Byline: Msgr. Charles E. Pope

1 min read

Sin

Misusing “Oh, my God!”

Msgr. Charles E. Pope

May 25, 2023 5:00 pm May 25, 2023

1 min read

30005 views

Comments Off

1 min read

While the phrase “Oh, my God” could be a prayer, it is not usually meant in this way. More commonly it uses the Divine name as a mere expression of…

While the phrase “Oh, my God” could be a prayer, it is not usually meant in this way. More commonly it uses the Divine name as a mere expression of surprise or exasperation. This is not a reverent or prayerful use of God’s name in most circumstances. The word “vain” means empty. And, therefore, the context you cite would usually seem to qualify as using God’s name in vain.

However, in assigning culpability (blameworthiness), it is good to remember that some have developed a bad habit of using this expression. As such, they usually commit the sin in weakness rather than malice, not intending to show disrespect to God.

It should further be recalled that the Second Commandment, “You shall not use the name of the Lord in vain,” has for its first meaning that we should never use God’s name to swear falsely or curse others. Irreverence of God’s name through casual use, such as you cite, is an extended meaning of the commandment. Thus we see that violations of the Second Commandment do admit to some degree of seriousness. It is far more serious a sin to use God’s name to swear falsely than to inadvertently use it to express surprise.

Still, one ought to avoid such vain or empty uses. One way to help break a bad habit that may have developed is for the one who says, “Oh, my God!” to correct themselves aloud by saying, “Oh, I mean to say, ‘May the name of the Lord be praised!’” This makes reparation and also helps break the habit.

Comments Off

2 min read

The Church

When Was The Church Born?

Msgr. Charles E. Pope

May 25, 2023 6:04 am May 25, 2023

2 min read

13102 views

Comments Off

2 min read

The Catechism No. 766 says: “ ‘The origin and growth of the Church are symbolized by the blood and water which flowed from the open side of the crucified Jesus.’…

The Catechism No. 766 says: “ ‘The origin and growth of the Church are symbolized by the blood and water which flowed from the open side of the crucified Jesus.’ ‘For it was from the side of Christ as he slept the sleep of death upon the cross that there came forth the “wondrous sacrament of the whole Church.”’ As Eve was formed from the sleeping Adam’s side, so the Church was born from the pierced heart of Christ hanging dead on the cross.”

Some have called Pentecost the “birthday of the Church,” but that is more of a pious custom and is not an official teaching or declaration. The image is used since, in a way, the Church comes forth from her initial formation in the “womb” of Galilee during Christ’s public ministry. She comes forth now to begin her mission to the ends of the earth.

The problem with this image is that the Church that comes forth is no infant. She has been formed and is now clothed with power from on high to begin a mission, having been schooled, prepared and enabled. The image of birth falls short here, since birth bespeaks a helpless infant in need of complete formation. But the Church at Pentecost was far more mature.

One might argue that in the image of Eve coming forth from Adam’s side she came forth as an adult, not an infant, and thus “birthday” here can be understood in that manner. And this may be fair enough, but it is not the usual manner in which we speak of birthdays. At some point an image with too many qualifiers suggests a possible flaw in the image itself.

What Pentecost surely is, is the commissioning of the Church to go forth unto all the nations. She has been formed, purified, taught, equipped and enabled to go forth with joy and confidence. On the day of Pentecost, a fire fell on the Church. Those who had been frightened, confused disciples went forth with confidence and holy boldness, their minds made clear.

Rev. Msgr. Charles E. Pope is a priest of the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C.

Comments Off

4 min read

Eternal Life

Understanding Predestination Properly

Msgr. Charles E. Pope

May 7, 2023 12:02 am May 7, 2023

4 min read

1006 views

Comments Off

4 min read

Predestination is a proper biblical concept which indicates that God chose us and called us before we were ever made to be His own. It does not deny that we…

Predestination is a proper biblical concept which indicates that God chose us and called us before we were ever made to be His own. It does not deny that we freely chose Him, but it does insist that He first chose us, and thereby enabled us to choose Him.

Scripture says: “He chose us in him, before the foundation of the world, to be holy and without blemish before him. In love he destined us for adoption to himself through Jesus Christ, in accord with the favor of his will” (Eph 1:4-5; see also Rom 8:29-30).

Predestination, understood in a way that does not cancel human freedom, is thus biblical and proper. Double predestination, however, as articulated by Calvin and others that follow him is not biblical. Double predestination teaches in effect that some are destined by God from before their birth to go to heaven or hell and have no real choice. In other words, God sovereignly ordains the eternal destiny of every human being — the lost as well as the saved. Thus the damned are fated and destined to hell from before their birth.

But this is contrary to Scripture, wherein God says, for example, “I find no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies” (Ez 18:32; see also 1 Tm 2:4). So, double predestination is wrong: God does not desire, will or force anyone into hell. Only by freely choosing against heaven and the values of the kingdom of heaven does a person depart to hell — it is really their choice, God merely affirms it at the judgment.

An analogy that is sometimes used regarding predestination and double predestination is in reference to sports. In the NFL draft, certain players are chosen by certain teams. And in this sense they are predestined to play for a certain team. However, they are not doubly predestined in that they are not absolutely forced to play for this team. Though they might have to pay some financial penalties, etc., they are free simply to refuse to play for that team and insist on being available for another team. If they were legally forced to play for whatever team chose them, no matter what they thought or wished, this would be an example of double predestination. It would be akin to the Calvinist notion that people are chosen to go to heaven or hell no matter what they think or do.

All of this cancels human freedom, which the Scriptures clearly attest that we do have. Otherwise, any moral exhortation makes no sense at all.

What Calvin’s double predestination is trying to do is to preserve the sovereignty of God. But it does so at the expense of another truth, the freedom of the human person. And this is the essence of all heresy: it takes two truths that are sometimes in tension and, in order to resolve the tension, discards one truth and embraces the other. The word “heresy” is rooted in a Greek term meaning “to choose.”

Orthodoxy however holds the balance and accepts the tension. The tension is embraced in humility that accepts the fact that the tension between God’s sovereignty and our freedom is created by our own human limits in understanding.

Part of the mystery of predestination is that God lives outside of time and sees it comprehensively. God knows and sees the future and the past along with the present as one moment. But the fact that He knows something does not mean He causes or forces it. Even humanly, I might be able to see two trains moving toward each other on a track and know they are going to crash. But my knowing this does not mean I cause this.

Msgr. Charles Pope is a pastor in the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C.

Comments Off

2 min read

Prayer

Why are there Different Versions of the ‘Glory Be’?

Msgr. Charles E. Pope

April 28, 2023 7:06 pm April 28, 2023

2 min read

12153 views

Comments Off

2 min read

The Breviary (also known as the Liturgy of the Hours) was revised by Rome in 1970. Strangely, the English translation of the conclusion of the Glory Be was different from…

The Breviary (also known as the Liturgy of the Hours) was revised by Rome in 1970. Strangely, the English translation of the conclusion of the Glory Be was different from the one most commonly known: “as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end.” In effect, the “ever shall be, world without end” phrase was truncated to “will be forever.” Exactly why this was done is not clear. One explanation is that it would render the Glory Be (a prayer that is repeated often in the Breviary) smoother. Another explanation that some of the members of the translation committee offered was that it was more accurate.

To be fair, the Latin of the final phrase of the Glory Be is difficult to translate well into smooth English. The Latin ending is, sicut erat in principio, et nunc, et semper, et in saecula saeculorum. A literal rendering is, “as it was in the beginning, and is now, and is always, and unto ages of ages.” As you can see, “world without end” is not really what the Latin says. “Unto the ages of ages” is basically a way of saying, “for a very long time,” or, more simply, “forever” — hence the shorter version. While ignoring saecula seculorum is more accurate, it folds the idea of the ages into the word semper (“always”).

That said, the version of the Glory Be known by the vast majority of Catholics is the traditional one, which ends “world without end.” And thus there are many stumbles when people less familiar with the Liturgy of the Hours pray it together with those experienced in praying it.

Current plans are underway to retranslate the English version of the Liturgy of the Hours, as was recently done with the Mass. It is expected that the Glory Be will be put back to the older form since that will help avoid issues created with two versions of the Glory Be known by the faithful.

Comments Off

1 min read

Sacraments

Why Unleavened Bread For Holy Communion?

Msgr. Charles E. Pope

April 23, 2023 7:46 am April 23, 2023

1 min read

22015 views

Comments Off

1 min read

Historically, it seems clear that Jesus would have used unleavened bread at the Last Supper. The ancient Jews were instructed to use unleavened bread during the feast of Passover. This…

Historically, it seems clear that Jesus would have used unleavened bread at the Last Supper. The ancient Jews were instructed to use unleavened bread during the feast of Passover. This is scripturally and historically linked to the fact that, in their hasty exodus from Egypt, there was no time to fully knead the dough and allow the bread to rise before baking it (see Dt 16:3). Thus they baked it quickly without yeast.

The Passover meal that commemorated the Exodus was therefore to be eaten with unleavened bread (see Ex 29:2; Nm 9:11).

Theologically and spiritually, yeast, or leaven in the New Testament, is often equated with sin, impurity and hypocrisy (see Mt 16:6; Lk 12:1). And thus unleavened bread comes to symbolize sincerity, purity and integrity.

Regarding what the bread was like, we must keep in mind several factors. In the first place, wheat bread, which is most common today, was far less common in the ancient world. Breads were more often made from other grains such as barley. Second, bread can be baked in such a way that it has a dry, crackerlike quality. Or, bread can be baked in such a way that it has a doughy, more pitalike, quality. And this is so for both leaven and unleavened bread. Thus, other than affirming the bread at the Last Supper was unleavened, we cannot be utterly certain of its other qualities.

Comments Off

1 min read

Sacraments

Consecrated Host Fragment At Mass

Msgr. Charles E. Pope

April 8, 2023 7:15 am April 8, 2023

1 min read

9943 views

Comments Off

1 min read

The priest breaks off a small part of the consecrated Host during the Agnus Dei, which is after the Lord’s Prayer and the sign of peace, but before holy Communion….

The priest breaks off a small part of the consecrated Host during the Agnus Dei, which is after the Lord’s Prayer and the sign of peace, but before holy Communion. The rubrics specify: “Then he takes the Host, breaks it over the paten, and places a small piece in the chalice, saying quietly: ‘May this mingling of the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ bring eternal life to us who receive it.’” The celebrant breaks the bread because that is what Jesus did at the Last Supper, and on that very night Jesus said, “Do this in memory of me.” Furthermore, the priest drops that little piece of the consecrated Host into the chalice with the Precious Blood to signify the unity of the Church. As the General Instruction of the Roman Missal explains: “The gesture of breaking bread done by Christ at the Last Supper, which in apostolic times gave the entire Eucharistic Action its name, signifies that the many faithful are made one body (1 Cor 10:17) by receiving Communion from the one Bread of Life, which is Christ, who for the salvation of the world died and rose again” (No. 83).

Comments Off