Today's readings

I alway wonder how the "health and wealth" type of preachers would deal with today's Gospel?

Jesus' refusal to turn stones into bread flies right in the face of the whole "name it, claim it" philosophy. Man does not live on dough ($ or otherwise) but on every word that comes forth from the mouth of God.

Then there is the not putting the Lord, your God, to the test. Ironic that Satan quotes scripture here to justify his position. How easy it is to use a verse out of context to justify whatever we desire.

But the last temptation is the most difficult to harmonize with the popular feel good idea of being Christian means being a worldly success. "All these I shall give to you, if you will prostrate yourself and worship me.”

Worldly success can bear a high price.

It is also tied together nicely today with the juxtaposition of the fall of Adam versus the triumph of Jesus over the Tempter. Adam was in a beautiful garden surrounded by the best of foods. He failed to be obedient even with everything going in his favor. Yet Jesus had fasted for 40 day in a desert, surrounded by heat and barren lands. But when he was tempted, he drew his strength from scripture. Not with a phony proof text to get what he wanted, but with actual context to do the will of the Father.

Using the right lens

Marcellino D'Ambrosio offers a superb example of looking at the appearance of the Magi
through the right lens. As he puts it

If it is the right lens, it magnifies the text and allows us to get at its true meaning. If it is the wrong lens, we get a distorted image.

Are these camel-borne, gift bearing, three kings actually biblical? Well, using the narrow lens to read only the New Testament verses regarding the visit of the Magi, all that would seem... well un-biblical tradition.

But, step back and factor in the prophecies and Psalms, we get a more accurate picture.

It just so happens that the lens the Catholic tradition uses to read the story flows from Scripture itself — to be precise, it flows from the connection between holy words written hundreds of years apart. But despite the many years and different human authors, the texts were inspired by the same Divine Author, the Holy Spirit. In chapter 60 of Isaiah (Is 60:1-6), it is predicted that at a time of darkness, the glory of the Lord will shine over Jerusalem. The heavenly light will be a beacon to the pagan nations and even to their kings. Here we find mention of camels whose job it will be to bring the wealth of these nations, including frankincense and gold, to the city of the Lord. Psalm 72 agrees that far off kings will bring gifts to the Son of David.

So we can dispense with the fundamental error that comes from the narrow lens. Of course, there still is the issue of the names. Those came from a different source.

In the early Church, Epiphany was therefore second only to Easter vigil as the time to celebrate the sacrament of baptism. Blessed water from those baptisms were used to bless the dwellings of the faithful, and it became customary to write over the doorposts of blessed homes "C+B+M" meaning "Christ blesses this house (Christus bendicat mansionem). Since the three kings were also remembered at the same time, someone decided to give them names, and to use CBM as their initials — Caspar, Balthasar, and Melchior. The names stuck.

Which reminds me. We forgot to do that yesterday.

Yummy cow

Been a while since I posted anything worthy of irritating the PETA folk. But today's first reading at Mass reminded me of how blessed we are to have the "fatted calf" on our menu. We get our beef from my parents ranch, and mmmm, this one is really good.

Just hearing this verse in Mass reminded me to thank God for our blessings.

He ran to the herd, picked out a tender, choice steer,
and gave it to a servant, who quickly prepared it.

Eating dirt

I have been listening to Pope Benedict's book, Jesus of Nazareth on audio book available from Audible.com. They have a special to try them for 14 days. I got my one book, but didn't think it was worth the try so I canceled. Then they offered a one year membership for $10 and another free book. So I jumped at that and got this book.

The reader of Jesus of Nazareth is quite good. And this just in, the Pope knows a little bit about the Bible. In fact he comes across as rather scholarly.

One part hit me as I was listening. I bookmarked the spot and turned off the reading so I could think about it further. Benedict is talking about the temptations of Jesus, in particular the first temptation to turn stones into bread. He goes off into why wouldn't God just solve world hunger if He is such a good and merciful God. Why wouldn't He just continue providing manna for his people? Good question and one often leveled at Christians and specifically his Church.

In his answer to the question, he quotes Alfred Delp, "Bread is important, freedom is more important, but most important of all is unbroken fidelity and faithful adoration."

This really stirred my mind. And if I can put all my thoughts together, may be an article of considerable length sometime. I pondered as I was driving and hopefully can bring it all back together.

Today though, I ask, why is freedom more important than bread? Without the proper order as Pope Benedict relates, the result is not justice, but ruin. God cannot be set aside. But in my thoughts, why ruin? Why couldn't God provide for all our needs? The short answer is, because of our human nature.

The longer answer is freedom would be sacrificed. Our freedom to choose right is what makes us, how should I say it, worthy of God's love. Not worthy as in He owes us the love, but worthy as in worth loving to the extent of dying for us. If we could not choose, what value would our obedience be? If someone, some entity, provided all our food, would we not become dependent on them? Would not we become virtually slaves? This is evident in the U.S. foreign aid policies. To receive aid, countries must comply with our demands. And then when they are dependent and the demands become unacceptable, are they free to choose? Hardly.

This doesn't even touch on the idea whether we would be satisfied with what is provided. It didn't take the Israelites long to grumble about free food every day. "Fresh bread is great, but what about some chicken?"

So as I develop more of this, I will keep you posted.

Glad I wasn't a lector this Sunday

Not being a Bible Christian, yes that is sarcasm, I didn't notice the omission from the Second Reading last Sunday. But as Carson Webber points out, Omissions Can Be Deadly via The Curt Jester

I often find it amusing to see how the readings are affected by the regular omissions made by those who prepare the Biblical texts for the liturgy, but this instance is even a bit scary!

Bible Christians

Shellie at Profound Gratitude comments on the vitriol of some anti-Catholics.
John MacArthur for example takes on the Mass so as to "save" us heathens.

Then the pageant really gets going. It takes a lot of training and you’ll understand why, okay?

This is what happens. The priest then makes the sign of the cross sixteen times in his pageant. I’m not going through it step-by-step, I’m going to sum it up. He has to make the sign of the cross sixteen times.

He has to turn toward the congregation six times, lift his eyes to heaven eleven times, kiss the altar eight times, fold his hands four times, strike his breasts ten times, bow his head 21 times, genuflect eight times, bow his shoulder seven times, bless the altar with the sign of the cross 30 times, lay his hands flat on the altar 29 times, pray secretly eleven times, pray aloud 13 times, take the bread and wine and turn it into the body and blood of Christ, cover and uncover the chalice ten times, go to and fro 20 times and in addition perform numerous other acts.

What in the world is he doing? All this extended pageant is designed, writes Betner [sic], to reenact the experience of Christ from the Last Supper in the Upper Room through the agony in the Garden, through the betrayal, through the trial, through the crucifixion, through His death, burial, resurrection and ascension.

That’s why all that motions going on, some kind of dramatization. His bowings and genuflections are imitations of Christ in His agony and suffering and if the priest forgets one element of the drama, he commits a sin, technically invalidates the Mass.So you’ve got to be trained to do this. And you’ve got to have a good memory. Who could count all those? What you do is you go through it, it’s like a routine until you get it down.

To which I would reply? Being you are well versed in the Bible, I have a question. Does the Bible lead us to salvation? If I were to immerse myself in the Bible, learning parts of it by heart, to ponder the Old and New Testament and listen to well versed preachers break open the Word of God; would that be a sign of a good Christian?

How about if I were to praise God as the angels do in the Bible, to pray as Jesus prayed? Would that qualify as good Christianity?

Then I would ask, do you realize that through the "pageantry" of the Mass, going only on Sundays, we would hear about 60% of the Bible over the course of 3 years? Daily communicants can hear over 80% over that same time. And do you know that most of the prayers we sing or recited come from the New Testament?

Have you heard of the Holy, Holy, Holy; it is found in Revelations. The "Lord, I am not worthy to receive you..." is direct from the Bible. The "Hosanna" also. Oh and the incense, where is that found repeatedly in the New Testament?

Here is a challenge. Read Revelations several times. Then go to a Mass and see how many prayers and rituals come straight out of Revelations.

As far as counting each action, some people must have too much time on their hands or their own faith must be shallow to nitpick such as this. Where in the Bible are we forbidden to "lift our eyes to heaven" when we pray? Or bow our heads, strike our breast, or to even "pray secretly". Going "to and fro"? Surely you protest too much.

Thoughts on the ICEL translation

Puff and Bear-i-tone over at the Spirit's Sword have put in some heavy lifting regarding the ICEL translations.

The Spirit's Sword

Communion
"Behold the Lamb of God, behold him who takes away the sins of the world. Blessed are those called to the banquet of the Lamb." "Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed."
- Very reminiscent of what people say in the Pian mass, but in Latin. "Domine, non sum dignus ut intres sub tectum meum; sed tantum dic verbo et sanabitur anima mea." (It was never changed in Latin. -Bear note.)

A few gentlemen and I were discussing this on Easter. One commented that he wasn't in favor of the changes to this prayer. He preferred the version I have heard (and what our family recites)

Lord, I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed.

He commented, and I sort of agree, that the new "under my roof" sounds a bit like a revisionist or "spirit of Vatican II" concept. But a fellow Maccabean Warrior pointed out that it was meant to flow right out of the Bible, where the Roman soldier asks that Jesus not defile himself by entering a gentile house, but to merely speak the word.
It made me think of how a Protestant should be able to recognize much of the Mass simply from his knowledge of the Bible.

And as Bear notes, it also follows the Latin that has not changed.

Keep coming home

Mark Shea points out someone who proclaims to have the Truth. She asks us Catholics, Can you handle the truth?

Mr. Truth Teller meets Mr. Duped

Truth Teller was walking down the street, and somehow gets into a conversation with a seemingly nice person. The topic of eternal salvation comes up. This seemingly nice person claims to be a fellow believer, yet he starts describing rituals and traditions that are not in the Bible, but are the opposite of what the Bible says in many places.

Truth Teller tries to alert this duped person to the fact that mere man is duping him, and shows him from the Bible what the truth is. Mr. Duped takes offence.

“How dare you be so hateful of me? You hater! You are putting down my religion, you horrible person you!”

Who’s the real hater here? Truth Teller, who is trying to help Mr. Duped? No. Truth Teller is warning Mr. Duped, out of LOVE. But apparently Mr. Duped hates it. :-(

If you’re a Roman Catholic, you may very well be duped. I’m going to warn you about it, and you can call me all the names you wish, but I’m going to shout out the truth anyhow.

One commentor rightly pointed out some misunderstandings in your notion of infallibility. But there is another point I must draw your attention too.

You refer often to the teaching of God versus the teaching of man. Meaning you find the teaching of God in the Bible while the Catholic Church follows the teaching of man.

Then I ask, how do you know the Bible is true? And where did you get it from? The KJV was sanctioned by King James (a man), was it not? And how do you know the Bible has been handed onto you without error? I assume no one is going to claim Jesus handed them their Bible personally.

Some institution of 'man' has preserved that Bible and translated it into the tongue of the people for 1500 years before another MAN came along and decided he knew better than history and the Holy Spirit guided Church.

But when some of the comments here point out that they disagree with some other Protestants and the different sect such as Mormons, then you must stop to think, who is following the tradition of man? And where is the Truth?

Sure, the Church has many warts. God chose to use man to save his people from sin. The big difference is that Jesus did not have sin. All of us, Catholic and otherwise are subject to sin. Hence we fall short.

But before you dismiss the "rituals" of the Catholic Church, read Revelations and then stop by a Mass sometime. You will see prayers right out of Revelations. The Holy, Holy, Holy for example. And on Sunday Mass, you will hear 4 readings from the Bible! And these readings are picked from the Old Testament, Psalms, Epistles and Gospel. And guess what, they are chosen because they relate.

That is the wonder of the Catholic Church. It has been around for 2000 years protecting the Bible, the faith and the teachings of the Apostles.

Divine connections

A rather profound revelation that Shellie brings up here.

Abide in Me

What a beautiful connection I’d not seen before, how do we abide in Him?

Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in Me. John 15:4 NKJV

He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. John 6:56 NKJV

I am doing the "Understanding the Scriptures" Bible study and these type of connection through the scripture keep coming up. I love learning about how the Old and New Testament are intertwined. I would share some of the profound items, but I would recommend listening to the podcast instead.

Mininstry of reconciliation

A side note in today's Epistle from 2 Cor 5:17-21

And all this is from God,
who has reconciled us to himself through Christ
and given us the ministry of reconciliation.
namely, God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ,
not counting their trespasses against them
and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation.
So we are ambassadors for Christ,
as if God were appealing through us.
We implore you on behalf of Christ,
be reconciled to God.
For our sake he made him to be sin who did not know sin,
so that we might become the righteousness of God in him.

Consider who the "we" refers to in those two lines. Given the "we implore you", I would say this could be St. Paul and the other Apostles. There is some aspects of the "Ministry of Reconciliation" in this reading. It isn't a proof text that can be taken out of context and tortured to say whatever we want, but in light of Sacrament of Reconciliation, we see that the Apostles (and the bishops in their place) are ambassadors for Christ just as they are in the confessional.

The old has passed away

All the readings tied together well today.

On that same day after the Passover,
on which they ate of the produce of the land, the manna ceased.
No longer was there manna for the Israelites,
who that year ate of the yield of the land of Canaan.

That was the end of the wandering. No longer did they have to rely on manna for they had reached the promised land. Considering how this ties to the promised land being a type (as in typos) of heaven and also a type of the era of the Church after Jesus died and rose again.

Whoever is in Christ is a new creation:
the old things have passed away;
behold, new things have come.

So after the death and resurrection, we were no longer wandering and waiting for the Messiah. And since Jesus said he was the living bread sent from heaven and unlike those who ate the manna and died, those who would eat his flesh and drink his blood would have eternal life. So no longer was their a need for the passover or of sacrificial lambs, as they were only types of the Christ. And not that the anti-type had fulfilled them, they were to pass away. And interestingly it was on Passover that the manna stopped.

And for the Gospel, we have the prodigal son. The imagery of the merciful Father accompanies the two sons who in some ways represent Jesus. Jesus is like the one who never left his father and always did as he was asked. Yet like the disobedient son, he became sin ( For our sake he made him to be sin who did not know sin. 2 Cor 5:21) and died (as the son's father thought he had.)

So Jesus shows us after the death of the Son, the merciful Father will welcome repentant sinners back to himself. For those who are in Christ, the old image of the Father being so far removed as to be unapproachable has passed away. We now have a Father that sees us as washed in the blood of Christ.

How can we be sure

As in Did Tolkien Write The Lord of the Rings? After a twisted trail through Locusts & Honey and Vox Popoli, I found the source to be Mark Shea.

The Lord of the Rings: A Source-Criticism Analysis

Experts in source-criticism now know that The Lord of the Rings is a redaction of sources ranging from the Red Book of Westmarch (W) to Elvish Chronicles (E) to Gondorian records (G) to orally transmitted tales of the Rohirrim (R). The conflicting ethnic, social and religious groups which preserved these stories all had their own agendas, as did the "Tolkien" (T) and "Peter Jackson" (PJ) redactors, who are often in conflict with each other as well but whose conflicting accounts of the same events reveals a great deal about the political and religious situations which helped to form our popular notions about Middle Earth and the so-called "War of the Ring.". Into this mix are also thrown a great deal of folk materials about a supposed magic "ring" and some obscure figures named "Frodo" and "Sam". In all likelihood, these latter figures are totems meant to personify the popularity of Aragorn with the rural classes.

Because The Lord of the Rings is a composite of sources, we may be quite certain that "Tolkien" (if he ever existed) did not "write" this work in the conventional sense, but that it was assembled over a long period of time by someone else of the same name. We know this because a work of the range, depth, and detail of The Lord of the Rings is far beyond the capacity of any modern expert in source-criticism to ever imagine creating themselves.

The tension between source materials and the various redactors is evident in several cases. T is heavily dependent upon Gondorian records and clearly elevates the claims of the Aragorn monarchy over the House of Denethor. From this it is obvious that the real "War of the Ring" was a dynastic struggle between these two clans for supremacy in Gondor. The G source, which plays such a prominent role in the T-redacted account of Aragorn, is significantly downplayed by the PJ redactor in favor of E versions. In the T account, Aragorn is portrayed as a stainless saint, utterly sure of his claims to the throne and so self-possessed that he never doubts for a moment his right to seize power. Likewise, in the T account, the Rohirrim are conveniently portrayed as willing allies and vassals to the Aragorn monarchy, living in perfect harmony with the Master Race of Numenoreans who rule Gondor.

...

Source

I like Vox Popoli's synopsis.

This is simply beautiful; a nearly perfect taunt. I don't know if there's ever been anything so completely and utterly ridiculous as the circular argument that insists parts of the Bible are unreliable because they conflict with Q. Now, the document Q does not exist, but is theorized to perhaps have existed, and is therefore considered to be more reliable than documents we know for certain to exist and can actually examine.

Filtering out

Zenit News Agency - The World Seen From Rome

Homosexuality in the Bible Interview With Authors of Exegetical Work
ROME, FEB. 12, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Three exegetes have published a new book in which they conclude that the Bible clearly teaches homosexual practices are wrong.