What’s it all about?

 

Yesterday I had the honor of celebrating the Mass of Christian Burial for another member of my family, a maternal aunt. My cousins selected as the first reading a segment of Chapter 3 of the Book of Ecclesiastes, verses 1-15—the verses reminding us that there is a time for everything, including living and dying. As I sat in the sanctuary pondering on this passage knowing that I would be offering a homily, which would also include some commentary on Saint Matthew’s Gospel, “come to me all you who labor, and I will give you rest…”, I realized that the Ecclesiastes passage has a bearing on what most of us do outside of funeral Masses. Of course, I do not mean to suggest that other, even many passages of sacred scripture do not have application to us, our labors, and our lives—for they do. But this Ecclesiastes passage surely has a particular bearing on what the Mirror of Justice contributors in the realm of the teaching of the law and the development of Catholic legal theory.

The bearing involves this: keeping regular focus on the question of “what’s it all about”? Many issues and problems transect the work that legal academics—including the Catholic ones—tackle. Some of these issues and problems pertain to the important political issues of the day; in parallel fashion, others concern the fiscal questions that are inevitable to the study and practice of the law and its rule. Still other questions raise important psychological and sociological matters that are of concern to the law and legal theory. Others concern the relationship between the human person, human societies, and the state. But rarely does the question I pose get much attention. And by this question, I mean to raise the insufficiency of interest that deals with the essence and nature of the human person that inevitably brings up the question about human destiny. Some will argue that there is little need to address these old fashioned ideas about nature, essence, and destiny. I suppose the justification for offering and defending such a perspective is based on the fact that exaggerated human autonomy, relativism, and secularism provide strong currents in the academic world of today that has a strong influence on the making of law and the practice of the legal profession.

It may well be that the metaphysical reflection that surrounds the question I have posed is of little interest to some, perhaps many; it may also alarm and frighten others who “don’t want to go there” because it involves consideration of matters that go beyond the collection and assessment of empirical data. There are a lot of important issues that demand the time of our study and research and that have an impact on our teaching and public speaking. But I think one matter that is in need of greater attention is the question that I have posed. For the Christian, the inevitable encounter with God is fundamental, yet many often avoid consideration of the topic. I suppose one rationale used to support the avoidance is that the Christian does not want to offend the non-believing or questioning person. Yet, is it not more than fair to raise with anyone we encounter matters which deal with the destiny of the human person, which can begin with the straight-forward question: what’s it all about?

 

RJA sj