BEND — It has been my lifelong experience that each of us is very insistent on having things go “our way.” It is also very clear that we tend to give an interpretation to documents and events which most closely aligns with what we would like those documents or events to mean. In other words, we all tend, more or less, to subjectivity. At the same time, in our self evaluation we are inclined to imagine that our thoughts or positions are really much more objective than those of our neighbor. I have experienced this over the past several months in regard to our conditional use permit application with Crook County. It seems perfectly clear to me that the zoning laws permit the building of the structures we hope to build for our new Catholic Center. That, however, which is crystal clear to me is not nearly so clear to others. Though we read the same statutes, the breadth of proposed interpretations are as varied as the minds of those reading the words of the statutes.

We understand and agree that the statutes permit the building of “churches” but then the pertinent question, as a recent headline asked, becomes “What constitutes a church?” In the narrow, civil, legal sense one could argue that “church” is that specific building in which the faithful gather for worship. In a broader, ecclesial and canonical sense one could argue that “church” is the entire complex of buildings, duties and responsibilities entrusted to a bishop of a particular diocese. It may come as no surprise that I lean toward the latter definition and that the planning commission, while not rejecting the broader definition, must likewise deal with the narrower definition. The matter comes before the commission once more on Tuesday evening and hopefully we will arrive at a bit more clarity on that occasion. Once again I urge prayer for the deliberative process and while I am faith-filled enough to ask that the prayer be for the fulfillment of God’s will, I am also inclined to ask for prayers that the necessary permits be granted. It would be very easy for me to accept God’s will if that will is that the conditional use permit be granted, but if the permit is denied I would be less inclined to identify such a decision with God’s will.

This is where trusting in God’s seemingly crooked lines really challenges the objectivity of faith. It is very consoling to have things work the way we would like them, to work and then to sit back with a kind of smug complacence thinking that we really are doing God’s will after all. On the other hand, since things rarely proceed flawlessly according to our plans, our faith is routinely challenged. In this, the subjectivity of our faith is revealed. For myself, I do recognize that my willingness to accept God’s will is very much conditioned on whether my particular hopes and aspirations are included in what God wills. In the case at hand, if our permit would be denied then I would have to admit that it was God’s will that it be denied. Then I would need to discern if it is God’s will that we engage in further petitions and applications and appeals or if it is His will to simply abandon the entire concept. From a purely subjective point of view it is almost impossible for me to envision that God’s will is that we not work very assertively for the promotion of His kingdom here in Eastern and Central Oregon. The precise method of evangelization is not spelled out, but it is clearly God’s will that the message of the Gospel be spread. It is also clear in the history of the Church that evangelization efforts often encounter significant resistance. Again, notice the subjectivity of this line of reasoning. Swift approval would be very consoling but denial, precisely because it forces greater reliance on God, may be more beneficial.

I pray for the grace to live out a prayer I found decades ago: Lord, I give this day entirely to You — I retain none of it for myself. It is Yours. If on this, Your day, You send me joy — I thank you. If on this, Your day, You send me loneliness — I will draw closer to You. If on this, Your day, You send me sorrow — I accept it. If on this, Your day, You send me peace — I will share it with the anxious. If on this, Your day, You send me pain — I will suffer it with You. If I accept good things from You, should I not also accept unpleasant? Since this is Your day, which You graciously have given to me, and which I now in intention return to You, help me to live it well; not to waste what You have given on idleness but to use it as You have designed. Help me to remember how well the day goes when it is given to You. I trust that You will give to me this day all that I need and that all that is given or withheld is for my good. With all this in mind, help me to live this day with You in joy. Amen.

I see a similar subjective interpretive tendency in relation to the Motu Proprio regarding the celebration of the Mass of Pope Pius V. There are a variety of interpretations about what it says or does not say, what it permits and does not permit, what it mandates and what it forbids. In general, the variety of proposed interpretations are as varied as the minds of those reading the words of the Motu Proprio. In regard to this very significant document it is clear that each of us tends to give an interpretation which most closely aligns with what we would like it to mean. It is important for each to recognize the level to which our personal feelings impact on our interpretation. If this is done then a fruitful discussion between those who insist on different interpretations is possible. Once someone concludes that their interpretation is objective and not at all subjective (which is, of course, already a subjective conclusion) then the ground for fruitful discussion is significantly diminished.

I do wish that the Crook County Planning Commission would see the county zoning statutes as clearly as I do. I am sure that some who are very interested in seeing a fuller restoration of the Mass of Pius V wish that I could see the objectively proper meaning of the Motu Proprio as clearly as they do. Let us pray for a fuller acceptance of God’s will and not only His will as refracted by our own very subjective interests.