“In the beginning … God.”  the first words of the Bible (see Gn 1:1) affirm an essential teaching of the Christian faith: Before all else, God is.  It’s a reality that seems obvious to most Christians, yet many people doubt or deny it.

Challenges are often issued to other articles of the Christian faith as well, such as the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and to specifically Catholic beliefs, such as the unique authority of the pope.  For this reason, Christians — and Catholic Christians in particular — often find themselves defending their beliefs in conversations with non-believers.

The Greek word for “defense” is apologia.  Our English word “apology” is derived from it.  In its classical definition, “apology” did not mean an admission of wrong, as the modern English word suggests.  Rather, an apology was a defense or justification of a belief.  For example, students of philosophy or the classics are familiar with Plato’s Apology: an account of Socrates’ defense of his teaching.

In the present context, then, “apologetics” refers to the reasonable defense of the Christian faith.  It is one aspect of what our Lord Jesus talked about when he urged us to love God with all our mind (see Lk 10:27).  Faith is not opposed to reason; in fact, reason, rightly understood, is a support of faith.

The foundations of Christian apologetics were laid by our Lord himself when he presented “many proofs” of his resurrection (see Acts 1:3), including his appearance to skeptical, hard-nosed, “doubting” Thomas and the other apostles (see Jn 20:24-29).  The resulting apostolic proclamation of the gospel included eyewitness (legal or scientific) testimony as a central feature (see, e.g., Lk 1:1-4; Acts 2:32).

St. Paul likewise engaged in apologetics, trying to persuade both Jews and Greeks of the truth of Christianity.  His reasoned style of evangelization is demonstrated in his sermon on the Areopagus, Mars Hill, in philosophy-dominated Athens (see Acts 17:22-34) and in his determination to “become all things to all, to save at least some” (1 Cor 9:22).  The apostle’s approach to sharing and defending his faith should encourage Catholics today to follow his example.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Gn 1:1  •  Lk 1:1-4; 10:27  •  Jn 20:24-29  •  Acts 1:3; 2:32; 17:22-34  •  1 Cor 9:22
General:  Acts 17:22-34  •  1 Cor 9:19-23  •  1 Pt 3:15  •  Jude 3

Biblical Greek terms:
Apologia (“apology”/”apologetics”):  Acts 22:1; 25:16  •  1 Cor 9:3  •  Phil 1:7, 16
Dialegomai (“dialogue”):  Acts 17:2, 17; 18:4, 19; 19:8-10
Suzeteo (“disputing,” “debating” about the truth of Christianity):  Mk 12:28 (Jesus)  •  Acts 9:29 (Paul); 15:7 (Church council at Jerusalem)

Catholic Church Catechism:  31-49  •  156-159

In the generations after our first parents disobeyed God, breaking their relationship with him (see Gn 3), their descendants’ knowledge of their Creator seems to have become faded and even distorted.  We find in the Book of Genesis, however, that God chooses to reveal himself to a series of individuals and their families, to begin the restoration of his relationship with humanity.  His revelation to Abraham (see Gn 12:1-9) begins a series of events that leads to the formation of the Jewish people, and eventually to the birth of God’s Son, Jesus Christ, to a Jewish woman.

As “the Word [who] became flesh” (Jn 1:14), Christ most perfectly reveals God the Father; the entire divine revelation is perfectly summed up in him.  He is not only the Son of God, but also God the Son: equal in essence and glory with his Father in heaven.  The Holy Spirit — the Spirit sent by the Father and breathed on the apostles by the Son — is also a divine Person, and fully God (see Jn 14:9-11, 16-17; 20:22).

Catholics believe that this revelation of the triune God — who is three Persons in one essence (or being) — is communicated in the holy Scriptures and through the Church, which authoritatively and infallibly interprets the Bible according to unbroken apostolic Tradition (see 1 Tm 3:15; 2 Thes 2:15).  It is true that individuals can come to know God, even if they have never heard the gospel (“good news”) of Jesus Christ, on the basis of nature and what it reveals of the Creator, and through the laws of their conscience (see Ps 19:2-3; Rom 1:19-21; 2:12-16).  Various non-Catholic, Christian communions also teach a great deal that is true about God.  However, the fullness of the Christian revelation is entrusted to the Catholic Church, the guardian of the apostolic deposit from the beginning.

This Christian message, most fully proclaimed by the Catholic Church, with the aid of the Holy Spirit, who leads the Church into all truth, reveals God’s nature and character, his love for us, his mercy, and his holiness and commandments.  Revelation is God’s message to us about himself and about how he wants us to live.  It teaches us what is right and wrong, good and evil.  It is passed on through the generations by the Church through words and deeds that testify to its truth.  (See also “What Is the Holy Trinity?”)

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Gn 3 • Ps 19:1-4  •  Jn 1:14; 14:9-11, 16-17; 20:22  •  Rom 1:19-21; 2:12-16  •  2 Thes 2:15  •  1 Tm 3:15
General: Jn 1:1-5, 14; 14:26; 15:26; 16:13  •  Acts 2:42; 20:28  •  Jude 3
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 31-141  •  175  •  198-267  •  737  •  768  •  839-845  •  1718  •  2812

Are the opening chapters of Genesis a literal, scientific description of the world’s creation?  Or is their language more figurative, whose essential meaning points to fundamental truths about God and the world?  Christians have debated the matter since ancient times.

Perhaps the sharpest controversy over these passages has to do with human origins, usually focusing on the scientific theory of evolution.  Some believe that Genesis, rightly understood, denies any possibility that human beings have descended in some sense from other species.  Others, however, claim that such evolution is a proven scientific fact.

Catholic tradition provides a different perspective.  Following the insights of St. Augustine and others, it allows that Genesis employs figurative language, so it cannot be citied as a scientific text that rules out human evolution altogether.  At the same time, however, the “proven facts of science” accepted by one generation may be rejected by later generations because of new evidence.  so the Church warns scientists against presumption in their conclusions.  She specifically rejects any scientific theories (such as that of Charles Darwin) which insist that evolution was the result of random forces rather than the intelligent design of a personal Creator.  Such pretentious claims move beyond the limited realm of inquiry that is possible to science.

Given divine revelation as a whole, the Church teaches that a few fundamental truths about human origins cannot be contradicted by scientific speculation:

• The entire universe, including the human race, is not the result of chance, but of God’s purposeful, loving design.  (see Gn 1:1, 31)
• Human beings are not simply more advanced animals; they bear the image of God in a unique way.  (see Gn 1:26-27)
• Even if God may have created the bodies of the first humans through evolution, their souls, like all human souls, were immediately created by him at their conception.  (see Gn 2:7)
• All human beings share a single, historical ancestor, so they all have the same nature and origin, and belong to one human family.  (see Acts 17:26)
• The primordial fall from original holiness of our first human parents was a real event within time.  It left them and their descendants with original sin.  (see Rom 5:12-14, 18-19; see also “What is Original Sin”)

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Gn 1:1, 26-27, 31; 2:7  •  Acts 17:26  •  Rom 5:12-14, 18-19
General: Ps 139:13  •  Lk 3:23-28  •  1 Cor 15:22, 45  •  Col 1:16  •  Jas 1:18  •  Rv 4:11
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  33  •  355-406  •  415-417  •  1934

Much of the language in Genesis’ opening chapters is figurative.  Nevertheless, the Catholic Church affirms that we find there a reference to a real event in time that took place at the very beginning of the human race — a tragedy unequaled in history, known as the Fall (see Gen 3:1-24).  We know few details, but the basic realities surrounding that fateful development are clear from the teaching of Scripture (here and elsewhere) and Tradition:

• God created our first human parents in a state of holiness, an original justice (righteousness), without sin, and thus without shame (see Gn 2:25).  They enjoyed a right and harmonious relationship with God, themselves, each other, and the world around them (see Gn 1:26-31; 2:8-9, 15, 21-25).
• Through their own free choice, however, they disobeyed God, breaking fellowship with him (see Gn 2:15-17, 3:1-13; Sir 15:14)
• Their disobedience — a turning away from the Source of all life and order — necessarily brought death and disorder into the world, and above all within themselves.  So they “fell” from their previous condition to a state of sinfulness, misery, and ignorance (see Gn 3:14-24).  Their human nature was deeply wounded, though not totally corrupted.
• Our first parents, having lost their original wholeness, could not pass on to their descendants what they themselves no longer possessed.  This deprivation is consequently inherited by all human beings and is called “original sin” (see Rom 5:12-19).
• Unlike personal sin, resulting from wrong choices of individuals, original sin does not result from our own doing.  It is contracted, not committed; we are conceived with it (see Ps 51:7).
• The sacrament of Baptism cleanses us from original sin.  It restores us to original righteousness and fellowship with God (see Acts 2:38; 22:16).  But after Baptism we are still left with a certain moral and spiritual weakness (concupiscence), so that even though our wills are free, we are inclined to sin — an inclination we must continually overcome by God’s grace (see Rom 6:19; 7:15-24).
• The only two human beings (after our first parents) to be conceived without original sin are our Lord Jesus Christ (see 2 Cor 5:21) and his blessed mother, whose immaculate conception was possible through the merits of her sinless Son (see Lk 1:28; see also “Was Mary Without Sin?”.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Gn 1:26-31; 2:8-9, 15-17, 21-25; 3:1-24  •  Ps 51:7  •  Sir 15:14  •  Lk 1:28  •  Acts 2:38; 22:16  •  Rom 5:12-19; 6:19; 7:15-24  •  2 Cor 5:21
General: Ps 14:1-3; 53:2-4  •  Eccl 7:20  •  Sir 15:11-20  •  Rom 3:9-18, 23  •  1 Cor 15:22  •  Heb 4:15
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 396-421

In Leviticus, chapter 9, we read that God commands Moses, as part of the old covenant, or ordain a specialized, professional priesthood to offer sacrifices for the people.  Later, as part of “the new covenant in [his] blood” (Lk 22:20), Jesus establishes a new ordained priesthood for the Church and gives its members the authority and power to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (see Lk 22:14-20).

All Christians share in a common “holy priesthood” offering “spiritual sacrifices” (1 Pt 2:5) such as prayer, almsgiving (see Heb 13:15-16), and faith in Jesus (see Phil 2:17).  But the special mission that Christ gave his apostles, their successors, and the priests they were to ordain — which includes, among other functions, presiding at the Eucharist and administering the sacrament of Reconciliation — was not to be shared by all of his followers.  “For … all the parts [of Christ’s body] do not have the same function” (Rom 12:4).

The New Testament refers to three types of permanent ordained offices in the Church: bishop (in Greek, episkopos), elder (presbyteros, from which we derive the English words “presbyter” and “priest”), and deacon (diakonos).  The term prebyteros, usually translated “elder”, appears often in Scripture (for example, Acts 15:2-6; 21:18; 1 Pt 5:1; 1 Tm 5:17).  Nearly all Christians accepted this ordained ministry for the first sixteen centuries of the Church’s history, though certain heretical groups, such as the Cathari (who taught Gnostic ideas), rejected it.

Non-Catholic Christians sometimes cite 1 Peter 2:5, 9 and Revelation 1:6 to support their claim that the Church is “a kingdom of priests,” it cannot have a special ministerial priesthood as well.  Nevertheless, in these texts, 1 Peter is quoting — and Revelation is echoing — the words of God to the ancient Hebrews recorded in Exodus 19:6.  If the Lord could refer to that entire nation as priests, even though they had an ordained priesthood, then sure the same is true of the Church.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Lv 9  •  Ex 19:6  •  Lk 22:14-20  •  Acts 15:2-6; 21:18  •  Rom 12:4  •  Phil 2:17  •  1 Tm 5:17  •  Heb 13:15-16  •  1 Pt 2:5, 9; 5:1  •  Rv 1:6
General: Mt 18:18  •  Lk 10:16; 22:19; 24:47  •  Jn 13:20; 15:5; 20:21-23  •  Acts 2:38, 41; 5:2-11; 14:23  •  Rom 10:15  •  1 Cor 4:1; 5:3-13  •  2 Cor 5:18-20  •  Eph 4:11  •  1 Tm 1:18-20; 4:14; 5:23  •  Ti 3:10  •  Jas 5:13-15
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 877  •  1088  •  1142  •  1461  •  1536  •  1539-1553  •  1564-1568  •  1578-1587  •  1591-1592

Leviticus and other biblical books show that God himself prescribed numerous religious rituals for the ancient Israelites.  Sacrifices and offerings, ordination ceremonies and priestly behavior, holidays and festivals — all had their designated rituals (see Lv 1:1-10:20; 16:1-34, 23:1-44).  In addition, devout customs grew up among hte people, such as those for mourning the dead (see 1 Sm 31:11-13) and anointing kings (see 1 Sm 10:1).

Jesus, Mary, Joseph, and the apostles were all faithful Jews, practicing the religious rituals of their people.  Mary and Joseph “fulfilled all the prescriptions of the law of the Lord” (Lk 2:39) with regard to circumcision, purification, and presentation after Jesus’ birth (see Lk 2:21-39).  The family took part in the temple rituals of the great holy days (see Lk 2:41-43), just as Jesus later did with his apostles (see Lk 22:1-13; Jn 2:13; 7:2-10; 10:22-23).

Our Lord also followed the weekly synagogue rituals (see Lk 4:16-20).  At meals — including the Last Supper — he prayed the ritual blessings customary among the Jews (see Mk 14:22; Lk 22:19; 24:30).  In fact, the words of the Catholic Church’s Eucharistic rite today still echo the ancient Jewish table blessing Jesus himself prayed.

The first Christians no longer practiced Jewish rituals that had been rendered unnecessary by Christ’s coming, such as temple sacrifices (see Heb 9:1-28).  But they by no means abandoned all ritual, as New testament passages indicate: “the breaking of the bread [the Eucharist] and … the prayers” (Acts 2:42); the customary three o’clock prayers at the temple (see Acts 3:1); the laying on of hands and anointing with oil (see Acts 6:6; Jas 5:14); the apparent quotations from the liturgy (see Col 1:15-20; Phil 2:6-11; 1 Tm 3:16).  When Acts says that the Church leaders at Antioch were “worshiping” (13:2), the Greek verb used is leiturgeo (the root of our English word “liturgy”), which refers to ritual worship.

Why does the New Testament provide no details of these rituals?  The earliest Christians require no written ritual instructions because they worshiped regularly according to an oral tradition.  That unbroken tradition, which reflected both Jewish roots and new Christian realities, eventually developed into th rich ritual of worship practiced today by the Catholic Church.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Lv 1:1-10:20; 16:1-34; 23:1-44  •  1 Sm 10:1; 31:11-13  •  Mk 14:22  •  Lk 2:21-39, 41-43; 4:16-20; 22:1-13, 19; 24:30  •  Jn 2:13; 7:2-10; 10:22-23  •  Acts 2:42; 3:1; 6:6; 13:2  •  Phil 2:6-11  •  Col 1:15-20  •  1 Tm 3:16  •  Heb 9:1-28  •  Jas 5:14
General: Ex 28:1-30:38  •  1 Chr 23:25-32; 25:1; 29:22  •  2 Chr 5:1-14; 7:6-10  •  Mt 13:54  •  Mk 16:18  •  Acts 8:17-18; 9:17; 13:3; 19:6  •  1 Tm 4:14  •  Heb 6:2  •  Rv 4:2-11; 8:3-4
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 1124-1125  •  1136-1209

In an effort to avoid being judgmental, some Christians insist that all sins are alike in God’s eyes — that no particular sin is worse than another.  But the Bible clearly teaches otherwise.

May of God’s laws for the ancient Israelites, along with the punishments prescribed for breaking those laws, are found in Leviticus.  The sanctions God commanded ranged in severity, reflecting the range of gravity in the various sin they punished.  For example, if someone tried to defraud another person, the punishment was restitution of what had been stolen or unjustly held, plus a portion of the object’s value (see Lv 5:20-24).  But if someone committed a grave sin such as incest, adultery, or idolatry, the death penalty was prescribed (see chapters 18-20).

No doubt Christians are not subject to all of the Old Testament laws.  Nevertheless, these and other biblical passages demonstrate that the degree of guilt incurred through sin can vary — that some sins are indeed more serious than others.  Of course, our modern legal system and even common sense assume the same reality:  The legal consequences of a petty theft are not nearly as severe as those of a murder.

In the New Testament as well, Scripture offers numerous examples of differential reward and merit, which implies varying degrees of sin (see Mt 16:27; Rom 2:5-13; 1 Cor 3:8-9; 1 Pt 1:17; Rv 22:12).  Jesus, for example, distinguishes between those who “shall be beaten severely” from those who “shall be beaten only lightly” (Lk 12:47-48).

No sin is ever a good thing, of course.  Yet not all sins are equally evil in God’s eyes.  Otherwise, we would face an absurd scenario:  A momentary pang of lust or jealousy would be the moral equivalent, before God, of rape or murder.

More specifically, Scripture teaches that not all sins lead to spiritual death — that is, damnation (see “How Can a Loving God Send People to Hell?”).  This is the basic distinction between mortal (spiritually deadly) sins and venial (lesser) sins:  “These is such thing as a deadly sin…. All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin that is not deadly” (1 Jn 5:16-17).  The Church’s teaching that certain conditions may lessen the guilt of even a serious sin (such as ignorance of fault) is rooted in Scripture as well (see Lv 4:27; Lk 12:47-48).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Lv 4:27; 5:20-24; 18-20  •  Mt 16:27  •  Lk 12:47-48  •  Rom 2:5-13  •  1 Cor 3:8-9  •  1 Pt 1:178  •  1 Jn 5:16-17  •  Rv 22:12
General: Mt 5:22-26; 12:32  •  1 Cor 3:11-15; 6:9-10  •  Gal 5:19-21  •  Eph 5:5
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 1472-1475  •  1852-1867  •  1873-1876

Was God’s ancient commandment “You shall not kill” (Ex 20:13) understood as an absolute statement, forbidding any taking of human life?  Apparently not, since the same divine law called for the death penalty (see Lv 20:2-21, 27).

For this reason, the Catholic Church reads the commandment against killing in the light of other biblical passages that specify its meaning: “The innocent and the just you shall not put to death, nor shall you acquit the guilty” (Ex 23:7).  The commandment thus forbids the taking of innocent life; execution of criminals may be another matter.

Of course, Christians are not obliged to practice all of the Old Testament laws (see Gal 3:23-25).  Nor, when the contemporary state punishes crimes censured in the Old Testament, must we demand that it impose as severe a penalty as God required of the ancient Israelites (see Jn 7:53-8:11).  Nevertheless, the Church has traditionally allowed for the possibility of capital punishment for extremely serious crimes.

Why?  Because societies may legitimately defend themselves — just as individuals may — and the defense of the common good depends upon rendering an unjust aggressor incapable of harming others.  In fact, such a defense may be not only a right but even a grave duty for public officials who are responsible to protect the lives of others (see Rom 13:3-4).

Must the aggressor be put to death to be rendered incapable of harm?  The Catechism explains:

Assuming that the guilty part’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity with the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, … the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity “are very rare, if not practically non-existent” (Blessed Pope John Paul II, Evangelium vitae 56).  [2267, emphasis added]

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Ex 20:13; 23:7  •  Lv 20:2-21, 27  •  Jn 7:53-8:11  •  Rom 13:3-4  •  Gal 3:23-25
General: Gn 9:5-6  •  Dt 32:35  •  Mt 5:21-24; 38-40; 43-48  •  Rom 12:19  •  Heb 10:30
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 2261-2268  •  2320-2321

In Deuteronomy, we find the great declaration of the Jewish faith that there is one God (see Dt 6:4), and this affirmation is echoed in Christian teaching (see Jas 2:19).  Yet at the same time, Scripture calls three Persons “God” (the Father; the Son, Jesus; and the Holy Spirit) and describes all three in ways that pertain to God alone, not to creatures.  Nor are these three names simply various ways of speaking about the same Person:  At Jesus’ baptism, for example, as he (God the Son) emerges from the water, a voice (God the Father) speaks from heaven, and a dove (a form taken by God the Holy Spirit) alights on him (See Lk 3:21-22).

The Church teaches that these two realities of God’s “oneness” and “threeness” are not contradictory.  Rather, God is one Being in three Persons; within his very essence, he is one community of love.

This Trinity in Unity is no doubt a mystery; after all, as human beings with limited intellects, we can’t hope to comprehend fully who God is in himself.  Consider this parallel:  Someone living in a one-dimensional world, where there can only be points on a line, could not imagine a square.  And in a two-dimensional world, where squares exist, a cube would be incomprehensible.

That’s how God stands in relation to us.  So we accept what he has revealed about himself, even though we find it difficult to fathom.  We recognize with the biblical character Job that when we try to figure out God, we are dealing “with great things that [we] do not understand; / things too wonderful for [us], which [we] cannot know” (Jb 42:3).  (See also “How Has God Revealed Himself?)

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Dt 6:4  •  Jb 42:3  •  Lk 3:21-22  •  Jas 2:19
General: Mt 28:19  •  Jn 10:17-18 (with Rom 8:11 and Gal 1:1); 14:23 (with Rom 8:9-11 and 1 Cor 3:16-17); 16-7-8; 17:21-23; 20:26-29  •  Acts 5:3-4, 9; 13:2-4; 16:6-7; 20:28; 28:25 (with Is 6:8-10)  •  1 Cor 8:5-6  •  2 Cor 13:13  •  1 Tm 6:13-16 (with Rv 19:11-13 and Jn 1:1-5, 14)  •  Heb 9:14; 10:29  •  1 Pt 1:2  •  1 Jn 5:7-8
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 202  •  228-267  •  663  •  684-685  •  689  •  731-732  •  813  •  1066

The first of the Ten Commandments makes it clear that worship is due to God alone.  In Deuteronomy, the Lord tells his people through Moses: “You sall not have other gods besides me…. You shall not bow down before them or worship them” (Dt 5:7, 9)

Catholics affirm this truth.  Only the all-mighty Creator of the universe, the one in whom “we live and move and have our being” (Acts 17:28), is worthy of our worship — of the adoration that involves giving ourselves completely to him.  No saint or even angel should ever be adored in that sense.

At the same time, however, we obey the biblical instruction to “pay to all their dues, … honor to whom honor is due” (Rom 13:7).  Though we don’t worship the saints and angels in heaven, wedo in fact honor (or venerate) them, because they are worthy of great honor.  This is a biblical distinction.

Why do they deserve such honor?  Because they now stand before him in heaven face-to-face, and they have become like him (see 1 Jn 3:2).  They have become, by God’s grace, his glorious image (see 2 Cor 3:18), partakers in his divine nature (see 2 Pt 1:4).  They share in his holiness (see Heb 12:10), his glory (see Rom 8:17; 1 Pt 5:1), his knowledge (see 1 Cor 13:12), and his authority to judge and rule (see 1 Cor 6:2-3; 2 Tm 2:12; Rv 3:21).

Are we somehow denying God the honor due him when we honor his saints?  By no means!  They are his perfected handiwork (see Eph 2:10) — and when we praise the craftsmanship, all the accolades go to the Craftsman.  If even “the heavens declare the glory of God; / the sky proclaims the builder’s craft” (Ps 19:2), how much more so do human beings who have been perfected in wisdom and justice, who “shall shine brightly / like the splendor of the firmament, / And … shall be like the stars forever” (Dn 12:3)?

Finally, we should note that, as the old saying goes, “Imitation is the sincerest form of praise.”  Of all the ways we can honor God’s saints, the best was is to imitate their faith in him (see Heb 6:11-12; 13:7).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Dt 5:7, 9  • Ps 19:2  •  Dn 12:3  •  Acts 17:28  •  Rom 8:17; 13:7  •  1 Cor 6:2-3; 13:12  •  2 Cor 3:18  •  Eph 2:10  •  2 Tm 2:12  •  Heb 6:11-12, 12:10; 13:7  •  1 Pt 5:1  •  2 Pt 1:4  •  1 Jn 3:2  •  Rv 3:21
General: 1 Cor 4:16  •  Phil 3:17  •  2 Thes 3:7-9  •  Heb 11:1-40; 12:22-23  •  Jas 5:10-11
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 828  •  956-957  •  2132  •  2683

In Deuteronomy, God warns the Israelites against “fashioning an idol to represent any figure, whether it be the form of a man or of a woman” or of other creatures (see Dt 4:15-18).  Joining biblical passages such as these with the divine commandment against idols (see Ex 20:4; “graven images” in the King James Version), many Christians insist that all statues of religious subjects are forbidden.

We must note, however, that as the rest of the commandment makes clear, God has forbidden only the making of such images with the intention of worshiping them, as the pagans did.  He has by no means banned the creation of all religious images.

On the contrary, the Lord actually instructed the Israelites to store those very commandments, carved in stone, within a sacred container (ark) to be decorated with golden images of angelic beings called cherubim (see Ex 25:10-22).  He also commanded the people to decorate the places where they worshiped with gold, bronze, and wooden images of animals and plants (see Ex 25:33-36; 26:1; 1 Kgs 6:23-7:51; 2 Chr 3:10-4:22).

Why do Catholic churches, schools, and homes display religious statues and other images?  Such images are an aid to remembering and honoring our Lord, his mother, the saints, and the angels.

No Catholic who knows anything about the Catholic faith has ever worshiped a religious image.  Even when Catholics kneel to pray before a statue, or burn candles or place flowers before it, they aren’t worshiping the image.  They are simply expressing love and honor for the person represented by the statue.

Think of how most people display photos of their love ones in their homes and workplaces or carry them on their person.  They may occasionally even kiss a picture.  When they do, are they worshiping these images?  Of course not!  The affection they show to the photos is actually directed toward those the photos portray.

Does venerating saints and angels in this way somehow “steal” honor from God?  No.  They are his “handiwork” (Eph 2:10).  Our praise of the masterpieces redounds to the glory of the Artist who created them.

Finally, consider this:  If we cherish the memory of statesmen, war heroes, and even sports celebrities by making statues of them, then what can be our object to honoring the heroes of the faith? (See Sir 44:1-15.)

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Ex 20:4; 25:10-22, 33-36; 26:1  •  Dt 4:15-18  •  1 Kgs 6:23-7:51  •  2 Chr 3:10-4:22  •  Sir 44:1-15  •  Eph 2:10
General: Rom 12:10  •  1 Cor 4:9  •  Heb 1:14; 11:1-40; 12:22-24
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 2129-2132

At the end of Moses’ life, God gave final instructions through him to the people of Israel.  He said in part: “Learn then that I, I alone, am God, / and there is no god beside me. / It is I who bring both death and life” (Dt 32:39).

Life and death are in the hands of God.  He is our Creator “who gives to everyone life and breath and everything” (Acts 17:25).  Our days are appointed to us by him from the very beginning (see Ps 139:16).

To take life and death into our own hands, then, through suicide or assisting someone in suicide (euthanasia), is to “play God.”  But that role is not ours to play.  for this reason, the Church opposes the active, direct killing even of those who desire to end their lives.

Why, some may ask, shouldn’t we be allowed to do as we wish with the life that is ours?  Because it is ultimately not ours at all.  We are stewards, not owners, of the life our Creator has entrusted to us.  We have no “right to die,” because our life is not ours to dispose of.  (See also “Why Are Abortion and Embryonic Stem Cell Research Wrong?”)

This is true twice over for the Christian, to whom God has given new life through Jesus Christ.  As St. Paul says: “Do you not know that … you are not your own?  For you have been purchased at a price” (1 Cor 6:19-20).

Catholic teaching recognizes that there are times when a life that is not innocent must be taken: for example, in self-defense; within the duties of law enforcement work, to protect threatened innocents; or in justly waged war.  (See “What Does the Church Teach About the Death Penalty?” and “What Does the Church Teach About War?”)  But apart from these circumstances, or other considerations such as insanity on the part of the killer, the deliberate taking of an innocent human life is murder, even when the killing is self-inflicted.

The Church teaches, and demonstrates in her many health care institutions, that sufficient palliative (pain-relieving) care can provide a viable moral alternative to suicide.  At the same time, avoiding or discontinuing overzealous or dangerous medical procedures can be legitimate when the intention is not to cause death, but merely to accept the inability to impede it.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Dt 32:39  •  Ps 139:16  •  Acts 17:25  •  1 Cor 6:19-20
General: Gn 2:7  •  Ex 23:7  •  Jb 12:10; 33:4  •  Mt 5:21  •  Gal 2:20
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 2261-2269  •  2276-2283  •  2320  •  2324-2325

The Book of Judges repeatedly speaks of angels being sent by God to his people (see, for example, Jgs 2:1-5).  Are we to understand these and similar biblical accounts as references to real supernatural beings, or simply as accounts of visions?

Both Scripture and Tradition repeatedly affirm that God has in fact created non-human, angelic beings to be his agents, warriors, and messengers.  they are personal and immortal; they have a rational intellect and free will, yet they are pure spirits, without bodies like ours.  (See the scriptural references below.)  They surpass in perfection all visible creatures, as is evident from their splendor (see Ps 103:20-21).  Nevertheless, redeemed human beings will one day be perfected in such a way that the angels will be subject to them (see 1 Cor 6:3).

Angels have been present since creation, and they have played critical roles in salvation history, from the fall of man to the present.  In various ways they carried out the divine plan for the ancient descendants of Abraham.  When God became man in Jesus Christ, they surrounded and served him throughout his earthly life, from his conception up to the very moment of his ascension into heaven.  they will also announce his return to earth at the end of time and will serve him as he judges the earth.  (See the scriptural references below.)

Meanwhile, angels are “ministering spirits, sent to serve, for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation” (Heb 1:14).  They join the Church in her worship and ministry; they serve us as guardians, intercessors, and guides.  With the saints in heaven they behold the face of God and enjoy the eternal life of the Blessed Trinity. (See the scriptural references below.)

Finally, Scripture speaks of various angelic hierarchies and provides the names of three particular angels: Michael, Gabriel, and Raphael.  (See the scriptural references below; also see “Do the Devil and Demons Really Exist?”.)

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Jgs 2:1-5  •  Ps 103:20-21  •  1 Cor 6:3  •  Heb 1:14
General: Gn 3:24  •  Ex 3:2; 23:20  •  Jgs 6:11-12, 20-22; 13:3-22  •  2 Kgs 1:15  •  Tb 12:12-15  •  Jb 38:4-7  •  Ps 18:11; 78:49; 91:11; 148:2  •  Is 6:2  •  Dn 9:21; 10:5-9, 13  •  Mt 2:13, 19-20; 4:11; 13:37-42; 18:10; 25:31  •  Lk 1:26-38; 2:9-15; 20:36; 22:43; 24:4-7  •  Acts 1:10-11  •  Col 1:16  •  Rv 4:6-8; 5:11-14; 8:2-3; 12:7
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 148  •  311  •  326-336  •  350-352  •  391-393  •  414  •  525  •  538  •  559  •  760  •  1023-1029  •  1038  •  1053  •  1161  •  1352  •  2676

The story of Deborah, recounted in the Book of Judges, portrays a woman of remarkable wisdom and courage (see Jgs 4:1-5:31).  As a “mother of Israel” (5:7), a prophetess speaking for God, and a judge governing the people, she attracted to her leadership many who trusted her judgment and were inspired by her example.

Scripture offers other women as well who serve us as models of faith and holiness — first among them, of course, Jesus’ mother, the Blessed Virgin Mary (see Lk 1:26-56).  Since biblical times as well, the Church has been blessed in every generation with gifted women who have witnessed to their Lord in extraordinary ways, including three — St. Teresa of Ávila, St. Thèrése of Lisieux, and St. Catherine of Siena — who have been recognized as Doctors of the Church for their insights as spiritual teachers.

Certainly, then, the Catholic Church affirms that women can be spiritual leaders and teachers.  Women assume countless positions of leadership and teaching throughout the Church today, and we all benefit from their gifts.  Nevertheless, the ordination of women as clergy is an altogether different matter; it depends, not on gifts, but on calling — and only God can issue a vocation.

Our Lord Jesus had many holy women among his disciples, including his mother (see Lk 8:1-3; Acts 1:14).  Nevertheless, he chose men to be his twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose the coworkers who would become their colleagues, successors, and assistants in the ordained ministry (see Mt 10:1-4; Acts 1:15-26; 6:1-6).  “The Church recognizes herself,” the Catechism says, “to be bound by this choice made by the Lord himself.  For this reason the ordination of women is not possible (cf. Blessed Pope John Paul II, MD 26-27; CDF, declaration, Inter insigniores: AAS 69 [1977] 98-116)” (CCC 1577).

Since ordination is a divine calling, no one has a right to it.  The choice belongs to God, and it must be received from him as an unmerited gift.  But the Church has the authority and responsibility to discern that calling along with the person called, and then to confirm it, through the bishops, by conferring the sacrament of Holy Orders.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Jgs 4:1-5:31  •  Mt 10:1-4  •  Lk 1:26-56; 8:1-3  •  Acts 1:14-26
General: 2 Kgs 22:14-20  •  2 Chr 34:19-28  •  Mt 1:18-25; 11:1; 19:28; 27:55-56; 28:1-10  •  Mk 3:14-19; 15:40-41; 16:1-11  •  Lk 6:13-16; 23:27, 49, 55-56; 24:1-12, 22-24  •  Acts 5:14, 13:1-3; 16:14-15; 18:1-2, 26  •  Rom 16:1-15  •  1 Cor 16:19  •  Phil 4:2-3  •  Col 4:15  •  1 Tm 3:2-13
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 1577-1580

Like many biblical characters, the ancient judge Gideon acted on a personal revelation he received from God (see Jgs 6:11-40).  The stories of such special revelations are now an important part of what is called the “public” revelation of God to the Church, which includes sacred Scripture and sacred Tradition — a deposit of faith that we must take as our norm of belief (see 2 Tim 1:14).

“In times past, God spoke in partial and various ways to our ancestors through the prophets; in these last days, he spoke to us through a son” (Heb 1:1-2).  Jesus Christ, the Son of God made man, is the Father’s one, perfect, definitive Word, which can never be surpassed.  In Christ, God has said it all.  so the heritage of faith, given in Christ and contained in Scripture and Tradition, is complete.  We expect no new public revelation until Jesus Christ returns to earth.

Over the course of centuries, however, the Church has gradually come to understand the meaning of that complete revelation more deeply.  From this deposit, handed down by the apostles and their successors, the teaching office (magisterium) of the Church draws everything that it proposes to us for our belief as being divinely revealed.  Catholics are obliged to accept this public revelation of God.

Do special revelations still come to individuals from heaven?  The Church certainly allows for that possibility.  At times she has even authoritatively recognized such messages, as with the appearances of our Lady to St. Bernadette at Lourdes.  But these “private” revelations, as they are called, do not belong to the deposit of faith.  Their role is not to add to or improve Christ’s definitive revelation, but to help believers live it more fully in a specific period in history.

For that reason, though the Church may recommend particular private revelations as worthy of acceptance, Catholics are not bound to assent to these in the same way they would place their faith in sacred Scripture and Tradition.  At the same time, Catholics should exercise caution toward alleged “revelations” that have not yet been approved by the Church.  And they must firmly reject as false any that offer “a different gospel” (see Gal 1:6-9), claiming to surpass or correct the deposit of faith given in Christ.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Jdgs 6:11-40  •  2 Tm 1:14  •  Heb 1:1-2  •  Gal 1:6-9
General: Ps 119:29  •  Jer 23:13-32  •  Mt 24:4-5, 11  •  Lk 21:8  •  Acts 8:9-25  •  2 Cor 11:4, 13-15  •  Eph 4:14  •  2 thes 2:1-5, 15  •  1 Tm 1:3-4; 4:1-2, 7; 6:12-16  •  2 Tm 4:3-4  •  Rv 13:11-14
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 50-100

To indicate that he was consecrated to God for a special work, Samson never cut his hair (see Jgs 13:2-5; 16:17).  In similar ways, other men and women in Scripture set themselves apart for God by taking vows, wearing distinctive clothing, eating a distinctive diet, or living alone in the wilderness.  The ancient nazirites, for example, took vows and promised not to cut their hair, come near a human corpse, or consume alcohol (see Nm 6:1-21).

In the early centuries of the Church, many men and women who sought to give themselves complete to God similarly practiced strict spiritual disciplines such as fasting, prayer, and vigils while remaining part of their local assemblies.  Their consecrated lives in some ways resembled that of Anna, the prophetess present when Jesus was presented in the temple (see Lk 2:36-38).

In time, however, many of these dedicated believers began moving out to the wilderness to devote their lives exclusively to prayer, penance, and works of charity.  They took vows: to remain single at St. Paul had advised (see 1 Cor 7:32-34); to live in voluntary poverty, as Jesus had counseled those who wished to become “perfect” (see Mt 19:21); and to obey the spiritual fathers and mothers who helped them become holy (see Heb 13:17).  The sacrificial way of life they practiced helped to focus and purify them.

These “ascetics,” as they were called (from the biblical Greek word for “discipline”, looked to several scriptural figures as their inspiration and model: in particular, Elijah the prophet (see 1 Kgs 17:1-9); St. John the Baptist and his disciples (see Mt 3:1-4; 9:14-15), and our Lord himself, who had spent forty days alone in the wilderness, to pray, fast, and do battle with the Devil (see Lk 4:1-13).  Over the following centuries, most of these Christians organized into religious orders — like-minded communities with a common life of prayer and discipline.  New groups emerged, each with its own “charism” (special gift).

Today, a wide variety of Catholic orders serve the Church and the world.  Some are more secluded (cloistered), dedicated exclusively to prayer, meditation, and manual labor.  Others give themselves to works of charity, such as health care or social work.  Still others specialize in evangelization, teaching, or communications media.  Whatever their special gifts, all share a vocation from God to serve as men and women set apart for a special task.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Nm 6:1-21  •  Jgs 13:2-5; 16:17  •  1 Kgs 17:1-9  •  Mt 3:1-4; 9:14-15; 19:21  •  Lk 2:36-38; 4:1-13  •  1 Cor 7:32-34  •  Heb 13:17
General: 1 Kgs 19:1-18  •  Mt 4:1-2  •  Mk 1:2-6, 12-13  •  Lk 5:33-35  •  Acts 21:23-24  •  1 Tm 6:17-19  •  Heb 11:37-38  •  Rv 14:4
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 914-933  •  944-945  •  1672

The eerie story of King Saul’s dealings with the medium at Endor illustrates the dangers of “necromancy” — the attempt to initiate communication with the dead (see 1 Sm 28:3-19).  Saul himself had previously driven mediums out of the land, in keeping with God’s consistent warning to the Israelites against adopting this practice of their pagan neighbors.  So grave was the crime of necromancy, and so pernicious its consequences, that God actually prescribed the death penalty for it (see Lv 20:6, 27).

Why is the matter so serious?  Because human beings cannot converse at will with the souls of the dead.  When they attempt to do so, they often open themselves to diabolical deception.

On the other hand, God himself may at times permit a departed soul to appear to the living (this is called an “apparition”) and even to disclose things unknown to them.  This would be true even in Saul’s case.  If the apparition of the prophet Samuel was indeed genuine, it was not because the medium had any powers to summon the dead, but simply because God took the opportunity to rebuke the king through the otherworldly visitor he was seeking out.

The gospel accounts provide much clearer cases of depart souls’ being allowed by God (or even sent by God) to encounter the living.  When Jesus was transfigured on the mountain, while Peter, James, and John watched and listened, the departed Old Testament saints Moses and Elijah appeared and conversed with him (see Mt 17:1-9).  After our Lord’s resurrection, a number of departed saints returned to Jerusalem “and appeared to many” (see Mt 27:52-53).

When Catholics talk about prayer to the saints, then, or about apparitions of Mary or other saints, they are not advocating necromancy.  Asking for the saints’ intercession is not an attempt to conjure up the dead; it simply acknowledges that those who are in heaven, perfected in Christ, are able and willing to help us by God’s grace.  After all: “He is not God of the dead but of the living” (Mk 12:27; see also “Why Do Catholics Pray to Saints and Angels?”)

At the same time, genuine apparitions of the saints are typically a startling surprise to those who experience them, not the result of someone seeking out a contact beyond the grave.  Mary or another saint appears unexpectedly with a message, sent from God, that calls us to repent, believe, and draw closer to him.  Nothing could be further from necromancy.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: 1 Sm 28:3-19  •  Lv 20:6, 27  •  Mt 17:1-9; 27:52-53  •  Mk 12:27
General: Dr 18:10-12  •  2 Mc 15:11-16  •  Wis 3:1-6  •  Mk 9:2-8  •  Lk 9:28-36
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 946-962  •  2683

Second Samuel details the many military exploits of King David (see, for example, 2 Sm 8:1-14), who was divinely appointed as commander of God’s people (see 1 Sm 13:14).  Other biblical books tell how God sometimes gave instructions for the Israelites to go to war (see, for example, Jgs 1:1-2).  In light of such passages, it is difficult to justify a strictly pacifist position — that is, the stance that war is always forbidden to God’s people.

Christian pacifist communities often insist that the New Testament standard replaces the Old Testament example in this regard.  They cite, for example, Jesus’ gospel command to “offer no resistance to one who is evil” (Mt 5:39), and his warning that “all who take the sword will perish by the sword” (See Mt 26:51-54).

Nevertheless, the New Testament also contains St. Paul’s statement that the civil state “does not bear the sword without purpose; it is the servant of God to inflict wrath on the evildoer” (Rom 13:4).  The natural law allows for self-defense, and Scripture commands us to defend and “rescue the lowly and poor; / [and] deliver them from the hand of the wicked” (Ps 82-3-4).  In this light, Christians have reasonably argued that sometimes war is justifiable — in fact, that justice and charity may demand our engagement in war to defend both our own people and the innocent victims of aggressors in other nations.

As the Catechism teaches, then, on occasion war can indeed be just, and public authorities can “impose on citizens the obligations necessary for national defense.”  But “the strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration” (2310 and 2309, emphasis in the original).  For instance, all other means to resolve the issue must have proven futile (see 2309 for a summary of all of the conditions).

Meanwhile, the Church urges all people, especially governments, to work for peace — not just the avoidance of war, or the uneasy balance of power between adversaries, but the creation of just conditions that lead to social and political tranquility.  “Blessed are the peacemakers, / for they will be called children of God” (Mt 5:9).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Jgs 1:1-2  •  1 Sm 13:14  •  2 Sm 8:1-14  •  Ps 82:3-4  •  Mt 5:39; 26:51-54  •  Rom 13:4
General: Nm 21:14  •  Jgs 4:4-16  •  Ps 20:8; 29:11; 34:15; 46:9-10; 55:22; 68:31; 120:6-7; 122:6-7; 144:1  •  Prv 12:20; 20:18  •  Eccl 3:8  •  Is 2:4; 9:4-6; 57:19; 60:17  •  Zec 9:10  •  Mt 24:6  •  Lk 21:9  •  Rom 14:19  •  Jas 3:18
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 2263-2267  •  2302-2317  •  2321  •  2327-2330

Through the prophet Nathan, God confronts King David over grave sins: adultery and murder.  The guilty sovereign responds by confessing his sin to the prophet and to God.  Then he humbles himself by exchanging his royal raiment for humble sackcloth, and for a week he lies on the ground and refuses all food (see 2 Sm 12:13-17).

David is performing penance in his deep grief for his wrongdoing.  His attitudes and behavior illustrate how genuine penance includes both an interior and an exterior aspect.

Interior penance is a conversion of the heart, a turning away from sin and toward God (see Dt 4:29; Jos 24:23).  It involves the penitent’s intention to change his life because he hopes in God’s mercy.  We see David’s change of heart reflected in his prayer of repentance on this occasion, recorded in Psalm 51.

External acts of penance, as David demonstrates, include such actions as fasting, prayer, and giving to those in need.  These behaviors can have several purposes: demonstrating the penitent’s intention to change; detaching him from the things he loves too much; drawing him closer to God; repairing some of the damage caused by his sin; and participating in the reparation to God (satisfaction) for sin made by Christ through his death on the cross.

David’s acts of penance are self-imposed, but Scripture shows us that sometimes God himself imposes penances on the guilty — some sort of labor or adversity, often connected to the natural consequences of the sin, that can serve a redemptive purpose if the sinner responds in the right way.  For example, the disobedient Israelite people are forced to wander in the desert for forty years (see Nm 14:26-35).  St. John the Baptist’s father, Zechariah, is temporarily struck mute when he won’t believe God’s message to him through an angel (see Lk 1:20, 62-64).

Voluntary penance is at the heart of the seasons of Lent and Advent, when Catholics traditionally make at least small sacrifices in the hope of becoming more like our Lord.  In the sacrament of Reconciliation, the priest assigns a penance on God’s behalf to help the penitent grow in holiness.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Nm 14:26-35  •  Dt 4:29  •  Jos 24:23  •  2 Sm 12:13-17  •  Ps 51  •  Lk 1:20, 62-64
General: Ex 32:15-20  •  Nm 5:5-7; 14:19-23  •  Is 58:6-7  •  Jl 1:13-14  •  Jon 3:1-10  •  Zech 7:5-10  •  Mt 6:16-21; 10:38; 16:19, 24; 18:18  •  Lk 18:9-14  •  Jn 20:23  •  Rom 8:13, 17  •  1 Cor 5:1-5  •  2 Cor 4:10; 11:23-30  •  Gal 6:1  •  Phil 3:10  •  Col 1:24
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 953  •  1420-1498  •  2043

Bathsheba was the mother of King Solomon of Israel (see 1 Kgs 1:28-30).  As any loving son would do, he obeyed God’s command to honor his mother (see Ex 20:12).  So even though the highest officials of the kingdom bowed when they came before his throne, Solomon himself stood and bowed before her when she entered the court.

Once he sat down again on his throne, “a throne was provided for the king’s mother, who sat at his right” (1 Kgs 2:19), the highest place of honor he could give her.  Then, when she interceded there with the king for his subjects, he gladly granted her request (see 1 Kgs 2:20).

Why did Bathsheba have her own throne at her son’s right hand?  Why did she receive such exalted honor at court?  After all, she herself had not been born in a palace.  Nevertheless, Bathsheba had borne this magnificent royal son.  That made her the queen mother of the land, despite whatever humble circumstances from which she herself may have come.

Now consider this: Solomon may have been one of the most illustrious and powerful kings in biblical history.  But his splendor pales to nothing beside the radiant glory of his descendant Jesus Christ, the “King of kings and Lord of lords,” ruler of all the nations (see Rv 19:16; 15:4).  Jesus fulfilled the prophecy that from David’s throne would rule a Prince of Peace whose kingdom would be universal and everlasting (see Is 9:5-6).  That throne is now “in the heavens, far above every principality, authority, power and dominion” (Eph 1:20-21).

If Solomon honored Bathsheba so highly as his queen mother, how much more must Jesus honor Mary as his own?  How much more exalted must be the woman — however lowly her original state (see Lk 1:48) — who bore the Son of God, Sovereign of the universe?  No doubt her throne, too, is at the right hand of her Son’s throne in heaven.  And no doubt, just as Solomon was eager to grant his mother’s requests, so Jesus gladly responds to her intercession for his subjects.

Mary’s exalted role among the saints also reflects her extraordinary position as our great exemplar of faith, the prototype of the Christian disciple.  With St. Elizabeth, we say to her: “Blessed are you who believed that what was spoken to you by the Lord would be fulfilled” (Lk 1:45).

In St. John’s vision of heaven, the “woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars,” bore a son “destined to rule all the nations” (Rv 12:1, 5).  Is it any wonder that in such a portrait, Catholics see Mary, Queen of Heaven?

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Ex 20:12  •  1 Kgs 1:28-30; 2:19-20  •  Is 9:5-6  •  Lk 1:45, 48  •  Eph 1:20-21  •  Rv 12:1, 5; 19:16; 15:4
General: 2 Kgs 10:13  •  Est 5:1-5  •  Ps 45:14  •  Jn 2:1-12  •  Rv 20:4
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 964-966  •  972  •  974-975

After the prophet Elisha died, he was buried in a cave.  Sometime later, the body of another dead man had to be cast into the same cave hastily so those burying him could avoid a band of marauders.  Then, “when the man came in contact with the bones of Elisha, he came back to life and rose to his feet” (2 Kgs 13:20-21).

This story from 2 Kings provides a biblical example of a “relic,” which is an object connected with our Lord or a saint.  Throughout biblical and Church history, relics have been venerated and have often demonstrated a capacity to convey the power of God through miracles, especially miracles of healing.

The Church divides relics into three classes.  A first-class relic is a part of a saint’s body, as in the case of Elisha’s bones.  A second-class relic is something a saint used during his life on earth, such as clothing.  The Bible also records an instance of such a relic and its power: Elijah’s mantle, which parted the Jordan River after the prophet had gone to heaven: “Wielding the mantle which had fallen from Elijah, [Elisha] struck the water…. When Elisha struck the water it divided and he crossed over” (2 Kgs 2:14).

Third-class relics are objects that have been touched by a first-class relic.  The Bible notes an example of this kind of relic, too, and the miracles it may work:  “So extraordinary were the mighty deeds God accomplished at the hands of Paul that when face cloths or aprons that touched his skin were applied to the sick, their diseases left them and the evil spirits came out of them”  (Acts 19:11-12).

We must keep in mind that the miraculous power conveyed through relics is not some kind of magic.  It is simply God’s power acting through material means, analogous to the way he acts through the matter of sacraments and sacramentals — or, for that matter, the way he sometimes works miracles through the touch of a saint’s hands long before the saint’s death (see “Why Are Sacraments Necessary?”).

Why would a saint’s relics be venerated?  We might just as well ask why a woman would carry a lock of her beloved’s hair in a locket around her neck.  The affection and honor shown a relic overflow from the affection and honor shown to the saints themselves, who are dear to us as exemplars of God’s grace, love, and holiness.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: 2 Kgs 2:14; 13:20-21  •  Acts 19:11-12
General: Ps 91:15; 112:1-9  •  Mt 10:8  •  Mk 16:17-18  •  Acts 2:43; 3:1-13; 5:12-16; 8:1-8; 9:32-42; 14:3, 8-15; 16:18; 20:9-11; 28:8-10  •  1 Cor 12:28
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 828  •  1674

The Second Book of Kings tells how the prophet Elijah was taken up bodily into heaven (see 2 Kgs 2:1-12).  Scripture notes, in fact, several unusual departures from this world to the next after a life lived close to God.  Not only Elijah, but also Enoch and those who came out of the tombs at Christ’s death were all received bodily into heaven before the final, universal resurrection of the dead that is still to come (see Gn 5:24; Heb 11:5; Mt 27:50-53).

Mary’s bodily assumption, as it’s called, into the glory of heaven was a singular privilege, reserved for the mother of our Lord, far beyond what these others experienced.  Nevertheless, in the biblical record of these earlier events we see that there’s nothing “unbiblical” about the claim that God has chosen to take a holy person to himself in a special way.

Is Mary’s assumption described in the Bible?  No, but that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.  The death of St. Joseph isn’t described in Scripture, either, though it’s certain that this important event took place within the years chronicled by the gospels.  In fact, many events even from the life of our Lord himself were not recorded in Scripture (see Jn 21:25).  The assumption of Mary is only one of the many significant events in the life of the early Church that have been remembered and witnessed to by ancient Tradition.

According to an ancient account of the life of St. Theodosius, the feat of our Lady’s assumption was already being celebrated in Palestine in the 400s.  This indicates that by the fifth century the Assumption was already a well-established conviction of Christ’s followers in the land where he and his mother had lived.  In 1950, after many centuries of Christian testimony to this reality, Pope Pius XII defined it as a dogma of the Church.

The Assumption is consistent with Mary’s role as the Theotokos (“God-bearer”) and immaculate sinless one, who was granted a singular divine grace to bear God himself in her body.  If indeed she was free from sin, then it follows that she would not have to undergo the decay of death, which was the penalty for sin (see Gn 3:16-19).  If not for the fall of the human race, no one would have died.  Mary is the exception, for very good reason, and the forerunner of the resurrection that all who belong to Christ will experience (see 1 Cor 15:12-23).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Gn 5:24  •  Gn 3:16-19  •  2 Kgs 2:1-12  •  Mt 27:50-53  •  Jn 21:25  •  1 Cor 15:12-23  •  Heb 11:5
General: Ps 16:10  •  Lk 1:28-31 (with Zep 3:14-17)  •  2 Cor 12:2-4  •  Heb 2:14-18  •  Rv 12:1, 5, 17
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 966  •  974

Second Kings tells how Naaman, an Aramean general, suffered from leprosy.  When he sought help from the Israelite prophet Elisha, the prophet instructed him to bathe seven times in the Jordan River.  Once the general complied, he was miraculously healed (see 2 Kgs 5:1-14).

Did that muddy water possess some kind of magic?  Of course not.  Instead, it was a rather ordinary vehicle of God’s extraordinary power.  As on so many occasions recorded in Scripture, the Creator used a natural element of his creation to work a supernatural result.

This divine principle lies at the heart of the Catholic Church’s sacraments (see “Why Are Sacraments Necessary?).  It also gives rise to the use of “sacramentals,” which are, as the Catechism (1667) explains, ” ‘sacred signs which bear a resemblance to the sacraments.  They signify effects, particularly of a spiritual nature, which are obtained through the intercession of the Church.  By them men are disposed to receive the chief effect of the sacraments, and various occasions in life are rendered holy’ (SC 60; cf. CIC, can. 1166; CCEO, can. 867).”

Some sacramentals are actions, such as blessings, exorcisms, or the Sign of the Cross (see also “Why Do Catholics Make the Sign of the Cross?”).  Others are objects that have been blessed, such as ashes, palm branches, or crucifixes (see also “Why Do Catholics Put Ashes on Their Foreheads?” and “Why Do Catholics Have Crucifixes?”).  “Sacramentals do not confer the grace of the Holy Spirit in the way that the sacraments do, but by the Church’s prayer, they prepare us to receive grace and dispose us to cooperated with it” (Catechism 1670).  While the number of sacraments instituted by Christ is fixed (seven), the number of sacramentals varies according to the pastoral judgment of the Church.

Water is an ancient symbol of life and purity, used by many scriptural rituals and analogies (see Ex 40:12; Is 12:3).  Holy water is thus a sacramental that recalls the sacrament of Baptism and its cleansing effects.  Catholics bless themselves with it while making the Sign of the Cross whenever they enter or exit a church.  It may also be sprinkled on objects when they are being blessed.

Do Catholics think there is some kind of magic in holy water?  Of course not.  But they know that even ordinary water, when joined to the prayers of the Church, can be a powerful source of divine blessing, just as God healed Naaman in the Jordan waters.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Ex 40:12  •  2 Kgs 5:1-14  •  Is 12:3
General: Ex 23:25  •  Lv 14:5-7  •  Nm 5:17; 8:7  •  Ps 1:1-3  •  Is 55:1  •  Mt 3:13-17  •  Jn 7:37-39  •  Eph 5:25-27  •  Rv 21:6; 22:1-2, 17
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 1667-1673  •  1677-1678

Solomon was the most glorious and powerful king the nation of Israel ever knew.  Not only his subjects, but foreign visitors as well would have knelt whenever they came into his presence.  In the ancient world, that was the universally recognized posture of reverence and submission.

According to 2 Chronicles, however, then Solomon entered the temple he had built, this great king himself knelt down before God’s altar (see 2 Chr 6:12-13).  He recognized that he was in the presence of the King of kings, the all-powerful, all-glorious Ruler of the universe.

Today our culture tends to scoff at the notion that anyone should ever kneel.  To many, the gesture is a quaint leftover from medieval times, an act that is somehow beneath our modern dignity.  But Catholics recognize that God is still God, and that “every knee should bend, / of those in heaven and on earth and under the earth, / and every tongue confess that / Jesus Christ is Lord” (Phil 2:10-11).  So Catholics count it a privilege to kneel before him, because he is worthy of our reverence an submission.

Jesus is present in his Body and Blood, soul and divinity, in the Eucharist (see “Is the Eucharist Truly the Body and Blood of Christ?”).  So when Catholics come before the tabernacle in a church, where the Eucharist is reserved, they genuflect — that is, they bend the right knee to the floor and rise again.  In this way they imitate the faith of the holy women when they encountered Jesus at the empty tomb and “did him homage” by falling at his feet (Mt 28:9).  Their gesture gives glory, not only to God the Son, but to God the Father as well (see Phil 2:11).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: 2 Chr 6:12-13  •  Mt 28:9  •  Phil 2:10-11
General: Ps 95:6-7  •  Mt 2:11; 8:2; 9:18; 15:25; 20:20  •  Lk 24:52  •  Jn 9:38  •  Rv 5:8
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 1378

In the Book of Nehemiah, Ezra the priest reads aloud to the people of Jerusalem from “the book of the law of Moses” (see Neh 8:1) — sacred texts that now comprise the first five books of our Bible.  Where did these and the other books in Scripture come from?

The Bible didn’t fall from heaven, whole and entire.  It’s actually a collection of divinely inspired (literally, “God-breathed” — see 2 Tm 3:16) books produced over hundreds of years by human authors and editors.  We can identify the writers of some of these texts (see, for example, Lk 1:1-4; 1 Cor 1:1-3).  But for many others, the identity of the composers has been lost to history.

Numerous ancient books claimed to be divinely inspired.  But only seventy-three were chosen for inclusion in the scriptural “canon” (literally, the “measuring stick” by which all else is judged).  So who had the power to discern and the authority to declare which books belong in the Bible?  Ultimately, that role was played by the “magisterium” (authoritative teaching office) of the Catholic Church, acting in light of the broader apostolic Tradition.

Though there was broad agreement among early Christians about which books belonged in the Bible, the agreement was not absolute.  Some important Church fathers regarded as unscriptural certain books that are currently in the canon of the New Testament.  Others (equally eminent) thought that certain books not now in the New Testament canon were part of the inspired revelation.  The first Church father to list the currently accepted twenty-seven New Testament books was St. Athanasius in 367 AD.

Who settled the issue?  Several regional Church councils in the latter part of the fourth century (in 387, 392, and 393 AD) listed the books of the canon law as we now know it.  Their pronouncements were universally accepted until the Protestant Reformation challenged them more than eleven centuries later.  In response, the canon was reaffirmed by the Catholic ecumenical Council of Trent in 1546.

This historical reality presents a difficulty for those who believe that Scripture alone (sola Scriptura) is the ultimate authority for Christ faith and life.  Clearly, the Church and apostolic Tradition are equally necessary; without them, we would not even know which books belong in the Bible.  (See also “Why Do Catholic Bibles Have Seventy-three Books? and “Why Don’t Catholics Believe in the Bible Only?.”

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Neh 8:1  •  Lk 1:1-4  •  1 Cor 1:1-3  •  2 Tm 3:16
General: Jn 20:30; 21:25  •  Acts 2:42  •  2 Thes 2:15; 3:6 (with Gal 1:9 and 1 Thes 2:13)  •  2 Tm 1:13-14; 2:2
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 80-82  •  101-107  •  119-127  •  131  •  135-141  •  304  •  572  •  688  •  702

The people of ancient Judah were conquered by the powerful Babylonian Empire, and nearly all of them were exiled from their land.  The city of Jerusalem and the great temple within its gates were ruined.  No longer able to worship there as their ancestors had done, the Jews were forced to live in a faraway pagan culture that knew nothing of their God.

Only many years later were the surviving exiles and their children allowed to return home at last.  the books of Ezra and Nehemiah report what happened upon their arrival in Judah.

Not surprisingly, those who were serious about their faith made it their priority to rebuild the temple so they could worship there again.  They wept and shouted with joy at its restoration.  Having been deprived so long of the freedom to worship God as he had instructed them, they had learned to treasure their sacred assemblies in the house of the Lord (see Ezr 3:1-13).

These ancient events illustrate why the Catholic Church requires attendance at Mass on Sundays and certain annual holy days.  Worship is a primary duty owed to God by his creatures, who receive from him not only their very existence, but every other good gift as well.  Worship is also a privilege, a precious opportunity to encounter the great King of the universe who loves his people beyond all telling.

The ancient Jews who recognized this awesome duty and privilege made every effort to come to the temple to offer their sacrifices of grain and animals.  How much more, then, should Catholics be eager to attend Mass, where the glorious sacrifice of the Lamb of God himself is offered on the altar (see Heb 9:13-14)!

In the time of Moses, God had commanded his people “to keep holy the [weekly] sabbath day” by setting it apart for worship and rest (see Ex 20:8-11).  The Church now applies what we might call that “Sabbath principle” to Sundays and holy days of obligation, when Mass attendance is an obligation.  Just as under the Old Covenant God required proper observance of the Sabbath, under the New Covenant the Church requires proper observance on Sunday, “the Lord’s day” (Rv 1:10), the day of Resurrection.  In fact, among the formal “precepts” (rules) of the Church, this one is the very first.  (See also “What Does the Church Teach About Work on Sundays?”

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Ex 20:8-11  •  Ez 3:1-13  •  Neh 1-13  •  Heb 9:13-14  •  Rv 1:10
General: Dt 5:12-15  •  2 Chr 36:21  •  Ps 27:4; 69:10; 84:1-13; 122:1-9  •  Mt 28:1  •  Mk 1:21; 2:27-28  •  Jn 20:19  •  Acts 2:42-46  •  1 Cor 11:17  •  Heb 10:1-25; 12:22-23
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 2042-2043  •  2168-2195

Nehemiah was a Jewish layman who was devoted to God and who longed to see God’s law kept by his people.  Through Moses, the Lord had commanded the ancient Israelites “to keep holy the sabbath day” — that is, to set aside a particular day each week especially for worship and rest (see Ex 20:8-11).  So Nehemiah rebuked the residents of Jerusalem for treating this sacred day like any other by working at their normal business (see Neh 13:15-22).

Scripture suggests that a regular day of rest is actually part of the “rhythm” of creation.  In the poetic language of Genesis, God himself is pictured as “resting” on the seventh day (Saturday) after creating the world, an example we are to imitate (see Gn 2:1-3; Ex 20:11).  Just as importantly, the Lord insists that we should give the same privilege of rest to family members, employees, guests, and even laboring animals (see Ex 20:10; 23:13).

Today the Church continues to call us to a weekly Sabbath.  But in honor of Jesus’ resurrection on a Sunday, this first day of the week is now our time for rest and worship — what the early Christians named “the Lord’s day” (see Acts 20:7; 1 Cor 16:2; Rv 1:10).

Those who take the Sunday Sabbath seriously have found it a welcome respite.  In a society often driven by a compulsion to work, produce, and succeed, a weekly day when we stop all that (“Sabbath” comes from a Hebrew word meaning “to cease”) provides a humbling reminder: We’re not the ones who keep the world turning.  God is.

What should we avoid doing on the Sabbath?  “On Sundays and other holy days of obligation,” the Catechism teaches, “the faithful are to refrain from engaging in work or activities that hinder the worship owed to God, the joy proper to the Lord’s Day, the performance of the works of mercy, and the appropriate relaxation of mind and body (cf. CIC, can. 1247)” (2185).

Isn’t work on Sunday sometimes unavoidable?  The Catechism continues: “Family needs or important social service can legitimately excuse from the obligation of Sunday rest. [But the] faithful should see to it that legitimate excuses to not lead to habits prejudicial to religion, family life and health” (2185).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Gn 2:1-3  •  Ex 20:8-11; 23:12  •  Neh 13:15-22  •  Acts 20:7  •  1 Cor 16:2  •  Rv 1:10
General: Ex 23:12; 31:15-17  •  Lv 16:29-31; 23:3, 24, 26-38  •  Dt 5:12-15  •  Is 56:2; 58:13-14  •  Mt 12:5; 28:1  •  Mk 1:21; 2:27-28; 3:4; 16:1-2  •  Lk 24:1  •  Jn 7:23; 9:14, 16; 20:1  •  Acts 2:42-46  •  Heb 4:9
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 345-49  •  2042  •  2168-2195

When Ezra the priest led his people in confession of their sins as a nation, the resulting list of wrongdoing was extensive: idolatry, rebellion, disobedience, pride, ingratitude, stubbornness, murder, injustice, and more.  Again and again, God extended them mercy; again and again, they slide back into sin.  If God hadn’t been long-suffering, the people would have perished many times over (see Neh 9:1-37).

Today, God’s people receive bountiful graces through our Lord Jesus Christ that weren’t available in Ezra’s time.  Most importantly, we have the sacraments of the Church to make us holy.  Yet even though such sacraments as Baptism and Reconciliation cleanse us of sin, we are still left with “concupiscence” — a certain weakness of the soul that inclines us to sin, so that the road to holiness is a continual struggle (see also “What is Original Sin?”).

Consequently, Scripture confirms, the Church is composed not just of saints in the making, but also sinners.  We see this reality most indisputably in certain parables of Jesus about the kingdom of heaven (the Church).  In the parable of the wheat and the weeds, for example, Jesus teaches that both will grow together until harvest time, the final judgment (see Mt 13:24-30; compare Mt 3:12).  He also compares the Church to a fishnet that draws good and bad fish, which must be separated, but not until the end (see Mt 13:47-50).  From the very beginning, the Church has been a mixed bag: Even the thief and traitor Judas was one of the apostles, chosen by Jesus himself (see Mt 10:1, 4; Mk 3:14; Jn 6:70-71; Acts 1:17).

Since we too are sinners, we must not let the presence of other sinners in the Church scandalize us.  The good news is that God’s mercy in Christ is extended to us all.  For that reason, we should maintain a lively hope for the salvation even of those whose sins disturb us most (see Rom 2:1-8; 5:8, 19-21).  In the meantime, only God knows who will finally end up as “wheat” and who as “weeds.”  We must leave it to him to sort us out (see Mt 13:28-30).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Neh 9:1-37  •  Mt 3:12, 10:1, 4; 13:24-30, 47-50  •  Mk 3:14  •  Jn 6:70-71  •  Acts 1:17  •  Rom 2:1-8; 5:8, 19-21
General: Mt 7:14, 21-13; 9:38; 24:10  •  Lk 13:23-24  •  Acts 20:17, 28, 30  •  Rom 14:10-12  •  1 Cor 3:1-4; 5:1-2; 11:21 (compare 1:2)  •  2 Cor 11:2-4; 12:20-21 (compare 1:1)  •  Gal 3:1-4; 4:9-20; 5:1-7  •  2 Tm 2:15-20  •  Rv 2:4-3:8
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 671-672  •  769  •  823-829  •  867  •  2030

One day as the Jewish general Judas Maccabeus and his men were burying comrades fallen in battle, they discovered that the slain soldiers had been secretly practicing idolatry (see 2 Mc 12:39-40).  “Turning to supplication,” Scripture says, “they prayed that the sinful deed might be fully blotted out” (2 Mc 12:42).  Then Judas took up a collection for an expiatory sacrifice for them at the temple.  “In doing this, he acted in a very excellent and noble way…. Thus he made atonement for the dead that they might be freed from this sin” (2 Mc 12:43, 46).

Why did the ancient Jews pray for the dead?  For the same reason they prayed for the living:  It was an act of fraternal charity.  They recognized that the departed needed their help to be cleansed of their sins.  And they were confident that such spiritual works would benefit those who had died, just as it would have benefited someone who was still living.

The first Christians, who were Jews, maintained this “excellent and noble” practice.  For example, St. Paul prayed for a friend named Onesiphorus, who was apparently deceased (see 2 Tm 1:16-18).  The apostle also noted, without objection, that the Corinthian Christians were being “baptized for the dead” (1 Cor 15:29).  Though we know nothing more about that ancient rite, it almost certainly would have included prayers, and early believers apparently assumed that it would help the departed in some way.

Not surprisingly, then, many inscriptions on ancient Christian tombs ask the living to intercede for those buried within.  Clearly, from earliest times the Church has offered prayers and sacrifices for the faithful departed — especially the most valuable sacrifice of all, the Eucharistic sacrifice.

Some Christians object to praying for the dead.  For those who are in heaven, they insist, our prayers are unnecessary.  And for those who are in hell, our prayers are useless.

But there are faulty assumptions here.  First, most people who go to heaven still require purification after they die before they are ready to live with God forever (see “Is Purgatory in the Bible?”).  Our prayers can help in that process.  Second, we don’t know for sure who is in hell, so we should still pray in hope for even the worst of sinners.

In short, charity demands that we should pray for the dead.  And humility demands that we should ask others to pray for us when our day comes to depart this life.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: 2 Mc 12:39-40, 42-43, 46  •  1 Cor 15:29  •  2 Tm 1:16-18
General: Phil 1:3-11  •  Col 1:9-12  •  2 Thes 1:11  •  Heb 11:39-40; 13:18  •  Jas 5:16
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 1030-1032  •  1474-1477

The writer of 2 Maccabees praises the offering of prayers and sacrifices for the dead (see 2 Mc 12:38-46).  Why do the departed need such assistance from us?  So that their sins “might be fully blotted out” (2 Mc 12:42).

The final destiny of the redeemed is to live in heaven eternally with God, where “we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is” (1 Jn 3:2).  Since God is holy, to be like him we, too, must be holy (see Mt 5:48).  Without that holiness, “no one will see the Lord” (Heb 12:14), for “nothing unclean will enter” the glory of heaven. (Rv 21:27).

Nevertheless, few people, even among devout Christians, are fully cleansed of sin and its effects when they die.  And God will not reject any penitent sinner, even one who has been notoriously wicked yet repents at the last moment before death (see Lk 23:39-43).  How, then, can we enter heaven immediately at death if we aren’t yet perfected in holiness?

St. John tells us that everyone who hopes to be holy as God is holy, and to see him at last face-to-face, “makes himself pure, as he is pure” (1 Jn 3:3).  That process of purification begins in this life as we submit in faith to the dealings of God that help to make us whole.  “Purgatory” is simply the name given to that process of purification as it continues after death.  (Like “the Holy Trinity,” “purgatory” is a term not occurring in Scripture; but the reality it refers to is implied by scriptural truths.)

God doesn’t purify us instantly in this life by waving a magic wand, bypassing the cooperation of our free will.  So we shouldn’t expect him to do so at our death, either.  And since his work to heal us of the effects of sin is usually painful now — just as surgery for our bodily health is painful — the purgatorial process will likely be painful as well.

The traditional image of cleansing purgatorial fire comes from such biblical passages as 1 Corinthians 3:11-15, which speaks of those who “will be saved, but only as through fire” (3:15).  The Bible also speaks of God’s holiness in this regard as “a consuming fire” (Heb 12:29).  Yet just as the physician’s cauterizing fire burns in order to heal, so does any pain we might experience in purgatory.  In the end, it is a work of God’s mercy.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: 2 Mc 12:38-46  •  Mt 5:48  •  Lk 23:39-43  •  1 Cor 3:11-15  •  Heb 12:14, 29  •  1 Jn 3:2-3  •  Rv 21:27
General: Lv 11:44; 19:2  •  Dr 4:24  •  Mal 3:2-4  •  Mt 5:48  •  2 Cor 7:11  •  1 Pt 1:16
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 1030-1032  •  1472

Job, a “blameless and upright man” (Jb 1:1) used to offer sacrifices regularly to the Lord for each of his sons (see Jb 1:5).  In this way he hoped to offer his own sacrificial acts on their behalf, trusting that God would credit his good deeds to their benefit.  A similar intention is involved the Catholic practice of indulgences.

The life of each person who is in Christ — whether on earth, in purgatory, or in heaven — is joined together through him with the lives of all the others, forming a supernatural unity, the “body [of Christ] …. If [one] part suffers, all the parts suffer with it; if one part is honored, all the parts share its joy” (1 Cor 12:12, 26).

A Christian who seeks to be purified of sin by God’s grace is thus not alone.  The holiness of other believers — their merits, which have value because of their union with Christ’s merits — can profit him spiritually.  The spiritual goods of this “communion of saints,” as the Church calls it, is a treasury that includes the infinite merits of Christ himself, as well as the prayers, sacrifices, and other good works of our Lady and all of the saints.

When Catholics obtain an indulgence, the Church, through the power of “binding and loosing” sins that Christ has given her (see Mt 18:18; Jn 20:23), intervenes on behalf of individual Christians, opening for them this treasury of merits.  What exactly does an indulgence accomplish?  It is “a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven” (Paul VI, apostolic constitution, Indulgentiarum doctrina, Norm 1) (Catechism 1471).

Sin has a double consequence: damage to our relationship with God (guilt), and damage to the order he has established.  Through the sacraments of Baptism and Reconciliation, we receive forgiveness in Christ, a healing of our relationship with God that takes away our guilt.  Nevertheless, every sin also involves a disordered love that spiritually and morally disfigures us and the world around us, leading to temporal punishment.

Even after we receive God’s forgiveness, this second kind of damage must be repaired through acts of penance and charity.  Scriptural examples of this reality abound: For example, God forgave David his sin of adultery with Bathsheba, but the king still had to endure penitentially the chastising consequences of his son’s death (see 2 Sm 12:13-14).  Indulgences can assist Christians in this reparative process, which is called “satisfaction.” (See also “Where Is Penance Found in the Bible?”)

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  2 Sm 12:13-14  •  Jb 1 :1,5  •  Mt 18:18  •  Jn 20:23  •  1 Cor 12:12, 26
General:  Gn 3:16-19  •  Ex 32:30  •  Dt 32:48-52  •  Mt 16:19, 24  •  2 Cor 1:5-7; 2:5  •  Phil 3:10  •  Col 1:24
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  1471-1479  •  1498

When the Jewish general Judas Maccabeus leads the resistance against the Greek occupation of their country, he tells his soldiers about “a dream, a kind of vision, worthy of belief” (2 Mc 15:11).  In this vision, the general saw Onias, a former high priest who has died, “praying with outstretched arms for the whole Jewish community” (2 Mc 15:12).  Then he saw “God’s prophet Jeremiah, who loves his brethren and fervently prays for his people and their holy city” (2 Mc 15:14).  In part through the assistance of these two Old Testament saints, the Jewish fighters win their battle.

The angel Raphael tells the couple Tobit and Sara: “When you … prayed, it was I who presented and read the record of your prayer before the Glory of the Lord” (Tb 12:12).  Then the angel reveals that God sent him to heal them in answer to their prayer (see Tb 12:14).

The New Testament displays similar scenes.  Jesus’ parable of Lazarus the beggar (see Lk 16:19-31) assumes that the deceased man is aware of those still living, is concerned with them, and wants to pray for them.  In St. John’s Revelation, the Christian martyrs in heaven know what is happening on earth, and they pray to God to accomplish justice there.  In addition, both the saints and the angels in heaven bring to God’s throne “the prayers of the holy ones” (see Rv 6:9-11; 5:6-8; 8:3-4).

In such passages, we find the saints and angels mediating before God for believers on earth, either interceding or otherwise assisting them.  (In the parable, even someone in hell is attempting to do so, if unsuccessfully.)  Does this contradict St. Paul’s statement that “there is … one mediator between God and the human race, / Christ Jesus” (1 Tm 2:5)?  No, because the apostle wasn’t excluding the participation of others in Christ’s mediating role.

In fact, whenever Christians pray for one another, whether in heaven or on earth, they are doing just that.  In a similar way, Jesus is the “chief” Shepherd of his flock (see Jn 10:11-16; 1 Pt 5:4), yet he assigns lesser shepherds to take part in this ministry (see Jn 21:15-17; Eph 4:11).

Catholics ask the saints and angels for their help, then, for the same reason they ask Christians on earth to pray for them and assist them in other ways: It has pleased God to make us interdependent as members of Christ’s Body (see 1 Cor 12:12-27).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Tb 12:12, 14  •  2 Mc 15:11-12, 14  • Lk 16:19-31  •  Jn 10:11-16; 21:15-17  •  1 Cor 12:12-27  •  Eph 4:11  •  1 Tm 2:5  •  1 Pt 5:4  •  Rv 6:9-11; 5:6-8; 8:3-4
General:  Jer 15:1  •  Lk 15:10  •  1 Cor 4:9  •  Eph 3:2  •  Heb 11:1-12:1
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  946-948  •  954-962  •  2673-2679  •  2683

If God is all-loving, all-powerful, and all-wise, why does he allow evil —  especially in he lives of holy people?  A series of personal calamities provoke Job to ponder that question.  In the end, he confesses that he simply cannot answer it:  “I have dealt with great things that I do not understand, / things too wonderful for me, which I cannot know” (Jb 42:3).

For Christians, too, evil is a problem we cannot figure out.  Nevertheless, our faith provides a number of clues that help us begin to explore the mystery.

First, we must recognize that much evil has come about because of sin.  Creatures with a free will — both humans and angels — have chosen to turn away from God, the Source of life, love, joy, and wisdom (see Rom 3:12, Jude 6).  In doing so, they have fallen into death, selfishness, misery, and ignorance, bringing great ruin to the world in the process (see also “What Is Original Sin?”).

God allows evil in part because it is a necessary risk of creating sons and daughters who are free to love or not to love.  And he recognizes that free, loving creatures are such a great good, they are more than worth the risk.

At the same time, no matter how terrible the evil caused by sin, God is great enough, and wise enough, to bring about through that evil an even greater good (see Gn 50:20; Rom 8:28).  The resurrection of Christ is in fact a glorious example of how God can create joy from sorrow, beauty from horror, victory from defeat, and life from death (see 1 Pt 1:3-5).

Why doesn’t God bring all evildoers to an end even now, since they have already had their chance to do good?  Because of his mercy, he delays the final overthrow of the wicked to allow every possibility for their redemption (see 2 Pt 3:9-10).  In the meantime, he can use the suffering caused by evil to purify us (see 1 Pt 1:6-9).

Finally, we must remember that God is not oblivious to the agonies caused by evil.  By joining his divine nature to our vulnerable human nature in Christ, he actually made himself capable of suffering with us and for us (see Is 53:1-12).  In fact, our Lord has experienced the pain and horror of evil to a depth we ourselves will never fully know.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Gn 50:20  •  Jb 42:3  •  Is 53:1-12  •  Rom 3:12; 8:28  •  Jude 6  •  1 Pt 1:3-9  •  2 Pt 3:9-10
General:  Gn 3:1-24  •  Is 14:12-15; 61:1-3  •  Rom 8:18  •  Phil 2:5-8  •  Col 2:13-15  •  Heb 2:18
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  309-314  •  324  •  385-421

The story of Job tells how Satan asked God for a chance to test Job (see Jb 1:6-12).  Are we to understand this is a symbolic reference to evil?  Or do demons have a real existence as personal, but not human, beings?

Scripture, Tradition, and the Church’s magisterium all consistently affirm that God has in fact created angelic beings to serve him (for biblical references, see “What Does the Church Teach About Angels?”).  But some of the angels made a radical and irrevocable decision to reject God and his reign (see Jude 6).  Though created good by God, they became evil through their own choice.  So they were cast from his presence in heaven (see Lk 10:18), and they now attempt to seduce human beings away from God as well (see Gn 3:1-7).

The leader of these fallen angels (or demons) has many names in Scripture: the evil one (1 Jn 5:18-19); the devil (from the Greek word meaning “the one who throws himself across the divine plan” — Mt 4:1); “the ruler of the world” (Jn 14:30); Satan (in Hebrew, “adversary, accuser” — Jb 1:6); the serpent or dragon (Rv 12:9).  The name Lucifer (from the Latin for “light-bearer” — Is 14:12-15, footnote) traditionally refers to the devil’s radiant angelic beauty before he fell.

The great power and intelligence that belongs to angels by their nature, now perverted for wicked purposes by the diabolical rebellion against God, allows the demons to do great evil in the world.  Nevertheless, as mere creatures they are by no means God’s equal, and in the end their utter defeat is sure through Jesus Christ (see Heb 2:14-15; see also “Why Does God Allow Evil?”).

In the meantime, except perhaps in the case of a genuine demonic possession (which is rare), human beings cannot be forced by Satan against their will (see Jas 4:7).  His tactics are to tempt, deceive, and accuse (see Mt 4:1-11; Rv 12:9-10; Zec 3:1-2).  For that reason, our Lord has taught us to pray, “Deliver us from the evil one” (Mt 6:13).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Gn 3:1-7  •  Jb 1:6-12  •  Is 14:12-15  •  Zec 3:1-2  •  Mt 4:1-11; 6:13  •  Lk 10:18  •  Jn 14:30  •  Heb 2:14-15  •  Jas 4:7  •  1 Jn 5:18-19  •  Jude 6  •  Rv 12:9-10
General:  Jb 2:4-5  •  Wis 2:24  •  Dn 10:10-14  •  Mt 4:24; 8:16, 28-34; 9:32-33; 12:22; 16:23; 25:41  •  Lk 11:14-26; 13:16; 22:3, 31  •  Jn 13:2, 27; 14:30  •  Acts 5:3; 10:38; 16:16; 26:18  •  Rom 16:20  •  1 Cor 5:5; 7:5; 10:13  •  1 Tm 1:20; 3:6-7; 5:15  •  2 Tm 2:26  •  1 Pt 5:8-9  •  1 Jn 3:8-10  •  Jude 9  •  Rv 12:1-9, 13-18; 20:1-3, 7-10
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  391-395  •  397  •  2850-2854  •  2864

Job’s contemporaries would have immediately recognized the meaning of some of his behaviors that seem strange to us today: tearing his cloak, shaving off his hair, prostrating himself on the ground, sitting amidst ashes (see Jb 1:20-21; 2:8).  Many ancient cultures interpreted all these actions as gestures of mourning.  they were an exterior form of expression for an interior grief.

Sometimes the mourning ritual reflected sorrow over personal loss, as it did at first in Job’s case.  He had just received terrible news about several calamities, including the sudden death of all his children (see Jb 1:13-19).

At other times, these were gestures of remorse — that is, of sorrow over sin.  In this case, the wearing of sackcloth and ashes in particular became a common ritual of penance before God and petition for his forgiveness and help (see Dn 9:3).  Job later used ashes in this way as well, when he felt sorrow for questioning God and decided to “repent in dust and ashes” (Jb 42:6).

The Catholic Church maintains a token of this moving ancient custom as an element of the rite for Ash Wednesday.  On this day, the first day of the penitential season of Lent (see “Why Do Catholics Observe Lent?”), Catholics express remorse for their sins.  The blessed palm branches used in the festive Palm (or Passion) Sunday procession of the year before have been dried and burned, and the ashes are then blessed.  Joy gives way to sorrow, then, as the priest imposes the ashes on each penitent’s forehead — a form of sacramental (see “Why Do Catholics Use Holy Water?”).

Why are ashes such an appropriate expression of penance?  Because they are “dirty.”  They humble us by reminding us that however proud we may be of ourselves, our accomplishments, and our possessions, in the end (as the words of the Ash Wednesday rite recall), we are dirt, and to dirt we shall return (see Gn 3:19).  At the same time, having dirty faces reminds us that sin stains us, and we need to be cleansed of it through God’s grace (see Ps 51:3-5, 9, 11-12).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Gn 3:19  •  Jn 1:13-21; 2:8; 42:6  •  Ps 51:3-5, 9, 11-12  •  Dn 9:3
General:  Gn 37:34; 44:13  •  Jgs 11:35  •  1 Sm 4:12  •  2 Sm 1:2, 11; 13:31  •  1 Kgs 21:27  •  2 Kgs 2:12; 5:7-8; 6:30; 11:14; 22:11  •  2 Chr 23:13; 34:19, 27  •  Est 4:1-8  •  Ps 102:10  •  Is 58:5; 61:2-3  •  Jer 6:26; 25:34; 36:24  •  Ez 26:16  •  Jl 2:12-13  •  Jon 3:6-10  •  Mt 11:21  •  Lk 10:13
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  540  •  1430-1439  •  1667-1671  •  2043

The great theme of divine judgment runs throughout the Book of Job (see, for example, Job 34:21-23, 25).  God alone is competent to render such a judgment, since he alone sees all things completely and as they truly are.  Only he is powerful enough to enforce a sentence on the wicked.  And only he is perfectly holy and righteous, so his judgment will be utterly just.

We must live soberly in light of that reality, “for he forewarns no man of his time / to come before God in judgment” (Job 34:23).  And what exactly is a man’s designated “time”?  The moment of his death.

“It is appointed that human beings die once, and after this the judgment” (Heb 9:27).  The Catholic Church affirms the reality that each human being possesses an eternal soul, which is separated from the body at death (see Jas 2:26).  In this particular judgment, each individual’s eternal destiny is determined by a divine examination of his or her life.

Those who have died in friendship with God will go on to complete any purification still necessary in preparation for their entrance into heaven (see “Is Purgatory in the Bible?” and “What Does the Church Teach About Heaven?”).  Those who have died outside of friendship with God will spend eternity apart from him in hell (see “How Can a Loving God Send People to Hell?”).

Yet there is more.  Jesus affirmed, as the Jewish prophets and St. John the Baptist had done, that a universal judgment is also to come at the end of time (see Dn 7:10; Mt 3:7-12; 25:31-46).  As God the Son, Jesus himself will return in power and glory to serve as the divine judge in this general (or last) judgment, when our bodies will rise to be reunited with our souls and to share in their judgment and eternal fate (see Mt 26:64; Jn 5:26-29; 1 Cor 15:35-44; see also “How Will the World End?”).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Jb 34:21-23, 25  •  Dn 7:10  •  Mt 3:7-12; 25:31-46; 26:64  •  Jn 5:26-29  •  1 Cor 15:35-44  •  Heb 9:27  •  Jas 2:26
General:  Dt 32:36  •  Jgs 11:27  •  1 Sm 2:10; 24:13  •  Ps 1:5; 7:7-10; 9:16-18; 50:1-6; 51:5-6; 75:1-11; 82:8; 94:1-11; 96:9-13; 98:7-9; 110:6  •  Is 2:4; 11:1-5; 33:22  •  Ez 34:17, 20, 22; 35:11  •  Dn 12:1-4  •  Jl 2:1-10; 3:3-4; 4:1-2  •  Mal 3:19  •  Mt 5:22; 7:1-5; 11:20-24; 12:32  •  Mk 12:38-44  •  Lk 12:1-3  •  Jn 3:18-21; 5:22; 6:39-40; 12:48  •  Rom 2:16  •  1 Cor 3:12-15; 4:5  •  Heb 10:26-31
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  327  •  677-682  •  1020-1022  •  1038-1041  •  1051-1054  •  1059

David speaks in a psalm of God’s intimate and abiding love for him, even before he was born.  He prays: “You formed my inmost being; / you knit me in my mother’s womb…. / My very self you knew; / my bones were not hidden from you, / When I was being made in secret” (Ps 139:13-15).  Other biblical passages confirm the truth that the child in the womb, at whatever stage of development, is a fully human person — known and loved by God, sharing the great dignity and value of every human person created by God in his image (see Gn 1:26-27).

The Bible condemns murder, the wrongful taking of innocent human life (see Ex 20:13).  Since children in the womb are regarded as human persons in Scripture, killing them is included in this prohibition.  In addition, we should note that Jesus shows special concern for children because of their vulnerability and is explicit in his condemnation of those who would hurt these “little ones” (see Mt 18:1-6; 19:13-15).  So the Church, in keeping with his example and with the consistent teaching of ancient Scripture and Tradition, condemns abortion as a particularly heinous crime.

Infanticide takes place when an infant is intentionally killed or allowed to die through neglect, often because the child suffers from some disability.  Embryonic stem cell research, however noble may be its medical objectives, involves the destruction of unborn children at the embryonic stage.  Consequently, the Church condemns these practices as gravely immoral on the same grounds she opposes murder in any form.  (Other forms of stem cell research that do not require the destruction of human embryos are acceptable.)

For similar reasons, the Church condemns human cloning.  This practice involves the manipulation and “manufacturing” of living embryos for commercial or other purposes, as if they were commodities to be used by others rather than children who share the innate dignity of all human beings.

Finally, the Church insists that the human right to life of the innocent, and to the dignity of all, should be defended in civil law.  This right is not merely a religious matter, but a part of the universal natural law that should be recognized by all civilized societies.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Gn 1:26-27  •  Ex 20:13  •  Ps 139:13-15  •  Mt 18:1-6; 19:13-15
General:  2 Mc 7:22-23  •  Job 12:10; 31:15  •  Ps 51:7; 82:3-4  •  Prv 24:11  •  Is 44:2; 49:1, 5  •  Jer 1:5; 7:6  •  Lk 1:15, 41-44  •  Acts 17:28  •  Gal 1:15  •  1 Jn 3:15
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  362-368  •  2270-2275  •  2319  •  2322-2323

The Psalms formed the prayer book and hymnal of the ancient Jewish people.  Psalm 136 has twenty-six lines, each one ending with the refrain: “God’s love endures forever!”  This and similar psalms, which were chanted responsively, are the forerunners of several popular forms of repetitive Catholic prayer.

In light of such biblical examples, it’s puzzling how some Christians claim that repetitious prayers are condemned by Jesus.  They quote his words: “In praying, do not babble like the pagans, who think that they will be heard because of their many words” (Mt 6:7; the King James Version, still popular among many Protestants, refers to “vain repetitions”).  But Jesus was a faithful Jew who took part in weekly Sabbath worship at the synagogue (see Lk 4:16).  So he himself would have prayed psalms with repetitious elements.

In both Jewish and Catholic worship and prayer, repetition simply indicates emphasis on the importance of a thought.  Repetition, then, isn’t a bad thing in itself.  Rather, Jesus is condemning empty repetition, not all forms of repetition.  The Greek word battalogeo here means “to repeat idly,” or “meaningless and mechanically repeated phrases,” as in pagan (not Jewish) modes of prayer.  Our Lord is thus rejecting prayers uttered without the proper reverence for God.

As usual, Jesus is concerned with the inner dispositions of the worshiper (see Mt 7:21-23; 15:8-9), not with mere outward appearance.  “The Lord looks into the heart” (1 Sm 16:7).

The same is true of formal prayers — that is, prayers whose words have a set form.  Again, some Christians think that Jesus’ words quoted above condemn such prayers.  But Jesus himself would have used formal prayers in the synagogue.  In fact, after warning against babbling, our Lord goes on to provide us one of the most famous formal prayers of all: the Our Father (see Mt 6:9-13).

Actually, all Christians probably make use of spiritual songs whose words have a set form.  Since many of these songs are prayers addressed to God, then all of these Christians in fact use formal prayers, just as Catholics do.

Formal prayer allows groups of believers to pray in unison, not just in a particular gathering but also all over the world and even across generations — an important expression of the unity of our faith.  At the same time, formal prayers, especially those taken from sacred Scripture and Tradition, shape our thoughts and desires as we pray, making them more in keeping with God’s revelation.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  1 Sm 16:7  •  Ps 136  •  Mt 6:7-13; 21-23; 15:8-9  •  Lk 4:16
General:  Is 1:11-15  •  Dn 3:51-90
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  2625  •  2678  •  2700-2704

“The Lord is just and loves just deeds,” the psalmist says, and “the upright shall see his face” (Ps 11:7).  These words summarize the Catholic view (which is also the biblical view) of salvaiton: Because God is just and loves justice, if we hope to “see his face” — that is, to live with him in friendship forever — then we ourselves must become “upright,” as he is.  The First Letter of Peter puts it this way: “Be holy yourselves in every aspect of your conduct, for it is written, ‘Be holy because I [am] holy’ ” (1 Pt 1:15-16).

How do we become holy?  Catholics agree with other Christians that we cannot save ourselves, and we cannot earn heaven on our own.  Rather, we are saved by grace — God’s merciful aid, given to enable us to become holy as he is holy.  It’s an absolutely unmerited, free gift of God, made possible through our Redeemer, Jesus Christ, and his atoning death on the cross for us.

Certainly, our faith in Christ’s power to transform us is essential to our salvation by God’s grace.  But a mere intellectual assent to the truths of the gospel is not enough.  Scripture insists that faith of itself, if it does not have works, is dead (see Jas 2:14-26).

When we are justified (literally, “made just”) by God, he doesn’t just declare us righteous as a kind of legal fiction so that we can escape eternal punishment.  Divine justification actually wipes out sin and provides a supernatural, renewing infusion of his power..  By cooperating with grace, we become like God, fit to live with him forever.

In this way, good works, and the transformation of character they contribute to and reflect, are indeed necessary for salvation.  God rewards the good works we do, works that he himself has made possible (see Mt 16:27; 25:31-46).  “To the obedient,” he promises, “I will show the salvation of God” (Ps 50:23).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Ps 11:7; 50:23  •  1 Pt 1:15-16  •  Jas 2:14-26  •  Mt 16:27; 25:31-46
General:  Mt 5:20; 7:16-27  •  Lk 14:13-14  •  Jn 3:36; 6:27-29  •  Acts 3:19; 10:31, 35  •  Rom 2:5-13  •  1 Cor 3:8-9; 6:11; 15:10  •  Eph 2:8-10  •  Phil 2:12-13; 3:11-14  •  Heb 5:9  •  Jas 1:22; 2:14-26  •  1 Pt 1:17; 2:7  •  1 Jn 1:7-9  •  Rv 22:12
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  26  •  142-147  •  150  •  155  •  161  •  176  •  180  •  183  •  222-227  •  654  •  824  •  846  •  1810  •  1987-1992  •  1999  •  2008-2011  •  2023-2024

Psalm 42-43 sings of the human heart’s deepest longing: “As the deer longs for steams of water, / so my soul longs for you, O God. / My being thirsts for God, the living God.  / When can I go and see the face of God?” (Ps 42:2-3).

Even those who aren’t aware of such a longing — even those who don’t believe in God — yearn to see him, because he created them for this very purpose.  they may search for ultimate happiness in other places; they may mistake this deep desire as a longing for something else.  But in the end, only God himself will satisfy them.

Our desire for God in fact corresponds to his own desire for us.  Though we have broken our relationship with him through sin, he woos us to return from our faithlessness, and he delights in our love (see Hos 3:1-5; Zep 3:16-20).  If we repent and embrace his offer of reconciliation through his Son, Jesus Christ, we are called to a life of grace that transforms us into Christ’s own likeness (see 2 Cor 3:18).

The new life begins in the present world and continues beyond death if we die in God’s friendship.  Once we are perfected, it culminates in eternal joyous fellowship with the Most Holy Trinity: “We shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is” (1 Jn 3:2).

The “beatific vision,” as it’s called — the unending sign of God’s face that grants perfect blessedness — is the full and final union with him we know as “heaven.”  Such a communion of life and love with God, shared with all his angels and saints, defies description (see 1 Cor 2:9).  But Scripture speaks of this mystery in imagery that suggests its perfect goodness and glory: the Father’s house (see Jn 14:2-6); a river of life-giving water (see Rv 21:6; 22:1); the heavenly Jerusalem studded with gold and jewels (see Rv 21:1-4, 10-21); a crown (see 1 Cor 9:25); radiant light (see Rv 21:23-25; 22:4-5); a wedding feast (see Rv 19:7-9).

The Christian hope of heaven anchors and transforms our lives even now, for “everyone who has this hope based on [God] makes himself pure, as he is pure” (1 Jn 3:3).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Ps 42-43:1-2  •  Hos 3:1-5  •  Zep 3:16-20  •  Jn 14:2-6  •  1 Cor 2:9; 9:25  •  2 Cor 3:18  •  1 Jn 3:2-3  •  Rv 19:7-9; 21:1-4, 6, 10-21, 23-25; 22:1, 4-5
General:  Is 65:17; 66:1, 22  •  Mt 5:8; 22:1-14; 25:21, 23, 34, 46  •  Rom 2:7; 6:22-23; 8:18-25  •  1 Cor 13:12  •  2 Cor 12:2-4  •  1 Pt 5:4  •  2 Pt 3:10-13  •  Rv 7:9-17; 21:1-27
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  325-326  •  1023-1029  •  1042-1050  • 1053

Some Christians have wondered why the Song of Songs is included in Scripture.  It never explicitly refers to God.  Instead, it’s poetry celebrating the love of a husband and wife: “My lover belongs to me and I to him” (Sg 6:3).

Since ancient times, however, Catholic interpreters have read this book in light of St. Paul’s insight that the marriage covenant is a sign of the everlasting covenant between Christ and his Church (see Eph 5:25-32).  As an inspired portrait of ideal human love, then, the Song of Songs also portrays the mutual love of God and his people, to be fully consummated at “the wedding feat of the Lamb” (Rv 19:9).

In Christ’s miracle at the wedding in Cana (see Jn 2:1-11), the Church sees his proclamation that the ancient institution of matrimony (see Gn 1:26-31; 2:18-25) has been raised to the level of a sacrament — an efficacious sign of God’s presence.  (In fact, in Ephesians 5:32, St. Paul uses the word “mystery” to refer to marriage, which in the Greek is also the word for “sacrament.”)  The other six sacraments are found in Scripture as well: Baptism, Reconciliation (also known as Confession or Penance), the Eucharist, Confirmation, Anointing of the Sick, and Holy Orders (the ordination of clergy).

In the list of biblical texts below, we find instances of all seven sacraments in the New Testament, as well as some Old Testament precedents.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Gn 1:26-31; 2:18-25  •  Sg 6:3  •  Jn 2:1-11  •  Eph 5:25-32  •  Rv 19:9
General:
Baptism — Mt 28:19  •  Mk 16:16  •  Jn 3:5  •  Acts 2:38; 16:15, 33; 18:8; 22:16  •  Rom 6:3-4  •  1 Cor 1:16; 6:11  •  Col 2:11-13  •  titus 3:5  •  1 Pt 3:21
Confirmation — Wis 9:17  •  Acts 8:14-19; 13:3; 19:1-6  •  2 Cor 1:21-22  •  Eph 1:13  •  Heb 6:1-2
Eucharist — Mt 26:26-28  •  Mk 14:22-24  •  Lk 22:19-20  •  Jn 6:47-66  •  1 Cor 10:16; 11:23-30
Reconciliation — Ex 32:20  •  Lv 19:20-22  •  Nm 5:6-7; 14:19-23; 17:11-13  •  Mt 16:19; 18:18  •  Lk 15:18-19  •  Jn 20:23  •  Acts 19:18  •  1 Cor 5:3-5 (with 2 Cor 2:6-11)  •  2 Cor 5:18-20  •  Jas 5:16  •  1 Jn 1:8-9
Anointing of the Sick — Mk 6:5, 12-13  •  Lk 13:13  •  Acts 9:17-18  •  1 Cor 12:9, 30  •  Jas 5:14-15
Holy Orders — Mt 18:18  •  Lk 10:16; 22:19; 24:47  •  Jn 13:20; 15:5  •  Acts 6:6; 15:2-6; 20:17, 28; 21:18  •  1 Tm 3:1-7; 4:14; 5:17  •  2 Tm 1:6  •  Ti 1:5-9  •  1 Pt 5:1
Matrimony — Mt 5:31-32; 19:1-9  •  Mk 10:2-12  •  Lk 16:18  •  Rom 7:2-3  •  1 Cor 7:1-24; 7:39  •  Heb 13:4  •  1 Pt 3:1-9

To contracept is to willfully exclude the possibility of a conception that could result from a sexual act.  The widespread practice of contraception in our day reflects the common attitude that children are more a burden than a blessing.  But that notion is utterly alien to Scripture.

In Psalms and Proverbs, for example, we hear a constant refrain about the great joy of being parents and grandparents, even many times over: “Children too are a gift from the Lord, / the fruit of the womb, a reward. / Like arrows in the hand of a warrior / are the children born in one’s youth. / Blessed are they whose quivers are full” (Ps 127:3-5).  “Grandchildren are the crown of old men” (Prv 17:6).  To biblical mothers and fathers, barrenness was not a convenience, but a curse (see Dt 28:18; Jb 15:34).

The constant teaching of the Catholic Church has been to prohibit contraception.  This prohibition was in fact taught by all major Christian groups until 1930.  Spacing of children or limiting of children for serious reasons is permitted, according to Pope Paul VI’s 1968 encyclical Humanae Vitae and Catholic moral teaching.  But this limitation must come about through natural rather than artificial means (such as natural family planning, or NFP) so that the integrity of the marital sexual act is preserved — that is, so that the act remains open to the possibility of transmitting new life, which is part of its natural purpose.

One biblical text cited in support of this truth concerns the grave sin of Onan, who sought the physical pleasures of sexual acts while preventing the possibility that they might produce children: “Whenever he had relation with his brother’s widow, he wasted his seed on the ground, to avoid contributing offspring for his brother.  what he did greatly offended the Lord, and the Lord took his life too” (Gn 38:9-10).

Contraception is contrary to our sexual nature and the innate purposes for which God created it.  Every marital sexual act, then, must be open to the possibility of conception.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Gn 38:9-10  •  Dt 28:18  •  Ps 127:3-5  •  Prv 17:6  •  Jb 15:34
General:  Gn 1:27-28; 9:1; 17:6, 20; 28:3  •  Ex 23:26  •  Lv 26:9  •  Dt 7:14  •  1 Sm 1:4-16  •  Ps 128:3  •  Prv 30:16  •  1 Cor 7:5
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  1652-1654  •  2249  •  2349  •  2352  •  2366-2379  •  2398-2399

When the Song of Songs speaks of marital commitment as a love that “deep waters cannot quench … nor floods sweep …  away” (Sg 8:7), it reminds us of an important reality to which the Catholic Church bears witness: A valid, sacramental marriage between two baptized Christians is permanent.  No power on earth can dissolve it.  It remains until the death of one of the spouses.

This may be an unpopular position to take in our culture, but it’s based on the explicit teaching of Jesus.  He said with regard to married couples: “They are no longer two, but one flesh.  Therefore, what God has joined together, no human being must separate” (Mt 19:6).  For this reason, the Catholic Church opposes divorce.

Jesus went on to say that those who have been validly married commit adultery if they attempt to remarry by taking another partner (see Mt 19:9).  Why?  Because they are still married to the original spouse.

Nevertheless, Jesus noted a special case: When a first marriage is “unlawful,” he said, the ban on remarriage doesn’t apply, because the first union was not valid (see Mt 19:9).  A true, “lawful” marriage didn’t exist in the first place.

In this light, the Church recognizes that not all attempts at marriage are valid, even if they have been legally recognized by civil authorities.  Certain conditions invalidate attempts to marry.  For example, if a woman were forced to take vows against her will, or a man attempted to take his sister as wife, the resulting “marriage” would be invalid.

When the Church grants an annulment, therefore, it’s not providing a “Catholic Divorce.”  Rather, the Church is declaring an instance of the special case Jesus noted: Civil authorities, may have legally recognized a particular couple’s union, but for one reason or another, a valid sacramental marriage was never present.  The individuals are free to marry.

The Old Testament distinction between a concubine and a wife is somewhat analogous to the Church’s distinction between civil and sacramental marriage (see Gn 21:10-14; Jgs 8:31; 1 Cor 7:15).  Even in the civil law of many societies, valid and invalid marriages are similarly distinguished.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Gn 21:10-14  •  Jgs 8:31  •  Sg 8:7  •  Mt 19:6, 9  •  1 Cor 7:15
General:  Gn 1:26-31; 2:18-25; 17:15-21; 21:12-20  •  Mal 2:14-16  •  Mt 5:31-32; 19:1-9  •  Mk 10:2-11  •  Lk 16:18  •  Rom 7:2-3  •  1 Cor 7:1-24, 39  •  Gal 4:21-31  •  Eph 5:2, 21-33  •  Heb 13:4  •  1 Pt 3:1-9
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  1534-1535  •  1601-1666 (especially 1629, 1650-1651)  •  2382-2386

The writer of Proverbs includes on the list of things “too wonderful” to understand this intriguing item: “the way of a man with a maiden” (Prv 30:19).  The biblical view of human sexuality affirms that it is indeed in many ways a mystery to be marveled at.  Despite the mystery, however, the Catholic Church affirms that certain essential truths about our sexual nature have been revealed to us by God, our Creator.

With regard to homosexual behavior, the Catechism (2357) teaches:

Basing itself on sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of great depravity (cf. Gn 19:1-29; Rom 1:24-27; 1 Cor 6:10; 1 Tm 1:10), tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered” (CDF, Persona Humana 8).  They are contrary to the natural law.  They close the sexual act to the gift of life.  They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity.  Under no circumstances can they be approved.

With regard to homosexual orientation, the Catechism (2358-2359) continues:

The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible.  This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial.  They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity.  Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.  These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

Homosexual persons are called to chastity.  By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

Given these truths, a homosexual union can never be equivalent to marriage.  God has naturally structured human sexuality to make man and woman complementary partners in transmitting life.  This sexual complementarity can only be expressed by the union of male and female, which makes possible the conjugal bond at the heart of marriage (see Gn 1:27-28; 2:18-24).  Same-sex union is thus contrary to the very nature of marriage.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Gn 1:27-28; 2:18-24; 19:1-29  •  Prv 30:18-19  •  Rom 1:24-27  •  1 Cor 6:10  •  1 Tm 1:10
General:  Mt 11:23-24; 16:24-25  •  Phil 3:8-11
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  369-372  •  383  •  1605  •  2331-2363  •  2392-2396  •  2520-2527  •  2529-2533

Many Christians declare: “Once saved, always saved!”  By this they mean that once a person confesses faith in Jesus Christ, he is “saved” from all God’s punishments for sin, including hell.  Whatever he may do for the rest of his life, he is guaranteed a place in heaven.

Catholics — and many other Christians as well — reject this teaching as unbiblical.  For example, there is this warning in the Book of Sirach: “Of forgiveness be not overconfident, / adding sin upon sin. / Say not: ‘Great is his mercy; / my many sins he will forgive.’ / For mercy and anger alike are with him; / upon the wicked alights his wrath” (Sir 5:5-7).

Some might object that this passage doesn’t apply to Christians; after all, Sirach is an Old Testament book that doesn’t even appear in Protestant Bibles.  Nevertheless, the New Testament echoes this warning to Christians:

For it is impossible in the case of those who have once been enlightened and tasted the heavenly gift and shared in the holy Spirit and tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, to bring them to repentance again, since they are recrucifying the Son of God for themselves and holding him up to contempt. [Heb 6:4-6, emphasis added]

At the same time, in speaking of severe trials ahead for his followers, Jesus predicts that “the love of many will grow cold.  But the one who perseveres to the end will be saved” (Mt 24:12-13).  Not the one who makes a one-time confession of faith, but the one who perseveres to the end.

To clarify further, we should note that “salvation” means much more than an initial experience of faith.  It’s a lifelong process, in this world and the next, which culminates — if we faithfully persevere — in perfect holiness and the vision of God. (See “Is Purgatory in the Bible? and “What Does the Church Teach About Heaven?”.)  After the “new birth,” St. Peter says, despite undergoing “various trials, … you attain the goal of [your] faith, the salvation of souls” (1 Pt 1:3, 6, 9).

So we don’t obtain our salvation one day and then “lose” it another.  Instead, for a lifetime we must “work out [our] salvation with fear and trembling” (Phil 2:12).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Sir 5:5-7  •  Mt 24:12-13  •  Phil 2:12  •  Heb 6:4-6  •  1 Pt 1:3, 6, 9
General:  Rom 13:11  •  2 Thes 2:3-5  •  Heb 10:26-29  •  1 Pt 1:3-5; 2:2-3
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  95  •  169  •  620  •  776  •  780  •  830  •  980  •  1129  •  1257  •  1696  •  1811  •  1889  •  2036  •  2090-92

Though people often speak of the “seven deadly sins,” the more accurate description is “seven capital vices.”  A vice is not the same thing as sin; rather, it is a habit that inclines us to sin.  Usually a vice is the result of repeated sinful actions of a particular kind, so that a truly “vicious” cycle appears: Sins lead to a habit, which in turn leads to more sins.

The word “capital” comes from the Latin term for “head”.  A capital vice is thus “head,” or chief, among other vices in the sense that it leads to others.  Though Scripture contains no explicit reference to seven particular vices as “capital,” we find numerous biblical warnings against these seven: pride, envy, sloth, lust, greed, gluttony, and anger.  The Wisdom Books especially — Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, and Sirach — address them repeatedly.

Pride, “the reservoir of sin” (Sir 10:13), is the habit of thinking of ourselves, and our qualities, more highly than we truly merit.  Envy is the sense of pain or misery indulged in when we see someone else prosper (see Wis 2:24).  Sloth (or acedia) is a kind of spiritual laziness that makes us reluctant to do good because it might cost us something (see Prv 12:24).

Lust is the inordinate desire for sexual pleasure that inclines us to see others as objects for our personal gratification (see Prv 6:25-29).  Greed (or covetousness or avarice) is an immoderate desire for material goods or worldly honors (see Ps 119:36).  Gluttony (or intemperance) is the excessive desire for, or use of, food and drink (see Prv 23:21).  Anger (or wrath) in this context refers to the tendency to become angry excessively or without just cause (see Ps 37:8).

The best way to cure a vice is to build the opposite habit through practice; this good habit is called a “virtue.”

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Ps 37:8; 119:36  •  Prv 6:25-29; 12:24; 23:21  •  Wis 2:24  •  Sir 10:13
General:  Ex 20:17  •  Prv 6:6-11; 12:27; 15:19; 16:18; 18:9; 19:24; 21:25-26; 22:13; 24:30-34; 27:4  •  Is 14:12-15  •  Heb 2:9  •  Rom 1:29; 12:11; 13:13  •  1 Cor 3:1-3; 5:11; 6:9-10; 10:6-8; 13:4-7  •  2 Cor 12:20  •  Gal 5:19-26  •  Eph 4:26-27, 31; 5:3-5  •  Col 3:5-8  •  1 Tm 3:1-7; 6:3-10  •  Jas 1:12-15; 3:14-16  •  1 Pt 2:1; 5:5  •  2 Pt 2:17-20  •  1 Jn 2:16
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  1607  •  1765  •  1768  •  1772  •  1774  •  1784  •  1865-1869  •  1876  •  2094  •  2259  •  2302  •  2317  •  2351  •  2514  •  2516  •  2534  •  2536  •  2538-2541  •  2553-2554  •  2728  •  2733  •  2755

The Book of Sirach recounts significant figures in ancient Israel’s history, many of whom, such as Moses, were associated with miracles (see Sir 45:2-3).  Many New Testament figures as well were reported by witnesses to work similar wonders — above all, of course, our Lord Jesus Christ and his apostles (see Acts 2:22; 5:12).

Such miracles in fact belong to the very fabric of the biblical story from beginning to end.  To dismiss them out of hand as impossible is to deny the foundations of the Christian faith.  As St. Paul insisted, a Christianity without miracles such as the resurrection of Christ is no Christianity at all.  It is “empty,” “false,” in “vain” (see 1 Cor 15:12-19).

Has science nevertheless disproved the possibility of miracles?  The Random House Dictionary of the English Language defines a “miracle” this way: “an effect or extraordinary event in the physical world that surpasses all known human or natural powers and is ascribed to a supernatural cause.”  Using that as a working definition, let’s look closer at the claim.

Science attempts to construct an accurate picture of the natural world.  Essential to its method are observation, hypothesis, and experimentation through controlled conditions.  Given this goal and method, how exactly would science go about disproving the possibility of miracles?

On a given occasion, of course, scientists might well be able to demonstrate that an extraordinary event can be accounted for by purely natural causes.  But how could they show that it is impossible for an event to have ever occurred in history that surpassed “all known human or natural powers” and had “a supernatural cause”?

First, scientists would have had to be present for observation at every event in history that has a claim to be miraculous.  That is not the case.  Second, they would need a hypothesis that reasonably accounts for every such event that has ever occurred.  They have no such hypothesis.  Finally, if an event should actually have a cause beyond nature (supernatural), then the merely natural means at scientists’ disposal would be incapable of observing it or controlling it for experimentation.

In short, science is too limited in both scope and method to disprove the possibility of miracles.  On the other hand, science is often capable to rule out known natural causes for certain extraordinary events.  So the Catholic Church makes careful use of scientific methods when examining claims for contemporary miracles — knowing that, since an almighty God exists, truly “nothing will be impossible” (Lk 1:37).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Sir 45:2-3  •  Lk 1:37  •  Acts 2:22; 5:12  •  1 Cor 15:12-19
General:  Jb 38:1-42:6  •  Lk 1:1-4  •  1 Jn 1:1-3
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  156  •  159  •  547-549  •  1335  •  2003  •  2293-2294

Catholics are sometimes asked, “If Christian faith is all about having a personal relationship with God, why does the Church have so many rules and regulations?”  The contrast between rules and relationship seems clear in two biblical books often placed side by side: the Song of Songs and the Book of Sirach.  The former poetically celebrates the love between God and his people (see also “Are the Seven Sacraments in the Bible?”).  The latter provides primarily a collection of rules for living — even going so far as to offer guidelines for table etiquette (see Sir 31:12-31)!

Are these two books in fundamental contradiction, then?  Which of them more accurately describes “religion that is pure and undefiled before God” (Jas 1:27)?  Is it “relationship,” or is it “rules”??

The dilemma is solved when we recall our Lord’s words: “If you love me, you will keep my commandments” (Jn 14:15).  A genuinely loving personal relationship with God must be more than devout feelings.  We express our love for him by obedience to the “rules and regulations” he has given us for living.

This truth should not surprise us.  Even in human relationships, following certain rules demonstrates the genuineness of our love.  In marriage, for example, spouses express their love in part by obeying the divine commandments against adultery, lying, and coveting another person’s spouse (see Ex 20:14, 16-17).

The gospel sums up the intent of God’s commands in a brief statement: “Love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your being, with all your strength, and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself” (Lk 10:27).  Simple enough — or so it seems.  But we must unpack the meaning of those few words in order to apply them to all the various situations in which we find ourselves from day to day.  To help, God has graciously given us Sirach and many other biblical books with the rich insights of their particular guidelines and ordinances.  The Catholic Church makes use of these in formulating her precepts.

Certainly Christian faith is much more than a collection of “rules and regulations.” A personal relationship with our Lord is essential.  But the relationship doesn’t dispense with the rules.  Rather, the rules help to define the relationship, and our obedience to them is the clearest indicator of our love for God.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Ex 20:14, 16-17  •  Sir 31:12-31  •  Jn 14:15  •  Lk 10:27  •  Jas 1:27
General:  Dt 6:4-9  •  Ps 119  •  Wis 6:17-19  •  Jn 14:15-24; 15:10  •  1 Jn 5:3  •  2 Jn 6
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  577-582  •  1776-1802  •  1949-1986  •  2030-2051  •  2052-2557  •  2614

Isaiah prophesied, “A child is born to us, a son is given us…. They name him … God-Hero” (Is 9:5).  Christians have long seen in these words a prophecy of Jesus’ birth and an affirmation of his divine identity.  Though it took several centuries for the Church to develop her understanding of the relation between Jesus’ human and divine natures, nevertheless, from the beginning she has declared of Christ, as the apostle Thomas declared, “My Lord and my God!” (Jn 20:28).

The reality that God himself became a man for our salvation — what is called the Incarnation (literally, “becoming flesh”) — is at the heart of Christian faith.  Denial of this truth has been the hallmark of many heretical sects.

Jesus himself declared, “The Father [that is, God] and I are one” (Jn 10:30).  When he did, some of those who heard him picked up stones to kill him for blasphemy, because they understood (correctly) the implication of what he was saying: He was claiming to be God (see Jn 10:30-33; also Jn 5:17-18).

In fact, virtually every attribute of the Father in heaven — the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who revealed himself in the Old Testament — was claimed by Jesus for himself.  He spoke authoritatively as God (rather than merely for God).  He accepted worship.  He forgave sins.  He said he was equal to his Father.  And he claimed that he had existed eternally.

New Testament authors verified his claim: “For in him,” St. Paul wrote, “dwells the whole fullness of the deity bodily” (Col 2:9); “In the beginning,” the Gospel according to John announced, “was the Word, / … the Word was God. / … All things came to be through him, / and without him nothing came to be. / … And the Word became flesh” (Jn 1:1, 3, 14).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: Is 9:5  •  Jn 1:1, 3, 14; 5:17-18; 10:30-33; 20:28  •  Col 2:9
General:  Mt 28:9, 17-20  •  Jn 1:1-5, 14; 5:17-23; 8:58; 9:38; 10:17-18; 14:13-14; 16:23-26  •  Acts 7:59  •  Phil 2:5-6  •  Col 1:15-19; 3:11  •  1 Tm 3:16  •  Ti 2:13  •  Heb 1:1-8  •  2 Pt 1:1  •  1 Jn 3:5  •  Rv 19:16
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  272  •  359  •  443  •  456-476  •  479-483  •  606-607  •  645-655  •  661  •  677-682  •  724  •  1040

When early Christians read biblical passages about the Incarnation (see “Why Does the Church Teach That Jesus Is God?”) — such as Isaiah’s words about the Child who would be called God (see Is 9:5) — the wondered: How exactly was Christ both human and divine?  Was he simply God, only appearing to be human?  Was he a human to whom God attached himself in a special way, dwelling inside him?  Was he partly human and partly divine?

Ultimately, in the light of Scripture and Tradition, the Church concluded that none of the above answers is correct.  An ecumenical Church council that helped to resolve the issue (Ephesus, 431) was provoked by a controversy over one particular question: Can we call Mary the “Mother of God”?

One prominent archbishop, Nestorius, rejected the title.  He claimed that Christ was two person — one human, one divine — joined together in Christ.  Though Mary was the mother of the human person in Christ, she was not the mother of the divine Person (God the Son).  So she could not rightly be called the Mother of God.

After examining this teaching, however, the Church concluded that Nestorius was mistaken.  Christ was not a combination of two person, one human and one divine.  That would be close to saying that he was simply a man to whom God was joined in a uniquely intimate way — a man specially indwelled by God, like one of the biblical prophets.

Instead, the Church declared, Christ is only one divine Person — the Second Person of the Trinity.  This single Person took human nature and joined it to his own divine nature, so that he possesses two natures (Jn 1:1-3, 14).  But these natures don’t constitute two different person.  They belong to one and the same Person, the divine Son of God.  And these two natures, though not to be confused, cannot be separated.

In this light, the Church concluded that not only is it correct to call Mary the Mother of God, but it is important to do so.  Mary is the mother of the one Person, Jesus Christ, who is the Son of God in the flesh.    If we deny that she is the Mother of God, then we are denying that Christ himself is God, come down from heaven.  Truly, as St. Paul declared, “God sent his Son, born of a woman!” (Gal 4:4).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Is 9:5  •  Jn 1:1-3, 14  •  Gal 4:4
General:  Lk 1:43  •  Jn 5:17-18; 9:58; 10:30-33; 20:28  •  Phil 2:5-8  •  Col 1:15-19; 2:9-10  •  2 Pt 1:1  •  Rv 21:6
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  468-483  •  495  •  509

In the Book of Isaiah, God promises that he will appoint a new master of the royal household of his people: “He shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, / and to the house of Judah. / I will place the key of the House of David on his shoulder; / when he opens, no one shall shut, / when he shuts, no one shall open” (Is 22:21-22).

The Book of Revelation refers this prophecy to Jesus as the new master of God’s household — the “new Jerusalem” (Is 21:2), which is the Church.  St. John calls him “the holy one, the true, / who holds the key of David, / who opens and no one shall close, / who closes and no one shall open” (Rv 3:7).

These passages take on additional significance when we read in the Gospel according to Matthew that Jesus gives a special commission to his chief apostle: “You are Peter [meaning literally, “Rock”], and upon this rock I will build my church” (Mt 16:18).  This is the most direct bible reference to the papacy.  In this moment, our Lord established St. Peter as the first pope and leader of the Church, whose role is indispensable to its mission.

Now notice what Jesus goes on to say to Peter at his commission: “I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven.  Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Mt 6:19).

Here Jesus tells more about what he means for Peter to be the “Rock” of the Church: “Peter and his successors will have a unique share in Christ’s authority as the keeper of the “keys.”  Alluding to the prophecy in Isaiah, Jesus foretells the role of the pope as a father to God’s people (the word “pope” literally means “father”), the head of God’s royal household, the one with divine authority to open and close the way to the heavenly kingdom.

If such an office was needed in the first generation of the Church, then it is also necessary in every generation, as in the case of priests and bishops.  St. Peter became the first bishop of Rome, so his unique office in the Church has been passed down to his episcopal successors there.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Is 22:21-22  •  Mt 16:18-19  •  Rv 3:7; 21:2
General:  Mt 17:24-27  •  Mk 16:7  •  Lk 22:32  •  Jn 21:15-17  •  Acts 2:14-36; 3:1-26; 5:1-11; 15:7-11  • 1 Pt 5:1
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  440-443  •  552-556  •  737  •  765  •  768  •  771  •  815-816  •  834  •  862  •  874-887  •  891  •  914  •  936-937  •  981  •  1444  •  2034-2035

Jesus’ teaching about hell — that is, the state of eternal separation from God — includes a quote from Isaiah: “Their worm shall not die, / nor their fire be extinguished” (Is 66:24; Mk 9:48).  The prophet was describing the immense garbage dump in a valley called Gehenna outside Jerusalem, where worm-infested refuse was heaped on a fire kept continually burning.  In ancient times this valley had been the site of ritual child sacrifice to a diabolical pagan god (see Lv 20:1-5; 2 Kgs 23:10).

No wonder, then, that in Jewish culture this hellish place gave its name to the fate of the damned.  Its ceaseless flames symbolized the horrors of sin and its consequences, the inner torment of those who remain in sin, and the just of an evil at last thwarted and abandoned in contempt.

Our contemporaries often dismiss the very idea of hell as a myth tied to belief in a cruel and vengeful God.  They may even attempt to contrast the doctrine of hell with the teaching of Jesus, insisting that he spoke only of the Father’s love and mercy.  Yet Jesus actually spoke more often about hell int he gospel accounts that he did about heaven.  Though he insisted that God loves the world and desires that no one perish eternally, he also insisted that we stand in danger of damnation if we reject God’s offer of reconciliation (see Jn 3:16-18).

To deny the possibility of hell is in fact to deny the reality of human free will.  God has created us as person who can choose to return his love.  But love that is coerced is not love at all.  If we are to be more than mere programmed robots, we must have the capability of rejecting God, both now and forever.  And if we reject him, we are in fact choosing hell, the state of eternal separation from him (see 2 Thes 1:8-9).

Our loving Father wills that all be saved (see 1 Tm 2:4; 2 Pt 3:9).  But he respects the free will he has given us.  “I have set before you life and death,” he says, “the blessing and the curse.  Choose life” (Dt 30:19).  (See also “What Does the Church Teach About Heaven?)

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Lv 20:1-5  •  Dt 30:192  •  Kgs 23:10  •  Is 66:24  •  Mk 9:48  •  Jn 3:16-18  •  2 Thes 1:8-9  •  1 Tm 2:4  •  2 Pt 3:9
General:  Lv 18:21  •  1 Kgs 11:7-8  •  Mt 5:22, 29; 7:13-14; 10:28; 13:41-50; 18:8-9; 22:13; 25:30, 41, 46  •  Mk 9:43-48  •  Acts 7:43  •  Heb 6:2; 12:29  •  1 Jn 3:14-15  •  Jude 7  •  Rv 1:18; 7:12, 14:11; 20:10, 14-15
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  633  •  1033-1037  •  1056-1058  •  1861

Baruch is one of seven Old Testament books found in Catholic Bibles but not in Protestant ones.  Catholics call them the “deuterocanonical” (literally, “second cannon”) books; Protestants call them the “apocryphal” (literally, “hidden” — thus “unknown, spurious”) books.  In addition to Baruch, these books include Tobit, Judith, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Wisdom (or Wisdom of Solomon), and Sirach (or Ecclesiasticus).

These deuterocanonical texts were included in the Septuagint, a third-century-B.C. Green translation of the Old Testament, which served as the Scriptures of the apostles and the generations that followed them.  The earliest Greek manuscripts of the Old Testament — such as Codex Sinaiticus (fourth century) and Codex Alexandrinus (c. 450) — include the deuterocanonical books mixed in with the others.

Church councils at Hippo (393) and Carthage (397 and 419) listed these books (and the other sixty-six) as Scripture, endorsing what had becomes the general belief of the universal Church.  The Council of Trent confirmed this canon in the sixteenth century.

How did Protestant Christians lose these books from their Bibles?  The influential Protestant reformer Martin Luther deleted them.  Though he insisted that Scripture must be the sole authority for the Christian faith, when scriptural texts did not support his teaching he tended to deny the authority of the books in which those texts were found.  [Webmaster note: The Book of Revelations was on his “chopping block” as well, but his peers coerced him in not doing so.]

The deuterocanonical books include passages that support the practice of offering prayers and sacrifices for the dead — and by extension, the doctrine of purgatory as well (see 2 Mc 12:39-46).  Luther rejected this ancient teaching and practice of the Church, so he denied these books a place in the Protestant canon.

The books of the “second canon” are similar in style to other Old Testament books.  Wisdom and Sirach are much like Proverbs.  Tobit is in somewhat the same literary category as the Book of Job.  Judith is comparable to Esther (two heroic Hebrew women who helped save their people).  First and Second Maccabees are historical narratives like the Books of Kings and Chronicles.  And Baruch is prophetic literature, akin to Jeremiah.

The New Testament closely reflects the though of the deuterocanonical books in many passages.  For example, Revelation 1:4 and 8:3-4 appear to make reference to Tobit 12:15.  St. Paul, in 1 Corinthians 15:29, seems to have 2 Maccabees 12:44 in mind, and Hebrews 11:35 mirrors the though of 2 Maccabees 7:29.  (See also “Why Don’t Catholics Believe in the Bible Only?).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Tb 12:15  •  2 Mc 7:29; 12:39-46  •  1 Cor 15:29  •  Heb 11:35  •  1:4; 8:3-4
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  120  •  138

The Bible plays a central and primary role in Christian faith, but it is not sufficient as the sole authoritative source of belief.  If it were, the more than thirty thousand “Bible-based” Protestant denominations in the world would not have such fundamental disagreements over what the biblical text really means.  Clearly, Scripture needs both a wider context of Tradition and a living, authoritative interpreter if it is to be rightly understood.

The fact that Baruch and certain other books don’t even appear in the Protestant Bible places the problem in even sharper focus: Many ancient books claimed to speak for God.  How can we even know which ones belong in the Bible unless we have an authority outside Scripture itself to tell us?

From the beginning, the magisterium of the Catholic Church has exercised the God-given authority to discern which books belong int he Bible and how they are correctly interpreted in the light of sacred Tradition (see “Why Do Catholic Bibles Have Seventy-tree Books?).

Catholics thus view the Bible, the Church, and Tradition as harmonious pieces of a whole.  In fact, the Bible itself points to Tradition and the Church as authoritative; it doesn’t teach that Scripture is the Christian’s sole ultimate authority.

St. Paul, for example, commands Christians to “hold fast” to the traditions he has passed on to them, both those that were written down (and were later recognized as Scripture) and those that were not written down (see 2 Thes 2:15).  He writes to St. Timothy that the Church (not Scripture) is “the pillar and foundation of truth” (1 Tm 3:15).

Nor is Scripture, as some Christians claim, fully self-interpreting.  As 2 Peter notes, for example, in St. Paul’s letters “there are somethings hard to understand that the ignorant and unstable distort to their own destruction, just as they do the other scriptures” (2 Pt 3:16).  The Catholic Church avoids such dangers by relying on the authoritative interpretation of the magisterium in the light of Tradition.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  2 Thes 2:15  •  1 Tm 3:15  •  2 Pt 3:16
General:  Mt 15:3, 6  •  Mk 7:8-9, 13  •  Rom 6:17  •  1 Cor 11:2, 23  •  1 Cor 15:1-3  •  Gal 1:9, 12  •  Eph 4:14  •  Col 2:8  • 1 Thes 2:13  •  2 Thes 3:6  •  1 Tm 4:1  •  2 Tm 1:13-14  •  2 Tm 2:2  •  2 Tm 4:3-4  •  2 Pt 1:20  •  2 Pt 2:21
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  78  •  80-87  •  90  •  95  •  109  •  111-120  •  128-133  •  137  •  234  •  817  •  2089

The opening chapter of Baruch tells how on one occasion the Jewish exiles in Babylon “wept and fasted and prayed before the Lord, and collected such funds as each could furnish” (Bar 1:5-6).  That one sentence summarizes the common penitential disciplines of God’s people since ancient times.  During the season of Lent especially, Catholics continue to express sorrow for their sins, and a desire to draw closer to God, through prayer, fasting, and almsgiving.

Why should we set aside special days and seasons for these activities?  Shouldn’t we be doing such things as a way of life?  Of course.  But with our human nature being weak as it is, the Church recognizes that if we have no time set aside especially for these disciplines, many of us will be tempted to neglect them altogether.

In the life of ancient Israel, God himself set the precedent for designating special days of penance.  Through Moses he commanded the people to observe an annual Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) “on the tenth day of the seventh month” (Lv 16:29).  On this day, the people were to “mortify” themselves (that is, eat no food) and do no work, so they could devote the day of repentance and prayer, asking God to cleanse them of their sins (see Lv 16:29-34).  In later times, the Jewish people set aside additional days and seasons of penitential fasting (see Zec 8:19 and the footnote).

The practice of penitential days and seasons was continued by the early Christians (see Acts 13:2-3) and became an established tradition in the Church.  Lent, observed in the forty days before Easter, developed as a way of recalling our Lord’s own forty days and nights fasting in the wilderness while he prayed and battled with the Devil (see Lk 4:1-13; see also “Why Do Catholics Put Ashes On Their Foreheads?”).

The value of prayer is immediately obvious.  But why, we might ask, are fasting and almsgiving ways to holiness?  When we make small sacrifices such as giving up food and giving away alms, we detach ourselves from the things that we tend to love too much (see Ez 16:49) — thus making more room in our lives for God.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Lv 16:29-34  •  Bar 1:5-6  •  Ez 16:49  •  Zec 8:19  •  Lk 4:1-13  •  Acts 13:2-3
General:  Jgs 20:26  •  1 Kgs 21:9, 12, 27  •  Ezr 8:23  •  Neh 1:4; 9:1  •  Est 4:15-16; 9:31  •  Is 58:1-12  •  Jer 14:12  •  Dn 9:3  •  Jl 1:14; 2:12-17  •  Jon 3:5  •  Mt 4:1-11; 6:16-18; 9:14-15  •  Mk 2:18-20  •  Lk 2:37; 5:33-35; 18:12  •  Acts 14:23; 27:9
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  538-540  •  566  •  1095  •  1430:1439  •  1460  •  1490  •  1969  •  2043  •  2447  •  2462

The first two chapters of Baruch tell us how the Jewish exiles in ancient Babylon repented of the sins that had led to their humiliation by their enemies.  These penitents confessed their sins to God and to the priests back in Jerusalem, asking the priests to intercede for them: “Pray for us also to the Lord, our God, for we have sinned against the Lord” (Bar 1:13).

Thus, the practice of confessing sins to God as represented by a priest, and having the priest respond with a prayer for divine mercy, has ancient precedents among God’s people (see also Lv 19:20-22).  In Catholic practice, however, the priest not only prays for the penitent but also imposes a penance (satisfaction) and speaks on God’s behalf with the words of forgiveness (absolution).

This sacrament of Reconciliation, as it is called, is firmly grounded both in Scripture and in early, constant Christian Tradition.  The priestly authority to represent God as an ambassador of his mercy was granted by Jesus to St. Peter and the other apostles — and by extension, to the priests they and their successors ordained: “Whatever you bind, that is, by imposing penance] on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose [that is, forgive in God’s name] on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Mt 16:19; 18:18).  “Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained” (Jn 20:23).

In the early Church, confession of grave sin was often made to the whole Christian assembly as well as the priests.  Certain instructions in the Letter of James are suggestive of this early practice.  When sick, believers were to call the presbyters (priests).  The priests were then to anoint them with oil and pray for them.  In confessing their sins, the sick could be healed and forgiven (see Jas 5:13-16).

Catholics are obligated to repent of all mortal, or grave, sins (contrition) and to confess them to a priest in order to be absolved.  The penitent performs the assigned penance to repair the harm caused by sin and to reestablish habits that lead to holiness.  The absolution imparted by the priest is not a mere expression of hope, but a sacramental, objective reality.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Lv 19:20-22  •  Bar 1:13  •  Mt 16:19; 18:18  •  Jn 20:23  •  Jas 5:13-16
General:  Nm 5:6-7  •  Ps 32:5  •  Prv 28:13  •  Is 43:25  •  Mt 3:5-6  •  Mk 1:5  •  Lk 15:18-19  •  Jn 20:21-23  •  Acts 19:18  •  2 Cor 2:10; 5:18-20  •  1 Jn 1:8-9
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  980  •  1424  •  1441-1442  •  1450-1470  •  1486  •  1493-1497

The prophet Ezekiel has a vision in which he sees great sins committed by God’s people.  But at the urging of a heavenly messenger, the godly men and women who lament the wickedness of their people are marked with an “X” on their foreheads.  Bearing that mark, they will be spared the divine judgment that is to come (see Ez 9:1-7).

St. John’s vision in Revelation includes a close parallel to this scenario.  Before the angels of judgment are allowed to devastate a wicked world, a seal is placed on the foreheads of “the servants of our God” (see Rev 7:1-3; 9:4).  Later, this seal is described as the name of Christ and of his Father (see Rev 14:1).

In light of these parallels, many early Christian teachers not surprisingly saw in Ezekiel’s vision a foreshadowing of the ancient Christ rite of Baptism.  Baptism, after all, is given “for the forgiveness of … sins” (Acts 2:38), so that those who have been forgiven may escape the wrath of God (see 1 Thes 5:9).  In addition, the baptismal rite included — as it still does today — the making of a cross with blessed oil on the foreheads of those baptized.  (In the Greek version of Ezekiel, the mark is actually the letter tau, which was written like an upright cross.)

The corresponding scene in St. John’s vision most likely reflects the Christian baptismal ceremony of his day.  This rite included (again, as it still does) the spoken words “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit” (Mt 28:19).  The Sign of the Cross on the forehead may also have been part of the rite by that time.  As early as the second century, making the Sign of the Cross was a common and well-established custom.

Today, this gesture is usually made by drawing the hand from forehead to breast and then from shoulder to shoulder.  When Catholics apply holy water to themselves with the Sign of the Cross upon entering a church, they are recalling their baptism “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.”  With the ancient Christians, they use the gesture at other times as well, such as when they begin and end prayers.  Each time, they point to Christ’s cross, the Holy Trinity, and the need to sanctify every action.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Ez 9:1-7  •  Mt 28:19  •  Acts 2:38  •  1 Thes 5:9  •  Rv 7:1-3; 9:4; 14:1
General:  Mt 10:38, 16:24  •  Mk 8:34; 10:21  •  Lk 9:23; 14:27  •  1 Cor 1:18  •  Gal 6:14
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  1667-1670  •  2157

The startling vision of the prophet Daniel, whose apocalyptic language is echoed in Revelation, have provided grist for many a mill of “end times” speculation.  Though a number of the book’s passages seem to refer to events now in the past, others clearly point toward “the end of days” (Dn 12:13).

Nevertheless, given the cryptic and often symbolic nature of these and related biblical texts, the countless interpretations of them often contradict one another.  So the Catholic Church warns believers to avoid futile speculation on the matter.  What, then, can we know for certain about the end of the world?

Here’s a summary of the essentials of Church teaching from the Catechism:

• Jesus will return to earth in glory (see Mt 24:27).
• First, however, the Antichrist will appear to deceive the world and persecute the Church (see 2 Thes 2:3-12).
• The Church will suffer the great tribulation prophesied by her Lord (see Mt 24:3-14).
• The final victory of Christ on earth will not come through a gradual improvement in the world’s spiritual condition, nor by a special period of his earthly reign before Judgment Day.  It will take place not within history, but beyond it, after Christ has brought an end to history by his glorious Second Coming (see 1 Cor 15:22-28).
• The Jewish people will come to recognize Jesus Christ as their Messiah before he returns (see Rom 11:25-29).
• The dead will be raised bodily (see 1 Cor 15:20-58).
• Christ will judge the living and the dead, and the Devil and his allies will at last be utterly overthrown (see Jn 5:26-29; Rv 20:10-15; see also “What Does the Church Teach About the Last Judgment?).
• At the end of time, God’s kingdom will come in its fullness, and all things will be renewed, perfected, and consummated (see Rv 21:1-22:5; see also “What Does the Church Teach About Heaven?”).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Dn 12:13  •  Mt 24:3-14, 27  •  Jn 5:26-29  •  Rom 11:25-29  •  1 Cor 15:20-58  •  2 Thes 2:3-12  •  Rv 20:10-15; 21:1-22:5
General:  Jb 19:25-26  •  Dn 12:2-3  •  Mt 24:27, 30-31; 26:64  •  Lk 18:8; 21:12, 27  •  Jn 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:21-27; 15:19-21  •  Rom 8:11  •  1 Cor 6:14  •  Phil 3:20-21  •  Col 2:12; 3:1-4  •  1 Thes 4:13-18; 5:2-3  •  1 Jn 4:2-3  •  2 Jn 7
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  668-682  •  972  •  988-1004  •  1015-1017  •  1186  •  2771-2772  •  2776

When Jesus was placed on trial by the high priests and council, he quoted a stunning passage from Daniel’s prophecies, identifying himself with the “Son of Man … coming on the clouds of heaven” in radiant glory one day to judge the world (Mt 26:63-64; see Dn 7:13-14).  All the biblical references to Christ’s Second Coming confirm that this event will be a magnificent public triumph, not invisible and secret, but universally visible and undeniable: “For just as lightning comes from the east and is seen as far as the west, so will the coming of the Son of Man be” (Mt 24:27).

Scripture knows nothing, then, of an “extra” coming of Christ in secret before that time — the “rapture,” as many Christians call it — to snatch away true believers from the world.  This notion is actually rather novel in Christian history.  For the first eighteen centuries after Christ, Christian teachers of every sort — Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant — had never even heard of the idea, nor found any indications of it in Scripture.  Even today, the great majority of Christians worldwide, including Protestants, reject it.

To prove their notion, rapture teachers typically cite St. Paul’s words about Christians on earth being “caught up … to meet the Lord in the air (1 Thes 4:17).  Taken as a whole, however, the passage speaks of the Lord’s “word of command, with the voice of an archangel and with the trumpet of God” (1 Thes 4:16) — hardly a picture of a secret, invisible coming.  Instead, this text is a clear reference to Christ’s glorious Second Coming, with obvious parallels to other biblical texts about that event (see 1 Cor 15:51-52).

Rapture believers may also cite our Lord’s words about how, at his coming, certain people will be “taken,” while others will be “left.”  But he also says this event will be “as it was in the days of Noah” when “the flood came and carried [the wicked] all away.”   So those who are “taken” are the ones to be punished — not the righteous (see Mt 24:37-41).

Finally, rapture teachers claim that Christians must be “snatched” from the world because God has promised them an escape from the “great tribulation” of the last days.  But actually the opposite is true: Jesus promised that in that time of trial, “the one who perseveres to the end will be saved” (Mt 24:4-22).  (See also “How Will the World End?” and “What is the Second Coming?”).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Dn 7:13-14  •  Mt 24:4-22; 27; 37-41; 26:63-64  •  1 Cor 15:51-52  •  1 Thes 4:16-17
General:  Mk 13:3-27  •  Lk 21:7-36  •  2 Tm 3:1-15  •  1 Pt 4:12-19  •  Rv 2:2-3, 10-11, 13; 3:10; 7:8-17
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  668-677  •  680  •  1001

Isaiah’s prophecy of the Messiah (Christ) tells of a suffering Servant who was “pierced for our offenses, / crushed for our sins” (Is 53:5; see Is 53:1-12).  Jesus fulfilled this prophecy when he died on the cross for us (see 1 Pt 2:24-25).  But there are other prophecies of Christ, still unfulfilled, that point to a different scenario: a glorious King, a powerful Judge, who comes to rules the earth (see Rv 19:11-16).

The prophet Daniel, for example, foresaw “One like a son of man coming, / on the clouds of heaven” who receives “dominion, glory, and kingship; / nations and peoples of every language serve him. / His dominion is an everlasting dominion” (Dn 7:13-14).

At Jesus’ ascension into heaven, angels confirmed what he had earlier promised: He will return one day to earth (see Acts 1:10-11).  Why is it necessary for him to return?  Because his mission on earth is not yet complete: He came the first time as our suffering Redeemer, but he must return as our holy Judge (see also “What Does the Church Teach About the Last Judgment?).

Christ’s life, death, resurrection, and ascension form only part of the gospel, the “good news” of our redemption.  The rest of the gospel is the good news that God is not only merciful but also just.  One day Christ will come back to set the world aright, and the evil one will at last be rendered utterly powerless to harm those who love God (see Rv 20:10, 14).  (See also “Do the Devil and Demons Really Exist?”.)

Even now Jesus reigns as Lord of all at the Father’s right hand in heaven (see Eph 1:20).  But when Christ returns, God’s kingdom will finally come to us in all its fullness, and God’s will at last will be done “on earth as in heaven” (Mt 6:10).

Yet another aspect of divine justice will be fulfilled when Christ returns: He will be vindicated and honored in the eyes of all the world.  Even those who have “spurned and avoided [him]” (Is 53:3) will be compelled to bend their knees before him at last and “confess that / Jesus Christ is Lord, / to the glory of God the Father” (Phil 2:10-11).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Is 53:1-12  •  Dn 7:13-14  •  Mt 6:10  •  Acts 1:10-11  •  Eph 1:20  •  Phil 2:10-11  •  1 Pt 2:24-25  •  Rv 19:11-16; 20:10, 14
General:  Mt 3:12; 24:30-31, 36  •  Mk 13:24-27  •  Lk 3:17; 18:22-25  •  1 Cor 15:23-28  •  Eph 1:8-10  •  Col 3:1-4  •  1 Thes 5:1-5  •  2 Thes 2:1-8  •  1 Pt 1:13; 4:13  •  2 Pt 3:1-16
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  668-682  •  1186  •  2771-2772  •  2776

Many non-Catholic Christians are uncomfortable with the display of a crucifix — a cross with the image of Christ’s crucified body.  They prefer to display an empty cross.  If Jesus was raised from the dead, they reason, why should we depict him still on the cross?

First, we shouldn’t forget that Catholics also sometimes display simple crosses without the corpus (image of Christ’s body).  Next, we must note that historically, discomfort with the crucifix has often had more to do with anti-Catholic sentiment than with genuine concern that Jesus’ resurrection is being forgotten.  Despite clear references throughout the New Testament to the importance of the cross as a sign of Christ’s victory over evil (see 1 Cor 1:17-18), many early Protestants rejected any use of the cross at all — even an empty one — as a sign of “popery.”

Nevertheless, those who are genuinely concerned that, in the crucifix, the resurrection is unduly overshadowed by the Crucifixion should read the messianic prophecy of Zechariah: “They shall look on him whom they have thrust through, and they shall mourn for him as one mourns for an only son, and they shall grieve over him as one grieves over a firstborn” (Zec 12:10).  St. John confirms that this passage represents a foretelling of Christ’s crucifixion (see Jn 19:37).

When the people look on their crucified Lord, the prophet says, God “will pour out” on them “a spirit of grace and petition” (Zec 12:10).  Catholics have long found this to be true whenever they gaze with love on this image of Jesus’ sacrificial death.  The crucifix inspires in them the graces of a deeper gratitude for this greatest of gifts (see Ps 116:12-13), as well as a more intense aversion to sin, which led him to the cross (see Rom 6:1-12).

No wonder, then, that in the old legends, the demons, vampires, and other evil creatures cannot bear to look at a crucifix.  It reminds the forces of darkness that they have been defeated by Christ’s death on the cross (see Col 2:13-15)!

Finally, we should note that when we are suffering, mediation on a crucifix comforts us by recalling that Christ suffers with us (see 2 Cor 1:5-7).  Our sufferings have great value when we join them to his (see Col 1:24).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Ps 116:12-13  •  Zec 12:10  •  Jn 19:37  •  Rom 6:1-12  •  1 Cor 1:17-18  •  2 Cor 1:5-7  •  Col 1:24; 2:13-15
General:  Mt 16:24-25  •  Acts 2:23-24, 36-39  •  1 Cor 1:17-25; 2:2  •  2 Cor 13:4  •  Gal 2:19-20; 3:1; 5:24; 6:14  •  Phil 2:8-11; 3:18  •  Col 1:19-20  •  Heb 12:2
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  562  •  571  •  598  •  616-618  •  1668  •  2015  •  2029  •  2427

The New Testament begins with four books that proclaim “the gospel [good news] of Jesus Christ” (Mk 1:1): Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.  Though they are not biographies of Jesus in the strict sense of the word, they provide accounts of his earthly life and in interpretation of its meaning for the world.

Why are there four such accounts instead of one?  Jesus wrote no autobiography, nor did he designate any of his followers to write an “official” biography.  Rather, the primary mission he gave his apostles was to “make disciples of all nations” (Mt 28:19) through preaching, teaching, and providing the sacraments of the Church (see also Mk 16:15-18; Jn 20:21-23; 21:15-17).  This first “witness” to Christ (see Acts 1:8) was thus oral rather than written, with an emphasis on the demonstration of its truth through the holy lives of believers and the wonders worked among them (see 1 Cor 2:1-5).

In time, however, several of the first Christians concluded that it would be useful for the new community to have a written account of Jesus’ life and works.  Luke’s statement of method and intention in producing his gospel suggests how they went about the task:

Since many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the events that have been fulfilled among us, just as those who were eyewitnesses from the beginning and ministers of the word have handed them down to us, I too have decided, after investigating everything accurately anew, to write it down in an orderly sequence for you … so that you many realize the certainty of the teachings you have received. [Lk 1:1-4]

Not surprisingly, the four evangelists (gospel authors) used some of the same sources.  But each seems to have drawn as well from sources not employed by the others, and each arranged his material in a distinctive way.  At the same time, no one of them could tell the whole story; as John’s gospel notes: “There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written” (Jn 21:25)

The result is that the four gospels, though telling essentially the same story, differ in many ways in content, perspective, emphasis, and style.  The resulting variety provides the Chruch with a wonderful richness of insight that would be lacking if only one of the gospels had come down to us.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Mt 28:19  •  Mk 1:1; 16:15-18  •  Lk 1:1-4  •  Jn 20:21-23; 21:15-17; 21:25  •  Acts 1:8  •  1 Cor 2:1-5
General:  Jn 21:24  •  Acts 2:14-3:10; 4:31-35; 5:12-16  •  1 Cor 11:23-26
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  76  •  83  •  124-127  •  515  •  638

Are the four gospels in the Bible — Matthew, Mark, Luke and John — the only ancient books that claim to be authentic records of Christ’s life?  If there are others, why don’t they appear in Scripture?  Is it true, as some have claimed, that the Catholic Church hierarchy (or perhaps the fourth-century Roman emperor Constantine) “banned” these other books from the Bible to cover up certain uncomfortable “truths” about Jesus reported in them?

There authentic teaching of the Church about Jesus began, not as a book, but as oral tradition — preached and passed on by the apostles and others who knew him personally (see “Why Are There Four Gospels?”).  Once the faith had spread throughout the Roman world and beyond, portions of this oral tradition were committed to writing and circulated among the scattered local churches.  The resulting books were recognized by these churches as reliable and authoritative accounts because they judged them to be in keeping with, and rooted in, the genuine apostolic Tradition they already possessed.

Three criteria were used to evaluate a book for which a claim to divine inspiration had been made: First, was it written by an apostle or an associate of an apostle?  Second, did it conform to the “rule of faith,” the doctrinal Tradition, affirmed by churches throughout the world?  Third, had it been read publicly and regularly in Christian worship, especially in those churches with apostolic beginnings?

Writings from the generations of Christians just after the apostles show that they quoted as authoritative the four gospels we now have in our Bibles.  By the mid-second century, teachers living as far apart as St. Ignatius in Syria, St. Justin Martyr in Rome, Tertullian in Africa, and St. Irenæus in what is now France had all accepted as reliable and divinely inspired the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.  This judgment was later confirmed authoritatively by formal Church councils, but certainly not by a Roman imperial decree.

A few other ancient writers did indeed claim to tell about Jesus’ life; St. Luke himself noted some of them (see Lk 1:1).  But their books were not “banned” by the “hierarchy.”  Rather, they never gained acceptance by the Church as a whole in the first place because they failed to meet the reasonable criteria described above.  Books such as the “Gospel of Thomas” were thus rejected as later products of eccentric teachers.  The genuine apostolic Tradition exposed them as a false “different gospel” (see Gal 1:6-9).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Lk 1:1  •  Gal 1:6-9
General:  2 Cor 11:12-15  •  2 Pt 1:16-2:3  •  1 Jn 2:18-23; 4:1-6  •  Rv 22:18-19
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  76  •  83  •  124-127  •  515

St. Mark begins his account of our Lord’s life: “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ” (Mk 1:1).  “Gospel” means literally “good news.”  The first four books of the New Testament (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) are called gospels because they announce the “good news of great joy” (Lk 2:10) — the coming of a Savior, God himself in the flesh.

Some Christians claim that the Catholic Church doesn’t really “preach the gospel,” because they believe that salvation by “faith alone” is the substance of the gospel.  (See “Does the Church Teach Salvation by Works?).  But what exactly is the substance of this “good news” that must be preached?

St. Peter’s first sermon, which is preached on the day of Pentecost (see Acts 2:22-40), summarizes Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, and ascension into heaven.  Then he instructs his hearers: “Repent, and be baptized … for the forgiveness of your sins” (Acts 2:38).

In this address, the notion of salvation by “faith alone” does not appear at all.  Instead, the gospel preached is the proclamation of who Jesus is and what he has done.  Salvation (including God’s forgiveness of sins) comes to the hearers through their response of repentance, baptism, and the subsequent life of obedience to God.  When St. Paul preaches the gospel, he makes the same kind of proclamation and calls for the same kind of response (see Acts 13:16-41; 1 Cor 15:1-11).

According to Scripture, then, the gospel is what the Catholic Church has always preached: a proclamation of the life, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus Christ, which calls for our response of repentance, baptism, and a life of obedience to God.

In fact, every Mass is an instance of preaching the gospel.  A passage from Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John is always read publicly at Mass so that we can hear and respond to God’s good news.  In addition , at every Mass the fruits of Christ’s work are re-presented to us in the Eucharist, to help us live lives pleasing to God.  (See also “Were Other ‘Gospels’ Banned From the Bible?).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Mk 1:1  •  Lk 2:10  •  Acts 2:22-40; 2:38; 13:16-41  •  1 Cor 15:1-11
General:  Mt 9:35  •  Mk 14:9; 16:15  •  Lk 9:6  •  Acts 2:42-47; 8:25; 14:7, 21; 15:7; 16:10; 20:7, 24  •  Rom 15:16, 19-20, 29  •  1 Cor 9:11-18; 10:16-17  •  Gal 1:6-11  •  1 Thes 2:2-9  •  1 Pt 4:6, 17
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  2  •  35  •  122-127  •  153-155  •  169  •  179  •  224  •  514-515  •  534  •  571-573  •  678  •  1846  •  1963  •  2000-2005  •  2010  •  2022-2027

The Catholic Church has testified from the beginning to the historical reality that Mary, Jesus’ mother, remained a virgin all her life.  Even the Protestant reformers Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli all taught that Mary was “ever-virgin.”  But if that is true, why does the Bible refer to the “brothers” and “sisters” of the Lord (see Mk 6:3)?

In ancient Jewish culture, the terms “brother” and “sister” were applied not only to children of the same parents but also to other relatives.  In Genesis 14:16, 29:15 and Leviticus 10:4, for example, we know from the context that these passages refer to a relative other than a brother, even though the Hebrew term for “brother” is actually used.

In a similar way, soon after the mention of Jesus’ “brothers” and “sisters,” Mark’s gospel refers to Herod’s half-brother Philip as his “brother” (see Mk 6:17).  The first Christians also spoke of each other as “brothers,” even when they were biologically unrelated (see Acts 15:13).

Meanwhile, when some of these “brothers of the Lord” are named in other biblical passages, they are identified as sons of a different Mary [emphasis by webmaster] (see Mt 13:55-56; 27:56).  So even though we many not know exactly how they are related to Jesus, we do know that they are not children of Mary’s womb.

Some Christians claim that the words “her firstborn son” (Lk 2:7), as applied to Jesus, imply that there must have been other children as well. But in biblical culture, “firstborn” was simply a legal term referring to the child who first “opens the womb” (Ex 13:2).  If a child were termed “firstborn” only when other children followed, how could the law of Moses have required that the “firstborn” be consecrated soon after birth, before other children arrived (see Ex 13:2, 12, 15; Lk 2:21-24)?

Finally, when St. Matthew in his gospel says that Joseph “had no relations with [Mary] until she bore a son” (Mt 1:25), he does not necessarily imply that such relations followed afterward.  In the same way, when Jesus says at the end of this same gospel, “I am with you always, until the end of the age” (Mt 28:20), he by no means implies thereby that after the end of the age, he will no longer be with us.  Similar uses of the word “until” appear throughout Scripture.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Gn 14:16; 29:15  •  Ex 13:2, 12, 15  •  Lv 10:4  •  Mt 1:25; 13:55-56; 27:56; 28:20  •  Mk 6:3, 17  •  Lk 2:7, 21-24  •  Acts 15:3
General: Mt 12:46-50  •  Mk 3:21; 15:40  •  Lk 8:19  •  Jn 7:5  •  Acts 1:14; 12:17  •  1 Cor 9:5  •  Gal 1:19
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  496-507  •  510

“You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (Mt 16:18).  When Jesus founded the Church, he established a concrete, visible institution that can be traced in an unbroken line down through the centuries.  The Church is both a living organism and an organization.  So Christian unity is expressed not only spiritually, but in organizational and practical terms as well.

Jesus spoke of the Church as “a city set on a mountain” (Mt 5:14).  The Church is not invisible.  It was intended by God to be readily identifiable.

When Jesus declared that the apostle Peter was the “rock” on which he would build his Church, he made it possible to identify the Church, to know where it could be found.  St. Peter became the first bishop of Rome, and the bishops of Rome who have succeeded him (the popes) have continued to fill his special office as the “rock.”  The Church Jesus established is thus the Church in spiritual and organizational communion with the successors of St. Peter — the Catholic Church, which is also called the Roman Catholic Church because of the leadership role of the Church of Rome.

The central role of the Roman Church in historic Christianity can be seen in that Church’s unique and decisive function in upholding Christian orthodoxy (literally, “correct doctrine”) throughout the ages.  It is also evident in the papal leadership in ecumenical councils (such as the Council of Trent and the Second Vatican Council).

Why is the Church called “Catholic”?  The word means “universal.”  It describes both the scope of Jesus’ saving mission — he came to redeem the whole world — and the extent of the organization he established — a global Church embracing all peoples.  The first recorded use of the term is in a letter written by a bishop of Antioch, St. Ignatius, [in 107 A.D.] who was taught by the apostle John and may well have known the apostle Peter himself.  [Webmaster: link to Epistle to Smyrnaeans 8:2 translation]

The Catholic Church, then, is the universal Christian family in communion with St. Peter’s successor, the pope.  Founded by Jesus Christ himself through the apostles, it is unique both in its catholicity and in its adherence to the “rock.”

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Mt 5:14; 16:18
General:  Mt 18:15-17  •  Jn 17:21-23  •  Acts 1:20; 14-24; 15:1-29; 20:28-31  •  Rom 13:13; 16:17  •  1 Cor 1:10-13; 12:12-27  •  1 Tm 3:1-4  •  2 Tm 4:1-5  •  1 Pt 5:1
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  750-752  •  763-765  •  770-780  •  789  •  792  •  796  •  805-826  •  830-838  •  846-849  •  855-868  •  874-892  •  936-939  •  2033  •  2044-2050

“Call no one on earth your father,” Jesus teaches.  “You have but one Father in heaven” (Mt 23:9).  In light of these words from the Gospel, many non-Catholic Christians object to Catholics calling priests “Father.”  How do Catholics understand this passage?

In this situation, Jesus is rebuking the Pharisees for their spiritual pride (see Mt 23:2-10).  He reminds them that God alone — God the Father — is ultimately the source of all authority, even the authority these men wield within the religious community.

Is this simply an admonition to the proud, or does Jesus actually mean that under no circumstances are we ever to refer to anyone as “father”?  Just consider: If the latter is true, then we could never legitimately speak of Church fathers, or founding fathers of a country, or even biological fathers.

This cannot be Jesus’ intent, given the words of Jesus on other occasions reported in the gospels.  The truth is that our Lord himself uses the term “father” numerous times (see, for example, Mt 15:4-6; 19:5, 19, 29; 21:31; Jn 8:56).  In telling the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, Jesus even has the rich man use the title “Father Abraham” three times to refer to the ancient patriarch (see Lk 16:24, 27, 30).  Later on, St. Paul certainly has no qualms about calling himself a “father” to other Christians (see Phil 2:22; 1 Cor 4:15).

All this can be said as well of Jesus’ instruction immediately before his words about not calling anyone “father.”  He warns, “Do not be called ‘Rabbi’ [literally, “Teacher” in Jesus’ native tongue, Aramaic, see Jn 1:38].  You have but one teacher and you are all brothers” (Mt 23:8).  Do those who object to calling priests “Father” refrain from calling anyone “teacher” as well?

Jesus himself speaks of teachers (see Mt 10:24-25; Lk 6:40; Jn 3:10).  Paul calls himself a teacher (see 1 Tm 2:7; 2 Tm 1:11) and noted that teachers are in fact one of the ministries God has set in the Church (see 1 Cor 12:28-29; Eph 4:11).  Any Bible concordance will reveal many other occurrences of the words “father,” “fathers,” “teacher,” and “teachers” throughout Scripture.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Mt 10:24-25; 15:4-6; 19:5, 19, 29; 21:31; 23:2-10  •  Lk 6:40; 16:24, 27, 30  •  Jn 1:38; 3:10; 8:56  •  1 Cor 4:15; 12:28-29  •  Eph 4:11  •  Phil 2:22  •  1 Tm 2:7  •  2 Tm 1:11
General:  Mk 11:9-10  •  Acts 7:2  •  Rom 4:12; 9:10 (see also Rom 4:16-18)  •  Eph 3:14-15  •  1 Thes 2:11  •  1 Tm 1:2  •  Jas 2:21  •  1 Jn 2:1, 12-14, 18, 28
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  78  •  238-242  •  270  •  688  •  1544-1553  •  2214

The claim that Jesus Christ truly died and truly rose bodily from the dead is not option for Christian faith.  It is central to the gospels and the witness of the apostles (see Mt 28:1-10; Mk 16:1-14; Lk 24:1-49; Jn 20:1-29; Acts 2:22-36), the guarantee of our own resurrection (see 1 Cor 15:20-22).  As St. Paul insists, if Christ has not been raised from the dead, our faith is in vain (see 1 Cor 15:17; see also “Hasn’t Science Disproved Miracles?”).

Skeptics have dismissed Jesus’ resurrection as a hoax or hallucination, a superstition or myth.  But all of the evidence points the other way.  First, if it was a hoax perpetrated by his followers (see Mt 28:11-15), would they have devoted the rest of their lives, and willingly suffered prison, torture, and death, for what they knew to be a lie (see Acts 12:1-5)?  If the tomb wasn’t empty, why didn’t Jesus’ enemies simply produce the dead body?

Second, if it was a hallucination, how could so many otherwise sane men and women be convinced they had encountered Jesus alive — more than five hundred witnesses on separate occasions and in various locations (see 1 Cor 15:3-8)?  If the resurrected Jesus was only a hallucination, how could people touch his body and watch him consume the food they gave him (see Lk 24:36-43)?

Third, as the scriptural account shows, first-century people were no more likely than we are to be superstitious or gullible about claims of returning from the grave.  Even the apostles reacted with skepticism, not to mention others (see Lk 24:9-11; Jn 20:24-25; Acts 17:32).

Finally, a myth takes generations to develop and take hold within a culture.  But Jesus’ followers were testifying to his resurrection within a few days after his death.  Even the biblical accounts of the Resurrection were written within the lifetime of those who knew what had really happened and could decisively challenge their claims if they had evidence to the contrary.

For all these reasons, the Christian testimony that Jesus was indeed raised from the dead must be taken seriously by non-Christians.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Mt 28:1-15  •  Mk 16:1-14  •  Lk 24:1-49  •  Jn 20:1-29  •  Acts 2:22-36; 12:1-5; 17:32  •  1 Cor 15:3-8, 17, 20-22
General:  Jn 2:19; 11:25; 20:20-29; 21:12-13  •  Acts 1:22; 3:15, 26; 4:1-2, 10, 33; 5:30-32; 10:34-41; 13:27-39; 17:1-3, 18, 30-31; 17:30-31; 23:6; 26:22-23  •  Rom 1:1-4; 4:24-25; 5:20-22; 6:4, 9; 7:4; 8:11; 10:9  •  1 Cor 6:14; 15:12-27  •  2 Cor 4:14  •  Gal 1:1  •  Eph 1:18-23  •  Phil 3:10-11  •  Col 2:12  •  1 Thes 1:9-10  •  2 Tm 2:8  •  1 Pt 1:3, 20-21; 3:21  •  2 Pt 1:15  •  Rv 1:17-18; 2:8
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  627  •  638-658  •  992-1004

The Gospel according to Luke refers to Mary with the Greek word kecharitomene, meaning “highly graced” or “full of grace” (see Lk 1:28).  In this deferential term of address used by the angel Gabriel — not used in Scripture of any other human being — we find one indication of an unparalleled grace given by God to our Lady: She was conceived with the defect of original sin (Catholics call this reality the “Immaculate Conception.”)  Throughout her life as well, God preserved her from committing any actual sin.

Why would God have granted Mary such a gift?  When the eternal Word took on flesh (see Jn 1:14), he took his flesh from her.  God wanted his sinless Son, Jesus, to receive his human nature from a sinless mother.  And it was most fitting for Jesus to be reared by a woman without sin.

Some Christians have argued that Mary’s sinlessness is impossible because St. Paul writes that “all have sinned” (Rom 3:23).  But in Scripture the word “all” (pas in Greek) doesn’t always mean literally “every single one without exception.”  For example, in the same letter, St. Paul writes that “all Israel will be saved” (Rom 11:26), yet we suspect that at least some Jewish people will not be saved.

This is also a matter of common Hebrew idiom.  In Romans 3:10-12, St. Paul quotes Psalm 14:3, which reads: “All have gone astray’ / all alike are perverse. / Not one does what is right, / not even one” (see also Ps 53:2-4).  Yet the very next psalm refers to those who walk “without blame” (Ps 15:2).  Obviously, then, the lament in Psalm 14:2-3 is emotional and exaggerated language, not intended as a literal utterance.  Since St. Paul is referring back to these sorts of passages, the interpretation of his words should take them into account, too.

We should also note that Jesus, who shared our human nature, was without sin (see Heb 4:14-15).  This fact alone demonstrates that St. Paul cannot mean that “every single human being has sinned.”

Some Christians object that if Mary was sinless, she didn’t need Christ as her Savior.  But the Church teaches, as does Scripture, that she did indeed need a divine Savior (see Lk 1:47).  She wasn’t saved out of sin, but rather saved from sin.  The rest of us have been delivered out of original and actual sin, while she was preserved from it.  Either way, her salvation was God’s gracious gift through the merits of her Son.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Ps 14:2-3; 15:2; 53:2-4  •  Lk 1:28, 47  •  Jn 1:14  •  Rom 3:10-12, 23; 11:26  •  Heb 4:14-15
General:  Gn 3:15  •  Jer 1:5  •  Lk 1:15
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  273  •  411  •  485-495  •  508-509  •  721-723  •  829  •  963-972  •  2030

The angel Gabriel’s greeting to Mary, when he came to announce the conception of Jesus, is familiar to most Catholics.  It is echoed in one of the most popular Catholic prayers, the Hail Mary (in Latin, Ave Maria): “Hail, [Mary,] favored one [or ‘full of grace’]!  The Lord is with you” (Lk 1:28).

The words that follow in that prayer also come from Scripture, from Elizabeth’s greeting to our Lady soon afterward: “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb” (Lk 1:42).  Then the “fruit” of her womb is identified as Jesus.  Next, “holy [Saint] Mary, Mother of God” refers to her status as the woman who bore the divine Son of God (see Gal 4:4; see also “Why is Mary Called ‘Mother of God’?”).  Finally, the prayer asks for Mary’s intercession: “Pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death” (see “Why Do Catholics Pray to Saints and Angels?”).

The Hail Mary is one of the chief prayers of the Catholic devotion known as the Rosary.  This series of repetitive prayers (see “Why Do Catholics Pray Repetitious Prayers?”) is usually prayed in conjunction with a string of beads that help the person praying to keep track of her or her progress.

Two other prayers are also central to the Rosary.  One is the Our Father (or the Lord’s Prayer), which comes to us from Christ as recorded in Scripture (see Mt 6:9-13).  The other is the Glory Be, an ancient expression of praise to the Most Holy Trinity: “Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit.  As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end.  Amen”  These words echo portions of various prayers and statements in Scripture (see Mt 28:19; Rom 16:27; Jude 25).

The Rosary also includes a recitation of the Apostle’s Creed, one of the earliest professions of faith produced by the Church.  Finally, Catholics may add a variety of additional personal petitions when praying the Rosary.

The historical sources of the prayers in this devotion are relatively straightforward.  How the Rosary came to us in its present form, however, is less clear.  According to pious tradition, Mary gave the Rosary to St. Dominic, with instructions to popularize its use, though it had earlier historical precedents.  The name “Rosary” (from the Latin word rosarium, “rose garden”) comes from the notion of offering a bouquet of prayers to our Lady.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Mt 6:9-13; 28:19  •  Lk 1:28, 42  •  Rom 16:27  •  Gal 4:4  •  Jude 25
General:  Rom 11:36  •  Gal 1:5  •  Eph 3:21
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  971  •  2676-2678

The gospels tell us very little about “Mary, called Magdalene, from whom seven demons had gone out” (Lk 8:2).  We know that she was among the holy women who accompanied Jesus in his ministry (see Lk 8:1-3).  She was also among those who looked on from a distance as Jesus hung from the cross (see Mt 27:55-56).  Her passionate devotion to our Lord compelled her to linger at the tomb on Good Friday after it was sealed (see Mt 27:61), and again to bring spices on the first Easter Sunday morning to finish preparing his body for burial (see Mt 28:1).

Believing the angel’s announcement that Jesus had risen, Mary went to tell the apostles (see Mt 28:5-8).  She also encountered the risen Lord personally that morning, though the details of that meeting are not fully clear in the scriptural account (see Mt 28:9-10; Jn 20:11-18).

Over the centuries, speculation about Mary Magdalene led some to identify her with both the notorious “sinner” (prostitute) who washed Jesus’ feet (see Lk 7:36-50) and with Mary the sister of Lazarus and Martha (see Jn 11:1-2; 12:1-8).  Nevertheless, these three gospel women were most likely different people.

Where, then, did the startling notion originate that Mary Magdalene was Jesus’ wife, by whom he had children?  Certainly not form sacred Scripture, sacred Tradition, or the Church’s magisterium.   These traditional authorities are firm and unanimous that Jesus never married nor had children.

In the late second and early third centuries, however, heretical (Gnostic) cults emerged that sough, for whatever reasons, to create for Mary Magdalene a more prominent role in the gospel story.  In certain texts they produced, which falsely claimed to be authentic “gospels” (see “Where Other ‘Gospels’ Banned From the Bible?”), several passages suggested a physical intimacy between Mary and Jesus.  But these passages had no elements that can be traced back to the time of Christ, and they actually contradict one another in their claims.  The books containing them were soundly condemned as spurious by contemporary Christians adhering to the genuine apostolic Tradition.

In more recent times, those who oppose the Church’s insistence that Holy Orders are reserved for men (see “Why Won’t the Church Ordain Women?”) have found the old Gnostic speculations attractive.  But their use of discredited heretical texts only serves to obscure the reasons for the Church’s unchanging position on this matter.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Mt 27:55-56, 61; 28:1, 5-10  •  Lk 7:36-50; 8:1-3  •  Jn 11:1-2; 12:1-8; 20:11-18
General:  Mk 15:40-41, 47; 16:1-11  •  Lk 24:1-11  •  Jn 19:25; 20:1-2
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  76  •  83  •  124-127  •  515  •  638  •  1577-1578

In the Gospel according to John, Jesus teaches at length about the greatest of the sacraments, the Eucharist (see Jn 6:22-59).  In this discourse, he lays out what we might call the “sacramental principle” that lies at the heart of the Christian faith: “I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world” (Jn 6:51.

“The Word became flesh, / and made his dwelling among us” (Jn 1:14).  In Jesus Christ, God — who is Spirit (see Jn 4:24) — came down from heaven and entered into his own creation, this physical universe.  He joined to his own divine nature a human nature of soul and body; he took up into himself the matter and energy of this world.

In this “Incarnation” (literally, “becoming flesh”), as Christians call it, God made it possible for the everyday elements of our lives to convey the transforming power of his grace.  This is the sacramental principle: “God, in his remarkable humility, doesn’t hesitate to make use of bread and wine, oil and water, human hands and human words, even the nuptial act.  The Creator doesn’t despise anything he has made (see Wis 11:24); he calls it all good (see Gn 1:31).  So it’s not beneath him to come to us in the form of a small, white wafer, and to be consumed by us so that we might become one with him.

Of course, the Eucharist is only one of seven sacraments — seven unique signs instituted by Christ that give to us the grace they signify.  The others are Baptism, Reconciliation, Confirmation, Matrimony, Holy Orders, and the Anointing of the Sick (see “Are the Seven Sacraments in the Bible?”).  In each of these, Christ himself meets us and ministers to us through the ministry of his body, the Church (see 1 Cor 12:12-13, 27).

Why are sacraments necessary, then?  Because we desperately need God’s grace, and He’s chosen to give us certain kinds of grace through the sacraments.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Gn 1:31  •  Wis 11:24  •  Jn 1:14; 4:24; 6:22-59  •  1 Cor 12:12-13, 27
General:  Mt 5:31-32; 26:26-28; 28:19  •  Jn 20:23  •  Acts 6:6; 8:14-19  •  Jas 5:14-15
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  6  •  698  •  738-740  •  774  •  798  •  815  •  947  •  950  •  1076  •  1084  •  1088  •  1114-1115  •  1118  •  1121-1134  •  1150  •  1210  •  1420  •  1533-1535  •  2003  •  2030

“Speaking in tongues” is a special grace (or charism) given by the Holy Spirit that llows a believer to speak in a language not learned by natural means.  Jesus speaks of this gift as one of those “signs” that “will accompany those who believe” (Mk 16:17).  On the day of Pentecost, the apostles speak in tongues, as do other new believers on several occasions (see Acts 2:4; 10:46; 19:6).  St. Paul lists “varieties of tongues” among the “manifestation[s] of the Spirit,” along with the “interpretation of tongues” (see 1 Cor 12:4-11, 28).

Other scriptural passages may also refer to tongues, though the connection is uncertain.  For example, Romans tells how, when “we do not know how to pray as we ought, … the Spirit itself intercedes with inexpressible groanings” (Rom 8:26).

St. Paul is the biblical writer with the most to say about tongues.  He notes that not everyone speaks in tongues (see 1 Cor 12:30), and that tongues will one day cease (see 1 Cor 13:8).  They are a gift less valuable than the gift of prophesy, and they have no value at all unless grounded in the virtue of love (see 1 Cor 14:5; 13:1).  Yet the apostle thanks God that he speaks in tongues more than others, and he values the gift enough to wish that everyone had it (see 1 Cor 14:5, 18).

Several kinds of related phenomena seem to fall into the category of speaking in tongues.  the tongues spoken by the apostles on Pentecost, for example, appear to have been common human languages they had not learned, which were understood by listeners who were familiar with these languages through natural experience (see Acts 2:5-12).  On the other hand, in the church at Corinth believers spoke in utterances unintelligible to both speaker and listeners.  The words spoken did not “build up” the listeners spiritually unless someone prayed for a gift of interpretation so that their meaning could be understood and announced (see 1 Cor 14:6-19).

Yet even uninterpreted tongues, St. Paul notes, have value for the one speaking.  They are a form of prayer, an uttering of “mysteries in spirit,” that build up the one praying (see 1 Cor 14:2).

The Catholic Church affirms that the Spirit still bestows the grace of tongues as he wills.  Some of her most illustrious saints, such as St. Anthony of Padua, are reported to have practiced the gift when preaching.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Mk 16:17  •  Acts 2:4-12; 10:46; 19:6  •  Rom 8:26  •  1 Cor 12:4-11, 28, 30; 13:1, 8; 14:2, 5, 6-19
General:  Lk 11:13  •  Rom 12:3-8  •  Eph 4:7-16  •  Heb 2:4
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  688  •  731  •  797-801  •  809  •  951  •  1287  •  2003  •  2024

The Holy Spirit descended on our Lord at his baptism, the sign that he was the Messiah and the Father’s well-beloved Son (see Is 11:1-5; Mt 3:13-17(.  Christ later communicated this fullness of the Spirit to the entire Church on the day of Pentecost, fulfilling his promise that his followers would receive power when the Holy Spirit came upon them (see Acts 1:8; 2:1-4, 16-21).  After receiving this gift themselves, the apostles passed it on to others who came to believe the gospel and were baptized (see Acts 2:38).

How was the Spirit imparted to the newly baptized?  The apostles “laid hands on them and they received the holy Spirit. (Acts 8:17).  This was the origin of the sacrament of Confirmation, which passes down to our own day the strengthening grace of Pentecost.

From the beginning, Confirmation was a normal part of Christian initiation.  The writer of Hebrews lists “laying on of hands” along with repentance, faith, and baptism as elements of the “foundation” of Christian faith, part of its “basic teaching” (see Heb 6:1-3).  Confirmation completes the grace received in Baptism.

The sign of anointing (applying oil) in this sacrament is rich in meaning.  In Scripture, oil is a symbol of gladness and abundance (see Ps 23:5).  It was used to cleanse the body before and after a bath and to limber up an athlete preparing to compete.

Wounds were dressed with oil to aid healing (see Is 1:6; Lk 10:34).  It made a person shine with beauty, health, and strength (see Ps 104:15).  In addition, objects set apart for sacred use, and people consecrated to a sacred purpose, were anointed with oil (see Ex 37:29; 1 Sm 10:1).  All these biblical associations find spiritual parallels in the use of oil before Baptism, in the Anointing of the Sick, and especially in Confirmation.

Through this anointing, the one confirmed receives the mark or “seal” of the Holy Spirit (see 2 Cor 1:21-22).  In ancient times a seal signified ownership: Slaves were marked with the seal of their master, and soldiers with the seal of their commander.  The seal of the Holy Spirit in Confirmation thus indicates that we belong totally to Christ and are enrolled in his service.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Ex 37:29  •  1 Sm 10:1  •  Ps 23:5; 104:15  •  Is 1:6; 11:1-5  •  Mt 3:13-17  •  Lk 10:34  •  Acts 1:8′ 2:1-4, 16-21, 38; 8:17  •  2 Cor 1:21-22  •  Heb 6:1-3
General:  Dt 11:14  •  Sg 8:6  •  Dn 6:18  •  Jl 3:1-5  •  Lk 3:21-22; 4:1  •  Jn 1:33-34; 6:27  •  Eph 1:13-14; 4:30  •  2 Tm 2:19  •  Rv 7:3; 9:4
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  698  •  900  •  941  •  1121  •  1285-1321  •  1546  •  2472

The Catholic Church baptizes infants because that has been her consistent practice from the beginning.  Scripture nowhere commands us nor forbids us to baptize little children.  But the Book of Acts reports several occasions when the apostles baptized adults along with their entire households (Acts 16:15, 33 and Acts 18:8 — compare Acts 11:14).  St Paul also recalls baptizing an etire household in the city of Corinth (see 1 Cor 1:16).  In all likelihood, these families and their servants would have included small children, so they too would have received Baptism.

The clearest indicator that the Church has always baptized infants, however, is the witness of the early Church fathers who received their faith and practice from the hands of the apostles and their immediate successors.  St. Irenæus (c. 125-c. 203), for example, was a bishop trained by St. Polycarp, himself taught by St. John.  In his work Against Heresies, Irenæus wrote that Christ came to save those who are “born again in God” through Baptism, including “infants and children.”

The Church fathers were known for their vocal, stubborn opposition to any major innovations in Christian belief or practice.  So we can be sure that many of them would have vehemently protested in their teaching and writing if the Church had begun infant Baptism as a novelty in their day.  On the contrary, however, their testimony to this practice is universal.

Why would Christians baptize little children who have no clue what the sacrament is all about?  Because Baptism, as with all the sacraments, accomplishes real, objective spiritual work.  The effects of this particular sacrament are not dependent on the faith or understanding of a child being baptized.  We receive Baptism, Scripture tells us, “for the forgiveness … of sins” (Acts 2:38).  The Catholic Church teaches that Baptism washes away both original sin and actual sins from our souls, takes away the punishment for these sins, and infuses in us a number of divine graces.

If the sacrament accomplishes all this, why delay Baptism until a child can understand it?  Consider this parallel: Infants have no idea about what is accomplished by a bath.  Should parents wait to bathe their children’s bodies, then, until they are old enough to understand?  Of course not.  Now should they wait to have their children’s souls washed clean in Baptism.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Acts 2:38; 11:14; 16:15, 33; 18:8  •  1 Cor 1:16
General:  Mt 19:14  •  Mk 16:16  •  Jn 3:5  •  Acts 2:38; 22:16  •  Rom 2:28-29; 6:3-4  •  1 Cor 6:11
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  403  •  977-978  •  1213-1284  •  1290

As believers multiplied in the first Christian generation, sharp controversy soon followed.  The new Church had expanded beyond the borders of the Jewish community, taking in Gentiles (non-Jews) as well.  Some of the Jewish Christians who were Pharisees insisted that their new Gentile brothers in Christ could not be saved unless they submitted themselves first to circumcision (see Acts 15:1, 5).

Not surprisingly, “no little dissension and debate” resulted.  Not only was this a costly demand, but leaders such as Sts. Paul and Barnabas were convinced that the theological reasoning behind it was flawed and even dangerous.  St. Paul thundered that “in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything” (Gal 5:6).  Christians, even Jewish Christians, he insisted, were no longer bound by the law of Moses (see Gal 3:23-27).  But his opponents appealed to the ancient tradition of their people, in which God had required circumcision of Abraham and his descendants as a sign of their covenant with him (see Gn 17:1-14).

So how did the Church settle this doctrinal dispute?  Did each Christian study the Scriptures individually and them come up with his own conclusion?  Was each believer his own final interpreter and judge in the matter?

No.  That would have led to the total fragmentation of the community.  Instead, “the apostles and the presbyters [priests] met together to see about this matter” (Acts 15:6).  Debate ensued, then St. Peter stood to sum up the case for no longer observing the law of Moses.  Sts. Paul and Barnabas added their own testimony to his (see Acts 15:7-12).

Finally, the apostle James, bishop of Jerusalem (where the council was held), issued a concurring judgment.  With that “the apostles and presbyters, in agreement with the whole church, decided to choose representatives” (Acts 15:22) to deliver their judgment to the believers in Antioch, where the debate was raging (see Acts 15:13-29).  This judgment they referred to, not as a mere recommendation, but rather as a divinely authoritative “decision of the holy Spirit and of us” (Acts 15:28).

Why, then, do popes and councils resolve doctrinal and disciplinary disputes, rather than allow individual Catholics to decide these matters for themselves?  Because this is the biblical way, the way St. Peter and the other apostles handled disagreements.  Christ himself gave them and their successors — popes and bishops — the authority to speak for him: “Whoever listens to you,” he told them, “listens to me.  Whoever rejects you rejects me” (Lk 10:16).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Gn 17:1-14  •  Lk 10:16  •  Acts 15:1, 5-29  •  Gal 3:23-27; 5:6
General:  Mt 18:15-18  • Jn 14:26; 16:13  •  Gal 2:1-10  •  1 Tm 3:15
Catechism of the Catholic Church: 77  •  85-88  •  100  •  888-896  •  935-939  •  2032-2040  • 2049-2051

In his First Letter to the Corinthians (see 1 Cor 11:23-26), St. Paul echoes the words of Jesus over the bread and wine at the first Eucharist (the Last Supper): “This is my body…. This is my blood” (Mt 26:26-28).  Nothing in these passages suggests that our Lord was speaking only symbolically.

In fact, Jesus stated repeatedly that whoever would eat his flesh and drink his blood would have eternal life (see Jn 6:51-56).  When some of his listeners had objected to this statement and had left him as a result (see Jn 6:52, 60, 66), he didn’t call them back, saying, “Wait a minute!  You misunderstood!  I was only speaking symbolically.”  Instead, he let them go.

If they had in fact misunderstood Jesus —  if he had been speaking only figuratively — would he have let them go, considering that their eternal destiny was at stake?  Wouldn’t he instead have cleared up the confusion to spare them unnecessary scandal?  No doubt.  But Jesus was in fact speaking literally.

Luke’s account of the disciples’ encounter with the risen Lord on the road to Emmaus also points to this truth.  There our Lord took bread, blessed it, broke it, and gave it to them — whereupon they recognized him, and he physically vanished from their midst (see Lk 24:30-31).  Later, when they reported to the apostles what they had witnessed, they told “how he was made known to them in the breaking of the bread” (Lk 24:35).

If any doubts remain about the intent of Jesus’ words, we need only consult the words of St. Ignatius of Antioch, who learned his faith from and was consecrated as bishop by men who had been at the first Eucharist: Ignatius wrote: “The Eucharist is the flesh of our savior Jesus Christ, who suffered for our sins and who, in his goodness, the Father raised.”

The change of bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ (called “transubstantiation”) is of course a mystery we will never fully understand.  But even though we may find it difficult to imagine how this event takes place, we can be sure that the God who created the universe out of nothing has the power to accomplish this miracle as well.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Mt 26:26-28  •  Lk 24:30-31, 35  •  Jn 6:51-56, 60, 66  •  1 Cor 11:23-26
General:  Mk 14:22-24  •  Lk 22:17-20  •  1 Cor 10:16
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  611  •  790  •  1088  •  1323  •  1329  •  1335-1340  •  1373-1377  •  1382  •  1390-1394  •  1406  •  1413  •  1846  •  2120

St. Paul’s warning about receiving the Eucharist improperly should give all Christians cause for reflection: “Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord.  A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup.  For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself” (1 Cor 11:27-29).

In light of this and other scriptural passages, the Church obliges Catholics to make sure they are properly disposed to receive the Eucharist before approaching the altar.  For example, they must not receive Holy Communion in a state of mortal sin (see “Does the Bible Distinguish Between Mortal and Venial Sins?”).  But there are other dispositions necessary as well.  Those who deny that the Eucharist is truly the Body and Blood of Christ, believing it to be just a symbol, should also refrain from receiving Communion.  To use the apostle’s words, they would be eating and drinking “without discerning the body” properly, placing themselves in danger of judgment.

This is one reason why non-Catholics, Protestants in particular, should not partake in the Eucharist in a Catholic church: “They typically deny that It is truly Christ’s Body and Blood.  But the Church insists that even Protestants who believe what the Catholic Church teaches about the Eucharist should not normally approach the Catholic altar for Communion.  The reason for this restriction is suggested by other words from St. Paul:

The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation [or fellowship] in the blood of Christ?  The bread that we break, is it not a participation [fellowship] in the body of Christ?  Because the load of bread is one, we, though many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf. [1 Cor 10:16-17]

The Eucharist thus signifies a oneness in faith, life, and worship among those who partake of it.  So reception of the Eucharist by those separated from the Catholic Church is in a sense dishonest.  It implies a unity that does not yet exist.  (A few exceptions are allowed for pastoral reasons in extraordinary situations; see the Catechism 1401.)

In the meantime, the Church urges us to pray fervently that all Christians might finally “attain to the unity of faith and knowledge of the Son of God” (Eph 4:13).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  1 Cor 10:16-17; 11:27-29  •  Eph 4:13
General:  Ps 133:1-3  •  Jn 18:20-23  •  1 Cor 1:10  •  Eph 4:1-6  •  Phil 2:1-2
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  805  •  838  •  1396  •  1398-1401

“An unmarried man is anxious about the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord,” St. Paul tells the Corinthians.  “But a married man is anxious about the things of the world, how he may please his wife, and he is divided” (1 Cor 7:32-34).  In light of that observation, the example of our Lord Jesus, and long historical experience, the Church has concluded that the celibate priest may be better able to devote himself single-heartedly both to God and his flock.

We should note that the Church holds celibacy as the disciplinary norm of practice for priests; she allows for some exceptions.  Many ancient priests and even bishops had a wife at some point (see 1 Tm 3:2), including the first pope, St. Peter. (Mt 8:14 speaks of his “mother-in-law.”)  Today many Catholic priests of the Eastern rite are married.  And even in the Roman rite, a handful of married men (usually clergy converts from a non-Catholic Christian tradition) have been given a special dispensation by Rome to be ordained as priests.

The Church doesn’t teach as a part of the Catholic faith, then, that celibacy is an inherent quality of priesthood — part of its essence.  But as St. Paul observes, celibacy has distinct advantages for the man who must give himself wholly to God in ministry to his Church.

Opponents of celibacy often simply assume that such a life is utterly impossible.  But St. Paul undeniably teaches the contrary (see 1 Cor 7:7-38), and our Lord speaks without criticism of those who “have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven” (Mt 19:12).

Celibacy is both a matter of personal choice and, on a deeper level, an acceptance of God’s calling.  St. Paul acknowledges the divine impetus (see 1 Cor 7:7, 20) as well as the free-will initiative of human beings in the matter (see 1 Cor 7:35, 38).  If a man is called to celibacy, he will be given both the desire and the ability to carry out this way of life successfully (see Phil 2:13).

Finally, we should note that the Catholic Church does not in any sense reject marriage or sexuality (see 1 Cor 7:38), as long as these remain within the proper biblical and moral guidelines.  According to the Catholic faith, marriage and ordination are both sacraments, both positive and wonderful means of God’s grace.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Mt 8:14; 19:12  •  1 Cor 7:7-38  •  Phil 2:13  •  1 Tm 3:2
General:  Sg 1-8  •  Mt 19:1-12  •  Lk 2:36-37  •  Rv 14:1-5
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  922-924  •  1579-1580  •  1599  •  1619  •  1694  •  1832  •  2338-2450

“When [Peter] came to Antioch,” St. Paul told the Galatians, “I opposed him to his face because he clearly was wrong” (Gal 2:11).  He explained that he had rebuked St. Peter in person when the latter lapsed into practices contrary to the truth of the gospel (see 2:12-14).

Some non-Catholic Christians cite this event as evidence that Paul challenged Peter’s position as chief of the apostles.  The implication, they insist, is that Christ’s choice of Peter as the “rock” of the Church did not bestow on the apostle any special authority in matters of doctrine or discipline, and that Peter’s successors (the popes) also lack such authority.

We must not, however, that Peter’s doctrinal and disciplinary authority was not challenged by Paul.  Rather, Peter was rebuked for his hypocrisy.  So Paul’s criticism had no bearing on Peter’s office, or on Paul’s position relative to it.

Consider this biblical parallel.  In ancient Israel, the prophet Nathan rebuked King David for serious sin (see 2 Sm 12:1-14).  But that rebuke was not a rejection of David’s office as king.  In a similar way, Paul’s rebuke was not a rejection of Peter’s office as leader of the Church.

The truth is that Catholics have a long history of rebuking decadent clerics — popes included — while not denying their authority in the Church.  (St. Bernard, St. Thomas Becket, St. Catherine of Siena, and St. Dominic come to mind immediately.)  In fact, St. Paul’s rebuke, far from implying a denial of St. Peter’s supremacy, implies just the opposite.

Paul stated that Peter’s bad example would “compel the Gentiles to live like Jews” (Gal 2:14, emphasis added).  Peter’s behavior was imprudent and could do much harm precisely because of his authority as the leader of the Church.

The authority of St. Peter as the first pope was exercised on several occasions, as recorded in the Bible.  He presided over and opened the first council of Christianity, in Jerusalem (see Acts 15:7-11).  He was the first to recognize and refute heresy, in Simon Magus (see Acts 8:14-24).  His proclamation at Pentecost concerning the “house of Israel” (Acts 2:36) contains a fully authoritative interpretation of Scripture, a doctrinal decision, and a disciplinary decree (see Acts 2:14-41) — an example of “binding and loosing” (see Mt 16:17-19).  He had the authority to judge the first recorded case of Church discipline (see Acts 5:1-11).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  2 Sm 12:1-14  •  Mt 16:17-19  •  Acts 2:14-41; 5:1-11; 8:14-24; 15:7-11  •  Gal 2:11-14
General:  Is 22:22  •  Lk 22:31-32  •  Jn 21:15-17  •  Acts 3:6-12
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  552-553, 641-642, 765, 881-882

When the Pharisees challenge Jesus for failing to practice some of their religious traditions, he rebukes them sharply: “You nullify the word of God in favor of your tradition that you have handed on” (Mk 7:13).  Some Christians quote this passage to condemn Catholic tradition as a whole as something contrary to the “word of God.”  But is Jesus actually condemning all tradition?

The word “tradition” means literally “that which is handed down.”  Anything received from others and passed on to others is thus a tradition: language, culture, scientific knowledge, and even faith itself.  Jesus is certainly not condemning all of these things.

Is the Lord rejecting specifically religious tradition, then?  If we examine other biblical passages, we must conclude that he is not.   In speaking of the Eucharist, for example, St. Paul notes that he received it from Christ himself, to be handed down to others: “For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you …” (1 Cor 11:23).  He explicitly commends the Corinthians for adhering to such traditions: “I praise you because you … hold fast to the traditions, just as I handed them on to you” (1 Cor 11:2).

Some Christians insist that only Scripture is authoritative for Christian faith and life.  They deny the Catholic teaching (and the historical reality) that Scripture is actually a written portion of  a much wider sacred and authoritative Tradition, which includes other elements passed down orally and by patterns of behavior.  They fail to realize that if Scripture were the only legitimate source of Christian belief and practice, the early Christians who lived before the New Testament was written and circulated could not have lived the faith.

St. Paul alludes to this reality.  He tells the Thessalonians how to discern the truth from error: “Brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement [oral tradition] or by a letter of ours [Scripture]” (2 Thes 2:15).  In addition, religious tradition can be enacted, a way of life handed down as an example: “Consider the outcome of [your leaders’] way of life and imitate their faith” (Heb 13:7).

The only traditions Jesus condemns, then, are those that contradict what we know, from divine revelation, to be God’s will (see Mt 15:3).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Mt 15:3  •  Mk 7:13  •  1 Cor 11:2, 23  •  2 Thes 2:15  •  Heb 13:7
General:  Mt 15:1-9  •  Mk 7:1-13  •  1 Cor 4:15-17  •  Col 2:8  •  2 Thes 3:6  •  2 Tm 1:13
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  75-84  •  95-98  •  113  •  120  •  126  •  172-175  •  182  •  1124 •  2650-2651  •  2661

St. Timothy in Ephesus and St. Titus in Crete each received instructions from the apostle Paul about the qualifications for a bishop (see 1 Tm 3:1-7; Ti 1:7-9).  This “noble” officer was to “teach” and to “manage” the affairs of the Church in each locale.  (The Greek word for bishop, episkopos, literally means “overseer.”)  How did the office of bishop come about?

Our Lord appointed the apostles to teach and govern the Church (see Mt 28:16-20).  Since the place of Judas had been vacated by the traitor’s suicide, a successor was appointed by the other apostles to fill his “office” (see Acts 1:20) — literally, his “episcopacy” or “bishopric” (Greek, episkopen).  The first apostles, then, were bishops, as were their appointed successors (see “Is Apostolic Succession in the Bible?”).

In referring to ordained Church leaders, biblical writers do not always distinguish clearly between bishops/overseers and presbyters/elders/priests.  St. Luke, for example, refers to the leaders of the Church at Ephesus first as “presbyters” and then as “overseers” (see Acts 20:17, 28).  But those distinctions were clarified within a generation after the apostles, as evidenced by the writings of their immediate successors, such as St. Ignatius, bishop of Antioch.

Since the beginning, then, the Catholic Church has been governed by bishops, maintaining an episcopal form of government.  Protestant denominations have experimented with a variety of alternative structures, such as congregational (governed by vote of the entire congregation) and presbyterian (governed by a system of courts composed of elders).  But having received her episcopal structure from Christ, through his apostles, the Catholic Church has preserved it for two thousand years as a divine mandate — though with some historical variations in the method of appointment and the exercise of the office.

The bishops serve as shepherds of God’s flock (see 1 Pt 5:1-4).  In governing the Church, they are to imitate the pastoral care of Jesus himself for his people.  He is the chief “shepherd and guardian [episkopos] of … souls” (1 Pt 2:25).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Mt 28:16-20  •  Acts 1:20; 20:17-18  •  1 Tm 3:1-7  •  Ti 1:7-9  •  1 Pt 2:25; 5:1-4
General:  Jer 23:4  •  Mt 9:36  •  Mk 6:34  •  Phil 1:1  •  Heb 13:20
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  3  •  77  •  815-816  •  830  •  833  •  873  •  857-864  •  869  •  873-896  •  919  •  935-939  •  981  •  1087  •  1120-1121  •  1142  •  1369  •  1483  •  1549  •  1560-1561  •  1575-1577  •  1593-1596  •  1600  •  1673

St. Paul writes to St. Timothy: “I remind you to stir into the flame the gift of God that you have through the imposition of my hands” (2 Tm 1:6).  Through this ancient rite, St. Paul ordained St. Timothy as a priest, and eventually consecrated him as a “bishop” (the Greek root word literally means “overseer”) — that is, one who would oversee God’s flock and share in the ministry divinely given to Paul and the other apostles (see “Why Does the Church Have Bishops?”).

The Church is built, St. Paul tells us, on “the foundation of the apostles” (Eph 2:20), whom Christ himself chose (see Jn 6:70-71; Acts 1:2, 13; for St. Peter’s special function in that foundatio, see Mt 16:18).  Who were these first apostles?  In Mark 6:30, the twelve original disciples of Jesus are called by that name.  (Note: the Latin word discipulus means literally “student” or “follower”; Jesus had many more disciples than just the Twelve appointed as apostles — including, for example, Mary Magdalene.)  Matthew 10:2 and Revelation 21:14 also speak of the “twelve apostles.”  (For a list of the Twelve, see Mt 10:2-4).

After Judas defected, the remaining eleven apostles appointed the disciple Matthias as his successor (see Acts 1:20-26).  The term translated in this passage as “office” (Acts 1:20), and applied to Judas, is in Greek episkopen — literally, “episcopacy” or “bishopric.”  If Judas, as an apostle, occupied the office of bishop, then by logical extension all the apostles can be considered to have occupied that office.

Given that the apostles were bishops, and one of them was replaced by another bishop after the death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ, then we have here an explicit example of apostolic succession in the Bible.  Clearly, apostolic succession is not a later invention of the Church, but a reality that existed and was recognized by the apostles within days after Christ returned to heaven.

The Catholic Church traces itself back historically, in an unbroken succession, to the apostles.  Apostolic succession was in fact a strong theme in the writings of the early Church fathers, who themselves had received the faith directly from the apostles or their immediate successors.  They insisted that such a succession was a sign of authenticity, necessary to identify which groups claiming to be Christian could legitimately be recognized as part of the Church Jesus had established.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Mt 10:2-4; 16:18  •  Mk 6:30  •  Jn 6:70-71  •  Acts 1:2, 13, 20-26  •  Eph 2:20  •  2 Tm 1:6  •  Rv 21:14
General:  1 Tm 4:14  •  Heb 6:2
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  3  •  77  •  642  •  815  •  830  •  833  •  857-863  •  935  •  981  •  1087  •  1120  •  1576

The First Letter of Peter addresses Christians as those who “have been born anew” (1 Pt 1:23).  This language echoes the words of Jesus, who tells Nicodemus: “No one can see the kingdom of God without being born from above” (or “born again”; the Greek in this passage — Jn 3:3 — allows for either translation).

Nicodemus is puzzled.  “How,” he asks, “can a person once grown old be born again?  Surely he cannot reenter his mother’s womb and be born again, can he?” (Jn 3:4).

Jesus’ reply to Nicodemus is critical for understanding what it means to be “born again”: “I say to you, no one can enter the kingdom of God without being born of water and Spirit” (Jn 3:5; emphasis added).  The event described here is not, as some Christians insist, an initial profession of faith in Christ.  Rather, it refers to the sacrament of Baptism, when the person is washed with water and receives the Spirit.  Later, preaching on Pentecost, St. Peter confirms that those who are baptized receive the Spirit (see Acts 2:38).

The new birth, which is the beginning of the new life in Christ, must come about after the death of the “old self” (Rom 6:6) — that is, the unredeemed nature burdened by original sin (see “What is Original Sin?” and “What Does the Church Baptize Infants?”).  The person who thus “dies,” says St. Paul, is “absolved from sin” (Rom 6:7).

How does this death, leading to new life, come about?  Through the absolution (remission) of sins in Baptism.  “Are you unaware that we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?  We were indeed buried with him through baptism and death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might live in newness of life” (Rom 6:3-4).

To be “born again” or “born anew,” then, is to be baptized.  In this sacrament, through “water and Spirit,” the soul is washed clean, the “old self” is buried, and the new life in Christ begins.  Since every Catholic has been baptized, every Catholics has indeed been “born again” — and is called to grow in grace with the help of the Holy Spirit.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Lk 3:21-22  •  Jn 3:3-5  •  Rom 6:3-4, 6-7  •  Acts 2:38  •  1 Pt 1:23
General:  Mt 3:13-17  •  Mk 1:9-11  •  Lk 3:21-22  •  Jn 1:29-34  •  1 Cor 12:13  •  Col 2:12-13
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  1213-1284  •  1425-1429  •  2813

In Revelation, the inhabitants of heaven sing to Christ: “With your blood you purchased for God / those from every tribe and tongue, people and nation” (Rv 5:9).  The Catholic Church affirms this wideness of God’s mercy in Christ, embracing the whole world, desiring with him that “everyone … be saved and … come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Tm 2-4).  Nevertheless, the Church also recognizes that the gift of salvation must be accepted to be effective, and human beings, having free will, may choose to reject or “ignore so great a salvation” (Heb 2:3).

The Church accepts Christ’s declaration about himself: “I am the way and the truth and the life.  No one comes to the Father except through me” (Jn 14:6).  She also recalls his words to her that warn those who would turn away from her: “Whoever rejects you rejects me.  And whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me” (Lk 10:16).

If Jesus Christ is the only way to salvation, and the Church is his Body on earth, we can understand why the Church fathers often declared: “Outside the Church there is no salvation.”  Or to put it another way: “All salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body” (Catechism 846).  Does this mean that only Catholics will be saved?

The Second Vatican Council made the following affirmations about the possibility of salvation for those outside the Catholic Church:

• Those who know that God founded the Catholic Church through Christ as the necessary means to salvation, yet still refuse to enter it or remain in it, cannot be saved (see Lumen Gentium 14).
• Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience — those too may achieve eternal salvation” (Lumen Gentium 16, emphasis added).
• “Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has an obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men” (Ad Gentes 7).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Lk 10:16  •  Jn 14:6  •  1 Tm 2:4  •  Heb 2:3  •  Rv 5:9
General:  Mt 8:11-12; 10:40; 28:18-20  •  Lk 13:28-30  •  1 Cor 9:16  •  2 Cor 5:14-15  •  Heb 11:6  •  Jas 2:21-23
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  816-822  •  846-856

The biblical Greek and Hebrew words sometimes translated as “saints” mean literally “holy ones” (Act 9:13) or “faithful ones” (1 Sm 2:9).  Typically, these are general terms for God’s people, who have a share in his holiness and are striving to become more holy (see Heb 12:10; 2 Cor 7:1).  The apostle Paul was especially fond of addressing his letters to “all the holy ones” in the churches (2 Cor 1:1).

All faithful Christians, then, are indeed “saints” in this sense.  In fact, the Catholic Church teaches that the vocation to holiness is universal; God speaks to all believers when he says: “Be holy because I [am] holy” (see 1 Pt 1:14-16).

It is in this latter, narrower, sense that the Catholic Church honors certain departed Christians with the formal title “saint.”  This title indicates the Church’s confidence that the individual died in friendship with God and is now in heaven with him (see “What Does the Church Teach About Heaven?”).

Why is it important for the Church to designate certain Christians this way?  “Saint” is actually much more than a title of honor.  Because the Church is confident that these “holy ones” are now in heaven, Catholics are urged not only to venerate them, but also to imitate their holiness and ask for their intercession (see “Why Do Catholics Pray to Saints and Angels?”).

How does the Church gain the confidence that a particular person is in heaven?  Various kinds of evidence are sough in the process of “canonization” (for recognition of sainthood): reliable testimony to the person’s extraordinary holiness, evidence that the person’s life has drawn others closer to God, and documented miracles occurring after the the person’s intercession has been invoked (see also “Hasn’t Science Disproved Miracles?”).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited: 1 Sm 2:9  •  Mt 27:52  •  Acts 9:13  •  2 Cor 1:1; 7:1  •  1 Thes 3:13  •  Heb 12:10  •  1 Pt 1:14-16  •  Rv 5:8; 8:3
General:  Lv 11:44; 19:2  •  Dt 33:3  •  Ps 89:6  •  Lk 1:75  •  Rom 1:7  •  Eph 1:1  •  Phil 1:1  •  Col 1:2
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  61  •  823-829  •  867  •  946-962  •  1161  •  1474-1479  •  2030  •  2683  •  2692

The dazzling vision of St. John in the Book of Revelation is perhaps best known for its depictions of horrific worldwide catastrophe.  Yet at the heart of this text stands a poignant figure full of mercy, hope, and glory: the “Lamb” who was slain for our sins, Jesus Christ (see Rv 5:6).  Biblical scholars have pointed out that at one level, in presenting us a vision of heaven, Revelation also provides us a glimpse of the Mass, our foretaste on earth of heaven’s “wedding feast of the Lamb” (Rv 19:9).

Catholics agree with other Christians that the divine sacrifice made “once for all” described in Hebrews 7:27 is a unique historical event: the death of Jesus Christ on the cross.  Bus Jesus’ sacrifice, though occurring in the past to us, is nevertheless always present to God, because God himself does not exist in time as we do.  John’s vision depicts this eternal reality; the presentation of Jesus as “Lamb” to the Father appears to be an ongoing occurrence (from God’s perspective, timeless), long after the death of Jesus (see Rv 5:6; 13:8).  Our Savior, Scripture says, “has a priesthood that does not pass away” (Heb 7:24).

In this light, then, we can understand how the Mass is a re-presentation of Jesus’ historical, one-time sacrificial death on the cross.  In every Mass, the priest re-enacts Jesus’ priestly actions at the Last Supper, offering once more his Body and Blood.  But Jesus is not sacrificed again in the Eucharist.  Rather, his unique sacrifice is made real and present to us here and now, because it is a divine reality that transcends space and time.

For this reason, the Mass is not merely a service of praise, preaching, and fellowship, presided over by a pastor around a meal table.  The Mass is truly a sacrifice offered by a priest upon an altar.  Though some Christians insist that priests and altars belong only to the Jewish temple sacrifice of the Old Covenant, these elements also play a role in the New Covenant in Christ’s blood (see Lk 22:20).  The Book of Revelation in particular tells us of the “altar” with a “gold censer” in the “temple” where the sacrificed Lamb, Jesus, reigns (see Rv 5:6; 6:9; 8:3; 9:13).

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Lk 22:20  •  Heb 7:24; 7:27  •  Rv 5:6; 6:9; 8:3; 9:13; 13:8; 19:9
General:  Gn 14:18  •  Lk 23:13  •  Ps 110:4  •  Is 66:18, 21  •  Mal 1:11  •  Heb 2:17; 3:1; 4:14-16; 5:1-10; 6:20; 7:1-28; 8:1-6; 9:11-15, 24-28; 10:19-22; 13:10  •  Rv 8:3-5; 11:1; 14:18; 16:7
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  1330  •  1359-1372  •  1378  •  1410  •  1414  •  1418  •  2643

What exactly is the nature of the “millennium” — that is, the “thousand-year” reign of Christ with his saints described in Revelation 20:1-10?  Some Christians, among them a few of the ancient Church fathers, have taken what is called the “premillennial” view of the matter.  This position holds that after Christ returns to the earth in glory, he will reign for a thousand years in a literal earthly kingdom before Judgment Day and the end of the world.  Premillennialists teach that this era will be a golden age of optimal natural, social, moral, economic, and political conditions.

The Church, however, eventually rejected such a view.  In one statement of the magisterium’s position, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith replied in 1944 to a formal query about the teaching “that Christ the Lord before the final judgment … will come visibly to rule over this word.”  The answer: This notion “cannot be taught safely.”

“Postmillennialists,” under the influence of the Protestant reformer John Calvin, teach that the kingdom of God is now being extended through the world by the preaching of the gospel, social activism, and the work of the Holy Spirit in conversion.  Through this process, the world will eventually be Christianized.  Then at the end of this “millennium” (the “thousand years” in this view represents simply “a long time”), Christ will return to earth at the climax of a long period of righteousness and peace.

The Catholic Church rejects this view as well.  As the Catechism (677) teaches: “The kingdom will be fulfilled, then, not by a historic triumph of the Church through a progressive ascendancy, but only by God’s victory over the final unleashing of evil, which will cause his Bridge to come down from heaven (cf. Rv 13:8; 20:7-10; 21:2-4).”

Since the time of St. Augustine, most Catholics have tended toward the so-called “amillennial” (“no millennium”) position he made popular.  Amillennialists might more accurately be termed “present millennialists,” because the do believe in the “millennium” of chapter 20 of Revelation.  But they insist that the “thousand years” refer symbolically to the present age between Christ’s two advents rather than to some era in the future.

St. Augustine’s views on this issue, though they have dominated Catholic thinking for many centuries, have not been officially adopted by the Church.  In fact, the magisterium has never defined the “millennium” St. John saw in his vision.  It has only rejected certain interpretations of the term discerned to be in error.

Related Scripture:

Texts Cited:  Rv 13:8; 20:1-10; 21:2-4
General:  Dn 12:4, 8-10  •  Mt 24:36, 42-51; 25:1-13  •  Lk 12:35-48  •  2 Pt 3:8
Catechism of the Catholic Church:  668-682  •  988-1001  •  1040  •  1059-1060  •  2771-2772