Twin Pillars

Solemnity of Saint Peter and Saint Paul

Today’s feast is an important one in our Church’s calendar but is not one which gets the attention it deserves because it’s not always that the twenty ninth of June falls on a Sunday. So, don’t be surprised and think this is a new celebration in view of the fact that we have a newly minted Pope. It is a feast of not only one but two Apostles of the Lord, in fact, described in Tradition and in our liturgy as the Princes of the Apostles. St Peter, whose birth name was Simon, is one of the Twelve. St Paul, though not one of the Twelve and not one of the followers of the Lord while He was still on this earth, is also regarded an apostle of the Lord by his own designation in his letters. Some mistakenly believe that Paul also underwent a name change after his conversion, but he actually had two names - Saul was his Jewish name and Paul was his Latin name, since he was a Roman citizen.

Though Saints Peter and Paul were not martyred on the same day, they lived and died as twin giants for one Church and share a feast day, befitting their friendship and their leadership. There is something wonderful in these two holy heavyweights sharing a feast, forever shouldering each other like brothers in their zeal for the Father and acting as twin pillars of the Church. One of the reasons, among many, why they were paired from the earliest centuries of the Church, is not because of their association and encounters recorded in the Acts of the Apostles and Paul’s letters, but because they served as a new paradigm for the refounding of the city of Rome, contrasted with another set of siblings - the legendary twin founders of the Eternal City who were said to have been raised by a she-wolf.

According to legend, Romulus and Remus, the former after whom the city of Rome was named, were abandoned at birth and cast into the Tiber River where they were discovered by a she-wolf who nursed them. When they grew up, the twins embarked on a quest to found their own city. Romulus and Remus disagreed about which hill to build their city on. Eventually, Romulus just started digging a ditch around the Palatine Hill and built a wall to mark the boundaries. Remus mocked his brother’s work, and in a fit of anger Romulus killed him and then buried him under the wall which Romulus erected around the city. The story is reminiscent of the first account of fratricide in the Bible; Cain killed his brother Abel. It is also ironic that Rome and her empire were founded on fratricide.

Now contrast this with the re-founding of Rome through the spread of Christianity by Saints Peter and Paul. Although both were unrelated and came from vastly different backgrounds and places of origin, they would find a common home in the city of Rome where both will be martyred. It is more than coincidence that their places of martyrdom and burial would be separated by the ancient wall which had separated the two ancient founders of Rome. St Peter would be martyred and buried within the walls while St Paul would be entombed outside the walls. Two eponymous major basilicas sit above their respective tombs.

Like Romulus and Remus, Peter and Paul too had their disagreements. If anyone had a cause for strife and division, it was these two. They had little in common. Paul was the chief persecutor of the early Christians led by Peter. Even after Paul’s conversion, there were also heightened moments of tension and disagreement between the two, especially on how Gentile converts to Christianity should be treated. In fact, Paul speaks of confronting Peter to his face for backtracking on an earlier decision to welcome these Gentile converts without condition. It took divine action to make these enemies into brothers. Peter and Paul were ultimately bound together in a bond stronger than blood: the love of Christ.

It is in this love that Peter and Paul had the foundation of their relationship. Through Christ, these two men were closer than twins in the womb. Peter and Paul are often depicted together in iconography in a circle, embracing one another in a brotherly hug with expressions of affection, like a pair of twins in the womb of their mother. This orientation is also reflected in the two Roman basilicas built over their tombs. Instead of just facing East, the direction of the rising sun from which the Lord is said to return, the two basilicas face each other across the Tiber - as if perennially yearning to be united in an eternal embrace. In contrast, images of Romulus and Remus, the mythological twins, are usually facing away from each other, as one ended up killing the other.

Peter and Paul remind us that brothers can be born from unlikely sources and that the spiritual bonds of fraternity can be stronger than blood ties. What is stronger than the blood which runs through our veins is the blood shed for us on the cross, a blood which has inspired so many Christians to give up their own life’s blood in knowing that eternal glory awaits them on the other side of the threshold of death. Peter and Paul were united in such a death as this. Early Christian tradition tells us they were imprisoned together for nine months before their martyrdoms on the same day. If the Old Rome was built on fratricide, brother killing brother, the New Rome and her Kingdom were founded on fraternal love, brothers dying for each other.

Today, the effigies of these two great Apostles stand as guardians to the entrances of the major Basilica of St Peter, as stone lions would in front of Chinese temples in the East. If the stone lions were meant to keep evil and inauspicious forces out, our two saints beckon to welcome pilgrims of the world to enter. A pillar must always have a partner, and so Peter and Paul are the twin pillars that hold up the doorway of the Church. So staunch are they that the rest of the faithful must celebrate their feast days together as one. They shared their life for the Faith, and so, to this day, they share it also in the observation of their glorious entrance into life eternal. As we celebrate the Solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul, let us look to their model of fraternal correction and mutual love as we work to spread the gospel message in our own lives.

Inspiration, Education and Freedom

Pentecost Sunday

It’s been 50 days since Easter, 49 days since the passing of Pope Francis and exactly one month since the election of a new Pope, Pope Leo XIV. Yes, I’ve been keeping count. Some can’t contain their exhilaration. Others are a little more cautious, observing a “wait-and-see” attitude. Still others remain disappointed that their preferred candidate wasn’t elected, though mostly hiding their disappointment publicly for fear of retribution or judgment. The question that was being floated before, during and even after the short conclave which elected the new pontiff has been this: what role did the Holy Spirit play in all this? Was it purely politics and human machinations or was this the result of divine intervention, the Holy Spirit at work in the Church?

It is not hard to come to such an assumption because if there is an implicit assumption that the Pope can be infallible (in whatever way that is claimed), then surely the election of the Pope must be equally infallible? It must be stated from the very beginning that we should not conflate the doctrine of infallibility with the election of the pope. The cardinals are not guaranteed infallibility. Furthermore, although secrecy is imposed on the participating cardinals under an oath that could lead to one’s excommunication, it doesn’t take much to assume that the entire conclave was conducted under a highly charged politicised atmosphere where much energy is spent on canvassing, persuading, negotiating, dissembling and organising. Is there even room for the Spirit to work?

On this feast of Pentecost, a feast that is specifically focused on the Holy Spirit, it would be good to understand how the Spirit works within the Church. Back to the question of the Holy Spirit’s role in the election of a pope, Pope Benedict XVI, while still Cardinal Ratzinger (and so cannot technically make any infallible pronouncement at this stage of his life), was asked by the Bavarian television: “Is the Holy Spirit responsible for the election of a pope?” Though not having the character of being infallible, his answer is perhaps the best answer we can have on the issue: “I would not say so, in the sense that the Holy Spirit picks out the Pope… I would say that the Spirit does not exactly take control of the affair, but rather, like a good educator, as it were, leaves us much space, much freedom, without entirely abandoning us. Thus the Spirit’s role should be understood in a much more elastic sense—not that he dictates the candidate for whom one must vote. Probably the only assurance he offers is that the thing cannot be totally ruined… There are too many contrary instances of popes the Holy Spirit obviously would not have picked!”

Then, Cardinal Ratzinger, provided us with three important points which apply to an election of a Pope, but I would also like to propose that these same principles can apply to how the Holy Spirit works within the Church in general, outside a conclave tasked with electing a pope. These three principles are control, education and elasticity.

The first principle is “control” or the lack of it. Although the word “inspiration”, used to speak of the source for both sacred Scripture and Tradition, suggests that it is the Holy Spirit who is the author and mover, He does so not in the manner of spirit possessions which the mediums of some non-Christian religions believe in. When the Holy Spirit “inspires” us, He does not take full control of our minds or wills as if we have to abdicate both and lose all consciousness or our freedom.

It is here that we need to make a clear distinction between prayer and magic and not confuse the two. It is all too easy to confuse prayer with magic. Magic is all about control – whether it is controlling our fate or our environment or even the gods. But prayer is not about control—it is the opposite. It is an act of surrender. It requires the surrender of our own will to the will of the Father. Discerning the will of God is not easy. We pray “Thy will be done” several times each day, but it never becomes easier to engage in the effort of discernment—of telling the difference between my will and Thy will.

This leads us to the second principle, which pretty much describes the mission of the Holy Spirit in today’s gospel - educator. Our Lord assures us that “the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything and remind you of all I have said to you.” The educator offers to teach, show, provide insight and wisdom. But, just as you can lead a horse to water but cannot make it drink, so the Holy Spirit offers H imself to the Church—but with preconditions. The first is that one prays. Prayer in practice is much harder than talking about it. It involves the sacrifice of time, the surrender of will, an abandonment of control, and the preferring of the slow, still, small voice. It also involves triangulation with the prayers of others.

Lastly, the answer of Cardinal Ratzinger helps us see that the relationship between the Holy Spirit and the Church is often elastic. It is not one where the Holy Spirit is the puppeteer and we are mere puppets in His hands. His direction, guidance and inspiration does not compromise our freedom. He gives us room to grow, to stretch, to discern the path that we must follow for our sanctification. We too must learn to give room to the unexpected, to spontaneity, to the Holy Spirit. Benedict’s notion of elasticity is wise and compelling. It combines the light touch of love with the firm grip of connection.

God will never let us go, never abandon us—but nor will He control us if we choose to wander. Benedict reassures us that God will not allow the Church to be utterly ruined. But He will allow us the scope to spoil it by our own wilfulness if we insist. How else do we explain the existence of some very poor popes who did great damage to the Church? As St Paul reminds us, where sin abounds, grace abounds all the more. It is the nature of God’s rescue mission that He can take the mess we make and reconfigure it into material for renewal, forgiveness and hope. That’s the “happy fault” sung by the priest during the Easter Proclamation, the Exsultet.

So, we rejoice that the Holy Spirit, the gift of our Lord to the Church, continues to inspire us, educate us and free us. The Holy Spirit will always act with Christ, from Christ, and conform Christians to Christ. It is the Holy Spirit who carries out Christ’s promise to Peter that evil would not prevail against His Church. Not that it could not spoil, corrupt, confuse or disturb. The history of the Church has been marked by many dark episodes when her shepherds and flock have given in to sin, sometimes to the most depraved kind of sin. But history shows that whenever the Church slips into corruption, God raises up saints and renews it afresh by enabling “the Church to grow young, perpetually renews it, and leads it to complete union with its Bridegroom.”

Come Holy Spirit and fill the hearts of Thy faithful and enkindle in them the fire of Thy love!

You are Peter

Twenty First Sunday in Ordinary Time Year A

If you are an avid follower of the Catholic blogosphere, you would certainly get the impression that the Catholic Church is deeply polarised and is spiralling completely out of control. There was a time when you would dismiss all negative commentaries as conspiracy theories and that there is no reason to panic. But today, you would find it hard to allay their fears and anxiety. As many of you may know, we are heading into another critical moment with speculations and anxiety building up about the outcome of the greatly touted Synod on Synodality, with rumours that women ordination, married priesthood, same sex marriages are on their way in. The entire Synodal process, though praised by marginalised voices as allowing them to air their views, seems to have rendered our bishops impotent - with one commentator claiming that the bishops have been reduced to “note-takers, not teachers; recording secretaries, not guarantors of orthodoxy; messenger boys, not apostolic leaders.”

In the middle of this storm is the figure of Pope Francis. Borrowing the cliched line in the Spider-Man movie, with great power comes great responsibility. Shouldn’t he be assuming the bulk of responsibility for this seeming mess? Many today would like to see him take a more proactive role to clean up the mess they see in the Church.

For those who fall on either side of the divide, whether you are an avid Pope Francis fan or against his policies or those who sit at the sidelines watching the ensuing mayhem and internal conflict unfold, it is good to remember that the office of the Pope, who is the visible guarantor of unity within the Church, has always been a controversial and divisive one, especially during major crises in the Church’s long history. During tumultuous periods of the Church’s history, the great schism between the East and the West, during the time of the anti-popes, and in the aftermath of the Protestant Reformation, the Pope has been at the very centre of controversy and division. Some see papal authority as an overreached while others view him as the anti-Christ. Has St Peter’s successor finally fallen on the wrong side of God’s plan of salvation?

It is good to return to what our Lord said in today’s passage. “You are Peter and on this rock I will build my Church. And the gates of the underworld can never hold out against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven: whatever you bind on earth shall be considered bound in heaven; whatever you loose on earth shall be considered loosed in heaven.” Earlier, Peter had made a definitive declaration that Jesus is the Messiah of Jewish expectation and the Son of the Living God. In return, Jesus issues His own declaration that Peter is to be the foundation of a new and messianic temple known as the Church.

The dialogue begins with our Lord asking for a public poll: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” Isn’t that often the way we define ourselves or rate personalities? Modern politicians often believe that the polls hold the truth. But are any of these polls conclusive? Just like real life, the opinion polls about the Lord are divided. There is no consensus as to the identity of Jesus, because His identity is the subject of revelation and not public opinion: “it was not flesh and blood that revealed this to you but my Father in heaven.” It is good to remember this when we wish to make an assessment about the papacy.

Our Lord then puts His own disciples on the spot and calls them to give a direct answer rather than relying on third party polls. This is a risky thing for both our Lord and His disciples. The disciples may not wish to end up offending our Lord by giving the wrong answer, and they could always hide behind the opinion of others. But St Peter makes this firm declaration of faith: “You are the Christ … the Son of the living God.” Peter did not only risk being humiliated by our Lord for giving the wrong answer but far more grievously, he risked being accused of blasphemy for calling Jesus “the Son of God.” But the response of Peter stands out amid the cacophony of conflicting opinions.

Just as Peter declares Jesus to be the “Messiah” and the “son of the Living God,” Jesus now returns the favour and declares Simon to be Peter, in Greek “Petros” or “Petra.” The title announces Peter’s unique role in God’s plan: “You are Peter and on this rock I will build my Church. And the gates of the underworld can never hold out against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven…” The Jewish expectation of the messiah was that he, like the original son of David (Solomon), would rebuild the Temple of the Lord. Rabbinical Judaism also believed that the foundation stone of the Temple capped off the shaft leading down to the netherworld. So, Peter is now given a comparable role in the living temple built by the Messiah, the Church, as the capstone or “rock” which seals off the forces of evil. Our Lord also entrusts Peter with the keys of the Kingdom. In the first reading, the possessor of the keys was the chief steward of the king; he was the senior official who held the most powerful government position in Israel under the king.

So, Peter and his successors were meant to be impregnable bulwark against the forces of evil and the gatekeeper who will ensure who gets into or is excluded, from the Kingdom. So, does our current crisis warrant that we question the words and promises of our Lord in today’s passage? Should the words of our Lord be read in a contingent way? Our answer must be a definite no and this answer is deeply rooted in our faith in Jesus Christ. Papal flaws are an opportunity to understand what the papacy really means, not to abandon it (or the Church).

What most Catholics fail to recognise is that throughout its 2000 years history, the Catholic Church has always been threatened with the risk of capsizing and many popes in the past and in present times have been subject to scrutiny and criticisms, some unfounded while others have some basis in reality. And yet, with all the odds stacked against these two institutions, both have somehow miraculously remained afloat! Saint Ambrose said: “The Church is like the moon; it may wane, but never be destroyed; it may be darkened, but it can never disappear.” When the Church is in greatest need, Christ comes to its help by miracles, or by raising up saintly men to strengthen and purify it. Yes, the Lord does not, and will not abandon His Church because the Lord always keeps His promises.

This is the meaning of the doctrine of “indefectibility”, a term which does not speak of the Church’s lack of defects but confesses that, despite all its many weaknesses and failures, Christ is faithful to His promise that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. The Church's indefectibility, therefore, means that she now is and will always remain the institution of salvation, founded by Christ.

So please, my fellow Catholics, the proper response when reading headlines about the corruption or destruction of the Church due to the mismanagement by her leaders is not panic or rage or despair. Rather, we should never cease or slack in praying for our Holy Father, the successor of St Peter, and for the unity of the episcopate, the successors of the Apostles. Let us continue to hold firm to the promise of our Lord: “You are Peter and on this rock I will build my Church. And the gates of the underworld can never hold out against it.”

Between a Key and a Rock

Twenty First Sunday in Ordinary Time Year A

A senior priest once told me that one of the most visible symbols of a parish priest’s authority and power is the number of keys which he possesses. One key to lock and unlock every door on the premises. Interestingly, I inherited a big set of keys when I came to Jesus Caritas. Some, I have absolutely no idea which door it opens. If keys make me an important person, the same could be said about St Peter. St Peter is often depicted as holding a single key or a pair of keys. One key (the gold one) symbolises his spiritual authority and the other, his temporal authority.

It should be noted that when Christ turned to St Peter and said, “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven”, He was not speaking in a vacuum. At the start of the Bible, Man is placed in a garden and given the task of guarding it. But Adam was guilty of dereliction of duty. Caught off guard, he allowed the serpent to enter the garden and deceive his wife. In failing to guard the garden a chain reaction was triggered, resulting in the Fall. Man had been entrusted as the guardian and steward of Eden. By failing in his stewardship, the keys to the garden were taken from him and given to the angels. It was now the angels’ duty to lock the garden to intruders, as they brandish a sword of fire at the doorway of Eden. And it was they who were given the privilege of delivering the Law, a role originally reserved for Man. So, here in the gospel, our Lord returns the keys to St Peter, the very keys which Adam lost.

There is another reference to keys and it is found in Chapter 22 of the Book of the Prophet Isaiah, which we just heard in the first reading. Here, it involves the story of Eliakim, who prefigures Peter, just as King David is a type of Christ. The previous steward, Shebna, just like Adam, had been removed from office for dereliction of duty. He is now to be replaced by the faithful Eliakim. The reading then provides us with a job description of the position of steward. His function was namely this: to reside “over the house” of the king (that is why he is known in Hebrew as “al-bayit”, which literally means the one in charge of the house/palace), ruling in the place of the king when the latter was absent. This sacred stewardship allowed the vicar of Judah’s king to open what others had shut and to close what had been opened. Additionally, the position of steward was an established royal office; it was to have successors.

This background is critical if we are to understand the role of St Peter. The gospel cannot be read in a vacuum. Neither can we understand the role of Peter without grasping the role of the chief steward and his keys. But the point of the story is not the keys, but Peter himself.

The naming of St Peter is a crucial part of this story. Peter’s original birth name is Simon, but our Lord gives him a new name (Peter in Greek or Cephas in Aramaic). The fact that he had his name changed by Christ is significant. A select number of individuals in the scriptures had their names changed by God, including Abraham and Jacob. These were individuals who were set apart for significant roles in redemptive history. Not only was the naming noteworthy, but the name itself was remarkable. Peter was given a name signifying an attribute almost exclusively attributed to God. “The Lord is my rock, my fortress and my deliverer; my God is my rock, in whom I take refuge, my shield and the horn of my salvation. He is my stronghold, my refuge and my Saviour (2 Samuel 22:2-3). Peter was the first human person in scriptures to bear the name. And the name itself points us to a deeper meaning of Peter’s role. It is upon “this rock” that Christ will build His Church.

In the New Testament, we see the primacy of St Peter depicted in a number of passages. In Luke chapter 12, Christ tells a parable about a group of faithful servants. At the conclusion of the story it is Peter who asks the question of whether this parable is intended for the Apostles. Christ then states, “Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his master will make ruler over his household...” Peter is the “faithful and wise steward” made ruler of Christ’s household, the Church. In the gospel of St John, during the Last Supper the disciples argued over who was the greatest amongst them. Christ redefines greatness as measured through serving. He then calls on Peter to serve his brethren by strengthening them. Christ is expecting Peter to hold things together after His departure. And finally, in Acts of the Apostles, we see Peter’s role at the Council of Jerusalem. As the discussion wore on between the two rival camps, the debate became increasingly heated. The entire ruckus came to an abrupt end when Peter rose and rendered his decision. Peter put all the parties to silence when he judiciously administered the keys, making a binding, doctrinal declaration. The storm had come, the winds had blown, but the Church remained safely moored to the chair of Peter.

At the end of the Sermon on the Mount, Christ makes the statement that the wise man will build his house on the rock. There are multiple interpretations to the text. One application is that Christ is the Wise Man as He builds His house (the Church) on the rock, Peter. Remember, it is Christ that is doing the building when He states in the same gospel, “I will build My Church”. Building His Church on Peter does not contradict having the Church built on God (the ultimate Rock), on Christ, His Word, the Apostles or even Peter’s confession. Peter’s office, teaching, authority and confession are based in Christ and therefore have the authority of Christ. To knowingly reject Peter, is to reject Christ.

When conflicts arise from within or from without, many have often speculated that this would be the end of the Church. But as Catholics, to even consider this thought would be to doubt the promise of Christ to Peter. Rather, we should be confident that the Church, built by Christ on the rock, will weather the storm. The house that falls apart or slips from its foundation proves that it was a poorly built house, of poor workmanship and therefore never built by the Divine Carpenter. Such edifices are man-made. But the Church, built by Christ on the rock of St Peter and his successors, protected by the keys of the kingdom, is one that will last the test of time and will weather the inevitable storms “and the gates of the underworld can never hold out against it.”

The Lord does not abandon His Church

Twenty First Sunday in Ordinary Time Year A

One of the weirdest movies I’ve ever watched is The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, based on the Douglas Adam’s trilogy of books. The setting of the story is simple, the planet Earth is faced with destruction by an alien race as it wants to make way for an inter-galactic super-highway. At the beginning of the movie, we are treated to a strange commentary of dolphins being the most intelligent beings on Earth. Curiously enough, the dolphins had long known of the impending demolition of Earth and had made many attempts to alert mankind to the danger.  The funny thing was that most of their communications were misinterpreted, and as a result, you see amusing attempts to punch footballs, or whistle for titbits, so they eventually gave up and left Earth by their own means - shortly before the aliens arrived. The last ever dolphin message was misinterpreted as a surprisingly sophisticated attempt to do a double backwards somersault through a hoop, whilst whistling the ‘Star-Spangled Banner’.  The simple message was, in fact, “So long and thanks for all the fish”.  In short, “It’s farewell and goodbye!”

Many Catholics who seem to have an apocalyptic bent in reading the signs of the times may feel like the dolphins. There is no doubt that we live in troubled times: times that can challenge our faith. It is wearisome to be constantly reminded of the persecution of Christians in the Middle East, terrorism, uprisings, wars and rumours of wars and so on. In recent years even the spectre of schism and new apostasy has been added to this litany of woes. The faithful are abandoning the Church in droves! The number of priestly and religious vocations are plummeting! Let us not forget the two shafts of lightning that had struck the dome of St. Peter’s Basilica just hours after the previous Pope announced his resignation. These doom-sayers have been trying to communicate their concerns about the imminent destruction of the Church to their fellow Catholics, but their feeble attempts have come across as hysterical rantings and over-exaggerations about the actual state of affairs. Thus, many are on the verge of bailing out, if they have not already done so, before the barque of St Peter, the Catholic Church capsizes.

Recently, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI paid tribute to his friend, the late Cardinal Meisner, one of the four dubia Cardinals, in a message read out at the latter’s funeral mass. “He learned to let go and to live out of a deep conviction that the Lord does not abandon His Church, even when the boat has taken on so much water as to be on the verge of capsizing.” Many had latched on to the last part of the quotation, about the Church capsizing, whilst conveniently ignoring the rest of the message. Some take it as a subtle slap-down of the present administration of the current Pope, whilst others see it as an admission that the Church is indeed in trouble, and we are all threatened with a sinking ship. What most Catholics fail to recognise is that throughout its 2000 years history, the Catholic Church has always been threatened with the risk of capsizing. And yet, with all the odds stacked against it, she has somehow miraculously remained afloat!  In paying so much attention to this last part of the message and in giving it an ominous interpretation, these commentators failed to give due attention to what I believe to be the most important statement in this message, “The Lord does not abandon His Church.”

This resonates with the promise given by our Lord to St Peter in today’s gospel, “You are Peter and on this rock I will build my Church. And the gates of the underworld can never hold out against it.” Saint Ambrose said: “The Church is like the moon; it may wane, but never be destroyed; it may be darkened, but it can never disappear.” Another great saint, Saint Anselm said that the barque of the Church may be swept by the waves, but it can never sink, because Christ is there. When the Church is in greatest need, Christ comes to its help by miracles, or by raising up saintly men to strengthen and purify it. It is the barque of Peter; when the storm threatens to sink it, the Lord awakens from His sleep, and commands the winds and waters into calm: “Peace; be still!” Yes, the Lord does not, and will not abandon His Church because the Lord always keeps His promises.

This is the meaning of the doctrine “indefectibility”, a term which does not speak of the Church’s lack of defects but confesses that, despite all its many weaknesses and failures, Christ is faithful to His promise that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. The First Vatican Council declared that the Church possesses “an unconquered stability” and that, “built on a rock, she will continue to stand until the end of time”. The Church's indefectibility, therefore, means that she now is and will always remain the institution of salvation, founded by Christ. This affirms that the Church is essentially unchangeable in her teaching, her constitution, and her liturgy. It does not exclude modifications that do not affect her substance, nor does it exclude the decay of individual local churches or even whole dioceses.

Historically, when the Church was just beginning, the Roman emperors vowed to destroy it. Nero, Domitian, Diocletian and others tried to exterminate the Church. It could have died. In the early Christian centuries and throughout history, there have been so many heresies and schisms that had threatened to destroy the unity and integrity of the Church, but they failed.  Many of these heresies and schisms still continue in different forms today. In the 16th century, the Protestant reformation seemed to have succeeded in diminishing the Church’s numbers and even sucking life out of it.  In the same century, it spread to America and Asia.  In the 18th century, the French Enlightenment and the French Revolution was aimed at destroying the Church in France. The Church survived and the French Revolution is now history, though Enlightenment ideas are still here with us. In the 20^th century, fascist, communist, socialist, secular regimes have tried to ban and destroy the Church, but in many of these countries, the Catholic faith continues to thrive in spite of the persecution and widespread restrictions.

So please, my fellow Catholics, the proper response when reading headlines about the corruption or destruction of the Church due to the mismanagement by her leaders is not panic or rage or despair, and definitely not to join the chorus of dolphins in singing, “Farewell, so long and thanks for all the fish.”  Rather, it’s a yawn, an eye-roll, and a resigned sigh and to be reminded once again of the greatness of Our Lord’s promise to St Peter. Catholics should not allow distress over the present situation, to shake their faith in Our Lord’s promise to preserve the Church from damnable error and to provide a trustworthy barque for the salvation of souls. They mustn’t succumb to the temptation to turn their frustrations, with fellow Catholics and even Church’s leaders, against the Church of Christ herself. Every Catholic should resolve to live as a saint, growing in charity of words and behaviour, keeping faith in the midst of a godless society and never letting go of the hope that looks to the return of Our Lord in all His glory to judge the living and the dead. Finally, they should never cease or slack in praying for our Holy Father, the successor of St Peter, and for the unity of the episcopate, the successors of the Apostles.

Perhaps, it’s good to remember the words of the late Cardinal Meisner in his Last Will and Testament. The words are beautiful, powerful and timely:

"Christ gave the Petrine office to the Church in order to give an orientation and support to the many people in the different times. That is my last request to you all for your salvation. Stay with our Holy Father. He is the Peter of today. Follow his guidance. Listen to his word. Peter wants nothing for himself, but everything for the Lord and for his brothers and sisters… I do not desire the grace which the Apostle John received, nor the forgiveness with which You pardoned Peter. I only desire the words which You said to the robber on the Cross: “Today you will be with me in Paradise.”"