Homily
for the
31st Sunday
of Ordinary Time
A Pre-Election Homily
Oct.
30, 2016
Collect
Holy Cross, Champaign, Ill.
“Almighty
and merciful God, by your gift your faithful offer you right and praiseworthy
service” (Collect).
The
“right and praiseworthy service” that the faithful people of Jesus Christ offer
to the Father is, 1st of all, the sacred liturgy, our public worship, thru the
Mass and the other sacraments.
2d,
it’s the service of our daily lives, our living as disciples of Jesus and
children of the Father once we leave the sacred liturgy. Our service continues in what has been called
the liturgy of life, in keeping with St. Paul’s exhortation to the Romans: “I urge you, brothers and sisters, by the
mercies of God, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing
to God, your spiritual worship” (12:1).
10
days before our elections, we need to consider how our exercise of democracy in
this place at this time expresses “right and praiseworthy service” of God. Apologies to anyone who’s voted early. I’m sure most of us wish this whole thing
would just go away! But of course, it
won’t, and we have to deal with it, not only on Nov. 8 but for the next 4
years, and probably far beyond 4 years because of the consequences that will follow
from Nov. 8’s decision.
I’ve
been reading massive amounts of newsprint—or whatever you call it on your
computer—from both the religious press and secular media about this year’s
life-and-death issues and the implications for the religious freedom we pray
for at every Mass. Brothers and sisters,
it’s not looking pretty for religious believers.
Pope
Francis has offered us some remarks worth attending to. 1) Almost everything we do is political
because politics has to do with how people live together. So when we talk about moral issues, we’re
necessarily being political. Along the
same line, Abp. Chaput of Philadelphia said in a speech at Notre Dame on 9/15
that we “have a duty to leave the world better than we found it. One of the ways we do that, however
imperfectly, is through politics.” 2) Pope
Francis advises all of us to study the issues, to pray, and then to vote our
consciences (CNS, 10/2). 3) Related to
no. 2, pastors have an obligation to offer guidance to their flocks on how to vote; not for whom to vote, but how; i.e., what issues or concerns should be
forming our consciences and guiding our decisions.
Every
4 years for the last 2 decades, the bishops of the U.S. have issued a long
statement about 15 or 20 issues that should concern Catholics as they prepare
to vote. The bishops of Illinois this
year, mercifully, put out a much shorter message that was published on a half
page of the Catholic Post on
9/25. It’s headed “Seven Key Themes of
Catholic Social Teaching.” The Catholic
teaching we’re talking about at election season, sisters and brothers, isn’t
dogmatic theology; we’re not talking about the real presence of Jesus in the
Blessed Sacrament. Nor is it about
Church practices, like celibacy or holy water.
It’s about how we treat one another.
In the words of St. John Paul II, it’s about the fundamental dignity of
every human person; or in the words of Pope Francis, it’s about addressing our
throwaway society—a society that is not only throwing away or destroying the
creation that God has given us but also disposing of inconvenient human beings.
So
what are the 7 key issues that our bishops identify? The life and dignity of the human person;
care for God’s creation; family; human rights and responsibilities; care for
the poor and vulnerable; dignity of work and rights of workers; and solidarity.
Clearly,
no party is in complete agreement with Christian morality on all issues. Many bishops and commentators in the
religious media have been reminding us that the public issues under debate, or
that should be under debate, can be sorted into 2 types: those that are non-negotiable from a moral
standpoint, policies that are either moral or immoral all the time; and those
that require prudential judgment about what might be the best policy or how
best to work toward a given purpose.
Practically
speaking, what does that distinction between non-negotiables and debatable
policies mean? Popes JPII, Benedict, and
Francis and our bishops have taught consistently that certain specific actions
are so offensive to human dignity that they are always wrong, regardless of circumstances. These actions include (but aren’t limited to)
genocide, the abuse of minors, abortion, euthanasia or assisted suicide, embryonic
stem cell research, and the deliberate targeting of non-combatants during war. Further, we are reminded that it is immoral
and sinful to support or vote for candidates who advocate those actions, if
there are other options for our votes.
There
are other issues that are important but require prudence, wisdom, and political
care to act upon. Racism is absolutely a
moral evil; but how one goes about
shaping a more just society, e.g., one in which blacks or Hispanics have no
reason to be afraid of police officers, is up for lots of discussion, and
different courses of action might address the evil.
Everyone
has a right to food, shelter, clothing, and health care. But how
do you see that everyone has reasonable access to them? What kind of public assistance is called
for? What is a just wage for
workers? How should we assist refugees?
We
have to take care of God’s creation and bequeath a livable world to our
children. But how are we to balance care
for the environment with economic stability and employment concerns in our
country and in the developing world?
There
are no obvious answers to such questions, either politically or morally. We may in good conscience vote for and work
for various policies to try to tackle them.
As
you may have noted, our local newspaper refused in its 10/2 editorial to
endorse either major candidate: “Nobody
for President.” Numerous pundits and
even some bishops, like Abp. Chaput and our neighbor Bishop Paprocki in
Springfield, have called both major candidates for President so seriously
flawed that people are wondering whether it would be moral to consider a minor
candidate or to sit out the election.
There’s a home about 10 blocks from here where a yard sign urges the
passer-by, “Vote Willie Nelson for President.”
Some
bishops agree that one may skip the presidential line on the ballot, but one is
still obliged to vote for other offices, because public policy that affects all
of us is shaped at many levels. Abp.
Chaput said in that 9/15 speech that if good Christians “leave the public
square, other people with much worse intentions won’t” leave that square. Therefore various bishops and commentators
urge us to opt for what is often called “the lesser of 2 evils,” for we must
necessarily have one or the other; not to choose is to choose. One commentator has opined that the
barbarians are already in charge of our country, and our battle is to try to
take back the public arena. Voting for a
3d-party candidate (if you can find one worthier than the 2 main ones) or
writing in the name of someone else entirely is a way of making a statement
about what the major parties have offered us, and that’s valid. If you do some homework, you can find a
qualified person whose name you can write in; I don’t suggest Willie
Nelson.
The
most recent issue of the Catholic Post
(10/23) includes an impassioned column
pleading with us to reject any candidate or party platform that endorses the
killing of the unborn or the sick or human embryos and calls for public funding
of abortion. A homily far stronger than
that column (and ⅓ longer than this
homily) was preached in the cathedral of Phoenix 4 weeks ago, and you can find
both text and YouTube online.
One
party platform and its presidential candidate enthusiastically endorses the anti-life
positions decried by that Post column
and the Phoenix homily. That platform
and candidate promise to select federal judges of like mind. The candidate has labeled people who aren’t
on her side as “deplorables,” and said candidate’s aides call our Church “a
middle ages dictatorship.” The platform
promises no quarter to those who oppose the pagan agenda that it promotes regarding
the unborn, homosexuality, and euthanasia; as far as they’re concerned, you and
I are religious fanatics; we’re bigots; and in the name of “tolerance” and
“non-discrimination,” our freedoms must be limited to private belief and harmless
worship but cannot include acting on our consciences if our consciences aren’t
in harmony with the prevailing mores of our secular culture—our pagan culture.
To
what extent is our religious freedom in jeopardy? You already know about legal decisions
affecting bakers, florists, and photographers compelled to give their unwilling
service, and implied approval, to gay weddings; and pharmacists compelled to
dispense abortion-inducing drugs. There
have already been attempts to compel all medical students to learn how to
perform abortions, and Catholic hospitals to provide them; and those attempts
will be accelerated. There is already
immense public pressure—even from Catholic parents—and at least one legal
settlement backing up that pressure, for Catholic schools to go along with the
pagan agenda regarding marriage and “reproductive rights.” Here in Illinois, religiously-based crisis
pregnancy centers have gone to federal court in defense of their religious
freedom and freedom of speech against a state law that requires them to give
patients information about abortion services.
If the past performance of the federal courts is any guide, watch out.
Massachusetts
has enacted a law that prohibits discrimination against transgender people in
public restrooms and locker rooms—as the Obama Administration tried with less
success to do nationally a few months ago.
In Massachusetts the law applies also to churches. And it prohibits the making of statements
intended to discriminate or incite others to do so; in other words, it aims to
prevent churches and pastors from offering opinions about sexuality that
conflict with the government’s opinions.
Which means I’d be in trouble for what I just said. We haven’t seen the end of this stuff, by any
means.
Call
them secularists, call them barbarians, or call them pagans—they will not
relent, nor will they grant the tolerance they demand for their own viewpoints.
On
9/8 the U.S. Civil Rights Commission issued a long report—306 pages—with one
sentence of great concern to religious leaders.
It reads: “The phrases ‘religious
liberty’ and ‘religious freedom’ will stand for nothing except hypocrisy so
long as they remain code words for discrimination, intolerance, racism, sexism,
homophobia, Islamophobia, Christian supremacy or any form of intolerance.” A lot of religious leaders, including our
bishops, have asked President Obama to renounce that one sentence in the
report. But the sentiments in that
sentence harmonize with the platform—the political agenda—of one of our major presidential
candidates and the party that supports that candidate.
So,
sisters and brothers, in these days we owe to the Lord our “right and
praiseworthy service” as we discern what direction we want our President, our
Congress, and our state legislature to take us in. There’s a great deal at stake concerning
human life and dignity, and our freedom to practice what we believe. We are accountable before God for our
votes. As Pope Francis has advised,
study the issues; pray; and vote your conscience.
May
God bless and guide all of us.