Barack Obama: A Shameless Marxist Ideologue

by Lawrence Fox

It has been postulated that we differ with U.S. President Barack Hussein Obama simply because the President’s policies are pro-abortion, pro-sodomy, anti-capitalist, anti-religious, and anti-gun ownership.  I suppose the gist of their argument is that credible opposition to Obama’s policies

requires more than 30 points of disagreement.  Maybe we would be more credible if we took umbrage with Obama’s prolific use of taxpayer’s hard-earned money to improve his golf swing or solo transport the family dog from place to

Our Fearless Leader

place, his lack of financial accountability as evidenced by the billowing government debt, five years of high unemployment, geometric increase in the level of food stamp distribution, lack of personal transparency, his disturbing support for the terrorist group, the Muslim Brotherhood, and blatant display of angst towards the American Flag and the recitation of the 
American National Anthem.

Be that as it may, I disagree with the initial proposition that a person like myself would never agree with a policy supported by Barack Obama. If it was reported, for example, that President Obama advocated the policy of washing one’s own hands after using the lavatory; I would certainly support him and that policy. Given the fact, that the Obama-fawning media has not reported on such a matter, I can only assume that Obama does not have an expressed opinion on the matter; or maybe worse and the fawning press is covering it up.

President Barack Hussein Obama is a pure ideologue, a person whose whole way of thinking is rooted in a Marxist materialist ideal without any introspection or debate.  President Barack Hussein Obama, while being idolized at Notre Dame University in May 2009 (see The Shame of Notre Dame University), stated that “Faith to be honest and sincere requires an element of doubt; the absence of total assent of the mind.” Barack was not talking about the concept of theological discovery, otherwise known as “faith seeking understanding.” No, Barack was pitting his materialistic ideology against a Catholic teaching formed by the marriage of Faith and Reason, which maintains that human life begins at conception.

I cannot recollect a single speech given by Barack Hussein Obama, which expressed an element of sincere dialogue (an openness to listen to someone else).  His entourage of friends, appointments to political positions, and his policies simply demonstrate a leftist myopia.

For example, of all the people he could have chosen in the United States as the head of the U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS), Barack picked an excommunicated Catholic, the former Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius. The governor was privately excommunicated for her public advocacy for “abortion on demand;” and for her personal protection of the infamous partial birth abortionist and psychopath George Tiller. 

The Catholic Conference of Bishops never got a clue from the Sebelius appointment that Obama was telling them to stick their moral fortitude up their ordained “you know what.”  In other words, his speech at Notre Dame was completely insincere as it related to honest dialogue on “life issues.” The majority of Americans, who do not support abortion, were not credible constituents in Obama’s mind. “Women in order to be free and successful need ready access to contraception and abortion,” so argued the President.

Many pro-life Catholics were shocked that the same Catholic Conference of Bishops began to engage the President when he proposed the government takeover of health care.  Many Catholic bishops advocated for universal coverage even for those individuals who were in the country illegally, as long as the government respected the moral conscience of all healthcare providers.

They did not understand that President Barack Hussein Obama was a pure ideologue, inflexibly attached to his perfect Marxist society. Obama listened to none of it. He denuded -- by executive order -- the “Medical Conscience Clause” previously signed by President George W. Bush. Further, HHS Mandates within Obama Care demand that every institution’s medical plan – regardless of religious sentiments - participate in the funding of abortion, contraception, the morning-after pill, and sterilization.  Again, he basically said, “stick your moral fortitude up your…”  

The supposed Constitutional Law Student Barack Obama demonstrated either a complete ignorance of the 1^st Amendment to the Constitution (Government shall not prevent the free exercise of religion) or he was arguing that elements of the U.S. Constitution are an impediment to something he believed to be universally greater, i.e. a Communist utopia.

 With the appointment of Kathleen Sebelius, President Barack Obama articulated the ideological notion that the injection of saline solution into a mother’s womb for the purpose of burning flesh off the unborn child was a form of health care. And he further articulated the notion that the horrific practice known as partial-birth abortion -- jamming scissors in the brain of a struggling partly born child -- was an integral part of health care. And to think that the Catholic Campaign for Human Development – sponsored by the Catholic Conference of Bishops – funded the community organizing activities of the once-youthful Barack Hussein Obama.

When President Barack Hussein Obama selected Judge Sonia Maria Sotomayor to the Supreme Court of the United States, he argued “Sonia as a Hispanic and Female (redundant fact) would bring increased empathy towards minorities as a member of the Supreme Court.” For an alleged constitutional lawyer, the argument was sophomoric. What about a demonstrated ability to apply the original intent of the U.S. Constitution as a means of bringing justice to all segments of society? For Barack, everything is a class struggle. 

Karl Marx argued that the institutions which stood against the Communist utopia (the material kingdom of God as they called it) are Capitalism, The Church, and the Institution of Marriage. All

Karl Marx

three had to be exposed, ridiculed, and forcibly removed from the public square. Once humanity no longer thought in terms of private ownership, life and ethics, and the traditional family as an integral part of self-identify, then humanity would be able to accept the ideal that the State is god – the arbiter of wealth, justice, human dignity and self-identity.

This Marxist ideology (dialectical materialism) is foundational with every position advocated by progressives (abortion on demand, universal health care, sodomy rights, earth first, equal pay for equal job, expanded roles for women in combat, condom and needle distribution, drug legalization, domestic partnership, etc.).  Polemics and policies advocating the government re-distribution of personal wealth, government universal mandated health care, ethics void of religious debate, and committed sodomy as a type of marriage are substantially Marxist in nature.

While running for President of the United States, candidate Barack was asked by a reporter: “When do you think human life begins?” Candidate Barack responded: “The question is above my pay grade.” In other words, there existed a void in Candidate Barack’s thought, making it impossible for him to rationally engage in one of the most important philosophical, ethical, scientific, and religious issues of the day.  In essence, there existed in Barack’s mind not an intuition, nor an opinion, nor an article of faith, nor personal knowledge nor understanding worth defending on the matter.  “Questions about the origins of human life are theological and all too personal to debate in the public square.” (Barack Obama)

And so religious persons may only have one valid position on life. And it must be ambivalent, relative, subjective, and personal even when the government dictates that they pay for it as with the HHS Mandate.

To assume that a man who attended both Columbia and Harvard University with a supposed emphasis in constitutional law never discussed or debated the matter is incredible. Candidate Barack Obama was either being disingenuous or his education was myopically free of any dialogue.

In contrast, Candidate John McCain was asked the same question, “When does human life begin?” He answered, “At the moment of conception.” President William Jefferson Clinton, who vetoed two partial birth abortion bans, was asked the same question. “Human life (personhood) begins when the physical body emerges from the woman and takes its first breath.”  

His argument was based upon a personal exegesis of Genesis 2:7: “And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.”  The maniacal press should have had a field day with his response. The president was publicly admitting that he made decisions on abortion based upon his personal biblical exegesis. So much for the sacred leftist cow known as “Separation of Faith from Politics.”  

On a similar note, Vice President Joseph Biden stated during the 2012 vice presidential debate, “I personally believe that human life begins at conception and I believe I do not have the right to impose my belief upon others.”  The maniacal press then had the right to ask, “Is it correct to conclude – based upon your remarks -- that every law and tax that you voted on was completely void of personal religious and moral conviction?”

And so candidate Barack --  whose mind is void of substance on the subject of human conception, gestation and personhood -- becomes president of the United States. Two days after being elected, Obama repealed by Executive Order, the Mexico City Accord, which restricted the use of taxpayer money to fund abortion activities around the world. For a man with no opinion on when human life began, why was he compelled to make us pay for the murder of the world’s unborn children?

President Obama then reversed a ban on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. He said taxpayers should fund increased embryonic stems cell research -- the art of bringing about a new human life and then destroying it for medical research – because science and not religious dialogue should be basis for such “medical” activities.

As every fool knows science makes no ethical judgments. The development of the atomic bomb was pure science. The assembly of gas chambers in Europe was pure science. The Jack Kevorkian machine of death is pure science.  The ability to bring about a conception using In Vitro Fertilization procedures and then bring about the child’s death is pure

Dr. Jack Kevorkian's Death Machine

science. Every human action has a moral consequence (good or bad). But what would one expect from a man who possesses no personal intuition, opinion, faith, personal knowledge nor understanding on the subject of human conception, gestation and personhood.

Deliberately obscured behind the stem cell fiasco is the simple fact that embryonic stem cell research has been conducted worldwide and in the United States for many years through private funding and with no discernible cures or promises.

The financially broke State of California passed a billion dollar bond measure to fund embryonic stem cell research when private monies began drying up. Private donators recognized they were throwing money into a black hole with no long-term results in sight.  California realized the number of viable embryos was disappearing. Young girls were being recruited and paid to ingest drugs for the purpose of forcibly ovulating so that eggs could be harvested and then inseminated in a petri-dish for ongoing medical research. What used to be “Girls Gone Wild” was now “Ovaries Gone Wild.” But ongoing adult and cord blood stem cell research has brought about discernible cures without any ethical quandaries.

So President Barack Obama -- who possesses not an intuition, an opinion, an article of faith, personal knowledge nor understanding on the matter of human conception -- immediately upon becoming president rules that American taxpayers must fund abortion and embryonic stem cell research. These are the actions of a pure Marxist Ideologue.  

Obama supported embryonic stem research because of his support for abortion. To support the one gives credence to the other. Adult stem cell research was already working. This form of medical science is notably morally, ethically, and scientifically sound. Anyone familiar with human transplants knows that the introduction of organs foreign to the host body requires the steady injection of anti-rejection drugs. Treatment using the host’s own adult stem cells or organs developed by their own adult stem cells does not require the use of anti-rejection drugs. Embryonic stem cells are not your own cells. They are the cells of someone else.

On the campaign trail, Barack mused, "When it comes specifically to HIV/AIDS, the most important prevention is education, which should include -- abstinence education and teaching the children -- teaching children, you know, that sex is not something casual. But it should also include -- it should also include other, you know, information about contraception because, look, I've got two daughters, 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby. I don't want them punished with an STD at the age of 16. You know, so it doesn't make sense to not give them information."

So let us see. Barack will teach his daughters about some form of chastity, and about contraception and condoms, which do not prevent the contraction of sexually transmitted diseases. The horrific truth is that the human papillomavirus – a sexually transmitted disease and a major contributor to cervical cancer  – is not prevented during sex by the use of contraception, the dental dam, nor the condom.

Barack (the father) essentially stated: “Daughters, if you are not going to be chaste, then at least pretend like you are wise and foolish at the same time.” The ideologue can neither guide his own daughters on purity nor provide the honest-to-God facts about the contraction of STDs. He leaves that up to Planned Parenthood, which profits from abortion. And what leads to abortion, promiscuity and false information about contraception.

Barack identified his two daughters as miracles.  So let us see, he is saying his daughters are miracles (an expression of personal faith) but his potential unplanned grandchildren are “instruments of punishment.”

Language is a powerful tool especially when used in propaganda. Former Illinois Senator Obama stated that unwanted children are mistakes and instruments of punishment. Hidden within the mumbo jumbo about sex education was the staple ideological diatribe: “Every child should be a wanted child and therefore abortion must be available and un-restricted.” This is the same argument the leftist Illinois senator and presidential candidate John Bayard Anderson made while debating candidate Ronald Reagan in the 1980 elections. Ronald Reagan adroitly responded, “Those who argue that position were obviously not aborted.”

During his first campaign, Barack told an audience that Middle America simply “clings to their guns and religion.” This gave rise to the expression the “bitter clingers” to mischaracterize the right. It seems Barack was upset that Middle America was not buying his message of “hope” and “change.”

How is a Marxist ideologue formed?

Imagine for a moment being dumped by a black father and then dumped by an anti-American white mother into the arms of a grandmother – whom you later identify as a “typical white person.”  Your formative years are fairly traumatic. Your pain and search for identify become a fertile field upon which Marxism and Class Struggle (jihad) are planted and take root. There is no doctrine of forgiveness in Marxism and the concept of Class Struggle. There is only submission to the State. Your mother takes you to a foreign land which possesses a language that also speaks of struggle (jihad) and submission (Islam). Only this time submission refers to a personage which commands its prophet to wage war (jihad) against infidels where ever he finds them. The ideological drum beat is well rooted and reaching out. Capitalism is evil. Christianity is evil. America is evil and the white man will never understand you. Truth is dialectical always changing and always moving towards a materialistic solution to all human suffering and forms of imagined injustice. The ends justify the means since there is no forgiveness. Justice is not that which supports virtue but a hammer which roots out inequality all over the land. Your ideology reaches maturity within various prestigious halls of higher education. You find your groove in the company you keep including: unrepentant terrorists and members of the Weather Underground, 20 plus years in an Afro-centered liberation church. You nurture relationships with family members that have ties with the Muslim Brotherhood. You have among your confidants a person who identifies the mass murderer Mao Tse Tung as a favorite political philosopher. In essence you surround yourself with people who share a common ideology that truth is dialectical always changing and always moving towards a materialistic solution to all human suffering and forms of imagined injustice. It is a  justice not rooted in virtue, but a hammer which roots out inequality all over the land. You are elected President of the United States and you tell the American people that through you, America will be completely transformed.

As such, I differ with President Barack Hussein Obama not because of this or that issue but because every action and word that he breathes flows from a destructive ideology. He is a Marxist Ideologue after all.

THE CATHOLIC PRIESTHOOD: The Language of Fulfillment

by Lawrence Fox

Introduction

The intent of this article is to demonstrate from Sacred Scripture and the Church Fathers that Jesus Christ established in the Catholic Church a kingdom of priests and an ordained sacred order hierarchical priesthood each with its own proper order and estate.[1]  The method employed in this paper to support this demonstration includes the language of fulfillment, which consists of the written arrangement of inspired and sacred expressions, events, signs and symbols, patterns, figures, and teachings that demonstrate the unity of the Old and New Testaments and the completeness of the Old in the New.

·      This language of fulfillment was used by the New Testament authors to show that Jesus Christ, the Apostles, and the Saints fulfill (complete) what was revealed by God through the formation, worship, duties, and ministry of the Old Testament kingdom of priests and ordained hierarchical priesthood.

·      This language of fulfillment was used by the Church Fathers (especially apostolic fathers) to show the faith received by the Church through the life, teaching, writings, and ministries of the apostles especially that related to Catholic worship, sacrifice, and sacred orders.

Arguments Against

Non-Catholics in various degrees argue that Jesus Christ did not establish an ordained priesthood, and certainly not a sacred order (estate) that was restricted to adult males.[2]  It is argued that the ministry of bishops, presbyters, and deacons possess the same character as the congregation; both estates are the same since the presbyter is priest because the baptized are priests.[3] In varying degrees, non-catholic movements profess that any baptized (male or female) may pastor a community, institute the Lord’s Supper, lay-hands, preach, and prophesy without hierarchical intervention (i.e. no apostolic succession exists). One argument rejecting the Catholic doctrine of an ordained priesthood stems from the observation that the language of the New Testament does not include the Greek term for priest (hiereus) to identify apostles, bishops, or presbyters; a distinction which arose with the development of extra-biblical literature (Church Fathers) leading to an ecclesial distortion and apostasy within the Church. This apostasy remained in the Church until the Protestant Reformation.  It is argued that the Greek word for priest (hiereus) is applied exclusively in the New Testament Epistles to Jesus Christ (Heb. 3:1, 4:14, & 7:22) and the Body of Christ (1Pet.2:9-10) – with one exception found in Romans 15:16 where Paul applies the Greek term for priestly duty (leitourgos) to New Testament ministers. Another argument rejecting the Catholic doctrine of an ordained priesthood stems from the understanding that with the death of Jesus Christ on the Cross, the Old Testament priesthood and offerings of gifts and sacrifices for sin ceased. (Heb 7:18, 8:13, 9:28) As such, the Church does not offer gifts of sacrifice to God with and through an estate of ordained men, nor men who administer sacraments of grace as if standing between the congregation and God.

Consequences

The rejection of an ordained priesthood has been detrimental to the sanctification of the mystical members of the body of Christ, communion (unity and fellowship), and overall mission of the universal church to the world because the sacramental graces of reconciliation, confirmation, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick are not received by a vast number of Christians. This rejection of an ordained priesthood prevents unity in the Body of Christ. “Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf.” (1 Cor. 10:17) Paul in his letter to the Corinthians states clearly that the divisions in their community stemmed from the ill manner in which they participated in the Lord’s Supper. This rejection of an ordained priesthood prevents unity within the Body of Christ because now few Christian movements possess the charismatic gift of holy orders necessary to preserve apostolic succession, in which apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers, prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built reaching a unity in the faith and knowledge of the Son of God…” (Eph. 4:11)

The Language of Fulfillment – Old Testament Priests and New Testament Apostles

The New Testament is resplendent with examples demonstrating how people and events in the Old Testament reach their fulfillment in the life of Jesus Christ and his Church. Jesus when speaking with the two disciples on the road to Emmaus tells them “Did not the Christ have to suffer all these things and then enter into his glory.” And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in the Scriptures concerning himself. Hearing the language of fulfillment communicated to them by Jesus from Sacred Scripture (God’s Written Word), set a fire in the hearts of the disciples and prepared them to recognize Jesus “in the breaking of the bread.” (Luke 24:25, 31-33) In this short discourse, Luke identifies the key to understanding the language of fulfillment; with this key the disciples are able to unlock and experience the total presence of Jesus Christ in Word and in Sacrament. Luke then goes on to use this same language to demonstrate that the apostles are a sacred order of ordained priests ministering amongst a kingdom of priests.

Luke writes to Theophilus in the Gospel, that many have undertaken to draw up an account of the events surrounding Christ’s life, death and resurrection and that he also carefully investigated everything and now would undertake to write an orderly account for Theophilus; so that “you may have certainty of the things that you have been taught.” (Luke 1:1-4)   Luke then opens the Gospel with the picture of the Old Testament priesthood as exemplified by the Priest Zachariah, the father of John the Baptist, who was chosen by lot – according to the custom of the priesthood – to go into the temple of the Lord and burn incense before the Holy of Holies.[4] (Luke 1:8)  Luke demonstrates to Theophilus the language of fulfillment in the New Testament Church by opening up the Acts of the Apostles with the Apostles seeking to fill the apostolic (episcopal) vacancy - created by the betrayal and death of Judas Iscariot – by using the same custom of lots employed by the Old Testament priesthood as the means of selecting Matthias as an ordained successor to Judas. Luke, the author of both books, demonstrates in these two events both continuity and fulfillment (i.e. Zacharias who is the Old Testament Priest, the Apostles who are the New Testament Priests). This is important because among the several non-Catholic arguments is an argument of rupture (i.e. Old Testament ordained priesthood has ended and was not replaced or fulfilled by another pattern).  Jesus said that he came not to abolish the law of Moses but to fulfill it. (Matt. 5:17) This means again that the patterns and ministries in the Old Testament are fulfilled in Jesus Christ and through him in the Church. Luke captures another important point as it relates to ordained men to the priesthood: Peter states that the person to replace Judas must be an adult male (andron) who was with them from the beginning, starting with the baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist, and a witness to the Resurrection. This pattern revealed by Peter remains in the Church today. Pope John Paul II in the Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, said this patter cannot be changed by him or another succeeding Pope.[5]  Luke patterns the apostles as a sacred order of priests and then goes on to complete the picture of the Church as the Temple of the Holy Spirit comprised of Ordained Priests ministering within a Kingdom of Priests.

The Language of Fulfillment – Apostles Ordained Priests and a Kingdom of Priests

Luke continues the Pentecost story by identifying specifically the names of the apostles, and Mary, the Mother of Jesus, assembled in the upper room with the women who followed Jesus and Jesus’ brethren.[6]  Luke writes that the brothers, who were praying constantly with one mind, numbered about 120.  With the reference to persons, places, events and then the number 120, Luke has now set the stage to show the fulfillment of another pivotal event in the Old Testament. King David wanted to build a Temple so God would no longer dwell in a tent but in a great and magnificent building of stone.  God tells King David that he was not to build a temple for his hands were covered in blood but that his son Solomon would build the Temple. King Solomon at this point represents a type of Christ in that King Solomon, a son of King David, builds an earthly temple made by human hands, and Jesus, a son of King David (Luke 1:32) builds a heavenly temple not made by human hands. (Heb. 8:1)  In the second Book of Chronicles, the temple in Jerusalem is constructed and the young King Solomon is overseeing the dedication of the temple and 120 priests are assigned to perform the required rituals of purification.  Into the temple and the holy of holies comes the Arc of the Covenant which at one time carried the two tablets of stone, a jar of manna, and the priestly staff of Aaron. The people are assembled in the temple singing God’s praises with cymbals, lutes and harps, the 120 priests are blowing trumpets as with one voice.  The 120 priests leave the holy of holies and the cloud of the Glory of the Lord (Shekinah) fills the house of God, and the OT priests can no longer minister in the Holy of Holies for it is filled with God’s Glory. (2 Chron. 6: 1-18) On the day of Pentecost the Apostles, Mary the Mother of Jesus, the women, and Jesus’ brothers are assembled in one place praying in unity as with one voice, suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house. They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. All of them began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them. (Acts 2:1)  Luke - using the language of fulfillment - presents the New Testament Church (New Jerusalem) as a priestly order of twelve (12) adult men ministering to a priestly people now numbering 120 and together with the descent of the Holy Spirit they together become living stones built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ (1 Pet. 2:4).  

The Language of Fulfillment – Apostles and Priestly Ministry

The word, apostle, comes from the Greek word (apostolos) which means “one that is sent.”  Jesus Christ chose 12 men (Matt.10:1 & Luke 6:12) to follow him, to learn from him, to be his companions, and stand by him in his trials and subsequently to be sent by him - with all authority - to drive out evil spirits and to heal every disease and sickness, and to be his witnesses to the whole world beginning in Jerusalem (Luke 24:45-49).  These twelve included: Simon, Andrew, James, John, Thomas, Philip, Nathaniel (Bartholomew), Matthew, Judas Iscariot, Jude, James the son of Alpheus, and Simon called the Zealot. Jesus changed the name of Simon, son of John, to Peter (Cephas) which means rock and called him to be a servant of the remaining eleven servants. Jesus prayed that Peter - once converted - would strengthen his brethren. (Matt 16:17 & Luke 22:31, 32)  Jesus conferred upon his Apostles the power to baptize and confirm with the Holy Spirit (Matt 25:16), forgive sins (Mark 6:7 & John 20:21), anoint and heal the sick (Mark 6:13, James 5:1), offer a memorial[7] sacrifice of thanksgiving (Eucharist) to the Father (Matt 26:26-30, 1Cor. 11: 23- 33), bind and loose (Matt. 18:17), and to guard, shepherd, and feed his flock.  (John 21:15, Acts 20:28, 1Pet. 5:18)  Sacred duties once performed by the Old Testament priests, presbyters, nazarites (deacons), prophets, and kings are now fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ who in turn confers upon the Apostles and their successors the charisma (gift) to administer his sacred duties within his Mystical Body.[8] So much so, that it is not they who minister but Jesus Christ who ministers in and through them. This is the language of fulfillment from which the Catholic Church teaches that the

ordained priest is acting as Jesus Christ in Person (i.e. in persona Christi Capitis).[9] Prior to Jesus’ ascension into heaven, he gathered his apostles together and said to them: “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.” And when he had said this he breathed upon then and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” (John 2:21-23)  In Genesis, God formed Adam from clay and breathed life into Adam’s nostrils and Adam became a living soul. Jesus breathed into his apostles, his priestly power and ministry to bring about new life through the forgiveness of men’s sins. The apostles administer this grace and power of forgiveness through their priestly ministry (Rom. 15:16) of preaching, baptism, anointing, and governing the spiritual sacrifices of the Church, the summit being the sacrifice of thanksgiving (Eucharist).[10] Jesus was commissioned by God the Father and the apostles were commissioned by Jesus Christ with the power of the Holy Spirit and they in turned commissioned other men to share in their ministry until the end of time.

The Language of Fulfillment –Apostolic Succession and Priesthood

The language of commissioning and succession was taken up by Clement, Bishop of Rome (A.D. 91), when writing to the Church in Corinth: “The Gospel was given to the apostles for us by the Lord; and Jesus Christ was sent by God, Christ received his commission from God and the Apostles their commission from Christ...and as they went through the territories and townships preaching, they appointed their first converts to be bishops and deacons for the believers of the future.”[11] Clement recognizes as a contemporary and living witness to the teaching of the apostles - the principle of apostolic succession as willed not by men but by Jesus Christ himself through their apostolic ministry. As such, the apostles by ordaining men to succeed them were demonstrating fidelity to the mind of Christ and not to human invention.

As the church grew in numbers, God the Holy Spirit conferred the sacred duties of the apostles to adult males who would become their successors. They formed an order of Bishops (Acts 1: 20, 20:28), an order of Presbyters (1 Pet. 5:1, 2 John 1:1), and an order of Deacons (Acts 6: 1-6) with each called to participate in a spiritual fatherhood (II Tim. 2:1, Titus 1:4, 1 John 1:5),  and to be administrators of God’s Grace (Eph. 3: 1). Paul commands Titus to ordain presbyters (adult male and husband of one wife) in every city on the island of Crete. He commands Timothy to ordain presbyters to function as guardians and deacons (again they are to be blameless, an adult male and husband of one wife). Paul reminds Timothy to use the gift that he received through the laying on of hands by the presbyters. The point is that in every case the authority to minister as bishop, presbyters, and deacons flows not from the congregation (kingdom of priests) but from the person of Jesus Christ, through the power of the Holy Spirit and with the laying of hands in the sacrament of Holy Orders. (1Tim 4:22, Titus 1:5) This succession is so demonstrative and critical to the life of the Church that Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch and Martyr (A.D. 110) writes in his letter to the Church in Tralles that without these three orders, a church does not have right to that name:

Let everyone revere the deacons as Jesus Christ, the bishop as the image of the Father, and the presbyters as the senate of God and the assembly of the apostles. For without them one cannot speak of the Church.[12]

The practice of ordaining and commissioning successors with the laying of hands is found throughout the Old Testament. In the Catholic Church, the laying of hands is the visible outward sign of inward grace instituted by Jesus Christ and administered in his Church when ordaining a man to be bishop, presbyter, or deacon. This practice continues down through the ages of the Church with the ministry of the apostles as their ordained successors using the same method, the laying of hands and invoking the power of the Holy Spirit. [13]

Language of Fulfillment – Apostles Ordained Ambassadors

 Paul a servant of God and apostle of Jesus Christ fatherly reminds Titus (my true son in the common faith) that the reason he was sent to the island Crete was to straighten out what was left unfinished and to ordain presbyters in each City. The term that Paul uses (katasteses) means: to settle, appoint, establish an installation, and to bring an ambassador before the assembly. The present context (to straighten out, to bring order) mirrors Paul concerns and language while writing to the Church in Corinth: “We (apostles) are ambassadors for Christ, as if God were appealing through us.”(2 Cor. 5:20) The apostles are ordained ambassadors brought before the assembly (ecclesia) by Christ Jesus. As such, the succession of bishops, presbyters, and deacons are also Jesus’ order of ambassadors before the assembly for it is through the same Holy Spirit that apostles and their successor are ordained. Again, the apostles and their successors represent the person of Jesus Christ within the assembly which offers spiritual sacrifices before God through the person of Jesus Christ, in communion with the Holy Spirit.  The New Testament using the language of fulfillment, demonstrates another priestly ministry of the apostles and that the call to be guardians and shepherds to the kingdom of priests.

The Language of Fulfillment –Shepherds and Priesthood

The Greek Church Father John Chrysostom (A.D. 347–407) wrote six books on the priesthood (heireus).[14] John felt compelled to write these six books because he was being called to leave the monastic life and become ordained as Bishop (episcopos). John does not use the Greek word (episcopos); he uses the Greek word (heireus) priest to describe his new calling. John pleads against such responsibility giving the example of Saul who when asked to be anointed King of Israel, attempted to hide with the donkeys. Saul pleaded that he is not ready and fears being held to a greater accountability. The task was daunting to John as well since he recognized that he was being called to share in Christ’s priesthood as guardian and shepherd to the people of God. When Paul informs the presbyters in Ephesus that the Holy Spirit has made them guardians (episcopoi) over the Church of God (Acts 20: 28, 29) he identifies one of the duties of the Old Testament priesthood. God commissions Eleazar, the son of Aaron the High Priest to be a guardian (episcopos) over the oil of the lamp of presence, the incense of daily offering, and the tabernacle of God’s presence amongst His people Israel. (Num. 4:16, Lev. 6:12) The apostles and their successors, especially the bishops (episcopoi), have been commissioned and empowered by the Holy Spirit to be guardians over the Jesus’ Mystical Body. This Mystical Body received the sanctifying oil of the Holy Spirit, offers the incense of daily spiritual prayers and through the gift of the Holy Spirit is God’s sacramental presence in the world. The apostles and their successors are not only guardians, they are shepherds. Jesus tells his disciples that he is the Good Shepherd fulfilling the promise made by God through the Prophet Jeremiah. At the time, Zedekiah and his serving priests were malignant "shepherds" who scattered and did not gather the people. Jesus said: “Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters.” (Matt, 12:30) Jeremiah said: "Woe to the shepherds who are destroying and scattering the sheep of my pasture!" declares the LORD" (Jer. 23:1). Jesus proclaims in John 10:11 “I AM the Good Shepherd. The Good Shepherd lays down his life for his flock.” After Jesus’ resurrection and prior to his ascension into heaven – using language describing the High Priest’s role of departing from the priestly people and entering into the Holy of Holies (Heb. 8:1, 9:11) - Jesus commands Peter three times to feed his sheep. (John 21:15-18) Jesus confidently confers upon Peter a character which belongs to Jesus alone. Jesus the Shepherd and High Priest is about to enter the Holy of Holies and he commands Peter to shepherd the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ, the Bride of Christ, the Kingdom of God, and the Living Temple of the Holy Spirit, which offers Spiritual Sacrifices to God. As such, Jesus as High Priest, continues to shepherd (Heb 7:23) a kingdom of priests through Peter, the apostles and their successors. This patterns and fulfills the relationship between Aaron and his descendants (High Priests) and the Levites supporting the High Priest and both ministering amongst a kingdom of priests.[15]   

The Language of Fulfillment – Eunuchs for the Kingdom of God and Priesthood

Jesus when speaking with his apostles about marriage and divorce identifies that there are men who live as eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven. (Matt. 19:12)  The Church is the Kingdom of Heaven and the Church is the Bride of Christ. (Eph 5:32) In the Old Testament, a priest when marrying was required to marry a virgin. (Lev 21:6, 13, 21:18) The Catholic Church is the virgin Bride of Christ. In this context, when Jesus was identifying men as eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven, he was identifying men participating in His priestly ministry. John captures this fulfillment in the Book of Revelation (Apoc. 14:4) seeing “Those who have not defiled themselves with women, for they are virgins. It is these who follow the Lamb wherever he goes. These have been redeemed from mankind as first fruits for God and the Lamb.”[16] The language may seem rough to modern ears, but given the context of marriage, the author is simply saying: “There are men who swore by oath (sacrament) to participate in Jesus’ priestly betrothal to His virgin Bride the Church, and these men took to vow of virginity (eunuchs). These men remained faithful to their oath; not defiling it by impropriety.”  Since the Book of Revelation was written to the bishops of the seven churches (Apoc. 1:4, 2: 1, 8, 12, 18, 3:1,7, 14), the Holy Spirit was encouraging the bishops to remain faithful to their vows. This sacred, priestly, and chaste betrothal in the New Testament fulfills most perfectly a promise that God made to Jerusalem through the prophet Isaiah, “As a young man marries a virgin so shall your sons marry you.” (Isaiah 61:10, 62:5) This promise is literally fulfilled in the life of the Catholic Church which is also identified as the New Jerusalem (Rev. 21:2). Sons are born to the Catholic Church through the waters of baptism and many of her sons participate in Jesus’ priestly betrothal to this New Jerusalem through the administration of sacred orders. As such, when Jesus commanded Peter to feed his sheep, he was inviting Peter, the apostles, and their successors to participate in His priestly ministry to the Church. Paul in the letter to the Church in Ephesus (Eph 5:22) draws the sacramental parallels between Jesus and His Bride the Church and marriage between a husband and wife. Paul commands husbands to love their wives as Jesus loves the Church (until death), guarding her and cleansing her by the washing of the word to be holy. Paul encourages wives to submit to their husbands. The Greek word is (hupotassetai) and in this context the woman submits to the husband as the Church submits to Jesus Christ. This same principle is picked up in the Letter to the Hebrews 13:17 in which the author tells the church (Bride of Christ) to “Have confidence in your hegemony and submit to their authority, because they keep watch over you (guardians) as those who must give an account.”  The people of God submit to the shepherds placed over them as a bride submits to her husband in the Lord. Again the point is that this relationship between the ordained and the virgin bride the Church is a betrothed priestly relationship. The Catholic Church is a sacred bride, a sacred vessel, with a sacred office to conceive, give birth, and nurture her members into eternal life. The wife is a sacred bride, a sacred vessel, with a sacred office to give birth and nurture her children leading them to the font of life. This language of fulfillment did not escape the apostles. When they started to ordain their successors to the orders of bishops, presbyters, and deacons they called forth adult males (and if married they were to be husbands of one wife) not that they had to be married but that they could not have been remarried. The apostles were demanding from the 1^st generation of ordained disciples – those who were married - a demonstration of fidelity to their sacred marriage which is rooted in the sacred marriage between Jesus and His Church. It should be noted that in both the Latin Church and Greek Orthodox Church, the bishop is required to be celibate. The requirement of priestly celibacy emerged more distinctly in the Latin Church. Consistently throughout Latin and Greek Church History, a man once ordained was not allowed to marry.[17] This call to men to share in Christ’s priestly betrothal and call to virginity reflects the mind of Jesus Christ and does not flow from the congregation.

Language of Fulfillment –Sacrifice, Altar and Priesthood

Humanity was created to be a priestly people and to offer sacrifice to God, otherwise Jesus’ actions would have been contrary to his divine and human natures. Jesus, the 2^nd person of the Blessed Trinity, actualizes the perfect love of the Father. Jesus took on human flesh so that humanity could participate in His one eternal and living sacrifice with the Father. The Spirit of Jesus received in Baptism enables the members of the Body of Christ to participate in His sacrifice. If the sacrifice of Jesus Christ is the one and only acceptable sacrifice (Heb. 10:10), then there must be a spiritual sacrifice performed within the Church which possesses the same substance and character with the one eternal sacrifice offered by Jesus Christ to the Father. This spiritual sacrifice is the sacrifice of thanksgiving (Eucharist), which is the re-presentation of Christ’s Sacrifice on Calvary (Sacrifice of the Mass) through the power of the Holy Spirit and administered through the hands of the ordained priesthood. [18]

In the Old Testament, Abraham was commanded by God to take his only beloved son up the mountain of Moriah and sacrifice him. On the way up the mountain, Isaac is carrying the wood and asks his father “Where is the lamb of sacrifice?” Abraham answers his son, stating that God himself will provide the lamb for the sacrifice. (Gen. 22:8)  In Jewish tradition, Abraham words were prophetic and to be fulfilled by God in some manner in the future. A standing lamb of sacrifice was maintained in the temple to remind God of his promise to Abraham. This standing sacrifice was literally fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ. John writes that he was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day (Sunday the 1^st day of the Week) - the day when Jesus rose from the dead and Christians in commemoration of God victory over death, assembled and celebrated the Sacrifice of Thanksgiving (Eucharist). He sees between the throne and the four living creatures among the presbyters, a Lamb standing, as though it had been slain. (Apoc. 5:6) John does not miss the fact that it is not the Old Testament priests who are involved with the heavenly liturgy of thanksgiving and praise, but revolving estates of twelve presbyters and twenty-four presbyters. This literally fulfills a pattern established by King David who arranged the order of Old Testament priests into estates of twelve priests and twenty-four priests to continually offer incense and sacrifice to God on a rotating basis.[19] John then writes that beneath the altar of the Lamb there were the souls of those beheaded for the word of God. Jesus is the standing lamb of sacrifice. The blood of his sacrifice flows from the altar and pools underneath in the form of martyrs.[20] Their suffering and sacrifice flows from Christ’s; his blood is their blood for they have been partakers of the Divine and Human Natures of Jesus Christ through the reception of the Sacrifice of Thanksgiving (Eucharist). This is what Paul literally tells the Church in Corinth: “The cup of thanksgiving (Eucharist) that we bless, is it not the partaking of the blood of the Messiah? And is not our breaking of bread the sharing in body of the Messiah?” (1Cor. 10:16, 17) Paul tells the Church in Corinth that as the sufferings of Christ flows into their lives, so also does his consolations. Participation in the Eucharist is the source of consolation for Jesus said, “My yoke is easy and my burden is light.” (Matt. 11:30)   As such the table of the Lord is the altar of the Church and the Eucharist is the Church’s Spiritual Sacrifice. Ignatius Bishop of Antioch (A.D. 110) drawing upon the teaching and life examples of the apostles writes emphatically that when the Church assembled to celebrate the Eucharist, they were assembled at the one altar of sacrifice – which by the way is validly celebrated by the bishop (episcopos) or someone authorized by him:

Make certain therefore that you all observe one common Eucharist, for there is one Body of our Lord Jesus Christ, and but one cup of union with His Blood, and one single altar of sacrifice – even also is there one Bishop with his clergy (presbyters), and my own fellow servers the deacons. This will ensure that all your actions are in full accord with God.[21]

In the Old Testament, one of the responsibilities of priests was to scrutinize the sacrifices being presented to the Lord by the God’s priestly people. Through the Prophet Malachi, God reproaches the priests for allowing the offering of blemished sacrifices. Paul in his Letter to the Church in Corinth is being faithful to the admonition spoken by God through the Prophet Malachi by guarding the sacred nature of the Lord’s Supper and by removing misunderstandings and misapplications. In Corinth, a number of Christians were attending the altar of demons and the altar of the Lord.  Paul warns the Corinthians that they cannot drink the cup of our Lord and the cup of demons, and cannot share in the table of the Lord and the table of demons without putting the Lord to the test. (1 Cor. 10:21)  From the words of Paul: “For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus Christ on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he has given thanks (eucharistas) broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in memorial of me.”  In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this whenever you drink in memorial of me.”  Then Paul adds: “For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.” (1 Cor. 11:23-28)  If this point is missed, Ignatius of Antioch, bishop and martyr, clarifies even further:

Follow the bishop in all things, even as Christ Jesus does the Father, and follow the presbytery as you would the apostles. Reverence the deacons, as those that carry out through their office the appointment of God. Let no one do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is administered either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it.[22]

And from the Didache (The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles): No one may eat or drink of your Eucharist but those who been baptized in the name of the Lord; for the Lords own saying applies here, “Give not that which is holy to dogs.[23]

In the New Testament, the offering of this unblemished sacrifice is completed through the person of Jesus Christ and his ordained priests. Prior to Jesus’ offering to the Father the one and perfect sacrifice of thanksgiving as High Priest, John describes that Jesus washed the feet of the apostles. In Leviticus chapter 8:6-8; 9:22-24, the inspired author describes how Aaron and his sons prior to performing their first priestly and sacred act - providing the sin offering first for themselves and then for the people – were bathed and anointed by Moses. John describes how Jesus girdled himself and washes the feet of the apostles.  Jesus - proclaimed by God to be the High Priest according to the Order of Melchizedek – perfectly fulfills with this humble act of love, the humbling act performed by Moses. (John 13:4)  Jesus tells his apostles that they have been made clean from head-to-toe with the word spoken to them. Jesus washes the feet of his apostles prior to the institution of the new and everlasting covenant and sacrifice in his Church. To the point, this sacrifice of the Church is scrutinized through the sacrament of Holy Orders. Clement, writes to the Church in Corinth: “The Old Testament High Priest for example has his own proper service assigned to him, the priesthood has its own station, there are particular ministries laid down for the Levites and the laity are bound by regulation affecting the laity. In the same way my brothers, when we offer our own Eucharist to God, each one should keep to his own degree.”[24]  Stated another way, through the faithful ministry of the apostles and their successors, the spiritual sacrifices of the Church are properly conducted, validly performed, properly received and spiritual anarchy is prevented.

One of the arguments against an ordained priesthood is that it is extra-biblical and not in keeping with the literal language of the New Testament. Arguments against an ordained priesthood in the infant Church, posses varying degrees of Gnostic theology and spirituality. The infant Church had to contend with three major oppositions in the beginning: Gnosticism, Pharisaical Judaism, and Roman Paganism. The struggle against Gnosticism has never ceased. This final section is meant show that the Catholic institution of sacred orders and the sacrifice of thanksgiving (Eucharist) are antitheses to the spirit of Gnosticism.

Language of Fulfillment – Priesthood Bulwarks against Gnostic Spirituality

The non-catholic argument that sacred orders, priesthood, clergy, and laity were malignant developments in the Church after the death of the apostles is anti-historical in as much as these orders were actually the bulwark through which the Holy Spirit was guarding the Deposit of Faith (2 Tim. 1:13-15, 1 Tim. 6:20) from the “knowledge so falsely called” movements outside the Church, known as Gnosticism.[25]  The foundation of Gnosticism is not Sacred Scripture or Sacred Tradition. It is a pre-Christian movement rooted in “hidden knowledge as opposed to faith” that understood material creation to be the result of an evil demiurge. The God of the Old Testament was not a benevolent demiurge. Jesus was a benevolent demiurge that took on the appearance of flesh, did not die on the cross, and instituted amongst his apostles a hidden knowledge composed of signs and symbols that did not flow from, point to, or participate in the Life, Death, and Resurrection of Jesus Christ. Gnosticism in various degrees forbid marriage, the drinking of wine (1 Tim. 4:3) and its adherents refused to participate in the Catholic Eucharistic celebration: “They (Gnostic Docetics) absent themselves from the Eucharist and the public prayers, because they will not admit the Eucharist is the self-same body of our savior Jesus Christ…”[26]  John the Evangelist warned against this spiritual movement identifying it as the spirit of the anti-Christ; a theology permeated with the following theological foundations: Jesus did not come in the flesh, Jesus is not the Son of God, and Jesus is not the Messiah. With this as a background, the reader may recognize that when John wrote the Gospel, Epistles, and Book of Revelation under inspiration, he was combating the foundations of Gnosticism and stressing the significance of Sacred Orders as a bulwark against their missionary formations.  The following reflections are meant to coalesce what has been stated above.  

A Samaritan woman comes to the well at about the 6^th hour to draw water. Jesus slowly guides the Samaritan woman to ask, “Sir give me this water so that I won’t get thirsty and have to keep coming to draw water from the well.” Jesus tells the woman that he is able to give water, that if anyone drinks they will never thirst again. This water is the gift of the Holy Spirit, received when a person is baptized. The Samaritan woman then questions Jesus about the correct place to worship God: “on this mountain or in Jerusalem” For the Samaritan woman, the issue of worship centered on location and not – so it seems – on matters associated with the knowledge of God (divine revelation), salvation, sanctity, nor purity (she had five husbands and the one she was with was not her husband). Jesus tells the Samaritan woman that knowledge of God is important, “We Jews worship what we know, but you Samaritans worship what you do not know for salvation comes from the Jews.” Then Jesus says, “But the “hour” is coming and is now come when the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshippers the Father seeks. God is spirit and his worshippers must worship Him in spirit and truth.” 

This “hour” was first identified by John at the wedding feast of Cana when Jesus tells Mary his Mother, “My hour has not yet come.” (John 2:4) At the wedding feast, Jesus changes water into wine. This miracle is a precursor to another miracle which would unfold at the designated “hour.” There are several other references to “hour” in the Gospels but the critical “hour” and the point of this reflection is the “hour” which commences on Holy Thursday as described in John Chapter 13 and runs to the end of John Chapter 17. It was just before the Passover Feast. Jesus knew the “hour” had come for him to leave this world and go to the Father. Having loved his own who were in the world, he now showed them the full extent of his love. (John 13:1)

Jesus identified that an “hour” would come which fulfilled the requirement to worship God in Spirit and in Truth. John identifies this “hour” with the institution of the Lord’s Supper Sacrifice of Thanksgiving (Worship in Spirit). The conjoiner statement “in truth” has an additional reference in Sacred Scripture which is easily missed.  Paul when writing to Timothy tells him: “Although I hope to come to you soon, I am writing to you these instructions so that if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.” (1 Tim 3:15-15)

A bulwark against Gnosticism is to worship God in Spirit and in Truth which means to participate in the real presence of Jesus’ Body and Blood during the celebration of the Eucharist which is legitimately sanctioned by the Bishop or someone authorized by him in the Catholic Church which is the Pillar of Truth. 

Summary

The intent of this paper was to demonstrate from Sacred Scripture and the Church Fathers that Jesus Christ established in the Catholic Church a kingdom of priests and an ordained sacred order hierarchical priesthood each with its own proper order and estate.[27]  The method employed in this paper to support this demonstration included the language of fulfillment, which consists of the written arrangement of inspired and sacred expressions, events, signs and symbols, patterns, figures, and teachings that demonstrate the unity of the Old and New Testaments and the completeness of the Old in the New.

·      The language of fulfillment was used by the New Testament authors to show that Jesus Christ, the Apostles, and the Saints fulfill (complete) what was revealed by God through the formation, worship, duties, and ministry of the Old Testament kingdom of priests and ordained hierarchical priesthood.

·      This language of fulfillment was used to show the faith received by the Church Fathers through the life, teaching, writings, and ministries of the apostles especially that related to Catholic worship, sacrifice, and sacred orders.

End Notes

1. Luke captures the unfolding of prophecy and fulfillment through the words of the Angel Gabriel to Mary, a virgin in Nazareth betrothed to man named Joseph. The angel declares to Mary that “the Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the Holy One to born will be called the Son of God.”  These are expressions of fulfillment in as much as in the Old Testament, when the Ark of the Covenant was completed in accordance with the instructions provided by God to Moses, the power of the Most High overshadowed the Ark. The language is the same, the Shekinah of God which overshadows the Ark will overshadow Mary and she will conceive in her womb the Word of God, the Bread of Life, and High Priest according to the Order of Melchizedeck.  Luke then captures how Mary received the message of the angels and proclaims “I am the Handmaiden of the Lord.” This term handmaiden is Mary’s profession of faith in the Messiah who brings about a new pattern of worship as found in Ps 115 (116) “What shall I render unto the LORD for all his benefits toward me? I will take the cup of salvation, and call upon the name of the LORD. I will pay my vows unto the LORD now in the presence of all his people. Precious in the sight of the LORD is the death of his saints.  O LORD, truly I am thy servant; I am thy servant, and the son of your handmaid: thou hast loosed my bonds. I will offer to thee the sacrifice of thanksgiving (Eucharist), and will call upon the name of the LORD.” This priestly prayer of sacrifice was literally fulfilled by Jesus Christ on Holy Thursday, who remains yesterday, today, and forever God’s son and the son of God’s handmaiden, Mary of Nazareth.

 Luke continues to develop this picture of fulfillment by identifying a new ark of the covenant (not by terms), but using the conversation and events paralleling Mary’s visit with her cousin Elizabeth with the OT finding of the Ark in the Desert. This OT ark when brought to King David, expresses a sense of awe that the ark of God should be brought to him and instead directs that the ark be taken to the house of Obededom, where it resides for three months. Mary carrying in her womb Jesus - who is the Word of God, the Living Manna of Heaven, and Priesthood as demonstrated by Aaron’s staff – is greeted by Elizabeth who expresses awe reminiscent to King David’s response “How is it that the Mother of my Lord should come to me,” and Mary stays in the house of Zechariah for three months. This being said Luke brings the reader to the Acts of the Apostles. Luke opens the Acts with the apostles assembled in the large upper room casting lots to determine who will take up the office (episcope) abandoned by Judas who hung himself.  This upper room in Jerusalem is the room in which Jesus and his apostles gathered at table to celebrate the Passover. On that night Jesus establishes a new and everlasting covenant in His Body and Blood.  

In the Old Testament, one High Priest, and once a year could enter the Holy of Holies and offer incense as was the example of Zechariah.  With the death of Jesus on the Cross, the curtain in the Holy of Holies is torn asunder making way for God’s Cloud of Glory to rest upon the 120 brethren in the upper room.  With the descent of the Holy Spirit upon those present in the upper room, they become the Temple of the Holy Spirit, members of the Mystical Body of Christ and through them Christ’s Universal (Catholic) Church is manifested to all of humanity.  When the Jewish people and converts from all around the known world hear the noise and brethren speaking with intelligible tongues, they are amazed and consider them to be intoxicated. Peter preaches to the people below and their hearts are pierced with the Word of God. Collectively representing the whole world they ask the New Testament Church built upon Peter the Rock, “What must we do to be saved.” The Universal Church answers their sincere question with one message, from the one room in which was celebrated the one Sacrifice of Thanksgiving (Eucharist) through the one voice of Peter: “Repent and be baptized.”

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Balthasar, Hans Urs von. The Scandal of the Incarnation: Irenaeus Against the Heresies. Translated by John Saward. San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 1990

Bettenson, Henry. Documents of the Christian Church. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1967.

Brenton, Lancelot C.L. Septuagint with Apocrypha: Greek and English. 3rd ed. Peabody MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1990.

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

Chrysostom, John: Treatise Concerning the Christian Priesthood. Edited by Philip Schaff. Translated by W.R.W. Stephens. Vol. 9 of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series. Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing. 1889.

Dogmatic Canons and Decrees: Of the Council of Trent, Vatican Council I, plus The Decree on the Immaculate Conception, and The Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pix IX. Rockford IL: Tan Books and Publishers. 1977.

Hahn, Scott Walker. The Lamb’s Supper: The Mass as Heaven on Earth. New York: Doubleday, 1999.

Louth, Andrew and Betty Radice, eds. Early Christian Writings: The Apostolic Fathers. Translated by Maxwell Staniforth. London: Penguin Classics. September 1, 1987

Paul II, John. Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis: To the Bishops of the Catholic Church On Reserving Priestly Ordination to Men Alone. (May 1994). http:// www.vatican.va/  holy_father/ john_paul_ii/ apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_22051994_ordinatio-sacerdotalis_en.html

Peloubet, F.N. and Adams, Alice. Peloubet’s Bible Dictionary. Grand Rapids MI: Zondervan Publishing House. 1967

Quasten, Johannes. The Beginning of Patristic Literature. Vol. 1 of Patrology. Westminster MD: Christian Classics, Inc. 1990

Quasten, Johannes. The Ante-Nicene Literature After Irenaeus. Vol. 2 of Patrology. Westminster MD: Christian Classics, Inc. 1990

Quasten, Johannes. The Golden Age of Greek Patristic Literature. Vol. 3 of Patrology. Westminster MD: Christian Classics, Inc. 1990

---

[1] Catechism of the Catholic Church. 2nd ed. (Washington: United States Catholic Conference, 1997), 386.  Specific articles referenced are #1546 and #1547.

[2] John Paul II. Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis: To the Bishops of the Catholic Church On Reserving Priestly Ordination to Men Alone. (May 1994). http:// www.vatican.va/  holy_father/ john_paul_ii/ apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_22051994_ordinatio-sacerdotalis_en.html

[3] Henry Bettenson. Documents of the Christian Church. 2nd ed. (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1967), 195.  Martin Luther argued that the difference between laymen and priests, and princes and bishops was one of office and not of estate since each received (as Christians) the imputed dignity of priest, prophet, and king.

[4]   Scott Walker Hahn. The Lamb’s Supper: The Mass as Heaven on Earth. (New York: Doubleday, 1999), 21.

[5] John Paul II. Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis. The various references to the term adult male are meant to demonstrate the pattern 1) in Jesus’ ministry as related to his calling of the apostles as a college to be his successor and 2) the mind of the apostles as related to their calling of bishops, presbyters, and deacons to be successors to the college of apostles. Both reflect the same mind under the guidance of the same Holy Spirit who searches the deep things of God and reflects the mind of Jesus Christ.

[6]  The importance of emphasizing Mary by name is clear when the reader recognizes how Luke pictures Mary as an embodied fulfillment of the Old Testament Ark of the Covenant through the recorded events and conversation taking place during the Annunciation and the Visitation. Reference End Note 1 listed before the Bibliography.

[7] Dogmatic Canons and Decrees: Of the Council of Trent, Vatican Council I, plus The Decree on the Immaculate Conception, and The Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pix IX. (Rockford IL: Tan Books and Publishers. 1977) 71-72.

[8]F.N Peloubet and Alice Adams. Peloubet’s Bible Dictionary. (Grand Rapids MI: Zondervan Publishing House. 1967), 529-531.

[9] CCC, 387. Reference Article 1548.

[10] CCC, 334. Reference Article 1324. 

[11] Andrew Louth and Betty Radice, eds. Early Christian Writings: The Apostolic Fathers. Translated by Maxwell Staniforth. (London: Penguin Classics. September 1, 1987), 40.

[12] Louth and Radice, 79.

[13] Johannes Quasten. The Ante-Nicene Literature After Irenaeus. Vol. 2 of Patrology. (Westminster MD: Christian Classics, Inc. 1990), 187 and CCC, 392. Reference articles 1568, 1569, and 1570.   

[14] John Chrysostom: Treatise Concerning the Christian Priesthood. Edited by Philip Schaff. Translated by W.R.W. Stephens. Vol. 9 of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing. 1889), 1-8.; Reference also Johannes Quasten. The Golden Age of Greek Patristic Literature. Vol. 3 of Patrology. (Westminster MD: Christian Classics, Inc. 1990), 459-463.

[15] CCC, 384-385. Reference articles 1539 and 1541.

[16] Hahn, 88.

[17] CCC, 395. Reference Articles 1579 and 1580.

[18] CCC, 344. Reference Article 1367

[19]   Hahn, 119. ; Reference also Peloubet and Adams, 531.

[20]  Hahn, 119.

[21] Louth and Radice, 39. Ignatius was the 3^rd bishop of Antioch after Peter and Euodius. Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, and Polycarp of Smyrna were bishops and either direct disciples to the apostles or the first disciples of the Apostles. As bishops they were entrusted with guarding the Deposit of Faith, catechesis, preserving unity among the Churches, ordaining successors, and shepherding their flock. Roman persecution generally began with the imprisonment and execution of the bishop since he was the father figure.

[22] Louth and Radice, 103.

[23] Louth and Radice, 195.

[24] Louth and Radice, 39-40.

[25] Hans Urs von Balthasar, The Scandal of the Incarnation: Irenaeus Against the Heresies. Translated by John Saward. (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 1990), 1-11.; Reference also Johannes Quasten, The Beginning of Patristic Literature. Vol. 1 of Patrology. (Westminster MD: Christian Classics, Inc. 1990), 284, 285, 295.

[26] Louth and Radice, 102.

[27] Catechism of the Catholic Church. 2nd ed. (Washington: United States Catholic Conference, 1997), 386.  Specific articles referenced are #1546 and #1547.