Amazing Catechists

Teaching and learning the faith together

  • Home
  • About
    • About Amazing Catechists
    • Patron Saint of Amazing Catechists
    • Donations
  • Topics
    • Art
    • Campus Ministry
    • Catechetics
    • Catechism
    • Catechist Training
    • Catholic Spirituality
    • Church Documents
    • Columnists
    • Culture
    • Elementary School
    • Evangelization
    • Family Life
    • Featured
    • Games
    • General
    • Grief Resources
    • High School
    • Homeschooling
    • Liturgical
    • Mary
    • Middle School
    • Music
    • New Age
    • NFP/Chastity
    • Prayer
    • RCIA & Adult Ed
    • Reader Suggestions
    • Sacraments
    • Scripture
    • Special Needs
    • Spiritual Warfare
    • Technology
    • Theology
    • Therapeutic
    • Video
    • Vocations
  • Contributors
    • Alice Gunther
    • Amanda Woodiel
    • Cay Gibson
    • Christian LeBlanc
    • Christopher Smith
    • Deanna Bartalini
    • Dorian Speed
    • Elizabeth Ficocelli
    • Elizabeth Tichvon
    • Ellen Gable Hrkach
    • Faith Writer
    • Father Juan R. Velez
    • Gabe Garnica
    • Jeannie Ewing
    • Jennifer Fitz
    • Justin Combs
    • Karee Santos
    • Lisa Mladinich
    • Marc Cardaronella
    • Maria Rivera
    • Mary Ellen Barrett
    • Mary Lou Rosien
    • Maureen Smith
    • Msgr. Robert Batule
    • Msgr. Charles Pope
    • Pat Gohn
    • Peggy Clores
    • Robyn Lee
    • Rocco Fortunato
    • Sarah Reinhard
    • Steve McVey
    • Tanja Cilia
    • William O’Leary
    • Alex Basile
  • Shop
  • Contact us

Catechesis or Apologetics; Do You Know the Difference?

By Mary Lou Rosien

Evangelistic Catholics who use the terms catechesis and apologetics, may be assuming people know what they are talking about. There are important differences, not only in the terms and what they mean, but in when they should be used.

Scholar Jean de VaudetarCatechesis refers to the handing on of the Catholic faith, often through the use of a catechism. If you look at the index of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, you will find a large volume of information on the teachings of the Catholic Church, on virtually every subject imaginable. From Abortion to the Death Penalty, Eucharist to Anointing of the Sick, and Mass attendance to Holy Days of Obligation, much of what we believe is explained within.

Apologetics is a system of well-reasoned arguments in defense of Catholic teachings; using history, practical knowledge, experience, Scripture and even science, apologetics demonstrates how the Church arrives at the conclusions it does.* The Church is believed to be led by the Holy Spirit and to possess the “Full Deposit of Faith,” through its understanding of Sacred Scripture and Tradition. The Catholic Faith does not change in the sense of dogma; however, the Church does develop a deeper understanding of that deposit of faith, as it is revealed by the Holy Spirit.

So when should a catechist use straight catechesis and when is apologetics more appropriate? This is a complicated question. I believe we should be aware of both and ready to use them as needed. Scripture tells us that we need to “be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you.” (1 Peter 3:15) To decide which is most appropriate, we need to ask ourselves a few questions.

What is the purpose of your discussion? If a student (or anyone else) has challenged you on a particular tenet of faith, backing up the teaching with apologetics (in a loving way) can assist your student in understanding why the Church teaches what it does. If, however, you are just providing information on Church teaching, then straightforward catechesis is a good place to start.

Do they need head knowledge or heart knowledge? Sometimes students grasp a concept easily but cannot advance that knowledge without a deeper understanding. This can work either way. Some people can understand that 1 + 1=2 without additional information, while others need to see physical evidence of the concept to internalize it. I find that catechesis provides the initial information, whereas, apologetics provides the concrete evidence that some need.

How old is the student? Younger students (in my experience) are very accepting of information and need little else. Consider how a First Communion class responds to finding out that the Eucharist is truly Jesus. The little ones will often say, “Hi, Jesus,” and wave. They just accept what you have taught them. Their parents, on the other hand, have often long since forgotten that innocence, and they want additional information. Apologetics can come in very handy at that point.

We cannot have too much knowledge, and the study of the Catechism and Catholic apologetics go hand in hand. The two are complementary, as both the head and heart journey to a deeper understanding of the Catholic Faith–and an appreciation for how blessed we are to practice it.

*Some free resources for apologetics online:

Catholic Answers

New Evangelizers

(C) 2016

Read all posts by Mary Lou Rosien Filed Under: Catechetics, Evangelization, General, RCIA & Adult Education, Resources Tagged With: apologetics, Catechesis, Roman Catholicism

Introduction to Natural Theology: FREE and still OPEN for enrollment!

By Lisa Mladinich

Learn how to defend your faith, FREE online, in a popular live course still accepting enrollment and taught by the wonderful Joseph Wetterling! See Joe’s invitation, below:

By natural reason man can know God with certainty, on the basis of his works. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 50)

More and more, young Catholics are being challenged to defend their faith. They hear from TV and movies, music, and peers that truth is subjective and no one can prove that God exists.  Are you ready to equip your students (and yourself) to defend their faith from a secular culture?

  • What is a “proof”?
  • What is “objective truth”?
  • What is “relativism”?
  • Why should we believe in a God at all?
  • Can you defend belief to people who don’t accept the Bible?

We’ll answer these questions and more in a FREE four-week class, hosted by Holy Apostles College & Seminary.  Introduction to Natural Theology started on June 21 but is STILL OPEN for enrollment! Attendees can learn at their own pace, at the time that’s convenient for them.  No experience necessary!

View the syllabus at: https://www.holyapostles.edu/wp-content/uploads/NT_MOOC_Syllabus_Summer_2015.pdf

Register online at: https://www.hacsmooc.cc

See: https://www.youtube.com/embed/C8rVXYg2_k8

 

JoeWJoe Wetterling is a professional educator, writer, and speaker. He’s appeared at national and international conferences, both secular and religious, holds a Catechetical Diploma (an ecclesiastical teaching certificate) and is a member of the Militia Immaculata. Joe is a contributor at New Evangelizers and the Catholic Writers Guild. Learn more about him at JoeWetterling.com.

Read all posts by Lisa Mladinich Filed Under: Catechetics, Catechism, Catechist Training, Evangelization, RCIA & Adult Education, Resources, Theology Tagged With: apologetics, Catholicism, free resources, Holy Apostles College and Seminary, Joe Wetterling

Does the Bible require full immersion baptism?

By Christopher Smith, OP

Recently I participated in an online discussion about baptism.  One of the comments made, by a non-Catholic, was that the Bible requires a person to be fully immersed during baptism.  I wanted to share my reply to her with the readers of Amazing Catechists.


Scripture is not exactly clear on this. I can tell you, for the record, I have seen Catholic Churches where infants have water sprinkled on them and adults are fully submerged. It’s rare for full immersion in a Catholic Church, but it is out there.

After Peter preached his first sermon, it says in Acts 2:41 that 3000 were baptized. I’ve read that archaeologists have demonstrated there was not a sufficient enough water supply for so many to have been immersed and even if there was, the people of Jerusalem would not have allowed for the contamination of the city’s water supply to have 3000 dirty people immersed. If that is true, and it seems reasonable, then either 3000 people were not baptized or they were not baptized by full immersion. Something to think about.

I know you prefer to focus our conversation on scripture, so I want to look at the word for baptism using immersion: βαπτίζω or baptizō

In Luke 11:38, Jesus is going to have dinner. Luke writes, “The Pharisee was astonished to see that he did not first wash (baptizō) before dinner.” The word used for “wash” is baptizō. I suppose an argument could be made that Jesus would “fully immerse” his hands during washing, but isn’t it more likely that he would pour water over his hands above a small bowl or basin? So therefore, baptizō has meanings apart from full immersion baptism.

There is a Greek word for washing (hands). It is νίπτω or niptō and we can see it used in Mark 7:3: “For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, do not eat unless they wash (niptō) their hands, observing the tradition of the elders.”

Then we can see another use of baptizō. In Luke 12:50 we see Jesus saying, “I have a baptism (baptisma) to be baptized (baptizō) with; and how I am constrained until it is accomplished!”

So now we see baptizō being used metaphorically to describe the suffering (i.e his Passion) Jesus is to endure.

Final point regarding the use of baptizō: In Acts 1:4-5, Jesus instructs his followers not to leave Jerusalem but to wait for “the promise of the father,” for ”John baptized (baptizō) with water, but before many days you shall be baptized (baptizō) with the Holy Spirit.”

Now, an argument could be made that one would be fully immersed in the Holy Spirit, thus confirming the understanding of baptizō as full immersion. However, let’s look at the second chapter of Acts. In three instances in that one chapter (2:17, 2:18, 2:33), the Spirit is described as being “poured” out (ἐκχέω or ekcheō) (i.e. not immersed).

The point behind this linguistics exercise is simply to point out one thing: baptizō, the word used by born-again Christians to insist on full immersion as the only valid means for baptism, is used broadly enough in scripture to incorporate “pouring” as well as “immersion.” Combine the massive amount of scriptural evidence with writings apart from scripture and art from that period (below), and the evidence is overwhelming that pouring or sprinkling over the head is as valid a means for baptism as full immersion and possibly even the preferred option.

 

Painting which depicts a baptism by pouring water over the head while kneeling in a river.

Painting which depicts a baptism by pouring water over the head while kneeling in a river.

Read all posts by Christopher Smith, OP Filed Under: Sacraments Tagged With: apologetics, baptism, Greek, scripture

Mary’s Perpetual Virginity and the new normal

By Christopher Smith, OP

Today’s Gospel reading is a short one.  In fact, I can copy it in its entirety right here:

The mother of Jesus and his brothers came to him but were unable to join him because of the crowd.  He was told, “Your mother and your brothers are standing outside and they wish to see you.” He said to them in reply, “My mother and my brothers are those who hear the word of God and act on it” (Luke 8:19-21)

When discussions or debates are held about Mary’s perpetual virginity – the teaching that she remained chaste even after giving birth to Jesus – inevitably two scripture references are brought up.  The first one is the one I quoted above which refers to the Jesus’ “brothers.” The second is from the first chapter of Matthew’s Gospel:

When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him; he took his wife, but knew her not until she had borne a son; and he called his name Jesus (Mt 1:24-25, my emphasis added)

The implication when these two verses are combined is Joseph didn’t have sexual relations with Mary while she was pregnant with Jesus, but afterwards they adopted a “normal” marital relationship which produced additional offspring (i.e. Jesus’ brothers).

That line of argumentation is one of those “zingers” Protestant fundamentalists like to throw at Catholics.  For Catholics who are not grounded in the bible, which sadly is many of them, and who do not know the development of the doctrine on Mary’s Perpetual Virginity, this argument comes across as rather convincing.  I remember a well-intentioned Baptist deacon rattling off these two quotes in quick succession at me when I was 19 years old and I had no idea how to respond (until I got this book, published two years earlier).

The debate on this topic is not a new one.  A man named Helvidius published a tract in Rome (c. 383), arguing against Mary’s Perpetual Virginity.  The great linguistics expert and biblical scholar, St. Jerome, who was also in Rome when Helvidius put forth his ideas, wrote a rebuttal, defending the Church’s teaching.

There is one part of Jerome’s response to Helvidius every Catholic should be able to grasp with the use of reason alone.  It doesn’t require an in-depth knowledge of scripture nor does it require one to know the 2000 history which comprises the Church’s teaching on Mary’s virginity.  No, all a person needs to ponder for a moment is the idea that nothing about Mary and Joseph’s life was going to be “normal” after their respective angelic visitations (cf. Lk 1:26-38 and Mt 1:18-25).

Think about it.  How was anything in the lives of these two people going to be “normal” after angels come to inform them of the miraculous conception of Jesus and tell them they will be the earthly parents of the Son of God?  I’m sure their lives were many, many things, but normal probably wasn’t one of them.

I feel comfortable making that kind of assumption (<– Marian pun) because it puts me in company with St. Jerome (not bad company to be in).  He wrote in his treatise, Against Helvidius: The Perpetual Virginity of Blessed Mary:

In short, what I want to know is why Joseph refrained until the day of her delivery? Helvidius will of course reply, because he heard the angel say, “that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost” (Mt 1:20) And in turn we rejoin that he had certainly heard him say, “Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife” (ibid) The reason why he was forbidden to forsake his wife was that he might not think her an adulteress. Is it true then, that he was ordered not to have intercourse with his wife? Is it not plain that the warning was given him that he might not be separated from her? And could the just man dare, he says, to think of approaching her, when he heard that the Son of God was in her womb? Excellent!

We are to believe then that the same man who gave so much credit to a dream that he did not dare to touch his wife, yet afterwards, when he had learnt from the shepherds that the angel of the Lord had come from heaven and said to them, “Be not afraid: for behold I bring you good tidings of great joy which shall be to all people, for there is born to you this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord;” (Lk 2:10)and when the heavenly host had joined with him in the chorus, “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men of good will;” (Lk 2:14) and when he had seen just Simeon embrace the infant and exclaim, “Now lettest thou thy servant depart, O Lord, according to thy word in peace: for mine eyes have seen thy salvation;” (Lk 2:25-34) and when he had seen Anna the prophetess (Lk 2:36-38), the Magi, the Star, Herod, the angels; Helvidius, I say, would have us believe that Joseph, though well acquainted with such surprising wonders, dared to touch the temple of God, the abode of the Holy Ghost, the mother of his Lord?

Jerome uses a lot of words (an admirable trait) to basically say, “Whatta stupid?”

I think there are two things that we, as modern 21st century people, struggle to get our heads around.  First is the radicalness of Mary and Joseph’s experience.  Ideas such as angelic visitations, voices from the heavens, pregnancy without intercourse, parenting the “Son of God,” etc. lay just out of our reach to comprehend.  We struggle with them (understandable) because we likely have nothing comparable in our own lives.  Our children didn’t come to us through divine intervention and they seem a little less than divine when they are throwing a fit about not getting their way.

The second concept is the idea of forsaking sexual intercourse for life.  That certainly doesn’t seem “normal” by today’s standards, perhaps not even by 1st century Palestinian standards either.  It would seem much more likely that Helvidius’ position, the one maintained by most Evangelicals, is right: Joseph and Mary refrained from intercourse “until [Mary] had borne a son” but afterwards they adopted a “normal” sexual relationship.  But what we must seriously consider is that Joseph’s and Mary’s standard for “normal” had been radically changed because of God’s intervention in their lives.

Just reflect on the magnitude of the responsibility this couple was being given.  Think about the mind-blowing, life-altering experiences they had before Jesus’ birth and after. What would you be willing to give up to be part of the plan to being salvation to the entire world?

You are part of that plan to bring salvation to the world you know, or at least to your corner of it.  God has intervened in your life in many different ways (e.g. sacraments, prayer life, through family/friends), your definition of “normal” is now different from the world’s definition (cf. 1 Pt 2:11, Rm 12:2 and Jn 17:16) .  Because your version of normal is different than the world’s, ask yourself: “What sacrifice am I willing to make in order to bring Christ to others?”

Read all posts by Christopher Smith, OP Filed Under: Scripture Tagged With: apologetics, BVM, reflection

Search

Follow Us!

  • Facebook
  • Pinterest
  • RSS
  • Twitter

Sign up for our Newsletter!

Join our email list and get immediate access to the free guide 'High Impact Lesson & Classroom Management Tips'.

Help us to serve the Church by patronizing our affiliates.

FTC Disclosure: If you make a purchase via a link on this site, we may receive a small commission. There will be no added cost to you. Thank you!

Sock Religious

That One Sheep Shirts

That One Sheep Shirts

Stickers

Stickers

The Catholic Store

Catholic Bibles

Catholic Bibles

catholic-jewelry

Catholic Religious Jewelry

Holy Heroes

holy-heroes

[footer_backtotop]

Copyright © 2023 Amazing Catechists. · Log in