Saturday was the Feast of Our Lady of Walsingham in the English Calendar, and Holy Mass, sung in English, was celebrated accordingly. The chapel’s statue of Our Lady of Walsingham, donated by a Dame of the Order, was on the Sanctuary.
In the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
I would like to add my own words of welcome to those gathered for this Day of Recollection here in this special place at Wardour Castle, soaked in the history of our Catholic faith, and a period of intense persecution and the sacrifice of so many martyrs. By the Tabernacle here we have flanking each side as though heraldic supporters the two Princes of the Apostles, Peter and Paul, martyrs of Rome, and beneath the Altar two martyrs, known to God, but whose names are unknown, adopted as ‘Primus’ and ‘Secundus’ by those who built this Chapel.
Let’s begin our Day of Recollection well by seeking the intercession of our Lady of Philermo, St John the Baptist, Ss Peter and Paul, the martyrs enshrined in the Altar here, Blessed Adrian Fortescue, Blessed Gerard, and all the saints and blessed of our Order:
Our Father – Hail Mary – Glory Be
When I asked Fra’ Richard what I might speak on today, he suggested that given the history of Wardour and the magnificent Chapel, I consider speaking about our Catholic past and the ‘Faith of our Fathers, living still, in spite of dungeon, fire, and sword’. The whole period of what we might call ‘Recusancy’ or ‘Penal Times’ we know well through our schooling, our reading, knowing the history of our country and of our Order. I want to embrace that invitation and broaden it slightly to understand what our forebears endured and what the sacrifice of their lives means for us, five centuries later.
In Criminal Law, a defendant may only be convicted by a Jury if they are convinced of his or her guilt ‘beyond reasonable doubt’. In Civil Law, when damages are sought, there is a lower threshold of proof required, simply ‘on the balance of probabilities. I want us to keep both legal thresholds in mind throughout the Day of Recollection as I ask you two challenging questions: If you were arrested for being a Catholic, would there be sufficient evidence to convict you? If you were arrested for being in the Order of Malta, would there be sufficient evidence to convict you?
There was a video on YouTube some years ago, I remember of an Evangelical Christian trying to provoke people in the streets into a challenging conversation about their lives, and whilst I don’t approve of the method, it brought out some interesting results. Stopping random
people, he would say ‘Do you consider yourself a good person?’ ‘Yes,’ was the reply each time. ‘Do you ever tell a lie?’ ‘Yes,’ the interviewee would reply, ‘Do you ever get drunk?’ ‘Yes,’ again the person would reply. ‘Have you had relations outside of marriage?’ Invariably the answer again would be an embarrassed ‘Yes,’. ‘So,’ he would conclude, ‘according tothe Bible, you are, by your own admission, a lying, drunken, adulterer. Do you still think you are a good person?’ A shocking method of attempting to win converts, isn’t it? He thought by ‘convicting’ them of their sin, he would perhaps jolt them into repentance, contrition, and faith. I wonder, though, whether there is something true in what he is attempting to reveal: that the manner of our lives proves or disproves what we tell others about ourselves. Can we really call ourselves ‘good’ in this example, if we are living lives contrary to what God has shown us is good?
To turn the question towards ourselves: Can we really call ourselves Catholics, can we really call ourselves members of the Order of Malta, if we are not living lives authentically as Catholics ought, and fulfilling our responsibilities in the Order as we promised to do? Our lives are a form of witness and the only testimony that others will accept is not what we say alone, but how we act, how they see us act. Who was it who said, ‘Be careful how you live. Your life is the only Gospel some people will ever read’?
This is the broadening I spoke of a short while ago about today’s theme. I do want to speak to you about martyrdom and the sacrifice our ancestors made, but also to discover what the Church really understands by martyrdom and how we are called to this charism in your life and mine.
As you may know, a ‘Martyr’ is, in its original meaning a ‘Witness’, in Greek μαρτυρία means to ‘bear witness’. A martyr is one who testifies by their life what they believe, and it is an unfortunate etymological development that we consider martyrs solely to be those who were killed for their belief. The laying down of a martyr’s life in death is simply the consequence of how they have lived: their life of faith and belief brought them to a confrontation that demanded of them integrity and courage. Were they prepared to testify to what they believed and how they had lived by the shedding of their blood? The authentic martyr is one who dies as he or she has lived. In the end, their death seals their testimony, but it is not simply being killed that makes a martyr, it is the witness of their lives and that they would not commit perjury by testifying to anything false, contrary to what they believed.
There is an ancient maxim, Causam, non pœnens, fecit martyrem ‘It is the cause, not the pains, that constitutes a martyr’. In Catholic tradition, martyrs are those who have been killed in odium fidei ‘In hatred of the faith’; that is, the life of the martyr has been such an affront and a contradiction to those in power, the State, or the prevailing morality, that in order to silence those who live lives of integrity and faith, persecution and ultimately death has been the methods chosen to crush the Church.
In our contemporary times, each of us experiences – or will experience - a degree of ‘martyrdom’ and a ‘death’ of sorts if we choose to live authentically as Catholics and authentically as members of the Order. Human respect is the likely cause of our ‘death’, a kind of ‘social death’ of being known for believing teachings and truths sometimes in direct contrast or contradiction to the prevailing social morality. More on this anon.
I want to explore with you a little what the Scriptures say about being a witness. One of the most extraordinary discoveries from a reading of Scripture is that the witness of both Testaments is that a woman could not give evidence. The word of a woman was considered to be unreliable. I would not wish to suggest the reasons for this, as I fear I would be taking my life in my hands with the women here today! Let it simply be noted that for the millennia that the Old Testament represents, women could not be a witness in a legal proceeding and their word was not regarded as sufficient evidence to convict or acquit.
I mention this because we know that the first witness of Our Lord’s Resurrection was...a woman. St Mary Magdalene was chosen by the Lord to be the first witness to His Resurrection, and it was Mary who was then charged by the Lord to go and tell His Apostles of His Resurrection from the dead. Perhaps this might shed new light on what happens in the Gospel according to John, when the news comes from the women that the Lord is risen, but Peter and John do not believe and must go to see for themselves and find the Tomb empty.
The Lord chooses the moment of His Resurrection to subvert and overturn the distorted cultural understanding of women, raising to the dignity of the first witness of His Resurrection, a woman, whose word would be regarded as unreliable, yet proved to be true. This beautiful choice by the Lord is the crowning moment of His own modelling of the worth and dignity of women throughout His life and His ministry, teaching, and healing. Indeed, the Lord even addresses Mary Magdalene with the title He only used for His Mother, remember what he said to her at the Tomb, ‘Woman, why are you weeping, who are you looking for?’1 Christ called His Mother ‘Woman’ at Cana and ‘Woman’ again at the foot of the Cross.
The Old Testament insists that two witnesses are required. The Lord says to the Jews in John’s Gospel, ‘Even in your own Law it is written that the testimony of two men is valid.’2 Christ is citing Deuteronomy and the Law of Moses which says, ‘ A lone witness is not sufficient to establish any wrongdoing or sin against a man, regardless of what offense he may have committed. A matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’3 Even when the Lord is instructing His Apostles on how to correct another disciple in the Church, He insists, ‘But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses’4. In this, again, the Lord is quoting the Law of Moses. Witnessing is never done alone. More on this point later.
Another moment where witnesses are seen if we look closely is on Mount Tabor. You will remember that Peter, James, and John accompanied the Lord to the summit of Mount Tabor where, in their presence, the glory of the Lord was revealed, and Moses and Elijah appeared alongside Christ, speaking to Him of His Passion and Death5. Moses and Elijah are the two pre-eminent figures of the Old Testament and so Moses is seen here as representing the Law, and Elijah, the prophets. These two fulfil the Biblical requirement that two witnesses are needed to testify: by the miraculous appearance of Moses and Elijah, together with the revelation of the glory of God, the Law and the Prophets testify to Who Christ is.
On Calvary, the Lord is crucified between two thieves, one on His right, the other on His left. And a battle between these two witnesses breaks out, the good thief defending the Lord, the bad thief accusing the Lord. You will remember the dialogue6, ‘If you are the Christ save yourself and us as well.’ But the good thief defends the Lord saying, ‘We are getting what we deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong. Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.’ The two witnesses here, crucified either side of the Lord cannot agree on the testimony they give: one is for, one against. And so, who is there at the foot of the Cross, but two faithful witnesses: our Lady and St John, testifying. And a third is added, even the Centurion who has overseen the execution, seeing how the Lord died, testifies, ‘Truly, this man was the Son of God’7.
A final double episode from Scripture to share with you. The Acts of the Apostles begins on the Mount of Olives. The Acts, as you know, is the sequel to the Gospel according to Luke – they are a narrative in two volumes. The Lord has gathered the Eleven around Him and as He prepares to leave them, ascending into heaven, they question Him as to when He will return, and His kingdom be definitively established. The Lord replies that days and hours are not for them to know, but ‘...you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.’8 After the Lord has ascended, the Eleven decide to choose a new Apostle to fill the place vacated by Judas when he betrayed the Lord and, falling into despair, took his own life. The most important consideration that the Apostles believe is vital to become an Apostle is told to us a few short verses after the Lord has ascended. The Apostles say, ‘Therefore, it is necessary to choose one of the men who have accompanied us the whole time from when the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from John’s baptism until the day Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of His Resurrection.’9.
I mentioned earlier that the most common way you or I might become ‘martyrs’ is through a loss of human respect, a kind of ‘social death’ made pariahs by holding to the perennial teachings of the Christ and His Church on morality, on the human person, on the dignity of life from natural conception to natural death. We become cowards when we shy away from witnessing to our faith in the small and greater moments of our lives. I give two examples from my own life: first, it is easy to wear clerical dress in Rome. It is, to use a contemporary phrase, a ‘safe space’. But to wear clerical dress in some areas of my parishes would be to invite ridicule, mockery, hostility, or aggression. Think of priests in those areas particularly hit by the scandals of recent decades and the consequent cover-up by the hierarchy: to wear a collar invites confrontation, perhaps. It would be a form of martyrdom, of witness, to wear a collar in those situations where it would invite ridicule rather than acceptance. And it would take courage to do so.
Another example, we have a number of traveller families in my parishes, and they come and go, as their name might suggest! But one girl, thirteen years old, walks from the traveller site to one of the four churches I have every other Sunday to serve Mass. And she walks that whole way already in her alb, her cincture tied, her neck cross visible. I said to her, ‘You’re great to come ready for Mass; how do you feel walking down dressed ready to serve?’ This thirteen-year-old girl said, ‘I feel proud. I am not ashamed of my religion.’
A small example that may touch on your own experience. When I was a child, friends were always welcome at our table for family meals. But meals always began with Grace. Whether the friend was a Catholic or not, Christian, or not, it is what we did. We always thanked God. Whenever we went abroad or on holiday, whenever we went out for a meal, still, we would make the Sign of the Cross, bow our heads, and say Grace. I wonder how many of us have retreated from these simple Acts of Devotion out of an embarrassment or an awkwardness that others may question, or mock, or we ourselves feel we fall under scrutiny.
It is true that we will be scrutinised if we claim to be Catholic, share that we are members of the Order, because people will expect a certain behaviour and conduct from us. They will want to see us as people of integrity: that we practise what we preach. The witness of our lives is so powerful – and people are yearning for such models of authenticity, I am convinced, and when they see them, they naturally become open to knowing more, to seeing what lies behind the one who believes. This is not to say that we need be perfect, part of authenticity is having the humility to share with family and friends that Catholics though we are and having taken on obligations within the Order that we have, we are stillimperfect and striving towards virtue, through God’s grace.
Our witness, our martyrdom, can encourage each other, spurring each other on. This is why our participation in Sunday Mass, in the works, events, and gatherings of the Order are not solely for our benefit, but for the good of our brothers and sisters, too. The history of the Church shows us that witnessing – martyrdom – is not done alone: Peter and Paul, Charles Lwanga and his companions, Ralph Sherwin and Edmund Campion and Alexander Briant, Thomas More and John Fisher. Two witnesses are required is the evidence of Scripture. We must be witnesses together.
In my Second Conference, I will explore with you how we must bear witness together and how the manner of our lives and our fidelity or otherwise to the Lord as Catholics, and as members of the Order, will be the most powerful testimony for good or for ill. As Pope St Paul VI wrote, ‘Modern man listens more willingly to witnesses than to teachers, and if he does listen to teachers, it is because they are witnesses.’10
Our witness, is our testimony, is our martyrdom. I began by asking: If you were arrested for being a Catholic, would there be sufficient evidence to convict you? If you were arrested for being in the Order of Malta, would there be sufficient evidence to convict you? Let that question sit with you and take it into your prayer. We will reflect further on this in our Second Conference.
In the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
8 Acts 1:8
9 Acts 1:22
Posts
