A Tale of Two Covenants

There’s a bit of kerfuffle I’m hearing through the grapevine about my views on the relationship between the Old and New Covenants. If you are interested, I offer the following little series I wrote a while back. It is offered, not as the “The Binding Teaching of the Church” but rather as a permissible opinion with a range of permissible opinions that I happen to think has the strongest and most obvious biblical support and is the best synthesis of the Tradition, but not the only possible synthesis of the Tradition.

By the way, the main thing the Church’s Magisterium does is not bind but loose. That is, it steps in to tell squabbling believers that they can’t issue, nor need they feel bound by, bulls of excommunication over matters of liberty and that Catholics are free to squeeze the toothpaste tube from the middle or from the end (though the Church does dogmatically bind the faithful have the toilet paper unroll from the front, not the back. I, I mean the Church, hates it when it unrolls from the back!)


A Tale of Two Covenants, Part 1

A Tale of Two Covenants, Part 2

A Tale of Two Covenants, Part 3

A Tale of Two Covenants, Part 4

"This is a good point. I think USCCB should speak out about this "trend" (its ..."

Fire Raymond Arroyo
"A thing that haunts me from the EWTN torture controversy in the Bush years was ..."

Fire Raymond Arroyo
"The U.S. is deliberately closing ports of entry."

Lying Mob Boss pauses to change ..."
"Arroyo represents EWTN perfectly, why should they fire him? Instead, the USCCB should state clearly ..."

Fire Raymond Arroyo

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • adevar@hotmail.com

    I read the first two parts , and indeed there are good points there..

  • TuEs

    Mark, May I suggest you try and to reconcile the below with your conclusion in your article:

    Pope Pius XII Mystici Corporis Christi:

    And first of all, by the death of our Redeemer, the New Testament took the
    place of the Old Law which had been abolished; then the Law of Christ together
    with its mysteries, enactments, institutions, and sacred rites was ratified for
    the whole world in the blood of Jesus Christ. For, while our Divine Savior was
    preaching in a restricted area – He was not sent but to the sheep that were
    lost of the House of Israel [30] – the Law and the Gospel were together in
    force; [31] but on the gibbet of His death Jesus made void the Law with its
    decrees [32] fastened the handwriting of the Old Testament to the Cross, [33]
    establishing the New Testament in His blood shed for the whole human race.[34]
    “To such an extent, then,” says St. Leo the Great, speaking of the
    Cross of our Lord, “was there effected a transfer from the Law to the
    Gospel, from the Synagogue to the Church, from the many sacrifices to one
    Victim, that, as Our Lord expired, that mystical veil which shut off the
    innermost part of the temple and its sacred secret was rent violently from top
    to bottom.” [35]

    30. On the Cross then the Old Law died, soon to be buried and to be a bearer of
    death, [36] in order to give way to the New Testament of which Christ had
    chosen the Apostles as qualified ministers;