acts. Conversely, people who many would consider as bad or even 'evil' can sometimes do a good act.

I would like to consider myself as falling into the former category, where I feel that most of us fall. An honest evaluation of the person that I know myself to be inside, and the reactions that people generally have towards me, lead me to believe that I am indeed a generally 'good' person. That I know also for a fact that I have committed some 'bad' actions in my life does not detract from that basic goodness, it simply keeps me striving to improve as a human being.

While being 'good' or 'bad' as a part of your basic character as a person is really not that hard to determine in most instances, even easier to determine is the idea of being a boy. It starts with the premise that you are sexually a male, so that part is easy. The real difficult point is to draw a line between boyhood and becoming a 'man', an adult male.

Putting an exact age on this shift is troublesome. Just because someone reaches the age of 18 for instance, where in America you can do such things as vote, is not enough. Even reaching the age of 21, where again in America you can legally consume alcohol and by which point many people have or are about to graduate from college is not enough.

Moving from 'boy' to 'man' is not about some numerical, chronological age. It is about combining a certain minimum age with reaching a maturity level at which you begin to think outside of yourself on an egotistical level. Some can reach this point at age 16, others at 18, others at 21. Some males take decades to reach the point where they can legitimately call themselves a 'man' in real terms.

Being a man means taking care of your responsibilities to home, family, and career. It means placing the needs of your family ahead of your own personal needs and desires. It means setting a good example, working hard, and taking important issues such as faith, politics, and morality seriously. During my own life, moving from boyhood to manhood came in fits and starts.

I had some tremendous responsibilities put on my shoulders at a time when many would still have considered me a boy in chronological age. Parenthood, marriage, and taking care of a sick parent all came to me at very young ages. Over the years I handled most of those responsibilities, but in retrospect I know that I didn't always handle them the way I now believe that a true man would. I absolutely can be accused of being selfish, ignorant, and unreliable at times, especially when I was younger.

But I certainly feel that the totality of my life experiences has left me as a 'man' today. I know that I have grown as a father and grandfather, as a husband in my second marriage, as a homeowner, as a professional in the law enforcement field. So at this stage of my life I feel pretty comfortable in accepting someone calling me a 'good man', even if I still may act a bit childish from time to time.

The final term to look at here is that 'Catholic' label. That one might indeed be the hardest, even though for some it might seem the easiest to determine. Let's face it, anyone can call themselves whatever they want and justify it in some way. People who consider themselves 'Catholic' as a matter of faith do that frequently. You grew up Catholic, or you go to a Catholic church at times, or you send your kids to a Catholic school.

Does any of that make you 'Catholic' truly? If not, what does make one a Catholic in deed, not just as a label. The roots of the word go back to Greek origin, and basically are going to lead you to 'universal' as a definition. In the early Church, if you were a Christian you were catholic. Of course as we all know there were many doctrinal splits in the Church over the millenia.

Today being a Catholic with capital 'C' signifies to most that you belong religiously to the Roman Catholic Church. You can call yourself a member if you are baptized into the Church, and then more fully as you progress through receiving the Sacraments, particularly Confirmation. Stronger commitments are reached with regularly attending Mass and receiving the Eucharist at Holy Communion, and in cleansing yourself of sin in Penance and Reconciliation.

But these are acts of physical or emotional commitment on ones part. What is truly needed to really be able to call oneself 'Catholic' is an understanding and living out of the basic creed of the Church to be 'one, holy, and apostolic' in nature. You follow the 'one Church' established by Christ whole-heartedly, you always attempt to live your life in a holy manner even if you fall short most times, and you try to spread Christ's word in apostolic fashion by your own words and deeds.

In this sense, I feel comfortable calling myself a Catholic. I do believe in the Church and it's creed, in the teachings of Jesus Christ, and I do feel inspired by the Holy Spirit as a direct presence in my life. I read the Bible. I go to Mass and receive Communion. I go to Confession and perform Penance (though not as often as I probably should), and I have been both baptized and confirmed in the Church.

As I have gotten older I have begun to express my Christianity and Catholic beliefs much more frequently, particularly here at my blog. I have volunteered as a lector in my own church. I have supported my wife as she herself converted to Catholicism some years ago now. I have subtly tried to pass along my faith to my children, something that I failed to do strongly enough when they were young. I pray every single day that they come to a full faith in Christ during their lifetime. I believe that I still have much more to do, but that 'Catholic' is certainly a term you can use to describe me at this point.

So in the end, the term that was hung on me of being a "good Catholic boy" is a bit misleading. I am only 'good' most of the time. I still have much room to grow in my 'Catholic' faith. I have mostly shed the habits of a 'boy' and take my responsibilities as a man far more seriously. But I know inside that I am a 'good' person, I am happy to practice and express my 'Catholic' faith, and am confident enough in my manhood to still allow the 'boy' in me to come out at times.

"A good Catholic boy." I have some work to do still, but I think that I can happily live with that. I hope to be able to live up to that label going forward in experiencing this gift of life that God has given to me. I would invite anyone reading this to also try living up to the challenge one day, one action, one moment at a time.