Avoid Immorality; Embrace Immortality

This weekend our Deacon, John Gallagher, is preaching for all my Masses. Not only is it a blessing for our parish to have a Permanent Deacon in its service: our Permanent Deacon is a good preacher, to boot! But (I remind myself) his preaching does not release me from the duty to consult the weekend Scripture readings. It turns out, as it does so often, that these readings are appropriate for the current events in the Church and in the world. (http://www.usccb.org/nab/readings/011809.shtml)

This past week was “Vocation Awareness Week”; this coming week is the “Week of Prayer for Christian Unity”; this Tuesday the United States will be inaugurating Barack Obama as our next president. Let’s see how these events are illumined by the Sunday readings.

The reading from I Samuel features Samuel’s late-night call from God. After two instances in which Samuel mistakenly attributes the summons to his mentor Eli, the latter recognizes that “the Lord was calling the youth” (I Sam 3:8). Eli is now able to direct his protégé properly, prompting him to respond, “Speak, Lord, your servant is listening” (3:9). The text goes on to mention how the LORD continued to speak effectively through Samuel because “the Lord was with him” (3:19). His Presence is the guarantee of potent prophecy, indeed of every legitimate vocation.

Saint John’s Gospel recounts the call of Jesus’ first disciples, Andrew and Simon Peter. Here John the Baptizer takes the place of Eli by pointing out “the Lamb of God.” Andrew originally followed the Baptizer, but now he is redirected to the True Teacher. Andrew and a companion ask Jesus where He is staying, and Jesus responds with the words that have framed the vocational call ever since: “Come and see” (Jn 1:39). Tradition has referred to Saint Andrew as the “Protoclete” (Greek for “first called”). Inspired by what he has seen and heard, Andrew brings his brother Simon to Jesus. Simon’s initial reaction wasn’t nearly as noteworthy as Our Lord’s. Who else but He would change a guy’s name at first sight? He must have been astounded. “Cephas? Well, if You say so…”

At first sight, the second reading from I Corinthians seems out of place with the other readings, but a deeper glance usually reveals important connections. I Samuel and John offer positive aspects of vocation; I Corinthians’ presentation is initially negative: “Avoid immorality.” While one may not be sure of his definite calling, he may be quite certain that he is not called to immorality!

When I first attempted to type the word “immorality,” I actually typed “immortality.” This slip is often heard at the pulpit, as well. How dare we summon people to avoid immortality! Isn’t that what we as Christians are all about? Yet if we don’t avoid immorality, we jeopardize our immortality. Not that we won’t live forever: we’ll just experience “an everlasting horror and disgrace” (Daniel 12:2).

What a difference a “T” makes! Think of the “T” as the Cross, which, after all, makes all the difference between a life of immorality and a life worthy of immortality. People who embrace immorality destine themselves for smallness. This is evident in the disgraceful demises of so many celebrities. But there’s no time for “tsk, tsk”-ing. We must always look squarely at ourselves in the light of God’s revelation. Specifically, according to Saint Paul, “Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ?” “Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own?” (I Cor 6:15, 19) There is no clearer basis for the precept to avoid immorality.

The Greek word translated as “immorality” is porneia. This is the root of the word “pornography,” literally “dirty writing.” Porneia refers to all manner of sexual impropriety. I don’t know whether Paul had any particular variety in mind when he wrote to the Corinthians; they seemed to be indulging most kinds of lustful expression in that period of history. Sound familiar?

We have not as yet considered the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity and the Presidential Inauguration, so here goes:

Believers in Christ have not worshipped as one Church since the beginning of the second millennium. Although our Orthodox brethren continue to enjoy the same valid Sacraments and adhere to most of the same doctrinal and moral teachings as Catholics, much prayer and dialogue are needed for us to be fully one. Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI have considered the unification of Catholics and Orthodox a priority in their pontificates. The Protestant communions differ from us in many ways, and from each other in many ways. Unification with them is a rather remote prospect.

One modern issue that has fostered disunity is the legitimization of birth control. The Anglican Communion approved the use of contraception in certain marital cases in 1930; this soon and predictably gave way to a blanket approval among the mainline Protestant denominations. In the mid 1960s, with the advent of “the Pill,” Pope Paul VI formed a commission to study the matter. Even though a sizeable number called for the legitimization of contraception, Pope Paul went ahead with Humanae Vitae, the landmark 1968 encyclical that roundly condemned it. He rather prophetically spoke of a day when all forms of porneia would prevail as a result of birth control. His eventual successor, then-Cardinal Karol Wojtyla, had written Love and Responsibility, a work that noted how persons are not being loved, but rather are being used as things. Hasn’t contraception contributed to that in a big way?

While most Christian denominations do not approve abortion, they fail to understand how the sanctioning of contraception sets the stage for abortion and every other disrespectful treatment of human life and the marital act. Society will not speak of sexual intercourse as the “marital” act, because many unmarried people engage in it with regularity—one might say, with “devotion.” Whether or not they realize it, even contracepting married persons have cheapened the currency of sexual expression. If a marital embrace can rendered sterile, little will keep a partner from engaging in it with another. Adultery comes from the Latin “ad” + “alter,” offering “to another” what is meant to be given “to one,” namely the one to whom one has reportedly pledged oneself with fidelity, permanence, and fruitfulness. In addition, other forms of sexual expression are used in a way that replaces true intercourse. These acts would properly be called “contraceptive.” Married and unmarried, same-sex and opposite-sex partners engage in them with apparent impunity. When sexual pleasure is exalted over the authentic gift of self, when the love of self replaces the love of the Trinity that marital intercourse foreshadows, anything goes. Because Christians are not united over this fundamental dimension of human activity, the chance that we will come together as one communion is slim indeed.

Our new president hardly will be working with a “united” government or a “united” populace. Part of America’s appeal is her ability to tolerate people of differing opinions; after all, we try to come together on those matters that “establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” But do we? Let’s see how this “American experiment” pans out, not merely over the next four years, but for future generations, for whom porneia is not merely tolerable, but expected and in many circles encouraged. We have not fostered youth who recognize the Lord’s call—not only the call to a genuine married or religious vocation, but to that holiness which ensures real Tranquility and the Blessings of Liberty. We have not liberty, but license, which profits nothing.

What will the passing of the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) contribute to the values enshrined in the U.S. Constitution? What doth it profit a church, a country, a married couple, or an individual to exalt freedom at the expense of truth and goodness? How can we hear the Lord speaking if our fingers are in our ears? How can we expect to enjoy God’s good pleasure if we care only to pleasure ourselves?