From the Pastor – 29th Sunday in Ordinary time

October 16, 2020

From the Pastor – 29 th Sunday in Ordinary time

Today’s readings encourage us Christian stewards to always be mindful of who we are and Whose we are in every aspect of our lives.

Jesus reminds us of this truth in our Gospel passage today as He cleverly puts the Pharisees in their place during their attempt to verbally entrap Him. They ask Him whether it is lawful to pay the tax to Caesar. But the Pharisees were thinking small. Christ, on the other hand, thinks big.

We all know how the story goes. Christ asks to see the coin that pays the tax and has them state whose image is on it. They of course, reply, “Caesar.” In response Christ tells them to “Repay to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God.”

With that, He reminds us that while civil authorities should be obeyed, we answer to an infinitely higher Authority, God, Who is Lord of everything and everyone. All things and all people were created by God. In Baptism we have been claimed for Christ. Our lives are a gift from God and we have the privilege and responsibility to use every aspect of our lives in grateful response to Him.

Let us joyfully give thanks to this wonderful God by the way we live our daily lives. We belong to Him and there is no other! © Catholic Stewardship Consultants, 2020

Pastoral Pondering

With a little more than two weeks before the election and with many already having participated in early voting, I wanted to continue offering guidance that could be helpful to the faithful as we seek to exercise our constitutional rights and allow our faith to guide us in that endeavor. The following information is taken from A Brief Catechism for Catholic Voters written by Fr. Stephen Torraco, Ph.D. The first half is included here and the remainder will be included next week.

1.  Isn’t conscience the same as my own opinions and feelings? And doesn’t everyone have the right to his or her own conscience?

Conscience is NOT the same as your opinions or feelings. Conscience cannot be identical with your feelings because conscience is the activity of your intellect in judging the rightness or wrongness of your actions or omissions, past, present, or future, while your feelings come from another part of your soul and should be governed by your intellect and will. Conscience is not identical with your opinions because your intellect bases its judgment upon the natural moral law, which is inherent in your human nature and is identical with the Ten Commandments. Unlike the civil laws made by legislators, or the opinions that you hold, the natural moral law is not anything that you invent, but rather discover within yourself and is the governing norm of your conscience. In short, Conscience is the voice of truth within you, and your opinions need to be in harmony with that truth. As a Catholic, you have the benefit of the Church’s teaching authority or Magisterium endowed upon her by Christ. The Magisterium assists you and all people of good will in understanding the natural moral law as it relates to specific issues. As a Catholic, you have the obligation to be correctly informed and normed by the teaching of the Church’s Magisterium. As for your feelings, they need to be educated by virtue so as to be in harmony with conscience’s voice of truth. In this way, you will have a sound conscience, according to which we you will feel guilty when you are guilty, and feel morally upright when you are morally upright. We should strive to avoid the two opposite extremes of a lax conscience and a scrupulous conscience. Meeting the obligation of continually attending to this formation of conscience will increase the likelihood that, in the actual operation or activity of conscience, you will act with a certain conscience, which clearly perceives that a given concrete action is a good action that was rightly done or should be done. Being correctly informed and certain in the actual operation of conscience is the goal of the continuing formation of conscience. Otherwise put, you should strive to avoid being incorrectly informed and doubtful in the actual judgment of conscience about a particular action or omission. You should never act on a doubtful conscience.

2.  Is it morally permissible to vote for all candidates of a single party?

This would depend on the positions held by the candidates of a single party. If any one or more of them held positions that were opposed to the natural moral law, then it would not be morally permissible to vote for all candidates of this one party. Your correctly informed conscience transcends the bounds of any one political party.

3.  If I think that a pro-abortion candidate will, on balance, do much more for the culture of life than a pro-life candidate, why may I not vote for the pro-abortion candidate?

If a political candidate supported abortion, or any other moral evil, such as assisted suicide and euthanasia, for that matter, it would not be morally permissible for you to vote for that person. This is because, in voting for such a person, you would become an accomplice in the moral evil at issue. For this reason, moral evils such as abortion, euthanasia and assisted suicide are examples of a "disqualifying issue." A disqualifying issue is one which is of such gravity and importance that it allows for no political maneuvering. It is an issue that strikes at the heart of the human person and is non-negotiable. A disqualifying issue is one of such enormity that by itself renders a candidate for office unacceptable regardless of his position on other matters. You must sacrifice your feelings on other issues because you know that you cannot participate in any way in an approval of a violent and evil violation of basic human rights. A candidate for office who supports abortion rights or any other moral evil has disqualified himself as a person that you can vote for. You do not have to vote for a person because he is pro-life. But you may not vote for any candidate who supports abortion rights. Key to understanding the point above about "disqualifying issues" is the distinction between policy and moral principle. On the one hand, there can be a legitimate variety of approaches to accomplishing a morally acceptable goal. For example, in a society’s effort to distribute the goods of health care to its citizens, there can be legitimate disagreement among citizens and political candidates alike as to whether this or that health care plan would most effectively accomplish society’s goal. In the pursuit of the best possible policy or strategy, technical as distinct (although not separate) from moral reason is operative. Technical reason is the kind of reasoning involved in arriving at the most efficient or effective result. On the other hand, no policy or strategy that is opposed to the moral principles of the natural law is morally acceptable. Thus, technical reason should always be subordinate to and normed by moral reason, the kind of reasoning that is the activity of conscience and that is based on the natural moral law.

4.  If I have strong feelings or opinions in favor of a particular candidate, even if he is pro-abortion, why may I not vote for him?

As explained in question 1 above, neither your feelings nor your opinions are identical with your conscience. Neither your feelings nor your opinions can take the place of your conscience. Your feelings and opinions should be governed by your conscience. If the candidate about whom you have strong feelings or opinions is pro-abortion, then your feelings and opinions need to be corrected by your correctly informed conscience, which would tell you that it is wrong for you to allow your feelings and opinions to give lesser weight to the fact that the candidate supports a moral evil.

5.  If I may not vote for a pro-abortion candidate, then should it not also be true that I can’t vote for a pro-capital punishment candidate?

It is not correct to think of abortion and capital punishment as the very same kind of moral issue. On the one hand, direct abortion is an intrinsic evil, and cannot be justified for any purpose or in any circumstances. On the other hand, the Church has always taught that it is the right and responsibility of the legitimate temporal authority to defend and preserve the common good, and more specifically to defend citizens against the aggressor. This defense against the aggressor may resort to the death penalty if no other means of defense is sufficient. The point here is that the death penalty is understood as an act of self-defense on the part of civil society. In more recent times, in his encyclical  Evangelium Vitae , Pope John Paul II has taught that the need for such self-defense to resort to the death penalty is "rare, if not virtually nonexistent." Thus, while the Pope is saying that the burden of proving the need for the death penalty in specific cases should rest on the shoulders of the legitimate temporal authority, it remains true that the legitimate temporal authority alone has the authority to determine if and when a "rare" case arises that warrants the death penalty. Moreover, if such a rare case does arise and requires resorting to capital punishment, this societal act of self-defense would be a *morally good action* even if it does have the unintended and unavoidable evil effect of the death of the aggressor. Thus, unlike the case of abortion, it would be morally irresponsible to rule out all such "rare" possibilities a priori, just as it would be morally irresponsible to apply the death penalty indiscriminately.

6.  If I think that a candidate who is pro-abortion has better ideas to serve the poor, and the pro-life candidate has bad ideas that will hurt the poor, why may I not vote for the candidate that has the better ideas for serving the poor?

Serving the poor is not only admirable, but also obligatory for Catholics as an exercise of solidarity. Solidarity has to do with the sharing of both spiritual and material goods, and with what the Church calls the preferential option for the poor. This preference means that we have the duty to give priority to helping those most needful, both materially and spiritually. Beginning in the family, solidarity extends to every human association, even to the international moral order. Based on the response to question 3 above, two important points must be made. First, when it comes to the matter of determining how social and economic policy can best serve the poor, there can be a legitimate variety of approaches proposed, and therefore legitimate disagreement among voters and candidates for office. Secondly, solidarity can never be at the price of embracing a "disqualifying issue." Besides, when it comes to the unborn, abortion is a most grievous offense against solidarity, for the unborn are surely among society’s most needful. The right to life is a paramount issue because as Pope John Paul II says it is "the first right, on which all the others are based, and which cannot be recuperated once it is lost." If a candidate for office refuses solidarity with the unborn, he has laid the ground for refusing solidarity with anyone.

7.  If a candidate says that he is personally opposed to abortion but feels the need to vote for it under the circumstances, doesn’t this candidate’s personal opposition to abortion make it morally permissible for me to vote for him, especially if I think that his other views are the best for people, especially the poor?

A candidate for office who says that he is personally opposed to abortion but actually votes in favor of it is either fooling himself or trying to fool you. Outside of the rare case in which a hostage is forced against his will to perform evil actions with his captors, a person who carries out an evil action, such as voting for abortion, performs an immoral act, and his statement of personal opposition to the moral evil of abortion is either self-delusion or a lie. If you vote for such a candidate, you would be an accomplice in advancing the moral evil of abortion. Therefore, it is not morally permissible to vote for such a candidate for office, even, as explained in questions 3 and 6 above, you think that the candidate’s other views are best for the poor.

From the Pastor

From the Pastor - Dedication of Saint Mark Church

By John Putnam • August 21, 2026
This weekend we celebrate a sacred milestone: the anniversary of the dedication of our church building. The readings chosen for this occasion invite us to look beyond brick and mortar and ask a deeper question: What makes a house of God holy? And how do we, the living Church of Saint Mark, continue to be that house? In the First Reading, Solomon stands before the newly completed Temple in Jerusalem and prays with both awe and humility: “Can it indeed be that God dwells on earth? If the heavens and the highest heavens cannot contain you, how much less this temple which I have built!” Yet he dares to ask the Lord to keep His eyes open toward this place and to hear the prayers of His people. The Temple was never meant to limit God; it was meant to make His presence accessible to a people who needed a place to gather, to pray, and to be reminded that they belong to Him. Saint Paul takes this truth even further. Writing to the Corinthians, he tells them—and us—“You are God’s building… Do you not know that you are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?” The foundation of this living temple is Jesus Christ alone. No other foundation can be laid. The physical walls of our church matter. They have been consecrated. They shelter the Eucharist. They hold our baptisms, our weddings, our funerals, and our daily prayers. But the true temple is the community of believers who gather here. We are the living stones. When we treat one another with reverence, when we protect the dignity of every person, when we refuse to allow division or scandal to take root, we honor the Spirit who dwells among us. Finally, in the Gospel, Jesus asks the decisive question: “Who do you say that I am?” Peter answers with the faith that becomes the rock: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Upon that confession Jesus builds His Church and entrusts Peter with the keys. Every time we renew our faith in Jesus as Lord, every time we hand over our lives to His authority, we strengthen the foundation of this parish. Saint Mark’s is not simply a building dedicated years ago; it is a community continually being built upon the rock of Peter’s confession and the living presence of Christ. As we mark this anniversary, let us give thanks for the sacred space that has sheltered our parish family. Let us also examine our hearts. Are we living as temples of the Holy Spirit? Are we building one another up on the one true foundation? May the Lord who cannot be contained by any temple continue to dwell richly among us—and may Saint Mark church always be a place where heaven and earth meet in prayer, in charity, and in faithful witness to Jesus Christ. Pastoral Pondering Consecrated church buildings hold a central place in Catholic worship and theology because they are set apart as sacred space—places where heaven and earth meet in a privileged way. The architectural style, the overall design and the artistic elements are all to serve Catholic worship and belief. The following offers some information on the role of church buildings in the life of the Church. 1. They are truly dedicated to God Through the solemn Rite of Dedication, a church building ceases to be ordinary architecture. The walls, altar, and space are anointed, blessed, and consecrated exclusively for divine worship. From that moment, the building belongs to God in a special way. Canon law treats consecrated churches as sacred places that may not be used for profane purposes (Canon 1210). This consecration is not merely symbolic; it affects a real change in the character of the place. 2. They house the Real Presence of Christ The most decisive reason a consecrated church is holy is the presence of the Blessed Sacrament in the tabernacle. Once the Eucharist is reserved there, the building becomes the dwelling place of the living Christ. Catholics genuflect not to architecture but to the Lord who remains present. The church is therefore more than a meeting hall; it is a true house of God. This presence elevates the entire space and gives Catholic church buildings a unique sacred character that persists even when no liturgy is being celebrated. 3. They are the ordinary place of the Church’s sacramental life The major sacraments of the Christian life—Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Reconciliation, Matrimony, Ordination and Anointing of the Sick—are normally celebrated within consecrated churches. The building itself becomes the visible setting in which the invisible grace of the sacraments is given. The altar, in particular, is the focal point: it is anointed and contains relics of the saints, signifying that the sacrifice of Christ is offered in communion with the whole Church, living and dead. 4. They image the mystery of the Church Catholic theology sees the consecrated building as a visible sign of the invisible reality of the Church. The physical structure points to the living temple made of “living stones” (1 Peter 2:5; 1 Corinthians 3:16-17). Just as Solomon’s Temple was the place where God’s name dwelt among His people, the church building is the place where the People of God gather as His temple. The architecture, art, and orientation of the building are meant to lift the mind and heart to the heavenly liturgy and to the eschatological reality of the New Jerusalem. 5. They foster continuity, identity, and reverence A fixed, consecrated place creates a shared sacred memory across generations. The same walls that witnessed baptisms and weddings decades ago continue to shelter the community today. Beauty, silence, and sacred art within the building form the senses and train the soul in reverence. This is why the Church has always insisted on the dignity and permanence of consecrated churches: they shape the faith of those who pray within them.  In short, consecrated church buildings matter because Catholicism is a sacramental religion. God works through material realities—water, oil, bread, wine, and also space and architecture. A consecrated church is not merely a convenient location for worship; it is a privileged locus of God’s presence, a visible expression of the Church, and a permanent invitation to encounter the living Christ.

From the Pastor - 20th Sunday in Ordinary Time

By John Putnam • August 14, 2026
Today's Gospel from Matthew reminds us to trust the Lord even when it seems He is not answering our prayers. God desires to lead us to the joy of heaven and eternal life with Him. To prepare us for that day, He calls us to grow in faith and to live each day as a grateful response to His goodness. In other words, He is forming us into saints. This is what the stewardship way of life is meant to accomplish. At times that process is difficult. Often, it stretches us beyond our comfort. Jesus certainly challenged the Canaanite woman in today's Gospel. She cried out to Him on behalf of her daughter, who was tormented by a demon. How did Jesus respond to this desperate mother's plea? At first, He "did not say a word in answer to her." Undeterred, she continued to seek Him, and He continued to test her faith. She responded with such remarkable trust that Jesus proclaimed, "O woman, great is your faith! Let it be done for you as you wish." Imagine hearing those words spoken to us by our Lord. There could be no greater affirmation of a life lived in faithful discipleship. The stewardship way of life will test our trust in God at times. But those are often the moments when He is doing His greatest work within us. Let us persevere in faith, trusting that His plan is always leading us toward the joy He has prepared for us. © Catholic Stewardship Consultants, 2026. Pastoral Pondering As the school year begins and we move into the post-summer routine, I wanted to give you an update on a few things which may be of interest to you. Building projects The rectory build is going well. Grainda Builders are projecting the project to finish by November (I am hoping for earlier!). We do plan to have an open house so that folks can see the new rectory upon its completion. The preliminary work for the second phase of our building projects is occurring with the installation of the water lines that will feed the new buildings. This will hopefully be done by Labor Day. We should be able to hold a groundbreaking shortly after the first of the year. Everything depends on when the present rectory sells and where we are with funding. The Diocese requires 60% of the project to be in cash, 30% to be in pledges and 30% allowable for Diocesan loan. We will keep you posted. Obviously, as we move forward, there will be growing pains that cannot be avoided due to the disruption of some parking. We are working with the general contractor to keep disruptions to a minimum, but we cannot avoid all of them. Thank you for your patience. Church Maintenance  As many of you know, we have been battling issues with the church roof for some time. There have been numerous leaks over the years that have been patched and patched again. We have been battling the insurance company for over a year, and it is clear that, after a minimal payment to repair water damage, they are not going to approve a claim for roof replacement. Kudos to the Pastoral Council and Scott Bruno for making a significant investment of time and energy to try to do the groundwork to provide justification for the claim. With that being said, we have already replaced a portion of the roof that was causing significant problems (the lower roof closest to the driveway). Nonetheless, the whole roof really does need to be replaced. Estimates for replacement are in the neighborhood of $250K. At present with the other projects going on, we do not have this in reserves or the operating account to cover this expense. Should you wish to assist, donations can be made on the website. We will continue to monitor and do what we can to manage the problem until we are able to fully address it. The second significant issue that has arisen is the foundation of the Kerin Center. Over the last several years, due to water and drainage issues, we have had to address foundation instability. Reinforcements were added a couple of years back to the school-side of the building, but we have been seeing some issues on the church-side of the building over the past year. We are watching it very carefully and trying to ascertain the root cause of the problems. We are appreciative of those parishioners with engineering expertise who have assisted in this effort. There is also a link on the parish donation website for Kerin Center repairs.