Vol 8 Issue 52 ~ Editor: Rev. Fr. Courtney Edward KrierDecember 26, 2015 ~ Saint Stephen, opn!

1. Baptism: Means of Salvation (48)
2. Saint John the Apostle (Bauer)
3. Saint John the Apostle (Butler)
4. Christ in the Home (23)
5. Articles and notices

Dear Reader:

May the New Year bring renewed fervor in our faith. As we live in a world that is ever more in darkness we must all the more walk in the light of the Truth. We cannot excuse ourselves that we cannot live our faith, rather we must understand that nothing has changed—only our attitude of not taking it serious and therefore excusing ourselves from living that faith.  The world may change, the environment we live in may change, but our faith never changes. This is what makes us Catholics. Do we attend Holy Mass every Sunday without exception if it is available? Do we keep the commandments? Do we read Catholic books and writings? Do we keep immoral entities out of our home? Do we raise our children as Catholics? The American philosophy is utilitarianism and its unholy spirit is chance (i.e., fate that centers on oneself). We believe in Divine Providence and know that everything must be directed not toward our own benefit, but to the Glory of God. This is why we work out our salvation in fear and trembling (cf. Philip. 2:12). Having celebrated the Birth of Our Lord Jesus Christ our Savior, let us give this our promise to live for our salvation and that of our families.

As always, enjoy the readings and commentaries provided for your benefit.—The Editor

____________________

Baptism

Means of Salvation

Sacrament of Baptism

The Church Defines her Teachings on Baptism

The Church Magisterium

From the Fifth to the Twelfth Centuries (b)

Nicholas I in November of 866 responded to the questions of Bogoris, Prince of Bulgaria, presented by his delegates with essentially the same words Pope Anastasius II wrote to the Emperor Anastasius I (Exordium Pontificatus mei; Cf. D 169) in 496. There was the addition, which seems to extend to doubts about baptism:

Chapter 104. You say that in your country many (have been) baptized by a certain Jew (you do not know whether he is Christian or pagan), and you are asking what should be done about them. If they were truly baptized in the name of the Holy Trinity or only in the name of Christ, as we read in the Acts of the Apostles [2:38; 19:5] (for it is one and the same thing, as St. Ambrose explains), it is clear that they should not be baptized again: but first it should be investigated whether this Jew was Christian or pagan, or if he later became Christian, although we believe one should not neglect what St. Augustine says about baptism: “We already have demonstrated sufficiently”, he says, “that for a baptism consecrated by the words of the Gospel, it does not matter if there is error on the part of either the minister or the recipient, whether he thinks differently about the Father, the Son, or the Holy Spirit than the celestial doctrine teaches”, and again: “There are also some in this number who live scandalously or even persist in heresies or Gentile superstitions, and yet even there ‘the Lord knows those who are his’ [2 Tim 2:19]. For in that ineffable foreknowledge, many who seem to be outside are within.”  (Cf. HD 646; D 335)

Saint Ambrose, one of the four great Latin Doctors (with Augustine, Jerome and Gregory I being the other three) had commented on the baptism of John in relation to the baptism of Christ, noting those baptized by John’s baptism had to be baptized by Christ’s baptism because they had not received baptism for the remission of sins, but in preparation for Christ’s baptism by the “Holy Spirit and fire”. Ambrose continues:

So they were baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ, and baptism was not repeated in their case, but administered differently, for there is but one baptism. But where there is not the complete sacrament of baptism, there is not considered to be a commencement nor any kind of baptism. But baptism is complete if one confess the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. If you deny One you overthrow the whole. And just as if you mention in words One only, either the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit, and in your belief do not deny either the Father, the Son, or the Holy Spirit, the mystery of the faith is complete, so, too, although you name the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and lessen the power of either the Father, the Son, or the Holy Spirit, the whole mystery is made empty. And, lastly, they who had said: We have not heard if there be any Holy Spirit, were baptized afterwards in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ. And this was an additional abundance of grace, for now through Paul’s preaching they knew the Holy Spirit.

Nor ought it to seem opposed to this, that although subsequently mention is not made of the Spirit, He is yet believed in, and what had not been mentioned in words is expressed in belief. For when it is said, In the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, the mystery is complete through the oneness of the Name, and the Spirit is not separated from the baptism of Christ, since John baptized unto repentance, Christ in the Spirit.

Let us now consider whether as we read that the sacrament of baptism in the Name of Christ was complete, so, too, when the Holy Spirit alone is named, anything is wanting to the completeness of the mystery. Let us follow out the argument that he who has named One has signified the Trinity. If you name Christ, you imply both God the Father by Whom the Son was anointed, and the Son Himself Who was anointed, and the Holy Spirit with Whom He was anointed. For it is written: This Jesus of Nazareth, Whom God anointed with the Holy Spirit. Acts 10:38 And if you name the Father, you denote equally His Son and the Spirit of His mouth, if, that is, you apprehend it in your heart. And if you speak of the Spirit, you name also God the Father, from Whom the Spirit proceeds, and the Son, inasmuch as He is also the Spirit of the Son. (On the Holy Ghost, I, 3, 42-44)

Saint Ambrose, as the words are in the Acts of the Apostles (But Peter said to them: Do penance, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins: and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost [2:38]; Having heard these things, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. [19:5]) qualifies that the baptism, if not in words, at least in intention, was done in the Name of the Father and Son and Holy Ghost. The Church requires the Baptism to be administered with the words, I baptize you in the Name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost to remove any doubt as the use of the words I baptize you in the Name of Christ to baptize are controverted. Saint Thomas Aquinas replies, concerning these words, the following:

Reply to Objection 1. It was by a special revelation from Christ that in the primitive Church the apostles baptized in the name of Christ; in order that the name of Christ, which was hateful to Jews and Gentiles, might become an object of veneration, in that the Holy Ghost was given in Baptism at the invocation of that Name.

Reply to Objection 2. Ambrose here gives this reason why exception could, without inconsistency, be allowed in the primitive Church; namely, because the whole Trinity is implied in the name of Christ, and therefore the form prescribed by Christ in the Gospel was observed in its integrity, at least implicitly.

Reply to Objection 3. Pope Nicolas confirms his words by quoting the two authorities given in the preceding objections: wherefore the answer to this is clear from the two solutions given above.

And Tanqueray, in summing up the various opinions of the theologians concerning this, inserts the following into his Dogmatic Theology (II, tract xiii, 1005b):

In the Acts of the Apostles it is stated that some were baptized in the name of Jesus Christ: in consequence, some, among them St. Bede, Peter Lombard, Cajetan, thought that Baptism conferred in the name of Jesus was valid. The common opinion, however, was in opposition, holding that the words from the Acts of the Apostles are to be explained in this way:

1) Along with St. Thomas some say that the Apostles, through special dispensation, baptized validly in the name of Jesus in order that His name might in this way be given honor:

2) But others more commonly judge that to baptize in the name of Jesus means nothing more than to baptize by the authority of Christ, or to confer the Baptism of Christ, in opposition to the baptism of John.

These papal and conciliar decrees seemed to have answered the concerns of the times for there does not arise a papal document until the Second Lateran Council. The Symbol of Faith that Saint Leo IX (1049-1054) presents to the Bishop of Antioch, Peter, expounds upon the teachings that were formulated against the errors that had arisen before the eleventh century, which includes these words against the Pelagians, semi-Pelagians, Pantheists (Scotists and false mysticism) and Determinists (Gotteschalk and predestinarians) that accepting their errors would void Baptism:

. . . (I believe) that God predestined only the good things, but that He foreknew the good and the evil. I believe and profess that the grace of God precedes and follows man, yet in such a manner that I do not deny free will to the rational creature. I also believe and declare that the soul is not a part of God but was created from nothing and was without baptism subject to original sin. (Congratulamur vehementer, April 13, 1053; cf. D 348)

The eleventh century saw the development of great schools of study, but also of intellectual pride by many of its students. Peter of Bruys (+1131) was one such individual who attacked the very foundation of the Church.

Peter of Bruys admitted the doctrinal authority of the Gospels in their literal interpretation; the other New Testament writings he probably considered valueless, as of doubtful apostolic origin. To the New Testament epistles he assigned only a subordinate place as not coming from Jesus Christ Himself. He rejected the Old Testament as well as the authority of the Fathers and of the Church. His contempt for the Church extended to the clergy, and physical violence was preached and exercised against priests and monks. In his system baptism is indeed a necessary condition for salvation, but it is baptism preceded by personal faith, so that its administration to infants is worthless. The Mass and the Eucharist are rejected because Jesus Christ gave his flesh and blood but once to His disciples, and repetition is impossible. All external forms of worship, ceremonies and chant, are condemned. As the Church consists not in walls, but in the community of the faithful, church buildings should be destroyed, for we may pray to God in a barn as well as in a church, and be heard, if worthy, in a stable as well as before an altar. No good works of the living can profit the dead. Crosses, as the instrument of the death of Christ, cannot deserve veneration; hence they were for the Petrobrusians objects of desecration and were destroyed in bonfires. (Petrobrusians, CE)

Innocent II (1130-1143) held the Second Lateran Council (1139) to bring unity to the Church after the schism caused by Pierleone (anti-Pope Anacletus II), and wherein the errors of the Petrobrusians were condemned as follows:

Canon 23. Those, moreover, who pretending a kind of piety condemn the sacrament of the Body and Blood of the Lord, the baptism of children, the sacred ministry and other ecclesiastical orders, and the bond of legitimate marriages, we drive as heretics from the Church of God, and we both condemn and we command them to be restrained by exterior powers. We bind their defenders also by the chain of this same condemnation. (Cf. D 367)

The following, from Innocent II (1130-1143), again quotes Augustine and Ambrose as authorities regarding baptism obtained in desire:

To your inquiry we respond thus: We assert without hesitation (on the authority of the holy Fathers Augustine and Ambrose) that the priest whom you indicated (in your letter) had died without the water of baptism, because he persevered in the faith of holy mother the Church and in the confession of the name of Christ, was freed from original sin and attained the joy of the heavenly fatherland. Read (brother) in the eighth book of Augustine’s “City of God” where among other things it is written, “Baptism is ministered invisibly to one whom not contempt of religion but death excludes.” Read again the book also of the blessed Ambrose concerning the death of Valentinian where he says the same thing. Therefore, to questions concerning the dead, you should hold the opinions of the learned Fathers’ and in your church you should join in prayers and you should have sacrifices offered to God for the priest mentioned. (Apostolicam Sedem to the Bishop of Cremona; D 388)

That a discussion was even taking place at this time concerning the necessity of baptism can be seen in the Alexander III (1159-1181) having to respond to the Bishop of Clermont the following:

Certainly if anyone immerses a child in water three times in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, Amen, and he does not say: “I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, Amen,” the child is not baptized.

Let those concerning whom there is a doubt, whether or not they have been baptized, be baptized after these words have first been uttered: “If you are baptized I do not baptize you; if you are not yet baptized, I baptize you, etc.”(Cf. D 398-399)

Since there is only one baptism, scrupulously adhering to the belief of one baptism, but scrupulously also assuring one is baptized, Pope Alexander III seems to provide an answer that has been employed since his time. But he does not negate the words of Innocent II, only averting any neglect.

(To be continued)

————————–

Saint John Evangelist

Benedict Baur, O.S.B. 

His testimony is true

1. Today at the side of the newborn King we find, with the Virgin Mother, the virgin apostle, John, adoring in the house of Mary in Bethlehem—the stational church of St. Mary Major.
2. John is the living expression of the blessings that have been brought to us by the redemption. John is a man of virginal purity, the man who rested on the breast of the Master, who is filled with divine wisdom. “In the midst of the Church the Lord opened his mouth and filled him with the spirit of wisdom and understanding; He clothed him with a robe of glory” (Introit). His life is absorbed in Christ, the incarnate Wisdom. “She will meet him as an honorable mother. With the bread of life and understanding she shall feed him, and give him the water of wholesome wisdom to drink. And she shall be made strong in him, and he shall not be moved; and she shall hold him fast, and he shall not be confounded; and she shall exalt him among his neighbors, and in the midst of the Church she shall open his mouth, and shall fill him with the spirit of wisdom and understanding, and shall clothe him with a robe of glory. The Lord our God shall heap upon him a treasure of joy and gladness, and shall cause him to inherit an everlasting name” (Epistle). These are the works which Christ, the child in the manger, the eternal Wisdom, accomplishes in John, His disciple, and in His Church. These, too, the fruits of the Incarnation, He would accomplish in our lives if we would permit it.

John is the unerring witness of the Incarnation and of the birth of Christ, the God-man. Yesterday St. Stephen, by his words and by laying down his life for his faith, bore witness to the child we see here in the crib. Today we receive the testimony of John, the apostle and evangelist. He has given us his testimony in his Gospel. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God . . . . And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us (and we saw His glory, the glory as it were of the only-begotten of the Father), full of grace and truth” (John 1: 1, 14). “And we know that his witness is true.” cries the liturgy today in the Gospel and in the Alleluia verse.

Because of his virginal purity and his spirituality. John drew closer to the person of Christ and had a keener insight into the mysteries of His life than any other apostle. He rested upon Christ’s breast and drew the great riches of his Gospel from the heart of Christ Himself. In his writings he poured forth upon the world the riches of the Word of God. As a result of his contemplation and of his great personal love for the Savior, he is full of wisdom and initiated into all the mysteries of Christ. In St. John we have a reliable witness; we know that his testimony is true. “In the beginning was the Word . . . . And the Word was made flesh.”

3. In St. John is fulfilled the promise of the Epistle: “He that feareth God will do good; and he that possesseth justice shall lay hold on her . . . . With the bread of life and understanding she shalt feed him, and give him the water of wholesome wisdom to drink; and she shall be made strong in him, and he shall not be moved” (Epistle). In John we recognize ourselves, for in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass our Lord feeds us with the bread of life and wisdom.

When we celebrate Christmas in the proper spirit, we, too, add our testimony to that of St. Stephen and St. John. “The light shineth in darkness, but the darkness did not comprehend it” (John 1: 5). We should add to the testimony of John the testimony of our own faith. Still more should we bear witness to Christ by the purity of our lives, and by manifesting our love for those with whom we live. “Dearly beloved, let us love one another, for charity is of God. And everyone that loveth, is born of God, and knoweth God. He that loveth not, knoweth not God; for God is charity” (I John 4:7-8).

PRAYER

Do Thou, O Lord, in Thy goodness shine upon Thy Church; that enlightened by the teaching of blessed John, Thy apostle and evangelist, she may attain to the everlasting gifts. Through our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen. 

SUNDAY WITHIN THE OCTAVE OF CHRISTMAS

The adoption of sons.

1. The Epistle refers us to the condition of the men of the Old Testament who lived under the stern discipline of the Mosaic law, which could lay down strict regulations and impose harsh penalties, but could give no inner strength for observing the law. It could define what sin was, but it could not purify a man from sin, nor protect him from it. But now, with the birth of Christ, “the fullness of time” has arrived. “God has sent His Son, made of woman, made under the law, that He might redeem them who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons” (Epistle).
2. The Son of God comes to the sons of men, assumes their nature and becomes one of them that they may become like Him, sons of God. What are we of ourselves? Less than nothing! What are we in view of our share in the sin of Adam? We are children of wrath, cursed by God, and worthy only of eternal damnation. But what does God do? He sends His beloved Son, His only-begotten Son, that we may be redeemed and may receive the adoption of the sons of God.

God’s Son is to be “made of a woman, made under the law,” How marvelous is God’s plan, The presence of the Savior in His crib is our guarantee that man is no longer rejected by God and that we are not born into this world destined for an eternity of misery and pain, With Christ we can expect to share the honor and dignity of being children of the Heavenly Father, of sharing with Christ the good will of the Father, His Fatherly solicitude, His loving protection and guidance. We are children of God! What was determined in the bosom of the Godhead from all eternity when the Father bore witness to His Son, what was felt by the Father for the child in the crib, at the baptism in the Jordan, when the Father said: “Thou art my Son,” can be applied also to us. We too are the sons of His love (Col. 1: 13). We have been made partakers of the name, of the nobility, of the riches, of the rights, of the inheritance, and of the joys of the Son of God. We are “heirs indeed of God, and joint heirs with Christ” (Rom. 8: 17). We are “Brothers of Christ” (Rom. 8:29). Christ is the Son of God by birth, we are sons by adoption. This is the message brought to us by the child in the manger.

“And because you are sons God hath sent the Spirit of His Son into your hearts crying: ‘Abba, Father’ “ (Epistle). The same Spirit which fills the life of Christ, lives and works in Him, lives and works in us also, since we too are sons of God. This same Spirit urges us to go to the Father with childlike confidence, with childlike reverence, and with filial love. When we pray, when we fulfill our obligations, in joy and in sorrow, we are to remember that we are under the loving and protective hand of God. God cares for us and watches over us. We have free access to Him and we may trust and depend on Him entirely. Even though we are mere children, we are nevertheless heirs, and heirs to a princely heritage. We know that “the sufferings of this time are not worthy to be compared to the glory that is to come” (Rom. 8:18). We know that though we are mere children, we are nevertheless brothers of Christ, and we know how to appreciate this privilege. We must remain loyal to our first born Brother, and follow Him on the path He has trod before us—the path of renunciation even unto death, the path of complete abandonment into the hands of the Father, the way of love, poverty and humility—in short, the way of the cross.

3. “Behold what manner of charity the Father hath bestowed upon us, that all should be called, and should be the sons of God” (I John 3:1). Does it seem a small thing to us that we who are after all mere dust and ashes should become brothers and co-heirs of the Incarnate Word of God? How many there are who look upon the goods of this world and the favor of men as of more value than this sonship of God.

We are children of God, informed by the Spirit of Christ, and we live, move and have our being in that same Spirit. This Spirit is manifested to us in the crib. When Christ comes into our hearts in Holy Communion we should beseech Him to deliver us from worldliness, from pride, from selfishness and sensuality. My brothers and sisters and all my fellow men are also children of God. Would that we might see a child of God in everyone we meet, no matter how much of the human we may also detect in them. How can 1 afford to despise anyone who is a child of God and therefore a brother of Christ? We may deplore the weaknesses of another, but we must love him as a brother of Christ.

PRAYER

O almighty and everlasting God, direct our actions according to Thy good pleasure; that we may deserve to abound in good works in the name of Thy beloved Son, who liveth and reigneth with Thee, world without end. Amen.

————————–

27: ST JOHN THE EVANGELIST, APOSTLE (c. A.D. 100)

ST JOHN THE EVANGELIST, distinguished as the” disciple whom Jesus loved” and often called in England, as by the Greeks, ” the Divine” (i.e. the Theologian), was a Galilean, the son of Zebedee and brother of St James the Greater with whom he was brought up to the trade of fishing. He was called to be an apostle with his brother, as they were mending their nets on the sea of Galilee, soon after Jesus had called Peter and Andrew. Christ gave them the nick-name of Boanerges, “sons of thunder”, whether as commendation or on account of some violence of temperament (cf. Luke ix 54) is not clear. St John is said to have been the youngest of all the apostles, and outlived the others, being the only one of whom it is sure that he did not die a martyr. In the gospel which he wrote he refers to himself with a proud humility as “the disciple’ whom Jesus loved”, and it is clear he was one of those who had a privileged position. Our Lord would have him present with Peter and James at His transfiguration and at His agony in the garden; and He showed St John other instances of kindness and affection above the rest, so that it was not without human occasion that the wife of Zebedee asked the Lord that her two sons might sit the one on His right hand and the other on His left in His kingdom. John was chosen to go with Peter into the city to prepare the last supper, and at that supper he leaned on the breast of Jesus and elicited from Him, at St Peter’s prompting, who it was should betray Him. It is generally believed that he was that” other disciple” who was known to the high priest and went in with Jesus to the court of Caiaphas, leaving St Peter at the outer door. He alone of the apostles stood at the foot of the cross with Mary and the other faithful women, and received the sublime charge to care for the mother of his Redeemer. “‘Woman, behold thy son.’ ‘Behold thy mother.’ And from that hour the disciple took her to his own,” Our Lord calls us all brethren, and He recommends us all as such to the loving care of His own mother: but amongst these adoptive sons St John is the first-born. To him /620/ alone was it given to be treated by her as if she had been his natural mother, and to treat her as such by honouring, serving and assisting her in person.

When Mary Magdalen brought word that Christ’s sepulchre was open, Peter and John ran there immediately, and John, who was younger and ran faster, arrived first. But he waited for St Peter to come up, and followed him in: “and he saw and believed” that Christ was indeed risen. A few days later Jesus manifested Himself for the third time, by the sea of Galilee, and He walked along the shore questioning Peter about the sincerity of his love, gave him the charge of His Church, and foretold his martyrdom. St Peter, seeing St John walk behind and being solicitous for his friend, asked Jesus, “Lord, what shall this man do? ” And Jesus replied, ” If I will have him to remain till I come, what is it to thee? Follow thou me.” It is therefore not surprising that it was rumoured among the brethren that John should not die, a rumour which he himself disposes of by pointing out that our Lord did not say, “He shall not die”. After Christ’s ascension we find these two same apostles going up to the Temple and miraculously healing a cripple. They were imprisoned, but released again with an order no more to preach Christ, to which they answered, ” If it be just in the sight of God to hear you rather than God, judge ye. For we cannot but speak the things we have seen and heard.” Then they were sent by the other apostles to confirm the converts which the deacon Philip had made in Samaria. When St Paul went up to Jerusalem after his conversion he addressed himself to those who” seemed to be pillars” of the Church, chiefly James, Peter and John, who confirmed his mission among the Gentiles, and about that time St John assisted at the council which the apostles held at Jerusalem. Perhaps it was soon after this that John left Palestine for Asia Minor. No doubt he was present at the passing of our Lady, whether that took place at Jerusalem or Ephesus; St Irenaeus says that he settled at the last-named city after the martyrdom of SS. Peter and Paul, but how soon after it is impossible to tell, There is a tradition that during the reign of Domitian he was taken to Rome, where an attempt to put him to death was miraculously frustrated (see May 6); and that he was then banished to the island of Patmos, where he received those revelations from Heaven which he wrote down in his book called the Apocalypse.

After the death of Domitian in the year 96 St John could return to Ephesus, and many believe that he wrote his gospel at this time. His object in writing it he tells us himself; “These things are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that, believing, you may have life in His name,” It is entirely different in character from the other three gospels, and a work of such theological sublimity that, as Theodoret says, it ” is beyond human understanding ever fully to penetrate and comprehend”. His soaring thought is aptly represented by the eagle which is his symbol. St John also wrote three epistles. The first is called catholic, as addressed to all Christians, especially his converts, whom he urges to purity and holiness of life and cautions against the craft of seducers. The other two are short, and directed to particular persons: the one probably to a local church; the other to Gaius, a courteous entertainer of Christians. The same inimitable spirit of charity reigns throughout all his writings. This is not the place to refer to the objections that have been raised against St John’s authorship of the Fourth Gospel.

Early writers speak of St John’s determined opposition to the heresies of the Ebionites and of the followers of the gnostic Cerinthus. On one occasion he was /621/ going to the baths when, learning that Cerinthus was within, he started back and said to some friends that were with him, ” Let us, brethren, make haste and be gone, lest the bath wherein is Cerinthus, the enemy of truth, should fall upon our heads”. St Irenaeus tells us he received this from the mouth of St Polycarp, St John’s personal disciple. Clement of Alexandria relates that in a certain city St John saw a young man of attractive appearance in the congregation, and being much taken with him he presented him to the bishop whom he had ordained there, saying, ” In the presence of Christ and before this congregation I commend this young man to your care”. The young man was accordingly lodged in the bishop’s house, instructed, kept to good discipline, and at length baptized and confirmed. But the bishop’s attention then slackened, the neophyte got into bad company, and became a highway robber. Some time after St John was again in that city, and said to the bishop, ” Restore to me the trust which Jesus Christ and I committed to you in presence of your church”. The bishop was surprised, imagining he meant some trust of money. But when John explained that he spoke of the young man, he replied, ” Alas! he is dead”. “What did he die of? ” asked St John. “He is dead to God and is turned robber “, was the reply. Thereupon the aged apostle called for a horse and a guide, and rode away to the mountain where the robber and his gang lived. Being made prisoner he cried out, “It is for this that I am come: lead me to such an one”. When the youth saw it was St John he began to make off with shame. But John cried out after him, “Child, why do you run from me, your father, unarmed, and an old man? There is time for repentance. I will answer for you to Jesus Christ. I am ready to lay down my life for you. I am sent by Christ.” At these words the young man stood still and burst into tears, tears wherein, as Clement says, he sought to find a second baptism. Nor would St John leave that place until he had reconciled the sinner to the Church. This charity which he had so conspicuously himself he constantly and affectionately urged in others. St Jerome writes that when age and weakness grew upon him at Ephesus so that he was no longer able to preach to the people, he used to be carried to the assembly of the faithful, and every time said to his flock only these words: ” My little children, love one another.” When they asked him why he always repeated the same words, he replied, ” Because it is the word of the Lord, and if you keep it you do enough”. St John died in peace at Ephesus about the third year of Trajan, that is, the hundredth of the Christian era, being then about ninety-four years old according to St Epiphanius.

As we may learn from St Gregory of Nyssa, from the Syriac breviarium of the early fifth century, and from the Carthaginian Calendar, the practice of celebrating the feast of St John immediately after that of St Stephen is of very ancient date. In the original text of the Hieronymianum (about A.D. 600) the commemoration seems to have been thus entered: “The Assumption of St John the Evangelist at Ephesus and the ordination to the episcopate of St James, our Lord’s brother, who was the first of the Jews to be ordained by the apostles bishop of Jerusalem and gained the crown of martyrdom at the time of the pasch.” One might have expected John and James, the sons of Zebedee, to be coupled in such a notice, but this is clearly the other James, the son of Alpheus, who is now honoured with St Philip on May 1. The phrase” Assumption of St John” is notable, containing as it does a clear reference to the last portion of the apocryphal “Acts of St John”. In this widely circulated fiction, dating from the late second century, it was represented (evidently in view of the saying that this particular disciple “should not die”, /622/  (John xxi, 23) that St John at the end of his days in Ephesus simply disappeared: his body was never found. On the other hand, according to the Greeks his resting place at Ephesus was well known, and famed for marvels. The Acta Johannis, though preserved to us only imperfectly and condemned for heretical tendencies by many early authorities, e.g. Eusebius, Epiphanius, Augustine and Turibius of Astorga, seems to have done much to create a traditional legend. From this source, or in any case from pseudo-Abdias, comes the story which was the basis of the frequently recurring representation of St John with a chalice and a viper. The apostle was challenged by Aristodemus, the high priest of Diana at Ephesus, to drink of a poisoned cup. He did so without sustaining any harm and thereby converted the high-priest himself. Upon this incident seems to be founded the folk-custom, prevalent especially in Germany, of the “Johannis-Minne “, the loving-cup orpoculum charitatis, which was drunk in honour of St John. In medieval ritualiaa number of forms of blessing are preserved which were supposed to render such a draught efficacious against dangers to health and helpful to the attaining of Heaven.

(Butler’s Lives of the Saints)

CHRIST IN THE HOME

BY RAOUL PLUS, S.J.

(1951)

MARRIAGE 

MARRIAGE AND SACRIFICE

IT IS not only the highest Catholic doctrine which requires the spirit of sacrifice of the married couple but more immediate common experience.

To live mutually in the closest proximity, in constant forgetfulness of self so that each of the two thinks only of the other requires something more than mere human attraction.

“Do not believe those who tell you that the road of love offers only the softest moss for your feet to tread. There are some sharp pebbles on the trail blazed by Adam and Eve.”

…

[Message clipped]  View entire message