Catholic Archives - Held By His Pierced Hands

3 Reasons: The Marks of the Church

That title might seem a little off–everyone knows that there are four Marks of the Church. But I’m linking up with Micaela again and she makes the rules: three reasons I love Catholicism. So we’re just going to say that the first mark, the mark of unity, of being “One,” manifests itself beautifully in the other three. That way I can have all four marks and still play the three reasons game. Okay? Good.

1. The Church is Holy.

Now before you get all cranky, I know that Catholics aren’t necessarily holy. In fact, Catholics are often among the worst sinners out there, all the worse because we claim to have standards for our behavior. So when I say that the Church is holy, I don’t mean that everything her members does is good–or even that everything she does as an institution is good.¹ But really, how much sense does it make to condemn an institution which teaches dogmatically that people are sinners when her members prove her right? Certainly, we ought to be better than that. But our Church is a saint factory, not a saints club.

Note that this wasn’t Pope Paul VI–it was Gandhi. (Source)

No, what I love about the holiness of our Church is her doctrines. Leave it to the Catholic Church to teach what is true–what she has always taught to be true–even when it’s awkward and inconvenient. When the Church of England first allowed contraception in 1930, every other mainstream Protestant denomination soon followed suit, leaving the Catholic Church alone holding the position that was held by all Christians and pretty much everyone else–including Gandhi–until the 20th century.

I love that our Church refuses to conform to secular models of liberal and conservative but runs instead after what is true, good, and beautiful. Find me a church that does as much good for the poor. Find me a church that defends all life–even that of the criminal and the immigrant and the handicapped–at whatever cost. Find me a church that works as hard for justice. This Church does all three and more.

A few months back, I was at a Catholic retreat with 800 teens. On the last day, they had us sing Happy Birthday to a few people who were celebrating that day. A few hours later, they announced that somebody else would be celebrating a birthday in a few weeks and asked us to sing to him, too. We all started off, quiet and rather confused because who cares if his birthday is coming up eventually? So is everybody’s.

At the end of the song, a young man with Down Syndrome climbed up onto the stage and stood grinning at us as we sang to him. The auditorium erupted with cheers, teenagers screaming and shouting because they saw his need and loved him for it. I don’t know that I’ve ever been prouder to be a Catholic. We say we’re pro-life, and apparently we really mean it–before birth, after birth, for the handicapped and sinful and unwanted and alone and refugee and just everyone. And our kids know it.

And you know what? This isn’t just true in some Catholic churches–it’s true across the board. Some of us are better at it than others, but our holy teachings bind us together even when we reject them. When you say, “I’m Catholic, but I believe in…” you’re proclaiming the one, holy teaching of the Church–and your refusal to consent. And yet, despite your best efforts, it remains the teaching of the Church. Even the disunity among our members can’t break the unity of our Church. What she teaches in Denver she teaches in Dubai and Delhi and Dover and everywhere, even when she’s ridiculed or marginalized or persecuted. Praise the Lord for our One, Holy Church.

2. The Church is Catholic .

This picture is from a church in Texas and I’m in Colorado but they have the same name and I forgot to take a picture so…deal with it.

Okay, this is the reason I’m thinking about the Marks of the Church today. Because we belong to a Church that is truly universal. Yesterday I went to Mass in Vietnamese. And I understood the whole thing. No, I don’t speak a lick of Vietnamese–but I speak Mass. And so I whispered all the prayers in English as the congregation responded in Vietnamese. I even beat my breast at the same time as them! I understood when the priest was saying Phillip and James, I understood which form of the penitential rite was being used–aside from the homily and the propers of the Mass, I got it all. And after Mass, when the celebrants and congregation turned to face a statue of the Holy Family and began to chant, I realized that it was the Magnificat.² Even the parts that weren’t liturgical, I understood because it’s a universal Church.

I’ve been to Mass in ten different languages³ and it’s always the same. If I kind of understand the language, I completely understand the Mass. If I don’t know a word, I can still pray right along with it. And even when I go to Eastern Rite churches, there’s a marvelous universality to the fact that I can join with people of any nationality and worship this one God in His Church.

The many rites in our Church show our unity in diversity and the Saints back it up. I’ve heard it claimed that Christianity is an inherently Western religion. Well, riddle me this: there are 11 American Catholic Saints. There are at least 120 Chinese Catholic Saints, at least 103 Korean Catholic Saints. The Blessed Mother has appeared in North America, South America, Asia, Africa, and Europe⁴ and every time she’s taken on the race of the people she’s speaking to. This is a universal Church.

All across this world, I know that if I find a church with a picture of the Pope in it, I’m home. In every country in the world, I have a church. Find me another Church that can make that claim. Whatever divides me from tribal Catholics in a remote village or persecuted Catholics in a totalitarian regime, we are united by our One, Catholic Church.

3. The Church is Apostolic.

And this Church which is universal in space is universal in time, too. Since the Resurrection, there has always been a Catholic Church.⁵ There aren’t a lot of churches out there that can claim an unbroken line back to the Apostles. Aside from Catholics (as far as I know) only the Orthodox and the Church of England even try. And while the former absolutely are and the latter can make a claim, there’s more to being apostolic than being descended from the Apostles.⁶

Not that I’m saying Jesus used a paten and chalice, but the doctrine of the real presence was just as clear then as it is now–maybe more so.

When I’m looking for the church that is most truly apostolic, my first question isn’t even apostolic succession. My first question is, “Would the Apostles recognize it?” This isn’t an issue of chant vs. drum kits. I don’t think anybody’s claiming that the Novus Ordo or even the Extraordinary Form would look entirely familiar to one of the Twelve. But would it feel right? I’m fairly certain that whatever the words of the Mass, the Apostles would recognize the use of Scripture in the prayers and the offertory and the many Jewish undertones of the liturgy. But most of all, they would recognize the Catholic reverence for Christ truly present in the Eucharist. The men who heard him say, “This is my body” the day before he was killed would be appalled–outraged, even–to hear churches say, “No, it is not.” I’d stake my life on it. As it happens, I already have.

To be an apostolic Church is to embrace apostolic doctrines: the real presence (John 6), the power of confession (Jn 20:21-23), the primacy of Peter (Mt 16:18-19). Catholics get accused of being unbiblical, of exalting human doctrines above the truth of God. Well, I’ve read the Bible 11 times and (even ignoring the fact that there is no Bible without the Church) I just don’t see it. And the minute you read the Church Fathers, the disciples of the Apostles, you begin to see that the early Church was, in fact, the Catholic Church. St. Edmund Campion famously asked an Anglican priest who was an expert on the Church Fathers how he could read the Fathers and not become a Catholic. “If I believed them as well as read them, you would have good reason to ask,” came the response, and Campion, who was trying his best to stay Protestant, was lost to the Church of England forever.

This is the Didache, an apostolic document that supports any number of the Church's doctrines. Note that it's a lot older than the 95 theses. — This is the Didache, an apostolic document that supports any number of the Church’s doctrines. Note that it’s a lot older than the 95 theses.

This Church that is descended from the Apostles, that honors the Apostles, that finds its guidance in the successors of the Apostles–this Church also teaches the one truth handed down by the Apostles. The Church’s stance against abortion and open communion, her commitment to Sunday as sabbath and the confession of sins,⁷ these unite us even when they upset us. They come to us from the writings of the Apostles and their disciples and from the guidance of the Holy Spirit through their successors. It is those teachings and those bishops that make us One, Apostolic Church.

So there you have it, friends–my fangirl love for the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. Click over to Micaela’s to see why else people love our Church–or post yourself!

The Catechism tells us that the Church is “at once holy and always in need of purification”–CCC 1428. [↩]
I heard the word Abraham at the end, it was an evening Mass, they were facing Mary, and they bowed for the last stanza–the Glory Be, I assume. I suppose I could be wrong, but it sure sounds like the Magnificat to me. [↩]
English, French, Spanish, Italian, Latin, Arabic, Croatian, Polish, Korean, and Vietnamese. [↩]
Australia and Antarctica need to get with the program. [↩]
Okay, they weren’t called “Catholic” until 107 by St. Ignatius of Antioch, but it’s clearly the same Church that it was. And it continues, the same Church in 100 as in 500 as in 1500 as today. The Orthodox could say the same thing. No Protestant denomination could. [↩]
The Orthodox would assert that their Church also has much of what I’m about to list and they’re right. My point is to say what is apostolic here, not what makes only us the apostolic Church. [↩]
All four from the first century Didache, the earliest Church constitution written by the companions of the Apostles. [↩]

Mary, Ark of the Covenant

I struggled with the idea of the Blessed Virgin Mary for a long time. I wasn’t raised with her and it’s hard to see how all that weird Catholic stuff with songs and statues and candles and parades isn’t worship. I figured early on that I could just ignore it and be okay, but, as it turns out, you can’t really be Catholic if you’re not at least trying to be into Mary. So I tried.

I started praying a rosary every day, I went to Medjugorje, and I even did St. Louis de Montfort’s total consecration to Mary. But I still didn’t get it.

And then I found the key somewhere surprising–the Old Testament. For pretty much everything I understand about Mary, I’m eternally (literally) in the debt of Scott Hahn, specifically his work in Hail, Holy Queen. When I read that book, I started to see that Mary is literally all over the Bible–the ancients were just subtler than I wanted them to be.

Marian theology’s too much for one post, obviously. Here I want to focus on Old Testament typology (foreshadowing) and Mary as the Ark of the Covenant. I’ll share the experiences in prayer that led me to a deeper understanding of Mary some other time. For now, let’s talk Scripture.

The Ark of the Covenant is an ancient artifact stolen by the Nazis that will consume you with lightning if you–oh, wait. Not so much.

Indiana Jones Ark — George Lucas didn’t get everything right.

The Ark was the center of God’s presence for the Israelites. In Exodus 25, it is described in detail as acacia wood plated with gold.* According to Exodus, the tablets of the ten commandments were placed inside (Ex 25:21). Numbers 17:25 suggests that Aaron’s staff may have been placed there as well, but it’s unclear until Hebrews 9:4:

…the ark of the covenant entirely covered with gold. In it were the gold jar containing the manna, the staff of Aaron that had sprouted, and the tablets of the covenant.

So the Ark of the Covenant held the presence of God and contained the life-giving bread, the high priest’s staff, and the word of God.

See where I’m going with this?

The Ark was treated with reverence, not because it was God but because it contained God (in a sense). It led the Israelites and was given a place of highest honor.

This is all on my mind because of the Feast of the Visitation yesterday, in which we celebrate Mary’s visit to Elizabeth. We’re used to these words because we’ve heard the story so much: the infant leaped, how does it happen that the mother of my Lord should come to me. But those Jews who read Luke’s Gospel would have been familiar with them, too, because the same words are used in reference to the Ark in 2 Samuel 6, where King David was bring the Ark of the Covenant into the hill country (Lk 1:39). Check it out:

Then David came dancing before the LORD with abandon, girt with a linen ephod. (2 Sam 6:14)

When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the infant leaped in her womb. (Lk 1:41)

Now, I’m no Greek scholar, but I did manage to ascertain that the Greek word for dancing in the Septuagint (Greek version of the Old Testament) is the same as the word for leaping in the New Testament.

David said, “How can the ark of the LORD come to me?” (2 Sam 6:9)

Elizabeth said, “And how does this happen to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” (Lk 1:43)

Again, we’re seeing the same language here, only replacing Ark with Mother.

The ark of the LORD remained in the house of Obed-edom the Gittite for three months. (2 Sam 6:11)

Mary remained with her about three months and then returned to her home. (Lk 1:56)

So Luke’s definitely feeling this Ark of the Covenant business, but John makes it even clearer in Revelation. Turn to Revelation 11:19 (right before Revelation 12, which we hear read from on pretty much every Marian feast day).

Then God’s temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant could be seen in the temple. There were flashes of lightning, rumblings, and peals of thunder, an earthquake, and a violent hailstorm.

Wow. That’s pretty intense. To give you some context, the Ark of the Covenant, which was the center of Israelite worship, had been lost for centuries. According to 2 Maccabees 2, Jeremiah hid the Ark in a cave right before the Babylonian Captivity (around 587 BC). So for 600 years, the most important thing in the world was lost. And John saw it! It was such a huge deal that there was lightning, thunder, hail, and an earthquake. This thing is for real!

And then the chapter ends and John moves on. “I saw the Ark! It was epic!

“Then this other time I saw a lady.”

That’s how it reads to us, with a big, bold “Chapter 12” separating his proclamation that he saw the Ark from his description of the Ark. But remember, John didn’t write in chapters. He said, “I saw the Ark! It was epic! A lady in the sky with a crown of 12 stars…. She was the mother of all Christians” (Rev 11:19; 12:1, 17; paraphrased).

John is explaining here that Mary is the new Ark of the Covenant. Just as the old Ark contained the life-giving bread, Mary contains Jesus, the Bread of Life (John 6). Just as the old Ark contained the high priest’s staff, Mary contains our Great High Priest (Heb 4:14). Just as the old ark contained the word of God, Mary contains the Word of God made flesh (Jn 1:1-3, 14).

“Okay, so Mary’s like some box,” says the voice in my head. “So what?”

So what?? So everything!!

Seriously, understanding this is a huge step towards understanding pretty much everything the Church teaches about Mary.

The Immaculate Conception

(This is when Mary was conceived without Original Sin, not when she conceived Jesus. Think embryonic Mary. More on this topic another time.)

The Ark of the Covenant was specially prepared to house God’s presence (see Ex 25 again). It was pure and holy, made specifically for a divine purpose. If Mary is the new Ark of the Covenant, she, too, must have been prepared from her creation for this purpose. She must have been pure, not by her own power but by the power of Him who created purity. They wouldn’t have used a random box for the Ark; God wouldn’t have used a random sinner for the Mother of God.

The Perpetual Virginity of Mary

(Mary remained a virgin before, during, and after the birth of Christ. Again, more on this later.)

The Ark of the Covenant was created for a sacred purpose and was made sacred by what it contained. If one were to empty the Ark of its holy contents, one would not then use it as a jewelry box or a stepstool. It was consecrated to one divine purpose; to use it for a worldly purpose would defile it. Now sex is holy and beautiful (see this beautiful reflection by Elizabeth Hanna Pham for proof), but sex must be open to life. And every baby besides Mary and Jesus is conceived with Original Sin. For Mary’s sanctified womb to nurture fallen life would defile it, just as using the Ark for a good but profane** purpose would be wrong.

The Assumption

(Mary was assumed body and soul into heaven by the power of God. She never suffered death, the separation of body and soul, as it’s a consequence of Original Sin.)

The Ark of the Covenant, as I said above, was made sacred by what it bore. Middle Eastern culture has a strong sense of sanctity (and profanity) being contagious, if you will. See pretty much the whole book of Leviticus for proof.

Having been made sacred, even if it had been emptied, it would have been honored. It wouldn’t have been left in the desert to rot (can things rot in the desert?) and it wouldn’t have been broken up and tossed. If Mary is the new Ark of the Covenant, she, too, must be revered even after she no longer contains the presence of God. An empty Ark wouldn’t have been tossed; Mary’s body wouldn’t have been left to decay. Since the options seem to be death (nope), immortality (I think we’d know if she was 2000 years old), or eternal life in the body (the Assumption), I think the logical answer is clear.

Reverence for Mary

No, the Bible doesn’t tell us to have parades and sing songs to Mary (although Luke 1:48 sure seems to suggest it), but that’s how Israel handled the Ark. Luke and John both make it clear to the discerning reader that the Ark is a type of Mary. So we honor her, we respect her, we pray through her, not because of who she is but because of whose she is and who he made her to be.

*These are the kinds of passages that make me want to skim.

**Profane, in this sense, does not mean evil but secular, non-sacred.