Lead Us Not Into Temptation

 

The words "Lead us Not Into Temptation" From the Lord's prayer, presents trouble for Pope Francis. He states that the translation makes it sound as if God is the one leading us into temptation. I've said this prayer since I was knee high to a tadpole and I never looked at it this way. However, here are a few excerpts from the story according to World Catholic Report

Pope Francis said that “lead us not into temptation” is a poorly translated line of the Our Father.

“This is not a good translation,” the Pope said in the video, published Dec. 6. “I am the one who falls, it’s not (God) who pushes me toward temptation to see how I fall. A father doesn’t do this, a father helps us to get up right away.”

He noted that this line was recently re-translated in the French version of the prayer to read “do not let me fall into temptation.”

The Latin version of the prayer, the authoritative version in the Catholic Church, reads “ne nos inducas in tentationem.”

The Pope said that the one who leads people into temptation “is Satan; that is the work of Satan.” He said that the essence of that line in the prayer is like telling God: “when Satan leads me into temptation, please, give me your hand. Give me your hand."

It further states...

"According to the French episcopal conference, the decision to make the change was accepted by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments in June 2013.


The new translation, released Dec. 3 to mark the first day of Advent and the beginning of the new liturgical year, now reads “ne nous laisse pas entrer en tentation,” meaning, “do not let us fall into temptation,” versus the former “ne nous soumets pas à la tentation,” or “lead us not into temptation.”

I take issue with this. I get what he's trying to say, but I think he's wrong. We are going by our Church's Mother tongue which use to be Latin before Vatican II decided every church had their own tongue which was to be spoken in their own language and we no longer focused on the teaching of Latin.

The translations of the Lord's Prayer were translated from Greek (which was translated from Christ's language of Aramaic) to Latin. 
Some say the translation is faulty and the Greek translation (which is "And let us not be led into temptation" should be the replacement.

I respectfully disagree that it was a misleading translation. Great care was taken with The translation process. et ne nos inducas in tentationem (Lead us not into temptation) is a literal translation of the Greek version, given to us by St. Jerome. (click the name to learn more about this Saint)

To understand the translation, let us understand St. Jerome. He was highly intelligent, a historian, and a trilinguistic. He was a holy man and the father of the standard Latin translation of the bible that has held for 1600 years. He, in fact, is the patron saint of archeologists, bible scholars, librarians and translators. He studied himself under the renowned theologian, St. Gregory. St. Jerome could understand Greek, Hebrew and Latin. He could also read Aramaic, but could not speak it well. 

There were early translations from Greek to Latin, before St. Jerome, but they missed the mark. Since Latin was becoming far more widely spoken and understood than Greek, they needed a proper, and accurate translation, and that is when St. Jerome came into the picture. He also took it upon himself to translate the old Testament from Hebrew into Latin.

St Jerome is credited with RESTORING the New Testament to it's original Greek state in his Latin Translation from the Old Latin translations which were deemed inadequate. In fact, many have stated you can see the Greek influences in the Latin Vulgate.

So the actual translation is not misleading or faulty. The accepted Latin translation is as close as literal as the language can get. St. Jerome worked on the thought of, "not word for word, but sense for sense". This is now called the Dynamic equivalent. The DE is used when the readability of the translation is more important than the preservation of the original grammatical structure. Meaning, the words may not translate exactly grammatically, but the spirit is the same. So "Lead us not into temptation" is the same as "let us not be led into temptation".

I never grew up thinking God led me to sin. But I understood there'd be trials, tribulations and tests (which would include temptations from the evil one). We were taught to understand that we are praying for deliverance from those tribulations and tests.

We must also consider that languages evolve and temptation may have had a different meaning that it does now, or (more likely) may have had more than one meaning. Most Apologists believe that temptation meant "Test" or tribulation in this sense. Thus making it "please do not put us to the test, instead deliver us from evil."

Just like Adam and Eve, God sometimes puts our faith and obedience to the test, and the evil one takes advantage. So the translation in Greek (let us not be led) and Latin (Lead us not into) are both valid in this sense when you understand the meaning behind it.

A lot of people accuse this of being an English translation problem since many languages use a form of "Let us not be led." That is not true.

The 1600 year old Lord's Prayer in the St. Jerome Latin is the first known use of the phrase "Lead us not", and all Roman Catholic churches used it, all across the world.

That is until Vatican II when the masses began to be said in the tongue of whatever country. Even then, many used a translation of the Latin prayer in their own language until modern times. Like the French who only this month changed the words from "lead us not" to "let us not be led".

So it is not an "English" problem... it is a lack of proper theological education problem.

Whichever the Pope chooses, I will continue to pray it as it's always been prayed, only I prefer to pray it in Latin. There used to be a time when every Catholic church in every country across the world spoke one language in Mass, Latin. Prayed as one unit, spoke with one voice. All around the world we prayed the same words, together.

Now we speak in thousands of different languages, some of whom do their own translations. It is no longer a single unified Church in Christ.

I don't feel we need a better translation, we need better teachers to explain these questions. We should also return to a unified, one Church way again, where we are all speaking the same language with the same translation and interpretations, in one voice.

I will always prefer the Traditional Latin Mass for this reason.

We need to stop dumbing down our religion and smartening up the Faithful. Instead of watering things down so people don't have to actually LEARN something, make them educate, make them get involved. TEACH them.

If Catholicism was being properly taught to our children, not only at Catholic schools or CCD, but at home... this wouldn't be an issue now.

When I taught CCD, the kids told me they weren't even going to church. The parents were using CCD as daycare. Other than that, they never went to church, never talked about God at home. The parents felt it was our responsibility to impart thousands of years of theology on kids 1x a week for a few months a year. Parents hold responsibility for their child's eternal soul and it's just not being done and now we have this. Changing prayers because the Pope can't answer the simple question as to "why it is this way". instead of teaching, change it... right? (sarcasm)

I again blame Vatican II for trying to water the religion down. When we lose our traditions, when we move to the modern, we put our own conveniences before God, and this is what you get. That's a blog for another time however.

------------------------------------------------

For more information on the Latin Bible and St Jerome:

Further Reading:

St Jerome and the Latin Bible

Et Ne Nos Inducas in Tentationem

St Jerome the Bible Translator

The Vulgate

Biography of St. Jerome

Christ's Birth - an Unplanned Pregnancy?

So whoever runs “Ask a Catholic Priest” on Facebook, is having a very hard time with people disagreeing with him. He is acting all persecuted and even claimed he's being called a heretic. (No one that I personally saw called him that.) Being wrong (or perceived wrong) doesn't make someone a heretic.

He posted a Meme of Christ's Manger bed, and the caption read: “An Unplanned Pregnancy Saved the World.”

Now it caused a few people to scratch their heads. No one disagreed with the pro-life sentiments other than, Our Lord's birth should not be equated with sexually active couples (whether married or living in sin... because in the Catholic faith, premarital sex is still a sin.) who have an “oops” and find themselves pregnant when they weren't planning on having children at that time (or ever). 

That is a false teaching to say our Lord is unplanned.

Our Lord, God the Son, was planned since Adam and Eve's banishment. God always knew he would send his Son to redeem what Adam and Eve had done. There would be a new Eve (Mary) and a new Adam (Jesus) who would be the shining examples of what he meant his creations to be. Loving, obedient, faithful, and Christ's sacrifice would offer us redemption and conquer death which was thrust upon us because of Adam and Eve's disobedience.

The priest (I assume it's a priest since it's called “Ask a Catholic Priest”) became indignant and stated he wasn't talking about God, who is all knowing. He was talking about Mary. That it was an unplanned pregnancy on her behalf.

Wrong again Padre. Far be it from me to argue Theology with a priest as I am no expert... but Mary planned on having Jesus. It was a split second decision but a planned one none-the-less.

Mary did not find herself “accidentally” pregnant with an unwanted or mistimed child. In fact, when St. Gabriel the Archangel appeared to her, she wasn't even pregnant yet. Right there is the key to whether this was planned, or unplanned. SHE WAS NOT PREGNANT YET.

She was surprised, for sure. “How can this be? I have not known a man.” (IE she was a virgin) and hearing the angel tell her she was to BECOME pregnant (not that she already was) was confusing. How could she become pregnant if she's never been with a man and would not be as she was not yet married. (She wasn't about to commit a sin.)

Gabriel explained (again, she's not yet pregnant) that with God, all things are possible, in fact... her cousin Elizabeth who was of advanced age and barren, is now with Child. He then explained that (if she said yes, cause Mary still had free will to reject this miracle from God) The Holy spirit would come to her, and that God would overshadow her. So he explained on how she would come to be with child.

Mary, STILL NOT YET PREGNANT, said, “I am a servant of the Lord. Let it be done to me as you have said.”

So the angel came to her, explained to her what God wanted of her, how it would be done, Mary agreed... THEN she became pregnant. The moment she had foreknowledge that she would become pregnant by saying “yes” to God's miracle... The pregnancy was PLANNED on every end. On God's end since time began... and now Mary's, who was awaiting the miracle to happen, willingly.

If she was willingly awaiting the Holy Spirit to come to her, and God to overshadow her, awaiting the moment she would become with child, how was it unplanned at this point?

Again, this is nothing like two sexually promiscuous teenagers who accidentally become pregnant. She was told it was what God wanted, the angel laid out how it would happen, she agreed to it, THEN became pregnant fully knowing it was about to happen and willingly accepting and desiring it.

Well, this didn't sit well with the priest who told me to “look up the definition of unplanned”. And that “free will is a matter of faith and has nothing to do with the unexpected pregnancy.”

Uh... Free will is TRUTH, not faith. Even atheists understand we are free to make our own choices and live with the consequences. And since Mary was also imbued with free will, she had the chance to back out before she ever became pregnant. The fact that she agreed to it before the pregnancy happened, shows that using her free will, she planned on following through with God's request of her. Kind of how a husband and wife decide it's time to have a child... only a little faster.

And I did one better than simply looking up the definition of “unplanned” since a single word's meaning can change depending on its use.

I looked up the definition of “Unplanned Pregnancy.” According to most sources including the CDC:

“An unplanned pregnancy is an unintended pregnancy that is reported to have been either unwanted (that is, the pregnancy occurred when no children, or no more children, were desired) or mistimed (that is, the pregnancy occurred earlier than desired).”

So lets walk through that definition.

Was Christ an unintended pregnancy? No. His birth was predestined since the beginning of time, and since St. Gabriel explained in detail to Mary what would happen, she intended to have it be done to her as it was said. So Christ was an intended pregnancy.

Was Christ unwanted? No. When Mary agreed to be mother to the Word Incarnate, she wanted that child and already loved him before he was even concieved in her womb. Just knowing was enough for her to want him and expect him.

Was Christ mistimed? No. It was exactly as God had perfectly planned. He hand chose Mary before her birth... she is the immaculate conception, meaning she was born free of Original Sin so that she would be a clean and sinless vessel for the Son of God to be born. And yet, Mary still had that choice, and she was ready to accept Jesus as her child. The timing was exactly as it needed to be.

So Mary's pregnancy and Christ's birth does not fit into the definition of an unplanned pregnancy by any stretch of the imagination.

And again... while I don't disagree with the pro-life sentiments, it is a false teaching to place our Lord and Savior on the same level as a scared teenager who finds herself unwantingly pregnant through her own promiscuity (as most teenage pregnancies happen). An unplanned pregancy is a couple, whether through promiscuity outside of the sacred bonds of marriage, or even within a marriage, actively avoid trying to have a child while still fulfilling their sexual desires, then have a whoops.

That is NOT Christ's conception or birth!

I have suddenly found that my posting privileges on that site are gone.

I'm not a theological expert by any means... But it would seem like common sense that Christ was planned, was wanted by Mary the moment she said 'yes' before she was even pregnant with him, and that he came at the intended time as he will one day return on a cloud of Glory from Heaven, at the intended time.

As I stated before I got kicked off the page: “Vatican II: Spreading nonsensical theology since the 60s.”

That said, there is nothing more precious than a life, and even an unexpected pregnancy can be a blessing. Whether it's a blessing on the family, a blessing on an adoptive family who can not have children of their own, a blessing on a community (the child could grow up to be a charitable business owner) or a blessing on the world, (The child could grow up to be the person who cures cancer, who ends hunger, or who is set to be the next St. Francis, St. Therese, St. Padre Pio...)

The life of a child is precious and should never be unwanted, even if unplanned. If you find yourself in a situation where you are pregnant and can not care for a child... please, still consider life, consider adoption. There are many Catholic services available to help you through either the adoption process, or the transition for if you choose to keep your child. Adoption changed the life of my cousin who couldn't have children of her own. It also changed the life of a child my mom's cousin adopted and raised as her own.

A friend of mine had an unplanned pregnancy, she was left by the man she trusted who fathered the child, but she raised that child and sacrificed much for that child, and now he's a man who is returning the favor to her. There was so much love that she never expected when she was in her panicked state of mind.

So, this argument about the meme aside, remember that life is precious. So precious, Jesus came to us as a little innocent infant who grew into something unimaginably great. So great, his sacrifice and ressurection has saved us from death, has brought us redemption, and a way into heaven for an eternal life of peace and love. Obviously, There will only ever be one Savior, but every child born has the potential to be something wonderful, just waiting to do good in the world in Christ's name. It just takes faith, hope, love, and sacrifice. 

God Bless

Happy Advent.

Gift of Tongues

Someone sent me this question to my old email address which I haven't checked in a while. (If you have a question you were curious on my opinions on, the new email is TraditionalCatholicAmen@gmail.com)

It is an interesting question I've actually gotten a few times. Speaking in tongues. The person asking sent me a video (which I will not link because it is clear how "tongues" should be handled, and this person was not handling it the proper way.)

Basically this person claims they can "speak in tongues" when the Holy Spirit overcomes them. Then after going into a trance-like state, they start to spew out what sounds like gibberish. The "tongue speakers" will say they are speaking what the Holy Spirit tells them to, so it must not be a human language, it's the language of the angels or of God.

So what is tongues?

And there appeared to them tongues as of fire distributing themselves, and they rested on each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance. (Acts 2:3-4)

In this case, "Speak other tongues" is often interpreted as "Speak other languages"

And when this sound occurred, the crowd came together, and were bewildered because each one of them was hearing them speak in his own language. They were amazed and astonished, saying, "Why, are not all these who are speaking Galileans? So how is it that each one of us hears them speaking in his own native language: "Parthians and Medes and Elamites, and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the districts of Libya around Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabs-- we hear them in our own tongues speaking of the mighty deeds of God." (Acts 2:6-11)

So on this case... some believe the "gift of tongues" allowed the Apostles to go out and preach God's word to all, and everyone who came to hear, heard in their own language. The gift of tongues was given so all could understand God's word.

Some believe the Holy Spirit descended upon everyone present and they were all hearing and understanding a language that is a connection to heaven and not of any particular earthly language which is how so many nations understood at the exact time. They were speaking in an unknown tongue, but through the Holy Spirit all present understood.

Some believe there are different types of tongues.

1. Conversational - Speaking in other languages without realizing, and those who speak that language understand.

2. Transference - Speaking in your own language, but others who do not speak your language can understand what you are saying. You transfer the gift of tongues onto the other person through the Holy Sprit.

3. The language of God - Those speaking in a language no one understands, not even the speaker, outside of knowing they're praising God. Some who meet with those who have the same gift can often interpret for each other.

So it is unclear which if any of these Acts is referring to. Were they speaking their own language and all who heard understood through the Holy Spirit, were they speaking different languages in the tongues of those present, or were they speaking a non-known language and the Holy Spirit opened the ears of all to understand? We're not 100% sure which. We merely know, they transcended the language barrier to bring God's word to those present.

Many Tongue speakers point to St. Paul's letter to the Corinthians for the ultimate answer.

Pursue love, but strive eagerly for the spiritual gifts, above all that you may prophesy. For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to human beings, but to God. For no one listens; he utters the mystery of the spirit. On the other hand, one who prophesies does speak to other human beings, for their building up encouragement, and solace. Whoever speaks in a tongue builds up himself, but whoever prophecies builds up the church. Now I should like all of you to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy. One who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the church may be built up.

Now, brothers, if I should come to you speaking in tongues, what good will I do you if I do not speak to you by way of revelation, or knowledge, or prophecy, or instruction? Likewise, if inanimate things that produce sound, such as a flute or harp, do not give out the tones distinctly, how will what is being played on the flute or harp be recognized? And if the bugle gives an indistinct sound, who will get ready for battle? Similarly, if you, because of speaking in tongues, do not utter intelligible speech, how will anyone know what is being said? For you will be talking to the air. It happens that there are many different languages in the world and none are meaningless; but if I do not know the meaning of a language, I shall be a foreigner to one who speaks it and one who speaks it a foreigner to me. So with yourselves; since you strive eagerly for spirits, seek to have an abundance of them for building up the church.

Therefore, one who speaks in a tongue should pray to be able to interpret. For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit is at prayer but my mind is unproductive. So what is to be done? I will pray with the spirit but I will also pray with the mind. I will sing praise with the spirit, but I will also sing praise with the mind. Otherwise, if you pronounce a blessing with the spirit, how will one who holds the place of the uninstructed say the "amen" to your thanksgiving? for you may be giving thanks very well, but the other is not built up. I give thanks to God that I speak in tongues more than any of you, but with the church I would rather speak five words with my mind so as to instruct others also, than ten thousand words in a tongue. (1 Corinthians 14:1-19)

Some believe this could mean one of two things. That tongues is "gibberish" to most, but understandable to those with the gift from the Holy Spirit. However, St. Paul believed it is better to prophesy than to speak in tongues because speaking in tongues is only to build yourself, but prophesy is for all and will build up all. It is more beneficial to Christ's church. As St Paul Said... if you are speaking something that is not intelligible, how will anyone know what is being said, so who will know when to say "Amen" to praise our God? Some believe this is St. Paul saying build up the church, rather than yourself, and do not be overly concerned with tongues. Not that tongues are not special gifts, but gifts should be shared to build up the church. If someone doesn't understand, then you are not building them up.

If anyone speaks a tongue, let it be two or at most three (persons) and each in turn, and one should interpret. But if there is no interpreter, the person should keep silent in the church and speak to himself and to God. (1 Corinthians 14:27-28)

Paul states we should strive eagerly to prophesy, not to turn a scoffing eye to tongues, but everything must be done properly and in order. In other words, unless there is someone who can interpret what you speak in tongues so that all may praise God, someone who can TRULY understand and know what the message is... then "tongues" should be kept to yourself in private prayer to God.

We should strive to build up the church. To do that, all must be able to praise.

So tongues isn't something the church turns its back on... but people should keep videos of themselves speaking tongues off the internet. again, unless there is someone reputable to interpret, it should be kept private because speaking tongues that is unintelligible to others lifts YOU up, not the church. In other words, it's private prayer between you and God and no others.

Now, Tongues is often abused by all Christian religions. It's sometimes a game of "I'm holier than thou", or trying to look like you're special, a prophet, or what not, to lead people astray, take advantage of them. Televangelists use "fake tongues" frequently to up their ratings and donations. They con people into believing they too can speak tongues when they start to utter gibberish that sounds right in the excitement of the moment. That makes them feel special, and causes them to open their purses wider.

This, I believe is why St. Paul is basically telling us in a round about way to keep tongues private and just preach God's word.

Paul also stated there will be a time when tongues will cease.

Love never fails. If there are prophecies, they will be brought to nothing, if there are tongues, they will cease. For we know partially and we prophesy partially, but when the perfect comes, the partial shall pass away. When I was a child, I used to talk as a child, think as a child. When I became a man, I put aside childish things. (1 Corinthians 13:8-10)

The entry above is somewhat up to interpretation. Some believe Paul meant we would have the gift of tongues until the 2nd coming of Christ. Still, some see the final line "When I was a child I talked as a child, but when I became a man I put aside childish things" as to mean, he had a more perfect understanding of God's commands to love, have faith and hope, but of course, the greatest is to Love.

So it is possible the gift of tongues from the Holy Spirit is revoked when we finally reach that understanding.

Either way, the gift of tongues is not to be taken lightly, nor is it to be shared if there is no interpreter, and if there is an interpreter, you should pray for the Holy Spirit to help you discern between those who are mentally ill, charlatans, and who have the true gift. When in doubt, pray. And remember, if you feel you have the gift, speak to your priest in confession, do not post it online as that goes against what Paul stated in the bible. Nonsensical tongues is for private prayer.

God bless.

- I Say Amen -

Protestant who kind of gets it.

Here is a protestant who actually gets it.

She's not 100% there yet, but if we can just educate her a little further, I can see hope for a conversion because she is almost there.

But she still has many things wrong.

For example: she does not believe in the Catholic stance on birth control because she plans to be on birth control.

For what reason? medical, the desire to not have children in marriage, or the desire to have sex outside of a Godly union so it does not lead to children.

It is not the Catholic faith that is clear on promiscuity, it's the bible. If you plan on fulfilling sexual desires before marriage and using birth control to prevent pregnancy, then you are going against the BIBLE... not the Catholic faith.

For evidence, look no further than in New Testament... letters from Apostle Paul. (Although you can find it in many other places in various ways in both the old and new testaments.)

In the letters from St Paul to the Corinthians, he states: "For "the two" it says, "will become one flesh". But whoever is joined to the Lord becomes one spirit with him. Avoid immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the immoral person sins against his own body. Do you not know your body is a temple of the holy spirit within you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own? For you have been purchased at a price. Therefore, glorify God in your body."

He goes on to say, "Because of cases of immorality, every man should have his own wife and every woman her own husband. The husband should fulfill his duty toward his wife, and likewise a wife toward her husband."

he continues: "To the unmarried and to the widows I say: It is a good thing for them to remain as they are (IE abstinent), as I do, but if they can not exercise self-control, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to be on fire."

In other words, sex outside of marriage is a mortal sin, and if you can not resist the urge to have sex, then you should get married since it is better to fulfill your urges with your spouse, than to commit a sinful act that can lead you to fall from grace.

Many religions including Catholicism, for this reason, look at premarital sex the same way as adultery. If you are not married and have sex with someone who is not your spouse, then you are committing adultery on your future spouse, because you are depriving them of your fidelity for your own selfish gratification.

Paul mentions sexual immorality many times in his letters. (Hebrews, Thessalonians, Colossians, etc) That is how important he found the matter of abstinence, fidelity and the holy union of a man and woman becoming one.

Not to mention, birth control is not infallible. Many children have been born to those who thought they were protected. Either by human error or some mishap with the birth control, they welcomed a child into a situation that is outside of the family structure God intended. It is also not infallible when it comes to protecting against sexually transmitted diseases. Many who have used birth control were surprised to find they still ended up with an STD. Again, either from human error or something faulty with the "protection" itself. Birth control is not infallible. It is still a risk, even if that risk is lessened. And it leads us to feel free to indulge in sinful behavior because we feel 'safe'.

Now, there are those who have used birth control for health reasons. One is a treatment of diseases such as adenomyosis and endometriosis, Something that has nothing to do with sex. These are diseases that can lead to cancer, iron deficiencies, anemia... It has nothing to do with keeping yourself from fulfilling God's plan of joining together with your spouse as one flesh and being fruitful and multiplying. So the church does not teach that you can not use birth control for health purposes.

But if you are using birth control to stop yourself from having a child with your husband, or to not get pregnant so you can have sex without the benefit of marriage, then you are going against the BIBLE, not Catholic teachings.

Sex and what God intended for it, is in the bible. However you want to spin it, is between you and God. The Catholic church merely follows biblical teaching on the subject.

Birth control to stop yourself from having a child so you can enjoy sex without risk is about self gratification, and thus our mind is on our own pleasures and not God.

There are other things she said that didn't make sense. Maybe I misunderstood her, or she misspoke or, I'm not sure, but she still has a lot of research to do.

While I don't agree with everything she said as she still seems to have a few misconceptions about what's Catholic vs what's biblical... I give her much credit for doing her research with an open heart and open mind.

God Bless this girl. I will pray for her and her continued growth as a child of God. I hope if she ever finds her way to this blog, she'll find more truths about the Catholic faith. One day we'll tackle the somewhat complicated Papal theory.

Amen.

God and science

In modern times, there has been a great separation of God from Science as if it is impossible for the two to coexist. which is funny since the greatest minds of science were either Christian or believed in the possibility of God.

Copernicus
Isaac Newton
Galileo
Kepler
Sir Francis Bacon

Even Einstein. Einstein was more agnostic than anything. He did not believe in a personal God, but he also did not like being "misrepresented" as atheist (those who don't believe in the existence of any higher power) and also believed a non-created universe (lacking intelligent design) was impossible.

In fact, there were (and are) many Catholic scientists.

As a Catholic, I firmly believe in science. As I type this on my computer, I'm using science... as science created the technology that allowed blogging to be possible. I was vaccinated using science. Scientists came up with cures for diseases that have all but been eradicated, and they continue to make advances.

I don't think the two contradict. God created this world, Got created man. Many use the intelligence and free will God endowed them with, to grow and learn, and utilize what he created on this earth to advance as a people. The earth God created provides many medicinal herbs that help with many ailments, and man's intelligence helps doctors and scientists learn about new ways to use them.

Science exists because God created the earth, then created man, gave man intelligence and free will, and let them go at it.

So science is not contradictory to religion.

And it's not just scientists that think the two can not coexist. There are some religious sects that reject science, and to me, that's rejecting a piece of God. I never understood the "God will heal me so I don't go to a doctor" argument. God made the doctor who wants to heal you, may have even nudged him in the direction of this career. He created the earth where all the resources that could save you comes from, God is in the work that doctor does, and the medicines he uses to treat.

It's like the story of a woman during a flood, a neighbor comes in his car to rescue her but she refuses saying God will deliver her from the flood. As the waters rise... a boat comes by, yet still she refuses help saying God will save her. Then a helicopter comes by as the water rise even higher, and still she rejects the help saying God is going to save her. When she drowns and goes to heaven, she asks God why he let her die when she had faith he'd save her... and God said, "What more could I have done? I sent your neighbor, someone with a boat and even a helicopter, but you refused all three."

I just never understood why you would reject life saving treatment, because "God". God is in that treatment. I personally believe in accepting the treatment that was made through that which God created and placed on this earth for our use, and then praying to God for the treatment to work. But that's me.

Anyway, I don't believe the two are separate and must be at constant odds... yet the scientific community search for ways to disprove the existence of God and find ways to say, "We've discredited the bible." (If only they'd spend so much time finding a cure for cancer with the God given intelligence and materials they have at their disposal.)

There was a recent article entitled: the Bible got it wrong: Ancient Canaanites survived and their DNA lives on in modern-day Lebanese.

the main purpose of the article was to discuss the remains of ancient bodies recently uncovered that were able to tie modern day Lebanese to ancestry with the Canaanites, which supposedly discredits the bible who stated the Canaanites were wiped out in a biblical event. If the DNA found links the Canaanites to those in modern times who come from Lebanon, the bible "obviously got it wrong".

Now, in science, there's a pesky little thing called "research". Research, research, research. It is important to almost any discovery, especially when making a sweeping claim like, "this discovery discredits" anything.

Research is such an important phase in the scientific process, because you wouldn't want to make a wide sweeping statement and claim it is factual, only to be humiliated when your glaring error is pointed out, and worse, pointed out by those who are not a part of the scientific community. That is what is happening with all of the articles on this topic. They are being left embarrassed by the comments section where they're basically getting schooled on how wrong they are and being shown evidence that they did not take due diligence to make sure their statements were accurate.

What is that evidence? Well, after the "destruction" of the Canaanites discussed in the book of Joshua... it's made very clear in the book of Judges that the Canaanites still existed and weren't, in fact, eradicated from the face of the earth. Their DNA still existed and thus could be passed on, which is why it was found in modern day Lebanese.

Manasseh did not take possession of Beth-shean with its towns or of Taanach with its towns. Nor did they dispossess the inhabitants of Dor and its towns, those of Ibleam and its towns, or those of Megiddo and its towns. The Canaanites continued to live in this district. When Israel grew stronger, they conscripted the Canaanites as laborers, but did not actually drive them out. Ephraim did not drive out the Canaanites living in Gezer, and so the Canaanites lived among them in Gezer.

- Judges 1:27-29

It's obvious, since the book of Judges take place AFTER this alleged "destruction", that this wasn't a full genocide of biblical proportions as the Canaanites were still alive when discussed in Judges, Chapter 1. While it may sound like a mass genocide in Joshua (possibly due to simplification of an ancient translation, or a misinterpretation)... Had these scientists researched the bible (since it is part of their hypothesis about their discovery) before making claims that their findings discredited it... they'd have saved themselves a little credibility.

This proves one thing. Science is not perfect because it is being advanced by humans, which are 100% fallible. All humans err. Even the smartest of us. That does not discredit science and scientific advances... but it's one reason TRUE scientists are open to the idea that a theory could be changed/built on or even wrong.

Everyone seems be believe science is infallible, "Science is based on facts, That is why it is more trust worthy than an imaginary friend in the sky." they say.

Science has been proven wrong on many occasions. Science often contradicts itself. Science told us that vaccines cause Autism. Yet, other scientists believe they have proven the autism link theory to be faulty and the math behind it manipulated.

A few decades ago, Scientists claimed that by 2016, we'd be underwater due to man-made global warming. It was a warning touted by Al Gore who became a billionaire off it. Of course, it's 2017 and we're still here. Now many scientists believe they have proved that Global warming is NOT greatly affected by man, that ice ages and global warmings are naturally occurring events that have happened without man's influence. Some scientists now believe it was a global warming after the first Ice Age that actually killed the last of the woolly Mammoths, and no carbon footprint offsets will make much of a difference.

Science was able to disprove the scientific theory of a static universe (A universe that neither contracts nor expands.) This was proven wrong by Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity, which proved that the universe is unstable, and must either be expanding or contracting. The Redshift effect substantiated this theory.

So, as someone who loves science, lives in an age of science and utilizes sciences, I must say that scientific minds must be very careful about their wording. In this particular case, they made a factual statement about a discovery... only to find out they didn't do proper research before releasing the statements... and were, in fact, wrong. (Sadly, I have not seen one of the articles making that correction). So now one must wonder if it doesn't hurt the credibility of the field that they didn't do the proper research... nor will they correct the statement. Or perhaps science isn't as important as their vendetta against Christianity.

jumping to the "We did it! We discredited the bible!" (and Torah since this is the old Testament) celebration... makes them look foolish, makes them look like anti-religion bigots, and does not do anything to advance science.

This is how science works.

There is an idea

There are tests

There is a lot of research

There is trial and error

a Hypothesis is created

The hypothesis is put to the test

If it fails, it's reconsidered - if it passes it's tested again.

If it can be replicated more than once... it is run through the ringer by fellow scientists

If they agree with the results, it becomes a theory.

Theory - Noun: a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena.

It does not mean - undisputed fact that can never be challenged. Theories are reconsidered, disputed, and proven wrong all the time in the scientific field, which is why it's not the "Fact of Relativity" or the "Fact of static universe" - they are THEORIES. Meaning, "this is what is believed, this is what is accepted in the scientific community"... but it leaves it open for corrections, should someone one day come in and say, "no, this is wrong, the math doesn't add up and here's why."

So to generalize the discovery of Canaanite DNA as "Discrediting the bible", "Proving the bible wrong"... etc. without having done the proper research, and then acting as if it is factual and not a theory... that's not science. That's embarrassing.

Powerful statement

painting by Akiane Kramarik

This is a very wonderful discussion the deacon of my church wrote about the message of the readings and Gospel for 7/2/17 (the 13th Sunday of Ordinary time)

Jesus said to his Apostles

"Whoever Loves Father or Mother more than me is not worthy of me. Whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever does not take up his cross and follow me is not worthy of me."

Those are very powerful words. Powerful words indeed. And difficult words too. Jesus is telling us that true Christianity comes at a cost.

Here's a cute story of two brothers, ages 9 and 5. They were arguing over who would get the last chocolate chip cookie. Their mother said to the boys not to fight. She told her sons, "Think of what Jesus would do. He would tell his brother, "here brother, you take the cookie". The nine year old thought for a moment then said to his 5 year old brother: "Mikey, you be Jesus".

To be a true Christian means suffering is part and parcel to our lives, but no one really likes the idea of suffering, do we? Yet pain, sorrow and suffering are a part of who we are and part of our human existence. Think of it. Headaches, muscle aches and pains, worries, cares, the death of a loved one, stress, misery, trouble with our marriages, jobs, daily living, so on. All of these things point to the fact that we do have pain and suffering in our daily lives. We'd like to be free of them, but the fact is we can not, no matter how hard we wish or how hard we try. In the end, following Jesus is going to cost us something.

We've all heard the saying, "You get what you pay for". Well then, beware of cheap religions or any religion that comes across as soft and easy and accepting of everything. Beware religion where the cost of following Jesus Christ is never mentioned and where our consciences is never challenged or disturbed. Also be wary when we begin to think that living for Jesus Christ is SUPPOSE to be easy.

Cheap religion will only wrap us in tales of God's love. It will never tell us the truth. The Truth is that Jesus Christ DIED for us. Think of that. Jesus Christ died on a cross for you and me, and the whole human race. He suffered a painful, humiliating death. he willingly gave his life for us and he calls us to be willing to give something of ourselves in return.

There are too many people who only know one side of the story. The story of God's love. Learning and living in God's love is important, but there is much more to the story! that is the point of today's Gospel.

Jesus tells his Apostles and those who succeed them, that they must be prepared to undergo great sacrifices, even death itself, if called to do so. Even though they had only a very vague idea of what he meant, when the time came, they remembered his words and gladly suffered imprisonment, hardships, and finally Martyrdom for Jesus. This shows how the resurrection of Jesus, and the descent of the Holy Spirit on them, changed them from worldly weaklings to fearless heroes.

They had become convinced that Jesus was the Son of God who had come to Earth to bring all men to heaven. They came to realize how transitory and unimportant the few years of earthly life were, when compared with the eternal life to follow. It was not only the apostles who gave their lives gladly for Jesus. There are thousands of martyrs who, during the first three centuries of the church, not only accepted, but welcomed death for Christ's sake, because they were convinced it was the door to eternal life, the only life that mattered.

Down through the centuries, the followers of Jesus have been persecuted because of their belief in him, and many of us can be proud that we have among our ancestors, men and women who died for their faith. Today, too, there are still those who are suffering a lingering martyrdom, because they obey God rather than man.

All of us, at one point or another, or in one way or another, have had to bear crosses in life. By bearing our crosses, we can become more like Jesus. Why do some of us come out of our trials more miserable than before? And why do some of us become more Christ like? Well, it may be that the answer has to do with how we see Jesus and follow him.

Remember our Lord's words in today's first reading. he who will give hospitality and help to a prophet will have the reward of the prophet. He who helps those who are preaching and teaching the message of salvation, the good news of Jesus, at home and abroad, will himself share in that reward of these preachers and teachers.

When we get to heaven, one of the many pleasant surprises awaiting us will be the gratitude we will receive from the saints we've helped send to heaven, people we never knew or perhaps thought about. We helped those who thought about them and worked hard for their salvation, and thus we share in their rewards.

Remember this promise, even a cup of cold water will not go unrewarded, every little helping hand we give to bring our fellowmen to heaven will help us too, toward the same goal. Heaven is our real goal in life. It alone will satisfy all our desires and it alone will last forever.

Are we truly followers of him or are we only admirers? That is an important question we need to ask ourselves. Are we followers or admirers? If we are only admirers, then we will tend to see our faith and belief in Jesus as a crutch or a Band-Aid. If that happens, when trials and sufferings and sorrows come, we'll become bitter and hopeless people. Especially when things don't go the way we want them to go.

If on the other hand, we are true followers of Jesus we will realize that all of our trials and tribulations, no matter how awful they are, can and will bring us closer to God. Remember that we are called to learn about God. This doesn't mean that we figure out the Trinity or know word for word what the pope or Vatican has said or that we can read the new testament in original Greek. no we are called to learn about Jesus from our every day experiences and the joys and happiness of life, the struggles and pains, in our strengths and weaknesses of life too. We need to learn about God from Christ like people, people who pick up their crosses everyday and do their best to follow Jesus.

All of us can be Jesus to someone, someone who will remember what Jesus is like because they remember what we are like. They will know that we are true followers of Jesus, even in the midst of bearing our crosses. True followers and not just admirers only.

But we must also be willing to put away our self-centeredness. If we do this and realize this, we'll gain a deeper appreciation of what pain and suffering can bring to our lives.

Jesus says, "Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake, will find it." Let us lose ourselves then in Jesus, and lose ourselves in all that life gives us, in joy and sorrow, in happiness and pain, in all things good and bad, so that one day, we can find life eternal in Him.

Readings and Gospel for this statement:

2 kings 4:8-17

Romans 6:1-11

Matthew 10:37-42

Today, so many religions are all about acceptance, tolerance, inclusivity. They talk about how God loves everyone and accepts everyone, and who are we to judge anyone? That's for God alone.

They don't teach about hell. Hell's become either a non existent place made up to frighten children or a place that is merely a separation from God. (despite the biblical mentions of fire and brimstone and suffering.)

God, in many newer Christian religions, has become a magic fairy godmother and all we have to do is love, accept, tolerate, and not judge. Suffering isn't part of the deal. Avoiding sin isn't part of the deal. sacrifice isn't part of the deal.

They are leading people astray by reinterpreting the harsh language of the bible and making it about love and peace and equality.

They are missing the point. The saints suffered, Christ suffered, and so we too must suffer in this world, and offer our sufferings to Christ, so that we can gain eternal peace and joy with Christ and all the saints who went before us.

The Rite of Confession

One favorite thing for non Catholics (and some Catholics) to attack, is the need for confession. After all, "We should go straight to God himself for only he can forgive sins"


Right?

That is not how Jesus saw it.

On the first day of the week, when the doors were locked, where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in their midst and said to them, "Peace be with you." When he said this, he showed them his hands and side. The disciples rejoiced when they saw the Lord. Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you. As the Father sent me, so I send you." And when he had said this, he breathed onto them and said to them "Receive the Holy Spirit. Whose sins you forgive are forgiven, and whose sins you retain are retained." (John 20:20-23)

Reread that last line. Jesus did not say, "Tell them to go unto God and confess their sins." He told them, Whose sins YOU forgive will be forgiven.

Obviously, God is the ultimate decider on the fate of our souls, but Jesus constantly calls upon his followers (The apostles, his disciples, and in turn... us) to forgive. It is even in the Lord's prayer. It does not say, "Forgive us our trespasses and we pray you forgive those who trespass against us." Jesus taught us to say, as WE forgive those who trespass against us. He calls on US to forgive. We are all imbued with the power to forgive through the Holy Spirit.

Forgive us our trespasses as WE FORGIVE those who trespass against us. - The Lord's Prayer

Be on your guard! If your brother sins, rebuke him; and if he repents, FORGIVE HIM. (Luke 17:3)

"Receive the Holy Spirit. Whose sins you forgive are forgiven, and whose sins you retain are retained." (John 20:20-23)

Jesus never once preached that Forgiveness was out of our hands, he preached that we must be forgiving to those truly repentant.

So where does it say we need to go to a priest rather than directly to God?

Of course you can go directly to God. In fact, all the priest does is remind us of God's love and mercy and that if we're truly repentant we are forgiven... then he reminds us of what Jesus told the adulteress he saved from stoning. "Go and sin no more." then the priest will give penance to do to reflect on our sins, on God's forgiveness, and how we can make changes in our lives to be better.

Confession is not a get out of jail free card. You can't sin, go to confession and say "sorry", then go back to sinning knowing you'll just say sorry again the following week. Confession is about being repentant. You must be repentant and want to change your sinful ways. you must want to be a better person. We're weak, and confession gives us the chance to talk our sins out with someone who serves God, like the disciples, hear ideas on where we've gone wrong and how to fix it, and hear that God can forgive us if we are truly sorry. But it does not work if you're just there to ease your guilt.

But again you ask, why not just go straight to God? Why humiliate yourself to a priest and tell him your faults?

We should feel humiliated for our transgressions, and we need to humble ourselves to show we are truly sorry. 

In the Letter of James Chapter 5 verse 16... he says "Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another." It is about humbling ourselves and showing true humility and sorrow for the acts which hurt God. God already knows our sins. So to show humility and humbleness, we confess to a priest, who is a disciple of Jesus, who has dedicated all that he is, his life and soul to God.

We humble ourselves to this follower of Christ, and he, in the authority Jesus gave, offers forgiveness if he truly believes we are repentant... and as Jesus said... if he forgives our sins... then we are forgiven.

There is nothing wrong with praying directly to God, but there is something sacred in the rite of confession. We humble ourselves, the priest, who has studied the bible and theology and interpretations of Christ's words from the top apologists of our time and times past, will explain to us the ways we can get back onto the path of the righteous, we are given penance we must do to further heal the wounds the sin caused on our soul... and we are given a chance to start anew. There is nothing more powerful than to hear the words, "You are forgiven, go and sin no more".

Confession is biblical, we are all called to forgive, and confession to a priest is just. It is in keeping with the bible.

If he repents... forgive him.

Those whose sins you forgive, are forgiven them.

Confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another.

Forgive us our sins, as WE FORGIVE those who trespass against us.