|
Q u i c k Q u e s t i o n s
|
This Rock
Volume 18, Number 4
 April 2007 
|
|
|
Can We Contracept to Avoid a Difficult Pregnancy?
Q: My wife has difficult pregnancies and is terrified of getting pregnant again. She wants to use contraception. Does the Church allow it under these circumstances?
A: My heart goes out to you and your wife. A difficult pregnancy is not something any woman looks forward to, especially when she’s experiencing emotional distress. But there is never justification for the deliberate interruption of the conjugal act through the use of contraception. Humanae Vitae clearly states
[T]hat the direct interruption of the generative process already begun and, above all, all direct abortion, even for therapeutic reasons, are to be absolutely excluded as lawful means of regulating the number of children…Similarly excluded is any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreation—whether as an end or as a means.
Neither is it valid to argue, as a justification for sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive, that a lesser evil is to be preferred to a greater one…Though it is true that sometimes it is lawful to tolerate a lesser moral evil in order to avoid a greater evil or in order to promote a greater good, it is never lawful, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil that good may come of it—in other words, to intend directly something which of its very nature contradicts the moral order, and which must therefore be judged unworthy of man, even though the intention is to protect or promote the welfare of an individual, of a family or of society in general. Consequently, it is a serious error to think that a whole married life of otherwise normal relations can justify sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive and so intrinsically wrong. (Humanae Vitae 14)
If you need to avoid pregnancy due to the difficulties your wife encounters during them, then the thing to do is investigate Natural Family Planning. There are many resources for this online, such as those provided by the Couple to Couple League, International (www.ccli.org).
—Peggy Frye
Q: Was Søren Kierkegaard a Christian? Based on excerpts from Fear and Trembling, I am doubtful that he was. Can a Catholic read Kierkegaard with the confidence that he is sympathetic to Catholic philosophy?
A: Søren Kierkegaard (1813-1855) was a Danish philosopher and, so far as I can ascertain, a member of the state church in Denmark, which is a Lutheran church. He was what we might call a Christian critic of Christianity as he understood it. One of his particular concerns was the church-state relationship in Denmark, which he saw as a perversion of Christianity. Although there are likely to be disagreements between his thought and that of the Catholic Church, Catholics probably could find much of value in his writings.
The question of Kierkegaard’s religious affiliation may arise because he did offer criticism of Christianity. However, criticism within Christianity by thoughtful writers who are struggling to reconcile what they see to be truth with their understanding of Christianity does not mean that those writers are necessarily not Christian. One Catholic example of this phenomenon is Desiderius Erasmus (ca. 1466–1536), a sixteenth-century Catholic thinker and theologian who verbally jousted with both the Church and with Martin Luther.
—Michelle Arnold
Q: When my wife and I were married in the Catholic Church, I was a baptized Catholic and she was a non-practicing Jehovah’s Witness. At that time she was not baptized but she has since been baptized in the Catholic Church. Is our marriage a sacramental marriage?
A: Yes, your marriage is sacramental. There are two requirements for a marriage to be sacramental: (1) The marriage must be valid, and (2) both spouses must be baptized. A valid marriage may exist when one or both spouses are not baptized, but such a marriage is not sacramental. Prior to your wife’s baptism, your marriage was presumably valid but not sacramental because she was not baptized. Her baptism did not in any way invalidate your marriage so, upon her baptism: (1) Your marriage remained valid, and (2) you both were baptized. Both of the requirements for a sacramental marriage being met, your marriage became sacramental at your wife’s baptism.
The Code of Canon Law explains,
The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life and which is ordered by its nature to the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring, has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament between the baptized. For this reason, a valid matrimonial contract cannot exist between the baptized without it being by that fact a sacrament. (CIC 1055) —Jim Blackburn
Q: I am perplexed by the phrase in the Divine Mercy chaplet, "I offer you the body and blood, soul and divinity, of your dearly beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, in atonement for our sins and those of the whole world." I thought that was something only a priest could do during the sacrifice of the Mass. Surely the offering made in the Mass is different in some way than what is offered in praying this chaplet. What am I missing?
A: Saying that prayer is not the same as offering Mass. At Mass we participate in the one sacrifice that Jesus made for us. But because he made that sacrifice, that perfect prayer is now ours. Therefore we can always make reference to it. It is a most powerful prayer because it is his prayer. Basically, what we are saying to the Father is: "By the merits of his Passion, we ask for your mercy!"
—Fr. Vincent Serpa
Q: I am thirteen years old. I don’t want to get confirmed at my parish because I don’t believe everything they teach. For example, my pastor knowingly allows openly homosexual couples to receive Holy Communion. If I get confirmed there, doesn’t that mean I am accepting the practices of my parish?
A: Being confirmed at your church does not mean you accept their unorthodox practices. You are receiving a sacrament that does a holy work within you. Confirmation, like baptism, imprints a spiritual mark on your soul, something you can receive only once in your life (CCC 1317). It’s the sacrament that gives you the fullness of the Holy Spirit, increases and deepens baptismal grace, and incorporates you more firmly into Christ (CCC 1316).
The Catechism of the Catholic Church also says,
Every baptized person not yet confirmed can and should receive the sacrament of confirmation. Since baptism, confirmation, and Eucharist form a unity, it follows that "the faithful are obliged to receive this sacrament at the appropriate time," for without confirmation and Eucharist, baptism is certainly valid and efficacious, but Christian initiation remains incomplete. (CCC 1306)
—Peggy Frye
Q: My boyfriend and I have been together for six years and we are both Catholic. Can we baptize our baby in the Catholic church even though we are not married?
A: As Catholic parents, you have an obligation to have your child baptized. Code of Canon Law states, "Parents are obliged to take care that infants are baptized in the first few weeks; as soon as possible after the birth or even before it, they are to go to the pastor to request the sacrament for their child and to be prepared properly for it" (CIC 867 §1).
However, to baptize your child licitly, the Church requires that
[T]here must be a founded hope that the [child] will be brought up in the Catholic religion; if such hope is altogether lacking, the baptism is to be delayed according to the prescripts of particular law after the parents have been advised about the reason. (CIC 868 §1)
—Jim Blackburn
Q: What is the difference between an apologist and a theologian? I’ve been told that an apologist doesn’t have to be a theologian, and I don’t understand why not.
A: As a somewhat rough analogy, the difference between an apologist and a theologian is like the difference between a science teacher and a scientist: Just as a science teacher explains science and a scientist develops human understanding of science, an apologist explains and defends what is known about the faith, while a theologian explores the faith and seeks to expand upon what is known about the faith. What that can mean in practical terms is that while a theologian should be prepared to act as an apologist, an apologist need not be a theologian.
—Michelle Arnold
Q: The catechism (2089) states, "Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same." What is "obstinate doubt" and how does it differ from ordinary doubt?
A: Obstinate doubt is voluntary doubt—doubt may be defined as either voluntary or involuntary. The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains,
Voluntary doubt about the faith disregards or refuses to hold as true what God has revealed and the Church proposes for belief. Involuntary doubt refers to hesitation in believing, difficulty in overcoming objections connected with the faith, or also anxiety aroused by its obscurity. If deliberately cultivated, doubt can lead to spiritual blindness. (CCC 2088)
Involuntary doubt is not, in itself, sinful and may be experienced by any sincere believer. Voluntary doubt, on the other hand, as a willful refusal to assent to God’s revelation, is a grave issue.
—Jim Blackburn
Q: Can deacons give blessings? I thought only a priest could give a blessing.
A: Canon Law says the following: "A deacon can impart only those blessings which are expressly permitted to him by law" (CIC 1169 §3). This differs from priests in that while a deacon can only give those blessings expressly permitted to him, the rule for priests is that they can impart any blessings, except those reserved to the pope or to bishops (CIC 1169 §2). In other words, the law appears to be more restrictive about the ability of deacons to impart blessings than it is about the ability of priests to do so.
—Michelle Arnold
Q: More than once at RCIA, I heard that praying after receiving Holy Communion is introverted. Is that true?
A: Such a statement betrays a lack of understanding of what prayer is in general and of what Holy Communion is in particular. To be introverted is to be turned in on oneself. Prayer, if it is true prayer, is all about God. When we receive the Holy Eucharist we are physically aware of his divine visitation. It is a time of the holiest of communions in which we are most intimately united with each other because of our union with him.
Often we hear liturgists insisting that we sing at such times to show our communion with each other—but Christ is the source of such union, not such feeble attempts to ape the real thing. By all means acknowledge the divine Presence under your roof. Nothing matters more—absolutely nothing!
—Fr. Vincent Serpa
Q: What is the difference between talking to a saint and talking to a ghost? In both cases the saint and ghost have passed on; therefore, they both are a spirit. So what difference does it make if one spirit is in heaven and the other is in my house?
A: By forbidding occult contact with the supernatural realm, what the Church is forbidding are the methods and techniques generally used to "summon up" departed human beings or other spirits (e.g., ouija boards, crystal balls, séances, mediums, etc.). It is not forbidding "conversation," so to speak, between those in this life and those in the next; it is only forbidding attempts to manipulate the supernatural realm to obtain forbidden power or knowledge (CCC 2116).
Take, for example, Saul’s attempt to speak with the dead prophet, Samuel, through the medium of Endor (1 Sam. 28:7-20). It was not Saul’s desire to speak with Samuel that was his sin but the forbidden means by which he accomplished it. It would have been perfectly fine for Saul to have prayed to Samuel, asking Samuel for his intercession, but instead Saul had a medium "conjure" Samuel. The text gives us no reason to think that the person with whom Saul spoke was not Samuel—demonstrating that God may allow such contact to occasionally "work" to bring good out of evil (in this case, allowing Samuel to issue the warning to Saul that he would soon die)—but that does not make the forbidden methods lawful.
Prayer to saints, on the other hand, is entirely different. There is no attempt to conjure up spirits, no attempt to seek forbidden knowledge. All that is done is that the petitioner honors God’s friend and asks the saint for prayer.
—Michelle Arnold
Q: I was hoping you can explain what gossip is. I always thought it was talking about someone’s personal business or saying half-truths and innuendos. But is it also repeating what you heard about someone divorcing or getting in trouble? When does communicating information turn into gossip?
A: A good rule of thumb is not to say anything that we wouldn’t want said about us.
—Fr. Vincent Serpa
Q: How important is the Old Testament to modern Catholics? I know that Christ fulfilled the old Law and all, but should we still feel that the Old Testament is important and viable to our faith?
A: The Old Testament is very important for Christians. The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains:
The Old Testament is an indispensable part of Sacred Scripture. Its books are divinely inspired and retain a permanent value, for the Old Covenant has never been revoked.
Indeed, "the economy of the Old Testament was deliberately so oriented that it should prepare for and declare in prophecy the coming of Christ, redeemer of all men." "Even though they contain matters imperfect and provisional," the books of the Old Testament bear witness to the whole divine pedagogy of God's saving love: these writings "are a storehouse of sublime teaching on God and of sound wisdom on human life, as well as a wonderful treasury of prayers; in them, too, the mystery of our salvation is present in a hidden way."
Christians venerate the Old Testament as true Word of God. The Church has always vigorously opposed the idea of rejecting the Old Testament under the pretext that the New has rendered it void (Marcionism). (CCC 121-123)
—Jim Blackburn
Q: Why is it acceptable for Catholics to say the Pledge of Allegiance? A Protestant friend has a problem with putting his hand on his heart and making an oath to a flag. Why does the Church say it’s acceptable to be a patriot as well as Christian?
A: Being a patriot is not in opposition to being a Christian. We don’t worship the country we love anymore than we worship the people we love. Because God comes first it doesn’t follow that no one or nothing can came second and third. Our Lord said to "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s" (Luke 20:25).
—Fr. Vincent Serpa
Q: Considering the shortage of priests, why does the Latin Rite Church continue to force its priests to be celibate?
A: First, the Church does not force celibacy on priests. A priest freely chooses celibacy, a choice he makes long before he’s ordained. Priestly celibacy is a charism of the Holy Spirit, a gift, a special grace that depends on a free-will response by the receiver:
[It] is to be welcomed and continually renewed with a free and loving decision as a priceless gift from God, as an "incentive to pastoral charity" as a singular sharing in God's fatherhood and in the fruitfulness of the Church, and as a witness to the world of the eschatological kingdom. (John Paul II, Pastores Dabo Vobis, 29)
Second, there are no objective studies that link mandatory celibacy to the priest shortage. If that were the case, then how does one explain the recent growth in priestly vocations worldwide? The late Cardinal John J. O’Connor said many of the men and women he talked to about vocations to religious life put the celibacy issue far down on their list of reasons for hesitating or turning away. A far more common reason was that no one ever seriously asked them (see "Celibacy Isn’t the Problem" by Cardinal John O’Connor).
—Peggy Frye
|
C A T H O L I C A N S W E R S :
[TOP]
of
