Saturday, September 11, 2004

Jesus, Trinity, Real Presence, & Celibacy

A Response to Jimmy Swaggert Ministries, Baton Rouge, Louisiana

Jesus Our Mediator

As you continue on page 16 of your letter, you make some serious oversimplifications. You state with the careful word "suggests" that Catholic tradition holds that prayer to Mary is more efficacious than the mediation between Christ and his Father (p. 16). You making a conflict where none exists. This is not only erroneous, it is heresy and no Catholic true to the Gospel believes it. Sometimes the affectionate term, "mediatrix" might be used, however, it cannot be defined in any way that would take away from the exclusive mediation of Christ to the Father on our behalf. Mary is very special to us, but she is not God. She loves us and we give her respect and honor as Christ's mother. If we are made into the adopted sons and daughters of God in regeneration and initiation, becoming new Christs, then she becomes our mother as well.

Collapse the Trinity?

As for the confusion of the Father with the Son, I have never heard of such a ridiculous thing. It must be a very localized "tendency" if at all. Catholic theology has always made the distinction that our prayer, worship, and service is to the Father, thru the Son, in the Holy Spirit. To collapse the Trinity is another heresy. It is unfortunate that poor instruction and deficient Scripture study should lead to such problems. It cannot be taken as representative of Catholicism. After all, in the denomination to which you once belonged, I recall a fellow minister of yours who was more interested in amusement parks and emotionalism than in solid study and sound doctrine.

Sacramental Real Presence

Although you will probably disagree with me no matter how I speak about the Eucharist; I must take exception to your simplification of this mystery (p. 16). You state that Catholics hold that the bread and wine become Christ's "physical" flesh and blood. Okay, we do believe that the risen body of Jesus is made present. However, I suspect that you mean "physical" in a crude and heretical fashion. The totality of Christ is made present-- his divinity and intact humanity-- however, if the species were indeed transformed into Christ's visible and tangible flesh and blood, we would be chewing on a man's flesh and gorging ourselves on his blood like cannibals. The teaching is that this is a "sacrament" wherein what is missing (the physical or empirical attributes of Christ) is substituted by the accidents (taste, touch, smell, appearance) of bread and wine from the community. The underlining substance or reality of the bread and wine is transformed and becomes Jesus Christ, sacramentally present. Although it looks and tastes like bread and wine, we see the truth about it with eyes of faith. When Jesus explained this coming living memorial to some of his listeners, a few found it too much for them and they left. In the Last Supper, the breaking of the bread on the road to Emmaus, the multiplication stories, and in other Scriptures, we find further supports for the Mass and for our appreciation of the Eucharist. Ancient Romans so misunderstood it that they actually accused the early Christians of cannibalism. Paul in one of his letters even narrates another tradition regarding the Last Supper, according to the form of liturgy which he had been taught to celebrate. The oldest testimony extent regarding the core of the Mass, the words of institution, are in Paul's first letter to the Corinthians "The Lord Jesus on the night in which he was betrayed took bread, and after he had given thanks, broke it, and said, 'This is my body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.' In the same way, after the supper, he took the cup, saying, 'This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me" (1 Cor. 11:23-27, written 57 AD). Similarly, the differences in the other versions of the words of institution are attributed by world class Scripture scholars to the fact that the evangelists used the liturgical forms customary in their own communities, forms which were similar and yet varied somewhat from place to place. This most ancient of beliefs regarding the Eucharist was never even questioned until the time of the Reformation. "This -- my body. This -- my blood." These words, closer to the original, since there was no "to be" verb in the language of origin, make the connection even closer. Christ would never leave his friends orphaned. In this living memorial of his Paschal Mystery he would nurture and feed his people in a very real and yet sacramental fashion, until he would come to take us all home.

Celibacy - Discipline, Not Doctrine

Your assertion that tradition decrees mandatory celibacy for priests is true, although this tradition is not as old as the previous one up through the eleventh entury, which made it optional. In the West, because of the growth of the monastic model and problems with scandal, the Church discerned that its priests could best and single-heartedly serve Christ if they remained celibate. However, as I said before, this is not constitutive doctrine but a discipline. Eastern Rite Catholics, also in union with Rome, are allowed in Europe to get married. There are married priests in the Catholic Church!

Catholic To The Core

It is on page 17 that I am tempted to forget that a few pages ago you said you love Catholics. You cannot treat us as if our faith is something extraneous to us. For the true faithful, the Church touches the deepest core of our identity. If you hate the Church, you hate many of us. I know that the presence of our Lord in the Church has always been a great source of strength and encouragement for me. You denounce Catholic traditions as anti-biblical and as an offense against God (p. 17). You further talk about Catholics burning people at the stake, by the "tens of thousands," as if it happened last Tuesday (p. 17). Not long ago? Who are you trying to kid? You know as well as I do that during those days, long ago, when religious officials tolerated the executions by the civil authorities of those who shook the accepted religious notions which were a part of the culture, that it was an unfortunate activity carried out by Protestants and Catholics alike. If you and yours were not involved, it was because "not long ago" your so-called (or former church) was not even in existence. Europe was divided under the maxim, whatever the prince, so too the rest of the kingdom. This was the bounty given to us all by the reformation. The reasoning for such punishments in those ancient days was that the person who caused spiritual death in others was seen as culpable as the one who enacted a physical murder.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home