17 September 2022

Homily - What can we learn from the grief on the death of Elizabeth II?

The Twenty-fifth Sunday in Ordinary Time (C)

Dear brother and sisters,

Across the globe, in these past few days, we have seen and heard prayers being raised to Almighty God for a monarch who reigned for more than seventy years (cf. I Timothy 2:1-2). It has been a striking spectacle to witness, and one many have found deeply – and surprisingly - moving. What are we to make of what we have seen and of what we have heard?

We must first consider what it is that we have seen. Thousands of men, women, and children have queued for hours – some as many as twenty-four – to walk by the bodily remains of a woman they cannot see. They have willingly – and even gratefully - gone without food and drink, without sitting or lying down, and even without the use of a restroom simply to spend perhaps fifteen second walking past a coffin draped with a flag.


Photo: Associated Press/Mike Moore

Pausing before the body of Her Majesty Elizabeth II, men bowed their heads with deep regard and admiration one final time to the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and numerous other realms and territories. Women made a polite and respectful curtsy. Children imitated their appreciative parents. Veterans, and those still in service, offered one final, tearful salute.

Each of these were expected gestures from those who loved their sovereign who dedicated what proved to be here long life to their service, but what is surprising is the great number of people queuing up for so many hours.

Second, we ought to consider what we have heard. Many commentators and pundits have noted the tremendous outpouring of gratitude, but what they have not spoken of is what is most important of what we have heard: nothing. As thousands of people made their way through Westminster Hall, aside from the rap of a staff and the tap of military shoes at the changing of the guard, all we have heard is the wordless moving of the masses.

In the midst of that austere silence, how many men, women, and children have we witnessed make the Sign of the Cross as they offered a quiet prayer for the peaceful repose of the one known to God as Elizabeth Alexandra Mary? The percentage of those who offered such a public and quiet demonstration of their faith is staggering, given that the United Kingdom is reportedly – and by most metrics is – almost entirely secular and devoid of religious devotion and intention. And yet, in the midst of their communal grief, these simple rituals – the bowing, curtsying, saluting, and signing, all of them religious in origin and in content – serve to help people mourn the loss of one they looked to as the grandmother of the nation. What are we to learn from this? We can come to a deeper understanding of the importance of ritual in human life. There is something to be said for expressing profound and heartfelt emotion – whether joyful or mournful - not in loud, flashy, and attention-seeking ways, but in the expansive richness of subtle and unassuming rituals.

Photo: Getty Images

And yet, there are those who wish to do away with such rituals, particularly religious ones, even in the face of the obvious good they hold for countless people. Of this desire, Queen Elizabeth II said in her Christmas Broadcast in 1957:

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.[1]

If such intimate ceremonies of honesty and self-restraint are able to convey and express the varying emotions of an entire people at the death of their queen, how much more are self-restraining rituals able to express the varying emotions of the People of God and instill within them ageless moral ideals?

There are those who want the liturgical rites of the Church to be imbued with more externally emotional expressions because they think doing so will draw more people into the Church, even against the evidence to the contrary. They even – sadly – abandon the Church in search of communities where such emotional highs can be sought. 

What they are really seeking is not the worship that God asks of his people – he gave us a ritual to follow at the Last Supper and entrusted it to his Apostles and their successors – but something more akin to entertainment and self-fulfillment. Faith, though, is not primarily concerned with emotions, entertainment, or even the self; rather, faith is concerned with an adherence to the Truth, to Jesus Christ.

Human emotions come and go. As such, our emotions are not always reliable. We misjudge them and misinterpret them. They frequently mislead us and cause up to jump to false conclusions. Moreover, emotions are concerned with, and are primarily focused upon, the human person, upon me as an individual; however, “worship in spirit and truth” is not concerned with humanity, with you or with me, but with God (John 4:24). The Mass is not about us, but about God, and about what God wishes to do for us, namely, to divinize us and conform us to the heart of his Son. 

There is a quiet wisdom to be found in the sober ceremonies with which the members of the Body of Christ draw near to Christ the “one mediator between God and man” (I Timothy 2:5). Effective rituals are unchanging both by nature and by design because they allow us to enter into the mystery more fully; they do not require constant work on our part, always trying to figure out what we are to do next, but rather allow us to be subsumed into the ritual action. In the liturgy, “it is not we who are celebrating for ourselves, but it is the living God himself who is preparing a banquet for us.”[2] The consistent quality of the liturgy helps to be fed by the Lord, to be open to his words and nourished with himself.

To learn this wisdom the liturgy offers to us, we must set aside the exuberance of so much of modern society, an exuberance that pretends at happiness, but is really quite empty of authentic joy. Whether those of the Mass, or of baptism, confirmation, confession, marriage, ordination, or, indeed, even of a funeral, the simplicity of the Church’s ceremonies allows each person to enter the sincere worship of God. It does not matter if an individual worshiper is feeling particularly melancholic or exceptionally giddy; each one, and everyone in between, can be united in the presence of the self-giving and self-impoverishing love of God and be taken up together into this love unlike any other (cf. II Corinthians 8:9).[3] Indeed,

The Christian liturgy is the worship of the universal temple which is the Risen Christ, whose arms are outstretched on the Cross to draw everyone into the embrace of God’s eternal love… It is important that every Christian feel and be truly integrated into this universal “we” which provides the “I”, the basis and refuge of the “I”, in the Body of Christ which is the Church.[4]

This, after all, is the very goal of the Christian life, to be integrated into Jesus Christ and share in the divine life of the Trinity.

Let us, then, not desire to conform the liturgy and rituals of the Church to ourselves, but to conform ourselves to the liturgy and rituals of the Church, to lose ourselves in them, so that, living in “all devotion and dignity,” we may perfect union with Christ and know in him the fullness of everlasting joy (I Timothy 2:2). Amen.

[1] Queen Elizabeth II, Christmas Broadcast, 1957.

[2] Pope Benedict XVI, Homily, 21 August 2005.

[3] @discerninganew, response on Twitter to Father Daren Zehnle on 16 September 2022.

[4] Pope Benedict XVI, General Audience Address, 3 October 2012.

10 September 2022

Homily on Blasphemy and God's Mercy - 11 September 2021 - The Twenty-fourth Sunday in Ordinary Time

Dear brothers and sisters,

More often than not the best way to uncover the truth is to ask questions. The best way to do this is to ask one question after another after another as you keep drilling down. Not everyone likes this approach, though, because doing so either reminds people of the method of Socrates or of a four-year-old. This was my approach early last week when I read what Saint Paul says of himself today: “I was once a blasphemer…” (I Timothy 1:13).

His words about himself caught me off guard because the day before I read this admonition from Saint Francis of Assisi: “…whoever envies his brother the good that the Lord says or does in him commits a sin of blasphemy, because he envies the Most High Who says and does every good.”[1] Saint Paul did not strike me as being envious of what God was doing through others, so I had to ask myself if I understood all of what blasphemy entails, which caused me to ask what blasphemy means in its etymology, in the origin of the word.

It comes from the Greek word blasphemia, which, to my surprise, carries a great many meanings. Blasphemia encompasses any or all of the following:

  • abusive or contemptuous language directed toward God or sacred things;
  • disbelief in God’s promises; 
  • unbelief which thinks God is powerless; and, 
  • infidelity to God’s covenant.[2]

None of these aspects of blasphemy may be a surprise to us, but they demonstrate that a sinful act rarely falls squarely into only one category of sin. For example, abusive language directed towards God may stem from pride; disbelief in God’s promises may stem from jealousy; thinking God is powerless may stem from impurity; and infidelity to God’s covenant may stem from unrighteous anger. Whatever the case, blasphemy may well also involve other sins, just as any other sin may also involve another.

This possibility of the multiplicity of sin is why the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that


Blasphemy is directly opposed to the second commandment. It consists in uttering against God - inwardly or outwardly - words of hatred, reproach, or defiance; in speaking ill of God; in failing in respect toward him in one's speech; in misusing God's name. St. James condemns those "who blaspheme that honorable name [of Jesus] by which you are called." The prohibition of blasphemy extends to language against Christ's Church, the saints, and sacred things. It is also blasphemous to make use of God's name to cover up criminal practices, to reduce peoples to servitude, to torture persons or put them to death. The misuse of God's name to commit a crime can provoke others to repudiate religion. 


Blasphemy is contrary to the respect due God and his holy name. It is in itself a grave sin.[3]

Blasphemy is one of those “acts which, in and of themselves, independently of circumstances or intentions, are always gravely illicit by reason of their object,” by reason of the acts themselves. Other such gravely illicit acts include “perjury, murder and adultery.” We must remember that we cannot “do evil so that good may result from it.”[4]

Why is it, then, that Saint Paul describes himself as having been a blasphemer and admits to Saint Timothy, his spiritual son, that he blasphemed against God (cf. I Timothy1:2; II Timothy 1:2)?


How can he say that, if indeed he had thought he was acting in God’s behalf in rounding up and imprisoning Christians and even approving the stoning of Stephen (Acts 8:1)? In retrospect, and in the light of his conversion, he now sees how mistaken and blind he was. The Pharisees believed in the resurrection of the just but thought it would happen only at the end of the age, whereas Christians were proclaiming that it had already begun in Jesus. The Holy Spirit too, according to Pharisaic expectations, would be given at the end but not now; for now for the law was sufficient. But the disciples of Jesus were claiming that they – all of them – had already received the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, they were actually worshiping Jesus as mara (“Lord”), and to Paul’s monotheism this was blasphemous. They even claimed to be eating his flesh and drinking his blood! So from a human point of view it is understandable that he had persecuted the Church with “zeal” (Philippians 3:6) “beyond measure and tried to destroy it” (Galatians 1:13). But his conversion had turned his understanding of blasphemy on its head – it was blasphemous of him to deny that Jesus is Lord, risen from the dead and giver of the Holy Spirit. Even to persecute the disciples of Jesus was now blasphemy, for that meant persecuting Jesus himself…[5]

Saint Augustine tells us that Saint Paul makes mention of his former blasphemy to tell us that he “had been a sinner of such proportions that no sinners need despair of themselves, precisely because even Paul had found remission.”[6]

Saint Paul asked for the Lord’s mercy (cf. Psalm 51:3). This is why Saint Paul was one of those entrusted with “the message of reconciliation” (II Corinthians 5:19); he would now invite sinners to draw near and listen to Jesus so that they, too, might be converted (cf. Luke 15:1). When we find that have sinned against the Lord – in whatever way – will we acknowledge what we have done? Will we ask for his mercy? Will we allow him to embrace us with his fatherly love (cf. Luke 15:20)? Or will we keep out distance, not trusting in his merciful love, thereby compounding out sin?

A Christian can never forget that “God alone is the medicine that cures the soul” and those who are sick “must apply the doctor’s services to their health. . . . And so it goes with the soul.”[7] The mercy God wishes to bestow upon us, the medicine he wishes to give us, through sacramental confession “suffices to offset any human sin, whatever its nature, gravity, or frequency. That is why Christ, in his supreme mercy, receives and pardons sinners, not only once or twice, but as often as they prayerfully beg for God’s mercy” in the confessional.[8]

Let each of us, then, never shy away from God’s mercy, question it, nor despair of receiving it; let us instead entrust ourselves to it. If we humble beseech his mercy in sincerity of heart we, with Saint Paul, will faithfully offer “to the king of kings, incorruptible, invisible, the only God, honor and glory forever and ever” (I Timothy 1:17). Amen.

[1] Saint Francis of Assisi, The Admonitions, 8.3.

[2] John L. McKenzie, Dictionary of the Bible (Milwaukee: The Bruce Publishing Company, 1965), 97.

[3] Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2148.

[4] Ibid., 1756.

[5] George T. Montague, Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture: First and Second Timothy, Titus (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2008), 42-43.

[6] Saint Augustine of Hippo, Sermon 170.1.

[7] Ibid., Sermon 271.1-2.

[8] Saint Bonaventure, Breviloquium, 6.10.3.