predication.net

Today, there is an opinion that the Catholic Church is incompatible with the modern state. The contemporary state professes a doctrine of sovereignty that cannot be reconciled with the Catholic Church’s claims, and this inevitably results in conflict. It can be spread over three objections:

1. The Catholic Church claims the universal right to judge in matters of faith and morality, and this means—theoretically and practically—the right to destroy by any means all subjects who disagree with it (heretics, schismatics, and others). For the secular state, even the presence of the Catholic community is a mortal danger.

2. Catholics’ reason is subordinated to the general authority of the Church and especially to papal authority, which is incompatible with the concept of citizenship in the modern state—it is based on the belief that all issues are decided individually by each citizen, in complete freedom from any authority, and the free decision of the majority commits the minority to obedience.

3. The universal claims of the Catholic Church conflict with the claims of the modern lay and absolute state. The term „laic“ means that the state must not adopt or support any particular transcendental philosophy. The term „absolute“ means that the modern civil state, like the ancient pagan state (which is getting closer and closer), does not allow the distribution of its sovereignty. It requires its citizens to commit themselves to obedience exclusively to the state and no other power.

The modern state differs from the medieval one in that it claims complete independence from any authority other than its own, while the medieval state considered itself only part of Christianitas and felt bound by general moral laws and the order of the Christian world. Modern state absolutism began in the 16th century with the belief of Protestant princes that their power was independent of the Church and its doctrine. Thus arose the doctrine of „divine law kráľov“ and its heir is today’s modern state – whether monarchist, republican, or other – when it claims the complete allegiance of its citizens.

The fear that the Catholic community in a non-Catholic society will use all available means to destroy the non-Catholic elements in it and force it into Catholic discipline is unfounded. The Catholic community will not do so – and not out of fear, but out of its principles. These principles define Catholic doctrine as accurate and sound, thereby implicitly labeling anti-Catholic doctrine as false and evil. A Catholic considers heretical and pagan morals harmful and believes that society should get rid of them. However, a Catholic must not strive for their destruction other than by free conversion. Catholic society has the right to defend itself against internal subversion, promote Catholic education and culture, and preserve Christian civilization’s unity. However, it does not have the right to violently attack a non-Catholic society that has been established somewhere for a long time, because it also has its rights (e.g., the right of the family to raise a child), the violation of which would be unfair.

Catholics will always—so they should—strive to convert the society in which they live. Sometimes, as in the case of the Roman Empire, they succeed, and other times, as in the case of Japan, they fail. But the effort to convert must not be violent. The Catholic State has the right to defend itself against attempts to destroy itself. However, the Catholic minority in a non-Catholic state does not have the right to speak out violently against it.

All claims of „catholic danger“ are based on misconceptions about Catholic claims and their application. Although the Catholic Church claims to be the only authority in matters of faith and morality, it exercises this authority differently than its opponents say. The Catholic faith does not allow forcible conversion because it understands that moral action must be free. If there have been violent conversions somewhere in history, it was wrong. Furthermore, it is rightly pointed out that an individual Catholic accepts the judgment of the Church and, in some instances, the judgment of the Pope as superior to his own. However, the general idea of non-Catholics how it goes is wrong. The fault lies in the notion that the Catholic attitude is irrational and unreasonable, while the attitude of a non-Christian is reasonable. It doesn’t work that way.

All people accept some authority. The difference lies in the type of authority they accept. A Catholic has come to believe – or obtained it through education – that Divine Revelation once occurred. He will discover and recognize the unique action of God on this earth. He discovers and recognizes the voice of the Catholic Church and an elaborate doctrinal system that is internally consistent and correct. The incarnation of the Deity in man Jesus Christ, the immortality of the human soul, its responsibility towards the Creator for good and bad deeds, its subsequent fate after death, the sacraments, the teaching about the Eucharist – it forms a continuous whole, which is the only consistent guide to the exemplary life, and a proper set of statements about the nature of essential things. To be Catholic is to accept this guidance, this set of claims. To doubt or deny it is to reject Catholicism.

This attitude is adopted under the sharp light of reason. It is not true, as people ignorant of history believe, that these truths were accepted without vetting in barbaric and pre-critical times. That logical argumentation is a modern invention. From the first apologetics in the 2nd century to today, during the Dark Ages, and when society reached a high intellectual level, Catholics universally and continuously invoked reason. Even today, Catholics are the only organized group that consistently invokes reason and the laws of thought and does not accept the a priori ideas of materialistic scientists and the confused views of emotional and fantastic philosophical systems. A Catholic acts based on reason when he recognizes the Church’s goodness, holiness, and authoritative divine character, just as a person acts based on reason when he acknowledges an individual voice or face. Once he has recognized such authority, his reason necessarily requires submission to the decisions of the Church. With his reason and experience, one can know that the Catholic Church is the only divine authority on earth. However, he cannot come to the certainty with his mind that a disturbed human nature can achieve eternal bliss without help. Reason can only accept it indirectly, based on authority.

A Catholic bases his faith on reason, and this faith, once accepted, prevents him from playing the role prescribed to the ideal citizen of a modern state. A Catholic will not subject all things to separate and individual private judgment, nor will he necessarily and always consider it a moral duty to obey laws passed through the majority voting process. In many questions –, for example, in the question of the indissolubility of marriage, – will accept established learning and prefer it to any possible conclusion arising from one’s own limited experience, judgment and ability. If the majority were to pass a law forcing him to act against Catholic morality, he would refuse to obey it.

About the principles of the secular state

The secular state is built on the principle of political atheism. Society consists of two elements, the ruling, which represents power and authority, and the ruled, or subject, whom the ruler rules to achieve the common good. In this regard, the ruling element, whether it is the king, the prince, the president, the government, the parliament in establishing laws, in enforcing them, or in the exercise of judicial power, can act so that, as if God does not exist and disregard God’s laws, natural or positive?

The political atheist will answer the question positively. It is not difficult to find the delusional principles from which he derived them, because they were already enumerated and condemned in the Syllabus of the errors of Pius IX. Depending on whether God’s existence is rejected, confused with nature or the world, or whether God’s existence is recognized, but His providence (God’s management of the world) rejected – God is in any case excluded from the world and „any divine intervention against people and the world is denied“.

From this, the logic of the political atheist is as follows: Human reason is the only arbiter of truth and error, good and evil. The innate faculties of human reason acquire all religious truths. Reason is the highest law by which man can and must come to the knowledge of all truths and can ensure good for people and nations with his natural abilities. The rules of morality and other human laws do not need authority to come from God. Philosophical and moral knowledge and civil laws can and should be exempted from God’s and the church’s authority. The State, the originator and source of all rights, has unlimited authority. Authority is nothing but the sum of material power. All these delusions are interconnected: by denying God’s existence, man comes to materialism and the tyranny of the stronger. This is both a principle and a consequence of political atheism.

Political atheism dismantles society itself. The last goal of society is the improvement of citizens who cannot achieve it alone, but achieve it through society. This perfection consists mainly in knowing the duties that belong to everyone and in learning the virtues that are necessary to fulfill these duties. The basis of all responsibilities is religious duties. Therefore, citizens should know how better to meet their religious obligations in and through society. Political atheism either rejects or does not care about things that belong to religion. Therefore, political atheism contradicts the most fundamental goal of human culture.

Elements of society are the government and the subjects. The government rules and subjects obey it according to the law. According to the secularist hypothesis of political atheism, state power rests on no moral foundations, only on the stronger one. But state power is not only the sum of material forces; it is something essential moral, because it considers its right to rule over society to be just, whether based on inheritance, military power, chance, by the consent of the people, etc. Therefore, it does not come from individual reason, which by itself has no authority to rule over others, nor does it come from an impersonal source that is abstract and fantastic. Still, it comes directly from God and is a share and participation in God’s power. Therefore, political power cannot be understood atheistically, because it would negate itself with this act.

Civil laws are immoral unless they express or clarify natural law; however, natural law is nothing more than participation in the eternal law from which it takes authority. Therefore, political atheism is a rejection of authority as such. It is a rejection of human legislation, because according to the atheistic hypothesis, it has no power to morally bind it. Power, as long as they move away from God, depends on nothing but themselves. Thus appeared the so-called. The Divine State, which in its essence is nothing more than the will of the monarch, only helps a more vigorous monarch. In political atheism (secular state), human society is not governed by moral authority, but only by the will to rule, just as it is among wild animals.

They are two completely different worlds. We enter the one, thanks to the grace of Baptism, in prayer and adoration, allowing us to live more deeply and receive what we receive at each Mass in Holy Communion. The other is the one in which we have lived and to which we keep returning, at least outwardly, and which is the world. We are still in the world, though we should no longer be of the world. The two worlds are quite different, quite opposite! We used to think that sin was only when we did some evil deed. Then we came to understand that it is something more profound than that, and that deeds are only a manifestation of the state of sin in our inner heart. And finally, we began to understand that sin is in its essence a world opposite to that of God, a personality opposite to that of the sons of God, attitudes, relationships, thinking, and inclinations opposite to those that rule in the Kingdom of God. It is a matter of being flesh in the world, but not being drawn into the world with the heart, of remaining in Heaven with the heart as we enter it in the Eucharist, interior prayer, and adoration. For it happens to us that when prayer and devotion are over, and we return to the world, our heart and thinking also adjust to the world out of old habit. And that isn’t good! That first one, God’s world, is real. The other one is just an illusion. “Let us therefore not sleep as others do, but let us watch and be sober” (1Sol 5:6). Silence of heart and wakefulness in the sense of being awake, not just some kind of “beware,” are tools and aids to staying in reality and not sinking back into the mists and waves of the world. To stay awake. Awake. Preserving, keeping everything in its place. And to be in your place too, yourself, at Christ, on Christ, in Christ, with Christ, from Christ. He is the Anchor. He is the foundation, the Rock. Or else, to remain holy by that first holiness, that is, separated from the world and “rooted and grounded in it, established in the faith” (Col 2:7). Indeed, the decision to separate from the world and to remain separate from it is fundamental. That is why, as Christians, we are called “saints” in Scripture, separated from and belonging already to God and His world. “You were bought with a price. Do not become slaves of men” (1 Cor 7:23). Abide fully and completely and openly and publicly and without question (much less any sense of shame) in God’s world, in God’s son ship. To think, perceive, live, act, speak according to him – to the world strangely, even despite. This is the prize.

Feast day: 7 April

* April 30, 1651 Reims (Reims), France

† April 7, 1719 St-Yon, Rouen, France

Meaning of the name John: God is gracious (Hebrew)

(Saint John the Baptist) Patron saint of teachers

Pierre Léger: St. John de la Salle

St. John Baptist de la Salle was born in Reims on April 30, 1651, into a prominent noble family. His parents cared greatly to give all ten children a good religious education. John was the eldest. Three brothers became priests, and one sister entered a convent. At the age of eleven, John – according to the custom of the time – received the tonsure and thus became a cleric. Not quite sixteen, he became a canon of Remes Cathedral, an essential and lucrative position. But this did not spoil John. He was not seduced to a life of ease and comfort. He continued his studies. In 1669, he became a doctor of philosophy. In 1670, he entered the seminary of St. Sulpice in Paris. In 1672, both his parents died. John became the head of the family. He returned home from the seminary and cared for his younger siblings. He wondered if he was called to become a priest in this situation. His relatives tried to talk him out of the priesthood. He hesitated. He undertook eight days of spiritual exercises. At these retreats, he became convinced that God was calling him to the priesthood. After that, he never wavered and continued on the path he had set out. He began to mortify himself, fasting and shortening his sleep. He continued his studies in Reims. Furthermore, he was ordained a priest on White Saturday in 1678.

In those days, there was a shortage of good and free schools. Europe was devastated by the wars that raged in the 16th and 17th centuries. Monasteries, schools, and parishes were destroyed. Many children and young people did not receive even a basic education, they were abandoned, on the streets. John observed this with sorrow. He decided to establish schools for them. In the town of Rouen lived a particular relative of his, a wealthy Mrs. Maillefer, who led a worldly life. After a while, however, she turned around and began to support a girls’ school founded and run by Canon Nicholas Roland. Mrs. Maillefer, however, wanted the boys to have the opportunity for education.

John received her recommendation and support to establish a free school for boys in Reims. After overcoming the difficulties, this was achieved. With the help of others, John founded the school, financed by the money he had as a canon or left over from his inheritance. All the time, however, he was thinking about what to do to make the school work even better, so that the teachers would not only teach out of duty but also witness the spiritual life. Finally, he decided. In 1683, he gave up his canonical place and the income that came from it. A year later, he also gave up his inheritance. He remained living in poverty and solely on alms, despite being discouraged from doing so by both priests and the archbishop. John, however, spoke: “How can I recommend poverty if I myself will not be poor?” Soon, several young men joined him and began to teach and educate the boys free of charge. But it was still only a secular association. After much prayer and reflection, John wrote spiritual rules so that a spiritual community could be formed. He decided that all those belonging to the religious order would not be priests, but brothers. It was logical that the superiors would also be brothers only. He therefore excluded himself from the superior position of the religious order. It was only at the insistence of his brothers that he assumed the leadership of the new society.

Thus, the Order of the Brothers of the Christian Schools, popularly “school brothers”, came into being. Their main aim was to fight against ignorance. Many parish priests, especially rural ones, begged John to send them school brothers who were willing to teach children for free. Because of this, John set up the first teachers’ seminary in Reims in 1685, where future rural teachers were educated. A year later, he opened a similar seminary in Paris. In both, teaching was free. There were usually about thirty pupils, who then dispersed to the villages and taught there. John himself had patronage over these institutes.

At the same time, John led a strict life. He fasted, spent much time in prayer, scourged himself, and wore a penitential girdle under his priestly vestments. At the same time, however, he was joyful, without drawing attention to his virtues. He wanted to do everything for the honor and glory of God. His schools spread elsewhere. He also founded the first industrial school in Europe, despite the slanders and persecutions he suffered for his activities. Pupils there were taught surveying, building, drawing, and bookkeeping. This was opposed mainly by secular teachers, who feared losing their jobs. In Paris, the parliament even forbade John from teaching. He was only allowed to teach those whose poverty was undeniable. By the end of the seventeenth century, the School Brothers had sixteen schools with over one thousand five hundred children.

When John saw that the order was sufficiently established, he asked the brothers to elect a new superior general. After much hemming and hawing, the brothers agreed. In 1717, they elected Francis Barthélemy to the post. John settled in Rouen, where he lived in prayer and modesty. He did not cease to help the poor. In the meantime, his health was deteriorating. Before Easter in 1719, he received the anointing of the sick. He died on Good Friday morning, April 7, 1719, at Saint-Yon near Rouen. He was declared a saint in 1900 by Pope Leo XIII.

St. John de la Salle gained enormous merit in schools and education. He is the founder of the vernacular school; he was the first to make the national language the basis of instruction (instead of the former Latin), the first to found an industrial school, and the first to found an institute for teachers. He made schools accessible to a wide range of people. His order continues this activity to this day. John also wrote several writings, such as Instructions for the Administration of Schools, On the Duties of the Brethren, The Duties of a Christian, Meditations, and others.

I was talking to a businessman once. Meanwhile, it came up how he must take all the chances to compete. He is consumed with the thought of the deadlines he is facing today. At breakfast, he looks at a few newspapers drinks coffee ´, in the car on the phone with the clerk, in the office he looks over the most critical files, rushes to a meeting with the heads of departments, negotiates with representatives of other firms, hears complaints, talks with architects, studies signs contracts. Every day, the same merry-go-round. No thought of God, no prayer. Late in the evening, he comes home full of plans and worries. He lies down to a restless sleep, and in the morning, the same thing awaits him.

No matter how great a piety he may have inherited, such a busy life will alienate him from God. And it is understandable. A man who thinks, talks, plans, decides, enjoys, gets angry, rejoices all day without looking at God, without considering God, will be guided in his decision-making solely by the vision of success, gain of benefit, desire for wealth, and so on. God, Jesus, the Church – these will slowly cease to interest them, and after years, if such people are honest, they will lose not only contact but also interest in God and spiritual life. How is it with us? We don’t get carried away by our smaller or bigger worries so perfectly that God has no more place in our lives. In short, we allow ourselves to be so overwhelmed by work, by various interests, that we alienate God. The solution is easy, but challenging to implement. Change the way we live. And that’s not easy.

Isidorus, ep. Hispalien. et doctor Eccl.

BIOGRAPHY

It comes from Seville, Spain. After his father’s death, he was raised by his brother Leander. After an initial distaste for learning, he achieved his goal by his decision and perseverance to become a teacher of the Middle Ages. He was Bishop of Seville, wrote many writings, convened and directed several councils where numerous affairs were wisely arranged. He is said to have meditated daily on the Passion of the Savior. Furthermore, he was holy in wisdom, love, humility, patient bearing of suffering, and repentance.

BIOGRAPHY FOR MEDITATION

What can endurance do?

He was born around 560 near Seville, perhaps in New Carthage, Spain, into an important family that gave the Church several saints. They were his two older brothers, Leander and Fulgent, and his sister Florentina. Both of his parents died in his childhood, and Leander, who was 20 years older, took over the care of his family and Isidore’s upbringing.

Isidore’s youth is said to have been impatient and fickle, until one day, he came to a well with stone timbers during his truancy. He sat down and inadvertently noticed the deep notches on the shaft and the numerous timber pits. After a while, when a woman came to get the water, he asked her how the notches in the hardwood and the holes in the stone were made. He learned from her what persistence can do! Drops falling on a single spot on the hard stone excavate the pit, and the wood is scourged by winding the rope daily. Isidore realized that he could attain education and wisdom if he studied persistently with God’s help. From that moment on, under the guidance of his brother, he quickly acquired knowledge until he also became a teacher in the Middle Ages.

He learned Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. He has acquired an eloquence that is still admirable in his writings today. Furthermore, he improved not only his thinking, but also his heart with Christian virtues. He had an example in Leandra. After his studies, he was ordained a priest, confirmed Spanish Catholics in the faith, and focused on the conversion of Arians. King Leovigild of the Visigoths pursued the clergy at the time, reportedly imprisoning some bishops and expelling Leandro from his realm. Isidore is said to have influenced his heart by releasing the imprisoned and calling Leandro back. Isidore then entered the monastery for a time. When Bishop Leander died in about 596, the new king, reared with the clergy and people, elected his brother Isidore as successor. Pope Gregory the Great sent him archiepiscopal insignia.

Priests’ ascetic and general professional education and the observance of church discipline were very close to Isidore’s heart. With this focus, he also performed at many provincial and national synods in Seville and Toledo. He acted very wisely and wrote many writings. In the third part, Sententiae (Ideas), he stated his ideas about the right bishop: The program of his profession should begin with himself, self-denial, humiliation, and exemplary life. He is to interpret the truths of the Christian faith to his believers and take care of them as a good shepherd or doctor.

Isidore’s work De officiis ecclesiasticis (About Church Services) was an excellent guide to the liturgy. File Chronica maiora it is a kind of world chronicle. De viris illustrious (About famous men) refers to church history. The two books are synonyms; they are ascetic writings, encouraging the sinful and the suffering. He wrote more writings than are mentioned here. His main theological work is three books of sentences: Sententiarum libri tres. In the first, he deals with the doctrine of God, and in the other two, fundamental questions of morality. Isidore’s most significant work is a 20-volume encyclopedia called Etymologiarum libri XX seu Origines (Inception). It is a comprehensive collection of information from various areas of life and science, similar to today’s databases. Inspired by the data and recommendations of the Pontifical Council for the Media, Spanish computer scientists from the Internet Observation Service in Barcelona recognized St. Isidore as the patron of the Internet and computer users. Pope John Paul II also confirmed the patronage during one pilgrimage to Spain. And the cult of St. Isidora, as the patron saint of the Internet, is popularized especially in Poland. Despite all the reservations, critics of Isidore’s works agree that he was a highly prolific man of letters with great merit in saving ancient cultural values.

Even in his literary activity, Isidore lived a high degree of virtue, cultivated charity, worked tirelessly in God’s service, was exemplary, and died with deep piety.

Before dying, he gave everything away and performed public penance according to the Visigothic ceremony. On Easter Monday, March 31, he was brought to the church of St. Vincent accompanied by subordinate bishops, in the presence of other clergy and people. He received penitential robes from one of the bishops, had his head sprinkled with ashes from the other, and publicly confessed his lapses. He deeply regretted them and asked those present for forgiveness and prayers. After receiving the Eucharist, he said goodbye to the bystanders with a kiss of peace, allowed himself to be transferred back to his cell, and died four days later.

Clement VIII is said to have declared him a saint in about 1598. In 1722, Pope Innocent XIII appointed him a teacher of the church.

I will determine what I will do for my more remarkable persistence in good and start right away.

God, You called Saint Isidore to educate Your church with Your teachings; hear our pleas and, through his intercession, help her grow in the knowledge of Your truth. Through Your Son Jesus Christ, our Lord, He lives and reigns with You in the unity of the Holy Spirit throughout all ages.

Scripture testifies that I should give thanks above all to God the Father through and in the name of the Lord Jesus: „But let it be Thank God through Jesus Christ, our Lord!“ (Rom 7.25); „And everything, whatever you say or do, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus and through him give thanks to God the Father.“ (Kol 3,17); „Staturally give thanks for everything to God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.“ (Ef 5,20)

Naturally, if we are truly grateful to God, we will not be ungrateful even to angels, saints, people, and his entire creation; on the contrary.

How to give thanks to God?

Just as we can sin with thoughts, words, and deeds, we can also give thanks through the same channels:

1. Thoughts – because „mouth speaks from the fullness of the heart“ (Mt 12,33)

2. In words – using the mind (1Cor 14,15) and using the spirit – giving thanks with the gift of languages (1Cor 14,16;17), singing (Ps 28,7), praising…

3. By deeds – fulfilling God’s will not only out of obedience, but also out of gratitude, for what the Lord has done for us, fulfilling the promises given to God, laying down life for the gospel (Ps 116,12–15). Bonus example – by turning your eyes to the Lord – Jehoshaphat 2 King 20.12 plus context

What to give thanks for?

If someone can’t think of something to give thanks for, then we will imagine some tips from God’s word: for salvation – (Kol 1.12; Ps 118,19); for an ineffable gift of God’s grace – (2Cor 9.15) ( suffer for Christ is grace – Flp 1.29); for abundance of grace – (2Kor 4,15); for healing – (Lk 17,16); for all people – (1Tim 2,1–2); for food – (1Tim 4,3–5; 1Kor 10,30); eating and not eating – (Rom 14.6); for service of the apostles (ted and for bishops and priests) – (2Cor 1.11; 2Cor 9.12); for hearing prayer – (Ps 118,21); for everything – (1Sol 5.18, Ef 5.20).

Of course, there are many more subjects. Whoever cultivates gratitude in his heart will find the most diverse reasons for giving thanks. Unfortunately, it also works in the opposite direction with an attitude of ingratitude.

Why did the Apostles give thanks?

We also find a beautiful pattern in the first ambassadors of the Lord Jesus and the pillars of the Church – in the Apostles. And why did they give thanks? This is what the Apostle of Nations Saint Paul shows us in his letters: for victory in Christ – (1Kor 15.57; 2Kor 2.14); for conversion – (Rim 6,17); for salvation – (2Sol 2,13); for accepting God’s word – (1Sol 2,13); for God’s grace – (1Kor 1.4; 1Tim 1.12); for the faith of believers in the Lord Jesus – (Rom 1.8; Ef 1.15–16; Kol 1.3–4; 1 Sol 1.2–3; 2Sol 1.3); for the love of believers among themselves – (Ef 1.15–16; Kol 1.3–4; 1Sol 1.2–3; 2Sol 1.3); for the hope of believers – (1Sol 1,2–3); for the participation of believers in the Gospel – (Flp 1,3; 5); for fellow servants – (2Tim 1.3; Flm 1.4); for the care of servants – (2Kor 8,16); for donations received (Flp 4,10–20); for the gift of languages – (1Kor 14,18).

This is only a calculation recorded by Scripture (ten real it would hardly be possible to write completely), but it still shows us what came from the apostolic hearts and mouths.

Thanksgiving in heaven

Of course, all angels (Rev 7,12) and saints in Heaven give thanks. Four beings give thanks before sitting on the throne and living forever and ever (Rev 4.9), and neither do the 24 elders (Rev 11.17).

Giving thanks to the Lord Jesus

The scribes also recorded several examples from the Lord Jesus. When propagating the bread, i.e. before eating (Mt 15.36; Mk 8.6; Jn 6.11; Mt 14.19; Mk 6.41; Lk 9.16); at the Last Supper, that is, before meals and during the celebration of the Eucharist (Mt 26.27; Mk 14.23; Lk 22.17; 19); at the resurrection of Lazarus (Jn 11.41); an example of how to recite a prayer (Flp 4.6).

Thanksgiving = Eucharist

Eucharist is a Greek word that means Thanksgiving or gratitude. The adjective eucharistic also means satisfied, memorable favors (friends, services, favors). These words are used in almost all places where we have a translation—Thanksgiving, etc.

But let’s go deeper into the word Eucharist for even deeper stimuli for contemplation. The word has two parts: eu a charisma, in Greek exactly: eu – good, charizomai – satisfy, give/grant benevolently, provide free (sincere forgiveness), graciously restore each other, grant as a favor. At the same time, the word charizomai is from Gr. charis – grace, thanks. And finally, a word chair, he is from Gr. chairo – (the root of the word) – extraordinary joy, to be full of cheerfulness, greetings. It is found approximately 77 times in the New Testament. After this hearty word mining Eucharist, we could also translate its in-depth meaning: to be full of good joy.

Thanks to the analysis of this word, we can easily measure how we relate to God’s gifts and especially to the Giver himself, i.e., how we are „thank givers“.

We know that the sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ is present at the Eucharist, a type of which was also the Thanksgiving sacrifice in the Old Testament (2 King 29,31), for which we must be grateful in the very first place and on which all other thanks also depend. Only then can we go to a depth that even the most humanly grateful unbeliever cannot understand and achieve, which shows that gratitude in us also depends on education and our character.

Thus, for someone to celebrate the Eucharist more deeply, worthily, and meritoriously, he needs to learn to be grateful for everything, a type of which gratitude for food is the basis of appreciation for life and salvation. From the root of the word Eucharist, we see that it contains not only gratitude, but also grace, forgiveness, and the fullness of extraordinary joy, which is also a type of heavenly glory, where we will always give thanks and praise to God for all that He has done.

Common experience confirms that water from some springs has healing properties. The desire of many to achieve healing with the help of this water led to the creation of healing baths. In today’s texts of the word of God, we also encounter the symbol of the source of invigorating water. In the first reading, a spring is described as rising from under the altar on the right side of the temple and flowing towards the east. Similar to nature, the cause is not the distance, but other tributaries, the further the river is from the source, so even in this vision of Ezekiel, the flow of water without tributaries gradually increases until it reaches the size of the river. Water brings life to the land, and trees grow on its banks that bear fruit every month, providing food, and their leaves are healing, ensuring lasting health and life.

This prophetic, symbolic image contains an essential message: the altar and the temple represent God; God is the source of life. As in Paradise, there was a tree of life, but humans have lost access to it through their sin. This water enables people to grow many trees of life on its banks. Thus, God did not forever close man’s access to full life, but announced hope based on Himself becoming the source of life for us.

He began to fulfill this prophecy when he came to us in his son. In the gospel, Jesus meets a man who has been ill for thirty-eight years and who, with constant hope, waits for the opportunity to be the first to enter the water when the spring “kick up”. According to popular belief, the one who first came to the swirling water should achieve healing. Jesus asked this man a question that further expressed the pain of the sick person’s constantly disappointed desire for healing. And to his sad answer, he turns to him with a short challenge: “Get up, take your bed and go!”

The fact that a man who had not been able to walk for thirty-eight years walked immediately on these words revealed another truth, that a life-giving power emanates from Jesus that manifests as a creator. Instantly, it restores the patient’s seriously disturbed health and gives him full health. We know that this was not the only miracle of healing performed by Jesus; in three cases, he also raised the dead. In the context of the place of this healing, Jesus manifested himself as a trustworthy source of living water, that is the Holy Spirit. From his resurrection, no one can say, “I have no one to care for me,” because Christ, the Son of God, became a man close to everyone. He assured us this: “I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”

Of course, He does not always heal us miraculously, but He accompanies us with His love and help in all life circumstances. If we remain faithful to Him to the end, He assures us that He will resurrect our body to eternal life by His divine power at His second coming. However, the condition is what he pointed out to the healed: “ Sin no more, lest something worse touch you.” Because with sin, we can prevent the effect of God’s life-giving spirit in us, and it could become “worse”: existence without communion with God and with people, without hope of change for the better…

Practical Instruction: I will express my gratitude in prayer for the fact that Jesus Christ, through the waters of baptism, has come to me and, inwardly transforming me with his Spirit, has made me a new person, able to go through life, overcoming evil and sin and doing works according to God’s will. I will take a few steps”.

Prayer: Merciful God, may prayers and acts of penance during this Lent prepare our hearts to willingly receive the Easter grace and proclaim the glad tidings of redemption to the world, through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son, who is God and lives and reigns with you in the communion of the Holy Spirit, one God, for all ages.