In my last episode, I confessed that I had misidentified which translation of the Bible I was using. In this episode, I take a deep dive into various translations to figure out how I got confused about which version I was using.

Hello, this is Chris Young. Welcome to Episode 106 of Contemplating Life.<\p>

In my last episode, I confessed that I had misidentified which translation of the Bible I was using. So I thought I would take a deep dive into various translations to figure out how I got confused about which version I was using.<\p>

The Bible is a collection of works written over the course of centuries by various authors and compiled by various editors. Scholars believe that the earliest pieces of the Hebrew Scriptures, known to Christians as the Old Testament, were written between the tenth and eighth centuries BCE. The newest book of the Hebrew Scriptures is probably 2 Maccabees, written around 150-100 BCE. It is among the deuterocanonical or Apocrypha books that many Protestant Bibles don’t recognise. The book of Malachi is probably the newest book of the Old Testament recognised by Protestants. It was written around 300 BCE.<\p>

Some of Paul’s epistles, most notably 1 Thessalonians, date to around 52 CE. Mark was written around 60-70 CE. Matthew and Luke were written around 80-90 CE. John’s Gospel, as well as Revelation, were written around 90-100 CE.<\p>

The Bible was originally written in Hebrew, Greek, and portions of Daniel and Ezra were written in Aramaic. The earliest manuscripts we have are fragments from John, dated around 100-150 CE. The earliest Old Testament manuscripts are from the Dead Sea Scrolls, dated from the third century BCE to the first century CE. Therefore, there is a gap of perhaps hundreds of years between when the books were actually written and our earliest available manuscripts.<\p>

According to tradition, Ptolemy II Philadelphus (the Greek Pharaoh of Egypt) sent 72 Hebrew translators—6 from each of the Twelve Tribes of Israel—from Jerusalem to Alexandria to translate the Hebrew Scriptures from Biblical Hebrew into Koine Greek for inclusion in his library.<\p>

This came to be known as the Greek Septuagint, which means the version of the 72. It is often designated by the Roman numeral LXX, which equals 70 rather than 72. Don’t ask me why. The New Testament was written in Greek, and references to the Hebrew Scriptures found in the New Testament in all likelihood referred to the Septuagint.<\p>

In 382 CE, Saint Jerome was commissioned by Pope Damascus I to translate the Gospels into Latin for the Catholic Church. On his own initiative, Jerome further translated much of the rest of the Bible. This version came to be known as the Latin Vulgate. The word “vulgate” means common or ordinary language. The word “vulgar” comes from the same root. Vulgar language is the language of the common people, not the language of the aristocracy. Because Latin was the common language of the Roman Empire, this Latin version was, in some respects, “vulgar” without the negative connotation of the word. Jerome used the Septuagint as well as some available Hebrew and Aramaic sources. It was considered the official version of the Western Church until the Council of Trent in the mid-1500s.<\p>

For centuries, most other translations were re-translated from the Latin Vulgate.<\p>

Martin Luther translated the Bible into German in the mid-1500s. It was based on a variety of sources, including the Septuagint and the Vulgate.<\p>

Another notable Medieval version is the famous King James Version (KJV) commissioned by King James of England in the early 1600s. While it was reasonably good for its time, translators were often more interested in producing beautifully flowing English rather than accurately translating the material. There was also a bias to whitewash anything that sounded critical of royalty.<\p>

Now let’s look at some modern translations.<\p>

Today, the Catholic Church in the United States uses a version called the New American Bible (NAB). It traces its origins to 1936, when Archbishop Edwin V. O’Hara, Chairman of the Episcopal Committee of the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, invited Catholic scripture scholars to begin work on a new English translation based on the Vulgate. This led to the formation of the Catholic Bible Association, which was created to work on this translation.<\p>

In 1943, Pope Pius XII issued an encyclical, Divino Afflante Spiritu, which means, “By the divine inspiration of the Spirit.” He encouraged the creation of translations of the Bible into the vernacular, that is, whatever your native language might be. Furthermore, he said that it should be based upon the earliest available Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic manuscripts rather than a retranslation of the Latin Vulgate.<\p>

The Catholic Bible Association abandoned its previous efforts to translate from Latin and took up the challenge of creating a version based on the earliest Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic manuscripts as ordered by the Pope. Their work was released in four volumes from 1952 to 1969. This version of the Old Testament became known as the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine (CCD) Bible. <\p>

However, when it was eventually combined with a new translation of the New Testament, it became known as the New American Bible, published in 1970. It was mostly the work of Catholic scholars, but other non-Catholic scholars were included in the process. The hope was that calling it the New American Bible rather than CCD might encourage its use outside the Catholic Church.<\p>

The NAB Psalms were updated in 1981, and the New Testament was updated in 1986. Some sources have referred to this as the Revised New American Bible (RNAB), although I don’t think that was ever an official name for it.<\p>

The NAB is a translation used in the Roman Catholic Lectionary. The Lectionary is a book of Scripture readings and prayers that are used in the celebration of the Catholic Mass and other liturgies. As best I can determine, the 1986 update is currently used in the Lectionary.<\p>

The situation gets a little bit muddy along the way. The most recent version of the NAB is the New American Bible Revised Edition (NABRE). It was published in 2011. The website of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) features an online Bible, the NABRE. However, it is approved only for private use and study, even though it is the official Catholic version in the US. The lectionary is still using the 1986 NAB. I found multiple websites that incorrectly state that the lectionary is based on the NABRE.<\p>

I have linked the preface to the NABRB from the Bishops’ website, which explains some of this history and parts of the philosophy behind this newest revision. I’ve also linked a Wikipedia article about the NABRE, which gives specific examples of the differences between it and the older NAB.<\p>

When I began to return to the church in the early 1980s, I asked for a Bible for my birthday. My mom bought me a really nice New American Bible with a fancy leather cover. I purchased a set of tabs for each book of the Bible that you could stick on the first page, so you can quickly get to whatever book you want. Then I also got a big leather cover that went over all of that.<\p>

In the RCIA program I attended as a returning Catholic, and later taught for 30 years, we would give everyone in the class a paperback version of the NAB called the St. Joseph Edition of the New American Bible. Don’t ask me what St. Joseph had to do with it. I think it was just branding. One of the things I really liked about it was that at the beginning, it included a document from Vatican II titled “The Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation,” which explains how Catholics rely not only upon sacred Scripture but also sacred tradition. I covered that document in Episode 94; you can find the link in the description.<\p>

When my mother attended RCIA with me, she would sit next to me and turn to the appropriate page in my Bible. My handout included specific page numbers from the St. Joseph Edition of the New American Bible for the verses I intended to read. So she and the class participants could quickly find those passages. If it didn’t have a page number, it was just a verse I was providing as reference material, not one I intended to read.<\p>

My Mom developed lung cancer and passed away in February 2009. I don’t know when she stopped attending RCIA with me, but I’m guessing it was two years earlier.<\p>

When I wrote Episode 104 of this podcast about the prophets of the Old Testament, I used an old Microsoft Word file I found on my computer that was my notes from that lesson, named “oldtestament notes 09.” That is, the version of my notes from 2009. There was a later document from 2014 that I did not use because that year, I organised things a little bit differently than usual, and I wanted to use the version I had normally taught from.<\p>

Because I didn’t have Mom to help me, my notes included all of the Scripture quotes I intended to read. I would prop up the pages on an easel, and I could knock the pages off one by one as the lesson progressed. That way, I was able to teach without physical assistance. <\p>

Looking at the document, it is obvious that these quotes were cut and pasted from some other source. If I had been retyping Scripture quotes or dictating them using my dictation software, I would not have included the verse numbers.<\p>

There are two possible sources from which I could have cut and pasted. One is a website called The Bible Gateway. It offers translations of the Bible in many languages, including multiple English versions. The more likely source was the Vatican website.<\p>

As these websites exist today, the Bible Gateway does not include the NAB. It does include the current NABRE. It also includes the New American Standard Bible (NASB). Therein lies the problem. Somehow, somewhere along the way, when I saw the NASB on the Bible Gateway, I thought it was the version I had been using for decades. I began calling the official Catholic version used at Mass the NASB. I called it that in blog posts over the years, occasionally linking to the Bible Gateway, and I called it that in every episode of this podcast up through Episode 104.<\p>

When I wrote the script for Episode 104, I used the quotes from that old Microsoft Word file “oldtestament 09.” After I recorded the episode, I prepared the links to the Scripture quotes I included in the description. I got those links from the US Bishops’ website and labelled them (NASB) because I thought that was the right version.<\p>

After recording the episode and doing basic edits, I went back to add the text pages to the video with the Scripture readings. That’s when I discovered that the Bishops’ version didn’t match my 2009 notes.<\p>

If you had asked me prior to January 19, 2026, what version of the Bible I used, I would have sworn on a stack of them that it was the NASB. I don’t know how or why I confused the NAB with the NASB. It had to come from using the Bible Gateway. Once that bit of erroneous error manifested itself in my brain, it’s stuck with me for years.<\p>

After several Wikipedia searches and after reading the introductory material on the Bishops’ website, I discovered that the Bishops’ version was the NABRE. When I did this research, I was already in bed. I became panicked. I was so certain I had been using the NASB that I began to wonder if our RCIA team had been purchasing the wrong Bible for the entire 30 years that I taught.<\p>

I did a Google search for the St. Joseph Edition of the New American Bible and found images of a salmon-colored cover identical to the ones we distributed in RCIA. When I got up the next day, I found an old RCIA Bible as well as that fancy leather-bound Bible I had received for my birthday decades ago. Much to my relief, they both were New American Bible versions.<\p>

So, the next mystery was, “What version had I cut-and-pasted it into those 2009 notes?” The bishops no longer had a NAB. Neither does Bible Gateway. But God bless the slow-moving Vatican. Their website has a New American Bible dated 2011. This would be after the 1981 Psalm revision and the 1986 New Testament revisions. Note that the NABRE was released around 2011-2012. I tried looking up some of the passengers from my 2009 notes, and they matched the Vatican NAB and did not match the NABRE.<\p>

I rerecorded some of the Scripture quotes for episode 104 to use the NABRE. Originally, Episode 104 was over an hour long, so I split it in half and planned to use the second half as Episode 105. But there were so many Scripture quotes I wanted to revise, so I scrapped the original recording and rerecorded 105 from scratch using the NABRE.<\p>

I still don’t know how I misidentified “my version” as the NASB.<\p>

I did some research about the differences between it and the NABRE. According to Wikipedia, “The NASB relies on recently published critical editions of the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts. It is known for preferring a literal translation style that generally preserves the structure of the original language when possible (formal equivalence), rather than an idiomatic style that attempts to match natural English usage.”<\p>

This leads to some awkward sentence structure. Direct translation of idioms does not translate well from one language to another. Editors of that version claim it is the most accurate and correct translation, but this formal equivalence approach is problematic.<\p>

The NABRE and the NRSVue use dynamic equivalence, also called functional equivalence. Wikipedia explains the difference as follows: “The ‘formal-equivalence’ approach emphasises fidelity to the lexical details and grammatical structure of the source language, whereas ‘dynamic equivalence’ tends to provide a rendering that is more natural to the target language.<\p>

“According to Eugene Nida, dynamic equivalence, the term he originally coined, is the quality of a translation in which the message of the original text has been so transported into the receptor language that the response of the receptor is essentially like that of a receptor of the original text. The aim is that a reader of both languages will understand the meaning of the text similarly.” I have linked the Wikipedia article on dynamic equivalence and functional equivalence in the description.<\p>

Recently, I began attending weekly Zoom meetings with Jeremy Steele a.k.a. the Skeptic Pastor. In one of those sessions, he compared scripture verses across different English translations. The scholarly consensus is that the best English translation is the New Revised Standard Version – Updated Edition (NRSVue). This is the latest version of the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV).<\p>

Pastor Jeremy compared the NRSVue, which he prefers, to the New International Version (NIV) and the English Standard Version (ESV). He illustrated how those two versions suffered from evangelical biases. I chimed in on the discussion, quoting from the Catholic version from the Bishops’ website. Unfortunately, I mistakenly identified it as the NASB instead of the NABRE. I corrected my mistake in the following week’s Zoom gathering.<\p>

By the way, Pastor Jeremy interviewed me for his January 11 podcast. I’ve provided a link. I had a blast appearing on his show. Also, he is coming to Indianapolis for a meet-up. If the weather isn’t too nasty, I plan to attend.<\p>

The NRSV has a Catholic edition called the NRSV-CE. It is simply the NRSV, including the Apocrypha books that are normally omitted from Protestant versions. It has received an imprimatur from the Catholic Church, approving its use by Catholics for private reflection and study.<\p>

Scripture translations need to be constantly updated. New manuscripts are discovered. Scholarly consensus evolves. The English language evolves. Words don’t mean the same thing they meant just a few decades ago.<\p>

The Catholic Bible Association is working on yet another revision, scheduled for release on Ash Wednesday in February 2027. It will be approved for use in the Lectionary at Mass as well as for private reflection and study. It will be called the Catholic American Bible (CAB). I guess they gave up on the idea that this Bible had a market beyond the Catholic Church.<\p>

So, anyway, I screwed up. I didn’t know what Bible I was reading from, but I think we’ve straightened it out now and take an interesting deep dive into various versions.<\p>

So, as always… if you find this podcast educational, entertaining, enlightening, or even inspiring, consider sponsoring me on Patreon for just $5 per month. You will get early access to the podcast and other exclusive content. Although I have some financial struggles, I’m not really in this for money. Still, every little bit helps. <\p>

As always, my deepest thanks to my financial supporters. Your support means more to me than words can express.<\p>

Even if you cannot provide financial support, please, please, please post the links and share this podcast on social media so that I can grow my audience. I just want more people to be able to hear my stories.<\p>

All of my back episodes are available, and I encourage you to check them out if you’re new to this podcast. If you have any comments, questions, or other feedback, please feel free to comment on any of the platforms where you found this podcast. <\p>

I will see you next time as we continue contemplating life. Until then, fly safe.

This is the fourth and final part of my very brief overview of the Old Testament. We continue with our look at Old Testament prophets and how to connect their stories to our present-day experiences.

Hello, this is Chris Young. Welcome to Episode 105 of Contemplating Life.

In this episode, I continue a multi-part series based on my 30 years of teaching the Catholic faith in my local parish’s inquiry program.

As always, whenever I talk about religion, I’m not out to convert anyone. I’m just telling my stories.

Note: Handout materials for this lesson are available as PDFs linked in the episode description.

This is the fourth and final part of my very brief overview of the Old Testament. Actually, I was going to wrap things up last time, but the episode was too long, so this is really sort of Episode 104 – Part 2. In this final segment, we will discuss the pros and cons of being a prophet and the dangers of false prophecy.

Before we get started, I have a retraction to make about previous episodes. I’ve been misidentifying the particular translation of Scripture that I’ve been using. The English language translation use that Mass in the United States is called the “New American Bible.” It is abbreviated NAB.

I’ve been calling it the NASB, which stands for New American Standard Bible. The links I have been providing in the descriptions of these podcasts come from the website of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, or USCCB. Those are an updated version of the NAB, called the New American Bible Revised Edition (NABRE). I’ve been misidentifying them as NASB throughout this podcast. I’m going to produce a mini episode explaining all of this in more detail. So, check that out. It should be available any day.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled podcast.

What’s it like to be a prophet? For one, prophets have power. One of my favorite Old Testament stories is about the prophet Elijah. It runs from 1 Kings 16:29 through 1 Kings 18:26.

This guy named Ahab became the king of Israel and ruled for 22 years. It says he “did what was evil in the Lord’s sight more than any of his predecessors.” Not only did he marry a woman named Jezebel (perhaps that’s where the word gets its negative connotation), but he went over to the veneration and worship of Jezebel’s God, Baal. He even erected a temple to this false God. It says, “You did more to anger the Lord, the God of Israel, than any of the kings before him.” [1 Kings 18:32-33]

It reminds me of the old song by comedian Allan Sherman about King Louis of France, who was the worst of all of the French kings.

Louis the Sixteenth was the King of France in 1789

He was worse than Louis the Fifteenth

He was worse than Louis the Fourteenth

He was worse than Louis the Thirteenth

He was the worst since Louis the First

[end]

The prophet Elijah delivers a message to Ahab. “As the LORD, the God of Israel, lives, whom I serve, during these years there shall be no dew or rain except at my word.” [1 Kings 17:1]

Then the Lord tells Elijah to leave and to hide out in the land east of the Jordan. He tells him don’t worry, you can drink from the stream, and I will command ravens to feed you there. And it happened. Eventually, the stream ran dry, and God sent him elsewhere, where he met a widow and her son.

He asked the widow to prepare some food for him. She explains that they have only a small amount of flour and oil for one meal for her and her son. After that, they will starve after death. After this bit of melodrama, he convinces her to make him something first. When she does, the flour and oil magically replenish, and they all three ate well for a year and a half.

Sometime later, the widow’s son fell ill. Elijah was able to miraculously revive him using what sounds like an early version of CPR.

I encourage you to read these accounts of Elijah’s self-imposed exile during the drought. There are some really interesting stories of how powerful Elijah was and how God took care of him.

Finally, after two years, the Lord tells Elijah, it’s time to go back to Ahab, and I will end the drought. He’s been punished enough.

Meanwhile, a guy named Obadiah had been left behind trying to protect believers in the true prophets of the Lord. He helped the prophets hide out, and he brought them food and water. Naturally, there was a lot of animosity towards them for causing the drought. When Elijah returned, Obadiah spotted him coming. I love this scene.

As Obadiah was on his way, Elijah met him. Recognizing him, Obadiah fell prostrate and asked, “Is it you, my lord Elijah?”

He said to him, “Yes. Go tell your lord, ‘Elijah is here!’”

But Obadiah said, “What sin has your servant committed, that you are handing me over to Ahab to be killed? As the LORD, your God, lives, there is no nation or kingdom where my lord has not sent in search of you. When they replied, ‘He is not here,’ he made each kingdom and nation swear they could not find you. And now you say, ‘Go tell your lord: Elijah is here! ’After I leave you, the spirit of the LORD will carry you to some place I do not know, and when I go to inform Ahab, and he does not find you, he will kill me—though your servant has revered the LORD from his youth! [1 Kings 18:7-12]

I love Obadiah’s attitude. What did I do to you to put me in this god-awful position? As sure as I go tell him you’re back, you will run off again, leaving me like you did the last time!

Obadiah then recounts everything he’s done and how faithful he has been while Elijah was away.

Elijah answered, “As the LORD of hosts lives, whom I serve, I will present myself to him today.” So Obadiah went to meet Ahab and informed him, and Ahab came to meet Elijah.

When Ahab saw Elijah, he said to him, “Is it you, you disturber of Israel?”

He answered, “It is not I who disturbs Israel, but you and your father’s house, by forsaking the commands of the LORD and you by following the Baals. Now summon all Israel to me on Mount Carmel, as well as the four hundred and fifty prophets of Baal and the four hundred prophets of Asherah who eat at Jezebel’s table.” [1 Kings 18:15-19]

So, they all gathered on the mountain, and Elijah prepared a demonstration. He told the people to pick a side. Sort of like the way Joshua gave a choice to the people in the example I gave last episode. Follow the false prophets of Baal or follow the true God. They prepared 2 sacrifices. One for the false prophets and one for Elijah. They didn’t like the fire. Whichever God could ignite the sacrifice was the true God. Everyone agreed. It says…

Taking the young bull that was turned over to them, they prepared it and called upon Baal from morning to noon, saying, “Baal, answer us!” But there was no sound, and no one answering. And they hopped around the altar they had prepared.

When it was noon, Elijah taunted them: “Call louder, for he is a god; he may be busy doing his business, or may be on a journey. Perhaps he is asleep and must be awakened.”

[1 Kings 18:26-27]

Elijah sure knew how to talk trash. Can’t you just picture these guys dancing around their altar, trying to get their god to ignite the sacrifice?

They called out louder and slashed themselves with swords and spears according to their ritual until blood gushed over them. Noon passed, and they remained in a prophetic state until the time for offering sacrifice. But there was no sound, no one answering, no one listening.

Then Elijah said to all the people, “Come here to me.” When they drew near to him, he repaired the altar of the LORD, which had been destroyed. He took twelve stones, for the number of tribes of the sons of Jacob, to whom the LORD had said: Israel shall be your name. He built the stones into an altar to the name of the LORD, and made a trench around the altar large enough for two measures of grain. When he had arranged the wood, he cut up the young bull and laid it on the wood.

He said, “Fill four jars with water and pour it over the burnt offering and over the wood.” “Do it again,” he said, and they did it again. “Do it a third time,” he said, and they did it a third time. The water flowed around the altar; even the trench was filled with the water.

At the time for offering sacrifice, Elijah the prophet came forward and said, “LORD, God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, let it be known this day that you are God in Israel and that I am your servant and have done all these things at your command. Answer me, LORD! Answer me, that this people may know that you, LORD, are God and that you have turned their hearts back to you.”

The LORD’s fire came down and devoured the burnt offering, wood, stones, and dust, and lapped up the water in the trench.

[By the way, I wonder if this is where they got the idea of Jewish space lasers. Sorry, I couldn’t resist. Anyway…]

Seeing this, all the people fell prostrate and said, “The LORD is God! The LORD is God!”

Then Elijah said to them, “Seize the prophets of Baal. Let none of them escape!” They seized them, and Elijah brought them down to the Wadi Kishon, and there he slaughtered them.

[1 Kings 18: 28-40]

Wow. He certainly showed them up.

However, I told you that story so I can tell you this one. There is a cost to being a prophet. Elijah had to go into hiding after telling Ahab there would be a drought. When he returned, Obadiah felt the cost of doing the right thing. He feared for the consequences of being faithful. Elijah knew he was doing what the Lord wanted. He was going to purge all of these false prophets and set things right. He became somewhat zealous about it. He may have gone too far. And he was going to suffer the consequences.

When Ahab told Jezebel about what had happened, she wanted Elijah killed. Keep in mind, Jezebel was the whole reason that Ahab converted to worship Baal in the first place. You can just imagine that difficult conversation. “You let that guy show you up and kill all the prophets to my God? Get off your ass and do something about it.”

Elijah had to escape into the desert. He became severely depressed. He did the right thing. Perhaps overboard. And now he was being hunted. It says in 1 Kings 19:4-18

He prayed for death: “Enough, LORD! Take my life, for I am no better than my ancestors.” He lay down and fell asleep under the solitary broom tree, but suddenly a messenger touched him and said, “Get up and eat!”

He looked, and there at his head was a hearth cake and a jug of water. After he ate and drank, he lay down again, but the angel of the LORD came back a second time, touched him, and said, “Get up and eat or the journey will be too much for you!”

He got up, ate, and drank; then strengthened by that food, he walked forty days and forty nights to the mountain of God, Horeb. There he came to a cave, where he took shelter. But the word of the LORD came to him: Why are you here, Elijah?

He answered: “I have been most zealous for the LORD, the God of hosts, but the Israelites have forsaken your covenant. They have destroyed your altars and murdered your prophets by the sword. I alone remain, and they seek to take my life.”

Then the LORD said: Go out and stand on the mountain before the LORD; the LORD will pass by. There was a strong and violent wind rending the mountains and crushing rocks before the LORD—but the LORD was not in the wind; after the wind, an earthquake—but the LORD was not in the earthquake; after the earthquake, fire—but the LORD was not in the fire; after the fire, a light, silent sound.

When he heard this, Elijah hid his face in his cloak and went out and stood at the entrance of the cave. A voice said to him, Why are you here, Elijah?

He replied, “I have been most zealous for the LORD, the God of hosts, but the Israelites have forsaken your covenant. They have destroyed your altars and murdered your prophets by the sword. I alone remain, and they seek to take my life.” [1 Kings 19:4-18]

Can’t you just imagine Elijah sitting there in the cave, repeatedly asking himself, “How did I get here? What did I do? Did I do the right thing? Why am I so scared? What am I going to do next?” But, in that tiny, soft, whispering voice, he heard God telling him what to do.

The LORD said to him: Go back! Take the desert road to Damascus. When you arrive, you shall anoint Hazael as king of Aram. You shall also anoint Jehu, son of Nimshi, as king of Israel, and Elisha, son of Shaphat of Abel-meholah, as prophet to succeed you.

Anyone who escapes the sword of Hazael, Jehu will kill. Anyone who escapes the sword of Jehu, Elisha will kill. But I will spare seven thousand in Israel—every knee that has not bent to Baal, every mouth that has not kissed him. [1 Kings 19: 4-18]

This story speaks to me on so many levels. You may recall from Episode 40 that I told the stories of my ministry on the finance committee at Saint Gabriel. We were in financial trouble. The so-called experts of fundraising say that you should keep hitting up your big money donors. The smaller donors are fine, but they are giving all they can. Even if those $5 donors gave $6 each, it still wouldn’t help. You can only make up a shortfall by going after the wealthy. In traditional charitable giving, that’s a good strategy.

The problem was that we were not doing traditional fundraising. We were promoting tithing. The philosophy was, don’t give because we need money. Saying that we need money is nearly heresy. It’s saying that God didn’t give us what we need. We said, give 10% because it’s the right thing to do. Now, if we come along and say we need more, it looks greedy. It says that the scripturally based idea of tithing didn’t work.

I tried to warn them it would backfire. I tried to be a prophet. Although they didn’t come after me with swords, it hurt to be ignored. See, I didn’t want to be right. I didn’t want to get in my “I told you so.” It hurt me to say that the parish I loved was going in the wrong direction. I had been zealous for the Lord, and I was paying a price for it. Like Elijah, I wanted to crawl into a cave and hide.

In some ways, I did. I withdrew emotionally. I tried to hear God. All I heard was storms, earthquakes, and noises. I had to find that quiet place in the cave where I could hear God whispering that it would be okay.

Unfortunately, my prophecy was right. There was backlash. Some of our wealthy donors were upset, and hitting them up for more money alienated some of them, and in the end, it didn’t help our financial problems. We had to try other strategies that were consistent with our principles. I was unable to call us back to those principles. The parish had to find its way back on its own.

In the New Testament, even Jesus had a rough time when he went home to Galilee. In Luke 4:24, he says, “Amen, I say to you, no prophet is accepted in his own native place.” Said things like, “Isn’t that Jesus the carpenter’s son? Why should we listen to him?” The same story is told in Matthew 13:57 and Mark 6:4. But what is really unusual is that it is also told in John 4:44. It’s common for Matthew, Mark, and Luke to agree. They are known as the synoptic Gospels. Synoptic means they see alike. John usually goes off and tells his own stories in his own way. This must’ve been a big deal to the gospel authors if they all four included it.

The bottom line is, it was hard for me to be a prophet in my own parish.

Sometimes I feel burdened by my role as a prophet or any other difficult job in my ministry. I often say, “Who died and left me this crappy job to do? Well… I guess it was Jesus, wasn’t it?”

That brings us to our next point. A prophet is called by God. You don’t just get to do it on your own. In Jeremiah 1:4-10 it says…

The word of the LORD came to me: Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I dedicated you, a prophet to the nations I appointed you.

“Ah, Lord GOD!” I said, “I do not know how to speak. I am too young!”

But the LORD answered me, Do not say, “I am too young.” To whomever I send you, you shall go; whatever I command you, you shall speak. [Jeremiah 1:4-7]

It sort of sounds like God is saying, “Ask not what your God can do for you. Ask what you can do for your God.” Continuing with verse 8…

Do not be afraid of them, for I am with you to deliver you—oracle of the LORD. Then the LORD extended his hand and touched my mouth, saying to me, See, I place my words in your mouth. Today I appoint you over nations and over kingdoms, To uproot and to tear down, to destroy and to demolish, to build and to plant. [Jeremiah 1:8-10]

Many of the other prophets felt unworthy. However, God makes them worthy. In Isaiah 6:1-8, Isaiah has a vision in which he is called to be a prophet.

In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord seated on a high and lofty throne, with the train of his garment filling the temple. Seraphim were stationed above; each of them had six wings: with two they covered their faces, with two they covered their feet, and with two they hovered.

One cried out to the other: “Holy, holy, holy* is the LORD of hosts! All the earth is filled with his glory!”

At the sound of that cry, the frame of the door shook, and the house was filled with smoke. Then I said, “Woe is me, I am doomed!* For I am a man of unclean lips, living among a people of unclean lips,d and my eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts!”

Then one of the seraphim flew to me, holding an ember which he had taken with tongs from the altar. He touched my mouth with it. “See,” he said, “now that this has touched your lips, your wickedness is removed, your sin purged.”

Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? Who will go for us?” “Here I am,” I said, “send me!” [Isaiah 6:1-6]

That particular passage is quite meaningful to me, and to much of Saint Gabriel Parish back when I was active. I’ve spoken before about our parish renewal program called Christ Renews His Parish. A primary goal of that program was to inspire people to become more actively involved in parish activities. We had a theme song for that program, which was titled “Here I Am, Lord.” It was based in part upon that scripture quote. I’ve provided a link to the song on Spotify.

Once you feel a call to some sort of ministry in the church, even if it isn’t as a prophet, that call can become irresistible. One of the prime examples of that irresistible call is the famous myth of Jonah and the great fish (sometimes called a whale) in Jonah 1-3. We always hear about Jonah and the whale, but you rarely hear how he got there in the first place.

Jonah was called to go preach a message of repentance to the people of Nineveh who had gone astray. Jonah didn’t want to go. He didn’t think the people of Nineveh were worth saving. He chartered a passage on a boat headed in the opposite direction from Nineveh. God sent a vicious storm that nearly destroyed the boat. When the sailors discovered it was Jonah’s fault, they threw him overboard, and he was swallowed by a giant fish. Three days later, the fish spits him out onto a beach. Guess where… Nineveh. Jonah preached repentance to them reluctantly. And then was still angry when they actually repented.

Scripture warns that there are many false prophets. In the story we told earlier about Elijah, it says that the false prophets outnumbered the good ones 850 to 1.

Jeremiah says, “A shocking, horrible thing has happened in the land: The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests teach as they wish; Yet my people will have it so; what will you do when the end comes?”

God warns that false prophets tell the people what they want to hear and do not speak for God. You can see examples of this in Jeremiah 14:11-60 and 23:9-25.

In Deuteronomy 18:20, God orders that false prophets be put to death. Anytime you lie, it’s a sin. But it’s particularly bad when you claim to be speaking for God, and you aren’t. We see too much of that today.

How do you know if a prophet is true or false? Sometimes it takes time. Sometimes you have to wait to see if the prophecy comes true. Again, we are not focusing too much on the predictive abilities of prophets. But if the prophecy leads you further astray, in the end, you will suffer for it and realize that the person was a false prophet.

Currently, many people are realizing that they may have been following a false prophet in the form of Donald Trump. They thought he was speaking for God, but gradually, too late, they are discovering their mistake and facing buyer’s remorse. It’s easy to be seduced by a false prophet. Sometimes it just takes time for things to play out, and you realize your mistake.

Even Moses, who spoke directly with God, had his doubts. He wasn’t sure he was really being called by God. It was only years later, in retrospect, that he could be certain he had done the right thing.

In Exodus 3, when Moses was first called to lead the people, God spoke to him through a burning bush. Moses was initially a bit skeptical. He wanted to know who he was talking to. God said he was the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. God had seen the suffering of his people in Egypt and was sending Moses to rescue them and lead them to the promised land.

But Moses said to God, “Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh and bring the Israelites out of Egypt?”

God answered: I will be with you; and this will be your sign that I have sent you. When you have brought the people out of Egypt, you will serve God at this mountain. [Exodus 3:11-12]

So, Moses would have to wait to see if he ended up back here successfully, then he would know he did the right thing.

Anyway, in Exodus 18, Moses realizes the prophecy was true; he ends up back in the land with his father-in-law Jethro, offering sacrifice to the LORD on that same mountain where he received his initial call. Only in retrospect is he certain that he really was doing God’s work. Sometimes, we think we are doing God’s work but we can’t really be sure until we see how things turn out.

That’s going to wrap things up for our brief look at the Old Testament. I hope you have come to appreciate why many things in the Old Testament seem so different from the New Testament. It isn’t because God is different. It’s because we are different.

If we go back to what we said about the Ascending View of Scripture, we understand that Scripture was not handed down by Divine Dictation. Rather, people of faith recorded their experiences of God to be handed down across generations. We have to understand Scripture in this context. In the Old Testament, humanity is like a rebellious child who must occasionally be disciplined. We need laws to keep us on the right path. Sometimes we have to be punished to get our attention. We have to be taught that there are consequences to our actions.

On the other hand, we were sent prophets whose job it was to call us back when we went astray. If we heed these prophets and their warnings, we will reap the benefits.

Sometimes, we have to listen to personal prophets. Our friends and family occasionally have to call us back to the right path. And sometimes, we are called to be prophets as well. Not to sit in judgment of others, but to lovingly remind people how to be the best versions of themselves.

When I taught these lessons, I would speak for about 90 minutes, and the remainder of the session was devoted to a discussion period. Here are the discussion questions I offered for our group sharing after this lesson. You can also find these questions in the PDF handout materials.

1. Is your image of God that of a harsh judge waiting to find fault with you, or is He a loving parent who protects you
2. Has your image of God changed over your life in regards to topic #1?
3. How do you feel about giving
4. Does god still speak to us through others? Who are our modern-day prophets? Who are false prophets?
5. Have you ever been a prophet to a friend/relative like David & Nathan? Or have they been one to you?
6. Can you give an incident in your life when god truly spoke to you, even if it was ever so softly?
7. How do you feel about this statement: The First Amendment to the Constitution which codifies the separation Church and State, which protects us from violating the First Commandment against worshipping false gods

In future episodes, we will wrap up this series of RCIA lessons with our brief look at the New Testament which will also be a failure because I had to teach the entire New Testament in one evening.

I will probably take a break from this series before that.

In our next episode, I will have a reflection about religious symbolism in literature, movies, and TV. This will include a look at the Netflix series “Stranger Things”.

By then, it will be time for the Academy Awards. I will again attempt to review all 10 movies nominated for Best Picture and perhaps some of the other major acting awards. But we will get back to the New Testament eventually.

So, as always… if you find this podcast educational, entertaining, enlightening, or even inspiring, consider sponsoring me on Patreon for just $5 per month. You will get early access to the podcast and other exclusive content. Although I have some financial struggles, I’m not really in this for money. Still, every little bit helps.

As always, my deepest thanks to my financial supporters. Your support means more to me than words can express.

Even if you cannot provide financial support, please, please, please post the links and share this podcast on social media so that I can grow my audience. I just want more people to be able to hear my stories.

All of my back episodes are available, and I encourage you to check them out if you’re new to this podcast. If you have any comments, questions, or other feedback, please feel free to comment on any of the platforms where you found this podcast.

I will see you next time as we continue contemplating life. Until then, fly safe.

This is the third part of my very brief overview of the Old Testament. Recall that we said last time that the New Testament refers to the Hebrew Scriptures as “The law and the prophets.” In this episode, we examine the role of a prophet. This is an attempt to make the Old Testament applicable to our everyday lives.

Hello, this is Chris Young. Welcome to Episode 104 of Contemplating Life.

In this episode, I continue a multi-part series based on my 30 years of teaching the Catholic faith in my local parish’s inquiry program.

As always, whenever I talk about religion, I’m not out to convert anyone. I’m just telling my stories.

Note: Handout materials for this lesson are available as PDFs linked in the episode description.

This is the third and final part of my very brief overview of the Old Testament. Recall that we said last time that the New Testament refers to the Hebrew Scriptures as “the law and the prophets.” In this episode, we examine the role of a prophet. This is an attempt to make the Old Testament applicable to our everyday lives.

We often think of a prophet as someone who predicts the future. While that does occasionally occur, that’s not their primary role.

I like to think of prophets as God’s Press Secretary or spokesperson. If you are a fan of the old TV series The West Wing, which was popular when I first started teaching this lesson, President Bartlett’s press secretary was CJ. Craig. She would come out before the press and say something like, “Today, President Bartlett initiated a new legislative agenda which will do… blah, blah, blah.” Similarly, the Old Testament prophets would go before the people and say, “Thus says the Lord, God of Israel… blah blah blah.”

It’s also important to consider what kind of message the prophets were delivering. Most of the time, it was to call people back to God when they were going astray. They would remind the people of all that God had done for them and that they had agreed to a covenant relationship with him.

Sometimes, prophets would have dreams or visions of what the future would hold for the Chosen People. Typically, these dreams foretold that if people reformed their lives and returned to God, they would prosper. Alternatively, if they continued to go astray, the people would suffer. So, in some respects, these predictions of the future were self-fulfilling prophecies.

It should be noted that much of what we consider “prophecy” in the Old Testament was written after the events had already unfolded. An event would occur, and they would write that it had been prophesied in advance.

Furthermore, Christian apologists look at Old Testament passages and interpret events as a prophecy about Jesus. In reality, many of these stories that seem to point to Jesus or foreshadow his coming were not actually written about him.

For example, in Matthew 1:18-23, Joseph is visited by an angel in a dream and told that his fiancée, Mary, is pregnant, but that she conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and that he should not divorce her. The angel says in part, “All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: ‘Behold, the virgin shall be with child and bear a son, and they shall name him Emmanuel,’ which means, ‘God is with us.’” This is a reference to Isaiah 7:14, which says, “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign; the young woman, pregnant and about to bear a son, shall name him Emmanuel.”

Notice that it says, “young woman” and not “virgin.” The Greek Septuagint mistranslates the word as “virgin”; thus, when Matthew quotes it, he uses the term “virgin” to reinforce the idea of the virgin birth of Jesus.

Apart from this mistaken translation, when Isaiah wrote it, it was not intended as a prophecy. It referred to contemporary events during King Ahaz’s time. This is just one of many so-called predictions about the Messiah that were not originally intended as prophecy. The New Testament authors were familiar with the Hebrew Scriptures and sought every opportunity to draw connections. This is especially true in Matthew’s Gospel, as he aims to portray Jesus within the context of Jewish history.

So, let’s not focus on the predictive powers of the prophets. We will concentrate more on their role of calling people back to God when they go astray. To help us wrap our brains around these ideas, let’s consider some more modern historical figures who I believe are also a type of prophet.

I propose that Abraham Lincoln was a prophet in delivering his famous Gettysburg Address. You probably had to memorize that speech in grade school, but did you ever really stop to think what he was saying?

It was just 87 years ago that our country was “conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.” He is reminding us that human equality is not just a value that we hold but is the very foundation of our country from its conception. He goes on to say, “Now we are engaged in a great civil war testing whether that nation, or any nation, so conceived and so dedicated can long endure.”

In essence, he’s saying that the war isn’t about North versus South. It isn’t about the economic reasons for the war. While it certainly is about slavery, on a deeper level, the entire concept behind America is on trial. He is calling us back to our roots. He is asking us whether we really believe in human equality. Why did these people die on this battlefield? It was so that a nation “of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from this earth.”

He is challenging us to remember what we are all about and to continue to live out that mission. That is what a prophet does.

Before we move on from Lincoln, let’s go off topic for a moment and talk about the enormity of what he did. For all of human history, the idea that human beings could be property that can be brought, owned, and sold was the natural order of things. There is absolutely nothing in Scripture that condemns slavery. In nearly every instance, it condones it. It acts as though it is no big deal. The best that can be said for Scripture on the topic of slavery is that in various places it says you should treat your slaves well. The concept of human ownership is entirely permissible in Scripture.

The American Revolution was based upon the radically new idea that people could govern themselves. The American Civil War was about the similarly radical view that human beings are not property. Lincoln dedicated his political career and ultimately gave his life for that idea.

If you ever wonder if massive moral reform is beyond the capability of the human race, if you ever think that we will always have wars and violence, if you think that hatred will prevail over compassion, look at Lincoln. He, and the other abolitionists of his time took a stance and eliminated institutionalized slavery.

Sure, not everyone experiences the kind of equality and dignity that our American ideals espoused. Circumstances such as generational poverty enslave people. Minorities, especially women, are abused and denied fundamental rights. However, in most of the world, the idea of ownership of human beings has largely been eliminated.

That’s why I think Lincoln was a prophet who spoke for God.

As our next example, consider the famous inaugural address of John F. Kennedy, in which he challenges us with the words, “Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country.” So often, especially today, people think of “the government” as some outside entity that controls their lives. JFK is reminding us that we are the government. The government only works when we participate. It’s not some outside influence that we should depend upon for a handout or that we should fear for its control over us. We are the government. Again, this is a prophetic message reminding us of our core values.

I also noted that prophets are often dreamers who envision a better future. And what better example of that do we have than the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and his famous speech, “I have a dream.” He envisions a future where people are judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. He is calling us to follow a righteous path in the same way the Old Testament dreamers, such as Daniel and other prophets, called the people to follow the ways of the Lord.

So, I hope that by examining some of these more modern historical prophets, we can better understand the prophets of the Old Testament.

Let’s look at some specific examples of other things prophets do.

Prophets guide us on our journey. Throughout much of Exodus, from chapters 3-24, we learn that Moses was not only God’s spokesperson but also guided the Chosen People to the Promised Land.

Often, a prophet will remind us of all that God has done for us. Moses didn’t get to enter the promised land, but Joshua took over as leader. In Joshua 24, he recounts all the good things that God had done for them.

It says…

Joshua gathered together all the tribes of Israel at Shechem, summoning the elders, leaders, judges, and officers of Israel. When they stood in ranks before God, Joshua addressed all the people: “Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel: [There is that press secretary mode I was talking about earlier.] In times past, your ancestors, down to Terah,b father of Abraham and Nahor, lived beyond the River and served other gods. But I brought your father Abraham from the region beyond the River and led him through the entire land of Canaan. I made his descendants numerous, and gave him Isaac. [Joshua 24:1-3]

[Skipping to verse 5]

“Then I sent Moses and Aaron, and struck Egypt with the plagues and wonders that I wrought in her midst.e Afterward I led you out. And when I led your ancestors out of Egypt, you came to the sea, and the Egyptians pursued your ancestors to the Red Sea with chariots and charioteers. [Joshua 24:5-6]

[Skipping to verse 8]

I brought you into the land of the Amorites who lived east of the Jordan. They fought against you, but I delivered them into your power. You took possession of their land, and I destroyed them at your approach. [Joshua 24:8]

[Skipping to verse 13. I really like this one.]

I gave you a land you did not till and cities you did not build, to dwell in; you ate of vineyards and olive groves you did not plant. “Now, therefore, fear the LORD and serve him completely and sincerely. Cast out the gods your ancestors served beyond the River and in Egypt, and serve the LORD. [Joshua 24:13-14]

[Joshua, speaking on behalf of God, then offers them a clear choice. Who are you going to serve? Continuing with verse 15.]

If it is displeasing to you to serve the LORD, choose today whom you will serve, the gods your ancestors served beyond the River or the gods of the Amorites in whose country you are dwelling.

[Next comes a well-known passage of Scripture that many people have posted in their homes. It illustrates that a prophet leads by example. Joshua says…]

As for me and my household, we will serve the LORD.”

But the people answered, “Far be it from us to forsake the LORD to serve other gods. For it was the LORD, our God, who brought us and our ancestors up out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. He performed those great signs before our very eyes and protected us along our entire journey and among all the peoples through whom we passed. At our approach, the LORD drove out all the peoples, including the Amorites who dwelt in the land. Therefore, we also will serve the LORD, for he is our God.” [Joshua 24:15-18]

Joshua could have just said, “Okay, cool. You guys made the right choice. But he is speaking for God. And God gives us free will. He’s making sure they understand the choice they are making.

“You may not be able to serve the LORD, for he is a holy God; he is a passionate God who will not forgive your transgressions or your sins. If you forsake the LORD and serve strange gods, he will then do evil to you and destroy you, after having done you good.” [Joshua 24:19-20]

Okay, so that’s a bit of Old Testament mentality. That’s like when your mother tells you you better behave, or when your father gets home, there will be hell to pay. In the Old Testament, humanity was still a child, and we had to be motivated to behave well. The threat of punishment was important. That may not be the loving God we see in the New Testament, but remember our thesis: God didn’t change; we did. God our father was looking out for us, even though he seemed harsh in doing so. Continuing with verse 21…

But the people answered Joshua, “No! We will serve the LORD.”

Finally, in verse 25, it says, “So Joshua made a covenant with the people that day and made statutes and ordinances for them at Shechem.”

There is another example of a covenant that we discussed in the previous episode.

Moving along… A prophet also points out to us the consequences we face when we don’t follow God. In the first chapter of Deuteronomy, Moses recounts their approach to the Promised Land, which was occupied by the Amorites. Moses told them that the Lord was giving them this land. Go ahead, occupy. God is on our side.

The people were skeptical. They wanted to send scouts ahead so they would know which road to take. Moses agreed. The scouts reported back that it was a great place. They brought back some lovely fruit, showing what a rich land it was.

In Deuteronomy 1:26-28, Moses complains, “But you refused to go up, and after defying the command of the LORD, your God, you set to murmuring in your tents, ‘Out of hatred for us the LORD has brought us up out of the land of Egypt, to deliver us into the hands of the Amorites and destroy us. What shall we meet with up there? Our kinsmen have made us fainthearted by reporting that the people are stronger and taller than we, and their cities are large and fortified to the sky; besides, they saw the Anakim there.” The Anakim were feared people who were often described as giants. There is some indication that Goliath the giant who was later killed by David was a descendent of the Anakim.

Anyway, Moses told them to proceed, that God would protect them, but they didn’t listen. Moses told them no one of their generation would see the Promised Land because they were too fearful. Only the next generation would get to see it. All except for Caleb and Joshua, and their families, because they were faithful.

Once they hesitated, Moses told them not to go. Because they doubted, God would no longer support them. The people decided to proceed with the fight despite Moses’ warning not to. They ultimately lost to the Amorites. One could argue that those who doubted were right all along. However Scripture takes the position that Moses warned them that they would suffer for their lack of trust, and he was right.

Sometimes the guidance of a prophet can be a personal one-on-one situation. We come to one of my favorite examples in Scripture in 2 Samuel 11-12.

It’s the famous story of King David and his lust for Bathsheba. One day, David is sitting in his mansion, looking out the window, when he sees a beautiful woman sunbathing nude on the rooftop next to him. He inquires who she is and discovers she is the wife of one of his generals, Uriah. Despite pretty clear commandments against adultery and literally coveting your neighbor’s wife, he summons Bathsheba and one thing leads to another. Doesn’t it always? Did you ever have one thing that didn’t leads to another? Anyway…

She ends up pregnant. So David orders Uriah back home so that he can be with Bathsheba and then he will presume that the baby is his. Unfortunately for Dave, Uriah is a man of honor. He refuses to take time off from his military duties because his men don’t have the opportunity to come home to their wives. Rats. What to do next?

David orders his army into battle; when Uriah is on the front lines, the army withdraws, leaving Uriah undefended. Our hero Uriah died a noble death in battle. So sad.

The prophet Nathan was David’s advisor and friend. In 2 Samuel 12:1-12 it says…

The LORD sent Nathan to David. [There is that spokesperson role again. Nathan is speaking for God.] … and when he came to him, he said: “Judge this case for me! In a certain town, there were two men, one rich, the other poor. The rich man had flocks and herds in great numbers. But the poor man had nothing at all except one little ewe lamb that he had bought. He nourished her, and she grew up with him and his children. She shared the little food he had and drank from his cup, and slept in his bosom. She was like a daughter to him.

“Now, the rich man received a visitor, but he would not take from his own flocks and herds to prepare a meal for the wayfarer who had come to him. Instead, he took the poor man’s ewe lamb and made a meal of it for his visitor.”

David grew very angry with that man and said to Nathan: “As the LORD lives, the man who has done this merits death! He shall restore the ewe lamb fourfold because he has done this and has had no pity.”

Then Nathan said to David, “You are the man! Thus says the LORD God of Israel: ‘I anointed you king of Israel. I rescued you from the hand of Saul. I gave you your lord’s house and your lord’s wives for your own. [Yes, that was wives plural. So much for the idea of biblical marriage between one maInn and one woman. Anyway, continuing…] I gave you the house of Israel and of Judah. And if this were not enough, I could count up for you still more. Why have you spurned the LORD and done evil in his sight? You have cut down Uriah the Hittite with the sword; you took his wife as your own, and him you killed with the sword of the Ammonites. Now, therefore, the sword shall never depart from your house, because you have despised me and have taken the wife of Uriah to be your wife. Thus says the LORD: ‘I will bring evil upon you out of your own house. I will take your wives while you live to see it, and will give them to your neighbor. He shall lie with your wives in broad daylight. You have done this deed in secret, but I will bring it about in the presence of all Israel, and with the sun looking down.'” [Wow, Nate, don’t hold back any. Tell us what you really think.]

Then David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the LORD.”

Nathan answered David: “The LORD on his part has forgiven your sin: you shall not die.”

By the way, God did forgive David, but David still suffered the consequences of his sin. Not only was he in constant battle the rest of his life, but he also lost the son he had with Bathsheba to illness.

This story is especially meaningful to me because there have been times in my life when people who loved me have taken on the role of the prophet. In one particular case, I will never forget, I did something incredibly stupid. A very dear friend called me aside one day and said, “What you did today was out of character.” Those words, “out of character,” really hit me hard. In essence, they were saying, “The Chris that I know and care about isn’t like that. This isn’t you. You are better than that.” They were right. I screwed up. While I didn’t wasn’t nearly as bad as murdering my neighbor to sleep with his wife, I felt like I was David and my friend was being Nathan.

There have been other times when, unfortunately, I felt like I had to be a prophet. Sometimes for a friend. Other times for my church. We’ll talk about that more in a minute.

As an aside for a minute, note Nathan’s use of the phrase “As the Lord lives.” You will hear that phrase repeated a lot. This was sort of an Old Testament way of saying something like “God as my witness…whatever.” It was sort of like swearing an oath without actually swearing an oath, which, of course, was forbidden. If someone said, “As the Lord lives,” you knew they meant business.

Change of plans here. Having recorded this episode and done a rough edit, is over an hour long. So were going to split this episode here and pick up next time and wrap up our look at the prophets and the Old Testament.

So, as always… if you find this podcast educational, entertaining, enlightening, or even inspiring, consider sponsoring me on Patreon for just $5 per month. You will get early access to the podcast and other exclusive content. Although I have some financial struggles, I’m not really in this for money. Still, every little bit helps.

As always, my deepest thanks to my financial supporters. Your support means more to me than words can express.

Even if you cannot provide financial support, please, please, please post the links and share this podcast on social media so that I can grow my audience. I just want more people to be able to hear my stories.

All of my back episodes are available, and I encourage you to check them out if you’re new to this podcast. If you have any comments, questions, or other feedback, please feel free to comment on any of the platforms where you found this podcast.

I will see you next time as we continue contemplating life. Until then, fly safe.

In this episode, I continue a multi-part series based on my 30 years of teaching the Catholic faith in my local parish’s inquiry program. This is the second part of my very brief overview of the Old Testament. We examine the differences between Catholic and Protestant versions of the Old Testament and the reasons behind those differences. We also discuss the role of a covenant ratified through sacrifice and Old Testament law.

Hello, this is Chris Young. Welcome to Episode 103 of Contemplating Life.

In this episode, I continue a multi-part series based on my 30 years of teaching the Catholic faith in my local parish’s inquiry program.

As always, whenever I talk about religion, I’m not out to convert anyone. I’m just telling my stories.

Handout materials for this lesson are available as PDFs in the episode description.

Note, this episode contains a frank discussion about how sexual assault was treated in biblical times. Listener discretion is advised.

This is the second part of my very brief overview of the Old Testament. Recall that we said last time that the New Testament refers to the Hebrew Scriptures as “The Law and the Prophets.” In this episode, we continue looking at laws. We proposed that laws are not a negative thing. They are designed by our loving Father to protect us. Let’s dive deeper into laws.

Why have laws?

One reason is to allow us choices. In our introductory lesson, we discussed free will as an essential element of humanity. It is a gift from God. Yet how do we show our devotion to God? How do we exercise our free will in our relationship with God?

Because God gives us laws, it gives us the opportunity to choose to follow his laws or to reject him. In Genesis 2:16-17, it says: “You are free to eat from any of the trees of the garden except the tree of knowledge of good and bad….the moment you eat from it, you are surely doomed to die.” So, in some respects, the forbidden fruit is simply a test which, unfortunately, Adam and Eve failed.

Another purpose of the law is to preserve the mission. For example, in Exodus 19:3-8, it says,

Moses went up to the mountain of God. Then the LORD called to him from the mountain, saying: This is what you will say to the house of Jacob; tell the Israelites: You have seen how I treated the Egyptians and how I bore you up on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself.

Now, if you obey me completely and keep my covenant, you will be my treasured possession among all peoples, though all the earth is mine.

You will be to me a kingdom of priests, a holy nation.

What does it mean to be a kingdom of priests? Priests are people who lead others to God. So the Israelites, God’s Chosen People, were to be an entire kingdom of priests. They have a holy mission to serve as intermediaries, bringing the rest of the world to God. However, to do so, they must follow God’s laws. Because Christians are also people of God, the New Testament also reminds us that we are a priestly people. (See 1 Peter 2:9)

Another reason for laws is to teach us fundamental morals. The prime example is the Ten Commandments as outlined in Exodus 20. Incidentally, the morality embodied in the Ten Commandments was nothing new. There are close parallels between them and an even more ancient standard called the Code of Hammurabi. We discussed the commandments in our previous episode.

There are many other commandments in the Old Testament. Much of Leviticus and Deuteronomy consists of lists of laws and commandments that Moses handed down to the Chosen People. Keep in mind that Moses wasn’t just a religious leader. He was a community leader. The commandments include what we today would describe as “civil law.” They include instructions on settling disputes. What if someone steals your ox or damages your property? What restitution must be paid? There are hundreds of these kinds of commandments that deal with these issues.

Scripture scholar Dan McClellan, who I’ve referred to many times, points out that many of the civil laws found in the Old Testament are contrary to the kind of morality we have today. In his book “The Bible Says So That this“ one of the main cases he outlines are the laws regarding rape.

If an unmarried woman was raped, the perpetrator had to pay her father because she was now damaged goods and could not be married to a suitor who would pay a price for his bride. The rapist had to pay restitution and marry the woman because no one else would. This meant that a rape victim was destined to spend the rest of her life married to her attacker.

If a married woman was raped, the penalty was death, not out of respect for the woman but for the damage done to the husband’s property, his wife. Depending on whether or not she cried out for help, she could be killed as well.

The woman had no agency in either circumstance. She was simply a property that the sexual assault had damaged.

The next time someone speaks in favour of biblical marriage, you might want to bring that up.

Many of the laws and commandments regarded various rituals and prayers. There are detailed descriptions of how to celebrate special occasions such as Passover. There are descriptions of priestly garments to be worn by the Levites.

Today, Christian apologists make a distinction between moral laws and ritual laws. No such distinction was made at the time these commandments were promulgated. One can argue that the debate among the apostles about whether or not one had to follow all Jewish practices in order to become a Christian released us from such ritual and dietary regulations. That’s okay. But just keep in mind that the distinction between morality versus religious commandments was not one observed by the ancient Hebrews.

Because these commandments also included what we would describe as civil laws today, issues such as dietary restrictions were simply good public health practices. Forbidding certain foods, such as pork, was good public health policy because these animals were literally unclean.

While male circumcision was considered a religious ritual, one can also argue the health benefits of the practice. There are legitimate reasons behind it not just an act of religious commitment.

To help put this in context, I invite you to take a look at the chart on the third page of our handout materials. It shows the relationship between various types of laws as is seen in the Old Testament, the New Testament, Church law, and our secular government laws.

In our first row of the table, we look at the source of the law. In the Old Testament, the source was God the Father via Moses and the prophets. In the New Testament, the source is God the Son, Jesus, who handed down laws to us via the apostles. In church law, the source is God the Holy Spirit via the Church leadership such as the Pope and the bishops. In our secular society, the source of law is “We the people” via our elected representatives.

On the second row of the table, we list basic principles. In the Old Testament this is found in the Ten Commandments. In the New Testament, our basic principles of Christian life are found in the Beatitudes delivered by Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount. In the Catholic Church, there are the Precepts the Church, sometimes referred to as the Laws of the Church, which we will discuss at another time. Finally, in our civil society, our basic principles are outlined in the U.S. Constitution.

The third row talks about social law. In the Old Testament, these are found in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, as I mentioned before. In the New Testament, we have the Sermon on the Mount and other teachings about the Christian life. In church law, there are rules and regulations regarding marriage and excommunication. In civil society, we have criminal and civil laws.

The fourth row we describe as religious laws, but more generically, these are rules and regulations about how to do things. In the Old Testament, there are descriptions of the Passover Seder and various other rituals and feasts to be celebrated. In the New Testament, we can find scriptural foundations for the celebration of the sacraments. These include things such as “Do this in remembrance of me,” which is the basis for our celebration of the Mass. Or “Baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” We are also taught how to pray, for example, through the Lord’s Prayer. In the modern church, we have liturgical law and sacramental policies. Under secular government, we have programmatic regulations. These explain in detail how to implement laws.

For the final row of our table, we look at guidance. In the Old Testament, we have the Wisdom and Prophetic books. In the New Testament, Jesus gives us parables and teachings to guide us. In the modern church, the Pope and Bishops issue Encyclicals and teaching documents to offer us guidance. In secular society, the government develops public policies and goals that it hopes to achieve.

I hope this helps you to understand various types of laws and put the Old Testament laws in context with the rest of Scripture, the authority of the church, and our civil governments.

On the same page of the handout material, let’s take a deeper dive into what is in the Old Testament.

The Catholic version of the Old Testament consists of 46 books. However, most Protestant Bibles contain only 39. Here is the background…

The books of Tobit, Judith, Esther, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, I & II Maccabees, and parts of Daniel were written in Greek. These books are known as “deuterocanonical books” which means they are part of a second canon of books. They formed part of the Septuagint Greek text and were interspersed among the other books of the Old Testament.

The Septuagint is the earliest Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. Legend holds that it was ordered produced by Ptolemy II Philadelphus ruler of the Ptolemaic Kingdom from 284 to 246 BC. He gathered 72 scholars, six from each of the 12 tribes of Israel, to translate the Hebrew Scriptures from Hebrew into Greek.

There is much scholarly debate on when Jewish leadership officially formed the canon of sacred writing considered inspired by God as Holy Scripture. In one respect, it wasn’t until 90 CE that the Jewish leadership officially adopted as inspired 38 books thought to be written originally in Hebrew and rejecting the Septuagint Greek text. One can understand why the Jewish people would only hold in reverence sacred writings in Hebrew.

The Septuagint was the basis for much of the Latin Vulgate, which was the official translation of the Catholic Church created by Saint Jerome in the fourth century CE. The seven books in question only became controversial because Jerome placed them in a separate section of his Latin translation.

In 393 CE, the Council of Hippo adopted as “inspired” the 26 books of the New Testament. Until then, each local church had its own collection of sacred writings; many were held in common, but others were disputed. There is no disagreement between Protestants and Catholics about the contents of the New Testament. We share the same 26 books.

Martin Luther published his German translation of the New Testament in 1522 and the Old Testament in 1534. He did not regard the deuterocanonical books as Scripture but described them as “useful and good reading.” He followed the practice of Jerome in placing them at the end of the Old Testament, but labeled them “Apocrypha,” which means not authentic.

In 1564, the Catholic Church at the Council of Trent officially declared these books to be sacred and to be accepted “with equal devotion and reverence”. That church Council was in response to the Protestant Reformation.

It turns out that there was a good reason why Martin Luther might’ve been prejudiced against these books. The Protestant Reformation was primarily about corruption in the Catholic Church. Let’s take a minute to go down a rabbit hole and talk about the Reformation.

One of the difficult parts of Christian teaching is the idea that if you die in a state of sin, you will be damned to hell for eternity. That doesn’t seem consistent with our concept of a loving and merciful God.

To remedy this situation, the Catholic Church invented the idea of purgatory. If you a committed a minor offense, you would not be pure enough to enjoy the beatific vision of God in heaven. But you didn’t deserve eternal damnation either. So upon judgment at your death, you could be sent to a place of finite temporal punishment called purgatory, which would purge you of your offenses. Everyone who ever goes to purgatory is guaranteed to get to heaven eventually. The severity of your sins determines how long you spend in purgatory.

The church holds that through prayer and good works, you can expiate some of your offenses and shorten your sentence in purgatory. Good works that you perform throughout your life count in your favor. These are called indulgences. The offering of particular prayers or various charitable works can earn one an indulgence. The problem is that the Church defined one way to gain an indulgence as donating money to the Church.

Unscrupulous clergy saw a way to exploit this for their own gain. Donate money to the church, and we will see to it that you get a short time in purgatory. Or, donate on behalf of a deceased friend or relative to earn them similar indulgences. The wealthy were encouraged to donate land and possessions to the Church in their will. In large part, the Protestant Reformation was motivated by the corruption surrounding the selling of indulgences.

In one of the deuterocanonical books, 2 Maccabees 12:38-46, we have the story of a Jewish priest and warrior named Judah Maccabee. He was an early leader in the Maccabean Revolt against the Seleucid Empire, taking over from his father around 166 BCE, and leading the revolt until his death in 160 BCE.

Judah and his warriors discovered something disturbing as they prepared to bury those of their number who fell in battle. In verse 40, it says, “But under the tunic of each of the dead they found amulets sacred to the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbids the Jews to wear. So it was clear to all that this was why these men had fallen.” That’s an interesting conclusion. You can just see Judah asking around the survivors, “Hey, are any of you guys wearing forbidden amulets? No? Will these guys were. No wonder they died.”

Feeling sorry for their fallen comrades, they prayed that God would forgive this sin. This begs the question: if you die in a state of sin, why bother praying for someone who is already condemned to hell? So, there must be some other place besides heaven or hell you can go after dying, where prayers of the living might be helpful to the ultimate disposition of your soul.

The Catholic Church uses that particular passage, in part, to justify the concept of purgatory. Prayers for the dead are perfectly fine. Look at that passage. Why did they pray if you are going straight to hell? There must be something else there. We’re going to call that purgatory.

Here’s where it gets interesting. They didn’t just pray. They took up a monetary collection to send to the temple so that they would offer sacrifices for the warriors who died in sin. And there is your scriptural justification for the practice of monetary donations to get you a shorter sentence in purgatory.

Because such donations are being solicited and used corruptly, you can easily understand why Martin Luther might be motivated to want to leave out that particular piece of Scripture if he had the chance.

By the way, I forgot a couple of things, so I’m editing in a brief insert here. First question: Did Martin Luther believe in purgatory? That depends. When he posted his original 95 Theses criticizing the Catholic Church, he addressed purgatory, but in later years, it’s clear his beliefs evolved away from purgatory altogether.

The other issue I forgot to mention is that the Council of Trent, in response to the Protestant Reformation, firmly declared that the Church had the right to offer indulgences, but specifically outlawed monetary donations for indulgences.

I’m going to wander off on a tangent for a second. How did the medieval church become so corrupt? One of my colleagues teaching RCIA at Saint Gabriel was the late Dr. Jim Divita, who was a history professor at Marion University, a local Catholic institution. He had a theory on why the Church became so corrupt. He blames it on the Black Death plague. It is estimated that 50 million people, roughly half of Europe’s population, died from the disease in the mid-1300s.

When someone is at death’s door, you call for the priest to administer Last Rites. Dedicated clergy would heed the call, exposing themselves to the disease. However, dispassionate or lazy clergy would stay isolated and survive. Additionally, the vacuum left by vacancies in the clergy was often filled by those seeking the position for less than altruistic or spiritual reasons. A great deal of power and wealth rested in the church, and men of greed were attracted to the position. Two centuries later, corruption was widespread and reached the top.

The theory makes sense to me. Jim was a great teacher who could make otherwise boring history compelling. I miss him dearly.

Back to the Apocrypha.

For centuries, most Protestant Bibles included the Apocrypha, but it was not considered as important as the remainder of Scripture. Dan McClellan has reported that the American Bible Society decided to drop the Apocrypha just to make the book smaller and cheaper to print. Commenters on his videos deny that. I’m not knowledgeable enough to have an opinion.

In summary, Jews are not too keen on these books because they don’t trust anything not written in Hebrew. Protestants, led by Martin Luther, have their reasons for wanting to ignore these books.

Moving along, we want to talk about how we could make the Old Testament more relatable. One way to do that is to understand the parallels between the Old and New Testaments. I invite you to look at the chart at the bottom of the third handout page. Here are the parallels.

The Jews were the first people of God. Christians are the second people of God.

The 12 sons of Jacob form the 12 tribes of Israel. The 12 apostles form the early church.

Israel’s children are enslaved in Egypt. Adam’s children are enslaved by sin.

Deliverance comes from the blood of the Passover lamb spread on the doorposts. Deliverance also comes by the blood of Jesus, spread on the cross.

The Chosen people were saved by passing through the waters of the Red Sea. Christians are saved by passing through the waters of baptism.

The chosen people were fed in the desert by manna– a bread come down from heaven. Christians are fed from the Eucharist, which is also bread from heaven.

Giants and walls barred the entrance to the promised land. Satan and his legions attempt to bar us from heaven.

The first city of God was Jerusalem. New Jerusalem is a city in heaven.

David, king of Israel, slew Goliath. Jesus, descendant of David, King of the Universe, destroys Satan.

Before we wrap up, we want to discuss the concept of covenant and how it relates to law and sacrifice all of which are very important themes in the Old Testament.

A covenant is a type of unbreakable promise. For example, it has been said that marriage is a covenant relationship. Unfortunately, humans are imperfect beings and the permanence of a human covenant is not what it ought to be. For purposes, we are talking about a covenant relationship between God and His people. Even when the people go astray, God never abandons the promises he made in that covenant relationship.

Let’s look at some examples. God made a company with Noah. God made a covenant with Noah after the flood. In Genesis 9:9-13, we read, “See, I am now establishing my covenant with you and your descendants after you and with every living creature that was with you: all the birds, and the various tame and wild animals that were with you and came out of the ark. I will establish my covenant with you, that never again shall all bodily creatures be destroyed by the waters of a flood; there shall not be another flood to devastate the earth.” God added: “This is the sign that I am giving for all ages to come, of the covenant between me and you and every living creature with you: I set my bow in the clouds to serve as a sign of the covenant between me and the earth.”

By the way, I once asked a Christian friend of mine, “The story implies that prior to the flood, there had never been a rainbow in the sky. But you understand the science of light refraction. You know what causes rainbows. How do you reconcile this?” He said that before the flood, it had never rained in all of human history. Genesis 2 says that the Garden of Eden, and presumably everything else, was watered by a spring welling up out of the ground. Okay. Agreed to disagree. Back on topic.

The most famous covenant of the Old Testament was between God and Abram (who later changed his name to Abraham). We read in Genesis 17:1-8

When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the LORD appeared to him and said: “I am God the Almighty. Walk in my presence and be blameless. Between you and me I will establish my covenant, and I will multiply you exceedingly.” When Abram prostrated himself, God continued to speak to him: “My covenant with you is this: you are to become the father of a host of nations. No longer shall you be called Abram; your name shall be Abraham, for I am making you the father of a host of nations. I will render you exceedingly fertile; I will make nations of you; kings shall stem from you. I will maintain my covenant with you and your descendants after you throughout the ages as an everlasting pact, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you. I will give to you and to your descendants after you the land in which you are now staying, the whole land of Canaan, as a permanent possession; and I will be their God.”

Throughout Exodus chapters 19-23, it speaks of the covenant God had with Moses. For example, in Exodus 19:5, we read, “Now, if you obey me completely and keep my covenant,* you will be my treasured possession among all peoples, though all the earth is mine.” When it says, “obey me completely,” it means “follow my laws.”

Covenants are ratified by sacrifice. Sacrifices are significant to the Jewish people. As examples, Abraham was ready to sacrifice his son, Isaac, until God intervened and told him that he did not have to.

Moses offered a sacrifice, as we read in Exodus 24:4-8. “Moses then wrote down all the words of the LORD and, rising early the next day, he erected at the foot of the mountain an altar and twelve pillars for the twelve tribes of Israel. Then, having sent certain young men of the Israelites to offer holocausts and sacrifice young bulls as peace offerings to the LORD, Moses took half of the blood and put it in large bowls; the other half he splashed on the altar. Taking the book of the covenant, he read it aloud to the people, who answered, ‘All that the LORD has said, we will heed and do.’ Then he took the blood and sprinkled it on the people, saying, ‘This is the blood of the covenant which the LORD has made with you in accordance with all these words of his.’”

Whenever a covenant sacrifice was offered, the community would consume the sacrificed animal. For example, in the Passover, you would eat the sacrificial lamb.

Finally, in the New Testament, we learn that Jesus establishes a new covenant, which is ratified by his own sacrifice on the cross. In Luke 22:19-20, it says, “Then he took the bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them, saying, ‘This is my body, which will be given for you; do this in memory of me.’ And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which will be shed for you.’”

Similarly, we consume that sacrifice when we receive the Eucharist.

I think back to my dear friend father Paul. When he talked about the Old Testament, he would often devote an entire lesson to the concepts we have discussed here, such as covenant and sacrifice. He also developed two lessons on the Mass. One was called “The Mass as a Sacrifice,” and the other “The Mass as a Meal,” which explored these topics in more depth. If I go beyond the four lessons that I used to teach on Scripture, I will talk a bit more about the Mass from a theological perspective, but not quite to the depth that Fr. Paul used to cover it. We have just barely scratched the surface of these topics.

That’s enough for this episode. In our next episode, we will further explore ways to make the Old Testament relevant to us today by examining the Old Testament prophets and comparing them to modern-day prophetic figures. That will probably wrap up our brief look at the Old Testament.

So, as always… if you find this podcast educational, entertaining, enlightening, or even inspiring, consider sponsoring me on Patreon for just $5 per month. You will get early access to the podcast and other exclusive content. Although I have some financial struggles, I’m not really in this for money. Still, every little bit helps.

As always, my deepest thanks to my financial supporters. Your support means more to me than words can express.

Even if you cannot provide financial support, please, please, please post the links and share this podcast on social media so that I can grow my audience. I just want more people to be able to hear my stories.

All of my back episodes are available, and I encourage you to check them out if you’re new to this podcast. If you have any comments, questions, or other feedback, please feel free to comment on any of the platforms where you found this podcast.

I will see you next time as we continue contemplating life. Until then, fly safe.

This episode is the final installment in a four-part series on Catholic Tradition. When I used to teach this lesson, it included a tour of the church. While I can’t do that with you physically, I want to try to cover the same material with you. We’ll discuss in more detail what you can expect to find in a Catholic Church, including an overview of the items the priest uses during Mass, as well as a discussion of priestly vestments. We will wrap up with a few words about other Catholic traditions.

In this episode, I present material based on the second lesson I taught in my local Catholic parish inquiry program for 30 years. I’m not here to convert anyone. I’m just sharing my stories. In this episode, we take a deep dive into the most important Catholic tradition – the celebration of our Sunday liturgy, the Mass.

Hello, this is Chris Young. Welcome to Episode 96 of Contemplating Life.

In this episode, I continue a multi-part series based on my 30 years teaching the Catholic faith in my local parish’s inquiry program.

As always, whenever I talk about religion, I’m not out to convert anyone. I’m just telling my stories.

I had hoped this would wrap up my series on Catholic traditions. However, having written the script, it’s too long. So, there will be one more episode after this one before we move on to our next topic.

Continuing with the topic of sacred tradition, this week we explore the most important tradition in the Roman Catholic Church – the celebration of Sunday liturgy, which we call the Mass. I’ve been a Catholic my entire life (off and on), and I taught adult Catholic classes for 30 years. and it never once occurred to me until I began to prepare this lesson to ask why we call it “Mass.”

I’ve done some research, and the general consensus is that it derives from the Latin phrase “Ite, missa est,” which are the concluding words of the Roman Catholic worship service. It means “go, it is dismissal.” This phrase is used not only in Roman Catholic ritual but also in the Divine Service of the Lutheran Church. Although the Lutherans don’t call their service “Mass.” They call it the “Divine Service.” See the Wikipedia links provided for more information.

I should also take a moment to define the word “liturgy.” It originates from the Greek word “leitourgia,” meaning “public work” or “work for the people.” In this context, it simply refers to any form of public prayer or worship conducted according to a particular, prescribed ritual. The celebration of the Roman Mass, Catholic sacraments, and other church ceremonies can all be described as Liturgy.

Our liturgies are celebrated in the context of a calendar year known as the Liturgical Year. The church year begins with the first Sunday of Advent, which is four Sundays before Christmas. It is a time of preparation not only for the coming of Jesus at Christmas but also in anticipation of His eventual second coming at the end of time.

Christmastide begins on Christmas Eve and continues through the Feast of the Baptism of the Lord, which is the first Sunday after the Feast of the Epiphany on January 6.

This is followed by Ordinary Time, which extends from Christmas until Lent. By the way, it’s not called “ordinary,” as in “nothing special,” even though there is nothing particularly special about that season. It is called ordinary because we measure it using ordinal numbers such as the first Sunday of Ordinary Time, the second Sunday of Ordinary Time, and so on.

Lent is a time of repentance and preparation for Easter. It begins on Ash Wednesday, which is 46 days before Easter. You may hear people describe Lent as 40 days. This is because Sunday is considered a feast day and, technically, doesn’t count as part of Lent. So, if you subtract the Sundays from 46, you get 40 days.

Lent concludes with the Mass of the Lord’s Supper on Holy Thursday night. That is the Thursday before Easter.

That event marks the beginning of the Easter Triduum, which includes Good Friday, Holy Saturday, and Easter Sunday. The Easter celebration spans seven weeks until the Feast of Pentecost, which commemorates Jesus’ ascension to heaven and the coming of the Holy Spirit.

After Pentecost, there is an additional period of Ordinary Time, which extends back to Advent, and everything starts over again.

So, some of the details behind our liturgical planning depend upon which of these various seasons we are in.

Each week, the Mass has a theme. This is based on the liturgical season and upon the Scripture readings specified for that day. We will discuss these readings further in a moment.

My mom was the chairman of the Liturgy Committee at Saint Gabriel for many years and was responsible for planning how we would celebrate each of the liturgical seasons. She used to ask a trivia question, “When does the Mass begin?”

Old school Catholics might tell you that it begins at a portion of the Mass called the “offertory.” This is because people asked, “If I come late to Mass or if I have to leave early, what are the essential portions that I have to be there in order to fulfill my obligation to attend Sunday services?” The answer was that the offertory, consecration, and communion were the essential minimum. Therefore, people wrongly concluded that anything before the offertory was optional and unimportant. That just isn’t right. You need to be there for the whole thing.

Some people say Mass begins with the priest’s opening blessing. Others might say with the opening hymn as the priest and altar servers process into the sanctuary.

My mom said, “Mass begins in the parking lot.”

The rationale is that God is present in three different forms during the Mass. We have God present in the Word of God proclaimed in the Scripture readings. We have the Real presence of the Body and Blood of Jesus in the Eucharist, and God is present in the community. Jesus said, “For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst f them.” (Matthew 18:20) So when we gather in the parking lot or the lobby of the church and greet one another, God is present there. That’s where it really begins.

People sometimes ask, “Why do I need to go to Mass to pray? Can’t I pray better on my own at home?” The surprising answer is, “Yes. You can play better at home on your own. You don’t go to church to pray. You go to church to worship.” Worship is a communal expression of our relationship with God. Worship requires a community, and that is a different kind of encounter with God than one-on-one prayer. So, once the community has gathered, our liturgical celebration has already begun, even if the prescribed rituals have not yet started.

My mother’s view of the parking lot notwithstanding, the Mass really begins with an opening hymn sung by the entire congregation, led by a song leader known as a cantor and possibly accompanied by a choir. While an organ typically provides accompaniment, it is not uncommon to also have a piano, guitar, or other musical instruments.

I have provided a link to a webpage that explains in detail what goes on at Mass. It includes all the prayers that are said. So, you might want to follow along.

https://www.liturgies.net/Liturgies/Catholic/roman_missal/roman_missal_order_of_mass.htm

After the hymn, the priest offers an open blessing. This is followed by a penitential rite in which we acknowledge our sinfulness and ask for God’s mercy and forgiveness.

The congregation prays, “I confess to almighty God and to you, my brothers and sisters, that I have greatly sinned in my thoughts and in my words, in what I have done and in what I have failed to do, through my fault, through my fault through my most grievous fault; therefore I ask blessed Mary ever-Virgin, all the Angels and Saints, and you, my brothers and sisters, to pray for me to the Lord our God.”

The priest replies, “May almighty God have mercy on us, forgive us our sins, and bring us to everlasting life.”

All reply, “Amen.”

The version of the prayers of the priest and the response of the congregation that I was most familiar with was promulgated in 1975. It was a somewhat streamlined and modernized English translation of the ancient Latin rites. In 2011, new translations were issued that more directly reflected the original Latin.

For example, in the middle of that prayer of confession, the phrase, “through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault,” was not in the 1975 version but was put back in 2011. During that portion of the prayer, you are supposed to strike your chest with your fist. You may be familiar with the Latin version of that phrase, which is, “mea culpa, mea culpa, mea máxima culpa.” Whenever someone takes responsibility for something they did wrong, it is often referred to as a “mea culpa,” even in a non-religious setting.

The penitential prayer is followed by a hymn called “Gloria to God” except for during Advent and Lent when we omit the prayer

This is another prayer that was revised between the 1975 version that I had memorized and a newer 2011 edition, which is a more direct translation of the ancient Latin version. In the Wikipedia article linked, the “ecumenical version” from 1975 is the one I have memorized. The new version sounds awkward to me.

For many centuries, composers have created musical settings for these words. Often, they are adapted where a cantor sings a phrase and the congregation responds. These variations all contain the same basic words.

If there is no organist or other musical accompaniment, as is typical for a weekday Mass, it is simply recited as a prayer rather than sung. However, it really should be sung. Sometimes the words are not enough. You need music to make it a complete experience.

Saint Augustine is quoted as saying, “When you sing well, you pray twice.” Both the words and music are parts of the prayer.

Some things just need to be sung. Suppose it was a special day for a friend. It doesn’t matter how sincerely I express these words; it doesn’t mean as much if I don’t sing them. For example, if I say [overly dramatic and sincere spoken word] “ Happy birthday to you. Happy birthday to you. Happy birthday, dear friend. Happy birthday to you.“ [jhuckling] That just doesn’t work. You have to sing, [singing] “Happy birthday to you…”

Similarly, you can’t recite, [spoken in a dull monotone] “Glory to God in the highest, and peace to his people on earth.” You have to sing, [sung] “Glory to God in the highest, and peace to his people on earth.”

After the introductory rite, we begin the first of the two major portions of the Mass. They are the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist.

The Liturgy of the Word consists primarily of three Scripture readings and a psalm. The first reading usually is from the Old Testament, or during Eastertime, a reading from the Acts of the Apostles.

This is followed by a Responsorial Psalm. Some people think it is called that because the cantor sings the verse, and the congregation sings a response. However, that is not why it is called Responsorial. Instead, it is called that because it is our response to the first Scripture reading.

The second reading is always one of the New Testament epistles.

Both of these readings are given by a lector, who may be a clergy member but is more likely to be a layperson.

This is followed by a reading from one of the four Gospels. There is a brief ceremony as the priest processes from the altar, carrying a lectionary book, and makes his way to the pulpit. This can be accompanied by music and singing, typically an alleluia. A lectionary is a large, ornately decorated book containing all of the prayers and Scripture readings used during Mass.

After the gospel reading, the priest delivers a homily. This is a type of sermon related to the Scripture readings for the day.

The Scripture readings set the tone and theme for the entire celebration. The hymns chosen by the music director are often based upon some of the Scripture readings or reflect the theme of those readings.

Scripture readings follow a three-year cycle, designated as Cycle A, B, and C. We are currently in Cycle C in the summer of 2025, which will continue until the Solemnity of Christ the King, the last Sunday of the liturgical year, immediately preceding the First Sunday of Advent. Cycle C uses gospel ratings from Luke. Cycle A uses Matthew and Cycle B uses Mark. Readings from John are used during Easter, Advent, and Lent.

This three-year cycle is specified by the Common Lectionary, which is used not only by Roman Catholics but also by other Catholic-like denominations, such as Lutheran, Methodist, Anglican, and others.

Mass is also celebrated daily, and it uses a different series of readings on a two-year cycle consisting of a mixture of the Gospels.

After the homily, the congregation recites a Profession of Faith, typically the Nicene Creed. This is a creed first established by the Council of Nicaea in 325 CE. It was then revised by other church councils over the centuries. In some churches, the Apostles Creed is substituted in various liturgical seasons, but I’ve never heard the Apostles Creed prayed at Mass. The current 2011 version, which sounds a bit strange to my ears. See the linked article for the new version. Here’s my version from the 70s.

“We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen. We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father, through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation, he came down from heaven; by the power of the Holy Spirit, he was born of the Virgin Mary, and was made man. For our sake, he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day, he rose again in accordance with the scriptures; he ascended into Heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son, he is worshipped and glorified. He has spoken through the prophets. We believe in one holy, catholic, and apostolic church. We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. We look for the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen.”

A couple of notes about the prayer… Where it says that the Holy Spirit “proceeds from the Father and the Son,” that is quite controversial. In 1054, a schism occurred between the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church. One of the major theological arguments centered on the phrase “and the son,” which was added to the prayer sometime in the sixth century. The Eastern Orthodox Church objected, and this remains a major sticking point between them and the Roman Catholic Church to this day.

The revised 2011 version, in my opinion, is more awkward and complicated. For example, instead of saying “one in being with the Father,” The new version says, “consubstantial with the Father.” Yeah… What the heck does that mean? Of course, any attempt to clearly understand the concept of the Trinity is a challenging endeavor. I don’t think the use of a bizarre word like “consubstantial” helps matters. Also, instead of “born of the Virgin Mary,” it now says “incarnate of the Virgin Mary.” Okay… Maybe that is technically correct, but we don’t celebrate Christmas as Jesus’ incarnation day. We celebrate his birthday.

As a side note, when I was drifting away from the church in my late teens, I felt hypocritical about attending mass when I didn’t believe. So, I would simply drop out during certain sentences of the creed. Eventually, I wasn’t sure I should be praying it at all, and that’s when I left. Of course, I came back. That has been chronicled in earlier episodes of this podcast.

The Liturgy of the Word concludes with prayers of petition. They are introduced by the priest, and then the prayers are read by a cantor or other layperson. Each petition is concluded with, “Let us pray to the Lord.” The congregation responds, “Lord, hear our prayer.” These petitions are prepared in advance by the priest or perhaps a pastoral associate.

The first petition is typically for the church in general, followed by prayers for the Pope, Bishop, and clergy. If there are specific community needs, they are mentioned, such as recovery from a natural disaster or other turmoil. Other petitions might include prayers for peace, especially if there are ongoing conflicts in the world, such as Gaza or Ukraine. Typically, we conclude with prayers for the sick and mention by name parishioners who have asked for prayers. We also mention any parishioners or family of parishioners who have died recently.

There is a tradition that you can have a Mass dedicated to some intention. Most often, it is prayers for a sick person or a deceased relative. You pay a stipend of about $5 to the priest. You get a card suitable to send to the sick person or grieving person, saying that a Mass has been said in their memory. Sometimes, a mass is dedicated to an anniversary or other special occasion.

This concludes the Liturgy of the Word.

The Liturgy of the Eucharist begins with the Preparation of the Gifts. When I was growing up, this portion was called the offertory. It was that first mandatory piece. Typically, there is a hymn as the priest prepares the altar. Members of the congregation carry the bread and wine in procession up the aisle and give them to the priest. At Saint Gabriel, we would schedule a family to bring up the bread and wine for every mass. For a while, my grandmother was the volunteer in charge of calling people and asking them when they typically attended Mass and asking them if they would be the offertory family. If no one has been scheduled, the ushers or lay Eucharistic ministers might do it.

Typically, during this process, the ushers also take up the monetary collections from parishioners. Sometimes, a second collection is taken up for missionary work or other special causes.

As the offertory hymn continues, the priest prepares the bread and wine as a symbolic sacrificial offering. He washes his hands in a ritual fashion. There are prayers that you will say quietly if the hymn is all going or if the hymn has concluded, or at Mass, when there is no music, the priest will pray these prayers out loud. You can see those prayers in the page I mentioned that covers the order of the Mass.

The priest then begins the Eucharistic Prayer, which is the central ritual of the Mass. There are four different versions of this prayer, varying in length and detail. The priest decides which one he will use, although I believe that process is informed by the liturgical season and the theme of the mass. Eucharistic Prayer II is the most commonly used.

The prayer begins with a dialogue between a priest and a congregation in which she says, “The Lord be with you.”

The congregation responds, “and with your spirit.”

“Let us lift up our hearts.”

“We lift them up to the Lord.”

“Let us give thanks to the Lord our God.”

The congregation says, “It is right and just.”

The priest continues, “It is truly right and just, our duty and salvation, always and everywhere to give thanks to you…” and the priest continues with the remainder of the Eucharistic prayer.

There are common elements to the four versions of the prayer. After giving thanks, the priest leads the congregation in a hymn called the Sanctus, which is Latin for Holy. The prayer is, “Holy, holy, holy Lord. God of power and might. Heaven and earth are full of your glory. Hosanna in the highest. Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord. Hosanna in the highest.” Again, if there is no musical accompaniment, it is simply recited rather than sung, but it should be sung.

The central part of the Eucharistic Prayer is the consecration of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. We previously spoke of these words in Scripture in the last episode, but here are the words used at Mass.

“On the night he was betrayed, he took bread and, giving thanks, broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying: Take this, all of you, and eat of it, for this is my body, which will be given up for you.

“In a similar way, when supper was ended, he took the cup and, once more giving thanks, he gave it to his disciples, saying: Take this, all of you, and drink from it, for this is the cup of my blood. The blood of the new and eternal covenant which will be poured out for you and for many, for the forgiveness of sins. Do this in memory of me.”

When I was very, very young, and the Mass was still celebrated in Latin, the altar servers would ring a bell when the priest says, “This is my body,” or “This is my blood.” This was to call the attention of the congregation to this moment because many of them didn’t speak Latin. Although I am glad that the mass is in English since Vatican II, I kind of miss the ringing of those bills. It made it extra special.

The priest then says, “Let us proclaim the mystery of our faith.” There are a variety of possible responses from the congregation. One of the most common is, “When we eat this bread and drink this cup, we proclaim your death, oh Lord until you come in glory.”

After an additional portion of the Eucharistic prayer, it concludes with the priest holding the bread and wine high above his head and proclaiming, “Through him, with him, and in him, in unity with the Holy Spirit, all glory and honor are yours, Almighty Father, forever and ever.”

The congregation responds, “Amen.” This is sometimes called “the great amen.” If it is sung, it is usually quite elaborate.

Next the priest invites us to pray as Jesus taught us. Lord’s prayer as we already outlined in detail last episode, complete with the embolism and the extra doxology which Protestants accuse us of leaving off.

A prayer for peace follows, and the priest concludes, “Let us offer each other a sign of peace.”

The congregation then turns to the people around them and shakes hands, saying, “Peace be with you.” Or if it is a family member, it might include a hug.

After additional prayers, the priest again holds up the bread and wine, saying, “Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. Blessed are those who are called to his supper.”

We respond, “Lord, I’m not worthy that you should enter under my roof. But only say the word, and my soul shall be healed.” This is a paraphrasing of a line from Matthew 8:8, when a Roman centurion came to Jesus and asked that his servant be healed. Jesus offers to go to the man’s house, but he refuses, saying, “Lord, I am not worthy to have you enter under my roof; only say the word, and my servant will be healed.”

The priest, with the assistance of several lay Eucharistic ministers, then distributes the bread and wine to the congregation. Typically, a hymn accompanies this. The ushers lead people up the aisles, pew by pew, to receive communion.

Traditionally, one would kneel, tilt one’s head back, open one’s mouth, and the priest would place the consecrated host on one’s tongue. After Vatican II, the standard practice is to remain standing and holding your hands out, palms up, cupped together. With your right hand underneath. The priest or Eucharistic minister places the consecrated host in your left hand and says, “Body of Christ.” To which you respond, “Amen.” You then pick up the host with your right hand and eat it, or if you are left-handed, reverse the process.

You then step over to a different Eucharistic minister and optionally take the wine. They say, “Blood of Christ.” You respond, “Amen,” and take a sip of the wine. The Eucharistic minister then wipes the lip of the cup with a cloth. You return to your seat for a moment of silent reflection.

Because receiving the Eucharist is a symbol of our unity, we ask that non-Catholics not participate by receiving the bread and wine. Non-Catholics are invited to participate by coming forward and folding their hands across their chest as they approach the priest or Eucharistic minister. This indicates that you are not Catholic, and they will give you a blessing. Children who are not yet old enough for their First Communion can also receive such a blessing.

After the distribution of communion, there is a moment of silent reflection. Then the priest stands and offers a blessing. “May Almighty God bless you, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.” He gestures in a cross shape, and you make the sign of the cross. You respond, “Amen.”

In Roman Catholic tradition, you make the sign of the cross with your right hand. You touch your forehead, saying, “In the name of the father.” Then you touch your chest, saying, “and the Son.” Then you touch your left shoulder and your right shoulder, saying “and the Holy Spirit.” Some denominations, particularly Eastern Orthodox Christians, make the sign of the cross right to left instead of left to right.

Sometimes announcements about pairs events are made before the final dismissal.. Then the priest dismisses the congregation by saying, “The Mass is ended. Go in peace to love and serve the Lord.” We respond, “Thanks be to God.”

There is a closing hymn as the priest and servers process to the back of the church. The priest typically stands by the door and greets the congregation as they exit.

Note that I described his assistants as altar servers and not altar boys. Both boys and girls can serve in that capacity.

That’s going to wrap up our overview of the Mass. In the next episode, I will provide more details about what you will find in a Catholic Church. We will discuss the utensils that the priest uses throughout Mass and discuss the symbolism of his priestly vestments. We were also wrap up a few more Catholic traditions.

So, as always… if you find this podcast educational, entertaining, enlightening, or even inspiring, consider sponsoring me on Patreon for just $5 per month. You will get early access to the podcast and other exclusive content. Although I have some financial struggles, I’m not really in this for money. Still, every little bit helps.

As always, my deepest thanks to my financial supporters. Your support means more to me than words can express.

Even if you cannot provide financial support, please, please, please post the links and share this podcast on social media so that I can grow my audience. I just want more people to be able to hear my stories.

All of my back episodes are available, and I encourage you to check them out if you’re new to this podcast. If you have any comments, questions, or other feedback, please feel free to comment on any of the platforms where you found this podcast.

I will see you next time as we continue contemplating life. Until then, fly safe.

In this episode, I present material based on the second lesson I taught in my local Catholic parish inquiry program for 30 years. I’m not here to convert anyone. I’m just sharing my stories. In this episode, we continue to explore the connection between Scripture and tradition. We will then take a deeper dive into Catholic traditions as they relate to the Sacraments.

Hello, this is Chris Young. Welcome to Episode 95 of Contemplating Life.

In this episode, I continue a multi-part series based on my 30 years teaching the Catholic faith in my local parish’s inquiry program.

As always, whenever I talk about religion, I’m not out to convert anyone. I’m just telling my stories.

In our previous episode, we talked about the role of sacred tradition in the Catholic Church. We discussed the Protestant position of sola scriptura or Scripture alone, and why it doesn’t hold up.

This week, we continue to explore the connection between Scripture and tradition. We will then take a deeper dive into Catholic traditions as they relate to the Sacraments.

One of the main reasons that sola scriptura is inconsistent is that there is nowhere in Scripture that says Scripture is the sole authority. However, there are several places in Scripture that talk about the importance of tradition.

In 1 Corinthians 11:2, Paul says, “I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold fast to the traditions, just as I handed them on to you.”

What were some of those traditions that Paul handed on to them? The early church held worship services that they described as “the breaking of the bread.” It was the earliest form of the current Roman Catholic worship service, which we call the Mass. More on the word “Mass” later. This practice is a remembrance and re-creation of what Jesus did at the Last Supper. He adapted the traditional Jewish Passover Seder meal into a new ritual. A few verses later in 1 Corinthians 11:23-26, Paul describes what happened at the Last Supper and the commandment that Jesus gave to do this in memory of him.

It says, “For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus, on the night he was handed over, took bread, and, after he had given thanks, broke it and said, ‘This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.’ In the same way, also the cup, after supper, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.’ For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes.”

If that scripture quote sounds familiar to you, it’s because it’s the exact words the priest says during the Eucharistic prayer at Mass. When we celebrate the Catholic Mass the way that we do, we are following the command that Jesus gave us to carry on this tradition. Now, one could argue that because this is in Scripture, it isn’t strictly sacred tradition apart from Scripture, but it does illustrate the importance of traditions.

Here are some more examples of Scripture speaking of the importance of tradition. In 2 Thessalonians 2:15, it says, “Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours.” This passage is one of Professor Scott Hahn’s favorite passages in defending the importance of tradition. Note that it speaks of traditions that were transmitted by oral statement and not simply those traditions which were written down in what would later become official Scripture.

Later in chapter 3:4-6 it says, “We are confident of you in the Lord that what we instruct you, you (both) are doing and will continue to do. May the Lord direct your hearts to the love of God and to the endurance of Christ. We instruct you, brothers, in the name of (our) Lord Jesus Christ, to shun any brother who conducts himself in a disorderly way and not according to the tradition they received from us.”

I mentioned last time that one of the verses traditionally used to support sola scriptura is in Mark 7:1-13, where Jesus condemns human traditions when in conflict with God’s law.

It reads…

Now when the Pharisees with some scribes who had come from Jerusalem gathered around him, they observed that some of his disciples ate their meals with unclean, that is, unwashed, hands. (For the Pharisees and, in fact, all Jews, do not eat without carefully washing their hands, keeping the tradition of the elders. And on coming from the marketplace they do not eat without purifying themselves. And there are many other things that they have traditionally observed, the purification of cups and jugs and kettles (and beds).) So the Pharisees and scribes questioned him, “Why do your disciples not follow the tradition of the elders but instead eat a meal with unclean hands?” He responded, “Well did Isaiah prophesy about you hypocrites, as it is written: ‘This people honors me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me; In vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines human precepts.’ You disregard God’s commandment but cling to human tradition.”

He went on to say, “How well you have set aside the commandment of God in order to uphold your tradition! For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and ‘Whoever curses father or mother shall die.’ Yet you say, ‘If a person says to father or mother, “Any support you might have had from me is qorban”‘ (meaning, dedicated to God), you allow him to do nothing more for his father or mother. You nullify the word of God in favor of your tradition that you have handed on. And you do many such things.”

The author of Mark is talking about a tradition that said it was unnecessary to support your elderly parents if you declared that your assets were to be given to the church upon your death. It was sort of a way to launder your money in a way that avoided your obligations to your family. Jesus condemns this tradition as it violates one of the 10 Commitments.

A similar version of this story can be found in Matthew 15:1-9. Also, Colossians 2:8 condemns “empty, seductive philosophy according to human tradition.”

The Old Testament also warns against empty, meaningless traditions in Isaiah 29:13-14, “The Lord said: Since this people draws near with words only and honors me with their lips alone, though their hearts are far from me, And their reverence for me has become routine observance of the precepts of men, Therefore I will again deal with this people in surprising and wondrous fashion: The wisdom of its wise men shall perish and the understanding of its prudent men be hid.”

So, it is warning against going through the motions without having spiritual intent behind them. Scripture also warns us not to perform traditions for the sake of showing off. In Matthew 6:1-18, Jesus says…

“(But) take care not to perform righteous deeds in order that people may see them; otherwise, you will have no recompense from your heavenly Father. When you give alms, do not blow a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets to win the praise of others. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right is doing, so that your almsgiving may be secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you.

“When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, who love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on street corners so that others may see them. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you pray, go to your inner room, close the door, and pray to your Father in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you. In praying, do not babble like the pagans, who think that they will be heard because of their many words. Do not be like them. Your Father knows what you need before you ask him.

“This is how you are to pray: Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as in heaven. Give us today our daily bread; and forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors; and do not subject us to the final test, but deliver us from the evil one.

If you forgive others their transgressions, your heavenly Father will forgive you. But if you do not forgive others, neither will your Father forgive your transgressions. “When you fast, do not look gloomy like the hypocrites. They neglect their appearance, so that they may appear to others to be fasting. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you fast, anoint your head and wash your face, so that you may not appear to be fasting, except to your Father who is hidden. And your Father who sees what is hidden will repay you.”

As an example of how we can misuse sacred traditions, there is a tradition on Ash Wednesday where Catholics go to Mass and they have ashes smeared on therefore heads in the shape of a cross. People who don’t regularly attend Mass are known to always go on Ash Wednesday just so they can be seen the rest of the day with the mark on their foreheads.

You undoubtedly recognize parts of that previous passage as a prayer we call the Lord’s Prayer.

Traditionally, when Protestants pray the Lord’s prayer, they add the phrase, “for thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever and ever. Amen.”

By the way, I love it when I can use the word “traditionally” in regard to Protestant doctrine.

Anyway, Catholics are often asked, “Why did you leave off the last sentence of the Lord’s prayer?”

The bigger question is, “Why did you add a sentence to the Lord’s prayer?” As you can see, that additional phrase is not in Scripture. The extra sentence called a doxology dates back at least to the Book of Common Prayer in 1662. Considering they believe strictly in sola scriptura, they sure do seem attached to that extra sentence which is not found in Scripture.

When Catholics pray the Lord’s prayer alone or perhaps in praying the rosary, we do not add an extra sentence. However, when praying it at Mass, we interject an additional sentence and then add the extra sentence. At Mass, the priest and the entire congregation recite the Lord’s prayer and conclude the prayer with, “… deliver us from evil.”

Then the priest prays a paragraph known as an embolism. In the same way a vascular embolism blocks the flow of blood through a vein or artery, this embolism interrupts the flow of the prayer. The priest says, “Deliver us, Lord, from every evil, and grant us peace in our day. In your mercy keep us free from sin and protect us from all anxiety as we wait in joyful hope for the coming of our Saviour, Jesus Christ.”

Then all pray together, “For the kingdom, the power, and the glory are yours, now and forever. Amen” So, the bottom line is, Catholics don’t completely delete the sentence that wasn’t there in the first place.

Moving along…

Last time we talked about what it might have been like to be one of the apostles or disciples and the rich experience you would have living with Jesus, traveling with him, and not only hearing him speak but seeing how he conducted himself. It would be impossible to put all of that lived experience into writing, and we see in John’s Gospels and epistles expressions of that impossible task of recording everything. In John 20:30-31, it says, “Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of his disciples that are not written in this book. But these are written that you may (come to) believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that through this belief you may have life in his name.”

That passage also reiterates our position that Scripture is not intended to be a historical record of exactly what Jesus did. These stories were written with a theological purpose behind them. They were written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God and through this belief you may come to have life in him.

If you study the last two chapters of John’s Gospel, you will see that it has two endings. It is believed that one of John’s disciples added that last chapter. In John 21:25, it says, “It is this disciple who testifies to these things and has written them, and we know that his testimony is true. 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.”

In John’s epistles, he also talks about the inadequacy of the written word. In 2 John 12, he writes, “Although I have much to write to you, I do not intend to use paper and ink. Instead, I hope to visit you and to speak face to face so that our joy may be complete.” He also concludes his third letter in much the same fashion.

Now let’s take a deeper dive into sacred tradition.

While the written or spoken word involves our sense of hearing or seeing, tradition is a much more sensual experience. Given that God is beyond our complete understanding, we want to use all of our capabilities to encounter Him. We need physical experiences to more closely connect to God.

Catholics have seven ceremonies we call Sacraments, where we experience God in special ways. In the RCIA curriculum, we typically devote an entire lesson to each of these Sacraments, but to get you started, here’s a brief overview of how the seven Sacraments are sensual experiences.

We categorize these rituals into three categories.

The first of the three Sacraments of Initiation is Baptism. We become adopted children of God. Water cleanses us of sin. Although in infant baptism, we typically just sprinkle the water, it is more meaningful for adults to be baptized in full immersion. When the priest dunks you under the water, if he doesn’t pull you back up again, you are dead. It is a symbolic dying to your old self and rising as your new self. We symbolize this new life with pure white garments. A candle represents the light of Christ.

The second sacrament of initiation is Eucharist: Also known as “Holy Communion”. The word Eucharist comes from a Greek word meaning Thanksgiving. We receive the Body and Blood of Christ. Catholic doctrine says that the bread and wine have the “real presence” of the body and blood of Christ. It looks like bread and wine. It tastes like bread and wine. It smells like bread and wine. But it is the body and blood of Jesus. When we receive communion, Christ joins us, dwells inside us, and nourishes us. We taste, feel, and smell. These are sensual experiences.

The third sacrament of initiation is Confirmation: We receive the Holy Spirit. We are anointed with sacred oil. The bishop or priest lays his hands upon her forehead in an ancient gesture of commissioning that was used to anoint kings. The result is that we receive and/or awaken spiritual gifts.

The first of two sacraments of healing is Reconciliation. You probably know this sacrament by its most common name, “Confession.” When I was very young, it was called “confession.” Then it was renamed “penance,” because the focus is not just on confessing your sins but reforming your life and recognizing your sinfulness by performing penance. However, it was once again renamed “reconciliation,” because that puts the focus where it properly belongs. We reconcile or heal our broken relationship with God. It is an expression of our sorrow and experience of God’s forgiveness.

You’re probably familiar with the confessional box, as depicted on TV or in movies. You are separated from the priest by a screen. However, the modern way of experiencing this Sacrament is face-to-face with the priest. You feel the human presence of the Priest. When the priest prays the words of absolution for giving your sins, he will place his hand gently upon your forehead, and you feel that human touch and you hear those words that God is forgiving you. It is a powerful and sensual experience.

The second sacrament of healing is also one that has gone through a metamorphosis of titles. You probably know it as “Last Rites.” When I was first learning the sacraments as a child, it was called “Extreme Unction.” An unction is an anointing. The adjective “extreme” indicated it was only used in extreme circumstances, such as upon your deathbed. Often, people were reluctant to call the priest to pray over a sick person. If grandma sees the priest coming, she will think she is dying. So, they only called the priest in extreme circumstances. The sacrament is now called “Anointing of the Sick” or the “Sacrament of the Sick.” It is no longer reserved for deathbed circumstances. Anyone who is facing a serious illness or a chronic condition can be anointed. Often, people seek the sacrament before a major surgery.

At Saint Gabriel, once a year, we would have a group ceremony of the Sacrament of the Sick. My mother would organize transportation for people from nursing homes to come to the Anointing Mass, in which we would anoint anyone who wanted it after Mass concluded. I’ve been anointed many times when I was facing a health crisis, even if it wasn’t life-critical.

Finally, we have two sacraments of vocation or commitment. First, we have Matrimony. The man and woman are joined in a covenant relationship of love. A covenant is an unbreakable and unconditional commitment. The joining of a man and woman is a covenant love relationship that is symbolic of the covenant love that Christ has for his people, the church.

Finally, we have Holy Orders: A Priest or Bishop is commissioned by the Church. The priest is given the delegated authority to forgive sins. They are authorized to celebrate Mass, given the power to consecrate the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. The ceremony involves an anointing and the laying on of hands.

In addition to these seven formal sacraments, Catholic tradition also includes other minor ceremonies and practices known as sacramentals. They are small signs to help us stay holy and faithful. These include sacred medals, statues, a crucifix, holy water, incense, and blessed palms from Palm Sunday.

The most important part of Catholic sacred tradition is the celebration of the Mass. In my next episode, I will give a brief overview of what goes on at Mass. We will not dig too deep into the theology of it. Typically, we would devote two entire lessons to the theology behind the Mass. When I taught this lesson on sacred tradition, part of the lesson would take place in the church and involve a tour of the sanctuary and explanation of the altar, the priestly vestments, and other items used during our celebration of the Mass. Although I can’t take you on a tour of the church physically, I will try to cover much of the same material I used in that tour.

So, as always… if you find this podcast educational, entertaining, enlightening, or even inspiring, consider sponsoring me on Patreon for just $5 per month. You will get early access to the podcast and other exclusive content. Although I have some financial struggles, I’m not really in this for money. Still, every little bit helps.

As always, my deepest thanks to my financial supporters. Your support means more to me than words can express.

Even if you cannot provide financial support, please, please, please post the links and share this podcast on social media so that I can grow my audience. I just want more people to be able to hear my stories.

All of my back episodes are available, and I encourage you to check them out if you’re new to this podcast. If you have any comments, questions, or other feedback, please feel free to comment on any of the platforms where you found this podcast.

I will see you next time as we continue contemplating life. Until then, fly safe.