Was St. Joseph present at the Visitation?

In previous articles we have considered what St. Joseph may have thought when he learned of the conception of the Christ Child and also have compared the evidence from Sts. Matthew and Luke to attempt to create a harmony of the events from the betrothal of St. Joseph and the Virgin through the finding of Jesus in the Temple, our purpose in the current article is to elaborate an additional point which was already covered briefly – Was St. Joseph present at the Visitation?

After briefly establishing the relevant points made from the previous articles, we will consider the arguments in favor of St. Joseph’s presence followed by those opposed to it. In so doing we do not attempt to establish dogma or come to absolute certainty, rather we only desire to gain some understanding of the historical reality of the Visitation of the Mother of God to St. Elizabeth. Certainly, a careful consideration of the Gospel text, together with the tradition of the Fathers and Doctors, will be of great aid to us as we make a meditation upon this mystery. Specifically, we recall that imaginative prayer (especially, that which is in the Ignatian tradition) is deeply rooted in the historical circumstances and details of the mystery – one simply cannot effectively engage this event in imaginative mental prayer without considering whether or not St. Joseph was present.

The Passion of Joan of Arc, a movie worth watching

30 May 1431, The Maid of Orléans is born into heaven

580 years ago, “at Rouen, St. Joan of Arc, Virgin, called the Maid of Orleans, who, after having fought bravely for her fatherland, was at length delivered into the power of her enemies and was condemned by a wicked judge and burnt at the stake. Benedict XV, Supreme Pontiff, inscribed her name on the roll of the saints.” (from the Roman Martyrology) The courageous Maid died at the age of nineteen.

In his Wednesday audience of 26 January 2011, Pope Benedict XVI spoke of the last moments of St. Joan’s life: “On the morning of May 30, 1431, she received holy Communion for the last time in prison, and immediately after she was taken to her ordeal in the square of the old market. She asked one of the priests to put in front of the stake the cross of the procession. Thus she died looking at Jesus crucified and pronouncing many times and in a loud voice the Name of Jesus.”

Should confirmation be delayed? Reflecting on the "restored order"

Confirmation of a youth in the Usus Antiquior

Currently, there is a movement in the United States and in Europe (and perhaps in other places) to move the age of confirmation lower. In recent times (that is, in the past three centuries or so), confirmation had been delayed until early adulthood. Moreover, first communion was often not received until this time of greater maturity (perhaps in the early teens). However, especially with the impulse of Pope St. Pius X, first communion was restored to the time of the age of reason (around the seventh year); however, until recently, confirmation was not moved up to this earlier age but remained to be received many years after first communion.

Certainly, the very recent lowering of the age of confirmation has caused some alarm among lay faithful and priests alike. In this article, we intend to look at some of the main concerns on both sides of the issue, and to discuss the nature of the relation between confirmation and first communion. This discussion will be concerned only with the practice of the Latin Church, as the issue is dealt with quite differently in the East.

How necessary is confirmation? A reflection for the 6th Sunday of Easter

6^th Sunday of Easter, Acts of the Apostles 8:5-8,14-17

They sent them Peter and John, who went down and prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Spirit, for it had not yet fallen upon any of them; they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

After having been baptized by St. Philip (the deacon, not the apostle), the Christians of Samaria still had need of the full outpouring of the Holy Spirit which is given through the sacrament of confirmation. To this end, it was fitting that the apostles in Jerusalem sent Sts. Peter and John (apostles) to bestow the Holy Spirit through the laying on of hands.

In this event, we see both that confirmation is a sacrament distinct from baptism and that it is most necessary in the life of the Church and of the individual believer. It will be fitting for us to reflect upon this sacrament, since this liturgical season is the time most commonly set aside for the administration of confirmation in dioceses throughout the Latin Church.

Recognizing that St. Luke tells us that the Samarian disciples had not yet fully received the Holy Spirit, since they had only been baptized and had not been confirmed; we are led to the following question: How necessary is the sacrament of confirmation?

Is spiritual direction really for everybody?

St. Teresa and her director, St. John of the Cross

The Holy Father recently spoke these words to the students of the Teresianum in Rome: “As she has never failed to do, again today the Church continues to recommend the practice of spiritual direction, not only to all those who wish to follow the Lord up close, but to every Christian who wishes to live responsibly his baptism, that is, the new life in Christ. Everyone, in fact, and in a particular way all those who have received the divine call to a closer following, needs to be supported personally by a sure guide in doctrine and expert in the things of God. A guide can help defend oneself from facile subjectivist interpretations, making available his own supply of knowledge and experiences in following Jesus. [Spiritual direction] is a matter of establishing that same personal relationship that the Lord had with his disciples, that special bond with which he led them, following him, to embrace the will of the Father (cf. Luke 22:42), that is, to embrace the cross.” (read the full text here)

It would seem that Pope Benedict XVI believes that every Christian adult must avail himself of spiritual direction in order to reach perfection in Christ. Certainly, this would come as a surprise to many, since there are relatively few Catholic faithful (even among the most devout) who regularly engage in spiritual direction. Indeed, we must admit that, if every Catholic were to seek formal spiritual direction, there would hardly be enough priests and other spiritual persons to serve as directors! Even if every priest were as devoted as St. John Vianney, I doubt that there would be enough time for him to offer personal formal spiritual direction to each and every member of his flock.

Still, the Holy Father has spoke and we must seek to understand the meaning of his words. Are we to conclude that spiritual direction is for all Christians? What sort of direction? And how much is needed?

Did Jesus know the day and the hour of the Apocalypse?

In the midst of the recent apocalypse fiasco, it was not uncommon to hear well-meaning preachers state that “No one knows the time of the end of the world. Not even Jesus knew when the second coming would be, that’s why he said no one knows, not even the Son.” Indeed, even many Catholics have a tendency to think in this way – whether explicitly or (more often) by an implicit concession.

Thus, it may come as a surprise to many to learn that this claim (that, in his humanity, Jesus did not know the day and the hour of the Final Judgment) has been condemned by several popes as a heresy. In fact, it would be impossible to hold this view without implicitly maintaining either the heresy of Nestorius (dividing Christ into two persons, one human and the other divine) or of Arius (denying the divinity of Christ all together).

The specific heresy which claims that Jesus did not know the exact time of his second coming is called Agnoeticism – Fr. John Hardon defined the Agnoetes (those who held this heresy) as follows, “A sect of Monophysites who held that Christ was subject to positive ignorance. The leading exponent of its error was Deacon Themistios of Alexandria. He was condemned by the Church, which declared that Christ’s humanity cannot be ignorant of anything of the past or of the future. To attribute ignorance to Christ’s human nature is to profess Nestorianism (Denzinger 474-76).” (Modern Catholic Dictionary, “Agnoetes”)

Are there two personalities in Christ, a human "I" and a divine "I"?

It is popular for modern(ist) theologians to speak of two personalities in Christ. Some have gone so far as to claim that there are two persons in Christ – and, to us, it is difficult to understand how such speculation on the part of certain scholars has not yet been openly condemned as heresy.

On account of the one person of Christ, the Church prays in her Creed: I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ. This means not only that Jesus Christ alone is the Lord, but also implies that he his one. Christ the Lord is one, he is not two – thus, though he is both human and divine, Jesus is one divine person which is the person of the Eternal Word.

Still, it is common enough for these modern theologians to speculate regarding the personality of Christ, they ask: Granted that the Lord is one person; is it yet possible to claim that there are two personalities, one human and one divine? We admit that the Church has not yet pronounced on this issue; however, for reasons which will be manifest below, we argue that it is not safe for a Catholic to suppose that there are two personalities in the one person of our Savior.