Primarily drawing from the work of Mother Angelica and Blessed John Henry Newman, the
development of a “Theology of Risk” (as identified by Mother Angelica herself) has garnered an
increasingly high profile since the passing of the great founder of EWTN1
. Likewise, Newman’s broad-
reaching verbiage concerning risk runs along the lines of a business venture in what he calls “Making a
Venture of Faith”
2
. The consensus between the two proposes that modern man has lost a sense of the
value of what Christ offers in reconciling him to the Father, so much so that man is unwilling, or
oblivious to, the call of God to risk his life and livelihood for the Gospel just as Christ did for his sake.
On the other hand, magnanimous men and women (like Mother Angelica) have taken enormous risks as acts of faith in the providence of God. As a result of this Imitatio Christi, they may very well have bridged the chasm between the “rich man” and Abraham’s bosom. In contrast, there are more than enough examples of rich young (and old) men who walk away from such a challenge in sorrow: Charles Dickens’ tale about Ebenezer Scrooge is one such example that could have ended similarly to more and more cases of modern men of the world. In general, men have lost a sense of what it means to risk for the Gospel. Particularly those men whose job it is in the business world to minimize risk, be adverse to risk, or to only risk what is nearly guaranteed to make a return based on a cost/benefit analysis. These parameters could be applied to the Gospel, as in the parable of the talents and the building of the tower, etc. Yet, worldly men who might even darken the door of a parish each week, do not desire to “make a venture” for eternal life. Instead, they experience peer pressure to store up treasures for the moth to destroy; they go the way of mammon in the hopes that insurance, stocks and bonds, etc. will pass on their legacy to the next generation without pause. To be clear, these prospects are not evil unless the “love of money” for its own sake is involved.
Pope Leo XIII and St John Paul II stressed the great good and potential that work, capitalism, and private property engender in the economy 3 . Simultaneously, their treatment of legal immigration and mission speaks to the need for mobility as well as stability, the willingness to “move” mountains if necessary by faith so as to make a claim in the reality of the Resurrection. Without such a claim, there is little proof in the relationship between a man and the “father of faith”, Abraham. Abraham, who himself was as well as his son Isaac, were successful businessmen throughout their long lives: risked his home, his only son of the promise, his herds and crops by tithing to Melchezidek, and so on. Chief of these risks, of course, is Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac in the belief that “God could raise him from the dead” 4 .
In Isaac, as a type of Christ, Abraham had a sense of being a type of the heavenly Father (Imitatio Patri) by not withholding his beloved son. He underwent a Kenosis, that is, a self-emptying with tremendous risk for his livelihood. As a result, it is Abraham who welcomes the downtrodden Lazarus beyond the grave. It is Abraham, and not the rich man—famous for making corporal demands of Lazarus only when it was too late--, whom we call, “father of faith”. His lofty title is as a result of “becoming obedient unto death”, an extraordinary paradox in which Abraham is both a type of Christ and a type of His Father (Imitatio Christi et Patri). After all, Abraham was “as good as dead”, meaning essentially that he had hit rock bottom. Nevertheless, God made him the “father of many nations” with “descendants as numerous as the stars and sands of the seashore”.
What assurance did Abraham have of the fulfillment of this promise? He was eventually given the son of the promise, and even then, Abraham was willing to risk losing him out of obedience. Had Abraham not engaged in a “Theology of Risk”, his story would be that of the “rich old man”. He would have walked away to Ur of the Chaldeans “sad for he had many possessions”. This is the plight of many men today, young or old, unwilling to take on the adventure of being a father of faith and risk losing their lives for the Gospel. Perhaps an Ebenezer Scrooge moment may still loom on the horizon for them while they passively sleep and dream, but making that presumption after many missed opportunities may undermine the prospect of taking an active risk for the greater glory of God today.
___________________________
1 Mother Angelica. Arroyo, 151-153
2 “Sermon 20”. Blessed John Henry Cardinal Newman
3 Rerum Novarum * Centessimus Annus
4 Heb 11:19
On the other hand, magnanimous men and women (like Mother Angelica) have taken enormous risks as acts of faith in the providence of God. As a result of this Imitatio Christi, they may very well have bridged the chasm between the “rich man” and Abraham’s bosom. In contrast, there are more than enough examples of rich young (and old) men who walk away from such a challenge in sorrow: Charles Dickens’ tale about Ebenezer Scrooge is one such example that could have ended similarly to more and more cases of modern men of the world. In general, men have lost a sense of what it means to risk for the Gospel. Particularly those men whose job it is in the business world to minimize risk, be adverse to risk, or to only risk what is nearly guaranteed to make a return based on a cost/benefit analysis. These parameters could be applied to the Gospel, as in the parable of the talents and the building of the tower, etc. Yet, worldly men who might even darken the door of a parish each week, do not desire to “make a venture” for eternal life. Instead, they experience peer pressure to store up treasures for the moth to destroy; they go the way of mammon in the hopes that insurance, stocks and bonds, etc. will pass on their legacy to the next generation without pause. To be clear, these prospects are not evil unless the “love of money” for its own sake is involved.
Pope Leo XIII and St John Paul II stressed the great good and potential that work, capitalism, and private property engender in the economy 3 . Simultaneously, their treatment of legal immigration and mission speaks to the need for mobility as well as stability, the willingness to “move” mountains if necessary by faith so as to make a claim in the reality of the Resurrection. Without such a claim, there is little proof in the relationship between a man and the “father of faith”, Abraham. Abraham, who himself was as well as his son Isaac, were successful businessmen throughout their long lives: risked his home, his only son of the promise, his herds and crops by tithing to Melchezidek, and so on. Chief of these risks, of course, is Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac in the belief that “God could raise him from the dead” 4 .
In Isaac, as a type of Christ, Abraham had a sense of being a type of the heavenly Father (Imitatio Patri) by not withholding his beloved son. He underwent a Kenosis, that is, a self-emptying with tremendous risk for his livelihood. As a result, it is Abraham who welcomes the downtrodden Lazarus beyond the grave. It is Abraham, and not the rich man—famous for making corporal demands of Lazarus only when it was too late--, whom we call, “father of faith”. His lofty title is as a result of “becoming obedient unto death”, an extraordinary paradox in which Abraham is both a type of Christ and a type of His Father (Imitatio Christi et Patri). After all, Abraham was “as good as dead”, meaning essentially that he had hit rock bottom. Nevertheless, God made him the “father of many nations” with “descendants as numerous as the stars and sands of the seashore”.
What assurance did Abraham have of the fulfillment of this promise? He was eventually given the son of the promise, and even then, Abraham was willing to risk losing him out of obedience. Had Abraham not engaged in a “Theology of Risk”, his story would be that of the “rich old man”. He would have walked away to Ur of the Chaldeans “sad for he had many possessions”. This is the plight of many men today, young or old, unwilling to take on the adventure of being a father of faith and risk losing their lives for the Gospel. Perhaps an Ebenezer Scrooge moment may still loom on the horizon for them while they passively sleep and dream, but making that presumption after many missed opportunities may undermine the prospect of taking an active risk for the greater glory of God today.
___________________________
1 Mother Angelica. Arroyo, 151-153
2 “Sermon 20”. Blessed John Henry Cardinal Newman
3 Rerum Novarum * Centessimus Annus
4 Heb 11:19
