From the Pastor - 25th Sunday in Ordinary Time

September 16, 2022

After today’s readings, we can’t say we have not been warned about the dangers of mixed-up priorities. God’s Word is so very clear today on the necessity of putting Him first in all areas of our lives.


We see this in the First Reading from Amos. The Lord has harsh words for those who would take advantage of the poor and whose priorities are not aligned with God’s.


In the Second Reading from St. Paul’s letter to Timothy, Paul gives us the antidote to the self-centeredness condemned in our First Reading. The antidote is to imitate Christ “who gave Himself as a ransom for all.” Rather than thinking of Himself and how to “get ahead” Christ gave Himself away — completely — for our sake. That is how we are to live.


In our Gospel passage from Luke, the Lord shows us how to bridge the gap between worldly thinking and priorities and eternal thinking and priorities. Jesus tells the parable of the corrupt but clever steward who is about to get fired when the master discovers the steward has been squandering his property. Realizing his imminent unemployed status, the clever steward reaches out to the various debtors of his master to wheel and deal with them, making friends who would look out for him when he became jobless.


What if we put that kind of effort into our own tasks as good stewards of all God’s gifts to us? Into our ministries, into the ways we could make more time for prayer as individuals, as couples, as families, and as a parish? What if we got as creative as the “bad steward” in the use of our finances so that we could give more generously to the poor and the advancement of God’s kingdom on the earth

That’s our lesson and our challenge. © Catholic Stewardship Consultants, 2022

 

Pastoral Pondering

As I write this, the Church is celebrating a beautiful feast day, the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary. The very reality of Our Lady’s birth shows not only the immense love of God for the human race, but also the perfection of His plan of salvation. At the same time, I am trying to sort out some emotions that welled up when I learned about the death of Queen Elizabeth II, the longest reigning monarch of the United Kingdom and Commonwealth. I was asking myself why this particular event was significant to me. The sentiments were similar to those that I experienced when Pope St. John Paul II died. Obviously, I am neither a British subject nor a particular devotee of modern monarchy, but there was a deep sense of loss.


In reflecting upon her passing, I came to the conclusion that the emotions that arose came from a sense that the passing of the Queen marked the ending of not one single life, but the end of an era. While she had detractors, as all do, Queen Elizabeth represented the best of a truly noble person. She was dedicated to God, to service and to country. She lived through some of the most tumultuous times in recent history and, through it all, remained steadfast and undaunted. Her dedication and concern were always turned outward rather than inward. Rather than always thinking of herself, as it seems so many do today, her first thought was to her duty before God. Her wisdom and, to some degree, prophetic outlook, were presented beautifully in her first televised Christmas address as sovereign in 1957. In it, she noted the following concerning the quickly changing world: “It’s not the new inventions which are the difficulty. The trouble is caused by unthinking people who carelessly throw away ageless ideals as if they were old and outworn machinery. They would have religion thrown aside, morality in personal and public life made meaningless, honesty counted as foolishness, and self-interest set up in place of self-restraint…Today we need a special kind of courage. Not the kind needed in battle, but the kind that makes us stand up for everything we know is right; everything that is true and honest. We need the kind of courage that can withstand the subtle corruption of the cynics so that we can show the world that we are not afraid of the future.”


Her Majesty’s sentiments are as true now as then, and perhaps more so. The world she leaves is a world that has largely ignored her subtle warning. The unthinking people, she mentioned, seem to be running the centers of power, and, in many respects, the courage that she described appears to be lacking across the landscape.



Nonetheless, there are glimmers of hope. Each week I am encouraged to see more and more young families coming to St. Mark. Parents who desire stability for their children along with those, both young and not so young, who are seeking a faith community where the Catholic faith is lived without fear or apology. While Queen Elizabeth’s passing does indeed mark an end of a world that has largely disappeared, the hopes that she expressed are neither dead nor completely forgotten. May she and the souls of all the faithful departed rest in peace. And may those of us who still run the race and fight the good fight always be courageous and hope-filled in the midst of all the challenges and uncertainty that come our way.


From the Pastor

From the Pastor - Ascension of the Lord

By John Putnam • May 15, 2026
Today we celebrate the great feast of the Ascension of our Lord — that moment when Jesus, 40 days after His Resurrection, was lifted up into heaven as the apostles looked on. It must have been an extraordinary sight. But the first reading tells us they were not meant to stand there for long. “Men of Galilee, why are you standing there looking at the sky?” In other words — don’t just stand there. Do something. This is a message for us as Christian stewards. We have been given every grace and blessing — through the Mass and the sacraments, through the Word of God, and through the gifts of our time, talent, and treasure. We are not meant to simply receive these gifts. We are meant to use them — in gratitude to the One who gave them. Like the apostles, we are called “to be [His] witnesses… to the ends of the earth.” And we do this not by our own strength, but through the power of the Holy Spirit at work within us. © Catholic Stewardship Consultants, 2026 Pastoral Pondering Just War Theory: The Catholic Moral Framework for Armed Conflict Just War Theory is one of the most important and carefully developed areas of Catholic moral theology. It does not glorify war — quite the opposite. The Catechism begins its section on war with a solemn reminder that "the fifth commandment forbids the intentional destruction of human life," and because of the evils and injustices that accompany all war, the Church insistently urges everyone to prayer and action so that God may free us from the ancient bondage of war. And yet, while war always involves evils, sometimes the choice not to engage in war can be an even greater evil — and this is the theory behind the Church's teaching that a nation *can* wage a just war. Historical Roots The theory of when and how war can be morally justified goes back at least to the pre-Christian Roman orator Cicero, and was taken up by St. Ambrose, then systematically developed by St. Augustine. Augustine's account was later refined by St. Thomas Aquinas, whose rendering was normative for Catholic theorists from the Middle Ages onward. The Second Vatican Council re-presented the classical account, placing much greater emphasis on the avoidance of war and offering a forceful condemnation of weapons of mass destruction. The current Catechism (CCC 2307–2317) develops this by conceiving war as a means of legitimate societal self-defense. Two Dimensions of Justice in War The Catholic Church distinguishes between two types of justice concerning war: jus ad bellum (justice before the war) and jus in bello (justice during the war). Most discussion focuses on jus ad bellum — the four conditions inherited from St. Augustine that determine whether going to war is justified. Jus in bello refers to how the war is actually conducted once it has begun. It is entirely possible for a country to fight a war that meets the jus ad bellum conditions for being just, and yet to fight that war *unjustly* — by targeting innocent civilians or dropping bombs indiscriminately. The Four Conditions for a Just War (CCC 2309) As long as the danger of war persists and no international authority has sufficient power to prevent it, governments cannot be denied the right of lawful self-defense once all peace efforts have failed. The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require that all four of the following be met simultaneously : 1. The damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain . 2. All other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective . 3. There must be serious prospects of success . 4. The use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. These are hard conditions to fulfill, and with good reason — the Church teaches that war should always be the last resort. Justice During War (Jus in Bello) Even in a just war, moral law does not evaporate on the battlefield. The Church and human reason both assert the permanent validity of the moral law during armed conflict — "the mere fact that war has regrettably broken out does not mean that everything becomes licit between the warring parties." Noncombatants, wounded soldiers, and prisoners must be respected and treated humanely. Actions deliberately contrary to the law of nations are crimes, as are the orders that command them. Blind obedience does not excuse those who carry them out. The extermination of a people, nation, or ethnic minority must be condemned as a mortal sin — and one is morally bound to resist orders that command genocide. As the Catechism states clearly: "Every act of war directed to the indiscriminate destruction of whole cities or vast areas with their inhabitants is a crime against God and man, which merits firm and unequivocal condemnation." Catholics in the Armed Forces A Catholic who serves in the armed forces must discern the morality of any conflict. If ordered to commit an intrinsically evil act — such as the direct killing of an unarmed civilian or the torture of a prisoner of war — a Catholic soldier must *refuse* that order, even if it is legal and even if punishment results. The Challenge of Modern Warfare Pope John Paul II suggested that the threshold for a just war has been raised very high by the existence of weapons of mass destruction. Cardinal Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI) went even further, asking "whether as things stand, with new weapons that cause destruction that goes well beyond the groups involved in the fight, it is still licit to allow that a 'just war' might exist."  Just War Theory is not a loophole for violence — it is a moral fence around it. The presumption always begins with peace. War is a tragic concession to human sinfulness, never a first resort, and always bound by the permanent demands of justice and human dignity.

From the Pastor - Sixth Sunday of Easter

By Lauren Rupar • May 15, 2026
On this sixth Sunday of Easter, our readings remind us that God must come first in our lives, and that love of God is shown through concrete actions — this is precisely why the stewardship way of life is so necessary. Our second reading, from St. Peter, challenges us to “Sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts.” In other words, we are to put Christ above all else. His role is not only as Savior — as essential as that is — but as Lord of our lives. As His disciples, we are called to place Him at the center of everything — our time, our talent, and our treasure. The beauty of the stewardship way of life is that it gives us a concrete way to live this out. It allows us to demonstrate that Christ truly is Lord of our lives, because love is not merely a feeling. “Whoever has my commandments and observes them is the one who loves me,” Jesus tells us in our Gospel from John. True love is an act of the will. It requires obedience, humility, and deep trust in God. But the reward is extraordinary. Christ tells us, “Whoever loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and reveal myself to him.” Could there be anything more fulfilling than living in such a way that the God of the universe reveals Himself more fully to us? © Catholic Stewardship Consultants, 2026 Pastoral Pondering Lately, with various discussions in the news, particularly with regard to a recent perceived back and forth between the Holy Father and President Trump, the issue of Catholic teaching and the authority of that teaching has come up. Hence, I thought it might be helpful to outline the levels of magisterial teaching in an effort to help folks navigate the different types of teaching along with the required response to each level. Summary: Levels of Magisterial Teaching The Catholic Church teaches with Christ’s authority through the Magisterium , but not all teachings carry the same weight or demand the same level of assent. Understanding these distinctions helps Catholics know how to respond faithfully to Church teaching. 1. Solemn Definitions (Extraordinary Magisterium) These are infallible dogmas formally defined by an ecumenical council or by the pope speaking ex cathedra. They concern truths revealed by God (e.g., the Immaculate Conception, the Assumption). Required response : The assent of faith. Denial is heresy. 2. Ordinary Universal Magisterium Teachings consistently and universally held by the bishops in communion with the pope, even without a formal definition. When universal agreement is clear, these teachings are also infallible (e.g., the intrinsic evil of abortion, male-only priesthood). Required response : The assent of faith. Denial is heresy. 3. Definitive Teachings (Non‑Revealed but Certain) Teachings proposed definitively because they are necessary to safeguard or explain divine revelation, even if not themselves formally revealed (e.g., canonizations, invalidity of Anglican orders). Required response: Definitive assent. Denial is grave error, though not heresy. 4. Authoritative but Non‑Definitive Teaching Non‑infallible teachings of the pope or bishops, such as many encyclicals or pastoral directives. Required response : Religious submission of intellect and will — a sincere openness and respect, not casual dismissal. 5. Prudential Judgments and Pastoral Applications Concrete applications of moral principles to specific situations (e.g., policy approaches in economics or immigration). Required response: Respectful consideration. Legitimate disagreement is possible. Why this matters : Recognizing these levels avoids two extremes—treating all Church teaching as optional opinion (laxism) or treating every Church statement as infallible dogma (rigorism). The Church teaches as a structured, living authority guided by the Holy Spirit, calling for responses proportionate to the level of teaching involved.