Q. At a Bible study on the Acts of the Apostles, there was a reference to the 71 members of the Sanhedrin. The facilitator didn’t know why the number was 71. Do you know? — N.C., Massachusetts.
A. After consulting several sources, we know that the Sanhedrin wielded considerable power in New Testament times and that its 71 members consisted of chief priests, elders, and scribes, with the high priest serving as president of the council, but we’re not sure where the number 71 came from. There is a possibility that it originated in the Book of Numbers, when the Lord said to Moses:
“Assemble for me seventy of the elders of Israel, men you know for true elders and authorities among the people, and bring them to the meeting tent. When they are in place beside you, I will come down and speak with you there. I will also take some of the spirit that is on you and will bestow it on them, that they may share the burden of the people with you. You will then not have to bear it by yourself” (11:16-17).
In any case, the Sanhedrin was the governing body of the Jews in Jerusalem and was made up of three groups: the chief priests, who were mostly from families who had served as high priests or from the aristocratic elite known as the Sadducees; the elders or Ancients, citizens who were influential because of their wealth or their status in the community; and the Scribes or doctors of the law, who were primarily laymen and Pharisees who had achieved power because of their ability to write and to interpret laws.
It was the responsibility of the Sanhedrin to decide any religious or civil case in any way connected with the Jewish law. Their decisions under the Roman governors carried great weight and they had both their own and Roman police to enforce them. They could pronounce the death penalty on a person, as they did on Jesus, but they could not carry it out, which is why they took Jesus to Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor, for approval and execution of the death sentence.
Q. In a recent reply about the statement of Pope Francis that divorced and civilly remarried Catholics are not excommunicated, you said that the Holy Father did not say anything that would change Catholic teaching that prohibits reception of Holy Communion by those living in a state of adultery. But I am confused. If the excommunication has been lifted for those in a state of adultery, then why can’t they receive Communion? — C.G.D., Maryland.
A. Because these couples are still in a state of objective mortal sin. Excommunication is a medicinal penalty that tries to shake a person out of his sinful lifestyle. Removal of the penalty of excommunication keeps them in communion with the Church, but they still must repent of their sin and intend to avoid that sin in the future in order to be worthy to receive Communion.
Q. When did the Church change the Third Commandment from “Keep holy the Sabbath day” to “Keep holy the Lord’s day”? — S.M., Michigan.
A. We don’t know exactly when the Third Commandment was changed from Sabbath day to Lord’s day. We do know that the substitution of Sunday, the first day of the week, for the Jewish Sabbath, the seventh day of the week, goes back to the Acts of the Apostles where St. Paul and the Christians of Troas gathered “to break bread” on the first day of the week (cf. 20:7). This substitution was made to commemorate the Resurrection of Jesus from the dead on the first day of the week. Here is how St. Justin Martyr explained the change in the middle of the second century:
“Sunday is the day on which we all gather in a common assembly because it is the first day, the day on which God, changing darkness and matter, created the world; and it is the day on which Jesus Christ our Savior rose from the dead.”
Most of us who grew up in the 1950s and 1960s can remember learning the Third Commandment as “Remember to keep holy the sabbath day,” and this same formulation appeared in the 1973 U.S. Catholic Bishops’ document spelling out the Basic Teachings for Catholic Religious Education. But when the Catechism of the Catholic Church came out in 1992 (in English in 1994), it listed the Commandments in three columns. Column one was from Exodus 20:2-17, in which the Third Commandment read, “Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.” Column two was from Deut. 5:6-21, and it read, “Observe the sabbath day, to keep it holy.” Column three said that the “traditional Catholic formula” was “Remember to keep holy the Lord’s Day.”
So if you are following the list of the Commandments in the Bible, you might use the words “sabbath day,” but the traditional formula for the Third Commandment now is Lord’s day.
Q. I don’t agree with your recent reply that county clerks, justices of the peace, etc., should not perform “same-sex marriages” if it goes against their conscience. If they have taken a job paid by the state, they should do their job. These “same-sex marriages” are not sacramental; they are creations of the state. All that the county clerk or J.P. is doing is announcing formally that the state recognizes the “marriage.” The Church teaches that a marriage after divorce is adultery, but the state disagrees. Must a Catholic county clerk refuse to issue a marriage license to a divorced person? — J.K., New York.
A. The state recognizes a lot of things that Catholics believe to be immoral, for example, abortion, doctor-assisted suicide, and “same-sex marriage.” But a Catholic may not cooperate in any sinful action, for as St. Peter said, “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29). The words of canon lawyer Dr. Edward Peters, while dealing with Catholics attending a “same-sex wedding,” could, in our opinion, also apply to officiating at one:
“Let there be no mistake: in Western culture, to attend a wedding . . . I say, is to offer public support for the actions of the two persons supposedly marrying. Thus, I hold that a Catholic’s attendance at a ‘wedding’ believed to be invalid, such as a ‘same-sex wedding,’ is itself an objectively gravely sinful act, and thus something forbidden to Catholics, even if one is related to the parties. Sometimes Christianity costs. More than once — need I say it — Church history has been sprinkled with the blood of Catholics martyred because they would not accept a ‘wedding’ that was plainly forbidden by the law of God. Is the price they paid in their day so unthinkable among us in ours?”
As for doing the job you are being paid for, would that include a nurse assisting at an abortion? The answer of course is no. So the nurse would have to find another job, as would a county clerk who is being put into the position of cooperating in actions she knows to be immoral. It may be difficult to give up a good job, but as Dr. Peters said, “Sometimes Christianity costs.”
Q. What is the Church’s teaching regarding yoga, meditation, and a deeper spiritual aspect? — R.G., Iowa.
A. There is nothing wrong with properly guided Christian meditation and with seeking to deepen one’s spiritual life. For a good understanding of this, see the 1989 Vatican Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on Some Aspects of Christian Meditation. While yoga is touted as a form of exercise, it can open a person up to the influence of Eastern religions and New Age practices as one seeks “enlightenment” or awareness of one’s “inner divinity.”
Warnings against getting involved with yoga can be found in the letter just mentioned and also in the Vatican document Jesus Christ, the Bearer of the Water of Life: A Christian Reflection on the “New Age”.
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress