Gee, Patrick, I thought asinine was spelled with two ss, but you are correct, asinine is spelled with only one s.

A Roman Catholic priest doing something asinine?  Well that’s just….shocking!  Who ever heard of such a thing!  And Maggi is far far far from being the craziest among the lot.  Unfortunately, Roman Catholic priests doing asinine things in the name of RCism is just par for the course. This should not even be news.

Lisa, I would say that your comment is equal in quality to the priest’s burning of the picture of the Pope. Rather than painting the whole fence with the same brush, perhaps it’s best to heed this advice: Don’t leave Peter because of Judas. Clearly you’re upset with Christ’s Church. Why is that? Are you a Protestant or some other religion/philosophy?

Chris

I am not"upset” with the RCC.  Being justly critical of this corrupt institution has mean that I am “upset” with the RCC?  You amke an assumption that has no basis in fact.  The RCC, and it hierarchy in particular, is a bit of mess.  That is just stating the objective facts.  The RCC and its priest are not above criticism.  The RCC has lots of problems.  And if you think RC priest are a bunch of really mentally healthy guys, you have not been paying attention.

Less than 1% of priest have done something wrong and the Church runs far better than most large companies.  Their bigest problem is a libral media that wants to take them out.

As for this Priest he should complain in private.

Robert,
  Check your one percent with the Bishop commissioned report from John Jay….they get 4.5% as abusers…I’ve seen an awful percent as percent of those hierarchy who shuffled abusers around….I’ll us the figure.

That should be….“I’ll spare us the latter figure.”

All this slander another against those eeevil “RCC’s” really makes me want to join another Rite.  Those lucky Byzantines never get any grief!  lol.

I imagine the good Lord has seen this kind of behavior before.  Today’s people may have new technology and many luxuries that the Israelites did not enjoy but there is a lot of similarity in behavior.

Lisa, I might consider taking you seriously as soon as you learn how to proofread.

Sure, there are many corrupt parts within the Church. That’s why I am convinced it is the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church of Christ. No way can any other “church” survive with the same kind of struggles that the Church has had, the Holy Spirit is involved. Yes, the Catholic Priests are actually mentally healthy guys, you clearly have been accepting whatever negative information falls in your lap. Trust me, Lisa, I’ve met enough Catholic priests to be convinced that they’re far more healthy (and intelligent) than most of us here.

The language used in this piece my Mr. Archbold is appalling. Words like ‘asshattery’ are fine to be published in a Catholic periodical? Come on. I know the job of this piece is to speak to Catholic issues and not to help us improve our decorum - but can we at least not move toward vulgarity?

Lisa Kaiser,
I’m not sure I should even respond, but you come to these discussions as a former Catholic, now Reform Jew, & post comments that are by any reasonable standard, disrespectful to Catholics.
Can you imagine if one reworded your posts & substituted “Jew” or “rabbi” for “Catholic” or “priest”?
I’m weary of reading sectarian comments.There is so much bigotry & strife in the world, surely we can make a better effort here in a Christian publication.

the mental health of RC priest is about more than the sexual abuse of children.  It is clear from many many sources that the mandatory celibacy takes a very high toll on the mental health of priests, lonlieness takes avery high toll on on the mental health of priests. The RCC forces priests into an unhealhy life.

Chris,

An FYI:  Judaism is a 4,500 yr old tradition.  It has survived much much more than the RCC.  Conclusion:  The RCC is not the the only “true” faith.  God has chosen us all—Jews, Christians, Muslims.  Each of the Abrahamic traditions exists because God so wills it.  God has separate, valid, ongoing, unbroken covenants of love and grace with Jews, Christians (not just RCs) and Mulsims.

Maggi burned the picture of Pope Benedict XVI at Mass. Maggi ought to be disciplined for subjecting a captive audience who came for the sacrifice of the Mass to his “not included in the liturgy” opinion. There are places to do invincibly ignorant things but not at Mass and not before an audience containing unemancipated and uninformed children and their adults who have come to worship God. Asshatery is the least of compliments to Maggi. blasphemer, malicious evildoer, excommunicated idiot, wait I will remember more. The wrath of God is maggi’s just deserts.

kathleen,

I am not being “disrespectful” of Catholics.  I am merely pointing out the facts about the dysfunctional RC hierarchy.  the facts are the facts.  Sorry if you think that discussing facts is somehow ‘disrespectful”.  It is that kind of attitude that has led the RCC into boatloads of trouble re child sexual abuse, finances, etc.  Brushing the facts under the carpet because its ‘disrespectful” to examine the facts, does not change the facts.  The RCC is a very falwed human institution that is not above just criticism for its failings.

oh, yes schismatic, sower of weeds in the field of wheat, predator of the night. I will keep the rest to myself. These may be found in the Bible, try brood of vipers. How can one man be a brood of vipers, try legion.

Robert Walleston,

The “liberal” media has nothing to do with the troubles the RCC finds itself in.  The facts are the facts.  The RC hierarchy is dysfunctional.  The RC hierarchy is its own worst enemy.  The RC hierarchy is sowing the seeds of its own destruction.  The media is just doing its job—shining light on the dark deeds of corrupt men. Put blame where it belongs—with the corrupt, dysfunctionl, unhealthy, immature RC hierarchy.

Lisa,

“The RCC forces priests into an unhealhy life.”

I’m not 1000% sure; but I don’t think that any Bishop ever held a gun to anyone’s head to force them to become a Roman Catholic priest.  These men knew full well what they were headed into when they accepted the call.  If they didn’t take the ramifications seriously, well then - who’s fault is that?

It’s not like you study for years and years and then after you’re ordained, they pull you off to the side and spring on you, “Psst ..... by the way, celibacy is one of the job requirements.”

LarryW2LJ,

I don’t think most young men who enter seminary truly can know or understand what it will mean for them to live decades as a celibate person, to never have a life partenr, to never have a loved one to come home to, to never have children, etc, etc.  Plus celibacy is not scriptural and it was not even a requirement for RC priests for about the first 1200 yrs of the RCC.  No matter how the Vatican wants to dress this issue up, mandatory celibacy did not come about as a spiritual practice.  It came about as a move by the RC hierarchy to protect church real estate and other property.

To add insult to injury, the RCC now permits some married men to be RC priests.  So even the Vatican understands that celibacy is NOT required to by an RC priest.

so yes, it is unhelathy to require, to force celibacy on most but not all RC priests.

Lisa Kaiser: Pope John Paul II called Jews “our older brothers”. That would make us, as Catholics, the Jews’ “younger brothers”

lisa,
I’m not delving into the sectarian comments again.You know that wouldn’t fly in a Jewish or Muslim publication.
But on another note…
Regarding celibacy & mental health, it would be interesting to see if there’s any data comparing the mental health between Latin Rite celibate priests & married priests in the Eastern Rites & elsewhere.You’d have to figure in cultural differences, etc.
My guess would be that family obligations as practised in Western culture, could add more stress to a priest’s already overburdened schedule.In an Eastern culture with extended family & differing expectations regarding child rearing,etc , that might not be the case.
If you’re not working with data, you end up working with preconceptions.And agendas. But it’s a legitimate subject to look at.
I think priests are over-worked, over stressed, & often sleep deprived.So are many physicians.

Sorry, don’t agree. And that’s YOU’RE opinion, which you are entitled to have. I have personally known many priests inmy lifetime who are happy with the sacrfice that they have decided to make. They are all, happy well adjusted men who are quite content with their lives.  In fact, I have broached the subject with my Pastor who commented that he is happy for the vow of celibacy, because the job is so time consuming that he would feel guilty of neglecting his family, if he were married and had one.  While I am sure there ARE preists who struggle with theur vows, MY personal opinion is that they are in the minority.  Please see:
http://www.osv.com/tabid/7621/itemid/8557/Study-finds-priests-leading-happy-healthy-lives.aspx

Mary De Voe,

Yes, JPII certainly advanced the the positive relationship and conversation between Jews and Roman Catholics.  BXVI, made similar, if less successful, efforts.  And hopefully, the continued development of the relationship and the conversation will be on the agenda for the new pope as well.

Lisa Kaiser: Jesus Christ is a virgin and celibate. To act in “persona Christi” is to be a virgin and celibate. Jesus Christ suffered loneliness, exhaustion, frustration, hunger and temptation. Every human thing, Jesus Christ willingly offered up to His Father in heaven for us men and our salvation. Without Jesus Christ, you will miss the Son of Man. The Pope is the spiritual father to all humanity: the Church militant, and with the help of the saints in heaven, the Church triumphant and the souls in purgatory, the Church suffering, the Church with the Holy Spirit guides man into the presence of God.

Kathleen,

Neither Islam nor Judaism is centralized int he same way as the RCC. And pleae know you are free to go to any online Jewish publication and talk about the facts and/or express an educated opinion.  I spent decades as an RC, have 16 yrs of RC education, went to an RC college, have BA in RC theology.  If you bring that same level of experience and understanding as a former Jew to a Jewish publication—have at it.

One does not have to go very far to find out about how marriage affects clergy in the West.  There are married RC priests who have raised families.  BXVI has certainly increased the ranks of married RC priests int he West.  There are other Christian clergy who are married, have families, most rabbis are married with families.  Most Muslim clergy (in the West and in the Middle East) are married with families.

Its a fallacy to think that marriage is somehow incompatible with being an RC priest.  For the first 1200 yrs of the RCC, it certainly was not.  There are millenia of all kinds of clergy experiences in the West that cleary indicates that marriage is not incompatible with being an RC priest, an episciopal priest or a rabbi or a minister or Muslim clergy.

Lisa,
We’re all expressing personal views, not citing valid studies.

Mary De Voe,

There is absolutely NO evidence to support the idea that Jesus was not married or was a “virgin” or was celibate.  Please re-read the NT.  The NT is entirely silent on this issue.  the fact is, no one knows if Jesus was married or not.  the idea that Jesus never married is propaganda of the RC hierarchy.  The first 38 or 39 popes were married men.  For the first 1200 yrs of the RCC, most priests were married.

Lisa,

If I may, aside from the fact that the Church has spent over 1,000 years contemplating the role of the priest in the community and the life of the Church in making celibacy a requirement of the priesthood, guided by the writings of the doctors of the Church (i.e. Augustine, Aquinas, etc) and the Holy Spirit, have you ever for a moment considered the practical aspects of celibacy in the Catholic priesthood? A Catholic priest lives on a very small salary, and as the shepherd of his flock, he must minister to a large number of people in his parish and meet a variety of diverse demands from his parish on a daily basis. His ministry consists of activities like ministering the Last Rites to the sick and dying (on a moment’s notice), marriage counseling for prospective couples, performing baptisms, celebrating weddings, presiding over funerals, meetings with fellow priests and the bishop, not to mention celebrating Mass daily, and multiple times on the weekend. A priest is effectively always on the go and on call 24/7/365, and all of this on a salary just barely large enough to support himself. Now imagine throwing in marriage, and the priest is now tied to his obligations for his wife, in addition to the children they would probably have, in addition to the varied and intimate needs of the parish. Do you see the inevitable conflict of interest that arises when a priest now has to meet the needs of a family of his own, in addition to the countless and endless needs of the people of his parish? Do really think it would be fair to the priest or his wife and children if he was having to constantly split his time between ministering to the varied needs of his parish family and those of his own family, all the while trying to support his wife and children on a priest’s salary? Believe it or not, there is a carefully contemplated rationale behind everything the Church teaches and decrees, and you may not and don’t always have to agree with it; but to paint the entire institution as corrupt with a broad brush because you don’t agree with it, especially if one has not made a thorough, honest attempt to educate oneself on why the Church has decided as it has in these matters, is disingenuous at best.

Kathleen,

Observation and the lived experiences of clergy (have you ever talked to a married clergy person?) are valid ways to form an educated opinion.  Lok around you—look at your local Christian churches, synagogues and mosques.  Notice that that they exist, thrive, work well with married clergy.  Talk to one of the increasing numbers of married RC priests—notice that the Vatican obviously does not beleive that being an RC priest is incompatible with being married.

Please don’t feed the troll . . . .

Bryan,

First, as I noted above, I spent decades an RC, have 16 yrs of RC education, have aBA in RC theology.  I understand the RCC’s position on clerical celibacy.  I think it is you who does not have thorough understanding of the world of clergy. For example, Judaism has a 4,500 yr successful history of married clergy—priests, then rabbis and cantors. Many christian denominations have long, successful histories with married clergy. Islam has a 1,600 yr successful history with married clergy.  There is nothing so special or different about the duties RC clergy that marriage would not work for RC priests.  Mulsim, Jewish, and other Christian clergy do the same things as RC priests.  And these clergy marry, have successful marriages, raise children.  Do you not know what non-RC clergy do?  Do you think their lives are not full of ministering to large numbers of people, marrying, burying, educating, going all hrs of the day and night to serve the faithful?

The RCC would have to do what other faith traditions do, pay the priest a living wage.  and of course, most clergy these days also have spouses that work, bringing in additioanal salary to the family.  That would work for priests as well.

Yes, the Church Fathers had their opinions on this matter. But God created all things to change.  Even the RCC priestthood has changed over time—once priests married, now they don’t.  But there is no reason why the RCC has to ossify the priesthood.  What does not change/evolve, dies.  Perhaps God is telling the RCC that the contemporary needs of the RCC are different than the needs of the medieval RCC. Perhaps, via the current priest shortage, God is telling the RCC to allow priest to marry because that is what the RCC needs now.

Honestly, if the Vatican does not address the priest shortage, then the possibilities are:  lay people take on these duties, the ordination of married and single women will have to occur or the RCC becomes much much smaller or ceases to exist in the way it exists now—it will become something else. 

It does not matter to me.  But it should matter to those RCs who want their faith tradition to continue.

Lisa,
*
Priestly celibacy is not an infallible doctrine of the RCC.  It is a practice developed for the good of the Church, but it is not contrary to scripture.  St. Paul writes about how it is better to be single and chaste (like him).  The Church that priestly celibacy is best over-all but exceptions can be made.  Eastern Orthodoxy also requires celibacy for bishops and patriarchs, and if a priest is unmarried at ordination he must remain unmarried. 
*
While scripture does not specifically say if Jesus was married or not, you have to remember that the Church predates scripture.  There are a lot of things that were taught about Jesus by the Apostles that are not written scripture.  (Scripture evens says that.)  We know this because many of the writings of the Early Church Fathers reference these things as common knowledge. 
*
That Jesus was never married was commonly understood, and surely if Jesus had been married it would have been mentioned.  His mother is mentioned several times as are his cousins.  A variety of female friends and followers are also mentioned by name.  To omit a wife would be very odd.  Plus if Jesus was married he would have certain responsibilities to his wife.  You’d think that while he was dying on the cross and making arrangements for someone to care for his mother he’d say, “Oh, yeah, and someone needs to make sure that my wife is taken care of, too.”
* 
And I have read the accounts of married clergy, Catholic and Protestant who have talked about the toll it has taken on pastors to be torn between the needs of their families and that of the churches.  Pastors wives and children are usually highly scrutinized, pressured, and expected to serve unpaid positions in the Church.
*
Here’s a perspective on celibacy from a married Catholic priest:  http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2013/03/celibacy-lust-and-love.html

Bryan,
I think your points are good.
It’s kind of funny that with 50% of marriages ending in divorce currently, we’d be suggesting pastors tack on that extra drama to their lives.
Anecdotal, but we knew a small, country church where the pastor & wife split up.There were some very ugly goings on-adultery & such, some of the congregation sided with the pastor, some with the wife.Her family were also parishoners there.The couple lost their position, their housing, & pretty much their reputation in the community.The little church lost members.It was bad all around.Marriage can be a great blessing but it can often be dysfunctional.

Barbara C,

Paul had his opinion about being unmarried. However the apostle Peter was married, as were the first 38 or 39 popes of the RCC.  So not everyone, not even Peter, agreed, with Paul in this issue.

And no, the RCC does NOT predate scripture. It may predates the NT, but not all of scriputre. The RCC is a human institution that came into being as in an early form in about the 1st centruy CE, with big changes in the 4th century CE and in the 12th century CE.

As for what was/is “common knowledge”—all that is a matter of total conjecture.  The writers of the NT gospels were NOT writing biography or history.  They were writing a spiritual message. No one knows what portions of the gospels even accurately reflect the man Jesus.  None of the writers knew Jesus, heard him speak. They wrote long after Jesus’ death.

Again the gospels are silent on whether Jesus was married or not.  By the time he started preaching at age 30 and died at 33, he might have been a widower and had grown children and so there would be no need to mention a wife.  Again, the writers of the gospels were not writing history or biography.  The writers of the gospels left out a lot of stuff about Jesus.  We don’t know his hair color, his shoe size, where he lived, his street address, his favorite color, his favorite food, what wine he like ir did not like, how often he went to synagogue (beyond the mandated times men had to present themselves at the temple), etc etc.  I think its more likely that the gospel writers assumed Jesus like most men of his time and place were married and so assuming felt no need to mention his wife.

Again, olok around you.  ee that the majority of clergy in all faith traditions are married.  It works for clergy. There is nothing special about the duties of an RC priest that would preclude marriage.  Not allowing RC priests to marry serves the interest of the RC hierarchy who are only interested in power, profit and privilege.

Lisa Kaiser:
Jesus said in the New Testament: “I and the Father are One” The Father in heaven is pure spirit, virgin and celibate. “My works testify to me and my Father testifies to me.” Two witnesses establish a judicial fact. One witness is no witness.

Mary De Voe,

Again, your RCC teaches the idea of the Hypstatic Union—that Jesus was both fully human and fully God. In other words, your RCC teaches that Jesus lived a total human being and that was nothing different about him as a human being.  And the NT is totally silent on the issue of whether Jesus ever married or not.  there is no evidende to sugges that he did not marry—as would have been the ususal case for a Jewish man of his time and place.

Also, your Vatican does not believe that celibacy is necessary for RC priests. The first 38 0r 39 popes were married, for the first 1200 yrs of the RCC, RC priests had the option to marry.  And lastly, both JPII and BXVI opened the ranks of RC priesthood to married men by allowing married Protestant clergy who converted to RCism and were ordained as RC priest to remain in their marriages.  So if the RCc teaches that priest model jesus on earth, apparently celibacy is not part of the model.

Sex/sexuality are great gifts from God.  God gave them to us to enjoy and for our welfare, happiness.  Being celibate or chaste is not a superior way of life.  Rejection of the gifts of sex/sexuality is a rejection of being fully human. And we do not know if God is “pure spirit, virgin and celibate”.  That’s pure conjecture. when Moses encounters God at the ‘burning bush” Moses wants to know God’s name. God response “eheyeh asher eheyeh.” The Hebrew translation of God’s response is accurate either in the present tense (I AM WHO AM) or in the future tense (I WILL BE WHO I WILL BE). In the future tense, God leaves it open as exactly who or what God is or will be.

Mary De voe,

A bit of additional clarfication re God’s response to Moses:

Moses wants to know God’s name. God response “eheyeh asher eheyeh.” The Hebrew translation of God’s response is accurate either in the present tense (I AM WHO AM) or in the future tense a better tranlsation is
(I WILL BE WHAT I WILL BE). In the future tense, God leaves it open as exactly who or what God is or will be.

Mary -

I would follow Sam’s advice. There’s not much to be gained from arguing with a troll.

Paul,

A pparently what you and Same are saying is that anyone who expresses a viewpoint differnt from yours is a “troll”.  Meaning your mind is closed and you are unwilling to admit that a differing viewpoint may force you to revise your thinking.  And apparently you are also saying that you are unable to refute viewpoints that differ from yours and you thereby admit that you are wrong.  Sounds good!

I believe they used the term “troll” because your responses seem to be tinged with a condescending “I know better than you” , “I’m right and you’re wrong” attitude.  That may not be your intention; but that’s the preception received.

LarryW2LJ,

Sometime people assume stuff that has no basis in fact.  Or project inaccurate meanings on things. Or there are RCs out there who buy into the old outmoded idea that the RCC is the only source of truth on earth, that the RCism is better than any other faith tradition, that only the RCC has the “truth”, etc.  And those folks don’t like it when their viewpoint is challenged—it makes them uncomfortable. They don’t like to think that there are other ways of looking att he world and that the RCC is not all goddness and light.

Lisa, you failed to get my point. My post was in trying to explain why these fine folks here consider you a troll. I, like them, believe in all those “outmoded” beliefs that you are taking delight in mocking. So, no matter how hard you try, I for one will not be made uncomfortable. There’s nothing for me to be uncomfortable with.  And I highly doubt you’re going to make anyone here uncomfortable with themselves. The point of Sam and Paul is, that in your arguements, you’re not being the least bit congenial.  You’re merely baiting and are being condescending.  It’s obvious that you have some kind of ax to grind and are using this forum to do it, as well as to display your perceived superior intellect and education.  May God bless and grant you peace.

LaryW2LJ,

I got your point.  Congeniality does not seem to be the point of many of the comments posted by most folks on this site.  I have no ‘ax to grind”.  I thought this was form for serious discussion, not just for smug RCs who just want to bat unfounded superstitions and inaccurate understandings of RCC teaching back and forth.

so you truly buy into the old outmoded idea that the RCC is the only source of truth on earth, that the RCism is better than any other faith tradition, that only the RCC has the “truth”, etc?  That no other faith tradition (even the ones older than the RCC) has any value, has any thing to teach you? Wow! Too bad.  Its that kind of closed thinking that will lead the RCC back into the Middle Ages, into irrevelancy, into nonexistence.  Too bad the hierarchy of the RCc is squandering all the potential of Vatican II. And that is to the detriment of the RCs in the pews.

Yes, Paul

Lisa,

“so you truly buy into the old outmoded idea that the RCC is the only source of truth on earth”

Yes.

“That no other faith tradition (even the ones older than the RCC) has any value, has any thing to teach you?”

No.

“Its that kind of closed thinking that will lead the RCC back into the Middle Ages, into irrevelancy, into nonexistence.”

It’s not closed thinking - it’s called “faith”.

“Too bad the hierarchy of the RCc is squandering all the potential of Vatican II. And that is to the detriment of the RCs in the pews.”

Vatican II was meant to be a hermeneutic of coninuity, not rupture.

Sorry to disappoint.  And if you truly desire a serious discussion, I would advise next time, perhaps a little more humility and less condescension and snarkiness.  It would go a long way towards a true congenial discussion and would prevent your posts from being percieved as a lecture.

Lisa,

Please allow me to clarify one of my answers:

“That no other faith tradition (even the ones older than the RCC) has any value, has any thing to teach you?”

No. By that , I mean that I DO believe that other faith traditions have value and do have things to teach all of us. I believe these other faith traditions contain fragments of the Truth.  However, I believe that Roman Catholicism contains the “Wholeness of Truth”.

This my faith, those are my beliefs. I realize thay are not yours - and that’s quite all right. You, like all of us, were granted free will and are quite entitled to believe in what you do.

Take care, and as always, may God bless you and yours.

Larry,

what is patently clear from your comments is that you are uncomfortable with other viewpoints and faith traditions.  It is clear that from your comments and comments from others that the any RC intellectual tradition is dead among RCs.  That many many RCs are closed off and are happy to march backwards.  That itis just all about trying to convince yourselves that your faith tradition is the only “truth"on earth.  That was the thinking during the 600 yrs of the RCC’s Inquisition.

BTW,Jesus was an observant Jew.  Jesus was not a RC or a Christian. What he taught about God, and love, etc came straight from the Torah.  But of course Judaism, the faith tradition of your Jesus has nothing to teach you.  OK, your loss.

Larry,

Thank you for clarifying.  Our most recent comments obviously were made close in time and crossed each other.

lisa,
I think if you’d truly moved on in your faith journey, you wouldn’t dally here in the comment boxes.Perhaps the Lord’s leading you here? I know His door’s always unlocked.
God bless.

Kathleen,

First of all, i am not on the comment thread daily.  Secondly, while I have moved on in my faith journey (God has called me elsewhere and i will never return to the RCC), the RCC remains of interest becasue it is large, global and spends millions of dollars lobbying US state and federal lawmakers in an effort to impoe RC teachings upon all Americans.  So it wise to keep my eyes open.  Also, I read widely.  And the Register is only one among several faith-based publications I read on a regular basis.  And as for the Register, reading it does not mean I agree with it.  Again, its about finding out how the right-wing thinks

Lisa,
I wrote “dally”, not “daily.
I hope you continue to dally here.Perhaps it’s a part of God’s plan.Who knows?
You have a good weekend.
God bless.

There can be no ecumenism until all people agree on WHO God is. The Holy Mother of God is espoused by the Holy Spirit and conceives Jesus Christ, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity. The Nicene Creed states: “conceived of the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary”. Could The Blessed Virgin Mary conceive Our Lord, Jesus Christ, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity if the Holy Ghost is not a Person? Holy Mary gives to Jesus Christ His humanity, Body and Soul. The Holy Ghost gives to Jesus Christ His Divinity and His Sovereignty. “I AM WHO I AM” Is the Name of God given to Moses. WHO denotes the Persons of the Holy Trinity, the Supreme Sovereign Being. What, that and which do not denote personhood in man, nor in God.

God is omnipresent. There is only the present with the Supreme Sovereign Being. God is.