Everything God Created Is Good

Another Pauline passage sometimes offered as a challenge to Catholicism is the following:


Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by giving heed to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, through the pretensions of liars whose consciences are seared, who forbid marriage and enjoin abstinence from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving; for then it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer. (1 Tm 4:1-5)

The claim is that Paul today would oppose the Catholic practices of a celibate priesthood—said to "forbid marriage"—and Lenten fasting and abstinence. These disciplines are described as, in Paul’s own words, "doctrines of demons."

Again, though, understood in proper historical context, we find that Paul was not referring to Catholic disciplines at all. Rather, he was speaking about Gnosticism, which opposed anything material and forbade marriage among its followers. And the Jewish faith’s dietary laws required complete abstinence from certain "unclean" foods. Paul opposed these doctrines.

In contrast, however, Paul embraced the Catholic disciplines of priestly celibacy and sacrificial abstinence (i.e. forgoing a good for a greater purpose). Consider these passages related to celibacy:

•  To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain single as I do (1 Cor 7:8).

•  I want you to be free from anxieties. The unmarried man is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to please the Lord; but the married man is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please his wife, and his interests are divided. And the unmarried woman or girl is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to be holy in body and spirit; but the married woman is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please her husband. I say this for your own benefit, not to lay any restraint upon you, but to promote good order and to secure your undivided devotion to the Lord . . . [H]e who marries his betrothed does well; and he who refrains from marriage will do better. A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives. If the husband dies, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord. But in my judgment she is happier if she remains as she is (1 Cor 7:32-35, 38-40).

Also, recall Acts 14:23 (quoted above) in which Paul commends fasting: "[W]ith prayer and fasting they committed them to the Lord in whom they believed" (Acts 14:23).

These passages alone leave little doubt that Paul would approve of today’s Catholic disciplines of priestly celibacy and Lenten fasting and abstinence.

Reference: Catholic.com (This Article was taken from Catholic.com. No changes have been made to the text; it’s in the original format to preserve the explanation and integrity of the document. Written by a professional staff Apologist from Catholic Answers Live. I personally do not take credit for writing this article.)

SHRINES MADE BY MAN

In the Acts of the Apostles, Paul proclaims, "The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in shrines made by man, nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all men life and breath and everything" (17:24-25).

Non-Catholics sometimes quote this passage to refute Catholic teachings on the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist and the sacramental priesthood. Since the Eucharist is reserved in tabernacles and worshipped by the Catholic faithful, Catholics are said to be in conflict with Paul’s teaching that God "does not live in shrines made by man." The sacramental priesthood is said to be unbiblical, as God is not "served by human hands." The claim goes that Paul’s words oppose related Catholic teaching and practice.

Of course, understood in its proper context, this passage addresses neither tabernacles nor Catholic priests. On Paul’s second missionary journey, he traveled to Athens, where the pagans worshipped multiple gods. Even today, pagan temples and ruins can be found throughout much of the city. In Paul’s day, a site just below the Acropolis served as a type of court—the Areopagus. Paul had been preaching in the local synagogues and marketplace before he was brought to the Areopagus to explain his teaching. There in the Pagan temples and shrines, his words in Acts were significant to those pagan worshippers who with their human hands served the false gods who heard them.

In fact, Paul was not condemning Catholic tabernacles and priests. His belief in the Real Presence and the priesthood are evident elsewhere in his writings. For example, Paul could only have in mind the Real Presence when he asked, "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?" (1 Cor 10:16).

Also consider, "Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself . . . For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself" (1 Cor 11:27-29).

As for the sacramental priesthood, Luke attested to Paul’s Catholic belief in Acts:

[Paul and Barnabas] returned to Lystra and to Iconium and to Antioch, strengthening the souls of the disciples, exhorting them to continue in the faith, and saying that through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God. And when they had appointed elders for them in every church, with prayer and fasting they committed them to the Lord in whom they believed. (Acts 14:21-23, emphasis added)

Elders here is translated from the Greek word presbyterous, from which we get the English word "presbyter," the official name of the office of Catholic priest.

Paul expected Titus (and others) to do likewise: "This is why I left you in Crete, that you might amend what was defective, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you" (Ti 1:5).

Reference: Catholic.com (This Article was taken from Catholic.com. No changes have been made to the text; it’s in the original format to preserve the explanation and integrity of the document. Written by a professional staff Apologist from Catholic Answers Live. I personally do not take credit for writing this article.)

UNCLEAN FOOD

When writing to the Romans, Paul speaks of a delicate pastoral situation in the first-century Church. There were many Jewish Christians who still believed that certain foods were unclean or otherwise forbidden (e.g., much of the meat sold in Gentile markets had been sacrificed to idols). Paul explained that none of these foods were really unclean or forbidden, but stressed that his readers should not do things that would tempt people into eating these foods if it would violate their consciences:


Then let us no more pass judgment on one another, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother. I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean. If your brother is being injured by what you eat, you are no longer walking in love. Do not let what you eat cause the ruin of one for whom Christ died. (Rom 14:13–15)

The mortal consequences of sinning in this way are clear. Paul speaks of an individual being “destroyed” by violating his conscience in this way: “Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for anyone to make others fall by what he eats” (Rom 14:20). “But he who has doubts is condemned, if he eats, because he does not act from belief [i.e., in accord with his beliefs or conscience]; for whatever does not proceed from belief is sin” (Rom 14:23).

Leviticus Chapter 17 verse 14.

Since the life of all flesh is its blood. I have told the Israelites: You shall not consume the blood of any flesh. Since the life of all flesh is its blood, anyone who consumes it shall be cut off. Lev 17:14

Again, let’s read the text in context. This law was given to the Jewish people and aliens Not Christians yet. Because Jesus our messiah was not sent yet.

You shall eat no blood whatever, whether of fowl or of animal, in any of your dwellings. Whoever eats any blood, that person shall be cut off from his people (Lv 7:26-27).

For the life of every creature is the blood of it; therefore I have said to the people of Israel, You shall not eat the blood of any creature, for the life of every creature is its blood; whoever eats it shall be cut off (Lv 17:14).

• You can say four things. First, any divine command that comes later modifies divine commands that came earlier. When Jesus declared all foods clean (Mk 7:19), his command superseded the earlier command that certain foods be regarded as unclean (Lv 11:1-8). If Jesus today commands us to drink his blood, his command supersedes any prior command concerning drinking blood.

• Second, the command against drinking blood, like all of the Old Testament dietary regulations, has passed away, for "These are only a shadow of what is to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink" (Col 2:17, 16).

• The mention of not eating blood in Acts 15:20, 29 was a pastoral provision suggested by James to keep Jews from being scandalized by the conduct of Gentile Christians. We know that these pastoral provisions were only temporary. One concerned abstaining from idol meat, yet later Paul says eating idol meat is okay so long as it doesn't scandalize others (Rom 14:1-14, 1 Cor 8:1-13).

• If it is objected that blood is not a food (though it is in some cultures), note that Jesus was asked (Mk 7:5) why his disciples ate with unwashed hands. He replied, "Don't you see that nothing that enters a man from the outside can make him unclean? For it doesn't go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body" (7:18-19). In context this refers to a non-food substance (the dirt on one's unwashed hands).

• Third, the Old Testament is very specific about why one was not to eat blood: "The life of every creature is the blood of it; therefore I have said to the people of Israel, You shall not eat the blood of any creature, for the life of every creature is its blood" (Lv 17:14, cf. Dt 12:23). The Israelites could not eat animal blood because it contained the animal's life, but there is one Person whose life you must have in you, "Christ who is your life" (Col 3:4).


Reference: Catholic.com

VENIAL OR MORTAL SIN – “SIN IS SIN”

Venial sin becomes mortal because a person ignores his conscience and commits a sin that violates his conscience in a grave way. Cutting yourself off from sanctifying grace and greatly offending God (Catholic.com)

Under the heading “Erroneous Judgment,” the Catechism states, “A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed” (1790).

GRAVEN IMAGES

“You Shall Not Make for Yourself a Graven Image...”

What does that really mean? Let’s see what the Catechism has to say about Graven Images in Catholic Churches.


Holy images Catechsim 476-477, 1159-1162, 2129-2132

476 Since the Word became flesh in assuming a true humanity, Christ’s body was finite.112 Therefore the human face of Jesus can be portrayed; at the seventh ecumenical council (Nicaea II in 787) the Church recognized its representation in holy images to be legitimate.113 (1159-1162, 2129-2132)

477 At the same time the Church has always acknowledged that in the body of Jesus “we see our God made visible and so are caught up in love of the God we cannot see.”114 The individual characteristics of Christ’s body express the divine person of God’s Son. He has made the features of his human body his own, to the point that they can be venerated when portrayed in a holy image, for the believer “who venerates the icon is venerating in it the person of the one depicted.”115

1159 The sacred image, the liturgical icon, principally represents Christ. It cannot represent the invisible and incomprehensible God, but the incarnation of the Son of God has ushered in a new “economy” of images:

Previously God, who has neither a body nor a face, absolutely could not be represented by an image. But now that he has made himself visible in the flesh and has lived with men, I can make an image of what I have seen of God... and contemplate the glory of the Lord, his face unveiled.27

1160 Christian iconography expresses in images the same Gospel message that Scripture communicates by words. Image and word illuminate each other:

We declare that we preserve intact all the written and unwritten traditions of the Church which have been entrusted to us. One of these traditions consists in the production of representational artwork, which accords with the history of the preaching of the Gospel. For it confirms that the incarnation of the Word of God was real and not imaginary, and to our benefit as well, for realities that illustrate each other undoubtedly reflect each other’s meaning.28

1161 All the signs in the liturgical celebrations are related to Christ: as are sacred images of the holy Mother of God and of the saints as well. They truly signify Christ, who is glorified in them. They make manifest the “cloud of witnesses”29 who continue to participate in the salvation of the world and to whom we are united, above all in sacramental celebrations. Through their icons, it is man “in the image of God,” finally transfigured “into his likeness,”30 who is revealed to our faith. So too are the angels, who also are recapitulated in Christ:

Following the divinely inspired teaching of our holy Fathers and the tradition of the Catholic Church (for we know that this tradition comes from the Holy Spirit who dwells in her) we rightly define with full certainty and correctness that, like the figure of the precious and life-giving cross, venerable and holy images of our Lord and God and Savior, Jesus Christ, our inviolate Lady, the holy Mother of God, and the venerated angels, all the saints and the just, whether painted or made of mosaic or another suitable material, are to be exhibited in the holy churches of God, on sacred vessels and vestments, walls and panels, in houses and on streets.31

1162 “The beauty of the images moves me to contemplation, as a meadow delights the eyes and subtly infuses the soul with the glory of God.”32 Similarly, the contemplation of sacred icons, united with meditation on the Word of God and the singing of liturgical hymns, enters into the harmony of the signs of celebration so that the mystery celebrated is imprinted in the heart’s memory and is then expressed in the new life of the faithful. (2502)

2129 The divine injunction included the prohibition of every representation of God by the hand of man. Deuteronomy explains: “Since you saw no form on the day that the LORD spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire, beware lest you act corruptly by making a graven image for yourselves, in the form of any figure....”66 It is the absolutely transcendent God who revealed himself to Israel. “He is the all,” but at the same time “he is greater than all his works.”67 He is “the author of beauty.”68 (300, 2500)

2130 Nevertheless, already in the Old Testament, God ordained or permitted the making of images that pointed symbolically toward salvation by the incarnate Word: so it was with the bronze serpent, the ark of the covenant, and the cherubim.69

2131 Basing itself on the mystery of the incarnate Word, the seventh ecumenical council at Nicaea (787) justified against the iconoclasts the veneration of icons—of Christ, but also of the Mother of God, the angels, and all the saints. By becoming incarnate, the Son of God introduced a new “economy” of images. (476)

2132 The Christian veneration of images is not contrary to the first commandment which proscribes idols. Indeed, “the honor rendered to an image passes to its prototype,” and “whoever venerates an image venerates the person portrayed in it.”70 The honor paid to sacred images is a “respectful veneration,” not the adoration due to God alone:

Religious worship is not directed to images in themselves, considered as mere things, but under their distinctive aspect as images leading us on to God incarnate. The movement toward the image does not terminate in it as image, but tends toward that whose image it is.