For His Friends

Here are a few of the thoughts which struck me as I was preparing the homily for yesterday’s [Saturday] ECHO graduation at Notre Dame. I have edited slightly and deleted a large section which probably could not be understood outside of the context in which it was given but perhaps as you returned from Mass this week-end, still wondering about the Gospel, this may or may not help. I hope it will.

When I was studying theology in Boston in the mid-seventies, seminarians then as now were required to do apostolic work of some kind. My assignment was to Boston College where I and about six of my colleagues who on one week with about three hundred undergraduates in a huge lecture hall would listen to the presentation of a Master Teacher on the subject of the Four Gospels. Then the following week, we would break the large group down into small groups and discuss the previous week’s presentation on the Gospel. At the end of each semester, the Master Teacher, who by the way today teaches on this campus, would ask the undergrads this question: Which of the four Gospel writers would you most like to have as your pastor and why?

The result was overwhelmingly in favor of Luke and the reasons were markedly consistent and broken down into three primary reasons for the choice: Luke’s Jesus is more human and focused on doing his father’s will; Luke’s Jesus interacts with women more frequently, sensitively, and occasionally at some cultural and religious risk; and, finally, Luke’s Jesus shows the greatest concern for the poor. Three rather good insights into the Gospel, I thought then and now.

This afternoon we heard Luke at the top of his game. The farmer in the Gospel is not necessarily a bad man. He is rich but there is no sin in that. But in Luke’s Gospel riches can be a barrier to following Jesus (remember the parable of the rich young man?). There are two primary problems, however, with the farmer in the Gospel: admittedly he has all that he or his family will ever need but he suffers from an insatiable appetite for more and second, his rugged individualism has placed him outside of any community and he has little concern for others. To be without a community in the time of Jesus was to be without an identity. You were recognized by which community you were from, Galilee, Samaria, etc.) Consulting no one and with no obvious concern for those who have less, all the rich farmer wants to do is build more barns – not for his family, not for his community but seemingly for his own peace of mind. It might appear to many that this man  has it made.

Jesus on the other hand understands the religious tradition from which he comes. He may or may not have been aware of the teaching from Ecclesiastes in the first reading. Certainly his response indicates as does Qoheleth that the ephemeral is precisely that – it is passing, fleeting, of no eternal value. I once had a married woman tell me of her husband, “Father, my husband brought home without asking a new BMW and he showed it proudly to all our neighbors. He was so happy, until four weeks later BMW introduced an even finer and more expensive version of the same model and then he became depressed.” Ecclesiastes draws our attention from this moment’s accomplishments and directs us towards those things which will last and enrich not only ourselves but our families, our Church, our nation – things that will make for a better world.

St. Paul to the Corinthians begs us to set our sights on higher things. Keeping things in proper perspective is what today’s Liturgy of the Word is all about. It can be a call not only to us as individuals to examine our priorities and values but it can also be a call to communities, local, regional and national, to churches (parishes, diocesan and universal) to see if our sights are clearly set on those things which are not vanity but are from and of God and that hoarding has no place among us, sharing does.

I shall look back tonight and throughout this week on these three readings, reflect on them, apply them.

+RNL

For the last twelve  years here as bishop the diocese has had one single Vocation Director, Father Leonard Plazewski. The role and responsibility of the Vocation Director in the life of the local church is very significant. He or she devote all their waking energy to the pursuit of men for the priesthood or religious life as a priest or brother and of women for religious life as a sister. Theoretically, that is their job description but realistically, since religious communities have their own Vocation Directors, he or she spends most of their time searching for young men who think God is calling them to priesthood. Father Len has done that for us for a dozen years and today he and I are announcing that he will leave that position at the end of this calendar year. I am certain that all of my diocesan family know him because he has in all likelihood preached in your parish four times on vocations (he made the rounds of the 76 parishes and missions four times in twelve years). Since assuming the responsibility, he has put into place many dinners at my residence or occasionally some other place called PROJECT ANDREW dinners where pastors and associate pastors come with interested young men juniors in high school and above for a meal and to listen to our vocation stories. Annually he has gathered the eleven year olds of our elementary schools and for a long time juniors in high school for what is called FOCUS ELEVEN because sociologists tell us that their science has found that vocation decisions begin to be made first at eleven years old and then later during the eleventh grade. In the last few years he has gathered inquirers for a period of reflection and retreat just prior to Christmas.  He never gives up on his search for vocations and as a result, our diocese has been the best in the state in recent years in attracting men to the seminary.  The Church of St. Petersburg owes Father Plazewski a debt of gratitude as he winds down his work and begins in a yet-to-be determined assignment. Along the way, he has served the last several years as the president of the National Conference of Diocesan Vocation Directors and has visited many other dioceses to assist them in their Vocation promotion.

Today, I am announcing that Father John Blum, pastor of St. John Vianney parish on St. Petersburg Beach, will assume the role of Diocesan Director of Vocations on New Year’s Day. He will continue to serve as pastor of his parish so his appointment is part-time in Vocations where he will serve almost strictly as Supervisor of Seminarians. To assist Father Blum, I am also announcing that Father Carl Melchior, associate pastor of St. Catherine of Siena parish in Largo, will serve as Assistant Vocation Director while continuing in his present assignment. Father Carl’s task will focus on recruitment and when they are accepted by the Diocesan Vocation Board and admitted to the seminary, his work will be complete and they will become Father Blum’s responsibility. To give up a full-time Vocation Director for two part-time Vocation Directors is not the best idea but our current clergy personnel requirements do not allow me at this time to do otherwise. Hopefully and prayerfully in a couple of years, we will return to a single, full time Vocation Director.

When I arrived fourteen years ago, Father Michael O’Brien who is now serving as pastor of St. Justin the Martyr parish in Largo was serving in this capacity. He did a wonderful job also so I have known nothing but good Vocation Directors. And let me add that during my time as Rector-President of the College Seminary in Miami (1979-1984), the Diocese of St. Petersburg had splendid Vocation Directors (Fathers Arthur Proulx, Dennis Hughes, Robert Tabbert, James Johnson) who brought splendid candidates to the seminary for admission. Vocations for and from this diocese have always been a blessing and some who chose to leave and get married remain faithful, wonderful Catholic men. I have always emphasized that quality of candidate is far more important than quantity of candidates but I must confess to being proud that last school year and this coming we will again have 32 seminarians, a testimony to Father Plazewski’s labors.

These men in formation can be assured that the two men soon to split the responsibilities will be every much as supportive, grateful, present and wise as their predecessors. Finally, this is a good moment to offer my thanks to the Diocesan Vocation Committee which has advised Father Len along his way, to the members of the St. Petersburg chapter of Serra International (who pray for, work for, and support vocations to the priesthood and religious life) and to the Diocesan Seminary Admissions Committee which gives a great deal of time to meeting prospective applicants and judging their fitness for the journey to the altar. Today marks the beginning of a significant change in our Vocations Office but I believe it will be seamless.

+RNL

This week-end, it seems to me, is definition week-end. It is the week-end when the liturgy calls our attention to who we are as baptized and practicing Catholics in a special way. It defines what separates us from most of the rest of Christendom and focuses on the unique gift we share as Catholics. It is the Solemnity of Corpus Christi which we translate as “the body of Christ.” Easter time has ended and before we get back to “Ordinary Time” we have one more special focus and that is on the Eucharist. When I was young there were two special days: Corpus Christi and Sanguinis Christi. The Church paused to reflect on the two constitutive elements of the Eucharist or the Mass, the body and the blood of Christ. If memory serves me right, one was celebrated on a Thursday after Trinity Sunday and the other was celebrated a week later. We had processions in my youth, of the Blessed Sacrament, mostly through the Church since I lived in towns where Catholics were such a minority that an outside procession in the streets would have occasioned taunts and ridicule from by-standers. And then there was the fact that fifty families, not all of whom would be able to attend, would hardly constitute a procession. The two feasts of the two parts of the Eucharist were combined after the Second Vatican Council into Corpus Christi and moved to the second Sunday after Pentecost.  In Rome there is still a procession of the Blessed Sacrament on Thursday from the Basilica of St. John Lateran to the Basilica of St. Mary Major and a younger and vigorous Pope would carry the Blessed Sacrament while walking. In recent years, the Pope still holds onto the monstrance (the gold vessel which contains the host) but is driven from one to the other – slowly, with great reverence, hymns and prayers along the way.

Part of our strategy these years here in the diocese has been to turn the spotlight back on the Eucharist as both gift and identifying mark of who we are as Catholic Christians. We are a Eucharistic people and if we do not understand that, then we are missing the source and summit and the central focus of our life with Christ. Through the transformation of bread and wine into his body and blood, the sacrifice on Calvary is re-enacted every Mass in an unbloody way, and Christ comes to those of us who receive Him. We do not consider Eucharist or Communion simply a memorial or a sharing of common cup. That approach was a result of the reformation era. We have remained true to his command on the night before He died to take bread and wine, break it, bless it and then share his body and blood by our own reception and the communion of others doing the same.

It is such a gift and so much a part of what makes us Catholic that when someone leaves the practice of the faith to join another Church, I grieve because somehow we never got through to them that life without the Eucharist is like a day without sunshine, or worse. It is pedagogical failure. It is a liturgical failure. It is a pastoral failure. No one who truly understands and longs to receive the body and blood of the Lord can or should go for any extended period of time without approaching the blessed Lord and receiving the Corpus Christi. The Lord dwells under the “roof of the believer” for a brief but significant and powerful time. Our religious ancestors longed for this intimacy with God. Jesus gave it to us in Himself.

So this week-end, discover once more the greatest treasure of our faith after baptism – the body and blood of Christ. Then thank God for the privileged moment we share with Him in Eucharist. It must be a defining moment in our lives every time we approach the Eucharist.

+RNL

Most of you know that I was a priest of the Archdiocese of Miami prior to coming to the Diocese of St. Petersburg as bishop. Today I returned to my priestly roots and joined the Church of Miami in welcoming their new Archbishop, Thomas Wenski, formerly a priest of Miami, auxiliary bishop there as well, and for the last seven years Bishop of Orlando, our neighbor just across the Polk county line. The installation of one already a bishop is a fairly simple and straightforward Mass with the official installation taking place right at the beginning, prior to singing the “Gloria.” The representative of the Holy Father, Archbishop Pietro Sambi, who is Apostolic Nuncio to the United States, after offering a few words of congratulations and welcome to Archbishop Wenski and of gratitude and farewell to the retiring Archbishop Favalora, then read the “Apostolic Bull” (an English translation of the Latin original) from Pope Benedict appointing the new archbishop. Archbishop Favalora, who began the Mass sitting in the cathedra or chair of the bishop, steps down and with the Nuncio leads the new Archbishop to his place on the same cathedra just vacated. From that point forward Archbishop Wenski presides as principle celebrant and delivers the homily.

I have already written that it was a bittersweet moment for me as I have throughout my fourteen years as a bishop been grateful to Archbishop Favalora for many kindnesses. He ordained me to the episcopacy at St. Jude’s Cathedral on January 26, 1996 (I was his first bishop ordination), he presided over many meetings we have in the state, and more recently he drove over to visit me during my second week in Intensive Care following my second surgery last August and faithfully called me almost every week during my long recovery. After five years here as bishop in St. Petersburg, upon going to Miami he never lost his interest in and concern for this diocese, its priests, deacons, religious and faithful. He came to ordain Father John Lipscomb when I was too weak to do so last December, celebrated our fortieth anniversary with us as a diocese and often asked me about certain priests and people he missed. Now I will miss him. And it all happens in an instant in the context of Eucharist. My moment is coming and I thought about that a lot today, having passed sixty-nine years last Thursday. Retired bishops, archbishops and cardinals need to recall the words of John the Baptist when Jesus appeared on the shore of the Jordan River, “as He grows greater, so I must grow less.” Archbishop Favalora was genuinely relieved to be retiring but not enough thanks has been given to him for his nearly fifty years of priesthood, nearly twenty-five years as a bishop, five years as our shepherd here, and leader of the Church of Florida. It had to be tough to turn over the reins of office but it happens to all of us and is what I call the “genius of Roman Catholic ordained ministry” which means everyone gets a chance occasionally to have someone else as leader. No bishop can make everyone happy, and I hope we do not try, but all God’s people in their lifetime will have an opportunity to experience different styles of leadership in the Church.

Thank you, Archbishop Favalora, for your time as our Metropolitan Archbishop and welcome Archbishop Wenski, home to Miami, and to the role of our provincial leader. There is a little moniker, borrowed from the Easter Gospel, which summarizes what happens the day after an episcopal ordination or installation and it is this: “they rolled the stone before the tomb and all withdrew.” Now the really tough work begins for every bishop after their ordination/installation and they deserve the prayers of the faithful said at every Eucharist and beginning today in Miami, “we pray for Benedict our Pope, Thomas our bishop, his assistant bishops and all the clergy.”

+RNL

Update: CatholicTV has the broadcast of the Installation Mass available to view on demand.

Today marks the 30th anniversary of the phosphate ship slamming into the old Skyway Bridge resulting in the loss of both lives and the bridge. I remember that I was in my first year as Rector/President of St. John Vianney College Seminary and we had a number of students from the old St. Petersburg diocese which stretched at that time from Citrus Springs and Crystal River in the North to Ft. Myers Beach in the South. My first prayer was that none of our seminarians’ families were killed in the tragedy. Slowly but surely the seminarians from this diocese contacted their families and were assured of their safety and well-being. Then we prayed, corporately, collectively, and privately for those who died. May they continue to rest in peace.

+RNL

Those of you who might be expecting some narrative of my weeks of confinement at St. Anthony’s Hospital in St. Petersburg, are bound to be disappointed. My purpose today is to address the recent statements of two organizations within the Church seemingly at loggerheads on the matter of health care reform.

On Saturday, the Catholic Health Association of the United States of America announced that the Senate health care reform plan enjoyed that association’s blessings, with some minor difficulties which needed to be fixed prior to passage or before enactment.

On Monday, Chicago’s Francis Cardinal George, president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a statement on behalf of the bishops saying that the Senate Health Care plan, while containing many admirable features is unacceptable because of far too generous abortion provision language and, sadly, its passage would have to be opposed by the bishops of the United States.

There you have it, two highly respected organizations representing the same Church of Jesus Christ on opposite sides of the street during this seemingly final week of deliberations and action. What should a serious Catholic make of all of this?

First, in the interest of full disclosure, I ask that you recall that:

• I am an elected member of the Board of Directors of the Catholic Health Association, serving the first year of my second three year term. Because of my well known illness, I have been unable to attend any CHA board meetings since last June and until only the last few days have been either unable or unwilling to read Board documentation. Therefore, as I write this¸ I have no personal knowledge of any discussions held and/or actions taken by the governing board prior to last Saturday’s press conference by Sister Carol Keehan, our president, and a woman whom I deeply admire for her history both in Catholic health care provision and pro-life advocacy.
• I am also a member of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. Again because of my lengthy and well publicized illness, I have been unable to attend or participate in any USCCB plenary meetings since November 2008 and until the last few days have been either unable or unwilling to read Conference documentation as well.
• Finally, for nine years I served as either Associate General Secretary for Public Policy Advocacy of the old NCCB-USCC or as General Secretary of the same, acting as the Chief Operating Officer for six years.

During the time of my confinement, I have been led to believe that CHA and USCCB were working together to eliminate any language in the health care proposals which threatened the effectiveness of the long standing Hyde amendment which prevents federal monies (your tax dollars and mine) from providing abortions. The USCCB skillfully acted as a major player in gaining the Stupak amendment to the House passed Health Care Reform Bill last Fall. CHA in the end supported the Stupak language.

CHA prefers the health care reform vision of the Senate bill as they deem it ultimately more successful, more efficient, and more effective than the House passed version. USCCB has no major objections to the language in the Senate bill as it relates to the delivery of services except for the need of greater inclusion of immigrants and its abortion language. CHA agrees that there are problems with the abortion language (or in some instances the lack thereof) in the Senate bill but offers that it can be fixed in the “reconciliation” process or after enactment. The bishops say in response to this basically, “that will be far too little and much too late.”

CHA says that general access to health care benefits is a right of all citizens and every effort should be expended to see that it is made available. USCCB agrees but says nothing in the law can or should either extend abortion “rights”, use taxpayer monies to pay for abortions through new insurance possibilities, or in any way infringe on the right of conscience of those opposed to participating in what they believe to be morally illicit procedures.

At the very beginning of this national debate, CHA and USCCB had a long record of working together for genuine, real health reform so that remains and does not divide.

So today, the Catholic Health Association says we are willing to accept the Senate version of health care reform with the understanding that the less than perfect working document must and will be improved later in the process.

And also today, the elected leader of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Cardinal Francis George says passing the Senate bill will produce too large a loss of moral integrity and the Conference can not risk fixing things outside of the legislative process. He wants health care but finds the Senate bill requires too high a price with woefully inadequate abortion language and conscience protection proposals. The bishops want the Hyde amendment to apply fully which the House bill does and the Senate bill does not.

As a member of the Board of the Catholic Health Association, I too want universal access to health care in this country to all our inhabitants. But I do not wish it through a vehicle that expands abortion rights or weakens conscience clause protection. So I side with the USCCB on this one. Were the bishops’ conference asking for new legislation, further tightening access to abortion or writing new abortion language law, it would have trouble. From the beginning the bishops have said only we must insure that we keep what we have.

I hope and pray that in these final decisive days, the Congress will see the wisdom of the Church’s position on abortion in health care as articulated by the bishops and the experience and wisdom of the Catholic Health Care providers who yearn for a reform of a system which is failing and becoming incredibly expensive – to maintain and to access.

If this were a tennis match, it would not yet be “game” but “advantage bishops.” However, the game is still not over although it is approaching match point. I would hope that Congress will see the wisdom and find the ways to fully apply the Hyde amendment so that both CHA and the USCCB can unite in general support of health care reform that protects the life and dignity of all.

+RNL