An outsider's perspective

An interesting titbit. A friend is getting married. He would like to do so in a Catholic Church. He's no regular Churchgoer but knows that I am.

A few weeks ago, from nowhere, he asked what I knew about the Franciscans – a Fransciscan friar is the marriage celebrant. My answer - not much.

Being asked questions like this, particularly on the spot, particularly when asked by a non or nominal Catholic, and particularly when you cannot give the answer, often forces a direct examination of just how much better you should understand your Church.

Nonetheless, I gave him the little I knew. The Franciscans were founded by St Francis (“You can take it that I know that much” he replied), are a particularly large order and have a lot of 'spin offs' (for want of a more ecclesiastical term) each with different characteristics. The Franciscans also have a lot of saints, including, recently, Padre Pio, a Capuchin.

He asked about the Franciscan way of life, and I said it was exemplified by simplicity and poverty. I relayed some limited experience of mine with the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate who give supply priests to my parish. These friars live very simply, and make sacrifices like wearing sandals without socks year around and not taking holidays.

He said that he had always thought that the friars were meant to live simply, and was seeking my confirmation.  He explained that the one he had met was wearing new Diesel jeans.

I felt embarrassed for my Church.

Recently, my friend provided the latest instalment of his Catholic experiences. It turns out that he and his fiancé went to Sunday Mass with these same Franciscans, but he came away disappointed and even confused. Now why do you think? Because there was too much incense? Too many pious hymns and genuflecting? No. Because he found nothing sacred and, as he said, an obvious desire by the celebrant to bring it all down a notch or two - to bring God to our level.

The first thing that surprised him was that during the Mass, which happened to occur during NADOC week, each opportunity was taken to make reference to the Aborigines. He said it almost became embarrassing. Next, was the sermon. Now, the Gospel that day was Jarius’ daughter. With its strong narrative, that’s a pretty good draw for an irregular churchgoer. But the celebrant used it to explain his own love for food, by making passing reference to how Jesus asked that the little girl be fed after the miracle. He spoke about the joys of food.

Finally, and I find this part the most interesting (and consider that it shows a depth of ‘natural religion’ in my friend), he could not understand why distributing communion was not the priest's province alone, particularly given that there were less than 100 people in attendance. He explained, as though this was likely to be news to me, that just before communion these people came up from the congregation to assist handing out Holy Communion. He was baffled.

In a way this is all good news. It reminds me of Fulton Sheen's story of a man who saw a lack of reverence and asked Fulty to explain what was wrong with his Church. As Bishop Sheen said "I then did - and a few months later received him into the Church". The man realsied that there was something sacred in the Church, and the start of his journey was his 'natural' repulsion (by a non-churchgoer) at seeing something that is obviously meant to be sacred treated without due reverence.