The Second Sunday in Lent

March 8, 2009

Homily for the Anglican Usage Mass

of the

St. Thomas More Society

celebrated at

St. Anthony of Padua Roman Catholic Church , 1013 Wood Street

Scranton, PA

Mark 9:2-10

            In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.  Amen

            I used to like reading George Will.  From his books about baseball to his columns in the newspaper, I took pleasure in often agreeing with him.  Then a few years ago he confused me by taking a position that contradicted the bedrock principals I thought we agreed on.  So I did some research.  I looked him up on the internet and found out that he does not believe in God, that he describes himself as an agnostic because he “isn’t decisive enough to be an atheist.”

            In other words, his conservatism is not principled.  It is not even logical.  As far as I can tell, the only authority he answers to is his own mind.  Thus, he has much in common with those on the left who deny any authority other than the meanderings of their own minds.  George Will is a conservative because he is a preservationist.  He desires to preserve what he has—as in conserve—and thus he is conservative.  He desires to conserve because he wants to be comfortable in the here and now, having no concern for the future comfort, or discomfort, of his eternal soul.  Therefore, he is willing to abandon conservative principles, and his fellow conservatives, if doing so means he can better conserve his temporal comfort.

            St. Peter gives us an example of this type of conservatism in today’s Gospel, and in doing so reveals the character of this flawed orientation.  So today I will talk about what happens to those who forget about the life to come and at the same time desire to keep what they have.  I call it the conservatism of preservationists.

            If we look to St. Peter—keeping in mind that this incident occurred before his conversion—we see that the first inclination of these conservatives is to keep what they have.  Jesus took Peter, James and John up on the mountain to show them the glory that was yet to be revealed.  Jesus’ transfiguration was a preview, so to speak, of the Resurrection, the rising from the dead that the disciples could not yet understand.  But Peter, forgetting about the future, mistook the preview for the feature presentation.  Thus, he suggested to Jesus that they build three booths right there on the mountain in order that they could preserve—or conserve—the fleeting moment forever.  Jesus does not even respond to this, but His leading the disciples off the mountain is His decisive rejection of Peter’s foolishness.

            Preserving the status quo as closely as possible is thus the first characteristic of this conservative who has forgotten the future.  Since they have forgotten the future, there is no impulse to improve, as they imagine the current circumstances are about as good as they are going to get.  Just as Peter did not want to come off the mountain, this type of conservative is not inclined to share his good fortune with other people either.  Peter forgot everyone at the foot of the mountain—the other disciples, his family, the world he had been called to evangelize; and so George Will conservatives do not have the welfare of their fellow men at heart either.  Their focus is to conserve, not to share.  So look for such conservatives in the future to find common cause with the population control movement as well as with radical environmentalism.

            The desire to preserve one’s temporal comforts leads these conservatives to make compromises rather than to stand up for what we thought they believed in.  St. Peter was told by Jesus that he was the rock on whom Jesus would build the Church, but when our Lord’s Passion came along, St. Peter’s preservationist tendencies got the best of him.  Rather than remembering the future and the eternal fate of his soul, Peter denied knowing Jesus, not once but three times, all in an effort to preserve his status quo.  Rather than stand up for Jesus, Peter distanced himself from the core belief as soon as faithfulness threatened to make him uncomfortable.

            And this brings me to that bizarre column of George Will’s that I read a few years back.  I thought Will believed in the sanctity of marriage.  He does not, and, in fact, is against the effort to amend our nation’s constitution to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman.  He thinks each state should decide how to define marriage, there being, evidently for him, no bedrock definition to defend.  That’s fine for him as he lives in Virginia where revisionists do not have a very strong hold.  What about the people of Massachusetts and Connecticut?  They do not warrant his sacrifice.  He will sell them out to keep what he has.  He will compromise himself and others to do what he thinks will keep the dogs at bay.

            We see there then that conservatism, if it is to be a force for good, must be committed to a greater principle than “I want to keep what I have.”  Conservatism that is true, holy and just is at its heart evangelical.  It desires to share with others the beauty of preserving the Faith once delivered to the saints—unadulterated and not compromised by errors introduced in order to accommodate the world.  Preservationist conservatism basically is defensive, as it fights to keep what others desire to take from it.  Evangelical conservatism is quite the opposite.  Those who want to share the faith are willing to risk all they have—their goods, their liberty, their lives—in order that their neighbors will have a chance to choose life, in order that their neighbors can know there is a future in heaven much brighter than the present we experience today.  No matter how beautiful we perceive it to be, this life is just a preview that we should not mistake for the feature presentation.  Our Catholic faith is the bedrock that will give others this better life; so we will not compromise it just to get along with those who have no faith.

            We know that the road to compromise leads to the forfeiture of our souls.  This is the truth St. Peter eventually figured out.  After Jesus did rise from the dead, Peter repented of his preservationist ways and became the conservative dedicated to evangelism that he was meant to be.  And after little more than thirty years of ministry, he laid down his life just as Jesus had in order to remain true to the Gospel.

            I urge you, therefore, to use this Lent to repent of the compromises you have made because for a moment you forgot about the future.  Keeping what we have in this life is not worth the price of our souls.  But giving it all away is well worth the sacrifice, if it means that more of our brothers and sisters also will come to know the joy to which we look forward.