The Catechism on human sexuality

ARTICLE 6
THE SIXTH COMMANDMENT

You shall not commit adultery.¹¹³ You have heard that it was said, "You shall not commit adultery." But I say to you that every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.¹¹⁴

* I. "MALE AND FEMALE HE CREATED THEM . . ."
2331 "God is love and in himself he lives a mystery of personal loving communion. Creating the human race in his own image . . .. God inscribed in the humanity of man and woman the vocation, and thus the capacity and responsibility, of love and communion."¹¹⁵
"God created man in his own image . . . male and female he created them";¹¹⁶ He blessed them and said, "Be fruitful and multiply";¹¹⁷ "When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God. Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and named them Man when they were created."¹¹⁸
2332 Sexuality affects all aspects of the human person in the unity of his body and soul. It especially concerns affectivity, the capacity to love and to procreate, and in a more general way the aptitude for forming bonds of communion with others.
2333 Everyone, man and woman, should acknowledge and accept his sexual identity. Physical, moral, and spiritual difference and complementarity are oriented toward the goods of marriage and the flourishing of family life. The harmony of the couple and of society depends in part on the way in which the complementarity, needs, and mutual support between the sexes are lived out.
2334 "In creating men 'male and female,' God gives man and woman an equal personal dignity."¹¹⁹ "Man is a person, man and woman equally so, since both were created in the image and likeness of the personal God."¹²⁰
2335 Each of the two sexes is an image of the power and tenderness of God, with equal dignity though in a different way. The union of man and woman in marriage is a way of imitating in the flesh the Creator's generosity and fecundity: "Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh."¹²¹ All human generations proceed from this union.¹²²
2336 Jesus came to restore creation to the purity of its origins. In the Sermon on the Mount, he interprets God's plan strictly: "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery.' But I say to you that every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart."¹²³ What God has joined together, let not man put asunder.¹²⁴
The tradition of the Church has understood the sixth commandment as encompassing the whole of human sexuality.

A praying people

I read this article the other day.
At first I was annoyed-- typical "Catholic" drivel about how praying spontaneously is something WE do instead of something GOD does in us. I let my feathers ruffle as I thought about the damage that encouraging people NOT to pray spontaneously together would do.

But then something funny happened-- I started to realize there was some truth to it. It is not so much that it was encouraging people NOT to engage each other to pray spontaneously. Instead, it was encouraging wives to pray formal prayers with their husbands, which would act as gateways to Kingdom living in their homes.

I believe that husbands and wives should pray spontaneously together, and that it should come easily, frequently and naturally. That husbands and wives should take the time to pray spontaneously together every day.

The article challenged me:

This type of intimate, spousal prayer might sound beautiful to women. But to most guys--good, devout guys--not so much. It requires seat-of-the-pants verbal skills that many of them do not have. Not to mention a willingness to, at times, express emotions that are hard for a guy to discuss with his wife in an ordinary conversation, let alone talk to God about with his wife listening in. It's one more example of a woman finding it therapeutic to talk about her problems, and the man finding the same activity to be close to torture.

So wives who want to persuade their husbands to pray with them, but find them recalcitrant, would be well-advised to drop the hand-holding, spill- your- guts- to -God- together idea, and go for something that is more realistic. That is, utilizing the type of prayer that the Catholic tradition excels at. Namely, reciting formal prayers that were written by someone else! Or I should say, reciting formal prayers while investing them with your own will, intentions, feelings, etc.

My husband has been a Christian much longer than I have. And like many, many Christians walking around this earth.... he believes with all his heart but he has never had the experience that Charismatics, both Catholics and Christians, refer to as "baptism in the Holy Spirit."

He has never been "overtaken" by the Holy Spirit. Never spoken in tongues. Never had a word of knowledge for anyone. His experience of the Holy Spirit is much more calm and steady. It's less of a loud, passionate, vibrant love affair and more of a kingdom mentality.  He bows and worships. He trembles and fears. He loves, he obeys, and experiences the goodness of The King. He is moved and moves. His love for God is like the love of a couple who knows and trusts each other because they've been married for years and struggled to communicate for years. It's beautiful, but it is intimate. Above all... it is private.

It's not that he hasn't ASKED for Baptism in the Spirit. It's that he isn't one to do/say something that is contrived of his flesh. And because God Himself has not reached down and CHANGED the way my husband prays, he has not changed it. It's not that he doesn't exhibit the fruits of the Spirit-- he absolutely does. Rather, it's that he doesn't look like/act like a Charismatic Christian in his appearance, and for a long time, I wasn't OK with that.

I've been around Charismatics all my Christian life, and usually praying from a book pains me. I use books as a starting off point to get me going, and it's not uncommon for me to spend an hour at a time "lost" in a prayer-dance with God. I sing random songs. I get moved and say what I'm thinking. I feel inspired and speak God's Word back to Him. I sing, I laugh, I cry, I get on my knees, I stand up. I clap my hands and stomp my feet. I listen. I spend a lot of time listening.

My husband, on the other hand, usually stands very still, closes his eyes, and folds his hands in his lap during prayer. When he leads our family in prayer, it's often in familiar prayers... The Our Father. The Hail Mary. The Apostles Creed. The Glory Be. He likes to pray straight out of his Bible, or straight out of a prayer book. He and I met in Jewish services on post at Ft Jackson, and he and I have often prayed straight out of the Jewish prayer book together.

In the beginning of our marriage, I'd be bored to death and wondering why he wasn't more "spiritual." He, on the other hand, was content. And my kids who didn't always know "what to say" when they talked to God, were participating.

When he became a Catholic, one of the first things my husband really latched onto was the rosary. He prayed the rosary all the time, and was constantly reminding us to do the same. I prayed the rosary quite a bit. But I also prayed the Divine Office (the psalms with the Church) and preferred it.
That's what I prayed with the kids when he was gone.

It's not that I didn't like the rosary- I love it. But I have to be in the right frame of mind to pray the rosary, whereas praying the psalms, I find, puts me in the right frame of  mind. I love a rosary when I'm super frustrated and rocking a grumpy baby in the dark... but if I am standing free before my God, I pray a little differently.

I think that's just me... I'm a very biblically driven person and the biblical language is something that brings me to life and ignites my being. It has been the focal point of my spiritual life from the beginning, and it is how I work out my salvation.

So prayer in my family had always been kind of ... awkward. We know that it is only through daily prayer that we will truly live, so we do it. But it's a learning experience.
In the beginning, I prayed with the kids, and he prayed with me.

My prayer times with the kids were extravagant--- loud, worshipful, expressive.
My prayer times with him were quiet and formal.

Over time, I noticed that my oldest two children responded REALLY well to the prayers at mass. They absolutely love the rhythmic chanting, the eloquent language that speaks to them, and the distinct roles they have: now we stand. now we sit. now we bow. now we cross ourselves.
Their prayers were hung on these pegs and I noticed their prayers began to really improve and become intimate moments with God when that happened.

So I jumped in to praying formal prayers with my kids. We pray the liturgy of the hours together morning and evening, and there is a time for spontaneous prayer included, but because it has a format, it's comforting to all of us. When I did that, I noticed that each of my children developed their own prayer-habits.
My oldest became really invested in eucharistic adoration.... even spending time on her knees facing the nearest tabernacle each day. She is a little evangelist, and quite adept.
My second child is a bit prophetic. He speaks to inanimate objects and commands them. He famously will pray for up to an hour spontaneously and when the mood hits him-- often in the bathroom.  My third is a singer. She truly prays twice when she sings hymns.
And so it goes.

Another thing I noticed is that when  we began to pray formal prayers together as a family, my husband and I began to pray spontaneously together... something we hadn't done much up until then. And it wasn't until we ALL prayed formally together that this began to change. Suddenly, I would mention a difficult situation one of our friends was in, and instead of saying: "remember to pray for her," he would say to me: ""let's pray for her right now. Come here..."

My heart burst. THIS was the prayer life I believe a Christian family should have. And for the first time in my life, instead of it being artificial or me forcing it, it was natural and our natural leader, my husband, was leading it. Beautiful.

So it's been about a year that this change has taken place, and I am quite sure that we are well on the way to a meaningful family prayer life.

Last night, two of our dearest male friends were visiting. They came by to say goodbye as one of them was on the last leg of a trip. We caught up, we shared a glass of wine, we talked politics, and  they wrestled the kids. But then, instead of saying goodbye, as we were winding down,  one of them said: "Let's pray a rosary together before we leave."
Now, these are some of our dearest friends. And we have prayed together many times-- quick bursts of prayer at various times during holidays, during mass together, etc. But never a rosary. Never like this. I was... surprised, to say the least. Grateful, but surprised.

They asked my husband to lead the rosary  and sent my kids off to the family altar to gather rosaries for everyone.

I had a momentary panic.
.... but my kids aren't used to the rosary and will probably act up.
.... but my father in law hates the rosary and will probably be uncomfortable hearing us pray it.
.... but my husband says the rosary weird and will probably lead it funny
.... why can't we just PRAY??
We began. We chose the luminous mysteries (it was Thursday). My husband led us... and
it. was. PERFECT.

To sit in a room with three men, three husbands, three fathers, humbly praying the rosary... perfect.
Each man was holding a child and teaching them how to pray by holding their little fingers around the "right" beads, by explaining what each mystery means and what it revealed to us about God's character....perfect.
Each man reverently bringing his intentions, his family, and (because these men are men of influence in the community and therefore in the world) his nation before God and it was one of the most beautiful things I've ever witnessed. Perfect.

I thank God for formal prayers. I thank God for the rosary---I thank God for the Liturgy of the Hours. I thank God for the Catholic Church who gave us these prayers, through which many parents, spouses, and friends truly become ONE VOICE united in prayer. Through them, progress in prayer is made. Through them charity and humility become the standard.

Through them three men joined powerfully in the Holy Spirit last night to change a devastated nation, starting with each other. Through formal prayers our family and friends have truly become a praying people.
Glory be to God always.

Answering questions Christians have about the Passover Seder

As passover will soon be upon us, and Holy Week has officially begun, there are some questions every year about the orthodoxy of holding a seder meal in a Christian home. Some very conservative Catholic homes participate in seder meals with Jews or hold their own, and others absolutely reject and forbid the holding of seder meals, calling it a sin. Which is the correct position?

There are several theological layers to unpack here but I will try to be brief and simple. The purpose of the passover seder is the ritual "telling" (this is what the term "Haggadah," the name of the books from which the ritual is read during the seder, means) of the passover story. It is a ritual mentioned in the Torah, and of primary importance to the Jewish people then and now. Because of our shared salvation history, it is beneficial to Christians to attend and understand the passover, and thus to participate in the passover seder. Neverthless there are many questions from Christians each year as they consider adding additional layers of meaning to their holy week observances and discovering the seder meal.

1. Understanding the Old and New Law.

Before the Catholic Church was born on Pentecost, the people of God were under the Old Covenant, the law of Moses. Under the law of Moses, the observance of the Passover was a requirement, for which Judaism has developped a liturgical rite held in the home or the community. The Passover is NOT a salvific requirement, nor is it a liturgical rite, of the Church. It's observance today belongs to the Jews who have rejected Jesus Christ as the promised messiah. However, it belongs to our history as well, because "salvation is from the Jews." (John 4:22)
The person of Jesus Christ, our passover lamb, is in fact the requirement fulfilled (Matthew 5:17-18). Those of us who are familiar with salvation history and the Bible understand and recognize how perfectly Jesus' messiahship is visible in the study of the Old Covenant. Nevertheless, no act of obedience to the Old Law is salvific in and of itself for Christians-- Christians must follow Jesus, and only following Jesus are we saved. Many Christians participate in the Seder because it is "biblical," and yet miss the point that it is not their own Liturgical Rite to hold. Christians have accepted Jesus Christ, the second person of the Trinity, as the Messiah, and are thus given the Holy Eucharist and the sacrament of Holy Orders (the priesthood), which Jesus Himself instituted at the Last Supper (which scholars believe was a Passover seder) and THAT is our "salvific requirement"-- the biblical participation in the mass is a real participation in the life and body of Christ. For Christians, although it is profound and meaninful, the observation of the passover ritual is only a shadow of this reality. (Colossians 2:17)

Therefore, Christians who find meaning in the passover ritual will find endless meaning in the Holy Mass, and it is THERE that the Church has its own liturgical rite. Seder meals, then, according to the Bishops, should never be organized in such a way as to imitate or overshadow the importance of our participation in the mass.

Different Catholics have different ways of ensuring that-- some do not hold passover meals at all, which is fine, and others hold them but make it very clear that what they are doing is valuable but very different from the importance of participation in the Christian Meal, in the same way that many Catholics celebrate and observe Hannukah, for example, while recognizing that it's liturgical value in the year does not overshadow the importance of recognizing and celebrating and remembering the birth of Our Lord.

Because the Passover Seder belongs to the Jewish liturgy, our Bishops have encouraged us, both out of senstivity to our Jewish friends and out of the need for CLEAR catechesis, not to alter or change the seder in any way from the traditional Jewish manner of holding it if we are holding it in public places or in eceumenical settings. Many Christians (mostly protestants) offer  "Messianic Seders." This is absolutely outrageous to Jews and should be avoided at all costs.

Catholics are encouraged by the Bishops to participate in an AUTHENTIC Jewish Seder, which, if they have taken their responsibility to learn the faith will catechize and teach them all they need to know about the Old Covenant, Salvation history, and the reason Jesus is the Messiah without their needing to alter or change the words or actions, much in the same way that attendance at a Jewish synagogue for Shabbat services will catechize them (presuming they have done the preliminary work of understanding the role of Judaism within salvation history)  without their needing to alter or change the liturgy of the Jews.

Here is what the Bishops have said:

"God's Mercy Endures Forever: Guidelines on the Presentation of Jews and Judaism in Catholic Preaching" by the USCCB's Bishop's Committee on the Liturgy:

28. It is becoming familiar in many parishes and Catholic homes to participate in a Passover Seder during Holy Week. This practice can have educational and spiritual value. It is wrong, however, to "baptize" the Seder by ending it with New Testament readings about the Last Supper or, worse, turn it into a prologue to the Eucharist. Such mergings distort both traditions. The following advice should prove useful:
When Christians celebrate this sacred feast among themselves, the rites of the haggadah for the seder should be respected in all their integrity. The seder . . . should be celebrated in a dignified manner and with sensitivity to those to whom the seder truly belongs. The primary reason why Christians may celebrate the festival of Passover should be to acknowledge common roots in the history of salvation. Any sense of "restaging" the Last Supper of the Lord Jesus should be avoided .... The rites of the Triduum are the [Church's] annual memorial of the events of Jesus' dying and rising (Bishops' Committee on the Liturgy Newsletter, March 1980, p. 12).

2. Practical guidelines for those interested in holding a seder meal.

First, consider your audience. A Parish hosting a seder meal would be following the Bishops' guidelines better, for example,  by hosting a joint Jewish/Catholic seder meal according to the Jewish tradition.
On the other hand, it would benefit everyone to also provide a bible study at some point around the meal (not the same day, or during) to explain the passover with a Christian worldview.
A seder held for a group, club, or bible study, likewise, would be better off holding a traditional Jewish seder and if possible, asking for help from a Jewish teacher in the preparation and delivery.
A family, of course, or groups of families, would be fine observing it either way, have much more freedom to explain or catechize DURING the event... a freedom which would be clearly out of place in a public event.
It is also helpful to think about how to engage all those present. A seder meal that includes many children will naturally need more "involvement" and games than one primarily consisting of adults, who can sit through long readings and prayerful considerations.

Second, consider the purpose of the passover. Passover seders are held on certain days and according to the Jewish calendar, in a certain order and within a certain framework.  It is very meaningful, then, to maintain these dates and methods.
Any attempt to alter the ritual renders it devoid of the full meaning it holds FOR the Jews... and thus handicaps a Christian who wants to understand more deeply the roots of his/her own faith.While there is a lot of freedom there and you will want to read many different Haggadahs to find the one that "fits" your particular needs, it is important to maintain a sensitivity to the "correct" way of handling each part of the telling.

And lastly, the passover is only one part of many feasts observed by the people of the Old Covenant. If you consider participation in the passover, please also consider participation in the other feasts and explore the fullness of our salvation history. But if you do so, please spend an equal amount of time studying the SACRAMENTS of the Church, which are defined as "efficacious signs of grace, instituted by Christ and entrusted to the Church, by which divine life is dispensed to us, "and the reasons why Christ instituted each one. In the sacraments are the fruit of the Jewish feasts for God's people IN Christ. We see elements of each feast and sabbath in each one, and the more we study them, the more fully we understand and live our Christian faith. It would be a terrible tragedy for a Christian to observe the passover, and yet skip mass each week. Likewise, it would be a terrible tragedy for a Christian to observe Hannukah and skip Christmas, to observe Shabbat and skip the Lord's Day, etc. And yet we see this more and more as many protestant Christians, seeking deeper meaning, more truth, and liturgy which their souls crave leave the protestant churches to join messianic congregations in which a somewhat artificial (in that it is not accepted by Jews)  form of Judaism is taught. If you are a Catholic Christian today, you are able and encouraged to participate FULLY in salvation--- by participating in the sacraments of grace. This is a great treasure and storehouse of grace for you and your family. I encourage you to study, love, and participate in the Jewish liturgical year, but I also remind you that the Church year exists for your Christian soul, and exhort you not to neglect it.

3. Understanding the connections and distinguishing  the differences between the Passover Meal and the Mass:

The following is a transcript of a talk by my favorite Bible Scholar, Scott Hahn that should help you to understand the connection between the passover and the lamb's supper: 

The Institution of the Eucharist in Scripture

The Catholic Church claims that Christ is really present in the Eucharist, that the sacrifice of calvary is repeated at every Mass, and that he gives Himself to us in Holy Communion as food unto eternal life.

With this in mind, let's look at Scripture. Luke 22, verse 15, our Lord says, "I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you." So we are assured that the Last Supper in the Upper Room was a Passover meal. In Mark 14, verses 22 through 26, we hear the words of institution, "And as they were eating He took bread and blessed and broke it and gave it to them and said, 'Take, this is my body.' And He took a cup and when He had given thanks, He gave it to them and they drank all of it and He said to them, 'This is my blood of the New Covenant which is poured out for many. Truly I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.'"

You could also say it this way: that if the Passover isn't finished until Calvary, I would suggest that Calvary is really begun in the Upper Room with the Eucharist. When does Jesus' sacrifice really begin? Well, He insists on the fact that His life is not being taken away from Him. He is laying it down. Now in the trial, in the passion, it's being taken away; but in the Upper Room, prior to all of that, Jesus lays it down. He says, "This is my body. This cup is the blood of the New Covenant."

What happens when you differentiate and separate body and blood? You signify death. When your body and your blood are separated, death begins. That's obvious, I think. So Jesus is symbolically and actually beginning the sacrifice. St. Augustine has said that Our Lord held himself in his own hands and commenced the sacrifice of the New Covenant Passover as He was transforming the old. Calvary really began in the Old Testament Passover being celebrated in the Upper Room, when the Eucharist was instituted and the Passover Eucharist of the New Covenant really isn't over until Calvary, when He says, "It is finished."

No wonder St. Paul says in 1st Corinthians 5, "Christ, our Passover, has been sacrificed for us." Therefore, what? Therefore we don't have any more sacrificial offerings or ceremonies or feasts and so on to celebrate because all those ceremonies are outdated and done with? No. He says, "Christ, our Passover, has been sacrificed; therefore, let us keep the feast." And he goes on to talk about how we take out the leaven of insincerity and we have this unleavened bread. What's he talking about? Christ, our Passover has been sacrificed; therefore, we've got to achieve the whole goal of that sacrifice, the second half is communion where we eat the lamb.

Now you can't eat a lamb cookie in Egypt. If you didn't like lamb, you couldn't have your wife make lamb bread, little biscuits in the shape of a lamb and say, "God, you understand, we just can't stand the stuff." No, you do that, your firstborn would die. You had to eat the lamb. Jesus Christ has said to us, "My flesh is food indeed and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has everlasting life."

Let's turn to John 6 and see the context in which he says that. John 6, verse 4 tells us, "Now the Passover, the feast of the Jews was at hand." So everything that transpires within John 6 is within the context of the Passover. Jesus is talking to them now. At the time of the Passover, after multiplying these loaves, ending up filling twelve baskets with the fragments from the five barley loaves, He uses that as his point of departure for one of the most important sermons that He ever preaches and also one of the most disastrous from a human perspective.

He goes on talking about this bread and He goes on talking about Moses in context with that bread. For instance, in verse 32, "Jesus then said to them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you it was not Moses who gave you the bread from heaven. My Father gives you the true bread from heaven, for the bread of God is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.' They said to him, 'Lord, give us this bread always.'" Welfare state! "Jesus said to them, 'I am the bread of life. He who comes to me shall not hunger and he who believes in me shall not thirst.'" And He goes on talking about this some more. The Jews would then murmur at him in verse 41 because He said, "I am the bread which came down from heaven."

They're thinking, "What is He talking about? This guy is Joseph's son. How does He say, 'I've come down from heaven?'" They only look at it from a human perspective. They don't see that He's the divine Son of God. Verse 47, "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness and they died. This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that a man may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread which came down from heaven.'"

How often did they eat the manna? Every day. How often do we receive the Bread of Life? Every day. This is not a once for all sacrifice, like many anti-Catholics allege in the sense that Christ is sacrificed and now there's nothing more to be done. Jesus Christ is sacrificed as priest and as victim, as lamb and as firstborn son and as the Bread of Life, he gives himself to us as well as the unleavened bread of the Passover meal, which commenced, of course, the whole feast of unleavened bread the week after the Passover celebration. Jesus Christ is the Bread of Life, the unleavened bread of God which came down from heaven which the Israelites received every day, the manna of the New Covenant.

Christ through the Holy Spirit makes himself available as the Lamb of God to be consumed continuously. That's the whole point of the Resurrection, incidentally. The Holy Spirit raises up that body and glorifies it so supernaturally that body and blood which is glorified may be internationally distributed through the elders and priests of the Church so that all of God's children can be bound back to the Father in the New Covenant sacrifice of Christ. He didn't die again. He's not bleeding and he's not suffering. He's reigning in glory and giving us his own flesh and blood.

Where do you get that? From the Old Testament -- the manna, the Passover, the sacrifice as it's described on Calvary as it's initiated in the Upper Room and as he states right here in verse 51. "If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh." Jews stop, wait a second. Hold the phone. "John, what do you mean 'my flesh?'" Verse 52, "The Jews then disputed among themselves saying, 'How can this man give us his flesh to eat?'" Cannibalism, paganism, barbarism, sin in the highest degree.

So did Jesus say to them, "I didn't mean it, guys. I was just kind of, you know, using hyperbole or metaphor." No. He actually intensifies the scandal. He actually raises the obstacle even higher. "He said to them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you unless you eat the flesh of the son of man and drink his blood,' which Leviticus condemns, the drinking of blood, 'unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood, you have no life in you. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life and I will raise him up on the last day. For my flesh is food indeed and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me and I in him.'"

He said that four times in four different ways.

In verse 60, "Many of His disciples when they heard it said, 'This is a hard saying. Who can listen to it?'" That is an understatement. "Jesus, however, knowing in Himself that His disciples murmured at it" (the disciples, the followers, the spiritual proteges, not just the crowd now, the disciples themselves are taking offense at this and murmuring and grumbling), "said to them, 'Do you take offense at this? Then what if you were to see the son of man ascending to where He was before? It is the Spirit that gives life; the flesh is of no avail. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.'"

What words? That you've got to eat my flesh and drink my blood, those words.

In 63 we discover why Christ's flesh and blood will be so powerful and animating for supernatural life. Verse 66, "After this, many of His disciples drew back...." We get the impression that the vast majority of them said, "This is just too much." "...and no longer went about with him. And Jesus turned to the twelve;" he didn't apologize. He didn't say, "Now that we're down to twelve, I'll tell you what I really meant." He didn't say that at all. In fact he is perfectly willing for this obstacle to remain scandalous even to the twelve. "Do you also wish to go away?" But "Simon Peter answered him, 'Lord, to whom shall we go?'" Almost implying we would leave if there was somebody else that we could trust more than you because what you said is rather baffling. But he says, "To whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. And we have believed and have come to know that you are the Holy One of God."

So we have reason to believe that this sacrifice of the New Covenant Passover begun in the Upper Room and consummated on Calvary and ultimately as 1st Corinthians 5 suggests continued and celebrated as a climactic communion on the altars of the Church around the world when we receive the Eucharist in Communion. All of this is right from the Bible but you've got to know your Bible. You've got to know John. You've got to know Matthew, Mark and Luke. You've got to know Exodus. You've got to know the Psalms. You've got to know Corinthians and you also have to know Revelation.

Abridged from Scott Hahn's audio and video tape presentation,
"Eucharist: Holy Meal" as it appears in the "Catholic Adult Education
on Video Program" with Scott and Kimberly Hahn.

Full text available in our library.
Both the individual audio and video cassettes and the entire 20 cassette
library, complete with study guides, are available from:St. Joseph Communications
PO Box 720
West Covina, CA 91793
818-331-3549

Electronic text (c) Copyright EWTN 1996. All rights reserved.

Feasting with the dead-- who live!

Me with my grandpère, circa 1982

Today and tomorrow mark the two feasts of the year that deal with our dead... On November 1 the Saints recognized by the Roman Catholic Church as having abounded in holiness in this life through careful examination, and those who are unknown to us or known only to a few are celebrated on this day. Tomorrow we remember in our prayers all the souls who have been here below, praying especially for the mercy of God on those who may be going through purgative purification.

It's a time I always begin to reflect on the Communion of Saints. 

the Communion of Saints is the name we give to a doctrine we teach that makes most protestants shudder-- and yet it is the most glorious thing.... one of the key pieces in the puzzle of Christianity. As a protestant, I was always so frustrated when my friends died-- my choices were to believe that they had gone to hell because I hadn't seen them make visible efforts with their alleged faith in God, in which case, it was horrid, I was helpless, and God didn't care. Or to believe that they had gone to heaven and were now separate from me, GONE, away, and lost until some magical day in the far off future when we would be united in heaven. Catholicism, however, offers the simplest, and most beautiful doctrine to demonstrate both how GOOD God really is and how interconnected we are... how much relationships DO matter.

The entire Church, called the "Mystical Body of Christ," has one head: Christ. The Church here on earth is called: "The Church Militant." We are here below, waging war on sin and evil. The Church above is the Church Triumphant, having succeeded in the spiritual battle, and now interceding for us before the Throne.

The Church Suffering are the souls in purgatory (state of being, not physical place) who did not succeed in the Battle completely, who have not received the graces necessary (because they didn't ask!) to enter God's presence, but who died "doing what they thought was right." Great suffering is theirs. as the Refiner's Fire purifies them, and we pray for them anticipating their eventual glory, they helping us by their prayers and we helping them. All of us are interconnected. For those in Christ, there truly is no time and space, we are all one.

In the Holy Eucharist, In Christ in the Blessed Sacrament, I am united to all believers past, present and future, militant, suffering, and triumphant. We are all One. When I receive the eucharist I am mystically  present with all my loved ones.... family members across the globe whom I love and miss and who, also are fed by the Lamb. Friends and family members who have passed on in Christ. The Saints whose lives inspire me and mold me and help me to be the best Christian I can be. They are all there, in that little tiny host, often described as "dry tasting" by people who simply don't understand what they are seeing and tasting... the body and soul, mind and divinity of Our Lord, Jesus Christ.

If you're like me and have a lot of friends and family who have passed away, and a lot who live far away and who you simply can't be with physically, this doctrine is of so much comfort and such a source for rejoicing.

Like a great Tree of Life the branches, representing the Church Triumphant,  spread throughout the heavens, praising God and shaking things up for us here below in our necessity, uniting heaven and earth. The trunk (Church Militant), stable and sturdy, healthy, ever growing and building, depends on the connection of the roots (Church Suffering-- buried but ever active!)  with the rich earth (God) from whom all nourishment comes. The trunk is tall and straight because of the wind in it's branches, the hope in it's brightly colored leaves, each different from the next but all similar in their shape, function, and beauty and because of the depth of the roots and their constant presence. We all matter. We all have a place, and a part. We all came from somewhere, and are going somewhere. We're all connected. We all matter, and no one is simply "gone." God made the tree, nourishes us in the earth, the air, the wind, the water..... He is in the heavens, and with us in the roots and soil.

Today, Catholics will sing  Ye Watchers and Ye Holy Ones..... reminded of the Communion of Saints. Tomorrow, Catholics will hear mass in a cemetery, reminded of their duty towards the Holy Souls in Purgatory, as much a part of the mystical body as any living person.

The reflections which naturally arise from the observation of these days are dark and triumphant, difficult and beautiful, mysterious and wonderful.....amazing.

As someone involved with  the paranormal community, these two days are the most important ways to communicate to non-catholics, and especially people who have been affected by supernatural experiences with the dead ("last phone calls," "last visits," "sightings" etc) that these things have a very real purpose, that there are people who need us still and that we can not forget them, that for the dead in Christ, death is only the beginning!

O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?
- 1 Corinthians 15:55

Today, I thank God for the Saints in heaven, especially my close friends Mary, Joseph, Elijah, Mary Magdalen, St Josemaria, and Blessed Mariam, the Little Arab.

Tomorrow, I remember especially in my prayers all my relatives who have died, especially my Grandpère, who died in the month of  November and who I miss very much. I remember also all of my friends who died back home, at least one a year since the year I turned twelve, of various tragedies ranging from car accidents to drug overdoses to suicides and freak illnesses. Death is no stranger to me-- but it has lost it's sting. Alleluia!

I remember also all of your friends and family, and most especially those sweet babies so many of my friends have lost in childbirth or through miscarriage. They are with us! Alleluia!

Eternal rest grant them, O Lord, and let perpetual light shine upon them. Amen!

*note to non-Catholic readers: the Roman Catholic Church teaches the existence of hell. The fact that I didn't discuss hell in this blog is NOT indicative of the doctrine of universal salvation within Catholic teaching. I wanted here to focus on the things we celebrate and observe these two days... our cause for rejoicing. There is, of course, a time to weep. We'll talk about that another day. ;)

Theology Thursdays- On Infant Baptism

"Let the children come to me
. . . for to such belongs the kingdom of God." (Luke 18:15-16)

One of the first theological conundrums we came across as we were slowly becoming Catholics was the idea of infant baptism. At the time, we had begun to understand the salvific necessity of baptism, thereby wanting it for our kids, but we saw baptism as the outward expression of an internal faith our children did not yet profess, and thus we sort of hesitated to allow what we saw as a "ceremony" that could potentially stall our children's spiritual progression. 

Of course, looking back, I can say that I was thinking like a true protestant and not like a Catholic at all. Had I been thinking like a Catholic, I would have been also thinking like an Israelite. You see, when we consider issues like this it becomes so totally clear (at least to me) that the Catholic faith is the continuation, in Christ, of the Jewish faith in every way that it is absolutely mind boggling to me now that more people don't make the connection. Are you ready? Here it is.

Why should we baptize our babies into the faith?

Because JEWS circumsized their babies into the faith.

What does circumcision have to do with baptism?

Baptism replaced circumcision.

Wait a minute.... huh??

Turning to Col. 2:11–12, we read:

11 In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands. Your whole self ruled by the flesh[a] was put off when you were circumcised by[b] Christ, 12having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.

Did you catch that? St Paul calls baptism a circumcision made without human hands here. Jewish children were circumsized in anticipation of the faith in which they were to profess, and so Catholic children are also baptized in anticipation of their coming Christian faith.

Further, because it is a sacrament, baptism brings certain graces which are simply not receivable in other circumstances.... such as the grace to erase original sin. Not convinced?


After Lydia was converted through Paul's preaching, "She was baptized, with her household" (Acts 16:15)
The Phillipian jailer who converted: "the same hour of the night . . . he was baptized, with all his family" (Acts 16:33)
And here Paul remembers: "I did baptize also the household of Stephanas" (1 Cor. 1:16)

Still need more? Below, find a more complete list compliled from John Salza over at  Scripture Catholic:

Gen. 17:12, Lev. 12:3 - these texts show the circumcision of eight-day old babies as the way of entering into the Old Covenant - Col 2:11-12 - however, baptism is the new "circumcision" for all people of the New Covenant. Therefore, baptism is for babies as well as adults. God did not make His new Covenant narrower than the old Covenant. To the contrary, He made it wider, for both Jews and Gentiles, infants and adults.

Job 14:1-4 - man that is born of woman is full of trouble and unclean. Baptism is required for all human beings because of our sinful human nature.

Psalm 51:5 - we are conceived in the iniquity of sin. This shows the necessity of baptism from conception.

Matt. 18:2-5 - Jesus says unless we become like children, we cannot enter into heaven. So why would children be excluded from baptism?

Matt 19:14 - Jesus clearly says the kingdom of heaven also belongs to children. There is no age limit on entering the kingdom, and no age limit for being eligible for baptism.

Mark 10:14 - Jesus says to let the children come to Him for the kingdom of God also belongs to them. Jesus says nothing about being too young to come into the kingdom of God.

Mark 16:16 - Jesus says to the crowd, "He who believes and is baptized will be saved." But in reference to the same people, Jesus immediately follows with "He who does not believe will be condemned." This demonstrates that one can be baptized and still not be a believer. This disproves the Protestant argument that one must be a believer to be baptized. There is nothing in the Bible about a "believer's baptism."

Luke 18:15 – Jesus says, “Let the children come to me.” The people brought infants to Jesus that he might touch them. This demonstrates that the receipt of grace is not dependent upon the age of reason.

Acts 2:38 - Peter says to the multitude, "Repent and be baptized.." Protestants use this verse to prove one must be a believer (not an infant) to be baptized. But the Greek translation literally says, "If you repent, then each one who is a part of you and yours must each be baptized” (“Metanoesate kai bapistheto hekastos hymon.”) This, contrary to what Protestants argue, actually proves that babies are baptized based on their parents’ faith. This is confirmed in the next verse.

Acts 2:39 - Peter then says baptism is specifically given to children as well as adults. “Those far off” refers to those who were at their “homes” (primarily infants and children). God's covenant family includes children. The word "children" that Peter used comes from the Greek word "teknon" which also includes infants.

Luke 1:59 - this proves that "teknon" includes infants. Here, John as a "teknon" (infant) was circumcised. See also Acts 21:21 which uses “teknon” for eight-day old babies. So baptism is for infants as well as adults.

Acts 10:47-48 - Peter baptized the entire house of Cornelius, which generally included infants and young children. There is not one word in Scripture about baptism being limited to adults.

Acts 16:15 - Paul baptized Lydia and her entire household. The word "household" comes from the Greek word "oikos" which is a household that includes infants and children.

Acts 16:15 - further, Paul baptizes the household based on Lydia's faith, not the faith of the members of the household. This demonstrates that parents can present their children for baptism based on the parents' faith, not the children's faith.

Acts 16:30-33 - it was only the adults who were candidates for baptism that had to profess a belief in Jesus. This is consistent with the Church's practice of instructing catechumens before baptism. But this verse does not support a "believer's baptism" requirement for everyone. See Acts 16:15,33. The earlier one comes to baptism, the better. For those who come to baptism as adults, the Church has always required them to profess their belief in Christ. For babies who come to baptism, the Church has always required the parents to profess the belief in Christ on behalf of the baby. But there is nothing in the Scriptures about a requirement for ALL baptism candidates to profess their own belief in Christ (because the Church has baptized babies for 2,000 years).

Acts 16:33 - Paul baptized the jailer (an adult) and his entire household (which had to include children). Baptism is never limited to adults and those of the age of reason. See also Luke 19:9; John 4:53; Acts 11:14; 1 Cor. 1:16; and 1 Tim. 3:12; Gen. 31:41; 36:6; 41:51; Joshua 24:15; 2 Sam. 7:11, 1 Chron. 10:6 which shows “oikos” generally includes children.

Rom. 5:12 - sin came through Adam and death through sin. Babies' souls are affected by Adam's sin and need baptism just like adult souls.

Rom. 5:15 - the grace of Jesus Christ surpasses that of the Old Covenant. So children can also enter the new Covenant in baptism. From a Jewish perspective, it would have been unthinkable to exclude infants and children from God's Covenant kingdom.

1 Cor. 1:16 - Paul baptized the household ("oikos") of Stephanus. Baptism is not limited to adults.

Eph. 1:1; Col. 1:2 - Paul addresses the "saints" of the Church, and these include the children he addresses in Eph. 6:1 and Col. 3:20. Children become saints of the Church only through baptism.

Eph. 2:3 - we are all by nature children of wrath, in sin, like all mankind. Infants are no exception. See also Psalm 51:5 and Job 14:1-4 which teach us we are conceived in sin and born unclean.

2 Thess. 3:10 - if anyone does not work let him not eat. But this implies that those who are unable to work should still be able to eat. Babies should not starve because they are unable to work, and should also not be denied baptism because they are unable to make a declaration of faith.

Matt. 9:2; Mark 2:3-5 - the faith of those who brought in the paralytic cured the paralytic's sins. This is an example of the forgiveness of sins based on another's faith, just like infant baptism. The infant child is forgiven of sin based on the parents' faith.

Matt. 8:5-13 - the servant is healed based upon the centurion's faith. This is another example of healing based on another's faith. If Jesus can heal us based on someone else’s faith, then He can baptize us based on someone else’s faith as well.

Mark 9:22-25 - Jesus exercises the child's unclean spirit based on the father's faith. This healing is again based on another's faith.

1 Cor. 7:14 – Paul says that children are sanctified by God through the belief of only one of their parents.

Exodus 12:24-28 - the Passover was based on the parent's faith. If they did not kill and eat the lamb, their first-born child died.

Joshua 5:2-7 - God punished Israel because the people had not circumcised their children. This was based on the parent's faith. The parents play a critical role in their child's salvation.

STILL not convinced? What about some early church fathers?

Irenaeus

"He [Jesus] came to save all through himself; all, I say, who through him are reborn in God: infants, and children, and youths, and old men. Therefore he passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants, sanctifying infants; a child for children, sanctifying those who are of that age . . . [so that] he might be the perfect teacher in all things, perfect not only in respect to the setting forth of truth, perfect also in respect to relative age" (Against Heresies 2:22:4 [A.D. 189]).

"‘And [Naaman] dipped himself . . . seven times in the Jordan’ [2 Kgs. 5:14]. It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [this served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions, being spiritually regenerated as newborn babes, even as the Lord has declared: ‘Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5]" (Fragment 34 [A.D. 190]).



Hippolytus

"Baptize first the children, and if they can speak for themselves let them do so. Otherwise, let their parents or other relatives speak for them" (The Apostolic Tradition 21:16 [A.D. 215]).



Origen

"Every soul that is born into flesh is soiled by the filth of wickedness and sin. . . . In the Church, baptism is given for the remission of sins, and, according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants. If there were nothing in infants which required the remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous" (Homilies on Leviticus8:3 [A.D. 248]).

"The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit" (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]).



Cyprian of Carthage

"As to what pertains to the case of infants: You [Fidus] said that they ought not to be baptized within the second or third day after their birth, that the old law of circumcision must be taken into consideration, and that you did not think that one should be baptized and sanctified within the eighth day after his birth. In our council it seemed to us far otherwise. No one agreed to the course which you thought should be taken. Rather, we all judge that the mercy and grace of God ought to be denied to no man born" (Letters 64:2 [A.D. 253]).

"If, in the case of the worst sinners and those who formerly sinned much against God, when afterwards they believe, the remission of their sins is granted and no one is held back from baptism and grace, how much more, then, should an infant not be held back, who, having but recently been born, has done no sin, except that, born of the flesh according to Adam, he has contracted the contagion of that old death from his first being born. For this very reason does he [an infant] approach more easily to receive the remission of sins: because the sins forgiven him are not his own but those of another" (ibid., 64:5).



Gregory of Nazianz

"Do you have an infant child? Allow sin no opportunity; rather, let the infant be sanctified from childhood. From his most tender age let him be consecrated by the Spirit. Do you fear the seal [of baptism] because of the weakness of nature? Oh, what a pusillanimous mother and of how little faith!" (Oration on Holy Baptism 40:7 [A.D. 388]).

"‘Well enough,’ some will say, ‘for those who ask for baptism, but what do you have to say about those who are still children, and aware neither of loss nor of grace? Shall we baptize them too?’ Certainly [I respond], if there is any pressing danger. Better that they be sanctified unaware, than that they depart unsealed and uninitiated" (ibid., 40:28).



John Chrysostom

"You see how many are the benefits of baptism, and some think its heavenly grace consists only in the remission of sins, but we have enumerated ten honors [it bestows]! For this reason we baptize even infants, though they are not defiled by [personal] sins, so that there may be given to them holiness, righteousness, adoption, inheritance, brotherhood with Christ, and that they may be his [Christ’s] members" (Baptismal Catecheses in Augustine, Against Julian 1:6:21 [A.D. 388]).



Augustine

"What the universal Church holds, not as instituted [invented] by councils but as something always held, is most correctly believed to have been handed down by apostolic authority. Since others respond for children, so that the celebration of the sacrament may be complete for them, it is certainly availing to them for their consecration, because they themselves are not able to respond" (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:24:31 [A.D. 400]).

"The custom of Mother Church in baptizing infants is certainly not to be scorned, nor is it to be regarded in any way as superfluous, nor is it to be believed that its tradition is anything except apostolic" (The Literal Interpretation of Genesis 10:23:39 [A.D. 408]).

"Cyprian was not issuing a new decree but was keeping to the most solid belief of the Church in order to correct some who thought that infants ought not be baptized before the eighth day after their birth. . . . He agreed with certain of his fellow bishops that a child is able to be duly baptized as soon as he is born" (Letters 166:8:23 [A.D. 412]).

"By this grace baptized infants too are ingrafted into his [Christ’s] body, infants who certainly are not yet able to imitate anyone. Christ, in whom all are made alive . . . gives also the most hidden grace of his Spirit to believers, grace which he secretly infuses even into infants. . . . It is an excellent thing that the Punic [North African] Christians call baptism salvation and the sacrament of Christ’s Body nothing else than life. Whence does this derive, except from an ancient and, as I suppose, apostolic tradition, by which the churches of Christ hold inherently that without baptism and participation at the table of the Lord it is impossible for any man to attain either to the kingdom of God or to salvation and life eternal? This is the witness of Scripture, too. . . . If anyone wonders why children born of the baptized should themselves be baptized, let him attend briefly to this. . . . The sacrament of baptism is most assuredly the sacrament of regeneration" (Forgiveness and the Just Deserts of Sin, and the Baptism of Infants 1:9:10; 1:24:34; 2:27:43 [A.D. 412]).



Council of Carthage V

"Item: It seemed good that whenever there were not found reliable witnesses who could testify that without any doubt they [abandoned children] were baptized and when the children themselves were not, on account of their tender age, able to answer concerning the giving of the sacraments to them, all such children should be baptized without scruple, lest a hesitation should deprive them of the cleansing of the sacraments. This was urged by the [North African] legates, our brethren, since they redeem many such [abandoned children] from the barbarians" (Canon 7 [A.D. 401]).



Council of Mileum II

"[W]hoever says that infants fresh from their mothers’ wombs ought not to be baptized, or say that they are indeed baptized unto the remission of sins, but that they draw nothing of the original sin of Adam, which is expiated in the bath of regeneration . . . let him be anathema [excommunicated]. Since what the apostle [Paul] says, ‘Through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so passed to all men, in whom all have sinned’ [Rom. 5:12], must not be understood otherwise than the Catholic Church spread everywhere has always understood it. For on account of this rule of faith even infants, who in themselves thus far have not been able to commit any sin, are therefore truly baptized unto the remission of sins, so that that which they have contracted from generation may be cleansed in them by regeneration" (Canon 3 [A.D. 416]).

Baptize your children. Give them the gift of faith.... and a running start on the spiritual journey!

My family with Fr. Michael Cassabon and the Godparents of our third daughter at her baptism.

Theology Thursdays: Understanding the differences between paganism and Catholicism

There is a lot of talk these days, as I mentioned before, about not celebrating Christmas, due to the allegation that Christmas is based on a pagan holiday and not the actual birth of Christ.
Since the whole concept of not celebrating Christmas is a thinly veiled attempt to remove any focus on the incarnation, and thus deny the Holy Trinity, the Eucharist, the relevance of Mary's "fiat" in the Salvation story and basically all of the doctrines of  the Roman Catholic Church, which have been passed down to some degree through tradition to the other mainline protestant ecclesial communities.
I've asserted here in the last few weeks that the "actual" spiritual authority that the Roman Catholic Church has established via the authority Christ gave Peter and his successors to do things like determine a feast and require that Christians observe it enables us to do something like require people of Christian faith to observe Christmas... after all, we are the Church, and doctrine is "what we do." So it is not at all surprising to us Catholics that we might be "required" to observe Christmas. Many protestants, however, in keeping with their longstanding tradition of 'questioning authority,' have in recent years begun to vehemently attack Christmas, basing their argument on the idea that Christmas was not "historically" December 25.
To set minds at ease, however, I will say that no one in any official capacity within the Catholic Church has ever asserted that this was the "actual" date of Christ's birth, etc. We do not disagree with modern historians if they discover that Christ was born some time in the summer. We simply claim that we OBSERVE and commemorate His birth on the day of Christmas.
Having addressed this previously, I will then avoid that discussion and move into directly addressing the following questions:
"If a holiday has apparently pagan "roots" should we cease to observe it?" and
"Isn't it true that the Roman Catholic Church is Pagan in Origin?"
This covers Christmas, Easter, and Birthdays, among other things which people object to in traditional Christianity in their attempt to be "more biblical." (For a discussion on why this attempt to be "more biblical" than "traditional" is a trainwreck waiting to happen, see next week's Theology Thursday.)
My first answer would be that it is wrong to assert that ANY of our traditional Catholic Holidays have "pagan" roots. We observe events in the life of Christ, period, and these events and the way we celebrate them are in no way "pagan" since our object of worship is the Holy Trinity, the ONE God who created us, whereas paganism is the worship of a pantheon of false gods and an attempt at universal manipulation for a particular outcome. It will be useful here to define paganism. The dictionary defines it thus:

1. An adherent of a polytheistic religion in antiquity, especially when viewed in contrast to an adherent of a monotheistic religion.

2. A Neopagan.

3. Offensive

a. One who has no religion.

b. An adherent of a religion other than Judaism, Christianity, or Islam.

4. A hedonist.

 

Perhaps a more Catholic definition of the word would be:

Paganism, in the broadest sense includes all religions other than the true one revealed by God, and, in a narrower sense, all except Christianity, Judaism, and Mohammedanism. The term is also used as the equivalent of Polytheism (q.v.)

 

So we see that paganism is not one particular religion but rather a demonic amalgom of all that is false.
This is what we are accused of, over and over, and yet the "proofs" offered as usually misplaced in context or completely misunderstood.  Having studied the mormon religion's similar claims and being fully convinced of the non-Christianity of the Mormon religion, despite the LDS Church's assertions otherwise, I understand completely the need for further explanation.
So why, for example, does it happen that two such events on the Catholic and Christian Calendar, Christmas and Easter fall on or near "pagan" celebrations? Surely the Catholic Calendar must be pagan! And yet, no.
The calendar is not religious in origin but secular-- it existed under the Romans and was reformed under Julius Caesar. In 1582, Pope Gregory XIII reformed it again and it was named the Gregorian Calendar. Today, the entire world uses it.
Within the framework of this calendar, the Church, over the years, instituted feasts and fasts, celebrations and periods of penance during which we observe the rhythm of Catholic life. These were sometimes placed on or near cultural celebrations to drive home a point. An example from this month, for instance, is the observation of the feast of St Lucia, who is the patroness of the blind and the "light bringer," due to her devotion to Christ. It is appropriate, then, to observe her feast at a time when darkness turns to light, in particular when pagans were already celebrating this day for that reason, deepening the converted pagan's understanding of Christ's role.... and so we do so on December 13. As I said in a post a few days ago--everyone observes a calendar and goes by a set of "markings" to note the rhythm of life. To mark time according the the rhythm of the heartbeat of Salvation History is.... breathtaking. Each year we are taken through events in the life of Christ and his followers, which renders these events and people more meaningful to us as we meditate more deeply on their significance each passing year. One could hardly classify this as a pagan practice.
Catholics have prayed the rosary for thousands of years,and this, too, is a cyclical prayer through which we meditate on a series of events in the life of Christ. It does not get "old." People who have prayed the rosary for fifty years will tell you it only gets deeper. Likewise, the Catholic Calendar grows in significance as we observe it corporately and individually. It adds universal meaning to the "concepts" of these feasts.
So it is with Christmas and Easter... I don't think anyone can argue when I say that that during these times everyone, even non-Christians, are placed face to face with the  realities of Christ's birth and Christ's death and resurrection. Even if the world does not recognize the rest of the feasts of the Church that depict our Salvation in time, these two feasts stand out among the secular universe and - indeed-- even force some families to come out of the world and into the Church, if only for just a day. For some, this "one day" can turn into a lifetime of seeking and following after God. It did for me one Christmas eve!
So the history of the Gregorian Calendar, as you can see, is one of continual re-adjustment, rendered "useful" by the Church, useful also to evangelize the world, and certainly not based on any pagan form of anything. If we want to talk pagan, however, with our brothers and sisters who are convinced that we must instead observe the Jewish Calendar, I would remind them that the Jewish Calendar is based on the ancient Babylonian Calendar. Could it possibly be any MORE pagan? As with the Talmud, which is not "biblical" in any sense of the word, but rather a "sacred tradition" which mirrors our "Catholic tradition" in that it interprets scripture FOR the people... close examination of the talmud, then, demonstrates that there are many problematic and "pagan" and "babylonian" points of interest worth noting. However, I am here to reconstruct Christianity in your minds, not to deconstruct modern Judaism.
I would ask also.... if we stop observing the gregorian calendar, shall we then cease to pray at all? For the pagans did these things long before "Christianity" or "Judaism" was an established religion. Shall we cease to "observe" the days of the week? For these were certainly named after pagan gods and goddesses. In fact, it is in the very days of the week that we see God's redemption at work, for while they were certainly named after pagan gods, we observe the Lord's day on "Sunday," the day of the Son, the day of redemption, the day that, as we Catholics recite every morning in the Liturgy of the Hours:

In the tender compassion of our Lord
The dawn from on high shall break upon us,
to shine on those who dwell in darkness
And the shadow of death,

And to guide our feet into the way of peace.

With a little examination, we can make some observations that shed light on why these accusations of paganism are absurd and based solely on a Satanic plan to divert people who are authentically drawn to God to move away from His Church and thus separate themselves from the sacraments, the surest means of acquiring grace.
I have heard people say that the Catholic practice of having statues around, for example directly violates the statute to avoid "carved and graven images" of the commandments from Sinai.

"You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments." (RSV Exodus 20:3-6).

 Interestingly enough, he then proceeded to give moses a "graven image" of those very commandments, on tablets of stone which he later struck on human hearts. This is why protestant are ok with "writing," I suppose. :P I've seen endless youtube videos and websites with pictures of a pope kneeling before a statue, plastered with this verse for the compelling "shock value" it creates. But what is really going on here?
St John of Damascus' apology "On the Divine Image," is a work in which he attempted to argue his way through the iconoclastic controversy begun by the Byzantine Emperor, Leo III and later by Constantine V.
We see from his work that in the Bible itself, God exhorted humans to use such carvings: for example the graven images of the cherubim over the Ark of the Covenant in Exodus 25:18-22, which God directly ordered Moses to make. There are also, as examples, the embroidered figures of cherubim which God told Moses to make on the curtain which separated the Holy of Holies in the tabernacle tent in Exodus 26:31, and most interestingly the Bronze serpent from the book of Numbers 29:19. 
"That may be," say the naysayers, "but I've seen Catholics bow before these images and kiss them!" I would hope that people who have these concerns wouldn't place their hand over their heart when they, for example, see an American Flag being honored!
But to be fair, most of them don't. However, I think it is clear, in examples such as Genesis 33:3 when Jacob bowed to the ground before the tip of his son Joseph's staff, and before Esau, his brother, that bowing to show honor is an acceptable practice.He bowed down, after all, but did not adore. Millions of Easterners "bow" to one another in greeting. Shall they cease immediately? (This reminds me of the exhoration protestants always give to "call no man Father," thus refusing to accept that we call our priests "Father." And yet, they have no problem with calling their OWN fathers "Father." :D)
In Joshua 5:14, Joshua, the Son of Nun, and Daniel bowed in veneration before an angel of God... not in adoration, but to honor. St Basil asserted that "the honour given to the image is transferred to its prototype." Thus we honor the American Flag, because of what it represents, not because of what it IS, a piece of fabric. Similarly, we honor the statues and images of the Lord and His Saints, because of who they are, not because of what we behold before us, which is wood and stone.
The Catholic and Orthodox church teach that ADORATION, latria, the veneration due God, is reserved for God alone. However, we reserve dulia, (honor and respect) for icons and images and statues which represent His Kingdom. We teach the difference between the two in our catechism and through various traditions we have maintained throughout the liturgical year. Thus, no Christian can say that we are "unbiblical" in the visible honor we give to the Lord and His Saints via icons or statues.
A fabulous Catholic article that demonstrates the relationship between Catholicism and Judaism  in opposing paganism says:

"Let no one imagine that the temptation to idolatry and paganism is a matter of the distant past when primitive peoples offered sacrifice to the sun or prayed to stone outcroppings and golden calves. Paganism is a permanent threat. The worship of false gods, a constant temptation.
How, then, can we know that it is an idol, a false god, and not the true God, that is being worshipped? I submit to you that there is a foolproof test: False gods always demand the blood of innocents. A pagan culture is always, in the end, a culture of death. Where the innocent and just are slain, there the god being worshipped is not the God of Israel, the Lord of Life, but rather Moloch in one or another of his protean disguises." (Robert P George, the New Paganism and the Culture of Death)

Fervent Catholics are well aware that the present situation of the world today is simply a continuation of the problem of old-- the pagans are everywhere, worshipping false gods (such as Mamon) and demanding ritual sacrifices to these false gods, the greatest example of which is the demonic act of Abortion, which is why we so greatly oppose it. Yet today, many fervent protestants are more concerned with ousting the perceived paganism in Roman Catholicism than with eradicating abortion, an obvious pagan practice and a clearly demonic stronghold that thrives in our nation today.
At this point, you might be interested to hear my own personal experience with "returning to" sacred images in my worship of God. As a protestant, I had left statues and icons behind with my Catholicism as I left the Church.
However, one of the first things I did upon returning to the Church was to place a crucifix in my home. I had had crosses before, all over the house, and crosses are certainly "symbols" we use, which could be defined as idolatrous to persons who think that ANY image is a pagan practice. Setting aside the whole "Catholics think Jesus is still on the cross" thing, which we can discuss another time, the simple practice of putting a crucifix up in my home made my protestant friends extremely uncomfortable, judging by their varied reactions to it as it went up.
However, the practice deepened my "daily acceptance" of taking up my own cross. Just by having an image of Our Lord on the Cross in my home that I passed regularly by, his life and sacrifice was made present to me in an amazing way. I couldn't "escape" remembering him. Likewise, having a family altar and icons on our walls did the same for us. My kids suddenly "saw" the reality of heaven around their house and it became real to them. I noticed it's harder to argue and lack charity in your living room when you are surrounded by the constant visual reminder- and thus, presence- of Christ and His Holy ones.

This is the image of Divine Mercy, given to St Faustina in a vision

One day about a year ago on the feast of Divine Mercy, I found myself in a funny situation. Having a devotion to the Divine Mercy, I wanted to celebrate by attending mass that morning and saying the Chaplet of Divine Mercy with other Catholics. At the mass, they had taken quite literally the request of Jesus to Saint Faustina (that the IMAGE of Divine Mercy be shared and honored,) by placing a huge framed photograph of the Divine Mercy Image to the side of the altar. At the end of the mass, the people lined up to give honor to the image, and thus worship to the God of Divine Mercy,  in whatever way they felt led. This was a real conundrum for me, as I still had remnants of protestant fear of idolatry swimming among my most Catholic of intentions. I was afraid that by going forward I would be committing the sin of idolatry (having not really given the idea much thought until then outside of what I had been taught by protestants-- that Catholics practice idolatry.) I prayed about it, and felt certain that God was about to teach me a lesson. I waited in line, nervous. I didn't really know what to do when I reached the image. I knew only that when I saw it, whenever I saw it, I was filled with awe and reverence for Christ. Outside of the traditional interpretation of the image, I was often moved by the sacred bond of trust that passed between myself and my Lord as I contemplated the image. Further, It was Jesus' bare feet that I had once seen in a vision walking with me, and once seen rising above me in a vision. The appearance of His bare feet in the image rendered it that much more meaningful for me. I didn't know what I was going to "do" when it was my turn to venerate the image, but I knew I would do something. Sure enough, I arrived before the image... nervous, heart racing, unsure of what to do next. Face to Face with God, so to speak. Afraid, because I was a sinner, and I didn't know Him well enough to know how to stop.
And there was Jesus, rays of blood and light immersing me in His love and sacrifice, beckoning me to Trust in Him, overpowering the darkness that retreated behind Him in the painting. Eyes gazing lovingly at me, a sinner, and oceans of love in His sacred eyes.
I wept, as I knelt and kissed His sacred feet and touched His hands. This Jesus, the one I saw, seemed only a portal-- a doorway-- through which I had walked into a deeper understanding of God's infinite mercy for me. I never worried about idolatry in the Catholic Church again. I had been touched by His divine mercy, because I had venerated an image of His mercy.
You see, the early Church understood that ALL creation is capable of praising Him. We do not remove our senses from the experience of praise. We worship Him as in the psalms... with bells, with drums, with horns and voices. When we light sacred incense, we watch our prayers rise to heaven. This is not idolatry, for we do not believe that the incense in and of itself is God or will sway God. However, we believe the scriptures:

Revelation 8:3-4

'Another angel, who had a golden censer, came and stood at the altar. A large quantity of incense was given to him to offer with all the prayers of the saints on the golden altar that stood in front of the throne; and so from the angel's hand the smoke of the incense went up in the presence of God and with it the prayers of all the saints.'

Malachi 1:11

'From farthest east to farthest west my name is honoured among the nations and everywhere a sacrifice of incense is offered to my name, and a pure offering too, since my name is honoured among the nations, says the Lord Sabaoth.'

Psalm 141:2

'Let my prayer rise before you like incense
And my hands like an evening offering.'

The incense is a physical reminder of a spiritual truth. It speaks to us at the core of our understanding. It moves us, not God, who is only moved by our fervor and desire to please Him.
Many Christians oppose the use of "pagan" symbols in our worship and in our lives. A Christmas tree is a perfect example. And yet the Jesse Tree, an advent tradition of the Roman Catholic Church, and traditionally what we use as a "Christmas tree," is the decoration of a tree with symbols from scripture to represent the history of the story of salvation... it is the very root of our idea of decorating the tree.
Many Christians decorate their trees with round balls for ornaments and think nothing of it, but Catholics will decorate with cards or statues of the saints in heaven, with symbols and imagery that represent the story of salvation: an apple for the fall, a shepherd's staff for King David, etc etc. and with ornaments that represent their family's own personal walk with God-- symbols of sacraments received, pilgrimmages undertaken, and blessings given, for example.
We open advent calendars each day that read back to us the scriptures which prepare our hearts for the coming of Christ. We hear proclaimed each day in Mass the Word of God as we listen for the coming of Our Lord.
 These are just a few examples of how these allegedly pagan traditions (which are not pagan at all) have birthed faith into families around the globe.
Another example is the easter egg, which causes much concern among American Christians. However Catholics and Orthodox have no problem with easter eggs, knowing that we use them to remind each other of the new life which they represent, and of the bursting from the tomb. "Christos Anesti," we say as we exchange colored eggs... Christ is risen! "Alithos Anesti," they respond... He is Risen indeed! (if you're a protestant reading this who is still convinced that the Catholic Traditions are steeped in pagan idolatry, you might want to stop using that tradition, then, the famous call-and-return of annunciation, when you celebrate the Risen Christ!)
We often color the eggs red to remember the story of Mary Magdalen, who had the opportunity to feast with the Emperor Tiberius after the resurrection. "When she met him, she held a plain egg in her hand and exclaimed "Christ is risen!" Caesar laughed, and said that Christ rising from the dead was as likely as the egg in her hand turning red while she held it. Before he finished speaking, the egg in her hand turned a bright red, and she continued proclaiming the Gospel to the entire imperial house." (wiki)
We believe the egg turned red to represent the blood of Christ, through which our "New Life" comes. In iconography, Mary Magdalen is often represented holding a red egg for that reason.
All this to say that for every allegation of paganism in the Roman Church, there is an equally "biblical" and reasonable, historically accurate explanation for the observation of these things and the reason we celebrate them. Further, close examination shows that these acts not only honor God and draw Him near to us in our homes in a special way, but they also reflect the sacred mysteries of heaven revealed to us on earth.... they are true light from the darkness, dimly lit representations of spiritual mysteries which we have only begun to understand. They ARE the redemptive work of Christ and the feasts of His Kingdom, of which earth is not yet wholly part, since it is "in the power of the Evil One." (1 John 5:19)
Lest we forget that Christ came for ALL men, all sinners, of whom pagans are certainly a part, I leave you with the words of the Catechism of the Catholic Church which depict this most sacred event of His coming with regards to the pagan understanding of life:

522 The coming of God's Son to earth is an event of such immensity that God willed to prepare for it over centuries. He makes everything converge on Christ: all the rituals and sacrifices, figures and symbols of the "First Covenant".¹⁹⁵ He announces him through the mouths of the prophets who succeeded one another in Israel. Moreover, he awakens in the hearts of the pagans a dim expectation of this coming.
523 St. John the Baptist is the Lord's immediate precursor or forerunner, sent to prepare his way.¹⁹⁶ "Prophet of the Most High", John surpasses all the prophets, of whom he is the last.¹⁹⁷ He inaugurates the Gospel, already from his mother's womb welcomes the coming of Christ, and rejoices in being "the friend of the bridegroom", whom he points out as "the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world".¹⁹⁸ Going before Jesus "in the spirit and power of Elijah", John bears witness to Christ in his preaching, by his Baptism of conversion, and through his martyrdom.¹⁹⁹
524 When the Church celebrates the liturgy of Advent each year, she makes present this ancient expectancy of the Messiah, for by sharing in the long preparation for the Savior's first coming, the faithful renew their ardent desire for his second coming.²⁰⁰ By celebrating the precursor's birth and martyrdom, the Church unites herself to his desire: "He must increase, but I must decrease."²⁰¹
The Christmas mystery
525 Jesus was born in a humble stable, into a poor family.²⁰² Simple shepherds were the first witnesses to this event. In this poverty heaven's glory was made manifest.²⁰³ The Church never tires of singing the glory of this night:

The Virgin today brings into the world the Eternal And the earth offers a cave to the Inaccessible. The angels and shepherds praise him And the magi advance with the star, For you are born for us, Little Child, God eternal!²⁰⁴

526 To become a child in relation to God is the condition for entering the kingdom.²⁰⁵ For this, we must humble ourselves and become little. Even more: to become "children of God" we must be "born from above" or "born of God".²⁰⁶ Only when Christ is formed in us will the mystery of Christmas be fulfilled in us.²⁰⁷ Christmas is the mystery of this "marvelous exchange":

O marvelous exchange! Man's Creator has become man, born of the Virgin. We have been made sharers in the divinity of Christ who humbled himself to share our humanity.

For a further examination of this question, please see:

http://www.davidmacd.com/catholic/were_catholics_pagan.htm


For a brief biblical apologetics cheat sheet on the use of statues, icons and relics (which we have no discussed much in this post but which certainly apply,) see below:


Ex 25:18-22, 26:1,31; Num 21:8-9 ... God commands that images be made.
1 Kings 6:23-29, 35, 7:29... Solomon's Temple; statues and images
Acts 19:11,12 ... Paul's handkerchief and aprons.
2 Kings 13:29-21 .. Elisha's bones
Acts 5:15-16 ...Peter's shadow
Matt 9:20-22 ... Jesus' garment cures a woman

Supercrafty Saturday: On the Nature of the Church

OK, so this isn't about knitting, scrapbooking or sewing... but it is definitely crafty, because in order to post it as is I had to go through the Catechism of the Catholic Church and manually graft relevant passages about the Church, as well as inserting the scripture references where the footnotes would ordinarily be. It was quite a job!
I decided to do this today instead of a knitting blog because we are discussing the nature of "the Church" in an inter-denominational Facebook group called "Union in Christ: a Dialogue." In it, we must of course examine the differing ideas about the Church and it's nature.
I like the approach I'm about to give because it gives a completely contextual scriptural portrayal of the Church alongside quotes from sermons and letters of the earliest recorded "Christian" leaders. Since Catholics are not constrained to Scripture-- or rather, since we believe that Truth can be found outside of Scripture that helps us to understand better what we read IN Scripture, we don't need to be constrained to examination the Bible for every instance of the word "Ekklesia" to get an understanding of what Church means. We can look to history, to scripture, to the writings of the saints before us, to mystical apparitions, to any number of things and gain a "WHOLE" perspective. That being said, what is written about the nature of the Church in the Catechism of the Catholic Church comes SOLELY from Scripture as explained by the early fathers. This gives the Catechism the edge over any other explanation out there-- we can say: The Bible says X, we know that X means X because a disciple of a disciple of Jesus wrote in the year 156 that X was to be interpreted as X... etc etc. In other words, we have tradition AND scripture to back up what we say "The Church" means and is. One of the number one reasons I love being a Catholic-- because no one else can accurately make that claim.

So without further ado.... who is "The Church?" If it is the body of believers, Does it include the Jews or is it only the body of believers in Christ? ie. Spiritual vs Temporal Israel? The first thing I would say is that "The Church" is composed strictly of The people of the NEW Covenant. This new covenant is in Christ-- Scripture says that Jesus came so that we could have salvation through Him. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (which I will always reference in here as the CCC) says: "Moved by the grace of the Holy Spirit and drawn by the Father, we believe in Jesus and confess: 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.'8 On the rock of this faith confessed by St. Peter, CHRIST BUILT HIS CHURCH." (CCC 424) (Mt 16:18)

Further, the Church was foreshadowed from the world's beginning, prepared for in the Old Covenant, instituted by Jesus Christ, revealed by the Holy Spirit, and will be perfected in glory: " (CCC 751 ) The word "Church" (Latin ecclesia, from the Greek ek-ka-lein, to "call out of") means a convocation or an assembly. It designates the assemblies of the people, usually for a religious purpose.139 Ekklesia is used frequently in the Greek Old Testament for the assembly of the Chosen People before God, above all for their assembly on Mount Sinai where Israel received the Law and was established by God as his holy people.140 By calling itself "Church," the first community of Christian believers recognized itself as heir to that assembly. In the Church, God is "calling together" his people from all the ends of the earth. The equivalent Greek term Kyriake, from which the English word Church and the German Kirche are derived, means "what belongs to the Lord."

(CCC 752 )In Christian usage, the word "church" designates the liturgical assembly, --1 cor 11:18,14:19,28, 34, 35-- but also the local community--1 cor 1:2, 16:1-- or the whole universal community of believers.--1 cor 15:9,gal 1:13, phil 3:6-- These three meanings are inseparable. "The Church" is the People that God gathers in the whole world. She exists in local communities and is made real as a liturgical, above all a Eucharistic, assembly. She draws her life from the word and the Body of Christ and so herself becomes Christ's Body. (CCC 753) In Scripture, we find a host of interrelated images and figures through which Revelation speaks of the inexhaustible mystery of the Church. The images taken from the Old Testament are variations on a profound theme: the People of God. In the New Testament, all these images find a new center because Christ has become the head of this people, which henceforth is his Body.--Eph 1:22, col 1:18-- Around this center are grouped images taken "from the life of the shepherd or from cultivation of the land, from the art of building or from family life and marriage."

(CCC 754) "The Church is, accordingly, a sheepfold, the sole and necessary gateway to which is Christ. It is also the flock of which God himself foretold that he would be the shepherd, and whose sheep, even though governed by human shepherds, are unfailingly nourished and led by Christ himself, the Good Shepherd and Prince of Shepherds, who gave his life for his sheep.

(CCC 755) "The Church is a cultivated field, the tillage of God. On that land the ancient olive tree grows whose holy roots were the prophets and in which the reconciliation of Jews and Gentiles has been brought about and will be brought about again. That land, like a choice vineyard, has been planted by the heavenly cultivator. Yet the true vine is Christ who gives life and fruitfulness to the branches, that is, to us, who through the Church remain in Christ, without whom we can do nothing.

(CCC 756) "Often, too, the Church is called the building of God. The Lord compared himself to the stone which the builders rejected, but which was made into the corner-stone. On this foundation the Church is built by the apostles and from it the Church receives solidity and unity. This edifice has many names to describe it: the house of God in which his family dwells; the household of God in the Spirit; the dwelling-place of God among men; and, especially, the holy temple. This temple, symbolized in places of worship built out of stone, is praised by the Fathers and, not without reason, is compared in the liturgy to the Holy City, the New Jerusalem. As living stones we here on earth are built into it. It is this holy city that is seen by John as it comes down out of heaven from God when the world is made anew, prepared like a bride adorned for her husband.

(CCC 757) "The Church, further, which is called 'that Jerusalem which is above' and 'our mother', is described as the spotless spouse of the spotless lamb. It is she whom Christ 'loved and for whom he delivered himself up that he might sanctify her.' It is she whom he unites to himself by an unbreakable alliance, and whom he constantly 'nourishes and cherishes.'"

The Church, we all agree, had a plan in the Father's heart from day one--- so I'll skip that portion and move on to the rest: will be brought to glorious completion at the end of time."

The Church- foreshadowed from the world's beginning

760 Christians of the first centuries said, "The world was created for the sake of the Church." God created the world for the sake of communion with his divine life, a communion brought about by the "convocation" of men in Christ, and this "convocation" is the Church. The Church is the goal of all things, and God permitted such painful upheavals as the angels' fall and man's sin only as occasions and means for displaying all the power of his arm and the whole measure of the love he wanted to give the world:

Just as God's will is creation and is called "the world," so his intention is the salvation of men, and it is called "the Church."

The Church - prepared for in the Old Covenant

761 The gathering together of the People of God began at the moment when sin destroyed the communion of men with God, and that of men among themselves. The gathering together of the Church is, as it were, God's reaction to the chaos provoked by sin. This reunification is achieved secretly in the heart of all peoples: "In every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable" to God.156

762 The remote preparation for this gathering together of the People of God begins when he calls Abraham and promises that he will become the father of a great people.--Gen 12:2, 15:5-6,-- Its immediate preparation begins with Israel's election as the People of God. By this election, Israel is to be the sign of the future gathering of All nations.--Exodus19:5-6, Deut 7:6, Isa2:2-5,Mic 4:1-4)--But the prophets accuse Israel of breaking the covenant and behaving like a prostitute. They announce a new and eternal covenant. "Christ instituted this New Covenant."Hos 1, Isa 1:2-4, Jer 2, 31:31-34, Isa 55:3---

The Church - instituted by Christ Jesus

763 It was the Son's task to accomplish the Father's plan of salvation in the fullness of time. Its accomplishment was the reason for his being sent. "The Lord Jesus inaugurated his Church by preaching the Good News, that is, the coming of the Reign of God, promised over the ages in the scriptures." To fulfill the Father's will, Christ ushered in the Kingdom of heaven on earth. The Church "is the Reign of Christ already present in mystery."

764 "This Kingdom shines out before men in the word, in the works and in the presence of Christ." To welcome Jesus' word is to welcome "the Kingdom itself." The seed and beginning of the Kingdom are the "little flock" of those whom Jesus came to gather around him, the flock whose shepherd he is.--Lk 12:32, Mt 10:16, 26:31, Jn 10:1-21-- They form Jesus' true family.--Mt 12:49-- To those whom he thus gathered around him, he taught a new "way of acting" and a prayer of their own.Mt 5-6

765 The Lord Jesus endowed his community with a structure that will remain until the Kingdom is fully achieved. Before all else there is the choice of the Twelve with Peter as their head.--Mk 3:14-15--Representing the twelve tribes of Israel, they are the foundation stones of the new Jerusalem.--Mt 19:28, Lk 22:30, Rev 21:12-14.--The Twelve and the other disciples share in Christ's mission and his power, but also in his lot.--Mk 6:7, Lk 10:1-2, Mt 10:25,Jn 15:20-- By all his actions, Christ prepares and builds his Church.

766 The Church is born primarily of Christ's total self-giving for our salvation, anticipated in the institution of the Eucharist and fulfilled on the cross. "The origin and growth of the Church are symbolized by the blood and water which flowed from the open side of the crucified Jesus."--Jn 19:34-- "For it was from the side of Christ as he slept the sleep of death upon the cross that there came forth the 'wondrous sacrament of the whole Church.'" As Eve was formed from the sleeping Adam's side, so the Church was born from the pierced heart of Christ hanging dead on the cross.

The Church - revealed by the Holy Spirit

767 "When the work which the Father gave the Son to do on earth was accomplished, the Holy Spirit was sent on the day of Pentecost in order that he might continually sanctify the Church."--Jn17:4-- Then "the Church was openly displayed to the crowds and the spread of the Gospel among the nations, through preaching, was begun." As the "convocation" of all men for salvation, the Church in her very nature is missionary, sent by Christ to all the nations to make disciples of them.--Mt 28:19-20--

768 So that she can fulfill her mission, the Holy Spirit "bestows upon [the Church] varied hierarchic and charismatic gifts, and in this way directs her." "Henceforward the Church, endowed with the gifts of her founder and faithfully observing his precepts of charity, humility and self-denial, receives the mission of proclaiming and establishing among all peoples the Kingdom of Christ and of God, and she is on earth the seed and the beginning of that kingdom."

The Church - perfected in glory

769 "The Church . . . will receive its perfection only in the glory of heaven,"at the time of Christ's glorious return. Until that day, "the Church progresses on her pilgrimage amidst this world's persecutions and God's consolations." Here below she knows that she is in exile far from the Lord, and longs for the full coming of the Kingdom, when she will "be united in glory with her king."--2 Cor 5:6-- The Church, and through her the world, will not be perfected in glory without great trials. Only then will "all the just from the time of Adam, 'from Abel, the just one, to the last of the elect,' . . . be gathered together in the universal Church in the Father's presence."

The last consideration is the relationship of the Church with the Jewish people. This is what the Catechism says: (CCC 839) "Those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways."

The relationship of the Church with the Jewish People. When she delves into her own mystery, the Church, the People of God in the New Covenant, discovers her link with the Jewish People, "the first to hear the Word of God."The Jewish faith, unlike other non-Christian religions, is already a response to God's revelation in the Old Covenant. To the Jews "belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ",---Rom 9:4-5 "for the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable."--Rom 11:29--

(CCC 840) And when one considers the future, God's People of the Old Covenant and the new People of God tend towards similar goals: expectation of the coming (or the return) of the Messiah. But one awaits the return of the Messiah who died and rose from the dead and is recognized as Lord and Son of God; the other awaits the coming of a Messiah, whose features remain hidden till the end of time; and the latter waiting is accompanied by the drama of not knowing or of misunderstanding Christ Jesus.