Bonus Post: Participating in the Exodus

Given that my last two posts (#1 | #2) have related to the Exodus, my friend Sean sent me a link to an article by Dave Armstrong about the relationship between the original Passover and the Seder meal celebrated by modern-day Children of Israel.

Screen Shot 2016-01-17 at 2.57.47 PM

I had heard before from theologians that Jewish tradition spoke about how, when present-day Jews celebrate Passover, there is something of a mystical participation with the original Exodus under Moses. This understanding of participation in a past event has an application in the realm of Catholic apologetics. I have often spoken to Protestants who insist that when we speak of the Lord’s Supper as being a “memorial” (“anamnesis” in Greek), it simply means that we remember what Jesus did and nothing more. A look at Jewish tradition present some problems with this understanding.

For the rest of this post, I would just like to offer a few quotations from Dave’s article, but I thoroughly recommend that you read the whole thing.

In a book specifically about the Passover celebration, Martin Sicker writes:

The Haggadah then continues with a statement that is also found in the Mishnah that calls upon each participant in the Seder to share vicariously in the experience of the Exodus.

In every generation one is obliged to view oneself as though he [personally] had gone out from Egypt. As it is said: And thou shalt tell thy son in that day, saying: It is because of that which the Lord did for me when I came forth out of Egypt (Ex. 13:8).

The Haggadah then amplifies this teaching, providing an appropriate biblical prooftext in support of its elaboration.

The Holy One, blessed is He, did not redeem only our ancestors, but also redeemed us along with them. As it is said: And He brought us out from thence, that he might bring us in, to give us the land which He swore unto our fathers. (Deut. 6:23).

. . . The Mishnah calls upon each participant in the Seder to make an intellectual leap across the millennia and thereby to share directly in the experience of their ancestors.

Another Jewish source concurs:

By participating in the Seder, we are vicariously reliving the Exodus from Egypt. Around our festival table, the past and present merge and the future is promising.

When you’re forced to say silly things…

Yesterday morning I was standing outside of a Planned Parenthood clinic and, as we prayed the rosary, I was reminded of a video I saw a few weeks ago and I made a mental note to share it here today. The video was of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, an American Politician, being interviewed about her children…

Here’s a transcript of the interview with my comments interspersed:

Interviewer: In your opinion, were [your children] human beings before they were born?

This is a simple question. It deserves a simple “Yes” or “No” answer. Of course, the answer is obvious: yes! Of course, they were human beings before they were born, it’s a simple matter of biology. They were living organisms with human DNA – they were therefore human.

Schultz: You know, I believe that every woman has the right to make their own reproductive choices.

Notice how a simple question was completely avoided. Instead of an answer, we were treated to a political slogan.

Interviewer: But what did you believe about your children?

The question is politely repeated…

Schultz: That I had the right to make my own reproductive choices, which I was glad to have and which I was proud to have.

Again the question is avoided. However, her response dresses in very nice language her rather distressing viewpoint, that she had the right to kill her children if she had so desired.

Interviewer: So were they human beings? Just yes or no.

Yet again, the question is politely repeated…

Schultz: They’re human beings today, and I’m glad I had the opportunity to make my own reproductive choices, as — a right that every woman has and should maintain.

So if they’re human beings today, what on earth were they before? Ants? Elephants? Dolphins? What species transitions into humanity? Aren’t we pro-lifers meant to be the ones who are unscientific? Sheesh…

I look back over this interview and marvel. I understand why this politician responds in the way she does – her philosophy demands it…even if it makes her look rather silly. Since she is in favour of “reproductive choices”, she is forced to avoid answering basic biological questions…because to do so honestly would bring her worldview into sharp conflict with reality.

Quitting the Mormon Church

I recently saw a post shared on Facebook concerning the subject of Mormonism. Several years ago, a local newspaper in Utah had been publishing a series of apologetic articles encouraging people to leave the Mormonism, the Church of Latter-Day Saints (LDS). This drew a response from an LDS member named Thomas Clark, who penned a letter entitled “Quitting the Mormon Church”. In his response, Mr. Clark explained the conditions under which he’d leave the Mormon Church and go elsewhere.

Temple

Since the Mr. Clark’s letter is rather long, I’ve provided an abridged version of it below, with the entire text at the bottom of this post for those who are interested. After the abridged version I will share a few thoughts concerning Mr Clark’s response and why, in my opinion, Mr Clark should in fact quit the LDS and join the Catholic Church…

Quitting the Mormon Church (Abridged)

I have been thinking of quitting the Mormon Church. Yes, if I can, I am going to get even with that church. As soon as I can find another church that teaches about the Gathering of the House of Israel; the return of the Ten Tribes and their mission; the return of the Jews to Palestine and why, and how they are going to build the temple; the building of temples and what to do with them; …the origin of the American Indian; …

Yes sir, as soon as I can find another church that teaches all that, or even half as much, I will say good-bye to this Mormon Church… It must be able to call, on a frosty day, some 5 or 6 thousand professors, students, lawyers, doctors, judges, policemen, businessmen, housewives and children to go and pick apples at 6 am…

Mr. Editor, could you help me find a church that teaches all that and more than hundreds of other doctrines and principles, which I have no room to mention here…

So, I repeat, if any one of the kind readers of this imperfect letter knows about another church that teaches and does as much for mankind as the Mormon Church, please let me know. And please do it soon, because my turn to go to the cannery is coming up… Do you think you can help me to find another church?

Thomas D. Clark

Read more

The Problem of pain

One of the books I read on my sabbatical was Jesus Among Other gods by Ravi Zacharias. The part of the book which I found most engaging was the chapter in which he addresses the problem of evil and suffering. Over the next week or so, I’ll be posting a few short extracts from the book from this section, together with a comment or two.

The “Problem of pain” is an understandably common reason given by Agnostics and Atheists for doubting or even denying the existence of God. However, as Zacharias points out, one can only really talk about the problem of pain if there is a moral law:

…[some] protest that God cannot exist because there is too much evil evident in life… [The Atheist says that] evil exists; therefore the Creator does not…

But here, Christianity provides a counterchallenge… If evil exists, then one must assume that good exists in order to know the difference. If good exists, one must assume that a moral law exists by which to measure good and evil.

– Ravi Zacharias, Jesus Among Other gods

Okay, so to talk about “good” and “evil”, a moral law must exist. So what? How does that point to theism?

But if a moral law exists, must not one posit an ultimate source of moral law, or at least an objective basis for a moral law? By an objective basis, I mean something that is transcendently true at all times, regardless of whether I believe it or not. 

– Ravi Zacharias, Jesus Among Other gods

What could possibly be the objective basis of this law? The Theist answers “God”.

1 29 30 31 32 33 57