Byline: Msgr. Charles E. Pope

2 min read

Jesus

Did Jesus Have Siblings?

Msgr. Charles E. Pope

September 21, 2023 11:28 am September 21, 2023

2 min read

6728 views

Comments Off

2 min read

There are a number of places in the New Testament (see Mk 3:31-34; 6:3; Mt 12:46; 13:55; Lk 8:19-20; Jn 2:12; 7:3-10; Acts 1:14; and 1 Cor 9:5) where Jesus’…

There are a number of places in the New Testament (see Mk 3:31-34; 6:3; Mt 12:46; 13:55; Lk 8:19-20; Jn 2:12; 7:3-10; Acts 1:14; and 1 Cor 9:5) where Jesus’ kinsfolk are mentioned using terms such as “brother” (adelphos), “sister” (adelphe) or “brethren” (adelphoi). But “brother” has a wider meaning both in the Scriptures and at the time they were written. It is not restricted to our literal meaning of a full brother or half-brother in the sense of sibling.

Even in the Old Testament “brother” had a wide range of meaning. In the Book of Genesis, for example, Lot is called Abraham’s brother (see 14:14), but his father was Haran — Abraham’s brother (Gn 11:26-28). So, Lot was actually a nephew of Abraham.

The term “brother” could also refer widely to friends or mere political allies (see 2 Sm 1:26; Am 1:9). Thus, in family relationships, “brother” could refer to any male relative from whom you are not descended. We use words like kinsmen and cousins today, but the ancient Jews did not.

In fact, neither Hebrew nor Aramaic had a word meaning “cousin.” They used terms such as “brother,” “sister” or, more rarely, “kin” or “kinsfolk” (syngenis) — sometimes translated as “relative” in English.

James, for example, whom St. Paul called the “brother of the Lord” (Gal 1:19), is identified by Paul as an apostle and is usually understood to be James the Younger. But James the Younger is elsewhere identified as the son of Alphaeus (also called Clopas) and his wife, Mary (see Mt 10:3; Jn 19:25). Even if James the Greater were meant by St. Paul, it is clear that he is from the Zebedee family, and not a son of Mary or a brother of Jesus (in the strict modern sense) at all.

The early Church was aware of the references to Jesus’ brethren, but was not troubled by them, teaching and handing on the doctrine of Mary’s perpetual virginity. This is because the terms referring to Jesus’ brethren were understood in the wider, more ancient sense. Widespread confusion about this began to occur after the 16th century with the rise of Protestantism and the loss of understanding the semantic nuances of ancient family terminology.

Comments Off

3 min read

Scripture

What Was Cain’s Sin?

Msgr. Charles E. Pope

August 26, 2023 8:00 am August 26, 2023

3 min read

12871 views

Comments Off

3 min read

While there is no obvious explanation given for the rejection of Cain’s offering in Genesis, there are differences in the details of the two offerings that provide some clues: First,…

While there is no obvious explanation given for the rejection of Cain’s offering in Genesis, there are differences in the details of the two offerings that provide some clues: First, Abel gives of the firstlings (first fruits) of his flock. There is no mention that Cain gave of the first fruits of his crop.

In biblical legislation, God commanded that the tithe be given. But it was not any tenth that was to be given, rather it was the first tenth that was to be given (see Ex 23:16,19; 34:26; Lv 23:10 to name just a few). Thus Cain erred by not presenting first fruits, and God did not regard his offering. We are not to give God leftovers.

A second, though less certain, problem may be that Cain offered a cereal offering, not a blood offering. Scripture attests that it was necessary to shed the blood of animals for the remission of sin. Hebrews 9:22 says, “According to the law almost everything is purified by blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.” This is confirmed all throughout the Old Testament wherein God specifies the sacrifice of certain animals for Temple worship. This theory is not without a problem, however, since cereal offerings and other offerings from the harvest are elsewhere commanded and acceptable to God (see Lv 2:14 for just one example).

Whatever the full reason, the Book of Hebrews attests: “By faith Abel offered to God a sacrifice greater than Cain’s. Through this he was attested to be righteous, God bearing witness to his gifts” (11:4).

Cain’s reaction to God’s response goes further to indicate a third area of concern, not for Cain’s offering, but for his disposition. As we shall see later in 1 John 3:12, Cain’s offering was not just lacking, it was evil. And this indicates not a merely external problem with Cain’s offering but an internal disposition of sin that renders his offering displeasing to God. And thus one can offer a technically perfect sacrifice to God, but if we offer it in unrepented and serious sin, God is displeased and we can even bring condemnation on ourselves (see 1 Cor 11:29).

Here, too, the Genesis text hints at the “heart problem” Cain brought to the moment. Scripture says: “Cain was very angry and dejected [that God did not regard his sacrifice]. Then the Lord said to Cain, ‘Why are you angry? Why are you dejected? If you act rightly, you will be accepted; but if not, sin lies in wait at the door; its urge is for you, yet you can rule over it’ ” (Gn 4:5-7).

The image of sin that lies in wait at the door is a powerful one. In permitting his anger and envy to grow toward his brother, Cain is moving toward darkness and sin. He must learn to master his anger and all his passions.

Sadly, Cain gives way to sin and murders his brother. Thus the First Letter of John tersely notes: “Cain … belonged to the evil one and slaughtered his brother. Why did he slaughter him? Because his own works were evil, and those of his brother righteous” (3:12).

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

Comments Off

1 min read

Sacraments

Is Adoration Different Than Prayer Before a Tabernacle?

Msgr. Charles E. Pope

August 8, 2023 9:27 pm August 8, 2023

1 min read

13901 views

Comments Off

1 min read

The Church does not assign an essential difference between praying before the tabernacle and praying before the Lord when displayed in the monstrance in Eucharistic Adoration. A Vatican document on the Eucharist says: “Exposition of the blessed sacrament, either in a ciborium or a monstrance, draws the faithful to an awareness of the sublime presence of Christ and invites them to inner communion with him. Therefore, it is a strong encouragement toward the worship owed to Christ in spirit and in truth” (Eucharisticum Mysterium, No. 60).

So, both forms of adoration are commended. But while there is not an essential difference, there can be a subjectively different experience. In adoration before the Blessed Sacrament exposed in a monstrance, there is a visual aspect that helps many to stay more focused. In this sense one may argue that Eucharistic Adoration before the monstrance is “better.” But as you point out, personal factors such as schedules or a preference for quieter, briefer or more solitary visits can also influence what is better.

The bottom line is that the Church encourages devotion to the Blessed Sacrament. Such devotion, through visits, adoration, signs of respect through kneeling, genuflection and making the Sign of the Cross as one passes a Catholic Church, all acknowledge the sublime presence of the Lord in the Most Blessed Sacrament.

Comments Off

1 min read

Saints

Purgatory Needed for Saints?

Msgr. Charles E. Pope

August 6, 2023 9:10 am August 6, 2023

1 min read

11152 views

Comments Off

1 min read

When the Church canonizes a saint, we are confirming they are in heaven. The pope does this based on the supplied evidence of a holy life, and also the evidence…

When the Church canonizes a saint, we are confirming they are in heaven. The pope does this based on the supplied evidence of a holy life, and also the evidence of miracles credibly attributed to the prayers of the saint. Canonization says they are in heaven now and that any purification they might have needed is complete. The Church is not thereby indicating that the saint needed no time in purgatory, only that their purgation is now complete and they are in heaven, as seen by the evidence of the miracles wrought by God through their prayers. Though we cannot know if or for how long a canonized saint might have needed purification in purgatory, it seems likely that even most canonized saints would need some purgation after death. Jesus promises us that when he is finished with us we would be perfect as our heavenly Father is perfect (see Mt 5:48). Even very holy people probably need some final purification for the Lord to finish and perfect this awesome promise in us.

Comments Off

1 min read

Sacraments

Mixing Water and Wine At Mass

Msgr. Charles E. Pope

July 31, 2023 9:45 am July 31, 2023

1 min read

19914 views

Comments Off

1 min read

Ever wonder why a drop of water is added to the wine while preparing the gifts at Mass? The practice of mixing water and wine was common in the ancient…

Ever wonder why a drop of water is added to the wine while preparing the gifts at Mass?

The practice of mixing water and wine was common in the ancient world. Wines were usually heavier than most modern vintages and to dilute them a bit made them more palatable and less inebriating. People also drank more wine since water in the ancient world could not be purified easily as is done today. Thus the wine used at Mass was mixed with water before the consecration in the usual manner of all wine.

Mystically it came to represent our inclusion into Christ’s body by our baptism. The priest says: “By the mystery of the water and wine, may we come to share in the divinity of Christ who humbled himself to share in our humanity.” Though the practical reason to mix water and wine no longer is needed, it remains a powerful symbol.

Comments Off

2 min read

Angels

Should We Name Guardian Angels?

Msgr. Charles E. Pope

July 17, 2023 6:59 am July 17, 2023

2 min read

11106 views

Comments Off

2 min read

Generally, the Church advises against the practice of naming our angels. In a document written in 2001 by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments entitled…

Generally, the Church advises against the practice of naming our angels. In a document written in 2001 by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments entitled “Directory on Popular Piety in the Liturgy: Principles and Guidelines,” it says, “The practice of assigning names to the holy angels should be discouraged, except in the cases of Gabriel, Raphael and Michael, whose names are contained in holy Scripture” (No. 127). While the congregation does not offer reasons for discouraging the practice, I would like to offer a couple.

First, there is the understanding of what a name is. For most of us in the modern Western world, a name is simply a sound we go by. But in the ancient, biblical world, and even in many places today, a name has a far deeper meaning. A name describes something of the essence of the person. This helps explain the ancient practice of the Jews to name the child on the eighth day. The delay gave the parents some time to observe something of the essence of the child, and then, noting it, they would name the child. Indeed, most biblical names are deeply meaningful and descriptive.

But it is presumptive to think that we can know enough of the essence of a particular angel in order to be able to assign a name. Hence, assigning a name seems inappropriate.

The second reason is that assigning a name indicates some superiority over the one named. Thus in the case of children, parents, who are superior over their children, rightly name them. However, in the case of angels, they are superior to us. And, even though we often speak of them as serving us, they do this on account of their superior power and as guardians. Thus God commands us to heed their voice (see Ex 23:20-21).

You are surely encouraged to speak to your angel, and the usual practice is to say something like, “Dear Guardian Angel….” or simply “Guardian Angel, please help….”

I usually get a lot of pushback when I have given this answer elsewhere, whether in print or in talks. I realize that many have strong feelings to the contrary of what the Roman congregation advises. And though I think the caution is reasonable and that we should not name angels, neither should we abandon charity among one another over this issue or allow it to loom too large as something permitted or forbidden.

The bottom line should be to avoid the practice but to preserve charity and gently correct if possible, or tolerate it with kindness where necessary.

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

Comments Off