Council Day 5 Reflection

Dear Emperor Constantine, Ossius, and fellow Council Members,

Although I was not content with the manner in which the council members portrayed their views, I was extremely happy with the outcome of the decisions.

In regards to the canon that was passed dating Easter to be on the first Sunday following Passover, I was extremely pleased. First of all, I was pleased that everyone agreed that Easter should definitely fall on a Sunday since there is undeniable historical evidence for this case because it is believe by all, that Jesus was crucified on a Thursday and rose again three days later. Furthermore, I truly believe that the Resurrection of Jesus must remain synchronized with Passover and the Jewish calendar because there is a strong connection between Easter and Passover. One of the most important elements of Passover is the “lamb” which points to the Lamb of God (John 1:29). Indeed, Jesus is the Passover Lamb. To remove this critical symbolism of Christ’s death as the Lamb of God who saves us all from Death would be to abandon our core beliefs as Christians. The argument that Passover should not be related to Easter since Passover is a Jewish tradition makes no sense because we need to remember that Christianity has its roots in Judaism and that Jesus was a Jew Himself. Also, it is important to note the ways in which Passover is directly related to the Last Supper. The Last Supper was itself a part of a celebration of Passover. Knowing that He (Jesus) would be crucified in a few hours, Jesus told his disciples that He “eagerly desired to celebrate this Passover with you before I suffer” (Luke 22:15). At this celebration, Jesus took elements of the Passover, such as the unleavened bread and cup, and identified them as His body and blood to symbolize His death. This celebration of the Passover was a powerful foreshadowing of Jesus’ sacrificial death, burial, and resurrection.

Moreover, I was also pleased with the outcome of the creed that was passed concerning the celibacy of the clergy. I think it is vital for us to follow the tradition in Jerusalem for the Bishop to follow in the path of James the Just and his successors by embracing celibacy. I believe that celibacy is a higher vocation than marriage and therefore it makes more sense for the clergy of the Church, who are those that have been called by God to serve the Church, to follow this higher vocation. As Paul mentions in 1 Corinthians, marriage may bring a division in the heart, but marriage is not a sin. It is believed that marriage might bring a division in the heart because it can distract one from the spiritual when one is also focused on his family. Celibacy is a gift that God bestows on those who are called to priesthood. Through celibacy, the priest mirrors the love that Christ has for all, a love that the priest, unattached to spouse and children, can also extend to everyone. With this being said, marriage is not a sin because not all are called by God to serve as clergy. The council further voted that we allow the clergy who are already married to keep their positions. Although I would have liked there to be a more rigid structure of celibacy for the clergy, I am willing to compromise on this issue since I do not want to exclude any one from the Church.

I am greatly looking forward to the upcoming discussions. I hope and pray that  we proceed with proper decorum and respect for all.