Sixth Sunday of Easter
May 16, 2004


How much do you pay attention to the teachings of the bishops?

On page 27 of yesterday’s Post Dispatch you would have read this headline. Bishop says Certain Voters Shouldn’t Receive Communion. Bishop Sheridan, formerly of St. Louis wrote this: “Any Catholic Politicians who advocate for abortion or for illicit stem cell research or of any form of euthanasia ipso facto place themselves outside of full communion with the church and so jeopardize their salvation. Any Catholics who vote for such candidates suffer the same fateful consequences.” In the three gatherings I have attended since then, I have had about 10 conversations about this. The ranges of responses run the gamut from ‘It’s about time’ to “What will they tell us how to think about next?”

It is a struggle, isn’t it? And as we are five months away from the presidential elections, I wonder where the church discourse on this will be by then? Then, if you caught the front page headline telling us that the Ban on Gay Marriages will Go Before Voters, you know that the bishops will have something to say in that arena as well. And if this sort of tension does not sit well with you, with people of good will and not so good will settling in on both sides of these issues, you kind of know that we are in for a long 5 months. Which is not necessarily a bad thing. And in the midst of that tension, I find it helpful to realize that we are not that far removed from the first controversy that rocked the early church.

In today’s first reading, we hear of the first huge ‘difference of opinion’ in the early church. Though it is not over quite as critical an issue as abortion, stem cell research and euthanasia, you sense how deeply the church was divided in those days as well. “Some who had come down from Judea were instructing the brothers: Unless you are circumcised, there is no salvation for you.” It is not that far from “Any Catholics who vote for such candidates suffer the same fateful consequences,” is it? Unless you conform in regards to ______ (you fill in the blank) you cannot saved. It is polarizing language.

So how did the early church handle this one? Is there a wisdom we can glean in our own prayer and reflection on these issues? (Or, how closely do you listen to the bishops?) It seems the church did three things.
They gathered together. Somehow, they sensed what was really at stake was the issue of unity. So any decision they made had to come from an experience of togetherness.

They prayed to the Spirit. In the gospel we hear the promise of Jesus to send that Spirit to us. “The advocate, whom the Father will send in my name will teach you everything, and remind you of what I told you…” So we pray for guidance from that spirit.

They decided upon a course that would foster unity. It was not without a certain limiting of their freedom, but it also did not put an undue hardship upon the gentile community.

Take a lesson from the council of Jerusalem. Gather, pray, and foster unity. Perhaps then, our church will also come to that space the early church did- “It is the decision of the Holy Spirit and of us…” as well…

And just a few thoughts toward a second homily. His name was Colin Fowler, and he was about 20 when I knew him many years ago. He was a musician and a Northern Ireland native. And he used his music as a way to protest ‘the troubles’. “It costs me some popularity. It may cost me my life some day. But if everyone just sits on their duff and does nothing, nothing will ever change.”

Colin was a man who knew “peace…not as the world gives” that Jesus spoke of in the gospel. And for you - where is the stand, the gospel decision that you know you have to do and choose or be false to yourself? Where do you know the peace the world cannot give?