Man Fully Alive

             In Theology class, my teacher poses this question, "what does it mean to be man fully alive?" When hearing this, we all groan. Mainly because no one in our class knows the full answer to his question. If we ask him what the answer is, he replies with a cool and collected "I don't know." During this time, he is asking a multitude of follow up questions to our answers. From watching these these discussions, I reasoned that there is not one specific answer, but many equally important answers.
            Attaining My maximum potential is a very important aspect of man fully alive. Acquiring that maximum potential requires us to transcend into another level of success through hard work and determination. Let me give an example. When Michael Jordan first tried out for a basketball team, he did not make the cut. That means that everyone was better than him. Through hard work he was able to transcend his previous abilities and become the best ball player in the world. It may seem like all that hard work shows no results, but the truly successful keep working and working, eventually transcending.
           Loving thy neighbor frees up the conscience. Hate and a bad disposition fills my being and consumes all mythoughts. Whenever I am mad at someone, I cannot do anything at all, I am paralyzed with hate and stubbornness.
          Seeing as loving thy neighbor is an important part of man fully alive, so is being happy. Happiness can be achieved through many different routes, but one thing happiness is not, is materialism. The underlying tones of many of my posts criticizes the consume culture of America and the world. Advertisers make money by telling me that if I buy this and that, it will make me happy.
           Finally, the most fundamental way to be man fully alive is by glorifying God. The end goal of life is to be one with God; if you are one with God, then the three points above are fulfilled. Wanting to know God is the most instinctual feeling a human can have. Everybody has that feeling, it might be suppressed by our crazy fast culture, but it is there if you think about it.
         All in all, being one with God is Man Fully Alive.

Fishers of Men

In our modern society, the number of priests to administer the sacraments dwindles. Young people in our modern bustling society do not have Christ present in their life. The vocation to the priesthood becomes dimmer and dimmer when the pressure of our modern society fills up our time.  The priesthood goes against this modern culture. Modern culture consists of tons and tons of distractions. Televisions and video games take time away from Christ. The absence of Christ in our society is a big problem in our communities.
Daily mass was a big deal a generation ago. Many Catholic families attended and prayed the rosary every night. Now, some people barely even show up once a month. Even in our schools, any aspect of religion is omitted from the education system.
Our fast culture omits God from our lives. We are distracted by the materialistic ideas and appearances, but we never slow down anymore to take part in the Sacraments. God will always supply the Church with people who have heard the call to the priesthood, but that call is getting quieter and quieter.

St. Justin Martyr's Letter

Among many other aspects of the Church, St, Justin Martyr's letter to the Roman Emperor explaining Christianity reveals how closely traditions in the early church mirror those of modern times. There are many examples of this. One involves the congregation's use of the same word "Amen" in the early church as in today's Catholic church. Another common tradition is the readings before the Anaphora. In the early days of the Church, Christians would read the memoirs and letters of the Apostles, much like today's Church reads the Gospels and letters of the Apostles. A third similarity is the re-enactment of the Last Supper during the Anaphora and belief in the transubstantiation of the host, as well as the existence of Eucharistic ministers.

These similarities, as well as a cool look into how Church ceremonies were peformed "back in the day" also cement the faith and teaching that the Catholic Church is the true one created by Christ. Christians in the time of St. Justin Martyr were not far removed from Christ's earthly life, temporally speaking. Therefore it's valid to assume that they practiced the equivalent teachings and traditions as the ones passed down by Christ. Examining the similarities pointed out above shows that the Catholic Church is the true Church established by Christ, validating its mark as One.

Some things do not change

          In 150 AD. Justin Martyr wrote to the Roman Emperor about his religion and what the physical actions of Christianity mean. At this time, Christians were being prosecuted and killed. Much of this dislike was founded on the accusation that Christians had "love feasts" and they ate the body of their leader each week. Basically, they were talking about having mass and partaking in the Eucharist, but when pagan Romans  heard this, they thought that Christians were crazy. Justin Martyr explained to the Emperor the significance of mass.
          Though Justin Martyr explained what the mass entailed, Christianity was not legalized until hundreds of years later. This goes to show that the hated of Christians was still deeply entrenched in the Roman ideology. The Emperor just shrugged off his letter and ignored Justin Martyr.
         Justin Martyr's letter provide insight into mass back in 150 AD. The core fundamentals of the mass in 150 AD is the exact same as today's mass. This shows the divinity in the Church. Nothing can stay the same for 2000 years, not even mountains.

• You still need to be Baptized to partake in the Eucharist
• Baptism is still for the remission of sins
• The host is still bread and wine mixed with water
• Amen is still the general remark for consent of the congregation
• Deacons still carry the host to people who cannot come to mass
• The Eucharist is still called the Eucharist
• There are Gospel readings in every mass
• Only bishops and priests can administer the Eucharist
• Sunday is still the day of Mass

A Human First and Foremost

The video of Mr. Ronald Davis, a homeless man, demonstrates many valid points and also opens one's eyes to reality. Too often in our society, we view the homeless as lazy or unwilling to try to get a job. We don't know these people's lives or their struggles, and we presume ourselves knowledgeable enough to judge them.  As a consequence of our culture's individualistic streak, many people assume that it is totally within one's power to pull themselves out of the misery they find themselves in. Many people ignore that homelessness isn't a lifestyle choice; it's forced upon people by circumstances outside their control. In other words, a tragedy such as a house fire or hurricane forces people to live and panhandle on the streets to remain alive. Many times it isn't the homeless person's fault they must beg for money, or that they can't get a job. Like Mr. Davis pointed out, the homeless face challenges that most people do not in trying to obtain a job: a call-back number or address, for example. This realization opens one's eyes to the contingency of a person's social circumstances and reinforces Christ's message of helping those less fortunate than yourself. Put simply, it's often not a homeless man's fault that he is in an unfortunate position, just as it was not by my doing that I was fortunate enough to be born into a steady family. All people being equal, we must attempt to give the less fortunate a chance to get their lives back, a chance they will not get otherwise.

Ronald Davis's message reflects another basic teaching of the Church: the inherent dignity of all people. Catholics believe that God created humans in His image and likeness, and in so doing assigned us dignity by virtue of our humanity. Sadly, many people ignore intrinsic human dignity and instead view others as inferior or not as worthy as they for success. Mr. Davis mentions passerby who call him "a bum" because of his unfortunate position. They probably view him as sub-human, reducing his own dignity by begging on the street. Like I mentioned above, these people judge the unfortunate without knowing their struggles. To echo Mr. Davis's words, he is a  human first and foremost and as such deserves love and respect from all people. It is the utmost tragedy when circumstances out of one's control reduce one's standing in the eyes of other people because the unfortunate do nothing to deserve it.

On Bumming

I watched video on Ronald Davis's emotional talk. If you have not watched the video or heard the story, Mr. Davis talks about his homeless life. No one wants to be homeless, it is not a life choice. Yes, some people might be happy homeless, but I can guarantee that they were not happy when they first became homeless. Mr.  Davis. has to beg for the 16 dollars so he can stay the night in a room. Begging is one of the worst ways to live your life. There is no satisfaction of doing a task with your own hands. When we see people begging, many of us shunt them away emotionally by saying they are there  for a reason. We do not see that these homeless people are also emotionally aware that you are shunting them away. This emotional ignore is like getting ignored by your parents, but you did nothing wrong.

I guess what I am trying to say is that the homeless are just like us. They are not dumb, they are not numb to emotion, they are trying to survive. Yes we have it easier than they do, but that does not mean we can't help out a little. No, I don't want redistribution of wealth, but lending a helping hand goes a long way.


Watch the video here

The Church's Limits

The Catholic Church is a remarkable institution; t is open to anyone, regardless of their past, ethnicity, or nationality. This catholic mark defines the Church as tolerant and accepting of people for who they are. However, there must be limits to the Church's openness regarding beliefs. Just like any other moral system, the Church's ethics prescribe a way of living, in accordance with Christ's words and deeds. While the Church continues to accept people of all backgrounds, its limit on tolerance must stop at belief. This may sound harsh at first glance, but it's really the same limit prescribed by any religion or moral code. In order to be called a Catholic, one must conform to what the Church teaches. For example, if you want to play basketball, you must dribble and shoot without picking up the ball and running. If you decide to run across the court while kicking the ball, you're playing soccer instead of basketball. 

When one chooses to follow a certain ethical code, he or she chooses it based on the merits of that code, not necessarily what they think they can shape the code to be. Similarly, when a person decides to become a Catholic, they choose based on the merits of the Catholic Church, not what they believe their conception of God to be. The Catholic conception of God is rigid and cannot change, given Christ's words in Scripture and Tradition. To put it bluntly, and a little coarsely, if you don't like Catholicism, then change religions (or denominations).  

Permanence of Matrimony

Marriage has a lot of discussion going on right now, gay civil union is a big one. Apart from that, divorces are becoming more and more commonplace. Jesus Christ said that "To the married I give charge, not I but the Lord, that the wife should not separate from her husband and that the husband should not divorce his wife" (1 Cor. 7:10-11). Meaning that Jesus is not the one who said that sacramental marriage is permanent, it is the Father. The only way a true sacramental marriage can be broken is through death. Only then can a spouse remarry. 
Another route of splitting from a sacramental are annulments. An annulment is an understanding that a sacramental marriage never truly existed because the vows did not mean anything to the spouses. and that the spouses can move on and remarry. This is very technical. The couple must get approval of an annulment from a diocesan marriage tribunal. The tribunal has to find truth that the vows were not said with any sort of meaning from the spouse, and that the words were just words coming out of a mouth. The spouses can remarry because there was not a sacramental marriage in the first place. 
True sacramental marriages receive God's grace to carry on through the rest of the couple's lives. 

To read more, click here.

Women and the Priesthood

One of the most hotly debated Catholic issues of the twentieth century is the issue of male-only ordination. Throughout the centuries, only men have been allowed to become priests in the Catholic tradition. Nowadays, people are increasingly labeling the Church as a misogynistic institution for its suppression of female ordination. However, blindly accusing the church of misogyny blatantly ignores the reasoning behind keeping priests strictly male. The Church prohibits women from becoming priests, not for sexist reasons, but rather because it has no authority to change the tradition created by Christ.

The Church's authority comes exclusively from Christ, so to break with His teachings would mean that the Church no longer has authority. For example, consider a scenario in which my teacher gives me the authority to give detentions in his class only. If I begin to roam the halls and give detentions to whomever I please, those detentions are invalid because I acted  outside the authority granted to me by my teacher. I was given authority to hand out detentions in class, not outside in the hallway. Similarly, Christ gave the Catholic Church authority to proclaim and instruct others in His teachings and traditions; nothing more. So what the Church can do is constrained by what Christ did.

To accuse the Church of misogyny is to accuse Christ of hating women, which is clearly untrue. Christ broke all social norms concerning women and men's interaction with them. Christ associated with women in public, which was frowned upon; he accepted His women disciples, which was unheard of ; and he spoke with a Samaritan adulteress, which was a massive no-no in Judea during the first century A.D. For all these reasons, it's obvious that Christ by no means hated or wanted to oppress women.

Now that we've established that Jesus was, in fact, not a misogynist, the Church's teaching on female priesthood becomes very clear. Although he welcomed female disciples, Christ appointed 12 men to start up His church and proclaim the Word of God throughout the world. So the argument for keeping priesthood strictly male goes like this: The church is constrained by what Jesus did and said during His time on earth, and Christ only appointed men to be his apostles. Humans can't know the mind of God, so it is impossible to understand why Christ chose His apostles as He chose them. All we know is that Christ did choose twelve men to become priests, and the Church has no authority to change Tradition instituted by Christ its founder.

Laciano and How it Differs

The miracle at Laciano is a unique Eucharistic miracle. In many eucharistic miracles, the host starts to bleed or emit light. The miracle at Laciano changed the host into  heart tissue and human blood. Fresh human blood was found at the miracle. It matched the blood type at the Shroud of Turin, and it has the same protein proportions as regular human blood. As well as being human blood and heart tissue, it has stayed immaculate since the 800s. Many other eucharistic miracles are and emission of blood or light from the host. At Laciano, the host transformed into immaculate heart tissue and blood.

To read more about Laciano and other eucharistic miracles, click here.

The Miracle at Lanciano

The Miracle at Lanciano is widely considered the first and greatest Eucharistic miracle of the Catholic Church. This miracle occurred in reaction to an unnamed Basilian monk's doubt about the Real Presence of of Christ in the Eucharist. The Church teaches that the Real Presence of Jesus Christ is present in the eucharist, in the sense that the Eucharist's bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ. The Miracle of Lanciano took place in the 8th century A.D. in a small church called St. Legontian, on the Adriatic Sea in Italy. During the consecration of the host, the bread became live flesh from a human heart and the blood became real blood from the same body. The  blood type from the Miracle of Lanciano matches the blood type found on the Shroud of Turin, indicating that the Eucharist truly transformed into the body and blood of Christ.

Though it's very self-evident that the Miracle at Lanciano is connected to the Real Presence doctrine, it's equally obvious that an actual transformation (like the one that happened at Lanciano) does not occur at every celebration of the Eucharist. The actual transformation of the host to flesh and blood was a miracle to confirm believers' faith in the Real Presence doctrine of the Church. The difference between ordinary Eucharist and what occurred at Lanciano is that the ordinary transformation of the host is beyond sensory experience; Christ merely made it perceptible in one instance at Lanciano. However, just because we cannot see or feel this transformation does not mean that it doesn't happen. For example, we don't see our brains fire their neurons or see the stars burn up hydrogen as fuel, but we take it on faith that these phenomena  do occur.

http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/why-lanciano-matters

Baptism before the Church

Baptism is usually synonymous with a cleansing of some sort. It has been used as way to enter into a congregation. Many cultures before Christianity used baptism as a right of passage. Baptism was used in pagan cultures because of the purifying qualities of water. There are also symbolic baptisms throughout the whole Old Testament. The parting and crossing through the Red Sea was a symbolic baptism of the Israelites. If you look at Baptism as an entrance to the Church, circumcision was one of the requirements to enter into Judaism. Circumcision can be called a type of baptism in this way. In the Catholic sense, Baptism is symbolic of washing away our sins.

The Catechumenate

The catechumenate in the Catholic Church was the process by which new members became initiated into the Body of Christ in the early church. During the catechumenate, hopeful members were instructed in Christ's teachings and teachers prepared them to receive the Sacraments of Initiation, which are Baptism, Confirmation, and the Eucharist. The catechumenate was divided into three parts in the early church: the catechetical, the ascetical, and the liturgical. The catechetical portion dealt with instructing the initiate about official Church doctrine, usually by a question and answer method (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05075b.htm). The ascetical portion of the catechumenate involved spiritual exercises to attain the virtues valued by Christians in the early church. The liturgical section taught initiates the liturgy and rituals of the Church, especially about the mass. The catechumenate relates to the Easter Vigil because the custom for the Church in its early years was, and still is, to initiate new members on the night before Easter.

The Sacraments and Human Nature

The Sacraments correspond to human nature because they help us understand truths that are not of this world. People have an instinctive need to understand, as the book puts it, "that which is invisible by experiencing that which is visible". For example, even if I tell someone I love them repeatedly , they won't believe me unless I show visible signs of that love, such as kindness, affection, or hugs. I can toss around the phrase "I love you" however many times I like, but human nature only allows us to understand the invisible (like the emotion of love) from the visible (signs that demonstrate love). It is the same with God and the Sacraments. The Sacraments correspond to human nature as they allow us to understand deeper realities, such as God, through their efficacious and visible nature. So the sacraments both allow us to receive grace from Christ and serve as instruments to help us understand the Trinity.

Indulgences

The Protestant Reformation came about through Martin Luther's dispute over indulgences. Indulgences are extra- sacramental remissions of temporal punishment for our forgiven sins. During Martin Luther's life, indulgences were sold for money by corrupt priests and bishops. Martin Luther did have a point to refute the sale of indulgences. Indulgences are not meant to raise funds for the Church. Where Martin Luther did go wrong is by criticizing indulgences itself. Indulgences are a part of the Church's infallibly defined teaching. They can be still given out today, but they usually are for certain, deserving cases.

Being "Pro-Life" Towards Quality of Life

Being "pro-life" in the Catholic understanding does not stop after birth. Of course, allowing innocent children to be born is most definitely classified under the pro-life banner, but respecting the sanctity of life continues until natural death. Unfortunately, in today's society, quality of life, or ensuring that a child's life is respected after birth, is considered less important than the quantity of life, or the number of children that are born at all. The Church recognizes that protecting peoples' quality of life is just as integral to giving God glory as protecting their right to life. For this reason, the Church endorses welfare for the poor. This teaching is inscribed in Pope Leo XIII's Rerum Novarum, where he states that:

“[W]hen there is question of defending the rights of individuals, the poor and badly off have a claim to especial consideration. The richer class have many ways of shielding themselves, and stand less in need of help from the State; whereas the mass of the poor have no resources of their own to fall back upon, and must chiefly depend upon the assistance of the State. And it is for this reason that wage-earners, since they mostly belong in the mass of the needy, should be specially cared for and protected by the government."

In addition to endorsing welfare for the less fortunate, the Catholic church also expresses support for workers' rights. The US Conference of Catholic Bishops website affirms that:

"The economy must serve the people, not the other way around. Work is more than a way to make a living; it is a form of the continuing participation in God's creation. If the dignity of work is to be protected, then the basic rights of workers must be respected-- the right to productive work, to decent and fair wages, to the organization and joining of unions, to private property, and to economic initiative."

Above all, in the realm of governmental participation and human dignity, the Church recognizes that humans are communal beings; we constantly influence and rely upon each other for assistance. The common good is the most important goal towards which one can strive. 

What Catholicism Means to Me pt. 3

The Church is very much a member based establishment. Without any people in the Church, the Church would cease to be the Church. In our country, religion is being struck down in schools and other activities. Many people do not go to Church on a regular basis, this absence of religion reflects how our society is changing for the worse. Laziness is becoming increasingly pervasive in our society. This might not be related to the suppression of religion in our country. There are lots of benefits of churches for a community, even our government.

Overview to the "Pro-Life" Label

In today's society, many people throw around the phrase "pro-life", usually in reference to their position on abortion. Sadly however, many of the same people who claim to be "pro-life" in the case of abortion support other measures which are to the detriment of both quality and quantity of life. For example, a common conservative position in America today supports both the repeal of Roe v. Wade (under the premise of being "pro-life") and the death penalty, as well as opposing welfare for the poor. It's very obvious how these two viewpoints conflict. In this 3-post series, I'll be outlining what the Church means when it classifies itself as "pro-life", and how this idea can be applied to the modern world.

As a basic overview, the Catholic church views life as sacred because it is the ultimate gift from God. Without life, nothing else is possible; we simply would not exist. The Church teaches that God granted humans life and dignity out of love, and that this life must be unconditionally respected. To disregard a gift is equivalent to disregarding the person who gave the gift. Therefore, respect for life is respect for He who gave us life.

The Universal Call to Holiness

The universal call to holiness as a general concept demonstrates that the goal of Catholic life is holiness. Though the nature of holiness is intrinsically a different question, its source is indisputable: we get our holiness from Christ via the Church and its sacraments. This universal call to holiness was defined in the second Vatican Council. Before Vatican II, Catholics had been taught to “pay, pray and obey”, but Vatican II changed everything by defining Catholic life as participating in Christ’s three-fold role as priest, prophet, and king. Striving to be holy does not mean trying to perfect in every sense of the word; rather, it means being in the process of growing into a more intimate relationship with Christ. We must follow the natural law ingrained in our hearts by God, and strive to become spiritually united with Christ. And, just in case there is any ambiguity about natural law, God has codified it into the Ten Commandments and Christ’s New Law of Love. To summarize, the Catholic universal call to holiness prescribes an obligation to follow Christ’s law and try to understand and be in union with God. 

The Start

I think I am going to start a chain of posts of me talking about my faith. It might consist of how I see my faith in my life,  how I see faith in other people, and why I am glad to be Catholic etc.

I feel that my faith lets me feel like there is something bigger than me. I guess that feeling is a good thing. More importantly, knowing that superior being is a benevolent, loving being is comforting. Though I know my faith better than most, I do not feel that the general population of Catholics know what their faith is based on. This lack of understanding might be based off the fact that religion is taken out of schools or that they do not feel that religion is very important. Many people do use religion as subject matter in group conversations. But they all discuss religion as a debatable subject, not a definite topic.

Apostolic Mark

The Church is apostolic because of Christ's choice of the Twelve Apostles as the foundation for the Church. Twelve is symbolic of the Twelve Tribes of Israel, or God's chosen people. Every single bishop's lineage can be traced back to the Twelve.  Each Apostle was entrusted with the responsibility to teach, sanctify, and govern the Church.

The Church is describe as Apostolic in three ways, Apostolic Foundation, Apostolic Faith, and Apostolic Succesion. Throughout the Churches history, each bishop was ordained by a previous bishop, and this goes on through to the Apostles. The Apostles were the foundation of the Church, without the Apostles handing on their responsibilities, the Church would not be what it is today. Though bishops are well read on their subject matter, they are not perfect. The Holy Spirit guides and transmits the teachings of the Apostles through the bishops. The succession of the Apostles is carried on through the bishops, making our Church and apostle based Church.

What Catholicism means to Me pt.2

As a small child, I took my religion very lightly. I never questioned what it meant to be Catholic. I had Saturday school classes at my church, but I never took it seriously, just a time to mess around and hang with some friends. Knowing what Catholic Rite you belong to is something that lets you experience where you came from. These Saturday schools and Sunday schools do not do as good a job as they can. I think that the deletion of religion in public schools desensitizes people to it. Also, the removal of religion from ones life shows in their behavior.  Religion grounds people in reason and gives them a greater sense of conscience, I can say this because this is what I have experienced in my life.

Protestantism, Catholicism, and Salvation

During the Protestant Reformation of the 16th and 17th centuries, many churches splintered off the Catholic church in protest against corruptions in its hierarchy. As the Protestant churches rebelled against the authority of the Catholic Church, they also began questioning the Church's teachings and forming their own. One of the most important and hotly contested teachings is salvation: what is it, and how do we obtain it? Because the Protestant churches are not unified under a single banner as the Catholic Church is, it is impossible to declare that Protestants as a whole believe in one method of salvation or another. Each sect has its own beliefs about how humans come to salvation. However, as an overall statement, many Protestant churches believe that good works do not contribute to Salvation, and only faith and God's love bring us into eternal communion with Him.

For example, the Calvinist Church, founded by French Protestant John Calvin, strictly adheres to the doctrine of predestination. Predestination argues that God chooses some people to be saved and go to heaven after their deaths, and some to burn in hell postmortem for their sins. Calvinists believe that no amount of good deeds can change God's mind, but that acting in a moral manner means that God has selected you for salvation. The United Methodists believe in a similar doctrine of predestination, as quoted from umc.org (United Methodist Church): "As such, God's decision to save us can be and is based on no conditions we can or could ever generate. God has chosen, based on God's own criteria, whom to save and whom not to save, long before we were ever born".

Unlike the United Methodist and Calvinist churches, the Lutherans and Baptists believe that humans have one avenue towards salvation, which is faith. Both churches teach that Christ died on the Cross to forgive the sins of humanity, and only through faith and love for Him can we be saved. Lutheranism and Baptist doctrines also teach, like United Methodists and Calvinists, that good works in this world do not assist our entry into heaven. Baptists, as opposed to Catholics, deny five out of the seven Sacraments, keeping only Baptism and the Eucharist; even then, they deny that Sacraments impart grace, and believe that the salvation through Baptism is merely symbolic, not an efficacious sign of grace.

More on:

the Lutheran Church: http://www.princeofpeacelutheran.org/belief.htm
the Baptist Church: http://www.baptistbasics.org/baptists/b003.php
the United Methodist Church: http://www.umc.org/site/apps/nlnet/content3.aspx?c=lwL4KnN1LtH&b=4746357&ct=5571239

Catholic Rites

When the Apostles carried out Christ's Great Commandment, they spread the Word of God across the globe. St. Thomas went to India, St. Andrew went to Scythia, and St. Peter went to Rome, just to name a few. Each of the Churches that the Apostles set up was a legitimate follower of Christ's teachings, but each also incorporated the customs of the culture it served. Thus the many different Catholic rites were born. According to the Catechism, there are seven major Catholic rites: Latin, Byzantine, Alexandrian (or Coptic), Syriac, Armenian, Maronite, and Chaldean. Many people, even Catholics, assume that the Latin Church, or the Roman Catholic rite, is the only Catholic Church, and don't know about the other rites. I'm a member of  a Maronite church, and when I tell people, many of them just assume it's another Protestant or Orthodox denomination. However, the united Catholic Church recognizes the validity of Eastern rites as well as the Latin one. The Maronite Catholic liturgy incorporates all the features of the Latin rite, but some prayers and readings are read in Arabic and some are read in English. Even though the Roman Catholic Church may be the largest Catholic rite in terms of people, the Church recognizes the equal validity of all rites.  

The Importance of an Open Mind

In mass today, the priest's homily was about the importance of evangelism, in particular, the need to keep an open mind and an accepting attitude during dialogue with another person about your faiths. Evangelism is all about trying to convince others to join or rejoin the Church. His message was that, both logically and in practice, people respond more positively to an open attitude than a close-minded approach. At the beginning, the people that someone is trying to evangelize usually view their faith as more valid than Catholicism, just because they've held it for their entire lives. Acting intolerant of other faiths is an easy way to turn them off in regards to learning about the Catholic faith. If you don't care about my beliefs, why should I care about yours? In summary, the best way to start up dialogue and begin the evangelization process is to have an open mind and seek truth while remaining loyal to Christ and His word.

Abortion

I was watching some news when I caught  snippet of the Kermit Gosnell abortion trail (Click here for details) some discretion is advised when reading.  Abortion is defined as murder by the Catholic Church. At conception, each baby has a soul, just as an older brother has a soul, a fetus does as well. The fetus is growing, so it is alive. John Paul II declared that the teaching on abortion is not going to change.

Leadership in the Catholic and Protestant Church

Leadership is an important aspect of all unified groups of people. In the case of the Church, leadership prevents schism and heresies from destroying the Church. The magisterium guided by the Holy Spirit prevents incorrect teaching from being spread. This means that heresies are corrected, and questions are answered. In the Protestant Church, there is no hierarchical structure similar the the Catholic Church. The clergy in the Protestant Church is ordained by the denomination, this means that there is not a unifying, ultimate person solving the problem. A person can go and split off from his or her denomination over a simple teaching and still be called Protestant.  This is partly the reason why there are 30,000 different Protestant churches, but only one Catholic Church.

The Problem of Evil

One of the most common objections to the existence of an omnibenevolent God is the so-called "problem of evil". Its proponents claim that if God loves everyone, how can He let bad things, like murder or tsunamis happen in the world? The logical conclusion of their argument is that an omni-benevolent God must not exist.
Now let's refute it. First, there are two types of evil: man-made, and natural. Murder is an example of man-made evil, because people kill each other. A tsunami, on the other hand, is an example of a natural evil, because people don't cause tsunamis.

Man-made evil is easy to explain in the context of an all-loving God. It is clear in Genesis that God endowed humans with free will, so that we can make our own decisions and take responsibility for them. Along with freedom comes those people who choose to abuse it. God does not interfere with free will, even if the action take were evil, but lets final judgment mete out punishment for the wrongs committed. God therefore doesn't cause evil, and permits it because He respects human free will.

However, natural evils are much more difficult reconcile with an all-loving God. The answer must be that, as odd as it sounds, natural disasters aren't intrinsically evil. In order for an action to be morally evil, the person performing the action has to intend the evil. Morality is premised on a system of praise and blame, where good deeds are praised and evil deeds are punished.This presupposes that there is someone to praise or blame for the action; someone has to take culpability for it. However, tsunamis and hurricanes can't intend evil because they aren't living beings. Agents of natural disasters can't be blamed for their destruction, and therefore the disaster isn't an intrinsic evil. To be sure, the deaths and sorrow that follow natural disasters are great tragedies, but it would be incorrect to assign the blame to God. God created the natural world, but doesn't micro-manage everything that happens.

The First Cause

One of the most simple and intuitively appealing arguments for God's existence is St. Thomas Aquinas's argument from causality. In the physical world, every material object has a cause. For example, a chair was built by a carpenter; the carpenter caused the chair to come into being. This chain of causality can stretch almost infinitely far back in time, because every action has to have been caused by a previous action. However, nihil fit ex nihilo; from nothing, nothing comes. There must have been a uncaused cause at the beginning of time to set the universe and its chains of causality in motion. Without a first cause, nothing would exist. 

Now we'll cover and refute some objections to the First Cause argument. The first objection replies that if everything in the universe has a cause, then God too, must also have a cause. This objection stems from a misunderstanding of the cosmological argument. The argument posits that everything in the temporal world has a temporal cause. A chair, a computer, and even a human have causes because they exist within a temporal framework. However, God, as the first cause,  definitionally exists independent of time and space, and is therefore not constrained by the limitations of temporal beings. Only temporal objects have causes, and seeing as God is not a temporal being, He has no cause.

The second objection stems from a remark made by famous physicist Stephen Hawking that God cannot exist because time came into existence at the Big Bang. It goes like this :a cause must necessarily temporally precede the object it causes; a carpenter has to exist before he can make a chair. If time didn't exist before the Big Bang, this objection argues,  then neither could a cause for the universe. The problem with this objection is that it assumes temporal causality is the only type of causality. In other words, it assumes that a cause must always precede the object it causes in time. However, the true essence of causality is logical causality. For example, when you place a bowling ball on a cushion, a dent in the cushion appears because the bowling ball is placed on it. Causality only appears temporal because we live in a world constrained by space and time. Again, because God exists independent of the spatio-temporal world, He is a logical cause for the world as opposed to a temporal cause. As a summary, it doesn't matter if time didn't exist before the Big Bang because God's existence and creation is not dependent on time. 

No such thing as a bad pope, just bad people.

Many people try to disprove the accuracy of the Church's teachings by calling out sinful popes. Nobody is perfect, neither are the popes. This argument of bad popes does distinguish infallibility and impeccability. There were pope who were not celibate, or they used their power for the wrong reasons, but none of them declared incorrect doctrine. The go to example of a "bad" pope is Pope Honorius, people said he taught Monothelitism which describes as only divine. When he was settling the controversy, he thought to not do anything at all. This shows the infallibility of the Pope because even when Honorius was teaching Monothelitism, he did not define it as doctrine so there would be peace in the Church. By not defining Monothelitism as truth, Honorius showed that the office of the papacy is infallible when defining doctine.

Evolution and Genesis

Bible interpretations shape how people believe. Many take parts of the Bible as literal, some take it as metaphorical. The story of Genesis is one of the best examples of misinterpretation. Many atheists refute Christianity solely because the Earth cannot be made in six days. Humans did not show up in a day when there is evidence that the human race took thousands of years to develop into a homo sapien. Days in Genesis are not recognized as days. God does not have day and night since he created the concept of time. So the metaphorical day in Genesis can be the length of time for humans to evolve. Also, the human race is one of the youngest species on the earth. In Genesis, God created humans last.

The Features of Love

Love is a subjective concept because it doesn't mean the same thing to different people. We obviously love different people, and we love people for different reasons. It's impossible to objectify love because it must apply to a specific people or objects.  For example, we don't just say "I feel love", but rather "I love" someone, because love is not a concept that we feel objectively, but a subjective feeling towards something. This isn't to say that there aren't similar components between the way people love others, but just means that each subject, or each person, must engage in the act of loving; no one can do it for another person. 

The Church's understanding of love is two-fold. One part comes from the Christ's New Commandment: love your neighbor as yourself.  This basically implies the Golden Rule, treat others in the way you want to be treated. Love of self is instinctively ingrained into every person; we intuitively value ourselves and our goals. Christ says that love means that we not only have to respect and love ourselves, but extend that same love to others, because we must recognize that they value themselves just as much as we value ourselves. This is manifested in the obligation all people have to help the poor and vulnerable, because they lack the means to help themselves. The second part of love is love of God Himself. We say that the virtue of charity is supernatural when it is infused by the Holy Spirit, as true love of God must be. Love requires near full knowledge of a being, and with humanity's finite limitations, full knowledge of an infinite being such as God is impossible. The full Catholic understanding of love as love of one's neighbor and love of God is manifested in the act of marriage. The Church recognizes three, not two, members in each marriage: the husband, the wife, and God. Both facets of Catholic love are present in a marriage: the man loves the woman, vice versa, and they both love God. 

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03592a.htm

Papal Infallibility

One of the most hotly contested and divisive topics between Catholicism and other sects of Christianity is the authority of the papacy, specifically papal infallibility. Protestant and Orthodox denominations are loath to accept the authority of the Pope, seeing as they deny that Christ created the post at all. We can get to Christ's establishment of the papacy in a later post, but this one just assumes that the pope does have authority as the Vicar of Christ. Even so, there are still some objections to infallibility, most of which result from a misunderstanding of the teaching. For example, some people point out that in Paul's letter to the Galatians, Paul corrects Peter: "But when Cephas came to Antioch I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned" (Gal 2:11). This, they argue, must mean that Peter, as the Pope, was incorrect and therefore his words are fallible. Others argue that popes disagree about theological teachings, and because two contradictory teachings cannot simultaneously be infallible, the doctrine of infallibility is untrue. However, both of these arguments stem from a misunderstanding of papal infallibility as extending to every word or thought that popes say or think. The Catholic Church defines papal infallibility as:

"The Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra, that is, when carrying out the duty of the pastor and teacher of all Christians by virtue of his supreme apostolic authority he defines a doctrine of faith or morals to be held by the universal Church, through the divine assistance promised him in blessed Peter, operates with that infallibility with which the divine Redeemer wished that His church be instructed in defining doctrine on faith and morals; and so such definitions of the Roman Pontiff from himself, but not from the consensus of the Church, are unalterable."

In neither situation in the objections listed above were the popes acting infallibly, or ex cathedra. In context, Paul was correcting Peter and chastising him on his imprudence. Imprudence is definitely not a teaching, much less one given ex cathedra. As for popes having different opinions, infallibility only applies when the pope speaks in union with his bishops or from the Seat of Peter, not when describing his own personal beliefs. So it's very obvious that objections to the doctrine of infallibility can be refuted by correctly understanding the doctrine. 

https://sites.google.com/site/apostolicapologetics/Bishop-of-rome/papal-infallibility#TOC-Objections 

Leviticus 18:22

 Leviticus 18:22. One of the most infamous verses in the Bible. Fervent anti-gay protesters have used it as proof of the sinfulness and unnaturalness of homosexuality. However, this single verse doesn't define the Catholic church's position on same-sex marriage. Modern scientific advancements demonstrate that homosexuality is encoded in a person's genes, and is not a choice. The Catholic church's position on this issue is summarized by Mahatma Gandhi's famous phrase, "Hate the sin, love the sinner". It isn't gay people themselves whom Catholics ought to object to, but rather the breaking of the marital covenant established in Genesis. To summarize, the Catholic church is opposed to same -sex marriage because it violates the original marriage covenant in Genesis, when God makes Eve for Adam, not because homosexual couples are intrinsically immoral.

Civil Union

I recently saw the argument of gay marriage on the news again. I personally feel that gay civil union is okay, if the government bonds two men/women together, the relationship is a civil union. Marriage is between a man and a women. The bond between Adam and Eve was a marriage, and since Adam is a man and Eve is a women, the Catholic understanding of marriage is between a man and a woman.

Defending the Catholic Faith

Blog Description

As the name might hint, this blog is dedicated to the defense of the Catholic Church and its marks of being One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic. Because this blog is a defense of Catholicism, it must necessarily be written from a Catholic perspective. We aren't picky about our target audience; Catholics, non-Catholic Christians, agnostics, and atheists are all welcome, regardless of age. Our posts will explain and refute common objections or misconceptions of the Catholic faith as contextualized to everyday life. For example, we might decide one day to defend the papacy against an objection in the media, or try to prove the existence of God to preserve the basis for Christianity.