- St. Michael the Archangel Story
- History of St. Michael the Archangel Prayer
- St. Michael the Archangel Prayers
- St. Michael the Archangel Apparitions
- The Chaplet of St. Michael Archangel
- Novena to St Micheal the Archangel
- Litany of St. Michael the Archangel
PHOTO OF THE MONTH
Why did Jesus, the sinless one sent from the Father in heaven, submit himself to John's baptism? John preached a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins (Luke 3:3). In this humble submission we see a foreshadowing of the "baptism" of Jesus bloody death upon the cross. Jesus' baptism is the acceptance and the beginning of his mission as God's suffering Servant (Isaiah 52:13-15; 53:1-12). He allowed himself to be numbered among sinners. Jesus submitted himself entirely to his Father's will. Out of love he consented to this baptism of death for the remission of our sins. Do you know the joy of trust and submission to God? Read More »
FATHER CANTALAMESSA COMMENTS ON EASTER
“If it were up to me, that is the only thing I would do.
I quit teaching the history of Christian origins 30 years ago to
dedicate myself to proclaming the Kingdom of God, but now when I
am faced with radical and unfounded denials of the truth of the
Gospels, I have felt obliged to take up the tools of my trade again.”
Father Raniero Cantalamessa, Pontifical Household Preacher, comments on the readings for Easter Sunday Liturgy.
Below is a translation of his commentary by Zenit.
* * *
He is Risen!
Acts 10:34a, 37-43; Colossians 3:1-4; John 20:1-9
There are men -- we see this in the phenomenon of suicide bombers -- who die for a misguided or even evil cause, mistakenly retaining, but in good faith, that the cause is a worthy one.
Even Christ's death does not testify to the truth of his cause, but only the fact that he believed in its truth. Christ's death is the supreme witness of his charity, but not of his truth. This truth is adequately testified to only by the Resurrection. "The faith of Christians," says St. Augustine, "is the resurrection of Christ. It is no great thing to believe that Jesus died; even the pagans believe this, everyone believes it. The truly great thing is to believe that he is risen."
Keeping to the purpose that has guided us up to this point, we must leave faith aside for the moment and attend to history. We would like to try to respond to the following question: Can Christ's resurrection be defined as a historical event, in the common sense of the term, that is, did it "really happen"?
There are two facts that offer themselves for the historian's consideration and permit him to speak of the Resurrection: First, the sudden and inexplicable faith of the disciples, a faith so tenacious as to withstand even the trial of martyrdom; second, the explanation of this faith that has been left by those who had it, that is, the disciples. In the decisive moment, when Jesus was captured and executed, the disciples did not entertain any thoughts about the resurrection. They fled and took Jesus' case to be closed.
In the meantime something had to intervene that in a short time not only provoked a radical change of their state of soul, but that led them to an entirely different activity and to the founding of the Church. This "something" is the historical nucleus of Easter faith.
The oldest testimony to the Resurrection is Paul's: "For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: That Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he rose again according to the Scriptures; and that he was seen by Cephas, and after that by the eleven.
"Then he was seen by more than 500 brethren at once, of whom many are still with us and some are fallen asleep. After that, he was seen by James, then by all the apostles. And last of all, he was seen also by me, as by one born out of due time" (1 Corinthians 15:3-8).
These words were written around A.D. 56 or 57. But the core of the text is constituted by an anterior faith that Paul himself says he received from others. Keeping in mind that Paul learned of these things immediately after his conversion, we can date them to about A.D. 35, that is, five or six years after the death of Christ. It is thus a testimony of rare historical value.
The accounts of the Evangelists were written some decades later and reflect a later phase in the Church's reflection. But the core of the testimony remains unchanged: The Lord is risen and was seen alive. To this a new element is added, perhaps determined by an apologetic preoccupation, and so of minor historical value: The insistence on the fact of the empty tomb. Even for the Gospels, the appearances of the Risen Christ are the decisive facts.
The appearances, nevertheless, testify to a new dimension of the Risen Christ, his mode of being "according to the Spirit," which is new and different with respect to his previous mode of existing, "according to the flesh." For example, he cannot be recognized by whoever sees him, but only by those to whom he gives the ability to know him. His corporeality is different from what it was before. It is free from physical laws: It enters and exits through closed doors; it appears and disappears.
According to a different explanation of the Resurrection, one advanced by Rudolf Bultmann and still proposed today, what we have here are psychogenetic visions, that is, subjective phenomena similar to hallucinations. But this, if it were true, would constitute in the end a greater miracle than the one that such explanations wish to deny. It supposes that in fact different people, in different situations and locations, had the same impression, the same halucination.
The disciples could not have deceived themselves: They were specific people -- fishermen -- not at all given to visions. They did not believe the first ones; Jesus almost has to overpower their resistance: "O foolish men, and slow of heart to believe!" They could not even want to deceive others. All of their interests opposed this; they would have been the first to feel themselves deceived by Jesus. If he were not risen, to what purpose would it have been to face persecution and death for him? What material benefit would they have drawn from it?
If the historical character of the Resurrection -- that is, its objective, and not only subjective, character -- is denied, the birth of the Church and of the faith become an even more inexplicable mystery than the Resurrection itself. It has been justly observed that "the idea that the imposing edifice of the history of Christianity is like an enormous pyramid balanced upon an insignificant fact is certainly less credible than the assertion that the entire event -- and that also means the most significant fact within this -- really did occupy a place in history comparable to the one that the New Testament attributes to it."
Where does the historical research on the Resurrection arrive? We can see it in the words of the disciples of Emmaus: Some disciples went to Jesus' tomb Easter morning and they found that things were as the women had said who had gone their before them, "but they did not see him." History too must take itself to Jesus' tomb and see that things are as the witnesses have said. But it does not see the Risen One. It is not enough to observe matters historically. It is necessary to see the Risen Christ, and this is something history cannot do; only faith can.
The angel who appeared to the women Easter morning said to them: "Why do you seek the living among the dead?" (Luke 24:5). I must confess that at the end of these reflections I feel that this rebuke is also directed at me. It is as if the angel were to say to me: "Why do you waste time seeking among dead human and historical arguments, the one who is alive and at work in the Church and in the world? Go instead and tell his brothers that he is risen."
If it were up to me, that is the only thing I would do. I quit teaching the history of Christian origins 30 years ago to dedicate myself to proclaming the Kingdom of God, but now when I am faced with radical and unfounded denials of the truth of the Gospels, I have felt obliged to take up the tools of my trade again.
This is why I have decided to use these commentaries on the Sunday
Gospels to oppose a tendency often motivated by commercial interests
and help those who may read my observations to form an opinion about
Jesus that is less influenced by the clamor of the advertising world.
« Back to Homepage
LIVES OF THE SAINTS
ST. ALPHONSUS LIGUORI
St. Alphonsus was born near Naples, Italy, in 1732. Read More »
St. Eusebius was born on the island of Sardinia, Italy, around 283. Read More »
ST. PETER JULIAN EYMARD
St. Peter Julian Eymard was born in a small town in the diocese of Grenoble, France in 1786. Read More »
BLESSED FREDERIC JANSSOONE
Blessed Frederic Janssoone was born in Flanders in 1838. Read More »
DEDICATION OF ST. MARY MAJOR
St. Mary Major is important to Christendom for three reasons: Read More »
St. Mary Major is important to Christendom for three reasons: Read More »
St. Cajetan was born in Vicenza, Italy, in 1480, the son of a count. Read More »
St. Dominic was born in Castile, Spain, in 1170. Read More »
BLESSED JOHN OF RIETI
Blessed John lived in the first half of the fourteenth century. Read More »
St. Lawrence, the famous martyr of Rome, lived in the third century. Read More »
St. Clare was born around 1193 in Assisi, Italy. She lived at the time of St. Francis of Assisi.Read More »
ST. MAXIMILIAN KOLBE
Raymond Kolbe was born in Poland in 1894. Read More »
THE ASSUMPTION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY
This feast of Mary celebrates a special privilege of Mary, our Mother.Read More »
ST. STEPHEN OF HUNGARY
St. Stephen was born around 969 in Hungary. This saint's name.. Read More »
BLESSED JOAN DELANOUE
St. Joan Delanoue was born in 1666. Her family had a small but..Read More »
ST. JANE FRANCES DE CHANTAL
St. Jane was born in Dijon, France, in 1572.Read More »
ST. JOHN EUDES
St. John Eudes was born in Normandy, France, in 1601.Read More »
St. Bernard was born in 1090 in Dijon, France.Read More »
ST. PIUS X
St. Pius X, the great pope, was named Joseph Sarto. He was born in 1835, the son of a mailman in Riese.. Read More »
ST. ROSE OF LIMA
St. Rose, the South American saint, was born in Lima, Peru, in 1586.Read More »
"Bartholomew" was one of the first followers of Jesus.Read More »
ST. LOUIS OF FRANCE
St. Louis was born on April 25, 1214. His father was King Louis VIII of France and his mother was Queen..Read More »
ST. JOSEPH CALASANZ
St. Joseph was born in 1556, in his father's castle in Spain. He went to college and became a lawyer.Read More »
ST. ELIZABETH BICHIER
St. Elizabeth was born in 1773. As a little girl, her favorite game was building castles in the sand. Read More »
St. Monica, the famous mother of St. Augustine, was born in 332 in Tagaste, northern Africa. Read More »
St. Augustine was born in Tagaste in modern Algeria on November 13, 354. This famous son of St. Monica spent many years in wicked living and in..Read More »
BEHEADING OF ST. JOHN THE BAPTIST
St. John the Baptist was a cousin of Jesus. His mother was St. Elizabeth and his father was Zechariah. Read More »
"St. Pammachius was a distinguished Christian layman who lived in the fourth century.Read More »
St. Aidan was a seventh-century Irish monk. He lived at the great monastery of Iona, which St. Columban had founded.Read More »
NEWS ARCHIVE & ACTIVITIES
- The Sacrament of Marriage
- Bishops Shield Pope Against BBC Assault
- Much Work Remain in Many Areas
- Vatican Appeals for Least Developed Countries
- Immaculate Conception of Mary
- Memorial of St. Frances Xavier Cabrini
- Feast of St. Jude the Miraculous Saint
- Miracle of Our Lady of Fatima