|
Q u i c k Q u e s t i o n s
|
This Rock
Volume 16, Number 4
 April 2005 
|
|
|
Can a Judge Force a Priest to Reveal a Confession?
Q: Suppose a prime suspect in a murder case, who did indeed commit the crime, confessed his sin to his priest. The prosecution found out that he went to confession after the murder. They also knew which priest was hearing confessions that day. Could the priest be called to court and forced to reveal the forgiven sin of the suspect?
A: Although there are laws on the books that protect the sacramental seal of confession, it is theoretically possible that a court of law might try to force a priest to reveal a penitent’s confession. Even if such pressure were brought to bear on a priest, he would be required to refuse to reveal the contents of any sacramental confession he heard, even if it meant being held in contempt of court and imprisoned:
"The sacramental seal is inviolable. Accordingly, it is absolutely wrong for a confessor in any way to betray the penitent, for any reason whatsoever, whether by word or in any other fashion. An interpreter, if there is one, is also obliged to observe this secret, as are all others who in any way whatever have come to a knowledge of sins from a confession" (Code of Canon Law 983).
Q: Did Jesus have free will?
A: If Jesus did not have free will, we are all in trouble. First of all, God cannot give what he does not have. So if he gave us free will, then he must have it also. We are redeemed because Jesus freely chose to suffer and die for us. There can be no love without the free choice to love.
Q: Don’t the stories of Enoch and Elijah disprove that heaven was closed?
A: The Church teaches that heaven was closed until Jesus redeemed humanity. Enoch and Elijah were redeemed by Jesus but entered heaven early. They were exceptions. God can do that!
Q: My friend told me that we cannot become like Christ because Christ was perfect and that the Bible tells us that this is impossible. I don’t agree with him, but what can I say to rebuke his answer?
A: Where does Scripture say that it is impossible for us to become like Christ? On the contrary, the Bible commands us to be perfect: "Be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect" (Matt. 5:48). It is certainly impossible for us to ever equal God, but with sanctifying grace we are able to live on his level. Paul speaks of becoming so united with Christ that he can say: "I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me; and the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me" (Gal. 2:20).
When the angel Gabriel told Mary that Elizabeth, who had been barren, was now in her sixth month of pregnancy, he said: "For with God nothing will be impossible" (Luke 1:37).
Q: Is there a list of the relics that are in each church in the world? I would like to know if the Church keeps records and if they’re accessible.
A: The Church does keep records. "It is the duty of the Congregation [for Causes of Saints] to decide those things that pertain to the authenticity and preservation of relics" (Divinus Perfectionis Magister 2), and it’s the responsibility of the Vatican library " to make available to qualified scholars throughout the world, with all necessary caution, both the original and the reproductions in various forms, of the relics conserved in the library, lending every possible and opportune scientific and technical assistance to research, continually updating the equipment and necessary or helpful subsidies for this work" (Nature and Purpose of the Vatican Library).
For a worldwide listing of relics on the Internet, visit www.geocities.com/Athens/Olympus/9587/gazeteer.html#austria. A good book on the subject is Relics: The Shroud of Turin, the True Cross, the Blood of Januarius . . . History, Mysticism, and the Catholic Church by Joan Carroll Cruz.
Q: What is the Miracle of the Holy Fire, and is it a real miracle?
A: The Miracle of the Holy Fire is a centuries-old tradition of the Eastern Orthodox church. On the Orthodox church’s Easter Saturday, the Orthodox patriarch of Jerusalem enters the sepulcher of Christ in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher (called the Church of the Resurrection in the Orthodox tradition). Within a few minutes, the patriarch emerges with lighted candles that are said to be lighted from a holy fire that appears in the sepulcher every year on this date. According to testimonies of some pilgrims outside the sepulcher, their lamps also were lit spontaneously in front of their eyes without any possible explanation.
We do not know of any Catholic investigations into this occurrence, and without one, a Catholic is free to believe either way. Even if a positive pronouncement did occur, a Catholic would not be bound in conscience to believe. But given that there is nothing inherently wrong with believing that such a miracle occurs, out of courtesy toward Orthodox Christians a Catholic should be careful not to scandalize pious believers in the miracle.
For an Orthodox perspective on the Miracle of the Holy Fire on the Internet, visit www.monachos.net/great_lent/holy_week_services.shtml.
Q: Will the Church allow a child to die to save the mother?
A: The Church requires that every effort be made to save both. To take the example of a developing embryo getting lodged in the fallopian tube, causing the tube to expand and ultimately rupture, the Church allows for the removal of the fallopian tube due to the abnormal growth contained within it, which, unfortunately, happens to be an embryo. The intention is to remove the damaged tube, not to kill the baby. If it were possible to implant the embryo into the mother’s uterus and save the baby, it would be morally obligatory to do so. But the fact that medical science is not yet advanced enough to succeed at this yet should not prevent the doctors from removing the damaged tube. But, again, the Church expects every effort to be made to save both mother and child.
Q: If thousands of voters were disenfranchised in an election, would it be immoral on the part of those responsible?
A: If anyone with the power to do so freely and knowingly sabotaged another’s right to vote with the intention of changing the outcome of an election that would be a grave injustice.
It also would be a grave injustice to accuse another of doing such a thing if there is reasonable evidence that such accusations may be false.
Q: Does the Bible say marriage is for a man and a woman?
A: Marriage between a man and a woman was instituted by God with Adam and Eve. Genesis 2:24 states: "Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh".
In Matthew 19:4–5 we see Jesus reaffirming this: "Have you not read that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one’?"
Q: If non-Catholic parents request that their Catholic children cremate them and spread their ashes somewhere, can the children honor the request?
A: "The practice of scattering cremated remains on the sea, from the air, or on the ground, or keeping cremated remains in the home of a relative or friend of the deceased are not the reverent disposition that the Church requires" (Order of Christian Funerals 416).
While cremated remains can be committed to the sea or to the ground in an urn, coffin, or other suitable container, the Church believes that the scattering of ashes is an irreverent treatment of the human body. In light of this it would not be appropriate to promise to scatter another person’s ashes, even those of a non-Catholic, and it may cause scandal to do so.
Q: If two people live together before marriage and do not go to confession before their wedding in a Catholic Church, is their marriage valid in the eyes of the Church?
A: The validity of the sacrament does not depend on the holiness of the couple.
"This is the meaning of the Church’s affirmation that the sacraments act ex opere operato [literally, ‘by the very fact of the action being performed’], i.e., by virtue of the saving work of Christ, accomplished once for all. It follows that ‘the sacrament is not wrought by the righteousness of either the celebrant or the recipient but by the power of God.’ From the moment that a sacrament is celebrated in accordance with the intention of the Church, the power of Christ and his Spirit acts in and through it, independently of the personal holiness of the minister" (CCC 1128).
Q: Is practicing natural family planning with a contraceptive mentality grave matter? If done with full knowledge and consent, would it constitute a mortal sin?
A: For a husband and wife to refuse to have children for selfish reasons is a mortal sin—quite apart from whether they use NFP. NFP is a technique that of itself is morally neutral.
The key word here is selfish. It is possible for a husband and wife to determine not to have children for reasons that are not selfish (e.g., financial or health reasons).
Q: Because of a mild disability, it is difficult for me to receive the host in the hand. Communion time has become very stressful as I have dropped the host once already. I was taught to receive in my hand in CCD. Can I receive on the tongue instead?
A: The norm (traditional method) for receiving Holy Communion is on the tongue, but the Holy See granted an indult allowing the faithful to receive in the hand (except in cases of intinction).
The new General Instruction of the Roman Missal specifically provides that "the consecrated host may be received either on the tongue or in the hand, at the discretion of each communicant" (160).
The following response appeared in the April 1999 issue of Notitiae, the official publication of the Congregation for Divine Worship, regarding the reception of Communion:
Certainly it is clear from the very documents of the Holy See that in dioceses where the eucharistic bread is put in the hands of the faithful, the right to receive the eucharistic bread on the tongue still remains intact to the faithful. Therefore, those who restrict communicants to receive Holy Communion only in the hands are acting against the norms, as are those who refuse to Christ’s faithful [the right] to receive Communion in the hand in dioceses that enjoy this indult.
With attention to the norms concerning the distribution of Holy Communion, ordinary and extraordinary ministers should take care in a particular way that the host is consumed at once by Christ’s faithful, so that no one goes away with the eucharistic species in his hand.
However, let all remember that the time-honored tradition is to receive the host on the tongue. The celebrant priest, if there is a present danger of sacrilege, should not give the faithful communion in the hand, and he should make them aware of the reason for the way of proceeding.
Q: My husband and I were asked to be godparents for our nephew. We are Christian but not Catholic, and after some investigation I found that we were not allowed to be godparents. Instead the honor went to Catholic family members who have numerous moral issues, including drug addiction, adultery, and theft. Why are they acceptable while we’re not?
A: Simply being Catholic does not make someone a good candidate to be a godparent. The person also must live "a life of faith that befits the role to be undertaken." That requirement rules out prospective candidates who may be Catholic but also would be poor Catholic role models. It is the parents’ responsibility to choose good candidates who fit all the requirements.
You and your husband could not be a Catholic godparent, because one of the godparents’ roles is to help form the child in the Catholic faith. As a non-Catholic, you cannot be asked to form a child in a faith that is not your own. But had it been understood at the time of the baptism, you could have stood as a Christian witness. Even now, you can and should be a Christian role model for your nephew. Given what you report, it is all the more important for you to be involved in their lives and, through your own commitment to Christian holiness, act as a counterbalance to the godparents’ bad examples.
Q: What is apokatastasis?
A: The Catholic Encyclopedia defines apocatastasis (or apokatastasis) as "a name given in the history of theology to the doctrine that teaches that a time will come when all free creatures will share in the grace of salvation—in a special way, the devils and lost souls" (www.newadvent.org/cathen/01599a.htm). The doctrine was condemned at the Council of Constantinople in A.D. 543.
Q: Is it okay to hang rosary beads from your rearview mirror?
A: If it is done as a statement of faith or for some other just purpose, hanging rosary beads on the rearview mirror would not violate canon law’s requirement that sacramentals be treated with due reverence:
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).
Q: Could you explain anathema? Does the Church teach that Protestants are anathema because they don’t agree with the Church?
A: The use of the word anathema has evolved during the history of the Church, and today it means the same thing as excommunication. (The word anathema is no longer officially used.) Because a person must be a Catholic to be anathema (excommunicated) the term does not apply to Protestants.
|
C A T H O L I C A N S W E R S :
[TOP]
of
