RonRolheiser,OMI

The Narrow Gate

A A A

A priest I know shares this story. Recently, on their priests’ retreat, the retreat director began his opening presentation with these words: we take for granted that most people are going to hell. Then he tried to ground this assertion by quoting Jesus: “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the way that leads to life, and only a few find it.” (Matthew 7, 13-14)

On the surface, this would indeed seem to indicate that most people are not taking the road that leads to heaven but are taking the road that leads to hell.

Are most of us going to hell? Is this what’s implied here? No! That’s not what’s being taught. This teaching of Jesus needs some parsing.

First, when Jesus says, “but small is the gate and narrow the way that leads to life, and only a few find it,” he’s not talking so much about going to heaven or hell, but rather about our lives, here and now.

Indeed, we can all relate to his words that the gate that leads to life is narrow and few find it. How? By simply asking ourselves: How many times in our lives do we have a moment, let alone a lengthy season, where we are without any depressions, without regrets, without undue restlessness, without jealousies, without frustrations, and without any sense that we are missing something in life, but rather have a deep sense of soul that we’ve arrived at the deepest meaning of life, that we’ve found the deep secret, that there’s nothing more to strive for?

Sometimes we do have moments like this when we have passed through the narrow gate that leads to life, though mostly we are still struggling to get there.

We can experience this when we look at the lives of others. Without being judgmental, how often do we look at someone’s life at the level of soul and say: He’s found it! She’s there! That’s what a full life looks like! We say this of very few people.

Moreover, what precisely is the gate and why is it narrow?

Simply put, the gate that leads to life, to the deepest and fullest happiness of all, is the invitation Jesus gives us in the Sermon on the Mount. (Matthew 5-7) For Jesus, this is what makes for fullness of life, namely: to be poor in spirit; to be in touch with the world’s wounds and our own wounds; to be meek; to hunger for justice; to be merciful; to be pure of heart; to be peacemakers; to suffer for what is right; and especially to love those who hate us.

That’s the narrow gate leading to life, and we struggle to pass through it because most everything in our world militates against this. Our world tells us that it’s best to be rich, that meekness and empathy are weaknesses, and we may in good conscience hate those who hate us. Our natural instincts agree. Both our world and our natural instincts invite us to a wide gate where we can justly curse those who curse us and may execute murderers.

The Sermon the Mount proposes a narrow gate, and it becomes particularly narrow at the end of the Sermon when Jesus invites us to be compassionate as our heavenly Father is compassionate and spells out what that means.

God’s compassion, unlike our natural instincts, goes out equally to the bad as well as to the good, like the sun that shines indiscriminately on weeds as well as on vegetables. God loves sinners and virtuous persons equally.

And so must we. Our virtue, Jesus says, must go deeper than our natural instincts, where quite naturally we love those who love us, hate those who hate us, curse those who curse us, and refuse to forgive someone who murders our loved ones.

The narrow gate that leads to full life is the gate of wide compassion, that is, we pass through that gate which leads to the fullness of life, when we love those who hate us, bless those who curse us, and forgive those who murder us.

Sadly, much inside us and much inside our world resists that narrow gate.

However, when Jesus says: “Small is the gate and narrow the way that leads to life, and only a few find it,” he’s not saying that most of us will go to hell and only a few will go to heaven. Instead, he is speaking about our lives right now and astutely pointing out that what ultimately makes for happiness and full life here in this world, namely, living out the Sermon on the Mount, particularly the part that invites us to love those who hate us, bless those who curse us, and forgive those who murder us.

That’s a gate we struggle to pass through.

Father’s Day

A A A

What makes for a father?

Fifty-six years ago, my father died, late on a December night. As clearly as I remember his death, I remember the bitter cold. Within a day the temperature dipped to minus forty degrees Fahrenheit.

I was still young; too young (I thought, at the time) to lose a father. Later, I’d realize I was wrong. Nobody is too young to lose a father, although losing your father before certain things can be given and received can leave its scars.

We, the family of this father, were lucky enough. We had plenty of preparation for his death. He died after a yearlong battle with cancer and he died with his faith, generosity, and humor intact; and he had given us his blessing. Moreover, he died without bitterness, grateful, blessing life. There are worse ways to die and there are worse ways to lose one’s father. In our family prayers we had always prayed for a happy death. Some months after his death, after some warmer weather, I realized he had died a happy death.

But this reminiscence on Father’s Day more than fifty years after that bitterly cold day, is not meant as a eulogy (something he would be uncomfortable with), nor as a homily on what constitutes a happy death. It’s intended as a reflection on what constitutes a father, a dad, and how we are connected, formed, and sometimes deformed by such a figure.

What is a father? What is a father meant to do, beyond simply being a biological partner in bringing us to birth? How does his care or neglect, his love or his indifference, affect us?

Various schools of psychology and anthropology suggest that your father and your mother have very different roles in the formation of your person. It’s the mother who is your symbiotic link to life and it’s from her, much more so than from your father, that you get your sense of being loved, wanted, cradled, and cherished. Among all mammals, it’s the mother who must metaphorically lick the newborn and free it from whatever constricts it at birth. The mother, after birth, opens your body to life. It’s she who gestates, carries, and then cradles and nourishes the child. No child or adult at some level of consciousness ever forgets this and our sense of being loved or not is very much linked to our mothers.

But it’s the father who gives the child both the permission to enjoy life and the challenge to discipline. It’s the father who must, especially by the way he himself lives, model for the child the correct combination of pleasure and renunciation. It’s from him, more so than from the mother, that the child learns the combination of release and control, submission to constraints and the freedom to walk one’s own path.

And this task is key in initiating us into adulthood, in helping to lead us beyond being the little boy or the little girl, towards becoming the adult, the man or the woman. A father must do this, first of all, by showing us in his own life how one’s energy for love and one’s energy to confront and protect should form a harmony so that the chaotic energies inside us are contained, focused, blended, and creatively opened for the service of God and others. A father must show how enjoyment and creativity blend with necessary self-renunciation and how our energy for love and our energy to fight to protect community (especially its weakest members) can work in tandem so that they are not enemies. A father must teach us how to be both a lover and a fighter.

My own father, imperfect like all human fathers, didn’t always find, nor radiate, the perfect balance between enjoyment and discipline, lover and fighter, enjoyment and self-abnegation. As one of his sons, I then also do not always know how to walk that tightrope, and sometimes there’s a sloppiness in my life between laziness and overwork, love and anger, self-indulgence and masochism. Sometimes I can protect community and sometimes I can’t even protect myself.

However, most times I have my father’s steadiness, beyond the slopping around. I had a good dad. He both loved and fought, though sometimes he was too hard on himself and sometimes he thoroughly enjoyed his life.

I’m more than fifty years after that minus forty degrees temperature day when he died and sometimes my spirit still feels the cold of that day and then I’m a little boy, a pre-adult, alone, waiting for my father to lead me to adulthood, unsure of how to integrate enjoyment and discipline.

But, when I search for my father, for his spirit, not among the bones of ancestors, but among the communion of saints, I find him walking still the delicate tightrope he walked in life, and his spirit reaches back to help me in my struggle with love and confrontation, with enjoyment and renunciation, and then I feel a little more steady as an adult.

Our Language Regarding Suicide

A A A

I generally try to be sensitive to using politically correct language, though sometimes that can be exasperating because of various hypersensitivities where people are too easily offended. Simply put, someone can take offense at almost any word. However, despite our occasional exasperation with those who are too easily offended, we must admit that in the past we were too careless and callous in our naming of things. Our vocabulary was often hurtful precisely to those who were most hurting. We had too many pejorative and belittling terms about those who were different from us and about those who suffered from various disabilities.

With that in mind, I would like to make a suggestion regarding how we speak about suicide. The common expression is that someone “committed” suicide. That verb needs to be struck from our vocabulary when we talk about suicide.

Very few people who die by suicide, “commit” suicide. More accurately they “succumb” to it in the same way as someone succumbs to cancer, a stroke, or a heart attack. Fifteen years ago, I was diagnosed with cancer. I didn’t “commit” cancer, it overpowered my immune system against my will. It’s the same with a stroke or heart attack. You don’t “commit” a stroke or a heart attack. They overpower your natural resistance.

Physically we have an immune system which, akin to police on patrol, keeps vigilance over our health, seeking out bacteria, viruses, and malignant cells and destroying them before they can take root, multiply, destroy our health, and cause death. But as we know, sometimes for all kinds of reasons, a malignancy can overpower our immune system and our health breaks down and we die because our natural protection against sickness is overpowered by bacteria, viruses, the breakdown of a vital organ, or some cancerous cells. We die, not by choice, but by conscription. We don’t “commit” a sickness.

The same holds true for our mental health. Mentally, we also have an immune system that, akin to patrolling police, keeps vigil on our psychological and emotional health. But, as with our physical health, sometimes a factor or a combination of factors (genetics, trauma, clinical depression, a tragic life circumstance) can overpower our psychological and emotional immune system and we can succumb to a sickness (unbidden and unwelcome) called suicide.

This is true, I submit, for most people who die by suicide. There are exceptions of course, though these are exceptions, not the norm. Someone can indeed “commit” suicide where, in effect, they are not succumbing in weakness to an illness but are in strength making a proactive choice. Thus, we can make a distinction between what might be called “killing oneself” as opposed to “succumbing to suicide.”  

Someone can kill himself out of strength, pride, and arrogance: I’m too proud and special to share life with the rest of you! Life has not honored my specialness. I’d rather die than continue to live in this world! That’s the difference between a Hitler-type suicide and that of an oversensitive soul too bruised and wounded to continue to fight for life. The former chooses suicide out of strength; the latter dies out of weakness. (Albeit, in fairness, we may not even judge Hitler. Who knows what malignancies overpowered his mental immune system?)

With that being said, allow me to reiterate some key truths vis-à-vis suicide which need to be said, said, and said again, until they need not to be said anymore.

In most cases of suicide:

  • We are dealing with a very sensitive or deeply wounded person who is too bruised to touch or too wounded to respond any longer to our outreach.
  • The one dying of suicide dies against his or her will.
  • Their manner of death is akin to jumping out of a high-rise window because your clothing is on fire.
  • Their manner of death is the equivalent of an emotional cancer, stroke, or heart attack.
  •  In many cases suicidal depression has some biochemical roots.
  • Suicide is not an act of despair. One doesn’t choose to lose hope, rather wound and illness overpower hope.
  • Suicide is not an act of selfishness, though it may seem so.
  • We need not be anxious about the eternal salvation of those who die by suicide. God’s empathy and understanding are infinitely deeper than our own.

When persons we know and love die by suicide, one of our tasks is to redeem their memory so that the gift their life brought to the world is not denigrated and erased because we now view their life through the prism of how they died.

To die of a heart attack, cancer, or stroke can be sad and tragic, but it’s not shameful. The same for dying by suicide. It’s sad and tragic, but it’s not shameful. Indeed, it may be the most unglamorous and humble of all deaths and thus deserves a special empathy and understanding.

When speaking about suicide, our vocabulary needs to reflect that special empathy, and to do that we need to eliminate the phrase: “someone committed suicide.”