From the Pastor – 30th Sunday in Ordinary Time

October 23, 2020

From the Pastor – 30 th Sunday in Ordinary Time

Today’s readings are all about the radical love of God for His people and the radical love we are called to live out in response. The stewardship way of life is nothing more and nothing less than the practical application of loving God and neighbor in our daily lives.

Jesus sums up the message of all the prophets, as well as the purpose of all God’s laws in today's Gospel passage, from Matthew. It is a message we have likely grown up hearing — but it is so beautiful and so challenging, it bears repeating again and again. It is Christ’s response to a question about which commandment is greatest. His answer reveals both the greatest and the second greatest commandments.

He says, “You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind... The second is like it: you shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

How is the second like the first? What do the two commands have in common? Love.

Love God first and love neighbor as self. This is the heart of the stewardship way of life — simple enough for a child to understand, challenging enough to be the life’s work of every “grown-up.” © Catholic Stewardship Consultants, 2020.

Pastoral Pondering — The following is the conclusion to A Brief Catechism for Catholic Voters by Father Stephen Torraco, Ph.D.

8. What if none of the candidates are completely pro-life?

As Pope John Paul II explains in his encyclical, Evangelium Vitae (The Gospel of Life), "...when it is not possible to overturn or completely abrogate a pro-abortion law, an elected official, whose absolute personal opposition to procured abortion was well known, could licitly support proposals aimed at limiting the harm done by such a law and at lessening its negative consequences at the level of general opinion and morality. This does not in fact represent an illicit cooperation with an unjust law, but rather a legitimate and proper attempt to limit its evil aspects." Logically, it follows from these words of the Pope that a voter may likewise vote for that candidate who will most likely limit the evils of abortion or any other moral evil at issue.

9. What if one leading candidate is anti-abortion except in the cases of rape or incest, another leading candidate is completely pro-abortion, and a trailing candidate, not likely to win, is completely anti-abortion. Would I be obliged to vote for the candidate not likely to win?

In such a case, the Catholic voter may clearly choose to vote for the candidate not likely to win. In addition, the Catholic voter may assess that voting for that candidate might only benefit the completely pro-abortion candidate, and, precisely for the purpose of curtailing the evil of abortion, decide to vote for the leading candidate that is anti-abortion but not perfectly so. This decision would be in keeping with the words of the Pope quoted in question 8 above.

10. What if all the candidates from whom I have to choose are pro-abortion? Do I have to abstain from voting at all? What do I do?

Obviously, one of these candidates is going to win the election. Thus, in this dilemma, you should do your best to judge which candidate would do the least moral harm. However, as explained in question 5 above, you should not place a candidate who is pro-capital punishment (and anti-abortion) in the same moral category as a candidate who is pro-abortion. Faced with such a set of candidates, there would be no moral dilemma, and the clear moral obligation would be to vote for the candidate who is pro-capital punishment, not necessarily because he is pro-capital punishment, but because he is anti-abortion.

11. Is not the Church’s stand that abortion must be illegal a bit of an exception? Does not the Church generally hold that government should restrict its legislation of morality significantly?

The Church’s teaching that abortion should be illegal is not an exception. St. Thomas Aquinas put it this way: "Wherefore human laws do not forbid all vices, from which the virtuous abstain, but only the more grievous vices, from which it is possible for the majority to abstain; and chiefly those that are to the hurt of others, without the prohibition of which human society could not be maintained: thus human law prohibits murder, theft and such like." [ emphasis added]. Abortion qualifies as a grievous vice that hurts others, and the lack of prohibition of this evil by society is something by which human society cannot be maintained. As Pope John Paul II has emphasized, the denial of the right to life, in principle, sets the stage, in principle, for the denial of all other rights.

12. What about elected officials who happen to be of the same party affiliation? Are they committing a sin by being in the same party, even if they don’t advocate pro-choice views? Are they guilty by association?

Being of the same political party as those who advocate pro-abortion is indeed a serious evil IF I belong to this political party IN ORDER TO ASSOCIATE MYSELF with that party’s advocacy of pro-abortion policies. However, it can also be true that being of such a political party has as its purpose to change the policies of the party. Of course, if this is the purpose, one would have to consider whether it is reasonable to think the political party’s policies can be changed. Assuming that it is reasonable to think so, then it would be morally justifiable to remain in that political party. Remaining in that political party cannot be instrumental in the advancing of pro-abortion policies (especially if I am busily striving to change the party’s policies) as can my VOTING for candidates or for a political party with a pro-abortion policy.

13. What about voting for a pro-abortion person for something like state treasurer, in which case the candidate would have no say on matters of life in the capacity of her duties, it just happens to be her personal position. This would not be a sin, right?

If someone were running for state treasurer and that candidate made it a point to state publicly that he was in favor of exterminating people over the age of 70, would you vote for him? The fact that the candidate has that evil in his mind tells you that there are easily other evils in his mind; and the fact that he would publicly state it is a danger signal. If personal character matters in a political candidate, and personal character involves the kind of thoughts a person harbors, then such a candidate who publicly states that he is in favor of the evil of exterminating people over the age of 70 - or children who are unborn - has also disqualified himself from receiving a Catholic’s vote. I would go further and say that such a candidate, in principle - in the light of the natural law - disqualifies himself from public office.

14. Is it a mortal sin to vote for a pro-abortion candidate?

Except in the case in which a voter is faced with all pro-abortion candidates (in which case, as explained in question 8 above, he or she strives to determine which of them would cause the less damage in this regard), a candidate that is pro-abortion disqualifies himself from receiving a Catholic’s vote. This is because being pro-abortion cannot simply be placed alongside the candidate's other positions on Medicare and unemployment, for example; and this is because abortion is intrinsically evil and cannot be morally justified for any reason or set of circumstances. To vote for such a candidate even with the knowledge that the candidate is pro-abortion is to become an accomplice in the moral evil of abortion. If the voter also knows this, then the voter sins mortally.

From the Pastor

From the Pastor - 33rd Sunday in Ordinary Time

By John Putnam • November 14, 2025
As we approach the end of the liturgical year, our readings offer a sober reminder that this life is not our aim and that God’s justice will triumph in the end. Now is the time to get our priorities in order, putting God above all else as his faithful stewards. Our Lord brings home the urgency of right priorities in our Gospel passage from Luke, reminding the people around him who were looking at the temple nearby, “All that you see here—the days will come when there will not be left a stone upon another stone that will not be thrown down.” Our Lord reminds us that all in this world is passing. We must keep our focus on eternity. Yet before the eternal bliss of heaven, we should expect to be tried and tested. “Before all this happens, however, they will seize and persecute you, they will hand you over to the synagogues and to prisons and they will have you led before kings and governors because of my name.” Sounds scary. But if you are living a stewardship way of life, there is nothing to fear. You have a plan in place. All you need to do is stick with it. Put our Lord first in your time, with your talents, and through your use of treasure. This way of life is not easy. But Jesus promises it will lead to eternal salvation and the joy of union with Him. “You will be hated by all because of my name, but not a hair on your head will be destroyed. By your perseverance, you will secure your lives.” Onward, Christian stewards, the struggle is worth the joy that awaits! Pastoral Pondering On November 4th the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith released Mater Populi Fidelis, a 20-page doctrinal note which was approved by the Holy Father. The Document addresses longstanding requests for clarification on Marian titles related to Mary’s cooperation in salvation. It emphasizes Mary’s unique role as Mother of believers while safeguarding Christ’s sole mediatorship, aiming to foster authentic devotion, Catholic fidelity, and ecumenical dialogue. The Note responds to decades of proposals, including petitions for new Marian dogmas, often amplified via social media and private revelations. It draws on Scripture, Tradition (e.g., St. Augustine), and prior papal reflections, including Joseph Ratzinger's 1996 and 2002 critiques of certain titles as unclear or prone to misunderstanding. The document appreciates popular piety but cautions against expressions that could confuse the faithful or obscure Christ's centrality. It promotes "participated mediation"—Mary's supportive role in union with Christ—without equating her to the Redeemer. The document goes on to underscore “approved titles/expressions” and “discouraged titles/expressions.” Those that are encouraged include: Mother of God (Theotokos), Mother of Believers, Spiritual Mother, Mother of the Faithful People of God, and Mediatrix (in a general sense of intercession). It notes that these underscore Mary's maternal bond with Christ and the Church, directing devotion to the Son. They are biblically rooted (e.g., John 19:26-27) and foster hope, tenderness, and unity. Those titles discouraged are Co-redemptrix and Mediatrix of All Graces. It notes that these risk eclipsing Christ's unique mediation (1 Tim 2:5) and redemption; not explicitly in Scripture or early Tradition; potential for confusion or imbalance in faith, especially ecumenically. I know in my own discussions over the years; it is very easy (especially for my non-Catholic relatives) to get confused over certain Marian titles. They can certainly be explained, but as the DDF points out, those titles that require greater explanation for common understanding should be discouraged. To be sure, you can find both titles used in various Catholic resources, and the document certainly does not forbid their use. Nonetheless, it approaches the topic in a balanced and pastorally sensitive way that recognizes the importance of Marian devotion and piety while, at the same time, reminding us all of the importance supporting and encouraging doctrinal harmony.

From the Pastor - Dedication of Lateran Basilica

By John Putnam • November 7, 2025
Today, the Church celebrates the Feast of the Dedication of the Lateran Basilica in Rome — the cathedral church of the Pope and the mother church of all Christendom. While this feast honors a sacred building, it also reminds us of a deeper truth: we, the People of God, are the living temple of His presence. In the first reading, Ezekiel describes life-giving water flowing from the temple, bringing renewal wherever it goes. This image calls us to be channels of God’s grace in the world. St. Paul tells us, “You are the temple of God, and the Spirit of God dwells in you” (1 Cor 3:16). As stewards, we are entrusted with the sacred task of caring for this temple — our own hearts and our parish community — so that God’s presence may shine through us. In the Gospel, Jesus cleanses the temple, declaring that His body is the true dwelling place of God. Through our baptism, we sare in this mystery and are called to reflect God’s holiness in all we do. Today’s feast is an invitation to renew our commitment to the Church — to participate actively in her mission, to serve generously, and to let our lives be signs of God’s living presence in the world. © Catholic Stewardship Consultants, 2025 Pastoral Pondering Last year, I noted that the norm for the distribution of Communion in the United States is standing and on the hand. I brought it up because parishioners were questioning why Bishop Martin, when he visited the parish, did not utilize the altar rails. This is not the norm universally, but each conference of bishops is asked to adopt that posture which is to be normative. The USCCB website states the following: The General Instruction asks each country's Conference of Bishops to determine the posture to be used for the reception of Communion and the act of reverence to be made by each person as he or she receives Communion. In the United States, the body of Bishops has determined that "[t]he norm... is that Holy Communion is to be received standing, unless an individual member of the faithful wishes to receive Communion while kneeling" and that a bow is the act of reverence made by those receiving (no. 160). The right to receive Communion on the tongue or on the hand and whether to receive kneeling or standing belongs to the individual. The normative practice, however, is clear and is set by the body of bishops. https://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/the-mass/order-of-mass/liturgy-of-the-eucharist/the-reception-of-holy-communion-at-mass When we began offering the Traditional Latin Mass a number of years ago, we added the altar rails to meet the requirements of that particular celebration. The use of the rails gradually became the norm at the parish because more and more people started to use them. Many believe it promotes reverence and devotion. At the same time, obedience is a virtue, and I think it is important to be united with other parishes in the Diocese and return to the normative practice as noted above, which we will implement here at St. Mark on the First Sunday of Advent, November 30. ( Correction: The previous sentence was updated to clarify that this change applies only at St. Mark .) As noted above, each individual retains the right to kneel to receive the Eucharist. I also want to be clear that love and devotion for the Eucharist can be expressed in any number of ways within the life of the Church. No one can argue that the Diocese of Charlotte does not have a deep love for the Eucharist. It is the center of our lives, and it is certainly the center of our parish here at St. Mark. From our love for the Eucharist flows our commitment to effective catechesis, evangelization, and our tremendous outreach to the poor. Those things remain unchanged. Any time changes are made, especially in the liturgy, it touches people deeply. My hope is that after almost 11 years as your pastor, you know how much I love and care for you and for the liturgy entrusted to us. I simply believe that it is better that we are faithful to the liturgical norms given to us by legitimate Church authority as outlined in the General Instruction of the Roman Missal. Personal preferences, including my own, which go beyond these norms should not encroach on the liturgical celebration. As our Holy Father reminds in his pontifical motto, In Illo Uno Unum (In the One (Christ) we are one), in the liturgy and in our Catholic life.