Posts

Q and A: Third Sunday of Lent

Lent2

Q. Today’s readings have a common theme: the absolute need to repent of sin, but also God’s abundant mercy for those who do. Would you agree?

A. That’s true. Psalm 103, the Responsorial Psalm from today’s readings, reminds us that “The Lord is kind and merciful”. One of the greatest mercies God provides for us is to “tell it like it is” – to explain reality to us, and warn us of the consequences of not repenting.

This is why St. Paul, in the second reading from 1 Corinthians 10, speaks about members of the Old Testament people of God who did not make it from Egypt to the promised land of Israel. Tragically, these people were “struck down” in the desert because they were not pleasing to the Lord. This was despite the fact that “all of them were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. All ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they drank from a spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was the Christ.”

Q. How does this apply to Catholics today?

A. The same dangers and consequences of unrepentance face the modern-day people of God. Like the Israelites of the Exodus generation, Catholics can sometimes view their baptism as a sort of “lifetime membership card” for Heaven. They frequent the communion lines, but not the queue for the confessional. They “all eat the same spiritual food, and all drink the same spiritual drink – the Christ” in the Eucharist. But they run the same risk that the Israelites did – of being “struck down” in the journey through the wilderness of this life, and not making it to the true promised land of Heaven. The reason is that they feel no need to repent of their sin. Just being “Catholic in name only”, they feel, will be enough to get them “in”. But God is not mocked.

Q. How can we avoid this trap?

A. By sincere repentance, and producing the fruit of the Kingdom in their lives. God will always forgive the one who truly is sorry for their sin, and who desires to change. This is why Jesus reminds us that “God is no respecter of persons”. This means that he judges everyone by the same, objective standard. As Jesus said in today’s Gospel, speaking of people who had died tragically in his time, “unless you repent, you will all perish as they did”.

Jesus then tells a parable about a fruitless fig tree. The owner wants to cut it down, but the “gardener”, who represents Christ, pleads with him to give him more time to “fertilize” it. After one more year, if the tree is still fruitless, the owner can cut it down.

We are like those trees. Christ has given us all the “fertilizer” we need to grow and bear fruit that will last. The scriptures, the sacraments, the teaching of the Church, the community of faith – all the conditions necessary for growth. We never know how much time we have left before we face eternity. Let us not waste this Lent. Who knows? It may be the last one we ever have. Let us truly repent and produce the fruit of the Kingdom in our lives, that we may share in the joy of the resurrection harvest.

/by

Four Verses to Remember in November

As we continue through this month of November, we’re getting closer and closer to the end of the liturgical year. This month has also seen us celebrate the feasts of All Saints and All Souls. So, it is a natural thing to think about our final end as we approach the end of another Church year. It’s also, of course, profitable to “begin with the end in mind”, to consider how our supernatural destiny following death affects our purpose in daily life.

Here are four thought-provoking verses from the New Testament that shed light on this:

1) “You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matthew 5:48).

In these words from the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus is preaching to the vast crowds. He is not speaking only to his “priests” (the Apostles). In other words, the Lord expects all baptized believers to be saints – not just priests, nuns, and monks. This is the “universal call to holiness”, which Vatican II reminded us of. It is both as old and as new as the Gospel.

2) “This is the will of God, your sanctification” (1 Thessalonians 4:3).

Many people wander through life wondering what God’s will for them might be. Saint Paul spells it out to the Thessalonians: God’s will is that you become a saint. His will is that you be holy, that you be sanctified. And what does it mean to become a saint? Nothing more than becoming the best version of yourself, the masterpiece God had in mind when he created you. In the verses that follow, St Paul also spells out some obvious facets of the life of sanctity, including avoiding immorality.

3) “He (God the Father) chose us in him (Christ) before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him” (Ephesians 1:4).

Saint Paul writes here to the Ephesian Church, reminding them of God’s plan for them from all eternity: that they would be saints. Paul was writing to a group that included many ordinary, everyday Christians: blacksmiths, metalworkers, and others involved in the trades. God expected the same sanctity from them as he did from Paul. The same is also true, of course, for you and I.

4) “Without holiness, no one will see the Lord” (Hebrews 12:14).

All of us want to go to heaven after we die. All of us want to see Jesus face-to-face. The writer of Hebrews gives us some straight talk: only saints get into heaven. So, if you want to go there, get serious about your spiritual life. Satan likes to trick us with the lie that there are three different kinds of people: those who are obviously saints, those who are obviously evil, and regular people like you and me. But we read in the parables of Jesus in the Gospels about many “normal, good people” who didn’t make it to heaven, because they failed to take God seriously: the “foolish virgins”, for example (Matthew 25:1-13), or those who refused the invitation to the wedding feast because they were too “busy” (Luke 14:15-24). If your goal is to get into heaven “by the skin of your teeth”, what happens if you miss your target? Rather, we should make up our minds to become saints. We can, with God’s help.

Are there other biblical verses that you have found helpful in responding to the call to holiness? Share this post and your answer on Twitter, Facebook, or LinkedIn.

/by

Authenticating the Resurrection of Jesus: The Corinthian Creed

Today’s first reading from 1 Corinthians 15 contains one of the first “creeds” of the early Church. As Saint Paul writes,

“For I handed on to you as of first importance what I also received:
that Christ died for our sins
in accordance with the Scriptures;
that he was buried;
that he was raised on the third day
in accordance with the Scriptures;
that he appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve.
After that, he appeared to more
than five hundred brothers at once,
most of whom are still living,
though some have fallen asleep.
After that he appeared to James,
then to all the Apostles.
Last of all, as to one born abnormally,
he appeared to me.”

– 1 Corinthians 15:3-8

In an interview with Lee Strobel for the book The Case for Christ, scholar Gary Habermas showed that Saint Paul is, in fact, quoting a very early creed of the Church. First, Paul uses the terms translated “received” and “handed on”, technical rabbinical language for the passing on of sacred tradition. The text is also in stylized format, using parallelism, presumably to aid memorization. The use of the Aramaic version of Peter’s name, “Cephas” is likely a sign of its primitive date. The creed also uses phrases that are uncommon in Paul’s writings: “the Twelve”; “he was raised”; “the third day”. Habermas noted that scholar “Ulrich Wilkens says that it ‘indubitably goes back to the oldest phase of all in the history of primitive Christianity'” (Strobel, The Case for Christ, p. 230).

Habermas, among others, would contend that this creed could have been composed within mere months after the resurrection of Jesus. He notes that no credible scholar disputes Pauline authorship of 1 Corinthians, which was likely written between 55-57 AD. But Paul says in 15:3 that he passed the creed on to the Corinthian Church at some point in the past, predating his visit there in 51 AD. That places the composition of the creed no later than within 20 years of the original Easter event.

But Habermas – and others – think the creed goes back even further: between 32-38 AD, when Paul received it, in all likelihood in Jerusalem. Three years after Paul’s conversion, he travelled to Jerusalem to interview the Apostles Peter and James (whose feast day we celebrate today). Habermas draws our attention to the fact that, when Paul described this trip in Galatians 1:18-19, he uses the Greek word historeo, which indicates a thorough investigation of the facts surrounding Jesus’ resurrection was being made. So, in all likelihood, this creed was delivered to Paul by the eyewitnesses of the resurrected Jesus, Peter and James.

Of course, the creed goes on to enumerate other Easter eyewitnesses, including an appearance of the Risen Christ to over 500 people at once – “most of whom are still living” at the time Paul wrote 1 Corinthians. Paul is virtually daring any skeptics to interview these people.

The 1 Corinthians creed authenticates the resurrection of Christ in many ways, not the least of which is this: its incredibly early, eyewitness testimony precludes any possibility of legendary accretion. The fact is, the resurrection is a fact.


/13 Comments/by

How Old Was Saint Joseph? Part I

The recent Solemnity of Saint Joseph on March 19 was a welcome feast within Lent – and we’ll have another one next week: the Annunciation. When contemplating Saint Joseph, one of the many interesting unanswered questions about him is this: How old was he? Was he an older man who served as a guardian to the Virgin, or was he younger and more robust? I’ll lay out the two competing views in the next couple of posts. First up: the view that he was older.

The Eastern wing of the Church has traditionally held that Saint Joseph was an older man, who betrothed and married Mary not for the purposes of romance, but protection – to be her legal guardian, as it were. The thinking here is that Mary had always planned on remaining a virgin dedicated to the service of God. Admittedly, this was a relatively rare position to take in Israel in the first century. But there are other examples, even in the same generation: Jesus himself (obviously), Saint Paul, and some of the Essenes, for starters. One could also add the prophetess Anna mentioned by Luke (2:36-38), who, although briefly married in her youth, lived out the rest of her days worshipping in the temple, consecrating herself to the Lord. She ostensibly could have sought remarriage, but didn’t. Mary may have been planning a similar life for herself.

But being an unmarried woman in the first century, especially if one was without extended family members to rely upon, may have been a precarious position to be in. Having a guardian, in the form of an older Saint Joseph, would have been a boon. Mary’s question to the archangel Gabriel, when told she would be the mother of the Messiah (“How can this be, since I am a virgin?” – Lk 1:34) is quite an odd question for an engaged woman to ask. Gabriel has said nothing at this point about the conception of Jesus being miraculous in nature – he does that a few verses later. Odd, that is – unless she was planning on remaining a virgin all along.

The concept of Joseph as an older man also carries explanatory power in other ways: most notably, it explains his absence from the adult ministry of Jesus. The presumption is that he had died by this point. Although the mother of Jesus is mentioned at key points in the ministry of the Lord, Joseph is nowhere to be found. This is felt most acutely at the crucifixion, where Jesus gives the care of his mother into the hands of – not Joseph, but the apostle John – inconceivable if Joseph had been living at the time (Jn 19:26-27). As well, in some strains of this tradition, Joseph is said to have been a widower, whose first wife had died some time before, when he married the Virgin. This may shed some light on who the alleged “brothers and sisters” of Jesus might have been. Certainly, they were not other children of Mary, but they may have been Joseph’s children from his previous marriage.

What do you think? Sound off in the comments box, but don’t forget to stay tuned for the other side of the argument, which I haven’t even presented yet – that Joseph was a much younger man. We’ll tackle that argument in the next post.

/4 Comments/by

Tell what the Lord has done for you

Today’s Gospel reminds us of the incredible power of Jesus the exorcist. He casts out a “legion” of demons from the Gerasene demoniac. There have been many modern scholars who wish to rebrand the New Testament cases of demonic possession as merely misdiagnosed mental illness. The thinking is that the ancients had no concept of such diseases,as we “enlightened” 21st-centry people do. This theory is preposterous on many levels, but there are two facts in this particular case that make such a diagnosis impossible.

One, as those who study demonology know, those possessed by malevolent spirits often exhibit enormous physical strength, disproportionate to their natural capacities. In this case, check.
Also, the fact that Jesus sent the demons into the pigs, who rushed headlong over the cliffs into the sea (what a hogwash!), is an objective physical manifestation that cannot be explained away by an interior, subjective mental state.

The freed man is so grateful to the Lord that he desires with all his heart to join the Apostolic band – the hierarchy of the nascent Church, if you will. But Jesus says no. That’s not his vocation, as it were. Jesus wants him to engage in a personal apostolate, telling everyone he meets about what Christ has done for him.

We are all called to the same mission. Our baptism demands that we seek two things: holiness and apostolate. If we don’t have that fiery passion to tell others about Christ, we may be in danger of falling into lukewarmness and eventually spiritual death.

Break those fetters, your own chains of fear that prevent you from speaking to your friends about the Lord. As Saint Paul says in another place, “the word of God is not chained” (2 Timothy 2:9).

/1 Comment/by

Authenticating the Resurrection of Jesus: the Jerusalem factor

The ResurrectionThe Bible is refreshingly clear about what is at stake if the Resurrection of Jesus didn’t happen: “If Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless, and so is your faith…but Christ has indeed been raised from the dead” (1 Corinthians 15:14, 20). Today, Easter Sunday, is the first day of the Octave of Easter (in the Church, it is as if Easter lasts as one continuous day until next Sunday), with the rest of the liturgical season of Easter to follow. So, over the next while, I’ll offer some solid reasons why we can be certain that Jesus indeed rose from the dead. Keep in mind that these facts are accepted by the vast majority of critical scholars, be they believers or not.

Reason 1: The Jerusalem factor. When the Apostles began publicly preaching that Jesus had been physically resurrected from the dead, it is not as if they began by travelling to some faraway land, to tell people who had no means of investigating the veracity of the event. It wasn’t like “Star Wars” – “Let me tell you about something that happenned ‘a long, long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.'” No, the Apostles began proclaiming the Resurrection in Jerusalem – the very city where Christ had been publicly killed. There is simply no way they could have done so if it were not true.

It’s instructive to note the response of the religious authorities of Jerusalem to this message: they didn’t say, “Jesus isn’t risen! He’s still in his tomb – and let us show you hs remains and put an end to this foolishness once and for all”. Their response was actually to say, “The disciples stole the body”. In other words, the enemies of the Gospel message admit the reality of the empty tomb. This response is noted in the Gospel of Matthew, chapter 28 (vv. 11-15), where it is said that “this story (of the stolen body) is told among the Jews to this day” (v. 15). Saint Justin Martyr, in his “Dialogue with Trypho”, notes that this response was still commonly heard among Jews in the mid-2nd century when he was writing.

In the next post, we’ll examine more evidence that Jesus rose from the dead in his physical body, leaving an empty tomb behind.

/4 Comments/by

On The Third Day…

When Saint Paul wrote (quoting an early creedal statement of the Church), that Jesus “was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures” (1 Corinthians 15:4), what scriptures were in mind? For that matter, when Jesus himself predicted his suffering, death, burial, and Resurrection “on the third day” (cf. Mark 8:31; Matthew 16:21; Luke 9:22), did he believe he would be fulfilling any particular passage? Dr. Craig Evans seems to think so.

In his book (co-authored with N.T. Wright) “Jesus: The Final Days”, Evans notes that Hosea 6 (which just happens to be the Old Testament Mass reading today) may be in the background here, especially verse 2: “He will revive us after two days; on the third day he will raise us up, to live in his presence” (RSV). Evans notes that the translation of this verse in the Aramaic Targum (which Jesus, as a native speaker of Aramaic, would have probably been quite familiar with) has a unique emphasis: “He will revive us in the days of consolations that will come; on the day of the resurrection of the dead he will raise us up and we shall live before him” (Aramaic differences italicized). As Evans puts it, “The coherence of Jesus’ words with the Aramaic tradition is striking” (p. 13). It is hard to escape the conclusion that Jesus not only predicted not only his death, but also his Resurrection, seeing both as fulfilling scripture.

/1 Comment/by

“Seven Stanzas at Easter” by John Updike

I’m not a huge poetry guy, but I’ve always been struck by this one: “Seven Stanzas at Easter”, by John Updike. I made use of it last night as I was giving a talk about the liturgical seasons of Lent and Easter. Updike’s poem emphasizes the bodily, corporeal reality of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. This was a real, historical event, not a metaphor. Christ really rose physically from death, leaving an empty tomb behind. As Saint Paul stresses, “If Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, and and your faith is in vain” (1 Corinthians 15:14). Or, as Updike puts it:

Make no mistake: if He rose at all
it was as His body;
if the cells’ dissolution did not reverse, the molecules
reknit, the amino acids rekindle,
the Church will fall.

It was not as the flowers,
each soft Spring recurrent;
it was not as His Spirit in the mouths and fuddled
eyes of the eleven apostles;
it was as His flesh: ours.

The same hinged thumbs and toes,
the same valved heart
that–pierced–died, withered, paused, and then
regathered out of enduring Might
new strength to enclose.

Let us not mock God with metaphor,
analogy, sidestepping, transcendence;
making of the event a parable, a sign painted in the
faded credulity of earlier ages:
let us walk through the door.

The stone is rolled back, not papier-mâché,
not a stone in a story,
but the vast rock of materiality that in the slow
grinding of time will eclipse for each of us
the wide light of day.

And if we will have an angel at the tomb,
make it a real angel,
weighty with Max Planck’s quanta, vivid with hair,
opaque in the dawn light, robed in real linen
spun on a definite loom.

Let us not seek to make it less monstrous,
for our own convenience, our own sense of beauty,
lest, awakened in one unthinkable hour, we are
embarrassed by the miracle,
and crushed by remonstrance.

/1 Comment/by

State of the Union

On a day when U.S. President Barack Obama gave the “State of the Union” address, it’s apropos that today is the feast marking the conversion of Saint Paul. This, in turn, denotes the close of the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity. And without true conversion, Christian unity will always be relegated to fantasy status. It seems that many Christians have either a) given up on the concept completely, or b) have a skewed vision of what true Christian unity looks like.

Pope Benedict XVI had some strong words mere hours ago for those who have given up on the possibility of Christian unity. At an ecumenical event capping the week of prayer at the Basilica of St Paul outside the wall in Rome, the Pontiff said that this attitude is a “temptation of resignation and pessimism”, and amounts to “a lack of trust in the power of the Holy Spirit.”  So much for option a)!

What of option b)? Many Catholic and Protestatnt Christians view success in ecumenism as simply “agreeing to disagree”. They believe there are “many valid expressions” of Christianity, even though they differ with each other on key aspects of faith and morality. But such an uneasy peace is not what either Jesus, Paul, or Pope Benedict has in mind.

Pope Benedict noted today that Christian unity is “a moral imperative, a response to a precise call of the Lord.” One of the passages he may have had in mind was John 17:20-21, when Jesus addressed his Father: “I do not pray for these only (the Apostles), but also for those who believe in me through their word, that they all may be one; even as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me.”

Christian disunity is not only therefore direct disobedience to Christ, but we must also recognize that Christian unity must be a corporate unity. That is, we must be visibly one, not just in agreement about some core essentials of doctrine – “Mere Christianity”, as it were (and who’s to say exactly how many elements constitute the “Mereness”?) – is not enough. The union must be visible, corporeal, for Jesus said if it was, “the world may believe that you have sent me”. Seeing is believing for the skeptic.

“That for which we yearn is the unity for which Christ himself prayed and which, by its nature, is manifested in a communion of faith, sacraments and ministry”, Pope Benedict said.

Christian disunity is not what Paul wanted, either. In fact, he was mortified at the beginnings of what amounted to “denominationalism” (denomination means “of a name” – hence Lutheranism, Calvinism, etc.) in Corinth:

I urge you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree in what you say, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and in the same purpose. For it has been reported to me about you, my brothers, by Chloe’s people, that there are rivalries among you. I mean that each of you is saying, “I belong to Paul,” or “I belong to Apollos,” or “I belong to Cephas,” or “I belong to Christ.”Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?

-1 Corinthians 1:10-13

To the contrary, as Paul writes to the Ephesians, “There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Ephesians 4:5).

The theme of the Week of Christian unity was, “One in the apostles’ teaching, fellowship, breaking of bread and prayer” (cf. Acts 2:42). There will be no Christian unity without an acceptance of all the apostles’ teaching, preserved in the Catholic Church. There’s no unity without the “breaking of the bread” – code for the Mass. And true fellowship derives from oneness in purpose and belief, for, as Jesus said, “Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand” (Matthew 12:25). Another U.S. President, Abraham Lincoln, once famously quoted those words. And the Civil Wars within Christianity must likewise end.

/2 Comments/by

Taylor “Marshalls” Evidence for the Catholic Paul

The wait is over for book two in Taylor Marshall‘s three-volume Origins of Catholicism series! You may recall my review of book one, The Crucified Rabbi, which focused on the organic links between Judaism and the Catholic Church. Christmas came early for me this year when volume two, The Catholic Perspective on Paul, arrived in my mailbox recently. Since a particular interpretation of Paul’s writings by Luther touched off the Protestant revolution in the first place, it’s crucial to understand Paul correctly to ascertain (to borrow a phrase from N.T. Wright) what Saint Paul really said.

Look for my full review in Catholic Insight magazine in early 2011, but let me give you a sneak peek at Paul from Taylor’s Perspective:

It has been said that Paul’s entire theology is an expansion upon the particular words of Christ pronounced to him on the road to Damascus: “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?” (Acts 26:14). With these words, Christ revealed that to persecute any of His disciples is to persecute Him. When Saul approved of the murder of Stephen, he had approved of the murder of Christ. When Saul imprisoned Christians, he had imprisoned Christ. From this intimate union between Christ and his disciples, Saint Paul extrapolated his entire theological system. Accordingly, Paul’s doctrine of the believer’s union with the person of Christ is the bedrock of Catholic theology because it presents salvation in terms of participation. Christ’s statement to Saul reveals that the Christian believer participates in the life of Christ. This is the center of Paul’s message. “So we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members of one another” (Rom 12:5). The epistles of Paul constantly and consistently resound with the phrase “in Christ” and “in him”. This phrase is more common than any other topic in the letters of Paul combined. This means that Paul discusses the believer’s participation in Christ more than justification, faith, works, law, or predestination. Union with Christ is the ubiquitous theme of Paul’s theology.

When we understand Christianity as a participation in Christ, we begin to read Paul’s epistles in a new light, or rather under the ancient light of the Church Fathers who lived before us. We find that the “old perspective on Paul” articulated by the Catholic Church had it correct all along. Saint Paul presents the Church, baptism, the Eucharist, marriage, faith, works, justification, sanctification, and regeneration as participations in the person and work of Christ…this interpretation confirms that Paul’s teachings are in fact the teachings of the Catholic Church.

Paul’s paradigm of “union with Christ” can be contrasted with what I call “zero-sum theology”. Let me boldly suggest that all theological misunderstandings regarding the Catholic faith can be attributed to the adoption of “zero-sum theology”. By “zero-sum theology”, I mean that theological framework that views salvation, grace, life, and love as a pie with only so many pieces. Christ either gets all pieces or loses the remaining pieces to Mary, saints, sacraments, priests, popes, etc. Naturally, Christ as God should receive all the pieces – not merely some of the pieces. He is the whole of salvation, right?

Of course, Christ is the whole. He is “all in all” as Saint Paul beautifully teaches (Eph 1:23). However, Catholics do not subscribe to a “zero-sum” approach to Christ. Rather than using a “zero-sum” model, Catholics use Saint Paul’s paradigm of participation. Christ is “all in all”, but this means that all other aspects of redemption participate in and through Christ – not apart from Christ. Catholics thus believe that the sacraments, Mary, saints, and priests participate in and through Christ, and thereby lead the Christian to embrace Christ more deeply.

This difference between Catholicism and Protestantism accounts for almost every doctrinal difference between Catholic theology and Protestant theology. Catholicism is framed by a doctrine of participation – Protestantism is generally framed by the zero-sum paradigm.

– Taylor Marshall, The Catholic Perspective on Paul, pp. 26-28



/2 Comments/by