Tag: traditional catholic

  • The Path to Forgiveness: Sacraments and Salvation

    The Path to Forgiveness: Sacraments and Salvation

          When younger I though the best and most beneficent gift given to sentient creatures was free will.  But I found that the fact is the best most beneficent gift God gave them was the ability to become intelligent – to have well formed reasoning skills.  I am totally blown away by the fact that any of the angels decided not to remain with God.  Here on Earth if people decide to stray from God, they may have demonic based temptation, human based temptation and ignorance and pride to blame.  In my estimation angels only had half of these to contend with – ignorance and pride.  Theologians I have read postulate that the devil and his angels left due to pride and the only reason they could was they were ignorant of how much better (infinitely better) staying with God would be, because He gave them freewill and did not want them to stay if they did not want to stay, or had reservations about staying.  If they had reservations they should have erred on known good which I think a lot of them logically must have. There was no reason not to want to stay because He had just created them and in line with justice they should have wanted to stay to serve the one that had just made them out of nothing.  The angels, I assume, were aware of the fact that they couldn’t die so the warning God gave Adam and Eve, He could not give them and, short of losing existence they could think of no worst thing that could happen to them.  Unfortunately, their lack of foresight robbed them of the prospect of unimaginable happiness.

           But as in the case of several famous movie stars (Marilyn Monroe), politicians (Seward’s folly), singers (Kurt Colbain) and business men (Ted Turner’s father) a life of physical ease, power or fame does not make up for lack of love in a person’s life and what the angels lost was Love itself – God.  See the effects of Jesus Christs _ God’s Love on the first Christians, and their willingness to die horribly, even with the understanding of their own mortality, produced for them what would haunt them throughout the rest of eternity, not knowing the incredible bliss of the Love of God – the Beatific Vision.  The curiosity that doomed Adam and Eve to damnation before the promise of a savior, would be part of the punishment that would damn the fallen angels for the rest of eternity – the gnawing curiosity of what perfect love would feel like. Theologians also hypothesize they had not witnessed the Beatific Vision – seeing God as he really is, otherwise they would not have the free will to leave.  Only upon deciding to stay with God were angels granted the Beatific Vision. Man of course is granted the Beatific Vision for the same reason as angels, that is deciding to stay with God, no matter what. Wanting God without reservation.

          Why must we give our unconditional affirmation to whatever God wants of us?  Because to have the Beatific Vision we will be fundamentally changed in ways incomprehensible to human beings.  Mark 12:25 says: ”For when they shall rise again from the dead, they shall neither marry, nor be married, but are as the angels in heaven.” As the angels? We have nowhere close to the intellect of angels or the control since they are not affected by the ravages of concupiscence as emphasized here.  God is not going to ask us: is changing X okay, or is changing Y okay?  He will simply change it and if we have reservations on His goodness as with the angels, we really don’t want to be in His presence for all eternity.  This life is to learn to trust him without reservation and to want whatever he wants without reservation (remembering 1 Corinthians 2:9).  ”This is my body and this is my blood” (Luke 22:18-20) must be believed (John 6:26-71), not what we might think or what might be easier to think: “this is a symbol of my body and is a symbol of my blood.”  We must believe the almighty God who created the universe actually transforms, through the priest he sent by way of apostolic succession, who offers the sacrifice of the mass that he is truly the bread and wine, all there, body, blood, Soul and Divinity.

          Similarly in the case of the forgiveness of sins, we must believe only through baptism can original sin and any other sin be removed or having been baptized, if one commits a mortal sin only through the power of an ordained priest and performing the penance he prescribes can sins be forgiven.  Believing anything else, specifically that we can ask God – Jesus Christ, directly is simply lazy or the sin of presumption. Doing a Bing search yield this explanation of presumption: The Catholic Church does not consider presumption itself as a sin, but it is a violation of the virtue of hope. The sin of presumption occurs when a person assumes God’s mercy without genuine repentance or effort to follow His will. This sin can lead to a distorted relationship between human freedom and divine mercy, risking turning faith into a shallow convenience rather than a lived commitment. Salvation remains possible, but only through repentance and a return to God’s grace.

         You may ask why am I of the opinion that these are the only two ways? Well I base my opinion on at least 4 biblical references. First Acts 2:38 which states: But Peter said to them. “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins: and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.  For to you is the promise and to your children and to all who are far off, even to all whom the Lord our God calls to himself.”

         Second is Matthew 9:1-8: 2And behold they brought to him one sick of the palsy lying in a bed. And Jesus, seeing their faith, said to the man sick of the palsy: Be of good heart, son, thy sins are forgiven thee. 3And behold some of the scribes said within themselves: He blasphemeth. 4And Jesus seeing their thoughts, said: Why do you think evil in your hearts? 5Whether is easier, to say, Thy sins are forgiven thee: or to say, Arise, and walk? 6But that you may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then said he to the man sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy bed, and go into thy house. 7And he arose, and went into his house. 8And the multitude seeing it, feared, and glorified God that gave such power to men.

          Now this passage shows how Jesus Christ made clear that only God can forgive sins and partially made the case that he was God with the many signs (miracles) He performed during his life.  In the resurrection, in that He raised himself from the dead, He completed the argument. Now if only God, Jesus Christ can forgive sins, how can saying you are asking Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins when he is not there, result in your sins being forgiven? “Christ” or God has to say your sins are forgiven.  But can we in any way get Christ in our midst? According to Matthew 18:19-20, yes.  It says:

    • 19: “Again I say to you, that if two of you shall consent upon earth, concerning anything whatsoever they shall ask, it shall be done to them by my Father who is in heaven.”
    • 20: “For where there are two or three gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”

    So if two of Jesus followers are together, IF THEY AGREE, and ask the father it shall be done for them.

           The problem with this is you need a second person and they must agree.  Also, it is not clear if Jesus is referring to any of his followers or just his apostles, the first priests and bishops.

          As serious as sin is, and Christs reference on how much harder it is to forgive and offense against God than it is to heal a cripple, should there not be some New Testament Biblical verse referring specifically to the forgiveness of sins, and how to obtain forgiveness of sins?

           The fact is there is, John 20:21-24 reads as follows:

    • 21: Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.
    • 22: Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.
    • 23: Whose sins ye shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins ye shall retain, they are retained.
    • 24: But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.
    • 25: The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.

    In the verses just prior to this we find the apostles are gathered away together in a locked room for fear of the Jews coming after them.  My point is that only the 11 apostles were there.  This strongly suggests that Jesus Christ only gave the first priests/bishops and their chosen successors the power to forgive sins.  The fact that Jesus sent them and that they were to chose successors, should be evident in that it was in the first Chapter of Acts if the Apostles (Acts 1:15-26) those successors, chose the successors, who in turn chose their successors so on and so forth until we get the priests and bishops of the present day.

         The question is even if you can just get another person to agree your sins should be forgiven, if you believed that would be accomplished, knowing the specific way Jesus appeared to want us to be forgiven, would you rather ask another believer, who may gossip, or a priest, who is under the seal of the confessional to tell no one even if threatened with death, in the anonymity of the confessional?

         Now Adam and Eve had a similar problem to the angels and that was they lived in a paradise and needed nothing, and though they knew God created them, because they had the “benefit” of physical bodies and since they had more distractions than the angels who were pure intellect, they might have thought more knowledge might have contributed to making their physical life better. But a concept that, I think, God has needed to teach thinking beings is there is a happy medium in everything. In life you must pray, be brave, meditate on God’s word and follow where we feel his words are leading us.  If where God is leading us seems to hard or dangerous, we can be classified as “cowardly,” avoid doing it and miss opportunities to improve either our spiritual lives or our physical lives, or both. If we try and do things which seem great, without proper meditation on the consequences, prayer and caution, we may do something which could be classified as “foolhardy” or “stupid” and lose either our happiness, our lives or quite possibly out souls doing it.  

         Good parents must foster the creation of a “right conscience” and if they can accomplish this then relying on conscience as to what to do in certain cases as touted by modern day clerics can be an acceptable solution.  But if one’s conscience is not well formed it will lead to damnation. But part of the sacrament of confession is not only the psychological reinforcement it gives us from telling someone else (which beats $70/hour psychotherapy session), it gives us the additional reinforcement of a priest (God’s Judicial arbiter and representative as a district court judge represents the country he is a judge for) prescribing your punishment (your penance, what you need to do to have your sins forgiven which may include turning yourself in for a crime to saying the prayers the priest asks you to say) and saying your sins are forgiven.

    This training of the conscience and also the training of the will is an important part of raising a good Catholic child, one who will fulfill their ultimate destiny to make it to heaven and be eternally happy.

  • The Importance of Family and Faith During Christmas

    The Importance of Family and Faith During Christmas

    In a few days it will be Christmas once again. We must remember to make the best of this time of year to reconnect with our family if we are older and to make it a magical time for our children if they are still with us.  We must ensure we stress the reason for the season to our children and the fact that will the birth of Christ began the fight against evil that shall last until the end of time.  We must not forget the Holy Innocents which died because of evil in the world and how this incident threatened to end Jesus’ saving mission before it had even begun.  Make it a priority to attend mass, and to pray together for our country and our children.  We must try to make this time the opposite of what it was during the days of the slaying of the Holy Innocents, a time of joy, laughter and reconnection to strengthen our children against the fight against evil that is almost daily clear in our lives even in, America, one of the freest nations that has ever existed.

  • Great Course Entitled Why Evil Exists

    This question of evil is one that has plagued mankind since the time he had started thinking in the patterns that led to the earliest philosophy. I though it necessary to cover it as soon as possible as a background against which to look at other books on Christianity, Jesus Christ, early Christianity and early philosophy.  As Jews or Christians, we know the answer we believe is true, and that is from the fall of original sin, and we know that Jesus came to teach each man and woman how to defeat it in our own lives and this idea of the fall is one of the ideas that is covered in this course.

    The following are the headings of the lectures with a summary of the lectures after the ones directly referring to the Judao-Chistian tradition.

    1. The nature and Origins of Evil
    2. “Enuma Elish”—Evil as Cosmic Battle
    3. Greece – Tragedy and “The Peloponnesian War”
    4. Greek Philosophy-Human Evil and Malice
    5. The Hebrew Bible—Human Rivalry with God

    The Hebrew Bible roots evil in various forms of rebellion. In the Hebrew book of Genesis, see how the Fall actualizes an intrinsic potential for evil. Then consider three faces of rebellion: the rejection of God’s plan (the Fall), interhuman strife (Cain and Able), and direct rivalry with God (the Tower of Bable)

    • The Hebrew Bible—Wisdom and the Fear of God

    The Hebrew Bible also offers a contrasting view of evil and suffering – as phenomena reflecting the mysterious will of God. Explore the implications of the covenant between God and Abraham, and Abraham’s mandated sacrifice of Isaac. In the book of Job, see how Job’s faith is established through determined acceptance of suffering

         7.  Christian Scripture—Apocalypse and Original Sin

    This lecture addresses the New Testament heritage on evil. Uncover the early Christian view of a cosmic struggle between God and darkness in the Gospels and the book of Revelation, noting numerous references to demonic powers. See how the doctrine of original sin is linked to the very goodness of Jesus.

    8.  The Inevitability of Evil – Irenaeus

    The early Christian theologian Irenaeus of Lyon proposed an important ‘theodicy” or theory of evil. Discover the tenets of Irenaeu’s thinking, based in his view that the descent into sin is necessary for the fulfillment of human destiny. Study his conceptions of natural and moral evil, and the redemptive “tutelage” of suffering.

          9. Creation, Evil, and the Fall—Augustine

    Saint Augustine propounded another seminal “theodicy” of evil. Contemplate his two foundational claims: evil as “privation” of fundamental good, and evil as perversion of human nature toward the meaningless. Consider also his views on the rationale for evil, evil’s ultimate mysteriousness, and its interior implications for the doe

        10. Rabbinic Judaism—The Evil Impulse

    Rabbinic Judaism resists the Christian “cosmic drama” of sin and redemption. Study the rabbinic conceptions of tov (goodness/conscience) and ra (badness/self-interest), as each functions in human nature. Also grasp the notion of ra as a practical challenge of will and responsibility and an ultimate gift from God to mature humanity.

    11.  Islam—Iblis the Failed, Once-Glorious Being


    12.  On Self-Deception in Evil—Scholasticism

    The monastic tradition of Christian scholasticism offers compelling views of satanic psychology. In the thought of Anselm of Lyon, explore the “logic” of Satan’s rebellion against God, rooted in bottomless, unspecified desire. In Thomas Aquinas, trace the psychology of Satan to a self-deceptive motive.

    13. Dante—Hell and the Abandonment of Hope

    Dante’s Inferno poetically elucidates Christian thinking on evil. In his observation of the damned, see how the literary “Dante” learns the meaning of both pity and piety. Then grasp the nature of Satan’s punishment, revealing Hell as a self-made crucible where the damned become what they internally want to be.

    14. The Reformation—The Power of Evil Within

    This lecture investigates the pivotal thought of reformers Martin Luther and John Calvin. In Luther’s works, discover his view of Satan as a subtle, inner force, working to induce delusive thought and action. Also study Calvin’s core conceptions of moral predestination and the innate depravity or corruptibility of the human spirit.

    15. Dark Politics – Machiavelli on How to Be Bad

    16. Hobbes- Evil as a Social Construct

    17. Montaigne and Pascal – Evil and the Self

    18. Milton—Epic Evil

    Milton’s Paradise Lost is another deeply influential literary meditation on evil. Here, travel deeply into the psychic agony of Satan, in Milton’s complex portrait of temptation, choice, rebellion, and futility. Conclude with reflections on the distinction between satanic and human sin, and the Fall’s significance in God’s plan.

    19.  The Enlightenment and its discontents

    20.  Kant – Evil at the Root of human Agency

    21.  Hegel – The Slaughter Block of History

    22.  Marx – Materialism and Evil

    23.  The American North and South – Holy War

    24.  Nietzsche – Considering the Language of Evil

    25.  Dostoevsky – The Demonic in Modernity

    26.  Conrad – Incomprehensible Terror

    27. Freud – The Death Drive and the Inexplicable

    28.  Camus – The Challenge to Take Evil Seriously

    29.  Post-WWII Protestant Theology on Evil

    Three challenging perspectives: Explore Tillich’s conception of the demonic as human “possession” by dimensions of reality beyond the personal self; Barth’s vision of Das Nichtige (“the nothing”), a force opposing creation, to which God says “no”; and Niebuhr’s “diagnosis” of sin as rooted in the desire to escape our condition as both matter and spirit.

    30.  Post-WWII Roman Catholic Theology on Evil

    In modern Catholicism, grasp theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar’s nuanced spirituality of hope, based in the conviction that God’s providence is so powerful that salvation is a possibility for all humanity. Then study Pope John Paul II’s precise delineation of “objectively” evil actions as a resource in the church’s larger public discourse.

    31.  Post-WWII Jewish Thought on Evil

    The Holocaust radically challenged Jewish conceptions of evil, faith, and identity. Grapple with four major Jewish thinkers, confronting the apparent death of the God of the covenant, as they urge profound questioning, new understandings of faith, and a turning to fellow humans to find meaning in healing the world.

    32. Arendt – The Banality of Evil

    33. Life in Truth – 20th – Century Poets on Evil

    34. Science and the Empirical Study of Evil

    35.  The “Unnaming” of Evil

    36.  Where can Hope Be Found?

    On the lecturer:

    Professor Charles Mathews is an Associate Professor of Religious Studies of the univesity of Virginia. An expert in theology and the philosophy of religion. professor mathews has received a wealth of honors,m including the Mead Honored Faculty Award – one of the University of Virginia’s highest teaching awards.

  • Social Justice Causes and The Catholic Church and How The Catholic Church Can, In My Opinion, Have More impact

            Many popes since, in my opinion, John XXIII have been overly concerned with social justice and trying use the Church to influence these issues through the clergy.  The clergy and the church in general has absolutely no business doing this.  Its main purpose is the salvation of souls.  Now, I think it is absolutely fine for the pope to voice church concern in the secular world but not realign church priorities mainly from training the clergy in the method and main mission of saving souls to that of training the clergy to be social justice warriors, if it is actually concerned with social justice.  If every deacon, priest and bishop (including the bishop of Rome, who I do cede the prerogative to try and influence social justice) were to concentrate on forming and saving the souls of the laity and themselves, social justice, in my opinion would not be a problem.  How many clergy, barring the pope or bishops who have become pope, have had a major impact on social justice, since it has become “a thing” in the last 2 centuries?

            I think the whole thing was precipitated by Pope John XXIII and his saving numerous Jews during WWII.  All of the church assisted the sitting pope during WWII in trying to save as many Jews as possible.  But when Pope John XXIII became pope I think it shifted the mindset of the cardinals at the time to favor focusing on more participation in the “church” personally trying to save the world.  Bring the light of Christ to the world and be its salt (Matthew 5:13), with a concentration on saving souls and champions and solutions to social justice problems will arise organically. 

            To begin with, I think it was a mistake, being a traditional catholic, to introduce the new mass (Novus Ordo) and I think the increase in the sexual abuse cases and the decreasing reverence in the real presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist proves this. But why?  Much has been said about our use of the electronics and the internet robing us of attention span.  The Tridentine Latin Mass AKA traditional Latin Mass (TLM), gives us time away from constantly thinking and having to respond as in the new mass in the vernacular.  The quiet of the church gives ones mind a chance to rest and meditate on the Epistle and the Gospel, reading the translation, and if not able to read, hearing it in the vernacular during the Homily or Sermon as it is on Sundays.  The quiet relaxes our mind and pulls us away from the cacophony that is traffic, the internet, smart phones and modern life in general and gives us time to meditate in relative silence.  It is a psychological breather from our modern noise world, no thinking to do responses, no talking, little noise except for the soft murmur of the priest conducting the sacrifice of the mass, which we can follow along with in our missals and the sound of crying children every once in a while, that are not in the cry room.

             But can I offer any proof that the Latin mass will lead organically to social Justice action? I’m not sure if I can call it proof per se, but I can give at least 2 examples of lay people, who were raised in the Latin mass that were social justice warriors, devout Catholics, one of whom won the Nobel peace prize.

             Lech Walesa was born in 1943.  The new mass or novus ordo was not introduced until 1968 when Lech Walesa was already 25. He had 8 Children.  Helped root communism out of Poland after being elected president, with the help of pope John Paul II.  He started out as a working man’s working man, an electrician. 

    https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/biography/lech-walesa

    https://www.bushcenter.org/freedom-collection/lech-walesa-a-polish-pope

    https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/1983/walesa/biographical/

             Cesar Chavez (birth name Cesario Estrada Chavez) is another example. Born in 1927. The new mass or novus ordo was not introduced until 1968 when Cesar Chavez was already 41. He had 8 Children.  As an American labor leader, he helped change the plight for the better of numerous American farm workers.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cesar_Chavez

             the bottom line is that the Church should concentrate on the salvation of souls, through going back to things that have proven to work like the Traditional Latin Mass, close booth confessions (which are still predominate in some countries), and communion on the tongue and other forms of respect for the Eucharist (like the priest keeping his thumb and fore fingers together after consecration and use of the paten etc.) to stress the fact that that Jesus Christ is really and truly The Eucharist (John 6:53-70) not symbolically and renews the power of Calvery in a non-violent manner in each mass. 

             These only a couple, there are certainly a lot more, mostly represented by more ancient saints, but their impact was great indeed, in both Europe and the United States of America, during the last 100 years.

  • On Sacrifice  

               Sacrifice, as was possibly mentioned some time in this blog (or at least should have been), is the supreme act of religion. But we need an in-depth description of sacrifice in its proper sense to investigate all its implications and past religions practices bearing on the Catholic holy sacrifice of the mass. To insure it is complete we will take an excerpt from Fr. Gihr book The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass: Dogmatically, Liturgically and Ascetically Explained by Rev. Dr. Nicholas Gihr, published by B. Herder Book Co. St. Louis Mo. Copyright 1902 Joseph Gummersbach, minus the Latin exemplification, mostly through footnotes. With regard to Sacrifice in the Proper Sense from this book we have the following quote:

            The interior acts and affections of the virtue of religion, that is, of adoration, thanksgiving, petition and satisfaction, manifest themselves in many ways, but find their supreme and most solemn expression in sacrifice.  Sacrifice is a special act of divine service, and, as such, differs essentially from all other acts of worship.  To form a correct idea of sacrifice, we must inquire what is properly meant by sacrifice, and in what its essence consists. By sacrifice we understand the offering of a visible object, effected through and change, transformation of destruction thereof, in order effectually to acknowledge the absolute Majesty and Sovereignty of God as well as man’s total dependence and submission.

         Among the requisites of sacrifice, the gift and its presentation as well as the object and meaning of the exterior act, chiefly deserve consideration.

    1. Sacrifice is the offering of a visible object; hence, in the first place, a visible gift is necessary as an offering to God. This gift ought to correspond to the object in view, and should, therefore, be selected with due regard thereto.  Consequently, the offering most appropriate to God is that which is the noblest in the visible creation – human life.  Wherefore Christ, in order to present the most perfect sacrifice, offered His precious life on the Cross, according to the will of His Father. In every other case the father did not wish that human life should be sacrificed to Him, but rather contented Himself with the interior offering of the heart and its symbolical expression – namely, with the presentation of irrational creature substituted for human life and offered in its stead.

    *footnote: This substitution for man and human life is, as seen in the rite of the Old Testament for the offering of sacrifices, expressed and commanded in the clearest manner (compare the ceremony of laying hands on the head of the animal to be slain, – the sacrifice of the two goats on the great Feast of Atonement). Recall also the sacrifice of Abraham. The patriarch was commanded to sacrifice his only son Isaac: but, in accordance with the will of God, he took a “ram and offered it as a holocaust in place of his son” (Gen. 22:13). The Fathers teach the same.

    It is at once evident that especially the living and inanimate things which serve directly for the support of man, and thus may represent his life, may  be appropriately substituted as offerings for man himself.  Before Christ such offerings consisted, for example, of lambs, heifers, doves; bread, wine, oil, salt, incense.

    As such gifts were offered to give honor to God, it is self-evident that they had to be as perfect as possible, without blemish or defect. In as far as sacrifice is an external act of worship, its value depends chiefly on the dignity and interior dispositions of the person who offers; the value of the fift presented also contributes to make the sacrifice more acceptable to God.  Hence when proper sentiments animate the heart, only precious gifts will be selected as offerings fo an action so exalted and holy.  On the other hand – to make choice of indifferent, trifling or imperfect objects as offerings is a sign that the proper spirit of sacrifice and respect for the Divine Majesty ar wanting (cf. Mal. 1:7-8)

    2. Not every gift offered to God is a sacrifice. It greatly depends on the way and manner of offering. – Some change or destruction of the gift must take place to constitute a sacrifice. An entire destruction of the gift, or such as is at least morally equivalent, pertains essentially to the idea of sacrifice: hence its outward form. Whatever has not been liturgically transformed, v.g. destroyed, cannot be a real sacrifice (sacrificium), but is only a religious gift (oblatio), essentially different from a sacrifice.  Thus we find in all sacrifices mentioned in Holy Writ, that there was ever some mode of destruction or dissolution, appropriate to the nature of the matter of the sacrifice.  Thus, the animals were slain and their blood spilled on the altar, incense was consumed by fire, and wine was poured out.  The intrinsic and more weighty reason why such a transformation, or destruction, of the gift is requisite for the act of sacrifice, lies in the peculiar meaning and in the special object of sacrifice.

    3.  Sacrifice, that is, the transformation of the gift offered, is intended to represent symbolically that God possesses absolute authority and dominion over all things – and, consequently, that man is essentially dependent upon God, belongs and is subject to Him and, therefore, that he is bound and is ready to give and dedicate his life entirely to God.  God is the Supreme Ruler, infinitely holy, the primal source of all being, and the last end to which all being should return, “that He may be all in all” (1 Cor. 15:28).  And now how could this grandeur and sovereignty of God over all that is and tha can be outside of Him, be more appropriately expressed than by the destruction of a visible object, as is done in sacrifice?  How could man’s dependence on and obligation to serve God be more suitably made apparent than in sacrifice, wherein a tangible, material object, is destroyed in the place of a human life?

           If the exterior rite of sacrifice is in reality to have the above meaning and be a worship acceptable to God, them it must also be and expression of the interior and spiritual sacrifice, and be animated and vivified by the essential sentiments of sacrifice. – “the visible sacrifice,” says St. Augustine, “is a holy sign of the invisible offering.”

          Hence the offering up of sacrifice essentially aims to glorify God as the absolute Lord and supreme legislator of all creatures, and this is to adore God.   This meaning is inseparably connected with sacrifice; it holds the first place, and is ever and act of worship due to God alone, – an act of adoration. – With the main object, thanksgiving and petition are naturally combined, inasmuch as the gift is presented also to honor and acknowledge God as the omnipotent and merciful Dispenser of all good gifts, that is, to show one’s self grateful for benefits received, and to supplicate for new graces. – In consequence of the fall of man, sacrifice assumes the additional characteristic of atonement.  It is offered to express the need and desire of appeasing the irritated justice of God and of being thereby freed from sin and its punishment.  Atonement for sin committed is made by sacrifice, inasmuch as the offended majesty of God is glorified, in order to restore to God the honor of which He had been deprived and to make satisfaction for the injury done to Him.  The destruction of the offering is especially suitable to this end.  How could sinful man more worthily and more strikingly acknowledge himself deserving of death on account of his fault, and, willing to undergo death in satisfaction for it, them when, by the laying of his hands on the victim, he transfers to it his sims, and slaying it and shedding its blood, offers it to God instead of his own life?

         History shows us atonement as always accompanying adoration and holding the rank next to it in the idea of sacrifice.  The first and greatest want and desire of fallen man was to appease the anger of an offended God, to obtain mercy and forgiveness for sin; hence it is quite natural that among the guilty, unredeemed generations living before Christ the character of atonement should have ben impressed in a marked manner upon their sacrifices.  In whatever necessity sinful man presents himself before God, whether to adore, to thank or to petition Him, his first and deepest conviction is that he is a poor sinner, unworthy of being heard and answered by God; hence it is most natural that precisely in the most ardent acts of worship, such as sacrifice, he will always, and at the very start, feel deeply conscious that he is laden with sins and debts to God.  How could he, a sinner, more worthily acknowledge the Divine Majesty of the infinitely holy and just God, show his gratitude towards Him in a more appropriate way, and approach Him with greater confidence of being heard?

         It is for this fourfold end that sacrifices are offered: hence there are sacrifices of adoration, of thanksgiving, of petition and of propitiation.  These divisions are not made according to the exclusive object of Sacrifice, but only with reference to its predominant end.  This means only that in the rite of celebration and in the intention of the person offering, one of these ends is chiefly intended, without, however, excluding the others.  Every sacrifice has in itself a fourfold signification: it serves at one and the same time to glorify the Divine Majesty (sacificium latreuticum); to return thanks for benefits received (sacrificium eucharisticum); to petition for new benefits (sacrificium impetratorium); and finally, to satisfy for sin and its punishment (sacrificium propitiatorium).

    4. In so far as sacrifice has a symbolical meaning and is a constituent part of public worship, it must positively be instituted by a legitimate authority.  The sacrificial service of the Old Law was regulated by God Himself in its most minute details; in the New Law the essential elements and features of worship proceed directly from Jesus Christ – hence, first of them all, sacrifice, which constitutes the fundamental and central of divine service.  Neither to the Synagogue nor to the Church did God Impart the right or the power to institute sacrifices: in His infinite mercy He Himself condescended to prescribe the sacrifices by which He would be honored and propitiated. No mere man, but our Divine Saviour alone could institute so sublime and so excellent a Sacrifice as we possess in the Holy Mass.

    5.  Sacrifice is an act of worship which can not be performed by anybody but a priest.  He alone who has been especially chosen, called and empowered, that is, only a priest can and may perform the office of sacrifice.  Sacrifice and priesthood are inseparably connected: no sacrifice can exist without a priesthood, and not priesthood without a sacrifice.  A special priesthood is, therefore, required by the very nature of sacrifice, which, as a public, solemn act of worship, must be performed in the name and for the welfare of the religious body by a duly authorized person.   – Consequently, it is highly proper that only he who is, at least by his office and dignity, especially separated from sinners and sanctified, would present himself in sacrifice as mediator between and offended God and sinful man. “For every high priest taken from among men,” so writes the Apostle, “is ordained for men in the things that appertain to God, that he may offer up gifts and sacrifices for sins” (Heb. 5:1). _ It is clear that it belongs to God, alone to bestow the honor of the priestly vocation and office, and to determine “who belong to Him, and the holy He will Join to Himself, and they whom He shall choose shall approach to Him” (Num. 16:5).

    6.  Nor is it less evident that for the celebration of so holy and solemn an act of worship it is especially becoming to make choice of a sanctified place; such a place, where sacrifice is offered, is called and altar.  Wherever sacrifice and priesthood are found, there also is always and altar.

    7. From the above it follows that sacrifice is the most exalted and perfect manner of honoring God, and, therefore, excels all other acts of worship.  It also constitutes the principal act, and is the centra point of the whole divine service.  In this all agree that man by the offering of sacrifice tenders to God the highest possible honor and homage.  In sacrifice the interior adoration of the Divine Majesty attains its fullest expression.  Sacrifice is essentially an act of adoration, and, therefore, always includes the acknowledgment of the divinity of Him to whom it is offered. It is among all acts of worship the prerogative of God, and may be offered only to the one true God.  To offer it to a creature, even to the greatest saint or the most exalted of the angels, would be heinous idolatry. _ At all times sacrifices have been offered to God, to acknowledge in the most perfect and solemn manner His sovereignty, to express gratitude for favors, to implore fresh blessings form Him and especially to avert the scourges of His avenging justice. *footnote: Many theologians assert that sacrifice is strictly required and commanded, by the very law of nature, that it is a natural necessity. Others do not grant this, but say that sacrifice is only in an eminent degree in accord with the law of nature, i.e., that it corresponds to the law of nature; that not only the interior but also the exterior worship of God is assuredly commanded by the natural law, but that this obligation may be fulfilled by performing other acts, for example, by vocal prayer, by the joining of the hands and the bending of the knees. Doubtless, sacrifice is necessary in order to make exterior worship perfect.  The Church teaches that human nature calls for a visible sacrifice. . .

              The above quote brings into clear, exact and concise focus what sacrifice in the ages before Jesus Christ, especially in the old law of the Old Testament meant and consisted of. As the supreme act of worship everyone knew they should carry it out. As the Catholic Church believes all religions have some part of how God wishes to be worshiped. These things were known, I assume, through ancestral memory from the earliest times possibly back to Adam and Eve. Even the Aztec human sacrifice had it partially correct, on how God wanted to be worshiped with “human sacrifice,” just not completely correct or correct in how He wanted complete human sacrifice (not just body consumed but a living body consumed in zeal and performance of his Word sacrificing not only his or her physical self, but their emotional self, their mental self and their spiritual self until God himself called them to heaven in death, natural, violent or as a martyr), with all of how he wanted to be worshiped and what he wanted man to believe, being contained perfectly and completely in the new law, the New Testament completing, clarifying and correcting the old law of the Old Testament. The perfect sacrifice was Jesus Christ, but He was all Human and all God (the all God part being the partial missing from the Aztec’s human sacrifice which was the infinite component that could only be supplied by God in atonement fir humanities offense to the divine dignity of God, Adam and Eve violating the only law (Genesis 2:16-17) given by an all-good Being who created us with infinite power out of nothing) and the only unique appropriate sacrifice to atone for man’s offense through Adam and Eve.

             From Martin Luther we hear that man, having sinned, is like dung and we can never be more, but God covers us with snow to make us appear better if we just have faith. (https://dwightlongenecker.com/luther-and-snow-on-dunghills/#:~:text=Luther%20and%20Snow%20on%20Dunghills%20Somewhere%20or%20other,underneath%20we’re%20still%20a%20pile%20of%20steaming%20shit.. ) But this faith without works led some of Luther’s followers to ignore their fellow man and concentrate only on themselves.  Some of them become experts in quoting and knowing the Bible but not acting on and spreading the gifts they have received from a loving God. Some literature I have read goes so far as to say they ignored the plight of widows and orphans in violation of James 1:27.  But James 2:14-26 relates faith without works is dead. And with regard to the commandments of God In Mark 12:30-31 we can see that faith is really covered in the “first overall commandment” of “love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength,” and the “second and final overall commandment” is “Love your neighbor as yourself,” ”No other commandment is greater than these” (Berean Standard Bible).

              As mentioned above and by God himself (Psalm 51:16-17) “For You do not delight in sacrifice, or I would bring it: You take no pleasure in burnt offerings. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, you will not despise.” God does not want physical sacrifice. Old Testament sacrifices are only a representation, a type, of what He actually wants “a broken spirit: a broken and contrite heart. . .” What God wants is to devote our whole lives to Him through following His two Commandments: 1) Love God with your whole being and 2) Love your neighbor as yourself (Mark 12:30-31), the 10 commandments being a more granular clarification of these 2 all-encompassing commandments.  If, as the Aztecs did, you sacrifice a human, if it had any effect, it would only be to show adoration to God and acknowledgement of His supreme authority.  It would do little if anything to change the world He created to make it better.  As Catholics we are called to make the world better for our fellow man and help him see the goodness of God and bring Him into God’s family to make things better for all that live on earth and lead our fellow men and women to eternal happiness.

            But Sacrifice is an integral part of the holy sacrifice of the Roman Catholic Mass (thus its inclusion in the common reference to it before 1968 – the holy sacrifice of the mass), the defining ritual of the Catholic religion, for though it, we join with the bloody sacrifice offered once with infinite efficacy which is done in remembrance of it.  But just like everything involving Jesus Christ, there is a more profound effect of the holy sacrifice of the mass, Jesus Christ is brought back body blood soul and divinity, what Catholics define as the “real presence.”  Not symbolic presence or consubstantial presence both of which are believed by some protestant sects. Consubstantial presence (https://www.britannica.com/topic/consubstantiation ) being that Jesus Christ is present with the bread and wine and of course symbolic presence meaning Jesus Christ is not really present at all only symbolically present or in some circles present with the bread and wine, the bread and wine not being actually his body. By real presence Catholics believe, as stressed in John 6:47-70, that the bread and wine changed by the consecration is actually God/Jesus (3rd person of the Blessed Trinity) that look like wine and bread. Though they look the same their essence has changed.  What was bread and wine is now Jesus Christ, something only God could accomplish.  Though this is an act of faith which must be believed by a true followers of Christ – Catholics, that a validly consecrated priest/bishop (the only actual clerical ranks, cardinals being bishops who can elect the bishop of Rome – this most senior elected bishop, St. Peter’s successor, in charge of leading the Catholic church during a particular stretch of time usually ending with his death,  being called the pope, and the lowest rung of this Apostle/God selected hierarchy being priests) can consecrate, red wine and unleavened wheat bread to transform it into the body blood soul and divinity of Jesus Christ. This transformation into the real presence of Jesus Christ is called transubstantiation, i.e bread and wine’s substance or essence is changed.  This is why true Catholics are so careful with the disposition of the consecrated bread and wine.

             What is important about the bread and wine being Christ actual body and blood is the fact that his real actual physical body actually becomes part of us along with his spirit and divinity (sanctifying grace) so that we are truly sons and daughters of God having absorbed a part of the real Jesus Christ!

            Thanks to Jesus Christ coming into this world and bringing us the gospel, the good news of God, animals and moreover humans do not have to die to fulfil a religious obligation to God. If people, like St. Francis of Assisi, have a problem hurting animals, the holy sacrifice of the mass only requires them to consume bread (or if they have an allergy through special permission, consume just wine) to fulfil their religious obligation of sacrifice to God.  God is most interested in that they should use their lives to improve the lives of other humans, not only in their families but at their jobs, and in that way fulfil the rest of their religious obligations to God.  This is of course is in addition to the mandatory weekly offering of the holy sacrifice of the mass on Sunday and daily prayers.  He wants us to use our talents and let those consume us, figuratively, to devote our entire being to His service through not only our religious adoration of him at the mass every Sunday, in which He shows his infinite love by being not only the sacrifice once performed in bloody form on calvary, but coming back to earth, really and truly in the Eucharist, in body, blood, soul and divinity. But as stated earlier, He clearly also wants us to use our talents in service to the universe He created and all who live there to create a happy and enjoyable life for all creatures and spread God’s word and how to worship Him, to our fellow sentient beings – humankind, so that they may live for eternity with God in unspeakable happiness (1 Cor 2:9).

             Not only does the ability to enter heaven given to us by Jesus Christ’s death on the cross but the ability to have our sins forgiven by a priest (John 20:21-23). Now many non-catholic Christians say you can go straight to God, by praying to him to have your sins forgiven. This is true only in the case of lesser sins which we call venial sins. For mortal sins, which cause the “death of the soul” or a break with friendship with God, you can only have your sins forgiven by a priest, unless you offer “perfect contrition,” that is only because you have offended God and for absolutely no other reason, if it is tinged with fear of hell, the contrition is not perfect.  The passage from the gospel of St. John in the first part of this paragraph, Jesus Christ gives his apostles and their successors the power to forgive sins, even with imperfect contrition, through true contrition of some type is mandatory.

           Why would you want to risk your immortal soul on a possible imperfect contrition? God knows what is in your heart, so you can’t fool Him.  After you are baptized the first time, which technically, as I understand any human can do, all your sins are forgiven, but it can only be done once with effect, to have all your sins forgiven and make you a child of God by another human being. You can not really baptize yourself, unless it is one of 2 very special cases, that you want to join the Catholic Church and studying for your baptism you somehow die before you accomplish it or you die as a martyr in defense of the faith before you can be baptized with the intention to be baptized.  Theoretically, also, people that are perfectly ignorant of Christ and his church may be saved if they live a perfect life according to their conscience. This is how people not Jews and not Catholic (Catholicism being the fulfilment of the Jewish religion) are “saved.”  But the event that allows this is still Christ’s death on the cross.  All the Old Testament people of God that faithfully practiced the Jewish religion went to heaven after Christ died on the cross.  He went to where their souls existed and brough them to heaven with Him, He being the first “human” to “merit” heaven.  The terms “merit” and “human” are very mysterious concepts in regard to the God-Man Jesus Christ and our human understanding, their nuances which I have touched on in other blogs.          In this type of sacrifice, a human or an animal, is not physically wasted, but the full physical, emotional, mental and spiritual being, especially in a human, is completely used, to honor God by making the world a better place and bringing clearer knowledge of him here through our words and actions. This is what I think is embodied in 1 Thessalonians 5:16-18 in saying “pray without ceasing.” We offer up all we do concentrating on doing the best we can to make God’s wish to produce the best world for our fellow man a reality. We Catholics must burn, consumed like fire, offering a sacrifice of our life with a zeal and with action to serve God’s will, to make the world a better place for our fellow man and to bring all our fellow humans back to him for an eternity of happiness. This is the consuming sacrifice God wants from each and every man and woman and how we should raise our children to be.

  • Politics and what seems to be the Problem with The Democratic Party in the United States

             The problem the democrats have in my opinion, as (full disclosure) a republican, is that they have abandoned common sense.  I feel they are blinded by an obsession with the use of sex purely for pleasure, with conception of a child an inconvenient nuisance and the perception that sex in some way drives most, if not all, human decisions and that a majority of the electorate shares this view.

             In Genisis 1:24-28, says:

    And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creatures in its kind, cattle and creeping things, and beasts of the earth, according to their kind. And it was so done.

    And God mad the beast of the earth according to their kinds, and cattle, and every thing that creepth on the earth after its kind. And God saw that it was good.

    And he said: Let us make man in our image and likeness: and let him have dominion over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and the beasts, and the whole earth, and every creeping creature that moveth upon the earth.

    And God created man to his own image. To the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.

    And God blessed them, saying: Increase and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it, and rule over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and all living creatures that move upon the earth.

    This is the mindset of those that purport to follow the Christian philosophy, which comprises approximately 62% of the of the United States population if you search google using the phrase “what percentage of the us population is christian or catholic”. This, of course, points to the fact that the majority should not, if they follow the bible, follow the sex obsessed thinking of what most democrats seem to be following

    In the last verse above quote God gives his first command: “increase and multiply,” not as democrats seem to champion, “have as much sexual pleasure as you can, doing everything you can to prevent or terminate any pregnancy that is not desired.”  This illustrates sex, for Christians at least, is, or should be, mainly for reproduction not pleasure.  Pleasure is a pleasant “reward” God built into the “system” when He created mankind, for producing new life for God. Contraception and abortion does not support the God’s command of “increase and multiply.”

    The whole idea of transitioning from male to female or vice versa or that there is more than two genders goes against the fact that God created them male and female. Trying to “transition” young children, under the age of reason, is barbaric. It of course is just mutilation of a young child who does not know what they are requesting to do.

    This male/female thing also extends to sports. Transitioned/transitioning males or any male for that matter, should never play against females, especially in full contact sports like boxing and the other martial arts. Pairing them this way invites serious injury or death. By transitioned/transitioning males I mean any one with a Y chromosome and by female I mean anyone with all X chromosome.  This definition covers even the very rare case of hermaphrodites. 

    Taking the choice of where the children go to school away from parents is also against the bible. Colossian 3:18-21 says: “Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them. Children, obey your parents in everything, for this pleases the Lord. Fathers, do not provoke your children, lest they become discouraged.” Parents are in charge of their children, according to the bible, not the government and should determine what is best for them, whether it be the books they read or the schools they attend. The most stupid thing for democrats, when it comes to who should decide where children y go to school or if they should transition, is that children don’t vote and sidelining the parents leads to parents getting mad at their power being taken away and they are the ones who can vote!

    Let us review:

    1. You don’t advocate the transition of under age children not only because their brains aren’t developed enough to make mature informed decisions but also because it’s their parents that vote, and who in the long run, if you want to get re-elected you need to please parents.
    2. You don’t advocate the teacher’s unions dictating the curriculum of schools, because once again the parents are the voters and are more numerous than the number of members in the teacher’s union.
    3. You don’t advocate transmales/males competing with biological females because the females can get seriously injured, and both them and their parents vote and those two voting blocks are at least 10 times bigger than the trans voting block.
    4. There are only 2 genders: not only does the bible hold this view, whole cultures/languages are based on the fact that there are only males and females. This means that the number of people as a whole on earth support the view that there are only 2 genders, once again translating to more people voting that believe this.

    Bottom line: more voters support the opposite view of the arguably popular democratic view! Common sense is if more people support a particular view you need to support that view if you want to get re-elected!

  • Salvations Climax Summarized

            The a few blogs ago (before the summer movie reviews) we spoke about the last supper, the passion and crucifixion at calvary and the Ascension. The last thing that should be mentioned is Pentecost. In the Old Testament, God the Father interacted with man directly, communicating with him, punishing him, rewarding him and giving prophets the information that He would be sending a messiah to save them from the punishment due to original sin, which they promptly transmitted to the people of Isreal. The information on the Messiah was detailed (see the book of the prophet Isaiah) so that Isreal would know when Salvation had come but unfortunately, they were a stiff-necked people (Exodus 32:9, Jeremiah 17:23 and Acts 7:51) and either refused to see the signs that Jesus Christ was the Messiah or ignored the signs through pride!

            Of all the people that had ever lived, only one was clearly predicted to come over 600 years before he was born, and that person was Jesus Christ.  In the New Testament, Jesus Christ, God Himself, came to fulfill the law (Matthew 5:17-20) that priest of old had been transmitting to the Jewish people. The priests of the Old Jewish religion were selected by God the Father using the natural law, i.e. the sons of Levi for priests and the sons of Aaron for the high priest. In the New Testament the priest and bishops were selected by supernatural law, by decisions by bishops or Christ Himself in the case of St. Paul which had to be “ratified” by someone who was a disciple and had presumably through at least the sacrament of confirmation if not Holy Orders (on reception of the Spirit being a prerequisite to full service to God see Acts 8:15-17)  had received the Spirit (the first 13 being the 11 apostles who chose the 12th Matthias in Acts 1:15-26 – a decision by the bishops for a successor to Judas Iscariot, and St. Paul, selected supernaturally by the risen Christ from heaven but ratified by a disciple Ananias, see acts 9:10-18, presumably blessed by the apostles to be the equivalent of a priest in those days sometimes referred to a Presbyter in the Douey-Rhiems version of the bible the first English translation of the Vulgate bible, the Vulgate being the first book produced by the first printing press).

           The reason for the implementation of a supernatural law to select priest and, with the advent of New Testament times, senior priests was two-fold: 1) to enable God to select non-Jews (i.e. gentiles) to be priests in his religion and 2) Since gentiles are everywhere, other than the place Isreal has always been, He wanted a religion that was “portable,” where a church or diocese could be anywhere even another planet.  This is why even the idea that dogma/doctrine that is solid, or that it can even change, is so ridiculous.  If man travels to the other side of the galaxy or even universe, how do they get news of that dogma/doctrine has changed?  The same with the holy sacrifice of the mass (the Sunday ritual worship of the Roman Catholic religion), if it is always done and transmitted in Latin, it is a common language neither the rich/[powerful nor poor can lay claim too and can keep the meaning of dogma constant and unconfused. No matter how language changes, if we assume the speed of light is the limiting factor for information transmission, changes in ritual or clarification of dogma will still insure the “old dogma” is not wrong.  Almighty God planned it this way and why everything in the Old and New Testament is infallibly transmitted and meaning is intended to be constant and unchanging.

             Many non-Catholic Christians, who follow Christ’s philosophy, appear to have problem’s with the fact that Christ might leave some visible authority who’s power is traceable back to God, specifically Jesus Christ.  They appear to think that to pick up a bible, learn it then preach it gives them the authority of a true representative of Christ which of course only a priest or bishop selected through apostolic succession/selection is. Hebrews 9:11,24-25 reads:

    “But Christ being come an high priest of the good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hand, that is, not of this creation: . . . For Jesus is not entered into the holies made with hands, the patterns of the true: but into heaven itself, that He may appear now in the presence of God for us.

    Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holies, every year with the blood of others:”

    Because the bible talks exclusively of Christ as the high priest, people reading the Bible take this to mean he is the only priest, priests having to be consecrated by some authorities are not self-selecting.  The fact is that if  he is indeed the high priest, not “the only priest,” which is not something He said, then it is implied that He has other priests working for him as the “high priest.” Also, a priest’s function is to offer sacrifice but they hold that Christ sacrifice was all that was needed and made total restitution for our sins, which is true, but at the last the supper saying “do this in remembrance of me” meant to renew the power of Calvery, as well as the memory of Calvery, through this union with the original sacrifice to continually draw power for the forgiveness of sins from that sacrifice. The Catholic Church is clear on this point, each mass is not a new sacrifice, it is the self-same sacrifice, to be pulled throughout time to renew the power of this sacrifice, through the remembrance that was asked for by Christ at the last supper.

            Many so called Christians as mentioned above question the churches authority and whether or not priests might still exist (in the bible New Testament presbyters and bishops, which are mentioned are the Catholic Churches names for those officiating at Christs remembrances as replacements for priest and the high priest, so instead of having one temple in one place, each dioceses can have a head official like the former high priest – of which there is still only one, Jesus Christ, who in turn has priests under him), as if God, ever in the Old Testament did not have priests. But Christ said I have not come to abolish the law but to fulfil it in Matthew 5:17. If this is so and if and entire book of the Old Testament Pentateuch, the most holy 5 books of the Jewish religion is dedicated to the ritual and priest – Leviticus, why would he abolish the priesthood, and the fact that they must be selected by some law God (in this case Jesus Christ through His apostles) put into place, in the New Testament? Plus, if Jesus Christ changed anything from the Old Testament he made it stricter and explicit such as the definition of the sin of adultery:  “I say, anyone who even looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” (Matthew 5:28-29)  Also, similarly his injunction on divorce and remarriage when the spouse is not dead is adultery (Matthew 19: 3-9). Everyone is always looking for loopholes for things that are not easy, so to go harder is always a better bet, and if allowed to interpret the bible any way they want, they may interpret it wrong to their everlasting regret! Unfortunately, they must interpret it all correctly to attain salvation!  But that is what the tradition of the Church and the fathers of the church (great Catholics/Christians in the first 400 years of the church) are for.

           This is why the keeping of tradition (“Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.” – 2 Thessalonians 2:14) is so important. As complex a problem as keeping the Barque/ship of Peter (a popular symbolic representation of the Roman Catholic Religion within the Catholic Church) on the right course to heaven, tradition becomes very important.  Just like a nuclear submarine (if we use this to symbolically represent the Catholic Religion), when built, is accompanied by a manual (this being like the Bible).  The builders wrote the manual, (Jesus Christ – God) also trained the first crew.  This original crew (which is equivalent to the original apostles) learned tricks to run the submarine which became tradition, which one crew passed on to the next when they left through reassignment or retirement.  If It’s important to ensure that a machine that could do incredible damage to the entire world have experienced people pass on the secrets to its efficient operation, how much more important is it to put into place a cadre of professionals to pass on the hard learned secrets to salvation for each and every man’s immortal soul from generation to generation?

            Some things that come to mind when I think of people rebelling against Gods appointed authority in the Old Testament are the respect David had for the ruling king Saul as God’s anointed one in the first and second books of Samuel as well as the rebellion of Korah and 250 followers who said Moses and Aaron were not above the congregation in authority as high priest etc.  God opened up the earth and swallowed them to prove the authority of Moses and Aaron as we see in the book of Numbers chapter 16. Others were not convinced (as seen in the same chapter) and as a result 14,700 Israelites died before the rest of the Israelites got the message loud and clear. Finally, Moses’ own sister Miriam challenged his authority in chapter 12 of the book of Numbers and as a punishment contracted leprosy until she recanted.

           God always leads his people through people He selects, either by natural law or by supernatural law, which in our case is seen in the apostolic succession/selection (see Acts 1:15-26 that this was sanctioned that they should select successors).  Those who pick up a bible and start to preach, should remember this.  God chooses his representative, they are sent by Him, His representatives don’t select themselves.

           But how can people now be thought to represent God? Because as spoke of earlier they are lead by the Holy Ghost, the third Person of the blessed Trinity – that is God, sent first on the last event of salvations climax, Pentecost, to the apostles (as promised by Jesus Christ in John 14:16-17).  They in turned passed it to their successors, for the purpose of the priesthood/episcopate through the sacrament of Holy Orders.  Rank and file Catholics are passed the Holy Ghost in different a way, with out the power to consecrate the bread and wine in mass to make it the body and blood of Jesus Christ, or to forgive sins (God alone can forgive sins  as supported by Matthew 9:2-8 and Mark 2:7, but if the power is delegated to someone in cooperation with the Holy Ghost as in John 20:19-23, then sins can be forgive by God the Holy Ghost through the representative He authorizes – the priest or bishop, through apostolic succession i.e. the sacrament of holy orders).    

       In part of the climax to salvation the apostles are given the Eucharist (Mark 14:22-25) to be able to increase grace in all men and the ability to forgive all sins, but most notably mortal sin (1 John 5:17), to be able to save their souls from eternal damnation should the devil’s wiles succeed in making a man or woman fall hard!  The Eucharist was a most wonderous way for Christ himself to quite literally guide every man and woman (John 6:53-66), at the age of reason, personally.

  • A Review of the course guide book for the Great Courses Lectures and one of the biggest misunderstandings of Protestants exposed in The Catholic Church: A History

             Most of the guide books that come with the great course’s lectures have summaries of each lecture, as well as suggested reading and questions to consider after each summary with the guidebook concluding with an extensive bibliography and some pages left blank except for the heading of notes, which, surprise, I assume are for taking notes while watching the DVDs or reading the course book.  With most of the rest of the blogs on the great courses both the DVDs and guide book will be covered in one blog, but in this case, there were a few extras in this particular guide book which I felt it important enough to cover separately.

           The biggest misunderstanding, as I understand as a traditional catholic, is the definition of  “apostolic,” in this course, when referring to the “One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic” Church.  The author of these lectures sees apostolic as meaning: “that the apostles would recognize the Roman Church as theirs . . .”  For traditional Catholics, we see apostolic as meaning that the legitimacy, authority and power that is entrusted to the Roman Catholic Church derives from Jesus Christ giving that legitimacy, authority and power to his apostles and sending them out to select their successors who they in turn send with the power to fearlessly and truthfully hand on the Truth, which Jesus Christ sent the human race, and through those perpetuate a perfected Jewish priesthood (Matthew 5:17), through supernatural means (see the selection of Mathias in the first Chapter of Acts)  to include the gentiles, which formally was perpetuated through natural means, the sons of Levi and Aaron.  This divergence in what the meaning of apostolic means leads to protestants not easily seeing the necessity or origin of the priesthood in the Roman Catholic Church.  Picking up and learning the bible is enough for a person to preach and lead a congregation in the protestant mind, without the necessity of having been sent by Jesus Christ or those He personally selected to teach his message who in turn personally selected their successors (As in the case of Mathias mentioned above).

          The additions to the standard stuff in most other guidebooks include:

    A time line with an excerpt below:

    c. 4 ……….of Jesus

    c. 30 …….death and resurrection of Jesus; Pentecost

    c. 65 …….Paul writes letters to several Christian communities

    54-68……Reign of Emperor Nero 

    c.64 …….Martyrdom of Peter and Paul

    c.65/70…Gospel of Mark written

           .     .     .

    1968…..Humanae vitae proclaimed by Paul VI; Latin American Episcopal Conference meets in Medellin

    1970…..Hans Kung publishes Infallible? An Inquiry
    1972 ….Gustavo Gutierrez publishes A Theology of Liberation 

    1978…..The pontificate of John Paul I (33 days)

    1978-2005… Pontificate of John Paul II

    1981……Attempted assassination of John Paul II in St. Peter’s Square, Rome

    1986……John Paul II calls Day of Prayer for Peace in Assisi

    1999……John Paul II and Lutheran leaders agree to a Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification

    2005-  …Pontificate of Benedict XVI

    A Glossary with an excerpt from the section of terms beginning with the letters C and D

    .   .   .

    Counterreformation (a.k.a. Catholic Reformation):  The programs of change that the Catholic Church carried out in the 16th century, often seen as a response to Protestantism and sometimes seen as having its origin before the Protestant Reformation began.

    Crusade: An armed expedition from Western Europe that attempted to conquer the Holy Land.  The First Crusade was successful in conquering Jerusalem and establishing a Latin Kingdom there.  Later, Crusades were conducted against other perceived enemies of the church, including Lithuania and Bohemia, as well as against heretics in France and Italy.

    Cyrillic: The Alphabet created in the 9th century by Saints Cyril and Methodius to create a written form of Slavic.  It is the basis of the alphabet of Russia and several other Slavic nations today.

    Deacon: A rank of clergy below priest.  Some deacons are permanent deacons, while transitional deacons are later ordained as priests.

    Decretum: A compilation of canon law formed by Gratian in 1140, which became the basis for the canon law of the church until the 20th century.

    .      .       .

    A set of Bibliographical notes that cite important people in the Catholic Church to include at least some popes;

    A bibliography broken down into the following headings:

    Primary Sources – Series

    Primary Sources – Individual Texts

    Modern Scholarly Works

  • Pertinent Information on the Great Courses DVD lectures on The Catholic Church: A History

    The DVDs.

               The following are the subjects of each of the 30-minute long lectures

    Disc 1

    1.  From Jesus to the Creation of the Church
    2. The First Christian institutions
    3. Christianities in the Early Church
    4. Persecution and Saints
    5. Peace between Empire and Church
    6. Institutional and Doctrinal Developments

    Disc 2

    7. Latin Theology, Including Augustine

    8. Popes and Bishops in the Early Middle Ages

    9. Monasticism- Benedict and His Rule

    10. Evangelizing Northern and Eastern Europe

    11.The Germanization of Christianity

    12. Charlemagne an the Church in Feudal Times

    Disc 3

    13. Monks and Hermits – New forms of Monasticism

    14. Papal reforms and Church State Controversies

    15. Crusades, Heresy, inquisition

    16. The Papacy – Innocent to Boniface VIII

    17. Francis, Dominic, and the Mendicants

    18. Flowering of Church Art in the Middle Ages

      Disc 4

      19. Scholastic Thought

      20. Medieval Mysticism

      21. The Great Schism and the Conciliar Age

      22. The Renaissance Church

      23. Luther, Calvin, and the Reformation

      24. Catholic Responses – The Council of Trent

        Disc 5

        25. The Jesuits

        26. Catholicism in Asia and the New World

        27. American Catholicism

        28. The Church in the Ages of Reason

        29. Pius IX and Papal Infallibility

        30. Leo XIII and the Modern world

        Disc 6

        31. The Eastern Catholic Churches

        32. The Second Vatican Council

        33. The Catholic Church Looks Outward

        34. The Challenges of New Theologies

        35. John Paul II and the 21st-Century Church

        36. One? Holy? Catholic? Apostolic?

        The Lecturer (The following is from the back of the DVD case)

        “Professor William R. Cook has taught thousands of students for more than 35 years at the State University of New York at Geneseo, where he is Distinguished Teaching Professor of History.  Professor Cook is an expert in Medieval history the Renaissance and Reformation periods, and the Bible and Christian thought. The Medieval Academy of America awarded Professor William R Cook the CARA Award for Excellence in the Teaching of Medieval Studies for his achievements.”

        This course, as with most others, also comes with a course guide book which will be covered in the next blog that I do on the great courses. I have observed that with at least some courses, you can also purchase a bound printed copy of the transcript.

      1. Salvations Climax Summarized

                The last 3 blogs spoke about the last supper, the passion and crucifixion at calvary and the Ascension. The last thing that should be mentioned is Pentecost. In the Old Testament, God the Father interacted with man directly, communicating with him, punishing him, rewarding him and giving prophets the information that He would be sending a messiah to save them from the punishment due to original sin, which they promptly transmitted to the people of Isreal. The information on the Messiah was detailed (see the book of the prophet Isaiah) so that Isreal would know when Salvation had come but unfortunately, they were a stiff-necked people (Exodus 32:9, Jeremiah 17:23 and Acts 7:51) and either refused to see the signs that Jesus Christ was the Messiah or ignored the signs through pride!

                Of all the people that had ever lived only one was clearly predicted to come over 600 years before he was born, and that person was Jesus Christ.  In the New Testament, Jesus Christ, God Himself, came to fulfill the law (Matthew 5:17-20) that priest of old had been transmitting to the Jewish people. The priests of the Old Jewish religion were selected by God the Father using the natural law, i.e. the sons of Levi for priests and the sons of Aaron for the high priest. In the New Testament the priest and bishops were selected by supernatural law, by decisions by bishops or Christ Himself in the case of St. Paul which had to be “ratified” by someone who was a disciple and had presumably through at least the sacrament of confirmation if not Holy Orders (on reception of the Spirit being a prerequisite to full service to God see Acts 8:15-17)  had received the Spirit (the first 13 being the 11 apostles who chose the 12th Matthias in Acts 1:15-26 – a decision by the bishops for a successor to Judas Iscariot, and St. Paul, selected supernaturally by the risen Christ from heaven but ratified by a disciple Ananias, see acts 9:10-18, presumably blessed by the apostles to be the equivalent of a priest in those days sometimes referred to a Presbyter in the Douey-Rhiems version of the bible the first English translation of the Vulgate bible, the first produced by the first printing press).

               The reason for the implementation of a supernatural law to select priest and, with the advent of New Testament times, senior priests was two-fold: 1) to enable God to select non-Jews or gentiles to be priests in his religion and 2) Since gentiles of everywhere, other than the place Isreal has always been, He wanted a religion that was “portable,” where a church or diocese could be anywhere even another planet.  This is why even the idea that dogma/doctrine that is solid can even change is so ridiculous.  If man travels to the other side of the galaxy or even universe, how do the get news of that dogma/doctrine has changed?  The same with the holy sacrifice of the mass (the Sunday ritual worship of the Roman Catholic religion), if it is always done and transmitted in Latin, it is a common language neither the rich nor poor can lay claim too and can keep the meaning of dogma constant and unconfused. No matter how language changes, if we assume the speed of light is the limiting factor for information transmission, changes in ritual or clarification of dogma will still insure the “old dogma” is not wrong.  Almighty God planned it this way and why everything in the Old and New Testament is infallibly transmitted and meaning is constant and unchanging.

                 Many non-Catholic Christians, who follow Christ’s philosophy, appear to have problem’s with the fact that Christ might leave some visible authority who’s power is tracable back to God, specifically Jesus Christ.  They appear to think that to pick up a bible, learn it then preach it gives them the authority of a true representative of Christ which of course only a priest or bishop selected through apostolic succession/selection is. Hebrews 9:11,24-25 reads:

        “But Christ being come an high priest of the good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hand, that is, not of this creation: . . . For Jesus is not entered into the holies made with hands, the patterns of the true: but into heaven itself, that He may appear now in the presence of God for us.

        Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holies, every year with the blood of others:”

        Because the bible talks exclusively of Christ as the high priest, people reading the Bible take this to mean he is the only priest, priests having to be consecrated by some authorities are not self-selecting.  The fact is that if  he is indeed the high priest, not the only priest, which is not something He said, then it is implied that He has other priests working for him as the “high priest.” Also, a priest’s function is to offer sacrifice but they hold that Christ sacrifice was all that was needed and made total restitution for our sins, which is true, but at the last the supper saying “do this in remembrance of me” meant to renew the power of Calvery through this union with the original sacrifice to continually draw power for the forgiveness of sins from that sacrifice. The Catholic Church is clear on this point, each mass is not a new sacrifice, it is the self-same sacrifice, to be pulled throughout time to renew the power of this sacrifice, through the remembrance that was asked for by Christ at the last supper.

                Many so called Christians as mentioned above question the churches authority and whether or not priests might still exist (in the bible New Testament presbyters and bishops, which are mentioned are the Catholic Churches names for those officiating at Christs remembrances as replacements for priest and the high priest, so instead of having one temple in one place, each dioceses can have a head official like the former high priest – of which there is still only one, Jesus Christ, who in turn has priests under him), as if God, ever in the Old Testament did not have priests. But Christ said I have not come to abolish the law but to fulfil it in Matthew 5:17. If this is so and if and entire book of the Old Testament Pentateuch, the most holy 5 books of the Jewish religion is dedicated to the ritual and priest – Leviticus, why would he abolish the priesthood, and the fact that they must be selected by some law God (in this case Jesus Christ through His apostles) put into place, in the New Testament? Plus, if Jesus Christ changed anything from the Old Testament he made it stricter and explicit such as the definition of the sin of adultery:  “I say, anyone who even looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” (Matthew 5:28-29)  Also, similarly his injunction on divorce and remarriage when the spouse is not dead is adultery (Matthew 19: 3-9). Everyone is always looking for loopholes for things that are not easy, so to go harder is always a better bet, and if allowed to interpret the bible any way they want, they may interpret it wrong to their everlasting regret! Unfortunately, they must interpret it all correctly to attain salvation!  But that is what the tradition of the Church and the fathers of the church (great Catholics in the first 400 years of the church) are for.

               This is why the keeping of tradition (“Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.” – 2 Thessalonians 2:14) is so important. As complex a problem as keeping the Barque/ship of Peter (a popular symbolic representation of the Roman Catholic Religion within the Catholic Church) on the right course to heaven, tradition becomes very important.  Just like a nuclear submarine (if we use this to symbolically represent the Catholic Religion), when built, is accompanied by a manual (this being like the Bible).  The builders wrote the manual, (Jesus Christ – God) also trained the first crew.  This original crew (which is equivalent to the original apostles) learned tricks to run the submarine which became tradition, which one crew passed on to the next when they left through reassignment or retirement.  If It’s important to ensure that a machine that could do incredible damage to the entire world have experienced people pass on the secrets to its efficient operation, how much more important is it to put into place a cadre of professionals to pass on the hard learned secrets to salvation for each and every man’s immortal soul from generation to generation?

                Some things that come to mind when I think of people rebelling against Gods appointed authority in the Old Testament are the respect David had for the ruling king Saul as God’s anointed one in the first and second books of Samuel as well as the rebellion of Korah and 250 followers who said Moses and Aaron were not above the congregation in authority as high priest etc.  God opened up the earth and swallowed them to prove the authority of Moses and Aaron as we see in the of Numbers chapter 16. Others were not convinced (as seen in the same chapter) and as a result 14,700 Israelites died before the rest of the Israelites got the message loud and clear. Finally, Moses’ own sister Miriam challenged his authority in chapter 12 of the book of Numbers chapter 12 and as a punishment contracted leprosy.

               God always leads his people through people He selects, either by natural law or by supernatural law, which in our case is seen in the apostolic succession/selection (see Acts 1:15-26 that this was sanctioned that they should select successors).  Those who pick up a bible and start to preach, should remember this.  God chooses his representative, they are sent by Him, His representatives don’t select themselves.

               But how can people now be thought to represent God? Because as spoke of earlier they are lead by the Holy Ghost, the third Person of the blessed Trinity – that is God, sent first on the last event of salvations climax, Pentecost, to the apostles (as promised by Jesus Christ in John 14:16-17).  They in turned passed it to their successors, for the purpose of the priesthood/episcopate through the sacrament of Holy Orders.  Rank and file Catholics are passed the Holy Ghost in different a way, with out the power to consecrate the bread and wine in mass to make it the body and blood of Jesus Christ, or to forgive sins (God alone can forgive sins  as supported by Matthew 9:2-8 and Mark 2:7, but if the power is delegated to someone in cooperation with the Holy Ghost as in John 20:19-23, then sins can be forgive by God the Holy Ghost through his representative the priest or bishop).        In the climax to salvation the apostles are given the Eucharist to be able to increase grace in all men and the ability to forgive all sins, but most notably mortal sin (1 John 5:17), to be able to save their souls from eternal damnation should the devil’s wiles succeed in making a man or woman fall hard!