The Independent News Source
Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
The Eucharist and health care
by Thomas Gumbleton on Aug. 21, 2009
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
PDF version
"They came for new teeth, mostly, but also for blood pressure checks, mammograms, immunizations, and pain medicine. South Los Angeles is the place where health care is scarce. So when it was offered nearby, word got around. For the second day in a row, thousands"
"of people lined up, starting after midnight, snaking into the early hours, for free dental, medical and vision services, courtesy of a non-profit group that more typically provides mobile health care for the rural poor. It's called Remote Area Medical.
Printer-friendly versionSend to friendPDF versionIn his homily from Sunday Aug. 16, Bishop Thomas Gumbleton relates the teaching on the Eucharist from John's Gospel to the debate on health care reform. He says, "If we're going to say, 'Yes, I will accept [this teaching on the Eucharist],' I hope we will accept it with a full understanding of what Jesus is teaching about the Eucharist, not just that he's present, but that he's present to give himself. … [to] pour out his blood, give his flesh for the life of the world."
Twentieth Sunday in Ordinary Time
|
As I've mentioned, we've been following this gospel of John now for a number of Sundays. In fact, this is the fourth Sunday where we're reading from the sixth chapter of John's Gospel. Now, it seems that we come to kind of a crucial point because those people who were listening 2,000 years ago began to be troubled about what they were hearing: How can he give us his flesh to eat? How can he do that?" If we stop and listening to what he is saying and let it sink in, it is extraordinary. We might get to that point where we say, "How can he do it?" We'll hear what comes right after this next Sunday. There were some who said, "This sort of teaching is very hard. Who can accept it?"
It's important, I think, now as we come to this point where we are being challenged, do we believe or not believe in what Jesus has been saying?
Perhaps it's helpful to go back over the last couple of Sundays, and remind ourselves how we get to this point. First of all, we were reading the Gospel of Mark every Sunday, and after next Sunday, we'll pick up on the Gospel of Mark again. Four Sundays ago, we came to the point in Mark's Gospel where Jesus multiplied the loaves and the fish in the desert place, but instead of hearing Mark's account of that, we took John's account. It's very important to remember that John's account of that incident in the desert was really, in John's Gospel, his account of the Last Supper.
He uses all the words that in other gospels Jesus used at the Last Supper. John doesn't have those words at the Last Supper in his gospel. He has them here in the sixth chapter of his gospel. "Jesus took bread, looked up to heaven, blessed it, broke it and gave it to the crowd, to his disciples." That's how the other gospels describe the Last Supper. Jesus, at the Last Supper, says, "Do this in memory of me. Keep on doing what I've done."
You may remember that after Jesus did that and he distributed the bread, John remarks that there were over 5,000 people who were fed from five loaves and two fish. They wanted to make him king, so he went off by himself and they followed him around the lake. Then he began this long teaching. In the teaching, he tries to help them and help us to understand what the Holy Eucharist is, that it really is the body and blood of Jesus. Not only that, we're to imitate: "Do what I have done. Do this is memory of me."
It's one thing to believe in the presence of Jesus in the bread and wine. In part of this sixth chapter of John's Gospel, Jesus is emphasizing, "I am the Living Bread. This bread I'm giving you is who I am," it's me, this bread, and this cup of wine. I am really present there.
We have accepted throughout our lives that Jesus is truly present in the bread and the wine, but also, on the Sunday after that when Jesus was trying to lay out what the Eucharist means, we're reminded of how, "This bread is my flesh given for you," or, "This cup is the cup of my blood poured out for you." We're being reminded that the Eucharist is the life, the death and the resurrection of Jesus that we celebrate at this altar.
So the Eucharist is Jesus pouring out his life for us. It's not just Jesus present so we can adore him because he's the son of God; no, it's Jesus pouring out his life for us, Jesus pouring out his blood for us, giving us that magnificent, amazing, almost unbelievable message about how love is all that he is about.
His death on the cross was not a way that Jesus repaid an angry God for our sins. No, it's Jesus loving us without limit, pouring forth his life for us to show us that love is what changes everything, the way of love. That is what the Eucharist is.
And so, as we have challenged today, who can accept this?
It's one thing to accept that he's present, that we adore Jesus as he is in the tabernacle, but how about accepting that the Eucharist also means that he's pouring out himself for us? What does that mean for us if we really believe it? "Who can accept this?" they said. We have to ask ourselves, "Can I accept this that when I receive the Eucharist, I'm really committing myself to be poured out as Jesus was for others?"
There are lots of practical ways in which we are challenged to pour out ourselves for others.
Just this week, and in the last couple of weeks in fact, I'm sure we've all been aware of those crowds of 200 people at this place and some other place, at the forums that have been held by members of Congress and even the President about health care. So many of those in the crowds said, "We don't want to change anything. It's OK the way it is. We don't want socialized medicine. We don't want everyone to have it. I have mine." That's almost what the message is. "Let everybody else worry about themselves."
This week, there was an article that was in the paper about health care. This happened in Englewood, Calif. It starts off:
-- not hundreds, but thousands --
"The Tennessee-based organization that ran this event decided to try its hand at large, urban medical services. Its principles thought that Los Angeles would be a good place to start, but they were far from being prepared for the outpouring of need.
"Set up for eight days of care, the group was already overwhelmed on the first day after allowing 1,500 people through the door, nearly 500 of whom had still not been served by day's end, and had to return in the wee hours Wednesday morning.
"The enormous response to the free care was a stark corollary to the hundreds of Americans who have filled town hall-style meetings throughout the country, angrily expressing their fear of the Obama administration's proposed changes to the nation's health care system."
The President is saying we need to provide health care for everybody. That might mean we have to change something that I already have, not that any of us would ever be asked to give up our health care if we have it. Don't we have to wonder how people who have what they need can be so angry that we're trying to spread this out to others? It seems like there's some kind of terrible fear that suddenly I'm going to lose everything I have, or if the government does it, it won't work, even though we already have government health care that does work.
There's something strange here happening out of fear, and I think maybe some selfishness, that we just don't let ourselves be aware of 49 million people in this country without health insurance. Even many millions of those who have it can't get adequate care. So there is an effort now to spread this so that everyone has adequate care like every other developed country in the world provides.
What is it in our nation that brings people out with such anger, and a seemingly uncaring spirit, especially if they think of themselves as Christians, and especially as we who are Catholic Christians and many other Christians have a sacrament like the Eucharist? The whole sacrament means Jesus pouring himself out for others, giving up himself for others.
It seems to me that as we reflect on this teaching that Jesus has been providing for us the last few weeks, that teaching about the Blessed Sacrament and the Holy Eucharist, we have to ask ourselves how can Jesus give us his flesh to eat, his blood to drink and this is a hard saying, "who can accept it?"
If we're going to say, "Yes, I will accept it," I hope we will say it with a full understanding of what Jesus is teaching about the Eucharist, not just that he's present, but that he's present to give himself. When we receive the Eucharist, we too must commit ourselves to what Jesus did: pour out his blood, give his flesh for the life of the world. We have to commit ourselves to do the same thing.
Maybe if we are going to do that, it's good to hear once more what St. Paul says because he makes it very specific and very clear: "Pay attention to how to behave and how to live, what your attitudes are. Do not live as the unwise do, but live as responsible persons. Do not let yourself be ignorant, but understand what the will of God is. Be filled with the Holy Spirit."
Paul goes on to say, "Sing songs and pray, giving thanks to God in the name of Christ Jesus, our Lord, always and for everything."
That giving thanks to God, in Greek, is "be eucharists." The word Eucharist means thanksgiving. So Paul says, "Be eucharists." That's the challenge to us today, to be Eucharists, but in the very way that Jesus taught it, giving ourselves for others as he did.
[This homily was preached at St. Hilary Parish, Redford, Mich, on Aug. 16. The transcripts of Bishop Gumbleton's homilies are posted weekly to NCRonline.org. Sign up here to receive an e-mail alert when the latest homily is posted. Send this homily to a friend.]
Bishop Gumbleton, what you
Bishop Gumbleton, what you seem to completely misunderstand is that Christ calls us to voluntarily sacrifice for others, to voluntarily give, be charitable. The current health care debate is all about the government compelling charity, it's about the government forcing people to give up their money or their current health coverage, without any input from the American people.
The 49 million number is completely inaccurate, as well. Included in that number are illegal immigrants (ILLEGAL!); indivuals and families in households making more than $50,000 per year, who could, if they chose, purchase insurance; folks between the ages of 18 and 34 who either do not need or do not want health insurance, etc. The number is intentionally misleading and intentionally false, and I am disappointed, though not suprised, to see Bishop Gumbleton fall for it completely.
I would think that a bishop of the Church would have a clearer understanding of genuine charity and compassion and would see that this proposal, a proposal that is about compulsory theft from the many to aid the few, is immoral and that Christ would not support such actions.
As I recall Jesus' quote it
As I recall Jesus' quote it was: "A new COMMANDMENT I give you: Love one another as I have loved you." That doesn't sound like a suggestion, nor is it voluntary if you want to call yourself Christian.
I would also quote J. K. Galbraith: "The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy: that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
Actually, it is voluntary.
Actually, it is voluntary. You see, Christ may have commanded it, but we retain free will in the matter. We have the choice to love and serve, or not to love and serve. Virtue is found when we choose to do as the Lord commanded us. There is no virtue to be found in being forced to do good under penalty of law. Then, one obeys the law, not out of a sense of love or compassion or charity, but rather out of a sense of fear of punishment. In a similar manner, a child is not praised for doing the dishes when he knows that he will be punished if he does not. He is praised when he VOLUNTARILY comes home, sees the dirty dishes, and chooses to help his parents by washing them. This is virtue.
The fact is that the currently proposed health care scheme would steal from one group of people (everyone who pays taxes) and redistribute that wealth. Much like the Eva Peron Foundation, which pressured and coerced the people of Argentina to "voluntarily" contribute, there is to be found not one ounce of virtue in this health care scheme.
Virtue, as any Catholic school child knows, requires free will. Where there is no free will, there is no virtue. Our Lord realized that when He created us. Sadly it seems, those who support this health care scheme on the basis of the virtue of charity and compassion obviously never learned this truth.
Mr. Green writes: "Actually,
Mr. Green writes: "Actually, it is voluntary. You see, Christ may have commanded it, but we retain free will in the matter."
ahh, okay . . .
You have chosen . . .
And writes: "there is to be found not one ounce of virtue in this health care scheme."
Because there might be taxmoney involved in healing the sick??
I have no choice that taxes go to wars condemned by two popes, and yet is there virtue for you in them? I cannot object to billions of our taxdollars going to support free and universal health care in other nations while millions of people here at home go without; where is the virtue in this.
Stop the war machine and thus save trillions of dollars, and heal our people.
What would Jesus do?
What does Jesus tell us when we cry, "Lord, Lord?"
Go away from me for I know you not. I was sick and you did not come to me.
What would Jesus do?
Heal.
The hypocritical Scribes and Pharisees of His day also found no virtue in his healing ministry . . .
And His Day is coming . . .
Prepare
Work for Peace, and for healing
Also an even more powerful
Also an even more powerful and direct commandment of Our Lord and Saviour to the rich was this:
"Go, sell all that you have and give the money to the poor. And then come follow me."
In the Gospel the rich went sadly away for having a whole lot of really cool stuff . . .
What will you do?
What about the story of Lazarus, the poor beggar denied relief at the gates of the rich man, who later begged Lazarus send forth a drop of water.
The measure you measure out to others is the measure by which you will receive. What will you do?
The early Love community gave unto each according to their needs, receiving freely and selflessly from each according to their gifts . . .
Great quote from Galbraith
See our eloquent and explicit Holy Father Saint Benedict's 1500 year old Rule for Monks on private property. Such a vice was seen for what it was. All property was community and lent out for the completion of specific work for a specific time.
See our near equally eloquent Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI's equally explicit social encyclical Charity in Truth on the evils of corporate greed.
and tremble
and give
and love
When someone asks for your coat, give the shirt off your back as well.
frère charles du désert OSB OBLAT (Congrégation de Subiaco)
Clint, I think you better go
Clint,
I think you better go back and read the gospels. I think Jesus would totally support such action. I'm not sure you can be a libertarian and a Christian. You can be whichever you choose but not both.
Actually, you can be both,
Actually, you can be both, and quite effectively, I believe. However, I would not characterize myself as "libertarian", conservative, yes, and perhaps a conservative with libertarian leanings.
But, to your point. Please find me a place anywhere in any of the Gospels wherein Christ commanded (or even suggested!) to His disciples that they should use the government to solve their problems. I would be grateful if you could, because I have searched through them and cannot find any such place or any such words or suggestions coming from the mouth of Our Lord, or His followers.
Rather, He suggested, He instructed, He commanded us to love and serve one another. But, you see, when the government confiscates, steals, money from my pocket to pay for others, this is not voluntary on my part. Indeed, all choice is taken away from me, and without choice there can be no virtue. There is nothing virtuous in a system that negates choice among individuals, that is, the choice to love and serve, or not to love and serve. There is nothing virtuous in big government, or any institution, for that matter, stealing from one group of people to benefit another group.
Christ commanded us to "render to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's". This health care scheme will force us to render everything to Caesar and leave nothing for God. In addition, eventually, abortion, euthenasia and birth control will find their way into the mandatory coverage (perhaps not this particular bill, but if the door is open, it will find its way in sooner or later) and I, a believing Catholic with strong moral convictions against all three, will be forced to pay for this (via my taxes) coverage. This will render my moral rights moot and I will not be able to exercise those rights. What is virtuous about that?
Many people of good will support this plan because they genuinely care about health coverage for the poor. Many more support this plan because they see it as an opportunity for them to get free health coverage (which is silly, since the coverage will never be free! We will pay for it in the form of taxation). But, sadly, this health care plan will not do what it says it will do, it will cause far more harm than good, increasing the role of the "Nanny State" in our lives, dramatically limiting our freedom, and extolling as virtue the sin of theft.
There is no way in the world that Our Lord would EVER endorse such a plan.
What will you say when you
What will you say when you have lost your job and insurance coverage and savings, and find yourself sick . . .
What will you say when you finally have time to read the Good News?
Mr. Green, knowing as he does
Mr. Green, knowing as he does with a certainty the inscrutable mind of Our Lord, writes: "There is no way in the world that Our Lord would EVER endorse such a plan."
Leave me. I was sick and you did not come to me.
Our Lord spent his public ministry healing the sick.
This he does not approve?
He sent the Apostles out, and they healed.
He did not approve?
Someone not of their inner circle healed in Jesus's name, and the Apostles objected to Him about it. He supported the healer.
There is every way in the world and beyond that Jesus would support the sort of government sponsored universal health care plane which all civilized nations enjoy (see the great Roman Catholic documetarian Michael Moore's Sicko).
Where did Jesus say: "Thou shalt enjoy no socialized medicine, but pour all of your resources into monopolized For-Profit corporate health managers."
In Texas a Governor Bush-era law is leaving the elderly homeless and well as unhealthy, because Medicare and Medicaid in that state takes people's home and belongings to cover their health expenses.
Would Jesus endorse this plan?
No way in the world.
I imagine you like travelling
I imagine you like travelling the roads paid for by taxes to the government or the military that keeps you safe. I imagine you will want your Medicare when the time comes and you Social Security. I imagine you like to know you can call 911 and tax paid police will come to your aid. Society is made up of many things, one of them being taxes so all can benefit from group cooperation. Did Jesus not collect the loaves and fishes from the few who thought to bring a meal and share it with ALL present. And guess what, there was plenty and more to go around.
There is no way that someone
There is no way that someone making $50,000 a year can afford good healthcare coverage. I am in a group plan provided by a major corporation without any company contribution and it costs me $21,000 per year. If healthcare costs increase at 8% per year, the cost in 10 years for the same plan will be $46,000! Something must be done to improve efficiency/reduce healthcare costs.
I accept completely the logic
I accept completely the logic of this homily. We do not accept easily to get rid of our selfishness. This is why we are scandalized by the selflessness of Jesus. When we accept what Jesus does to others, we also accept the challenge of acting like him. This is very difficult to all of us. The Holy Spirit can work on our hearts but we have the responsibility of taking care of our understanding.
For those who believe that
For those who believe that Health Care reform legislation that includes a public option will allow unfettered abortions - I enclose what I received from my congresswoman:
Beginning in 1976, federal law banned public funding of abortions except in cases of rape, incest or life endangerment for certain federal programs such as Medicaid. The TRICARE system, which covers active and retired members of the military and their families, pays for abortions only when the mother's life is in danger. Military hospitals are not permitted to perform abortions, even if they are privately paid for, except in cases of life endangerment or rape or incest. Similarly, the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, which covers nine million federal workers and their dependents, is prohibited from paying for insurance coverage of abortions, with the same exceptions as those in the original 1976 law.
However, abortions are covered for most Americans who have private, employer-based insurance. A Guttmacher Institute survey found that 86 percent of employment-based health plans cover medication and in-clinic abortion. Five states (Idaho, Kentucky, Missouri, North Dakota and Oklahoma), restrict private insurance plans' coverage of abortion; additional coverage that includes the procedure is available for an extra fee. And 12 states restrict abortion coverage in plans for public employees.
Within the debate of health insurance reform, there has been a lot of misinformation about the federal plan and coverage of abortion procedures. Let me be clear: nothing within the legislation mandates abortion coverage.
Is your congresswoman Nancy
Is your congresswoman Nancy Pelosi? Every time an amendment comes up with any of these proposals to prohibit money for abortions and mandated abortion coverage, it is killed in committee--meaning that the new bills do in fact cover abortions. It will probably be the abortion provisions that take down any good that can come from needed healthcare reform. The fact is any pro-life legislator, as well as most moderates, will not accept anything that provides for abortion. The left, with Planned Parenthood and Emily's List dolling out the millions, will not accept any policy that does not include 100 percent mandated abortion coverage. Planned Parenthood stands to make billions from the increased abortions as well as the scam they have where as part of the bill they will be contracted into the public schools to provide "health services" regardless of whether parents or school officials want them.
Bama provided primary
Bama provided primary documentation insupport of that testimony.
Could you please?
I am getting a mind-ache trying to separate fact from fiction in your statement and fiction is bearing the brunt . . .
The problem is "coercion".
The problem is "coercion". People need health care but, the government should not provide it because the government is based on coercion-- the tax system. The Gospel is clear: people should help one another not because they are forced, rather, because they love.
Bill. Where's the love?
Bill.
Where's the love?
Unfortunately, Bishop
Unfortunately, Bishop Gumbleton's view of the health care debate is at best poorly informed, but worse, based on untrue assumptions. People who are objecting to the Obama plan are not all motivated by selfish interests. They don't want a government which is wasteful and inefficient running a very important function. They don't want a a government panel somewhere deciding on what health care they need, possibly limiting their care because they are no longer productive. They don't want their tax money used to promote abortion. And on and on... We do not have a government health care system that works; both Medicare and Medicaid are disasters. In spite of having had Medicare for the last fifty years, the problems have only increased, not been properly resolved.
My hope and the hope of others I know is to provide better health care for everyone, but government has not shown itself capable or willing to do it well. That is the principle reason for the objections to the current plan, not selfishness.
The government has not waged
The government has not waged war particularly well either during the last decade, but I haven't heard much outcry to get out of that business.
Unfortunately, your view of
Unfortunately, your view of the health care debate is at best poorly informed, but worse, based on untrue assumptions. Most people I know are very happy with their medicare coverage. It would be wonderful if it were more comprehensive but just ask them if they would like to no longer have it. The reason it is in trouble financially is because we do not have a single payer system. Private insurance has increased medical costs drastically. Just ask someone you know from Canada and they will tell you that you must have a supplemental policy to cover medical costs when you travel to the US because they are so much more than in Canada. We MUST have a system that provides health care to EVERYONE. It is the only just thing to do and I truly believe we can not call ourselves followers of Jesus without striving to provide justice for everyone.
I use government TriCare for
I use government TriCare for the military and their families and it has served me quite well. My husband uses the VA system which is working for him. My sister can't afford to pay for anything and has two years to go before Medicare kicks in for her. She is praying nothing happens in the meantime. If she does get sick and dies because healthcare doesn't pass I will know to blame all the folks who didn't want to be their brothers keeper. Just remember, when you cut her out of care you do it to Jesus. That's what he said, not me. (By the way, my sister worked and is still working in her 60's, never taking government assistance in any way but she still has no insurance or means to go to the doctor).
Here is an excellent sermon
Here is an excellent sermon on John 6! Thanks for posting it online.
Absolutely beautiful homily!
Absolutely beautiful homily! Thank you, Bishop Gumbleton.
I wish this message could be
I wish this message could be heard from all pulpits throughout
our great country. After all, Jesus was the greatest socialist of history.
Amen!
Amen!
Amen!
Amen!
Just read Michael Crichton's
Just read Michael Crichton's "A Case of Need" copyrighted in 1968. He talks of two waves post WWII that changed medicine. The first was scientific advances and the second "was more recent and involved social, not technical change. Social medicine and socialized medicine became real problems to be solved, like cancer and heart disease. Some of the older physicians regard socialized medicine a cancer in its own right and some of the the young ones agreed. But it has become clear that, like it or not, doctors are going to have to produce better medical care for more people than they ever have before."
Some 40 years later it is very clear the old system is broken and needs fixing. Insurance compianies need to look beyond their shareholders quarterly profits. I think at the very least a public option is in order to remind the insurance companies of the product they are selling on which their profit making ablities are based.
Bishop Gumbleton has connected the dots for receivers of the Eucharist to be involved in the distribution of health care among citizens.
I love these homilies and
I love these homilies and like to share them with my family
Thank you Bishop Gumbleton
Thank you Bishop Gumbleton for expressing the most profound mystery of our faith in such simple but compelling ways. Indeed the Eucharist is not fulfilled until we ascent to be Christ for others. How can anyone receive the very Body of Christ, an act which unites them with every child of God, and then turn around and say, effectively, "I keep my body well on my own, I won't have any part in keeping others' bodies well" ? On one hand we say "One bread, one body" but on the other we live "My body, not yours" If receiving the Eucharist doesn't stir us to compassion, perhaps we should consider the idea that we not receiving it worthily.
So preaching on healthcare is
So preaching on healthcare is ok, but preaching on abortion is right wing politics and a violation of church/state. I get it now.
Is this good and holy Bishop
Is this good and holy Bishop publicly refusing Holy Communion to those who might have voted for Catholic Joe Biden?
Thank you, Bishop Gumbleton
Thank you, Bishop Gumbleton for this homily in which you land the God's Word to the real life of this country where a lot of Christian people doesnt matter that over 49 million are without health care insurance. The health insurance companies are only thinking how to gain more money. The debate about Health Care Reform is showing that many Christian Americans who attack the Reform are thinking only in themselves, the others don't matter. What shame!
Thank you! I have been
Thank you!
I have been wondering where the Catholic Bishops have been in the healthcare debate, particularly as it pertains to the public option.
As Christians, aren't we called to care for the "least of" our bretheren?
I am appalled every time I see coverage of another politician decrying the reasons why we cannot have a public option, so that every person, every CHILD in this country can have basic healthcare.
I wish more Priests and Bishops would set aside politics, and realize that the answer to this healthcare debate is simple:
WHAT WOULD JESUS DO?
I think the bishops would
I think the bishops would preach about the need for health care. However, every time they speak up for justice, like the lives of 49 million babies, you NCR people accuse them of being political. So let me get this straight: preaching on something liberal Catholics like is justice; preaching something conservative Catholics like is called partisan politics and a violation of Church and State.
Thanks for this superb
Thanks for this superb homily, Bishop Gumbleton. Your pastoral leadership is needed now more than ever.
Did the bishop preach about
Did the bishop preach about President Bush's pro-life initiatives in his homilies from 2000 to 2008?
Fortunately they are archived
Fortunately they are archived here.
The search engine is quite efficient.
Which pro-life initiatives? The warmongering condemned by two Popes?
What did he ever really do on pro-life issues beside deceive a whole lot of people with lip service?
Bishop -- What a terrific
Bishop --
What a terrific homily! -- I just don't understand all the fuss about trying to help people who need help. It sure helps when people like you speak out.
Bob Kaffer
"Unless we are the church of
"Unless we are the church of the poor, we are not the church of Jesus Christ."
The Institute of Medicine tells us that 22,000 uninsured poor will die this year from lack of healthcare. As followers of Jesus, we have no choice but to change the system so that all have access to affordable quality healthcare. Thank you, Bishop Gumbleton, for reminding us of who we are. Mary Ellen
Thank God that Bishop
Thank God that Bishop Gumbleton has spoken out so eloquently and forcefully for those 46 million people without health care insurance. Where I come from the pulpits are dead silent on such issues. The fear of those who oppose a change in health care seems to be fired by a “Me First” self-centered greed. There are moments when I feel it myself. I don’t want to lose what I have. But, as Bishop Gumbleton points out, if we are to receive the Eucharist in good faith and trust in the Lord, then, by literally being one with Him, we must also pour ourselves out with Him and be Eucharist with Him.
Again, thank God for Bishop Gumbleton
Pax,
Bill
'Love one another as I have
'Love one another as I have loved you'. 'Whatever you do to the least of these my brethern you do unto me'. The standard of conduct one to another. This is our Lord speaking. Our Master and Maker. The Creator of the universe saying who we are and who we are to be. Not that any of us truly fulfil this calling. We all fall short of the image of God, of the Eurcharist. I recall a veteran of the Vietnam war standing up in a town hall meeting saying that his health care insurance meets all his needs. He is standing up for the 47 million whose does not. Urging congress to act on behalf of those in need. Its OK to spend billions on a war machine but we argue about a voluntary command to serve those in need. We are coerced into supporting war. But we argue about being coerced when it comes to serving the needs of the working poor. It makes me weep. Yes we need to protect the unborn, the helpless and the needy. But we need to protect those in need after birth as well. May the Lord have mercy upon us all.
Thank you bishop Gumbleton for reminding us who we are.
Post new comment