St Raymond Nonnatus is named so because he was "Not Born"...An Interesting Story

Saint Raymond Nonnatus is a Spanish saint surnamed "Nonnatus" meaning in Latin "not born." He was "not born" in 1204 and died in 1240.

He received the nickname "not born" because he entered this world by caesarean section - an extremely rare phenomenon in the 13th century. His mother died in labor and so they cut open her belly. The baby was still alive. This was taken as a sign that God had special plans for him. He was "ransomed" and his life was sacrificially dedicated to merciful act of ransom. The painting above shows the infant Raymond Nonnatus being cared for by angels since he entered this world without a mother. 

By the way, Saint Raymond is one of the patron saints of pregnant women and childbirth. So he's a great saint for Catholic families.

His miraculous birth was the beginning of a miraculous life. He was a contemporary of St Dominic and St Francis, but did not join their orders. Rather, Saint Raymond became a member of the Mercedarian Order in order to ransom Catholic captives from the Mohammedans of North Africa. He traveled to North Africa and is said to have surrendered himself as a hostage when his money ran out.

Even as a slave, Saint Raymond continued his priestly ministry and preached the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the Mohammedans. Troubled by his preaching, the Mohammedans punctured a hole through his lips with a hot iron, and padlocked his mouth to shut him up permanently. 

Saint Raymond was ransomed by his order and in 1239 returned to Spain. He died at Cardona, sixty miles from Barcelona in AD 1240.

In Mexico City, the faithful leave padlocks on the altar dedicated to Saint Raymond as votives against gossip and slander! This hearkens back to the saint having his own mouth pierced and locked up.

Pope Paul VI removed this great saint's feast day (Aug 31) from the calendar in 1970. A big mistake in my lowly layman's opinion.

Saint Raymond Nonnaturs, pray for us!

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 Augustine on the Samaritan Woman as the Catholic Church Not Yet Righteous

Saint Augustine provides a beautiful description of the episode of Christ and the Samaritan woman at the well. In this passage, he describes her as mystically representing the "Church not yet made righteous." You'll remember that Saint John highlights her position as an adulteress and as not pertaining to the Jewish people. Moreover, Christ initiates by asking her for a drink - which then leads to her desire for waters of life.

John's account profoundly highlights the ministry to the Samaritans as full members of the Church through baptism. Perhaps John was also recalling the time when he and Peter administered the sacrament of Confirmation to the first Samaritan believers (Acts 8:14). The incorporation of Samaria into the Church recalls the Messianic prophecy to reunite "all Israel."

Here's Saint Augustine:

A woman came. She is a symbol of the Church not yet maderighteous but about to be made righteous. Righteousness follows from the conversation. She came in ignorance, she found Christ, and he enters into conversation with her. Let us see what it is about, let us see why a Samaritan woman came to draw water. The Samaritans did not form part of the Jewish people: they were foreigners. The fact that she came from a foreign people is part of the symbolic meaning, for she is a symbol of the Church. The Church was to come fromthe Gentiles, of a different race from the Jews.

We must then recognize ourselves in her words and in her person, and with her give our own thanks to God. She was a symbol, not the reality; she foreshadowed the reality, and the reality came to be. She found faith in Christ, who was using her as a symbol to teach us what was to come. She came then to draw water. She had simply come to draw water, in the normal way of man or woman.

Jesus says to her: Give me water to drink. For his disciples had gone to the city to buy food. The Samaritan woman therefore says to him: How is it that you, though a Jew, ask me for water to drink, though I am a Samaritan woman? For Jews have nothing to do with Samaritans.

The Samaritans were foreigners; Jews never used their utensils. The woman was carrying a pail for drawing water. She was astonished that a Jew should ask her for a drink of water, a thing that Jews would not do. But the one who was asking for a drink of water was thirsting for her faith.

Listen now and learn who it is that asks for a drink. Jesus answered her and said: If you knew the gift of God, and who it is that is saying to you, “Give me a drink,” perhaps you might have asked him and he would have given you living water.

He asks for a drink, and he promises a drink. He is in need, as one hoping to receive, yet he is rich, as one about to satisfy the thirst of others. He says: If you knew the gift of God. The gift of God is the Holy Spirit. But he is still using veiled language as he speaks to the woman and gradually enters into her heart. Or is he already teaching her? What could be more gentle and kind than the encouragement he gives? If you knew the gift of God, and who it is that is saying to you, “Give me a drink,” perhaps you might ask and he would give you living water.

What is this water that he will give if not the water spoken of in Scripture: With you is the fountain of life? How can those feel thirst who will drink deeply from the abundance in your house?

He was promising the Holy Spirit in satisfying abundance. She did not yet understand. In her failure to grasp his meaning, what was her reply? The woman says to him, Master, give me this drink, so that I may feel no thirst or come here to draw water. Her need forced her to this labor, her weakness shrank from it. If only she could hear those words: Come to me, all who labor and are burdened, and I will refresh you. Jesus was saying this to her, so that her labors might be at an end; but she was not yet able to understand.

Saint Augustine, Tract. 15, 10-12. 16-17: CCL 36, 154-156.


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.

Mormons and Baptizing for the Dead - What is the Catholic Reply?

We have a Mormon running for President of the United States and many people are learning more and more the heretical doctrines of the Mormons.

• Mormons are polytheists (they believe in many gods, not one God). 
• Mormons believe that the god of our galaxy (whom they identify with the Father of Scripture) has a wife-goddess
• Mormons believe that this god (whom they identify with the Father) was once a human and that he still has flesh and bones
• Mormons have an invalid baptism since they deny the doctrine of the Holy Trinity
• Mormons have a secret rites
• Mormons have baptisms for the dead

This last error, baptisms for the dead, is derived from Saint Paul's words in 1 Corinthians:

“Otherwise, what shall they do that are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not again at all? Why are they then baptized for them?” (1 Corinthians 15:29, D-R)

Mormons claim that this verse proves that the original Apostles baptized living people on behalf of dead people so that the dead might be redeemed.

How does the Catholic respond to this error?

Cornelius a Lapide, that great Catholic Bible scholar gives a number of opinions:

1. This baptism is metaphorical, the baptism of pain, afflictions, tears, and prayers, which they endure on behalf of the dead, in order to deliver them from the baptism of fire in purgatory. For even those Judaisers are baptized who deny the resurrection, like Cerinthus and others, or, at any rate, their fellow-religionists, the Jews, and this, according to the faith and custom of the Hebrews, who are wont to pray for the dead, as appears from 2 Macc. xii. 43, and from their modern forms of prayer. This meaning best fits in with what follows. Baptism is in other places often used in this sense, (as S. Mark x. 53; S. Luke xii. 50; Ps. xxxii. 6). Throughout Scripture, waters and waves typify tribulations and afflictions.

2. “Baptism” can also be understood of purification before the sacrifices which were offered for the dead. The Jews were in the habit of being purified before sacrifice, prayer, or any Divine service. Cf. S. Mark vii. 9; Heb. vi. 12, and ix. 10.

3. The different interpretations of others are dealt with at length by Bellarmine (de Purgat. lib. i. c. 4) and Suarez (p. 3, qu. 56, disp. 50, sect. 1), and they all are referred to literal baptism. 

(a) S. Thomas explains it to mean baptism for washing away sins, which are dead works.

(b) Theodoret thinks that “for the dead” is “like the dead,” when they rise from death, viz., when they are baptized, and emerge from the waters of baptism as from the tomb, they symbolise the resurrection of the dead.

Epiphanius (Hære. 28) takes “for the dead” to mean when death is close at hand, and they are looked on as already dead. For then those who had deferred baptism wished to be baptized in hope and faith in eternal life and resurrection. Hence those to be baptized used to recite the Creed, in which is the Article, “I believe in the resurrection of the dead.”

(d) Claud Guiliaud, a doctor of Paris, thinks that the phrase refers to the martyrs, who suffer for the faith and the article of the resurrection of the dead. This meaning agrees well with the words that follow. “Why stand we in jeopardy every hour?”

(e) Others refer to a custom which the followers of Marcion afterwards observed, and suppose the meaning to be that some, in mistake and out of superstition, received baptism for the dead who had died without baptism. Cf. Ambrose and Irenæus (Hæres. 28), Tertullian (de Resurr. c. 24) and Chrysostom. {This would be one similar to the Mormon position.}

(f) Chrysostom proffers and prefers another explanation, viz., that S. Paul’s meaning is: Why do all receive baptism in hope of the resurrection of the dead, or to benefit their state when dead, that it may be well with them after death, if the dead do not rise? Surely, then, in vain do they do this. But this is not credible, for the common faith of all the faithful is that they do rise, so much so, that many of them put off their baptism, even to the end of life, and are baptized on their death-bed, in the hope that, being purified by baptism from all pain and guilt, they may fly to heaven, and obtain a joyful resurrection. Hence we get the name “clinical baptism.” Many canons are extant ordering that such baptism be not refused to those who ask for it.

This last meaning seems the simplest of all, and the one most on the surface, and is taken from the literal meaning of “baptized.” Tertullian says that “for the dead” means, “When the sacrament of baptism is performed over the body, the body is consecrated to immortality.”

I would propose a another interpretation based on research into Judaism. In the next verse, Saint Paul refers to being danger all the time. This danger of death is key to understanding the argument.

“Why also are we in danger every hour?” (1 Corinthians 15:30, D-R)

What is the danger? Paul's greatest danger were the Jews who reject the Gospel. They were constantly trying to harm or kill him - read Acts for details. So the context here is Saint Paul being persecuted by Jews. These are his opponents. So when he writes: “Otherwise, what shall they do that are baptized for the dead," he is not speaking about Catholics ("we") but Jews ("they").

Now are Jews baptized for the dead? Yes, all the time. When a Jew dies, those Jews who come in contact with the body or bury the body are unclean and must undergo a tevilah ceremonial washing to be restored to worship (I discuss the tevilah and relationship to baptism in my book The Crucified Rabbi). 

“He that toucheth the corpse of a man, and is therefore unclean seven days, Shall be sprinkled with this water on the third day, and on the seventh, and so shall be cleansed. If he were not sprinkled on the third day, he cannot be cleansed on the seventh. Every one that toucheth the corpse of a man, and is not sprinkled with this mixture, shall profane the tabernacle of the Lord, and shall perish out of Israel: because he was not sprinkled with the water of expiation, he shall be unclean, and his uncleanness shall remain upon him.” (Numbers 19:11–13, D-R)

Paul is referring to Jews and saying, "If the Jews are ceremonial washed after touching dead bodies, then of course there must be a resurrection. Otherwise, what's the the point of doing the ceremonial cleansing?"

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.

Should Pro-Life Catholics add Anti-Porn to Their Agenda?

Saint Martin clothes the naked

As we ramp up in America for the 2012 Political Bonanza, perhaps we might think about how else our country could improve. Of course, the right to life is the fundamental right underlying all other rights. After all, if you are not alive, how can you appeal to any other rights or freedoms?

All political law derives (or should derive) from natural law. See the end of Saint Thomas Aquinas' Prima secundae of the Summa for details. This means that being anti-abortion is not merely Catholic (revealed by divine law), but that it is essentially natural (derives from natural law). Human nature demands not only procreation, but the protection and education of offspring. Killing children is immoral because it is unnatural - it is contrary to human nature.

The same goes for marriage. Human nature, since it is naturally inclined to procreation, also has natural laws governing that procreative activity. These are the laws of matrimony. This is why matrimony requires a male and a female. It takes a man and a woman to have a baby. Period. Close the book.

Now Catholics are fighting for both preservation of life (pro-life) and for the protection of how life is procreated (traditional marriage). However, I think we should add a third plank to this battle - the battle against pornography.

The pornography industry is absolutely evil and its tentacles stretch to every television and computer in the world. Just as our nation condemns child pornography as criminal and actively seeks to shut it down within our borders, so also the United States should do the same WITH ALL PORNOGRAPHY. Pornography isn't good for anyone, children or adults. It's victimizes and corrupts the naked and the one who looks upon the naked. It is opposed to charity, justice, and the corporal work of mercy of clothing the naked. It victimizes women especially. It arrests the mental and social development of teenage boys through narcissism and false fantasies. (Ladies, do you wander why there are so few real men nowadays?)

It is not unreasonable to ask our legislators do move for the illegality pornography in the United States. Someone may argue, well you will always be able to find porn, so why try to stop it? That is the lazy-libertarian argument. You might as well say, "Well there will always be murders. So why try to stop it?"

Pornography, like abortion, and deformed "unions" are contrary to natural law. We should begin to speak out against it and pray for its criminalization.

Pro-Life

Pro-Traditional Marriage

Now what do you call being against pornography? Suggestions?

PS: If you don't have a filter on all of your computers, get one now. Young people especially can fall into evil pictures by just searching for photos. I recommend Net Nanny, but there are others. Bite the bullet. Pay the money. Protect yourself and your family.

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.

Latin Nuptial Mass of Blessed Charle's of Austria's Great-Grandson Scheduled in Washington, DC

Ms. Kathleen Walker (formerly the Communications Director at American Life League, and most recently, the Communications Director at Catholic Charities, Arlington, VA) is engaged to be married to His Imperial Royal Highness, Archduke Imre de Habsburg-Lorraine.

Archduke Imre is the great-grandson of Blessed Charles, Emperor of Austria and the grandson of Archduke Carl Christian.

Their wedding will take place at the Shrine of St Mary Mother of God in Washington, DC. The nuptial mass will be in the Extraordinary Form, and is to be on September the 8th, feast day of the Nativity of the Mother of God.

HT: Philip Onochié

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.

How Our Fifth Pope Dealt With Church Growth

Saint Evarstus, Fifth Pope of Rome

The exile of Saint Clement from Rome left the Church of Rome in need of a new shepherd. Pope Saint Evaristus succeded Clement as the fifth Bisohp of Rome, having reigned from about AD 99 to 107 AD. His name in Greek means “well pleasing.” According to the Liber Pontificalis, he was “born in Greece of a Jewish father named Judah, originally from the city of Bethlehem.” Saint John, the last of the living Apostle, died either just before or during his pontificate. His pontificate was the first in which the personal authority of the Apostles was absent. This makes Saint Evaristus the first post-apostolic pope of the Catholic Church.

Pope Saint Evaristus persevered under the persecution of Domitian, which is reckoned by Catholics as the Second Roman Persecution. He divided among the priests the titles of the city of Rome. Titles were approved and ratified places of worship apart from the liturgy of the Pope. The Latin word titulus as term for a Roman parish is interesting. It probably derives from the Old Latin (and Vulgate) version of the Holy Bible, in which it is said that Jacob erected a title or altar to the Lord:

And trembling, he said: How terrible is this place? This is no other but the house of God, and the gate of heaven. And Jacob arising in the morning, took the stone which he had laid under his head, and set it up for a title {titulum}, pouring oil upon the top of it (Gen 28:17-18).

According to the Roman way of seeing things, each validly erected altar in the city was a titulus erected by their patriarch—the Bishop of Rome. Hence, to have valid worship and communion with the Pope, one had to worship and receive the sacraments from a properly appoint titulus. As we read in 1 Clement above, Pope Saint Clement had already established the custom of proper places of worship: “Where and by whom He desires these things to be done, He Himself has fixed by His own supreme will, in order that all things being piously done according to His good pleasure, may be acceptable unto Him.”
Saint Ignatius of Antioch, a contemporary of Saint Evaristus, orders the same:

Let that Eucharist be held valid which is offered by the bishop or by the one to whom the bishop has committed this charge. Wherever the bishop appears, there let the people be; as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.

Both in Antioch and Rome, the bishops were dealing with a new problem—the church was growing quickly. The faithful could not attend the Eucharist of the bishop. Rather, delegates were appointed by the bishop for the celebration of the Holy Sacrifice. In the writings of Saint Ignatius we find that the faithful should attend the Eucharist of the bishop or the Eucharist offered “by one to whom the bishop has committed this charge.” It comes to no surprise that during the same exact decade, the Bishop of Rome, Saint Evaristus, has appointed priests to the seven titular churches of Rome. This appointment of priests and titular churches in the city reveals that Christianity in Rome was now spread throughout the population of Rome. We also learn that Pope Saint Evaristus appointed seven deacons to assist him in ministering to the city. It would seem that these seven deacons served the seven titular churches of Rome. The Liber also records that he promoted six priests, two deacons and five bishops, destined for various churches. Evaristus received the crown of martyrdom in his ardent love for Christ. He was buried near the body of Blessed Peter in the Vatican, on October 25. His feast day is October 26. The throne of Saint Peter remained vacant for nineteen days until his successor, Pope Saint Alexander I was raised to the dignity of Bishop of Rome and Vicar of Christ.

The selection above is from Taylor Marshall's forthcoming book: The Eternal City: Rome and Origins of Catholic Christianity

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.

Did Pope Pius XII Teach that the Virgin Mary Died? Yes He Did.

I have heard or read it dozens of times. There are Catholics that assert that the Immaculate Mary did not die. They claim that when Pope Pius XII dogmatically declared the Assumption of Mary, he left the question open. The cite the following from Munificentissimus Deus:

by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own authority, we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory.

Here, it is said, that the Holy Father left the question open by declaring only "having completed the course of her earthly life," and not "having died."

This begs the question, what did Pope Pius XII intend when he wrote, "having completed the course of her earthly life"? As in the study of Sacred Scripture, the answer lies in context.

If you read Munificentissimus Deus, it becomes manifest that the Holy Father taught that our Immaculate Lady died an earthly death before being assumed bodily into Heaven. This belief is stated repeatedly in the text of Munificentissimus Deus. Here are some examples from Munificentissimus Deus:

Citing Pope Adrian I, His Holiness Pope Pius XII records: "Venerable to us, O Lord, is the festivity of this day on which the holy Mother of God suffered temporal death, but still could not be kept down by the bonds of death, who has begotten your Son our Lord incarnate from herself."

Citing the Byzantine liturgy: "As he kept you a virgin in childbirth, thus he has kept your body incorrupt in the tomb and has glorified it by his divine act of transferring it from the tomb."

Citing Saint Modestus, the Holy Father writes: "As the most glorious Mother of Christ, our Savior and God and the giver of life and immortality, has been endowed with life by him, she has received an eternal incorruptibility of the body together with him who has raised her up from the tomb and has taken her up to himself in a way known only to him."

The citations employed Pope Pius XII reveal that he believed and intended to show that the Immaculate Virgin Mary did in fact undergo death prior to her glorious Assumption.

It should be stated that Mary did not die because of sin, but rather in her desire to be conformed to Christ in all things - to be the speculum justitiae, mirror of justice. Her death gave her dominion over Purgatory as prophesied in Ecclesiasticus 24 and gave her more meritorious prayers for those in the hour of death.

If you would like a detailed defense of the death of the Immaculate Virgin, see the Glories of Mary by Saint Alphonsus Ligouri, a doctor of the Church.

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.

How a Catholic Wrote Half of Chick-fil-A's Mission Statement

His name is Bill Soltesz. Let me introduce him.

In 2006, wen I was still an Episcopalian priest and ready to enter the Catholic Church, I went to Washington, DC to interview for a position at the Catholic Information Center. As I mentioned on EWTN recently, this was the job I received after praying the nine-day novena to Saint Jude. While in DC, I was invited by the Director, Father Bill Stetson to attend the National Prayer Breakfast with President George W. Bush.

The hotel that the Presidential Prayer Breakfast was held in was the one at which President Reagan had been shot, the Washington Hilton. Security was everywhere.

I was reading the USA Today in the lobby and enjoying a cup of coffee, when I gentlemen introduced himself. I was wearing a clerical collar and the man assumed I was a Catholic priest. His name was Bill Soltesz.

I told him that I wasn't a Catholic priest but was praying to enter the Catholic Church soon and shared with him my story. We became instant friends and he spent the rest of the day introducing me to Catholic bishop after Catholic bishop, Tom Monaghan of Ave Maria University and Legatus (who was a relative cause for my conversion to Christianity with the baseball signature with Romans 10:9 - a story I have told on EWTN and elsewhere), priests, friars, nuns, and various other politicians and big shots in the DC circuit. It was a great day. I will always remember Bill Soltesz as the guy whom God appointed to be waiting at the door of the Catholic Church to help me enter therein.

After I accepted the position at the Catholic Information Center, I stayed with Bill Soltesz's family. He drove me around and around until we found a home for my family in McLean, Virginia near Saint John's Catholic Church.

He has always been a dear friend and an advocate for me in every way. He was a great encouragement to me as I was writing my first book - The Crucified Rabbi.

Bill recently shared a great story with about Chik-fil-A

Bill Soltesz worked for CFA from 1979 to 1982 when they had fewer than 100 stores.

Truett Cathy and Bill became very good friends. He invited Bill to come visit him in October of 1982. He picked Bill up at the airport and he stayed at his home over the weekend. They rode motorcycles most of the day Saturday, went to church on Sunday. One night, as they were eating their ice cream, Truett said he was planning to meet with his sons and senior staff in the next few days and try to develop a corporate purpose statement for Chick fil A. 

He had a yellow pad of paper, tore off a sheet and handed one to Bill. He wrote the words "To be good stewards of the gifts that God has given us." Bill wrote the words "To have a positive influence on everyone who comes into contact with Chick fil A." Truett said " I like both of these." 

Soltesz said, "It was easy for me to come up with those words because Truett and Chick fil A really did have a positive influence on my life."

That has been the corporate purpose statement for CFA since Truett and Soltesz wrote those words on October 1982. They are inscribed in stone at the entrance to the CFA headquarters on Buffington Road in Atlanta.

So there you have it. Half of the Chick fil A purpose statement was written by a devout Baptist, and the other half by a devout Catholic.

As Paul Harvey used to say, "That's the rest of the story!"

And last of all, thanks Bill for all that you have done.

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.

How does Saint Joachim fit into Saint Luke's Genealogy

The Sacrifice of St Joachim by Fra Giotto

Today is the feast day of Saint Joachim, father of the Virgin Mary, in the Extraordinary Calendar (1962). The genealogy of Saint Matthew is read for the feast. Oddly enough, Saint Joachim is not mentioned. Neither does the name appear in the genealogy of Saint Luke. This has led some to doubt the Catholic conviction that Saint Joachim is the historic father of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

Tradition holds that Saint Luke's genealogy is that of the Blessed Virgin Mary. When Saint Luke writes "Joseph, [ ] of Heli", without the word "son" being present in the Greek, the Evangelist indicates that "Joseph, of Heli" is to be read "Joseph, [son-in-law] of Heli." Joseph is not the biological son of Heli, but the son-in-law of Heli. Cornelius a Lapide holds that Joachim/Heli was the full brother of Jacob, the father of Saint Joseph. This would make Joseph and Mary first cousins.

Early Church Fathers note that "Heli" who is mentioned as the "father of Joseph" in Saint Luke's genealogy is one and the same as Saint Joachim. 

Heli is short for Heli-achim (meaning "God prepares"), a Hebrew alternate form for the Hebrew Jeho-achim (meaning "Jehovah prepares").

All this being said, it would seem more appropriate to have Saint Luke's genealogy, not Saint Matthew's, to be read at Holy Mass for Saint Joachim's feast day. If any one has the reason why it's Matthew and not Luke, please leave a comment below.

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 the Lives and Acts of Unbelievers Entirely Sinful?

If unbelievers and those not in a state of grace cannot please God in anyway, since the Apostle Paul wrote: “But without faith it is impossible to please God.” (Hebrews 11:6, D-R), are their lives and every act entirely sinful?

On account of Hebrews 11:6 and Romans 3, the Protestant Reformers taught that all the acts of the unbeliever, even naturally good ones (like caring for an infant), were inherently sinful acts.

The Catholic Church does not hold such a view. It is true that naturally virtuous acts do not please God or merit salvation, nonetheless the acts themselves are not sinful acts.

Saint Thomas Aquinas clarifies this in his discussion of heathen marriages:

Reply OBJ 5: An unbeliever does not sin in having intercourse with his wife, if he pays her the marriage debt, for the good of the offspring, or for the troth whereby he is bound to her: since this is an act of justice and of temperance which observes the due circumstance in pleasure of touch; even as neither does he sin in performing acts of other civic virtues. Again, the reason why the whole life of unbelievers is said to be a sin is not that they sin in every act, but because they cannot be delivered from the bondage of sin by that which they do. 

Summa theologiae Sup. q. 59 a. 1, ad. 5

Here, the Angelic Doctor refers to sin as "falling short of the mark" and thus the life of an unbeliever without grace cannot attain to that supernatural end which is the beatific vision, which we call Heaven. Will the unbeliever without grace be damned. Certainly. However, he will not be punished for any naturally good acts in Hell, only his evil acts. An unbeliever can do naturally good things (feed a poor man, love a spouse, care for a sick child), but these acts in themselves are not salvific nor meritorious. One must be in a state of grace for merit to incur. For more on that, see Saint Thomas' at Summa I-II q. 114 at New Advent.org.

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 does the New Testament use the word Presbyter or Elder for Priests?

Protestants often note that the NT usually refers to clergy as "presbyteroi" which means "elders," and not as priests. Why does the New Testament use the word Presbyter or Elder for Priests?

One confusion centers on the word "priest." The English word "priest" comes directly from the Greek word "presbyteros." This is examined in detail in my book The Catholic Perspective on Paul.

Presbyteros > Presbyter > Prester > Priest

Here is an example of how presbyter is used in the New Testament:

“The elders therefore that are among you, I beseech who am myself also an elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, as also a partaker of that glory which is to be revealed in time to come.” (1 Peter 5:1)

Here's another:

“Is any man sick among you? Let him bring in the priests (presbyterous) of the church and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord.” (James 5:14, D-R)

The Greek word for sacrificial, Old Testament priest is "hiereus."

One key verse is in the third chapter of Hebrews, where Saint Paul writes:

“WHEREFORE, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly vocation consider the apostle and high priest of our confession, Jesus” (Hebrews 3:1, D-R)

Here the apostleship is paired with high priesthood. Christ is THE Apostle and High Priest. His New Testament ministers participate in this office. Hence, an apostle is a high priest. Apostolic succession transmits this apostolic priesthood.

The use of presbyteros instead of hiereus in the NT is for two reasons:

1) The word hiereus (priest) is related to hieron (temple). Now the temple in Jerusalem was still standing. Hence, in Hebrews and other epistles, hiereus is avoided since the temple stands. 

This, by the way, relates to a previous blog post about the different spellings of Jerusalem based on it being an earthly "temple city" or heavenly.

2) The NT priesthood is a return to the ancient primogeniture priesthood prior to Moses. This "priesthood of the firstborn" (father to son; Noah to Shem; Abraham to Isaac) is a reflection of the relationship between God the Father to God the Son. The Levitical priesthood was a temporary TRIBAL solution to gold-calf worship. Originally, God planned for a "first born priesthood." Saint Thomas speaks of the "first born priesthood" as pertaining to natural law prior to Moses.

This is why priests are always called "Father" since they represent the Father.

The argument of Hebrews is that Christ, as the "Firstborn Son of God," not only supercedes but precedes the Mosaic Levitical arrangement.

Priests are called "presbyteros" for this very reason. They are representative "fathers" or "old men" within the assembly. The NT priesthood is a primogeniture priesthood in Christ - extended not by Levitical natural generation but by supernatural generation in the Spirit.

This is why priests are celibate (the Father-Son dynamic is a non-nuptial generation), why priests should wear the tonsure (bald old fathers), why they are called presbyteros (old men), and why they are called "father" (old men). Presbyteros is the title Saint Peter prefers. See the Si dilgis Mass epistle.

The identity as "father figure" or "older man" or "patriarch" is more noble and excels the Levitical temple title "hiereus" or "priest." 

For all these reasons, Saint Paul is hesitant to use "hiereus" for the NT ministry. However, he does do so in Greek in Rom 15:16 (regretfully the Douay gets this verse wrong in English).

Short answer: presbyteros hearkens back to the primogeniture priesthood of natural law (which is purer than Old Law). Christ's priesthood is the eternal primogeniture priesthood.

ad Jesum per Mariam,

Taylor

PS: If you are interested in this subject, please visit Paul is Catholic.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.

How a Catholic Emperor Banned the Olympic Games

Saint Ambrose (right) disciplines Emperor Theodosius (left)

In AD 390, the Christian Roman Emperor Theodosius was threatened with excommunication by Saint Ambrose of Milan for having ordered the massacre of all the spectators in the Thessalonian circus as retaliation for a local uprising. Saint Ambrose ordered months of penance for the Emperor who was then  allowed once again to receive Holy Communion at the hand of Saint Ambrose.

Shortly after this date, the Roman Emperor Theodosius began to zealously criminalize the practice of paganism in the Roman Empire. (Paganism refers to any polytheistic cult of worship. For example, the worship of Jupiter, Juno, Minerva, Mars.) Emperor Theodosius accomplished this by passing anti-pagan laws and by destroying pagan temples. He abolished pagan holidays, criminalized witchcraft, snuffed out the eternal fire at the Temple of Vesta in the Roman Forum, and disbanded the Vestal Virgins.

The Olympic Games were traditionally held in honor of Zeus and the Olympiad gods. The Games were also well known for their athletic nudity (did they have also have beach volley ball?!). These Olympic Games, being celebrated every four years, were due to be held in AD 393. Emperor Theodosius condemned and banned the Olympic Games as pagan and unworthy of Christian culture, with the approval of the Catholic bishops (Saint Ambrose in particular). The Olympics were seen as one of the most popular pagan celebrations in the Empire, and so they came to an end in that year.

Under Christian rule, the Olympics remained forgotten for over 1,400 years.

In 1796, the anti-Christian regime of revolutionary France re-instituted the Olympic Games, but it was short lived. The Olympics were celebrated again in England in the 1850s. The Greeks began to hold Olympic Games in the 1870s. The International Olympics that we know today began in 1896 and have been held every four years (with several exceptions) till this very year.

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 Do Catholic Dissenters Make Social Justice Their Highest Goal?

A man once told me about his brother who had become a Catholic priest. This brother, before he was ordained, admitted that he had ceased to believe in the doctrines of the Apostle's Creed - that he no longer believed the Catholic Faith - that is was a collection of myths. Nevertheless, the brother went along and was ordained a Catholic priest. Why? He said that being a Catholic priest would enable him to have a better platform for social justice than if he had simply remained a normal member of the local community. You see, he didn't believe the Catholic Faith. Instead, he resorted to social justice as the final good for mankind.

Of the Catholic priests, religious, and laymen that I have met, those that have dissented from the revealed doctrines of Christ and the Apostles given to the Church have also spoken as if social justice or social work is the highest good of the Christian and should be the highest goal of the Catholic Church.

For example, one might have denied transubstantiation, the existence of Hell, the conditions for mortal sin, and/or salvation through Christ alone, but he was always convinced about the Church's vocation to social justice. In fact, if you listen carefully, they subscribe to a kind of religious communism - what is known as liberation theology. Why is this?

Saint Thomas Aquinas provides us the answer. Spiritual goods can be shared equally by all because God is all in all. The beatific vision is not reduced by another person sharing in it. Likewise, sanctifying grace is not reduced when another sinner receives grace. Rather the grace is magnified as it is shared. This is a fundamental principle of Catholic theology.

However, material goods do NOT work like this. The more people sharing a pizza entails that each person gets less pizza. The same goes for property, water, money, coal, or any other natural resource. God is infinite. Matter is finite.

Those that deny our supernatural end and good which is the beatific vision, must then take the supernatural principle (the beatific vision of God is not divisible) and apply it to earthly goods. They supernaturalize material goods as man's final end. 

Yes, we should provide social justice and endure hardships for the well-being of others. The wealth should be spread to others. However, Our Lord Christ said, "Seek ye therefore FIRST the kingdom of God, and his justice, and all these (material) things shall be added unto you.” We must never forget that the salvation of souls through proper preaching, spiritual direction, and sanctification is a higher priority than social justice. That being said, social justice is the will of God. But it is not an end in itself. It is is means to deliver our souls and the souls of others into the sanctifying grace of God and finally into the beatific vision of God. God loves justice and he hears the prayers of the poor, the widowed, and the orphaned. As Catholics we should have a love for the poor and for poverty itself since this was the state of Christ, Hist Mother, Saint Joseph, and His Holy Apostles. Social justice is an integral element of Christian identity and Christian orthodoxy - it just isn't the highest good.

In conclusion it is the observation of many that those who are dedicated to Catholic orthodoxy, a life of penance and the acquisition of grace - that these are the very ones that serve the poor and proclaim justice. Many of the Church's greatest saints and even doctors were well known for their love of the poor and their willingness to alleviate the suffering of their neighbors. Some even became enslaved on behalf of others. Yet these same men and women were pillars of orthodoxy, lovers of the sacraments, faithful to the Church, and far advanced in the mystical life.

To replace the superior ideal which he has abandoned, man may, for example, place his religion in science or in the cult of social justice or in some human ideal, which finally he considers in a religious manner and even in a mystical manner. Thus he turns away from supreme reality, and there arises a vast number of problems that will be solved only if he returns to the fundamental problem of the intimate relations of the soul with God.' 

- Fr Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange

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.