WHEN DEATH IS BORING

Don’t worry - there will not be any spoilers beyond the obvious in this post.

So recently I viewed another extremely popular movie and was left a bit empty at the end.  I enjoyed the movie even with some of its more than obvious flaws, and people are praising it for its handling of mercy and vengeance . . . but I think . . . eh.

Here is why:  My cousin once said to me, “The worst thing you can wish on anybody is that they learn.”  That is, what a terrible thing it is to discover that your actions that you formally thought of as justifiable or even good are suddenly revealed to you to be abhorrent.  It is like waking up the next day after tying one on and realizing that you had been an absolute jerk to everyone and thoroughly embarrassed yourself.  Now you have to live with it and clean the whole mess up.

Hollywood, for the most part, does not operate that way.  What is the ultimate payback?  Death to the bad character.  The evil one goes around creating havoc and destruction and then, at the end, usually at the hand of the good guy, the evil guy is destroyed in some gloriously colorful fashion, (usually to rise again after not being thoroughly killed, only to be killed again - not unlike Saint Sebastian.)  

The mentality in this thinking is rather medieval.  There was the practice of not permitting someone who has committed a rather heinous crime the sacrament of confession.  The thought was that, not only will they be punished in this life, they will be punished for ever in the next because they were never able to confess and receive absolution.  It was thought to be the ultimate of ultimate punishments though, as you and I know, the theology has more holes in it than a window screen.

In Hollywoodland, there are two rare exceptions to this mentality.  One is a superhero villain that must live because he needs to come back for a sequel.  The other is the even rarer case of someone coming to grips with either how evil they are and find they have to change, or have to face the consequences of their actions such as in the movie The Shawshank Redemption when the antagonist that *ahem* took advantage of the main character was beaten to a pulp because of what he did and would spend the rest of his life in a wheelchair sipping his steak through a straw and knowing it was because of his own inappropriate (to say the least) actions.

So the bad guy gets blown up - lassered - shot - crushed - vivisectioned - WHATEVER - so what?  It’s just over.  There is no horror of realizing the depravity of their actions, there is no guilt, there is no consequences to be lived out, nor is there any chance of redemption (which is part of the reason we are generally opposed to the death penalty.)

I would like to propose that, except in certain cases, this “easy ending” to a movie is neither beautiful nor satisfying.  It is unimaginative and unedifying and the story teller does not give the viewer anything to use, process, or contemplate.  It points to nothing and in the end is selfish.  “We don’t have to share the world with that creep anymore.”  

WHY DO BAD THINGS HAPPEN TO GOOD PEOPLE?

Then why must bad things happen to good people?  We will never understand fully nor completely satisfactorily in this life with this is so.  But we can begin to scratch the surface.  For example, yesterday we asked the question why did God allow the 9/11 accident to occur.  One clear reason is because of that pesky blessing and burden:  Free Will.

 

But why must innocent people suffer?  Why not keep the pain amongst those who want to play with fire?  Why must I lose my house because you fool around with matches?  It is because there must be consequences to one’s actions.  If I could perform a truly evil act and nobody would effected by it, would it be evil?  If there were never any consequences, what need would there be to punish people who choose ill?

 

Part of the problem is, of course, that often when we punish we want to cause harm back to the person who did evil, not correct him.  But let us suppose we have always the best of intentions and when someone errs, we would want to help set them on the right path.  If there were no negative consequences to our actions, how would we rate someone as sinful?  God’s laws would then simply amount to a chosen set of limited actions rather than the highest, healthiest, and most fruitful fashion of living.

 

Without suffering, there could be no sacrifice – no great offering of love.  With no effects from evil actions, Jesus could not have suffered and died for us as the innocent Victim for our sins, for nothing evil could happen in this life to the innocent.  In anger I could throw my Mother’s crystal glass into the fireplace and because she is innocent and would suffer most from the incident, it would not break.  If I knew it would not break, would there be sin since nobody would suffer?  If there could not be sin, would there be the possibility that I might grow in peace?  If there were not sin would it be possible for me to reject sin and so love?  Would there be love?

 

This world is imperfect and needs the innocent Victim to die because we live in a fallen but redeemable world where the innocent suffer.  But if they did not suffer, no one could choose the good, nobody could sacrifice, nobody would need God, and we would all suffer for that even more greatly.

KNOCK, KNOCK. "WHO'S THERE REALLY?"

A priest recently said, “people do not know how to suffer.”
That was a rather provocative statement to say the least.

Suffering has been the age old question mark concerning God. Why is their suffering? Why do good people suffer? Great minds have tackled this problem with varying degrees of satisfaction. I like C. S. Lewis’, “The Problem with Pain.”

Others have said, “God’s wrath and God’s mercy are two sides of the same coin.” That is, if there is suffering God is trying to use it to bring a person closer to Himself the only way the person might listen.

But what this priest was saying is that suffering, desiring, yearning, are all finger posts pointing us to God. We want something (or want something to stop) and so we can imagine something greater – a better world – a better way of being that seems to, yet seems to not quite exist here – but does exist somewhere. What our desiring is pointing to is God and heaven.

For example, the explosion of porn and porn addiction in our country, what is that really about? Men (mostly) are yearning for something. Is that something really just images? If you ask (most) men if they feel fulfilled by porn – especially after they are finished, you will receive a very mournful and emphatic NO! But there is a deep yearning there and porn can be a quick fix; empty calories to fill the stomach so to speak. The only problem is that it fails to satisfy. Afterwards men are left feeling even emptier (which may lead them back to the porn for more consolation, which make them feel worse – and a vicious cycle has begun.)

No real man really wants porn; they want something greater – something to fill a great need inside of them. They desire love, and communion, and a sense of self worth. Marriage can help this need. It will never completely fill it but it can last us for this life. That is why we have celibates in the Church – to point us toward something even greater. Ultimately these men sho use porn and all of us want – yearn for – that greatest good where we are completely and utterly loved and accepted for who we are and Who we can love back so completely and with utmost trust. As Chesterton said, “Every man who knocks on the door of a brothel is looking for God.”

When we yearn, our eyes should turn from the thing we think we desire and realize what we want most deeply is God. Stare at the piece of chocolate cake for which you are not really hungry, and realize that you want the goodness of heaven which is far sweeter, far more comforting, and infinitely less fattening.

This is not a complete answer but gives us something to think about when we are tempted or are suffering.

FAIR NAMES TO FOUL DEEDS

In a comments section last week it was stated that a short series would begin today. With Thanksgiving tomorrow and a few other things on my plate, that will have to wait until next week. Fortunately CK, a regular guest blogger on Adam's Ale, sent an excellent post in so that I could have a little break today. Thank you CK! I hope everyone finds it as useful and well said as I did.

On November 6th, The City Club of Cleveland sponsored a talk by Barbara Coombs of the euthanasia advocacy group “Compassion and Choices”, formerly known as the Hemlock Society. In her speech Ms. Coombs claimed that her group promotes dignity and truth and religious groups, on the other hand, are in favor of dogma and guilt.

She told sad stories of patients who suffered because their end-of life wishes were ignored. But in all of her stories, the patients’ requests would have been acceptable to every major religious denomination, including the Catholic Church. None of them expressed the desire to poison themselves.

She claimed to be on the side of truth, but went on to say that poisoning yourself is not suicide, and a doctor prescribing poison is not euthanasia, it is “aid in dying”. (I recall a certain priest cleverly suggesting that if we call toxic waste “drinking water” we still should not dump it in our rivers.)

She claims that Churches and those with conservative values impose guilt and shame, but her group advocates for advanced directives that ask a patient if they want to be a “burden to their families” by extending their lives and or if they want to live lives that are “useless”. Who is causing guilt and shame here?

Contrary to what Ms. Coombs claimed, the Catholic Church does not demand that death “always be fought” (an extraordinary accusation to launch at a Church full of martyrs). In all of the examples she sites, the Church would have allowed the cessation of the extraordinary means she described. The Church even allows as much pain medication as necessary to eliminate pain, even if it shortens life, but doesn’t directly cause it. The Church only demands that you allow the patient to die of their disease or condition, not of poisoning or dehydration.

If someone in unbearable emotional pain tries to commit suicide by jumping off a bridge, we don’t stand back and say, “Well, they are exercising their autonomy.” We run to their rescue. If they poisoned themselves instead of jumping off a bridge it still would not be a “death with dignity”. The Catholic Church tries to end the pain, not the person.

It is Christian churches who have true mercy on the dying by lavishing their fellow brothers and sisters in Christ with a love that makes many patients change their minds about suicide. The Catholic Church asserts their inherent dignity, even when the patient’s life is seemingly unproductive and full of suffering, like Christ on the cross. Euthanasia is the false mercy that releases the living from their duty to care for the dying and to suffer with them, the true meaning of empathy. It is my hope that Catholics succeed in showing the world who is really on the side of truth and dignity here.

IF I AM TO BE A MARTYR, COULD IT PLEASE BE QUICK?

The little girl in Flannery O’Conner’s short story, “A Temple of the Holy Ghost” thought that “she could never be a saint, but she thought she could be a martyr if they killed her quick. She could stand and be shot but not be burned in oil.”

I suppose I think of martyrdom much the same way. It seems like an easy in (said with only mild seriousness.) Much harder I believe is living day in and day out the life of a good man or woman. Not culminated in one brilliant, shining moment of sacrifice and love, but the day in and day out living through life’s joys, difficulties, temptations, graces, grievances, injustices, illnesses, gains, losses, insights, and love. How much more challenging! How many more graces available! How many more chances to get it right or at least better!

Along with this Catholics are amoung the few who believe in redemptive suffering. That pain in this life can have great spiritual and sometimes more earthly benefits. God is so great that anything offered to Him He can change into something for the good. Julian of Norwich even points out that the honest sinner can even offer His failings to God through prayer and the sacrament of confession and He can use that sin (not committed for the this purpose) to draw him closer to Himself.

When we suffer in this life never fail to offer that suffering to God. In the midst of suffering our prayer becomes greater when we unite ourselves with the sufferings of Christ. In suffering we continue to reach out in love through prayer thus purifying our praise and adoration.

In a minor way about two weeks ago I had my wisdom teeth out. There was a certain amount of discomfort involved - nothing of great note. But the discomfort I offered to God on behalf of the community that I was sent to minister to and for my loved ones and sometimes for those with whom I have difficulty dealing.

When you are passing through difficulty and it need not be physical, offer prayer through the mist of our pain. Unite yourself with the sufferings of Christ. Remember those who need prayer. Use your pain and do not be merely used by it.

NO PAIN - NO GAIN - RO GAIN

So Father B and I were traveling about and needed to take a room somewhere in Pennsylvania. I went to work out in the hotel exercise room and when I returned B was watching a televangelist. I think a lot of these people preaching for such a long period of time week after week. It must be difficult. But five minutes into it we found ourselves saying, “Please say something of substance – please say something of substance.” It was like a long drawn out joke in which a person gives too many details before the punch line. Perhaps an hour sermon (for some – others are really quite good) say as much of substance as priests (are supposed to) do in an eight minute homily.

This particular man (and I would like to emphasize that I am talking about one preacher who was unassociated with a denomination) was going through great lengths to tell people that God wants them to be successful, rich, and happy. His prayer was that this is exactly where his congregation would find itself so that others would look at them and now that God is blessing them because of their wealth and happiness show that they must have truth.

Apparently the crucifixion was lost on him.

He is far from alone in the idea that if we are good enough, if we pray enough, if we are well practicing Christians then God will give us the high life. I would want to believe this! If I were a bit more naive and thought this message possible, I would gobble it up. Why not? What would I have to lose? Why not go with the guy who promises wealth and happiness from God?

Because it is a false promise.

There are not many non-Catholic Christians out there they see the merit in redemptive suffering. It is precisely when we suffer and remain true to God that we are refined like silver in the furnace, becoming more pure, more holy, even closer to God. Love of another human being is exactly the same. A couple that never has difficulties never truly grows in love for neither must sacrifice for the other. It is exactly when sacrifice is necessary, practiced and given freely that love, which is at first tried, becomes a deeper, more mature love.

Why do we purposefully practice acts of denial, charity, and penance in this season? Exactly to train ourselves to love and focus on God. This helps us prepare for those times when trial will hit us involuntarily. This will enable to trust God to see us through difficult times – to love Him just the same and not blame Him for our woes. It is redemptive because love will be tested and found then stronger than ever.

If you need proof, contemplate His Son’s Cross, or Job, or the Virgin Mary, or the violent life and death of those closest to Jesus such as the apostles, of Saint Paul, of the Martyrs, of the missionaries, of those who stand alone in their faith, of those persecuted for believing in Him – there is a reason they are now called saints – it was not because God made them wealthy and happy in an earthly sense – but wealthy in love and full of joy even when there were tears and trials.