Category Archives: apologetics

When Did Christians First Call Themselves “Catholic”?

Ignatius.jpgOne of the real joys of spending time reading and studying the writings of the earliest Christians (aka the Early Church Fathers) is gaining a bit of insight into what life was like those who professed to be Christian.

One of the real surprises (at least to me) was how early the term “Catholic” came to be used to refer to all Christians.

How early? How about the year 107 … maybe even earlier!

From the Letter to the Smyrnaeans by St. Ignatius of Antioch:

Wherever the bishop appears, there let the people be; as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful to baptize or give communion without the consent of the bishop. On the other hand, whatever has his approval is pleasing to God. Thus, whatever is done will be safe and valid.

Note that St. Ignatius is a real hero of the early Church – both a bishop and a martyr at the hands of the Romans, he left an awesome written legacy of letters to local churches … primarily encouragement as he marched to his martyrdom.

The current wiki article presents a good overview of the life of St. Ignatius of Antioch. From that article comes this paragraph:

It is from the word katholikos that the word “catholic” comes. When Ignatius wrote the Letter to the Smyrnaeans in about the year 107 and used the word “catholic”, he used it as if it were a word already in use to describe the Church. This has led many scholars to conclude that the appellation “Catholic Church” with its ecclesial connotation may have been in use as early as the last quarter of the first century.

While this may seem like a small point, I think it’s rather significant – the sense of universality, of all Christians belonging to the church that they themselves called katholikos … this gives us some real insight into what Christians thought important.

An Opposing View
Notice it is in direct contrast to the probably well-intentioned, but definitely historically inaccurate perspective of those who oppose the reality of the one Church founded by Jesus Christ. Typical of this perspective is a recent post by Thomas H., who writes from a Baptist perspective:

The application of the word “catholic” was not used in reference to all supposed Christians until the Council of Trent. This word was used by catholics to beat over the heads of non catholics in the sence of saying you do not belong to the true church. This resulted in the murder of hundreds of thousands of Christians who were not Roman Catholics by the emissaries of Rome.

I think you get the idea … the only real problem with all that is it doesn’t square with the historical record on any level, starting with the word catholic.

The Historical Reality
I can empathize with folks like Thomas – when you have spent your whole life being told bits and pieces of what happened, along with stuff that’s simply not true by folks who spent their lives in the same circumstances, it must be hard to be open to the reality that contradicts what you believe.

Yet, the historical record is clear, and provides an eloquent testimony to the truth … from its earliest days the Church understood that unity and universality were basic marks of the Church founded by Jesus Christ.

It began calling itself katholikos around the end of the first century, at most a few years after the death of the last apostle (John). It did not begin with the Council of Trent (late 16th century – nearly 1500 years later) or any other time. In fact, by the time the canon of Scripture – what we call the Bible – was settled Christians had been calling themselves Catholics for almost 300 years … longer than the United States has even been a country!

That Church remains Catholic to this day, and will remain so until the end of time (Matthew 16:18+).

An Invitation
If this does not seem right to you, please investigate on your own. Look into the historical record – pagan, Jewish, or Christian – and see what evidence supports each side. What you’ll find is exactly what the Church has always understood … it is katholikos, and has been so from the beginning.

The writings of the Early Church Fathers are widely available, with treatments ranging from the easily-accessible to the more in-depth, scholarly works. A good place to start for most folks is Four Witnesses by Rod Bennett – a very readable account, well-grounded in current scholarship,

A Greater Freedom – Sex and Love for Real

Last week I posted on the 40th anniversary of Humanae Vitae, looking at the aftermath and the effects on the individuals, families, the Church, and society as a whole. While not explaining the teachings per se, that post inferred from the predicted effects (which were seen as inevitable consequences should contraception be widely adopted, which was the case) that Humanae Vitae was clearly right.

One response (read it here) that I received took fundamental exception to both that conclusion and Humanae Vitae itself. This is a response to those comments.

I need to start by point out that what you oppose is not the Church’s teaching, plain and simple. Even more to the point, the reasoning that you attribute to the Catholic Church is not part of the Church’s thinking.

It is true that what you oppose is commonly attributed to the Church, yet it remains not so – perhaps it would be better labeled as common misperception.

Bear with me a moment, and I will try to offer some things up for you to consider, clarify what the Church does in fact, teach and why, and perhaps raise some questions for you to ponder. By necessity this will be the barest of overviews, so it is my sincere hope that you will find this intriguing enough to investigate further. Therefore, I will finish with a few resources for going deeper.

Foundations of Teaching
What the Church proposes for our belief in sexuality (of which the teachings on contraception are only a small, but important part) are precisely intended to bring us closer to the one who made us, to conform us more closely to Him, to enable us to understand and experience real joy.

In short, to teach us how to love.

On the other hand, what the world proposes for our belief about sexuality is entirely centered on ourselves – how does my partner make me feel, how am I most fulfilled, what will make my life better … this isn’t really authentic sexuality at all, but simply a shallow counterfeit, a caricature of what could be. It most definitely does not lead to genuine love … and the world is relentless.

Christ teaches us another way. In fact, His entire life teaches us that love is truly much more about sacrifice, self-donation, about losing our self, even losing our very lives … and as we know, that very disregard for ourselves is precisely the center in which we find who we really are, where God returns everything we could have been and far, far more.

The contrast could not be more fundamental.

Every parent knows this, of course, though not all see the gift. Admittedly, it’s hard to to truly appreciate our “school of love” while trudging down the hall in the wee hours with no sleep, a screaming baby or two in tow, and barf running down our clothes. Or perhaps when our tools or favorite book is lost or damaged, and not by our hands. Or yet again when when we receive some large medical bills even while we have bills – even the most basic ones – that remain unpaid.

Yet in each of these – and so many more, the list is nearly endless – we are presented with a chance to turn away from ourselves, and to turn toward others. Turn away from ourselves, and towards God. To learn how life is truly designed to be.

In fact, it is in just this sort of mutual self-donation, in marriage as a continual mutual gift of self, that we are truly gifted with love.

A Central Role
Where then, does our sexuality fit in?

 jp21878-1-photo.jpg

As Christopher West puts it in The Good News About Sex and Marriage,

“Love one another as I have loved you” (John 15:12). These words of Christ sum up the meaning of life and the meaning of human sexuality. At its core, sexual morality is about expressing God’s love through our bodies. This is why Pope John Paul II can say that if we live according to the truth of our sexuality, we fulfill the very meaning of our being and existence.

Ponder that a moment, and see if it sounds repressive.

West goes on to say

Sex, then, is by no means a peripheral issue. In fact, Pope John Paul II says the call to “nuptial love” revealed through our sexuality is “the fundamental element of human existence in the world” … He even insists that we can’t understand Christianity if we don’t understand the truth and meaning of our sexuality.

Marriage as a Revelation About God
God is, in Himself, a family. The Father makes an eternal gift of himself to the Son, as does the Son to the Father. The love between them is is so profound that it is an entirely new person, the Holy Spirit … and this is the pattern for our families.

Again from West

This is what we embody as male and female. Sex is so beautiful, so wonderful, so glorious, that it’s meant to express God’s free, total, faithful, and fruitful love.

In our marriages we image the reality of God, in our marriage embrace we reaffirm our marriage vows. Not just in words, but in deed … sealing our mental and spiritual commitments with out physical bodies.

In that embrace, fully understanding where we are and what we do, we can express our total and complete gift of self to our spouse. We learn how to love.

I think that if you reflect on this a bit, perhaps you will begin to see why the Church teaches that separating the physical act from the possibility of life is, by definition, a non-starter. Shorn of meaning, our actions descend from their intended place, and we drift farther from our intended dignity.

Or to put it another way, the very possibility of life is so inexorably intertwined in the very meaning of marriage, that we will choose a certain poverty of existence to separate the marital embrace from that possibility.

Pleasure and Meaning
Though lacking this transcendant meaning, it is still safe to say that a really good meal is likewise enjoyable. Of course I’m not making relative comparisons here – I’m simply observing that eating a good meal does result in pleasure.

The pleasure itself is a great thing, certainly a gift from God … and most Christians thank God for the provisions of each meal beforehand.

Of course at least part of that thanksgiving comes from the simple fact that we need nutrition, and the meal will satisfy those needs (at least for the moment!). So in addition to being pleasurable, eating food has an intended purpose.

What then, do we say happens when somebody purposefully throws up after eating? Obviously it is a disorder … bullimia. A person who purposely separates the act of eating from the intended purpose of consuming food has a problem. It doesn’t matter that they get more and more pleasure from eating more and more food … what matters is that they regain balance, learn to connect the act of eating with its intended biological purpose.

Of course the pleasure itself was good, so far as it went. But it wasn’t the ultimate meaning. Besides, anyone who has struggled with an eating disorder (and here I speak from my own experience) will also tell you that the pleasure itself diminishes, that it takes on a hollow quality when separated from it’s natural place.

In Meaning Comes Fulfillment
Notice that I am not saying that each time a married couple has sex it must result in a pregnancy – that would be absurd. I am also not saying that couples that contracept either get no pleasure nor benefit in their relationship in any way. What I am saying is the fullest richness of married life will come when our sexual lives are lived as intended by the one who made us, who knows us better than we know ourselves … and that means being open to the possibility of life, allowing God to make the final decision.

That is why the Church forbids all contraception – both artificial and otherwise. It has always done so (not just 40 years ago … I discussed that in several places in the last post), and will always do so. All Humanae Vitae did was acknowledge that the Church did not have the authority to rule differently in this area – that it had to continue to proclaim what was always understood to be true.

Truth simply cannot be subject to a vote.

In fact, when asked years later to reflect on each of his encyclicals (teaching documents, Pope Paul VI is reported to have spent five or ten minutes for each encyclical excitedly recounting what was on his mind, what points he was trying to convey, what needs of the Church he was trying to address, and so forth.

Yet when he got to Humanae Vitae, he grew quiet and simply said “I did not betray the truth”.

Natural Family Planning
With regards to Natural Family Planning (here, here and elsewhere), the difference is clear – NFP simply is not contraception. That is, couples who use NFP are not separating the meaning of the sexual act from the act itself … rather, they are acknowledging that meaning and living it in their very lives. Choosing to refrain from sex at any particular time is just not the same thing as changing the sexual act itself … these are no more alike than skipping a meal is the same thing as gorging and barfing.

There are tons of benefits and practical aspects to NFP – and yes, there can certainly be some frustrations as well – but that is really a discussion for another day.

The Authority of the Church
So where does the Church fit into all this? Simple – the Catholic Church has always understood (see Matthew 16:18+ and more), and faithful Catholics acknowedge and appreciate, that the Church has the responsibility to represent Jesus here on earth, to proclaim the Good News till the end of time, to faithfully teach what is true and right (whether or not it is fashionable or easy to accept), to guide Christians in their journeys towards God.

This does not mean that members and leaders of the Church have not sinned and strayed far from the truth – this is a sad reality of our battle with sin – but it does mean that Catholics can trust the Church to be right on matters of faith and morals.

While it is true that many people who call themselves Catholic dissent from teachings of the Church, that does not make the teachings wrong. In fact, something that I heard a few years back has been a big help to me in this area.

Clearly for all of us there are times when it may be difficult to understand or accept particular teachings – after all, we are all still on our journeys towards God. A more profitable approach to teachings that don’t yet make sense is to first accept them as true, then pray for understanding. That understanding will inevitably follow, and this approach has a big added benefit – we learn to trust God, then are drawn closer to truth, and therefore to God Himself. This is a direct result of trusting God to do as he says … “seek and you will find”.

Faith and Science
Faith is never in opposition to honest science – it can’t be, as they both reveal aspects of truth, and truth can never in opposition to itself. Faith reveals aspects of spiritual realities, and science reveals aspects of the physical world. Not only can these go hand in hand, the truth is they must go hand in hand. It is when they don’t that the trouble begins.

Mendel.jpg

Keep in mind that science can tell us how something works, or what is involved in making something happen. What it cannot tell us is why something happens, or whether we should take a particular action or not – that is, whether it is moral and just. That is the domain of faith.

The Church has always understood this to be true – that is why the father of modern chemistry is St. Albert the Great, why Catholic priests largely developed the scientific method, and much, much more. For that matter, the man who discovered genetics – Gregor Mendel – was a Catholic priest.

This is why the Church encourages the advancement of science, and reveres great scientific and engineering accomplishments … and will continue to oppose those that contravene spiritual realities. You might find it interesting to note that in Humanae Vitae itself Pope Paul VI contained an appeal to scientists to apply their skills and talents into this area, that we might benefit from the knowledge gained.

A Few Parting Thoughts
In your last comments you stated that “there are plenty of dogmatic church teachings that create a repressive attitude about sex and I think that this is one of them”. I would hope that if you reflect on what the Church actually teaches about sexuality (of which this is the very briefest of introductions) that you will see that far from being repressive, what the Church teaches enables us to understand and participate in the real meaning of sexuality, and in doing so to learn how to live truly free.

After all, what greater freedom can there be than to live as God intends us?

Places to Look for More
Early in his pontificate Pope John Paul II developed what came to be known as the “Theology of the Body” … a fantastic set of teachings that show how God reveals Himself through our physical bodies.

Christopher West has a very good apostolate dedicated to spreading these teachings in popular forms and language. Here are some select resources:

Christopher West also has a number of good talks on video and audio.

Tim Staples – The Passover Connection

How could Jesus have been any more plain in declaring the Eucharist is, in fact, Himself?

Historically (the early church fathers) clearly taught the Real Presence.

The Sacrificial Nature of the Mass
Pope Leo the GreatLeo the Great.jpg produced the Tome of Leo, the greatest Christological work ever produced in the Church.

The Lutherans accept the Real Presence, but they deny the sacrificial nature of the Mass.

However, the Church understands the Mass as the one sacrifice of the Mass represented to us in our time, in our space.

If you want to receive the Eucharist well, you must kneel with Mary at the foot of the cross. – St. Padre Pio.

Any spirituality that attempts to bypass the Crucifixion to get to the Resurrection, is a sign of the demonic. – Bishop Fulton Sheen (reference to Matthew 16:21-23)

This is why we must strive for holiness daily … no exceptions whatsoever.

In the holy sacrifice of the Mass we experience not only the real presence of our Lord, but his passion. Then it becomes our passion, we experience what we see and learn, and that powers our transformation, or transformation, or increase in holiness.

Exodus 12 (where the Lord proscribes the original Passover) is the antecedent to the Mass. Note that it was the father who took charge in preparing the Passover.

The husband is the head of the family, and holds the chief place in authority. The wife is the heart of the family, and holds the chief place in love. – Pope Leo XIII, Arcanum Divinae.

We (men) need to take headship in this battle against evil. For example, check out Catechism 2354 we as men have allowed this to happen.

Exodus 12:14, This day shall be a memorial feast for you, which all your generations shall celebrate with pilgrimage to the LORD, as a perpetual institution. Exodus 12:26 When your children ask you, ‘What does this rite of yours mean?’ you shall reply, ‘This is the Passover sacrifice of the LORD, who passed over the houses of the Israelites in Egypt; when he struck down the Egyptians, he spared our houses.‘”

Check it out: in perpetuity, and absolute reality. This is a type of the Mass.

While we are celebrating Mass, people outside are dying. THIS IS EXACTLY LIKE THE ORIGINAL PASSOVER.

THIS IS WHY WE MUST EVANGELIZE.

The Ordinary Path to Holiness
Sacraments are the ordinary means of our sanctification – that is, how we become holy.

Mark 14 we have the passover connection. Check out Matthew 14:22-26. THIS IS THE MASS.

Almost every scripture scholar now understands that this is a precise fulfillment of the Passover liturgy.

For centuries and centuries, Moms would get the Passover kicked off by lighting a candle – this is a type of Mary, whose assent is what kicked off the whole Incarnation, which enables the Crucifixion, the Resurrection, and of course the Eucharist.

Check out B16′s Holy Thursday homily from 2007.

The Fourth Cup
The Passover is not over at the end of the first day. It continues for another seven days, and is then re-enacted every year. Again, a type of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

The fourth cup of this original Passover is actually the Crucifixion, beginning with his discourse in Matthew 14:32. As in Hebrews 5:7. He experienced the pain of all our sins for all time at that moment … he became joined to us and our sin to such an extent that he could that he could plead with the Father, “if this be possible let this cup pass, but not my will but your will be done”.

In this Jesus became perfected – through his suffering. Perfected in the sense that he transcended the limits of his humanity, and exploded the grace of the Father throughout the world, through all time and space.

This empowered him to go to the cross, where he prays and fulfills the fourth cup.

We are now in the seven days of unleavened bread … the un-bloody days of sacrifice. At Mass we receive the third cup, the cup of blessing. But since we are in the seven un-bloody days of Passover, each Mass is still a sacrifice, albeit un-bloody.

The fourth cup is at the hour of our death – viaticum – the last sacrament in our lives. We consummate this life in preparation for the next.


Hector Molina and the Office of the New Evangelization

speaker_hector_200.jpg

Hector Molina (the new director of the Office of the New Evangelization in St. Louis, an awesome new effort by Arch. Burke) gave his energetic challenge to become evangelists, all of us. Check this out:

The disciple of Christ must not only keep the faith and live on it, but also profess it, confidently bear witness to it, and spread it: “All however must be prepared to confess Christ before men and to follow him along the way of the Cross, amidst the persecutions which the Church never lacks.”Service of and witness to the faith are necessary for salvation: “So every one who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven; but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven.”

Where do you think this comes from? Probably a surprise answer: this is from the Catechism of the Catholic Church! (paragraph 1816). The reality is that this is only a surprise because so few Catholics actually live it … our bad. My bad.

Actually, this leads to the best joke of the morning -

Q. What happens when you cross a Jehovah’s Witness with a Catholic?

A. Someone who knocks on your door and has nothing to say.

But this is changing, and entirely by the grace of God will continue to change.

One final thought – the greek word for power is dunamas, where we get the word dynamite from. We are called to live dunamas power … allowing God to fundamentally change the world. And it’s happening!

Tim Staples: First Talk

When he encountered Sgt. Matt Dula, found out that he was Catholic, he started with the “call no man father” and went in very aggressively (you can pretty much tell this from his personality … let’s charitably say that he is not shy!).

Sgt. Dula’s response was “Amen, I believe that just as it’s written. But remember that there’s more than one verse in the Bible …”. Where he was going was that all scripture must be read and understood in the analogy of the faith (the whole of the faith).

Context is everything. Used the example of “put the kitty on the table”.

Sgt. Dula came back with Eph 6:1-3, “Honor your father and mother”. How did that happen. Was God confused?”.

Oops!

Then came back with Luke 16:24 “Father Abraham”. Then Acts 7:1-2. 1 Corinthians 4:14-15.

What bugged Tim the most was that Dula would always take Staple’s Bible out of his hands and beat him with it.

Then Dula finished Eph 3:14 … First time that Staple’s knew that a Catholic was right. This verse says “give thanks to the Father, from whom all fatherhood comes. A play on words … patera / patria. Kind of like Matthew 16:18?

Good fatherhood participates in the Fatherhood of God, bad fatherhood usurps the Fatherhood of God.

Bingo.

Staples never let Dula know that he’d made a point. He started firehosing with every other objection that he could think of.

Well that set him on a path of reading the Catechism of Trent and the Early Church Fathers.

At Jimmy Swaggart Bible College he ended up defending the Catholic Church, to the point where the college brought in Andrés Carrodeguas, a former Catholic priest and faculty member to straighten him out. One big bogus point that gets thrown at Catholics all the time: The Council of Valencia in 1229 approved Pelagianism … didn’t happen, could never have happened because Valencia was Moorish at that time.

275px-Virgen_de_guadalupe2.jpg

Staples left that meeting knowing that he wasn’t Protestant any more, but he most definitely didn’t want to become Catholic. He struggled in this no-man’s land for some time, until in desperation one night he asked Mary for her help … and what sounds like basically a mystical moment he knew that he knew that he knew.

The faith had travelled from his head to his heart, and he was on his way home.

Awesome.

Tim Staples Live in St. Louis

Staples_Tim.jpg

Today Carol & I are attending a mini-Lenten “retreat” (really a set of four talks) by Tim Staples, Catholic apologist who came home from Pentacostalism (he was an Assembly of God youth minister).

I’ll post a couple of times throughout the talks.

Tim has one of the funniest names for his conversion story, Jimmy Swaggart Made Me Catholic . How awesome is that?

Funny first line … talking about how East Timor went from 90% Muslim to majority Catholic, he said that “… you don’t hear that on the Clinton News Network … oops, I meant CNN”.

Now there’s hundreds of thousands of converts in Indonesia … remember that’s where the penalty for conversion is death. DEATH.

This first talk is starting off great!

Since 1999 there have been more than 1,000 Protestant pastors coming into the church, signed Christological accords with the Assyrian Church and the former Nestorians (one of the earliest heresies), and so very much more.

More as the day progresses …