Pope Pius XII: Righteous Gentile or Hitler's Pope? Controversy has arisen in the past over the role of Pope Pius XII during the holocaust. Did he speak out against the atrocities against the Jews or did he remain silent? Since there are many people in today’s world that do not know about the Holocaust and Nazism it is good to remind people what did happen. An article in The New York Times published shortly after the death of Pope Pius XII quoted several Jewish leaders who voiced praise for the Pope. One was Rev. Dr. William F. Rosenblum, speaking at Temple Israel in New York who said, "...five hundred million Catholics the world over form a spiritual government that can always wield an influence on the side of understanding and peace. One of the most poignant examples of this was during the Hitler holocaust when Pope Pius made it possible for thousands of Jewish victims of Nazism and Fascism to be hidden away in monasteries and convents of the various Catholic orders and for Jewish children to be taken to their orphanages." (The New York Times. October 12, 1958). In an article in Time Magazine (December, 1940) Albert Einstein, himself a Jewish refugee from Nazi Germany, paid tribute to the moral courage of Pope Pius. Einstein said, "Only the Catholic Church stood squarely across the path of Hitler's campaign for suppressing the truth. I never had any interest in the Catholic Church before, but now I feel a great affection and admiration because the Church alone has had the courage and persistence to stand for intellectual truth and moral freedom. I am forced thus to confess that what I once despised, I now praise unreservedly." (quoted in Dalin, 2001) Some claim that since Einstein left Germany before 1940 he would not have seen the worst of the holocaust. Controversy of Pius XII's Role Still Pius XII's role during World War II is not without controversy. Many trace the beginning of criticism of the Pope to the play, The Deputy, written by German left-wing Protestant Rolf Hochhuth in 1963. In the play, Pacelli (Pope Pius XII) is depicted as a Nazi collaborator guilty of cowardice in the face of rising Nazi popularity. The play ignited a storm and other writings followed, including a book by British author, John Cornwell, Hitler's Pope published in 1999. Many feel that there is overwhelming evidence that Pope Pius XII did speak out against the Nazis and their treatment of Jewish people. Why, then, does the myth of Pacelli as 'Hitler's Pope' persist? As Cardinal, Eugenio Pacelli was sent as Vatican Nuncio (Ambassador) to several countries including Germany before World War II. Although Italian, he loved German music and culture. After he became Pope he condemned war in general and tried to promote peace in the years leading up to World War II. Did this mean that he accepted the status quo of Hitler’s rule? During the war, it seems that the Pope hesitated to speak against the Nazi movement, not only because he felt Communism was a greater threat, but also because he felt that denunciation of the Nazis would unleash harsher treatment of the Jews. In fact, this did happen in Holland where Bishops publicly spoke out against the Nazis in July 1942. It resulted in the deportation of more Jews from Holland to death camps, the highest percentage of Jews of any country occupied by Nazis. Some thought that the Pope should have ex-communicated Hitler, who was from a Catholic background, but others said that ex-communicating leaders in the past (Elizabeth I and Napoleon) had not changed their policies and would have had no affect on Hitler who had never been a practising Catholic and had no love for the Church in any case. Pope Pius XII thus became responsible for a balancing act in which he tried to save as many Jews as possible. The Pope's War Messages It can be shown that the Pope did, in fact, speak out against the treatment of Jews by the Nazis although perhaps not as directly as some would have hoped. In January of 1940, Vatican Radio revealed to the world the terrible cruelty that the Nazis were inflicting on Jews and Catholics in Poland. In his 1940 Easter message, the Pope condemned Nazi bombing of defenceless people. In June 1942, he spoke against the mass deportation of Jews from France and urged the Bishops of Europe to do all they could to save Jews from Nazi persecution. After his 1941 Christmas homily, The New York Times called Pius XII a "...lonely voice of protest against Hitler...the Pope put himself squarely against Hitlerism". And even the Nazis interpreted his 1942 Christmas sermon as a condemnation of Nazism, '...he is clearly speaking on behalf of the Jews...he is virtually accusing the German people of injustice toward the Jews..." (quoted in Dalin, 2001). In the Pope's 1942 Christmas message, he said, "Humanity owes this vow to those hundreds of thousands who, without any fault of their own, sometimes only by reason of their nationality or race, are marked down for death or gradual extinction." Detractors point out that he did not actually use the word 'Jewish' in the statement but there were others who were persecuted by the Nazis as well. Pope Pius' Role in Saving Jews In his book, Three Popes and the Jews (1967), Israeli diplomat, Pinchas Lapide says Pius XII "...was instrumental in saving at least 700,000, but probably as many as 860,000 Jews from certain death at Nazi hands." (quoted in Dalin, Rabbi David. Pius XII and the Jews) Rabbi David Dalin PhD a well-known scholar of the history of Christian-Jewish Relations, credits Pope Pius XII with "... saving more Jewish lives from the Holocaust than any other person; a 'righteous gentile' and true friend of the Jewish people". (Dalin, Rabbi David. Pius XII and the Jews. Weekly Standard, February 26, 2001.) Did the Pope tell the Bishops, monasteries and priests to save Jews? One can hardly know what he said personally to individuals which would have, of necessity, been in secret. Possibly the most revealing statement about Pacelli is what was published in the Berlin paper Morgenpost the day after his election as the new Pope in March, 1939 before the war: "The election of Cardinal Pacelli is not accepted with favor in Germany because he was always opposed to Nazism and practically determined the policies of the Vatican under his predecessor." The vindication of Pius XII has been established principally by Jewish writers and from Israeli archives. It is now established that the Pope supervised a rescue network which saved 860,000 Jewish lives - more than all the international agencies put together. (from the Jewish Virtual Library website). Sources: Dalin, Rabbi David. Pius XII and the Jews. Weekly Standard. February 26, 2001. Duffy, Eamon. Saints and Sinners: A History of the Popes. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. 1997. Pius is Extolled by Rabbis in City. The New York Times, October 12, 1958. JewishVirtualLibrary.org. Accessed April 20, 2012.

Holy

 The Hebrew word "kadosh" is translated as "holy" in the Scriptures. It is often used of God, of course, but the real meaning of "kadosh" is "set apart" or "consecrated". So we have "holy ground" (kadosh) in Exodus 3:5, "holy garments" in Exodus 28:2 and "holy things or objects" in Numbers 4:15. Protestants use "holy" only to mean "divine" or "God". They cannot say "holy Mary" because that would make Mary equal with God and she is not God but human. Catholics can say "holy Mary" because it means that Mary was "set apart" to be the mother of Jesus, who is God. Catholics can call water blessed by a priest "holy water" as it is water set apart or consecrated for special use by God. When we see that "kadosh" means set apart, we can use it to describe many ordinary things that have been consecrated or set apar

Kateri Tekakwitha: A First Nation's Saint

 

Kateri Tekakwitha: A First Nation's Saint

On October 21, 2012, a Mohawk woman who lived in North America in the 17th century, Kateri Tekakwitha. was recognized as a Saint. Here is her story. 

Who is Kateri Tekakwitha?
Kateri Tekakwitha was born in 1656 in what is now New York State. Of course, at that time the territory was the Mohawk nation as the United States of America did not exist as a country. Kateri’s mother was a Christian Algonquin who had been captured by the Iroquois. Her husband saved her from the fate of a captive by marrying her.
When Kateri was only four years old (some sources say six), her parents died of smallpox and she, too, contracted the disease. As a result, her face was badly scarred and she was left partially blind.
In 1667 two Jesuit missionaries from Quebec came and stayed with Kateri’s uncle. It was from them that she first learned about Christianity and believed. She lived a life of virtue in a place where carnage and debauchery were common. Furthermore, she resisted all efforts to marriages arranged by her relatives.
When she was eighteen she was baptized by Father Jacques de Lamberville and afterwards faced great opposition to her faith in her village. Kateri was her baptismal name, a form of 'Caterina' and previously she had been known only as Tekakwitha. Finally, a Christian friend helped her to escape to Kahnawake on the St. Lawrence River in New France (now Quebec). There her life, which she dedicated to God, and her deeds impressed both the French and her own people.
Kateri worked at the Mission of St. Francis Xavier until her death at the young age of 24.
It is said that she scourged herself and sat on hot coals to endure the suffering that Christ had endured and that this caused her early death. Critics have commented on an 'evil institution' that would require such acts. The Catholic Church does not require these acts but she did learn about this from those around her at the Mission. It was common at this time to increase one's suffering in order to partake in Christ's suffering. One can read about these scourgings in books written at the time. In the movie, Black Robe, which tells of the Jesuits in early Quebec, a priest scourges himself after being tempted. In today's world, it is difficult to understand this practice. Whether or not it hastened her death cannot be known for certain; life in those times was difficult in any case.
People who were present said that the scars from smallpox disappeared from her face almost immediately after her death and her skin was once again beautiful. People began to call her ‘The Lily of the Mohawks’. Devotion to her by Native Americans began shortly after her death and her grave was visited by many pilgrims. In 1884 a monument was erected to her memory by Rev. Clarence Walworth.
On January 3, 1943, Kateri was declared venerable by Pope Pius XII, the first step towards sainthood. On June 22, 1980, she was beatified by Pope John Paul II, the second step towards sainthood and in October 2012 she was canonized by Pope Benedict XVI raising her to ‘sainthood’. This means that the Catholic Church recognizes her as a saint - the Church does not make her a saint.
What then is a saint?
St. Paul addresses all those who are Christians as saints, for example, “to the saints in Colossae, our faithful brothers and sisters in Christ.” (Colossians 1:2) and so all Christians are in this respect ‘saints’.
Early in the Christian Church, it was seen that some Christians lived lives of extraordinary virtue. These people were then venerated or honoured in their local church and eventually, the Catholic Church began a process called ‘canonization’ by which these people could be recognized in a special way by all.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church states that all Christians in any state or walk of life are called to the fullness of Christian life; all are called to holiness. (CCC 2013) i.e. we are all called to be saints. Saints are examples of holiness and show us the kind of life we can lead. Instead of looking to movie stars and sports heroes, who often fail us, we can look to the saints for examples of how we should live.
Saints are also ‘companions in prayer’. Just as we ask our friends to pray for us we can ask the saints to intercede for us. One of the requirements for being recognized as a saint is a healing or other miracle, scientifically unexplainable, attributed to the intercession of the candidate for sainthood.
One miracle is required for beatification and a second is required for canonization. In the case of Kateri Tekakwitha, there were reported healings after her death. One case was that of a Protestant child, Joseph Kellog, captured by Native Americans in the 18th century. After he contracted smallpox the Jesuits were asked to treat him. The Jesuits used relics from Kateri’s grave and he was reportedly healed. Another priest reported that he had been healed of deafness after prayer to Kateri and a Native woman was healed of pneumonia.
In 2006 a half-native child in Washington State, Jake Finkbonner, had necrotizing fasciitis commonly known as ‘flesh-eating disease’. It was not responding to treatment and his family had already called a priest for the sacrament of the sick (formerly known as ‘the last rites’) expecting that he would not live much longer. They also made arrangements to donate his organs after his death. Mortality rates for necrotizing fasciitis are reported to be very high.
A Catholic nun, also a Mohawk, Sister Kateri Mitchell, brought a relic - a fragment of a bone from the body of Kateri Tekakwitha (see Matt 9:20-22 and Acts 19:11-12 about relics).  The Sister placed the relic on Jake’s body and prayed with his parents asking for Kateri's intercession for healing. The next day the infection stopped its progression. There is no clear scientific explanation for the abrupt change in Jake’s condition and Jake and his family believe that his healing was due to Blessed Kateri’s intercession. Miracles to be used in the 'cause of saints' are always investigated by a panel of experts in their field - they are not necessarily Catholics. In this case, the medical experts also agreed that there were no natural causes for the healing.

 Except for scars from surgery, Jake fully recovered and became an enthusiastic basketball player when he was 12.  Jake and his family and other members of the Lummi tribe attended the canonization ceremony in Rome.

A saint would be the last person to claim that a healing or other miracle was ‘performed’ by them. The miracle is always done by the power of God and not the saint. The saint only intercedes for us and leads us to Jesus, the real Healer. Neither do Catholics ‘worship’ saints; worshipping anyone or anything other than God is a sin. We have pictures of our family members in order to remember them but we do not worship the pictures. In the same way, a statue of a saint is only a representation of the saint; it is not an ‘idol’.
Link to Residential School Abuse?
The media and commentators on some media sites suggested at the time that the Catholic Church had conveniently proclaimed Kateri Tekakwitha a saint in order to ‘pacify’ First Nations people for the abuse at Residential Schools. However, Kateri was recognized as someone with extraordinary virtue shortly after her death; schools and churches have been named for her for many years. Her sainthood cause (investigation of her life in order to see if should be declared a saint) was opened in 1932, long before residential schools were called into question and she was declared venerable in 1943. 

The abuse in Residential Schools was not publicly known until 1990. It was in that year that Phil Fontaine wrote his autobiography, A Knock on the Door, about the sexual abuse he and schoolmates endured from priests, Indian Agents and the Mounted Police. (Fontaine, Phil.  Manitoba University Press). Fontaine later became the leader of the Association of Manitoba Chiefs and he called for those involved in Residential Schools to acknowledge the abuse. A year later the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples was convened by the Canadian government. The timing of Kateri's canonization indicates that it had nothing to do with the ‘abuse’ and would have gone ahead even if there had been no scandals regarding Residential Schools.
First Nations People and Hope
An estimated 2,000 First Nations people from North America attended the canonization ceremony in Rome. Several of them were interviewed by journalists. They expressed joy that a fellow First Nation's woman was raised to such an honour and said that this gave them hope. They mentioned how their people had asked for Kateri’s prayers for many years. The fact that there are many devout Catholics amongst the First Nations people of Canada suggests that not all students of residential schools had bad experiences at the schools. This, of course, does not wipe out the wrong that was done: abusing innocent children and tearing them away from their families. However, it should caution us not to paint all who worked in the schools with the same brush.
Another Native woman of the Carrier Nation, Rose Prince, who lived in British Columbia, may also be on the road to sainthood. When her grave had to be moved for construction, her body was found incorrupt. Relics from the gravesite have been reported in several miracles. Rose attended a Residential School in LeJac, BC and when her schooling was completed she asked to stay on and work there as she did not want to return to her home. Her cause to sainthood is being investigated.

 Mary - The New Ark of the Covenant  Dr Brant Pitre (Catholic Productions)  22 minutes

 Saint Elizabeth of Hungary

(My visit to the Wartburg Castle)

The Wartburg Castle, the home of St. Elizabeth of Hungary, can still be visited and is near the city of Eisenach in the eastern part of Germany. The Wartburg is also the place where Martin Luther, many years later, hid while translating the Bible after his break with the Catholic Church.

Early Years
Princess Elizabeth of Hungary was sent to the Wartburg Castle, Thuringia, in present day Germany, when she was only four years old. Her marriage had been arranged by her parents, King Andrew II of Hungary (1205-1235) and his wife, Gertrude and the Landgrave Hermann I of Thuringia. Elizabeth was brought up at the court at the Wartburg Castle and was said to be a child who loved to pray and give her clothes and food to the poor even at a very early age. When the eldest son, her betrothed, Hermann, died she was then betrothed to the next eldest son, Ludwig (also called, Louis). His father, the Landgrave Hermann I died in 1217, and Ludwig became the new Landgrave. Elizabeth and Ludwig were married in 1221 when Ludwig was 21 and Elizabeth was only 14. Their marriage was a happy one and Ludwig supported his wife's charitable acts.

Stories of Elizabeth
In this same year as their marriage (1221) the followers of St. Francis of Assisi, known as Franciscans, came to Germany and four years later the Landgravine Elizabeth had a monastery built for them. She became a Secular Franciscan (or Third Order Franciscan) which is still an option to those who are married as well as for single persons.
Elizabeth also built a hospital near the Wartburg to treat the poor and it is reported that she washed and treated the wounds of the patients herself.

The most famous story told of Elizabeth is when she took leftover bread from the Castle to the patients at the hospital. Her brother-in-law, who did not approve of her charitable acts and thought she wasted money from the royal coffers, passed nearby. The bread she was carrying appeared to him as roses so that he could not accuse her of taking bread from the tables of the Wartburg for the poor peasants.

In 1227 Ludwig started out on a Crusade with Frederick II but fell ill at Otranto, Italy and died there. When Elizabeth heard of his death she cried out, "The world with all its joys is now dead to me."

Drastic Changes
There are two accounts of what happened to Elizabeth after her husband’s death. One is that she was driven from the Castle by her brother-in-law, Heinrich Raspe, who was regent for her 5 year old son. The other account says that Elizabeth left the Wartburg because Heinrich did not allow her to continue her acts of piety and the life that she felt honoured God. She spent the remaining years of her life in a monastery although her brother-in-law tried to get her to remarry. Her children were brought up by others. The eldest and only boy, Hermann II (1222-41), died at a young age. Sophia (1224-84) married Henry II, Duke of Brabant, and was the ancestress of the Landgraves of Hesse. Gertrude (1227-97), Elizabeth's third child, was born several weeks after the death of her father; she became the abbess of the convent of Altenberg near Wetzlar.
On May 28, 1235, which was Pentecost Sunday, Elizabeth of Hungary was canonized by Pope Gregory IX in a ceremony at Perugia, Italy. She has been called ‘the greatest woman of the German Middle Ages’. In the same year construction on the Gothic church of St. Elizabeth was completed at Marburg, Germany and her remains were moved to rest there.
In 1539, Philip the Magnanimous, Landgrave of Hesse, who was a Protestant, put an end to the pilgrimages to the Church and removed the relics of St. Elizabeth.
Since the re-unification of Germany, pilgrimages to the Wartburg at Eisenach and to the church of St. Elizabeth in Marbourg have resumed and many in Germany and Austria continue to call her the ‘dear St. Elizabeth’.

Is the Resurrection of Jesus True?

The Resurrection of Jesus is considered the cornerstone of belief of all mainstream orthodox Christians. St Paul writes, “If Christ has not been raised, then empty is our preaching; empty, too, our faith.” (I Corinthians 15:14). In other words without the bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead, Christianity has no valid message. The resurrection is the ‘good news’; Jesus has been victorious over sin and death. The Church defines resurrection as the rising from the dead and resumption of life and has always proclaimed its belief that three days after his death Jesus rose from the dead.
Let us examine, then, the events surrounding the resurrection, the arguments against it and the counter-arguments.

The four Gospel writers (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) all give accounts of the death of Jesus by crucifixion, the discovery of his empty tomb and the appearances of a living Jesus after his death. The Catholic Church and other orthodox Christians believe in the historical reliability of this Scriptural account. Although the four accounts relate some different details they are basically the same and do not contradict each other.
While in the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus was arrested and then brought before the Sanhedrin, the council of Jewish leaders. Although there were other charges against him, the main charge against Jesus was that of blasphemy. He had claimed to be the Messiah and the Son of God (Luke 22:70,71); a very serious matter in Jewish law. The Jewish leaders brought him before the Roman authorities as they had no authority to execute criminals in the Roman Empire. At first, the Romans said it was not their problem. Pilate said he did not find that Jesus had done anything illegal according to Roman Law but in the end, at the insistence of the gathered crowd, he agreed to crucify Jesus, the Roman method of capital punishment at that time.

Reports of the Resurrection
After he was taken down from the cross, Jesus was buried in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea, a secret follower of Jesus, and the tomb was sealed by a huge stone at the entrance. The chief priests and Pharisees asked Pilate to place guards at the tomb because they were afraid his disciples would come to the grave, steal the body and then claim that Jesus had risen from the dead. Jesus had implied that he would rise from the dead saying, ‘Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up.’ (see John 2:19-22). John says He was referring to his body and not the literal temple. The disciples, however, did not understand Jesus’ meaning until after his resurrection.

In the morning, several guards hurried to the chief priests to report that during the night there had been an earthquake and an angel had rolled the stone away. The guards were struck with fear. The chief priests decided that they would pay the Temple Guards (they were not Roman soldiers) to say that the disciples had come and stolen the body while they were sleeping and promised them they would not be punished for the disappearance of the body. The guards must have been well-paid for they agreed to tell that version of the story even though it made them look very incompetent!
The disciples did not go to the tomb on Saturday which was the Jewish Sabbath and it was forbidden to travel that far.
On the first day of the week (Sunday) some women followers of Jesus went with spices to embalm the body. When they arrived they found that the stone had been rolled away and the tomb was empty. A man in white clothing, an angel, asked them why they sought the living among the dead. He told them that Jesus was not there but had risen from the dead. The women hurried back to tell the disciples the news but the disciples thought it was an idle tale - as usual, the women were imagining something! But Peter and John wanted to check the story out anyway and ran to the tomb. To their surprise, they saw that Jesus’ body was no longer there.

Jesus Appears to His Disciples
After that Sunday, Jesus appeared to many of his disciples: the twelve Apostles hiding in a locked room in Jerusalem, two believers on the road to Emmaus, two groups of pious women and his disciples again on the shore of the Sea of Tiberius. St. Paul reports that Jesus also appeared to Cephas and 500 believers, many of whom were still alive at the time St. Paul wrote the letter to the Church at Corinth (see I Corinthians 15:5-7).
The Church has always believed the accounts of the Gospel writers but there have been several alternate theories put forth
.
The Stolen Body Theory
This, of course, was the first theory that was circulated by the Jewish authorities of the time: the disciples of Jesus came and stole the body. According to the Gospel accounts the guards were bribed to lie and say that this is what happened. But, if the disciples had come to steal the body, why didn’t the guards prevent the disciples from rolling away the stone? After all, that is the task they had been hired to do, they were armed and probably outnumbered any disciples who would have come. The guards claimed that they had fallen asleep but surely guards would have taken turns sleeping in order to prevent a theft. And even so, would they have slept so soundly as to not have heard a group of men rolling the stone away? They knew that if they had fallen asleep and had failed to prevent the theft of the body, they very likely would have been punished. In the end, money, and the promise that they would not get into trouble for their incompetence, was enough compensation for them to tell the lie.
If the disciples did indeed steal the body what did they do with it after? Anyone wanting to discredit their story of the resurrection would just have to prove that the body of Jesus had been buried elsewhere.
The apostles spent the rest of their lives preaching that Jesus had risen from the dead. Would they do this for what they knew was a lie? What did they gain from it? Wouldn’t it have been better to keep a low profile and go back to what they had been doing before they met Jesus? Instead, all but one of them (John) were killed for their faith. Would not at least one of them confessed rather than lose his life for something that was not true?

The Swoon Theory
This theory claims that Jesus did not die but was just unconscious when he was put in the tomb. When he revived, he came out of the tomb and was seen alive by his disciples.
Since Jesus had been whipped before his crucifixion and then spent agonizing hours hanging on a cross meant to kill him, it is unlikely that he survived. Before taking Jesus’ body down from the cross a soldier thrust a sword into Jesus’ side to make sure he was dead and blood and water poured out. His body was placed in a tomb where there was little air and no food or water for three days. If Jesus was not dead and merely revived was he able to move the heavy stone at the entrance or did someone else move it? If this theory were true, Jesus would need a lot of care after leaving the tomb. It would have taken a long time for him to recover without a miracle.  And if this theory is true, when did he die? One day there would be a dead Jesus and if someone discovered the body then, the game would be up!

The Hallucination Theory
This theory proposes that the followers of Jesus so much wanted to believe that he was not dead and that he had risen, that they had visions of him after his death and burial. In their stressful mental state and knowing that Jesus said ‘he would return’ they were susceptible to having hallucinations. It is true that people have had this type of vision after the death of a family member or close friend, however, it is unusual for many people to have the same vision. As well, normally visions do not last as long as the appearances of Jesus did. And why did the visions end abruptly?  Luke reports that Jesus ascended to heaven and after that no one saw him again (with the exception of Paul).
The disciples had not really understood what Jesus had said about being ‘raised up in three days’ and only understood his meaning after they had seen the resurrected Jesus. The two men on the road to Emmaus had to have it explained to them by Jesus, whom they did not recognize at first.
The story of the disciple Thomas is interesting in the light of this theory. John writes that Thomas was not in the locked room when Jesus first appeared to the Apostles. When hearing what had happened during his absence, Thomas, the cynic,  says he will not believe unless he sees the wounds with his own eyes. Jesus later appears to Thomas, shows him his wounds and even allows him to touch them. If the psychological vision theory were true it is unlikely that Thomas would have this kind of vision. And if the resurrection were not true for any other reason, it is unlikely that any gospel writer would include this story of a ‘doubting’ disciple who eventually believed.

The Modernist or Myth Theory
The most recent theory is one which says that Jesus’ body remained in the tomb and decomposed and the resurrection spoken of in Scripture is not a literal but a spiritual or supernatural ‘resurrection’. It is meant to portray Jesus’ spiritual victory over death or his immortality in a spiritual sense. Some would also claim that the resurrection crept into the Gospel accounts from ancient religions. However, the Greeks believed in the resurrection of the soul but not the body. Other religions (Hinduism and Buddhism, for example) believe in re-incarnation - the soul living on in another body but not a bodily resurrection. There was a tradition of resurrection of the body in Judaism amongst the Pharisees whereas the Sadducees did not believe in resurrection. St. Paul, a Pharisee, used this disagreement to his advantage when on trial, "For the Sadducees claim that there is neither resurrection nor angels nor spirits, while the Pharisees acknowledge all these things." (see Acts 23:8)
The Modernist Theory gives rise to the same problem as those in the other theories. Why didn’t someone produce the body of Jesus? There would have been many who wanted to discredit the claim of the disciples. Why has the so-called myth persisted for 2000 years? Why has it been literally believed world-wide by people of many different cultures, education and backgrounds?

Conclusion
As mentioned, the simplest way to disprove the resurrection would have been to produce the body of Jesus. No one was able to do this, in spite of the fact that many would have wanted to show that the disciples had lied. Those who had bribed the guards would have loved to have found the body of Jesus in order to prove that they were right.
For the remainder of their lives, the apostles put themselves in danger by preaching the death and bodily resurrection of Jesus. They were beheaded (John the Baptizer), stoned to death (Stephen), put in jail (Peter, Paul), and crucified (Peter, Paul). Many later believers were also killed by the Romans. In fact, worldwide there are still people being killed for their faith in a Jesus they believe rose from the dead.
Christians believe that Jesus rose from the dead and that they, too, will be raised to everlasting life. "But Jesus said to her (Martha), "I am the resurrection and the life; whoever believes in me, even if he dies, will live." John 11:25

Sources
Berkhof, L. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans. 1962.
Hahn, Dr Scott. The Bodily Resurrection of Christ. (CD) Sycamore, Il: Lighthouse Catholic Media, NFP. 2011
Catholic Encyclopedia- New Advent website. Accessed July 8, 2012.
New American Bible. New York: Catholic Book Publishing Co. 1970.

All is Calm, All is Bright - But Not For Long

Years ago a friend of mine was with his nephew in the card department of a store at Christmas time.  The nephew (around 12 at the time) was shocked to hear a boy about his age ask his Dad, “Who is this baby on all the cards?”  My friend’s nephew went to Catholic School and had been taken to Sunday Mass by his parents since he was an infant.  He could not understand how someone could live in Canada and not know that the baby on Christmas cards was Jesus.

Today it is more common to find Christmas cards with Santa, Christmas trees and poinsettas than a picture of a baby on them.  We who have grown up in families that attend church services are so used to seeing pictures of the baby Jesus and hearing carols about singing angels, shepherds and wise men, Mary, Joseph and Jesus that they seem commonplace. Silent Night, Holy Night, All is calm, all is bright - it is a picture that comes to our minds all through Christmas season.  But it didn’t take long for things to take an ugly turn.  You might say all hell broke loose.

St. Matthew is the only Gospel writer who tells us the story of the men from the east who came to Jerusalem to find a baby born to be king of the Jews.  They are called ‘wise men’ by St. Matthew -some think they were astrologers possibly because they had followed a star. Traditionally there are three because they brought three gifts to the baby - gold, frankincense and myrrh - but there could have been more or or even less than three.  It is said they were ‘wise men from the East’, but no one knows where they came from.

In Jerusalem, the travellers visited Herod the Great who strived to stay on the right side of the Roman rulers and was doing quite well at it, thank you.  Herod had built a palace at Caesarea Maritima (in honour of Caesar Augustus) and though he maintained he was a Jew, did everything he could to stay in Caesar’s good graces.  Caesar Augustus claimed the title ‘Son of god’ for himself as his stepfather, Julius Caesar was worshipped by the Romans as god.  When, years later, Jesus asked his disciples who they thought he was, St. Peter answered, “You are the Son of the living God.’ that is, not the son of a dead god, Julius Caesar.

Herod the Great was a ruthless man who murdered anyone who got in his way, including his own wife and sons.  When Herod heard from the visitors that there had been a baby born who was to be King of the Jews, he felt his place as ‘king’ was seriously threatened.  He found out that Bethlehem was the insignificant town that the prophet Micah, who had prophesied 700 years earlier, would be the birthplace of ‘...a ruler who will govern my people Israel.’ (Micah 5:2).  And so that is where Herod advised the men to go and cunningly told them to bring him news about the baby so that he could go and worship him, too.  The wise men did not suspect Herod’s intentions, so perhaps they were not all that wise after all.

The men did find the baby with his mother Mary and Joseph now in a house in Bethlehem and presented him with the three gifts, gold (because he was a King), frankincense (because he was a priest) and myrrh (because he would die).  Fortunately, God warned them not to return to Herod, and they went back to their country by a different route.

Joseph also had a dream that was that he should flee to Egypt with the child and his mother because Herod was planning to find the child and destroy him.

Herod was not happy about being tricked by the wise men and sent his soldiers to kill all the boys under two years old and under in Bethlehem.  Does this mean that the story of the wise men’s visit could have been up to two years after Jesus’ birth?  As Bethlehem was a small town, there may not have been that many boys killed, but their mothers surely wept for them.  “A voice was heard in Ramah, wailing and loud lamentation, Rachel weeping for her children; she refused to be consoled because they were no more.”  They are remembered as the Holy Innocents and the first martyrs.

The Holy Family stayed in Egypt until they heard that Herod the Great had died.

Jesus continued to be in danger throughout his life.  Like Herod, the Devil (or Satan or whatever you like to call the embodiment of all evil) does not like to lose his role as ‘ruler of the world’.  Herod’s son, also King Herod, had St. John the Baptist the forerunner of the Messiah, killed.  Several times people tried to kill Jesus, and finally, they did succeed.  The charge was blasphemy - he claimed to be God.  The joke is he is God, and it was God’s plan for him to die in order to save us all along!  Jesus conquered death by his death and resurrection.

Today, those who believe Jesus is God are often denounced, laughed at, made fun of and sometimes, also killed.  Yes, one could say, “all hell broke loose” and still is. But, in the end, the devil will have no greater success than Herod did.