Why does God have to be Jesus? (Asked by Bel Lioanag, SE-6)

Why does God have to be Jesus? Why does he have to be a human? Can we not be forgiven without Jesus’ sacrifice?

It would help very much if you could read my answer to the question “What is the Holy Trinity?” It will answer 50% of your question.

In summary, this article will explain that God DID NOT HAVE TO become Jesus. The God that we know IS Jesus. Jesus is who God is, and not someone that God has to be. Our God is not a one-person God (unlike the God professed by other faiths). Our God is a Trinitarian God. The name of our God is “Father-Son-Holy Spirit.” Just click here to read the full article.

Here’s the other 50%.

Our God is a communicating God. God WANTS to communicate with us. In the Old Testament, God communicates indirectly through signs (for example, thunder and lightning, parting of the Red Sea, through the prophets, victories and losses of the Israelites against their enemies, and so on). But in the New Testament, God communicated to us DIRECTLY. God did this through Jesus Christ. This is what St. Paul meant when he wrote:

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, whom he made heir of all things and through whom he created the universe. (Hebrews 1:1-2)

Let me explain it this way. Tita Wena and I do not have children, as you know. But we do have two wonderful dogs named Sunshine and Email. You should come and visit, and see us talk to our dogs. “Sunshine, don’t make wee-wee on the floor again; do it here on the newspaper,” TW would say. I would then follow-up and say, “Mabuti pa si Email, she learned already where to make wee-wee. Sunshine, you follow what your sister here does, ok?”

Now, do you think Sunshine and Email understands what we’re telling them? I suppose somehow they do. But if we wanted to communicate with them directly and clearly, we would have to learn and communicate to them in “dog language,” not in human language.

This is what God did. Instead of communicating to us in “divine language,” God wanted to communicate to us in human language. Thus, God became human, just like one of us, through Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ communicated to us through his words and actions. People saw him, talked to him, ate with him and so on. Now, St. Paul also says in Colossians 1:15: “Jesus Christ is the image of the invisible God.”

If you really want to know who God is, then get to know Jesus because he is the image of God. If Jesus is loving, forgiving, and healing, then God is ALSO loving, forgiving and healing. That is as plain as it get. It’s like WYSIWIG – what you see is what you get.

Can we not be forgiven without Jesus sacrifice?

We often associate Jesus sacrifice ONLY with his death on the cross. Let’s note that God did not become man to simply die. That would make God the Father such a cruel God who demands that the Son die for our sins.

We should also focus on what Jesus was saying and doing during his life WHICH RESULTED to his death on the cross.

This is consistent with the biblical meaning of sacrifice. When a Jew would offer an animal as sacrifice, the animal was the symbol for his or her life: by offering the animal, the Jew was also offering his or her life to God. But for the Jew, the focus is NOT the killing of the animal, but what it symbolizes: his or her life would now be based on obeying God’s will. The Jew was in effect saying, “I am offering this animal to tell my God that I would like to live a life that is God-centered.”

It is the same with the sacrifice of Jesus. It is not just the crucifixion but the entire life of Jesus that we should consider.

The core of Jesus’ teaching is the Kingdom of God, mentioned more than a hundred times in the Gospel. The Kingdom of God is not a place, but a condition where unconditional love prevails (see the parable of the Prodigal Son). God’s love is unconditional, which means that it is open to everyone, regardless of how sinful you are. That is why for Jesus, salvation is not just something that happens in the “after life” but something that God does now because God cares passionately about what happens to us.

Preaching this contradicted and embarrassed many of the Pharisees, Sadducees and other authorities during Jesus’ time. Eventually, people plotted against him, which resulted to his crucifixion and death.

So, please answer my question, can we not be forgiven without Jesus sacrifice?

This is the way you should also look at “being forgiven.” Jesus has shown in his life that we are forgiven and loved unconditionally.

“When we begin to accept that God loves and accepts us unconditionally, then we can change our sense of who we are and our sense of what life is about. Our primary image of our self would then become one of ‘trusted, loved and already forgiven by God,’ rather than ‘sinner who must please God to be forgiven.’ We can begin to discover that the Christian life is about a life lived in a loving relationship with God. Realizing this, we may be able to allow the transforming power of our love relationship with God to work in our lives.”[1]

A profound healing can begin to take place within us. Our “being saved” or “being forgiven” happens.

What’s the implication of all these in my life?

When you look at Jesus on the cross, do not remember only his death. Remember his entire life, what he said and did, his unconditional love manifested in forgiveness and healing of both the physical, mental and emotional illnesses of those around him. Recall that Jesus was willing to do all these even if he knew that he would antagonize people and that he may eventually pay for it with his life. But he did so anyway out of love for all of us.

Realizing this, I think it would not be difficult for you to do also start to love others unconditionally. Your “being saved” and “being forgiven” happens.

---

[1] Lode Wostyn, CICM, I Believe: A Workbook for Theology I (Manila: Claretian Publications, 2004), 174.

What are indulgences? - Asked by Sonny Santiago, SE-9

There are two things I’d like you to appreciate before we discuss indulgences, namely:

- First, any sin is never just between a person and God. Sin damages our relationship with our family, friends and others. One cannot say that my sin is only between my God and myself. Any sin has consequences and eventually affects our relationship with others. For example, stealing is a sin because you deprive someone of something and it hurts the relationship. Lying hurts our relationship because you mislead me.

- Secondly, there are two consequences of sin. If your sin is mortal, and here I regard mortal sin as not only one act but as a position you have taken to completely reject God’s love in your life, then the consequence is complete and eternal separation from God. This should come as no surprise to such a person since that person has already taken the position that he or she does not want God in his or life. This is referred to as “eternal punishment.”

The other consequence of sin is the harm to our community and social relationship that I referred to earlier. This is referred to as “temporal punishment.”

These two punishments should not be thought of as a kind of vengeance inflicted by God, but as following from the very nature of sin (CCC 1472).

When we convert, i.e. when we once again accept God’s love in our life (and we are forgiven in the Sacrament of Reconciliation), then “eternal punishment” is removed. But “temporal punishment” remains, i.e. the harm brought to our community and social relationships is still there. This is obvious, isn’t it? When I hurt you through unkind words, the hurt is still there even after I go to confession.

We therefore need to repair these hurts in our relationships to ensure that I stop hurting other people, or at least hurt less people or hurt people less. I need to change. But I cannot just will or intend these changes. I must practice patience, kindness, forgiveness and so on. In other words, I need to “pay for” these punishments. We also believe this change process is actually facilitated by the problems, trials and sufferings that we encounter in our life because these make us turn to God as the source of all life and the One who is in control of our life. In a manner of speaking these “punishments” help us reform and change.

When do we start talking about indulgences?

Ok, let's now turn to your question. The church defines indulgence as the remission of the temporal punishment due to sins already forgiven, which persons who are duly disposed gains under certain conditions (CCC 1471). What that means is this.

The burden to change our self is never an individual effort! We are members of Christ’s body, the Church. The Church helps its members by granting indulgences, that is, by assigning to a penitent person a portion of the “treasury of merits Christ and the saints” to help the person “pay for” the temporal punishments. In the case of plenary indulgence, ALL the temporal punishment is “paid for.”

I hope you do not look at “treasury of merits of Christ and the saints” as the sum total of material goods accumulated by the Church through the centuries. Rather, look at it as our Church’s “assets of goodness in the world” (my phrase). Just as there is evil in the world, there is also so much goodness and, as St. Paul says, “where sin abounds, grace abounds even more.” Our Church is therefore saying that we want to share with our members some of these goodness to help these members make up for their “temporal punishments” but still ensure that personal change happen.

This is why indulgences are not just doled out. Certain conditions are required. For example, in the granting of a plenary indulgence, the following are the requirements: sacramental confession, Eucharistic Communion, prayer for the intention of the Pope, and that all attachment to sin be absent. The objective of these requirements are to promote and help facilitate the change in the person.

The last condition ("all attachment to sin is absent") is admittedly a tough one, but it is the Church’s way of saying that a profound and personal change must begin to happen in one’s self so that the person will now do less harm to relationships in the community.

Where does purgatory fit into all of this?

We believe in a “purgatory,” that is, a transition between a person’s death and final judgment. We certainly express this in our practice of praying for the dead. Contemporary theology prefers to speak of purgatory as a process rather than as a place, and therefore theologians use the term purification rather than purgatory. Indeed, that is the language commonly used by the early church and the Eastern Churches.[1]

Our own Pope Benedict XVI views purgatory as “the inwardly necessary process of transformation in which a person becomes capable of Christ, capable of God and thus capable of unity with the whole communion of saints.” [2]

Pope John Paul II explained purgatory as part of the “process of purification” for the sinner when the repentant sinner is prepared to receive “the fullness of love.” (CWNews.com, Sept. 29, 1999)

In this context, our Church also believes that we can share our indulgences with those in purgatory so that temporal punishments due for their sins may also be “paid for.” Again, don’t look at this as like a bank book wherein we withdraw from our account and deposit to your grandfather’s account in purgatory. Rather, look at this as our way of saying that there is a “perennial link of love between those who have already reached their heavenly home, those who are being purified in purgatory, and those who are still pilgrims on earth; between them there is an abundant exchange of all good things.” (CCC 1475)

As a final word on indulgence, John Paul II reminds us that the process of earning indulgences cannot be a matter of “external gestures, done superficially,” but must be “a process of interior growth toward actual detachment from sin.” (CWNews.com, Sept. 29, 1999)

- Written by Manny Blas, with help from Chris Mallion (SE-9)

Sources (in addition to those cited in the footnotes):

-CCC or Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1471-1479

-CFC or Catechism of Filipino Catholics, 1820 – 1821

-www.catholic.org/clife/prayers/indulgc.php

[1] Peter C. Phan, Responses to 101 Questions o Death and Eternal Life (New Jersey: Paulist Press, 1997), 70.

[2] Joseph Ratzinger, Eschatology: Death and Eternal Life (Washington D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 1988), 230; as cited by Phan, 71.

Why do we pray the rosary? Are we praying to Jesus or Mary? (Asked by Mark Lim, SE-2)

Let’s learn something first about the history of the rosary, and then I will answer your questions.

History

According to tradition, the devotion of the Rosary was spread by St. Dominic in the thirteenth century. In the Roman Catholic Church, the feast of the Blessed Virgin Mary of the Rosary is observed on October 7.

Historians have traced the origin of the Rosary back to the 9th century, and to a form of prayer that evolved in the early monasteries of the church. One of the most important forms of monastic prayer was the daily chanting of the 150 psalms of David. Lay people around the monastery would hear the psalms every day as they were sung or recited, and the beauty of this prayer intrigued them. They yearned to join in, but the psalms were too long to memorize, copies could not be found since printing was rare, and few knew how to read Latin anyway. The lay people were however, determined to adapt this prayer form for their own use.

Sometime around 800 AD, the people's desire to participate led to their reciting the “Our Father” in response to every psalm recited by the monks. As this form of devotion became popular, people began to carry leather pouches of 150 pebbles, in order that they might keep count of their daily prayers when they were not in hearing distance of the monastery. A thin rope with 150 knots became less of a burden and soon replaced the bag of stones.

When the missionary monks began to travel and evangelize Europe, this form of devotion was brought with them. In some areas, priests and lay people began to recite the Angelic Salutation, or “Hail Mary, full of grace…” in response to the psalms, instead of the “Our Father.”

During the 13th century, the recitation evolved into yet another form. Medieval theologians began to interpret the 150 psalms as hidden prophesies about the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, and they composed a series of psalters, or praises, based on each interpretation. These thoughts took the form of narratives. The fifteen narratives were divided into five Joyful, five Sorrowful, and five Glorious mysteries in the lives of Jesus and Mary, and the Rosary itself became a string of 50 beads to be prayed.
In order to fit the existing prayer string, the psalters were divided into three "rosariums" or bouquets of 50 each. This was the form that St. Dominic promoted.

Now, let’s answer your questions.

The rosary began as the layperson’s attempt to pray regularly to God. People wanted to pray and when they could not pray the “official prayers” of the monks, then this yearning eventually led to the rosary as a prayer. Eventually, the lives of Jesus and Mary were incorporated to the rosary.

There are several approaches that you can use when praying the rosary:

- One approach is to focus on the fact that you are praying, and prayer is essentially being aware of God’s presence in our midst. The Rosary helps you to focus your mind in God’s loving presence for you. In this approach, the constant repetition of the “Hail Mary and Holy Mary” helps prevent your mind from being diverted into thoughts other than God’s presence.

- Another approach is focus on the mysteries of the lives of Jesus and Mary which corresponds to the Mystery of the Rosary that you are praying. So, if you are in decade of the mystery of the “birth of our Lord,” focus on the scene to keep your mind from being distracted, as well as help edify your thoughts on God’s love for us in becoming one of us.

- The third approach, which I often use, is to have a special prayer intention for each decade which you can declare to those praying with you, and then focus on praying to God for that intention. For example, you may declare that the first Joyful Mystery is for the intention of your “movie premier fundraising activity,” and then pray for that as you recite the decade.

Finally, do we pray to Jesus or Mary?

Well, “technically,” all prayers are to God, but we keep in mind that Mary and the saints (as well as our apostolate brothers and sisters, family, and friends) are one with us in praying because we are all part of God’s family. This is referred to as the communion of saints and is discussed in another AskTM question. Click here if you want to read more about that.



Sources:
Catholic Encyclopedia, Our Sunday Visitor, 1994
http://www.aoh.com/history/archive/rosary.htm

Was Jesus actually born on December 25? (Asked by Edward Santillan, SE-7)

Christmas is based on the story of Jesus’ birth as described in the Gospel according to Matthew (1:18-2:12) and the Gospel according to Luke (1:26-56). Roman Catholics first celebrated Christmas, then known as the Feast of the Nativity, as early as 336 ad.

The word Christmas entered the English language sometime around 1050 as the Old English phrase Christes maesse, meaning “festival of Christ.” Scholars believe the frequently used shortened form of Christmas—Xmas—may have come into use in the 13th century. The X stands for the Greek letter chi, an abbreviation of Khristos (Christ), and also represents the cross on which Jesus was crucified.

ORIGINS OF CHRISTMAS

Historians are unsure exactly when Christians first began celebrating the Nativity of Christ. However, most scholars believe that Christmas originated in the 4th century as a Christian substitute for pagan celebrations of the winter solstice.

Before the introduction of Christmas, each year beginning on December 17 Romans honored Saturn, the ancient god of agriculture, in a festival called Saturnalia. This festival lasted for seven days and included the winter solstice, which usually occurred around December 25 on the ancient Julian calendar. During Saturnalia the Romans feasted, postponed all business and warfare, exchanged gifts, and temporarily freed their slaves. Many Romans also celebrated the lengthening of daylight following the winter solstice by participating in rituals to glorify Mithra, the ancient Persian god of light. These and other winter festivities continued through January 1, the festival of Kalends, when Romans marked the day of the new moon and the first day of the month and year.

Most scholars believe that Christmas originated in the 4th century as a Christian substitute for pagan celebrations of the winter solstice.

Although the Gospels describe Jesus’ birth in detail, they never mention the date, so historians do not know on what date he was born. The Roman Catholic Church chose December 25 as the day for the Feast of the Nativity in order to give Christian meaning to existing pagan rituals.

Edited from: Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2003. © 1993-2002 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Since it's Christmas time, can you provide some historical details on the circumstances of the birth of Jesus? (Asked by Rose Meim, SE-2)

Let’s use the account of the birth of Jesus according to Luke 2:1-20. This is commonly the gospel passage read during Christmas eve mass. (See where Bethlehem is located, map below).

Luke is quite specific about the circumstances surrounding Jesus birth:

1. When was Jesus born? Luke 1:5 states that Herod the Great was the king at around the birth of Jesus. Since history dates the death of Herod at around March or April 4 BC, then Jesus must have been born before that date. December 25 was not his exact birth date, but was assigned by the Church later on (more on this on a separate AskTM question).


2. Luke mentioned that the Roman emperor Caesar Augustus ordered a census of the whole world, i.e. the Roman empire. We now know that this is inaccurate since there was no such universal census taken at around this time. The closest is that held in Palestine when Quirinius was governor of Syria (also mentioned by Luke), but which was around 6 AD.

Biblical scholars believe that the census is a literary device used by Luke to associate Mary and Joseph, residents of Nazareth, with Bethlehem, the town of David. Also, every time there is a Roman census, there is usually opposition by the people since this is a recognition of Roman authority over them, and caused a lot of inconvenience. Luke wanted to tie Jesus birth to a time of political disturbance associated with a census.

Such political disturbances were one of the triggers for the revolt of Judas the Galilean, and Luke wanted to show that Joseph and Mary (who were both Galileans) were obedient to Rome. Jesus and the Christians have no political ambitions.

Augustus is also known at that time as the peaceful Savior, so this serves as a contrast to Jesus who brings the real peace (see the message of the angels) and is the real Savior.


3. Luke establishes that the procedure is for everyone to go to the city of his ancestry and Joseph went to Bethlehem, the city of David; even though Jerusalem is traditionally regarded in the Old Testament as the city of David.

Luke wanted to connect the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem with what is written in Micah 5:2: "But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, who are little to be among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel."

Joseph and Mary were living in Nazareth at that time and had to travel southward to Bethlehem which was about 100 kilometers away. Using an animal to travel (at about 3 to 4 kph), and considering Mary is pregnant which would have added to travel time, this distance would have taken about 7 to 9 days. By the way, the bible does not mention that Joseph and Mary used a donkey, although they certainly used an animal to travel. It could have been an ass, horse, mule or donkey.


4. Luke’s narrative of Jesus birth is very brief. Luke seems more interested in telling his readers where Mary lay the newborn child - in a manger. The symbolism behind this is not clear. Perhaps it lies in the contrast between the extraordinary titles given to the child and his poverty. God is thus revealed in a paradox.

A manger is a feeding-trough, crib, or open box in a stable designed to hold food for livestock. In Bible times, mangers were made of clay mixed with straw or from stones cemented with mud. Some mangers were cut from a limestone block or carved in natural outcroppings of rock, because livestock was sometimes stabled in a cave. (Thus, there is some tradition that Jesus was born in a cave).


5. There were shepherds out in the field. Shepherds were despised people at the time of Jesus. They were suspected of not being very scru­pulous in matters of ownership; and so, their testimony was not admissible in court. They had the same legal status as the tax collectors. In view of what Luke says later on in his gospel regarding the preference of Jesus for tax collectors and sinners, the choice of the shepherds as the first beneficiaries of God's revelation in Jesus becomes quite significant.

Sources: Nil Guillemette, SJ, Kingdom for All (St. Paul’s Publications, 1988) and Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia.

What is the difference between the Ascension and Assumption (Asked by Charlie Rancudo, SE-1)

Ascension

The biblical verses referring to the Ascension are:

- “Then he led them as far as Bethany, raised his hands, and blessed them. As he blessed them he parted from them and was taken up to heaven. They did him homage and then returned to Jerusalem with great joy, and they were continually in the temple praising God.” – Luke 24:50-53

- “So then the Lord Jesus, after he spoke to them, was taken up into heaven and took his seat at the right hand of God. But they went forth and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them and confirmed the word through accompanying signs.” - Mark 16:19-20

- Also Acts 1:9-12

The Ascension (or being lifted up to heaven) is described as Jesus Christ's return to the Father. It marks the end of the visible ministry of Jesus on earth.

The Ascension is best understood in connection with the Resurrection which you can read in the footnote below.[1] In the Resurrection, Jesus went through a transformation in body and spirit. Jesus was not just resuscitated (like Lazarus, who eventually died), but transformed.

This transformation of Jesus did not stop at the Resurrection, but continued with the Ascension. We think of the Ascension not so much as the transition of Jesus from one place to another (i.e. from earth to heaven) but from one condition to another. When we say that Jesus ascended, we mean:

- Jesus withdrew from a world of limitation (that is our human condition) to that higher existence where God is.

- It is the end of the visible activities of Jesus on earth, but not the end of Jesus presence. Jesus is now physically far, but spiritually near. Jesus ascension precedes the sending of the Holy Spirit which is His presence in our everyday life today. “It is much better for you that I go… If I go, I will send the Paraclete to you.” – John 16:7. Being now free from earthly limitations, Jesus can now more “freely” interact and intercede for us.

- It is the return of Jesus to the Father in the beginning of time before He came into the world. Ascension or being "lifted up into Heaven" is Jesus Christ's coming back home. It is also at this event that marks the sending of the Holy Spirit to work within us.


Assumption

The Assumption refers to Mother Mary’s “body and soul” (that is, her entire being) as taken up into heaven without having tasted death. The bible also refers to both Elijah and Enoch being taken to heaven in the same manner (2 Kings 2:11 and Hebrews 11:5).

Again, just in the explanation of the Ascension, “taken up to heaven” should be read as Mary having gone through a transformation from one condition to another (rather than physically floating from earth to the skies).

The Assumption was declared as a dogma on November 1, 1950 by Pius XII.

That early Christian believed in Mary's Assumption is proven in the lack of her relics, empty tombs, and quotes from early Christians. The early Christians were very careful to keep the relics of saints and martyrs, even if it involved great risk (like trying to retrieve the remains of those who were eaten by lions). Because Christians took care of the remains of the saints, we know where the bones of Saint Peter, Mary Magdalene and many other New Testament believers are buried. But where are the remains of the Virgin Mary? There is no record of anyone ever claiming to possess the body of the Mother of Jesus.

This would have been the most prized relic of all; the mortal remains of the Savior's closest blood relative, the very same body which had carried God Incarnate for nine months and nursed and cared for Him afterward! Yet in all of Church history, both biblical and extra-biblical, there is no record of its whereabouts.

The early Church Fathers were very zealous for the faith. They strenuously fought all new heresies which threatened the Faith delivered to the Apostles. If the Assumption of Mary were a novel belief at the time, we would expect to find Christian writers of the third to fifth centuries condemning it as a newfangled heresy. Yet none do! Nowhere in the writings of the early Church Fathers do we find the slightest condemnation of this doctrine.

(Sources: CFC, 524 – 525, article found in http://www.ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2bvm54.htm, and article found in http://home.nyc.rr.com/mysticalrose/marian8.html)

Footnotes:
[1] An understanding of the Resurrection will help us understand what happens during consecration.

We regard the Resurrection of Jesus as not just resuscitation (as in the case of Lazarus, who eventually died), but that of transformation (Jesus lives forever). Resurrection refers not just to a physically risen Jesus, but to a spiritually Risen Jesus.

Our Risen Lord was no longer bound by time and space. He could walk through walls. In the account of the “doubting Thomas” in John 20:19-29, the evangelist emphasizes by saying twice that “the doors were locked,” and yet Jesus suddenly appeared to them.

In the story of the two men on the way to Emmaus in Luke 24:1-53, we learn other aspects about our Risen Lord. We know that the tomb was empty and so his body rose and changed (24:12). His body changed because when Jesus appeared to the two men on the road to Emmaus, he was not readily recognizable (24:32), and yet he could be seen and touched, and he ate brad and fish. We also know that he was recognized when he started to talk about the Scriptures and when they broke bread (24:35), and that this encounter with him brought about much excitement and joy (24:33 and 41).

I’m afraid that is as much as we can know about Jesus Resurrected presence. (The disciples did not have a video camera then, so they could not be any more helpful). But one thing we do know, Jesus was not just resuscitated; he was transformed to a glorious presence.

The close analogy I can think of is that of a caterpillar that is transformed to a butterfly. It changes to something totally new.