|
Q u i c k Q u e s t i o n s
|
This Rock
Volume 1, Number 2
 February 1990 
|
|
|
"Didn't St. Paul Say the Priesthood is Hokum?"
Q: The Catholic priesthood is disproved in 1 Timothy 4:3, where Paul warns Timothy that in the last days apostates in the Church would forbid marriage. Catholic priests, contrary to the Bible, are forbidden to marry. In view of this verse, and since we're living in the last days, how can you possibly defend your priesthood?
A: First of all, how do you know we're in the last days? Your question implies that because Catholic priests don't marry these must be the last days--not a good argument. Perhaps you're unaware that for the last 850 years (since the Second Lateran Council in 1139), all candidates for priestly ordination in the Roman Rite have been required to take the vow of celibacy. By your reasoning that means we've been in the last days an awfully long time.
There's another problem with your assertion. No Catholic is forbidden to marry. Men who become priests do so voluntarily with the understanding that in the Roman Rite marriage is not an option for priests.
Rather than being forbidden to marry, Catholic priests freely sacrifice the option of marriage in favor of serving God more single-mindedly as chaste, celibate disciples. (Married men in the Eastern rites of the Catholic Church are allowed to be ordained.)
Although marriage is lawful for all Christians, it's not mandatory. It's in harmony with the gospel to abstain from marriage for the sake of serving Christ. Jesus tells us that some "have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom. Whoever can accept this [a life of celibacy] ought to accept it" (Matt. 19:12).
Paul, himself a celibate priest, explains in 1 Corinthians 6:12-13 that "everything is lawful for me, but not everything is beneficial. Everything is lawful for me but I will not let myself be dominated by anything." Here Paul warns against sexual immorality and exhorts Christians to "glorify God in their bodies" (1 Cor. 6:20).
In the next chapter he encourages celibacy by explaining its eminent role in a life of chastity: "Now, in regard to the matters about which you wrote, it is a good thing for a man not to touch a woman, but because of cases of immorality every man should have his own wife and every woman her own husband. . .
"Indeed, I wish everyone to be as I am [celibate], but each has a particular gift from God, one of one kind and one of another...Now to the unmarried and to widows I say, it is a good thing for them to remain as they are, as I do, but if they cannot exercise self-control they should marry because it is better to marry than to remain on fire" (1 Cor. 7:1-2, 7-10).
1 Timothy 4:3, far from impugning the Catholic discipline of priestly celibacy, condemns those heresies (like the Manichaeans and Albigensians) which said marriage is evil because the body is evil. Paul wasn't warning Timothy about the Cathohlic discipline--after all, Paul himself followed it!
Q: I have two questions. In Revelation 12:7-9 it says Lucifer and his angels fought against God and were cast out of heaven. Since Lucifer was a highly intelligent creature--not to mention the fact that he had an intimate knowledge of God--I can't comprehend how he (or any angel for that matter) could rebel against God. That seems to be utterly insane. The second question is: What was the particular sin that Lucifer and the angels allied with him committed?
A: You're right in characterizing Lucifer's rebellion as an insane act. Don't forget that, although Lucifer had a superabundance of spiritual gifts, he was also endowed, as we are, with the gift of free will. God left him free to choose good over evil, and, as we know, he chose evil.
Consider Adam and Eve. Before the Fall they possessed immortality, control over their passions and appetites, the complete integrity of their wills, as well as a human intelligence far superior to that which we have now. Yet, like Lucifer, they chose to commit a mortal sin. This means God allowed them to exercise their free will.
As for the particular sin the bad angels committed, many theologians believe that in their pre-fallen state the angels were given a foreknowledge of humans (who would be inferior to them), as well as a foreknowledge that God himself (the second Person of the Trinity) would be incarnated as a man and redeem the universe through his death on the cross.
This revelation angered Lucifer because it meant he and the other angels would have to worship God incarnate. Lucifer and the other angels who fell were so proud of being superior to men that their overweening arrogance wouldn't allow them to worship Jesus Christ the God-Man. This refusal--this non serviam--stemmed from pride. That, anyway, is the theologian's theory.
Q: Who or what is the "anti-christ?"
A: The term antichrist is mentioned only a few times in the Bible and is used in singular and plural forms, implying there will be both a particular Antichrist as well as preceding antichrists. Because of their heinous crimes, men such as Nero, Hitler, and Stalin have been termed antichrists.
In 1 John 2:18 the term implies a particular man who, before the Second Coming, will persecute the Church with a ferocity never before experienced. 1 John 2:22 tells us that anyone who opposes the Father is an antichrist. 1 John 4:3 says, "Every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus does not belong to God. This is the spirit of the antichrist that, as you have heard, is to come, but in fact is already in the world."
Bishop Polycarp of Smyrna (d. cir. A.D. 156) said in his Letter to the Philippians, "Everyone who does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is an antichrist."
Paul's reference to "the Lawless One" seems to be another allusion to the Antichrist. He's described as a man who will be empowered by Satan, come forth in the end times, savagely persecute the Church, proclaim himself a god, and, through the signs and wonders he performs, be worshipped by most people living at that time.
Finally, when the time comes, the Antichrist will be destroyed by Jesus Christ when he returns in glory (2 Thess. 2:1-12).
By the way, the Church has made no formal definition on the matter, so Catholics are free to hold that the Antichrist was or will be an individual, a group of people, or a particularly wicked era.
Q: Your articles on Mormonism frequently mention the book Doctrine and Covenants. What is it?
A: Doctrine and Covenants, to quote its explanatory introduction, "is a collection of divine revelations and inspired declarations given for the establishment and regulation of the kingdom of God on earth in the last days.
"Although most of the sections are directed to members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the messages, warnings, and exhortations are for the benefit of all mankind, and contain an invitation to all people everywhere to hear the voice of the Lord. . . speaking to them for their temporal well-being and their everlasting salvation. The book of Doctrine and Covenants is one of the standard works of the Church in company with the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, and the Pearl of Great Price."
That's what the Mormon Church claims it is. In reality, Doctrine and Covenants is a compilation of messages from Joseph Smith designed to bolster his image as a prophet. Although he claimed to be receiving direct revelations from God, these "revelations" often contradicted others given in the Book of Mormon and elsewhere. They were simply a convenient way for Smith to get the things he wanted (such as many wives--see Doctrine and Covenants section 132:1-62) without argument or interference. After all, who would want to argue with God?
Q: Why does the Roman Catholic Church teach the doctrine of "works-righteousness" [that through good works one can earn salvation]?
A: The Catholic Church has never taught such a doctrine and, in fact, has constantly condemned the notion that men can earn or merit salvation. Catholic soteriology is rooted in apostolic Tradition and Scripture and says that it is only by God's grace (completely unmerited by works) that one is saved.
The Church teaches that it's God's grace from beginning to end which justifies, sanctifies, and saves us. As Paul explains in Philippians 2:13, "God is the one, who, for his good purpose, works in you both to desire and to work."
Notice that Paul's words presuppose that the faithful Christian is not just desiring to be righteous, but is actively working toward it. This is the second half of the justification equation, and Protestants either miss or ignore it.
James 2:17 reminds us that "faith of itself, if it does not have work, is dead." In verse 24 James says, "See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone." And later: "For just as a body without a spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead" (2:26).
The Council of Trent harmonizes the necessity of grace and works: "If anyone says that man can be justified before God by his own works, whether done by his own natural powers or by the teaching of the Law, without divine grace through Jesus Christ, let him be anathema" (Session 6; can. 1).
The Council fathers continued by saying, "If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone, meaning that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to obtain the grace of justification and that it is not in any way necessary that he be prepared and disposed by the action of his own will, let him be anathema" (Session 6: can. 9).
[By the way, "let him be anathema" means "let him be excommunicated," not "let him be cursed to hell." The phrase was used in conciliar documents in a technical, theological sense, not in the same sense as the word "anathema" is found in Scripture. Don't let "Bible Christians" throw you for a loop on this one.]
So, far from teaching a doctrine of "works righteousness" (that would be Pelagianism, which was condemned at the Council of Carthage in A.D. 418), the Catholic Church teaches the true, biblical doctrine of justification.
Q: I've understood Mormonism is polytheistic because it teaches that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three separate gods. When I recently told a pair of Mormon missionaries they were polytheists, they heatedly denied it, claiming their church teaches the doctrine of the "Godhead" of the Trinity and worships only one God. What's up?
A: The answer to your question is: Yes, Mormonism is essentially polytheistic. But let's make sure we're straight on our terms. In Catholic lingo, "Godhead" is another way of saying Trinity in that we understand the Godhead as one God comprised of three divine Persons--not three distinct gods. Polytheism means the worship of a plurality of gods.
(Some Mormons, recognizing their theology is polytheistic, prefer to soften it by referring to their religion as "henotheistic," which means the belief in many gods but the worship of one chief god).
For Mormons, "Godhead" means a spiritual partnership that exists among the three "gods" of this planet: God the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost. (Mormons usually don't say "Holy Spirit.")
Joseph Smith, the founder of the Mormon Church, declared: "I have always declared God to be a distinct personage, Jesus Christ a separate and distinct personage from God the Father, and that the Holy Ghost was a distinct personage and a spirit; and these three constitute three distinct personages and three distinct Gods" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, page 370).
In fact, Mormonism teaches that God the Father is essentially a "perfected man" and is limited by a body of flesh and bone and thus is limited to time and space. He happens to reside on a planet near an uncharted star called "Kolob" (Abraham 3:3-9).
Since Mormons worship both God the Father (Doctrine and Covenants 18:40) and Jesus Christ (3 Nephi 11:17; 2 Nephi 25:29), and since they believe the Father and Jesus are two separate gods, they truly are polytheists.
For an added, bizarre twist, turn to the Pearl of Great Price to see this doctrine contradicted: Moses reportedly says, "For God [the Father] said unto me: 'Worship God [the Father] for him only shalt thou serve'...Call upon God [the Father] in the name of mine only begotten [Jesus] and worship me'...Depart from me, Satan, for this one God only [the Father] will I worship, which is the God of Glory" (Moses 1:15-20).
Q: I've been told the only thing necessary for a Catholic to live a moral life is for him to follow his conscience. Is that right?
A: There's more to it than that. Conscience involves a judgment about what's right or wrong, but it doesn't work by magic. You first have to form your conscience. This means learning about good and evil, and that's a job for the intellect.
Many people think conscience is the faculty that tells us what's right and wrong. That's a mistake. Conscience is better thought of as an alarm. With your intellect, your mind, you learn what's right and wrong, and then conscience "sounds off" when you're about to violate the standards your intellect has learned. If you have no standards, you'll never hear the alarm.
But not neglecting the formation of your conscience isn't enough. You need to make sure not just that your conscience if formed, but that it's formed correctly. If it is, the moral judgments you make will be reliable. But if it's not--if your conscience if formed poorly--then your moral judgments won't be trustworthy.
For example, if you've been taught that stealing isn't wrong, and if you really believe that, you won't have any inhibitions against stealing. Your conscience won't bother you when you steal because it isn't reliable when it comes to right and wrong. It's been formed, but not formed correctly.
It's true we have an obligation to follow our conscience, even a poorly formed or "erroneous" one, but we also have an obligation to form our consciences properly. For Catholics this means following what Jesus teaches in Scripture and Tradition through the Magisterium of the Church.
Q: Why does the Catholic Church send people to hell by excommunicating them?
A: It doesn't. The Church doesn't have the power to send anyone to hell. Only God can do that. More properly, people who go to hell send themselves there because they choose hell over heaven, themselves over God.
Excommunication isn't a condemnation to hell. It is the Church's top judicial sanction and involves excluding a notorious sinner from communion with the faithful. (Someone who is "ex-communicated" is "outside of communion.") Excommunication is intended as a warning to the sinner that he needs to repent.
Q: We Catholics are ignorant of our Bible. Shouldn't we attend Bible studies?
A: It depends. If you can find a good one, by all means, but don't attend just any Bible study. There are a number of reasons to be cautious.
Many "non-denominational" Bible studies attack Catholic beliefs. Unless you're already familiar with Scripture, they might throw you off track.
Second, the Bible is a large book and, despite what Evangelicals claim, it's not always clear, even on basic matters such as justification. (For example, compare Romans 3:28 and James 2:24). It's good to have someone with a working knowledge of the Bible to guide your study.
Third, some people use Bible studies as platforms to promulgate their own views of Catholicism, even if these views don't coincide with what the Church teaches. You need to be discerning.
If you don't know where to go to find a top-notch Bible study, ask a priest you trust to recommend one. If you still can't find a good one, study Scripture on your own with a good Bible translation and a good Catholic commentary.
Q: You Catholics spend outrageous sums of money on your cathedrals. How can you justify this?
A: The Bible doesn't forbid Christians to construct beautiful churches. In fact, if the Bible is our guide, we should expect Christians to build fine churches to express their faith.
In the Old Testament God commanded the Jews to build a magnificent Temple in Jerusalem (2 Sam. 7:13; 1 Kings 6-7). In the New Testament Jesus commended the poor widow for contributing to the Temple's upkeep (Luke 21:2).
The Lord showed his own love for the Temple by driving out the money changers who were desecrating it (John 2:1-17). Remember also that Christ rebuked Judas, who complained about using precious oil in Jesus' honor instead of selling it and giving the proceeds to the poor (John 12:3-5).
|
C A T H O L I C A N S W E R S :
[TOP]
of
