First and Sixth Commandment: True Motivation

I recently listened to a talk from a traditional Catholic priest on exorcism and possession. Of course he spoke about cases that he had dealt with including screaming children, possessed individuals, cases of obsession etc. all of which appeals to our morbid curiosity. It was however a comment he made when speaking about the sixth commandment [Thou shalt not commit adultery] which caught my attention and has stayed with me and given me much to reflect on in prayer.

He got on to the topic by stating that almost inevitably those who lose their faith or are simply far from God are almost inevitably involved in some activity (either personal or with others) that breaks the sixth commandments. He then said how to truly fulfil the commandment not to commit adultery, and this is the interesting part, one mustn't simply stop breaking the sixth commandment but must first stop breaking the first commandment [You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind].

It is impossible to live a pure life without God's grace and it is through placing God first that we break all ties with other sins and begin to "put on the New Man" that St. Paul speaks about in the fourth chapter of his letter to the Ephesians.

Also of note he also said that nowadays many people turn from sins against the sixth commandment (although it applies to all sins) not because they truly love God above all things - first commandment - but simply because they are sick and tired of the consequences of a particular sin.

Food for thought with regards to our motivations.

Jews, Christians and Muslims - praying to the same God?

I would like to share a recent conversation that I had with a good friend of mine who stated on his Facebook that "Jews, Christians and Muslims, praying to the same and only God but in different ways". My responses are in red.

My initial response was this:

But we should also remember that Judaism is a false religion which rejects the new and eternal covenant and Islam is a heresy (Arian - diabolic?) which was founded by a man who "seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasure" (Thomas Aquinas speaking) and which seeks to, and indeed does!, lead others away from the true and living Trinitarian God.

It should also be noted that even if one accepts that Jews, Christians and Arabs pray to the "same God" (I think this is debatable) that does not mean that the different ways of praying are comparable in any way. Jews and Muslims give false worship to God and reject the true worship found in Christ's sacrifice re-presented at each Mass.

His response was:

I just wanted to say that there is only One and Almighty God. In other words, even though we pray different (doctrine, rites,...) we focus in the same big and supreme God. Buscar lo que nos une y no lo que nos diferencia! (Translation: Look for what unites us not what differentiates us!)

I took issue with this and my response was the following:

I'm sorry but this is going to be a long post as I have to disagree completely with your post. The way to true unity is through the conversion of the Muslims to the One True Faith. Any other unity is false and leaving them in their error is an evil act towards that person whose only hope for salvation is in Christ. I don't know what you mean exactly by your last sentence [Buscar lo que nos une y no los que nos diferencia!] but if it is hinting that all religions are essentially the same and we should discard "problematic" issues looking for unity and what unites us instead, well this is a free-mason idea and is very much condemned by the Church.

I understand what you are saying with we have different doctrines, rites etc. but in fact these are essential in our lives and the salvation of souls which is our goal as Catholics.

Do Muslims believe in one god? Yes they do, but it is only a natural faith and not a supernatural one which brings forth life and is completely different to Christian faith in God. Even though they believe there is one god they have not accepted the reality of that one God through the revelation of Jesus Christ without which they cannot be saved. Belief in one God doesn't unite us when the two beliefs (Trinity vs the Muslim "god") are so opposed and completely contrary.

Muslims reject Christ, they reject Him as the only way to heaven and instead trust that their own works will take them to heaven. This attitude will not lead them to heaven. They reject salvation through grace, they reject Christ as the only means to salvation, they deny his crucifixion (the ultimate act of God's love) with such twisted logic that it can only be of demonic origin. They deny the resurrection of our Lord, deny Baptism which now saves us, deny the Eucharist which unites us to Christ and through which true worship is offered etc. these are not small differences that can be brushed aside, these are key tenets required for salvation something which is unattainable through following Islam and it's tenets!

And this isn't even going in to the details of daily living inspired by the Qu'ran where multiple wives are allowed, abortion is permitted, lying is permitted under certain circumstances, contraception is approved of etc. these are all grave evils promoted by an evil pagan book. The "god" that Muslims follow and adore is not the true God revealed in Christ and there is no salvation found in Islam.

As the Church has constantly taught Islam is an evil heresy that seeks to draw people away from the only means of salvation and we should seek to convert the Muslims not seek false unity with them based on human concerns (i.e. peace, friendliness, brotherhood at any cost etc.).

We must be on our guard against the Christianisation of Islam. The religions are in no way comparable and Islam is something that must be fought not embraced and accepted.

God bless,
Paul

Corpus Christi and My Conversion

Corpus Cristi is one of the great feasts of the Church but for me it holds a special personal significance as it was this topic which lead me to the knowledge that the Catholic Church is the One True Church.

According to Wikipedia: The Feast of Corpus Christi (Latin for Body of Christ), also known as Corpus Domini, is a Latin Rite liturgical solemnity celebrating the tradition and belief in the body and blood of Jesus Christ and his Real Presence in the Eucharist. It emphasizes the joy of the institution of the Eucharist, which was observed on Holy Thursday in the somber atmosphere of the nearness of Good Friday.

I was received in to the Catholic Church as an adult May 24, 2009 and a big part of my conversion story was being convinced intellectually that the Eucharist is not a symbolic memorial but truly the Body and Blood of our Lord, Jesus Christ.

After coming to belief in God and the Christian faith I began looking for the true church of Christ one with authority to teach in His name. One of the central issues that drew my attention was precisely the Eucharist. Is it truly the Body and Blood of Christ or not? What focus on this? Well, apart from being a clear difference between the Catholic Church and Protestant communities it is also one of those clear black and white issues about which there can be no middle ground and it can't be left up to the individual to decide either. It either is the Body and Blood of  Christ, or it is not. Of course this question slowly brought me on to the question of authority in the Church which only the Catholic Church can hold any reasonable claim to. Curiously enough the process of reading the Bible and the Early Church also brought me to the belief that Apostolic Authority which was passed down through the laying on of hands through the Bishops was also a Christian truth which couldn't be denied, but that is for another post.

Back to the Eucharist. After much reading and listening I slowly came to the conclusion that Christ was not speaking metaphorically when [26] ...Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke: and gave to his disciples, and said: Take ye, and eat. This is my body. [27] And taking the chalice, he gave thanks, and gave to them, saying: Drink ye all of this. [28] For this is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins.

Scripture

Part of coming to knowledge of the truth came from reading the Bible. There are many passages than speak about the true presence of Christ such as "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?" (1 Cor. 10:16) and "Therefore whoever eats the bread and drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. . . . For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself" (1 Cor. 11:27, 29) - if it were merely bread and wine how could someone eat and drink judgement on themselves by consuming it?

However, the most powerful passages that I read which give witness to the Eucharist being the True Body and Blood of Christ are found in John 6.

[51 ]I am the living bread which came down from heaven. [52 ]If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world. [53] The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat?

As you can see in John 6:51, Jesus identifies himself with the miraculous bread and then says that if any man eats of this bread they will live forever. Was he speaking metaphorically? Well, the Jews looking at their response in John 6:53 obviously took him literally. What was Jesus' reaction to them taking him as speaking literally? The answer is found in the next verse:

[54] Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. [55] He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day.

Jesus, rather than correct their error about as he does for example when speaking about the "yeast of the Pharisees" (Matt 16:6) instead goes on to insist on the eating His body and blood even more.

[56] For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. [57] He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him.

He then re-affirms it and continues to do so in very explicit language.

[61] Many therefore of his disciples, hearing it, said: This saying is hard, and who can hear it?

If he was just speaking of symbolically eating his flesh as eating and drinking his cup, or accepting Him would this have been so scandalous? It's clear Jesus is saying something very shocking here. And now comes the shocking bit that I remember reading:

[66] And he said: Therefore did I say to you, that no man can come to me, unless it be given him by my Father. [67] After this many of his disciples went back; and walked no more with him. [68] Then Jesus said to the twelve: Will you also go away? [69] And Simon Peter answered him: Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life. [70] And we have believed and have known, that thou art the Christ, the Son of God.

In verse 67 many of his disciples left him. This is the only place in the Bible where Jesus' disciples abandon him over something he taught. We know from verse 53 (The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat?) that they took him at his word and he lets them walk away. Even more shocking is that he then turns to his disciples and asks if they will leave as well.

Reading this it was obvious that Jesus really couldn't have been speaking figuratively and if he were then surely he would have corrected those that misinterpreted him and left? His silence is almost as powerful as his words.

Early Church

The other thing that convinced me that the Catholic Church was right on the Eucharist was the writings of the Early Church. Indeed, it was these that truly led me to the Church on an array of topics; apostolic authority, importance of the liturgy, obedience to the Bishops etc. Whilst researching online I remember reading many protestants who claimed that their "reformation" was not based on new doctrines but was a renewal of the church to how it was in the first centuries. That sounds quite nice. However, it struck me as strange reading and listening to debates that it was in fact only the Catholic apologists who seemed to quote from writers in the early Church. Well, what better way to see what faith the Apostles handed on than by reading the writings directly? I started reading the Church Fathers looking to see whether the early Christians believed in the real presence and to my surprise it is so unanimously taught and believed that even some Protestant scholars that reject the real presence do indeed admit that the early Christians professed it.

I will just include one quote here that I found incredibly powerful and further below is a link to a large selection of further quotes from the first centuries of the Church which confirm that the real presence was not only taught but was unanimously taught.

"They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that THE EUCHARIST IS THE FLESH OF OUR SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST, flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in his goodness, raised up again". (Letter to Smyrnians 7:1)

The following link shows many quotations from the Early Church fathers:

http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/father/fathers.htm