How Catholicism Made Me Socially Aware (Part 2 of Becoming Catholic)

Yesterday, in Part I, I shared how I became Catholic in my heart during a Holy Mass with Pope Benedict XVI. Today’s story is less exotic. It happened about a year before I visited Rome and it happened in Fort Worth, Texas.

I was a newly minted Anglican clergyman and I sensed that I should be doing something active and visible for Christ in the local community. I began praying with other Anglicans in front of Planned Parenthood once a week. Having been previously Reformed, “social action” and anything that smacked of the “social Gospel” was mocked and condemned both by my friends and myself. In fact, my RUF leader in college told us that preaching against things like abortion from the pulpit was an abuse since the pulpit was solely for “Gospel preaching” not “political issues.” I thought that this sounded a bit off, but I did not question it.

Now that I was praying in front of an abortion clinic with a collar around my neck, I began to see that Christianity is much more than preaching, reading “solid” books, and debating doctrine. Teenage girls were crying. Men were dropping off girlfriends for their dirty deed. It was terrible, and yet somehow I knew that Christ was working through those present in a special way.

Here’s the kicker. On each day that we went to pray before Planned Parenthood, there were always many, many Catholics and usually at least one Catholic priest. They were kneeling in the gravel and praying. After a few months of observing this, one begins to ask himself: “Why are these Catholics here humiliating themselves and praying for people who mock them? Where are the Lutherans? Where are the Baptists? Where are the Reformed?” The denominations weren’t there. That’s not to say that they are not pro-life. However, it demonstrates that in this case, Catholicism is somehow more socially aware.

As I got to know these Catholics and their priests, I learned that they were not flimsy “social justice only” types. They went to Mass daily. They prayed. They defended the Creeds and Councils. They even studied Sacred Scripture. It was a balance that is rarely achieved in the realm of Protestantism.

I’m not saying that this one event “made me Catholic,” but it opened my eyes to authentic Christianity. The combination of theological rigor and corporal acts of mercy was something that I found very attractive and it certainly lead to my conversion.

My conclusion now is that Catholic liturgy naturally makes one socially aware. This would be a longer post for another time.

Godspeed,

Taylor Marshall

Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

Becoming Catholic Isn't Easy (Part 1 of Becoming Catholic)

The Vatican and the Tiber River

In the next few days I hope to write brief posts about key moments in my journey that pushed me over the edge.

I’ll begin by admitting that becoming Catholic is very difficult. For some, it entails for losing their jobs. It can cause deep marital strain and stress. Grown children don’t often understand. Friendships can be lost. It is very difficult. Anyone who tells you that entering the Catholic Church is easy is lying to you. Avoid that person. Even though it is difficult, I can recall a moment in which the call to Rome became firm. I was still an Episcopalian priest. I was in Rome. It was Feb. 2, 2006. I was at Holy Mass with Pope Benedict XVI. I won’t bore you with the details, but there I was. I was wearing a black cassock and I’m sure everyone thought I was a real Catholic priest (unless, of course, they noticed my blonde pregnant wife nearby). It was a beautiful Mass–the feast day of the Purification of Mary. When it came time for Holy Communion, I was devastated. I realized that the Pope was right there in front of me, but I could not receive the Eucharist.

At that moment everything in my soul felt contorted and out of whack. I knew that I should be Catholic. I wanted to be Catholic so badly. That was it. I knew that if I did not strive to enter the Catholic Church that I would never be happy and that I would be damned. I felt the sin of “schism” for the first time. In my soul, I realized that schism is just as horrid as murder, adultery, or rape. I realized schism was contrary to love and that I was part of schism. Worst of all, I felt that I was not enjoying all the gifts that Christ had given to us.

When I got home to Texas, I met with the Catholic bishop. The rest is history. It wasn't easy, but it was worth it.

Look for more “journey notes” in the days to come.

Godspeed,

Taylor Marshall

This post first appeared at www.calledtocommunion.com

Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

The Gruesome Death of Saint Mark the Evangelist

Saint Mark, the author of the Second Gospel of Our Lord is the same as "John Mark" who led to identifying him as the man who carried water to the house where the Last Supper took place (Mark 14:13). He may also have been the young man who ran away naked when Jesus was arrested (Mark 14:51-52).

Saint Hippolytus states that Saint Mark was one of the Seventy Disciples sent out by Christ (Luke 10:1). The Cenacle was owned by the mother of Saint Mark. The Cenacle is the place of the Last Supper, the first resurrection appearance of Christ to the Apostles and the descent of the Holy Ghost on Pentecost.

According to tradition, Saint Mark was born in Cyrene in North Africa (modern day Libya). Saint Mark returned to Pentapolis later in life, after being sent by Saint Paul to Colossae (Colossians 4:10; Philemon 24 refer to Mark the Cousin of Barnabas), and serving with him in Rome (2 Tim 4:11); from Pentapolis he made his way to Alexandria where he became the first bishop of Alexandria. To this day, the Patriarch of Alexandria is the "Successor of Saint Mark". When Mark returned to Alexandria, the idolators of the city resented his efforts to turn the Alexandrians away from the worship of their traditional gods. In AD 68 they placed a rope around his neck and dragged him through the streets until he was dead. His relics were kept in Egypt until they were transferred to Venice where they are venerated till this day.

Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

Saint George: Sample Chapters from My New Novel

Writing non-fiction is not nearly as humiliating as writing fiction. When one writes fiction, he puts his soul on paper and makes himself more vulnerable. So here goes. I'm a bit uneasy about it...

On this feast day of Saint George I'd like to share a few sample chapters of my new novel about Saint George titled: Kill This Dragon. The title of the novel comes from Daniel 14:25:

“But give me leave, O king, and I will kill this dragon without sword or club. And the king said: I give thee leave.” 

It's a story about Saint George, Saint Christopher, and Saint Nicholas (and many other saints of that time), but it is primarily a story of manhood, virtue, virginity, and humility.

The final chapters depict the killing of the infamous dragon whom I have named "Molech" - the Phoenician god of child sacrifice. The book also contains a subtle polemic against our society that murders its own children.

If you follow the following link, you'll get a pdf of the first five chapters of the novel for free:

PDF link: Kill This Dragon by Taylor Marshall (First Five Chapters)

PS: I'm looking for an agent or publisher if you are one or know one.

The Year of the Assumption of Mary according to Maria Agreda

Venerable Maria Agreda 

The Bluebonnet of Texas

Venerable Maria Agreda, in her Mystical City of God records that the Immaculate Mother of God survived her Divine Son 21 years and that she died peacefully at 3pm on Friday the 13th of August in the 21st year after the resurrection of Christ. Her glorious Assumption occurred three days later on Sunday the 15th of August.

We find that AD 33 plus AD 21 yields AD 54 for the date of the Dormition and Assumption of Mary. However, when we confer with the Julian calendar calculator, we find that the Friday does not fall on the 13th of August in the year AD 54. Uh oh.

There is, however, a problem with the math in the preceding paragraph. Christ did not live out a full 33 years and Mary did not live out a full 21 years beyond the resurrection of Christ our Lord. So we should not look for AD 54, but for AD 53.

And guess what. In the Julian AD 53, the 13th of August is a Friday and the 15th of August is Sunday.

If we are to trust the vision of Maria Agreda, AD 53 in the Julian calendar fits rather perfectly.


Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

The Very First Marian Apparition - Our Lady of the Pillar

The first recorded Marian apparition occurred while the Blessed Virgin Mary was still on earth. According to tradition, the Apostle Saint James the Greater (brother of Saint John the Evangelist) was sent by Saint Peter to Spain to evangelize the Gentiles of that province. While praying by the banks of the Ebro at Saragossa, the Holy Mother of God bilocated and appeared to the Apostle. She instructed him to build a church there, which he did.

When did this miracule occur? Tradition places Saint James in Spain for about 5 years in the latter half of the AD 30s. Local tradition identifies the date as Saturday January 2, AD 40 on the Julian Calendar. It's an established fact that Saint James the Greater was martyred in Jerusalem around AD 44. This entails that the traditional date is within a reasonable range both for Saint James to travel to Spain and to return to Jerusalem by AD 44.

Why did Saint James the Greater receive this great privilege of the first Marian apparition? Christ chose Saint James to be His first Apostolic martyr. It seems then that this vision was meant to strengthen and console Saint James. In fact, Maria Agreda states that Saint James was allowed a vision of the Blessed Virgin Mary as he was being martyred and that she personally escorted Saint James' soul to the judgment seat of Christ.

In this light, Saint James the Greater is very much like the 20th century martyr Saint Maximilian Maria Kolbe who consecrated his life to Jesus through Mary and found strength there to offer his body in the oblation of martyrdom.

Make it easier to receive daily posts from Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

Why Do We Suffer? The Theological Answer of St Paul

…I have been crucified with Christ...

Galatians 2:20

…I complete what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions

for the sake of His body, that is, the Church…

Colossians 1:24

The Problem of Pain

Nearly every religion seeks to make sense of the problem of pain. If God is both omnibenificent {all-loving} and omnipotent {all-powerful}, why then does He allow us to suffer? The Eastern traditions such as Buddhism dismiss pain and suffering as “unreal.” This solution is difficult to explain to a child with cancer. Other religious traditions attempt to accrue “good karma” in order to ensure that good times will come with a future reincarnated life. For these traditions, the origin of suffering is past sins, even sins committed in previous lives. Still other religions, such as Islam, seem to place the origin of suffering in the capricious “will of Allah.”

Knowing Christ Crucified

The Catholic Faith offers an entirely different account of suffering, because the Church holds up the crucified Christ as the archetype for Christian living. No doubt, the Church is obsessed with the crucifix, and that for good reason. The crucified Christ provides the meaning of life and the meaning of death, even the meaning of the life to come! The suffering of Christ does not prevent our suffering on earth, but it does allow us to suffer with dignity and meaning. Saint Paul indicates that every authentic Christian will suffer in this world:

For it has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in him but also suffer for his sake (Phil 1:29).

It was for this reason that the Apostle Paul focused the attention of his spiritual life on the crucifixion of Christ:

For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified (1 Cor 2:2).

This “crucifixion mentality” is one that Paul sought to instill in his disciples. When the Apostle perceived heresy in the Church in Galatia, he realized that they had forgotten their identity as followers of the crucified Christ:

Who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified? (Gal 3:1)

The glib Protestant adage, “But we worship the resurrected Christ, not the crucified Christ” finds no traction in the writings of Paul. One cannot divide Christ. There is not a “resurrected Jesus” and a “crucified Jesus.” There is one Lord Jesus Christ and His resurrection possesses meaning for us only in so far as we appreciate His crucifixion. Moreover, Saint Paul indicates that if we wish to attain the resurrected glory of Christ we must first enter into the sufferings of His death:

That I may know him and the power of His resurrection, and may share His sufferings, becoming like Him in his death, that if possible I may attain the resurrection from the dead (Phil 3:10-11).

Paul also states that we are “fellow heirs with Christ, provided that we suffer with Him” (Rom 8:17). Moreover, Saint Luke also preserved the words of Christ to this effect: “Whoever does not bear his own cross and come after me, cannot be my disciple” (Lk 14:27).

A person will carry the cross only if the cross carries meaning. The cross swallows every sin and every pain. When Adam and Eve sinned, they brought mankind into the state of original sin, as we observed in an earlier chapter. “Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men” (Rom 5:12). God permits the suffering of mankind on account of sin. Yet, God did not choose to remain outside of our sufferings. Instead, He entered into our sufferings. Jesus Christ experienced the hardships of humanity. He experienced poverty, hunger, thirst, false accusations, persecutions, and even a bloody death. Christ our Lord has experienced pain and death, and so when we unite our own sufferings to those of Christ, our personal sufferings take on redemptive power. Saint Paul explains how through Christ he transformed physical hardships into spiritual strength:

I will all the more gladly boast of my weaknesses, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. For the sake of Christ, then, I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities. For when I am weak, then I am strong (2 Cor 12:9-10).

Many well-meaning Christians are repulsed by the crucifix, because it displays the weakness of Christ. However, the cross teaches us that Christ transformed His greatest moment of physical weakness into the most potent act of redemptive suffering. Christ’s death is our salvation. The Catholic Church guards as a precious jewel the paradox that states, “when I am weak, then I am strong,” or alternatively: “death brings forth life.” Because of this, Saint Paul perceived his own vocation as a ministry of redemptive suffering:

We are afflicted in every way, but not crushed; perplexed, but not driven to despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed; always carrying in the body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be manifested in our bodies. For while we live we are always being given up to death for Jesus’ sake, so that the life of Jesus may be manifested in our mortal flesh (2 Cor 4:8-11).

Saint Paul explains that he always carries in his body “the death of Jesus.” When Paul is crushed, persecuted, struck down, he remains mindful that he bears within himself the “death of Jesus.” The union between Paul’s sufferings and Christ’s sufferings results in the manifestation of Christ’s life in the person of Paul.

Saint Paul articulates his doctrine of redemptive suffering in a shocking statement to the Christians in Colossae:

Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of His body, that is, the Church (Col 1:24).

On the surface, it seems that Saint Paul is uttering blasphemy. How can Paul complete what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions? Can we possibly speak of there being any lack in the sufferings of Christ? We know that Paul did not wish to diminish the sufferings of Christ, or else he would not have said:

But far be it from me to glory except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world (Gal 6:14).

We might best understand what Paul means by “that which is lacking in Christ’s afflictions” as those sufferings that we must experience in this life. Christ’s sufferings are complete and efficacious in their own right. We can add nothing to the redemptive suffering of Christ. However, we can unite our sufferings to Christ. This is the element that is “lacking.” When we offer our sufferings to Christ, Christ makes them His own in a mysterious way. To this end, Saint Paul even speaks of himself as nailed upon the cross with Christ:

I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me; and the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me (Gal 2:20).

Ultimately, this is where Saint Paul’s doctrine of participation reaches its highest expression. At this point, our book turns full circle. We began with Saint Paul’s miraculous experience on the Road to Damascus where he heard those significant words of Christ in Acts 9:4: “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?” Unbeknownst to Paul, Saint Stephen and the other persecuted Christians had united their sufferings to the sufferings of Christ. One might even place the words of Paul in the heart of Stephen as he died a martyr’s death: “I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake…for the sake of Saul.” Perhaps it was the prayerful suffering of Stephen, in union with Christ, that initiated the grace of God toward Saul who stood by holding the coats of those who cast their stones at Stephen, the Church’s first martyr.

This post is excerpted from a chapter in Taylor's Marshall's book The Catholic Perspective on Paul: Paul and the Origins of Catholic Christianity. The book vindicates Saint Paul as a Catholic priest, apostle, and theologian against the claims of Martin Luther and Protestantism in general.
.

On Academic Humility by Thomas a Kempis

I'm an academic by trade and this reading from Thomas a Kempis is a great reminder regarding knowledge and humility. It echoes what Saint Paul once wrote:

“Knowledge puffeth up: but charity edifieth.” (1 Corinthians 8:1, D-R)

Hat tip to my bride for finding this passage for me.

Thomas a Kempis

Imitation of Christ

1.2 Humble Self, Having a Humble Opinion of Self

EVERY man naturally desires knowledge [2] ; but what good is knowledge without fear of God? Indeed a humble rustic who serves God is better than a proud intellectual who neglects his soul to study the course of the stars. [3] He who knows himself well becomes mean in his own eyes and is not happy when praised by men.

If I knew all things in the world and had not charity, what would it profit me before God Who will judge me by my deeds?

Shun too great a desire for knowledge, for in it there is much fretting and delusion. Intellectuals like to appear learned and to be called wise. Yet there are many things the knowledge of which does little or no good to the soul, and he who concerns himself about other things than those which lead to salvation is very unwise.

Many words do not satisfy the soul; but a good life eases the mind and a clean conscience inspires great trust in God.

The more you know and the better you understand, the more severely will you be judged, unless your life is also the more holy. Do not be proud, therefore, because of your learning or skill. Rather, fear because of the talent given you. If you think you know many things and understand them well enough, realize at the same time that there is much you do not know. Hence, do not affect wisdom, but admit your ignorance. Why prefer yourself to anyone else when many are more learned, more cultured than you?

If you wish to learn and appreciate something worth while, then love to be unknown and considered as nothing. Truly to know and despise self is the best and most perfect counsel. To think of oneself as nothing, and always to think well and highly of others is the best and most perfect wisdom. Wherefore, if you see another sin openly or commit a serious crime, do not consider yourself better, for you do not know how long you can remain in good estate. All men are frail, but you must admit that none is more frail than yourself.

[2] Aristotle, Metaphysics, i. 1.

[3] Augustine, Confessions V. 4.

Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

Are Unicorns in the Bible and Why Did Medievals Own Unicorn Horns?

Daniel from Houston writes:

I was wondering if you could write about the unicorns in Psalm 91/92 and the other mythological beasts in Job on your blog.

For brevity sake, let's limit ourselves to unicorns and leave the beasts of Job alone for now. The Greek Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate and many English translations (King James and Douay Rheims) speak of monokeroi (Greek for "one horn") or unicorns (Latin for "one horn"). Strange right?

For example, the Douay Rheims mentions unicorns five times:

I used Catholic Logos Bible Software to generate this finding. To get this software and receive 15% off your purchase, use my name MARSHALL as a coupon code with Logos after clicking here.

To make things even more interesting, medieval monarchs and monasteries boasted in owning unicorn horns. For example, a real unicorn horn was kept in the Cathedral of St. Denis in France. At one point even the Holy See listed a unicorn horn among its possessions. Once when the son of King James was ill, the doctors had him drink some powered unicorn horn to heal him.

From where did these unicorns horns arise? Vikings, most likely. Vikings and other northern traders were able to sell "unicorn horns" for many times their weight in gold. From where were these nordic traders getting unicorn horns? Modern investigation reveals that these horns derived form the narwhal. Narwhals are mammals with one single large tusk that they use to break up sea ice. You can see a picture of one below:

Narwhals live in the environs of the Arctic Ocean. The horn of the narwal is identical to the horns depicted in medieval art on the heads of white horses. It seems that Vikings and nordic traders were able to sell these horns to Europeans and make a quick buck. Europeans down south had never seen narwhals and would never be the wiser.

Yet, the tradition of biblical unicorns doesn't come from narwhals at all. The Greek Septuagint which depicts monokeroi or unicorns was written before Christ...over one thousand years before the tradition of the narwhal horn trade and white "horse-unicorns."

Saint Isidore of Seville, a Doctor of the Church who lived (AD 560-636), tells us precisely what is meant by a unicorn:

The Greek word rhinoceros, meaning "with horn in nose," refers to the same beast as the names monoceros or unicorn. This is a four-footed beast that has a single horn on its forehead; it is very strong and pierces anything it attacks. It fights with elephants and kills them by wounding them in the belly. The unicorn is too strong to be caught by hunters, except by a trick: if a virgin girl is placed in front of a unicorn and she bares her breast to it, all of its fierceness will cease and it will lay its head on her bosom, and thus quieted is easily caught (Etymologies, Book 12, 2:12-13).

St Isidore is clearly describing what we know as the rhinoceros. However, he may also be the source for the legend that unicorns can be tamed by virgins with bare breasts. Medieval tapestries and art often show a bare-breasted virgin with a horse-unicorn resting its head on her lap. 

Somewhere between AD 600 and AD 1500 the term unicorn went from meaning rhinoceros to meaning "white horse with a narwhal horn on its head." 

I wonder if the rascally Viking salesmen had something to do with it!

Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

St Cleophas: Christ's Uncle and also the Father and Grandfather of 4 Apostles

Christ, St Cleophas, and an Unnamed Disciple, Lk 24

Saint Luke records that there were two men on the road to Emmaus on that first Easter Sunday when Christ appeared to them and made Himself known in the "breaking of the bread." One of them is identified as "Cleophas." Here's the Scripture from Luke 24:

13. And behold, two of them went, the same day, to a town which was sixty furlongs from Jerusalem, named Emmaus.

14. And they talked together of all these things which had happened.

15. And it came to pass that while they talked and reasoned with themselves, Jesus himself also, drawing near, went with them.

16. But their eyes were held, that they should not know him.

17. And he said to them: What are these discourses that you hold one with another as you walk and are sad?

18. And the one of them, whose name was Cleophas, answering, said to him: Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things that have been done there in these days? 

Who was this Cleophas? Cornelius a Lapide, drawing on St Jerome, reports that Cleophas was "the brother of S. Joseph the husband of the Blessed Virgin, the father of S. James the less, and S. Jude, and the grandfather of S. James the greater and S. John, who were the sons of Salome the daughter of Cleophas."

Let's break that down:

1. Cleophas was the brother of St Joseph and the brother-in-law of the Holy Mother of God (so says St Jerome).
2. Cleophas was the father of St James the Less, St Jude, and Mary Salome (one of the three Marys at the empty tomb).
3. Cleophas was the grandfather of St James the Greater and St John since Cleophas' daughter Mary Salome was the mother of St James the Greater and St John.

This would make Cleophas the father of two Apostles and the grandfather of two Apostles. This would also entail that James the Less and Jude were the uncles of James the Greater and John.

The martyrology of the Catholic Church identifies the date of the martyrdom of Cleophas as September 25th. He was martyred at the hands of Jewish authorities in Judea.

Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

The Gentle Rain of Divine Mercy

Today the skies open and mercies of God rain down upon all of humanity. It is the calm and even rain of God's love for us. There are no thunderbolts. Listen to the words of Christ to Saint Faustina:

In the Old Covenant I sent prophets wielding thunderbolts to My people. Today I am sending you with My mercy to the people of the whole world. I do not want to punish aching mankind, but I desire to heal it, pressing it to My merciful Heart. I use punishment when they themselves force Me to do so; My hand is reluctant to take hold of the sword of justice. Before the Day of Justice I am sending the Day of Mercy. (1588)

Jesus Christ wants to heal "aching mankind." I still have a difficult time comprehending the Divine Mercy of God. How could a God so holy desire to press sinners to His merciful heart? Yet He does and this reveals how little we know of God.

If you have read any of Saint Faustina's Diary and the messages that Christ gives her, one thing stands out: Hell is real and Christ doesn't want us to go there. 

Here are the words of Saint Faustina on this matter:

But I noticed one thing: that most of the souls there are those who disbelieved that there is a hell. When I came to, I could hardly recover from the fright. How terribly souls suffer there! Consequently, I pray even more fervently for the conversion of sinners. I incessantly plead God's mercy upon them. O my Jesus, I would rather be in agony until the end of the world, amidst the greatest sufferings, than offend You by the least sin. (741)

Unlike sappy and sentimental versions of Christianity, her Diary doesn't teach that God is tolerant of evil and will receive everyone into Heaven regardless of whether they died with faith, hope, and charity toward God and neighbor. No, Hell is a constant reality for those who live on earth. Yet, the Divine Mercy of Christ is always ready to rescue and redeem souls. One can therefore say that the Divine Mercy is about Christ's powerful mediation - it's not about universalism.

If someone doesn't believe in Hell, then the Divine Mercy devotion means nothing to them. Yet, if you believe in the fires of Gehenna and the fires of Purgatory, the promise of Divine Mercy is the greatest consolation. In particular, today's feast on the Octave of Easter, is especially consoling.

Today the rain of God's mercy falls down in torrents upon the earth. Like children, let's play in the rain and drink it in. All spiritual life comes from the reality that we glorify today.

Learn how to pray the Divine Mercy Chaplet by clicking here.

Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

Why Divine Mercy Sunday is Better Than a Plenary Indulgence

Divine Mercy Sunday (the Sunday after Easter Sunday) might be the greatest day of the year due to the immense amount of mercy that Christ pours out upon the earth. Below is the exact wording of the Divine Mercy promise given by Christ to Saint Faustina:

Our Lord Jesus said, "The soul that will go to Confession and receive Holy Communion shall obtain complete forgiveness of sins and punishment. On that day all the divine floodgates through which graces flow are opened. Let no soul fear to draw near to Me, even though its sins be as scarlet...Mankind will not have peace until it turns to the Fount of My Mercy."  

- Saint Faustina, Diary, 699. 

Some say that Our Lord's Divine Mercy Promise is even greater and more generous than a plenary indulgence. Why? With a plenary indulgence the usual conditions are:

1) Receive Holy Communion

2) Make a good Confession within 20 or so days

3) Pray for the Pope

4) Be fully detached from all sins

The last one (4) is the most difficult and most subjective. No one knows if they have attained full detachment from all sins. Hence, plenary indulgences are difficult and uncertain.

The amazing thing about Christ's promise to us on Divine Mercy Sunday is that the condition for detachment of sin is absent. This means that if you make a good confession and receive Holy Communion devoutly, you will receive full remission of all temporal punishment. If then you went to Confession and died after receiving Communion on Divine Mercy Sunday you would not spend one single moment in purgatory!!!

Saint Faustina's vision was originally doubted by the Holy Office and her writings were censured because it was assumed that such a merciful and generous promise would be impossible. This doubt was later overcome and the Catholic Church universally embraces this promise of mercy. Christ's promise essentially offers all the graces of a second baptism! Of course, it should not surprise us that Our Lord is so merciful and loving toward us. Saint Paul wrote that:

“the Gentiles are to glorify God for his mercy, as it is written: Therefore will I confess to thee, O Lord, among the Gentiles and will sing to thy name.” (Romans 15:9, D-R)

The nations of the earth shall be greater glory to God for His divine mercy. That's a promise.

If you want to learn more about Divine Mercy Sunday, I highly recommend this Catholic sermon: Sermon for Divine Mercy Sunday.

Glory be to the God of Mercy.

I highly recommend St Faustina's Diary for only $7.95:

Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

Why Did Christ go to Galilee after the Resurrection? Three Reasons

On the morning of the Glorious Resurrection of Christ, the angel tells the women to tell the Apostles that Christ would go before them into Galilee. Why would Christ desire to go to Galilee rather than remain in Jerusalem? After all, we might presume that it would be better to remain in Jerusalem. In the city of Jerusalem, Christ would have more witnesses to the resurrection.

On the contrary, Christ purposed to go to Galilee. Cornelius a Lapide gives three reasons for this:

1) He goeth before you into Galilee. First, because Galilee was the native country of the Apostles, to which, after the death of Jesus, they were purposing to return, that they might live more safely among their own relations. 

2) Secondly, because in Galilee Christ willed to show Himself openly to all His assembled disciples. For the Jews would not have permitted them to assemble in Judæa. 

3) Thirdly, because in Galilee Christ had for the most part preached, and had performed very many miracles.

St. Gregory (Hom. 21)  continues on the mystical reason for going to Galilee:

For Galilee means a passing over from death to life; for our Redeemer had already passed from His Passion to His resurrection, from death unto life. And He is seen first by His disciples after His resurrection in Galilee, because we shall have joy in seeing the glory of His resurrection, if only we pass over from vice to the heights of virtue. He, then, who is announced at the tomb is shown in passing over; because He who is first known in mortification of the flesh is seen in this passing over of the soul.

Yet Christ appeared to the Apostles in Judæa also, but secretly; in Galilee publicly.

Here is the historical order of events:

In the historical order of the events must be brought in here what Luke mentions (chap. xxiv. 3), namely, that Magdalene and her companions, while at the invitation of the angel they had entered the sepulchre and seen that it was empty, yet were affrighted; on account of which the angels cheered them, and at the same time gently reproved their want of faith. For that Luke’s account is not the same as that of Matthew and Mark, as some think, is clear from the words themselves, which are evidently different. Also, from the circumstance that in Luke two angels are said to have appeared, while in Matthew and Mark only one is mentioned.

Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

Photo: Apostolic Activity

On Holy Saturday, my eldest son and I engaged in the apostolic activity of fishing. Here's a photo of a large mouth bass that I caught. The key? Pray to Saint Andrew - patron saint of fishing. Saint Andrew is also the patron of golf, which makes him the perfect saint for weekend recreational activities.

I've always wanted a fishing lure with a St Andrew's medal worked into it. How great would that be?

Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

Does 'Easter' Refer to a Pagan Holiday?

Christ is risen! Alleluia!

Basing their hypothesis on a passage of the Venerable St. Bede, some Protestants claim that the northern European Christians adopted the name Easter from the name of a pagan goddess: "Eastre" in Anglo-Saxon; "Eostre" in Northumbrian. She is also the infamous Ashtorah of the Old Testament, the one for whom poles were erected as signs of fertility. The Hebrew prophets spilled much ink condemning the the cult of Ashtorah (cf. Isaiah 17:8, 27:9, Jereimiah 17:2, Micah 5:14).

The name "Eastre" or "Eostre" comes from the proto Indo-European root "aus/eas" meaning "to shine" and "the east" (since the sun shines from the east). Our word "east" clearly derives from this root. Likewise, the word Austria comes from the same Indo-European root since it is the kingdom of the east or the "austra".

The Catholic Church does not formally call the feast "Easter" but rather "Pascha" - a word derived from the Aramaic word for "Passover". Only English and Germanic lands use the term related to "Easter".

Some well-meaning apologist claim that Easter comes from the Anglo-Saxon word "oster", meaning "to rise". This would be a convenient etymology since it avoids the pagan connotations. Instead, it connects the word to Christ rising from the dead.

I favor a third explanation. The Anglo-Saxons called the Spring equinox "Eostre". It was a astronomical description. Since pagans ceremoniously celebrate astronomical events as holy days, the natural phenomenon (the spring equinox as a "shining") and the religious feast (the goddess of fertility and light, Ashtorah) were indistinguishable.

Anglo-Saxons didn't borrow the name of a goddess for the feast of Christ's resurrection. They simply denoted it by the name of the natural phenomenon (the spring equinox which they called "Eostre"), since the festival is calculated by using marking the spring equinox. It happens that the name of the goddess and the name of the feast are etymologically connected. This would confirm the exact context of Bede's words:

"Eostur-month, which is now interpreted as the paschal month, was formerly named after the goddess Eostre, and has given its name to the festival."

This doesn't mean that paganism was baptized or that the newly Christianized people were still devoted to the goddess Eostre. Think about it, we still speak of "Thursday" but that doesn't mean that we really think of it as "Thor's day." Rather, the old day names remained without their religious content. The same goes for "Easter" as the name of the spring equinox - the name remained but the goddess did not. Anyone who claims that Catholics worship "Eostre" for saying "Easter" should have the tables turned on him and then be accused of worshiping "Thor" for saying "Thursday."

Happy Easter or Pascha, then. Christ is risen! Alleluia!

Godspeed,

Taylor Marshall

Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

8 Bible Verses on Christ's Descent into Hell

Previously we examined "Why Did Christ Descend into Hell?" and discussed the four abodes of Hell. On this Holy Saturday, here are eight Bible verses for you to keep near you for apologetic purposes. These eight verses describe the descent of Christ into the Limbo of the Fathers (also known as Abraham's Bosom).

1. Saint Paul teaches us in Ephesians 4:9 that Christ our Lord descended into Hell after He offered His life on the cross. "Now that He ascended, what is it, but because He also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?" Note here that Hell is described as having "parts" that is the four parts of Hell.
2. Saint Peter wrote in Acts 2:24 that "God hath raised up Christ, having loosed the sorrows of hell, as it was impossible that He should be holden by it." Christ loosed the Old Testament saints from hell.
3. Saint Peter also wrote in 1 Peter 3:19 that "Christ coming in spirit preached to those spirits that were in prison, which had some time been incredulous." On this verse, Saint Athanasius says that "Christ's body was laid in the sepulchre when He went to preach to those spirits who were in bondage, as Peter said." (Ep. ad Epict.)
4. The prophet Hosea foretold the descent of Christ into Hell in Hosea 13:14 by placing these words into the mouth of the Messiah: "O death, I will be thy death; O hell, I will be thy bite." 
5. Zechariah foretells the redemption of those in the Limbo of the Fathers in Zech 9:11: "Thou also by the blood of Thy Testament hast sent forth Thy prisoners out of the pit." What could this mean except that the Messiah would free people from the underworld?
6. Colossians 2:15: "Despoiling the principalities and powers, He hath exposed them confidently." This refers to Christ's victory over the condemned angels who are the demons of Hell.
7. Psalm 23:7: "Lift up your gates, O ye princes," which the medieval Gloss interprets: "that is--Ye princes of hell, take away your power, whereby hitherto you held men fast in hell".
8. In Ecclesiasticus 24:45, Siracides prophecied: "I will penetrate to all the lower parts of the earth." 

I hope you find these helpful. If you find yourself with a Protestant who only rolls "Scripture alone," you'll want these in your tool belt.

A blessed Holy Saturday to you.

Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

Good Friday Prayer for the Jews - A Controversial History and Theology

By now we are accustomed to the complaint that the millennial old Good Friday liturgy was "inherently anti-semitic." This is commonly assumed by almost everyone since it is widely reported in newspapers and on television. Especially during the release of Mel Gibson's Passion of the Christ, the issue has become a hot topic. Catholics reacted so as to distance themselves from the label of anti-semitism and from accusations that the ancient Latin Good Friday liturgy incited hate-crimes against European Jews.

Well-meaning Catholics, and I include myself, have thereby received a version of an unfortunate liturgical history which asserts the following:

Our Catholic forebears prayed anti-semitic prayers before the altar of God for centuries. We contemporary Catholics have remedied the situation. 

...but is it really true that our Catholic forbears prayed sinful or imprudent liturgical prayers?

St Bernard, St Francis, St Clare, St Dominic, Thomas Aquinas, St Bonaventure, St Catherine of Sienna, St Pius V, St Francis de Sales, St Teresa of Avila, St John of the Cross (himself an ethnic Jew), St Alphonsus Liguori, and, yes, even St Therese de Lisieux the Little Flower, lisped these allegedly hateful and anti-semitic prayers to God.

I myself once believed this version of history. If you have a copy of my book The Crucified Rabbi, it ends with the "revised Good Friday prayer" for the Jews. I put that in there because I wanted to be careful not to offend Jewish readers. Having never examined the topic, I assumed like everyone else that the older prayers were bad and that the new prayers were good. However, I've been looking over the texts and have noticed a few notable features that are often ignored or misunderstood in this debate over the Jews and Good Friday.

Let me also preface this discussion that like Christ, Mary, and the Apostles, I have a fond love for the people of Israel - those children descended from Abraham. I've written a book on the subject and I have always attempted to present a very balanced and careful account. Please done accuse me of anti-semitism. 

All that being said, I have no doubt that some will fling the "a-word" (anti-semitism) toward me, simply because I suggest reinvestigating the older Good Friday prayers for the conversion of the Jews. So be it. I maintain friendships with dozens of ethnic Jews (those who follow Christ and those who don't), and have only love in my heart for the Jewish people.

My recent concern centers on what might be a lack of charity in our generation when we so readily accuse saints, popes, bishops, priests, and laity for over a thousand years of praying "anti-semitic" prayers at the altar of God. Do we really want to accuse our forebears of racism and anti-semitism? I don't. I'm not ready to say that Saint Francis and Saint Therese were even the least bit anti-semitic for participating in the old Good Friday Prayer for the Conversion of the Jews. Therefore, I think we need to rethink the issue and reexamine the prayers from a theological point of view.

So before anyone picks up stones, rolls out the guillotine, or accuses anyone of the "a-word," let's make a careful examination of the theology behind the Good Friday prayers for the Jews.

Why is the Good Friday Prayer Considered "Anti-Semitic"?

Those who allege that the Good Friday Prayer for the Jews (henceforth as GFPJ) is "anti-semitic" give three reasons for their argument:

1. The ancient introduction to the prayer refers to the Jews as "perfidious Jews" {perfidis Judaeis}. The prayer itself also speaks of the "faithlessness of the Jews" {Judaicam perfidiam}. Let it be known that in Latin, perfidia means "faithless." Unfortunately, in English "perfidious" usually means "treacherous."
2. The ancient prayer speaks of a "veil over the hearts" of those adhering to the synagogue.
3. The ancient prayer refers to the "blindness" {caecatione} of the Jews and prays that through "Christ they may be delivered from their darkness {a suis tenebris}."

For these three reasons (perfidy, veiled hearts, and blindness), the ancient Latin GFPJ is condemned as anti-semitic. However, we should note that the reason for the prayer is that, and I quote, "they might recognize the light of thy truth, who is Christ."

History of the Good Friday prayer for the Jews

The Good Friday Prayer for the Jews (GFPJ) exists in five versions:

1. Old Latin version (the one discussed above)
2. 1955 version (Revised Holy Week under Pope Pius XII)
3. 1960 version (Pope John XXIII)
4. 1970 version (Pope Paul VI - Novus Ordo)
5. 2008 supplement to 1960 version (Benedict XVI's replacement version for those using the 1962 Missale)

The 2008 version is a replacement GFPJ for the 1960 GFPJ since there was a worry that the 1960 GFPJ was still too offensive.

Before we get into all that, here are the texts of the ancient GFPJs:

Old Latin GFPJ

Let us pray also for the faithless Jews {perfidis Judaeis}: that Almighty God may remove the veil from their hearts; so that they too may acknowledge Jesus Christ our Lord.

Almighty and eternal God, who dost not exclude from thy mercy even Jewish faithlessness {Judaicam perfidiam}: hear our prayers, which we offer for the blindness of that people; that acknowledging the light of thy Truth, which is Christ, they may be delivered from their darkness. Through the same our Lord Jesus Christ, who liveth and reigneth with thee in the unity of the Holy Spirit, God, for ever and ever. Amen.

1955 GFPJ (same text but with kneeling introduced)

Here, the same introduction and prayer are said, but kneeling was added so that the prayer conformed to the other surrounding prayers.

1960 GFPJ (same prayer, but deletes "perfidis" and "perfidiam")

Let us pray also for the {perfidis} Jews: that almighty God may remove the veil from their hearts; so that they too may acknowledge Jesus Christ our Lord. Let us pray. Let us kneel. Arise.

Almighty and eternal God, who dost also not exclude from thy mercy the Jews {Judaicam perfidiam}, hear our prayers, which we offer for the blindness of that people; that acknowledging the light of thy Truth, which is Christ, they may be delivered from their darkness. Through the same our Lord Jesus Christ, who liveth and reigneth with thee in the unity of the Holy Spirit, God, for ever and ever. Amen.

1970 GFPJ (revised to exclude "perfidy, veiled hearts, and blindness")

Let us pray for the Jewish people, the first to hear the word of God, that they may continue to grow in the love of his name and in faithfulness to his covenant. (Prayer in silence. Then the priest says:)

Almighty and eternal God, long ago you gave your promise to Abraham and his posterity. Listen to your Church as we pray that the people you first made your own may arrive at the fullness of redemption. We ask this through Christ our Lord. Amen.

2008 Supplement GFJP for those using the 1962 Latin Rites (like 1970 Novus Ordo, revised to exclude "perfidy, veiled hearts, and blindness")

Let us also pray for the Jews: That our God and Lord may illuminate their hearts, that they acknowledge Jesus Christ is the Savior of all men. (Let us pray. Kneel. Rise.)

Almighty and eternal God, who want that all men be saved and come to the recognition of the truth, propitiously grant that even as the fullness of the peoples enters Thy Church, all Israel be saved. Through Christ Our Lord. Amen.

Is the Old GFPJ Offensive and Should This Matter?

By comparing the older versions to the 1970 and 2008 Supplement, we find that the GFPJ is changed so as to exclude the concepts of "perfidy, veiled hearts, and blindness."

We can understand how these ideas are offensive. As stated above, the word "perfidy" in English (and I assume other languages), has taken on the meaning of "treacherous." Surely we don't believe that our Jewish neighbors are sneaking around our backyards ready to attack us. Nor do we believe that they are plotting against us.

However, it is obvious to everyone that Jews do not believe the Catholic Faith, and nobody holds that Jews have faith in the crucified and resurrected Christ. It is a fact confessed by Christians and Jews alike: Jews in the synagogue don't believe in Jesus Christ. They do not have the gift of supernatural faith. Therefore, Catholics acknowledge that the those in the synagogue do not have the Catholic Faith and so they pray that they will have faith in Christ. If the Jews of the synagogue had faith in Christ, then we wouldn't be praying for them in the first place.

With regard to the idea of "veiling," nobody wants to be thought of as having a "veiled heart" or as dwelling in "darkness." I can never imagine walking up to a Jewish acquaintance at a cocktail party and saying, "So, how is like living in blindness and darkness?" So, of course, we can readily grant that these descriptions are offensive.

But here's the rub. If we are worried about our Catholic Faith being "offensive" then we'll have to do MUCH more than simply change the Good Friday liturgy. We'd have to back down on naming abortion as "murder." We'd have to erase that uncomfortable truth about the existence of Hell. We would have to also revise the First Commandment prohibition against "idols" so as to not offend our Hindu neighbors. Then, we'd have to revise our doctrine of matrimony, since this also offends those of different orientations. Our basic claim that "God has a Son, Jesus Christ," is entirely offensive to Muslims - as they have often explained to me. So shall we also revise this? And my Protestant friends are offended that they cannot receive Holy Communion at Mass and they are also offended by Marian devotions and Marian statues. Should we revise these features of the Catholic dogma, liturgy, and devotion? If we do, there will be nothing left.

The fact is, Catholic liturgy will offend those who are not Catholic. Period. Close the book. That non-Catholics are offended by Catholicism should not be surprising. Saint Paul said it best when he wrote, "But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews indeed a stumbling block, and unto the Gentiles foolishness" (1 Cor 1:23). So "offensiveness" does not amount to hate-crimes, racism, or even "anti-semitism."

A Theological Analysis of the GFPJ

So then, do these three descriptions (perfidy, veiled hearts, blindness) accurately apply to those who adhere to Rabbinical Judaism and who are not Catholics?

Saint Paul writes the following and it should be the go-to text for these discussions:

And not as Moses put a veil upon his face, that the children of Israel might not steadfastly look on the face of that which is made void. But their senses were made dull. For, until this present day, the selfsame veil, in the reading of the old testament, remaineth not taken away (because in Christ it is made void). But even until this day, when Moses is read, the veil is upon their heart. But when they shall be converted to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away. Now the Lord is a Spirit. And where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. (2 Corinthians 3:13–17, D-R)

What do we learn here from the Apostle Paul? Three things:

1. The children of Israel have been made "dull" in some way.
2. A "veil is placed over their hearts" whenever the Old Testament is read by them. 
3. They shall be "converted" - not be observing the Old Testament, but by turning to Christ and by receiving the Spirit of liberty.

The older Good Friday prayers express all three truths. If these three truths are offensive, sinful, and/or anti-semitic, then we should also purge 2 Cor 3:13-17 from our Bibles. Where would it stop?

Conclusion

The purpose of this post is to encourage three actions points:

1. Reinvestigate the theological reasons for the old Good Friday prayers.
2. Bury the liturgical myth that Catholic Saints before the 1900s were praying anti-semitic prayers.
3. Stir up discussions about the salvation of the Jews as Catholics, as the Fathers and Saint Thomas Aquinas teach. The Jews, they say, will all become Catholic during the Apocalypse.

I look forward to your comments, but on a subject this controversial, please follow this rule for posting comments:

1. Pray a Hail Mary before you post in order to have a right intention in union with God's will.
2. Don't accuse people on the internet (whom you've never met) of anything pejorative. I'll delete offensive comments right away.

A blessed Triduum to you. Christus passus sub Pontio Pilato.

Plenary Indulgence Opportunities in Triduum

From the Enchiridion of Indulgences:

On Good Friday, a plenary indulgence is available to those who assist devoutly at the adoration of the Cross during the solemn liturgical celebration of the Passion of the Lord.

At the Easter Vigil or on the baptismal anniversary, a plenary indulgence is available to those who renew their baptismal vows through a legitimately approved formula.

HT: Fr Pio Maria, CFR



Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

Traditional Names for Holy Week Days

It's lamentable that we (at least in America) have lost the traditional names for Monday, Wednesday, and Thursday in Holy Week. Let's bring them back into usage. They are as follows:

Palm Sunday - The name is obvious.
Fig Monday - The day on which Christ cursed the fig tree. Sometimes, people ate dried figs on this day to commemorate the miracle.
Spy Wednesday - The day on which Judas Iscariot met with the Jewish priests and made plans for the betrayal, hence the name "spy."
Maundy Thursday - This one comes from the Latin Vulgate version of John 13:34 “A new commandment I give unto you: That you love one another, as I have loved you, that you also love one another.” In Latin, the verse begins with Mandatum novum do vobis. The word "maundy" is a corruption of "mandatum" meaning commandment.
Good Friday - Here "good" hearkens back to Middle English in which the word denotes piety or holiness.
Holy Saturday - A quiet day, the perfect Sabbath of Christ in which He descended into the limbo of Hell and delivered the saints of the Old Testament.

Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

Who is the Naked Man in St Mark's Gospel?

Saint Mark the Evangelist

St. Mark's account of Our Lord's Passion describes a "young man wearing nothing but a linen cloth about his body," that ran off naked during the arrest of Christ:

Then his disciples, leaving him, all fled away. And a certain young man followed him, having a linen cloth cast about his naked body. And they laid hold on him. But he, casting off the linen cloth, fled from them naked. (Mark 14:50–52, D-R)

A reader named Tim from Orinda, California recently wrote me about this. He asks:

Why does Mark's Gospel include this seemingly random detail? What's the meaning of this? Nothing more of this young man is described. I understand that no details in the Gospels are "random", but I can't see how this fits into the larger narrative. Any enlightenment on this would be appreciated.

Let's play Sherlock Holmes here. Note that the Apostles all fled, but this one man "followed him," that is, this man in linen followed Christ when the Apostles abandoned Christ. Second, the passage has clear allusions to Joseph in Genesis 39:

Now it happened on a certain day, that Joseph went into the house, and was doing some business, without any man with him: And she catching the skirt of his garment, said: Lie with me. But he leaving the garment in her hand, fled, and went out. (Genesis 39:11–12, D-R)

Every Jew knew this story about Joseph well. It seems that Mark includes this to show that this person was faithful to Christ and that he, like Joseph in the Old Testament, fled from the adulterers. Who were the adulterers? The adulterers were high priests of Jerusalem who had gone whoring after Caesar and abandoned their true Bridegroom the Messiah.

Some have suggested that the naked young man of Mark 14:50–52 is none other than Saint Mark himself. I'm partial to this view. It's a random detail and Mark doesn't usually focus on odd details that do not pertain to the action of the narrative. Moreover, the Last Supper took place in the home of St Mark's mother. Hence, we might rightly suppose that St Mark was present with Christ and the Apostles on the evening of Maundy Thursday. Saint Mark would also have been a young man at this time. Perhaps he is humbly recounting how he as a young man and as a new disciple tried to remain faithful to Christ on that dreadful evening.

St. John Chrysostom, St. Ambrose, St. Gregory, and Baronius, according to Lapide, think the naked man was St. John the Apostle; for he was a youth, and the youngest of the Apostles. Moreover, Saint John remained faithful all the way to the crucifixion.

Of course, we will not know until Heaven, may God grant it to us. Still, I think that the naked man's identity is most likely Saint Mark.

Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

Fridays in Lent: Steak No, but Lobster Okay?

Lobster and French Fries Anyone?

A Canterbury Tales reader writes:

I am from the Central American country of Belize. I read the blog occasionally and am always pleased to learn the back story of the very many habits, customs, historical trivia and explanations and traditions of our great Catholic Faith. This Ash Wednesday, I received ashes at the Cathedral of our diocese and towards the end of Mass, the bishop explained that the restriction on the consumption of meat is limited to that of warm-blooded animals. 

I understand from the local interpretation that the abstinence from meat consumption is linked to the fact that meat is a sort of a luxury. We are encouraged here to eat fish or seafood on Fridays. The odd thing is that seafood is more expensive than say chicken, so I wonder whether it is really sensible to have fish or seafood which would really be even more luxurious fare than the normal chicken or beef. Shouldn't the spirit of abstinence necessitate that any sort of luxury food be given up? Also, why would warm-blooded creatures be restricted in the first place? 

Could you perhaps give an explanation of the restrictions on the blog? I know you are well versed in this area and expect, should you be able to give one, a response that will be comprehensive. 

With grateful appreciation,
Ray

Great question, Ray.

Saint Thomas Aquinas provides the answer to this question. There are two reasons. First, Christ offered his flesh for our us on the wood of the cross. Since Christ gave us his flesh, we also give up flesh meat.

There is another deeper reason that is given by Saint Thomas Aquinas in detail:

Fasting was instituted by the Church in order to bridle the concupiscences of the flesh, which regard pleasures of touch in connection with food and sex. Wherefore the Church forbade those who fast to partake of those foods which both afford most pleasure to the palate, and besides are a very great incentive to lust. 

Such are the flesh of animals that take their rest on the earth, and of those that breathe the air and their products, such as milk from those that walk on the earth, and eggs from birds. For, since such like animals are more like man in body, they afford greater pleasure as food, and greater nourishment to the human body, so that from their consumption there results a greater surplus available for seminal matter, which when abundant becomes a great incentive to lust. Hence the Church has bidden those who fast to abstain especially from these foods. 

So hot blooded animal foods generally provide more pleasure than cold blooded animal foods.

But what about lobster or oysters? Writing in the 13th century, he recognized this problem: "Further, some fish are as delectable to eat as the flesh of certain animals. Now "concupiscence is desire of the delectable," as stated above (I-II, 30, 1)." Saint Thomas writes that the Church rules regarding this in general and that eating flesh meat is generally more desirable than eating fish. If you doubt this, count the number of burger restaurants, steak houses, and fried chicken restaurants and compare that number to the number of Long John Silver franchises.

Of course, lobster is much better than Long John Silver, isn't it? It's probably a good rule of thumb to avoid lobster or crab in the spirit of penance. However, for me, I'd much rather have a steak or burger than lobster.

It's very similar to wine. The Church doesn't forbid drinking $100 bottles of wine during Lent, but it's contrary to the spirit of Lent. The Church's general rules of Lent are the bare minimum. The heartfelt sacrifice of love by which we offer little hidden penances (like eating the salad and not the lobster on Friday) to Christ bring joy to His heart and grace to our souls. Most people don't regularly eat lobster anyway. Most people do however eat meat regularly and the Church thinks that we should make more sacrifice in this regard on Fridays.

PS: Now that you're getting used to meatless Fridays in Lent, why not go old-school and make it a year round practice?

Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.