Is It Good to Change Your Mind?

Pope St. Paul VI

(Twenty-sixth Sunday of the Year (A): This homily was given on September 27, 2026 at St. Pius X Church, Westerly, R.I., by Fr. Raymond Suriani.  Read Matthew 21: 28-32.)

[For the audio version of this homily, click here: Twenty-sixth Sunday 2026]

 

I knew a man that I did not care for

And then one day this man gave me a call

We sat and talked about things on our minds

And now this man he is a friend of mine

If you’re over 65—like I am—you might recognize those words as some of the lyrics to a popular song of the 1960s, “Reach out in the Darkness”.  I thought of them in preparation for this homily, because they’re the words of a man who has obviously changed his mind.

In this case, what the man did was a good thing—since it led to the healing of a bad relationship he had with another human person.  But the act of changing one’s mind is morally neutral in and of itself.  That’s important for us to realize. 

In other words, the act can be either morally good or morally evil: it all depends on WHAT YOU’RE CHANGING YOUR MIND ABOUT!

Today’s gospel parable of the man with two sons provides us with a perfect illustration of this truth.  Notice that both boys changed their minds in this story: the first initially refused to go to work in his father’s vineyard, but then he changed his mind and went; the second initially said he would go, but then didn’t.

In the first instance, the son’s act of changing his mind was good, because in doing so he ended up honoring his father by his obedience; in the second instance, the son’s act of changing his mind was bad, because in doing so he was refusing to obey the 4^th commandment.

Jesus used this story to reprimand the chief priests and elders of the people, who didn’t like John the Baptist, and who refused to change their minds about him, even after they saw tax collectors and prostitutes experience genuine conversions through John’s preaching and ministry.

The chief priests and elders refused to change their minds when they should have changed their minds because of pride—and probably also because of fear: they feared that if they accepted and honored John as a prophet, they’d lose some of their power and influence among the people.

Which only proves that human nature hasn’t changed much in 2,000 years! 

As was the case at the time of Jesus, people sometimes refuse to change their minds when they should change their minds, while others do change their minds when they should not. 

Concerning the latter phenomenon, do you know what Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton, Jesse Jackson, Richard Gephardt and Al Gore have in common?

They all “changed their minds” on the abortion issue—when they shouldn’t have!  Most people don’t realize that all those politicians of the recent past were once pro-life.

But they didn’t stay that way.  They changed their minds in the wrong way for material gain and to increase their popularity.  Unfortunately, those are very common reasons why people change their minds when they shouldn’t.

So is the fear of punishment: you’ll recall that this is why Simon Peter “changed his mind” about Jesus on Holy Thursday evening in the courtyard of the high priest.

He was afraid of being hurt—or killed.

Or it can even be something as simple as laziness.  In fact, that’s probably why the second son in this parable changed his mind and never went to his father’s vineyard: he just didn’t feel like working that afternoon!

But, thankfully, it does work in the opposite direction sometimes.  Like the first son, many people do change their minds and end up doing what’s right—even when they might be tempted to do otherwise.

One example of this is Dr. William E. May, who taught moral theology for many years at Catholic University in Washington, D.C.  He passed away in 2014.  He was a married man with children and grandchildren—he was not a priest.  He became known in his later years as a staunch defender of the Church’s teaching on artificial contraception and on many other issues of personal morality. But it hadn’t always been that way.  In fact, 58 years ago—in 1968 to be exact—Dr. May was on the opposite side of the contraception issue.  He saw nothing wrong with it—and he was very vocal about that fact. 1968, of course, was the year that Pope Paul VI issued his famous encyclical, Humanae Vitae, in which he reiterated the Church’s traditional teaching on this subject, much to the chagrin of many Catholics—including theologians like young Dr. William E. May.  In fact, May was one of the more than 600 professors who signed the infamous “statement of dissent” as soon as the encyclical came out!

He was one of the pope’s biggest critics!

But he eventually changed his mind.  Which led him to write books defending and explaining the truth on this and many other moral issues.  As he later said, “I was beginning to see that if contraception is justifiable, then perhaps artificial insemination, test-tube reproduction, and similar modes of generating life outside the marital embrace are morally justifiable too. . . . I began to realize that the moral theology invented to justify contraception could be used to justify any kind of deed.  I saw that it was a consequentialist, utilitarian kind of argument, that it was a theory which repudiated the notion of intrinsically evil acts.  I began to realize how truly prophetic the pope had been, and how providential it was that he had been given the strength to resist the tremendous pressures brought to bear upon him.”

Dr. May could have added, “Pressures brought to bear on him by people like me!”

It was good for Dr. May to change his mind.

It was good for the first son in this parable to change his mind.

And sometimes it’s good for each and every one of us to change our mind.

May the Holy Spirit help us to know when those times are, and may that same Holy Spirit give us the courage we need to actually do it.

 

The Reward Will Be the Same, But People’s Capacity to Enjoy the Reward Will Be Different!

 

(Twenty-fifth Sunday of the Year (A): This homily was given on September 20, 2026 at St. Pius X Church, Westerly, R.I., by Fr. Raymond Suriani.  Read Isaiah 55:6-9; Psalm 145:2-18; Philippians 1:20-27; Matthew 20:1-16a.) 

[For the audio version of this homily, click here: Twenty-fifth Sunday 2026]

 

The reward will be the same, but people’s capacity to enjoy the reward will be different.

This is a very important truth for us to keep in mind when we’re trying to understand the parable we just heard from Matthew 20, this well-known story of the workers in the vineyard.

First of all, however, we need to make a crucial distinction: we need to distinguish between the primary meaning of this parable as it was told by Jesus Christ 2,000 years ago, and the legitimate—but secondary—application of the parable that people very often make.

The primary meaning of this story is that Gentiles, through God’s saving grace, have the same opportunity to go to heaven that Jews have.  That’s it, in a nutshell.  Here’s how one Bible commentary explains it:

This parable is addressed to the Jewish people, whom God called at an early hour, centuries ago.  Now the Gentiles are also being called—with an equal right to form part of a new people of God, the Church.  In both cases it is a matter of a gratuitous, unmerited, invitation; therefore, those who were the ‘first’ to receive the call have no grounds for complaining when God calls the ‘last’ and gives them the same reward. . . . Jesus leaves no doubt that although he calls us to follow different ways, all receive the same reward—heaven.”  (Navarre Bible Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew, page 173.)

This brings us to the secondary application of the story, which is where people often get confused.  Let me frame the issue in this way: From the way the story is told, it seems that non-believers who convert and get baptized on their deathbeds—and lapsed Catholics who make a good and sincere confession right before they die—get the best of both worlds (so to speak).  They live their entire lives doing what they want and having a good old time, but in the end they get the same heavenly reward that someone like Mother Teresa gets!

So people read this text and say, “Why should I make the effort to know, love and serve God every day?  Why should I try to be holy and obedient to the Lord in all things?  Why should I fight the good fight and run the race and keep the faith?  What difference does it make?  According to what Jesus says here I can do whatever I want for my entire life, convert at the end, and I’ll get the same reward as the great saints who served God faithfully for their entire lives!” 

Ah yes, but these good people are forgetting one thing—one very important thing; as I said a few moments ago, the reward will be the same, but people’s capacity to enjoy the reward will be different.

Everyone, in other words, who dies in the state of grace will eventually get into the eternal kingdom of God—even if their conversion (or re-version to Christ) happened at the “11^th hour” of their life.  So the “reward” of every saved person will be the same: heaven.  But the capacity of a particular person—me, for example, to experience God and his blessings in the kingdom will be greater or lesser, depending on the level of holiness I attained during my earthly life.

Jesus indicated this when he talked about “the least” and “the greatest” in the kingdom of heaven, and when he spoke about the seat at his right hand and the seat at his left hand in his Father’s kingdom.  We also see an indication of it in John 14, where our Lord said, “In my Father’s house there are many dwelling places.”

St. Augustine described this situation by, in effect, comparing our souls to different sized containers.  Pope Benedict alluded to this idea of Augustine in one of his encyclicals when he wrote: “Man was created for greatness—for God himself; he was created to be filled by God. But his heart is too small for the greatness to which it is destined. It must be stretched.  [As St. Augustine says,] ‘By delaying [his gift], God strengthens our desire; through desire he enlarges our soul and by expanding it he increases its capacity [for receiving him].’”  (Spe Salvi, n. 33)

By following the advice that Isaiah gives us in today’s first reading and seeking the Lord faithfully through prayer and through the sacraments; by living in faith and performing acts of selfless charity; by growing closer to Jesus Christ and becoming more like him—that is to say, by growing in holiness each day—we increase our capacity for God. 

That’s Augustine’s point here.

This means that someone who has a conversion on his deathbed will probably have a much smaller capacity for God in heaven than a great saint like Pius X—or even compared to an ordinary Christian who grew in faith and in holiness for many years on earth.

The person who has a conversion at the end of his life will probably have a capacity for God in heaven that’s the size of a thimble.  Comparatively speaking, the ordinary, holy Christian will have a capacity for God that’s the size of a pint or quart; whereas the great saints of the Church like Pius X and Mother Teresa will be like gallons!

Now the interesting thing is, in heaven everyone will be full: everyone will be full of God and his grace!  But the fullness experienced by the thimble-sized soul will be a lot different than the fullness experienced by the gallon-sized soul of the saint! 

So yes, the reward will be the same, but people’s capacity to enjoy the reward will be different.

I was trying to think of another earthly analogy that I could use to conclude my homily today and drive home this point, and what came to me was the following example:

Imagine two men, John and Bill, who work for the same company.  One day the boss calls them into his office and says, “Gentlemen, you’ve done excellent work lately, and to show my appreciation I’m going to give you my two tickets to this Sunday’s Patriots’ game.  I’m going out of town this weekend, so I can’t use them.  Here they are.  Enjoy!—they’re great seats, on the 50 yard line, ten rows up.”

John and Bill say, “Thank you very much, sir!” and they immediately make plans to go to the game.

Here now is a little essential background information on these two men:

John has been a Patriots’ fan for as long as he can remember—ever since he was a little boy 60 years ago.  He’s been loyal to the team in good times and in bad—which includes the mid-1960s, when the Patriots were one of the worst teams in the old AFL.  He watches every game; he knows the statistics of all the key players; he has Patriots memorabilia all over his house!

Bill also is a Patriots’ fan—although he’s only been one for a couple of years.  One reason for that is that he’s originally from Australia, where “football” means something very different than it does here in the United States.  In fact, he’s still learning about our game.  For example, the last time he watched a game of American football on television, the punter punted the ball out of the end zone and Bill thought the man had just kicked a field goal!

So I ask you, in all likelihood which of these two men will enjoy Sunday’s Patriots’ game more?  Which one will have the capacity—the ability—to enjoy it more?

The answer, of course, is John.  Because John has been a faithful follower of the Pats for so many years; because he knows the game of football so well and has persevered with his team through thick and thin, HIS CAPACITY TO ENJOY THIS REWARD FROM HIS BOSS WILL BE MUCH, MUCH GREATER THAN BILL’S, since Bill barely knows what an American football is!

But notice—both men will have the same experience—the exact same experience; both will have the same reward from their boss—a free ticket to this game.  

Their reward will be the same, but their capacity to enjoy the reward will be different!

And so it will be for souls in heaven.