Sunday Lectionary: Cleaning Out The House

3rd Sunday Of Lent, 11th March 2012

The First Reading and the Gospel this week recall events of epic proportion.

The First Reading takes place three months after the Israelite exodus from Egypt. The Children of Israel have journeyed through the desert and found themselves at the foot of Mount Sinai. The stage is set for arguably one of the most important events of the Old Testament: the giving the Ten Commandments through Charlton Heston Moses.

The Gospel Reading contains no less drama! We read the account from John’s Gospel of the “cleansing of the Temple”. The Lord drives out the money lenders and animal sellers and, when challenged by the authorities, He speaks outlandishly about the destruction of the Temple and its rebuilding in three days…

Moses guarded the nation of Israel and, through God’s grace and guidance, acted as Israel’s leader, law-giver, mediator and intercessor. In Christ all these roles find their fulfillment and perfection.

The Temple has been cleansed. A new dawn is at hand…

Read more

Quick Apology: “No such thing thing as mortal sin”

I haven’t done one of these in a while…

In case you haven’t seen my Quick Apology articles before, these are extremely short posts in which describe how I might respond in thirty seconds or less to objections I often encounter. These might be objections to my pro-life view, or the fact that I believe in God, that I’m a Christian or specifically to my being Catholic.

FeaturedMortalSin

Objection

Today’s objection came from a friend:

“Catholics believe in mortal sin, but the Bible never talks about it. It never makes a distinction – sin is sin”

How might one respond to this objection?

Response

I’ve spoken before about the objection that something is “not in the Bible”, but the above statement is one which can actually very easily be answered from Scripture alone.

When this particular issue comes up, I ask whether or not that person has read chapter five of John’s first epistle:

If any one sees his brother committing what is not a mortal sin, he will ask, and God will give him life for those whose sin is not mortal. There is sin which is mortal; I do not say that one is to pray for that.

– 1 John 5:16 (Revised Standard Version: Catholic Edition)

So there we go, John seems pretty clear that there is such a thing as mortal sin.

Lost in translation?

However, is this just a translation issue? After all, in the above Scripture quotation, I’ve quoted from a Catholic translation.

Well, the standard Protestant translation is the King James Version, so let’s see how that translation renders the passage:

If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.

– 1 John 5:16 (King James Version)

As we can see, the KJV renders “mortal sin” as “sin which is…unto death”. Even with this translation the same central meaning remains:

1. There are two kinds of sin

2. One kind of sin leads to “death”

3. Another kind of sin does not lead to “death”

However one chooses to interpret this passage, it’s very clear that Scripture is making a distinction between different kinds of sin and saying that one is more serious than the other.

Not only John

As a quick follow up, I typically point out that John is not the only person in Scripture to distinguish between different kinds of sin. Although it’s a little different, Jesus Himself speaks to this subject:

Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven – Matthew 12:31

Again, regardless of how one chooses to interpret this passage, it’s clear that not all sins are the same.

All sin is serious!

After pointing out these two passages, I would typically conclude the brief exchange by saying that, despite these distinctions, in a certain sense it is correct to say that “sin is sin”. It is true that all sin is an offense against God.

The Catholic distinction between different kinds of sin doesn’t mean that venial sin is “okay”. No, all sin is serious. We shouldn’t just try and avoid mortal sin, but all sin and strive for the holiness for which we were made!

Best of British: Part 9

I can’t believe I forgot these two shows when I previously shared my favourite British comedies…

Black Books

When I was living back in Cheltenham, “Black Books” was a shared love between myself and my flatmate, Amit.

The show is set in a book store, which obviously immediately made me love it. The shop is owned by Bernard Black, a drunken slob of an Irishman. Manny, played by the musical genius Bill Bailey, is Bernard’s shop assistant/lackey/human pet. The cast is completed by Fran, Bernard’s long-time friend/drinking buddy and owner of the store next door.

Over the course of the three seasons I would say that that the comedy style changes quite a bit and becomes increasingly farcical. I initially found this a little off putting. I don’t think it matters though; you really can’t help but love these three misfits.

The clip below comes from the second episode of the first season, where Manny arrives for his first day working at Black Books:

Spaced

I remember when the show “Spaced” being released in the UK. I didn’t like it at all. It was all just a bit random and a little too weird for my tastes at the time. However, a few years later, with an evening to spare and nothing on TV, I sat down with my flatmate’s Season 1 DVD and watched the entire series in one sitting. I absolutely loved it.

This programme is really a show for geeks. If you love star wars, video games and cult classic movies, this is the TV show for you!

The Four Loves – Chapter 2 (“Likings And Loves For The Sub-Human”)

Four Loves 2

Continuing my notes on The Four Loves, in this chapter Jack examines the likings/loves we have for things things which are not human (which he calls “subhuman”). In particular, he focuses in on love of nature and love of country. We will not deal with these in this post. Due to the length of the chapter, these will be dealt with in subsequent posts.

Notes and Quotes

1. Before we get to loves, we need to look at likes, which means we need to look at pleasures

…there is a continuity between our elementary likings for things and our loves for people. Since “the highest does not stand without the lowest”* we had better begin at the bottom, with mere likings; and, since to “like” anything means to take some sort of pleasure in it, we must begin with pleasure.

* This is a quotation from “The Imitation of Christ” by Thomas a Kempis

2. We may divide pleasures into two kinds

Now it is a very old discovery that pleasures can be divided into two classes…

(a) Need Pleasures

…those [pleasures] which would not be pleasures at all unless they were preceded by desire… An example… would be a drink of water. This is a pleasure if you are thirsty and a great one if you are very thirsty. But probably no one in the world… ever poured himself out a glass of water and drank it just for the fun of the thing.

(b) Appreciative Pleasures

…[the other kind are] those which are pleasures in their own right and need no such preparation [of desire]. An example… would be the unsought and unexpected pleasures of smell – the breath from a bean-field or a row of sweet-peas meeting you on your morning walk. You were in want of nothing, completely contented, before it; the pleasure, which may be very great, is an unsolicited, super-added gift.

3. There can be complications with dividing up pleasures in this way

(a) You can have both pleasures at the same time

If you are given a coffee or beer where you expect (and would have been satisfied with) water, then of course you get a pleasure of the first kind (allaying of thirst) and one of the second (a nice taste) at the same time.

(b) Addiction can turn pleasure from appreciative-pleasure to need-pleasure

For the temperate man an occasional glass of wine is a treat like the smell of the bean-field. But to the alcoholic…no liquor gives any pleasure except that of relief from an unbearable craving. 

Read more

Shameless Publicity

On this blog I regularly share edifying resources that I’ve come across in my Internet wanderings. Today I’d like to publicise a site that is probably my favourite Catholic blog on the Internet:

Shameless Popery is written by a chap in the DC area named Joseph Heschmeyer. He posts articles pretty much every day on a wide range of subjects pertaining to the Catholic faith.  He’s a lawyer by training and his systematic and methodical writing style is testimony to his logical and orderly way of thinking. I want to keep him humble so I’ll cease the adulation here, but I’d strongly encourage everyone to go subscribe to his blog.

Read more

Let’s talk about love

clementThe Second Reading at Mass today is one of those better known Scripture passages, St. Paul’s praise of the virtue of love, found in his First Letter to the Corinthians.

“Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, . I’m pretty sure I don’t need to quote the rest of this passage as you will have certainly heard it at…every…single…wedding…you have ever attended 😉

It is my guess that St. Paul’s great hymn of love was the inspiration for a section of an epistle written by St. Clement of Rome at the end of the First Century. A few decades after St. Paul’s death, St. Clement wrote a letter to that same troublesome Corinthian congregation to address that community’s latest round of problems. Some young whipper-snappers had usurped control of the church and deposed their clergy. The Bishop of Rome wrote to them, urging the members of the church to obedience and to brotherly love.

Read more

Non-Catholics receiving Communion?

Reception of the Holy Eucharist has recently been the subject of scrutiny in the media, prompted by some of the discussions taking place in the “Synod on the Family”. In my own life, Holy Communion was also the subject of a recent incident concerning a friend of mine.

You see, a friend recently went to a Catholic conference together with a Protestant. Being a Catholic event, there was, of course, the celebration of the Eucharist. When time for Mass came, the non-Catholic was upset that she couldn’t go up to receive the Eucharist. She couldn’t do this because, under ordinary circumstances, the Catholic Church does not allow non-Catholics to receive Holy Communion.

“…members of those churches with whom we are not yet fully united are ordinarily not admitted to Communion”
– United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, “Guidelines For communion”

In this post I would like to provide a summary of what I say when I’m asked why it is that the Catholic Church doesn’t allow anyone to receive Holy Communion (the Eastern Orthodox Churches have similar rules for similar reasons). As usual, this won’t be an exhaustive theological explanation, simply a rough outline of the kind of thing I personally say when I’m asked to explain this particular Catholic teaching.

communion

Read more

1 35 36 37 38 39 172