Called to Communion with Dr. David Anders - 05/07/26

Añadido: 2026-05-09

[00:00:00]that you know is this a book by first century people about first century events is a view called predtoatism. It was actually it was invented that view was was articulated for the first time by Catholics in particular by Jesuit scholars in the 16th century who wanted to respond to the Protestant charge that the pope was the beast of the book of revelation that the pope was the antichrist. And Jesuits said well that can't be because the book actually doesn't reference contemporary events.

[00:00:27]It repres it it it it references events that were contemporary to its authors.

[00:00:31]And that's really where it it it stops.

[00:00:33]That doesn't make it irrelevant to us, but it just it's a point of hermeneutical key to understand how to interpret it. And predatism has really it's probably the dominant view among scholars, Catholic and non-atholic. It is my own view. Um, you are not obligated to hold it, right? Um, I will say that the futurist way of reading the book of Revelation has proved continually to be wrong because every time somebody reads the book of Revelation as if it were a prophecy about events contemporary to us >> and then they make all kinds of geopolitical or personal plans accordingly. um they are left with egg on their face and sometimes real real profound social harm like you know when people think that the world is going to end tomorrow because they've they've you know been reading the New York Times or something and they line it up with their interpretation of the book of revelation and they go off and do extreme things and make extreme statements and it's it's usually a really bad idea. Um and it also tends to you know it's not a good it's not a good tool for accuminism to um to identify the guy you're talking to as Satan or the Antichrist. You know, it's one of the reasons, it's one of the things in the Reformation era that made dialogue so difficult, right? Because everybody on both sides of the aisle was persuaded that the other side was the devil.

[00:01:46]>> And you know, you don't compromise with the devil, right? And so it's it's not a helpful way of, you know, there better ways to engage in geopolitics other than other than apocalyptic date setting.

[00:01:56]>> Thanks so much uh for your call overnight from the EWTN listener comment line. But hey, we are live right now on this Thursday afternoon. would love to chat with you at 833-288 EWTN. Call or [music] text 833-288-3986.

[00:02:13]The first voice you'll hear will [music] be our great uh call screener Matt Kabinsky. He'll get things uh set up, get your name and information very quickly, and then you're off to the races. Here it is called to Communion on this Thursday afternoon on EWTN. Do stay with us.

[00:02:29][music] A popular [music] item on EWTNRC.com in the month of Our Lady is this blue enameled miraculous metal keychain.

[00:02:43]Designed [music] exclusively for EWTN, this beautifully detailed, lightweight keychain is a wonderful way to carry [music] the Blessed Mother with you wherever you go. Around the edge of the metal is the prayer, "Oh Mary, [music] conceived without sin, pray for us." To order, go to EWTNRC.com and search for item number 40mmir.

[00:03:06]>> Sometimes we can forget that we are more than just physical beings. Adam and I answer your questions [music] every week about the invisible spiritual world, including saints, angels, demons, and more. So, call in with your questions or email us tswgrnonline.com.

[00:03:24][music] Join us Saturday at 11:00 a.m. Eastern for The Spirit World on EWTN [music] Radio.

[00:03:36]Mother Angelica had a simple goal when she began EWTN, [music] to reach the world with a gospel message. EWTN is the most trusted source of authentically Catholic content on the [music] air today, featuring Mother Angelica, Dr. Marcus Peter and Father Wade Manes.

[00:03:55]We've [music] never wavered from our mandate to proclaim the truth and majesty of the Catholic faith. Thank you for joining EWTN in this mission.

[00:04:11]It's Call to Communion with Dr. David Andrew. We're live on this Thursday afternoon hoping to talk with you at 833288 [music] EWTN. Call or text 833-2883986.

[00:04:24]Matt [music] is screening a call right now. We'll get that call on the air in just a couple of minutes. Later on today here on EWTN radio, it's going to be a beacon of truth with Deacon Harold Burke Civers. That'll be at 400 p.m. Eastern.

[00:04:36]They'll be talking about the Father Augustus Tolton Shrine. If you don't know who Father Augustus Tolton uh is or was, be sure to check out that program today at 4 PM Eastern on EWTN radio. If you're ready now, let's go to the phones at 833288 EWTN, beginning today with Matt in Indiana, listening on the EWTN app. Hey there, Matt. What's on your mind today?

[00:05:01]>> Hi, afternoon gentlemen. Uh I have a question that is uh related to a conversation I had with one of my kids which is where most of my theological questions come from. Um so it's about annihilationism and essentially uh you know my kid will look at me and I'll say you have these duties to do or this is our relationship I take care of you and they'll respond frequently with well I didn't ask to be born. And my question is if we don't have an option to not no no longer exist and the only options are for choosing God or not. Um if annihilation isn't a valid um option then how does that play in with the justice of God? Like how can be God be just if we don't have that choice?

[00:05:43]>> Okay. Yeah. Thanks. I appreciate the question. So let me let me back up a little bit and take this from a slightly different angle. Um I didn't choose to be born. Here I am. Right? Given the fact of my existence, I I get to choose every moment of my life whether or not to align myself with reality, right? I mean, the world is a certain kind of way whether I want it to be or not. And I'm not talking esquetology.

[00:06:14]I'm not talking about the afterlife. I'm just talking about things like gravity and biology, right? Um the world is a certain kind of way whether I want it to be or not. Um, I can certainly kick at the goats and live in a way that is counter to my natural good as an organic being. Um, you know, I could dissipate myself in intoxication. I could eat to excess. I could, you know, run around screaming in the rain like a wild hooligan. You know, I could not study in school. whatever it might be, you know, and uh and and reality is a pretty loud teacher and and I'm and what is going to happen to me is what's going to happen to me, right? I'm I'm going to flourish or not depending on >> uh whether or not I am finally basically exceeded concede to sort of grant that the world that I live in is the world that I live in and I'm going to flourish here. I'm not going to flourish anywhere else because there's no place else to go.

[00:07:12]>> Right. Right. And um and uh I mean that's just an evident empirical fact regardless of the metaphysics and regardless of the esquetology um and as it turns out in the Christian tradition at least in the Catholic tradition we just add a moral imperative to that and that is you actually have a moral obligation to seek your own flourishing. Now you don't need the concept of moral obligation to come up with ethics. So Aristotle didn't have the concept of moral obligation.

[00:07:44]There were no thou shalt and thou shalt nots in Aristotle's ethical philosophy.

[00:07:48]What Aristotle does is he says look this is the way the world is. You want to be happy here here's how to do it. Martin Seligman a much more contemporary example is an atheist and a relativist.

[00:07:58]He was the former president of the American Psychological Society. um and he wrote a book called authentic happiness detailing the research in positive psychology and all the work that's been done in the last 50 years or so and what is it that actually make people happy and Seligman who is himself an atheist and a relativist and doesn't believe in objective moral norms says I don't actually think you have a moral obligation to be happy I don't think you have a moral obligation to do anything but I'm going to tell you empirically if you want to be happy here's what you need to do right if you don't want to be happy hey that's on you no skin off my you go back but whatever you know I'm a relativist I don't care but if you want to be happy this is what the data says and uh and all Christianity does is it comes along well I should say all Catholicism does is it comes along and says yeah yes to Aristotle yes to Seligman and oh by the way thou shalt >> right you follow me >> yeah yeah >> um now you know when you when you add the the thou shalt you're obviously importing an idea here in addition to an aristoilian worldview and that of divine personality Because you know if I live in an indifferent universe, there's no one to rail against. There's no one against whom I can shake my fist.

[00:09:08]>> That's true.

[00:09:09]>> Right. There's just reality and I got to get along the best I can. Right.

[00:09:13]>> When you throw in the idea of divine personality now, now I've got somebody to be mad at about this whole thing and to protest my injust the injustice of it, etc., etc., etc. And this in the way that all teenagers throughout the world have always protested, you know. Um and uh but you but existentially it doesn't really change anything right now. Uh here's something I personally have come to in my own walk and that enables me to kind of live this tension. Whatever we mean by divine personality, it isn't what we mean by human personality, right? I mean the Catholic faith teaches that anytime we predicate of God, anytime we say something about God, we have to borrow human terms like intelligence or personality or wisdom or goodness or what have you. Um but when applied to God, they are analogies at best and the disanalogy is infinitely greater. Right? So if I press really hard on the personalist language when I'm talking about God and I try to squeeze my concept of God into my conception of human personality, I'm going to run up against some paradoxes that I can't deal with. All right. The other side of the equation is the equally emphatic Catholic declaration that God is completely unlike us. That God in his essence is unknowable. Um that the best way to describe God is by way of negation. Um and uh and so there's some great big fat unknowns out there and um personally just for me right in that dichotomy between the personal and the apehatic apathic meaning you know basically that which I can't name right >> um when I come up against a problem of divine justice in my own life I find it to be more useful existentially spiritually to remind myself of the apehatic dimension right if I try to squeeze God into the character of my kindergarten teacher, it doesn't work.

[00:11:10]Right? I've got I have to have a more expansive notion that is more content with mystery and uh and is about the business of you know rather than shaking my fist at reality and kicking against the gods saying here I am what am I going to do with this right what am I going to do with this when it you know when it comes to esquetology when it comes to heaven and hell and so forth you know St. Paul said, "Eye has not seen, ear has not heard, hasn't entered into the heart of man what God has in store for those who love him." And I suppose you could probably say the same thing the other way around. Eye hasn't seen, ear hadn't heard, it hasn't entered into the heart of man what God has in store for those who don't love him.

[00:11:46]>> Yeah. Yeah.

[00:11:47]>> Right. Um that uh you know that in other words, these things are just profound mysteries from where I'm standing. The catechism says that dogmas don't save us. Dogmas don't save us. What saves us is the realities to which they point.

[00:12:01]Right? that dogmas are a way of aligning us existentially in the world, you know, in a certain way of being that is tends to our flourishing, right? That's good for us. Um, but the dogma itself is not the ultimate truth, right? And it's kind of like, this is a poor analogy, but it's sort of like, you know, what if I believe really, really hard that this antibiotic will get rid of my infection?

[00:12:25]Well, great. Good for you, buddy. That's not actually going to heal you. You got to, you know, the thing that heals you is the antibiotic, not the belief about the antibiotic. In the same way, you know, my my my propositional knowledge or my propositional conviction that the world is such and such or God is such and such. That's not what saves me. It's it's it's the actual openness of my soul to the reality which is God, which is always greater and more transcendent and more mysterious than anything I could possibly imagine that helps me integrate with this world that is that I didn't choose. So, you know, I don't have an answer when you put it in terms of a syllogism, right? A sort of logical ethical syllogism. You know, in my conception of the world, good people X do X and don't do Y.

[00:13:11]>> Reality doesn't seem to align with that.

[00:13:12]Therefore, God can't be good. If I put it syllogistically like that, I can't give you a syllogism that will satisfy your son existentially. Um what I what I think I can do instead is try to point you in a direction existentially towards how to engage the mystery you know in a Christian way within the context of the Christian faith that acknowledges the mystery and and and transcendence of God acknowledges God's goodness in so far as you know basically all God commands me to do is to seek my own happiness which every teenager well you [laughter] know more or less wants to do >> you know they just have misaligned notions about what tends to happiness.

[00:13:52]>> Yeah.

[00:13:52]>> And uh and I'm already living in a universe where if I don't seek my own rational good, I'm going to suffer.

[00:13:59]>> I don't know if that's helpful. I mean, that's just I'm really kind of talking around your problem because I don't think it has a really really good solution because I I myself find the doctrine of of eternal conscious torment to be somewhat impenetrable. I I mean, I think it's a mystery. I I I can't I cannot give you a calculus where that is makes perfect moral sense. And so I have to treat it as part of that apehatic reality that is gone.

[00:14:22]>> Sure. Uh Matt, is that helpful for you?

[00:14:25]>> It is. Would would you be able to just clarify very briefly if an an annihilist position is okay to have as a Catholic?

[00:14:33]>> It is not Catholic dogma. The Catholic dogma is against annihilationism. Well, there you go. Hey, Matt, thanks for checking in from Indiana. That opens up a line for you at 833288 EWTN. That's 833-288-3986.

[00:14:47]You can call or text that number. Let's go to uh Torah now. Torah is in Witchah listening on the Catholic radio app. Hey there Torah. What's on your mind today?

[00:14:58]Um I wanted to know why do Protestants just think that the Eucharist is a symbol only and that they don't um you know believe like in in John I forget the verses. I know 666 is when they all walk away.

[00:15:17]>> Yeah. Okay.

[00:15:18]>> Some of them walk away.

[00:15:19]>> Sure. Sure. So I I need to clarify the statement as as as you articulated is not accurate to the belief of Protestants. Protestants are a diverse group. Uh they don't all believe the same thing. Really have to emphasize our Lutheran friends believe in the doctrine of the real presence as emphatically as any Catholic.

[00:15:41]They have a slightly different metaphysical explanation for the real presence. But as to the fact of the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ being present in the sacrament of holy communion, locally present, held in your hand, present, the Lutheran are as emphatic about this as the Protestants, I mean, excuse me, as the Catholics are.

[00:16:01]In fact, there was in the 16th century, and I think it's 1528, there was a meeting between Luther and another Protestant who did not believe that, namely Erlick Zwingley. And Marberg, it was called the Marberg colloqui. And Luther and Zwingley agreed on a lot of stuff and they were trying to figure out whether they could make common cause in their reformation work. And Luther who already knew Zwingley's position on the Eucharist had written there was a table that had dust on it. And he had written the words hoax corpus may in other words this is my body on the table. And he'd covered it with a cloth because he was waiting for the key moment in the in the dialogue. And they got around finally to the Eucharist. and Zwingley gave out his position on the Eucharist which was the symbolic view that you articulated and at that moment Luther rips the cloth off the table points to the words you know hoaxes corpus mayam on the table and says you know this is what I believe this is the word of God you're a heretic you know away with you so Luther emphatically believed in the real presence Zwingley for reasons I'll get to in a second did not and a second generation reformer John Calvin uh who was French not Swiss um was disturbed by the breach between Luther and Zwingley and so he wanted to bring the Protestant world together. So he articulated yet a third point of view which is kind of halfway between Zwingley and Luther and what has come to be known as the reformed doctrine of the Eucharist. Also believes in the real presence believes that those who participate in communion with faith have a substantial partaking in the body and blood of the Lord. and he uses the word substance just like the Catholic Church does. The difference between Calvin and the Catholics and Calvin and the Lutheran is whereas Luther and the Catholics would think that you hold Christ in your hand if you have the consecrated host, Calvin's belief was that the body of Christ remains in heaven, but the spirit of God mystically unites the body and blood, soul and divinity of Christ to that of the believer. Thus, what one experiences a mystical presence of Christ, uh, not a local one, but it still is a substantial partaking of Christ's body and blood.

[00:18:13]Now, that sounds kind of funky and weird, and it is kind of funky and weird, but he was emphatic that it was not a mere symbol. Zoingley, of course, takes the symbolic view. So, when you say, why do Protestants believe in a merely symbolic presence? Well, that doesn't mean Lutheran. It [clears throat] doesn't mean Calvinists.

[00:18:31]It doesn't mean a lot of Anglicans, right? It does mean kind of the mainstream of American Protestant evangelicalism.

[00:18:41]Uh but it definitely does not mean all Protestants. Why do they think that?

[00:18:46]Okay. Well, Zwingley, who rejected the doctrine of the real presence, had strongly neoplatonic philosophical prejudices.

[00:18:56]Um so that means he was biased against flesh and and matter and and highly valued uh the spiritual or the immaterial in his in his metaphysical thinking. Um also everybody at the table Protestant and Catholic alike was really concerned about the problem of Catholic and for that matter Protestant superstition and uh and there were a lot of superstitious beliefs about the Eucharist that prompted Protestants and Catholics to experiment with different ways of talking about it in the 16th century. I think today most Protestants who who believe in a merely symbolic presence do so for two reasons. one, it's what they were taught. And two, they know that belief in the real presence is a Catholic doctrine, and anything Catholic has to be rejected. I mean, quite honestly, I think there's a pretty I know when I was coming up through seminary as a Protestant, we'd sometimes have doctrinal debates and somebody would like veer too far in one direction and everybody else would go, "Oh, well, you can't hold that. That's what the Catholics hold." You know, it's just you can't go there. Can't go there. Um but Zwingley again I think it was it was a concern for a certain kind of doctrine of the liturgy concern about Catholic superstition [music] and then a neoplatonic metaphysical bias against matter. Tara, thanks so much for your call in a moment. Sharon in New Albany, Indiana, Chuck near Columbus, Ohio.

[00:20:19]Marie is calling in from Idaho. Couple lines open for you at 833288 EWTN. Call or text 833288-3986.

[00:20:29]It is called to communion here on EWTN.

[00:20:32]Stay with us >> on EWTN News in Depth. One year with Pope Leo I 14th. From his diplomatic mission to his endearing interactions [music] with his flock. We take a look at the major moments and themes of his pontificate [music] and American Catholics share their thoughts on the first US-born pontiff's first year. Join us for EWTN News in depth tomorrow at 8:00 p.m. Eastern.

[00:21:01]Exclusively [music] on EWTN radio and television.

[00:21:06]>> This is Life Issues with Victor Naveves, president [music] of Life Issues Institute. Wendy Duff, a 56-year-old British woman, was described as physically healthy. Yet, she traveled to the Pagasos Clinic in Switzerland to end her life. You may think that officials would refuse to kill someone who is healthy, but unfortunately they did not.

[00:21:27]Following the death of her son, she became suicidal and even attempted to take her own life. After she failed, she saw a documentary about someone else who had been euthanized under similar circumstances. Around the world, euthanasia and assisted suicide continue to take the lives of vulnerable people like Wendy Duff who need love and support, not lethal injection.

[00:21:52]Euthanasia is not merciful. It is not humane. It is a horrific devaluation of the sanctity of human life.

[00:22:00]>> Follow us on social media at Life Issues Institute.

[00:22:06]>> The free ebook, [music] Novena for the Holy Souls in Purgatory, offers prayers and scripture verses [music] that will help you pray for your loved ones who are now in purgatory. It's available at EWTN.com/allsouls.

[00:22:20]>> I'm Deacon Harold Burke Civers. Join me for Beacon of Truth today at 400 p.m.

[00:22:25]Eastern.

[00:22:25]>> On the next Beacon of Truth, more about Father Augustus Tolton Shrine.

[00:22:30]>> Now, back to Call to Communion with Dr. David Anders.

[00:22:41]Still time for your phone call to EWTN's Call to Communion with Dr. David [music] Anders. We are live on this Thursday afternoon. Love to chat with you. 833288 EWTN. Again, call or text 833-288-3986.

[00:22:56]Speaking of texting, got this text from Susan who says, "Does a Catholic who stops going to mass and stops participating in the sacraments? Does that Catholic is that Catholic prohibited from receiving the Eucharist?"

[00:23:11]>> Yes. Thanks. So, Catholics have a canonical obligation to go to mass every Sunday unless they have a valid excuse and on holy days of obligation to receive communion once a year and uh uh and to go to confession once a year if they're conscious of grave sin. These are basic precepts of the church. And so, a Catholic who doesn't fulfill those basic precepts would be required to go to confession prior to resumption of of of eucharistic communion. Um they're not absolutely barred from going to communion, but you know, they ought to go to confession prior to it. Yeah.

[00:23:46]>> Um and presumably with a purpose of amendment that they're going to obey the church's teaching and get back into the regular practice of the Catholic faith.

[00:23:52]>> Well, there you go, Susan. Thanks so much for your text. Let's go now to Marie listening to us in Idaho on SiriusXM channel 130. Hey there, Marie.

[00:24:01]What's on your mind today?

[00:24:04]>> Hello.

[00:24:05]>> Hi, Marie.

[00:24:07]>> Hi.

[00:24:08]>> Go right ahead.

[00:24:11]Hi there, Dr. Anders. I have a question.

[00:24:14]Um, I learned a new word, if you will, in the in Catholicism Catholicism, radical senation.

[00:24:22]>> Great word.

[00:24:22]>> And >> yeah, and I I'd like more explanation of it because my situation is this. Um, I'm a returning cradle Catholic, been away for a long time, and I my heart is just set on coming home. However, I married into Protestant and um I'm seeking reconciliation and and I'm bringing my husband along. Uh he's not opposed to it, but he's intimidated. Um and so I'd like to um find a way back together. Um and yet mostly for myself right now as I bring him along and um to get our marriage blessed in the sacrament. So, I have a couple questions. Yes, it is possible. I have a couple questions for you.

[00:25:09]>> Um, you married your husband in a Protestant service.

[00:25:13]>> Yes, we were in the military and a chaplain married up on base.

[00:25:17]>> Had either one of you been married previously.

[00:25:21]>> Yes, he was married um in a you know a backyard service um years prior.

[00:25:27]>> Okay. So, he was he was previously divorced.

[00:25:30]>> Yes.

[00:25:30]>> Okay. So, that changes the dynamic. that changes the dynamic. If he had never been married before and and this was each of your first marriages, then simple convalidation uh either through mutually pronouncing your vows or through radical sination would have been a possibility. The fact that he had a previous marriage as an impediment to your being validly married in the church right now. So the first thing that you would need to do is apply uh for an anulment for his previous marriage. So the church would have to investigate and determine whether or not that previous relationship was in fact a valid marriage, which I mean when you know a Protestant guy marrying somebody who's not Catholic years ago, the odds that he intended a Catholic marriage next to nothing. Yeah.

[00:26:22]>> So I you not allowed to say you've got good or bad odds, but like >> Right. You follow me? I mean, I think that's it's it's going to be you just have a process there, but that's the process. First, you got to get the anulment for the previous marriage, >> then you can be validly married in the Catholic church. So, the priest can walk you through all of this. Usually, what we radical senation would look like this, like if you guys had married in front of a chaplain and there were no impediments to a valid marriage and as long as he wants to continue to be married to you, but he says, "Well, I'm not going to stand up in front of any old Catholic priest and say anything. I don't like Catholic priests, but I still want to be married to you. As long as he has that intention to remain in conjugal union, then you can apply to the church for radical sination and they can they can grant you validity without his explicit participation. But that doesn't apply in this case because you had that previous marriage. There you go, Marie. Thanks so much for your call. Let's go to uh Lyanna who's listening to us in Idaho.

[00:27:20]Let's see here. Let me click this. and uh listening on the great Salt and Light Radio. And Lyanna, what's on your mind today?

[00:27:27]>> Uh it's Lyanna.

[00:27:30]>> Lyanna. Lyanna, thank you. What's on your mind today?

[00:27:34]>> Um I just wondered if there was if the church recognized a level of mercy towards people who have been poisoned by false religions like Mormonism.

[00:27:51]Um, for context, like I know a lot of people in my life who have been a part of the Mormon church, were traumatized by it, and now refuse to go to church, to join any organization that has anything to do with church because of their like experiences with Mormonism.

[00:28:12]And so, I know there's more like more than just Mormonism out there. And so I wondered what the church's if if there even is an official um stance on this.

[00:28:27]>> Yeah, sure. I really appreciate it. So I I'll I'll take this even farther. There are people who've been traumatized by by other religious groups. There are people who've been traumatized by Catholics.

[00:28:38]>> Yeah, >> there have been people who've been traumatized by Catholic priests. Um Pope Francis wrote a book called The Name of God is Mercy. I think is highly relevant in this case. the name of God is mercy.

[00:28:50]And we talked about the case of a particular priest that he knew of in Argentina who had sexually abused a child and had done so um in a really perverse context where he invoked the words of consecration.

[00:29:04]>> Oh, >> and and I mean it nauseates to even think about and the pope brings it up as a very e egregious example of religious abuse and obviously he thinks that's exable. and and the pope's position is pretty clear that he doesn't think that the victim there is uh is somehow cut off from God by their inability to set foot in a Catholic church because of the associations that they have. Right? Um now you know the church has a teaching that our moral responsibility is is dependent on contingent upon our um on our free will and our rationality.

[00:29:41]And people can have experiences that can lead them just compulsively unable to engage certain kinds of moral obligations like say for example that of public worship and uh and you know where freedom ends moral responsibility ends.

[00:29:57]Um I mean the example of the gospels in Christ I think it's quite evident that you know Jesus went out of his way to show mercy to people who had been abused by the system uh or just abused and and sometimes just manifestly and evidently refused to uh to to prosecute them to the full extent of the law so to speak.

[00:30:19]I mean the best example of this is John chapter 8. The woman who's caught in adultery the law of Moses says she's supposed to be stoned. Pharisees come and say, "Well, you know, anybody got some rocks?" And Jesus says, "We're not going there. We're not doing this."

[00:30:31]"Well, what about the law of Moses?"

[00:30:32]"Well, fooy on the law of Moses. We're not picking up any rocks. Go away. Go home." You know, um and so I think there's good reason to be hopeful. Now, you know, I mean, look, I'm not going to pass judgment on somebody in that situation at all. Uh you know, privately, my hope is that they don't become embittered, you know, and that's hard not to do, right? I mean, I'd give them a pass if they did become embittered, but I mean, whenever horrible things happen to us, we all have to make a decision about what we're going to do with those horrible things.

[00:31:01]And >> sure, >> and uh, you know, I may not have full control over my ability to say be triggered by some deeply traumatic experience, but I may have some measure of control over whether I allow that to cause me to lash out at somebody else, you know? I mean, not everybody who is abused goes on to be an abuser.

[00:31:18]>> True.

[00:31:19]>> Some people do.

[00:31:20]>> Lyanna, thank you so much for your call from Idaho. Glad you're listening on our great partner there, Salt and Light Radio. It is Call to Communion with Dr. David Anders and we still have a time for a few more phone calls at 833288 EWTN. Call or text 8332883986.

[00:31:39]Got a text here from Thomas listening to us on YouTube and he says, uh, St. Augustine's sermon 26 says that Jesus calls Simon Peter, but that he will build his church on Peter's confession of Christ as the rock. Does this weaken the church's teaching about Peter as the foundational rock?

[00:31:58]>> No, I don't think it weakens the church's teaching about Peter as a found as the as the rock foundation of the church's unity. So you know the the the doctrine of Petrine primacy does not depend upon the exogesis of a single text and Augustine didn't think it did and Augustine otherwise believes in Roman primacy. I mean Augustine's one of his famous quotes about this in the Pelagian controversy is when African senates sent letters to the pope of Rome uh to seek his opinion and council on this particular theological issue and Rome gave its response and Augustine writes back gleefully um Roma lutes esta fenites meaning Rome has spoken the case is closed right and he you know other in other places he remarks on the importance of Petran succession Roman primacy So I think an Augustine's exesus of Matthew 16 changed over the course of his career. In the present case I think that Augustine is motivated by his um his highly allegorical method of exes Jesus where in this passage he wants Peter to stand as a symbol for the entire church right and um and and the role that faith plays in our union with Christ. And so he's got he has a spiritual application that he's trying to draw um more than making an argument from the literal sense about about um ecclesiology or juristprudence.

[00:33:21]>> All right, appreciate that. Uh and thank you so much for your text, Thomas. Glad that you're listening to us on YouTube today. Call to Communion here on EWTN.

[00:33:29]Still time for a few more calls. 833288 EWTN. That's 833-2883986.

[00:33:37]You can call us or text us at that number. Uh tonight on the world over with Raymond Doyo, Carrie Severino. She is attorney and president of the judicial crisis network bringing us the latest news on the status of the abortion pillar.

[00:33:53]You may have heard about this. Uh the Supreme Court temporarily restored access to it. We'll see where that's going to wind up. Also, our friend Father Gerald Murray who's coming up in about 20 minutes here on Open Line.

[00:34:05]He'll have analysis of the latest Catholic news, Nina Shea, director of the Center for Religious Freedom on the persecution of faith in China, and to add to an already power-p packed show.

[00:34:18]Victoria Arland on how her faith got her through struggles with physical and mental health. Also talking about her new book, The View is Worth It.

[00:34:27]Wonderful program coming up tonight, 8 PM Eastern on EWTN radio and television.

[00:34:32]It's the world over with Raymond Royo.

[00:34:35]Here's a text that just came in from John in Boisey. When was the code of canon law first documented?

[00:34:42]>> Yeah, thanks. I appreciate the question.

[00:34:44]So, the church has published canons uh rules for its internal organization uh basically going back to the New Testament era. I mean, you find you find something like a kind of early >> uh canonical system in the writings of St. Paul in particular in first Corinthians where he says I'm going to give you a rule for what to do when you find this case, you know, like you here's a woman who's been married and divorced. What do you do in that case?

[00:35:08]Okay, here's a rule. What do you have when there's a widow and nobody to support her? Should she get married or not? Here's a rule about how you handle that. He starts laying out these kinds of rules in the text of scripture. So does so do the gospels in a few places that seem to be, you know, perspectives obviously imported from like later church history that are written into the fabric of the narrative. So you you find things like this very very early on. I mean a lot of the second century literature contains laws and precepts and principles about handling the Eucharist or how you handle this excommunications and other things. It's kind of scattered around.

[00:35:41]>> Bishops begin to issue rulings. Councils and senators begin to issue rulings.

[00:35:45]Popes issue rulings >> and and so that process goes on really for a thousand years. Um how what there what there doesn't what you don't find is some sort of systematic attempt to gather them all together. Now in the uh in about in the 9th century the the the monks of of Clooney the Cloak monastery begin a monastic reform movement that hearkens back to the Benedict and rule and says you know we need to get back to the strict celebration of the rule and it was very successful and it it has this ideology of going back to antiquity going back to ancient monasticism to clean up. um somebody who was raised in the Kleenac system, namely Hildebrand or Pope Gregory IIIth, brings that reformist ideology to bear on his papacy and he says, you know, we need to reform the whole church based on an ancient model, in this case, ancient cannons. So he starts appealing to ancient canons.

[00:36:39]Now in the 11th century, you get the rise of scholasticism as as an educational pedagogical method.

[00:36:48]Um and along with it some attempts to come up with sort of systematic digests of human knowledge and there's a monk by the name of Gracian who's 12th century monk um who who decides to start compiling a uh a concordance of canon law based on all these different cinnids and letters from popes and ancient documents and to put them in one place.

[00:37:11]And so Gracian is usually considered to be the father of modern canon law studies. He's not the founder of canon law, but he is the guy that like begins the compilation of all these all these things. Now, you don't get a universal code, you know, where the holy sea says, "Okay, we're going to promulgate a single code of canon law for the universal church." Actually, until 1917, not until the 20th century. Really?

[00:37:35]Yeah. So, you have canon law. I mean, you have a thing called church law. You have the study of canon law, but you don't get a universal code until the 20th century and then it's updated by by John Paul II in what 1983.

[00:37:47]>> Fascinating.

[00:37:48]>> All right. I appreciate that, John.

[00:37:50]Thank you so much for your text from Boise. Call to Communion here on EWTN.

[00:37:54]We can squeeze in another call or two at 833288 EWTN. Call or text 8332883986.

[00:38:04]Here's a call that came in overnight from the EWTN listener comment line.

[00:38:09]Yes. Uh, can you find some biblical support for the claim of Mary's perpetual virginity? I do not see any.

[00:38:21]That would be very important. And my name is Dan calling from MLAN, Virginia.

[00:38:27]>> Okay. Yeah. Thanks, Dan. I appreciate the question. So, um, be I will answer the question. Before I answer the question, I'd like to ask, and you can't, you're not on the phone, so you can't answer me. Why is it very important to have biblical warrant to advance a Catholic doctrine? Um, and I don't think that any Christian can consistently follow that rule. And I'll give you an example. Uh many Christians that I know would say advance the hypothesis that uh you have to have biblical warrant um to advance a Catholic doctrine or Christian doctrine even though that that proposition is itself not warranted by scripture.

[00:39:12]There's nothing in scripture that says you have to have scripture to warrant a Christian doctrine. So I once had a public debate. Actually, it's the only time I've ever engaged in a public debate in apologetics context. And I I got to pick the topic and I said, "Well, I'll be happy to debate, but we've got to debate this issue resolved." [snorts] The doctrine of solos scriptura, that's the position I just articulated. The doctrine of solos scriptura >> is an article of faith in the Christian tradition.

[00:39:44]>> An article of faith, something you're bound by divine authority to believe.

[00:39:47]Yep.

[00:39:48]>> You other guy, you take the affirmative.

[00:39:50]I'm going to take the negative.

[00:39:53]>> Right. So that what what he had to try to demonstrate, my opponent, was demonstrate to me that the doctrine of solos scriptura is in fact an article of faith, something that Christians are bound to believe. I took the negative and my position was well solur means it has to be found in the Bible. And yet soul scripture is not found in the Bible. It's not in there, right? Um, I'll take you another one.

[00:40:19]So, the doctrine that you have to find biblical warrant for a doctrine is itself not in the Bible. How about the doctrine of the canon of the Bible?

[00:40:27]That's a different question.

[00:40:30]Um, the doctrine of the canon is the doctrinal affirmation that here are the books that make up the biblical canon.

[00:40:37]Now, if you read Protestant confessions of faith like the Westminster confession, they will tell you here are the books of the Bible. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. I had to learn the song as a kid, you know, learned all the 66 books of the Protestant canon. They list them off for you. There we are.

[00:40:53]>> You would have been great on animeiacs.

[00:40:55]I got to say, >> all right. And uh Okay, great. So, you're just you just articulated that's a dogma. It's a dogma that you have to hold these 66 books. Okay. Where does the Bible say that? Doesn't say it. It's not in there. There's no place in the Bible where the contents of the Bible are enumerated.

[00:41:13]I can keep going. All right. How about the idea that on Sundays we should all gather in the building, sit on pews.

[00:41:20]Uh get up and sing some songs of middling quality and and uh listen to a usually a man sometimes in a business suit, although these days more likely in like kind of a Steve Jobs kind of turtleneck thing. um sit on a bench and you know be spotlighted with the sound system behind him who then discourses for 45 minutes as in on his interpretation of a biblical text. Where does scripture say that's what you're supposed to do? Nowhere.

[00:41:47]Where does scripture say that you should give communion to women?

[00:41:52]Nowhere. Where does scripture say that um baptisms are performed by pouring water on the head or at least getting the head under water by by what whatever means necessary and pronouncing the words in the name of the father, son, and the holy spirit.

[00:42:07]>> Nowhere.

[00:42:08]>> I mean, I really can do this all day.

[00:42:11][laughter] So the the principle, show me where it says that in the Bible is just a really unbiblical principle.

[00:42:21]And so if it were the case that there was nothing in scripture about Mary's perpetual virginity, that would in no way count against the truth of the doctrine.

[00:42:31]Now that's a conclusion that early Protestants came to. Luther believed that Francis Turitan who was the head of the Genevan Academy after Theodore Batesa, right? and Batesa followed Calvin and Turretin was about as anti-atholic a systematic theologian as you could ever hope to meet. Turretin famously affirmed the dogma of Mary's perpetual virginity. Why Turretin?

[00:42:58]Because he said, "Look, I I recognize that everybody in Christian antiquity believed this and I'm just not comfortable contradicting a universal belief of the ancient church. So, it's got to be true." He appealed to sacred tradition. a guy who theoretically denies the value of sacred tradition, right? Um, so if all you had was the universal witness of Christian antiquity, the very same people who who gave you the Bible, the people who compiled the list of biblical books and said, "Here, believe this. This is sacred scripture." Those same people also believe in the dogma, Mary's perpetual virginity. Now, as it happens, they thought they found it in the Bible.

[00:43:37]All right? Now, I'll tell you what they said. the ancient c church at the enunciation when and she's engaged to be married. She's betrothed to Joseph, >> right? Mary knows where babies come from. She knows she's supposed to get married. And Gabriel says, "You're going to have a kid. What's the logical inference?" "Oh, you mean after my nuptuals?" But that's not what she says.

[00:44:02]She says, "How is this going to be?"

[00:44:06]Again, she knows where babies come from.

[00:44:08]She knows she's getting married and yet she expresses surprise at the enunciation when she's told she's going to get pregnant. So the fathers of the church found in that a uh a kind of veiled confession of her of her pledge of perpetual virginity.

[00:44:25]>> Okay.

[00:44:26]>> Now if you don't find that compelling that's fine. You don't have to. but reflect on the points I made about soul scriptura and whether or not that is a valid criterion for articulating the contents of the Christian faith.

[00:44:39]>> Oh, there you go. Appreciate that. Thank you so much for all these great questions. We have time for one more I believe here and this is from Ken who says regarding the wedding feast at Kaa.

[00:44:50]David Ken says, "Did Mary advance the hour of Jesus's public ministry? Some say she did, others say she did not.

[00:44:59]What say you?

[00:45:01]>> Um, well, you know, I don't know that my worthless opinion on this matters too much. Um, but um, [sighs and gasps] you know, I I I guess my p my my own personal perspective would be that everything happens within the scope of God's providence.

[00:45:19]>> Sure.

[00:45:20]>> Right. Um I you know everything that happened in the life of Christ has symbolic value for the Christian. Um and uh and so all of this is kind of scripted for us, right? You know, now you know God is a a brilliant enough author that he can script Mary's spontaneity.

[00:45:42]>> Sure he can.

[00:45:43]>> You know, so I don't know it has to be either or.

[00:45:46]>> Okay, fair enough. Well, I guess we have time for uh one more quick question.

[00:45:51]This is from uh Richard listening to us uh out of Walaw Wala, Washington. He says, "Did Mary, the mother of our Lord Jesus, did she have any stepchildren?

[00:46:01]Thanks again for your show." Uh and that's from Richard. Possibly.

[00:46:05]>> Ah, >> possibly. There is an ancient tradition that Joseph was a widowerower who brought children from a previous marriage, in which case she would have had stepkids. Um that's not a dogma of the church. You don't have to hold it.

[00:46:17]It is an ancient Christian opinion, but not all ancient Christians held it. So maybe she did, maybe she didn't. Maybe one day we'll find out. Fair enough.

[00:46:25]Appreciate that, Richard. Thanks for checking in from Walaw Wala. Here's one from Debbie in Ohio. My husband told me in the Bible it states, "There are many gods." I dispute this. Does the Bible say there are many gods? Looking forward to knowing the truth. Thanks, Debbie in Ohio.

[00:46:43]>> Um, yes it does. The question is, what does that mean? Ah, >> what does that mean? Right? And I'm I'm afraid we're about to have to go to a break and so I I or go to end of the show. So I'm hesitant to go deep into the analysis of Old Testament religion and how that gets, you know, worked out in biblical interpretation. 30 seconds.

[00:47:01]>> So So basically, I mean, the the Old Testament recognizes that polytheism is the is the the mythological lingua frana of the ancient world and it and it it it talks in terms of other gods. Um, but of course the perspective particularly of the prophets is that those gods are not God with a capital G. Full stop. And ultimately they're part of the fallen angelic system that we understand to be the demonic hierarchy, right? So yes and no is the answer to the question. Okay.

[00:47:34]Yes and no. We'll have to do it then.

[00:47:36]Thanks so much for that email. I want to thank everybody for the great emails that you sent in. Also for the overnight calls we got on the listener comment line. uh and all these live phone calls and texts. It's been a great program.

[00:47:47]Dr. David Andrews, you make it great.

[00:47:49]Thank you.

[00:47:50]>> Working on it. Thanks, Tom.

[00:47:51]>> Well, that's what we're all trying to do here [music] at EWTN. Be sure to stick around. Coming up next on most of these EWTN stations, it'll be open line Thursday with Father [music] Gerald Murray also answering your questions. On behalf of our fantastic team here, including our uh guest producer, Rich Jesse, I'm [music] Tom Price along with Dr. David Andrew. Hey, thanks for joining us. See you tomorrow on the Friday edition [music] of Call to Communion. Till then, have a great one.

[00:48:16]God bless.

[00:48:36]This is Conversations with Consequences, where [music] we delve deeper into issues affecting our church, our country, and our core, the family. As Catholics, we need to be informed, aware, and able to talk through some of the tough topics that we're facing in our culture [music] and in our world.

[00:48:51]Conversations with consequences gives us the tools to do so. It's not enough to pray. We have to be a light for the world.