Do you feel the Catholic Church has failed you?

I have reached a point where I can no longer justify the actions of the hierarchy of the Catholic Church. I have not had anything done to me personally, but I have witnessed for years how the hierarchy’s thirst to hold on to power and control has hurt and even destroyed others. I have managed to continue to attend Sunday after Sunday by telling myself the church is not at fault it is the hierarchy of the church that is at fault.

I thought Pope John Paul I would bring change, but his death came too quickly. I thought Pope John Paul II would bring about change, but he caved to the misguided Cardinals. I knew when Pope Benedict XVI came to power all hope for change was lost.  I still cling to hope that Pope Francis can bring about change, but I do not think I will live to see it due to my bad health.

I realize the church is governed by men who are not perfect. Anyone who expects them to be flawless is not logical. I can deal with not personally agreeing with some of the decisions they make, but when I see people being hurt by their decision it is difficult for me to deal with that.

For years I have ask God Do I leave or do I stick it out and continue to hope for change? There are many denominations that I could attend like Methodist, Lutheran, Episcopalian or Presbyterian, but I love the Mass. No other denomination could replace the Mass for me.

 “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Matt. 16:18.

No matter the issue of hurt, harm or anguish, Jesus is the head of the church, not the pope, not the cardinals, not the bishops and that will never change.  Unfortunately, many in the hierarchy of the church have come to believe it is their church, they are in charge, they make the rules and the rest of us must follow without questioning them.

“So shall my word be that goes out from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it.” Isaiah 55:11.

“If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more the heavenly Father will give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him.” Luke 11:13.

When in doubt I go the Bible and the Holy Spirit for guidance. If the words of the hierarchy do not line up with the Bible and the direction the Holy Spirit leads me I ignore their words.

The Holy Spirit does not just speak to the hierarchy of the church He speaks to us to. When we are living in close relationship with God, the close proximity of our heart to His allows us the privilege of hearing as He speaks to us with peace in our decision-making processes.  If you are walking with God and do not feel peace about a situation then something is wrong for our God is not the author of confusion. (I Cor. 14:33). There is a reason the Holy Spirit is not giving you peace and this should guide your decisions in all situations, including church situations.

There was a time when it bothered me to hear a Christians say, ‘The church has failed me’.  I now think differently because if you are Catholic you have no say in the decisions of the church. If you are Protestant you do. Protestants have a say in making the church what it should be, but Catholics do not.  If you risk speaking out in the Catholic Church you risk being excommunicated. There is no democracy within the Catholic Church and the hierarchy of the Catholic Church would be the first to admit that. The hierarchy has unquestionable authority. The priests cannot even question their authority.

Do you honestly believe all Catholic laity and Catholic priests believe artificial birth control is a sin? Do you honestly believe all Catholic laity and Catholic priests believe divorced and remarried people should be denied Communion? Do you honestly believe all Catholic laity and Catholic priests believe divorce should not be allowed? Do you honestly believe all Catholic laity and Catholic priests believe you can pray the dead into heaven? Do you honestly believe all Catholic laity and priests believe the same on the issue of homosexuality? Do you honestly believe all Catholic priests were for the bishops covering up pedophilia by other priests?  I know they do not and did not! Many priests reported child abuse to their bishops and it fail on deaf ears.

The church hierarchy is not infallible; neither are the pastors. What do you do as a Catholic when you are assigned a pastor by the bishop that is lazy, arrogant, and stubborn, has a bad attitude, and never prepares a homily? You do nothing because you have no say on who your pastor will be or who the assistants will be. You pray you can tolerate him for six years. If you are Protestant you take it up with the Board or Elders.

For decades and decades and decades we sat silently suspecting something might be odd with our priest, but we never uttered a word that he might be molesting children. When some began to speak out they were not only attack by the hierarchy of the church they were attacked by some priests and some of the laity.  We had been trained well. Catholics never speak in a negative way about their priest. To speak against the priest or the hierarchy is to speak evil of the Catholic Church. I would venture to say some feel it is speaking evil against God.

I am all for having people of authority in the church, but I am not for those people abusing that authority. All organizations need authority figures, especially the church.

There was a time in history when absolute control may have been justified, but not today.  Any curious challenge or genuine question about Scripture, teachings traditions or doctrines is seen by the hierarchy as a direct attack on church leadership. I know people who have been branded as spiritually rebellious for questioning something they've been told rather than silently accepting it without question.

I feel like the hierarchy of the church is preoccupied with maintaining its position of authority in a changing society rather than seriously challenging itself. It appears to me the hierarchy would prefer the church to be an outdated museum than a relevant part of modern society. It refuses to make any changes to adapt to modern society. The attitude seems to be if it worked in 300A.D. it should work today and if it does not then something is wrong with you. The Church hierarchy has allowed the church to become out of touch and ineffective. It has become steeped in hypocrisy and complacency.

“If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.” (1 John 1:9).

This is speaking of confessing our sins to God not man.  There was a time when only the bishops could forgive abortion and allow you to take Communion again. Now the bishop can allow the priest under him to forgive abortion and permit you to take Communion again.  This is a change and a good change, but whose Communion is it, the bishops, the priest or Gods? Why does a woman have to tell her bishop or priest about the abortion if she has confessed it to God, repented and sought forgiveness. It seems to me the change did not go far enough, but we do not have the right to question if the change went far enough or not.

“…for he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself (herself).” 1 Corinthians 11:29.

This scripture does not say he that gives the Communion brings damnation to himself. It says the one taking the Communion unworthy brings damnation to himself. Should the worthiness to partake in Communion be between God and the Communicant or the hierarchy/priest of the church and the Communicant? Should anyone have the right to deny another Christian the right to take Communion? None of us hierarchy/priest/laity are really worthy.  How can my divorced friends and homosexual friends feel a part of the church when they are judged by the church every Sunday?

Don’t tell me we cannot change we no longer own slaves, we no longer kill our children that talk back to us, we no longer require women to remain silent, we no longer consider women property of men, we no longer require women to cover their heads in church, we allow women to do the 1st and 2nd readings and we are now allowed to attend weddings and funerals at churches of other denominations. This is just a few of the unjust and silly cultural/traditions that we have done away with.

My closing words to the hierarchy/priest/pious laity is take the 2x4 out of your eye before you try to take the splinter out of your brother’s or sister’s eye. Then maybe we can become the church God called us to be.

Democracy - Oligarchy - Caste System?

I had a blog in 2011 and I stopped writing it and deleted most of the writings. I did it because I wrote an article that offended a newspaper reporter and an attack on me began. I said nothing in that blog that I had not heard Filipino friends say and that I had not heard on television or read in newspapers. I had been warned that foreigners do not have a voice in the Philippines and I foolishly ignored the warning. Now I am afraid that I am about to step into it again, but it is hard for me to ignore discrimination or injustice.

It may not be called a caste system, but in my opinion there is a caste system in the Philippines. I guess I should not let it bother me since it does not appear to bother Filipino’s, but it does.

The Philippines certainly is not India, but there is a distinction made between rich and poor, educated and uneducated, titled and untitled and having the right surname certainly will get you a lot of respect and privileges you may not deserve.

If you ask you will be told that the Philippines is a democracy, but I think oligarchy would best define it because it is well known and obvious that power is in the hands of a small exclusive class. This exclusive class are the rich.

I think people in the West would be surprised at how many Filipino’s have college educations. A college degree is no longer reserved for the rich. But, a college degree is not a guarantee that you will move up the social ladder. Most working in mall retail shops have a college degree. If you are from the right family and have a degree you will naturally go farther than if you are not. Your family connections are usually more important than your degree.

The uneducated are happy to get a job in farming or as maids, drivers, or child care provider. 

I have not and will not accept the cultural tradition that those who work for me should not eat at the table with me, eat at the same time I do, sit in the living room with me and watch television or carry on a conversation. They do not even want to enter through the front door because they think it disrespects me in front of my neighbors. My being a Christian and being a retired priest will not allow me to discriminate or disrespect anyone in that manner.

The Vice President of the country is looked down upon by some because of his dark skin. That reminds me of blacks in the United States who at one time thought the shade of their skin mattered. During the slave period dark skin blacks were not selected to work in the Masters house they were selected to do field work.  I have even heard some discouraging remarks made about Filipino-Chinese, but it appears to me that the Filipino-Chinese are the ones with the most money so that may be more jealousy than discrimination.

When I first moved to Davao the local bank employees told me that I did not have to wait in line or take a number. I could just walk directly to the counter. I had noticed that some people walked in and went directly to the counter while we all waited and it disturbed me, but I said nothing. Then when I was told I could do the same I became upset. I ask to speak to a bank officer and I ask why this was allowed. He laughed and said that is just the way we do it in the Philippines and you will get used to it. I have not gotten used to it and I continue to take a number and wait my turn.

This became an issue for me again when I ask a neighbor why they did not visit me anymore. They seem shocked that I ask and appeared to be embarrassed. I guess they thought the question made them lose face and that is another thing you do not do to a Filipino no matter how wrong he or she may be. I ask had I done anything to offend them and at first they said no. I kept insisting on them to tell me what the problem was and if I could fix it I would. They went on to explain to me they did not like it that I treated my ‘caregiver’ and ‘housekeeper’ as family or friends. I stood up and told them it was nice knowing them, but that was something I was not willing to change or fix for them or anyone else. I will love those Filipino neighbors from a distance from now on.

These neighbors call themselves devout Catholics and they are active in the church, and friends with all the priest in the parish, but obviously they do not know that Pope Francis warned the hierarchy of the church not to be “a closed caste” but to lead in reaching out to all who are rejected by society and the church. I would think the Pope intends for the laity to do the same.

The Philippines is a Catholic Nation and a Catholic should not accept or participate in a caste system regardless of what you may call it. If they do they are not being faithful to the teachings of Christ or the Catholic Church.

Pope John Paul II told visiting Roman Catholic bishops from India that Christians must reject divisions based on caste, saying any type of prejudices towards people violates authentic human solidarity and is a threat to genuine spirituality. Pope John Paul II also said customs or traditions that perpetuate or reinforce caste division or prejudices should be reformed. Are some groups of humans inherently superior to other groups? Not in God’s eyes.

The Jehovah Witness' strive not to participate in a class system. They recognize that social classes have no place in the eyes of God. Therefore, they have no clergy/laity division, and they are not segregated according to skin color or wealth. Although some of them may be wealthy, they do not focus on “the showy display of one’s means of life.”

Every Jehovah Witness accepts the responsibility to share in the work of preaching the good news of the Kingdom to his or her fellowman. Like Jesus, they honor the downtrodden and neglected by visiting them in their homes, offering to teach them God’s Word. Those with a humble status in life work side by side with those who may be viewed by some as upper class. It is spiritual qualities that count, not social class. As in the first century, all are brothers and sisters in the faith. We could all learn from them when it comes to discrimination.

The liberal Democrats in the United States are desperately trying to encourage class warfare in preparation for the 2016 election. The United States imagines itself as a classless society, based on a faith in natural equality – that all are “born equal. Even if there are wide inequalities in income, wealth or education, the bowing and scraping before the ‘upper classes, is completely unknown. Accusations of “elitism” are especially damaging in a culture that instinctively rejects the idea that certain people are born to rule, and others to be ruled.

In a self-defined classless society, people will naturally not want to separate themselves from their fellow citizens. That is why, according to Pew, almost nine in ten Americans define themselves as ‘middle-class’.

At its best, America displays the culture of a true civic republic in which, every individual can “speak their minds, walk tall among their fellows, and look each other squarely in the eye.” Somebody once remarked that the only thing different about rich people in America is that they have more money. They may be better off: but they are not better. This means that a certain respect is accorded to everybody, whether they are tending pumps in a gas station or moving millions on Wall Street. “Disrespecting” somebody is a social crime in a classless republic.

I was shocked at the pedestal priest are put on in the Philippines. That is not the case in the United States. If the priest says or does something the people do not like or agree with they have no problem telling him. Wearing a clerical collar does not guarantee respect in the United States and that is the way it should be.

 No doubt, American classlessness is overstated. But it remains real to some extent, but I am beginning to wonder if it will last. It appears that Democrats see creating division among the classes as a means to get votes. There is most definitely a lower class - middle class - upper class, but movement between the classes is allowed and I do not see that ending. With hard work - education - determination - you can move all the way up. Republican candidates for President in 2016 Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and Dr. Carson all came from poor families. Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz parents were immigrants with Cuban heritage. 

Since I have no intention of returning to the United States and I now think of the Philippines as my home I will have to accept the cultural differences, but that does not mean I have to adopt them.

 

2015 Vatican Synod on Family Life

The bishops’ synod wrapped up its business in Rome last weekend what are they all afraid of?

The Final Report made no explicit mention of a path to communion for the divorced and remarried, much less sanctioning “artificial” contraception or living out of wedlock. Same-sex relationships got thumbs down.

Pope Francis took the tiny opening that last year’s synod gave to annulment reform and pushed through new canon law. Who knows what he’ll do with the openings he’s been given now? Are they afraid of what Pope Francis may do in the future or are they afraid that Pope Francis might decide to act on his irritation with conservatives?

If the results of this synod had been under Pope John Paul II it would have raised little concern. The cardinals were not suspicious of Pope John Paul and believed he would not go against anything the Cardinals wanted, but with Pope Francis he is his own man.

The majority of the cardinals would like to see the issue of divorce-remarry-communion remain as the rules were written in the Fourth Century. Eastern Orthodoxy permits sacramental remarriages. The cardinals leading the Roman Catholic Church have yet to realize that some valid marriages sometimes have to be ended by divorce. They prefer Catholics who get divorced apply to them for an annulment and they decide who will be or will not be granted one. They prefer the children of divorced Catholics to be declared illegitimate by the Catholic Church because they were born to a marriage that never existed in the eyes of the Church, that seems harsh to me.  Perhaps I might consider the stand the Catholic leadership takes on divorce for second marriages.

I believe that the marriage-divorce-annulment-remarriage issue is as it is today because, as in many things in our church, the cardinals take the stand that’s the way it has always been and that is the way it will stay. Tradition takes presentence over what is reality, practical and obtainable for today’s Christians.  It would be different if Catholics were adhering to these archaic traditions, but they are not.

The Catholic cardinals did pave the way for greater openness towards divorcees. Cardinals agreed divorcees must be “more integrated in Christian communities”. The cardinals decided to allow the local clergy to decide whether to allow divorcees to participate fully in church life. What was once left to the bishops and ultimately Rome is now in the hands of the local pastors as it should be. I will be more comfortable with this decision when it is formulate and put in writing.

While bishops have spoken, it is up to the pope to decide the next move. Beyond the synod vote, he will face tough opposition in any attempt to change archaic church rules, but the upcoming jubilee year of mercy could serve as an opportunity to table new plans for Catholic Family Life.

Pope Francis on Sunday at the end of the synod appeared to lecture church elders, suggesting they should not be quick to exclude a broad array of people deserving of God’s grace. The pope implied the men of the church needed to be more aware of the needs of the people and take action instead of turning a blind eye and trying not to become involved.

While subjects were addressed that previous popes and synods would have never discussed the opposition in the synod to rapid changes in rules also suggested how far off Catholics may be from seeing Francis’s revolutionary style turned into practice.

Now the media will start debating who won the debate the pope, the conservatives or the liberals.  If anyone won it was the pope for in the end he has the final say. Doors were open for him to make changes.  Changes may take years and he may not live to see them, but at least the ball for change is now rolling and I do not think it can be stopped. The laity today is too intelligent and has access to more knowledge than in the past and will no longer be pushed around and accept doctrine they consider is without merit.  

I think it was a tie and no one won as far as the conservative and reformers go. The conservative were able to prevent changes or slow changes that they adamantly did not want and the liberals or reformers got the debate started on changes they did want and I believe that debate will continue.

I think the Pope was the real winner over all for he made it clear following the synod that he is tired of the Bishops not following his instructions and not practicing what they are teaching.  This is probably why many of them left Rome a bit shaken and frighten.

Why pray for the dead?

The question of purgatory and praying for the dead was a major issue between Catholics and Protestants in the 16th century. The Council of Trent in 1563 reaffirmed the existence of purgatory and the usefulness of prayers for the dead, yet it cautioned against superstition concerning it.

The Catholic teaching regarding prayers for the dead has nothing to do with buying the dead out of purgatory, but unfortunately that is what most non-Catholics believe?  The Catholic Church’s teaching about purgatory (Catechism of the Catholic Church, #1030-32) says that all sin has a life of its own and may have bad effects even after the sinner repents.  Repentance includes a desire to repair the damage done by one’s sins, but repentance may not be complete before the person dies, therefore Catholics pray for completion of repentance.  I do not agree totally with that teaching.

I will say this in defence of the Catholic doctrine on purgatory I would not say beyond a doubt that no type of purgatory exists.   I want to believe our loved ones go straight to heaven, but the truth is I do not know that for a fact.  The Bible provides evidence that there can be no imperfections in heaven.   According to the Catechism, most of us who don’t merit hell still need purification before we can enter heaven. 

I believe if there is any type of purgatory it would have nothing to do with punishment of sin.  It would only be a place to put the final touch on our perfection or holiness.  I will go further to say I do not believe it has anything to do with suffering or paying a sin debt.  Christ paid in full all our past, present and future sin debt. 

I do not believe anything we do after a person dies will affect the deceased relationship with God or their status in heaven.  I believe our salvation is determined on earth prior to death, therefore heaven or hell is determined before death.    

Christians and non-Christians alike have both heard the Bible verse ‘to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord’ (2 Corinthians 5:6-8 Plus 9), but what does those verses really mean?  Does it really mean as soon as we breathe our last breath we are face to face with God?  I think those verses have a much deeper meaning.  Is Paul saying - if we are in our earthly bodies we are away from the Lord.  Yes, the Lord is always with us, but not where we can stand face to face with Him and that makes the difference.   I question that Paul was talking about a time line in those verses, but instead was assuring us that when we die we will come face to face with God.  Will that happen immediately, one day later, two days later or upon Christ coming again.  I do not know for sure.  I do know for sure it will happen and believers will come face to face with God. 

Protestants believe Hebrews 9:27 when it affirms that..."it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment."  Protestants feel that prayers for the dead are useless.  They believe once you die judgment follows immediately.  They believe there is no state in between death and judgment called purgatory.   I am comfortable with that teaching.  But, I also find some aspects of Catholicism appealing due to its historicity and great respect for traditions, authority, and the early Church Fathers.

 I guess in the end it is up to each Christian to decide this issue, since there is no definitive answer in the Bible.  Catholics believe in Scriptures authority and its traditions.  Protestants believe in the sole authority of Scripture alone. There are many things in Scripture that remain a mystery to me and will remain a mystery until I am face to face with God.  These mysteries do not create a faith problem for me.  I think some scriptures remain a mystery for all, but some do not want to admit that they do not have it all figured out and are not in control.

Some may be scratching their head and saying I still do not have an answer.  I still do not know what he believes about praying for the dead.  Sorry, I am not sure I know.   I came to believe over fifty years ago that God did not call me to think for you or to tell you what to think.  I sincerely believe God called me to challenge you and provoke you to study scripture not just read it.  Pray over scripture and allow the Holy Spirit to lead you to a conclusion.  

The practice of praying for the dead in my mind naturally implies that we can influence the present state of those who are dead and I do not believe we can.  I do believe we are justified by faith in Christ, and we stand or fall based on our faith at the time of our death.  I believe our righteousness comes from the righteousness of Christ and that makes it hard for me to believe a place like purgatory would need to exist.  I do believe regardless of what you believe about praying for the dead it will not affect where you will spend eternity.   I hope that somewhat clears up my beliefs, but what I believe should not be a defining factor in your deciding what you believe. 

God wanted and wants us to be in unity.  He gave us the church and man was not satisfied.  God then allowed us to have Plan B - denominations.  We were not and are not yet mature enough to come together on the things we have in common and allow our difference to teach us and allow us to grow.  When we surround ourselves with only likeminded people we stifle our growth, but it seems we are more comfortable with likeminded people.

Was the birth of Jesus as we have been taught?

“Silent night, holy night, all is calm; all is bright round yon virgin mother and child.  Holy infant, so tender and mild, sleep in heavenly peace, sleep in heavenly peace.”

Giving birth to my knowledge has never been easy, soothing, peaceful and without pain.  Why do we think Mary would have experience birth any differently?  Why do we think Joseph would not have been concerned about their being complications with the birth of his child as daddy’s are today. 

Caesar Augustus, emperor of Rome, decreed that a census be taken and that everyone return to the ancestral village of the head of the household.  Joseph was from Bethlehem which meant they would have to travel approximately ten days walking from Nazareth to Bethlehem.  The Bible does not say Mary rode on a donkey, although many have come to believe that was the mode of her transportation.  Do not forget Mary was nine months pregnant.  I would think that the journey included pain, fear and tears. 

They had no reservations in Bethlehem and I doubt if there was an inn in Bethlehem.  Bethlehem was a very small town.  They must have been concerned about where they would stay.  Like most people in that time they would have wanted to stay with relatives.  Joseph had relatives in Bethlehem.  No innkeeper is actually mentioned in the Biblical record of Christ’s birth.  There would have been a problem finding a place to stay, everyone was crowding into Bethlehem for the census and his relatives may not have had any room.

They arrived and Luke tells us there was no room, but he does not tell us that Mary and Joseph were in a barn with sheep’s and goats.  Luke does tell us there was a feeding trough for animals.  Someone may have removed the animals so Mary and Joseph could use the room. 

They were most likely in a room at the back of a relative’s house.   At that time people brought their animals in at night to protect them.  “Away in a manger the baby awakes, but little Lord Jesus, no crying he makes.”  Although this is part of a beautiful song, we cannot be sure that Jesus did not cry.  The Bible does not report this.  I don’t think it was a silent night, but it was a holy night!

Did Mary and Joseph arrive in Bethlehem the night she gave birth?  The Bible does not suggest this. They could have arrived weeks earlier.  God’s Word simply states, “While they were there in Bethlehem, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered,” (Luke 2:6).  Arriving in town well before her due date would make more sense.

We have all seen the pictures of three wise men, Magi, Kings or important men from Parthia in the manger worshipping Jesus.  Don’t let tradition, folklore, and custom become your truth.  These depictions are well intended, but I think they only add confusion to the story. 

The Bible does not state how many wise men there was it only states there were three gifts.  Men assumed there were three men, but no one knows.   There were at least two because the word for Magi used is plural.  Jesus Christ was born in Bethlehem that we know from scripture and the wise men, maybe twelve, did end up at a house in Bethlehem, not a manger.  When the wise men arrived Jesus was not a baby, but a child.  The wise men probably did not come until quite a while after the shepherds. 

The 1913 Catholic Encyclopaedia, in an article about who visited Jesus, admits that Matthew and the rest of the New Testament completely omits the number of high-ranking important men that came more than 1,000 miles to worship the true King of all Kings.  According to this reference, not only is there no certain tradition regarding this question, but some Catholic church Fathers speak of three Magi. They are very likely influenced by the number of gifts.  In the Orient, tradition favours twelve wise men.

There are many differences in the telling of the birth of Christ in Matthew and Luke and they really have little in common.  Mark writes nothing of the birth of Jesus and John alluded to it in a different way than Matthew and Luke. 

Jesus wasn't born in winter we know this because Luke chapter 2 verse 8 tells us, “Now there were in the same country shepherds living out in the fields, keeping watch over their flock by night."   Was Jesus born in December?  It is not impossible, but probably not so.  December would more likely be the month of conception.

The common practice of shepherds was to keep their flocks in the open fields from April to October, but in the cold and wet winter months they took their flocks back home and sheltered them.  On Dec. 25^th the weather would not have permitted the shepherds to be watching over their flocks in the fields at night.  Some scholars say the writings in Luke lead them to believe Jesus was born in September.

Others say God would not have allowed Jesus to be born on the pagan feast of Saturnalia which is December 25^th.   If we accept the premise that God did cause the birth of Jesus to happen on a Biblical feast day, then which festival would that have been? 

For many years I have heard and I believe that Jesus was really born during the Feast of Tabernacles.  The Feast of Tabernacles, also called Booths or Shelters, comes on the fifteenth of Tishri (September-October), the seventh month according to the Jewish biblical calendar. 

Zachariah the father of John the Baptist was performing his priestly service in the Temple in Jerusalem.  The angel Gabriel tells the Virgin Mary, “Your relative Elizabeth (wife of Zachariah) has also conceived a son in her old age and she who was called barren, is in her sixth month.” This establishes the fact that John the Baptist is six months older than Jesus.  Zechariah completed his Temple service on the third Sabbath of the Jewish month of Sivan (May-June).  Zechariah then returned home and conceived his son. 

An average gestation term is 40 weeks then go forward to the middle of the first Jewish month of Nisan, which coincides with the Feast of Passover.  Since John was born around the middle of the first Jewish month of Nisan, and he is six months older than Jesus; then the likely date for the birth of Jesus would be the middle of the seventh Jewish month of Tishri (September-October). This is when the Feast of Tabernacles begins. 

This festival celebrates the time when God led His people through the wilderness after delivering them from Egyptian bondage.  When Jesus came, He fulfilled that feast by completing God’s plan of redemption and thus was able to lead God’s people away from the bondage to sin and death.

The Feast of Tabernacles is a mandatory attendance feast, which meant that all Jewish men were required to come to Jerusalem to celebrate it in the Temple. As a result of that there was no room for Mary and Joseph as found in Luke 2:7. 

Other dates claimed to be the dates of Jesus birth are November 18th and March 28th.  Although it is difficult to determine the first time anyone celebrated December 25^th  as Christmas Day, historians are in general agreement that it was sometime during the fourth century.  Christmas was not observed in Rome, the capital of the Roman Empire, until about 300 years after Christ's death. 

Does it really matter the month that Christ was born?  I think using December 25^th when scholars know that it is not the right date can cause confusion among sceptics.  It would affect the church calendar if December 25^th was not used.  At this point in time the date will never be changed, but we should know the truth.  It does not affect my faith one way or the other which day we celebrate and it should not affect yours.

Jesus told us to celebrate his death in 1^st Corinthians 11:23-26.  “… ‘This is my body, which is given for you.  Do this in remembrance of me.  In the same way, he took the cup of wine after supper, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant between God and you, sealed by the shedding of my blood.  Do this in remembrance of me as often as you drink it’ … you are announcing the Lord’s death until he comes again.”