|
Q u i c k Q u e s t i o n s
Tree worship?
Q: Some Fundamentalists argue that it is wrong to have Christmas trees because they are of pagan origin and are condemned in the book of Jeremiah. How should we respond to that?
A: The passage they are referring to is Jeremiah 10:2-4: "Thus saith the Lord, 'Learn not the way of the heathen . . . For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not'" (King James Version).
We should respond by asking them to read the rest of the passage instead of stopping at verse 4. When one does this, it is clear that prophet is discussing idols, not Christmas trees.
God says, "They are upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot go. Be not afraid of them; for they cannot do evil, neither also is it in them to do good.' Forasmuch as there is none like unto thee, O Lord; thou art great, and thy name is great in might" (Jer. 10:5-6).
If this passage were talking about Christmas trees rather than idols, why would God need to point out to us that they cannot speak? Why would he point out that they have to be carried because they cannot walk around on their own? Why would God tell us not to be afraid of them, that they cannot do us evil-or good? Finally, why would Jeremiah say that there is no Christmas tree like God?
The passage makes sense only when one realizes the prophet is talking about idols-false gods. Idols cannot speak or walk. We should not be afraid of them, because they cannot do us evil; neither should we hope in them, because they cannot do us good. When one surveys the idols, one discovers that there is no god like Yahweh -the God who made the trees from which the idols were carved.
Fundamentalists tend to quote Jeremiah 10 from the King James Version. More recent versions make it even more obvious that Christmas trees are not being discussed. Here is how the New International Version (a contemporary Protestant translation) renders the passage:
"This is what the Lord says: 'Do not learn the ways of the nations . . . For the customs of the peoples are worthless; they cut a tree out of the forest, and a craftsman shapes it with his chisel. They adorn it with silver and gold; they fasten it with hammer and nails so it will not totter. Like a scarecrow in a melon patch, their idols cannot speak; they must be carried because they cannot walk. Do not fear them; they can do no harm nor can they do any good.' No one is like you, O Lord; you are great, and your name is mighty in power" (Jer. 10:2-6).
If a Fundamentalist still insists on taking the passage as a reference to Christmas trees, you can point out that it is perfectly harmless to have one in your house since God himself says, "Be not afraid of them; for they cannot do evil" (Jer 10:5).
By the way, if honoring the Lord with greenery were offensive to God, the disciples would not have borne palm branches to celebrate Jesus' entry into Jerusalem (John 12:13).
Q: Everyone knows that Santa Claus is another same for "St. Nick," but no one seems to know much about St. Nicholas. Who was he, and how did he get transformed into the patron saint of commercialism?
A: According to Butler's Lives of the Saints, there are seven saints with the name Nicholas and as many beati ("blesseds"). The one we are interested in is Nicholas of Myra, who lived in the first half of the fourth century.
According to legend, he suffered during the persecution of Diocletian, the last Roman Emperor to persecute the Church, but was released from prison when Constantine came to power. He became bishop of the city of Myra, which the apostle Paul had visited in Acts 27:5. The ruins of this city are located in modern Turkey. Nicholas attended the council of Nicaea (the first ecumenical council) in A.D. 325, and he died in either 345 or 352.
Unfortunately, some sources for this information may not be reliable, and even many conservative Catholic scholars state that the only certain point is that he was bishop of Myra in the fourth century.
Nicholas's feast day is December 6, and he is a patron of Russia, Sicily, Lorraine, Greece, sailors, merchants, pawnbrokers, bakers, travelers, and children. His bones were kept in Myra until the eleventh century, but in 1087 they were stolen by Italian soldiers and taken to the Italian city of Bari to keep them from the control of the Muslims who had conquered Myra. His relics remain in Bari today, which has led some to refer to him as Nicholas of Bari.
According to legend, Nicholas secretly supplied dowries for three young girls whose father was too poor to find them husbands. One night Nicholas threw a bag of gold through an open window of the man's house, thus supplying a dowry for the eldest daughter. Later he repeated the procedure to supply dowries for the younger two. On the third occasion he was discovered and profusely thanked by the father of the three girls. The three balls that traditionally adorn pawnshops represent these bags of gold given by pawnbrokers' patron saint.
In Germany this story was combined with native folklore to make Nicholas a secret supplier of gifts to children in general. This version of the legend was popular in Germany, Switzerland, and Holland. The delivery of gifts was originally connected to Nicholas's own feast day, December 6, and is still celebrated in some countries as a gift day for children. In other places, gifts are given on Epiphany (January 6), in memory of the Magi's offerings. In still other cultures (including the U.S.), the two traditions were conflated and eventually transferred to December 25.
According to Butler's, the custom "was popularized in America by the Dutch Protestants of New Amsterdam [that is, New York City], who had converted the popish saint into a Nordic magician (Santa Claus = Sint Klaes = St. Nicholas)."
John J. Delaney says the secular figure is based on Thor, who rode on a chariot drawn by goats named Cracker and Gnasher. Our present conception of the "jolly old elf" owes much to Clement Moore's poem, The Night Before Christmas, which in turn derives from folklore and early engravings that picture Santa Claus as a smiling, bearded man smoking a pipe and wearing suspenders-in other words, costumed as one of the Dutch immigrants who founded New York.
It was this de-Catholicizing of a Catholic saint that eventually produced the modern icon of materialism at Christmas time.
Q: Someone told me that the chapter and verse divisions were not originally in the Bible. When were they introduced?
A: Except for the book of Psalms, which, one could argue, has always been divided into chapters since each psalm is reckoned as a chapter, the division into chapters was introduced around 1206: "The division by chapters of approximately equal length dates only from the beginning of the thirteenth century. It is due to Stephen Langton (d. 1228), who was a professor at the University of Paris and subsequently became Archbishop of Canterbury and a cardinal. It was introduced into the so-called Parisian Bible, about 1206, and then was employed in all later editions of the Bible, including the printed Hebrew Bible. The modern chapter division does not differ appreciably from that of Stephen Langton" (Robert and Tricot, Guide to the Bible [Paris: Desclée, 1960], I:5).
Chapters were split into verses in the sixteenth century: "The division by verses is more recent. It received its final form from the celebrated printer Robert Etienne (Stephanus) in 1551. In spite of its inconsistencies, it has been consecrated by usage, and is employed in all editions of the Bible" (ibid.).
Q: Why does John report on things in the Bible that no one else does?
A: Each of the four Evangelists (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) does this to some degree, but John does it most often.
According to a tradition that goes back to the second century, John did not originally plan to write a Gospel but was urged to do so by others. Early tradition also records that John wrote last and did so in part to fill in material not included by the other three Evangelists.
These traditions jibe with the last two verses of the Gospel. The next-to-last verse, John 21:24, says that the disciple whom Jesus loved (John) "is the disciple who is bearing witness to these things, and who has written these things; and we know that his testimony is true." The plural third person remark (" we know") seems to be a statement vouching for the authenticity of John's Gospel, written by the group of men who asked him to write the work.
The last verse of the Gospel, John 21:25, states, "But there are also many other things which Jesus did; were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written." The singular first person remark ("I suppose") seems to be an expression on John's part that, although he wrote some of the things Jesus did, there was no way he could write them all.
In any event, the tradition is that John wrote different things from the other Evangelists precisely in order to fill out the earlier accounts.
Q: Why is the Eucharist considered by Catholics to be the center of the Mass?
A: Because the Eucharist is Jesus and Jesus is God. Anytime God manifests his presence in a special way in the place where you are, he ought to be the center of attention.
Q: The students in my CCD class are asking whether it is okay to use a Ouija board or call the psychic hot-lines advertised on television. Are these practices permissible?
A: No, both are forbidden. The psychic hot-lines claim to have people who can tell you the future, not by divine revelation, but by psychic means. This is the practice known as divination, and it is forbidden in Scripture. Ouija boards are used in an attempt to gain information from the spirits of the dead and thus constitute a form of necromancy (not the same as asking departed Christians to pray for one, but trying to get information from the dead).
Both divination and necromancy are forbidden in Scripture and the Church's official documents. The Bible states: "When you come into the land which the Lord your God gives you, you shall not learn to follow the abominable practices of those nations. There shall not be found among you any one who burns his son or his daughter as an offering, any one who practices divination, a soothsayer, or an augur, or a sorcerer, or a charmer, or a medium, or a wizard, or a necromancer. For whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord; and because of these abominable practices the Lord your God is driving them out before you. You shall be blameless before the Lord your God. For these nations, which you are about to dispossess, give heed to soothsayers and to diviners; but as for you, the Lord your God has not allowed you so to do. The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your brethren-him you shall heed" (Deut. 18:9-15). Such practices are forbidden in New Testament passages (Acts 19:18-19, Gal. 5:20-21, Rev. 18:23).
This shows us that God's method for communicating supernatural information to his people would be by divine revelation through prophets, not through divination and necromancy.
In the same way, the Catechism of the Catholic Church states: "God can reveal the future to his prophets or to other saints. Still, a sound Christian attitude consists in putting oneself confidently into the hands of Providence for whatever concerns the future and giving up all unhealthy curiosity about it. Improvidence, however, can constitute a lack of responsibility.
"All forms of divination are to be rejected: recourse to Satan or demons, conjuring up the dead or other practices falsely supposed to 'unveil' the future. Consulting horoscopes, astrology, palm reading, interpretation of omens and lots, the phenomena of clairvoyance, and recourse to mediums all conceal a desire for power over time, history, and, in the last analysis, other human beings, as well as a wish to conciliate hidden powers. They contradict the honor, respect, and loving fear that we owe to God alone.
"All practices of magic or sorcery, by which one attempts to tame occult powers, so as to place them at one's service and have a supernatural power over others-even if this were for the sake of restoring their health-are gravely contrary to the virtue of religion. These practices are even more to be condemned when accompanied by the intention of harming someone, or when they have recourse to the intervention of demons. Wearing charms is also reprehensible. Spiritism often implies divination or magical practices; the Church for her part warns the faithful against it. Recourse to so-called traditional cures does not justify either the invocation of evil powers or the exploitation of another's credulity" (CCC 2115-2117).
Q: A question has arisen concerning whether one can fulfill one's Sunday obligation by going to an Anglican or Episcopal liturgy. My friend says you can, but I say you can only do so by going to a Catholic or Eastern Orthodox liturgy. Which of us, if either, is correct?
A: You are correct that Anglican and Episcopal liturgies do not fulfill the Sunday requirement. The Code of Canon Law states: "The precept of participating in the Mass is satisfied by assistance at a Mass which is celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite, either on the holy day or on the evening of the preceding day" (CIC 1248:1).
Since the Anglican and Episcopalian liturgies have never been approved for use in the Catholic Church, they are unapproved rites and so do not satisfy the requirement. Besides, they do not have a valid Eucharist since they have no valid priesthood.
In the case of Eastern Orthodox, these would also not fulfill one's Sunday obligation since, though they have a valid Eucharist, their liturgies are not approved for use in the Catholic Church. The Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church, which do fulfill one's Sunday obligation, have slightly different liturgies, in which prayers for the pope have been inserted, for example, and which have been approved for use in the Catholic Church (CCC 1015-1016).
|
Catholic Answers
