Recently in Theology Category

This week - probably because of everything going on in the world - is a more serious collection of posts that I remember seeing recently. And it makes for compelling reading that really challenges you to think through your preconceptions and understand Catholic teaching. That's not to say there aren't a few lighter posts, but this Carnival is a little heavier than most! Enjoy:

Father Aloysius starts us off with Fundamental Truth at Life's Crosses. This post explores our reasons for being and why we reject the overtures from God so often.

Next we move to Mini Confessions at Quantum Theology where we hear the outcome of sending a 14-year-old to a face-to-face confession rather than a penance service.

Never forget that God Alone is Enough as explained on Thoughts on Grace. When you are filled with fear, remember St. Theresa's poem and know that God alone is enough.

Steven highly recommends him, so he reviewed J.F. Powers Bibliography at Book Reviews and More. Powers is an excellent Catholic short story writer that you should know more about. This is a good place to start!

Poetry speaks and convicts in Like Dinner on Wood at Long Skirts. It is a poem about how Catholics before us were willing to be served up Like Dinner on Wood to preserve the Faith.

Okay, I admit it at Homeschool Goodies takes us in a different direction: She admits being a "dance mom" and explains the benefits her homeschooled children receive from dance.

Keeping on that theme, Homeschooling: A Growing Trend at A Catholic Mom Climbing the Pillars explores the question of why people are homeschooling and paints a great picture of the homeschooling family.

Sarah makes grape jelly in The Color Purple at Just Another Day of Catholic Pondering. She also reflects on opportunities for prayer during her work. Wow - sounds delicious . . .

A Reflection . . . at Organ-ic Chemist ponders a homily on the reading from September 14 where the image of a snake is raised to save those who were bitten. What caught her attention was the pastor's reference to a snake being an ambivalent symbol.

Another reflection on the same readings: God's Punishment and Salvation at HMS Blog. As always, HMS Blog is definitely worth your time. It also focuses on the image of a snake prefiguring Christ.

Moving to politics, Over the Edge? at A Catholic View points out that Bishop Niederauer wants to speak with Nancy Pelosi about her recent misstatements on Catholic positions. Can we expect anything to come from this? Interesting comic included.

In a moving post, an Abortion Survivor Pleads with Obama in New Ad at Catholic Fire. Gianna Jessen survived when her mother's abortion was botched. She asks Senator Obama why he would vote against a bill requiring doctors to provide medical attention to babies born during botched abortions. It's a powerful ad.

Staying in politics, The Change We Need at Living Catholicism takes a closer look at Senator Obama's stance on abortion and how it matches up against Catholic teaching. Includes the USCCB's points from Faithful Citizenship.

Don't miss the Worldwide Rosary for Unborn Babies reported on at A Life of Benevolence. The event happens on October 18th and you can find the details in this post.

Serious issues continue with Suicide and Salvation at Aggie Catholics. Is it a sin to think about killing yourself? How about to try to kill yourself? This post explains Catholic teaching.

Notes from a Subculturist at The Catholic Journeyman explains what a subculturalist is and how they find balance, beauty, and battlescars in Catholic apologetics.

We finish up with Parable of the Laborers in the Vineyard at Prepare for Mass offers a series of videos exploring the readings - it's a great way to get prepared for Mass!

God bless,
Jay

I was recently emailed this and thought it made a wonderful Easter post:

"The Cross had asked the questions; the Resurrection had answered them.
 
The Cross had asked the question: How far can Power go in the world? The Resurrection answered: Power ends in its own destruction, for those who slew the foe lost the day.
 
The Cross had asked: Why does God permit evil and sin to nail Justice to a tree? The Resurrection answered: That sin, having done its worst, might exhaust itself and thus be overcome by Love that is stronger than either sin or death.
 
Thus 'there emerges the Easter lesson that the power of evil and the chaos of any one moment can be defied and conquered, for the basis of our hope is not in any construct of human power, but in the Power of God Who has given to the evil of this earth its one mortal wound-- an open tomb, a gaping sepulchre, an empty grave.'
 
...Whence shall come our hope for the Church? It will not come from the world, for if the world loved the Church, the Church would be no salvation to the world. If it were not hated, it would be weak. It is only because the fires of its Truth are blinding evil eyes and convicting them of sin and judgment, that the world vainly tries to put them out. And though the world is tearing up all the photographs and blue-prints of a society and a family based on the moral law of God, be not disheartened. The Church has kept the negatives..."

It is from Archbishop Fulton Sheen (a message on 4/25/1943). If you don't know, Archbishop Sheen was a powerful preach of the Truth. He was, I believe, the first priest to have a television show, where he led people to Jesus' Church every week. His sermons still resonate today.

I hope you have a wonderful Easter! Christ is Risen, let us rejoice in Him!

God bless,
Jay

 

In light of the feast of St. Nicholas and the gift-giving associated with this saint, this article will add a twist to the idea and focus on the gift of self.

The main idea of the theology of the body is to make our bodies a gift to others so that we can love and be loved as God loves, thus fulfilling our highest destiny. But what exactly does this mean? First of all, we must recognize that the body is an integral part of the human person, so it is good. Creation, especially our bodies, is good. Second, human beings are fulfilled only in communion with others. We are not created to be alone; we are created to find our fulfillment in relationships with others. This is why God created Eve for Adam. Without an 'other', it would be impossible to make our bodies a gift. By making our bodies a gift to each other, we reflect the life and love of the Trinity.

Now the sexual differentiation between Adam and Eve allows men and women to be a special gift to each other. If a man and a woman are called to the vocation of marriage, then they, on a natural level, fully express the nuptial meaning of the body. The love between spouses can actually make a third person, just like the Holy Spirit spirates from the love between the Father and the Son. Yet one does not have to be married to be able to make his body a gift to another. Single and consecrated celibate people live out their gift of self in different ways. Celibate people make themselves a total gift to God by renouncing marriage and making themselves completely available for spiritual fatherhood or spiritual motherhood. They are a powerful sign of the life to which we're all called to live in eternity: a life united with Christ where none marry or are given in marriage.

Ultimately, the purpose of the theology of the body, as with all Church teaching on sexuality, is to build a culture of life. Life is a gift. It can only be given or taken away by God, the author of life. To build a culture of life, the Church and her teachings protect marriage and the family, which are the fundamental human institutions that nurture life. To attack these institutions is to attack civilization and humanity itself. Though Christ has won the war and conquered death, we are currently engaged in battle with those who promote a culture of death. The defenders of this mentality apply a cost-benefit analysis to life and make death an acceptable solution to human problems such as suffering, unwanted pregnancies, and issues regarding population. As Catholics called to build a culture of life we must oppose this mentality and defend the defenseless, no matter how "useless" they might seem to be in society's eyes. With the good news of salvation we must transform ourselves, live the Gospel, and make it penetrate every part of society until every institution recognizes and upholds the immeasurable gift of human life.

Have a prayerful Advent and God bless,
Daniel

To continue to savor the feast of Christ the King we celebrated last Sunday and to help us anticipate His birth during Advent, I wanted to post a short reflection on Jesus our Lord and savior based on the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 410-411):

If God is good, then sin is evil. More accurately, if God is infinitely good then every sin, no matter how small, is infinitely evil. Thus, the emergence of sin in man's reality created an infinite gap between humanity and God. As finite beings there was nothing we could or can do within our own power to bridge this chasm. So only God Himself could repair the damaged relationship and restore things to how He meant them to be in the first place. In a nutshell, this is why God had to take on human nature to save humanity.

I’m so thankful to have a God that loves us so much. This Advent let’s focus on growing in that love and living in a way that is pleasing to God. The more we do this, the better Advent we will have. The better the Advent, the better and more meaningful Christmas we will have also.

In Christ,
Daniel

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith often creates much controversy as it keeps the faith pure with definitions of doctrine, and with its past association with the Inquisition. Before he became pope, Cardinal Ratzinger headed this office with tremendous responsibility, and kept an intense prayer life in order to not fall into the danger of becoming a bureaucrat who mechanically signed decrees without thinking of the humanity of the persons involved.

There are many misunderstandings surrounding the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Originally called the "Holy Office", it was in charge of the Universal Inquisition, which tried to protect the faith from heresy spreading from Germany and Switzerland in the sixteenth century. Contrary to popular thought, the Holy Office was more just, more moderate, and more prudent than myth would have it. According to the book The Ratzinger Report, it is precisely secular historical research that proves this. There must also be a distinction between the "Spanish Inquisition" and the "Roman and Universal Inquisition". Though the Spanish Inquisition sometimes protected the faith against heresy, it was also often used as a political tool of the Spanish monarchy against Rome's wishes. By contrast, the Roman and Universal Inquisition was never influenced by secular powers.

Unfortunately, the clarification of doctrine is not very appreciated in the Church today. Many don't understand that truth is the fundamental life-element for man which must be protected from all distortions. Many fall into the trap of thinking 'all that really matters is how I treat my neighbor'. However, they don't realize that correct behavior presupposes correct thinking, thus necessitating a search for orthodoxy. Consequently, the Church sees this search and defense of orthodoxy as a social work for the benefit of all believers, no matter how scandalous some may think it is to define truth.

Let us keep the new head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the faith, Cardinal William Levada in our prayers as he continues the wonderful job done by Cardinal Ratzinger.

God bless,
Daniel

Do you ask your Guardian Angel to intercede for you? Have you given your Guardian Angel a name? I must admit I’ve been ignoring mine until recently. Fortunately the Church has a feast day for our Guardian Angels on October 2nd, where we can be reminded of their presence and helpful role in our lives.

The Catholic Church does not have a defined doctrine on Guardian Angels, but as St. Jerome states, the belief that every soul has a Guardian Angel is the “mind of the Church”. The Bible has several passages that support Guardian Angels such as Matthew 18:10 "See that you despise not one of these little ones: for I say to you, that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father who is in heaven." Or Hebrews 1:14 “Are they (angels) not all ministering spirits sent to serve, for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation?"

What exactly does our Guardian Angel do? If we all have an angel personally assigned to guard us, then there must be something pretty harmful trying to get us. Indeed there is. The Church teaches that there is a hierarchy of angels, and that at some point before time began, various angels of different hierarchies chose to disobey God. These are the fallen angels. Satan is the head fallen angel and demons are the other fallen angels of different lower hierarchies.

I’ve often wondered why the fallen angels would bother attacking humans and try to make us fall like they did. Why aren’t they content with their own evil ways by themselves? But upon thinking about the nature of evil, I realize that it leads to the need for domination, power, use, abuse, unhappiness, and like the old adage says, misery loves company.

Make no mistake; the fallen angels are smarter than we are and they want to lure us down their path to claim us as a hunting prize. Thanks be to God that He has conquered evil through Jesus Christ and that He has given us many means to protect us from evil, including our Guardian Angels.

St. Michael the Archangel and our Guardian Angels, defend us in battle.

God bless,
Daniel

Recently, a hot topic for the media has been a certain document issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith entitled RESPONSES TO SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE DOCTRINE ON THE CHURCH. It's classic to me how the media feels it necessary to make it sound like Pope Benedict is personally making comments anytime the Magisterium issues a document. Yes, each issued document is "ratified and confirmed...and ordered (for) publication" by the pope, but I believe the media simply enjoys stirring up controversy when it come to reporting on the pope.

Many of the articles I've read attempt to make it sound like the Church is changing Her mind on the doctrine proclaimed in reference to the Church or that the issuing of this document was ill-intended. However, as is always the case, this document was issued to provide clarification as to what the Church, specifically at the 2nd Vatican Council, has taught about the Church in relation to other Christian churches and communities.

In reference to what the document had to say about the Catholic Church's understanding of God's presence within other Christian churches and communities, it stated the following:

“It follows that these separated churches and Communities, though we believe they suffer from defects, are deprived neither of significance nor importance in the mystery of salvation. In fact the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as instruments of salvation, whose value derives from that fullness of grace and of truth which has been entrusted to the Catholic Church”[12].

It also goes on to explain the Catholic Church's explanation as to why it does not refer to those Christian communities born out of the Reformation of the sixteen century as churches:

According to Catholic doctrine, these Communities do not enjoy apostolic succession in the sacrament of Orders, and are, therefore, deprived of a constitutive element of the Church. These ecclesial Communities which, specifically because of the absence of the sacramental priesthood, have not preserved the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic Mystery[19] cannot, according to Catholic doctrine, be called “Churches” in the proper sense[20].

Again, nothing new here. Pope Benedict XVI and the rest of the Magisterium are simply reasserting what the Church has always taught and believed. I highly recommend reading the entire document, I provided a hyperlink to it above.

In Christ,
Joe

If Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. - - 1 Corinthians 15:14

I often hear people suggest that Jesus wasn't "really" raised from the dead. Everything from a ghost to a metaphysical resurrection is inferred. But the reality is that if Jesus wasn't raised, then we won't be raised and our faith is worthless. So this morning, let's give thanks for the bodily Resurrection of Our Lord and, like St. Thomas, hit our kness and say, "My Lord and my God."

The late Pope John Paul II explains:

The resurrection reveals the fact that "in Christ the whole fulness of the deity dwells bodily" (Col 1:19). Thus the resurrection completes the manifestation of teh content of the Incarnation. It can therefore be said that it is also the fullness of revelation. It stands therefore, as we have said, at the center of the Christian faith and of the Church's preaching. - - General audience of March 8, 1989

Easter is not only the fullness of Christian teaching, it is the single moment when salvation is open to us. Christ has conquered death and we too have hope. So now as "sons of God" we can worship the Risen Christ and hope to be reunited with Him in heaven. The power of today is overwhelming.

When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will realize that I AM. - - John 8:28

God bless,
Jay

Lent is upon us. As Catholics, we focus on our mortality and our relationship with Jesus Christ during the forty days of Lent in preparation for Easter (just as Jesus spent 40 days in the wilderness before His public ministry). And this is a good Lenten meditation for that time.

Who died on the Cross?
At first, this question seems silly: it was Jesus Christ, of course! But it was actually more than just the person of Jesus Christ. As believers in the Trinity, we believe that God died on the cross at Calvary. Not just the person of Jesus, but the single God we follow actually died on the Cross.

This is a profound statement. God not only gave His Son so that we might have Life, He also gave His own life. Yes, He rose again, but He did die for you. Just meditating on this reality can change your life forever.

In Pope John Paul II’s biography, Witness to Hope, it is pointed out that Pope John Paul II was calm and confident even in bad times. The reason was that Pope John Paul II knew that the worst thing that could ever happen had already happened: our God came to earth and we killed Him. Nothing this bad (or even close) could ever happen again. So he proceeded with courage, faith, and confidence that no matter what happened, it would not be the worst possible thing.

How would you live your life differently if you didn’t worry about the bad? If you were completely confident that the God who died for you would lead you forward to heaven (even if that meant through suffering)? How would you live your life differently if you realized that you had already done the worst thing you could do: you killed your Savior through your own sins. Jesus Christ, who is God, would have died if you were the only person on earth. He still would have needed to repair the damage done by your personal sins.

Each of us must live with the consequences of our sin, but we must realize that our sins did have real consequences: they killed God. And He died willingly to pay for them, despite the fact that we have never lived up to the love He gives us.

How would you live differently if you fully realized the ramifications of this?

God bless,
Jay

Do you know the leading cause of poverty in the United States, according to the president of DePaul University? Last September I was at the National meeting for the St. Vincent de Paul Society where he was the keynote speaker, and his answer struck me: divorce.

Unfortunately, this was a minor side-note in his speech and he went on to say many other things, but my mind kept coming back to this fact. To me, it is obviously true that in this country of immense wealth, moral poverty often (not always) has a link with material poverty. Ironically, when many Catholic institutions talk about decreasing poverty, there is no mention of the moral link. For example, Catholic Charities (with St. Vincent de Paul Society) has set a goal of cutting poverty in half by 2020. The main means in their effort to reach this goal is changing government policy. To my knowledge, there is no mention of the moral poverty link.

The goal is a noble one, but I think a different approach would more successful. What if a huge effort was made to create healthy families? There would be fewer single mothers, and I know for a fact that single mothers are the main type of client that the St. Vincent de Paul Society serves. Children would grow up with more financial security, but more importantly, with more love, values, and emotional support. Many Christians know what most of secular society doesn’t; that the family is under attack and it is wreaking havoc on society. The breakdown of the family is a much greater problem in this country than material need. The huge piles of free bread thrown away every other day at the St. Vincent de Paul Society proves that to me.

If we focused our efforts in this area, not only would we reduce poverty, but we would increase people’s dignity and happiness, even if they fell on hard economic times. This approach would help people holistically, by addressing their spiritual, emotional, and physical needs, not just their physical needs. I’m sure many have seen the movie “American Beauty”. If we succeed in pulling thousands of families out of material poverty, but they are as dysfunctional as the ones in that movie are, have we succeeded in anything?

Sadly, many Catholics who are all about social justice do not see the intricate web of personal sin, corruption, and different kinds of poverty. They tend to put all the blame on what they see as black and white government economic policies. Let us pray for a deeper conversion to Christ in our pursuit of justice.

In Christ,
Daniel

The following is a reflection written by Pope Benedict XVI on the "New Man". Enjoy!

The breakthrough to the new man takes place in Jesus Christ. In him the real future of man, what he can be and should be, has in fact begun. The inner self of Jesus, as it is portrayed throughout the whole of his life and finally in his self-sacrifice on the cross, offers a measure and prototype of future humanity. It's not for nothing that we talk of following Christ, of entering upon his way. It is a matter of inner identification with Christ - just as he identified himself with us. That is really what man is moving toward. It is in the great stories of discipleship, which extend across the centuries, that we see unfolding what is hidden in the figure of Jesus. It is not the case, then, that a schematic pattern is imposed, but that every potential development of true human existence is contained therein. We see how Therese of Lisieux or Saint Don Bosco, how Edith Stein, the apostle Paul, or Thomas Aquinas, has learned from Jesus how to go about being human. All these people have become truly like Jesus - and they are nonetheless different and original... The salvation that is offered us is no mechanical process or exterior matter. It has been entrusted to our freedom and has thereby also been rendered vulnerable to the fragility of human freedom and of the human character. Salvation begins anew in every man; it is not simply there. You cannot just cement it on externally or control it by the use of power, but always only enter into the freedom that opens up. But above all and in all is the One who comes to meet us and who gives us a hope that is stronger than all the devastation that men can bring to pass. - Taken from Benedictus: Day by Day with Pope Benedict XVI

In Christ,
Joe

For many, both within and outside the Catholic Church, this question is both important and relevant. Marriages between individuals who have been previously married are becoming more and more common. For these types of marriages to occur in the Catholic Church the previous marriage must be annulled. It's a simple formula for Catholics and/or those marrying a Catholic where either individual has previously been married: No Annulment = No Marriage. This is a painful reality for some; it forces them into a difficult and emotional situation. If an annulment is not issued by the Church those individuals cannot marry. Many have left the Church over this, choosing to marry in another "Christian" church rather than remain faithful to Christ and His Church.

But that doesn't answer our question. What's an annulment? Is it simply another name, created by Catholics, for divorce? Or maybe some clever tool invented by the Catholic Church to get around Jesus' clear teaching that marriage is indissoluble (Mt 19:3-9)? No. The Catholic Church is quite clear on divorce. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states:

Divorce

2382 The Lord Jesus insisted on the original intention of the Creator who willed that marriage be indissoluble.174 He abrogates the accommodations that had slipped into the old Law.175

Between the baptized, "a ratified and consummated marriage cannot be dissolved by any human power or for any reason other than death."176

2383 The separation of spouses while maintaining the marriage bond can be legitimate in certain cases provided for by canon law.177

If civil divorce remains the only possible way of ensuring certain legal rights, the care of the children, or the protection of inheritance, it can be tolerated and does not constitute a moral offense.

2384 Divorce is a grave offense against the natural law. It claims to break the contract, to which the spouses freely consented, to live with each other till death. Divorce does injury to the covenant of salvation, of which sacramental marriage is the sign. Contracting a new union, even if it is recognized by civil law, adds to the gravity of the rupture: the remarried spouse is then in a situation of public and permanent adultery:

If a husband, separated from his wife, approaches another woman, he is an adulterer because he makes that woman commit adultery, and the woman who lives with him is an adulteress, because she has drawn another's husband to herself.178

2385 Divorce is immoral also because it introduces disorder into the family and into society. This disorder brings grave harm to the deserted spouse, to children traumatized by the separation of their parents and often torn between them, and because of its contagious effect which makes it truly a plague on society.

2386 It can happen that one of the spouses is the innocent victim of a divorce decreed by civil law; this spouse therefore has not contravened the moral law. There is a considerable difference between a spouse who has sincerely tried to be faithful to the sacrament of marriage and is unjustly abandoned, and one who through his own grave fault destroys a canonically valid marriage.179
______________________________________________
175 Cf. Mt 19:7-9.
176 CIC, can. 1141.
177 Cf. CIC, cann. 1151-1155.
178 St. Basil, Moralia 73,1:PG 31,849-852.
179 Cf. FC 84.

So just what is an annulment?

This isn’t the first time the topic of faith and works has been addressed on this blog, and I’m certain it won’t be the last. However, I thought that for ecumenical purposes it would be worthwhile to clearly state what the Catholic Church teaches on this doctrine and how it affects our understanding of salvation. This is rather lengthy but, I believe, necessary to fully grasp what Catholics believe.

CHAPTER THREE

MAN'S RESPONSE TO GOD

142 By his Revelation, "the invisible God, from the fullness of his love, addresses men as his friends, and moves among them, in order to invite and receive them into his own company."1 The adequate response to this invitation is faith.

143 By faith, man completely submits his intellect and his will to God.2 With his whole being man gives his assent to God the revealer. Sacred Scripture calls this human response to God, the author of revelation, "the obedience of faith".3

To many in the world today the idea of the Catholic priesthood is foreign. Many mistakenly believe that the priesthood is some elite society within the Catholic Church that rules the Church in a tyrannical way or for personal gain. Yet this is farther from the truth than most realize. Sure, we all have witnessed scandalous behavior by priests. Certainly there are some who use their priesthood to obtain comfort and a life of prestige. Absolutely there are priests who preach and teach things contrary to the teachings of the Catholic Church. Yet these are the exception not the rule. It is important for us to remember that priests are men and being men are just as susceptible to sin as we are; even Jesus Christ had Judas. Yet the true priest is another Christ to the world. He lays down his life out of love for God and for his fellow brothers and sisters. In this article I would like to contemplate the priesthood in both the Old and New Covenants. What purpose does it serve? Why even have "priesthood" to begin with?

The priesthood from the beginning has been shrouded in mystery. In Genesis 14:18-19 we read:

And Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine; he was priest of God Most High. And he blessed him and said, “Blessed be Abram by God Most High, maker of heaven and earth; and blessed be God Most High, who has delivered your enemies into your hand!”

Prior to this passage we find no reference to Melchizedek or to a priesthood of God Most High. Yet clearly it was preexistent to Abraham and, in a certain sense, greater than Abraham for Melchizedek blesses him and in return is given a tenth of everything Abraham owns. The Navarre Bible commentary has this to say about Melchizedek and his priesthood:

Melchizedek is regarded as having a priesthood earlier and greater than that of Aaron; cf. when the King Messiah is praised: “You are a priest for ever, after the order of Melchizedek” (Ps 110:4). In the New Testament, the mysterious priestly figure of Melchizedek is portrayed as a type of the priesthood of Christ, for Christ is truly the eternal priest even though he (like Melchizedek) does not belong to the priesthood of Aaron. “For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, and to him apportioned a tenth part of everything. He is first, by translation of his name, king of righteousness, and then he is also king of Salem, that is, king of peace. He is without father or mother or genealogy, and has neither beginning of days nor end of life, but resembling the Son of God he continues a priest forever” (Heb 7:1-3).

In the light of all this, Christian liturgy has seen a prefiguring of the Eucharist in the bread and wine offered by Melchizedek (cf. Roman Missal, Eucharistic Prayer I); tradition sees him as a figure of priests of the New Law.
- The Navarre Bible: Pentateuch, Texts and Commentaries, p. 94.

Yet while the priesthood of Melchizedek was earlier and greater than that of Aaron, Aaron’s priesthood was necessitated by God and, like the priesthood of Melchizedek, a prefiguring of the priesthood of the New Covenant (cf. CCC, 1541). This understanding of the priesthood of the Old Covenant is brilliantly laid out in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

1539 The chosen people was constituted by God as "a kingdom of priests and a holy nation."6 But within the people of Israel, God chose one of the twelve tribes, that of Levi, and set it apart for liturgical service; God himself is its inheritance.7 A special rite consecrated the beginnings of the priesthood of the Old Covenant. The priests are "appointed to act on behalf of men in relation to God, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins."8

1540 Instituted to proclaim the Word of God and to restore communion with God by sacrifices and prayer,9 this priesthood nevertheless remains powerless to bring about salvation, needing to repeat its sacrifices ceaselessly and being unable to achieve a definitive sanctification, which only the sacrifice of Christ would accomplish.10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8 Heb 5:1; cf. Ex 29:1-30; Lev 8.
9 Cf. Mal 2:7-9.
10 Cf. Heb 5:3; 7:27; 101-4.

"If I speak in human and angelic tongues, but do not have love, I am a resounding gong or clashing cymbal. And if I have the gift of prophecy, and comprehend all mysteries and all knowledge; if I have all faith so as to move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing..."

- 1 Cor 13:1-2

I find this quote from scripture to be a good theme for this article. Sometimes in my experiences with dealing with our separated brethren, the religious dialogue turns into gongs and cymbals clashing to win an argument. However, it should not be so. Jesus prayed that we believers might be one, and this can only be founded on love. This article will examine the essentials that must be kept in ecumenism and apologetics in light of the Vatican II document Unitatis Redintegratio.

First of all, I really like how Unitatis Redintegratio explicitly states the activities that must be engaged in the “ecumenical movement” in order to promote Christian unity. In sum, they are to avoid erroneous judgments of our separated brethren, to have "dialogue" between experts from different Churches to clarify the teachings of their communion, to cooperate in the duties for the common good, to come together for common prayer, and to examine our own faithfulness to Christ, renewing wherever necessary. These concrete actions should be always on the minds of all Catholics who engage in any form of ecumenical activity. They should also produce the fruits of "justice and truth, concord and collaboration, as well as a spirit of brotherly love and unity" (UR 4). Amen! I have a hard time seeing how they would not! While all the activities listed are important, the document declares one of these activities to be "primary". The Council Fathers thought that the principal activity is to "make a careful and honest appraisal of whatever needs to be renewed and done in the Catholic household itself", so that we may give others a greater witness to the fullness of truth which lies in the Catholic Church (UR, 4). This awareness is fundamental and indispensable for Catholics involved in these activities. If we do not keep this as our primary concern, then spreading the Catholic faith will become an issue of pride and we will fail to live by the truth we have. We will also forget that our separated brethren can contribute to our edification. Those of us involved in apologetics should be especially attentive to this.

No ecumenism is possible without interior conversion. I believe this point cannot be stressed enough. Before we try to spread the Gospel of love, it must be deeply rooted in us. People can see insincerity quite easily. Therefore, whenever Catholics engage in apologetics, they must keep their own renewal as part of the apologetic mission. I believe apologetics to be good and necessary, but it can also be quite dangerous. If a Catholic intent on defending his or her faith does not constantly seek greater union with God, then he or she will not receive the graces to be “self-denying, humble, and gentle in the service of others” (UR, 7). Nor will he or she have an “attitude of brotherly generosity” toward his or her opponents (Ibid.). When this aspect lacks, apologetics becomes an intellectual dispute, a fight where the one with the best argument “wins”. I know first hand because I have fallen into this trap several times. The fruits of these types of encounters are not to be desired. Nobody will be converted to the fullness of the truth if in defending my faith I do not have my renewal and the good of the other as my primary goal, no matter how logical and reasonable my argument may be.

It's Sunday morning....you wake up, get dressed, and head to church. For those of you that are Catholic, you walk through the front (or side) door, dip your fingers in the holy water, make the sign of the Cross, and then head to your usual pew. Hold up...rewind...you dip your fingers in holy water?! What is that about?! I guess it is just another one of those crazy, superstitous, ritualistic Catholic traditions... Man, what are we going to do about those poor Catholics :-)

Okay, wait a minute we Catholics know why we use holy water, right? Unfortunately, many of us don't.

So here's a crash course on the use of holy water (references to more in-depth explanations will come at the end).

What Is Holy Water?

Holy Water is water that has been blessed by a priest. It is a sacramental , i.e. a "sacred sign which bears a certain resemblance to the sacraments, and by means of which spiritual effects are signified and obtained through the prayers of the Church" (CCC, 1667).

Why Is Holy Water Used?

1. It is a reminder of our Baptism. In making the sign of the Cross when using Holy Water we are reminding ourselves of our commitment to the Christian way of life, the way of Cross.

2. It is a symbol of interior cleansing. In baptism, Holy Water is poured over the individual as a sign of the actual effect of the Sacrament, the cleansing of the soul of all sin. Using Holy Water on a regular basis is a symbol of that cleansing and our desire to be continuously cleansed through Christ's life-giving Grace that we receive through the Sacraments.

3. It prepares us and properly disposes us to receive grace. Using Holy Water, especially as we enter the church on our way to Mass, should create in us that proper focus and disposition that is necessary when participating in the Mass. We remind ourselves of our baptism, of our need for continual cleansing, and then we participate in that "perfect" act of worship where we receive the very "source" of all grace, namely Christ Himself.

4. It wards off evil. Holy Water, being blessed by the priest, can be used to exorcise the presence of evil. "When the Church asks publicly and authoritatively in the name of Jesus Christ that a person or object be protected against the power of the Evil One and withdrawn from his dominion, it is called exorcism (CCC 1673). In the blessing of Holy Water, the priest publicly and authoritatively prays for these things. Now, this DOES NOT mean that Catholics should whip up their bottles of Holy Water and run around the world trying to perform "major" excorisms. "Major" exorcisms can only be performed by a priest with the permission of the bishop (cf. CCC 1673). However, it does mean that the blessing invoked over the water by the priest is applicable to the individual who uses this sacramental.

What does Holy Water not do?

Holy Water does not confer the grace of the Holy Spirit in the way that the sacrament of Baptism does, rather, by the Church's prayer, it prepares us to receive grace and disposes us to cooperate with it (cf. CCC 1670).

References

Holy Water - provides a good history of the use of holy water.

Holy Water - provide a detailed overview.

In Christ,
Joe

May is considered to be a Marian month, so I thought it would be appropriate to consider what the Early Fathers taught about Mary.

On the Immaculate Conception

"He was the ark formed of incorruptible wood. For by this is signified that His tabernacle was exempt from putridity and corruption."
Hippolytus,Orat. Inillud, Dominus pascit me(ante A.D. 235),in ULL,94

"This Virgin Mother of the Only-begotten of God, is called Mary, worthy of God, immaculate of the immaculate, one of the one."
Origen,Homily 1(A.D. 244),in ULL,94

"Let woman praise Her, the pure Mary."
Ephraim,Hymns on the Nativity,15:23(A.D. 370),in NPNF2,XIII:254

"Thou alone and thy Mother are in all things fair, there is no flaw in thee and no stain in thy Mother."
"Ephraem,Nisibene Hymns,27:8(A.D. 370),in THEO,132

"Mary, a Virgin not only undefiled but a Virgin whom grace has made inviolate, free of every stain of sin."
Ambrose,Sermon 22:30(A.D. 388),in JUR,II:166

"We must except the Holy Virgin Mary, concerning whom I wish to raise no question when it touches the subject of sins, out of honour to the Lord; for from Him we know what abundance of grace for overcoming sin in every particular was conferred upon her who had the merit to conceive and bear Him who undoubtedly had no sin."
Augustine,Nature and Grace,42[36](A.D.415),in NPNF1,V:135

"As he formed her without my stain of her own,so He proceeded from her contracting no stain."
Proclus of Constantinople,Homily 1(ante A.D. 446),in ULL,97

"A virgin, innocent, spotless, free of all defect, untouched, unsullied, holy in soul and body, like a lily sprouting among thorns."
Theodotus of Ancrya,Homily VI:11(ante A.D. 446),in THEO,339

"The angel took not the Virgin from Joseph, but gave her to Christ, to whom she was pledged from Joseph, but gave her to Christ, to whom she was pledged in the womb, when she was made."
Peter Chrysologus,Sermon 140(A.D. 449),in ULL,97

"[T]he very fact that God has elected her proves that none was ever holier than Mary, if any stain had disfigured her soul, if any other virgin had been purer and holier, God would have selected her and rejected Mary."
Jacob of Sarug(ante A.D. 521),in CE

"She is born like the cherubim, she who is of a pure, immaculate clay" Theotoknos of Livias,Panegyric for the feast of the Assumption, 5:6(ante A.D. 650),in THEO,180

"Today humanity, in all the radiance of her immaculate nobility, receives its ancient beauty. The shame of sin had darkened the splendour and attraction of human nature; but when the Mother of the Fair One par excellence is born, this nature regains in her person its ancient privileges and is fashioned according to a perfect model truly worthy of God.... The reform of our nature begins today and the aged world, subjected to a wholly divine transformation, receives the first fruits of the second creation"
Andrew of Crete,Sermon I,On the Birth of Mary(A.D. 733),in THEO,180

"[T]ruly elect, and superior to all,not by the altitude of lofty structures, but as ecelling all in the greatness and purity of sublime and divine virtues, and having no affinity with sin whatever."
Germanus of Constantinople,Marracci in S. Germani Mariali(ante A.D. 733),in ULL,98

"O most blessed loins of Joachim from which came forth a spotless seed! O glorious womb of Anne in which a most holy offspring grew."
John of Damascus,Homily I in Nativ.(ante A.D. 749),in THEO,200

This is an excellent passage from Fulton Sheen’s Life of Christ:

“Tell the daughter of Zion, Here is your king, who comes to you in gentleness, riding on a donkey.” - - Matthew 21:5

The prophecy came from God through a prophet, and now God Himself was bringing it to fulfillment. The prophecy of Zechariah was meant to contrast the majesty and the humility of the Savior. As one looks at the ancient sculptured slabs of Assyria and Babylon, the murals of Egypt, the tombs of the Persians, and the scrolls of the Roman columns, one is struck by the majesty of kings riding in triumph on horses or in chariots, and sometimes over the prostrate bodies of their foes. In contrast to this, here is One Who comes triumphant upon an ass. How Pilate, if he was looking out of his fortress that Sunday, must have been amused by the ridiculous spectacle of a man being proclaimed as a King, and yet seated on the beast that was the symbol of the outcast – a fitting vehicle for one riding into the jaws of death! If He had entered into the city with regal pomp in the manner of conquerors, He would have given occasion to believe that He was a political Messiah. But the circumstance He chose validated His claim that His Kingdom was not of this world. There is no suggestion that this pauper King was a rival of Caesar.

How can we stand and lay down the palm branches welcoming Christ in our lives? Christ desires deeply to enter in the Jerusalem within each of us and conquer the city through His love.

God bless,
Jay

Considering the discussion many of you have entered into regarding the article “The Eucharist in the Age of the Fathers” I thought it would be appropriate to post the next chapter from Nichols' book. I believe that in any historical-theological study we owe it to ourselves to look at the big picture. It was for this reason that I recommended Nichols’ book, The Holy Eucharist: From The New Testament to Pope John Paul II. Yet knowing the general unavailability of this book and the fact that many of you will not actually attempt to purchase it, I decided to go ahead and post the next chapter. Currently much of my thought is bent upon the Eucharist, as my friend Darius told me in his last days…”it is the only thing that matters.” This is the pivotal teaching…the Eucharist must be…for to Catholics (and Orthodox) the Eucharist is Christ, “the source and the summit of Christian life” (CCC 1324). So let us turn once again to the wisdom of Aidan Nichols, a man who has truly attempted to treat this Subject with care and consideration.

The Mediaevals on the Nature of the Real Presence

In considering the development of eucharistic doctrine in the Latin Church between the age of the Fathers and the classical moment of St. Thomas, we encounter two fundamental issues. First, what is the mode of Christ’s presence in the Eucharist? Here we shall find maximalists and minimalists, or if you will, literalists and symbolists, in debate sometimes enlightening, sometimes merely, alas, acrimonious, until, with the emergence of the concept of transubstantiation, a satisfactory resolution is achieved. Although transubstantiation enters the conciliar tradition with the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215, it flowers into theological light with the tertia pars of Thomas’ Summa Theologiae, written in 1272. The second issue occupying the centre of the stage in the early mediaeval period concerns the purpose, aim or salvific rationale of the Eucharist. As the Cappadocians had already realised, the real presence cannot be left as a bare metaphysical fact. It must possess its own ‘finality’, its own intrinsic purpose within the economy of salvation. As we shall see in the next chapter, two views of what this purpose might be existed side by side. One concentrated on the mystical aspect of the Eucharist, and saw its purpose as the achieving of spiritual union between Christ and the believer. The other emphasised the ecclesial dimension, locating the finality of the presence in the unification of the whole Church by charity. These two perspectives are conveniently brought together in Thomas’ assertion that the ultimate reference of the Eucharist is the mystical unity of the Church of Christ – thus showing that the ‘vertical’ and ‘horizontal’ perspectives are not rivals or competitors but complement each other.

There has been much discussion on this site about whether or not St. Augustine and other Early Fathers actually believed in the Real Presence. This article will focus specifically on St. Augustine.

Some have insisted that Augustine believed that the Eucharist was only a symbol or figure of Christ. It is important to point out that these individuals have used these words (i.e. symbol and figure) to imply that Augustine is saying that the Eucharistic elements are “not” Christ Himself, but rather a reminder of Christ. Some have said that there is “some” spiritual significance in the Eucharist but that the elements do not change materially. These views have provided some very stimulating discussion and insight into the various understandings of the Eucharist within the different Protestant religions.

The following is from the book The Hidden Manna: A Theology of the Eucharist by Fr. James T. O’Connor. If you are genuinely interested in gaining a better understanding of the Church’s teaching and understanding of the Eucharist down through the ages, I highly recommend this book. This particular section is a bit lengthy but well worth reading…Enjoy!

St. Augustine
In the Apostolic Letter that Pope John Paul II issued on the occasion of the sixteen-hundredth anniversary of the Baptism of Augustine, the Pope made his own the following words of his predecessor, Paul VI:

Indeed, over and above the shining example he gives of the qualities common to all the Fathers, it may be said that all the thought currents of the past meet in his works and form the source that provides the whole doctrinal Tradition of succeeding ages. (69)

The statement is hardly an exaggeration. The person and work of Augustine have always played so large a part in the Church’s theology, especially in the West, that one can run the risk of overlooking the other Fathers. His thought is so faithful to the Tradition, so rich in insight, so persuasively expressed that, by way of imitation or reaction, he has influenced theologians up to and including our own day. Often men of totally opposed theological positions have appealed to the authority of Augustine to substantiate their own opinions.

I've been meaning to address evolution as it applies to Christian thought for a while now, so I've made it a New Year's resolution to do so. In our society, the theory of evolution is taught as fact in schools as well as throughout secular media. But is it real?

There are actually two theories of evolution: macro-evolution and micro-evolution. Micro-evolution is fact and I won't address it here. Macro-evolution is the issue that is debated throughout our society and now being handled by the courts: did we as humans evolve from lower species to what we are now.

The issue is really a religious one at heart. The problem: If macro-evolution is proven false, then there must be a god (in the sense of a superior being who put us on this earth - it doesn't necessarily follow that it was the Christian God). So the argument for evolution has become a religious argument among atheists and believers, which is why it is so heated (unlike other scientific arguments).

My posts will address some of the scientific problems of evolution as well as the religious issues behind it. I'll update this post with links each time I add another post on evolution (I've started a long post before, but it gets very long very quickly). Hopefully Joe and Dave will jump in and add their posts as well.

By the way, if there is any particular topic you'd like addressed just let me know.

God bless,
Jay

Joachim has once again graced our lowly site and posted an excellent refute to comments made by a fellow blogger. After reading Joachim's comment I felt it worthy of being a post in and of itself. If you wish to review the entire dialogue you can find it at:

10 Questions for "Bible Christians"

Kaffinator,

I have come to give Matthew some assistance in the debate on the correlation of Sacred Scripture with Church Tradition.

From reading your posts, it is clear that you, the “Kaffinator,” believe in “Scripture Alone” as the means to attain salvation, and, therefore, consequently you believe that Sacred Tradition and the Catholic Church are “not necessary.” However, your arguments for “Scripture Alone” are insufficient in so much as you misinterpret Scripture, and misunderstand what the Church means by Tradition.

What is Tradition?

In this debate it is important to understand what the Catholic Church means by Tradition. Contrary to the belief of numerous persons outside and even within the Church, the term, “Tradition,” does not refer to legends or mythological accounts, nor does it encompass transitory customs or practices which may change, as circumstances warrant, such as styles of priestly dress, particular forms of devotion to saints, liturgical rubrics or even “avoiding to take a bath for a full week after baptism.” Sacred or Apostolic Tradition consists of the teachings that the apostles passed on orally through their preaching. It is true that a majority of these teachings overlap with those contained in Scripture, but the mode of their transmission is different.

Jesus and the Apostles were Pro-Tradition

Fundamentalists say Jesus condemned tradition. They note that Jesus said, "And why do you transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?" (Matt. 15:3) (Mark 7:9 is parallel). Paul warned, "See to it that no one makes a prey of you by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the universe, and not according to Christ" (Col. 2:8). But these verses merely condemn erroneous human traditions, not truths which were handed down orally and entrusted to the Church by the apostles (Sacred Tradition) which is to be distinguished from human traditions or customs. Let’s look at Matthew 15:6–9, "So by these traditions of yours you have made God’s laws ineffectual. You hypocrites, it was a true prophecy that Isaiah made of you, when he said, ‘This people does me honor with its lips, but its heart is far from me. Their worship is in vain, for the doctrines they teach are the commandments of men.’" Jesus was not condemning all traditions, only those that made God’s word void. In this case, it was a matter of the Pharisees feigning the dedication of their goods to the Temple so they could avoid using them to support their aged parents. By doing this, they dodged the commandment to "Honor your father and your mother" (Ex. 20:12). Kaffinator, granted you are correct in saying that Jesus used and instructed with passages from the Old Testament often, but He also instructed His followers to abide by traditions that are not contrary to God’s commandments, "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice" (Matt. 23:2–3).

What Fundamentalists and Evangelicals often do, unfortunately, is see the word "tradition" in Matthew 15:3, Mark 7:9 or Colossians 2:8 or elsewhere and conclude that anything termed a "tradition" is to be rejected. They fail to see that the term is used in a different sense, as in 1 Corinthians 11:2 and 2 Thessalonians 2:15, to describe what should be believed. Jesus did not condemn all traditions; he condemned only erroneous traditions, whether doctrines or practices, that undermined Christian truths. The rest, as the apostles taught, were to be obeyed. Paul commanded the Thessalonians to adhere to all the traditions he had given them, whether oral or written.

The Bible denies that it alone is sufficient as the complete rule of faith. Paul says that much Christian teaching is to be found in the tradition which is handed down by word of mouth (2 Tim. 2:2). He instructs us to "stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter" (2 Thess. 2:15).

This oral teaching was accepted by Christians, just as they accepted the written teaching compiled in Sacred Scripture that came to them years later. Jesus instructed his disciples: "He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me" (Luke 10:16). The Church, in the persons of the apostles, was given by Christ the authority to teach; the Church would be his representative. He commissioned them, saying, "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations" (Matt. 28:19).

How would the apostle make disciples of all the nations? By giving everyone they met a Bible? No, but by preaching, by oral instruction: "So faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ" (Rom. 10:17). The Church would always be the living teacher. It is a serious error to limit "Christ’s word" to the written word only or to suggest that all his teachings were reduced to writing. The Bible nowhere supports either notion.

I stumbled upon this article recently and I felt that it adequately addresses this common misunderstanding held by many Protestants. It also sheds some light on just how active the Catholic Church has been in making Sacred Scripture available to all. For the full text of this series follow this link: Catholics and the BibleEnjoy!

It is the wish of the Church that her children should know the Bible.

In the Past. Pre-reformation literature is satu¬rated with Bible quotations. Much that is left to us consists either of books of the Bible or breviaries which are almost wholly made up of Scripture. The sermon literature of the Middle Ages was a mosaic of Scripture texts. Preachers used the Bible much more than is customary today in any pulpit. Half an hour’s perusal of the sermons of a Bernard or a Bonaventure shows us that the preachers almost thought in Scripture texts. For those who could not read, the Church moreover, provided a knowledge of the Bible by means of mystery plays, illustrated editions of parts or the whole of it the paintings, sculptures, and stained glass windows of her churches: the statuary of one great cathedral is known as the Bible of Amiens. Of the Bible in pictures, the Synod of Arras (1025) said: "The illiterate contemplated in the lineaments of painting what they, having never learnt to read could not discern in writing."

To the man of the Middle Ages the Bible was a living reality.

In the Present. Priests are obliged to read Scripture in their Office, or daily prayers, for about an hour and a half every day.

The laity are more than encouraged, they are urged to read the Bible. By Pius VI (1778), bv Pius VII (1820), they were earnestly exhorted to read it, by Leo XIII a special blessing was given to all who would read the Gospels for at least a quarter of an hour daily. Benedict XV (himself the founder of the Society of St. Jerome for distributing the Gospels in Italian, which sells great numbers every year sent, by the Cardinal Secretary of State, the following message to the Catholic Truth Society:

"It was with no little gladness of heart that the Holy Father learned of the work of the Society and of its diligence in spreading far and wide copies of the Holy Gospels, as well as of the other books of the Holy Scriptures, and in multiplying them so as to reach all men of good will. Most lovingly therefore his Holiness blesses all who have put their hand to this very excellent work; and he earnestly exhorts them to persevere with ardor in so holy an enterprise."

In an age when many chose to create their own code of ethics, of right and wrong, of good and evil, I thought it would be appropriate to reflect on virtue. What is virtue? Why is virtue necessary? Are there different virtues? As a "cradle Catholic" I grew up learning about the theological virtues, the moral virtues, and the cardinal virtues (also included in the moral virtues).

Before we consider the different virtues it is appropriate that we consider what Sacred Scripture and the Catechism of the Catholic Church have to say about virtue in general:

1803 "Whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is gracious, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things."62

A virtue is an habitual and firm disposition to do the good. It allows the person not only to perform good acts, but to give the best of himself. The virtuous person tends toward the good with all his sensory and spiritual powers; he pursues the good and chooses it in concrete actions.

The goal of a virtuous life is to become like God.63
----------------------------------------------------------------------
62 Phil 4:8.
63 St. Gregory of Nyssa, De beatitudinibus, 1:PG 44,1200D.

Virtue, finding its origin in God, directs us back to God, to being and living as God's wills. The life of virtue is our imitation of Christ.

Yet even before the Incarnation we find this disposition towards the "good" as well as an understanding of the effects of virtue, Aristotle in his work Ethics stated:

...for the virtue of any being is that which makes its possessor good and also makes his work good.

Likewise, throughout the Old Testament we repeatedly hear the call to virtue. Yet in Christ the virtuous life was made new through His grace. The Catechism has this to say about the relationship between the virtues and grace:

1810 Human virtues acquired by education, by deliberate acts and by a perseverance ever-renewed in repeated efforts are purified and elevated by divine grace. With God's help, they forge character and give facility in the practice of the good. The virtuous man is happy to practice them.

1811 It is not easy for man, wounded by sin, to maintain moral balance. Christ's gift of salvation offers us the grace necessary to persevere in the pursuit of the virtues. Everyone should always ask for this grace of light and strength, frequent the sacraments, cooperate with the Holy Spirit, and follow his calls to love what is good and shun evil.

So what are these virtues that we are to pursue? Why are they important?

Why do Catholics pray for the dead? Before we can answer this question there are two points that need to be made. First, the Catholic Church believes that the Body of Christ is One. This simply means that there exists a real unity among ALL members of the Christ's Body regardless of whether they are alive or dead (Jn 17:20-21). Second, the Catholic Church, in her prayers for the dead, is not praying for those souls that she has declared are in heaven (the canonization process will be a later post). Once in heaven, a soul no longer needs our prayers, rather that soul then enters into continual praise and worship of God and also takes on the role of intercessor (Rev 5:8).

Once we have acknowledged these two truths - the unity of Christ's Body and that Catholics do not pray for those souls that we know with certainty are in heaven - then we must address the question of why Christians pray for each other in the first place. When did the practice of praying for others begin? The earliest biblical reference we find is in the book of Genesis:

Now then restore the man's wife; for he is a prophet, and he will pray for you, and you shall live. Gen 20:7

In the New Testament we find Jesus saying:

But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you... Matt 5:44

And then in Acts:

And Simon said, "Pray for me to the Lord, that nothing of what you have said may come upon me." Acts 8:24

Yet no one mentions intercessory prayer more than St. Paul. He continously asks for the prayers of others and tells them that he is praying for them (Rom 1:9, 10:1, 15:30-32; 2 Cor 1:11, 9:14, 13:7; Eph 1:16, 6:18-19; Phil 1:3-5, 1:9; Col 1:9, 4:3, 4:12; 1 Thess 1:2, 5:25; 2 Thess 1:11, 3:1; 1 Tim 2:1-3; 2 Tim 1:3; Philemon 4; and Heb 13:18). Of course, I'm sure that most of us ask others to pray for us and have prayed for others as well. The reason we pray for one another is because we want some "good" for the other. So intercessory prayer is concerned with the good of the other. The greatest good we can want for another is eternal life.

It is based on this understanding that the Catholic Church beseeches us to pray for the dead, specifically the souls in Purgatory. The following are excerpts from two outstanding articles. The first deals with Purgatory and the second with praying for the dead.

Due to recent comments made on this blog, I felt it necessary to lay out in clear detail exactly what the Catholic Church teaches in reference to death, the particular judgment, heaven, purgatory, hell, and the final judgment. Some of you have attempted to claim that after death we are all simply asleep until Christ's Second Coming and the Final Judgment, knowing nothing and being unable to praise and worship Jesus Christ. Sacred Scripture and the writings of Christians down through the ages clearly disproves this false belief. The following is from the Catechism of the Catholic Church (the footnote numbers throughout the text can be referenced at the bottom of the article):

ARTICLE 12
"I BELIEVE IN LIFE EVERLASTING"

1020 The Christian who unites his own death to that of Jesus views it as a step towards him and an entrance into everlasting life. When the Church for the last time speaks Christ's words of pardon and absolution over the dying Christian, seals him for the last time with a strengthening anointing, and gives him Christ in viaticum as nourishment for the journey, she speaks with gentle assurance:

Go forth, Christian soul, from this world
in the name of God the almighty Father,
who created you,
in the name of Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God,
who suffered for you,
in the name of the Holy Spirit,
who was poured out upon you.
Go forth, faithful Christian!
May you live in peace this day,
may your home be with God in Zion,
with Mary, the virgin Mother of God,
with Joseph, and all the angels and saints. . . .

May you return to [your Creator]
who formed you from the dust of the earth.
May holy Mary, the angels, and all the saints
come to meet you as you go forth from this life. . . .
May you see your Redeemer face to face. 591

Isn’t this the ultimate question: what purpose do we serve? In other words, why did God make us? I’m not just asking why God created the earth and people, I’m asking, why did God create you? Why do you exist and why have you been allowed to live this long?

It’s an interesting question because it is so personal. It’s also difficult to get your hands around an answer, since by definition the answer will require more from you. If you exist for a reason, that implies obligation, particularly to God. If God specifically created you in this time and place, rather than another, then He must have a divine reason behind that choice. Are you fulfilling the need God had when He created you?

In the old Baltimore Catechism, we find the answers in fairly simple language:

Why did God make us? God made us to show forth His goodness and to share with us His everlasting happiness in heaven.

That explains why God made the world and populated it, but why did he make you? This is a significantly more difficult question to answer, since it would be a different answer for each of us. As unique creations of God, we each were created for unique reasons. Reasons, by the way, that are divine, rather than human, which means it would it impossible for us to give a full answer for each of our existences.

Perhaps one reason for our existence is to simply smile at another person on a very specific day. Or to brighten someone else’s afternoon on one day in July. We will never know until – and unless – we get to heaven. However, we can know some of the reasons God created us. The Baltimore Catechism is also famous for the quote “to know, love, and serve God,” which sums up the reason for our existence. The Catholic Catechism starts out with:

CCC 1. God, infinitely perfect and blessed in himself, in a plan of sheer goodness freely created man to make him share in his own blessed life. For this reason, at every time and in every place, God draws close to man. He calls man to seek him, to know him, to love him with all his strength.

To add on, we have specific obligations handed down from God. Both norms and obligations – from the Ten Commandments to the requirement that we go and make disciples of all men. Outside of this, only prayer can light our way. Only an absolute trust that God will guide us to complete the tasks he has for us. In othe