The Father Coleridge Reader

Pope Leo XIII – On the Duties of Laymen to Study and Spread the Faith

April 7, 2022

The Feast at St. Matthew’s House

From
The Training of the Apostles, Part I
Fr Henry James Coleridge, 1886, Ch. VI, pp 93-109
St. Matt. ix. 10-13; St. Mark ii. 15-22; St. Luke v. 29-39; Vita Vita Nostræ, § 40.

The publicans and Our Lord

The bright and simple character of St. Matthew is shown in a very beautiful way in the incident which is selected by the three historical Evangelists — himself one of them — immediately after the account which they give of his vocation to the more close following of our Lord.

It may not have happened immediately and without any interval upon that call; but it is hardly likely that there should have been any great distance between the two. ‘Levi,’ says St. Luke, who delights to give to his brother Evangelist the more honourable of the names by which he was known among the Jews, ‘made Him a great feast in his own house, and there was a great company of publicans and of others that were at table with them.’ Many publicans and sinners came and sat down with Jesus and His disciples. ‘For they were many,’ adds St. Mark, ‘who also followed Him.’ That is, there were already a large number of men of this class attracted to our Lord.

We have already seen that the publicans formed a sufficiently numerous body among those who flocked to the baptism of St. John to receive some special instructions from him. Our Lord, at a later point in His Public Ministry, reproached the priests and scribes for their neglect of the opportunity of repentance which was offered to them by St. John, and told them that the publicans and harlots went before them into the Kingdom of Heaven.

If the austere preaching of St. John had so much attraction for men of this kind, on account of the appeal which it made to their consciences, and the abundant grace with which that appeal was accompanied, it is certainly not surprising that the winning and gentle teaching of our Lord should have drawn them to Him in large numbers. Thus we get a picture of the extent to which our Lord's preaching had already penetrated the various classes of which the society of Galilee was composed. On the occasion of the miracle of the healing of the paralytic, the audience to which He was addressing Himself was made up in large measure of ecclesiastics, teachers of the law, and the like, who had come even from a great distance to hear Him.

Now we see Him in a very different company, less honourable in the eyes of the world, even of what is called the religious world, but not less dear to His Sacred Heart, not less precious in the eyes of His Eternal Father.

St. Matthew’s banquet – invitation to his friends

St. Matthew's joy needed, as it seems, some outlet, and he could express it in no more natural way than by a great feast in his house, to which our Lord and His near disciples were the most honoured guests, but to which he also invited his friends of his own class, and a multitude of others who had already begun to be followers of our Lord.

He was like a man who had found a great treasure, or attained the greatest success in life for which he could hope, or which he could desire, or who had received the greatest boon that could be bestowed upon him, as one who has won a long-sought bride, or had a firstborn child born to him, or recovered from a most dangerous sickness, or been raised to a throne.

No doubt there were other ways in which he could and did show his gratitude to God, in alms to the poor, or offerings for the maintenance of divine worship, and the like; but that particular manner of manifesting his gratitude and joy, which consists in ‘calling his friends and his neighbours together to rejoice with him,’ was not to be omitted.

For the blessings which we receive, if they can be shared by others, are to be imparted to them, and, even if they are in themselves incommunicable, it is at all events natural and right to make those who love us and whom we love have that much of companionship in them which they can receive, by being called upon to rejoice and make merry with us.

Thus our Lord, when He draws the picture of Himself in His love for souls in the parables of the lost sheep, the lost piece of money, and the Prodigal Son, always insists upon this part of the similitude, which indeed is the point of all others to which He seems to wish to draw the attention of His critics. The Good Shepherd and the woman who has found her piece of money call together their neighbours and friends to share their joy, and, by sharing it, to increase it.

The father of the Prodigal incurs the censure of his eldest son by his rejoicing over the return of the younger. ‘There shall be joy in Heaven over one sinner doing penance, more than over ninety and nine just persons who do not need penance.’ ‘Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep which was lost,’ or ‘my groat which was lost.’ ‘It was meet that we should be merry and make glad, for this thy brother was dead and is alive again, he was lost and is found.’

All this witnesses to the fitness of the holy joy which vents itself in celebrations of the kind which took place on this occasion in the house of St. Matthew. Not that the children of God are to rejoice after the fashion of worldlings, but that they are not to avoid the usual human ways of showing their gladness at the reception of spiritual benefits, and that by so doing they make religion more amiable and attractive.

For there is nothing which more forcibly witnesses to its Divine authorship than its power to flood the human heart with intense and pure joy.

Our Lord at the feast

We have already seen our Lord taking part in the holy happiness of a wedding feast, and selecting that occasion for the beginning of the marvellous cycle of His miracles of love and mercy. And now He is to be found celebrating the spiritual nuptials — for so they may indeed be called — of the soul of one who was henceforth to belong to Him alone.

St. Matthew, in his glorious innocence and simplicity of heart, could not but call his neighbours and friends to his banquet, and it was only natural that they should be men of the same class with himself. Indeed, we may gather from the criticisms made on our Lord at this time, that the more seemingly religious of the Jews would not have been found in his house.

No doubt the crowd was promiscuous in character. No class, at least no set of men devoted to any lawful calling, however much it may approach the limits of entire worldliness, is ever without at least some few good among its members. The majority of the guests may have been like St. Matthew himself to some extent, — that is, they may have been to some measure disciples of our Lord, who had not abandoned their gainful calling.

There may have been among them some souls very dear to our Lord; but it is very likely that some, at least, may have been unconverted. Some may have come out of curiosity, to see Who the Teacher was Who exercised so marvellous an influence over their own former companion. To others the occasion may have been simply one of merry-making and good cheer.

Amidst all this crowd our Lord took His place like one of themselves, and gladdened the heart of His future Evangelist by the sweet condescension and cordiality of His manner, mixing freely with the other guests, and raising their hearts to high truths by the way in which He spoke of the most ordinary subjects.

Nor can we doubt that many a publican went away from that banquet with the seeds of future good sown in his heart. Many a sinner was forced by some secret influence of the Divine Presence to which he had unwittingly drawn near, to curb his thoughts, his eyes, or his tongue, to refrain from the evil or violent words, or the self-indulgence in the satisfaction of his appetite, with which he might otherwise have still further degraded his soul.

Our Lord contradicting the fashion

It must be remembered that one of the great faults of the religious people of that time and country, as we learn from the words of our Lord about the Pharisees, was their hypocrisy.

Since the return of the Jews from the Babylonian captivity, we hear little of the open apostasies and abandonments of religious profession of which their ancestors had so frequently been guilty. The preservation of their nationality came to be entwined, as it were, with their profession of the true religion.

The enemies of the independence of the Jews as a nation endeavoured to force on them absorption in the Greek civilization and culture all around them, and, although there were times when the persecution seemed almost triumphant, still the nation, as such, survived the storm, and emerged from its sufferings with an intense feeling of tenacity for its peculiar faith, now its only distinction in the world.

The Romans were too sagacious to interfere with any peculiarities in their subjects which did not clash with their own position as masters of the world. We see the same policy pursued by the wisest princes of the house of Herod, as by Herod himself, who, although he seems to have hated the Jews and to have delighted in occasional insults to their religion and their rulers, nevertheless rebuilt the Temple with the utmost magnificence.

At the time when our Lord appeared, religious observance was in the highest esteem among the Jews, and the credit of being a strict follower of the Law was likely to bring to those who possessed it great opportunities of worldly advancement. All this naturally led to an immense prevalence of hypocrisy, such as has been sometimes seen in Christian Courts, when absolute sovereigns — men, themselves, of notorious profligacy — have insisted on patronizing religion as an engine of statecraft, or in sectarian communities, which have aimed at exhibiting something like a counterpart of the visible theocracy of Judaism.

Under such circumstances, it was likely that our Lord would act in a way which would run counter to the fashion, or, rather, that the way of acting which was natural to Him would be very much in contradiction with that fashion. Everything of this kind was most deliberately and thoughtfully adopted by Him — and we shall find that, at the time of His teaching on which we are now occupied, there were many occasions on which He chose to contradict the maxims of conduct common with persons who made profession of religion.

He must have known what the remarks were that would be made on His presence at a banquet of this kind, and He must have chosen deliberately to brave them. So He afterwards chose to brave the common maxims as to the observance of the Sabbath Day, at the cost of alienating from Himself the rulers at Jerusalem, or, if they were already alienated, giving them a pretext, which they were not slow to use, of acting against Him as a violator of the law.

He must have seen, therefore, some great mischief in the maxims which enforced so wide and continual a separation, in the matter of social intercourse, between those who made a special profession of strictness and religious observance and those who were considered worldlings. He must have intended to leave behind Him an example, as well as to protest in the most pointed manner against the exclusiveness of the religious world of the time.

Actions of His saints grounded on this

He must have looked forward to the manner in which so many of His chief saints would follow His example.

He may have thought of the beautiful incidents in the lives of men like St. Francis Xavier, who thought it worth his while to make a voyage on purpose to keep company with a man of bad life, that he might win his love and confidence, and lead him at last to confession and a perfect change of life. He must have had in His Heart the same saint, at the time when he was criticized by those who knew little of him for mixing with the soldiers and mariners and merchants at their games, looking on as they gambled, rejoicing if they won and mourning if they lost, sometimes even blessing their cards, that they might have good luck.

He must have thought on St. Symeon Salus, paying the poor victims of debauchery in order that they might not sin, and exposing himself to the danger of the foulest charges by his friendship for the wicked. This example of our Lord has been the sanction for a thousand such actions, and numberless souls would have lost their only chance of repentance and conversion, if the saints could not have remembered how He condescended to sit at meat in the house of St. Matthew, in company with a crowd of publicans and sinners.

Importance of Apostolical conversation

This and other similar actions of our Blessed Lord, even when the company in which He placed Himself was less likely to expose Him to criticism than on the occasion before us, must be considered as the foundation, in His own Divine Life upon earth, of all that large branch, so to speak, of the work of His saints and ministers after Him which may be called by the name of ‘Apostolical conversation.’

This is in many respects a part of the general work of preaching the Gospel, to which is committed, in the providence of the Father, the conversion of the world. But it differs in many more respects from preaching and instruction, in the stricter sense of the terms. If it has not all the security, all the authority, all the power, all the promise and blessing, of the preaching of the Word of God in its highest sense, it has still some advantages, and a direct mission of its own.

For private conversation can be carried on at any time and in any place; it can address itself to the wants and condition of each individual person one by one; it can reach hundreds of persons who can never be persuaded to take their place in a public church and listen to a formal sermon. It is a weapon of grace, the power of which depends in a very particular manner on the character and qualities of the person who uses it, and it requires great dexterity and great union with God to use it well.

At the same time, it must not be supposed that the successful use of this weapon requires high sanctity, for God can often bless the chance word of a child, or the passing observation of a Christian of ordinary virtue, nay, even of those who are not virtuous, to enlighten the darkness of someone who is struggling towards the truth, or to loosen the chains of some prisoner of sin.

In this case, the effect follows from the state of the heart and soul of the person to whom the word is addressed, rather than from the state of the person from whom it comes. So that it may be said that all Christians may have some part in the work of Apostolical conversation.

Its dangers

Not all, indeed, are fit to undertake this work, and especially, it must require a special grace of sanctity and a special direction of obedience or of the inspiration of the Holy Ghost before it can be safe for a Christian to mix freely with those whose lives are either lax or bad for the purpose of winning their confidence and then converting them.

The danger will always be great that the self-constituted Apostle may lose more than he may gain, and that spiritual persons may become worldly while they are undertaking to make worldly persons spiritual. Apostolical conversation is not confined to that intercourse with sinners, in the common sense of the term, of which we have the example, the sanction, and the blessing in this action of our Lord. This is but one, and one most difficult branch of Apostolical conversation.

The truth is, that the whole conversation of Christians is in a certain sense meant to be Apostolical, for it is all to be edifying, and the gains and losses to the soul of others among whom he may move which may result from the habitual intercourse and conversation of any one are, in truth, immense. This holds true of the conversation of the strictest religious persons among themselves, as well as of the intercourse with the world at large, or with a special circle of friends, which any one may carry on whose direct vocation or purpose it is to glorify God in all things.

Holy writers have given some rules for this conversation in general, to which all Christians are more or less called, but which naturally belongs to the special range of duty of those who have the definite Apostolic calling.

The first rule that may be mentioned is that to which allusion has already been made, namely, that we must undertake a work of this kind only after the direction of some kind of authority, such as that of religious or ecclesiastical superiors in the case of their subjects.

This must be understood as an ordinary rule, to which there may nevertheless be exceptions. For it is clear also that there is a general obligation of charity in this respect, and as we are already bound to converse kindly and openly with our neighbours, so we are bound, in regard to this particular matter, to endeavour humbly to advance the cause of God and of religion in their souls by what we say and what we do not say. It may often be altogether imprudent to wait for a special mission when the opportunity is presented to us and when we are prompted to exert ourselves by strong interior inspirations.

But there may be delusion as to this in certain persons, whose zeal is altogether indiscreet and imprudent, and who precipitate themselves into controversy or into religious conversation when they are not even able to control their own temper or to refrain from exaggerations.

Any great love for this sort of enterprize, any great desire to get ourselves employed upon it, are marks of a soul which may easily be deluded in the matter, and which may really seek its own satisfaction in what appears to be undertaken for the glory of God.

Pope Leo XIII – On the Duties of Laymen to Study and Spread the Faith

April 7, 2022

Rules for it — to act under obedience

Again, a work of this kind must not only be undertaken by obedience of some sort, in the way that has been explained, but it must be directed aright by a special intention of God's glory and elevation of the mind to Him.

This should be made at the beginning of the action, that it may not be done at haphazard or for any lower motive, and the intention should be renewed from time to time, as occasion may serve, during the action itself. Few works that can be undertaken by a servant of God need this intention and elevation of the mind more than it is needed in this Apostolic conversation.

This is the way to secure an abundance of the grace which is needed, for then we may hope for the fulfilment of our Lord's promise, ‘He that abideth in Me, and I in him, the same beareth much fruit.’1 The same holy precaution secures us a great alacrity and zeal in the work which we undertake, which, to really spiritual men, is certainly distasteful, and it will also wing our zeal with fresh strength when the persons with whom we have to converse are such as to discourage us or present great difficulties in any other way.

Lastly, other benefits which may be gained by carefulness as to our intention and the raising of our mind and heart to God, are the security that we shall not be too much discouraged or put out by our own failure, if that is the issue of our enterprise, and that, after the work is over for the time, we shall find it comparatively easy to return to our normal state of calm recollection with God.

Care not to lose fervour

Another rule of the same kind is that which bids any one who undertakes work of this kind for God to be very careful lest he lose his own fervour while he is attempting to communicate fervour to others.

This is the order of charity, and in this subject matter also our Lord's words hold true, ‘What shall it profit a man to gain the whole world, and suffer injury on his own soul?’ Our Lord's example of retirement and prayer, His taking the Apostles into the desert after their short course of preaching, which is mentioned in the Gospels,2 and the prudence of the Apostles in the Acts, when they determined to free themselves from the external occupations of charity in order to give themselves to prayer and to preaching,3 may be quoted as illustrating this precept.

The practical fruit of this is to make us unwilling to undertake too much intercourse with many persons at once, to be in a hurry to catch at every such work the moment it presents itself, to act without consideration for our health and strength, which may easily suffer and thus render us incapable of doing any good at all in this way, and above all, to neglect, under the pretext of charity to others, our own essential and regular spiritual exercises.

In cases where this kind of mixing with the world has been undertaken foolishly and, consequently, without profit, there will almost certainly be some of these signs of imprudence and precipitancy. Other things that are to be avoided are such as these — rivalry with others and interference with work of this sort which has been committed to them, in which case positive mischief may be done, and much disedification given — or again, ‘acceptance of persons,’ a preference for those who are more distinguished in position, and, what is almost certain to follow, a loss of Christian liberty in dealing with such persons, and taking our own tone from them, instead of forcing on them higher principles, higher maxims, and more spiritual views.

The persons who are the most fitted to receive benefit from this kind of conversation may thus often come to be neglected — the poor, the sick, the ignorant, children, and the weak or suffering in any way whatsoever. It is here that we see the difference between the perfect exercise of this Apostolical function, as we may call it, and its exercise by those who are actuated by imperfect motives, or not guided by the consummate prudence of the saints.

Gentleness of manner

But perhaps the most important rules for the use of this weapon of charity are those which relate to the manner in which it is to be employed. In the office of the preacher there is much room for vanity and display, and for imprudence of various kinds.

But in the conversation of which we are speaking, which is conducted with far more familiarity than can be allowed in ordinary preaching, and in which there is an opportunity for question and answer, argument and objection, not only is the speaker more off his guard, less able to prepare and consider beforehand what he is to say and what he is to leave unsaid, but there is also more opportunity for the natural character of each person to display itself, as it were, in undress, and for the betrayal of any hardness, severity, impatience of contradiction, or rigorism, which may belong to that character.

It’s not a sin to have a sense of humour and be cheerful, say Ss Thomas Aquinas & Philip Neri

May 26, 2022

How should we behave towards those whom we think are in error? Fr A. Vermeersch, 1913

January 12, 2023

On the other hand, the pulpit is the place for declamation, for the denouncing of vice in strong language, for the objurgation of the sinner, for the threats of Divine judgment, and the like. All these things are alien from the kind of conversation of which we are speaking.

Conversation of itself implies courtesy, gentleness, consideration, affability; and, if it may now and then be necessary to speak plainly and strongly, it must even then be remembered that we are on the same level with those to whom we are speaking, and not above them, as is the case when we are preaching the Christian doctrine and the Word of God. Thus it is that all exhibition of temper, or anything that has an overbearing character, any severity of language or harshness of demeanour, are out of place in the exercise of this part of the Apostolical office.

It was on these occasions in particular that our Lord displayed His immense meekness and gentleness. He could, as we know, speak with extreme majesty and authority, and He could, as we learn from other parts of His ministry, use severe language, and denounce in the strongest terms the hypocrisy and malice of His enemies, even when He had at the same time to tell the people that the Scribes and Pharisees sat for them in the seat of Moses, and were therefore to be obeyed.

It is on these occasions, therefore, that the servants of our Lord must be especially careful in the practice of the virtues of meekness and gentleness. They are to lead people on sweetly and lovingly, without bitterness or severity, to the practice of virtue, especially to the frequentation of the sacraments, and the use of the means of grace which unite the soul to God.

Thus we find it said in the contemplations of St. Mary Magdalene of Pazzi, that the spirit of St. John the Evangelist and that of St. Ignatius of Loyola were greatly pleasing to God, because each of those Saints strove to lead men to Him by the way of love. And, it was added, this pleasure of God was renewed as often as the children of St. Ignatius used the same method for the same purpose.

Need of familiarity with God — and prudence

A slight consideration of these rules, and others which may be suggested by them, will show us at once that the most perfect exercise of this function of the Christian Apostolate requires a great and consummate virtue.

It requires much familiarity with God, and much prayer for the persons with whom we have to deal, as well as with ourselves. It requires above all things an exquisite prudence, lest, as St. Ignatius used to say, we may be among the number of those who not only build up but also pull down, who do good, as it were, with one hand and mischief with the other.

Thus he himself, and his disciple and brother saint, St. Francis Xavier, were both remarkable for the great use which they made of consideration before they undertook any work of this kind for the good of souls. They examined the condition and character of persons with whom they were to deal, they found out how to approach them, what works of piety or religion to recommend to them, what motives to urge on them for their conversion, and the like.

The long letter of St. Francis Xavier to Father Gaspar Baertz4 is a treasure-house of the wisest counsels for this holy prudence. Again, it is evident that a work of this kind requires all the spiritual power which holiness of life can alone give, and that it must be exercised with the most perfect benevolence and goodwill towards those with whom we have to deal.

How should we behave towards those whom we think are in error? Fr A. Vermeersch, 1913

January 12, 2023

It is also plain that the opportunities for the kind of service to God of which we are speaking may be more frequent and ordinary under certain external conditions of society than under others. There may be times when there is hardly any other means of bringing home to many classes of persons the truths of the Gospel, or at all events, no other means so easily available.

The Christians in many of the towns and cities in the Roman Empire in the early ages must have had a very distinct and universal mission, so to speak, of this kind. Those were days when there could not be much preaching to the heathen from the pulpit, and when personal influence and private conversation must have played a large part in the enlargement of the Christian flock.

The same may be said in a measure of states of society in which there is a great deal of intercourse among persons of different religions, and in which matters of controversy are constantly introduced in promiscuous conversation. The bringing back of heretics and those who are involuntarily outside the pale of the visible Church is a work as pleasing to God as the conversion of sinners in the more ordinary sense of the term.

But it may often be almost impossible to reach such persons in any other way than by means of social intercourse. In all such cases the practice of the most prudent Christian charity is the duty of those who are endeavouring to walk in the footsteps of our Lord and His saints in this respect.

There are many reasons, for instance, connected with our own spiritual well-being, for acquiring an intellectual knowledge of the doctrines which we believe, and the history of our religion. It is almost shameful to be learned about anything else, and comparatively ignorant about these, even for our own sakes. Much more is it prudent to acquaint ourselves with these subjects, for the sake of being able to ‘satisfy every one that asks of us a reason of that hope which is in us, with modesty and fear,’ as St. Peter tells us,5 and thus not only defend ourselves, but perhaps help on some soul that is in good faith, but under false impressions as to the truths of the Catholic religion.

Pope Leo XIII – On the Duties of Laymen to Study and Spread the Faith

April 7, 2022

And if the saints just now mentioned made it a point to study the dispositions and tastes of the men across whom they came, in order to be the better able to help them, rather than harm them, it may well be a study for Catholics to make themselves in some degree acquainted with the intellectual position and characteristics of those among whom they live, in order to prepare themselves for their questions, and for the opportunities which may occur of delivering them from popular misconceptions.

The present days are times in which religious subjects are very generally talked of in promiscuous society, and in which the servants of the Church have as much to do with those who are under the bondage of false doctrines, as with those who are in the toils of sin.

Conclusion – different characters require different approaches

It is not easy to lay down any rules for such cases which may be of universal application, on account of the very great difference which prevails between one instance and another.

For there are many persons with whom it is useless to convince the intellect as to the truths of the faith, on account of the moral state of their souls, which is the real obstacle to their conversion. Others, on the other hand, are in a state of perfect moral rectitude and innocence of life, while their minds are full of false maxims and erroneous impressions concerning the Catholic doctrine and the practices habitual to Catholics generally.

It may be said with regard to those who are in good faith and good lives, that it is a work of immense charity to deliver their minds from any misconception or intellectual error as to the faith or the Church. With regard to others, whose moral state is in truth their chief difficulty, it is better to gain their affection and regard by kindness and charity and then to endeavour to lead them to amend their lives before entering on controversy in the proper sense of the word.

The first companion of St. Ignatius, the Blessed Peter Favre, has left a beautiful letter on this subject, addressed to his friend Father James Laynez.6 The experience of Father Favre led him chiefly to speak of the Lutheran heretics with whom he had so much to do in Germany.

The main principle on which he insists, in the letter of which we speak, is that after their affection has been won by kindness, they are to be induced to resume the practice of virtue and the ordinary Christian devotions which they have abandoned, before they are led on to the rejection of the false doctrines which they have taken up.

From Fr Coleridge, The Training of the Apostles, Part I.