First off, a special shut-out today to all our Dads, the physical, emotional, and in all other ways that you men out there share your lives with the People of God. I think too of all the Dads who have passed on, my own Dad, Barney and my father-in-law, Gerold. Blessings to all–with gratitude, Pastor Kathy

__________________________________________________________________________________

   My friends, once again, I find myself “conflicted” as I come to this homily.  Many things have come across “my plate” so to speak this week, both good and not so good, which I guess is the reason for my state of mind.  I will leave that for a bit and turn to the messages from Scripture that should give us pause and hope. 

   The 1^st reading from Exodus is simply a recitation of how the God of the Israelites “carried [them] on eagles’ wings,” bringing them out of Egypt, that they might become “a priestly people, a consecrated nation.”

   Being a “priestly people” in the Old Testament times simply meant, “to be chosen,” with some being “anointed” as representatives for the people.  In the New Testament, we can say the same, with our brother Jesus, being named by Paul as the “high priest.” Through our baptisms each of us becomes part of this, “priestly people,” with the expectation of living, or at trying to live as Jesus did—this is what each of us has been “chosen” to do. 

   In our present day then, our brother Jesus calls women and men to be priestly representatives for the entire priesthood of the people.  In other words, we are all included and called to live priestly lives. I am spending some time here to call attention to the fact that still too many clerics choose to have themselves spoken of as the “Right,” even, “Very Right Reverend, and such other titles. Makes one wonder whether there are some, “Very Wrong Reverends” out there.  As far as I know, Jesus called women and men “to serve,” not to be “served and exalted.” 

   As I said earlier, I took a bit of literary license this week and chose the beginning of chapter 5 of Romans, verses 1-5 instead of the lectionary selection that follows those verses, 6-11.  I did that because I wanted to pull us away from Paul’s incessant need and seemingly that of Church fathers, to lift up the notion that we “are sinners” and that Jesus died for our sins.” 

   The 1^st 5 verses of Romans lead us instead, to “hope” through “grace,” as we strive to become, “all that God has intended.”  This is why Jesus came to be one of us— “to show us the way,” not to “brow-beat” us with the thought that we are sinners, and “hopeless” but for Jesus.   

   But, we do have reason “to hope” that we can become “what God intended” for each of us, because as Paul continues in this alternate reading, we don’t do it alone, but through the holy Spirit, God’s love, “has been poured into our hearts.” 

   The gospel from Matthew basically says the same—God is for us, not against us.  Matthew tells us that when Jesus looked upon the people, [his] “heart was moved.”  Jesus recognized them as, “sheep without a shepherd.”  We must do the same, my friends.

   We may not be able to relate to terminology about “sheep,” but we can make our own connections in the present time to people we see who are missing something vital in their lives, and then allow “our hearts to move” for the needy in our midst.  Jesus tells us that “the harvest is bountiful, but the laborers are few.” 

   In the beginning of this homily I said I came to its writing in conflict.  As I have reflected on the readings for today, I have to question why our beloved Church in its hierarchy would spend any time “reverencing the Bread of the Altar,” the Eucharist, and not reverence that same Eucharist in the people who are pleading with them to be listened to, and accepted for who they are, created in God’s holy image. 

   I understand, from what I have read, that the push from the hierarchy, especially in this country, to instill within believers, an ever-greater reverence for the “Body and Blood” of Christ and bring them back to the Church, to believe again in “transubstantiation,” which says that even though the elements appear as “bread and wine,” they are, in fact, real flesh and blood. 

   As I said last week, we must get beyond surface meanings that allow for reverence in a “small way” but not in the greater way that Jesus sent those first disciples out to do. 

   There can be no action that “reverences” the “bread on the table” without likewise reverencing that same “bread” in women, LGBTQ+ folks, children and their families struggling with trans-gender issues, and so on.  To reverence the Eucharist on the table without taking that same action into our world, addressing all the issues that the hierarchical church is consistently on the wrong side of, is to cancel out the 1^st action! 

   A fine-tuning of this would be to say as the priest did recently at a family wedding, “If you are not a practicing Catholic, you can’t receive, but please come forward with your hands crossed over your heart and receive a blessing.”  At this point, the “Eucharist” being offered to some, but not to all, ceases to be the Eucharist, as Jesus gave it originally with the attention that it was meant for all!

   As Jesus said, “the harvest is bountiful, the laborers are few…” Never has our world needed these laborers truly committed to the path of Jesus more!  Amen? Amen!

   My friends, I come to this feast of Corpus Christi—the Body of Christ with a bit of angst.  This is due to the fact that what I and many theologians alike feel is the real importance of this feast, and in fact, what our brother Jesus more than likely, intended the Eucharist to be, is apparently lost on many in leadership within the National Association of Catholic Bishops as they are planning a national Eucharistic Congress for 2024 in Indianapolis. 

   Interestingly enough, these same bishops are running a similar 3-year “revival” time alongside that of Pope Francis’ synodal process—the only thing is that the two processes are on divergent tracks, never intended to meet one another.

   Francis’ synodal process is intended to encourage our Church once again, “to open windows and doors,” as did Pope John XXIII 58 years ago at the 2^nd Vatican Council.  John’s intent then, as is Francis’ now, was to be open and understanding, being good listeners to all the unique stories out there that make up the “Body of Christ.” 

   Many bishops in our country today, including our own, Robert Barron in the Winona/Rochester diocese, do not even mention Francis’ inclusive work in our world to complete Jesus’ mission of welcoming “all to the table,” not with a set agenda, but with open minds as to how we can make our Church more viable in our present day, open to, and addressing current problems and concerns. 

   As many of you are probably aware, the Winona/Rochester diocese sponsored its own Eucharistic Congress yesterday in Mankato.  They billed it as a “renewal,” but if you read the agenda for the day, in my mind, it could only be billed, “a return” to the past. 

   After I read the agenda, I experienced a “floundering moment,” –something my friend Alice would call, “crazy-making,” about what I could say regarding this event.  Another friend suggested that “I say nothing.” 

   After a good deal of reflection, I found that I could not, “just say nothing,” so trying not to be overly negative, but rather aiming toward truth-telling, I find that I must say something. 

   Yesterday’s event in Mankato offered confession, Eucharistic adoration, the rosary, among other pre-Vatican II practices, concluding with a Eucharistic procession through the streets of Mankato. All these rituals and practices are reminiscent of pre-Vatican II times when a relationship with God was more of an individual thing, not with a look-out to the larger world. The event hosted several speakers, including the bishop, religious sisters clad in more traditional garb, and lay men and women, all with the mission of reviving “love” for the Eucharistic bread of the altar-the Body of Christ.  There was an English and Spanish-speaking track for all speakers and musicians, with translations available into Vietnamese. Apparently, all avenues were covered to present the Church of pre-Vatican II times. 

   Now, I want to be clear.  At face value, there is nothing wrong with any of the rituals and practices that made up yesterday’s event or the event being planned for next year.  The trouble with such events is that they make no connection to the present-day world and its problems that so desperately need Christ’s body to be transformed in us, and for us to move into our world with the love and understanding that Jesus came to share in his. 

      I find it extremely hard to understand how we can profess to love and worship the Body of Christ on the altar, and yet abuse that same Body where we find it in our world, in people and ideas and ways of life that are different from the set agendas of these proposed Eucharistic Congresses.

   As we always say here—we must get beyond the surface, literal message of what is taught in our Catholic church.  Unless love of and for the Body of Christ moves from the altar, from the constructed adoration chapels, the confessionals and individual prayer lives of Jesus’ followers, we are basically, “spinning our wheels,” if our intention is to follow him in our lives.   

   In today’s 1^st reading from Deuteronomy we hear, “Not by bread alone, [we can insert the Eucharist here] do we live, but by every word that comes from the mouth of our God.”  I believe Jesus intended the Eucharist as a means of comfort, yes, because he couldn’t remain physically with us—but it was meant to be just a beginning…just a place to start. That is why at the end of our liturgies, we say, “The Mass is ended, but let the service continue!”

   If we truly follow “every word that comes forth from [Jesus’] mouth,” then we must not imprison him on our altars, or in golden monstrances.  We must take him into our own bodies, now transformed into his, to all the places, and to all the people that this old way of thinking and acting ignores, sometimes shuns, and all the time, sees as unworthy because they do not follow the established rules. 

   This is why the 2^nd Vatican Council was so needed—to free Jesus up—to let him live among us again, challenge us to be our best, in a Church free of patriarchy, one that is inclusive of all the differences—all the ways to live out our own, wonderful lives—all the ways that can express God’s love.  We must not live by “black and white” rules, that so many today can’t live by. We need to allow God’s love to open up, to grow. 

   Jesus supported and called women to serve, and so should real Eucharistic people support God’s call to women to be ordained—a Church that acts through half of the people, and one gender at that, to tell its people how to follow God’s call, instead of letting that work to the Spirit, seems to not be attentive to “every word coming from the mouth of God.” 

   What I see wrong with the “return” to a theology of pre-Vatican II rituals is that it leaves the Eucharist, “a static thing” and it was always, I believe, meant to be an active word, a verb!  As Paul says in the 2^nd reading today from Corinthians, “Because the loaf of bread is one, we who are many are one body.”  That’s quite clear to me—we are all invited!  How dare any cleric ever refuse the Eucharist to someone who presents themselves, telling them, “No, you aren’t yet fit to receive” what our brother Jesus so freely gave, to everyone.

   Then we come to John’s gospel message of Jesus’ words to the people of his time about the “real” food he was offering them. We see the Temple authorities asking, “How can this be?” and it is because they are looking at just the literal meaning, which unfortunately, many still do today.  Diane Bergant, Scripture scholar, states that “blood symbolized life itself,” and for us, that means the life of Jesus, his words—his actions—all that he taught about living-loving, dying and rising to a new place.

    She goes on, “the significance of the cup of wine is not in its material substance, but in its incorporation of the partakers in the blood of Christ”—in other words, the sharing of Jesus’ “essence” with the community is where the true goodness lies. This feast of Corpus Christi, the Body of Christ, should not leave us “settled” in simply, worshipping the body and blood on the altar, because if it does, perhaps we have missed the point of this feast.  Jesus never asked us to worship him in the elements of bread and wine, but to care for his “body” in the world.

   Exegetes continue; breaking bread with someone was looked at in the time of Jesus as a sign of forming community with them.  Jesus raised that to a new level in saying that sharing Eucharistic bread forms us into the body of Christ.  In other words, when we eat regular food, we incorporate that food into our very selves.  The opposite is true with the Eucharist, Bergant says.  When we partake of Eucharistic bread; we are transformed into Eucharistic bread, meaning—we become Jesus’ body for the world. 

   Looking at the Eucharist in this way, is indeed another level—receiving communion is not just between us and God, but us, (think Jesus) and our world. Receiving communion is a community action for the larger community.

   In the Gospel from John, Bergant tells us that “flesh and blood,” on a literal level, was a common way of characterizing a human being—when applied to Jesus, speaking of Jesus’ flesh and blood is our proclamation of faith in the incarnation—the fact that Jesus became one of us to have a human experience, thus telling us how much we are loved by our God—that God in Jesus would go to that extent to make sure that we creatures know how important we are to the Creator.  Jesus became one of us, flesh, and blood through his entire life; not just when he gave us the Eucharist. When we make conscious efforts to live as Jesus, we do give his “body and blood,” on a deeper level, to our world.

   In conclusion then my friends, this feast should embolden each of us as Jesus’ followers to go out into our lovely world and see each and all we meet as loved by our God—in Jesus—as his body and blood, and adore, respect, and honor each one, in the same way, as many did in Mankato yesterday, but only in the elements of bread and wine.  Jesus called, and continues to call us to so much more! Amen? Amen!

My friends, as I said in the bulletin, this Sunday gives us the opportunity to truly come to know our God if we carefully study the messages within the Scriptures today. 

   Let’s begin with the reading from Exodus.  The 1^st thing we should notice is that God initiates the encounter with Moses, not the other way around.  This is important!  This truth reminds me of the 23^rd Psalm in the biblical translation, The Message. The writer of this translation opens up the traditional line, “Only goodness and love will follow me all the days of my life,” to “Your beauty and love chase after me, every day of my life.”  I don’t know about you, but I rather like the idea that God is, “chasing after me” through the ups and downs of my life.  It speaks to the intimacy of our God and that wanted relationship with us. 

   If we look at God’s words to Moses, we can see this most clearly.  “I am…a God of tenderness and compassion, slow to anger and rich in kindness and faithfulness.”  This is really such a beautiful and telling reading and one unfortunately, that I have heard far too many homilists get stuck on—the beginning that is, which is apparently God’s answer to Moses’ question of, “Who are you?”  God says, “I am who I am,” or some form of that.  This again, is an example of “staying” on the top level of a message and failing to go deeper to truly understand what is being said. 

   It doesn’t matter what we call God, as much as who God is and we learn that going deeper— “I am a God of tenderness and compassion…”

   This reminds me of a young man who was interviewed on public radio, MPR, this past week.  He is the valedictorian of his high school graduating class and will, as a result, be giving the commencement address to them.  The interviewer was interested in knowing what he might speak to them about. 

   He was quite clear that he didn’t want it to be about him alone, what he had done and so on, but he wanted it to be about all of them.  He wanted them to know that just because his grades allowed him to have the highest place in their class, academically, he had the same worries and struggles that they all had and that they were all in this together.  He realized that he hadn’t gotten to where he was alone, and that he had much to be thankful for.  He saw himself as no better than anyone else and he wanted his classmates to know that. 

   The interviewer had also invited several adults to be on the show who had given commencement addresses in the past to learn what they had imparted to the newly graduating students.  One man said it best I think when he shared a general list of good things, he had heard other speakers remind graduates of as they look at their lives ahead of them.  Some of the things that we would expect to be on the list, included, work hard, when you don’t quite make it, pick yourself up and try again, and so on.  He ended his comments sharing an idea he had heard along the way that he found very compelling, in making your way in the world— “be kind.” 

   This notion seems to be in sync with what Moses heard from God on Mount Sinai—his, and our God said that we all could expect, “tenderness and compassion, one, slow to anger, rich in kindness and faithfulness. 

   So, if we were merely to stop in the Exodus reading with, “what should we call God?” we would miss the deep relational response that God offers here. The valedictorian that I mentioned above ended his comments by saying to his peers, “It is my hope that each of us will make our own particular way.” A “kind” response, I would say. 

   Paul, in his letter to the Corinthians says as much; “Encourage one another –live in harmony and peace.” 

   And John’s gospel today confirms this idea through Jesus’ words: [God does not] “condemn, but through Christ, the world may be saved.”  Once again, we must get beyond the surface meaning.  The “saving” that our brother Jesus came to do was in showing us—each of us, through the justice, mercy, understanding, and kindness, that he showed in his own life, how in fact to do the same in our lives. 

   And as always, we must take the Scriptures and apply them to our own lives.  To read about Jesus but fail to do the same in our own lives, or to at least try, seems to miss the point of Christian living. 

   If we were truly, each of us, following Jesus, there could not be two tiers in our society in so many ways—the rich and the poor, white and black—we call that, “racism,” by the way, something our country is far from getting its arms around. We call this, “white privilege,” –another concept to take to our prayer. We might be closer to a resolution if we laid our “hearts” and not just our “heads” on these issues. 

   If we were truly following Jesus, gender issues—sexism, which really is about patriarchy—who has the “right to speak and act,” would also, not be an issue.   This is true in state, country and Church. Again, we must look back to our brother Jesus and what he had to say about these issues.  He was crucified in the time he lived, “not for our sins,” but because he was speaking, in his time, against inequality, patriarchy, and more, and the powers that existed then, needed to silence him. Pure and simple. Makes me think of women today following our God-given calls to be ordained. We have been told that this will immediately excommunicate us if we do, as they wish to silence us too.  So, if we get caught up in that old theology of “reparation for our sins” in the face of a tyrannical God, that takes us off the hook to really follow in Jesus’ footsteps.

   We would do better to look to the beautiful words of Psalm 8 today, and remember who God truly is, “Who are we that you should be mindful of us?”  Being “mindful” seems to me, a “relational” skill.  In this regard, this past week, I heard a news special on the social and political divide in our country.  All of those interviewed were asked to state their beliefs, and on the merit of what they said, were then paired with someone who held an opposite view.  They were asked to sit together and “truly listen” to each other. 

   The amazing thing that they discovered was, when you, “put a face” to the opinion, trying to see why each other felt as they did, it helped break down some of the animosity. Now, you might be thinking, and questioning as I have, “what do you do if you have someone in your life who has told you, they don’t want to hear your opposing view.” And my friends, this is precisely why being a Christian is not for wimps. 

   Our lives today in the midst of so many concerns, many of which I have mentioned here, call for what I will name, “eucharistic moments.”  If you think about it, you probably could all name for me a time when something truly wonderful and unexpected happened between you and another person, or group that was able to move you and them, beyond the things that divided you to a place where you could truly be one. Naming such times, “eucharist moments” where the “body and blood” of our Savior Jesus, was truly evident—not on the altar, but in the humanity of our every day lives seems to be most appropriate and what Jesus had intended the Eucharist to be. We will continue this conversation next week when we celebrate the feast of Corpus Christi—the Body of Christ.  Amen? Amen!