(Posted with permission from Phil, originally posted on the Catholic Debate Forum ).
I am not so sure that Martin Luther was protesting against abuses in the Church as much as he was fighting against a local prince-bishop seeking to raise money so he could become an absentee bishop of another diocese.
The guy that got Luther's back up was a Dominican friar named John Tetzel who had been hired by the prince-bishop and who was preaching about indulgences. The indulgence being preached was for donating money or goods for the good work of building saint Peter's basilica in Rome. Tetsel's preaching apparently sounded like extortion to Martin Luther so he got angry and wrote a few tracts against the practise and also the famous 95 theses that in legend was nailed by Luther to the Castle Church door at Wittenburg on 31st October, 1517. Around three years later Luther was excommunicated for writing a number of books and tracts against the Pope and the Church.
The whole affair was mixed with the politics of the German states, the Holy Roman Empire, and unfortunately some corrupt popes. It was a bad time for the Church, yet Luther's action did not help matters. He managed to precipitate a peasant's revolt and series of wars in Germany that lasted for about thirty years and helped to reshape the map of northern Europe. Sweden became a major power as a result of these wars. France gained power at the expense of Spain - one of the saddest signs of the corruption of power within some parts of the Church is the fact that the French Cardinal Archbishop Richelieu funded and aided the protestants in the Germans wars, he did so to disadvantage Spain, it was a very sordid period in European history.
Henry VIII motive was to get rich as well as to divorce a wife he no longer was attracted to; he raided the monasteries for land to sell to the nobility of England and used the money to fight wars in France. The wars didn't work out well, so the money was almost gone by the time Henry died. His Son Edward VI was tutored by protestants who shared much of Luther's theology and that is when the English church became protestant in theology. After a brief return to Catholicism under Mary I, Elizabeth I ascended the throne and England became the protestant nation that we know today.
Nobody should harbour the myth of protestant faith being freely accepted by the people of Europe. In England the Church of England was a state church and membership was enforced upon the whole population by law. In Sweden, Norway, and Denmark the Lutheran Church was the state Church and membership was enforced upon the whole population by law. In the north eastern parts of Germany similar laws enforced membership of the Lutheran Church. Catholic states acted in similar ways, enforcing Church membership by law.
It was a cruel time. Many good people died because they would not yield to the laws that demanded that they violate their conscience. We should all be glad that such cruelty has past in the west.
Phil
Qui Locutus - Formerly The CathApol Blog - a Catholic Apologetics Blog Defending the Faith and keeping Catholics Catholic! Scott Windsor, MEd. - aka: CathApol
Running Water!
No more dependence on fossil fuels?
You decide! I realize that this and the last posting I presented here are not directly related to Catholic apologetics - but I saw this and felt it needed to be shared:
You decide! I realize that this and the last posting I presented here are not directly related to Catholic apologetics - but I saw this and felt it needed to be shared:
Rush Exposes Speaker Pelosi
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Let’s go to Pelosi. This was on Meet the Press yesterday. I want you to hear this, and we’ll comment after it. Tom Brokaw said, "Senator Obama saying the question of when life begins is above his ‘pay grade,’ when whether you’re looking at it ‘scientifically or theologically,’ if he were to come and say, ‘Help me out here Madam Speaker,’ what would you tell him?"
PELOSI: As an ardent practicing Catholic, uh, this is an issue that I have studied for a long time. And what I know is over the centuries, the doctors of the church have not been able to make that definition, and, uh, senator—uh, I’m—senator—Uh, St. Augustin’ (sic) said at three months. We don’t know. The point is is that it shouldn’t have an impact on a woman’s right to choose. Roe v. Wade talks about very clear definitions of when the child—uh, eh, er, first trimester, certain considerations second trimester, not so third trimester. The—the—there’s very clear distinctions.
RUSH: You know, folks, this is just embarrassing. As I’ve often wondered, is she genuinely this uneducated, uninformed, silly, stupid, whatever—and I’ve concluded there isn’t a word to describe the status of her brain. The Catholic Church doesn’t know? The Catholic Church hasn’t stipulated? The "doctors" at the Catholic Church? You mean the pope goes and consults the doctors to find out when life begins? Really? The doctors have more to say than God-d? I mean, Nancy, cite anybody. Don’t cite the Catholic Church. You’re putting them in an untenable position. You’re fixing it so every priest, no matter how wacko left the priest might be, cannot support you. Good grief, ladies and gentlemen! Life begins a conception. Where else can it begin? Peggy Noonan had a great way—I’m going to have to paraphrase what she wrote—of reducing this to its most simple, its most elemental. If life doesn’t begin at conception, then why the hell wear a condom? If life doesn’t begin at conception, then why the hell take the pill? Well, the church doesn’t allow the pill. I know the church doesn’t allow the pill because life begins at conception—and the church is not cool on condoms, either, logoed or otherwise. But that’s the point. This is not something that we’ve been arguing about for centuries. St. Augustine said life begins at three months? St. Augustine knew that Roe vs. Wade was going to come along and basically say the same thing? Ed Morrissey, writing at the Hot Air blog, has done yeoman’s research into this. He writes today: "The notion that the Catholic Church declared abortion a sin at the same time as the Pill is patently absurd, and shows that Pelosi has either lied about studying the issue in terms of Church history or lied about what she found. Church writings specifically naming abortion as murder appear as early as 70 AD in the Didache, the first written catechism of the Christian church: ... ‘Tertullian, sometimes known as the Father of the Latin Church, wrote with equal clarity and force: "In our case, a murder being once for all forbidden, we may not destroy even the fetus in the womb, while as yet the human being derives blood from the other parts of the body for its sustenance.’" This is AD 179, the year 179, following year 70. "The Catholic catechism is extremely clear on the nature of its position on human life, and has been remarkably consistent on this point for almost 2,000 years, and it finds that position in the Old Testament. Human life begins at conception, not at birth, and not at some point consistent with Roe for convenience. "In Psalm 51, David refers to his sinfulness beginning at the moment of conception, and sinfulness requires physical life and a soul to exist." So there you have it in the Old Testament. The Catholic Church has not thrown the Old Testament under the bus, the last time I looked. This is a giant embarrassment, or ought to be. Where’s Brokaw? Where is the media on this? She got away with this kind of inane, insane rambling, trying to fit one of the most sacred religious beliefs held by Catholics all over the world into a political issue that would conform with a rogue Supreme Court decision called Roe vs. Wade in 1973. Now, that is hubris. That is arrogance like I cannot believe. She has placed herself above the doctors of the church, above "St. Augustin," as she said. She has placed herself above the pope and everything the Catholic Church has ever said about this. And of course Brokaw just sits there, "Heh, heh, heh. Oh. Good." Well, that’s not entirely true. Brokaw did challenge her on this. I have to be honest. It’s with the natural gas business that he just sat there. He said, "But wait a minute, the Catholic Church at the moment feels she strongly that life begins at the point of conception."PELOSI: (mumbling) And this is, like, 50 years or something like that. So again, over the history, uh, of the church, this is an issue of, uh, controversy.RUSH: No, it’s not an issue of controversy in the church. It’s an issue of controversy with the followers, with the parishioners, with the flock like you. Note the 50 years. I’ve always said, "A person’s historical perspective begins with the day they were born." So her use of 50 years there, "Well, it’s been a bone of contention, a controversy in the church for 50 years," meaning her adult life. That’s what she is relating it all to. Th-th-th—(sigh) I’m sorry to stutter, folks. I’m in stunned bewilderment and disbelief over what I consider to be not just stupidity and silliness but arrogance and hubris, and the ignorance that these people have over how this kind of comment is going to come back and bite her presidential nominee. I guess she thinks that she has to provide some sort of Democrat Party interpretation of Catholicism that permits Obama to get away with his infanticide belief.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Now, look, don’t misunderstand me on this, folks. You’ve got a lot of liberal politicians who, for their own purposes, from Mario Cuomo to John Kerry to any number of them, will twist the Catholic Church’s doctrine abortion to fit their own personal desires to attach firmly the Democrat political policy dogma and this sort of thing. The way Cuomo did it, he did it at Notre Dame University, he went to Notre Dame University, and he said, "Of course I understand the sanctity of life, I’m pro-life and so forth, but I cannot impose my political will, my religious views on people. I cannot impose my religious views on the rest of the country." Yet he was perfectly comfortable imposing his tax views on the rest of the country and every other view he had. But it was just a cop-out to allow him to remain pure to Democrat policy. But Cuomo nor Kerry nor any of the others has ever come along and spoken for the Catholic Church like Pelosi did yesterday on Meet the Depressed. That’s the arrogance and hubris. I don’t care whether she said the Catholic Church’s doctors or doctrines, some people say she might have been saying doctrines, doesn’t matter. She was speaking for the Catholic Church, and that’s brazen. This is going to come back to bite. The, quote, unquote, third most powerful woman in the United States of America telling the world what the Catholic Church’s official position on life is, the church cannot let this stand. How they deal with it, we’ll just have to wait and see.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Joseph in Palm Coast, Florida, it’s great to have you on the program, sir.
CALLER: Hi.
RUSH: This place was in the path of Fay. You guys got a lot of rain up there, right?
CALLER: Turn it off. Hi.
RUSH: Hi.
CALLER: I’m a former Catholic priest and a Jesuit, and—
RUSH: Wait a minute. You have to educate me. What’s a former Catholic priest?
CALLER: I was dispense bid Pope Paul VI about 35 years ago from the automations of the priesthood.
RUSH: I see. Okay.
CALLER: But I’m still a priest, and times of emergency I can absolve from sin when someone’s in danger of death.
RUSH: I see. Last rites.
CALLER: Yeah. Yeah. But as to the theology, listening to Pelosi, she is misrepresenting what the Catholic church teaches. For one thing, the theologians don’t teach what the Catholic Church teaches unless it’s accepted by the church.
RUSH: I know.
CALLER: St. Augustine—
RUSH: You can go to Catholic encyclopedia, you can go anywhere you want. This is just a flat-out expedient political lie.
CALLER: Right but people don’t know that, the people don’t know how the church works.
RUSH: Well, wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait. Just a second here, Joseph. Catholics know it, and there are a lot of them, and the Democrats are going to need ‘em, and that’s one of the reasons they put Biden on the ticket, ‘cause he’s a Catholic.
CALLER: Right.
RUSH: But this isn’t going to fly. The Catholics know what’s what.
CALLER: Right.
RUSH: They may get mad at the pope now and then, but Nancy Pelosi is not going to be accepted as redefining church doctrine no matter what their political points of view are.
CALLER: I don’t know. Some people might go along with her, but she’s misleading the public about where the church’s teaching comes from. The pope—
RUSH: She’s not "misleading." She’s lying!
CALLER: Okay. If you want to say that.
RUSH: I do want to say that.
CALLER: You know, Jesus Christ would not start a church that would lead men into error. That’s why the pope is "infallible in matters of faith and morals," and you can’t make an error when he officially teaches the Catholic doctrine. He can’t make an error. He can’t tell people something that’s going to lead them into error. And when the council defines something, it must first have the approval of the pope before it becomes official—
RUSH: Exactly.
CALLER: —Catholic doctrine.
RUSH: And the pope, as we all know, is not Nancy Pelosi. And we know that Pelosi would never be the pope. The question is, Pope Benedict is going to hear about this if he hasn’t. He cares. He’s the pope. He cares about the Catholic Church. The most powerful woman in the United States of America has just lied about his church. Something has to happen here at some point. I don’t know what. I don’t know what steps publicly the Catholic Church takes in a situation like this. But the first thing that is going to happen is, American Catholics are going to hear about it on this program, just like we have not forgotten, do you know that the Drive-By Media nowhere, no place, no how, has played Barack Obama when the cameras had shut down in Chester, Virginia, last week, praising China and its infrastructure? That has not made it to the Drive-Bys. It will, and if it doesn’t make it to the Drive-Bys it’s going to make it to the American people because we’re not going to let go of that, just like we’re not going to let go of this. This is not just about abortion. This is about the hubris, brazen arrogance of a foolish, dangerous woman who as Speaker of the House is on a mission total folly; making a mockery of not only sacred beliefs, but common sense and intelligence on a daily basis. This is the woman who said that Obama is "a gift from God." His leadership and talents are a gift from God. So if that’s how they’re going to appeal to the values voters and if they want to bring abortion up, if they want to bring it up in this campaign we’re going to welcome it. We will welcome them bringing it up again. They cannot win on this, no matter how they fool themselves. The American people did not vote Roe vs. Wade. A bunch of liberal judges on the Supreme Court wearing black robes did it, and the American people have never had their say on it. And this is another way of liberals fool themselves into thinking they are the majority, when they are not.
END TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Let’s go to Pelosi. This was on Meet the Press yesterday. I want you to hear this, and we’ll comment after it. Tom Brokaw said, "Senator Obama saying the question of when life begins is above his ‘pay grade,’ when whether you’re looking at it ‘scientifically or theologically,’ if he were to come and say, ‘Help me out here Madam Speaker,’ what would you tell him?"
PELOSI: As an ardent practicing Catholic, uh, this is an issue that I have studied for a long time. And what I know is over the centuries, the doctors of the church have not been able to make that definition, and, uh, senator—uh, I’m—senator—Uh, St. Augustin’ (sic) said at three months. We don’t know. The point is is that it shouldn’t have an impact on a woman’s right to choose. Roe v. Wade talks about very clear definitions of when the child—uh, eh, er, first trimester, certain considerations second trimester, not so third trimester. The—the—there’s very clear distinctions.
RUSH: You know, folks, this is just embarrassing. As I’ve often wondered, is she genuinely this uneducated, uninformed, silly, stupid, whatever—and I’ve concluded there isn’t a word to describe the status of her brain. The Catholic Church doesn’t know? The Catholic Church hasn’t stipulated? The "doctors" at the Catholic Church? You mean the pope goes and consults the doctors to find out when life begins? Really? The doctors have more to say than God-d? I mean, Nancy, cite anybody. Don’t cite the Catholic Church. You’re putting them in an untenable position. You’re fixing it so every priest, no matter how wacko left the priest might be, cannot support you. Good grief, ladies and gentlemen! Life begins a conception. Where else can it begin? Peggy Noonan had a great way—I’m going to have to paraphrase what she wrote—of reducing this to its most simple, its most elemental. If life doesn’t begin at conception, then why the hell wear a condom? If life doesn’t begin at conception, then why the hell take the pill? Well, the church doesn’t allow the pill. I know the church doesn’t allow the pill because life begins at conception—and the church is not cool on condoms, either, logoed or otherwise. But that’s the point. This is not something that we’ve been arguing about for centuries. St. Augustine said life begins at three months? St. Augustine knew that Roe vs. Wade was going to come along and basically say the same thing? Ed Morrissey, writing at the Hot Air blog, has done yeoman’s research into this. He writes today: "The notion that the Catholic Church declared abortion a sin at the same time as the Pill is patently absurd, and shows that Pelosi has either lied about studying the issue in terms of Church history or lied about what she found. Church writings specifically naming abortion as murder appear as early as 70 AD in the Didache, the first written catechism of the Christian church: ... ‘Tertullian, sometimes known as the Father of the Latin Church, wrote with equal clarity and force: "In our case, a murder being once for all forbidden, we may not destroy even the fetus in the womb, while as yet the human being derives blood from the other parts of the body for its sustenance.’" This is AD 179, the year 179, following year 70. "The Catholic catechism is extremely clear on the nature of its position on human life, and has been remarkably consistent on this point for almost 2,000 years, and it finds that position in the Old Testament. Human life begins at conception, not at birth, and not at some point consistent with Roe for convenience. "In Psalm 51, David refers to his sinfulness beginning at the moment of conception, and sinfulness requires physical life and a soul to exist." So there you have it in the Old Testament. The Catholic Church has not thrown the Old Testament under the bus, the last time I looked. This is a giant embarrassment, or ought to be. Where’s Brokaw? Where is the media on this? She got away with this kind of inane, insane rambling, trying to fit one of the most sacred religious beliefs held by Catholics all over the world into a political issue that would conform with a rogue Supreme Court decision called Roe vs. Wade in 1973. Now, that is hubris. That is arrogance like I cannot believe. She has placed herself above the doctors of the church, above "St. Augustin," as she said. She has placed herself above the pope and everything the Catholic Church has ever said about this. And of course Brokaw just sits there, "Heh, heh, heh. Oh. Good." Well, that’s not entirely true. Brokaw did challenge her on this. I have to be honest. It’s with the natural gas business that he just sat there. He said, "But wait a minute, the Catholic Church at the moment feels she strongly that life begins at the point of conception."PELOSI: (mumbling) And this is, like, 50 years or something like that. So again, over the history, uh, of the church, this is an issue of, uh, controversy.RUSH: No, it’s not an issue of controversy in the church. It’s an issue of controversy with the followers, with the parishioners, with the flock like you. Note the 50 years. I’ve always said, "A person’s historical perspective begins with the day they were born." So her use of 50 years there, "Well, it’s been a bone of contention, a controversy in the church for 50 years," meaning her adult life. That’s what she is relating it all to. Th-th-th—(sigh) I’m sorry to stutter, folks. I’m in stunned bewilderment and disbelief over what I consider to be not just stupidity and silliness but arrogance and hubris, and the ignorance that these people have over how this kind of comment is going to come back and bite her presidential nominee. I guess she thinks that she has to provide some sort of Democrat Party interpretation of Catholicism that permits Obama to get away with his infanticide belief.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Now, look, don’t misunderstand me on this, folks. You’ve got a lot of liberal politicians who, for their own purposes, from Mario Cuomo to John Kerry to any number of them, will twist the Catholic Church’s doctrine abortion to fit their own personal desires to attach firmly the Democrat political policy dogma and this sort of thing. The way Cuomo did it, he did it at Notre Dame University, he went to Notre Dame University, and he said, "Of course I understand the sanctity of life, I’m pro-life and so forth, but I cannot impose my political will, my religious views on people. I cannot impose my religious views on the rest of the country." Yet he was perfectly comfortable imposing his tax views on the rest of the country and every other view he had. But it was just a cop-out to allow him to remain pure to Democrat policy. But Cuomo nor Kerry nor any of the others has ever come along and spoken for the Catholic Church like Pelosi did yesterday on Meet the Depressed. That’s the arrogance and hubris. I don’t care whether she said the Catholic Church’s doctors or doctrines, some people say she might have been saying doctrines, doesn’t matter. She was speaking for the Catholic Church, and that’s brazen. This is going to come back to bite. The, quote, unquote, third most powerful woman in the United States of America telling the world what the Catholic Church’s official position on life is, the church cannot let this stand. How they deal with it, we’ll just have to wait and see.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Joseph in Palm Coast, Florida, it’s great to have you on the program, sir.
CALLER: Hi.
RUSH: This place was in the path of Fay. You guys got a lot of rain up there, right?
CALLER: Turn it off. Hi.
RUSH: Hi.
CALLER: I’m a former Catholic priest and a Jesuit, and—
RUSH: Wait a minute. You have to educate me. What’s a former Catholic priest?
CALLER: I was dispense bid Pope Paul VI about 35 years ago from the automations of the priesthood.
RUSH: I see. Okay.
CALLER: But I’m still a priest, and times of emergency I can absolve from sin when someone’s in danger of death.
RUSH: I see. Last rites.
CALLER: Yeah. Yeah. But as to the theology, listening to Pelosi, she is misrepresenting what the Catholic church teaches. For one thing, the theologians don’t teach what the Catholic Church teaches unless it’s accepted by the church.
RUSH: I know.
CALLER: St. Augustine—
RUSH: You can go to Catholic encyclopedia, you can go anywhere you want. This is just a flat-out expedient political lie.
CALLER: Right but people don’t know that, the people don’t know how the church works.
RUSH: Well, wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait. Just a second here, Joseph. Catholics know it, and there are a lot of them, and the Democrats are going to need ‘em, and that’s one of the reasons they put Biden on the ticket, ‘cause he’s a Catholic.
CALLER: Right.
RUSH: But this isn’t going to fly. The Catholics know what’s what.
CALLER: Right.
RUSH: They may get mad at the pope now and then, but Nancy Pelosi is not going to be accepted as redefining church doctrine no matter what their political points of view are.
CALLER: I don’t know. Some people might go along with her, but she’s misleading the public about where the church’s teaching comes from. The pope—
RUSH: She’s not "misleading." She’s lying!
CALLER: Okay. If you want to say that.
RUSH: I do want to say that.
CALLER: You know, Jesus Christ would not start a church that would lead men into error. That’s why the pope is "infallible in matters of faith and morals," and you can’t make an error when he officially teaches the Catholic doctrine. He can’t make an error. He can’t tell people something that’s going to lead them into error. And when the council defines something, it must first have the approval of the pope before it becomes official—
RUSH: Exactly.
CALLER: —Catholic doctrine.
RUSH: And the pope, as we all know, is not Nancy Pelosi. And we know that Pelosi would never be the pope. The question is, Pope Benedict is going to hear about this if he hasn’t. He cares. He’s the pope. He cares about the Catholic Church. The most powerful woman in the United States of America has just lied about his church. Something has to happen here at some point. I don’t know what. I don’t know what steps publicly the Catholic Church takes in a situation like this. But the first thing that is going to happen is, American Catholics are going to hear about it on this program, just like we have not forgotten, do you know that the Drive-By Media nowhere, no place, no how, has played Barack Obama when the cameras had shut down in Chester, Virginia, last week, praising China and its infrastructure? That has not made it to the Drive-Bys. It will, and if it doesn’t make it to the Drive-Bys it’s going to make it to the American people because we’re not going to let go of that, just like we’re not going to let go of this. This is not just about abortion. This is about the hubris, brazen arrogance of a foolish, dangerous woman who as Speaker of the House is on a mission total folly; making a mockery of not only sacred beliefs, but common sense and intelligence on a daily basis. This is the woman who said that Obama is "a gift from God." His leadership and talents are a gift from God. So if that’s how they’re going to appeal to the values voters and if they want to bring abortion up, if they want to bring it up in this campaign we’re going to welcome it. We will welcome them bringing it up again. They cannot win on this, no matter how they fool themselves. The American people did not vote Roe vs. Wade. A bunch of liberal judges on the Supreme Court wearing black robes did it, and the American people have never had their say on it. And this is another way of liberals fool themselves into thinking they are the majority, when they are not.
END TRANSCRIPT
Power of the Keys
A friend of mine in the Catholic Debate Forum posted this article, I repost here with his permission:
Power of the Keys
"A type is a person, thing, or event in the Old Testament that foreshadows something to come later in time, either later in the Old Testament itself or in the New Testament. It is like a taste or hint of something that will be fulfilled or realized. Types are like pictures that come alive in a new and exciting way when seen through the eyes of Christ's revelation." The type is always lesser than the anti-type. The anti-type (New Testament event) is always greater than its type (shadow of an event in the Old Testament). And both are independent of each other.
"Types" are explained in Rom 5:14 and Heb 9:9, as a figure, 1 Cor 10:6 and 2 Thess 3:9 and 2Pet 2:6, as examples, 1 Cor 10:11 and Heb 11:19, as a type.
The Egyptian Exodus told in Hosea 11:1 is quoted exactly in Matt 2:15 when speaking of Jesus' return to Israel from Egypt: "where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: "Out of Egypt I called my son.""
What Matthew has done here is he took an historical event and interpreted it as a shadow of something greater to come in the future, which he sees as 'fulfilled' in the person of Jesus the Messiah.
Adam and Kind David are other examples of types of Christ. By their very nature Old Testament types are imperfect since they only prefigure the ultimate reality that is made known by and through Jesus Christ. Types of Christ find their perfection in the New Testament anti-type, Jesus Christ.
So when we read the Bible, we need to read it on two levels at once. We read the Bible in a literal sense…But we read it also in a spiritual sense, searching out what the Holy Spirit is trying to tell us through the words…
We do this in imitation of Jesus, because this is the way He read the scriptures. He referred to Jonah (Mt 12:39), Solomon (Mt12:42), the temple (Jn 2:19), and the brazen serpent (Jn 3:14) as "signs" that prefigured Him.
The king of Judah had a throne and this throne symbolized Yahweh's kingship over Israel (1 Chron 28:5; 29:23). The king was a consecrated and recognized as chosen by God (1 Kings 2:15, 1 Chron 28:5). As king, Saul is recognized as Yahweh's anointed, and therefore is a sacred person (1 Sam 24:7,11; 26:9,11,23 2 Sam 1:14,16).
The words "anointed" and "messiah" are synonyms being respectively the translation and the transliteration of the same Hebrew word "mashiah." The word "Christ" is the Greek translation of this word. Therefore, Hezekiah as an anointed king of Judah prefigured Jesus Christ.
This typology is also seen in several parallels in King Hezekiah's life with that of Jesus Christ. Let us consider one of the most striking parallels between Jesus Christ and the good King Hezekiah. We read in 2 Kings 20 that the King is mortally ill and that he prays to the Lord. Then the Lord speaks through his holy prophet Isaiah that the king is to go up to the temple on the third day and his life will be saved and the city will be saved as well. Thus, Christ's own resurrection on the third day was foreshadowed and how He brought His own Body back to Life and saved the city, the New Jerusalem, the Church.
A very important thing happened in the life of King Hezekiah that Jesus Christ later alludes to.
Isaiah 22:19-23
"I will thrust you from your office and pull you down from your station. On that day I will summon my servant Eliakim, son of Hilkiah; I will clothe him with your robe, and gird him with your sash, and give over to him your authority. He shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah. I will place the key of the House of David on his shoulder; when he opens, no one shall shut, when he shuts, no one shall open. I will fix him like a peg in a sure spot, to be a place of honor for his family"
Compare Isaiah 22 with Matthew 16:18-19 which states:
"And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
This title, or position was also known in non-Jewish governments and we can see that the power that the holder of the keys actually has can be determined by reading Gen 41:39-40 "So Pharaoh said to Joseph: '…You shall be in charge of my palace,…Only in respect to the throne shall I outrank you.'" Gen 41 seems to suggest that he ruled not by exercising his own private judgment, but rather was in charge of executing the will of the king.We see this confirmed in Isaiah 22:22 when we read that the Master of the palace will rule such that when "he opens, no one shall shut, when he shuts, no one shall open." This passage presupposes that he will just be executing a judgment in keeping with the will of the king, or else it would have said, "what he opens, no one shall shut, except for the king." The Master of the palace is, so to speak, the agent or mouthpiece for the king.
One important point in Isaiah 22 is that it is the transfer of the keys that designates Eliakim as the new master of the palace, "I will place the key of the House of David on his shoulder…" King David had been dead many years when this took place. Therefore, this verse shows that the office of key holder/master of the palace, was an office with successors just as the office of king was. It was the transferring of the keys that denoted the transfer of power to the new successor of this office as the king's representative, his regent, the master of the palace.
It was God the Father who had picked Peter to be the one to proclaim Jesus as the Messiah. And it was upon hearing this that Jesus alludes to that passage in Isaiah 22 above and gives the keys to Saint Peter. Matthew 16:13, 19 "'You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God... , you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and what you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.'"
The keys represent absolute power to rule. They are owned by the King of Israel who entrusts them to his representative the "master of the palace." Christ is the true King of Israel. Just as in Isaiah 22 above where the keys are handed down to the successors of the king's prime minister we see Christ giving His keys to his designated "master of the palace," his chief minister, his vicar, St. Peter.
That the "gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it" also implies succession for Peter's office just as the holders of the keys of David had successors. Peter died. Yet, Christ's promise is true. Peter who became the Bishop of Rome has a successor. The future tense used in Matthew 16, "will build" and "will give you the keys," refers to what Christ will give to St. Peter after the Resurrection.
Since we find many instances when Jesus is comparing the kingdom of heaven to a field, a mustard seed, leaven, and a net (Matt 13:24-52) demonstrate that the kingdom Jesus is talking about the universal Church on earth, not the eternal state of glory. Jesus comparing the kingdom of heaven to ten maidens, five of whom were foolish (Matt 25:1-2), further shows that the kingdom is the Church on earth. This kingdom cannot refer to the heavenly kingdom because there are no fools in heaven! Again, the "kingdom of God" is like the seed which grows and develops (Mark 4:26-32). The heavenly kingdom is eternal, so the kingdom to which Peter holds the keys of authority is the earthly Church. The one Jesus Himself founded.
Let's put it all together with what we've learned today. God promises to establish the Davidic kingdom forever on earth (2 Sam 7:16; Psalm 89:3-4; 1 Chron 17:12,14) and Matthew clearly establishes this tie of David to Jesus in the first line of his Gospel. Jesus is the new King of the new House of David, and the King will assign a chief steward to rule over the house while the King is in heaven. We see that the keys of the kingdom pass from Shebna to Eliakim (Isa 22:22). Thus, the keys are used not only as a symbol of authority, but also to facilitate succession. We see in the early Church that successors are immediately chosen for the apostle's offices (Acts 1:20). Just as the Church replaced Judas, it also replaced Peter with a successor after Peter's death. The keys of Christ's kingdom have passed from Peter to Linus all the way to our current Pope with an unbroken lineage for almost 2,000 years.
God Bless
Nathan
Stations for CATHOLIC World Youth Day
Click here: Catholic World News (CWN)
I have copied and replied to the text here:
allow our Faith to be watered down in the name of this false
ecumenism. True ecumenism does not mean we change our
Faith! Afterall - this is the CATHOLIC World Youth Day, NOT
the inter-religious World Youth Day!
Catholics need to be CATHOLIC and not be ashamed of our
Faith! We need to NOT hide our Light under a bushel!
gathering - don't make our youth think there's something "wrong" or
feel like they can't BE Catholic!
is NOT about Jews or any other religious group! It SHOULD be
about Catholic kids learning to love and LIVE their CATHOLIC
Faith!
In JMJ,
Scott<<<
I have copied and replied to the text here:
Sydney, May. 29, 2008 (CWNews.com) - World Youth Day organizers in Sydney, Australia, have altered the traditional pattern for the Stations of the Cross in a bow to ecumenical and inter-religious sensibilities, the Sydney Morning Herald reports.We should write our bishops and Rome too and ask them not to
allow our Faith to be watered down in the name of this false
ecumenism. True ecumenism does not mean we change our
Faith! Afterall - this is the CATHOLIC World Youth Day, NOT
the inter-religious World Youth Day!
Catholics need to be CATHOLIC and not be ashamed of our
Faith! We need to NOT hide our Light under a bushel!
Instead of the usual 14 stations, the Stations of the Cross that will take place in Sydney on July 18 will be a shortened version, "founded entirely on passages from the New Testament," the Morning Herald says. Stations based on pious tradition, such as those recalling Christ's falling three times, and Veronica wiping his face, will not be included. The choice of an exclusively Scriptural approach is intended to appeal to other Christian groups, organizers say.Let such "appeals" happen at OTHER events! If this is a CATHOLIC
gathering - don't make our youth think there's something "wrong" or
feel like they can't BE Catholic!
The text for the Stations of the Cross has also been chosen to avoid language that might offend Jews or inflame anti-Semitic feelings. Bishop Anthony Fisher, the chief organizer for World Youth Day in Sydney, explained: "In the choice of scriptural texts you can choose ones that are less likely to be misinterpreted by people to encourage that kind of feeling and we've chosen those texts carefully and in consultation with others."Again, we're CATHOLIC - our youth is CATHOLIC. This gathering
is NOT about Jews or any other religious group! It SHOULD be
about Catholic kids learning to love and LIVE their CATHOLIC
Faith!
In JMJ,
Scott<<<
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Feast of the Assumption
The Feast of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary - another example of "not-so-ordinary" days! These are COUNTING days - and...
