|
Question 167: Will all those who are not Christians go to hell? (TR)
Answer: This question has already been discussed earlier in answer to question 17 (Questions and Answers 1). To complete the answer I add No 16 of the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, “Lumen Gentium”:
“16. Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are related in various ways to the people of God (32). In the first place we must recall the people to whom the testament and the promises were given and from whom Christ was born according to the flesh (cf. Romans 9:4-5), On account of their fathers this people remains most dear to God, for God does not repent of the gifts He makes nor of the calls He issues (cf. Romans 11:28-29). But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind. Nor is God far distant from those who in shadows and images seek the unknown God, for it is He who gives to all men life and breath and all things (cf. Acts 17:25-28) and as Saviour wills that all men be saved (cf. 1 Timothy 2:4). Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience (33). Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life. Whatever good or truth is found amongst them is looked upon by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel (34) She knows that it is given by Him who enlightens all men so that they may finally have life. But often men, deceived by the Evil One, have become vain in their reasonings and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, serving the creature rather than the Creator (cf. Romans 1:21-25) Or some there are who, living and dying in this world without God, are exposed to final despair. Wherefore to promote the glory of God and procure the salvation of all of these, and mindful of the command of the Lord, "Preach the Gospel to every creature" (Mark 16:15) the Church fosters the missions with care and attention."
Question 168: What is Advent? (TR)
Answer: Advent (from the Latin adventus, arrival”; Greek epifaneia), preparation of the celebration of the birth of Christ, points to the coming of the saviour “in the form or a servant” (Incarnation) and also points to his coming in glory at the end of time (parousia). Advent begins on the 4th Sunday before Christmas. The reformed churches also celebrate Advent. The Eastern churches, however, do not know Advent as a liturgical period. On the last Sunday before Christmas the Byzantine church remembers Christ’s ancestors (the Gospel according to Matthew 1:1-15). The Syrians call the four (East Syrians ) / four (West Syrians) weeks before Christmas “weeks of proclamation”.
Nr 524 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church talks of the advent liturgy and therefore of the spiritual purpose of the period of advent:
524 When the Church celebrates the liturgy of Advent each year, she makes present this ancient expectancy of the Messiah, for by sharing in the long preparation for the Savior's first coming, the faithful renew their ardent desire for his second coming (c.f. Revelations 22:17). By celebrating the precursor's birth and martyrdom, the Church unites herself to his desire: "He must increase, but I must decrease." (John 2:30).
Question 169: Is Pope Benedict really interested in a dialogue, or is dialogue only a tactic employed to evangelize Muslims? (TR)
Answer: In answer I cite the relevant passage from a speech by Pope Benedict XVI on 20th August 2005 during a meeting with representatives of Muslim communities at the World Church Day in Cologne.
“Dear friends, I am profoundly convinced that we must not yield to the negative pressures in our midst, but must affirm the values of mutual respect, solidarity and peace. The life of every human being is sacred, both for Christians and for Muslims. There is plenty of scope for us to act together in the service of fundamental moral values.
The dignity of the person and the defence of the rights which that dignity confers must represent the goal of every social endeavour and of every effort to bring it to fruition. This message is conveyed to us unmistakably by the quiet but clear voice of conscience. It is a message which must be heeded and communicated to others: should it ever cease to find an echo in peoples' hearts, the world would be exposed to the darkness of a new barbarism.
Only through recognition of the centrality of the person can a common basis for understanding be found, one which enables us to move beyond cultural conflicts and which neutralizes the disruptive power of ideologies.
“[…]Past experience teaches us that, unfortunately, relations between Christians and Muslims have not always been marked by mutual respect and understanding. How many pages of history record battles and wars that have been waged, with both sides invoking the Name of God, as if fighting and killing, the enemy could be pleasing to him. The recollection of these sad events should fill us with shame, for we know only too well what atrocities have been committed in the name of religion. The lessons of the past must help us to avoid repeating the same mistakes. We must seek paths of reconciliation and learn to live with respect for each other's identity. The defence of religious freedom, in this sense, is a permanent imperative, and respect for minorities is a clear sign of true civilization.
In this regard, it is always right to recall what the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council said about relations with Muslims.: "The Church looks upon Muslims with respect. They worship the one God living and subsistent, merciful and almighty, creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to humanity and to whose decrees, even the hidden ones, they seek to submit themselves whole-heartedly, just as Abraham, to whom the Islamic faith readily relates itself, submitted to God.... Although considerable dissensions and enmities between Christians and Muslims may have arisen in the course of the centuries, the Council urges all parties that, forgetting past things, they train themselves towards sincere mutual understanding and together maintain and promote social justice and moral values as well as peace and freedom for all people" (Declaration Nostra Aetate, n. 3).
For us, these words of the Second Vatican Council remain the Magna Carta of the dialogue with you, dear Muslim friends, and I am glad that you have spoken to us in the same spirit and have confirmed these intentions. […]Teaching is the vehicle through which ideas and convictions are transmitted. Words are highly influential in the education of the mind. You, therefore, have a great responsibility for the formation of the younger generation. I learn with gratitude of the spirit in which you assume responsibility. Christians and Muslims, we must face together the many challenges of our time. There is no room for apathy and disengagement, and even less for partiality and sectarianism. We must not yield to fear or pessimism. Rather, we must cultivate optimism and hope. Interreligious and intercultural dialogue between Christians and Muslims cannot be reduced to an optional extra. It is in fact a vital necessity, on which in large measure our future depends. The young people from many parts of the world are here in Cologne as living witnesses of solidarity, brotherhood and love. I pray with all my heart, dear and esteemed Muslim friends, that the merciful and compassionate God may protect you, bless you and enlighten you always. May the God of peace lift up our hearts, nourish our hope and guide our steps on the paths of the world.“
Question 170: In the 1st letter of St John a person who does not recognize that Jesus is the Son of God is called the Antichrist. Are all Muslims Antichrists? (TR)
Answer: The expression Antichrist only appears in the letters of St John as a description of those who denied Christ in those days (2 John 7; 1 John 2:18b-22), or for Christ’s adversary who is expected at the end of time (1 John 2:18a; 4:3). In Catholic exegesis the latter is the same as “the man of sin, the son of lawlessness, who opposes and exalts himself over everything that is called God, or is worshipped.” He “even sets himself up in God's temple, proclaiming himself to be God. “ He is the lawless one, “whom the Lord (at his Second Coming) will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming”. “His coming will be in accordance with the work of Satan displayed in all kinds of counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders, and in every sort of evil that deceives those who are perishing. …” (2 Thessalonians 2:3-10).
Nos 675-677 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) speak of “the final trial” of the church and, in this context, also of the Antichrist.
675 Before Christ's second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers [cf. Luke 21:12); John 15:19-20]. The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the "mystery of iniquity" in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh (cf. 2 Thessalonians 2:4-12); 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3); 2 John 7; 1 John 2:18-22].
676 The Antichrist's deception already begins to take shape in the world every time the claim is made to realize within history that messianic hope which can only be realized beyond history through the eschatological judgment. The Church has rejected even modified forms of this falsification of the kingdom to come under the name of millenarianism [cf. DS3839], especially the "intrinsically perverse" political form of a secular messianism. [cf. [cf. the rejection of false “mysticism“, the erroneous form of salvation of the poor in the Encyclical “Divini Redemptoris" Pius‘ XI.; cf. Also “ Gaudium et Spes, 20-2].
677 The Church will enter the glory of the kingdom only through this final Passover, when she will follow her Lord in his death and Resurrection [cf. GS 20-21]. The kingdom will be fulfilled, then, not by a historic triumph of the Church through a progressive ascendancy [cf. Revelation 19: 1-9], but only by God's victory over the final unleashing of evil [cf. Revelation 2:18], which will cause his Bride to come down from heaven [cf. Revelation 20:7-10]. God's triumph over the revolt of evil will take the form of the Last Judgment after the final cosmic upheaval of this passing world [cf. 2 Peter 3:12-13]
Question 171: What is Caritas? Is Caritas a secret organization for mission? (TR)
Answer: On 25. December 2005 Pope Benedict XVI published his first Encyclical. It has the Latin title DEUS CARITAS EST (= God is love), its subject matter is therefore Christian love. The first of the two main parts of the text deals with “The Unity of Love in Creation and in Salvation History”. The second part: “Caritas – the Practice of Love by the Church as a Community of Love” “. In response to the question I quote selections of the second part of the Encyclical:
“(19) […]The entire activity of the Church is an expression of a love that seeks the integral good of man: it seeks his evangelization through Word and Sacrament, an undertaking that is often heroic in the way it is acted out in history; and it seeks to promote man in the various arenas of life and human activity. Love is therefore the service that the Church carries out in order to attend constantly to man's sufferings and his needs, including material needs. […]
(20) Love of neighbour, grounded in the love of God, is first and foremost a responsibility for each individual member of the faithful, but it is also a responsibility for the entire ecclesial community at every level: from the local community to the particular Church and to the Church universal in its entirety […]
(22) As the years went by and the Church spread further afield, the exercise of charity became established as one of her essential activities, along with the administration of the sacraments and the proclamation of the word: love for widows and orphans, prisoners, and the sick and needy of every kind, is as essential to her as the ministry of the sacraments and preaching of the Gospel. The Church cannot neglect the service of charity any more than she can neglect the Sacraments and the Word. […]
The distinctiveness of the Church's charitable activity
31. The increase in diversified organizations engaged in meeting various human needs is ultimately due to the fact that the command of love of neighbour is inscribed by the Creator in man's very nature. It is also a result of the presence of Christianity in the world, since Christianity constantly revives and acts out this imperative, so often profoundly obscured in the course of time. […]For this reason, it is very important that the Church's charitable activity maintains all of its splendour and does not become just another form of social assistance. So what are the essential elements of Christian and ecclesial charity?
a) Following the example given in the parable of the Good Samaritan, Christian charity is first of all the simple response to immediate needs and specific situations: feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, caring for and healing the sick, visiting those in prison, etc. The Church's charitable organizations, beginning with those of Caritas (at diocesan, national and international levels), ought to do everything in their power to provide the resources and above all the personnel needed for this work. Individuals who care for those in need must first be professionally competent: they should be properly trained in what to do and how to do it, and committed to continuing care. Yet, while professional competence is a primary, fundamental requirement, it is not of itself sufficient. We are dealing with human beings, and human beings always need something more than technically proper care. They need humanity. They need heartfelt concern. Those who work for the Church's charitable organizations must be distinguished by the fact that they do not merely meet the needs of the moment, but they dedicate themselves to others with heartfelt concern, enabling them to experience the richness of their humanity. Consequently, in addition to their necessary professional training, these charity workers need a “formation of the heart”: they need to be led to that encounter with God in Christ which awakens their love and opens their spirits to others. As a result, love of neighbour will no longer be for them a commandment imposed, so to speak, from without, but a consequence deriving from their faith, a faith which becomes active through love (cf. Gal 5:6).
b) Christian charitable activity must be independent of parties and ideologies. It is not a means of changing the world ideologically, and it is not at the service of worldly stratagems, but it is a way of making present here and now the love which man always needs. The modern age, particularly from the nineteenth century on, has been dominated by various versions of a philosophy of progress whose most radical form is Marxism. Part of Marxist strategy is the theory of impoverishment: in a situation of unjust power, it is claimed, anyone who engages in charitable initiatives is actually serving that unjust system, making it appear at least to some extent tolerable. This in turn slows down a potential revolution and thus blocks the struggle for a better world. Seen in this way, charity is rejected and attacked as a means of preserving the status quo. What we have here, though, is really an inhuman philosophy. People of the present are sacrificed to the moloch of the future—a future whose effective realization is at best doubtful. One does not make the world more human by refusing to act humanely here and now. We contribute to a better world only by personally doing good now, with full commitment and wherever we have the opportunity, independently of partisan strategies and programmes. The Christian's programme —the programme of the Good Samaritan, the programme of Jesus—is “a heart which sees”. This heart sees where love is needed and acts accordingly. Obviously when charitable activity is carried out by the Church as a communitarian initiative, the spontaneity of individuals must be combined with planning, foresight and cooperation with other similar institutions.
c) Charity, furthermore, cannot be used as a means of engaging in what is nowadays considered proselytism. Love is free; it is not practised as a way of achieving other ends. But this does not mean that charitable activity must somehow leave God and Christ aside. For it is always concerned with the whole man. Often the deepest cause of suffering is the very absence of God. Those who practise charity in the Church's name will never seek to impose the Church's faith upon others. They realize that a pure and generous love is the best witness to the God in whom we believe and by whom we are driven to love. A Christian knows when it is time to speak of God and when it is better to say nothing and to let love alone speak. He knows that God is love (cf. 1 Jn 4:8) and that God's presence is felt at the very time when the only thing we do is to love. He knows—to return to the questions raised earlier—that disdain for love is disdain for God and man alike; it is an attempt to do without God. Consequently, the best defence of God and man consists precisely in love. It is the responsibility of the Church's charitable organizations to reinforce this awareness in their members, so that by their activity—as well as their words, their silence, their example—they may be credible witnesses to Christ.”
Question 172: Did Jesus have brothers? There is one instance where the Gospels say “your brothers are outside”. (TR)
Answer: The NT does mention brothers and sisters of Jesus: Mt 12:46 ff.; 13-55ff.; John 2:12; 73:5-10.; 20:17(?); Acts 1:14; 1Cor 9:5; Gal 1:19. Four brothers are mentioned by name: Jacob (the younger, Mk 15:40), Joseph or Joses (The spelling is not always the same in the hand written texts), Simon and Judas (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). There is no record of the names of the sisters.
(I) When answering this often recurring question it is important to make a clear distinction between the probably and the unlikely. It is certain that these people are not brothers and sisters of Jesus in accordance with today’s meaning of the words, i.e. they were definitely not children of Mary, but distant relatives, e.g. cousins of Jesus. In the Greek language, in which these reports were written, the words brother and sister usually have the same meaning as we understand today. However, in this case we are permitted to consider the Green expressions as a literal translation of an Aramaic equivalent, which was used by the early Christian community in Palestine as an expression for a certain group of people related to Jesus; “Brothers of the Lord “ or “Jesus’ brothers” was apparently a known expression, cf Acts 1:14; 1 Cor 9:5. As can also be seen in the OT (Gen 13:8 – Lot is Abraham’s “brother”; 14:14-16; 29:15), the Aramaic (and Hebrew) use of the word differs from ours in this respect. In those languages, the word brother (Hebr. ۥākh) also includes distant relatives such as nephews and cousins, because they do not have terms describing those relations more precisely. For example, the expression “the brothers” was used in order to avoid descriptions such as “the sons of the uncle and the suns of the mother’s sister) (Lagrange). That the authors of the NT knew about the multiple meanings of the word adelfós can be seen in John 1:41, where Simon is described as the “true” brother of Andrew.
(II) This fact makes it appear possible that the “brothers of Jesus“ are distant relatives and not genuine brothers. That this is truly the case will be shown in the following.
(A) The four named “brothers of Jesus“ Mk 6:3 (Mt 13:55) are sons of another mother than the mother of Jesus; the first two, Jacob and Joseph (Joses), are mentioned again later in Mark as well as in Matthew in the story of Jesus’ crucifixion, and are there named as sons of a different Mary from the mother of Jesus (Mt 27:56; Mk 15:40). It is not entirely impossible that this report refers to other persons. However, when a writer mentions two brothers by name and when he later repeats those names in a short piece of writing without any further explanation, it has to be assumed that he refers to the same two people. This also gives rise to the fact that the other two (Simon and Judas), who appear much later and much further distanced from Jesus, are also not brothers in our sense of the word; It is probably that these persons are cousins of a different origin, especially since they are not mentioned in Mt 27:56 ; Mk 15:40.
(B) This conclusion is confirmed in that according to the Gospels Jesus is the only son of Mary and the only child of the Holy family. At the time of Jesus’ birth Mary was a virgin (Mt 1:23; Lk 1:27) and intended to remain a virgin ( Lk 1:34).; All signs point to the fact that at the age of twelve Jesus is still the only son of Mary (Lk 2:41-52); Nowhere are the “brothers of Jesus” (who first appear during the time of his public ministry), called Sons of Mary and or Joseph; On the cross Jesus entrusted his mother to John, one of his disciples (John 19:26), a fact that only truly makes sense if Mary had no other children but Jesus.
(C) From the verses quoted in point (B) we can also deduct with a strong probability that the “brothers of Jesus“ were not children of Joseph from a previous marriage, as for example the proto-gospel Jacobi, Origines and Ambrosiaster (Migne Latinus 17,344f) believed. Just precisely what the relationship of Jesus and his “brothers” was cannot be proved with final certainty; This fact, however, does not change the first, negative part of the evidence. Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. IV, 22:4) cites a quote from Hegesippus, which is said to show that Simon and Judas are sons of Cleophas (cf. John 19:25). This Cleophas is an uncle of Jesus, i.e. a brother of St Joseph. Their mother would therefore be “Mary of Cleophas”, who stood beneath Jesus’ cross. The mother of Jacob and Joseph (Joses) would be the “sister of Jesus’ mother“ mentioned by John, whom Mk 15:40 calls Mary, and who can therefore not have been a blood sister of the holy virgin. Her father would have been Alphaeus (Mt 10:3), provided it is possible to equate Jacob, “brother“of the Lord with the disciple Jacob Alphaei. Not all exegetes accept this, however. In this explanation John 19:25 would mention four people. Others would like to equate Alphaeus with Cleophas and therefore see only three people named in John 19:25. According to this view, the four “brothers” of the Lord would be four blood brothers, and beneath the cross there would only have been one “other Mary“ next to Mary the mother of Jesus and Mary Magdalene. This other Mary would then have been the wife of Cleophas (Alphaeus), the mother of the four “brothers” of the Lord and sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (John 19:25). (slightly abbreviated text by W. Grossouw, art. “Brüder Jesu“ in H. Haag (ed.), Bibel –Lexikon. Einsiedeln/Zürich/Köln, 1956), p. 262f.
Question 173: Noel Baba (St Nicholas) is said to have lived in Antalya. Has he been moved to the North Pole after his death? (TR)
Answer: The St Nicholas who is remembered by the Latin Church on 6th December was, probably in the first half of the 4th century, the Bishop of Myra in Lykia. The early reports of miracles in his biography, for which there are no confirming facts, are later supplemented by stories from the life of the Abbot of Sion or Myra and the Bishop of Pinora (died 10.12.564), who had the same name. The legendary Saint is therefore an amalgamation of two historic persons. Core of the Green legend surrounding Nicholas is the Stratelates miracle, the liberation of three imprisoned innocent knights, which laid the foundation of Nicholas becoming the patron saint for prisoners. The legendary rescue of shipwrecked seamen by Nicholas resulted in his patronage as rescuer of seafarers, which in 1087 resulted in the transfer of his relics from Myra to Bari. Another facet of the early legends is the secret gift of a gold coin each for three virgins to enable their marriages. Out of this grew not only the idea of St Nicholas as a giver of gifts, but also his dominant iconographic description by three golden balls. In many places the Bishop Nicholas has been replaced by Father Christmas as the giver of gifts.
Questions 174: What does Jesus mean with the statement: „Blessed are the pure in heart: they shall see God. “ (Matthew 5, 8)? (DE)
Answer: Purity of heart contrasts with purity as a legal status, which – according to the prescriptions of the Book Leviticus – is brought about by ritual cleaning. This is an ever recurring contentious issue between Jesus and the Pharisees. What Jesus has in mind he makes clear in Matthew 15, 10-20:
“He [Jesus] called the people to him and said: ‘Listen and understand. What goes into the mouth does not make anyone unclean; it is what comes out of the mouth that makes someone unclean.
Then the disciples came to him and said: ‘Do you know that the Pharisees were shocked when they heard what you said? He replied: ‘Any plant my heavenly Father has not planted will be pulled up by the roots. Leave them alone. They are blind leaders of the blind; and if one blind person leads another, both will fall into the pit.’
At this, Peter said to him, ‘Explain the parable for us.’ Jesus replied, ‘Even you – don’t you yet understand? Can’t you see that whatever goes into the mouth passes through the stomach and is discharged into the sewer? But whatever comes out of the mouth comes from the heart, and this is that makes someone unclean. For from the heart come evil intentions: Murder, adultery, fornication, theft, perjury, slander. These are the things that make a person unclean. But eating with unwashed hands does not make anyone unclean.’”
Purity of heart manifests itself above all in the way a person speaks, because in the words of a person his or her thought as well as the desires of the heart become manifest. The fruit of the purity of heart is the vision of God, i.e. the being admitted into the presence of God (see Matthew 18, 10). In the language of the Old Testament the members of the royal court are those, ‘who see the face of the King’.”
|
