TEXT: Sixth Sunday of Easter, May 10, 2026
May 10, 2026 Father De Celles Homily
6th Sunday of Easter
May 10, 2026
Homily by Fr. John De Celles
St. Raymond of Peñafort Catholic Church
Springfield, VA
“If you love me, you will keep my commandments.
…Whoever has my commandments and observes them
is the one who loves me.”
Think of how fundamental these words are for the Christian life.
You can’t really be a Christian if you don’t love Jesus.
And yet Jesus says, “If you love me, you will keep my commandments.”
But what are His “commandments”?
Well, clearly, they begin with the two “greatest commandments”
to love God and love your neighbor.
And also the Ten Commandments.
But Jesus’ “commandments” also include all the other things
He taught His apostles about good and evil, about loving and not.
Sometimes it’s hard to know how to apply
what Jesus taught 2000 years ago to specific events today.
How do we know whether this particular new thing or event
is good or evil, right or wrong?
What does the love of Jesus require of us in this situation?
But the thing is, in calling us to love Him, first Jesus loves us.
He does not “leave us orphans.”
He sends the Holy Spirit, “the Spirit of Truth,”
the “Advocate to be with you always.”
That Spirit is alive in the Church, which for 2000 years
has contemplated the commandments, the teachings,
that Christ gave to His apostles.
Guided by the Holy Spirit, the Church has taken those teachings
and developed and applied them to give us principles and doctrines, rooted in Scripture and Tradition, that apply Christ’s teachings
to specific issues in life.
Plus, just as He sent out the twelve apostles in the power of the Holy Spirit
to proclaim these teachings 2000 years ago,
today He sends out their successors in ministry,
bishops and popes, and to some extent priests,
to teach and guide all Catholics today.
Still, it’s not always objectively clear how a doctrine or principle
applies to particular situations we encounter.
And a lot of times bishops and popes, and even priests,
even with their best intentions, make mistakes when they teach,
sometimes confusing their own private judgments
with the judgment of the Church or the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
But remember, the Holy Spriit is also in each one of us,
through our Baptism and Confirmation,
and the infallible doctrine of the Church teaches us
that it’s up to each of us to form and bind our consciences
by the truth of Catholic doctrine.
Then it’s up to us to prayerfully cooperate with the Holy Spirit
and reasonably follow our consciences
in applying that doctrine to specific cases.
Even so, sometimes in doing our best
to apply doctrine to particular situations,
our perspectives and knowledge of facts are different,
so each of us may make the best judgment we can but disagree.
Lately, Catholics have encountered two issues in the public square
that have caused a lot of problems for Catholic consciences.
And frankly, some of the successors of the apostles
have not been doing a great job of helping us with these issues.
In fact, it seems to me, many have been adding to the confusion.
So, today I want to address some of the confusion
I don’t want to tell you how to think or to dictate your judgments;
I just want to help clear up some misconceptions
and to help you form and exercise your own Catholic consciences.
And, by the way, I make mistakes too, so just keep that in mind.
First, the issue of illegal immigration.
(And let’s be clear: I’m speaking about immigrants
who come and/or stay in the US illegally,
not the legal immigrants who respect our laws,
whom we joyfully welcome.)
A few months ago, the American bishops issued a letter that seemed to
strongly oppose enforcement of our immigration laws,
at least the way the laws were being enforced.
In that letter, and in other speeches and letters by individual bishops,
the bishops seemed to indicate that their position
is Catholic teaching, necessary for justice.
Some even say that all Catholics must sort of
oppose federal law enforcement, especially ICE,
and side with illegal immigrants.
So, let’s consider what the Church actually, historically, officially teaches.
Christ and His Church clearly teach we must love our neighbor,
even our enemies,
so, of course, we have to love and respect illegal immigrants.
But the Church also teaches that nations have a right to protect their borders
and to make laws about who can immigrate to their country,
how they can do that,
how to enforce those laws,
and how to punish those who break them.
The Church also teaches that everyone who immigrates or wants to immigrate
has a duty to obey those immigration laws
and all the laws of a country.
And if we don’t follow the just laws of our country,
we are not only disobeying authority,
we are also not loving our neighbor.
But how do we know if a law is just, or if the enforcement is just?
Sometimes it’s not self-evident,
so people have to make their best judgment about it.
In other words, we have to follow our conscience.
As I’ve said before, sometimes
our perspectives and knowledge of facts are different,
so each of us may make the best judgment of conscience we can,
but we disagree!
So, we may both see a crowd gathering near ICE agents,
and you may see legitimate protesters,
and I may see violent rioters interfering with just law enforcement.
Or I may see a woman trying to drive away from conflict with police,
and you may see her trying to run over a policeman.
In any case, you and I as big grown-up adult Catholics can disagree,
not on doctrine, but on what facts mean
and how we apply doctrine to particular situations.
But to hear some bishops talk,
you’d think there is only one judgment that can be made:
Essentially illegal immigrants are good, and ICE is bad.
I exaggerate…but not by much.
The Catechism says:
“Political authorities…may make the exercise of the right to immigrate
subject to various juridical conditions…
[with regard to the country that receives them]
Immigrants are obliged…to obey its laws
and to assist in carrying civic burdens.”
Some bishops have called ICE agents “lawless.”
I’m not sure that is necessarily true.
But it seems pretty clear that people who immigrate here illegally
and/or remain here illegally,
then hide and run from law enforcement,
are always by definition “lawless”?
Some bishops say that we have to respect the rights of illegal immigrants.
Absolutely.
But it seems to me that they should also remind illegal immigrants that they
have a duty to obey the law, and that disobeying the law is a sin,
and in this case, perhaps even a mortal sin.
Wouldn’t that mean they should turn themselves in peacefully,
not waiting for ICE to come to their door with guns?
We also hear the bishops argue illegal immigrants have families,
and it’s cruel to separate parents from their families.
But isn’t that what we do every single time we arrest anyone?
When we put a man in jail for stealing a car, if he’s a father, do we say that’s unjust
to separate him from his children?
___
The second issue causing a lot of confusion for Catholics is the war in Iran.
Some bishops seem to say that Catholics must always oppose war,
that war is never acceptable and is always contrary to God’s will.
But the official doctrine of the Church rejects this in its just war doctrine,
which was developed by the Church’s greatest theologian,
St. Augustine of Hippo,
clarified in detail by the Church’s greatest philosopher,
St. Thomas Aquinas,
and affirmed by various popes and councils since,
including the Second Vatican Council.
Some bishops say a just war can only be for self-defense
and argue that since Iran never attacked us, this war is not a defensive war.
But it seems at least reasonable to argue
that Iran has been attacking us for forty-seven years,
from the invasion of our Embassy in 1979,
to four decades of funding surrogate terrorist organizations in
Lebanon, Gaza, Syria, Yemen and Iraq,
who have killed thousands of Americans throughout the Middle East.
One cardinal said recently,
“In the Catholic teaching this is not a just war…
You can’t go for a variety of different aims.
You have to have a focused aim,
which is to restore justice and restore peace. That’s it.”
This is sadly misleading, not only in its premises and conclusion,
but also in its seeming definitiveness,
because a just war can be waged for several reasons
besides direct self-defense
or direct restoration of justice and peace.
For example, a war is just if you fight to defend an ally,
to free an oppressed foreign people from a tyrannical government,
or even to punish a tyrant for violating treaties
and endangering neighbors.
Even so, all of this does have an indirect effect, in the long run,
of restoring some justice and peace.
Some bishops say we haven’t negotiated enough.
Maybe so, but how much is enough—how do you know?
Especially when you’re dealing with a regime
which devoutly believes that their religion
allows and even requires them to lie to infidels,
and so it keeps doing so in negotiations.
And some bishops seem to say the just war doctrine is outdated, no longer doctrine.
But this ignores the fact that no one, not even a pope,
can change a doctrine that is rooted in Scripture,
articulated by Councils and Doctors of the Church,
and unanimously agreed upon by the whole Church for centuries,
as is the case with the Just War Doctrine.
It seems to me this makes it infallible and unchangeable.
So, while bishops, and maybe even a Pope,
might come to the judgment that a particular war is unjust,
in the end, again, that is not really their decision to make,
at least not in any kind of authoritative way.
As the Catechism puts it:
“The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy
belongs to the prudential judgment
of those who have responsibility for the common good.”
And in our form of government, that’s the president.
One cardinal wrote recently that lots of people have responsibility
for the common good, so they should all decide together.
But that’s not what the doctrine says.
As Aquinas explains,
“The care of the common [good] is committed
to those who are in authority.”
And in the case of war, Thomas says that is the person or persons,
“by whose command the war is to be waged.”
In our country, that is clearly the president.
So, while you and I can disagree with each other and with the president
about whether the war is just,
the Church teaches that
we should respect each other’s reasonable conscientious judgments,
as well as the president’s authoritative judgment,
even as we peacefully and logically advocate for our positions.
We can also disagree with the Pope and bishops.
They clearly do not judge infallibly or inerrantly in matters of war:
After all, maybe twenty or more popes called for the Crusades in the Middle Ages,
only to have Pope John Paul II apologize for them in 2000.
___
Now, one of the key arguments we hear in both of these issues
—illegal immigration and just war—
is based on the “dignity of the human person.”
The argument is that these things are contrary to human dignity.
But what exactly is “human dignity,”
and how does it protect human beings in these ways?
It’s interesting that the use of “dignity” as a foundation for moral arguments
isn’t very common prior to the last century.
And while we have official definitions
for all the other primary Catholic theological principles we use,
there’s not a definition of dignity.
Clearly human dignity is rooted in being created in the image and likeness of God.
And it is something that must be respected.
But is human dignity so awesome that it overrides everything else in morality?
And can’t human dignity be lost or diminished by sins and evil actions?
Pope Francis and Pope Leo have both said it can NOT be lost,
and they claim this teaching comes from John Paul II.
Yet, what John Paul II actually taught was that we can
“…lose this dignity in a superficial and irresponsible life,
in sin and guilt before God…”
So, dignity is in some way infinite, but it can be lost by our sins.
It seems to me, then, that before we can base prudential judgments,
much less changes in doctrine,
on the principle of “human dignity,”
we need to understand more precisely what it is and its limits.
So, as Cardinal Ratzinger, who soon after became Pope Benedict,
taught the American Bishops in 2004:
“There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion
even among Catholics about waging war …”
My point in all this is not to attack, insult or dictate to anyone–
not any of you, or any bishops, and especially not the pope.
I simply want to point out that sometimes bishops, popes, and pastors
say things that are confusing.
Sometimes they make mistakes.
We should surely listen to them with respect,
but in the end, we are bound to follow
not the consciences of prelates or priests,
but to follow our own consciences,
properly formed by the truth of Catholic doctrine
handed down for 2000 years to you and me.
And then, guided by reason, and the grace of the Holy Spirit,
to consider all the facts before us,
we judge for ourselves, whether this particular event before us
is good or evil, right or wrong?
What does the love of Jesus require of us?
That all of our judgments conform to the words of our Blessed Savior:
“If you love me, you will keep my commandments.
…Whoever has my commandments and observes them
is the one who loves me.”