Catholic Answers

25K posts

Catholic Answers banner
Catholic Answers

Catholic Answers

@catholiccom

Catholic Answers is a media ministry that serves Christ by explaining and defending the Catholic faith. See all the ways we do it. 👇

San Diego, CA Katılım Şubat 2011
783 Takip Edilen172.7K Takipçiler
Catholic Answers
Catholic Answers@catholiccom·
Catholic Answers@catholiccom

Tim Staples addresses this directly in Behold Your Mother. TL;DR: There are good reasons to read Mary's pangs of birth in Revelation 12 as spiritual and metaphorical. "Knowing that Catholic teaching has traditionally held that Mary did not suffer the pains of labor, the question is asked, how can Catholics believe this is Mary? "First, I know of no Protestant scholar who would interpret this text in any way other than to say that the 'labor pangs' were spiritual in nature. If one held the woman to be Israel or the Church, 'the labor pains' would obviously be spiritual. It should be no problem to interpret it that way if it were Mary. "Secondly, Mary did in fact suffer greatly throughout her life as a result of her calling to be the Mother of God. Right from the start, she had to suffer through being misunderstood—perhaps even by St. Joseph—with regard to her pregnancy. She would have had some knowledge that her son was destined for great suffering from the time the angel revealed to her that he was to be the Messiah. This would be a source of suffering for any loving mother. Moreover, she was promised suffering by almighty God through the prophet Simeon in Luke 2:34-35: 'A sword shall pierce your soul.' This would be dramatically fulfilled at the foot of the cross. "Ecclesiastes 1:18 says: 'For in much wisdom is much vexation, and he who increases knowledge increases sorrow.' Mary’s unique and intimate knowledge of her son would have been a source of great consolation and great suffering. Any mother can readily see this even on a natural level; given the plenitude of grace in Mary’s life, her intimate knowledge and therefore her suffering would have been multiplied exponentially. It is certainly no leap to see why she would be depicted as suffering 'labor pangs' in Revelation 12:3—not physical pain from the head of her child passing through her birth canal, but just as real. In fact, spiritual suffering in the soul can be worse than any physical suffering. The body can go numb with intense pain, but there is no way to shut down the pain in a heart that loves." (Behold Your Mother 107-108)

QME
0
0
16
308
🌷 LIZZIE🌷
🌷 LIZZIE🌷@farmingandJesus·
Wait so Catholics say Mary’s childbirth was likely painless but they also say Mary is the woman in revelation 12 (it’s Israel) Cant make this up. 😬 Revelation 12:1-2  A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. 2 She was pregnant and cried out in PAIN as she was about to give birth. This is what happens when you don’t rightly divide the word of truth and create doctrines of men.
🌷 LIZZIE🌷 tweet media
English
66
16
242
14.3K
Catholic Answers
Catholic Answers@catholiccom·
Tim Staples addresses this directly in Behold Your Mother. TL;DR: There are good reasons to read Mary's pangs of birth in Revelation 12 as spiritual and metaphorical. "Knowing that Catholic teaching has traditionally held that Mary did not suffer the pains of labor, the question is asked, how can Catholics believe this is Mary? "First, I know of no Protestant scholar who would interpret this text in any way other than to say that the 'labor pangs' were spiritual in nature. If one held the woman to be Israel or the Church, 'the labor pains' would obviously be spiritual. It should be no problem to interpret it that way if it were Mary. "Secondly, Mary did in fact suffer greatly throughout her life as a result of her calling to be the Mother of God. Right from the start, she had to suffer through being misunderstood—perhaps even by St. Joseph—with regard to her pregnancy. She would have had some knowledge that her son was destined for great suffering from the time the angel revealed to her that he was to be the Messiah. This would be a source of suffering for any loving mother. Moreover, she was promised suffering by almighty God through the prophet Simeon in Luke 2:34-35: 'A sword shall pierce your soul.' This would be dramatically fulfilled at the foot of the cross. "Ecclesiastes 1:18 says: 'For in much wisdom is much vexation, and he who increases knowledge increases sorrow.' Mary’s unique and intimate knowledge of her son would have been a source of great consolation and great suffering. Any mother can readily see this even on a natural level; given the plenitude of grace in Mary’s life, her intimate knowledge and therefore her suffering would have been multiplied exponentially. It is certainly no leap to see why she would be depicted as suffering 'labor pangs' in Revelation 12:3—not physical pain from the head of her child passing through her birth canal, but just as real. In fact, spiritual suffering in the soul can be worse than any physical suffering. The body can go numb with intense pain, but there is no way to shut down the pain in a heart that loves." (Behold Your Mother 107-108)
🌷 LIZZIE🌷@farmingandJesus

Wait so Catholics say Mary’s childbirth was likely painless but they also say Mary is the woman in revelation 12 (it’s Israel) Cant make this up. 😬 Revelation 12:1-2  A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. 2 She was pregnant and cried out in PAIN as she was about to give birth. This is what happens when you don’t rightly divide the word of truth and create doctrines of men.

English
4
4
84
7K
Catholic Answers
Catholic Answers@catholiccom·
"Why doesn't the Church sell all its fine art and precious metals to feed the poor?" When someone asks this question, writes Fr. Gabriel Mosher, "he is naturally defaulting to his personal experience of private ownership and then projecting that upon the institution of the Church and its ministers. The appropriate disposition, however, clearly perceives the distinction between the private and the common good. "Like a museum, the Church acts as a steward of these beautiful creations for the sake of all people. Unlike in a museum, the Church sets these objects of devotion to work for the glory of God and to aid the faithful as they journey toward communion with the incarnate and triune God. "If this art existed merely for those who could afford to commission it, then it would only unjustly impoverish the faithful." Read more here: bit.ly/4vBmE3y @lukei4655
Catholic Answers tweet media
English
23
64
408
11.5K
Catholic Answers
Catholic Answers@catholiccom·
The evidence suggests Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John did write the Gospels. The names attached to the Gospels were in use in the first century. Had the Gospels circulated without names, or under any other names, for an extended period, they would have come to be called different things, the same way that there are multiple titles for many ancient works. However, they didn’t. In ancient documents they are always referred to as the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Unlike disputed books such as Hebrews, no ancient source ever proposes an alternative author for any of the four Gospels. When the Gospels were read in church, the congregation needed to be told what was being read, and there needed to be a way to distinguish them from each other, since so much of their content was similar, with each telling the story of Jesus. The churches chose to refer to them by their authors. This need to distinguish them existed as soon as there was more than one Gospel, and so the names were used immediately, not at a later date. This is a strong indication that the names are accurate. If OP is correct that the traditional authors didn't write the Gospels, he needs to explain how those names came into universal use. The most common explanation put forth is that early Christian communities attached authoritative-sounding authors' names to the texts. This is exactly what we see forgers in later centuries doing when they circulated false gospels. But if someone were inventing authors for credibility, these are strange choices: Mark wasn't an apostle at all; he was just Peter's secretary, and Scripture itself remembers him abandoning Paul's first mission, an episode serious enough to split Paul and Barnabas (Acts 15:36-41). Luke wasn't an apostle either, and is mentioned only three times in Paul's letters. Matthew is the strangest choice of all: a former tax collector, the kind of man Jews despised as a Roman collaborator (Matt. 18:17), somehow attached to the most Jewish Gospel of the four. Who would forge authority by picking a deserter, a nobody, and a tax man? No one, that's who.
ApostateNate@MentallyNathan

Christians are painfully unaware that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John did not write the gospels

English
21
114
1K
37.1K
Catholic Answers
Catholic Answers@catholiccom·
"You're a rockstar, man." "You've been a huge help for me as I've come into the Church." "Behold Your Mother is the best Marian theology book I've read." Happy retirement, Tim ❤️
English
10
32
484
14.7K
The Blessed Salt ❤️‍🔥🇻🇦🇺🇸
Apropos of nothing, Tim Staples rode in my car once.
Catholic Answers@catholiccom

As it is so often on this side of the veil, it is with equal parts sorrow and joy that we announce that, as of July 1, Tim Staples has retired from his post at Catholic Answers. Sorrow to be bidding farewell to our brother in arms but joy in considering the magnificence of his life of service in the spread of the gospel. Tim's name can be said in the same breath as Bart Starr's and Hank Aaron's. There are more recent celebrity athletes with more sparkly stats, perhaps, but Tim belongs in this company not only for his greatness in his field—Tim is the original apologetics GOAT—but also, because, like Starr and Aaron, Tim has always been first about his team and the game. And the game Tim plays every day, and is an undisputed champion of, is the only one that matters: eternity. Tim’s lost nothing of his staggering and ready command of Scripture, St. Thomas, and Church documents, but certain blows to his health have taken their toll on his sowing and harvesting in the vineyard. And yet—seat him behind a microphone in the Catholic Answers studio or stick one in his hand behind any podium (not that he will stay behind the podium!), and the unmitigated energy and joy of his earliest apologetics days returns. "Can I get an Amen??" Marvelous indeed are Tim’s depth and breadth of knowledge and his capacity to render an involved theological or doctrinal question with extraordinary lucidity and accessibility. Most admirable about the man, however, is his certain conviction that every single soul is worthy of his time. For Tim, apologetics and evangelization have never been about the metrics or the numbers. They are about the individual human person with whom he is talking, who at that moment might as well be the only other person on earth. You hear this care in his habitual repetition of a caller’s or audience member’s first name over the course of his answer. It’s not a mere rhetorical device. It’s love. And where it most manifests is in those many, many occasions when Tim, long after a talk is over, the lights in the church all are turned off, and all the folks have gone home, has stayed up till two or three in the morning in the parking lot with that one young man still struggling with a Church teaching. In this way, he very much reflects the Good Shepherd leaving the ninety-nine behind to bring back the stray. From where does this love come? From his own palpable love of Jesus Christ and the Church he founded. Happily, our working relationship with Tim is not altogether ended; devoted listeners of Catholic Answers Live will still hear him as a guest, twice a month. Like our other regular guests and contributors, Tim now occupies the esteemed role of "fellow worker in the vineyard." Godspeed, Tim. For all of us at Catholic Answers, working alongside you has been an honor, and inspiration, and a joy.

English
2
1
16
1.8K
Catholic Answers
Catholic Answers@catholiccom·
As it is so often on this side of the veil, it is with equal parts sorrow and joy that we announce that, as of July 1, Tim Staples has retired from his post at Catholic Answers. Sorrow to be bidding farewell to our brother in arms but joy in considering the magnificence of his life of service in the spread of the gospel. Tim's name can be said in the same breath as Bart Starr's and Hank Aaron's. There are more recent celebrity athletes with more sparkly stats, perhaps, but Tim belongs in this company not only for his greatness in his field—Tim is the original apologetics GOAT—but also, because, like Starr and Aaron, Tim has always been first about his team and the game. And the game Tim plays every day, and is an undisputed champion of, is the only one that matters: eternity. Tim’s lost nothing of his staggering and ready command of Scripture, St. Thomas, and Church documents, but certain blows to his health have taken their toll on his sowing and harvesting in the vineyard. And yet—seat him behind a microphone in the Catholic Answers studio or stick one in his hand behind any podium (not that he will stay behind the podium!), and the unmitigated energy and joy of his earliest apologetics days returns. "Can I get an Amen??" Marvelous indeed are Tim’s depth and breadth of knowledge and his capacity to render an involved theological or doctrinal question with extraordinary lucidity and accessibility. Most admirable about the man, however, is his certain conviction that every single soul is worthy of his time. For Tim, apologetics and evangelization have never been about the metrics or the numbers. They are about the individual human person with whom he is talking, who at that moment might as well be the only other person on earth. You hear this care in his habitual repetition of a caller’s or audience member’s first name over the course of his answer. It’s not a mere rhetorical device. It’s love. And where it most manifests is in those many, many occasions when Tim, long after a talk is over, the lights in the church all are turned off, and all the folks have gone home, has stayed up till two or three in the morning in the parking lot with that one young man still struggling with a Church teaching. In this way, he very much reflects the Good Shepherd leaving the ninety-nine behind to bring back the stray. From where does this love come? From his own palpable love of Jesus Christ and the Church he founded. Happily, our working relationship with Tim is not altogether ended; devoted listeners of Catholic Answers Live will still hear him as a guest, twice a month. Like our other regular guests and contributors, Tim now occupies the esteemed role of "fellow worker in the vineyard." Godspeed, Tim. For all of us at Catholic Answers, working alongside you has been an honor, and inspiration, and a joy.
Catholic Answers tweet media
English
60
56
863
32.8K
Catholic Answers
Catholic Answers@catholiccom·
OBJECTION: "Jesus couldn't be the Messiah because he did not fulfill Jewish prophecy!" ANSWER: Ancient Jews did not all expect the same messiah; there is no single understanding of the Messiah in Judaism. There have been multiple understandings. There has even been an expectation of more than one Messiah. The authors of the Dead Sea Scrolls, for example, expected 1) Messiah ben Aaron of the tribe of Levi and 2) Messiah ben David of the tribe of Judah. Some in rabbinic Judaism also expected 3) Messiah ben Joseph from the ten northern tribes. We are principally interested in Messiah ben David, so we can set the other two aside, but in some Jewish writings there is also the heavenly Messiah. How is he to be related to Messiah ben David? There are many theories about this Messiah. Some sources say he will be King David himself; others, a descendant of David. Some say he was born around A.D. 70 and went to live in seclusion in Rome. Some indicate he would be a warrior and expel Gentiles from Israel. Others indicate he would be a man of peace and have a reign that embraces Gentiles. According to some, the Messiah would reign forever, but others indicate he will suffer and even—as in 4 Ezra—die and be resurrected. This diversity of views reveals that there are many ideas about the Messiah in Judaism. Anyone, therefore, who says that Jesus could not be the Messiah because he did not fulfill Jewish prophecy, either reveals that he does not know the scope of what Jewish sources have said about the Messiah or is deliberately concealing what he knows. How can we navigate this maze? We can make a series of distinctions regarding predictions about the Messiah. The first distinction is between what the Jewish scriptures say and what other sources say. A second distinction, within the Jewish scriptures, is between passages where the literal sense of the text clearly predicts the Messiah and other passages. Clear messianic prophecies: -Speak of a future ruler -Identify him as a descendant of David -Portray him as an ideal ruler or as ruling in an ideal age A text that does these things contains a messianic prophecy in the literal sense of the text—what the human author was trying to communicate. But Jews and Christians recognize God as the ultimate author of the scriptures and recognize that he is aware of things the human authors were not. God can and does put additional meanings in the text that are not obvious on first reading. These are said to belong to the spiritual sense of the text, and both Jews and Christians have recognized that the spiritual sense also contains prophecies of the Messiah: giving us another category of messianic prophecy. —Jimmy Akin, Evidence for Christ Want to read more? Order "Evidence for Christ" here: bit.ly/3TyPgNq
Catholic Answers tweet media
English
8
11
146
6.9K
Catholic Answers
Catholic Answers@catholiccom·
"[T]here has been some cynicism about the oxygen-sucking nature of [Taylor Swift's and Travis Kelce's] public courtship and about the long-term marriage outlook for a woman who made her fortune writing breakup songs. Still, in a generation where marriages are later and less frequent than ever before, I entertain some hope that the union of America’s most powerful couple may be a positive encouragement to the anxious single masses. "And make no mistake: a union it surely is." Continue reading: bit.ly/4vlsohD
Catholic Answers tweet media
English
8
0
28
7.5K
Catholic Answers
Catholic Answers@catholiccom·
Baptism saves. But it also calls us to holiness. The sacrament of baptism truly confers grace that dynamically and radically reshapes the life of the soul, but we have to cooperate with this grace to order our lives in holiness and spiritual freedom. In other words, with grace comes the call and the supernatural capacity to live virtuously. God pours his life into us as a free and unearned gift, and that magnificent gift carries with it an immense responsibility of reverence. Virtue, Augustine learned and subsequently taught the Church, is nothing other than rightly ordered love. True holiness consists precisely in continually choosing and loving God supremely above all things and loving all other created things rightly in him. This is a moment of introspection for us all. Do we love things or people more than we love God? Perhaps now is the time to prayerfully choose to reorder our hearts with God as our first love. The baptized believer is empowered, by this wondrous divine life of grace, to exercise the theological virtues (faith, hope, and charity) and also to live the infused moral virtues (prudence, justice, temperance, and fortitude) in a dynamic manner, reflecting not just Christ’s holiness but the person of Christ in everyday life and action. In this life, virtue and sanctification become not mere individual moral effort but the fruit of loving cooperation with divine grace as a participation in God’s own divine life. As incredible as it seems, we share in the very virtues and holiness of Christ! This is why the witness of Christian living becomes one of the most powerful testimonies to the world of our encounter with Jesus Christ. Our virtuous conduct in baptized life is a visible manifestation of invisible grace’s interior work within our souls. Once one gives his life faithfully to Jesus Christ, everyone notices that he is no longer the same. Continue reading in Marcus Peter's new book, "Not Finished Yet": bit.ly/4peZkab @AveAfternoon
Catholic Answers tweet media
English
2
14
57
2.9K
Zy
Zy@ZyMazza·
PRIEST: "Should I turn left?" THE SKULL OF AQUINAS: it would seem that any priest driving down this road should turn left P: "Yeah because the abbey is that way, okay makes sense" S: The abbey is off to the left, and indeed there is no other turn available, in either direction for 1.2 miles P: "Okay, great, I'm turning left since that's what I should do!" *turns on left-turn signal and begins to turn left* S: ON THE CONTRARY, the sign says 'do not enter' and beside it 'one way road'; in this situation, the correct thing to do is continue going straight
Archaeology & Art@archaeologyart

Skull of St. Thomas Aquinas being transported to Fossanova Abbey. Photograph by Daniel Ibanez, 2024

English
30
412
4.8K
258.9K
Catholic Answers
Catholic Answers@catholiccom·
@alexlyle We took "no record of a pope for 100 years after Peter died" to mean "no record of any popes in that time period." But your math on Irenaeus is correct.
English
1
0
73
2K
Alex (XY)
Alex (XY)@alexlyle·
@catholiccom So, Peter died around 70-80 AD and the first record of his successors is from Irenaeus who wrote around 180 AD? I thought 180-80=100
English
5
0
14
2.2K
Catholic Answers
Catholic Answers@catholiccom·
"We have no record of a pope for 100 years after Peter died." Tell that to St. Irenaeus. Sure, nobody in the first century was issuing press releases for each new pontiff. But by A.D. 180, St. Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons, writing about a church 600 miles from his own, names every man who'd held Peter's chair, in order (Against Heresies, Book 3, chapter 3): Linus Cletus Clement Evaristus Alexander Sixtus Telesphorus Hyginus Pius Anicetus Soter Eleutherius Irenaeus is writing 114 years after the apostles died. That's about the same length of time separating us from the Ford Model T. Try telling people the Model T came with a CD player and see how fast someone's grandmother corrects you. If the papacy were actually a late invention, Irenaeus's own readers (and the Gnostics who despised him) would've laughed him off the page. "Peter also never served as supreme pontiff in Rome." Peter signs off his own letter "from Babylon" (1 Pet. 5:13), which was the early Church's nickname for Rome under persecution. Clement of Rome (named above), writing around A.D. 96, references Peter's martyrdom as something that happened "in our own generation." (1 Clement, chapter 5). That's living memory. In his Letter to the Romans (A.D. 110), Ignatius of Antioch remarked that he could not command the Roman Christians the way Peter and Paul once did; such a comment makes sense only if Peter had been a leader, if not the leader, of the church in Rome. And in 1968, archaeologists confirmed what Christians had claimed for 1,900 years: Peter's bones, beneath the high altar of St. Peter's Basilica, in a tomb first-century believers had already marked as his. Historian Eamon Duffy calls this shrine "overwhelming evidence of a very early Roman belief that Peter had died in or near the Vatican Circus" (Saints and Sinners, p. 8). "The Church was born in Jerusalem." True! And Jerusalem had a single bishop too, James. "One city, one shepherd" was the pattern everywhere, including the mother church. Peter's authority was never competing with Christ's. It's just the way he set it up.
🎸 Matt 🎸@ChristandGuitar

We have no record of a pope for 100 years after Peter died. Peter also never served as supreme pontiff in Rome. This undermines the Roman Catholic Church's "unbroken apostolic succession" claims and the idea that the Church has always had its headquarters in Rome. The Church was born in Jerusalem and spread throughout the world. Christ alone is its Head. The papacy is blasphemy against God. Turn to Christ alone for salvation.

English
73
341
2.6K
134.2K