|
Q u i c k Q u e s t i o n s
|
This Rock
Volume 15, Number 7
 September 2004 
|
|
|
Christ Was Crucified on the Cross, Not Resurrected on It
Q: Our church has a risen Christ above the altar, but our processional cross isn’t a traditional crucifix. Instead of Jesus being nailed to the cross, one of his arms is reaching upward. Would this be considered a crucifix?
A: The processional cross depicting Jesus in such a stylized pose does not comply with the new GIRM requirement for the altar cross. The altar cross must have a corpus attached, the figure of Christ crucified. This means the hands and feet are nailed to the cross:
"Also on or close to the altar, there is to be a cross with a figure of Christ crucified" (117).
"There is also to be a cross, with the figure of Christ crucified upon it, either on the altar or near it, where it is clearly visible to the assembled congregation. It is appropriate that such a cross, which calls to mind for the faithful the saving Passion of the Lord, remain near the altar even outside of liturgical celebrations" (308).
Q: I’m a cradle Catholic who grew up under the impression that nuns and sisters were the same thing. But sometimes when I go to different Catholic vocational web sites, the selection usually says something like this: priests, deacons, brothers, sisters, nuns, lay person. Is there a difference between nuns and sisters? If so, what is the difference?
A: The distinction between nuns and sisters actually was made by the old Code of Canon Law. Nuns were cloistered and made what were called solemn perpetual vows, which were somewhat more binding than the simple perpetual vows made by sisters.
With the new Code of Canon Law, this distinction no longer exists. All perpetual vows are the same. But some cloistered women religious still prefer to call themselves nuns. Popularly speaking, the two terms continue to be used interchangeably.
Q: My brother, a fallen away Catholic, is talking about getting a vasectomy. The Church’s moral teaching on this matter does not sway him. What can I do to persuade him not to do this?
A: You might suggest that he research some of the lesser known health risks associated with vasectomies. For example, some studies indicate that the risk of prostate cancer increases dramatically for men who have had vasectomies. In 1993, Harvard published the results of two studies of vasectomized males. Those results concluded that the overall risk of prostate cancer increased between 56 and 60 percent and even went as high as 89 percent for men who had vasectomies for twenty years or more. There are other health issues of which he should be aware, and the Couple to Couple League has an article that highlights some of them. The article is heavily footnoted with all the pertinent references for the studies discussed (http://ccli.org/contraception/vasectomy.shtml).
Q: Are the bishops and priests of the Society of St. Pius X validly ordained? If so, can someone fulfill the Sunday Mass obligation at an SSPX chapel?
A: Although ordained illicitly, the bishops and priests of the Society of St. Pius X are valid bishops and priests. The status of the SSPX is similar to that of the Orthodox churches that went into schism centuries ago, but the SSPX’s schismatic status is more serious because that schism is recent (1988) and thus more formal for its adherents than it is for Christians who have lived for centuries under Orthodoxy.
The SSPX Mass, though gravely illicit, is valid and thus theoretically could fulfill the Sunday obligation when no valid, licit Catholic Mass is available. But because of the SSPX’s freshly schismatic state, it would be extremely imprudent to attend an SSPX liturgy, and it could cause scandal. When no valid, licit Catholic Mass is available, one is exempted from the Sunday obligation, so there is no need to try to fulfill that obligation at an SSPX chapel.
Pope John Paul II, in Ecclesia Dei, said, "I wish especially to make an appeal both solemn and heartfelt, paternal and fraternal, to all those who until now have been linked in various ways to the movement of Archbishop Lefebvre, that they may fulfill the grave duty of remaining united to the Vicar of Christ in the unity of the Catholic Church and of ceasing their support in any way for that movement."
Q: Lately I have read some articles about the origins and authenticity of a woman named Veronica. This name has brought about curiosity because of how little information exists about her and because of her association with the Stations of the Cross. Why would the Church grant sainthood to someone without being certain of her existence?
A: In the early centuries of the Church, there was not a formal canonization process. Saints were declared or acclaimed by the people after death. Later on, the Church formalized the canonization process in order to prevent such abuses as venerating someone about whom little or nothing is known.
The name Veronica is Hebrew for "true face" and refers to the story that after a woman used her veil to wipe away the blood on Christ’s face during his carrying of the cross, her veil was imprinted with Christ’s image.
By giving the woman a name that symbolizes the story, the early Christians may have been giving a clue that this was a well-known story but that the person who assisted Christ was unknown. It would be similar to a hospital referring to an unknown accident victim as "John Doe," a well-known medical pseudonym. The person exists but the hospital assigned him a generic identity until his true identity could be ascertained. In the same way, it is possible that an unknown woman gave practical assistance to Jesus during his journey to Calvary. The first Christians may have known only what she did, not who she was, and so assigned her a name that reflected the story of her encounter with Christ.
So is it possible to honor St. Veronica even though we have no knowledge of her beyond the fact that early Christians believed that a certain woman of Jerusalem helped Jesus during the Via Dolorosa? Of course. Even today, anonymous heroes are honored for their deeds even though nothing particular about their lives can now be known. Consider, for example, the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at Arlington National Cemetery.
Q: Is it true that Martin Luther intentionally added words to the Bible?
A: Martin Luther did indeed add words to the Bible to help support his beliefs about justification.
Fr. Mitch Pacwa, S.J., explains: "Luther added the words alone and only to Paul’s writings when he said people are justified ‘by faith alone’ or they are justified ‘only by faith.’ The only place where the Bible actually mentions being justified by faith alone is James 2:24: ‘You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.’ The Bible explicitly says that we are not justified by faith alone but by works, too. Therefore, the Catholic Church has always taught what the Scripture teaches on this and on other things" (www.catholic-forum.com/luxveritatis/defendrock/scriptur.htm).
The Catholic Encyclopedia article on justification states: "It is well known that Luther in his German translation of the Bible falsified Rom. 3:28 by interpolating the word alone (by faith alone)" (www.newadvent.org/cathen/08573a.htm).
In the book The God Who Justifies, James White goes to great lengths to defend Luther’s distortion of the word of God.
Q: My parish is offering a holistic "healing touch" workshop. I was told it’s a therapeutic "energy technique" that uses the hands to heal through touch. Is this okay or is it New Age nonsense?
A: There is, of course, nothing wrong with a real therapeutic massage. Some people need massages as a way of relieving muscle tension and pain. But there is a New Age discipline known as the "healing touch," which believes physical and emotional ailments are caused by poorly distributed "energy" in the body, which the therapeutic touch tries to move around. What you’re describing sounds New Age.
The following excerpt is from the Church document on the New Age: Jesus Christ, the Bearer of the Water of Life: A Christian Reflection on the "New Age":
"Advertising connected with New Age covers a wide range of practices as acupuncture, biofeedback, chiropractic, kinesiology, homeopathy, iridology, massage and various kinds of ‘bodywork’ (such as orgonomy, Feldenkrais, reflexology, Rolfing, polarity massage, therapeutic touch, etc.), meditation and visualization, nutritional therapies, psychic healing, various kinds of herbal medicine, healing by crystals, metals, music or colors, reincarnation therapies and, finally, twelve-step programs and self-help groups. The source of healing is said to be within ourselves, something we reach when we are in touch with our inner energy or cosmic energy.
"New Age is often referred to by those who promote it as a ‘new spirituality.’ It seems ironic to call it ‘new’ when so many of its ideas have been taken from ancient religions and cultures. But what really is new is that New Age is a conscious search for an alternative to Western culture and its Judeo-Christian religious roots. ‘Spirituality’ in this way refers to the inner experience of harmony and unity with the whole of reality, which heals each human person’s feelings of imperfection and finiteness. People discover their profound connectedness with the sacred universal force or energy, which is the nucleus of all life. When they have made this discovery, men and women can set out on a path to perfection, which will enable them to sort out their personal lives and their relationship to the world, and to take their place in the universal process of becoming and in the New Genesis of a world in constant evolution. The result is a cosmic mysticism based on people’s awareness of a universe burgeoning with dynamic energies. Thus cosmic energy, vibration, light, God, love—even the supreme Self—all refer to one and the same reality, the primal source present in every being."
For more in-depth information on the "healing touch," see "Is Healing Touch at Your Parish?" by Clare McGrath Merkle (a former "healer") at www.catholicculture.org/docs/doc_view.cfm?recnum=2928.
Q: With regards to infants who die before baptism, paragraphs 1261 and 1283 of the Catechism answer this question. Paragraph 1283 states: "With respect to children who have died without baptism, the liturgy of the Church invites us to trust in God’s mercy and to pray for their salvation." The Church is saying that it doesn’t really know what the eternal destiny of the child will be. If the Church isn’t sure of the infant’s eternal destiny, why doesn’t it do everything possible to get the infant baptized? I have heard of cases in which a priest won’t baptize a baby because the parents aren’t practicing Catholics. Why should the action of the parents—or anyone for that matter—possibly affect the eternal destination of the child? Also, since there is life at the moment of conception, why not have the child baptized in utero as soon as possible when it has been confirmed that conception has taken place?
A: All of the sacraments are personal signs of God embracing his people, and they always are administered in a personal context. The context of baptism is the Christian community in the person of the parents and the parish. The womb has never been the context for baptizing an infant, nor has baptizing a baby outside of the context of a believing community.
We must not underestimate the extent of God’s mercy. It is not a matter of chance. In the season of Lent our attention is focused on the extent to which God was willing to go in demonstrating his love for us. It is in looking at his bleeding body, broken and scorned, that the Church entrusts every person of the human race. We do what we can—which is indeed limited. And we entrust all that we cannot do to his mercy. Our eyes are on him.
Better to trust his Church in this matter. In our efforts to leave no stone unturned, we must not dismiss the assurance of his love as too chancy.
Q: Does contemporary Judaism still maintain animal sacrifices?
A: Since the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in A.D. 70, animal sacrifices in Judaism for the most part have ended. Post-Christian Judaism retains a liturgical holiday cycle and teachers (known as rabbis) study the Jewish texts, but since there is not a temple, there is usually no animal sacrifice. Post-Christian Judaism could be compared to the Babylonian exile: That was a time when there was no temple and rabbinic Judaism got its start. One exception to the general norm is the kapparot ceremony on Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement), in which a fowl is used as a vicarious scapegoat rather than the traditional goat or ram. The meat is then given to the poor. It is usually practiced in the ultra-Orthodox communities. Modern Jewish communities usually substitute almsgiving for this ritual sacrifice.
The Jewish people do keep track of priestly descendants for the ceremony of the redemption of the firstborn son (called Pidyon HaBen) and in the eventuality that the Temple is restored. It generally is agreed that priestly descendants have the last name Cohen or equivalents to that name in the various languages. Were the Temple to be restored—and this is not likely since the Muslim Dome of the Rock sits on the site of the old Temple—men of this family would be considered eligible to be Jewish priests.
Q: Whenever I try to discuss the faith with "Bible Christians," I come away angry and frustrated by their lack of comprehension and their insistence on teaching a false gospel. Besides prayer, do you have any suggestions for me?
A: Yes. As your interaction with Evangelicals is leading you to occasions of frustration and lack of charity, you should consider stepping out of the theological debate arena for a while. Use that time to learn more about your faith and work on your spiritual life with an orthodox and trusted confessor or spiritual director. If, after study and reflection, you and your spiritual director think that you are ready to re-engage in apologetics, you might then look to some books and study materials that can help you hone your discussion skills.
Not everyone is called to engage in debate with non-Catholics. Even those who are so called sometimes have to take a break from evangelistic activity when they get in over their heads. The apostle Paul, at the beginning of his ministry, was sent off to Tarsus by the Church after his clumsy first attempts at evangelization incited the Hellenists to try to kill him (cf. Acts 9:29–30). Only later, when Barnabas was sent by the Church to find him, did Paul begin the mission to the Gentiles that the Lord had ordained for him (cf. Acts 9:15–16; 11:22–26).
|
C A T H O L I C A N S W E R S :
[TOP]
of
