Pickled Peppers

From CNS today:

Using a phrase that translates literally as “the face of a pickled pepper,” Pope Francis said that when Christians have more of a sourpuss than a face that communicates the joy of being loved by God, they harm the witness of the church.

It’s a good thing for me to keep in mind as I continue to blog here, especially about sour news like bishops behaving badly.

While I tend to think that newcomers to the faith don’t visit me here, I do get a lot of traffic from engaged couples. While they might not be seeing this past week’s relentless and depressing news about bishops in New Jersey and Southern California, maybe they are.

My staff colleague who does the “intake” interview of RCIA inquirers reported that of the 25 talks she had in 2012, only two catechumens made it to the Rite of Acceptance and to the Easter Vigil. And we will have two candidates received into the Church tomorrow. That’s not a good year for us at all. I also remember bad RCIA years in 2002 and 2003. You know who was in the pepper jar those years, right? Another staff colleague at another parish was vilified in 2007 for a small crop. But RCIA was way down across my last diocese that year. The pickled pepper? Maybe it was Pope Benedict. Remember the SSPX fiasco and the matter of how a “church” is defined?

 

On My Bookshelf: Evangelization

I’ve been cleaning off the bookshelf in my parish office. A few weeks ago I noticed two brief, older volumes I must have picked up shortly after grad school. Authored by the Chicago archdiocesan priest Patrick J. Brennan, each is a quick easy read: paperback and under 200 pages. Each is out of print, I think. They describe early efforts (in the 1980′s) to revitalize Catholic life through evangelization and a more proactive approach to the Great Commission. Fr Brennan takes Evangelii Nuntiandi seriously. But it was also a time when many Catholics fretted about the word “evangelization.” I remember those discussions in my first parishes. “Evangelization” sounds too darned Protestant. Our people will misunderstand. Can we call it something different? Outreach? Re-Membering Church? What a difference a generation makes.

The first book, The Evangelizing Parish, from Tabor Publishing in 1987 was written by a priest for other priests. Or so it seemed to me. Fr Brennan has a snappy, no-nonsense writing style. He jumped from topic to topic. He offered a lot of forms he used, told a number of stories and anecdotes on how things worked for him. He wasn’t shy about mentioning things that he tried that worked for a few years, then didn’t. Or the occasional effort that bore no fruit.

The Evangelizing Parish progresses from a treatment of “What Is Catholic Evangelization?” in Chapter One. The foundation document is Evangelii Nuntiandi, and Fr Brennan explores succinctly what this might mean in a parish.

The largest chapter (forty pages) addresses “Evangelizing Active Parishioners.” There’s a lot to do, obviously–mainly getting people on board with leaving behind the “productivity” of parish programs and renewing the sense of turning Catholics into evangelizers in their workplace,s neighborhoods, and communities as they attend to greater personal depth in their own life in Christ.

Maybe Fr Brennan will disappoint some by this assessment:

The parish, like the larger Church, is a tool–a tool whose purpose it is to help make the Reignb of god more and more realized in time and space. The true focus … is the world, the marketplace, the neighborhoods, the mores of the nation, and the geopolitical climate of the world.

Honestly, I could set some people’s teeth a-gnashing by suggesting the same of the liturgy. But it would be true.

From here, the author tackles possibilities with “Inactive or Alienated Parishioners,” and then “Evangelizing Youth.” A very brief chapter on “The Catechumenal Parish” wraps it up by page 113.

The other book came out three years later, and while it doesn’t feature evangelization in the title, this effort is both the stated and unspoken theme throughout.

More than half the book considers “Base Communities” and looks at various manifestations of these in North America and around the world. In my parish we have about thirty “small groups” for students each semester. Many resident parishioners have similar structures that have held up well over the years.

Fr Brennan explains why these groups–between households and parish–are essential for faith development. There are lessons to be learned from the Americas and Africa. Notably, no examples from Europe.

From there, Fr Brennan turns attention to adult Catholics for twenty-plus pages. Then he addresses the family, including a brief chapter on “Family-Centered Evangelization and Catechesis.” All interesting stuff, peppered with real experiences: successes and a few failures and some things in-between.

It was illustrative to me what a good, thoughtful, and proactive pastor in the 80′s was doing. Long before the malaise of the later JP2 and B16 years set in. Before evangelization was “new.” When more people, it seemed, were taking Church documents more seriously than the distillation that became the catechism.

A bit of the lingo was cringe-worthy, but I have the perspective of another generation, I suppose. And while Fr Brennan was critical of “programmitis,” a lot of the efforts of the 70′s and 80′s were indeed … programs. On the other hand, I applaud the author’s insight that the catechumenate offers more than a liturgical structure for evangelization and initiation. It can become an effective model for renewing the baptized believers of a parish.

RENEW and other efforts gave parishes and small groups a helpful structure and model to follow. The problem was that many lay people, and a good number of parish professionals lacked the depth or insight to follow up with the published offerings. Catholicism is far too rich to allow people to just sit back and do nothing once their five, six, or ten semesters are completed.

 

On Self-Absorption

CNS had a teaser of a piece yesterday. Pope Francis, before his election, took his turn talking at the pre-conclave meetings. A message that seemed to point at the institution has a resonance with Christian ministry. I’d like to read the whole speech. But CNS only gives us snippets. One of them:

The evils that, over time, happen in ecclesial institutions have their root in self-referentiality and a kind of theological narcissism.

What does that mean? Is this always true? Does it hold for parishes and chanceries as well as the curia?

In part, I interpret this as a direct criticism of the Small Church Getting Smaller meme we’ve seen of recent years. Why? Because that SCGS outlook, even the nuanced one presented by Pope Benedict that many of his followers have grabbed, pretty much takes God out of the equation. SCGS swims in self-reference: the way believers define membership, orthodoxy, what-have-you. Rather than do the work and let the Judge determine final placement. Like Jesus suggested. There is a tragic flaw in that self-reference often tends to be a self-fulfilling prophecy, rather than a natural consequence of some people being presented the Gospel, then walking away. To be sure, walking away happens. But maybe not in the same way as the self-styled orthodox expect.

The Holy Father’s approach seems essentially Ignatian. Trust. See what happens. Focus on God. But also look for God in the unexpected. I think the prime fault of Catholic neotraditionalism is that its advocates and believers have nailed down that God was to be encountered in certain ways at a certain time in the past. And so the instinct–the human instinct–is to return to the past, to what worked before. It’s like Moses going back to the burning bush in Exodus 4. Isaiah going back to the Temple in Isaiah 7. Isn’t there that saying, “You can never go back home.”

Certainly, there are things that have “always” worked, and will continue to be a good starting point. But Christians, especially in the postmodern age, should be prepared to ask, “What else might work?” and serve from there.

As believers, we do think we’re with the Lord, and he is with us. Why does that not always translate into our actions?

In Revelation, Jesus says that he is at the door and knocks. Obviously, the text refers to his knocking from the outside in order to enter, but I think about the times in which Jesus knocks from within so that we will let him come out.

The self-referential church keeps Jesus Christ within herself and does not let him out.

Put simply, there are two images of the church: a church which evangelizes and comes out of herself by hearing the word of God with reverence and proclaiming it with faith; and the worldly church, living within herself, of herself, for herself.

This should shed light on the possible changes and reforms which must be done for the salvation of souls.

This insight seems essentially evangelical. We can own our closeness to the Lord. We can acknowledge that we have been prepared as God’s instrument in the world. We have a place as a person within a community, and with a role to play. This is original Theology of the Body: the eye sees, the hand works, the legs propel. We work with others, and the mission gets accomplished … though we often don’t see how.

What does this mean in a parish, especially for its pastor and ministers? I’m going to need to give that a lot of thought as I reexamine my role in my parish. In what is mostly a bookkeeping measure, my new job title will be liturgy/campus ministry. Practically I’ve done campus ministry for the past five years, as about half the liturgy volunteers are students. On one hand, this is just about half of my personnel expenses coming out of the campus ministry endowment. But it also reflects a gradual refocus in the liturgy/music position in this faith community.

I’m going to be watching more carefully what is coming out of the pope’s mouth and from his pen in the coming months. Not that I wasn’t paying attention to Pope Benedict, but this evangelical focus with a wide swath of discernment is an opportunity. One side of that opportunity is personal: keeping watch that my service to the Church does not become something that’s about me. But also that I continue to explore the possibilities of the border between worship and evangelization.

 

Where Does This Holy Thursday Lead?

I’ve been reticent about posting on every news item coming from the vicinity of Pope Francis. Cardinal Law. Msgr Marini. Et cetera. It seems he will be celebrating the Mass of the Lord’s Supper in a youth prison. It had been his custom as a bishop to pray this Mass in hospices, prisons, hospitals, and such.

The medieval custom of washing the feet of the poor on Holy Thursday was kept alive by monastics. I’m sure that’s as much of a derivation of the ritual as associating it with ordained ministry (hence 1956′s viri selecti).

Still, this sort of gesture moves liturgy far beyond the placement and number of candlesticks. It begins to place the liturgy in a direct context of evangelization. (Not to mention service.)

In the internet age, it seems we can no longer suggest the pope’s liturgies have little bearing on the life of faith. Fifty years ago, they progressed in pomp and finery unnoticed by people outside the walls of a big Roman church. Today, they serve as fodder for cheerleading or dismay or things in between.

The stories of Pope Francis’s liturgies are also picked up and noted by others. But it’s good to keep in mind that Holy Thursday in a prison is not the Event, but merely a start. Liturgy, as ordinarily celebrated, is partly for the purpose of the sanctification of the faithful. And how do people become holy? How do they cooperate with God’s grace which offers them holiness? It’s simple. By saying yes to God. We can say yes as we receive the Eucharist. We can, and really must, say yes in other ways in our lives.

One becomes touched by a leader’s gesture of reaching out to the young in prison. It does not end with a feeling of regard for the man. It must continue with a searching of the observer’s heart. Is my heart moved to pity for young people? Or do I feel contempt? Perhaps I feel nothing at all. This is where discernment is key.

Discernment guides the believer to make present and future choices in response to the event. For me, I have to listen carefully in these situations. I must watch my thoughts and feelings–my whole reaction. Am I feeling the urge to assist in some way? Is there an inner movement, nudging me forward? Or am I called elsewhere? And with that last question, is the nudging away due to my own fears or deafness? Or has another path been set for me by the Lord?

This is why I am most hopeful (as I think I’ve written) that Pope Francis is well-grounded in Ignatian discernment. Like a good director, he places options and surfaces choices that might be more or less hard to perceive. And the question sits with us: is this my path? Or is there another?

This must be the best way to approach these news stories. Pope Francis brushes aside Msgr Marini, and perhaps I disagree or get bothered. Then I look to my own life and the times I have been brusque and dismissive. And if this is wrong for the pope (whether or not it is true) then it is wrong for me. And if the pope carves out the opening of the Paschal Triduum for imprisoned youth, then I am responsible for adjusting my regard for a celebrity event into an opportunity for personal reflection.

Getting back to the bigger picture of liturgy as evangelization, this is cause for some long and deep reflection for me personally. Perhaps we are moving past an age of “contemplation,” where getting the liturgy done “properly” is no longer enough. How does liturgy contribute to Matthew 28:19-20 and the commission we have all been given in baptism? And for what will I stand? Liturgy? Evangelization? Or something wholly different than what I did before?

 

Pope Francis on Evangelization I

From another interview, when discussing the missionary spirit of the faith:

Staying, remaining faithful implies an outgoing. Precisely if one remains in the Lord one goes out of oneself. Paradoxically precisely because one remains, precisely if one is faithful one changes. One does not remain faithful, like the traditionalists or the fundamentalists, to the letter. Fidelity is always a change, a blossoming, a growth. The Lord brings about a change in those who are faithful to Him. That is Catholic doctrine. Saint Vincent of Lerins makes the comparison between the biologic development of the person, between the person who grows, and the Tradition which, in handing on the depositum fidei from one age to another, grows and consolidates with the passage of time: «Ut annis scilicet consolidetur, dilatetur tempore, sublimetur aetate»

Aside from the Latin quote, I think a few self-styled traditional Catholics might bristle. But I think we have a pope who will be taking up the cause of evangelization. Or rather, he won’t be laying it aside.

I’m finding these old interviews to be full of fascinating details. With a mod to my brother Charles, maybe a Jesuit pope is just what I we needed.