However, our Tennessee friend erred by thinking that it was his hand that caused him to sin. It was not his hand but his will. There are other ways to refrain from sin besides cutting off your hand. Self-control, for starters.

What causes a man to sin? In the area of sexual sins, which seem to be everywhere nowadays, an appetite run wild, perhaps. Perhaps he has gotten into the habit of giving in to his appetite when it gets stirred up, and thus he finds it hard to resist. But what stirs up the appetite? If we may believe Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas, it is either the senses or the imagination. These two taught that the appetite seems to have a will of its own and it listens not only to reason (as our arm or leg would) but to the senses and the imagination as well. The three voices of the senses, reason and the imagination compete for control of the will.

So, a person is tempted by the senses and the imagination to commit sexual sins. Temptations of the senses would ordinarily involve sight or touch primarily. Visual temptations could be a provocatively dressed member of the opposite sex, or provocative pictures or images. One of the saddest things of our time is the widespread availability of pornography on the world wide web. Pornography is not merely a temptation, but as the Catholic Catechism (CCC) teaches, a serious sin in itself (para. 2354).

A temptation by way of the imagination would be simply an impure image which pops into the mind. If the image was not in any way sought, there is no sin here unless the will seeks to continue the image and an accompanying arousal. If there is full consent and sufficient reflection and awareness of the evil involved, there is mortal sin. Jesus said as much in Matthew 5:27, 28 when he warned against committing “adultery in the heart.”

What can a man do to win back his appetite to the control of reason? He cannot do this by simply commanding it “despotically” but he must convince it “politically,” as Aristotle and St. Thomas said. In other words, he must present to his appetite the values to be gained by turning down the temptation, values such as the dignity of controlling himself by reason rather than by his urges, and the benefit of upholding the sacredness of sex rather than trivializing it. He must remind himself so often of these values that his appetite surrenders to reason. Then he’ll be able to live at peace with his appetite. He will have the habit, the virtue, of chastity. (See Pope John Paul II’s Love and Responsibility, p. 200.)

What is the difference between temptation and sin? Temptation is an incitement to sin. Sin is when you exercise your will to choose the evil action. If the temptation is not intended, there is no sin in simply being tempted. There is, of course, sin in seeking temptation. We pray in the Our Father that we will not be led into temptation, asking God to remove temptations from our path.

Is there a difference between temptation and an occasion of sin? Yes. An occasion of sin is a situation or action which tends toward a “temptation to sin, and which can be modified so that the temptation will be less likely . . .” (Germain Grisez, Living A Christian Life, p. 221). Usually when we speak of the occasion of sin we mean the near occasion of sin, something we promise to avoid in the act of contrition.

A perfect example of a near occasion of sin was the case of Lt. Ryan Berry. He was assigned to a small underground capsule the size of a school bus in 24- or 48-hour shifts with a woman. He objected, and after being denied re-assignment due to an unfortunate military priority of “gender-equity,” common sense prevailed and he was later granted a new assignment.

Is an occasion of sin sinful in itself? No, not if it isn’t willed as such. A near occasion of sin is sinful if it is willed. It’s a sin against love (of God) and prudence.

So, the person who is wholly given over to the Lord wants to avoid not only sin, but temptation (“lead us not into temptation . . .”) and “the near occasion of sin” (Act of Contrition). This is what it means to have a converted heart. The entire person is committed to loving God, mind and will. This is the way to real peace in the Lord.

The priest took a long breath. It all seemed hopeless. Nonetheless, he remembered the words of today’s gospel: “The woman who divorces her husband and marries another commits adultery.” He asked her if she had taken a vow before God’s altar to love and honor this man, in good times and bad, for as long as they both shall live? Yes, she had, she answered. “Then don’t you think you should do everything in your power to save this marriage, and take him back?” he asked her. “You may need to talk to him about healing some past hurts and avoiding some of the behavior that drove you apart, but don’t you think you should work to save this marriage? You have a daughter to think about as well.”

“But what about my family? What’ll I do with them?”

“Genesis provides the answer to this,” answered the priest. “‘A man must leave his father and mother and cling to his wife . . .’ Your first obligation is to your husband. Your parents will probably come around.”

She took him back, and although there followed some rough spots in their marriage, ten years later they were still happily married, and had another child.

There is no doubt that God wants us to marry “for keeps,” and to do everything possible to make the marriage work. But, what if a woman marries and does everything possible to save her marriage, and her husband divorces her anyway, and marries someone else? What should she do?

Ideally she should not remarry, especially if there are children, to give witness to the permanence of the marriage. What is the status of such a person in the Church? As long as they sincerely did all they could to live out their marriage, they are in good standing. They can receive the sacraments as long as they don’t remarry outside the Church.

What if they want to remarry in the Church? The only way they can validly do this is to get an annulment for their first marriage. Is it wrong to get an annulment and marry again? No, as long as the person tried his/her best to save the first marriage. But one should never take this course lightly. A person should lift the entire issue to the Lord in prayer before acting.

Before ever pursuing a new marriage, one should have applied for and received an annulment. This is not automatic, and it takes time—usually about a year. No one should get romantically involved with another before they receive an annulment.

What is the status of a person who has divorced and remarried outside the Church? Can they receive communion? No, because of what Jesus said in today’s gospel. But, all is not lost. There are two possible solutions—solutions which should be pursued. The first, of course, is to seek an annulment. Some ask, “But won’t this make my children illegitimate?” No, neither in civil law, nor in canon law. It has no effect whatsoever on the status of children in the Church. If the couple presumed they were married, the children are legitimate (CIC, n. 1137), regardless of what follows.

The second possible solution for a couple divorced and remarried outside the Church is for husband and wife to live as brother and sister. Difficult? Yes. Impossible? No. A surprising number of couples have opted for this, so that one or both can receive the sacraments and return to the state of grace, to friendship with Christ. Why do they do it? Because they realize the unsurpassed gift that the Eucharist, and the other sacraments are. What could ever be more important?

Jesus wants marriages to last, as he said in today’s gospel. When a couple makes a vow to love and honor each other all the days of their life, they should keep it. But, if one person refuses to live out the marriage, the other has options in the Church. We need to encourage people to live out their marriage vows above all. But, if a person finds himself/herself deserted, we must also tell them what options they have, so that they might live in communion with Christ and his Church.

In the end, only that communion will be important. We must hang on to that above all. And, we must help our fellow Catholics to hang on to it. It is our most precious gift.

Perhaps one of the most perplexing “sacrifices” a priest makes in this world is to renounce the wonderful good of marriage. Members of the media, secularists in general, seem to find such a thing unimaginable. “Why would any sane man do this?” they wonder.

Where does this renunciation come from? It is based on Scripture. Jesus said in Matthew 19 “Not everyone can accept this teaching (of not marrying), only those to whom it is given to do so. Some are eunuchs from birth; some have been made eunuchs by men; and there are eunuchs who have made themselves so for the kingdom of Heaven . . .” Priests are those who have given up the joy of marriage for the sake of the kingdom.

What does that mean? Pope John Paul II puts it well (Familiaris consortio n. 16):

Virginity or celibacy, by liberating the human heart in a unique way, “so as to make it burn with greater love for God and all humanity,” bears witness that the kingdom of God and his justice are that pearl of great price which is preferred to every other value no matter how great, and hence must be sought as the only definitive value.

The world looks with awe and wonder at a priest who has chosen celibacy for the kingdom. But, if they are open-minded, they see his happiness and realize, “God is really enough, even in this life. There really must be something to this religion thing.”

When I was a young boy I thought that I would have to make the great sacrifice of living celibacy to become a priest. When I was ordained I realized that it was a gift God gave to me, to be better able to carry out the mission he had given me. The Scriptures came home to me—it is only for “those to whom it has been given.” Priestly celibacy is not a void which a priest has to endure, but a fulfillment in Christ so profound, that it leaves no room for the demanding life of marriage. If a priest spends a good deal of time in prayer, and continues to read spiritual books, his life is happy (though not without suffering, as Jesus indicated to Peter); he is given a 100-fold return of all he has surrendered to Christ.

Now some have suggested that the Church denigrates marriage by proposing celibacy for priests. Not so. As Pope John Paul II mentioned in Familiaris consortio, his 1981 apostolic exhortation on the family, (n. 16) :

Virginity or celibacy for the sake of the kingdom of God not only does not contradict the dignity of marriage but presupposes it and confirms it. . . . Rightly indeed does St. John Chrysostom say: “Whoever denigrates marriage also diminishes the glory of virginity. Whoever praises it makes virginity more admirable and resplendent. What appears good only in comparison with evil would not be particularly good. It is something better than what is admitted to be good that is the most excellent good.”

In virginity or celibacy, the human being is awaiting, also in a bodily way, the eschatological marriage of Christ with the Church, giving himself or herself completely to the Church in the hope that Christ may give himself to the Church in the full truth of eternal life. The celibate person thus anticipates in his or her flesh the new world of the future resurrection.

Celibacy is a mystery: it will never be a hit in the media, or in big business. But, it is a gift to the priest and to the Church as a sign and an instrument of God’s kingdom on earth.

Not bad for a TV talk show.

The existence of God is an important issue for everyone. It gives a huge incentive to, as Jesus says, “serve the needs of all,” and to “wait for the Lord,” as the psalmist says we do. How do we convince others that there is a God?

Pascal’s Wager can help, but there are some logical arguments for the existence of God. Thomas Aquinas has perhaps the most important one in his Summa Theologica. It is his so-called “fifth way.” There he states,

things which lack intelligence, such as natural bodies (the stars, etc.) act for an end, and this is evident from their acting always, or nearly always, in the same way, so as to obtain the best result. Hence they achieve their end . . . by design. Now, what lacks intelligence cannot act toward an end, unless it is directed to by an [intelligent being]. . . . This being we call God.

St. Paul uses a similar argument in Romans:

Since the creation of the world, invisible realities, God’s eternal power and divinity, have become visible, recognized through the things he has made. Therefore these men [who disbelieve] are inexcusable. They certainly had knowledge of God, yet they did not glorify him as God or give him thanks; they stultified themselves through speculating to no purpose, and their senseless hearts were darkened (Rom. 1:20-21).

For all men were by nature foolish who were in ignorance of God, and who from the good things seen did not succeed in knowing him who is, and from studying the works did not discern the artisan: But either fire, or wind, or the swift air, or the circuit of the stars, or the mighty water, or the luminaries of heaven, the governors of the world, they considered gods. Now if out of joy in their beauty they thought them gods, let them know how far more excellent is the Lord than these; for the original source of beauty fashioned them. Or if they were struck by their might and energy, let them from these things realize how much more powerful is he who made them. For from the greatness and the beauty of created things their original author, by analogy, is seen. But yet, for these the blame is less; for they indeed have gone astray perhaps, though they seek God and wish to find him. For they search busily among his works, but are distracted by what they see, because the things seen are fair. But again, not even these are pardonable. For if they so far succeeded in knowledge that they could speculate about the world, how did they not more quickly find its Lord? (Wis. 3:1-9).

To know him personally, however, requires faith . . . and a love which only God himself can inspire. This personal encounter with God should be the goal of every Christian.

The redemptive sacrifice of Christ is unique, accomplished once for all; yet it is made present in the Eucharistic sacrifice of the Church. The same is true of the one priesthood of Christ; it is made present through the ministerial priesthood without diminishing the uniqueness of Christ’s priesthood: “Only Christ is the true priest, the others being only his ministers.”

We hear from time to time of parents who are completely repelled by the thought of their son becoming a priest. What a tragedy! One of the highest callings a man can receive is that to be a priest of God, a representative of Christ himself! Pray for those parents who discourage their sons from becoming priests!

The road to priesthood is a long one, requiring at least a year of philosophy and four years of theology. Along the way, a man receives the ministries of lector, and acolyte, and then is ordained a deacon about a year before priesthood ordination.

What are these ministries all about?

The ministry of lector or reader is the official designation of this person to read at Mass, excluding the gospel, which is reserved to the deacon or priest. (This ministry is open to all the laity, not just seminarians.) A reader is also commissioned to “instruct children and adults in the faith and prepare them to receive the sacraments worthily” (from the Rite of Institution of Readers). Readers are told to “Meditate on [the Word] constantly, so that each day you will have a deeper love of the Scriptures, and in all you say and do, show forth to the world our Savior, Jesus Christ” (Ibid.). A seminarian would ordinarily receive this ministry in his first year of theology.

The ministry of acolyte calls one to assist deacons and priests, “and as extraordinary ministers to give holy communion to the faithful at the liturgy and to the sick” (Rite of Institution of Acolytes). Those who receive this ministry are told “Because you are specially called to this ministry, you should strive to live more fully by the Lord’s sacrifice and to be molded more perfectly in its likeness. You should seek to understand the deep spiritual meaning of what you do, so that you may offer yourselves daily to God as spiritual sacrifices acceptable to him through Jesus Christ” (Ibid.). What a beautiful thing: to reflect on the deep meaning of bringing the Eucharist, to offer themselves daily as spiritual sacrifices. . . . This in itself is an awesome responsibility. This ministry is usually given to seminarians in their second year.

Usually in the year before ordination to the priesthood, a man requests candidacy to the diaconate, and then is ordained deacon. What is the role of the deacon? The answer is found in the Catechism (CCC, para. 1570):

it is the task of deacons to assist the bishop and priests in the celebration of the divine mysteries, above all the Eucharist, in the distribution of Holy Communion, in assisting at and blessing marriages, in the proclamation of the Gospel and preaching, in presiding over funerals, and in dedicating themselves to the various ministries of charity.

The fullness of Orders resides in the bishop, not the priest. The priest hears confession and preaches only by permission of the bishop. And yet, how sublime, how beautiful the vocation to the priesthood. What a privilege, what a gift for the Church!

John Vianney said, “How great is the priest! The priest will only be understood in heaven. Were he understood on earth, people would die, not of fear, but of love.”

Pray for our priests and bishops, and pray for our seminarians, that they might be worthy by God’s grace, of the calling they have received. And pray that the harvest-master will send priests to gather the harvest of souls into God’s Kingdom. What could be more important?