Fourth Day of Christmas

Keeping Christ in ChristMass...  Day 4!  Some great insights from the sermon today, I'll share later when I get to a computer.

Merry Christmas 3rd Day

Third Day of Christmas - we begin with Mass at Immaculate Conception in Fountain, Colorado.

Chicken Parmesan Church

Chicken Parmesan

I wrote this some time ago after an interesting discussion with a protestant friend. 

I read the menu for a formal dinner to which I'd been invited.  One of the three options for the entree was Chicken Parmesan.  However, the description said that the entree is a lightly breaded chicken breast cutlet covered in marinara sauce and provolone cheese.  Now, how can one call an entree Parmesan chicken without Parmesan cheese?  It may look similar but provolone is not Parmesan.

It is like the Church or what some call "the church."  The Church I know now, the Catholic Church, is both the visible, holy, apostolic, united Church Christ founded for His people, and the invisible spiritual body of Christ.  However others, the ones who claim to be part of the mysterious, coincidentally hard to define, invisible church, are not quite the same thing.  It may have similarities to the Church, but none of these churches are the original.  Church is more than just a word or a name, it is the substance of the thing.  Just like the Parmesan chicken without the Parmesan, these other "churches" are not the Church without the rock on which Christ founded His Church.

Christ commissioning St. Peter

The Catholic Church claims to be the Church Christ founded.  Why?  The short answer?  Because He did found the Catholic Church.  The Church is founded on Jesus' words, "You are Rock, and on this rock I will build my Church", "Feed My sheep, Feed My lambs, Feed My sheep", "Go and make disciples of all nations.  Baptizing in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit", and "I will be with you until the end of the age."  But, because a mentally unstable German priest had problems with the abuses of the men in the Church in his country, and a rebellious and ambitious Frenchman decided to create a church in their own image, many left the Church for an imitation of the Church.  They left Christ's Church for someone's idea of what the Church should be; they left the actual Church for an imitation. 

The tragedy is that now so, so many don't realize that their "church" is an imitation.  They don't know the difference between Parmesan and provolone, because they've never tasted Parmesan.  What they have is something similar in name, similar in focus, similar in words, similar in appearance but not the same.  We all should pray for the unity of the Body--the intention of Christ.  He didn't say, "You all form churches that reflect your idea of what My Church should be" or "There will be many bodies."  It is tragedy that so many Christians spend so much time and energy fighting and disparaging His Church.  Let us pray for future Christian unity or at least understanding--that someday they, those Christians who are not full members of His Church, will come to know the "taste" of the real thing.

Recommended reading:
How to Become a Catholic by Catholic Answers
Visible Vs. Invisible Church by David MacDonald of CatholicBridge.com
Joining the Catholic Church by OurCatholicFaith.org

Merry Christmas - Day 2!

Today is the SECOND DAY of Christmas!  Remember, the Christmas Season JUST STARTED!  What was before December 25th was ADVENT.  Christmas lasts until at least January 6th, Epiphany (the Twelve Days of Christmas), or even until February 2nd, Candlemas.

So, MERRY CHRISTMAS!  Don't take down those decorations just yet!

Christ Mass, December 25th

Why is Christmas celebrated on December 25th?  There are a lot of rumors, half-truths, and anti-Catholic nonsense circulated every year at this time.  One thing must be stated from the start, many of the customs, feasts, and celebrations have their roots in the not only in the 1st century Church but from the Jewish roots of the original Christians.  Many of these traditions were not formalized or universally celebrated until Christians were no longer persecuted by the Roman Empire.      

Back to the original question--Why was that day, December 25th, chosen for the celebration of the Nativity of Christ?

First of all, there is little evidence that prior to the end of the persecutions that Christians had any interest in celebrating Christ's birth.  The biggest reason for this is that they were expecting Christ's return at any time; they thought that Christ would be back in their lifetimes.  As time marched on, the disciples of Christ decided to begin writing about Christ and His teachings in the event that Christ's return did not occur while they were yet living on Earth. 

Modern biblical scholars believe Mark may have written his Gospel first, and there is no mention of the manner of Christ's birth nor the date of His birth.  Matthew, one of the original apostles, and Luke did include details of His birth interspersed with Old Testament prophesies concerning the awaited Messiah. They both, Matthew and Luke, added infancy narratives for the purpose of making it clear that He was the actual Son of God, not just a son of God in the sense that we all sons and daughters of God. 

The only chronological evidence of Christ's birth is contained in the two Gospels which include the birth narratives say that Jesus was born during the reign of Herod the Great. So, Christ was most likely born around 6 BC on our modern calendar according to most biblical scholars.  I won't get into the mistakes of how our calendar is slightly off as far as the starting point of year one; that is a whole different post.

Ancient peoples thought that the earth was "born" or created at the vernal equinox in the Spring.  So, as the "new Adam", it was thought that Jesus was born on March 25.  However, a man named Sextus Julius Africanus put forward the idea that March 25th was the day of Christ's conception, so that December 25th would be the actual birth day.  Since Malachi called the Messiah, the "Sun of righteousness", some early Christians applied this to Christ.  So, later some of ideas surrounding the sun god in the winter would be incorporated into secular celebrations of Christmas.  The days becoming longer after the winter equinox and Christ being the "light" or the "Sun" helped make the 25th of December a popular, then later the only, celebration of Christ's birth in the West.

Over 16 centuries after the feast of the Nativity was fixed in Rome, rumors still circulate that December 25th was a pagan festival re-appropriated by the Catholic Church, therefore it is really a pagan holiday.  This error is a reference to Saturnalia.  While Saturnalia is in December, the date of December 25th was not chosen because of it.  As already mentioned, this date was advocated by a Churchman named Sextus Julius Africanus as the date of Christ's birth because he advocated the conception of Christ happened March 25th, the traditional date of the creation.  Saturnalia was a festival celebrated from December 17 through December 23 with all kinds of eating, drinking, gambling, and forms of debauchery.  While the Catholic Church authorities did hope that the celebration of Christmas in December would encourage Christians not to celebrate the pagan festival, it was not the primary purpose of choosing that date nor was the date chosen to take over that pagan holiday. 

There is evidence that the decision to celebrate Christ's Nativity Mass (or Christmas) on December 25th happened no later than AD 335.   There is a document dating from that year that lists the dies natalis Christi on December 25th.  There is no mention on who made the decision or how it came about but it was a fixed feast and celebrated in Rome by December 25, 335.

Another error put forth about the December 25th date is that the change from the Julian calendar to the Gregorian calendar causing the loss of 10 days of the calendar, caused the celebration of Christmas to be moved from January 6th to December 25th. While it is true that the Gregorian calendar was not adopted by everyone at once, Christmas was already being celebrated on December 25th by the Western Church.  The conflict of the date of Christmas was mainly in the East, where they still celebrated Christ's birth, the visit of the magi, and the baptism of Christ on January 6th.  Some countries in the East did change to the Gregorian calendar, therefore celebrating Christmas about 10 days eartlier than their neighbors.  So, some churches in the East may have changed their date to the same day as the West for consistency and wanting to be one with the rest of the Church in the West.

The earliest record of the celebration of Christmas in Rome is 335AD.  It was chosen because of a North African theologian's suggestion that Christ was conceived in the Spring. Another theologian asserted in 320, "We hold this day holy, not like the pagans because of the birth of the sun, but because of him who made it."  December 25th was not chosen specifically because of the pagan festival but after the fixing of the date, it was the hope of the hierarchy that Christmas would counteract the pagan festivals (Saturnalia December 17 - 23 and the January 1-6 New Year) and be a way to make families closer to Christ.

Some excellent resources on Christmas and the choosing of the date:
The Origins of Christmas by Joseph F. Kelly, PhD.
This book is a well research source on all the traditions we all know and love about Christmas.  He goes into the tradition of the Wisemen and their names, the names of Mary's parents, the date of Christmas, and much more.
The Feast of Christmas by Joseph F. Kelly, PhD.
This book is an abbreviated version of The Origins of Christmas focusing specifically on the fixing of the date of Christmas in the Western Church.  I did use some information I learned from reading this book.

Why is Christmas celebrated on December 25? by David Bennett
In this online article, Mr. Bennett goes into the reasons why December 25th was chosen for the Nativity for Christian reasons.  He also cites Mr. Kelly's research in his article.
A Timeline of Catholic Church History: 1 -500 AD by David MacDonald.
This is a good general outline of Church history.  He references the Christmas date recorded in AD 336.

More on the Church and Homosexuality

Below is a letter someone named "John" wrote me back in 2013, and I lost track of the letter.  I believe it deserves a response still - I hope "John" is still out there and sees this.

(Feb. 13, 2013) Scott,                         Thank you for your time. I have been trying to resolve an issue I have with my Church the Catholic Church for some time now unsuccessfully. I have made the observation that the Church has come to accept the existence of the “homosexual person”. This I believe to be an error the Church must correct.               I have communicated with a number of people in the Church over the past eight years and have been unsuccessful resolving this issue. I do not judge anyone we all have the gift of freewill and will all be judged by the Lord for our lives. However the Church does not have freewill but has an obligation to the Lord to be consistent with the faith of our fathers and the traditions of the Church.               I believe that human sexuality is a very complicated issue that I am ill equipped to discuss with any level of competence. My issue is much simpler “Church 101” if you will. Sexuality of any kind is only involved due to the nature of the change in Church teaching. The heart of this issue is the Church’s handling of temptation.                           Here is what leads me to believe that the Church has accepted the existence of the “homosexual person”.   This section of the Catechism 2357 I believe defines “homosexuality”:   “Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive … sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex.”               I leave out the words “or predominant” as that just makes the group size smaller and clarifies the definition. This statement says that there is a group of people who “experience an exclusive … sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex”. If this group has an “exclusive … sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex” they are incapable of being attracted to people of the opposite sex.   2359 says “Homosexual persons are called to chastity” I do not see how this is not an acceptance of the “homosexual person” who is fundamentally different than the “heterosexual person”. I reject this idea.   In the daily readings recently I noted that 1 Corinthians 6:9 says: "Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor practicing homosexuals" I use a Catholic translation and checked the Vatican site this quote is from the Vatican site.               The implication being that there are “non-practicing homosexuals”. “fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes” are not qualified as “practicing”. I do not believe that Paul was familiar with the concept of the “homosexual person”. I do not believe it right and just for the Church to change the Evangelists thoughts to correspond with its current teaching.               2357 says “Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained” as far as I can tell this is the only justification for the Churches acceptance of the “homosexual person”. To accept something that is “unexplained” can only be done as an act of faith. As a Catholic I am required to accept much on faith and I do. For me to accept “homosexuality” as an article of faith it would need to be consistent with the faith of my fathers, Church history and tradition, and in this case natural law. Since “homosexuality” is consistent with none of these I reject it as a false premise. Let me say I believe that psychology does wonderful things for many people. I also believe that psychology is a soft science. Some in psychology say that God is a delusion. I believe it is wrong to look at this with the rubric of psychology. I believe the correct lens is morality. I believe God is not provable by design I believe God wants us to come to Him through faith. A provable God and faith are not possible. If God is not provable then it is reasonable to come to the conclusion that there is no God. My belief is rooted in faith and the faith of my fathers as well as the Church. If one concludes there is no God then why is one person’s morality better than an others and who is to say “same-sex behavior” wrong. Since I believe in God I believe God determines morality. At my father’s funeral the Priest said “If there is no God then life is a cruel joke”. I believe this to be true.             In communicating with a fair number of people in the Church over eight years. Generally they fall in two camps. Those who believe as I do that the Church has changed its teaching and accepts the existence of the “homosexual person” and those who don’t. Those who believe that the Church has changed its teaching for the most part think that it should. A small subset think that the Church should accept “same sex behavior” presumably in “marriage”. Most say the Church has not changed its teaching.   I have been looking for the rational explanation for the Church’s action unsuccessfully. All I have found are “self-identification”, “same-sex behavior”, “group think”, “political correctness” and “false compassion” none of which is substantial enough to change Church teaching in my view.               It is also clear to me that the normalization of this behavior in the secular world is well underway. I believe that with Adam and Eve the Lord created the most basic unit of society the family. I believe that same sex “marriage” is a direct assault on the institution. I believe that the Churches acceptance of the “homosexual person” ties its hands while fighting this evil.           We all face innumerable immoral temptations in our lives and of course the Church has an obligation to update its teaching as new things are learned. “Same sex behavior” is just sinful behavior and the Church is cruel if it continues to tell people who engage in “same sex behavior” that they are fundamentally different. It is my belief that this is the only immoral temptation the Church tells practitioners that they are fundamentally different than others.   One of the Bishops who was kind enough to respond wrote “you may find it helpful to review an earlier section of the Catechism, from #355 to #421 on creation, human dignity, the fall and redemption.  May the Holy Spirit continue to guide you in your quest for Truth. ”. When I asked if 387 and 2357-2359 are contradictory he did not respond.           I believe that the Church is making it harder for the lost sheep to find its way home with this error. 387 says “Without the knowledge Revelation gives of God we cannot recognize sin clearly and are tempted to explain it as merely a developmental flaw, a psychological weakness”. I believe that 2357-2359 feeds this temptation. Everyone tries to rationalize their behavior. I know that I do. I know of no other sinful behavior that the Church hands out a tool to rationalize the sinful behavior.           If we lived in a vacuum I would be silly pursuing this but we do not. I believe the Lord has purpose for his Church in the real world. I believe that action or lack of action by the Church has consequence. I believe if the Church had stood up 50 years ago and properly said that the “homosexual person” does not exist the reality of same-sex “marriage” in the secular world would not be accepted today. I believe it is never too late to correct an error the Lord is forgiving.               I do not believe this to be a complicated issue but an important issue. The Church has come to accept the existence of the “homosexual person” to teach something new is a change of teaching. I believe this a profound change of teaching. I believe the Church does not disavow the existence of the “homosexual person”               As a member of the Church I feel an obligation to the Lord to point out an error by the Church if I see one. I also feel the Church has an obligation to the Lord to either correct the error or explain my error to me the Church has done neither to date.               I believe that acceptance of the existence of the “homosexual person” is an evil pervasive in the world today. I believe that next to spreading the Gospel in the world standing against and exposing evil in the world is the Church’s highest obligation to the Lord.               If you can give a rational explanation as to why my observation is an unreasonable one that would be helpful to me.               Thank you again for your time.   God bless John

Dear John,
First off, my apologies for not responding sooner.  I copied your letter to the blog and then got sidetracked.  Poor excuse for a serious and I believe a sincere question. 

Let me start out by saying, I share some of your concern with the casual use of terminology, I too believe it can (and likely does) confuse many out there.  "Homosexual" defines the "sexuality" of a person, it implies that such a person is active sexually and follows the "sexual preference" of those of the same sex (hereafter SSA or "Same Sex Attraction").  Just because someone has SSA does not make them a homosexual!  A homosexual is one who ACTS upon the SSA.  Likewise, a person with Opposite Sex Attraction (hereafter OSA) does not automatically equate to that person "being" heterosexual.  There are people who have SSA and OSA who choose to be "celibate," celibacy is their chosen lifestyle and more accurately describes their sexuality.

The above being said, the Catholic Church is "accepting" of SSA individuals whether they are active or not.  The Church must "accept" these sheep into the fold, if they come.  Now, for one who is active in SSA or even OSA in a pre-marital situation, is in a state of mortal sin.  They are not permitted to any of the Sacraments, save Penance (Confession/Reconciliation).  There are many "in" the Catholic Church who are "accepted" as Catholics - yet are in a state of mortal sin, which separates them from the Grace of God, and ultimately from salvation.  The Catholic Church then must be "accepting" of SSA individuals, and those who have been active in that lifestyle need to seek reconciliation with God's Grace through the means God put in place for such - they need to get themselves to the confessional and make an honest confession and a sincere act of contrition.  If the Catholic Church were not "accepting" of such individuals - the door to the confessional would be shut to them and they would be cut off from the means of reconciliation.

ANYONE who is sexually active outside the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony is partaking in the sin of fornication and/or adultery.  Since same sex marriage is impossible in the Catholic Church, any homosexual is in the state of mortal sin - just the same as one who is OSA and in a sexually active relationship outside of marriage.  The Catholic Church does not accept the sin of fornication or adultery, but does accept the sinner and invites them to reconciliation.  The old adage, "love the sinner, hate the sin" rings true here for both SSA and OSA persons who have sinned in this regard.

The bottom line here is, I share your concern with the relaxed use of language.  Words mean things, but when officials in the Church (and elsewhere) use "homosexual" to describe anyone with SSA, whether active or not, it confuses matters - and persons.  The Church needs to be "accepting" of the persons - while at the same time be not accepting of the sin. 

I hope this helps.  If you have more questions, feel free to post in the comments section here.

AMDG,
Scott<<<
 

Fourth Sunday in Advent

Today is the Fourth Sunday in Advent, Rorate Sunday - and the last Sunday before the Christ Mass!  

Let the earth be opened and bud forth a Savior!

℣ Rorate coeli desuper et nubes pluant justum

(Drop down dew, ye heavens, from above, and let the clouds rain the just)

℟ Aperiatur terra et germinet salvatorem"

(Let the earth be opened and send forth a Saviour").

We are reminded today to prepare ye the way of the Lord!  Make straight His paths; let every valley be filled and every hill and mountain be brought low!  In the Gospel we're reminded of the "voice crying in the wilderness," St. John the Baptist.  I am reminded of the following song from "Godspell" (not the greatest theological piece, but I like this song)...  "Prepare Ye"

From the Epistle for today we are reminded of our conscience - that little voice inside us that warns us when we're about to do something wrong... do we listen?  Often we do not.  Conscience can be Scrupulous, Lax or Delicate.

Scrupulous - can overdo it - make one not trust anything.
Lax - does not say enough (or we do not hear enough) and we make poor decisions.
Delicate - has a balance, not too scrupulous, not too lax - and we make rational decisions which do not get us into moral difficulties.  We should strive to have a delicate conscience.

Conscience - presents us with two scenarios and lets us pick the "better" one.  Say you're out duck hunting with your buddy and you see what you think is a duck, but it's too far away and maybe it's your buddy - do you shoot first and work out the details later, or do you hold off and wait until you're sure?

Today's readings in the Traditional Lectionary:

Introit

Drop down dew, ye heavens, from above, and let the clouds rain the Just: let the earth be opened and bud forth a Savior.  (Psalm) The heavens show forth the glory of God: and the firmament declareth the work of His hands.  Glory be to the Father.  Drop down…

Collect

O Lord, we beseech Thee, stir up Thy power, and come, and with great might succor us: that by the help of Thy grace that which is hindered by our sins may be hastened by Thy merciful forgiveness: Who livest and reignest.

Epistle –1 Corinthians 4:1-5

Brethren: let a man so account of us as of the ministers of Christ, and the dispensers of the mysteries of God. Here now it is required among the dispensers, that a man be found faithful. But to me it is a very small thing to be judged by you, or by man’s day: but neither do I judge my own self. For I am not conscious to myself of any thing: yet am I not hereby justified, but He that judgeth me, is the Lord. Therefore judge not before the time, until the Lord come: Who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise from God.

Gradual

The Lord is night unto all them that call upon Him: to all that call upon Him in truth.  My mouth shall speak the praise of the Lord: and let all flesh bless His holy name.

Alleluia

Alleluia, alleluia.  Come, O Lord, and tarry not: forgive the sins of Thy people Israel.  Alleluia.

Gospel – Luke 3:1-6

Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judea, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and Philip his brother tetrarch of Iturea, and the country of Trachonitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilina; Under the high priests Annas and Caiphas; the word of the Lord was made unto John, the son of Zachary, in the desert. And he came into all the country about the Jordan, preaching the baptism of penance for the remission of sins; As it was written in the book of the sayings of Isaias the prophet: A voice of one crying in the wilderness: Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight his paths. Every valley shall be filled; and every mountain and hill shall be brought low; and the crooked shall be made straight; and the rough ways plain;  and all flesh shall see the salvation of God.

Offertory

Hail Mary, full of grace: the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.

Secret

O Lord, we beseech Thee, look down favorably upon these present Sacrifices: that they may profit us unto both devotion and salvation.  Through our Lord.

Communion

Behold a Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son: and His name shall be called Emmanuel.

Post Communion

Having received Thy gifts, we beseech Thee, O Lord that as we frequent this mystery, so the work of our salvation may advance.  Through our Lord.

And let us not forget!