Some things are important enough to repeat. Last week, Gary Pritts wrote up a flyer that was handed out at the doors about the needs of the Somali refugee family. This week I’m going to start off Communio by reiterating some key points from the flyer:

• A big need is employment for the father, Shair, who is 33 years old. He would prefer factory work. Personal introductions to employers and coaching with job interview skills are needed.
• Another important need is affordable housing. The preference is for a Lakewood double for about $500 a month with shared basement and a yard located near the Detroit or Clifton bus lines. Someone who can volunteer 8 to 16 hours a week helping in this search please step forward.
• English tutors for the spousewife, Medina, and the children, are needed. They need to commit to a significant effort over the long term.
• Bicycles with helmets are needed for the 9-year-old boy, Mohamed, and the 12-year-old girl, Fartun.
• And of course, prayers for this family as they adjust to their new life are an ongoing priority.

Kay Vine at 521-5836 is the central contact person coordinating volunteers and donations. Again, many thanks to the Pritts for opening their home to the refugee family.

The Communications Committee has long been a working group that is not big on meetings, but some of us are starting to get that itch again. John Lucic and I are talking about how to get all the Communio writers together. No date is set, but keep it in mind. If we know you, we’ll call you, and with any luck, we’ll have the chance to publicize it here with the hope of attracting some new blood.

Has anyone watched "Nothing Sacred"? The new network television show (Thursdays, 8 p.m., channel 5) about a very non-traditional priest drew a fire storm of protest before anyone even saw it —-- a common, but particularly odious practice in my book. After watching the first episode, my reaction was: not great, but not bad; not 100% accurate, but not too far off the mark. While hitting all the hot buttons, like sex, birth control and abortion, the first show did manage to express some themes about living faith in contemporary urban society that look promising. But my guess is we’re going to see a lot more about the hot buttons. My biggest question was how did this guy make it through today’s conservative seminaries? I’m very interested in printing Community members’ opinions about the show in Communio.

Thanks to all who submitted articles for this issue: Mary Englert, Joan Nuth, Jane Reilly, Syndie Eardly and John Lucic.

Note that we have an three-week break before the next Newsletter/Communio. Next issue: Oct. 19; deadline Oct. 12.

In a May 14, 1997, forum sponsored by FutureChurch, The "Dialogue Issue in the Church" was addressed by Fr. Paul J. Hritz, pastor emeritus of the Community of St. Malachi and St. Malachi Parish. Fr. Hritz now teaches at Cleveland’s St. Mary Seminary.

He described last summer’s "three remarkable initiatives" in the life of the American Catholic community:

1) San Francisco’s retired Archbishop John Quinn, in a lecture at England’s Oxford University, called for a truly collegial relationship between Rome and local bishops. Fr. Hritz described the archbishop, a one-time classmate, as having fulfilled "a leadership role for 30 years" and as "an advisor to Pope John Paul II," and "a theologically very moderate man."

2) Cardinal Joseph Bernardin called for an honest discussion of various issues of concern in today’s Church in America to reduce "the polarization that inhibits discussion and cripples leadership."

3) The "Lineamenta," or discussion outline, issued from Rome by the general secretariat of the Synod of Bishops, for a Special Assembly of the Bishops of the Americas scheduled for this coming December, in Rome.

Archbishop Quinn was especially critical of the Roman Curia, Fr. Hritz said. The Vatican bureaucracy that advises the Pope has asserted itself in recent years over both individual U.S. bishops and the National Conference of Catholic Bishops. An example was the negation of the inclusive language Bible for the Liturgy thatwhich had been approved by the U.S. bishops, even by the most conservative among them.

Said Fr. Hritz, "Some analysts say it’s not only an issue of inclusive language, but also an issue of power."

Archbishop Quinn also spoke out against the appointment of bishops being totally reserved to the pope. Until 1829, it was the policy to leave the appointment of bishops to the local church where possible. In that year, for example, only 24 of the world’s 646 Roman Catholic bishops were directly appointed by Rome.

As with the U.S. Supreme Court, Fr. Hritz said, whoever appoints the bishops sets the tone, the mentality, for years to come. One apostolic delegate saw to the appointment of very pastoral bishops, he said, "which we don’t seem to be getting now."

Archbishop Quinn said that bishops are not meant to be mere managers of dioceses, under instructions from Rome, but rather to be true witnesses of faith who teach in communion with the pope, in the name of Christ. "Vatican II," Fr. Hritz said, "looked on the church as a ‘communion of churches.’""

He said that Archbishop Quinn saw the Curia as intervening between bishops and the pope and becoming another legislative body, one controlling bishops rather than serving them and serving the pope.

Fr. Hritz described the archbishop as faithful to the papacy. "His point is simply to underline that issues of major concern —-- ordination of women and married men, priestly celibacy, divorce and remarriage —-- are not really open to a free and collegial evaluation and discussion by bishops. They are not really open to free and open discussion so that people can see what is the theological basis...so that the entire church can come to a consensus and understanding of what really pertains to the faith, and what does not."

Part of the problem is that we come out of an American mentality that differs from the European, Fr. Hritz said. The European approach tends to be that people in authority, including teachers and professors, lecture —-- and there is no discussion. Our style is that the teacher teaches, but calls for reaction, for response and critique. The European mentality is that if you raise a question, you are against the issue. This is very serious. In the American mentality, to raise a question does not mean to be in opposition...but to seek fuller understanding.

The center of Mark’s gospel follows a particular pattern: three times Jesus predicts his coming passion and death. Each time the disciples misunderstand or object, and Jesus gives an instruction on the true meaning of messiahship and discipleship (8:31-38; 9:30-50; 10:32-45). Today’s gospel is part of the instruction following the second passion prediction.

Jesus has just foretold that he will be betrayed and killed. But, Mark tells us, the disciples "did not understand what he was saying and were afraid to ask him" (Mk 9:32). Instead, they argued about "who was the greatest" among themselves. Jesus knew that some instruction was needed, and told them clearly, "Whoever wants to be first must be last of all and servant of all" (Mk 9:35). True greatness in God’s reign, necessary for all Christian leadership, means a willingness to be in the last place, a willingness to serve others. It means not being concerned about one’s status or privilege, not jockeying for power or prestige. To demonstrate his meaning, Jesus took a little child into his arms and announced: "Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me" (Mk 9:37).

Two things are implied here. First, the child is chosen not because of its innocence, but because of its lack of social status. To welcome a child is to welcome one of no account in the pecking order of rank and privilege. (Indeed, the Aramaic word "talya" means both "child" and "servant.") But Jesus is also implying something about himself, since to welcome one of little account is to welcome him. What messiahship means for Jesus is the way of suffering as a common criminal, becoming one without honor. This is to be his ultimate service.

Today’s gospel begins at this point. The first incident tells of an exorcist, not of Jesus’ following, who was casting out demons in the name of Jesus. This recalls the Old Testament story of Eldad and Medad (our first reading for today). These twomen were touched by the Spirit and prophesied even though they had not been officially designated to do so by Moses. Just as Moses’ reaction to them was tolerance of their prophetic activity, so Jesus does not condemn the unauthorized exorcist who heals in his name.

Both of these stories remind us that the power of the Spirit cannot be contained within the boundaries of any church or institution. This idea was espoused by the Second Vatican Council when it emphasized that not only the ordained, but all the baptized, since they have been anointed by God’s Spirit, are called to act and preach in the name of Jesus.

Furthermore, in today’s climate of interreligious dialogue, this passage can also be a reminder that Christians do not have a monopoly on the truth about God. It can remind us to be tolerant of, and indeed to learn from, the other religious traditions of the world. As long as "non-Christians" perform true healing works, as long as they resist evil, as long as they serve the little ones, they too can be understood to be acting in the name of Christ. God’s reign is not for those who need to be considered among the elite, but for the many. If we are not content to be counted among the many, especially among those with no worldly status, then we will have no part in God’s reign.

Yet the rest of this passage seems to be about those who do explicitly believe in Christ. Jesus promises a reward to whoever gives a cup of water to those who "bear the name of Christ," that is, to those who call themselves Christians. It is quite likely that the "little ones" who believe in Jesus mentioned in the last part of the reading refer to the disciples. In very strong words, Jesus states that those who do them harm would be better off dead or maimed.

There is a very satisfying irony, I think, in today’s gospel. On the one hand, we who would be Jesus’ disciples are reminded not to be on the lookout for power, honor and privilege. We ought not be concerned about how people regard us, about who among us is the greatest. We ought, rather, to be dedicated to the service of others, especially the most needy. On the other hand, Jesus promises a reward to those who treat us with kindness and honor. The way to true honor in Jesus’ eyes is to be content to go without it. How like Jesus himself:

who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited, but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness. Andand being found in human form, he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death —-- even death on a cross. Therefore God also highly exalted him and gave him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bend, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father (Philippians 2:6-11).

Can we apply the reflections above more specifically to the place of women in today’s church? Sometimes women who put themselves forward to use their talents —-- to teach in Jesus’ name, or preach, or aspire to ordination —-- are accused of being "power-hungry," like the apostles in today’s gospel. Their critics say they want to be among the elite, among the "priests," among the "greatest." The implication is that they would be more like Jesus if they did not aspire to priesthood. Now there may well be some women who are power-hungry; women are not completely immune, as far as I know, to the sin of pride.

But something more than this needs to be said. Why do people automatically assume that women are seeking after prestige? Why do they associate the priesthood, or any other position of leadership in the Christian community, with power and privilege? It seems to me that these women’s critics themselves betray a view of leadership in the community that is diametrically opposed to that of Jesus. Couldn’t we say that Jesus, too, aspired to priesthood, in the sense of his desire to be of compassionate service to the needy? Don’t we call him our high priest —-- one who gave himself totally to the service of all? Couldn’t it be the case that these women are simply following the lead of the Spirit in their call to service?

Finally, might not those who begrudge women such a call be themselves the power-hungry ones, reluctant to share what they perceive as their power and prestige with the unworthy "little ones"? Remember what Jesus said about those who harm such little ones, such disciples of his! Just a few questions worth pondering in light of today’s gospel!

Last week I took my children to a restaurant. My six-year-old son asked if he could say grace. As we bowed our heads he said, "God is good. God is great. Thank you for the food, and I would even thank you more if mom gets us ice cream for dessert. And Liberty and justice for all! Amen!"

Along with the laughter from the other customers nearby I heard a woman remark, "That’s what’s wrong with this country. Kids today don’t even know how to pray. Asking God for ice-cream! Why, I never!"

Hearing this, my son burst into tears and asked me, "Did I do it wrong? Is God mad at me?"

As I held him and assured him that he had done a terrific job and God was certainly not mad at him, an elderly gentleman approached the table. He winked at my son and said, "I happen to know that God thought that was a great prayer."

"Really?" my son asked.

"Cross my heart." Then in theatrical whisper he added (indicating the woman whose remark had started this whole thing), "Too bad she never asks God for ice cream. A little ice cream is good for the soul sometimes."

Naturally, I bought my kids ice cream at the end of the meal. My son stared at his for a moment and then did something I will remember the rest of my life. He picked up his sundae and without a word walked over and placed it in front of the woman. With a big smile he told her, "Here, this is for you. Ice cream is good for the soul sometimes and my soul is good already."

Of all my children he is by far my most... trying. The quickest to anger, the first one to break something, and the last one to do as he’s told. None of it matters though, cause like he said, his soul is good already!

The Community Of St. Malachi Book Club met Monday, Sept. 15 at Rosemarie and Steve DeJohn’s home in Lakewood to discuss How Good Do We Have To Be? by Rabbi Harold Kushner.

In his latest book, Rabbi Kushner (author of the popular Why Do Bad Things Happen To Good People?) focuses primarily on the subject of shame and guilt, and our need for forgiveness and acceptance.

Casey Stengel kicked off the meeting with the humorous reminder that while the Jewish people invented guilt, the Catholics perfected it., Sheand then led the group in a discussion of Rabbi Kushner’s provocative interpretation of Adam and Eve’s actions in the Garden of Eden. This along with many other insights in the book provided excellent fodder for an intense two-hour discussion at the meeting.

The group agreed to discuss the subject of prayer at the next meeting and each member was asked to bring a favorite book relating to prayer. Participants at the October meeting are also asked to bring suggestions for an ongoing reading list for the group. aAnd book assignmentsassaignments for the coming months will be decided upon at that time.

Next Meeting: Oct. 8, 7:30 p.m. at the DeJohn’s’ home, 1054 Nicholson Ave. in Lakewood; phone 228-0000.

How Good Do We Have To Be? That is the question addressed in Rabbi Harold Kushner’s book of the same title discussed recently at a book discussion group in the home of Rosemarie and Steve DeJohn. Eight St. Malachi Community members gathered together to share insights and experiences relevant to the book. We shared many ideas in the two hours we discussed the book and, as so often at St. Malachi gatherings, we found a common bond in our spiritual struggles and triumphs. Knowing there are others "out there" trying to live a spiritual life in an unspiritual world was especially helpful.

The question for each of us is: how perfect do we have to be, given that we are only human and yet created by a perfect God? It seems a troubling question but, simply put, the answer to Kushner’s title is that God expects us to be "imperfectly perfect" Or is it "perfectly imperfect"? That conundrum is a question in itself to be pondered like a Japanese koan.

Clearly, what Kushner wants us to take away from the reading of his most recent book is the awareness that while we can never achieve perfection, we don’t really need to, to be beloved in the eyes of the Creator. Kushner seems to say that our preoccupation with perfection is part of what keeps God at a distance, hindering the process of being perfected as a work of God. Even so, as we discussed the book we agreed that it also seems to be essential to our spiritual maturing to strive to be our best while at the same time we are aware that we don’t need to be perfect in order to be within God’s graces.

Just in case you are interested, our discussion ended with plans to meet again in October at the DeJohn’s’ to discuss prayer and any book you have read on the topic that has been especially useful to your own spiritual life. Titles for future book discussions will also be discussed. Any and all members are welcome!

It helps, now and then, to step back and take a long view. The kingdom is not only beyond our efforts; it is even beyond our vision. We accomplish in our lifetime only a tiny fraction of the magnificent enterprise that is God’s work. Nothing we do is complete, which is a way of saying that the kingdom always lies beyond us. No statement says all that could be said. No prayer fully expresses our faith. No confession brings perfection. No pastoral visit brings wholeness. No program accomplishes the church’s mission. No set of goals and objectives includes everything. This is what we are about. We plant the seeds that one day will grow. We water seeds already planted, knowing that they hold future promise. We lay foundations that will need further development. We provide yeast that produces far beyond our capabilities. We cannot do everything, and there is a beginning, a step along the way, an opportunity for the Lord’s grace to enter and do the rest. We may never see the end results, but that is the difference between the master builder and the worker. We are workers, not master builders; ministers, not messiahs. We are prophets of a future not our own. Amen.

CSM Council met on Sunday, September 21, 1997. Highlights are as follows:

MEMBERSHIP: Seven individuals attended the Prospective Member meeting on Sept. 14. The new Welcome Series will be held Oct. 7, 12 and 14.

COMMUNICATIONS: A revised "Policy Statement on Communications" was passed by Council. Unlike the former policy, it defines guidelines for the various communications areas, including the Newsletter, the Calendar of Opportunities, Communio, and Community News. It also establishes an editorial policy, and guidelines for copyright and inclusive language.

PRESIDENT’S REPORT: Thanks to the many people who have helped with the refugee family with rides, child care, diaper supplies, coordination of volunteers, donations and tutoring. The fund-raiser breakfast brought in more thanover $1200. During the search for housing, biases have been encountered in the area of family size and ethnic background. The July Golf Outing for the Center raised $16,300. Volunteers are needed for Malachi Mart.

PASTOR’S REPORT: On Nov. 9, the parishes of the Central West District (near West Side) will have an open house from 2-5 p.m. As our District Sesquicentennial celebration, all the area parishes will be open to visitors and tours. We need some people to be available as greeters and to answer questions. Call the rectory if you can help. "Samaritan Ministry," a free program on alcoholism and addiction, will be held on Friday afternoons 1-4:30 p.m., in October at the Center. A communal celebration of the Sacrament of the Anointing of the Sick will be on Sunday, Oct. 12, at 2 p.m. This is for all persons (and their families) who seek Christ’s healing. Upcoming benefits: Oct. 3: Parish Reverse Raffle, Casa DiBorally, $85 per couple; Nov. 7, Malachi House: Cleveland Public Library, Stokes Building (tentative site).