|
Q u i c k Q u e s t i o n s
|
This Rock
Volume 17, Number 8
 October 2006 
|
|
|
Bay(side) Watch
Q: Some people in my parish follow the Bayside apparitions and are encouraging me to do the same. What does the Church say about this group?
A: The Bayside apparition ("Our Lady of the Roses") is totally and completely false. A Catholic should ignore it and have nothing to do with it or its literature. The supposed seer, the late Veronica Leuken, issued bizarre revelations and false prophesies that have not come to pass, such as the claim that "the Warning spoken of through the ages will occur in the year 1997." This Warning—not to be confused with the Three Days of Darkness or the Chastisement that some speak of—"is the worldwide cataclysm predicted by little Jacinta Marto, the youngest of the three child-seers at Fatima."
She also said Mary told her that test-tube babies do not have souls, a philosophically and theologically impossible proposition, since all living human beings have souls.
Furthermore, the late bishop of the diocese in which Veronica Leuken resided (Bishop John Mugavero) had repeatedly condemned the apparition as a fake. The condemnation remains in force. The full text of Mugavero’s 1986 declaration concerning the "Bayside Movement" can be found at www.ewtn.com.
—Peggy Frye
Q: Did Fulton Sheen support Vatican II? Sheen is a favorite of some who reject the Council, so a quote from him citing his support for Vatican II would be quite helpful for discussions with them.
A: Archbishop Fulton Sheen’s autobiography Treasure in Clay, which was written just before his death in 1979 and published posthumously, devotes an entire chapter to Sheen’s experience at Vatican II. In his memoirs, Sheen deemed the Council’s document Gaudium et Spes to be "brilliant" (p. 247); he fondly recalled his audiences with both pre-Vatican-II popes such as Pius XI and Pius XII and post-Vatican-II popes such as Bl. John XXIII and Paul VI. Within one year of John Paul II’s election, he was already predicting that John Paul II would be one of the greatest popes in the history of the Church (p. 244).
In addressing the post-conciliar upheaval in the years since the close of the Second Vatican Council, Sheen had this to say: The tensions that developed after the Council are not surprising to those who know the whole history of the Church. It is a historical fact that whenever there is an outpouring of the Holy Spirit as in a general council of the Church, there is always an extra show of force by the anti-Spirit or the demonic. Even at the beginning, immediately after Pentecost and the descent of the Spirit upon the apostles, there began a persecution and the murder of Stephen. If a general council did not provoke the spirit of turbulence, one might almost doubt the operation of the third Person of the Trinity over the assembly. (pp. 292–293) —Michelle Arnold
Q: Is faith necessary for adults to be baptized?
A: Adults must have faith for baptism, but it need not be a fully developed faith. The Catechism explains: The faith required for baptism is not a perfect and mature faith but a beginning that is called to develop. The catechumen or the godparent is asked: "What do you ask of God’s Church?" The response is: "Faith!" For all the baptized, children or adults, faith must grow after baptism. (CCC 1253–1254) —Jim Blackburn
Q: In the prayer "Hail, Holy Queen," we call Mary "our life, our sweetness, and our hope." Is this proper?
A: How often have we heard people refer to their children as their life? We are not inclined to take this literally. It doesn’t mean that their children have taken the place of God in their lives. It simply expresses how important their children are to them.
So with Mary. She is special but not because she has any super power of her own. She is our life because she is the channel the Father chose to bring us her Son. She is our sweetness and our hope for the same reason. We love her so much because she is God’s Mother. Such consideration of Mary does not diminish the reality of who her Son is; rather, it magnifies it. She is special because of how much more special he is. Or do we think that he doesn’t deserve a mother who could be our life, our sweetness, and our hope? Her soul and everything about her magnifies the Lord.
—Fr. Vincent Serpa
Q: Saying that Mary is the Mother of God sounds like saying she is the source of Jesus’ divinity and the Mother of the Trinity. How should I understand this?
A: Understood correctly, the title Mother of God (Greek: Theotokos, "God-bearer") does not mean that Mary is the source of Christ’s divine nature, nor does it mean Mary is the Mother of the Father or the Holy Spirit. It means Mary is Mother of the person of Jesus, who is God: The One whom [Mary] conceived as man by the Holy Spirit, who truly became her Son according to the flesh, was none other than the Father’s eternal Son, the second person of the Holy Trinity. Hence the Church confesses that Mary is truly "Mother of God." (CCC 495) —Peggy Frye
Q: If a person asks in prayer for assistance but no answer comes, should the person just give up on the prayers?
A: We all like our prayers answered yesterday. But the Lord knows the best time. He’s the only one who really knows what time it is. To keep praying is to keep trusting him. To keep trusting him is to keep loving him. St. Monica spent thirty years praying for her son’s conversion. When he finally converted, he became a great saint. But all the while she had been praying, she herself became a saint. Don’t give up on God.
—Fr. Vincent Serpa
Q: I once heard that you can sell a blessed item, but if you do, it is no longer blessed. Is this true?
A: A blessed item may be sold but only for its intrinsic value, not the value of its blessing (which cannot be ascertained anyway). The item remains blessed.
—Jim Blackburn
Q: My husband wants his thirteen-year-old brother to be our baby’s godfather, but our priest said no. My brother-in-law has received confirmation, so why can’t he be the godfather?
A: Confirmation is not the only requirement for a person to be a godparent. Canon law also requires that the person be at least sixteen, unless a different age is stipulated by the bishop or unless the minister of baptism believes that there is just reason to make an exception (Code of Canon Law 874). Apparently your priest does not consider the reasons you’ve given so far to be just reason to make an exception for your brother-in-law.
One of the reasons that there is an age requirement for godparents is that the godparents are expected to assist the parents in forming the child to "live a Christian life befitting the baptized and faithfully to fulfill the duties inherent in baptism" (CIC 872). A thirteen-year-old is himself still being formed in the faith and may not be ready for the responsibility of participating in the spiritual formation of another.
—Michelle Arnold
Q: If a person is baptized in the Catholic Church as an infant and then elects to be baptized in the Baptist church as an adult, what effect does this have?
A: The new baptism, in itself, has no effect. "Baptism seals the Christian with the indelible spiritual mark (character) of his belonging to Christ. . . . Given once for all, baptism cannot be repeated" (CCC 1272).
—Jim Blackburn
Q: My daughter is seven and will be receiving First Communion next year in second grade. The diocese also has them make their confirmation at the same time. But another diocese in which I used to live confirms children when they are teens. Which is correct?
A: The Code of Canon Law states: The sacrament of confirmation is to be conferred on the faithful at about the age of discretion, unless the episcopal conference has decided on a different age; or there is a danger of death; or, in the judgment of the minister, a grave reason suggests otherwise. (CIC 891) Since the Church has traditionally understood the age of reason to be seven years old, your daughter would not be too young to receive confirmation at age eight. In the United States, the bishops’ conference promulgated the following norm in July 2002, with the approval of the Holy See:Following recognition by the Holy See, the [USCCB] has decreed that the age for conferring the sacrament of confirmation in the Latin rite dioceses of the United States will be between "the age of discretion [‘considered to be about age seven’] and about sixteen years of age.’" (www.usccb.org) This means that individual American bishops can decree for their dioceses that the age for confirmation within their diocese be within that range of seven to sixteen years, which is why your former diocese confirms teenagers and your current diocese confirms children who have attained the age of reason.
—Michelle Arnold
Q: A non-Catholic coworker claims there were early Christian councils that upheld the sixty-six books of the Old Testament, but the Catholic Church suppressed them, and it was Martin Luther who finally stood up to the Church and reclaimed the true Bible for Christians. Is there any truth to his statement?
A: No. There were no early councils that endorsed the sixty-six books Protestants honor (check the facts in your local library). The current canon of Scripture was affirmed at the Council of Rome in 382 under Pope Damasus, which included all and only the seventy-three books Catholics honor today. This canon was repeated at Hippo and at Carthage (A.D. 393 and 397, respectively) and has been repeated ever since.
It was Martin Luther who tossed out the seven books considered canonical since the beginning of Church history. He also rejected the epistle to the Hebrews and the book of Revelation. He also called the epistle of James "an epistle of straw" because James 2:14–26 conflicted with his personal theology on good works. He also added the word (in his German translation) only in Romans 3:20 and Romans 4:15, and he inserted the word alone in Romans 3:28.
—Peggy Frye
Q: Why does the pope wear decorated robes and ornate headwear? If he is a Christian, he should be Christ-like. Jesus never dressed that way. He was very humble in his dress.
A: Jesus never wore a top hat and tuxedo. If you wear these things on formal occasions, does that mean that you are not acting in a Christ-like manner and that it would be appropriate to question your Christian commitment? Our Christian commitment is not demonstrated by wearing exactly the clothes that Jesus would have worn but by imitating his example of holiness.
In the pope’s case, he ordinarily wears a simple robe called a cassock and a cap called a zucchetto. For special occasions, such as when he celebrates Mass, he wears a formal robe called a chasuble and a headdress called a miter. These clothes signify his status as Christ’s vicar and honor the occasions on which he wears them, much as our clothing signifies our state in life and honors the occasions on which we wear them. If it is okay for ordinary Christians to wear clothing for such reasons, it is okay for the pope to do so.
—Michelle Arnold
Q: What are some examples of venial sins?
A: The Catechism describes two main types of venial sin. First, one commits venial sin when "in a less serious matter [than mortal sin], he does not observe the standard prescribed by the moral law" (CCC 1862). In other words, if one does something immoral but the matter is not serious enough to be gravely immoral, he commits only venial sin.
For example, deliberate hatred can be venial sin or mortal sin depending on the seriousness of the hatred. The Catechism explains, "Hatred of the neighbor is a sin when one deliberately wishes him evil. Hatred of the neighbor is a grave sin when one deliberately desires him grave harm" (CCC 2303).
Another example is abusive language. "Abusive language is forbidden by the fifth commandment but would be a grave offense only as a result of circumstances or the offender’s intention" (CCC 2073).
The second type of venial sin involves situations in which the matter is serious enough to be gravely immoral, but the offense lacks at least one of the other essential elements required for mortal sin. The Catechism explains that one commits only venial sin "when he disobeys the moral law in a grave matter but without full knowledge or without complete consent" (CCC 1862).
An example of this could be masturbation. The Catechism explains: To form an equitable judgment about the subjects’ moral responsibility [for masturbation] . . . one must take into account the affective immaturity, force of acquired habit, conditions of anxiety, or other psychological or social factors that can lessen, if not even reduce to a minimum, moral culpability. (CCC 2352) —Jim Blackburn
Q: When Moses and Aaron got water from the rock in Numbers 20, what exactly did they do wrong that caused them to be punished?
A: If you re-read Numbers 20:6–11, you’ll see that Moses and Aaron did not do as the Lord commanded them to do. He asked them to speak to the rock and told them that it would bring forth water. Instead, Moses and Aaron decided to strike the rock for water, which was a method of obtaining water that had previously been successful for them (Ex. 17:5–7). In other words, they decided to ignore the Lord’s request and go with what had worked before, which demonstrated a lack of faith (Num. 20:12) and, arguably, superstition (CCC 2111).
—Michelle Arnold
Q: Recently a Methodist friend said that you couldn’t pray directly to God, that you must go through Jesus. Can we pray directly to God or must all prayer go through Jesus?
A: It is important to make the distinction between prayer addressed to God the Father and prayer having access to the Father.
Jesus taught us to pray directly to the Father when he gave us the Our Father (Matt. 6:9). But we should understand that our prayers have access to the Father only through Jesus, for he proclaimed, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me" (John 14:6).
—Jim Blackburn
Q: Our church has a large cross with a figure of the risen Christ attached but no crucifix. Even the processional cross has the risen Christ. Shouldn’t there be a crucifix near the altar?
A: The General Instruction of the Roman Missal instructs that there must be a cross (with a crucified corpus) on or near the altar, "positioned either on the altar or near it, and . . . clearly visible to the people gathered there" (GIRM 308). In the case where a crucifix is not in the sanctuary, the processional cross with the figure of Christ crucified upon it would be an option.
—Peggy Frye
Q: Why is Paul referred to as an apostle when he clearly was not one of the Twelve?
A: The Catholic Encyclopedia defines "apostle" as "one who is sent forth, dispatched—in other words, who is entrusted with a mission, rather, a foreign mission. It has, however, a stronger sense than the word messenger and means as much as a delegate."
St. Paul was clearly sent forth by Jesus, entrusted with a mission. In our Lord’s own words, Paul became "a chosen instrument of mine to carry my name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel" (Acts 9:15).
Paul refers to himself as an apostle many times in the New Testament, and he even defends his apostleship in his first epistle to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 9:1–2).
—Jim Blackburn
Q: My fiancé and I would like to have a medieval-themed wedding and nuptial Mass, but our parents are disappointed with our plans and complain that a theme is inappropriate for a Catholic wedding. Is this true?
A: Your parents may fear that your chosen theme will undermine the sense of the sacredness of the event. This is a particularly valid concern when it comes to the Mass itself, where the focus needs to be clearly on the sacraments rather than on any theme. The reception, on the other hand, is an appropriate place for individual expression. In making your plans, keep in mind that you want your guests to notice more that it was a Catholic wedding than that it was a theme wedding.
—Michelle Arnold
Q: In Mass today the priest remained seated while a layman distributed Communion. Is this allowed?
A: This is allowed only when necessary. Redemptionis Sacramentum explains: The extraordinary minister of Holy Communion may administer Communion only when the priest and deacon are lacking, when the priest is prevented by weakness or advanced age or some other genuine reason, or when the number of faithful coming to Communion is so great that the very celebration of Mass would be unduly prolonged. (RS 158) In the absence of true necessity, this practice is expressly prohibited (RS 157).
—Jim Blackburn
Q: Why is St. Anthony of Padua invoked for the finding of lost items?
A: One popular story is that a brother friar of St. Anthony stole a commentary the saint had written. The saint prayed for its return, and the friar was waylaid by a sudden storm that frightened him so badly that he thought it the wrath of God for his sin. He turned around and ran back to St. Anthony to return the manuscript. Since then, so the story goes, St. Anthony has had a special talent in the recovery of lost items. Whether this story is true or simply a pious legend is not something we know for certain.
—Michelle Arnold
Q: As I understand it, Protestants do not have a valid priesthood, and only priests can baptize unless there is a danger of death. Why, then, does the Catholic Church recognize Protestant baptism?
A: Since baptism is necessary for salvation and God wills the salvation of all, the Church recognizes all validly administered baptisms, even if Protestant. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states: The ordinary ministers of baptism are the bishop and priest and, in the Latin Church, also the deacon. In case of necessity, anyone, even a non-baptized person, with the required intention, can baptize by using the Trinitarian baptismal formula. The intention required is to will to do what the Church does when she baptizes. The Church finds the reason for this possibility in the universal saving will of God and the necessity of baptism for salvation. (CCC 1256) When considering the validity of non-Catholic baptism, the Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism instructs:Baptism by immersion, or by pouring, together with the Trinitarian formula is, of itself, valid. Therefore, if the rituals, liturgical books, or established customs of a church or ecclesial community prescribe either of these ways of baptism, the sacrament is to be considered valid unless there are serious reasons for doubting that the minister has observed the regulations of his/her own community or church. (DE 95.a) —Jim Blackburn
Q: I was baptized in a Lutheran church as a baby and would now like to enter the Catholic Church. Because I have not been living a Christian life until recently, I very much want to be re-baptized but have been told that the Catholic Church does not re-baptize. Why?
A: Baptism is a once-for-all sacrament that washes away original sin, gives sanctifying grace, and imparts a supernatural character upon the soul that makes a person a Christian. An attempt to "redo" a valid baptism would be useless: The second baptism would not "take" because the first was valid. Furthermore, it would be an objective sacrilege because it would cast aspersion on the validity of the first baptism.
Even if you have not lived a Christian life until recently, if you were validly baptized then you are a Christian. Your status as a Christian does not depend upon how well you have lived. The proper sacrament to wash away personal sins you have committed since your baptism is confession.
—Michelle Arnold
|
