Is Easter a pagan holiday?

Is Easter a pagan holiday?

Full Question

A publication I read claims Easter has its roots in a pagan holiday and rituals and as such ought not to be observed by Christians. Colored eggs were used in rituals associated with a pagan god. If this is true, shouldn't we stop calling the day we celebrate Christ's Resurrection Easter and stop hunting eggs on that day?

Answered by:  Catholic Answers Staff

No, because whatever it meant for ancient pagans, for Christians Easter is the celebration of Christ’s Resurrection. The fact that when it was first celebrated the feast of the Resurrection coincided with pagan celebrations doesn’t mean it was derived from them. The Jewish Passover (on which Christ was crucified) also coincided with such celebrations, yet this didn’t mean it was pagan.

As for Easter eggs, there’s nothing wrong with painting or hunting them on Easter--provided the real meaning of the day isn’t lost. As with the days of the week (the names of which are of pagan origin), any peculiarly pagan significance attached to Easter eggs was forgotten centuries ago.

Has the magisterium only definitively interpreted five or six passages of Scripture?

Has the magisterium only definitively interpreted five or six passages of Scripture?

Full Question

A Catholic Bible scholar says that at best the Church has defined the interpretation of five or six passages of Scripture, perhaps not even that. If this is so, what's the big deal about Catholics having a magisterium to interpret the Bible? Outside of the interpretation of these six verses or so, what use is it?

Answered by:  Catholic Answers Staff

The magisterium’s usefulness with respect to interpreting Scripture isn’t based on how many definitive interpretations of individual biblical texts it has rendered. Anytime the Church rejects a heresy or defines a doctrine, it’s interpreting the biblical message, even if the sense of no particular passage is defined.

For example, the Jehovah’s Witnesses interpretation of John 1:1, Colossians 1:15, and Revelation 3:14 (that Jesus is a mere creature and not God himself) was ruled out by the Catholic Church when it defined the divinity of Christ and existence of the Trinity (at the Councils of Nicaea and Constantinople in the fourth century). This remains so despite the lack of an ex cathedra definition by a pope or a conciliar decree precisely defining the sense of each of these passages. The Church has the power to teach infallibly the overall, doctrinal sense of biblical revelation as well as to interpret particular verses.

Religion is irrational, right?

Religion is irrational, right?

Full Question

There's no way you're going to get me to buy Christianity. I'm a rationalist. Religion is irrational because it claims there's a reality beyond reason. It's based on blind faith.

Answered by:  Catholic Answers Staff

You may call yourself a rationalist, but that doesn't make the positions you espouse reasonable. In fact, for all their talk about reason and all their railing against blind faith, rationalists are often among the most irrational people.

Christianity claims there are truths which are beyond the power of reason to demonstrate, but that doesn't mean it's irrational. There's a difference between what is irrational (against reason) and what is suprarational (above reason).

Consider this. Quantum physics is above the reasoning abilities of most four-year-olds. Does this make it, even for a four year old, irrational? No.

Or think about this. To know everything there is to know about modern science is beyond the capabilities of any one human being. This is why we have specialists. Yet, we don't say that, because the totality of scientific knowledge is beyond the powers of one person to know, science is irrational.

In other words, the fact that a person is limited in what he can know doesn't mean there isn't something beyond that. If we move from an individual to the human race as a whole, we can say that the fact that there may be limits upon what man, as a finite creature can know, doesn't mean there aren't thing beyond what he can know.

Christianity claims to have a message from beyond man's intellectual horizon. It claims God (whose existence, by the way, is knowable even with our finite reasoning abilities) has revealed things which are beyond reason, but which don't conflict with it. It also claims that reality as we know it gives evidence, though not proof, that transcendental truths exist. Whether this is so or not, it's not an irrational position.

From the Christian perspective, the rationalist is like a man with a road map who, having found the map reliable in what is pictured, somehow concludes from this that only what is pictured is real. The rationalist thinks roads which go off the map go nowhere, but it's really rationalism with its blind faith that's a dead end.

Doesn't 1 John 5:11-13 prove "once saved, always saved"?

Doesn't 1 John 5:11-13 prove "once saved, always saved"?

Full Question

The Bible speaks of believers as having eternal life now (1 Jn 5:11-13). This proves "once saved, always saved."

Answered by:  Catholic Answers Staff

Sometimes Scripture speaks of believers possessing eternal life now, but it also talks about it as something in the future.

When eternal life is described as a present possession of Christians, this is an example of what theologians call "realized eschatology." This means that Christians participate now in a limited way in what they will experience more fully in the Kingdom of God to come. It doesn't necessarily imply those who have so partaken of the Kingdom and its gifts can't be lost (Heb 3:14; 6:4-6).

The Bible speaks of eternal life as something future (Mt 19:29; Mk 9:43-47; Ti 1:2; 3:7; Jude 21) and based upon our fidelity, by God's grace, to his commandments (Mt 19:16-17; 25:46; Jn 3:36; Rom 2:6-10; 1 Tm 6:18-19; Jas 1:12; 2 Tm 2:12).

What is the Catholic understanding of the biblical plan of salvation?

What is the Catholic understanding of the biblical plan of salvation?

Full Question

I heard a radio preacher talk about the "biblical plan of salvation"--which, of course, he said the Catholic Church didn't obey. How does our Church understand the biblical plan of salvation?

Answered by:  Catholic Answers Staff

The Church understands that we are all sinners in need of a savior (Rom 5:12-21). We are inheritors of original sin and all its consequences, and by actual sin we distance ourselves from God. We can't save ourselves, but we don't need to: Jesus Christ has paid the price for our sins. The Catholic Church teaches that salvation comes through Jesus alone (Acts 4:12), since he is the "one mediator between God and man" (1 Tm 2:5-6).

The saving grace won by Jesus is offered as a free gift to us, accessible through repentance, faith, and baptism. We turn away from our sins, we are sorry for them, and we believe in Jesus Christ and the gospel. Repentance shows our willingness to turn from things that keep us from God, and baptism renews us, filling us with the grace necessary to have faith and to live it. This belief is more than just "head knowledge." Even the demons have that (Jas 2:19). It's more than just believing you're saved. Even the Pharisees had that (Jn 5:39). True, saving faith is one lived and exhibited daily: It is "faith working through love" (Gal 5:6, cf. Jas 2:1-26).

Sometimes the Church is accused of teaching "salvation by works," but this is an empty accusation. This idea has been consistently condemned by the Church. Good works are required by God because he requires obedience to his commands (Mt 6:1-21, 1 Cor 3:8, 13-15) and promises to reward us with eternal life if we obey (Mt 25:34-40, Rom 2:6-7, Gal 6:6-10, Jas 1:12). But even our obedience is impossible without God's grace; even our good works are God's gift (Rom 5:5, Phil 2:13). This is the real biblical plan of salvation.

Would you recommend the Collegville Bible Commentary?

Would you recommend the Collegville Bible Commentary?

Full Question

I have the Collegeville Bible Commentary for the New American Bible, but it seems really technical. Is this a good commentary?

Answered by:  Catholic Answers Staff

We are unable to recommend the Collegeville Bible Commentary. It is characterized by one-sided, liberal Bible scholarship and lack of fidelity to the Church's teachings.

A good example of this is the commentary on Romans 1:18-32. In that passage of the Bible Paul states that because pagans worshiped creatures rather than the Creator, "God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error" (Rom 1:26-27).

The Collegeville Bible Commentary states "'natural' and 'unnatural' should be more accurately translated 'culturally approved' and 'culturally disapproved.'" This is linguistic nonsense. The Greek word here for "natural" is the adjectival form of phusis, from which we get "physics." The term means "according to [a thing's] nature." It has nothing to do with society's approval or disapproval. In fact the phrase for "unnatural" (para phusin) was found in the Stoic philosophers before Paul's time and clearly indicated something that was out of accord with nature. Sickness, for instance, was said to be para phusin (cf. Kittel's Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 9:265).

The fact that the Collegeville Bible Commentary would go so far as to say that the terms "should be more accurately translated" as "culturally approved" and "culturally disapproved" shows the lengths to which the authors of the commentary are willing to go to push their social agenda. (In the case cited the commentary gives what may be termed a pro-homosexualist interpretation.) This is not scholarship, but the antithesis of it, where a scholar's personal social or political views are allowed to dominate the data.

We have given only one example of this commentary's deficiencies, but we have found enough similar problems that we cannot recommend this as a trustworthy work.

Can you tell me about the Foursquare Gospel Church?

Can you tell me about the Foursquare Gospel Church?

Full Question

Friends who belong to the Foursquare Gospel Church have invited me to attend a lecture, but I am hesitant to go since I know little about that denomination. Can you tell me more?

Answered by:  Catholic Answers Staff

The Foursquare Gospel Church was founded earlier this century by Aimee Semple McPherson. Born Aimee Kennedy in Ontario, Canada in 1890, at 17 she experienced a conversion under the preaching of evangelist Robert Semple. After marrying Semple, she went to work with him as a missionary in Hong Kong. In 1911, after his death, she returned to the United States with her infant daughter and began preaching. In Florida she married a grocer named Harold McPherson, but the two divorced. A third marriage, in 1931 to a member of her choir, lasted only four months.

In 1918 McPherson moved to Los Angeles, bringing along her daughter and new son. Once there she began to build a large auditorium (5,300 seats) named the Angelus Temple; it was dedicated January 1, 1923.

In 1921 McPherson was ordained as pastor of First Baptist Church in San Jose, California, but her association with this church was loose. She founded the Echo Park Evangelistic Association and L.I.F.E. Bible College. Eventually, she founded the denomination known as the Foursquare Gospel Church.

As understood by her, the "Foursquare Gospel" reflects four aspects of Christ's character in relationship to the Christian: Jesus Christ the Savior, the Healer, the Baptizer with the Holy Spirit, and the Coming King. Theologically the Foursquare Gospel Church is Pentecostal. It believes in Spirit baptism as a separate and distinct work of grace, subsequent to the believer's conversion. Those who experience Spirit baptism will give initial evidence of this by speaking in tongues. The Foursquare Gospel Church also places emphasis on faith healing, on the pre-millennial coming of Christ, and on Christian holiness.

McPherson was a very popular preacher in Los Angeles, though her flamboyant antics attracted criticism. Once, dressed as a policeman, she drove a motorcycle to the front of the sanctuary at Angelus Temple and shouted, "Stop! You're going to hell!" Another time she dressed in a football player's uniform and depicted the conflict between God and the devil as a football game.

McPherson's movement was rocked by sex scandal in 1926 when she suddenly disappeared. Later she claimed to have been kidnapped, but it was revealed that she had been on a "love retreat" with a man to whom she was not married.

Her movement also was jolted by financial scandals involving charges of misappropriation of funds. From 1927 to 1931 McPherson had to battle her mother for control of Angelus Temple; she ultimately won and retained control of the denomination until her death in 1944, when leadership was assumed by her son, Rolf.

Currently the Foursquare Gospel Church has 200,000 members in the United States, though due to emphasis on world missions, the worldwide membership is much larger, with 1.5 million members in sixty countries.

Are 1 and 2 Esdras non-canonical books?

Are 1 and 2 Esdras non-canonical books?

Full Question

An answer in the February 1994 issue confused me. You stated that Church councils rejected 1 and 2 Esdras as non-canonical, yet my Douay-Rheims lists these two books. What's the story?

Answered by:  Catholic Answers Staff

The confusion is caused by the fact that some of the books of the Bible and the apocrypha (those which do not belong in the Catholic Bible) have changed names over the last few centuries. You have put your finger on the most confusing name change there has been. Read carefully, because this is tricky.

There have been four books associated with the prophet Ezra (also spelled Esdras). In some circles these became known as 1, 2, 3, and 4 Esdras. In other circles, the first two of these (1 and 2 Esdras) became known as Ezra and Nehemiah, while the second two (3 and 4 Esdras) became known as 1 and 2 Esdras.

The first two of the four books belong in the Bible and are accepted by both Catholics and Protestants as canonical. In older Catholic Bibles they were called 1 and 2 Esdras, but now they are more commonly called Ezra and Nehemiah. The second two of the four books (sometimes known as 3 and 4 Esdras, sometimes known as 1 and 2 Esdras) do not belong in the Bible at all and are not accepted by either Catholics or Protestants.

When we said that the Church councils did not accept 1 and 2 Esdras, we were using the modern system of book names and were referring to the two formerly known as 3 and 4 Esdras.

One final note to the confusion: While 3 and 4 Esdras are not accepted by Catholics or Protestants, some Eastern Orthodox accept one or the other of them.

Are miracles a violation of natural law?

Are miracles a violation of natural law?

Full Question

What is a miracle? Is it a violation of a law of nature? Didn't people in the past believe in miracles only because they didn't know much about science?

Answered by:  Catholic Answers Staff

A miracle may be defined as an event that occurs in nature but that has a cause lying outside nature, that is, a supernatural cause. Miracles are not violations of the laws of nature. The way we know if an event is a miracle is by seeing if it could have been caused by natural forces.

For example, when Jesus changed water to wine (Jn 2:1-11), it would have been impossible for random movements or any other natural stimuli to have effected this transubstantiation. If the water could not have turned into wine by natural means, the change must have had a supernatural cause. Since we know nature could not effect this change, we infer that a miracle took place. In fact, it is precisely because of our knowledge of science that we can identify miracles when they occur.

As C. S. Lewis pointed out, the Virgin Birth is only perceivable as a miracle if one first knows the law of nature that virgins don't normally give birth. Joseph understood this law of nature. When he discovered Mary was pregnant, he initially suspected her of unfaithfulness (Mt 1:19). It took a visit from an angel of the Lord to convince him of the miraculous nature of Mary's pregnancy.

To learn more about how eminently scientific it is to believe in miracles, get hold of these books: Miracles, by C. S. Lewis, Miracles: A Catholic View, by Ralph McInerny, Scaling the Secular City, by J. P. Moreland, and That You May Believe and Miracles and the Critical Mind, both by Colin Brown. Highly recommended are the now out-of-print works of Catholic apologist Arnold Lunn, Revolt Against Reason and And Yet So New.

What are the Nag Hammadi writings

What are the Nag Hammadi writings, and do they reveal anything we didn't already know about Christ or the Bible?

Answered by:  Catholic Answers Staff

Discovered in 1945 near the village of Nag Hammadi in Upper Egypt, they are fourth-century papyrus manuscripts that formed part of a gnostic library. The writings are a valuable source of information about gnostic beliefs and practices. From them we can see more clearly the arguments and the theology the gnostics used in their attacks on the Catholic Church.

Although some writings are fragmentary, enough are still intact that a fairly clear picture of gnosticism emerges in the pseudo-gospels and epistles. Included in the Nag Hammadi collection are such spurious works as the Apocryphon of John, the Gospel of Philip, the Apocalypse of Paul, and the Gospel of Mary.

Scholars were delighted to discover several works whose existence was known in the early centuries of the Church but which were presumed lost. Perhaps the best treatment in English of these writings is The Nag Hammadi Library (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988).

Many Catholic theologians of the first several centuries devoted themselves to refuting the gnostic arguments, in particular, Irenaeus of Lyons (140-202), who wrote a devastating critique of gnosticism in his masterful five-volume work, Detection and Overthrow of the Gnosis Falsely So-Called, more commonly known as Against Heresies.

What's gnosticism?

What's gnosticism?

Answered by:  Catholic Answers Staff

Gnosticism, which gets its name from the Greek word gnosis ("knowledge") was a religious movement beginning, possibly, before the time of Christ and extending into the first few centuries of the Christian era. Gnostics viewed themselves as "those who know." Their heretical teachings varied from group to group and can't be pinned down with specificity, but common gnostic beliefs included these:

1. Although Christ appeared to be human, his humanity was merely an illusion.

2. Christ appeared to die, but did not really die. The Crucifixion was really a crucifiction.

3. Christ was not truly God, the second Person of the Trinity. He was merely a created being who was the lowest of the aeons, a group of semi-divine beings between God and man. Each lower aeon was given power by a higher aeon. Christ, the aeon furthest removed from God, created the world because God was too pure to dirty himself with matter.

4. Matter is evil, so one can do anything one wants with one's body, including killing it to release the soul from its imprisonment.

5. The God of the Old Testament is evil, as evidenced by the fact that he created the material universe. He is not the same as the God of the New Testament, who is the God of Love, as Jesus and his apostles taught (1 Jn 4:8, 16).

6. People are saved by acquiring secret knowledge (gnosis), which is imparted only to the initiated.

Gnosticism was similar in some ways to the modern New Age movement. Like New Agers, gnostics used Christian terminology and symbols, but placed them in an alien religious context that gutted the essential teachings of Christ. It's unclear when gnosticism began. Many Church Fathers thought gnosticism was founded by Simon Magus, the Samaritan sorcerer who converted to Christianity (Acts 8:9-24). Some contemporary scholars think gnosticism started a few centuries before Christianity and then invaded it from the outside through the conversion to Christianity of Jewish and Gentile gnostics. Other scholars believe gnosticism started as a Christian heresy.

It seems clear, though, that the apostles themselves had to contend with a form of gnosticism (Col 2:8, 18; 1 Jn 4:1-3; Rv 2:6, 15). Paul said, "Avoid profane babbling and the absurdities of so-called knowledge [gnosis]. By professing it some people have deviated from the faith" (1 Tm 6:20-21).

Does my annulment mean that my ex and I were living in sin, and are our children illegitimate?

Does my annulment mean that my ex and I were living in sin, and are our children illegitimate?

Full Question

I was granted an annulment, and I've begun to wonder: Was I living in sin with my "spouse" during those years? Are our children considered illegitimate?

 Answered by:  Catholic Answers Staff

If by "living in sin" you mean fornication--a mortal sin--the answer is no. One requirement of mortal sin is full knowledge of the sin being committed. In a situation where the spouses are unaware of the invalidity of their union--what the Church calls a "putative marriage"--there is no sin of fornication, because this condition is not met.

The Church teaches that children born of a putative marriage (which exists when at least one spouse is convinced of the validity of a marriage and lasts until both are convinced of its invalidity) are considered legitimate, even if the marriage is later declared null (CIC 1137).

Illegitimacy is not a moral or spiritual state. It has no bearing on a child's soul or salvation. Historically, legitimacy impinged only upon canonical matters, being required for ordination or appointment as a prelate or abbot.

Is the Catechism for lay people or only for clergy?

Is the Catechism for lay people or only for clergy?

Full Question

Is it true the universal Catechism of the Catholic Church is intended only for clergy and that lay people should not bother to read it because it's too technical? That's what our associate pastor said from the pulpit last Sunday. He made it clear he felt lay people should ignore it and let the experts decide if it's worthwhile or not.

Answered by:  Catholic Answers Staff 

Your priest is misinformed. The Church's Catechism can and should be read by all Catholics (some might say especially by associate pastors). The language is not at all technical and is within the grasp of the average adult Catholic.

The Catechism is laid out in an orderly, systematic style with copious citations to Scripture, to the Fathers of the Church, and to the ecumenical councils. Of particular help are the summary statements at the end of each section. The Church desires that all Catholics - especially lay Catholics - study the new catechism as a means of growing in knowledge of the faith.

Many Catholics are confused about what the Church really teaches because they have received conflicting messages from priests, nuns, and others. Perhaps one reason some are opposed to the promulgation of this Catechism is that they'll no longer be able to say the Church has "changed its teachings" on issues such as purgatory or Marian doctrines, or that there is no official teaching on issues such as contraception and homosexuality. Buy two copies: one for yourself and one as a gift for your associate pastor.

Where does the "Holy, holy, holy" prayer come from?

Where does the "Holy, holy, holy" prayer come from?

Full Question

At Mass we say, "Holy, holy, holy, Lord God of Hosts, heaven and earth are full of your glory. Hosanna in the highest. Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord. Hosanna in the highest. " What is this prayer, where does it come from, and what on earth does "Hosanna" mean?

Answered by:  Catholic Answers Staff

This prayer is called the Sanctus because that is its first word in Latin. The first line is the hymn of the seraphim in Isaiah 6:3 and Revelation 4:8. The second part is what the crowd cried to Jesus at his triumphal entry into Jerusalem (Mt 21:9), which is modeled after Psalm 118:25.

Hosanna is a Hebrew term which is derived from the words yasha, which means "save," and na, which is an expression of entreaty or request and can be translated in a variety of ways-for example, "I pray," "I beseech," "please," or "O." The Hebrew terms were combined - yasha na ("O, save!"), as in Psalm 118:25 - and this became hosanna.

It was used as part of the Jewish temple liturgy during the feast of Tabernacles, when the priests carried willow branches and cried "Hosanna!" while processing around the altar of burnt offering'. Over time, the crowd gathered to worship picked it up, and it became a cry of joy. The seventh day of Tabernacles even came to be called "Hosanna Day."

Thus the crowd greeted the Messiah by waving palm branches and joyfully crying "Hosanna!" to him as he entered Jerusalem. By this time, the term may have lost some of its original meaning and may have been mostly an acclamation of joy and petition (as it is now during Mass).

Yet it still carried the air of a joyful petition for deliverance The expression "Hosanna to the Son of David!" was an exhortation to acclaim or praise the Messiah in hopes of deliverance (probably from the hated Romans in the mind of the crowd).

The expression "Hosanna in the highest!" is more mysterious. Suggestions have included the idea that it is an exhortation to us to cry "Hosanna!" to God, that it is an exhortation to the angels to cry "Hosanna!" to God, that it is an exhortation for there to be songs of praise in heaven, and even that the phrase means "Up with your branches!" (on the unlikely supposition that the branches carried during the feast of Tabernacles had come to be called "hosannas").

"Hosanna" was used as part of Mass in the first century. The Didache (A.D. 70) includes the acclamation "Hosanna to the God of David!" among the congregation's responses during the prayer of thanksgiving after Communion.

Who are the Rosicrucians, what do they believe, and why do they believe it?

Who are the Rosicrucians, what do they believe, and why do they believe it?

Answered by:  Catholic Answers Staff

The Rosicrucians are an occult sect originating in either the 15th or 17th century, depending on which account you accept. The latter is the more plausible and involves the 1610 publication by Johann Valentine Andrea of a work called Fama Fraternitatis, which purported to be a history of a society of mystical healers begun by the German scholar Christian Rosenkreuz. Though this "history" was later admitted to be a complete fabrication, the concept of a brotherhood of men interested in science, medicine, and occultism was a fashionable one at the time and took root in Germany; the Brotherhood of the Rosy Cross spread also to England.

The history of this movement becomes vague after the end of the 17th century, and little is known of it until 1866, when modern Rosicrucianism was organized as a branch of Freemasonry. It spread from England to the United States and then back to Continental Europe, and by the end of the 19th century, Rosicrucians had established numerous lodges, colleges, and regional headquarters throughout the Western world.

Rosicrucian theology is vague and undefined. It has borrowed certain Christian concepts while rejecting others, viewing "all things as complicitly and ideally in God" and tending toward a kind of pantheism. Here there are similarities (unsurprisingly) with the occultic religion of upper-level Freemasonry. Despite their name, the Rosicrucians are not a Christian denomination, nor even a quasi-Christian sect; a Catholic should have nothing to do with them.

What is a good way to respond to door-to-door evangelists who ask if I've been "born again"?

What is a good way to respond to door-to-door evangelists who ask if I've been "born again"?

Answered by:  Catholic Answers Staff 

Most Catholics are thrown off by this question and answer hesitantly at best. This leads Fundamentalists to assume that Catholics haven't been born again.

But they are wrong. All baptized Catholics have been born again, so you can answer "yes." Discussion no doubt will follow.

A good way to start is to admit the importance of being born again. Jesus commands it (Jn 3:3,7). To be born again implies a radical change in a person, an event as life-altering as the "first birth" out of your mother's womb. When you are born again, the Holy Spirit makes a change in your soul, cleanses you from sin, and gives you a new nature, planting supernatural love in your heart. Just as you were once born into an earthly family, when you are born again you become part of a spiritual family, with God as the head and all his people, on earth and in heaven, as your brothers and sisters.

Once in agreement on what "born again" means, proceed to the point of disagreement: how we are born again. Probably the Fundamentalist will posit some kind of spiritual experience, a moment of commitment to Jesus, an acceptance of him as "personal Lord and Savior." But Catholics use the biblical means of being born again: baptism.

Jesus told Nicodemus, "No one can enter the kingdom of God without being born of water and Spirit" (Jn 3:5). Paul spoke of God's gift of "the bath of rebirth and renewal of the Holy Spirit" (Ti 3:5). Paul told the Romans that "we who were baptize into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death . . . so that . . . we too might live in the newness of life" (Rom 6:3-4). Water baptism is the physical sign of and instrument for bringing about the spiritual rebirth. In baptism we are regenerated into new life in Christ.

So answer door-to-door missionaries with a proud affirmative--if you have been baptized, you already have been saved the Bible way and in the way the first Christians understood "born again."

How can use Scripture to counter Protestant claims about justification?

How can use Scripture to counter Protestant claims about justification?

Full Question

The new Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that "justification includes the remission of sins, sanctification, and the renewal of the inner man" (CCC 2019) Protestants deny that the last two of these are part of justification. What Bible verses can I use to show they are?

Answered by:  Catholic Answers Staff

Look up Romans 6:7. All standard English translations render this verse as some variation on the statement "He who has died has been freed from sin." The topic here is one of sanctification, the making holy of the believer, or the freeing of him from sin.

What is significant about 6:7 is that when it says the one who has died has been freed from sin, the word for "freed" is actually the Greek word for "justified." What it literally said was "he who has died has been justified from sin," yet the context is so obviously sanctificational that all standard English translations of the Bible rendered "justified from sin" as "freed from sin." This shows that there is not a rigid wall between justification and sanctification in the apostle Paul's mind. The semantic ranges of the two terms overlap.

Do the prophecies of St. Malachy suggest we are living in the end times?

Do the prophecies of St. Malachy suggest we are living in the end times?

Full Question

Someone in my parish told me about the prophesies of St. Malachy, which he claims, prove that we are nearing the end of times. What are these prophesies?

Answered by:  Catholic Answers Staff

St. Malachy was an Irish bishop who lived in the 12th century. By far the more famous of his prophecies concerns the sequence of popes.

The prophecy consist of 112 short Latin descriptions of future popes; the prophecies were discovered in 1590 and attributed to Malachy. Each description indicates one identifying trait for each future pope, beginning with Celestine II, who was elected in 1130. In some instances, the descriptions hit home in an uncanny way; they have led to centuries of speculation that the prophecy might be a real one.

For instance, the description of the future John XXII (1316-1334) is "de sutore osseo"--"from the bony shoemaker." This pope was the son of a shoemaker, and his family name was "Ossa," which means bone. In another example, "lilium et rosa" was the phrase used to describe the pope who would be Urban VIII (1623-1644), whose family coat-of-arms was covered with "lilies and roses."

Malachy's prophecy has been cast into doubt by the fact that the descriptions become vague from the 16th century on--about the time the prophecy was "discovered" in the Roman Archives. But there have been a few good matches in modern times. The phrase "pastor et nauta," meaning "shepherd and sailor," was attributed to John XXIII. This pope hailed from Venice, historically a city of sailors, and on the day he took office he indicated the goal of his pontificate was to be "a good shepherd."

There have been many more misses, though. Describing the popes to follow John XXIII are the phrases "flower of flowers" (Paul VI), "from a half-moon" (John Paul I), and "from the toil of the sun" (John Paul II), none of which is an obvious connection. After our current pope there are only two left in Malachy's prophecy, "the glory of the olive" and "Peter the Roman." The latter will supposedly lead the Church through many tribulations, concluding with the last judgment.

Is "Malachy's" prophecy legitimate? Probably not. The consensus among modern scholars is that it is a 16th-century forgery created for partisan political reasons.

10 Great Prayers from the Psalms

1.

Arise, Lord!

Psalm 3:1-7a

Lord, how many are my foes! How many rise up against me! Many are saying of me, “God will not deliver him." But you, Lord, are a shield around me, my glory, the One who lifts my head high. I call out to the Lord, and he answers me from his holy mountain. I lie down and sleep; I wake again, because the Lord sustains me. I will not fear though tens of thousands assail me on every side. Arise, Lord! 

2.
Better is One Day
Psalm 84:10-12

Better is one day in your courts than a thousand elsewhere; I would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God than dwell in the tents of the wicked. For the Lord God is a sun and shield; the Lord bestows favor and honor; no good thing does he withhold from those whose walk is blameless. Lord Almighty, blessed is the one who trusts in you.

3.
Better than Life

Psalm 63

You, God, are my God, earnestly I seek you; I thirst for you, my whole being longs for you, in a dry and parched land where there is no water.

I have seen you in the sanctuary and beheld your power and your glory. Because your love is better than life, my lips will glorify you. I will praise you as long as I live, and in your name I will lift up my hands. I will be fully satisfied as with the richest of foods; with singing lips my mouth will praise you.

On my bed I remember you; I think of you through the watches of the night. Because you are my help, I sing in the shadow of your wings. I cling to you; your right hand upholds me.

4.

Confession of Sin

Psalm 51:1-12

Have mercy on me, O God, according to your unfailing love; according to your great compassion blot out my transgressions. Wash away all my iniquity and cleanse me from my sin.

For I know my transgressions, and my sin is always before me. Against you, you only, have I sinned  and done what is evil in your sight; so you are right in your verdict and justified when you judge.

Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me. Yet you desired faithfulness even in the womb; you taught me wisdom in that secret place.

Cleanse me with hyssop, and I will be clean; wash me, and I will be whiter than snow. Let me hear joy and gladness; let the bones you have crushed rejoice. Hide your face from my sins and blot out all my iniquity.

Create in me a pure heart, O God, and renew a steadfast spirit within me. Do not cast me from your presence or take your Holy Spirit from me. Restore to me the joy of your salvation and grant me a willing spirit, to sustain me.

5.

God Knows You

Psalm 139

You have searched me, Lord, and you know me. You know when I sit and when I rise; you perceive my thoughts from afar. You discern my going out and my lying down; you are familiar with all my ways.

Before a word is on my tongue you, Lord, know it completely. You hem me in behind and before, and you lay your hand upon me. Such knowledge is too wonderful for me, too lofty for me to attain.

Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence? If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths, you are there. If I rise on the wings of the dawn, if I settle on the far side of the sea, even there your hand will guide me, your right hand will hold me fast.

If I say, “Surely the darkness will hide me and the light become night around me,” even the darkness will not be dark to you; the night will shine like the day, for darkness is as light to you.

For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place, when I was woven together in the depths of the earth. Your eyes saw my unformed body; all the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.

How precious to me are your thoughts, God! How vast is the sum of them! Were I to count them, they would outnumber the grains of sand —  when I awake, I am still with you.

6. 

"I Will Never Be Shaken"

Psalm 30:6-12

When I felt secure, I said, “I will never be shaken.”  Lord, when you favored me, you made my royal mountain stand firm; but when you hid your face, I was dismayed. To you, Lord, I called; to the Lord I cried for mercy: “What is gained if I am silenced, if I go down to the pit? Will the dust praise you? Will it proclaim your faithfulness? Hear, Lord, and be merciful to me; Lord, be my help.”

You turned my wailing into dancing; you removed my sackcloth and clothed me with joy, that my heart may sing your praises and not be silent. Lord my God, I will praise you forever.

7. 

"My Soul Thirsts"

Psalm 42:1, 5

As the deer pants for streams of water, so my soul pants for you, my God.

Why, my soul, are you downcast? Why so disturbed within me? Put your hope in God, for I will yet praise him, my Savior and my God.

8. 

 

"The Lord is my shepherd" 

Psalm 23

The Lord is my shepherd, I lack nothing. He makes me lie down in green pastures, he leads me beside quiet waters, he refreshes my soul. He guides me along the right paths for his name’s sake.

Even though I walk through the darkest valley, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; your rod and your staff, they comfort me.

You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies. You anoint my head with oil; my cup overflows.

Surely your goodness and love will follow me all the days of my life, and I will dwell in the house of the Lord forever.

9.

"The Prayer of Protection"
Whoever dwells in the shelter of the Most High will rest in the shadow of the Almighty. I will say of the Lord, “He is my refuge and my fortress, my God, in whom I trust.” Surely he will save you from the fowler’s snare and from the deadly pestilence. He will cover you with his feathers, and under his wings you will find refuge; his faithfulness will be your shield and rampart. You will not fear the terror of night, nor the arrow that flies by day, nor the pestilence that stalks in the darkness, nor the plague that destroys at midday. A thousand may fall at your side, ten thousand at your right hand, but it will not come near you. You will only observe with your eyes and see the punishment of the wicked.

Psalm 91

If you say, “The Lord is my refuge,” and you make the Most High your dwelling, no harm will overtake you, no disaster will come near your tent.  For he will command his angels concerning you to guard you in all your ways; they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone. You will tread on the lion and the cobra; you will trample the great lion and the serpent.

“Because he loves me,” says the Lord, “I will rescue him; I will protect him, for he acknowledges my name. He will call on me, and I will answer him; I will be with him in trouble, I will deliver him and honor him. With long life I will satisfy him and show him my salvation. ”

10.

"Slow to Anger, Rich in Love"

Psalm 145: 1-16

I will exalt you, my God the King;  will praise your name for ever and ever. Every day I will praise you  and extol your name for ever and ever.

Great is the Lord and most worthy of praise; his greatness no one can fathom. One generation commends your works to another; they tell of your mighty acts. They speak of the glorious splendor of your majesty — and I will meditate on your wonderful works. They tell of the power of your awesome works — and I will proclaim your great deeds. They celebrate your abundant goodness and joyfully sing of your righteousness.

The Lord is gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and rich in love.

The Lord is good to all; he has compassion on all he has made. All your works praise you, Lord; your faithful people extol you. They tell of the glory of your kingdom and speak of your might, so that all people may know of your mighty acts and the glorious splendor of your kingdom. Your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and your dominion endures through all generations.

The Lord is trustworthy in all he promises and faithful in all he does. The Lord upholds all who fall and lifts up all who are bowed down. The eyes of all look to you, and you give them their food at the proper time. You open your hand and satisfy the desires of every living thing.

What is the non-biblical argument against homosexuality?

What is the non-biblical argument against homosexuality?

Full Question

It is easy to show Scripture condemns homosexuality. Can a case be made without referring to Scripture?

Answered by:  Catholic Answers Staff 

One way is by showing how homosexuality violates natural law. Many people have a basic ethical intuition that certain behaviors are wrong because they are "unnatural." For example, virtually everyone would agree that bestiality (sex with animals) is unnatural. We perceive intuitively that the natural sex partner of a human is another human, not some lower animal. If one can argue in this fashion, then one can also argue (drawing on the same intuition) that the natural sex partner of a man is a woman and of a woman, a man.

This is also supported by considering the nature of reproductive organs. It is clear that in nature some things have inherent functions (called teleologies by philosophers). In the human body the function of the heart is to pump blood, of the teeth to tear and grind substances (usually food). Reproductive organs also have teleologies which can be easily discerned. The physical design of each organ, as well as the process of human reproduction, is geared for this function. To violate this arrangement is to engage in an unnatural act--thereby offending God, the author of natural law.

Answered by:  Catholic Answers Staff

What can I do about anti-Catholic materials in a Protestant bookstore?

What can I do about anti-Catholic materials in a Protestant bookstore?

Full Question

I went into a Protestant bookstore recently and found a bunch of anti-Catholic material on the shelves. What should I do?

Answered by:  Catholic Answers Staff

Explain and complain. Some book stores are not really aware they they stock anti-Catholic materials or do not have a strong commitment to carrying it, and pointing it out can get it taken off the shelves. The best thing is to approach the cashier and ask to see the manager (or assistant manager if the manager is not there). This will be the person who makes the decisions. In talking to the manager, stress three things:

First, stress the orthodoxy of the Catholic Church, citing examples of things that the manager will consider foundations of orthodoxy (e.g., the Trinity, the fact we are saved by grace and do not earn our place in heaven, that we must all repent of our sins and have a "personal relationship" with Christ).

Second, stress errors in the anti-Catholic material. Even if the manager doesn't mind carrying anti-Catholic material, he may mind carrying erroneous material.

Third, stress the hatefulness and divisiveness of the mind-set which motivated the production of the work.

Finally, give the manager something to read about the anti-Catholic material (e.g., This Rock's article on Dave Hunt's A Woman Rides the Beast or Christianity Today's exposé of Alberto Rivera).

Is it unbiblical to refer to ministers as "reverend"?

Is it unbiblical to refer to ministers as "reverend"?

Full Question

I do not think ministers should be called "reverend" because even in the King James Version of the Bible that term is only used once and then as a description of God's name (Ps 111:9)

Answered by:  Catholic Answers Staff

This objection is either silly or uncharitable--take your pick. Not only does it hinge on the use of terms in the King James Version (why not try to base the argument on a Catholic translation?), but it seems to be a gratuitous dig at non-Catholics (and, come to think of it, even at Catholic priests). It ignores the fact that there are a lot of individual terms that appear in the Bible only once, and some of them are in passages which apply them to God. This does not mean that in everyday life we may use those terms only in connection with God.

The term reverend does not mean that a person is equal in dignity with God or possesses divine attributes or even that he is to be revered for anything intrinsic to himself. A person bearing the title Reverend may be a thorough scoundrel. The title simply indicates that a person holds a position for which reverence is to be shown (as he has chosen to devote his full-time to ministry in serving God), whether or not he is a worthy occupant of that position.

Reverencing another human being is shown in Scripture. One will note that in 2 Samuel 9:6 Mephibosheth does reverence to King David, as does Bathsheba in 1 Kings 1:31. In Hebrews 12:9, children are said to revere their fathers, and in Ephesians 5:33 wives are instructed to revere there husbands. All of this is true and proper regardless of whether the husband or father or king (or mother or wife or queen) is a scoundrel or a saint. It is the office that is revered, not anything intrinsic to the person.

Your problem about the title Reverend results from an legalistic reading of Scripture, using the premise that if something isn't commanded or stated (e.g., "Thou shalt call men 'Reverend'") then it is prohibited. This is contrary to the basic principle of all law: That which is not prohibited is permitted.

Finally, Scripture requires us to show reverence for validly ordained ministers (e.g., 1 Thes 5:12-13, Heb 13:17; cf. Ex 28:2), and since they are to be shown reverence, it is thus perfectly appropriate to call them Reverend. It is also appropriate to use the title Reverend for Protestant ministers, not because we recognize their ordinations as valid (they aren't), but simply as a matter of courtesy.

Does the seal of the confessional go against the Bible's admonition to tell the truth?

Does the seal of the confessional go against the Bible's admonition to tell the truth?

Full Question

A recent court case involved a situation in which a prison system had taped a prisoner's confession without his knowledge or the priest's. (The prisoner and the priest communicated through a glass partition, I understand.) A Protestant minister told me that the tape should be allowed in court because the Bible requires us to tell the truth, not keep secrets, and thus there is no basis for a priest-penitent privilege.

Answered by:  Catholic Answers Staff

The Protestant minister is flat-out wrong. There are multiple verses in the Bible that talk about not revealing secrets (e.g., Prv 11:13, 12:23). While there is a biblical requirement not to lie, there is no biblical requirement to spill all the truth one knows whenever anyone asks.

Second, the minister appears to admit that the attorney-client privilege is valid and to be honored. But if what he says about the Bible requiring full disclosure to the authorities were true, this would demolish the attorney-client privilege as well, since what the Bible says about truth-telling applies just as much to lawyers as it does to priests.

Third, society deems the attorney-client privilege beneficial, even if some guilty people go free because of it. How much more beneficial is the priest-penitent privilege, which entails a requirement of true contrition! The advantage to the many in knowing that their sins will not be broadcast justifies the practice, even though it means some people guilty of criminal offenses (which are by no means the worst offenses discussed during confession) will escape civil (though not divine) justice.

Fourth, the Bible requires us to confess our sins to others (Jas 5:16). On the Protestant model one confesses to just anybody and does so for purely therapeutic purposes, not for absolution. Even in that model the confider-confidant privilege would be needed. People need to know that their sins will not be publicly revealed, or they will not confess them.

Finally, Catholics believe that the priest, in administering sacraments, assumes the role of Christ; what is said by the penitent is as inviolate as anything said directly to God in prayer.

Isn't inclusive language just simple justice?

Isn't inclusive language just simple justice? Should the Church exclude half of the worshipers by using "man" and "men" in the Mass?

Answered by:  Terrye Newkirk

Such a view betrays a lack of knowledge of the history of language. The Latin homo and the Anglo-Saxon man merely mean "person," without regard to sex. Therefore, no one is excluded by such Bible passages such as "Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked" or by phrases in the Liturgy such as "for us men and for our salvation." The real problem, if there is one, is that English has no common word that specifically means "male person," parallel to the Latin vir, but it has one, "woman," that means "female person." Perhaps it is men who should feel left out.