|
Q u i c k Q u e s t i o n s
|
This Rock
Volume 14, Number 7
 September 2003 
|
|
|
What Was Old Is New Again
Q: Why were practices such as Communion in the hand and receiving Communion from a layperson introduced?
A: We have evidence that receiving Communion in the hand was practiced in the early Church. In his instructions to newly baptized catechumens, Cyril of Jerusalem said, "In approaching therefore, come not with thy wrists extended, or thy fingers spread; but make thy left hand a throne for the right, as for that which is to receive a King. And having hollowed thy palm, receive the Body of Christ, saying over it, Amen" (Catechetical Lectures XXIII One the Sacred Liturgy and Communion).
Individuals may or may not prefer to receive Communion in the hand, but it is a practice that Christians have long used.
The same is true of receiving Communion from someone other than a priest. Non-priests have distributed Communion, especially to the sick, in many ages. This also is nothing new. The Holy See wishes to make sure that provisions for extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion are not abused, as they often are in this country, but in principle there is no problem.
Q: Can different rites in the Church have different theologies or beliefs?
A: There are differences allowed in the theology found in different rites, provided that they do not contradict what the Church has taught infallibly.
This is no different from allowing differences of thought on theological questions within the Latin rite—as long as they don’t contradict what Rome has mandated. For example, Jesuits tend to disagree with Dominicans on certain issues regarding grace and predestination, but Rome has permitted these differing opinions, so along as neither is opposed to the one true faith.
Q: Given that the Orthodox didn’t break away from Rome until 1054, and that the Old Testament canon was already set forth by the fourth-century councils of Hippo and Carthage, why does the Orthodox Old Testament canon include some books that Catholics consider apocryphal?
A: The Catholic Old Testament canon was defined even before the councils of Hippo and Carthage, by the Synod of Rome in 382 under Pope Damasus I. The canon was not infallibly defined until after the Great Schism, in the councils of Florence and Trent.
Most Orthodox (except for a few under the influence of Protestants) accept the Septuagint tradition of the Old Testament canon, but since the Septuagint tradition was not fixed (i.e., some versions of the Septuagint contained a few books that others didn’t), there was still flux on this point. Since Greek was the language of the East, the Orthodox never migrated from using the Septuagint as their Old Testament, and its fuzzy boundaries were not sufficiently clarified in the East by the time of the breakaway.
Incidentally, the breakaway wasn’t something that occurred in 1054. It was a long process of alienation of East from West that began much earlier.
Q: Where do souls go immediately after death? Can living people do anything for the dead, such as forgive their sins?
A: Those who die in God’s friendship and are perfectly purified go immediately to heaven. Those who die in God’s friendship and are imperfectly purified undergo purification before entering the joy of heaven. Those who die outside of God’s friendship go immediately to hell.
We can forgive sins to the degree that they were committed against us, but only God can forgive sins to the degree that they were committed against him. We can also pray that God will be gentle with the dead if they are being purified, though if they are already in heaven or hell then our prayers do not affect them. We can assist by prayer only those who are being purified in purgatory in preparation for going to heaven.
Q: What is the Catholic Church’s opinion on the ministries on TBN, such as Benny Hinn?
A: The Church has not taken a specific stand on the ministries you mention. But it is very clear from observing these ministries that they do not preach the Christian faith in its fullness and that there is much to be suspicious of in their reports of miracles.
Benny Hinn in particular has a penchant for making unorthodox claims regarding the nature of the Godhead. For example, he has claimed that the Father and the Spirit both have "spirit bodies" (whatever those are) and that within the Trinity "there’s nine of them" (whatever that means).
Q: Does the number 666 have any true ties to the Antichrist or Satan?
A: In many ancient languages, including Hebrew and Aramaic, the alphabet doubled for numbers. The most likely interpretation of the 666 reference is to the numeric value of the letters in the name of the Emperor Nero Caesar, who instituted the first sustained persecution of the Church in the first century and under whom both Peter and Paul were executed. Using this theory, here is how the 666 is derived: Nero Caesar in ancient Hebrew is NRW NQSR (there were no vowels in ancient Hebrew).
N=50;R=200;W=6;N=50;Q=100;S=60;R=200. The sum of the numeric values is 666.
Q: What is the Catholic Church’s teaching about people in the Old Testament living to be hundreds of years old, even into their 900s?
A: The Church does not have a teaching regarding whether these ages are to be taken literally or not. The Church will say that whatever Scripture says is inerrant but must be understood in terms of the rules of literature that were in use at the time.
It is known that in many ancient cultures fantastically large ages were assigned to famous forebears, so that could be an indication that the ages are to be taken as symbolic of the greatness and venerability of the individuals.
However, this is not something the Church has taught. God can keep people alive as long as he wants. If he wants someone to live to be 900, he can keep him alive that long.
Q: Can the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) of the Bible be called the Holy Bible, when it changes the word of God? For example, it frequently changes the word man to people or person.
A: Of course the NRSV can be called the Holy Bible—but it’s necessary to add that it is a very flawed translation. It doesn’t exactly change man to people, since English words such as man don’t appear in the original languages, but it does translate as people Greek and Hebrew words that ought to be rendered man. These translation decisions were influenced by gender politics to utilize so-called inclusive language (which is actually feminist language). For obvious reasons, this translation has been forbidden for use at Mass.
A much better translation is the Revised Standard Version-Catholic Edition, which does not suffer from the same defects.
Q: I am a Southern Baptist whose daughter is cohabitating with her Catholic boyfriend. He has told her that the Bible is full of errors. Is that the Church’s position? Does Catholicism endorse unmarried couples living together? If a Catholic doesn’t follow the teachings of the Bible, the pope, or the Church, is he really Catholic?
A: The Catholic Church teaches that Sacred Scripture is the inerrant and infallible word of God. The Second Vatican Council states: "Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth that God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures’" (Dei Verbum 11).
The Catholic Church rejects cohabitation outside of marriage. The Catechism states, "All the baptized are called to chastity. The Christian has ‘put on Christ’ (Gal. 3:27), the model for all chastity. All Christ’s faithful are called to lead a chaste life in keeping with their particular states of life. At the moment of his baptism, the Christian is pledged to lead his affective life in chastity" (CCC 2348).
It further states, "Those who are engaged to marry are called to live chastity in continence. They should see in this time of testing a discovery of mutual respect, an apprenticeship in fidelity, and the hope of receiving one another from God. They should reserve for marriage the expressions of affection that belong to married love. They will help each other grow in chastity" (CCC 2350).
Is a Catholic who doesn’t follow the teachings of the Bible, the pope, and the Church really a Catholic? Yes, though not a good one. In the same way, an American citizen who rejects basic principles of American democracy and shows no regard for federal law remains an American citizen, but not a good one.
Q: Given that participation in the Eucharist unites us as one body in Christ, how should we view Protestants who do not partake in or even believe in the Eucharist? How do we understand them in relation to the communion of the saints uniting the Church on earth, the saints in heaven, and the souls in purgatory?
A: Through faith and baptism we become united to Christ and therefore with each other. All baptized persons are linked to the Church, though they do not profess the faith in its entirety or do not preserve unity of communion with the successor of Peter. No one will call himself Protestant in purgatory or in heaven. Everyone who is united in Christ—whether on earth, in purgatory or in heaven—is part of the communion of saints, even if through no fault of his own he is unaware of the term or does not believe in the doctrine.
Q: Since Easter, our parish church has been decorated in rainbow colors. I understand that the rainbow is a sign of the New Age movement. Is this rainbow decoration something to be concerned about? Where can I learn more about the New Age movement within Catholicism?
A: In the Bible, the rainbow is a sign of God’s covenant with man (cf. Gen. 9:13–16). The New Age movement uses the rainbow as a symbol of the antahkarana, or the Rainbow Bridge. Randy England, in his book The Unicorn in the Sanctuary, says the Rainbow Bridge "represents the bridge of consciousness that each must build between his own mind and soul and the universal mind and soul. It symbolizes realization of oneness with the universe" (p. 43).
As to the significance of the rainbow decorations in your church, that is a question for your pastor. For information on the New Age movement within Catholic circles read Catholics and the New Age by Fr. Mitchell Pacwa, S.J., available from Catholic Answers.
Q: The priest who celebrates Mass on weekends at my parish has instructed us to raise up our hands on cue, when he says, "Let us lift up our hearts—and hands" (to which we are to respond, "We lift them up to the Lord"). Is this a proper Mass prayer? Are we obliged to respond to inappropriate acclamations and/or prayers added to the Mass?
A: There is no provision in liturgical law for lay people raising their hands during Mass. For a priest to instruct the congregation to do so constitutes the mandating of an unapproved posture. No priest has the authority to mandate such a posture on his own authority. No lay person is required to comply with a non-authoritative instruction.
Q: Can you identify the order of nuns who wore the large, white headwear that protruded out like wings on each side of the head? What is the proper name of the headpiece?
A: They are the Daughters of Charity of St. Vincent de Paul. The headpiece—a familiar sight in some old movies—is called a cornette. These days they wear a simpler blue head covering.
Q: I’ve always thought that the Holy Family was poor and that in their poverty and humility Jesus, Mary, and Joseph are models for all families. But recently I read someone’s claim that the Holy Family was not poor because the Greek word describing Joseph’s profession (tekton) indicates that he was a "master craftsman," a class of artisan who made a very comfortable living in his trade.
A: It’s true that Joseph is called a tektonos in Matthew 13:55, but the Greek word tekton means simply craftsman and does not connote anything with regard to level, skill, or income, and the rendering of master craftsman is not etymologically supportable. The scant biblical evidence we have indicates that the Holy Family was poor, not middle-class and certainly not affluent.
Luke writes, "And at the end of eight days, when he was circumcised, he was called Jesus, the name given by the angel before he was conceived in the womb. And when the time came for their purification [forty days] according to the law of Moses [cf. Lev. 12:2–8], they brought him up to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord (as it is written in the law of the Lord, ‘Every male that opens the womb shall be called holy to the Lord’) and to offer a sacrifice according to what is said in the law of the Lord, ‘a pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons’" (Luke 2:21–24).
This passage suggests that Mary and Joseph were poor. According to the Mosaic Law, the mother had to purchase and have sacrificed in the Temple a young lamb as a burnt offering and a turtle dove as a sin offering (this being done to expiate ritual impurity related to blood and childbirth, not personal sin). If the parents could not afford a lamb, they were allowed to substitute two turtle doves or pigeons (cf. Lev. 12:8).
Other than this brief glimpse, the Bible tells us little about the Holy Family’s economic status.
Q: What does the term ex cathedra mean, and where did the Catholic Church come up with it?
A: Ex cathedra is a Latin phrase that means "from the chair." It refers to binding and infallible papal teachings that are promulgated by the pope when he teaches officially in his capacity as the universal shepherd of the Church a doctrine of a matter of faith or morals and addresses it to the entire world. The concept derives from Christ.
In Matthew 23:2–3, Jesus speaks of the authority of the Old Testament magisterium when he says, "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat [Greek, cathedras]; so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice." As Jesus recognized the authority of the Old Testament magisterium when it spoke ex cathedra (with the authority of Moses), we recognize that the New Testament magisterium of the Church, which speaks with the authority not of Moses but Jesus Christ (cf. Matt. 10:40; 16:18–19; 18:18; Luke 10:16; 2 Cor. 5:18–20) possesses a binding, infallible teaching office that is guaranteed by Christ himself (cf. Matt. 28:20; John 14:16, 26; 16:13).
Q: When a non-Catholic marries a Catholic, doesn’t he (or she) have to promise to raise the children of the marriage in the Catholic faith?
A: No. This used to be the case, but the 1983 Code of Canon Law did away with this requirement. The Code states that "the Catholic party . . . [must] promise to do all in his or her power to have all the children baptized and brought up in the Catholic Church" (1125), but the non-Catholic party is not required to make this promise. Thus the non-Catholic party is not asked to violate his conscience if it requires him to refuse to promise to raise the children Catholic, and the Catholic party is asked to live out the belief that Catholicism is true by doing all that is possible to have the children raised in the truth.
|
