Empathy - Einfühlung : An Absolutely Necessary Factor for Minimizing Re-Traumatization of Sexually Assaulted Victims

Having counseled many sexually assaulted victims, one thing that always sticks to my mind is that rape victims are re-traumatized when they were physically examined by physicians for treatment and investigation. Further re-traumatization occurs as these victims were interviewed by prosecuting attorney(s) and attorney(s) defending perpetrators.

Imagine what it would be like for a woman, whose sexual part was violated traumatically, upon being forcibly undressed and her leg tore open with violent forces, to be put on a physician’s examination seat, being asked to open her legs – for the sake of necessary medical treatment and obtaining legal evidence.

As they were put in the examination room, the victims have to open their legs, shortly after their perpetrators forcibly tore open their legs.  Even for the sake of necessary medical care and legally required investigation, this procedure is re-traumatizing, given that it is conducted shortly after the traumatic assault.

Victims of traumas, including sexual assaults, almost always experience and exhibit catatonia. They can hardly mobilize their bodies and body parts. This is particularly so with the parts affected most. But, an examining physician and assisting nurse(s) constantly ask victims to cooperate medical procedure and legal investigation by opening legs – when victims’ bodies are still catatonic.

In order to heal from catatonic effects of trauma, victims need some time and safe space. However, post-sexual-assault medical and legal procedure must be conducted as soon as possible to prevent medical complications, including infection, and to obtain legal evidence for perpetrator prosecution.

Psychologically, it is better to wait until the victims’ emotional stability is recovered up to a certain level to go through the medical procedure that requires their legs to be opened again and to have their sensitive and sacred anatomical part touched by another person.  However, in reality, medically and legally, rape victims are to be examined as soon as possible upon the assaults to prevent pathophysiological complication and to preserve prosecutor evidence.  This is a dilemma in working for healing and justice for sexually assaulted victims.

As a mental health clinician and pastoral minister, I do all I can to facilitate the victims’ healing and new psycholospiritual growth, focusing on their unique inner strengths. For this, I gently guide their attention to unearth what is not destroyed and lost – whatever sustained the traumatic assault – to rebuild their personhood anew.  Spiritually and pastorally, I also apply some biblical narratives, such as the post-exilic restorative narratives, to ignite the victims’ new hope and strengths, for healing and post-traumatic growth. However, a mental health clinician, like myself, is not the first helping professional that victims have to see.  They have no choice but to have a re-traumatizing physical examination by a physician, followed by attorney(s)’s investigatory interviews.  Victims seek psychological and spiritual care after such re-traumatizing and stressful procedures are over.

By the time victims seek professional psychological and spiritual care, they have gone through additional traumas and stress, because of this frustrating reality.

Though re-traumatizing and highly stressful, these physical examination, which requires the victims to open catatonic legs, and distressing investigative interviews are necessary medically and legally. Thus, there is a dilemma between the psychological -spiritual interests for the victims and the medical-legal interests for the victims. 

Whether you are a physician, or an attorney, or a psychologist, or a minister, we the helping professionals need to be aware of this dilemma in engaging our respective tasks for victims of sexual assaults.

In my clinical and pastoral work I provide for victims, it is important that I acknowledge their most sensitive and sacred anatomical part was traumatically assaulted and desecrated by the evil forces of the perpetrators. I also recognize that not only they sustained the horrendous traumatic sufferings but also re-traumatizing medical procedures and prosecutor investigations, as they come to me for healing and post-traumatic growth.

In fact, it is critically important that anything associated to the victims’ strengths are noted not only by the victims themselves but also by others.  Psychologists, ministers, physicians, nurses, social workers, and attorneys, who get involved in the victims’ post-assault life in their respective professional capacities, play important roles in this regard.  As other persons acknowledge the victims’ strengths, it helps them recognize their own resilient strengths to prompt healing and post-traumatic growth. It will also help them overcome and transcend victim mentality, which could haunt them for the rest of their lives.

The victims certainly understand that what is needed to be done medically and legally must be cone as it should .  However, given the inevitable re-traumatizing nature of this post-assault medically and legally required procedures, it makes difference if examining physicians and nurses, as well as interviewing attorneys and social workers, more sensitively acknowledge the victims’ re-traumatization with their procedures, and conduct more empathically.

Medical and legal procedures should not be mere mechanical tasks to be done. The procedural tasks must always sensitively and empathically acknowledge sexually assaulted victims’ traumatization and  re-traumatization.  

In a way, this is similar to how physicians should tell their patients “bad news” – shocking, even possibly traumatizing diagnoses.  In this regard, I always advise physicians and medical students to place themselves in places of their patients and see how they think their patients would like to hear what they rather do not want to hear.  Telling physicians to think how they would want to hear if they were the patients is not enough, because it does not sufficiently acknowledge patients’ unique perspective. Physicians need to go beyond the sphere of their own perspectives in empathically placing themselves in patients’ distressed hearts and minds.

Empathy means to enter into the pathos of patients. The German word, corresponding to empathy in English, is Einfühlung. It literally means to enter (ein) into the feeling (Fühlung), pathos, of the patient. Another way to understand is to become one (ein) contact (Fühlung), indicating solidarity with the patient.  The latter interpretation is more closer to Einfühlung’s similar word, Mitfühlung.  Thus, whether physicians are examining rape victims or telling “bad news” to terminally ill patients – whenever physicians had to perform a task that can shock and (re)traumatize patients – procedures must genuinely embody the very meaning of empathy or Einfühlung.  In other words, treating sexually assaulted victims must be conducted in a way for clinicians are in solidarity with victims in the very traumatize hearts and minds of them.  This is no easy task at all, as we cannot be totally free from the sphere of our own personal perspectives.  But, this is a very important task that we constantly strive for – to serve victims more sensitively and compassionately.

We must go beyond our own professional and personal perspective in dealing with such sensitive clinical issues, whether we are serving rape victims or terminally ill patients.

I always tell physicians, nurses, attorneys, medical students, nursing students, and law students, that being a physician, or a nurse, or an attorney, means being an empathic psychologist first.

Being an empathic psychologist and minister, as well as a physician and attorney, means simply being compassionate fellow human first, reflecting the new command (mandatum novum )of Jesus – love your neighbor (John 13:34) as the Good Samaritan did (Luke 10:25-37). Practice this commandment – not just in our specialized professional capacities, but first and foremost, as a fellow human being reaching out to victims.

We know professionally that the procedures need to be done as soon as possible – though we know that the victims are still in trauma.  We work under the pressure. However, this is only our own professional perspective.  And, we need to go beyond this for the sake of empathy – Einfühlung.

Though there is no simple one-fits-all kind of formulate, we must balance traumatize victims’ perspectives with our professional perspectives under the pressure by placing our own hearts and minds into the victims’, because this is the only way we can become genuinely empathic.

For this, we also need to constantly examine and reflect our own professional perspectives in light of the victims at each case and at each encounter. In order to accomplish this objective, we must first establish rapport with them by providing gentle, genuinely compassionate, secure space and time.  Without this, post-assault medical and legal procedures sure to re-traumatize unnecessarily due to the empathy deficit on our side.

Though the case may be successfully prosecuted at the expenses of the victims’ re-traumatization, I do not think   that justice, in a true sense, is attained this way.  As a pastoral psychologist, I continue to address lingering effects of their initial traumas from sexual assaults but also re-traumatizations brought by the post-assault investigative medical and legal procedures, lacking the aforementioned empathic sensitivity.

In addition to trauma and re-traumalizations, shame and guilt, as well as a sense of powerlessness are important factors to be addressed both psychologically and spiritually, as these factors certainly further complicate victims’ complicated accumulative traumatizations from re-traumatizations from medical and legal procedures.

In order to prevent such psychological complications and their further lingering effects, we really need to take empathy (Einfühlung) more seriously in a way for us to be in solidarity with victims not in our own perspectives but in their shattered hearts and minds.  This is also an absolutely necessary condition to prompt post-traumatic growth. 

Narcissism and Free Will is a Deadly Combination – A Lesson from Comparing and Contrasting the Nathan’s Parable to David (2 Samuel 12:1-7) and Jesus’ Parable to the Religious Leaders (Matthew 21:33-46)

Jesus was sent to this world to covert our hearts and minds from a life of sin to a life in God. God the Father sent His only begotten Son to this world for this purpose, because God so loved the world that we might not perish and might have eternal life as we believe in him (John 3:16). God did this because He really loves us, regardless of our sinfulness, and wants us to come to Him. And the only way to God the Father, whose desire is to have us closer to Him, is through the Son (John 12:44; 13:20; 14:6), as our Good Shepherd to follow (John 10:11,14). But, the wickedness of the leaders of the God’s house of prayer killed the Son that the Father in heaven sent, by conspiring the Roman civil authority to crucify him.

Before Jesus, God sent various prophets to turn our sinful hearts back to God. However, these prophets were persecuted (Matthew 23:24). Jesus was like a stone that builders rejected and cast out (Matthew 21:42; Psalm 118:22). But, the Father, who sent the Son, Jesus, who became the rejected stone, will make him a cornerstone (Matthew 21:42; Psalm 118:23), as it is the Father, who raised the Son from his death on the third day.

The parable of the tenant vineyard worker (Matthew 21:33-46), in conjunction with Isaiah 5:1-7, reflects this progression of unrepentant sinfulness and its consequence.

Jesus told this parable specifically to the hypocrite religious leaders of the time, who turned the Temple, the God’s house of prayer, on earth, into the house of thieves (Matthew 21:13) to point out their sinfulness, by juxtaposing them to the tenant vineyard workers, who hijacked the vineyard and stole the inheritance of the vineyard owner’s son, upon killing all of the vineyard owner’s servants and his son.

Through parables spoken by prophets and Jesus, God teaches us a lesson of acknowledging our own sinfulness and need of repentance to reconcile with him.  Some learn the lesson and turn their sinful hearts and minds from sin and back to God. But, others refuse to convert and choose to remain in sin.

In this regard, this is a striking contrast between Jesus’ parable of the tenant vineyard workers to the hypocrite religious leaders (Matthew 21:33-46) and prophet Nathan’s parable of the rich man and the poor man’s ewe lamb to David (2 Samuel 12:1-13).

Nathan was a prophet to David, the King of Israel, offering spiritual advice to him as God commanded.

David humbly listened to and obeyed the word of God, as spoken to him by Nathan (2 Samuel 12:7). However, once experiencing sensual temptation upon seeing a bathing scene of Bathsheba, a beautiful wife of Uriah, a David’s royal guard, David was succumbed into double mortal sins:  conspiring of murder and adultery (2 Samuel 11).

The Nathan’s parable comes to David to point out David’s sinfulness.

In response to David’s sinful acts of stealing Uriah’s beautiful wife, Bathsheba, by conspiring to have Uriah killed, God spoke to her through Prophet Nathan, in the parable of the rich man and the poor man’s ewe lamb.  In this parable, the rich man, who had a great flocks and herds, took the poor man’s only ewe lamb and slaughtered to serve for his guest’s dinner.  The poor man basically lost all he had, as he loved his only ewe lamb so much and took a great care of her. To this parable, David became very angry at the rich man and uttered that the rich man should to be put to death, while the poor man should be compensated four-fold for his loss. David was so angry because the rich man had no regard for the poor man.

Obviously, David grew so indignant out of his compassion for the poor man. This shows that David was a man of kind heart. However, until Nathan reminded David that the man he became angry at for his ruthless and pitiless act was a metaphoric projection of David himself for arranging to have Uriah killed in order to have Uriah’s wife, Bathsheba, as his own.

David could have killed Nathan, if he were a narcissistic man, as pointing out his sins could have irritated him. However, David humbled himself and acknowledged his great sins and repented (2 Samuel 13:13), and this is also reflected in Psalm 51, which David wrote. 

David’s humble response and repentance in response to the Nathan’s parable (2 Samuel 12:1-13) draws sharp contrast with the hypocrite religious leaders’ response to the Jesus’ parable (Matthew 21:33-46).

In the parable of the tenant vineyard workers (Matthew 21:33-40), Jesus juxtaposed the sins of the religious leaders to the wickedness of the tenant vineyard worker in the parable and projected this back to them.

As these leaders corrupted the Temple by their own narcissistic ambitions, turning the God’s sacred house of prayer into a den of thieves (Matthew 21:12-13), the tenant vineyard workers turned a fertile vineyard into a field of abomination (Matthew 21:33-39). The religious leaders were entrusted by God to take a good care of the Temple as the God’s sacred house of prayer. However, instead of doing the will of God to take care of the Temple, these hypocrite leaders abused their free will and run amok with the Temple as a den of thieves.

David also forgot about the will of God when he was seduced by the bathing scene of Bathsheba (2 Samuel 11:2-5). It was when he was abusing his free will without the consideration for the will of God, carried by a powerful sensual temptation.  The hypocrite religious leaders were also living only with their free will, ignoring the will of God, to hijack the Temple to do whatever they willed to do.

Though both of them committed serious sins, the difference between David and the hypocrite religious leaders is that former repented but the latter refused to repent, when they were given opportunities to turn their hearts and minds from sins to God through the parables.

Like David, even a humble person can lose our sight on God and the will of God when there is a certain temptation and slip into an abuse of free will. When we abuse the God-given gift of free will, we do whatever we will, without any regard to the will of God, the will of the very one who gave us the free will. Psychologically, narcissists tend to practice the abuse of free will in their own relentless pursuit of the objects of what they will.

It was grace of God that came to David as the parable that Nathan spoke. The words in the parable were of God to give David a chance to use free will to wake up to his own sinfulness and repent. And David did so and was forgiven by God (2 Samuel 12:13).

On the other hand, the hypocrite religious leaders used free will not to repent, even though they realized that Jesus’ parable was sharply pointing their sinfulness. Instead of acknowledging their sinfulness and repenting, they continued to abuse free will to decide to silence him (Matthew 21:46).

It was the narcissism of them that made the hypocrite religious leaders refuse to repent. Rather, they decided to arrest Jesus and kill him – just as metaphorically said in the Jesus’ parable, as the wicked tenant vineyard workers not only killed the landowners’ servants but also the very son of him and stoke his inheritance. So, Jesus became the stone that the builders rejected (Matthew 21:42; Psalm 118:22).

Because David was not narcissistic, all he needed was God’s grace through the parable to let him turn free will to be used for the will of God.

Psychological studies, such as Williams & Leopendorf (1990), Kenis & Sun (1994),  and Paulhus & Williams (2002), indicate that narcissism makes it difficult to have remorse. For us to repent, we must have remorse, as repentance is contingent upon remorse.

In response to grace of God, through the teaching message of the parables, David felt remorse over his sins and repented, while the hypocrite religious leaders did not but decided to attack the agent of the grace. This comparison of David and the hypocrite religious leaders indicates that narcissism, which is a stumbling block of remorse, impairs our abilities to repent and reconcile. As the above-cited studies indicate, narcissism is what let us continue to abuse free wills until we hijack what God has leased us and destroy His servants and Son, as the wicked tenant vineyard workers did with the vineyard and the landowner – as the hypocrite religious leaders did with the God’s sacred house of prayer and His son, Jesus Christ.

But, as God has turned the rejected stone into the cornerstone (Matthew 21:42, Psalm 118:22-23), God already raised the Son, who was killed by the devil of the narcissism of the hypocrite religious leaders, from the dead. Though the world that God so loved and sent His only Son (John 3:16) has been plagued by the evil of our narcissism, especially among the ministers of the Church, God will renew the world, as prophesized in the Book of Revelation. In this cleansing process toward the end of time, those who refuse to overcome their narcissism and refuse to repent will face due judgement. God will take away what they have hijacked and clung to, as also prophesized in Isaiah 5:1-7.

A lesson from the comparison of the above two parables is that narcissism and free will make a deadly combination, as it can disable us to have remorse over our own sinfulness and repent. As we refuse to repent but continue to sin, pursuing objects of what our free will dictates without any regard to God and His will, we will eventually lose everything – even salvation at the end.

As we use God-given free will to fight our narcissistic disposition, we can keep ourselves from becoming narcissistic. Therefore, using the free will to overcome our narcissistic tendency is a necessary condition to our salvation. For this, as David did for his repentance, we need God’s grace. In order to be merited by God’s grace, we must turn our hearts and mind to the Word of God, which may come in parables (Psalm 78:2).  

The Word of God, especially in the parable spoken by God’s servants, prophets, and His Son, Jesus, are vehicles of God’s saving grace to help us stay on the right course so that we can use free will to do the will of God. And this is how we journey into salvation. Even we stumbled by temptations, God still gives a chance with parables, as He did to David. But, it is ultimately up to us in deciding what to do with free will: to remorse and repent or not to do so. 

For God’s grace to make its intended effect, it needs our free will to turn to God. Psychologically, our battle with Satan is our war against narcissistic disposition, which is what we gained upon the very first abuse of free will, committed by Adam and Eve.

Kernis, M. H. & Sun, C. (1994).  Narcissism and reactions to interpersonal feedback,   Journal of Research in Personality, 28(1), 4-13

Paulhus, D. L. & Williams, K. M. (2002). The dark triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy, Journal of Research in Personality, 36, 556-563

Williams, N. & Lependorf, S. (1990).  Narcissistic pathology of everyday life: the Denial of remorse and gratitude, Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 26(3), 430-451

We are Loyal Trustworthy Workers of God’s Vineyard – A Lesson from Three Vineyard-Related Parables

In the northern hemisphere, this is the harvest season for grapes.  In the Middle West and East Coast regions of the United States, this is when we enjoy harvesting concord grapes.

Interestingly, as to reflect the grape harvest season, for the last 3 Sundays (25^th Sunday, 26^th Sunday, and 27^th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A), Gospel readings have a theme of vineyard. These Gospel readings are: Mathew 20:1-16 (25^th Sun), 21:28-32 (26^th Sun), 21:33-43 (27^th Sun). 

The parable in Matthew 20:1-16 is bout vineyard workers complaining about their wages to the vineyard owner.  The vineyard workers who started working at the crack of dawn felt unfair, when they found out that the vineyard owner paid the same wage to those who came to work in late hours and did less work.  But, the vineyard owner insisted that he was not treating his workers unfairly as he sure paid what he agreed to pay with each of his workers.  The vineyard owner also told these complaining workers to leave his vineyard with what they received.

In this parable, God is the vineyard owner, and we are the vineyard workers.  The vineyard is the place that God provides for us to be and act as who we are and are to become in the eyes of God.  The vineyard owner went outside the vineyard to invite those who have no jobs to work in his vineyard. It means that God reaches out to those who are not treated for their self-worth by the place where they are. Then, God invites them into His domain so that their lives will have meaning and purpose by working in God’s “vineyard”.

 In Matthew 21:28-32, one son did not say “yes” but actually changed his mind and went out to work in the vineyard, while the other son said “yes” but never did the work, when their father asked them to work in the vineyard.

This parable reminds us of the importance of conversion, an act of turning our minds and hearts from a life of sin to a new life of doing the work for God.  In this parable, doing the work for God is juxtaposed to working in the vineyard.

While some people filling the pews every Sunday only live with empty “pious platitude”, there are people who are considered as outsiders by these pious platitude church goers, actually doing the work for God.  To point out the hypocrisy of those only live with empty “pious platitude”, Jesus referred the son who did not say “yes” to his father but actually did the work to tax collectors and prostitutes, who converted from their former lives of sin to do the will of God.  Thus, vineyard is where we do the will of God, upon our conversion – turning our lives from sin, Satan’s lure, to God.

The last of these three vineyard-related parables, Matthew 21:33-43, is the parable of the tenant vineyard workers, who hijacked the vineyard, abusing the trust that the vineyard owner put on them.  The vineyard owner worked hard to set up a nice vineyard with great care and leased it to his tenant workers.  These workers are to produce good fruits by the harvest season. However, when harvest time nears, instead of showing the progress of their vineyard work to the vineyard owner’s servants, they beat and killed these servants.  Finally, when the vineyard owner sent his own son to the vineyard, the tenant workers threw him out of the vineyard, killed him and stole his inheritance.

In this last vineyard-related parable, God is the vineyard owner, who set the vineyard up to lease.  The tenant workers in the vineyard are the hypocrite religious leaders at the time of Jesus. They are the ones who turned the Temple, the house of God, the house of prayer (Isaiah 56:7), into a den of thieves (Jeremiah 7:11), as Jesus confronted them when he cleansed corrupted Temple (Matthew 21:12-13; Mark 11:15-18; Luke 19:45-48). In other words, what Jeremiah 7 describes as false religious teachers, are projected into the hypocrite religious leaders who manage the Temple and deconsecrated this holy house of prayer. And, they are further juxtaposed to these tenant vineyard workers in the parable of Matthew 21:33-43.

The vineyard is the world that God set up for us to bear fruits.  We are not only called to work in His vineyard to bear its fruits but also to be judged by the fruits we produce (Matthew 7:19-21), as Jesus taught in his Sermon on the Mount, echoing John the Baptist’s challenge to the hypocrites in Matthew 3:10. What was a tree that cannot bear good fruits in Matthew 3:10 and Matthew 7:19-21 is now projected into the desecrated vineyard hijacked by corrupt tenant workers in Matthew 21:33-42. Thus, there is a progressive thematic development leading to this vineyard-related parable in the Matthew’s Gospel to remind us how important it is for us to be faithful to God, not abusing His trust in us, and to bear abundant fruits in His vineyard. Not abusing God’s trust in us means not abusing God’s gift of free will.

Originally, vineyard is a metaphor of Israel, the nation of the first chosen people in the Old Testament, as in the first reading for the 27^th Sunday, Isaiah 5:1-7, describes.  However, because of Isaiah’s prophesy of salvation of the world (i.e. Isaiah 45:22, 52:10, 15,  56:7, 60:3, 66:18) and elsewhere in the Old Testament prophecies (i.e.  Zechariah 9:10) and Psalm (i.e. Psalm 22:27-28, 72:8-11), on the universality of salvation, the salvific dominion of God is applied not just the nation of the first chosen, Israel, but extended to all nations on earth. This extensive dominion of God’s salvation is projected into the vineyard metaphor throughout these parables read in these three Sundays:  Mathew 20:1-16 (25^th Sun), 21:28-32 (26^th Sun), 21:33-43 (27^th Sun).  However, Matthew 21:33-43 indicates that unrepentant sinfulness, as in the rebellious tenant workers who hijacked the vineyard, has turned the salvific world into desolation, filled with sins of greed and so forth, in a similar ways the Temple had turned from the God’s sacred house of prayer into a desecrated den of robbers.

The first reading for the 27^th Sunday, Isaiah 5:1-7, is a prophetic prototype of the 27^th Sunday’s Gospel reading, Matthew 21:33-43, to prophesize a possible consequence of not just unrepentant sins but rather progressively escalating sins.

The progressive nature of unrepentant sins begins with our selfishness – our attachment to “our will”. -This makes it difficult for us to accept the will of God, which is emphasized in the vineyard-related parable for the 26^th Sunday Gospel, Matthew 21:28-32. This selfishness, our clinging to our own will, a misuse of God-given free will, makes us complain like the vineyard workers in the 25^th Sunday Gospel reading, Matthew 20:1-16. However, as indicated in the 26^th Sunday Gospel reading, Matthew 21:28-32, like the son, who first did not say “yes” to his father to work in the vineyard but changed his mind and actually worked, we are given a chance to turn our hearts and mind from a life of sin – a life of abusing free will -  to a life to do the will of God, by accepting the will of God with the gift of free will that we have. But, if we fail to convert our life from a life of abusing free will – a life of sin – to accept and do the will of God, then, we will be like the rebellious tenant vineyard workers, who killed not only the vineyard owner’s servants but also his son, and stole his inheritance, as described in the 27^th Sunday Gospel parable, Matthew 21:33-43.

It is the harvest time for concord grapes in North America. We will rejoice as we see abundant fruits in the vineyard at this time of the year. 

It is also when the end of the liturgical year draws near. It means that Gospel readings are more geared to draw our attention to the end of time to prepare for the coming of Christ the King.  We start this season of our eschatological preparation with these three vineyard-related parables from Matthew’s Gospel this liturgical year (Year A).

We must ask now, “Are we still complaining about the term we agree with God, because we have not yet overcome our selfishness?”, “Are we still living a life of free will without the regard to the will of God?”, “Have we turned our hearts and minds to do the will of God?”, or “Are we becoming like the tenant vineyard workers, who hijacked the vineyard and stole the vineyard owner’s son’s inheritance, because we refuse to convert our hearts and minds to the will of God but continue to abuse free will?”

Both Isaiah 5:1-7 and Matthew 21:33-43 also remind us that God will impose a judgment upon those who remain unrepentant and refuse to convert.

God will take the vineyard away from those who hijacked and stole the inheritance of the vineyard owner’s son.  It means that the Kingdom of Heaven, the domain of God’s salvation, will be taken away from such unrepentant progressive sinners at the time of the final judgment. Their names will not be found in the Book of Life.

Though it is already the harvest time for concord grape.  However, the eschatological harvest time in God’s vineyard has not yet come. It means that we still have time to become loyal vineyard workers, worthy of His trust, to our vineyard owner, who generously provides us with the place and opportunity to do meaningful work for the will of God.  As we turn ourselves from a life of sin, a life of abusing free will, to a life to do the will of God in the God’s vineyard, we will turn the vineyard abundantly fruitful field of harvest, when Christ, the Son, returns.

The Spirit of St. Francis of Assisi in the Jewish High Holy Days: From Rosh Hashanah to Yom Kippur

This year, 2014, the holiest day in Jewish life, Yom Kippur, coincided with the feast day of St. Francis of Assisi, October 4. This is no coincidence.  Given the meaning of Yom Kippur and significance of St. Francis of Assisi for us to be more intimate with God, there is a reason at least both for the Jews and the Christians to ponder upon our relationship with God.

Yom Kippur is the concluding day of the Yamim Noraim (Days of Awe or Days of Repentance), which is the 10-day high holy days, starting with Rosh Hashanah.  These 10 holy days of the Yamim Noraim also mark the beginning of a new Jewish year.

Yom Kippur is the climax of the 10 days of repentance leading to atonement with God. It is a progressive process from Rosh Hashanah toward Yom Kippur, to mark the these 10-day period of high holy days.  It is first to commemorate God’s Creation as the feast of trumpet (Yom Teruah), remembering how good God’s creation was.  So, we, as being created by God, were good in the beginning.  But, we have turned away from the Creator, God, who made us good, as tempted by Satan and his tricks, throughout history.  Thus, we turn our acknowledgement of God’s creation to our repentance, in moving through these high holy days toward Yom Kippur, which means the day of atonement, to start a new year in good terms with God, as we were once before at the time of Creation.

St. Francis of Assisi is an Italian Saint, living during the medieval time, from 1181/2 to 1226, who is considered as the most beloved Saint, not only among Christians but also non-Christians, as well.  Perhaps, it is because the way St. Francis loved not only people of all kinds, including those who were regarded as enemies, but also all created beings and things.  He must have sensed God in all of these things he loved and embraced.  St. Francis has been known for allegedly preaching to birds and taming wolves. Francis’ love for all created beings and things, including planets, is well reflected in his canticle of the sun, calling the sun, as his brother.

In praising all God’s creations, singing St. Francis’ canticle of the sun, is like joyfully blowing the horns and trumpets on Yom Teruah for Rosh Hashanah, remembering how good God’s creation was and is to be.  St. Francis’ canticle of the sun reflects the spirit of Yom Teruah.

As these 10 high holy days move from Rosh Hashanah to Yom Kippur, the joyful and grateful acknowledgement of God’s creation shifts to recognizing our sins against God for not keeping the Covenant that was established between God and humans, through the Ark of the Covenant, which was first established with Noah (Genesis 6:11-22).  This reflective focus on our sins and need for atonement is culminated on Yom Kippur.

The life of St. Francis of Assisi also reflects this shift from joyful acknowledgement of God’s creation of Yom Teruah to somber acknowledgement of our need of penance and atonement of Yom Kippur, as his mission was to restore our relationship with God, through a metaphor of rebuilding a ruined church of San Damiano in Assisi, Italy.  According to St. Bonaventure, St. Francis heard God telling him, “Go Francis, rebuild my house which is falling down” (St. Bonaventure, Legenda Maior, Ch. II), as cited by Pope Pius XI in paragraph 31, Rite Expiatis.

St. Francis not only responded to this calling of God literally but also figuratively. He and his followers, later becoming early Franciscan friars, rebuilt this ruined church of San Damiano. The mendicant religious order he formed, the Franciscans, strove to turn the world from a life of sins to a blessed life in God. Thus, St. Francis spearheaded a rebuilding of the falling house of God, the Church as people of God, by inspiring people to convert to a God-centered simple life of joy.

The way St. Francis worked to rebuild the falling Church by turning people from sins to God was pretty much like the way Jesus ministered people. 

Neither St. Francis nor Jesus asked people to bring sacrificial animals for reconciliation and atonement with God, though the law of Moses in the Book of Leviticus demands sacrificial animals as sin offerings for atonement. It is particularly so for Yom Kippur.  But, as Jesus has become New Passover through his death on the Cross, Yom Kippur has been renewed into the Sacrament of Reconciliation, a bloodless form of atonement process, through the blood of Jesus Christ. Thus, St. Francis simply ministered to touch hearts and souls of sinners warmly with compassion to remind them what they miss and what they deserve –rather than guilt-tripping them, like the Pharisees.

The life of St. Francis was so exemplary as to living a Christ-centered life, as addressed by St. Paul (i.e. Philippians 1:21-23; Galatians 2:20). It is a life of beatitude, as taught by Jesus (Matthew 5-7), because it is the best possible life that we can live in the New Covenant that Christ has brought to us through his own blood. This New Covenant was announced during the Last Supper with these words:

While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said, “Take and eat; this is my body”.  Then he took a cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins” (Matthew 26:26-28).

These words in incorporated in the Eucharistic prayer during the Liturgy of the Eucharist in Catholic Mass, as our practice of anamnesis. But, this is not just remembering Jesus instituting the Sacrament of the Eucharist during the Last Supper but remembering the korban in the Holy of Holies for Yom Kippur for atonement.

In this sense, the Last Supper marks the beginning of Christian Yom Kippur, as it was when Jesus instituted the Sacrament of the Eucharist, as the new sin offering once for all for our atonement with God. Because of this, we no longer have to slaughter goats as our sin offerings (korban practice) for atonement. That is why the Liturgy of the Eucharist during Catholic Mass is now a bloodless sacrifice. 

Remembering the Last Supper and the above his words in Matthew 26:26-28,, let us not forget that the Liturgy of the Eucharist during Catholic Mass is Christ’s self-sacrifice with atonement nature. And, next day, Jesus offered himself as the new Yom Kippur korban to shed his blood for this New Covenant for atonement and salvation, making him both as the new high priest and the paschal victim for atonement and salvation.

This is why, before citing Matthew 26:26-28 in the Eucharist Prayer, as we begin the Liturgy of the Eucharist, the presiding priest, like the high priest at Yom Kippur ceremony in the Holy of Holies, says, “Orate, fratres, ut meum ac vestrum sacrificium acceptabile fiat apud Deum Patrem omnipotentem”, which mean,” Pray, brethren (brothers and sisters), that my sacrifice and yours may be acceptable to God, the almighty Father”. In response, we say, “May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands for the praise and glory of His name, for our good and the good of all His holy Church.”.

This is a new way of practicing Leviticus 17:11and Isaiah 56:7 for our New Yom Kippur, remembering how Jesus offered up himself and shed his blood for our atonement. Instead of eating the roasted meat of sacrificial goats of Yom Kippur, we receive De Corpore et Sanguine Christi Domini during the Liturgy of the Eucharist at Catholic Mass.

Thanks to this, St. Francis brought a bunch of animals to the alter, not for korban but to simply celebrate their presence as God’s creations, coexisting with us.

Only Christ can be both the high priest and the sacrificial victim. As he meditated in front of the cross in the church he rebuilt, San Damiano, he was completely immersed himself in the Passion of Christ to a point of receiving stigmata.

Whenever St. Francis of Assisi calls us to align our hearts and souls more closer to God, he is speaking from the depth of his Christ-centered life of joy, where he is one with Christ, who is our redeemer. It is where St. Francis experiences the redeeming blood of Christ for our atonement and salvation.

Once we realize what Christ’s paschal sacrifice means in light of Yom Kippur, we can be moved into conversion to live a Christ-centered life of beatitude, as St. Francis did. As we reconcile and atone with God, we humbly ask God to make us His loyal servants and channel of His Covenant – the New Covenant that the blood of Christ has brought.  The New Covenant is characterized by the Mandatum Novum:

A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another (John 13:34 ).

As we convert our life from a life of sin to a life of Christ, exemplified by St. Francis of Assisi, and atone with God, then, we are ready to live a new life in the New Covenant brought by Christ’s sacrificial Yom Kippur blood. We are ready to live a life of love in a way to embody these words of St. Francis.

Lord, make me an instrument of Your peace;

Where there is hatred, let me sow love;

Where there is injury, pardon;

Where there is discord, harmony;

Where there is error, truth;

Where there is doubt, faith;

Where there is despair, hope;

Where there is darkness, light;

And where there is sadness, joy.

O Divine Master, Grant that I may not so much seek

To be consoled as to console;

To be understood as to understand;

To be loved as to love.

For it is in giving that we receive;

It is in pardoning that we are pardoned;

And it is in dying that we are born to eternal life.

May we always live in harmony with God and all of His creation, as reflected in the above prayer of St. Francis of Assisi, as we pass Yom Kippur into a new spiritual life.