|
Q u i c k Q u e s t i o n s
|
This Rock
Volume 15, Number 8
 October 2004 
|
|
|
Is a Saint’s Name Required for Baptism?
Q: I am preparing for my infant daughter’s baptism, and the parish priest is upset because my daughter does not have a saint’s name. Is this required?
A: No. All that canon law requires is that the name not be opposed to Christian beliefs:
"Parents, sponsors, and parish priests are to take care that a name is not given that is foreign to Christian sentiment" (Code of Canon Law 855).
Examples of names that would not meet this requirement would be Lucifer or Jezebel, as those names are too closely identified with enemies of God’s people. Secular names such as Taylor or Madison might not be historically Christian, but they do not reflect anti-Christian sentiment and thus would be allowable. The Church does strongly encourage parents to give their child a saint’s name or a name that represents a Christian virtue or mystery (e.g., Felix, Hope, Grace):
"The sacrament of baptism is conferred ‘in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.’ In baptism, the Lord’s name sanctifies man, and the Christian receives his name in the Church. This can be the name of a saint, that is, of a disciple who has lived a life of exemplary fidelity to the Lord. The patron saint provides a model of charity; we are assured of his intercession. The ‘baptismal name’ can also express a Christian mystery or Christian virtue" (Catechism of the Catholic Church 2156).
If you wish to give your child a saint’s name and at the same time please your parish priest, you can give a saint’s name to be given at baptism. It does not need to be added to the birth certificate; the priest will call the child by that name only during the baptismal ceremony. The baptismal name may be used again at confirmation, thus more closely linking these two sacraments of Christian initiation.
Q: In pre-Vatican II church architecture, tabernacles often were built into the altar. Now, as stated in the 2002 General Instruction of the Roman Missal, the norm is for the tabernacle not to be on an altar on which Mass is celebrated. Why?
A: The relevant passage from the GIRM says this: "It is more in keeping with the meaning of the sign that the tabernacle in which the Most Holy Eucharist is reserved not be on an altar on which Mass is celebrated" (315). The reason for this change is to emphasize the change of the bread and the wine into the body and blood of Christ that takes place during the Consecration (or, to put it in more traditional terms, to spotlight the "miracle of the Mass").
The reasoning is that if the reserved Blessed Sacrament is kept in a tabernacle on the altar then Jesus is always present on the altar, and the eucharistic change is not nearly as significant to the congregation as it is when Jesus becomes present on an altar on which he had not been present previously. The miracle that occurs is still awesome under both conditions, but it is better highlighted with the reform of tabernacle placement. Notice that there is no requirement to remove the tabernacle completely from the church but only to create a separation from the altar of sacrifice.
Q: Can a rosary be worn as a piece of jewelry?
A: "Sacred objects, set aside for divine worship by dedication or blessing, are to be treated with reverence. They are not to be made over to secular or inappropriate use, even though they may belong to private persons" (CIC 1171).
Essentially, sacramentals such as rosaries must be treated with respect, particularly if they have been blessed. Reverence is the attitude of awe or respect that is most often given to sacred things. By its very definition, it is an interior disposition that usually cannot be determined by onlookers by appearances alone. A person may be wearing a rosary as a statement of faith, to keep it handy for praying throughout the day, or to avoid losing it. Those reasons would be indicative of reverence and would not interfere with the canon’s directive that sacramentals must be treated reverently.
Ordinarily speaking, then, if someone is spotted wearing a rosary, he should be charitably presumed to be wearing it for just reasons. Only if the rosary is being put to an objectively sordid use (e.g., a rock star is using it as a prop in a music video, obscenely contrasting the symbolic purity of the rosary with the immodest or immoral actions of the performers) can we be sure that the rosary is being treated irreverently.
Q: I was told by a priest that the sacrament of holy anointing can be given to any Catholic even when there is no serious reason. Is this true?
A: No. A priest is never to administer the sacrament of the anointing of the sick for trivial reasons. Concerning when the sacrament can be received, the Catechism states the following: "The Anointing of the Sick ‘is not a sacrament for those only who are at the point of death. Hence, as soon as anyone of the faithful begins to be in danger of death from sickness or old age, the fitting time for him to receive this sacrament has certainly already arrived.’
"If a sick person who received this anointing recovers his health, he can in the case of another grave illness receive this sacrament again. If during the same illness the person’s condition becomes more serious, the sacrament may be repeated. It is fitting to receive the anointing of the sick just prior to a serious operation. The same holds for the elderly whose frailty becomes more pronounced" (CCC 1514–5; cf. Sacrosanctum Concilium 73; CCC 1511–25).
Q: Suppose on a Saturday you go to Saturday morning Mass, to a nuptial Mass, to an ordination Mass, and to a vigil Mass. How many times can you receive Communion?
A: That’s quite a day! But, no matter how many Masses are crammed in, the rule remains the same according to the Code of Canon Law:
"One who has received the blessed Eucharist may receive it again on the same day only within a eucharistic celebration in which that person participates, without prejudice to the provision of canon 921 §2. . . .
"Christ’s faithful who are in danger of death, from whatever cause, are to be strengthened by Holy Communion as Viaticum. Even if they have already received Holy Communion that same day, it is nevertheless strongly suggested that in danger of death they should communicate again" (CIC 917, 921).
So, in the course of the day in the hypothesis offered, a person could receive Communion at any two Masses of his choice. If, on the way home, he got into an accident, he could receive Communion again, without participation in a Mass, if he was in danger of death.
Q: I am wrestling with whether or not to purchase and carry a handgun. What does the Church teach about self-defense?
A: The Church’s teaching on the legitimacy of self-defense can be found in paragraphs 2263–7 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Of particular interest is paragraph 2264:
"Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one’s own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow."
The Catechism quotes Thomas Aquinas, who said that a man has the right to defend his life with necessary violence but must not go beyond what is necessary to save his life (cf. ST II-II:64:7). Of course, in the heat of battle it may be difficult to moderate the force with which one defends one’s life. Aquinas does not say that a person must "pull punches," so to speak, when defending his life; he merely is cautioning that one cannot deliberately choose to inflict excess violence after one has ensured his own safety.
Q: A friend of mine says that in Matthew 6:7, Jesus condemns repetitious prayers, which proves that it is wrong to pray the rosary. How do I respond?
A: Your friend read the passage a little too quickly. Jesus isn’t condemning repetition in prayer; he’s condemning vain prayer. When Jesus said, "Do not babble like the pagans, who think that they will be heard because of their many words" (Matthew 6:7, NAB), he was referring to a belief of the pagans that a god would not listen to your prayer unless you used his correct title, and the title would change every day. Thus, the pagans would begin their prayer with every title they could think of in order to make sure their prayers would be heard (e.g., "O Great Zeus, O Master of Olympia, O Great Father Zeus. . . .") Jesus tells us this is vain because pagan gods don’t exist, and when we pray to God he hears all our prayers. We don’t have to worry about getting the right title.
In fact, Scripture gives us many examples of repetitive prayer. For example, in Matthew 26:36–46, Jesus prayed the same prayer three times. In Revelation 4:8, four living creatures are around and within the throne, and day and night they do not cease to say, "Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God Almighty." And then there’s the tax collector in Luke 18:9–14 who is beating his breast repeatedly and praying, "God, be merciful to me, a sinner!" And let’s not forget Luke 11:1–4, where Jesus tells us how to pray: He gives us the Lord’s Prayer. Since most Christians pray the Lord’s Prayer from time to time, they are all "guilty" of repetitious prayer. But it is not vain prayer—after all, we merely are doing as Jesus taught us.
Any prayer can be prayed in vain. What makes a prayer efficacious is the attitude of the heart (cf. CCC 2559). And sadly, "If our heart is far from God, the words of prayer are in vain" (CCC 2562; cf. Matt. 15:8–9).
Q: What is the Church’s stand on limbo?
A: Even though the theory of limbo has never been a defined doctrine of the Church, the Church has never rejected it. The official teaching of the Church on the fate of unbaptized children is found in the Catechism:
"As regards children who have died without baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved and Jesus’ tenderness toward children, which caused him to say, ‘Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,’ allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without baptism. All the more urgent is the Church’s call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy baptism" (CCC 1261).
While it is possible that the theory of limbo is true, Vatican II taught that God offers every person (including unborn children) the possibility of salvation, even if it is in a way that we cannot perceive or understand (cf. Gaudiam et Spes 22). Thus, there’s no need to postulate a middle destiny between the joys of heaven and the pains of hell.
Q: For several months our parish bulletin has included this announcement: "Introduction to yoga for beginning, intermediate, and advanced Hatha yoga, and Iyengar techniques for your wellness and stress relief. Your teacher has found yoga to be a tool for healing for the body, mind, and spirit." Is this acceptable and should it be published in a church bulletin?
A: Particular physical exercises that are common to yoga and that help improve one’s health are perfectly fine. The problem is when a Christian participates in non-Christian Eastern spirituality. If your church is sponsoring an exercise class, it should call it simply an exercise class and omit confusing and possibly scandalous terminology such as yoga. If the church is sponsoring classes in non-Christian Eastern spirituality, that is a serious problem that should be discussed with the pastor.
Q: I had an argument with a priest about horoscopes. He said they are fine, and I said that horoscopes go against the first commandment. Who is right?
A: Here is what the Catechism says:
"All forms of divination are to be rejected: recourse to Satan or demons, conjuring up the dead or other practices falsely supposed to ‘unveil’ the future. Consulting horoscopes, astrology, palm reading, interpretation of omens and lots, the phenomena of clairvoyance, and recourse to mediums all conceal a desire for power over time, history, and, in the last analysis, other human beings, as well as a wish to conciliate hidden powers. They contradict the honor, respect, and loving fear that we owe to God alone" (CCC 2116, emphasis added).
While some people who check out "what the stars say" may not really believe in astrology, it is at the very least an imprudent practice that can weaken faith in God and trust in his providence. To the extent that the predictions are believed and followed, it can constitute grave matter. Full knowledge and free consent of the will are required in addition to grave matter to constitute a mortal sin.
All in all, one should refrain from reading astrology columns and definitely should never consult an astrologer.
Q: The third luminous mystery of the rosary is the proclamation of the kingdom. What is the origin of this mystery?
A: In the Holy Father’s apostolic letter Rosarium Virginis Mariae, he says of the luminous mysteries, "Each of these mysteries is a revelation of the kingdom now present in the very person of Jesus." Of the third luminous mystery he says, "Another mystery of light is the preaching by which Jesus proclaims the coming of the kingdom of God, calls to conversion (cf. Mark 1:15) and forgives the sins of all who draw near to him in humble trust (cf. Mark 2:3–12; Luke 7:47–48): the inauguration of that ministry of mercy that he continues to exercise until the end of the world, particularly through the sacrament of reconciliation, which he has entrusted to his Church (cf. John 20:22–23)" (RVM 21).
So the origin of the mystery is Christ, who reconciles the world to himself, healing our spiritual wounds with compassion and mercy, especially through the sacrament of reconciliation. When Christ reigns in our hearts, the kingdom of God is within us.
|
C A T H O L I C A N S W E R S :
[TOP]
of
