The Accidental Catholic

Catholic Exchange ^ | July 1, 2006 | Fr. Paul Scalia

[NYer]

		During His earthly life and in His small area of the world, our Lord was what we moderns would call a celebrity. Scripture tells us that crowds came to Him from all over — crowds so great that they blocked the streets and doorways (Mk 2:2) and so demanding that He and His Apostles could not even eat (Mk 3:20).
Knowing how insistent and unruly crowds can be, we can easily imagine that people must have pushed in upon our Lord, bumping and jostling one another and Him. Some surely came for reasons of faith of devotion. But human nature being what it is, others probably came only to see the local celebrity, to marvel at His miracles or just to follow the crowd. So when on one occasion our Lord in the midst of a crowd asks, “Who has touched my clothes?” His disciples reasonably respond, “You see how the crowd is pressing upon you, and yet you ask, ‘Who touched me?’” (Mk 5:30-31). With all the people pushing, elbowing and shoving, it could have been anyone. Yet our Lord asks the question for a reason. Most people in the crowd touched Him and His clothes because they could not help it — that’s the way crowds are. They bumped up against him accidentally, or perhaps touched Him just out of curiosity. But someone in the crowd touched Him for a different reason: the woman “afflicted with hemorrhages for twelve years” (Mk 5:25), who thought, “If I but touch His clothes, I shall be cured” (Mk 5:28). She “came up behind Him in the crowd and touched His cloak” (Mk 5:27). Unlike the rest of the crowd, she touched Him not accidentally, in the jostling of people, but deliberately, in faith. We do well to keep in mind the distinction between the crowd and the woman — between accidentally bumping into our Lord and deliberately touching Him in faith. It is the difference between knowing about our Lord and knowing Him personally; between proximity to Christ and intimacy with Him; between going through the motions and striving for holiness. And either one is possible for us. Just as then there were some who accidentally brushed up against our Lord in all the commotion, so today there is the “Accidental Catholic.” He might know all about our Lord, about His life and miracles. He might be familiar with the Mass and Catholic devotions — the prayers, responses, hymns, gestures, etc. But he never deliberately invests himself in them. He recites the Creed and goes to Communion, but without reflection or thought — simply because the rest of the crowd does and because it happens every Sunday. He only bumps into our Lord. They happen to be in the same place at the same time. He confuses proximity to our Lord for intimacy with Him, and Catholic “things” for Catholic faith. Each of us — and especially we “cradle Catholics” — is in danger of becoming an “Accidental Catholic.” We should examine ourselves often on this point, asking whether we are in fact reaching out to Christ or just running into Him. The solution, of course, is not to stop this contact with the Lord — to end our prayers, devotions, Communions, etc. Rather, it is to do and make them deliberately, as acts of faith. Outwardly, the woman with hemorrhages may have touched our Lord in much the same way as anyone else. The difference was that, unlike the crowd, she invested herself in that action. She placed all her hope, her entire future — indeed, her very self — in that one touch. So also our practice of the Faith, although routine, should never be rote. Every prayer we utter, every sign of the Cross we make, every Communion we receive, should be as a hand reaching out to Christ — seeking the power that goes out from Him (cf. Mk 5:30).

[annalex]

I see her as someone who really did have a physical malady.

I agree that all the episodes of Christ healing reflect medical realities, but I am certain that they also reflect the spiritual realities, because Christ came to heal souls, and healing of bodies came as an accessory to that. To the ancient mind the distinction was non-existent: body was soul and disease was sin. So, Christ here does not merely teach us "what to do when we are hurting", He is teaching us what to do to be saved.

If you mean what I would call sanctification, then I am with you. But in the context of the woman, you appear to be saying that she did not have "true" (formed) faith until she did the "work" of touching Jesus' garment. If so, then works are necessary before initial salvational status?

In this episode obviously she had faith (v28) before touching the garment. But healing did not happen till she actually touched it. This shows that faith and works are like the two legs of a walker, one forwards the other.

In infant Baptism, my understanding is that the benefits of the work by the parents are accorded to the child and he is initially saved. But is the actual credit for doing the "work" also accorded to the child? I could see someone (parent) giving away the benefits of his own work, but I don't see how one (baby) could take credit for the work of another.

We certainly can do work that spiritually benefits the other, that is the Catholic belief. For example, St. Paul, while considering himself spiritually secure ("I have finished the race") ocnsidered his suffering beneficial for the Church, and he did mean fellow believers by that:

all the creation that is under heaven, whereof I Paul am made a minister. 24 Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in my flesh, for his body, which is the church: 25 Whereof I am made a minister according to the dispensation of God, which is given me towards you (Col. 23-25)

The paradigm of that is, of course, Jesus himself, Who did not need any of the benefit His work on the Cross provided us.

[annalex]

If you haven't already posted it, I'll bet folks on the other thread would also be interested in reading this. Heck, it could even be its own thread. :)

It actually was posted, I remember participating in it.

[annalex]

what caused the woman to seek out Christ? For me, as a Reformer, the truly important matter is not that I chose (sought after) Christ, but that He chose me first

Exactly so. What caused the woman to seek out Christ? Why, Christ did, -- He crossed the sea another time to meet them.

The realization that Christ chooses before we do is important as we reflect about infant baptism, where Christ meets the infant before the infant meets Christ.

[Forest Keeper]

Thank you for your very kind words. And please don't apologize about the theology, I meant it as no criticism at all. :) I apologize if I gave that impression. I was very impressed and appreciative of your openness, so I was just trying to respect the spirit of your post. May God bless you and your family. (You too, Jerry :)

[Forest Keeper]

So, Christ here does not merely teach us "what to do when we are hurting", He is teaching us what to do to be saved.

I'm not sure I can buy it in this particular case, but you make a valid argument. I agree with what you said earlier in that disease was commonly associated with guilt or sin at the time. This was especially true of leprosy. But now we know "better", and do not make that sort of connection automatically (although I would never throw out the possibility on a case by case basis). So, if you are with me so far, and knowing what you know now, how would you reconcile that with the ancient belief? IOW, do you think that the woman was riddled with sin and thus stricken for years and years because that would have been a common conclusion made by others at the time, or do you think she really was stricken because of sin, independently of what other people thought at the time? If you say she was stricken, do you think that many sicknesses or maladies today are the result of sin?

In this episode obviously she had faith (v28) before touching the garment. But healing did not happen till she actually touched it.

OK, this goes to what our views of "healing" are, and more importantly, what "faith" is, as the article you showed me pointed out.

We certainly can do work that spiritually benefits the other, that is the Catholic belief.

I'm not sure I understand your point here. Every time my pastor does the work of preparing and delivering his sermon, I benefit spiritually from it. In your Paul example, he suffered and was ultimately martyred. That was of great spiritual benefit to the Church because it both inspired and focused people towards Christ. "What is this mystery that Paul gave his life for?" I don't understand how this compares with infant Baptism because in your example, the benefits were that people LEARNED something. Obviously babies can't do that.

What you say about Jesus is true, but the benefits of His sacrifice were much more significantly supernatural. Do you mean that the benefits of Paul's sacrifice were partially supernatural? Anyone else's?

[annalex]

do you think that many sicknesses or maladies today are the result of sin?

Not at all, I think they very often are opportunities to turn to God and so vehicles of grace. "God loved me so much, He gae me cancer" is a very valid turn of thought.

in your example, the benefits were that people LEARNED something. Obviously babies can't do that.

We learned nothing from Paul's "thorn". If anything, it probably prevented him to teach more (for example, he depended on secretaries to write). So, while learning from others' work is one example, it is not the only scenario. There is also a supernatural benefit that we derive from the Christian martyrs, for example, even if we are unaware of them. Likewise, a baby benefits from the prayers of the Church, because they direct the gaze of Christ toward the baby, if I may wax poetic for a minute.

Jairus's daughter did not know Jairus interceded for her.

[Forest Keeper]

Not at all, I think they very often are opportunities to turn to God and so vehicles of grace. "God loved me so much, He gave me cancer" is a very valid turn of thought.

I agree. I just hope I don't have to prove it. :)

We learned nothing from Paul's "thorn".

Well, I learned through a very concrete example that His grace is sufficient for me, and that I have no right to blame God for when I'm hurting. I've actually thought of that passage when I was tempted to sin in my mind by feeling sorry for myself, etc.

Jairus's daughter did not know Jairus interceded for her.

And I accept the daughter's excuse. See what a nice guy I am? :) I do agree that people benefit from the prayers of others. I pray for missionaries I will never meet all the time and I hope it does some good for them. So, I think I see better what you are saying.