Fatherhood: A Lesson from the Abbey

Saint Benedict of Nursia provided a Rule that was made for monks to find holiness in leading a life that the Gospels call for. Saint Benedict established a system that was meant to be lived within an abbey. The abbey is a place of solitude, prayer, soul-searching, and finding God. I believe that most of The Rule can be applied to everyday living, but his call “[t]o obey the commands of the Abbot in all things, even though he himself (which Heaven forbid) act otherwise, mindful of that precept of the Lord: "What they say, do ye; what they do, do ye not" (Mt 23:3)”¹ seems to share a distinct relationship with a father in a household. Thus, I believe that the practice of this particular rule could lead to exponential growth of the virtues obedience and humility for all the persons within the household, including the father.

First, it is appropriate to analyze Benedict's Rule from its foundation: Sacred Scripture. Saint Benedict references the Gospel of Matthew to form this rule. The passage reads:

Then Jesus said to the crowds and the disciples, 'The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat; so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice. They bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with their finger. They do all their deeds to be seen by men; for they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long, and they love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues, and salutations in the market places, and being called rabbi by men. But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brethren. And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Neither be called masters, for you have one master, the Christ. He who is greatest among you shall be your servant; whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted (Mt. 23:1-12, RSV).

With the Scripture as background to The Rule, it is clearly seen that this calls the onlookers to obedience and humility. The portion of the Gospel points to respect for the authority established by God in covenant with Israel and the Davidic Kingdom. This establishment moves the disciples towards an understanding of Christ's earlier message: a call to the Kingdom of God. This Kingdom, not being of this world but other-worldly, pushes the Christian to a new-found way of life.

Jesus stresses that the Pharisees must be respected despite their lack of piety and practice. Jesus, acknowledging that all the Pharisaical actions are for show, demonstrates respect is due to the Pharisees despite not listening to the call of the Lord. This manifests itself in the abbey by mirroring the respect given to the old authority of 'Moses' seat'² to the new authority of the Church through the Apostles and those who give up all things and secure for themselves a place in Heaven (cf. Mt. 19:28-30). Thus, Saint Benedict calls for an Abbot who “hates his own will,”³ as stated in the rule prior to this examined rule. This Abbot, therefore, follows a will not of his own, but rather through his prayer-life follows the Divine Will.

The relationship of the Abbot to the brothers is one of leadership whilst the God-Man does not reside with them. It is fully acknowledged that the Abbot is safeguarding their well-being spiritually and physically, and stands as the head of the community, but remains a part of the greater Church and is subject to the Lord. This prompts the motion from religious life to what is not called religious life, but very much is religious life: the domestic church. During the reign of Blessed John Paul II, the Holy Father issued the Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio. In this work, Blessed John Paul II examines the call of the family to holiness and defines the role of the Christian family: “Accordingly, the family must go back to the "beginning" of God's creative act, if it is to attain self-knowledge and self-realization in accordance with the inner truth not only of what it is but also of what it does in history. And since in God's plan it has been established as an "intimate community of life and love,"(44) the family has the mission to become more and more what it is, that is to say, a community of life and love, in an effort that will find fulfillment, as will everything created and redeemed, in the Kingdom of God. Looking at it in such a way as to reach its very roots, we must say that the essence and role of the family are in the final analysis specified by love. Hence the family has the mission to guard, reveal and communicate love, and this is a living reflection of and a real sharing in God's love for humanity and the love of Christ the Lord for the Church His bride.”⁴

Very much like the abbey, the family is a place where souls can learn about, find, and experience love. The love that is given is not solely of the individuals within the walls, but from the Creator Who causes all things and gives the love to be given (cf. 1 Jn 4:12-17). Thus, the brother in a religious family loves analogously to the sibling. Providentially, the Lord entrusts His children to other children of the Kingdom. It is the parental responsibility to “form a community of persons, serve life, participate in the development of society, and share in the life and mission of the Church.”⁵ Thus, with analogous community structures, it can be seen that the father is responsible to guard his wife and children as an Abbot guards his community spiritually and physically (cf. Ephesians 5:21-33).

With the given structure, the father must act with great humility and obedience understanding that he is meant to be the spiritual leader of his home. As spelled out in Saint Paul's letter to the Ephesians, the couple must be “subject to one another out of reverence for Christ,” and the Scripture goes on to explain how the husband is “the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the Church, his body, and is himself its Savior” (Eph 5:21-23). Thus, the father of the household, like Christ, is responsible for the salvation of his family, just as the Church is a family under the head of Christ. Therefore, the father is called to develop character in the areas of humility and obedience: listening to the Will of God and humbly acting out what he believes the Lord is leading his house to do in all things. Saint Joseph serves as a very good example of trusting in physical and spiritual matters that may be referenced as a barometer of prudence (cf. Mt 2:13-23).

As stated previously, the Lord has entrusted this man with the care of the family and ought to be considerate of all the opinions and weigh the spiritual and physical ramifications. Progressively, this structure allows for growth in obedience and humility for the mother and children. The blind assent to the father's prayer-life and union with the Father, trusting in his prudence, while also respectfully indicating feelings about decisions, is important and vital to the father's role as executor and is instrumental to the growth of humility and obedience for all parties. With these things in mind, communication and consequently unified action within the household serves to be a union of hearts, minds, and will that is on the level of supernatural.

Lastly, the rule indicates that the community must do as the teachings, in union with good conscience, call to. Thus, a father, like the Abbot who “[fulfills] daily the commandments of God by works,”⁶ must do the same in order that he leads not by commands but rather by actions and example. This shows that the actions flow from the head of the family. It is the call of the leader of the household, like the Abbot, to silently, yet resiliently carry his cross with a Christ-like habit that allows for an example for children and serves as a motivator for his wife. This is done by sanctifying the work day, whether it be schoolwork, physical labor, prayer, etc. All things must be renewed in Christ to move the Kingdom of God out into the darkness of the secular world and brighten the world to become a world both of God and Man coinciding.

Therefore, Saint Benedict's Rule can be for all. Saint Benedict established a system that was meant to be lived within an abbey, but finds itself amplifying daily life of even the domestic church. The household can become the place of solitude, prayer, soul-searching, and finding God as it is called to be. With The Rule applied to everyday living, the call “[t]o obey the commands of the [father] in all things, even though he himself (which Heaven forbid) act otherwise, mindful of that precept of the Lord: "What they say, do ye; what they do, do ye not" (Mt 23:3)”⁷ leads a household to Heaven and brings the Kingdom of God evermore to earth. Thus, with a society desperately in need of a witness, the practice of this particular rule will lead to exponential growth of the virtues obedience and humility for all the persons within the household, and possibly serve to inspire others to take up their cross and follow the Lord in all things and all states of life.

1 St. Benedict of Nursia. "The Holy Rule of Saint Benedict." http://www.documentacatholicaomnia.eu/03d/0480-0547,_Benedictus_Nursinus,_Regola,_EN.pdf (accessed February 21, 2014).

2 Ibid.

3 Ibid.

4 Blessed John Paul II. “APOSTOLIC EXHORTATION FAMILIARIS CONSORTIO.” http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-familiaris-consortio-_en.html (accessed March 13, 2014).

5 Ibid.

6 St. Benedict of Nursia. "The Holy Rule of Saint Benedict." http://www.documentacatholicaomnia.eu/03d/0480-0547,_Benedictus_Nursinus,_Regola,_EN.pdf (accessed February 21, 2014).

7 Ibid.

TRADITION OF THE ELDERS OR TRADITION OF GOD?

During Jesus' ministry, Christ encounters many challenges from the scribes and Pharisees. Blatant attacks against His teachings and followers all attempt to move people from considering following Him to focusing on following the Pharisees and the scribes from their comfortable positions atop the Judaic hierarchy. One of the many instances of this blatant abuse of power and influence is found at the beginning of the fifteenth chapter of the Gospel of Matthew where the Pharisees question Jesus in regard to why Jesus' “disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat” (Mt 15:2, RSV). Jesus is about to use this moment to teach a lesson that forever changes the understanding of the Law and how it is to be cared for.

[15:1] “Then Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem [...]” From its beginnings, the evangelist wishes for us to understand the setting of our location, for it has a significance. In the previous chapter, Jesus arrives at Gennesaret, which is located on the “northwest shore on the Sea of Galilee.”¹ Many gathered after His arrival, and the people brought all who were diseased and needed to be healed. These were not the only to arrive to visit Our Lord and hear His words. The mention of the location points to the Pharisees went out of their way to pay Him a visit: they made a point to come all the way from Jerusalem, a long journey, which is estimated to be sixty miles away.

[15:2] After arriving the evangelist wastes no time in showing how the Pharisees and scribes have come to question and dampen this mission. Immediately they ask, “Why do your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat” (Mt 15:2). It is important to note that “[t]he Pharisees, as a heightened expression of piety, applied this priestly standard of purity to all Israel, requiring even laypeople throughout the land to cleans their hands before taking a meal.”² Simply put, this is an extra law. A law that is not from God, but rather from man, which serves to be a rather big issue as the discussion unfolds. Nevertheless, the intellectual battle has begun, the leaders of Israel have questioned the author of the Law. Thus, the teacher, the Man Who speaks with Authority will begin to teach by questioning.

In regard to the subject of the precepts of the extraordinary laws, St. Thomas Aquinas had much to say. St. Thomas Aquinas wrote: “Deuteronomy 4, 2: 'You shall not add to the word that I speak to you, neither shall you take away from it.' Hence, by adding traditions, they were acting contrary to the Law; not because it was not allowed to make an ordinance, but because they were ordering that their decrees be observed just like Lord's Law.”³ This has serious ramifications, when seen in its context, the Pharisees are adding “ordinances” that they are claiming to be equal to the Law of the Lord. If the Law of the Lord is held equal to the law of men serious ramifications will follow, because man and his understanding are not equal to that of God. Therefore, this is an early indicator that the Pharisees, in practice, lack the humility of fully understanding the Law from its heart and, therefore, cannot enforce and regulate its practice justly or prudently.

The Philosopher also sheds light on why the Apostles did not wash their hands: “It was because they were so preoccupied with the word of God that they did not even have time: hence, due to their preoccupation for spiritual things, they were not washing their hands in the manner that the Jews did, as it is stated in Mark 7, because all the Jews do not eat without often washing their hands: for that reason, the disciples were not washing their hands according to their ritual.”⁴ The Apostles were worrying about things more important than the external, the internal. With the serious focus, the Apostles ate the words of the Word, and were being purified by His Message. The Lord, by His Message, sanctifies those who hear and believe. Just as the Gospel of John states, “And from his fulness have we all received, grace upon grace. For the law was given through Moses: grace and truth came through Jesus Christ” (Jn 1:16-17).

[15:3] “And why do you transgress the commandment of God for the sake of tradition?” This practice of questioning is common amongst the rabbis of Jerusalem. The unlearned carpenter from Nazareth is utilizing their methods of discussion. Jesus is immediately showcasing His expertise, cunning, but, most importantly, His Authority over the Law.

[15:4] “For God commanded, 'Honor your father and your mother,' and, 'He who speaks evil of father or mother let him surely die.'” The Lord's words are very strong and are very familiar to the Pharisees and scribes because it is straight from the Scriptures they hold so dearly. Despite two clear lines distinctly being noted, Christ is referencing four different pieces of Scripture: Exodus 20:12, Deuteronomy 5:16, Exodus 21:17, and Leviticus 20:9. These four verses share the same basic idea, but must be looked at to understand the fullness of the Scriptural background. Exodus chapter twenty, verse twelve, commands honoring of mother and father in order “that your days may be long in the land which the LORD your God gives you” (Ex 20:12). This verse flows continuously from the original ideas found as early as Abraham that one who follows the ways of the Lord shall be blessed. Deuteronomy reiterates the main idea of the previous verse, while adding “and that it may go well with you, in the land which the LORD your God gives you” (Dt 5:16). The reiteration serves to remind the people of the seriousness and sacredness of these words, which do not come from man, but from YHWH. Additionally, this idea being mentioned in two books is no coincidence, and brings to mind the idea of a nation/Kingdom that had once been established and was anticipated to be reestablished by all in Israel. Recalling infidelity to the Law, Jesus calls further on the curses of not obeying the precepts. The Pharisees and scribes recall the lessons that when a man who breaks the covenant between God and His people will incur struggles and an end: death (cf. Ex 21:17). This is only furthered by a memory of “one who curses his father or his mother shall be put to death; he has cursed his father or his mother, his blood is upon him” (Lev 20:9). Leviticus is taking it further to recall that it is not permitted to work dark magic wishing the demise of their family. Thus, Jesus is calling the Pharisees and scribes out in regard to fidelity in both word and deed, and the bait has been hooked, with all eyes and ears attentively awaiting the next words.

With the suspense built, Jesus moves on to state, “But you say, 'If any one tells his father or his mother, What you would have gained from me is given to God, he need not honor his father'” (Mt 15:5). Jesus has drawn the intellectual sword and thrust it through the Pharisees and scribes' complacent guarding of the Law. Jesus is bearing witness to a teaching that the scribes passively promoted, “By dedicating his property to God, i.e., to the temple, a man could avoid having to help his parents, without actually giving up what he had. The scribes held such a vow to be valid without necessarily approving it” (Mt. 15:5, footnote). The Book of Proverbs, also, sheds a great deal of light on this matter stating: “He who robs his father or his mother and says, 'That is no transgression,' is the companion of a man who destroys” (Proverbs 28:24). This, clearly, is avoiding the fourth commandment. Simultaneously, the teaching shares a serious case of adverse selection and moral hazard on the part of the scribes and Pharisees. Of course, Jesus does not waste much time.

Jesus ushers in His closing remarks to the scribes and Pharisees before He teaches to the crowds and disciples saying, “So, for the sake of your tradition, you have made void the word of God” (Mt. 15:6). The beginning of the closing statement. An accusation from the Author of the Law has been issued. Christ indicates that the “word of God,” which can also be translated as “the law of God,” has been left, forgotten, and absconded by those who claim to hold it so dearly to their heart. The Catechism of the Catholic Church speaks to matters of the law by saying, “The perfect fulfillment of the Law could be the work of none but the divine legislator, born subject to the Law in the person of the Son. In Jesus, the Law no longer appears engraved on tables of stone but 'upon the heart' of the Servant who becomes 'a covenant to the people,' because he will faithfully bring forth justice.'”⁵ Thus, Jesus has the Law written on His Heart, and the Apostles have followed Him and trusted Him in all things. Therefore, the Apostles have followed the Law by following the Living Law, Christ.

Closing, Jesus points out how the Pharisees and scribes have fulfilled a prophecy in a way that no good Jew would want to. Jesus exclaims: “You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you when he said: 'This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men'” (Mt 15:7-9). The term hypocrite, widely misunderstood, has a clear, precise, burn to it as Jesus shouts in passion. The Lord is declaring them to be “Men […] who entered into the theater, and had one personality and pretended to have another by using masks. Therefore, these men are hypocrites, who outwardly pretend to be something different than they are inwardly; hence, they were inwardly intending profit, and outwardly they were inducing men to offer gifts to God.”⁶ This bold assertion not only communicates a question of individual fidelity to the Law, but outright puts a question of whether or not their motives are really centered on God. Jesus is removing the darkness over the people's eyes and showing how the Pharisees and scribes are using a holy structure for personal gain. Which points to the heart of the problem that St. Thomas points out “the more greed there is, the less charity there is (cf. Jer 12:2).”⁷

As clearly seen, the prophecy is a message of the hypocrisy of the scribes' teaching about avoiding honoring one's father or mother, as well as taking the law into their own hands. As a master of the word, He points out that their words mean nothing, as stated in earlier pieces of Scripture for they do not follow the precepts of the Lord, and their heart is not after YHWH's, but rather is after their own precepts: “the precepts of men.” By these laws, they claim their ordinances to be equal with that of God's. This calls to mind Job's admonition stating, “I will not level God with man” (Job 32:21). Later this is solidified in the Acts of the Apostles which states, “We ought to obey God rather than man” (Acts 5:29). Thus, their worship and all things, while not living the covenant, is in vain. As supported by the Book of Sirach, which states, “The Most High is not pleased with the offerings of the ungodly; and he is not propitiated for sins by a multitude of sacrifices” (Sir. 34:19).

N. T. Wright expounds on the idea of the heart saying, “Jesus, in the course of cryptically subverting the Jewish food laws, explains that what really matters is not physical substances that pass into someone's body, but thoughts and intentions that emerge from (what we would call) the personality. This distinction between outward act and attitude of heart was quite frequent in the Hebrew Bible, and there is no reason at all why Jesus should not have used the idea and indeed made it central to this part of his agenda [… This makes] him a good Jew, recognizing that YHWH desires to recreate human beings as wholes.”⁸ Therefore, Jesus' lesson stands as a proof of His position as an authority of the Scriptures. This moment serves as a very important moment between Christ, the Pharisees, and the scribes. The scribes and Pharisees traveled a long way to ask a question, which was intended to cause Christ's stumble, but rather led to the self-inflicted wound of hypocrisy.

This passage serves as a very serious and necessary reminder that precepts of the Lord must be learned, practiced, but truly lived. Christ looks for those who desire to find the truth in practicum, while also sharing a heart to know the Law. Ultimately, Christ is looking for disciples who are so caught up in Him and His message that they might forget to follow little practices, but are still at the feet of the Master consumed by His Life and willing to transform their lives to live like Christ. Of course, this is found in daily life. As N. T. Wright points out, the good Christian, like the good Jew must always be searching for holistic human growth, and not simply the outward appearance. Additionally, Christians must carefully examine their lives in regards to legalism and find a healthy balance of a true, Christian life of works amplified by love with integrity.

In regard to the Church teachings immediately relevant is the Church teaching on honoring our father and mother according to the fourth commandment. The Church teaches, “Adult children should give their parents material and moral support whenever they find themselves in situations of distress, sickness, loneliness, or old age.”⁹ Of course, when one practices living like Christ, Christ points towards caring for His mother, even at His death. Therefore, it is not something that is lost, but finds new life in a Christian's heart.

Thus, despite Christ's many challenges from the scribes and Pharisees, Jesus topples the oppositions' argument and, consequently, begins to establish His Authority as the Messiah. In the fifteenth chapter of the Gospel of Matthew where the Pharisees question Jesus in regard to why Jesus' “disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat” (Mt 15:2, RSV). Jesus, in His Infinite Wisdom, transformed an attempted intellectual ambush into a moment of evangelization and a call to a conversion of heart. With the visit from the Pharisees and scribes, the Messiah not only spread His Message further, but also taught a oneness of heart, mind, and soul conformed to the precepts of the Lord and not of man. Thus, Christ teaches the purpose of the Law: the unity of the personal and Divine hearts, minds, and souls. Furthermore, Christ provides an example in the Apostles, who although may have been distracted away from the custom of washing the hands, were truly immersing themselves in the Word of God, which all are called to do.

Bibliography Page

Aquinas, St. Thomas. Commentary on the Gospel of Saint Matthew. 2012. (accessed March 10, 2014).

Catechism of the Catholic Church. Washington, D.C.: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, (accessed January 20, 2014).

Compendium. Washington, D.C.: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, (accessed January 20, 2014).

Mitch, Curtis, and Edward Sri. The Gospel of Matthew. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2010. (accessed January 20, 2014).

Wright, N. T. Jesus and the Victory of God: Christian Origins and the Question of God, Volume 2. London: Great Britain Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1996. (accessed January 20, 2014).

1Mitch, Curtis, and Edward Sri. The Gospel of Matthew. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2010. (accessed January 20, 2014).

2Ibid.

3Aquinas, St. Thomas. Commentary on the Gospel of Saint Matthew. 2012. (accessed March 10, 2014).

4Ibid.

5CCC, 580.

6Aquinas, St. Thomas. Commentary on the Gospel of Saint Matthew. 2012. (accessed March 10, 2014).

7Ibid.

8Wright, N. T. Jesus and the Victory of God: Christian Origins and the Question of God, Volume 2. London: Great Britain Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1996. (accessed January 20, 2014).

9Compendium of the Catholic Church, 459.

A Defense of the Most Holy Eucharist

In the modern world, Christians bicker about many things amongst themselves and others outside of the fold, but no other teaching of Jesus Christ sparks as much controversy as the “Bread of Life Discourse.” In multiple accounts of the Gospels and oral tradition, Jesus claims, “I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh” (John 6:51 RSV). This claim echoes in many of the disputes of denominations of Christianity. The question is tantamount to one's understanding of Christ. Thus, the defense of the Eucharist creates a necessary dialogue between the denominations in order to more deeply understand Who Christ is and what it is He intends for us.

To be fair to those who do not believe in a God, Christians defend God proclaiming a piece of bread to be His Presence amongst us as a rational claim. The claim's rationality hangs on the idea of whether or not Jesus Christ was truly God and Man, Who hung upon a cross, died for the salvation of all mankind and rose from the dead as a sign of hope for all. If Christ did not raise from the dead, the argument fails. It is important to note that the “Catholic doctrine says that Christ's sacrifice, besides being an atonement, was also a redemption – in other words, a buying back into spiritual liberty of the human race which had become the slave of evil”¹ Without the belief in a Supreme Being, this argument loses its support. Belief is not a thing that can be possessed, but rather is a gift given. An assent to faith is not man-made: it can not be. Man can not give himself something he does not possess. Therefore, the argument points directly back to the idea that Christ was either God or a liar.

Therefore, holding a belief in not only a God, but the Christian God, the Eucharist begins to take on importance due to the fact that Christ Himself stated that it is entirely dependent upon man's development of a relationship between Him and God (cf. John 6:56-58). Therefore, the Eucharist comes to the forefront of the Christian question. In order to prove that transubstantiation is possible, laying out an argument that any change at all for man becomes important. In his Summa Theologiae, St. Thomas Aquinas questions, “Whether the Body of Christ be in This Sacrament in Very Truth, or Merely As in a Figure or Sign?”² (III Q. 74, Art. 1). This serious question leads us to his reply which states, “Christ's true body and blood in this sacrament cannot be detected by sense, nor understanding, but by faith alone, which rests upon Divine authority. Hence, on Luke 22:19: 'This is My body which shall be delivered up for you,' Cyril says: 'Doubt not whether this be true; but take rather the Saviour's words with faith; for since He is the Truth, He lieth not.”³ The Scriptures do not speak of this moment solely in one Gospel, but rather it is found in multiple parts of the Gospel message. Thus, St. Cyril's claim holds very firm that if Christ is not held true to his statement, then the doubters declare Christ a liar. A god who lies is not God at all, because he would not be true (a transcendental).

Continuing with the argument, Aquinas points out that the Lord would not leave us as He stated (cf. Mk 16:8): “Yet meanwhile in our pilgrimage He does not deprive us of His bodily presence; but unites us with Himself in this sacrament through the truth of His body and blood. Hence (John 6:57) he says: 'He that eateth My flesh, and drinketh My blood, abideth in Me, and I in him.' Hence this sacrament is the sign of supreme charity, and the uplifter of our hope, from such familiar union of Christ with us.”⁴ Again, holding that the Lord is not a liar, a believer accepts the idea that Christ stated He would never leave us, and promises His presence amongst us. The Lord does this by means of His Sacraments. Particularly within the context of the Sacraments of Initiation, by which one becomes a full member of the Body of Christ, the Church.

Thus, man, as a soul-body composite must respond in two ways that are appropriate to him. Abbot Vonier points out St. Thomas Aquinas believes that “'the linking up which is by faith takes place through an act of the soul, while the linking up which is by the sacraments takes place through the use of external things.'”⁵ Vonier indicates that going through life without faith is entirely missing why Christ came in the first place. Vonier writes, “Without this contact of faith we are dead to Christ, the stream of His life passes us by without entering into us, as a rock in the midst of a river remains unaffected by the turbulent rush of waters.”⁶ Thus, man must respond with an assent to faith initially. Secondarily man responds to faith by deepening it by assenting to the Word of God, which reveals that “I am the Bread of Life, He Who eats of my Flesh and drinks of my Blood remains in me and I in him” (Jn 6:35). The Lord reestablishes the once lost relationship with man by coming to be with him in the Eucharist.

Pope Benedict XVI, in his Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Sacramentum Caritatis, states:

Through the sacrament of the Eucharist Jesus draws the faithful into his 'hour'; he shows us the bond that he willed to establish between himself and us, between his own person and the Church. Indeed, in the sacrifice of the Cross, Christ gave birth to the Church as his Bride and his body. The Fathers of the Church often meditated on the relationship between Eve's coming forth from the side of Adam as he slept (cf. Gen 2:21-23) and the coming forth of the new Eve, the Church, from the open side of Christ sleeping in death: from Christ's pierced side, John recounts, there came forth blood and water (cf. Jn 19:34), the symbol of the sacraments.⁷

Echoing the ideas previously conveyed, Pope Benedict indicates that man's origins are fulfilled by Christ on the Cross. God mirror-images His act of creation by creating again a Church, which He gives life at that moment. With all humans suffering from the pains of the original sin, Christ dies on the Cross once, but it must be transmitted to all. The Sacraments provide the means to transmit God's saving Grace to the faithful. Thus, Benedict asserts, “Since the Eucharist makes present Christ's redeeming sacrifice, we must start by acknowledging that 'there is a causal influence of the Eucharist at the Church's very origins'”⁸. The Eucharist exists as Christ who gives himself to us and continually builds us up as his as his body. This is all found within the context of the relationship between the believer and God through the sacraments He provides.

God chooses and implements sacraments, because He knows us better than we even know ourselves. God comprehends that we are physical beings that perceive reality. Despite that all of creation points to an “other” that created or caused it. Man constantly seeks that individual without a chance to perceive it, until the incarnation: God became man, and therefore becomes tangible. Thus, St. Thomas Aquinas contends, “this belongs to Christ's love, out of which for our salvation He assumed a true body of our nature. And because it is the special feature of friendship to live together with friends, as the Philosopher says (Ethic. ix), He promises us His bodily presence as a reward, saying (Mt. 24:28) “Where the body is, there shall the eagles be gathered together”⁹. As the true friend, Christ has never left. He gives us the spirit to reside in our hearts, but He physically remains as well.

Other Christians support their counter claim by using Christ's words stating, “For you always have the poor with you, but you will not always have me” (Mt. 26:11). Within this context, it is clear that the Lord is speaking of His Passion to come. The relationship between Christ and the people entirely changes. This passage shows the necessity of conversion for Israel. As Christ defends St. Mary Magdalene he concludes the passage by teaching, “Truly, I say to you, wherever this gospel is preached in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her” (Mt. 26:16). Our Lord shows that He provides forgiveness not only for the single prostitute, Mary Magdalene, but also the harlot Israel who lives in a state of betrayal of the covenant. The Lord comes to settle the score, and provides Himself as the door to union with God. His flesh and blood serve to be the food of the faithful according to His Words.

Most importantly, other Christians seem to ride off the cultural context of this table-fellowship of the Lord. Many Protestants present the Lord in a way that makes it seem that all Christ desired was to sit down together at a table, eat, and enjoy the company. The Lord's mission includes this aspect, but it is not the end of the whole action. Dr. Scott Hahn states, “for in the culture that extended from Jeremiah to Jesus a covenant accomplished more than any testament could. In fact, a covenant was that culture. It was the bond that constituted Israel's law, liturgy and life”¹⁰. The profundity that God establishes a covenant with Israel that creates a culture of covenant shows that with the Christ's Mission He too shares in this covenant, but now has come to reveal it more deeply. Thus, the First Letter to the Corinthians indicates that the Church was not simply a Church of Word, but of Word and Sacrament. Paul expresses that Jesus “also [took] the cup, after supper, saying, 'This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me'” (1 Cor. 11:25).

Covenant, a word rooted with meaning, represents a whole divine pedagogy. The Lord states His terms extremely intentionally. As good and faithful Jews, the apostles would have understood that when Christ was establishing a new covenant there would be a role, a form and a sign. The apostles would have understood full well that the Lord was presenting Himself in the same way that God presented His Messages to the Fathers of Israel. Christ exists as the High Priest, the God-Man Who is both of the Davidic Line and also as God Himself. The form of God's covenant between His People presents itself by the Church, the Body of Christ. Thirdly, pointing to the importance of this defense, the Lord makes His sign the Eucharist: God's Presence amongst and with us always.

Thus, the Lord presents Himself, within the context of His culture-religion, established by His Father. Christ does not simply make this a moment of history, but rather extends it to all of salvation history. The Lord does not limit Himself, while maintaining the free will of His beloved. Therefore, Pope Benedict points out that “God's presence in the word and his presence in the Eucharist belong together, inseparably. The eucharistic Lord is himself the living Word. Only if we are living in the sphere of God's Word can we properly comprehend and properly receive the gift of the Eucharist”¹¹. According to the world-view of Christianity, the life of a Christian does not compartmentalize actions and participation in Church. Rather, the Christian sanctifies and brings God's Presence into the world by his/her life and can not separate themselves any longer: they are forever changed.

Although Roman Catholicism has remained true to these teachings, many Protestants, like the early Christians in the Gospel, turn away from Our Lord due to this teaching. For example, Martin Luther states, “It is real bread and real wine in which the true flesh and true blood of Christ are found, not less than as those people think who describe them as their accidents”¹². Going on, Luther declares that the transubstantiation is “without foundation in Scripture and reason”¹³. Luther was adamant on believing that the bread was both Christ's body and bread simultaneously. Despite his attempts to be true to reason and faith, the argument stands on neither the feet of reason or faith. It cannot be found within the context of Scripture without interpretation leading in that direction. Additionally, as for its validity in faith, then it seems that Luther doubts our Lord's statement of the term “is”. When “Esse” Himself utters that it is, it simply exists as such, and that is that. Genesis indicates that God made creation from nothing and assigns it meaning. Therefore, when Christ, as the God-Man declares the bread to be His Body it is. Secondarily, if Luther is claiming that something is two things simultaneously, then one can not comprehend anything verily. Just because something does not look or taste like something, external qualities, does not mean that substantially it is not something else. As Aquinas points out well in his great prayer the Tantum Ergo, senses fail the faithful frequently. Thus, Luther, fundamentally, questions God's truth, and ironically possesses a “faith” not even rooted in Scripture itself, but rather his personal interpretation of Scripture.

Thus, as Scott Hahn professes, “The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and gave his flesh to be our life, Wisdom's Banquet. [Christians] live the dream of the prophets and seers, [Christians] live the promise of the divine covenant, [Christians] are given the bread of angels, whenever [the Church consumes] the Word”¹⁴. Christ has provided Himself in this form as a presence that can not be forgotten or taken advantage of. Thus, God manifests His meaning for us to be one with Him, which He accomplishes by His Sacraments. Truly, the Lord presents His intention for us to be in relation with Him so closely that we become part of His Body as His Spouse. The presence of the Blessed Sacrament is the Heart of the Church, for it is His Heart. It beats at the center of every Catholic Church and gives us life as His Body. Just as the body is contingent upon the heart for life, so too the Christian is contingent upon the Eucharist for life in the Church.

Bibliography

Aquinas, St. Thomas. Summa Theologiae. Fathers of the English Dominican Province.

Hahn, Scott. CONSUMING THE WORD. New York: Crown Publishing Group, 2013.

Lienhard, Marc. LUTHER: WITNESS TO JESUS CHRIST. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1982.

Ratzinger, Joseph Cardinal. God is Near Us. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2003.

SACRAMENTUM CARITATIS. Washington, D.C.: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2007.

Vonier, Abbot. A KEY TO THE DOCTRINE OF THE EUCHARIST. Bethesda: Zaccheus Press, 1925.

1 Abbot Vonier, A KEY TO THE DOCTRINE OF THE EUCHARIST, (Bethesda: Zaccheus Press, 1925).

2 St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, (Fathers of the English Dominican Province).

3 Ibid.

4Ibid.

5 Abbot Vonier, A KEY TO THE DOCTRINE OF THE EUCHARIST, (Bethesda: Zaccheus Press, 1925).

6Ibid.

7 SACRAMENTUM CARITATIS, (Washington, D.C.: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2007).

8Ibid.

9 St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, (Fathers of the English Dominican Province).

10 Scott Hahn, CONSUMING THE WORD, (New York: Crown Publishing Group, 2013).

11 Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, God is Near Us, (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2003).

12 Marc Lienhard, LUTHER: WITNESS TO JESUS CHRIST, (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1982), 127.

13 Ibid., 127.

14 Scott Hahn, CONSUMING THE WORD, (New York: Crown Publishing Group, 2013).

The Didache

Tucked away in a quaint monastery in 1056, The Didache, also known as The Teaching of the Lord to the Gentiles, through the Twelve Apostles, was found. Divided into two distinct pieces, The Didache served the Church from Her origins as a guide for Christian perfection individually and through the Church as an organism. Although the author is unknown, the document is referenced by Church Fathers such as Athanasius, Clement of Alexandria, Eusebius, and Serapion. Just as the author is unknown, the date is subject to skepticism and uncertainty. The latest the piece can be dated is 150 AD, but many, due to it's voice and state of ecclesiastical structure, claim that it could have been written as early as the middle of the first century. However, the common position held is that the book is a “composite affair, in which materials of an early date have been used by the compiler and touched up with additions and alterations of his own”. The first part (chapters 1 to 6), known as 'the Two Ways', serves as a type of ancient catechism, which is “usable for the introduction of candidates for baptism”. The second part (chapters 7 to 16), according to Maxwell Staniforth, “reflect[s] the life of a primitive Christian community somewhere in Syria (or possibly Egypt) towards the close of the first century, at an epoch when traveling missioners were still the chief officers of the Church and bishops had not yet become distinguished from presbyters.”

The first chapter opens with a line both clear and powerful: “There are two ways, one of life and one of death, but a great difference between the two ways.” The author defines the way of life as the call to “love God who made you; second, love your neighbor as yourself, and do not do to another what you would not want done to you.” This social call entails “[giving] to every one who asks you, and [asking] it not back; for the Father wills that to all should be given our own blessings (free gifts).” It goes to further describe the joys and pains incurred for accepting gifts out of necessity as right and just, while receiving gifts without need to be a grave offense. Thus, the author pushes for justice between man and God and man and fellow man.

Following the first chapter, the second serves as a litany of what not to do. Mirror-imaging the last seven commandments of the Decalogue, the author shares that grievous sin against one's neighbor can not be permitted, of which adultery, pederasty, magic, abortion, double-mindedness, and many others are included. Continuing into chapter three, sin is explained in its nature as a growing inclination in the human person and, if entertained and practiced, will grow to be destructive. The author beckons the Christian to seek suffering rather than worldly-pleasure: “Accept whatever happens to you as good, knowing that apart from God nothing comes to pass.”

Expounding on the previous comments, the author urges Christians to “seek out day by day the faces of the saints, in order that you may rest upon their words.” This cry calls the Christian to respect the missioners who bring the Gospel message to them. Sequentially, the author advises Christians to “not turn away from him who is in want; rather, share all things with your brother, and do not say that they are your own.” Additionally, the author points to the primacy of child-rearing with a Christian mindset stating, “[d]o not remove your hand from your son or daughter; rather, teach them the fear of God from their youth.” Upon closing the fourth chapter, the first mention of a church is made: “In the church you shall acknowledge your transgressions, and you shall not come near for your prayer with an evil conscience. This is the way of life.” Defining the way of life, the author, by pointing to acknowledgment of transgressions, indicates that the members are in a state of practice, not perfection. Additionally, acknowledging that one may have an evil conscience moves the Christian to begin to consider what one's conscience ought to reflect.

In chapter five, the description of “the way of death” is provided as a litany of sins that had been listed previously. After warning Christians twice in regard to sin and upright consciences, the author writes warning Christians of false teachers and about the food offered to the gods. The author warns about the food offered to the gods, because “it is the service of dead gods.” Utilizing familiar language, the author indicates that the gods are in direct opposition to the God of Christianity: a God of life.

The second part of The Didache opens with the author discussing the form and matter of baptism still recognized in the Church today and discusses separate disciplines involved at that time such as fasting for the baptizer prior to baptism and for the baptized to fast between one to two days before the sacrament is conferred. Continuing with the prayer and worship theme, the author guides the Christian towards fasting on “the fourth day and Preparation (Friday)”. Then, he urges the faithful to pray the Our Father as seen in scripture with the addition of “for Thine is the power and glory for ever.. Pray this three times each day.” Thus, the introduction of prayer constantly in the Church has been introduced while simultaneously the hours of the day for prayer. Furthering the discussion of prayer and worship, the author describes the Eucharist by discussing the cup of the covenant first. Secondly, he speaks of the “broken bread.” The only admonition given in regard to the Eucharist is to only permit the baptized to receive the Eucharist. The author gives the Prayer after communion, which asks the Lord to protect the faithful and the Church which they make up. Then, he teaches of the Lord's day (Sunday) and commands that all faithful meet and be at peace with one another in order that “your sacrifice may not be profaned.” All of these components point towards aspects that are present even in today's Church. Thus, the Liturgy and the Sacraments stand true to their origins.

In regard to hospitality, the author points out that hospitality must be given to “everyone who comes in the name of the Lord.” The standard that one may stay is no more than three days, and if he has a trade it is expected he perform it. If the person is without a trade, then, as a Christian, you are to make sure that the guest is not idle during his stay. Following, the author points towards those who bring the Gospel to the world: the teachers, prophets, and apostles. Those who teach have a responsibility to be faithful to the Truth both in word and deed. The Didache serves the faithful of the Church to be warned, while providing criterion that a faithful Christian might judge for him or herself whether it is good and right for them to listen to the prophet, teacher or apostle. It shows that signs of lack of fidelity to the truth include desiring and asking for money while in the spirit, residing in places more than two days, and one who preaches something while not practicing that which he preaches. Adversely, the author points out that it is good to have prophets and teachers among you. Therefore, assuming they are good, a Christian is to give the first press of the wine and the wool of the sheep and oxen to the prophets and teachers “for they are your high priests.” The men who follow in the footsteps of the Lord are to be provided and cared for, but if they act differently than the Gospel that they preach, “let no one speak, nor let him hear anything from you until he repents.”

Summing up all the warnings against false teachers, prophets, and bad clergy, the author, in his final chapter points towards awaiting the coming of the Lord. The signs of the time when the Lord will come will be when “love shall be turned into hate.” With love as the central doctrine of Christianity, it would be pointing to a time when Christians no longer live, follow, or teach the true faith.

Thus, with a way of life to live, and a church structure, the Church, in her infancy was found to be with life that is mirrored and shared today. Although there are many new aspects, we can see the roots of our faith found in this early Church document. This document points towards the integrity and individual unity with upright living each Christian ought to have, while simultaneously providing an understanding of the early church and her structure in mission to spread the Gospel to the world.

Genesis Exegesis

Before time, God was. A God that does not serve time, but rather created it. A God Who not only sums up perfections but exists as the summation of perfections. This Perfect God decided to create ex nihilo a creation that He presents as center stage of a drama in which a narrative about God and man begins:

“The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it. And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, “You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die.”

Then the Lord God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.” So out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name. The man gave names to all cattle, and to the birds of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for the man there was not found a helper fit for him. So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh; and the rib which the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. Then the man said, “This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.”

Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and clings to his wife, and they become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked, and were not ashamed”(Gn 2: 15-25 RSV).

The first act of creation “sets the stage for the drama that follows, introducing the story's central characters: God, man and woman.”¹ All that has been created is good, and our story is about to reveal the model of goodness and the creation that God chose to reveal Himself by. This particular creation account is the description of the gift of land from God to man, the relationship between man and creation, the relationship between man and woman, and the relationship between God and man prior to the fall. Thus, the creation account allows for us to understand the divinely revealed idea of why man was made, our earthly duties, and our duty to our Creator.

God made man and placed him in the garden of Eden. The passage places tantamount importance on the idea that man was taken and physically placed in the garden. It implies that prior to this moment Adam was somewhere else. Looking at the prior verses, the passage describes a picture of four rivers that set up the borders for the garden of Eden. Adam lived between the Pi'shon, Gi'hon, Tigris, and the Euphrates. Thus, the stage has been set in modern-day Iraq. The verbs “took” and “put” imply that despite the fact that man is a rational and free entity, in his beginnings he was placed and taken to a place. When God takes and places Adam into a location it does not only express something Adam experienced, but something all men undergo in their own particular creations. God creates man by parents not chosen by him, but by God. Thus, the first line expresses the first step into the human experience, which is vulnerability to a prior creator. Thus far in the Creation account, God is the sole creator.

Immediately, the author states man's purpose in the garden: “to till it and keep it.” Thus far, God made man and placed him in a garden. God placed man in this garden to “till it and keep it.” God places Adam in Eden. The name Eden is very important because behind it, as with most names in Old Testament literature, is a very blunt meaning to its manner or essence, in this case a “fertile plain.” If the land is fertile, then the land must constantly be looked after. This richness implies a fullness of life: an allegory for both life with and in union with God. Although the Hebrew states a name that is a “fertile plain,” the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops utilizes an interpretation that also makes sure to keep open the consideration of a word that sounds similar to Eden in Hebrew that “means “delight,” which may lie behind the Greek translation, “The Lord God planted a paradise [= pleasure park] in Eden.””² Despite the fact that some assert that creation was made for man. The USCCB's commentary suggests that God did not make the garden for man, but rather for Himself. Therefore, the call to “till and keep it” leads man towards the end of honoring God by serving Him to delight Him.

With the understanding that we are tillers of God's Garden, it only comes natural to understand that the Lord can command man to do His Will. Thus, it is appropriate and good when God commands by stating, “You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die” (Gn 2:16-17). Within the context of understanding the current scenario, the Lord explains, as a father explains to a child, what is permissible and impermissible to do in this creation. In this explanation, the Lord explains that the food is free. The explanation draws us back to the point that the garden is not man's but God's. The Lord grants permission for man to be both a steward and to share in the creation. Simply put, God fully possesses while He fully shares.

As God continues to concern for the parameters of man, the Lord continues with speaking by stating “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him” (Gn 2:18). This line presents itself interestingly. Initially, the piece provides strong consideration to whom God is speaking. This moment isn't God simply speaking to man, rather it seems that the Lord within Himself is speaking to Himself: a reflection of His Trinitarian Existence.

After looking within Himself and speaking to Himself, “out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name.” (Gn 2:19). This shows that the Lord is not simply sharing, He wishes for us to have authority over creation. Adam is not simply a slave to his call, but rather Adam acts within his authority, and thus out of his own generosity. When God permits Adam to name the animals, it shows that man is over animal within the same spirit of understanding that the garden is God's first, and is presented to man as a gift to be cared for.

Continuing with the story, “The man gave names to all cattle, and to the birds of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for the man there was not a helper fit for him” (Gn 2:20). The motif of naming expresses, from the Old Testament lens, a metaphysical superiority and an authoritarian role for man amongst the other creatures. Man possesses both a gift and a duty within and towards creation, which is not truly his to possess of his own accord. According to the USCCB's commentary the literal translation for this line states “a helper in accord with him.”³ As the authority over all of the creatures within God's Paradise, man was given the authority to name the animals. Naming is significant because it signifies that there is a type of relationship between the person and the other being named. This phenomenon goes to reiterate that man and animal participate in a unity centered in being, but a hierarchy exists. Although very subtle, this particular passage is important to understand why animal worship is so far from the human person's call as seen in all of Israel's history. Simultaneously, God identifies Himself with this term “helper” in Deuteronomy 33:7 and Psalms 46:2. This “helper” is someone who will be made for Adam, but is compared to a self-identification of God. This quiet response describes the upcoming character in this story. This new being that Adam seeks represents how “God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them” (Gn 1:27). This very strong allusion leaves us in proper suspense: something amazing is about to take place!

Sequentially, the “Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh; and the rib which the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man” (Gn 2:22). Once more, the Lord uses very strong action verbs to describe his motions in creating man. “Caused” implies that all exists within His Own Person. All these actions find their beginning and source in Him: existing by Him, through Him, and with Him. The Lord caused a deep sleep to fall upon man. Sleeping is a constant motif throughout scripture. It can be both good and bad as we see with Noah in the field, which later leads to the sin of Ham. In this particular case, the sleep was a good type of sleep: it resulted in new life and another person, Eve. It shows the type of response that man ought to have to God's Will. Adam, in his ordered nature, is subject to the Lord and does not resist, but cooperates. Similar to resting in music, it might not seem that Adam is doing anything at all, but it is just as important for man to rest as it is for him to tend to the field, just as it is for some instruments to rest during particular points of different pieces.

Continuing, the Lord presents an important motif that He utilizes quite frequently: a gift of self. The Lord, in order to provide a good for man (a new person), requires that man give of Himself. Once more, the Lord reveals Himself through His Creation: the Lord shows how He gifts Himself and makes Himself a gift to Himself analogously to the man providing a woman for new life. Additionally, this is a covenant establishment: a type of quid pro quo. The Lord takes Adam's gift and makes a good for Him.

At this point, God responds to Adam's generosity with a gift. Adam's generosity lies in his obedience, commitment, and fulfillment of his role: to till and keep the Garden. Adam steps outside of himself for the service of others prior to the Lord providing woman. Within the spiritual sense of the anagogical lens, the Lord shows that man is not meant to be alone: he is to have a helper. This helper does not bow down and simply subject themselves to man, but rather helps as God aids man. God creates and shows how He co-creates with our gift of self: Adam gave a piece of himself for another to exist. This mentality forms the mindset for true covenant relationship between one another and God.

Finally, Adam cries, “This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man” (Gn 2:23). The text is leaping off the page with joy. The man who once was alone without a fulfillment has found his companion: an accompanying sojourner. The Lord, in His Goodness, provided for man an assistant with his mission: to till and care for the Garden.

The final piece provides an understanding of the purpose of the second creation account, which can be found in the final two verses of the chapter:

Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and clings to his wife, and they

become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.

The finale has summed up that man's purpose lies entirely for God in matrimony: a divine union of persons three in one, and one in three. Blessed John Paul II declares that the final experience between man and woman in Genesis 2: 25 as:

The innocence of reciprocal experience of the body. The sentence, 'Both were naked, the man and his wife, but they did not feel shame,' expresses precisely such innocence in the reciprocal 'experience of the body,' an innocence that inspires the inner exchange of the gift of the person, which concretely realizes the spousal meaning of masculinity and femininity in their reciprocal relation. Thus, in order to understand the innocence of the mutual experience of the body, we must try to clarify what constitutes the inner innocence of a person. This exchange constitutes, in fact, the true source of the experience of innocence.⁴

To further the claim, the acknowledgment of man's nakedness while not being ashamed points towards the theological points of the preternatural gifts: immortality, integrity, and infused knowledge. This shows how “Man occupies a unique place in creation: (I) he is 'in the image of God'; (II) in his own nature he unites the spiritual and material worlds; (III) he is created 'male and female'; (IV) God established him in his friendship.”⁵

Modernity has provided a severely skeptical lens for the modern reader of scripture. For example, Joshua Moritz argues that men and women who believe in a creation story hold an “anthropocentrism of the gaps.” This lens allows for the religious person to avoid the possibility of evolution and other human-like creatures that once roamed the earth. As Mortiz states:

As the tide of empirical findings washes up new discoveries every day that call into question the singular status of human culture and behavior, the scientific gaps currently filled with a faith in anthropocentrism must give way to an acknowledgment of the reality of evolutionary continuity. In our discovery of the fact that at one time we, as human beings, were not alone in the universe, we ironically come closer to a more ancient understanding of the human place in the cosmos. Though Neanderthals may now take the taxonomical place of “the mighty men who were of old,” the “unique” human species may once again be regarded as one among many. The fact of finding ourselves once again among the company of other creatures raises a number of challenging theological questions surrounding the meaning of the imago Dei. Such questions need not, however, be cause for fear. For new questions—in time—provide occasions for new answers and bring us closer to the truth.⁶

Without going into much detail, Moritz equates burials and other similar rituals to existing as the same as rationality. Despite his belief that finding these coincidences amongst our two separate species, habits do not imply rationality, nor does it prove that the other “hominids” are thinking. This can not and should not debunk a creation account due to the fact that it proves nothing other than that there are shared characteristics between the two species. The particular worldview is entirely either unaware or does not care to acknowledge that Adam and Eve were made in the image and likeness of God and made with the purpose to glorify and serve him by “tilling and keeping” God's Eden. This requires that rationality be the likeness. Moritz deals with image and characteristics, but does not provide an argument for rational likeness.

Despite scientific struggle with understanding Genesis from a proper interpretive lens, Erin McMulen, a scientist of the journal Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science exemplifies how faith and reason are nestled together in a tight, with very little room for error, but organized fashion stating:

For those who believe in a Creator, God is active at all moments in the history of the universe, not just the first one. Thus a believer is entitled to describe the ordinary workings of the laws of nature as themselves a testimony to creation, at one remove admittedly, hence 'derivative.'⁷

With the Genesis account providing two stories for creation that seem to be contradictory, the modern man, as Joshua Moritz shows, could choose to throw out the creation stories, choose one or the other, or entirely throw the entirety of scripture out. Simply put, there is no need, the believer synthesizes what one knows scientifically with what has been divinely revealed to come to the understanding that God created and creates continuously, which shows that confining the scripture to a finite, literal moment would be fallacious. Rather, the allegory shows how man within his relation to nature, other men, and God continuously work in God's paradise, His Creation.

With a purely literal understanding of scripture, Genesis competes with its own ideas. Thus, the Church in Her Wisdom asserted:

For truth is set forth and expressed differently in texts which are variously historical, prophetic, poetic, or of other forms of discourse. The interpreter must investigate what meaning the sacred writer intended to express and actually expressed in particular circumstances by using contemporary literary forms in accordance with the situation of his own time and culture. (7) For the correct understanding of what the sacred author wanted to assert, due attention must be paid to the customary and characteristic styles of feeling, speaking and narrating which prevailed at the time of the sacred writer, and to the patterns men normally employed at that period in their everyday dealings with one another. (8)⁸

Thus, men can not interpret scripture without looking at both the literal and spiritual senses. The literal allows for man to see scripture as it presents itself in meaning. Concurrently, the spiritual sense amplifies scripture by providing an anagogical, tropological (moral), and allegorical understanding. With these provided, the man peruses through the ideas such as that of Moritz, despite seeming rational flow, and address and quite possibly even understand scripture from a hermeneutic of continuity.

Therefore, God made man in His image and likeness. God provided us with a gift of land. This land is to be cared for, because it is not truly ours, but rather a gift that we must care for and, as a consequence, share in. The Lord provided Adam with Eve, a “helper” like God, upon Adam's gift of himself with his rib. Thus, God finalizes and shares a family life with man. With creation established, the Lord solidifies that creation works around the family and He works through and with them, because He too is present. Thus, the Lord shows that the covenant relationship between God and man is modeled off of the initial parents relationship with God in Eden. This serves as both a beginning and leaves room for an even greater end, for life in and with Christ is even greater than living in the Garden.

Bibliography

Cavins, Jeff, and Tim Gray. Walking with God: A Journey Through the Bible. 1^st ed. Pennsylvania: Ascension Press, 2010.

Catechism of the Catholic Church , 2^nd ed. (Washington, DC: United States Catholic Conference, 1997).

Ernan, McMullin. "Responses to Darwin in the Religious." DARWIN AND THE OTHER CHRISTIAN TRADITION, JUNE 01, 2011. http://ehis.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=4&sid=640720a7-e67b-48fc-bda5-bb989d6ca3f7@sessionmgr12&hid=8 (accessed November 19, 2013).

John Paul II. Man and Woman He Created Them. Vatican City: Pauline Books and Media, 1986.

Moritz, Joshua. "HUMAN UNIQUENESS, THE OTHER HOMINIDS, AND." (2012): 65-96, 92-93.

Paul VI, Dei Verbum. http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651118_dei-verbum_en.html.

United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, "Genesis, Chapter 2." Accessed November 19, 2013. http://www.usccb.org/bible/genesis/2.

1. 1 Cavins, Jeff, and Tim Gray. Walking with God: A Journey Through the Bible. 1^st ed. Pennsylvania: Ascension Press, 2010.

1. 2 United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, "Genesis, Chapter 2." Accessed November 19, 2013. http://www.usccb.org/bible/genesis/2.

1. 3 Ibid., http://www.usccb.org/bible/genesis/2.

1. 4Man and Woman He Created Them, (Vatican City: Pauline Books and Media, 1986).
   

1. 5 Catechism of the Catholic Church , 2^nd ed. (Washington, DC: United States Catholic Conference, 1997), 335.

1. 6 Moritz, Joshua. "HUMAN UNIQUENESS, THE OTHER HOMINIDS, AND." (2012): 65-96, 92-93.

1. 7Ernan, McMullin. "Responses to Darwin in the Religious." DARWIN AND THE OTHER CHRISTIAN TRADITION, JUNE 01, 2011. http://ehis.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=4&sid=640720a7-e67b-48fc-bda5-bb989d6ca3f7@sessionmgr12&hid=8 (accessed November 19, 2013).

1. 8Paul VI, Dei Verbum (1965), 12, http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651118_dei-verbum_en.html.