When Our Lady and St. Joseph presented Our Lord in the Temple, Simeon prophesied to Our Lady:
“Behold this child is set for the fall, and for the resurrection of many in Israel, and for a sign which shall be contradicted; And thy own soul a sword shall pierce, that, out of many hearts, thoughts may be revealed.” (Gospel according to St. Luke 2:34-35)
Our Lord will cause some to rise and some to fall. Some will embrace Him, some will reject Him. He will be a sign of contradiction. I propose that there is an Old Testament type of this prophecy: the reconstruction of the Temple after the Jews returned from their Exile. Continue reading
Strange, how the seeds of doubt are sown. I read a blog post by someone who touts himself as a traditional Catholic. The author made an observation. Earlier in Church art, images of Our Lady always include Our Lord. Think of the icons of the East, where Our Lady typically holds the Christ Child. Think of Romanesque and Gothic statues of Our Lady seated, with the Christ Child on her lap. The author contrasted this artistic tradition with Neo-Gothic statues of the modern era, which often show Our Lady standing alone, her arms outstretched. This pose is often associated with Our Lady of Lourdes or Our Lady of Fatima.
The author was implying that this artistic convention is un-traditional and divorces Our Lady from Our Lord. It makes her an independent force or mediator, separate from Our Lord, making the Protestant allegation of Mariolatry seem true. This thought now occurs to me when I see statues of Our Lady absent a representation of the Christ Child. It occurs to me when I venerate Our Lady at the Lady Altar in a local church, where the statue shows Our Lady in the pose described above. It’s a wicked thought, but it takes some insight to redress. For me, the insight was slow in coming. It came one day when praying the Rosary, specifically the mystery of the Visitation. Continue reading
Regardless of the date stamp above, it’s still Epiphany (Jan. 6) as I type this. The purpose of this post is to draw some parallels between Epiphany and Pentecost. Why? Three reasons:
a.) Hopefully to render the Church calendar a bit more intelligible. If you don’t know what the calendar is about, it’s easy to think we’re arbitrarily and superstitiously celebrating one random event after another. This way lies Protestantism and/or rationalism.
b.) Hopefully to provide some food for prayerful meditation.
c.) Perhaps goad you to share the good news of the Gospel with others. The Gospel that was first made known at Pentecost is a reiteration and reinterpretation (in light of Our Lord’s Passion, Death, Resurrection, and Ascension) of those manifestations of Our Lord celebrated on the Feast of the Epiphany.
I’m not being original when I say that Epiphany is a sort of pre-Pentecost. Here are a few ways in which Epiphany anticipates Pentecost:
1.) They both close the preceding liturgical season. Pentecost closes Eastertide, and Epiphany closes Christmastide. A period of wearing white vestments yields to a period of wearing green vestments.
Think of it this way: Epiphany is to Christmas as Pentecost is to Easter. Christmas and Easter are the two major feasts of the Church year, celebrating Christ’s Birth and His Resurrection, which is a sort of Rebirth in Glory and certainly effects our own rebirth. Both feasts require a sort of pendant feast to close out their respective “afterglow” seasons. These parallel feasts are Epiphany and Pentecost. Continue reading
I propose that there is a mystical connection between Our Lady’s Immaculate Conception and Christ’s cleansing of the Temple as told in the Gospel of St. John. Unlike in the Synoptic Gospels, in St. John’s Gospel the cleansing of the Temple occurs at the beginning of Our Lord’s public ministry, not long after the Wedding at Cana.* Here’s the aftermath of Our Lord knocking over the tables (2:18-22; emphasis added):
“18 The Jews, therefore, answered, and said to Him: What sign dost thou shew unto us, seeing thou dost these things? 19 Jesus answered, and said to them: Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. 20 The Jews then said: Six and forty years was this temple in building; and wilt thou raise it up in three days? 21 But He spoke of the temple of His body. 22 When therefore He was risen again from the dead, His disciples remembered, that He had said this, and they believed the scripture, and the word that Jesus had said.”
I propose that there’s a hidden meaning to the number 46 years that explains its presence in the text. Like the Temple of Herod, Our Lord’s Body was, at this point, 46 years in the making. For that was the number of years from the Immaculate Conception to the beginning of Our Lord’s public ministry. Continue reading
In the Old Testament, many figures are types, or foreshadowings, of Christ. Some of these types are more familiar to Catholics than others. I think Joshua* is one of the lesser-known types for Catholics. It’s a shame, as there any number of obvious parallels:
–In Hebrew and Greek, the names Joshua and Jesus are the same. Jesus is the new Joshua.
–Joshua led the old Chosen People into the Promised Land after the death of Moses. Jesus leads the new Chosen People into Heaven after the death of the Mosaic Law. What Joshua is in the Old Testament, Jesus is in the New Testament.
–Joshua leads the Israelites through the Jordan River into the Promised Land. Christ was baptized in the Jordan, and Baptism opens the gates of Heaven to us.
Catholic, Protestant, and presumably (?) Orthodox scholars have assembled these parallels and others to boot. I propose a parallel that I’ve never seen called out elsewhere: Joshua’s last words foreshadow Christ’s institution of the Papacy. Continue reading
Well, from the *edge* of the Driftless, to be precise. I’ve been wiped out by work this last week, which is great, because I love having a job. On the downside, I’ve had less time to coruscate with refulgent wisdom on these here pages. I have a longer post in the works, but in the meantime I’ll jot down some drafts for future reference. The author of the Siris blog does much the same, and he’s my inspiration. Here goes:
–The indissolubility of sacramental matrimony as a sign of the indissolubility and final perfection of the New Covenant. Divorce allowed under the Old Testament because of the provisional nature of the Mosaic Law.
–If the ordained priest acts in persona Christi, the non-ordained Christian acts in persona Mariae
–St. Joseph as the type of the clergy, providing the canonical structure within which the Holy Ghost overshadows and fecundates the Blessed Virgin/the Church
–God the Son as Eternal Christ (“Anointed”): The Holy Ghost as the seal of the bond between the Father and the Son. Oil as a seal preserving the integrity of skin and hair against soiling and disintegration/rupture.
–Noah and his Ark, outside of which there was no salvation, as a type of St. Peter and his Barque, the Church, outside of which there is no salvation Continue reading