A Year with the Catechism. Petroc Willey, Dominic Scotto, Donald Asci, & Elizabeth Siegel

that were current, especially in the area of laws on the Sabbath and on dietary regulations (581-582). For example, he taught the true “pedagogical meaning” (582) of the dietary law through explaining what it is to be truly clean of heart before God.

      Day 81

       CCC 583-586

      Jesus and the Temple

      Jesus is not only the fulfillment of the Law. He is also the fulfillment, in his own Person, of all of the worship of Israel. Jesus had zeal for the Temple (584); it is “my Father’s house” (see Jn 2:16-17). Nonetheless, the physical Temple was only ever a dim image of his own Body, and all of the sacrifices offered in the Temple only ever a poor shadow of his perfect sacrifice of obedient love to the Father for all mankind. Upon Christ’s coming, “Types and shadows have their ending,” as Saint Thomas Aquinas wrote. As in the case of the Law, Jesus did not overthrow the sacrifices and worship, the feasts and holy seasons of the Old Covenant. He came to perfect and fulfill them (583-584), although — as in the case of the Law — the meaning of his words and actions were distorted (585).

      Jesus refers to himself as the true Temple of God because all worship now takes place “in him” and “through him” (586; see the footnote reference to Jn 2:21). He is the one over whom the cloud of God’s presence, his shekinah, rests (see Mk 9:7), and it is through his sacrifice of love that access to the Father is made possible (Mt 27:51).

      For ourselves, we are now being “built” into the Temple of Christ’s Body. Each of us is placed as a jewel (Rv 21:18-21), a “living stone” (1 Pt 2:5), in the new Temple of Christ, in which the Holy Spirit dwells as our true life (Eph 2:21; see CCC 1695), teaching us to pray in the Son, as members of his Body united to him, to the Father (see 797).

      Day 82

       CCC 587-591

      Jesus and Israel’s Faith in the One God and Savior

      With this third element in the conflict between Jesus and some of the religious figures of his time, we reach what the Catechism calls the “real stumbling-block” for those who opposed him: his claim to be able to forgive sins (587). The scandal of Jesus’ actions was based on the fact that “only God can forgive sins” (Mk 2:7; CCC 589, see also 1441). While I can forgive a person those sins committed against myself, no one else has the right to do this; no one, that is, except God, to whom I belong. Likewise, I cannot forgive a person’s sins committed against a third party; again, only God can do this, for all of us belong to him.

      God alone can forgive everything since all sin flows from disobedience towards God and expresses distrust in his goodness (397). Jesus never contradicted this fundamental truth. He never claimed that anyone other than God could declare sin to be forgiven; he simply exercised this divine authority himself — “Your sins are forgiven” (Mk 2:10) — and left it to his hearers to draw the conclusion as to his union with the Father (589). His divinity was further expressed in the fact that he gave to his apostles this same authority to forgive sins (Jn 20:21-23). Clearly, only one who himself had the power and the authority to forgive sins could share this with others.

      The forgiveness of sins, then, is described in the Catechism as the “divine work par excellence” (587). An appreciation of this phrase from the Catechism, together with our understanding of the meaning of the name “Jesus” as “God saves” (see 430-432), helps us to realize that the forgiveness of our sins and our liberation from evil is the focus of Christ’s work in our own lives (see 1741).

      Day 83

       CCC 595-598

      The Trial of Jesus

      Today’s reading is particularly hard-hitting. The answer to the question “Who was responsible for Christ’s crucifixion?” is quite simply, “I am responsible, because I sin, and Christ died to rescue me from my sin.” All sinners collectively are responsible for Christ’s death.

      The section begins by noting that if we seek to answer that question, “Who was responsible for Christ’s crucifixion?” purely on the level of history, looking at the various actors during the trial and death of Jesus, we face a certain “historical complexity” (597). Some religious authorities in Jerusalem clearly wished him dead, on a charge of blasphemy. But this antagonism towards Jesus was not characteristic of all of the Pharisees (595-596), nor of all the Jews in Jerusalem. In any case, it is difficult to identify motivation. While the charge against him was blasphemy (Mk 14:64), the fear of Caiaphas appeared to be that Jesus would bring disaster upon the Jewish people through Roman aggression. Ultimately, the “personal sin of the participants (Judas, the Sanhedrin, Pilate) is known to God alone” (597).

      In considering this question of responsibility, the Catechism also wants us to appreciate the difference between objectively sinful acts and the accompanying subjective guilt. Notice the side reference to 1735, which speaks about how far the guilt of bad acts can be “imputed” to a person. Many elements — fear, ignorance, pressure — can lessen the guilt and blameworthiness of a person who acts badly. On the cross Jesus said that his enemies did not know what they did, for they were ignorant of who he was (see Lk 23:34).

      Of course, we do not have such an excuse, for we profess to know him and to be his disciples (597). And notice the present tense: “our sins affect Christ himself” (598). They do so in two ways: they “crucify” him anew in our hearts, where he now lives, and they “crucify” him in the members of his Body (see the scriptural references in footnote 390).

      Day 84

       CCC 599-605

      Christ’s Redemptive Death in God’s Plan of Salvation

      From the consideration of the historical circumstances surrounding Christ’s trial and death, we now turn to the place of Christ’s death in God’s plan. Jesus’ death on the cross was part of God’s deliberate plan (599), foretold in the Scriptures (601). That God has a plan does not make our actions into those of robots or mere puppets (600). It might help to look back to CCC 306-307 on Providence and secondary causes: God uses our free choices to achieve his plan. God never causes evil, but he does permit it, even the evil of the Crucifixion, so as to achieve redemption (311-312).

      The Catechism also wants us to understand that the fact that this is God’s plan does not imply for a moment that the Father has no care for his Son. On the contrary, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are one God: they have one name (233), one substance (242), with each wholly possessing the Godhead (253) and sharing together the same mission (258). It is not that “God’s plan” is that of the Father only. It is the common plan of the Persons. Moreover, we remind ourselves that in his innermost being God is love (221). The three divine Persons live in a perfect unity of love (255). Christ’s redemptive death is therefore an expression of this Trinitarian unity and love.

      Christ’s death is the divine answer to the disorder, hate, sin, and disunity of fallen humanity, the common divine response of the three Persons who are One almighty, unifying Love. As we saw in the section on the Fall, sin is a lack of harmony, of love, and of truth, and so the Son “assumed us in the state of our waywardness of sin” (603). He totally identified himself with us in our fallen state, experiencing the effects of sin, and even death, in order to mend what was broken in us. His healing love is offered for each person without exception (606).

      Day 85

       CCC 606-612

      Christ Offered Himself to His Father

      In our readings for the next two days we see that Christ’s free offering of himself is out of love for the Father (606-612) and out of love for humanity (613-618).

      The freedom of Christ is a key theme in today’s reading. Jesus freely chooses what the Father wills — he exercises “sovereign”