Catholic Bulletin: July 2007

Bowing before receiving Holy Communion

Bowing before receiving Holy Communion
Question from on 07-13-2007:
Dear Mr. Donovan,

When should the bow take place before receiving Holy Communion? Should it happen before you have approached the minister (ie when one person is receiving before you) or while you are directly in front of the minister?

Thanks!
Answer by Colin B. Donovan, STL on 07-30-2007:
It should be when the person in front of you is receiving, so as not to delay the distribution of Communion or endanger the Eucharist, by accidentally coming up under the ciborium or chalice.

Are lay Catholics allowed to read non-Catholic and/or heretical books?

Are lay Catholics allowed to read non-Catholic and/or heretical books?
Question from on 07-27-2007:
1) Are lay Catholics allowed to read non-Catholic books?

2) Also, are lay Catholics allowed to read heretical books?
Answer by Rev. Mark J. Gantley, JCL on 07-30-2007:
There is no longer any list of prohibited books. However, a Catholic should not read materials that might be a source of temptation to sin or lead him or her away from the truth of our faith.

Receiving the Sacraments from Orthodox priests

Receiving the Sacraments from Orthodox priests
Question from on 07-31-2007:
I know most Eastern Orthodox jurisdictions do not allow Catholics to receive the sacraments, but in the past I have received them in the Ukrainian, Armenian and Syriac Orthodox jurisdictions.

I am wondering canonically if I committed a sin by having done so on three separate occasions, once in each jurisdiction.

When canon law says Catholics can receive the sacraments from schismatic clergy when it is either morally or physically impossible to receive them from Catholic clergy, what does that mean? What would be some examples of when that canonical provision might apply?
Answer by Rev. Mark J. Gantley, JCL on 07-31-2007:
The full text of the relevant canon is: "Whenever necessity requires it or true spiritual advantage suggests it, and provided that danger of error or of indifferentism is avoided, the Christian (Catholic) faithful for whom it is physically for morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister are permitted to receive the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick from non-Catholic ministers in whose Churches these sacraments are valid" (canon 844, §2). If you read the canon carefully, there are also requirements that error and indifferentism (i.e., that all religions are the same) are avoided.

brown scapular

brown scapular
Question from on 07-18-2007:
I am a protestant but I have recently received a brown scapular from my aunt. I have a few questions about it. First what are all the fast of the church and how can I observe them along with obtaining from meat on Wednesday and Saturday? Secondly as a protestant I pray the rosary, divine chaplet and have faith in Mary’s intersection can I be invested with the scapular? I am sorry if this is in the wrong forum.

Thank You and God Bless

Answer by Richard Geraghty on 07-29-2007:
Dear MB,

Go the the EWTN search forum, put in "Brown Scapular" in the search box, and you will get a great deal of information on that subject.

Dr. Geraghty

Original Sin

Original Sin and Childbirth
Question from on 07-21-2007:
Hi Father Torraco,

God willing, I will be giving birth to my first child in about a month (and am VERY excited!!!).

I have a question about original sin and childbirth. The pains of childbirth were one of the consequences of Eve's sin in the garden of Eden, right? If this is true, is it theologically, morally wrong to try a lessen these pains (ie medication)?

Just something I have pondered about the last couple months...
Answer by Fr.Stephen F. Torraco on 07-23-2007:
No it is not wrong. But at the same time, you might consider Pope John Paul II's words on this matter in his apostolic exhortation entitled "The Dignity and Vocation of Women." He says that the pains of childbirth are a uniquely womanly participation in the Passion of Christ.

Mass Protocol

Mass Protocol
Question from on 06-18-2007:
Dear Mr Donovan and Mr Gregson. After the Penitential Rite in the beginning of Mass, about 1/2 of the parishioners will Bless themselves and the others don't. Some Priests will Bless themselves and others don't. Is there a liturgical recommendation about this? Or, is the choice to Bless oneself a matter of personal choice? Thankyou for your time! God Bless You! Sincerely, John
Answer by David Gregson on 07-26-2007:
The practice of some priests and parishioners blessing themselves at the words, "May almighty God have mercy on us, forgive us our sins, and bring us to everlasting life," is a carry-over from the Tridentine use, in which priest and altar servers bless themselves after saying the Confiteor. But in the Tridentine use, priest and servers bless themselves not at the Misereatur (the English equivalent of which is given above), but at the Indulgentiam, which follows, translated as "May the almighty and merciful Lord grant us pardon, + absolution, and remission of our sins." The Indulgentiam wasn't retained in the reformed liturgy, and so, strictly speaking, it's out of place to bless ourselves at the Misereatur.

Gay priests

Gay priests
Question from on 07-20-2007:
Are gay priests allowed to stay in the priesthood?
Answer by Robert J. Flummerfelt, J.C.L. on 07-27-2007:
Hi Marvin,

Yes, priests with gay sexual orientations are allowed to stay in the priesthood. As priests they are called to chastity and purity just like straight priests. Priests who remain chaste and pure are certainly allowed to remain as priests.

Since all priests are called to chastity and purity in virtue of their being single and also having devoted themselves to a life of service to God and His people, their orientation really should not be an issue in their ministry, since they deny the use of that part of themselves in order to best live out their vocation and ministry.

Of course the case is different for married priests, but who are still called to chastity within their vocation as married clergy.

Peace and best wishes, Bob

Deacon

Deacon
Question from on 07-12-2007:
Hello, After a long period of reflection and discernment I am considering becoming a Deacon. I was baptized and raised a Ukrainian Catholic. I am recently married and my wife and I now live in the Los Angeles area. My wife is a member of the Roman Catholic Church and we both attend a local parish of like kind. There is no Ukrainian Catholic Church within even moderate proximity. Can I as a member of the Ukrainian Catholic Church become a Deacon in the Roman Catholic Church and by default be assigned to the local Bishop or would I have to become a Deacon in the Ukrainian Catholic Church even though there is not a church within a reasonable distance? My local Priest is a very good man and believes it is not a problem however he often says what he believes versus researching and finding the definitive answer. Thank you for your assistance.

John
Answer by Robert J. Flummerfelt, J.C.L. on 07-27-2007:
Hi John,

Blessings to you. I noticed that you mentioned that you live in the LA area, downtown, there is a Ukrainian Catholic parish - I bet you were aware of that though. The best thing to do, would be to become a Ukrainian Catholic deacon but to serve also with faculties in the Latin Church. You would need to contact both the Ukrainian bishop of Chicago and also of course the Cardinal or his delegate in that matter to discuss the possibilities. I would not see it as a problem, but as as opportunity to serve both Churches. If God is calling you to this vocation, then finding which Church to serve and perhaps even both, will come in time. I would start the ball rolling by speaking to both bishops to see where each stands on this. That may make your solution quite easy - but know that even if you choose to serve the Latin Church exclusively, you will remain Ukrainian Catholic, but receive the faculty to serve the Latin Church.

I hope this helps a bit.

Peace and best wishes, Bob

Virgin Mary

Virgin Mary
Question from on 07-23-2007:
Hi Father Levis,

I have met Father Triglio and I watched Leaps of Faith and enjoy the program. Now I can place a face when I read your responses.

I sent something to Apologetics but I prbably should have sent it to you. It concerns our Dear Blessed Mother. In my parish, I never heard a priest tell the congregation on the importance of saying the Rosary EVERYDAY, wearing the Scapular of Our Lady of Mt. Carmel, going to Confession and attending Holy Mass everyday if you can. The only time Mary is discussed is on her feast days, the Christmas season and the Wedding at Cana. However, the priest at the Shrine of the Blessed Sacrament, in the 15 or so times I have gone there, Mary and the Rosay has been mentioned many times.

I'm beginning to think that when men enter the seminary to become priests, Mary and the Rosary is not discussed, or at least, the importance of it does not seem important.

I've been taught and believe that Jesus will never refuse Mary anything she asks of Him for our salvation. I continue to pray and ask for Mary's intercession regarding my life and the life of family and friends.

I have heard from people who are Catholic but believe Mary had other children with St. Joseph and do not believe me when I have told them that both Mary and St. Joseph took a vow of Chasity. One man told me that Mary was only the Mother of Jesus and does not believe Mary is our Mother. She's dead and that's it. I've heard terrible things said about Mary who Loves us so much she willingly sacrificed her Son for our salvation because it was the will of God.

Why isn't the importance of Mary and the Rosary preached about more often?

God Bless You for all you do.

Rocco
Answer by Fr. Robert J. Levis on 07-24-2007:
Rocco, One of the most unfortunate occurences since about 1960 in American Catholicism is the loss of Marian devotion. Many priests seldom preach about Mary, except on rare occasions. I suspect these men are strongly affected by an ecumenical spirit. Since few Protestants give Mary any role in their faith journey, since others teach notions contrary to Catholicism (e.g. Mary bore many children), since others write that we were too Marian before the Council, and for other reasons, Mariology has fallen on bad times in America. I want to congratulate you for finding Mary and want to encourage you to keep her always in your daily prayers and intercessions. Marian devotion is a sign of your eternal salvation. Fr. Bob Levis

Funeral options with cremation

Funeral options with cremation first
Question from on 07-20-2007:
My parents and I are life long practicing Catholics. We would like to know the Catholic doctrine on cremation and funeral options. We would like to have the cremation first, with the cremation vessel present at the funeral for the Catholic funeral mass and rites. Who can inform and guide us on this? We are members of Prince of Peace Parish in W. Bloomfield, MI.

If the above is not allowed, is a priest able to perform a Catholic funeral at the funeral home?

Or, would the priest only be able to perform a memorial service?

My mother is 75 and had a heart attack 9-06, and my father is disabled 16 yrs from a stroke. We wish to know ahead of time of the options, when the family in not devastated with grief.

I've searched several Catholic sites, and there does not seem to be a well written, informative, concise answer to this question. Please respond quickly or refer us to the appropriate expert.

Thank you.
Answer by Catholic Answers on 07-23-2007:
Dear SM,

The Catholic Church does allow cremation. However, the remains are to be placed in a Catholic Cemetary where they will be reverenced and where Mass is periodically offered for the souls of such remains.

It is possible to have the urn present at the funeral Mass.

Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P.

Why Doesn't the Pope Do Something about "Bad" Bishops?

Why Doesn't the Pope Do Something about "Bad" Bishops?
by Rev. Robert Johansen

A question I have heard frequently among conservative Catholics is "Why doesn’t the pope do something about those bad bishops?" The question usually is prompted by frustration with a perceived lack of orthodoxy or zeal on the part of some bishop. Catholics in some places face situations in which it seems the bishop turns a blind eye to heterodoxy and dissent—or even appears to give them his blessing. Faced with such dysfunctional diocesan environments, they naturally look to Rome for relief and redress, but often are disappointed to find that help is slow in coming, if it ever comes at all.

By "do something" people usually mean that they want the pope to discipline the bishop, to apply pressure on him to adhere more closely to Church teaching, or even to remove him. But most of us—while from time to time sharing such wishes or even voicing them—don’t know exactly what can be done about a bad bishop. So I’ll address a couple of common misconceptions about the bishop’s role and his relationship to the universal church, and I’ll explain how the Church sees these things, both in its teaching and tradition.

Misconception #1:
The Pope as CEO

Most of us have a boss. Many of us work in large companies where our boss also has a boss, and so on, up the ladder to the president or CEO. If you mess up at work, you’ll be called to account for it, and if you make too many mistakes, you risk being fired. Your boss is in the same position with regard to his superior, etc. So it’s rather natural for us as Americans to assume the hierarchy of the Church functions in a similar way. But having a hierarchy of organization is where the similarity between the Church and the corporation begins and ends.

One reason the Church is different from a corporation is the sacrament of holy orders. When a man is ordained, he is changed in his very being; he is "configured" to Christ as head and shepherd. This new identity is permanent and cannot be removed. Even if a priest is removed from the priesthood ("defrocked"), he remains a priest, sacramentally speaking, so a priest or bishop can’t be fired in the sense that a corporate employee can.

A department head or vice-president of a corporation has authority by delegation: his authority is given from the next higher level of the organization and ultimately comes from the president, CEO, or board of directors. The department head has authority only insofar as it is "borrowed" from above; it does not belong to him.

But this is not the case regarding the Church. The bishop enjoys the fullness of the sacrament of holy orders (cf. Lumen Gentium 26) and as such is head of the local Church, the diocese. A bishop’s authority within his diocese does not operate by delegation: The bishop is not merely exercising a power "borrowed" from the pope. Canon 381 of the Code of Canon Law states: "In the diocese entrusted to his care, the diocesan bishop has all the ordinary, proper, and immediate power required for the exercise of his pastoral office." The Second Vatican Council’s Dogmatic Constitution on the Church explains:

The pastoral charge . . . is entrusted to [the bishops] fully; nor are they to be regarded as vicars of the Roman pontiff, for they exercise the power that they possess in their own right and are called in the truest sense of the term prelates of the people whom they govern (LG 27).

A bishop, then, should not be thought of as a middle-level executive, carrying out the instructions of his Vatican superiors. Each bishop governs his diocese in and by virtue of his own authority. The policies and directives of each diocese are not set in Rome, to be executed by local officials. Bishops are not employees of the pope, and they do not have to get approval from higher authority for the vast majority of their decisions. While each bishop is accountable to the Holy Father and the whole college of bishops, the terms of that accountability are actually quite narrow.

Misconception #2:
The Bishop as Manager

A corollary of seeing the pope as a CEO who delegates his authority to his department heads, the bishops, is to see each diocesan bishop as a manager—someone responsible for meeting goals and deadlines, keeping the organization "on message," and delivering the product. In the corporate world, a manager who fails to do these things will be fired and replaced. By analogy, Americans are tempted to think that a bishop who fails in his responsibilities needs to be fired as well.

But the Church sees the bishop as the father of his diocese. In the Second Vatican Council’s document on bishops, Christus Dominus, the Church, "the Lord’s flock," is compared to a "family of which the bishop is the father" (CD 28). Elsewhere, the bishop’s office is defined as "father and pastor" (CD 16). This identification of the bishop as father goes back to the earliest Church Fathers, such as St. Ignatius of Antioch (c. A.D. 115), who, in his Letter to the Trallians, described the bishop as "the image of God the Father."

This identification of the bishop’s office as fatherly in turn derives from the witness of the apostles themselves. The apostles referred to themselves as "fathers" of the faithful and to their flocks as their spiritual children. For example, Paul writes to the Church in Corinth, "I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel" (1 Cor. 4:15).

The spiritual fatherhood of the bishop has profound theological and ecclesiological implications. Once again, the early Fathers bear witness to the centrality of the episcopate. Ignatius of Antioch writes:

As therefore the Lord, although united to him, did nothing without the Father, neither by himself nor yet by his apostles, so neither should you do anything without your bishop and presbyters (Letter to the Magnesians, 7).

Ignatius even links our unity in the Eucharist to our unity with the bishop:

Wherefore let it be your endeavor to all partake of the same holy Eucharist. For there is but one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, one cup in the unity of his blood, and one altar. As also there is one bishop, together with his presbytery and the deacons my fellow-servants, so that whatever you do, you may do it according to the will of God (Letter to the Philadelphians, 4).

It is quite clear from Ignatius that the bishop is the center of unity for the local Church. Without the bishop exercising his fatherly office as successor of the apostles, nothing happens in the Church. The strongest expression of this principle might be found in Ignatius’s Letter to the Smyrneans:

Wherever the bishop will appear, there let the congregation also be; as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church (Letter to the Smyrneans, 8).

This centrality of the bishop is reiterated constantly throughout our Tradition—through the Fathers, the Council of Trent, Vatican II, and up to the present.

Can You Make a Case for Amputation?

There is a temptation to view the expressions of the truths of our faith as metaphors or figures of speech. But this is a capital mistake. For example, when we hear the statement that "the Church is the body of Christ," we may be tempted to ultra-spiritualize it and turn it into a nice saying rather than recognize it as a profound revelation of our status as members who have been incorporated (literally em-bodied) into Christ and living in him. Likewise, when we say that the Church is a family, we mean it quite literally. The Church is not a reflection of the reality that is "family"—quite the opposite. The family is a reflection of the reality that is the Church. We must always bear in mind that spiritual realities are more real, not less real, than physical or natural realities. In Christ we are more truly connected, more truly in communion with people than we are with our own family members.

So if in Christ the Church is truly a family, then the bishop is truly a father to his flock. Now think about fatherhood for a moment: Is a father’s identity dependent on how well he fulfills it? Not really. A father is a father, almost regardless of how well he fulfills his responsibilities. We might say that John is a better father than Sam, but we don’t say that Sam is therefore not a father. There are some very good fathers; there are the majority of fathers who muddle along doing the best they can; and, unfortunately, there are a few bad fathers out there.

Now, in the natural sphere, a father has to be very bad indeed before he is relieved of his office. Mere incompetence is insufficient. While we may look at him as a sad case, most reasonable people wouldn’t say that the father who lets the house get run down or who doesn’t effectively discipline his children should be removed from his family. No, in order to justify separating a father from his family, we require substantial evidence of actual abuse or neglect. The father of a family is so integral to its identity that before removing him we have to be sure he is actually causing harm to the family. That determination is made in a court of law, with evidence and witnesses, and the father has an opportunity to defend himself. To paraphrase C. S. Lewis, removing the father from his family is not so much like firing a bad manager as it is like amputating a limb from one’s body: It’s justifiable only under the direst circumstances.

So it is in the family of the Church. The citations above from Ignatius of Antioch show that the father of the Church family, the bishop, is integral to its identity and functioning. And so the Church contemplates removing a bishop only when circumstances are grave—mere incompetence is insufficient. The bishop must be shown to be actually harming the faithful in his diocese—and the Church demands a very high threshold of evidence to make such a judgment.

Canon law stipulates that only the pope can appoint or depose (remove) a bishop (CIC 377, 401–402). Given the nature of the sacrament of holy orders and the spiritual identity of the bishop as father to the people of his diocese, one might expect that papal intervention in the affairs of local dioceses would be rare. A perusal of Church history bears this out. While some Catholics may desire to see the pope "clean house" and remove a number of inadequate bishops en masse, you’d be hard pressed to find historical precedent for that kind of sweeping measure. Popes throughout history have removed bishops here and there, one or two at time. But those who imagine a pope setting episcopal heads to roll simply are misunderstanding how the papacy and the Church work.

Obligation to Charity; Necessity of Evidence

When it comes to dealing with an erring bishop, a pope is far more likely to employ methods such as persuasion, fraternal correction, and gentle chiding than he is to wield the club of discipline—much less the atomic bomb of removal. There are at least three reasons for this. The first is charity: If a bishop is saying or doing bad or dumb things, we are all—especially the pope—obliged to assume in charity that he is well-intentioned and is acting either out of ignorance or confusion, barring evidence to the contrary (supposition, conjecture, and probability do not count as evidence). The experience of the church bears out the wisdom of this approach, as does my own experience as a pastor: In my experience, most Catholics who embrace positions at odds with Church teaching are well-intentioned—they want to follow Christ. But they are either uninformed, misinformed, or malformed (in their conscience or intellect). All three of those conditions can be remedied with great patience and love.

John Paul dedicated a good amount of his energy to correcting the errors to which many Catholics, including bishops and priests, had succumbed. His approach was to teach, explain, and correct. This approach does not yield a quick fix, but there is evidence that his work has already begun to bear fruit: in the throngs of young Catholics who fervently embrace the Church’s teaching, in the rise of dynamic orthodoxy, in the founding and growth of authentically Catholic colleges, and in the signs of a resurgence of vocations in dioceses and religious communities that make no compromises on Catholic teachings.

The second reason that a pope will be reluctant to attempt to discipline a bishop is that of evidence. As I pointed out above, the Church always has viewed removing a bishop as drastic surgery, fraught with danger in and of itself. So there needs to be very strong evidence that the damage done by removing a bishop will be less than the damage caused by his remaining. The problem is that this sort of evidence is not easy to come by. If we think about the kinds of things Catholics frequently complain about regarding episcopal inadequacy, they’re usually "sins of omission"—rarely does the bishop openly advocate dissent or preach rank heresy. Usually the complaint is that the bishop isn’t reining in the heterodox elements in the diocese: He allows that dissenting theologian to speak in his diocese; he isn’t doing anything about Fr. Warmandfuzzy’s liturgical abuses. The problem with this kind of episcopal inaction is that it usually falls under the heading of prudential judgment. A bishop could quite sincerely judge it imprudent to intervene in a situation. He may be wrong, objectively speaking, but he may have plausible reasons for his decisions. And if that’s the case, it doesn’t meet the threshold of evidence necessary to remove him. Now, it’s also possible that a bishop inwardly is applauding and encouraging the dissenters or Fr. Warmandfuzzy, but short of an open admission from him or the ability to climb inside his head and heart, how are you (or the pope) supposed to determine that?

The Danger of Schism

The third reason popes are reluctant to depose bishops is the danger of schism. Whenever a bishop is removed, there is at least the possibility that he may elect to leave the Church altogether and set up on his own church, taking many of the faithful with him. Going back to our Lord’s prayer that "they all be one" (John 17:20–21), the Church regards schism as great evil and precipitating or fomenting schism as a grievous sin. Ignatius, in his Letter to the Smyrneans, wrote "Shun divisions as the beginning of evils." As long as people are kept within the Church, even tenuously, there is the possibility of correction and conversion. But if they depart, they may be lost for good.

And the larger the dissenting element, the more prevalent the heterodoxy, the more grave the danger. Msgr. George Kelly, in his book The Crisis of Authority, argued that, because dissent had become so widespread, the danger of schism was very real in the United States in the 1970s and ‘80s. Any papal "crackdown" against dissent, he argued, likely would have led to the separation of a large body of the faithful from communion with Rome. And so John Paul II seems to have adopted a "gradualist" approach: He largely avoided direct confrontation, save in the realm of ideas. He taught, corrected, and exhorted his brother bishops, and all of the faithful, to holiness and to the embrace of the fullness of the faith.

The gradualist approach may turn out to have been a mistake, but I don’t think so. The majority of episcopal appointments under John Paul II have been very good, even outstanding. Bishops of unquestioned orthodoxy, such as Raymond Burke of St. Louis and Charles Chaput of Denver, are now to be found in many of the major U.S. sees. And in a host of smaller sees one can find many excellent young bishops who are zealous and courageous exponents of the faith.

These bishops, along with the many renewal movements, are beginning to reorient the Church toward a more authentic expression of the Catholic faith. Dissent and heterodoxy are being recognized as the dead ends that they are; their proponents are aging, and they are not attracting new adherents. In time, they will likely wither. While the struggle is by no means over, I think we can say that the tide is beginning to turn: As the dissenters fade away and diminish in influence, they are being replaced by younger, wholeheartedly Catholic bishops, priests, and laypeople who will set the direction for the next generation. In this respect, a wise saying commends itself: Many times, the solution to the Church’s problems is found in the funeral rite.

Women Priests

Women Priests
Question from on 07-23-2007:
Fr. Levis,

There is a local priest in my area who often raises his opinions of his support for women priests. He is actually, in any other way, a fine priest with a great example of sprititually relying on the Lord. However, in this area; he and I are at odds. I have talked with him before and, of course, pointed out the encyclical that Pope John Paul II put out in 1994 that, for all intents and purposes, put closure on this issue - basically stating that the Pope nor the Church has the power to change this to have women priests. He, however, dismisses that as simply the opinion of our prior Pope and says that the statement was not an infallible statement that the faithful are expected to adhere to. As this priest is scheduled to give a mission at my parish in the near future, I would like to have some more information to disuade his perspective since he has been known to bring up this issue even during his homilies.
Answer by Fr. Robert J. Levis on 07-23-2007:
Paul, This good priest should be met with the Faith of the Church, expressed so faithfully by the document, Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, not an infallibly statement, but surely Church doctrine. This priest seems to be leaning on the simple fact that the document is not infallible. Tell him the dogma of the Assumption was not defined de fide till 1950 by Pope Pius 12 but still we all b elieved it. Fr. Bob Levis

Who Created God

Who Created God
Question from on 07-19-2007:
Dear Dr Geraghty

Please forgive the question, but who created God? If God was not created why did he not need to be created.

I have been asked this question many times but have no sustaining arguement.

Kind Regards

chris
Answer by Richard Geraghty on 07-28-2007:
Dear Chris,

If God had to be created, then he would not be God. The one who created him would have to be God. God has to be the first cause, the uncaused cause. God cannot be caused. He does not even cause himself. He simply always was, is now, and ever will be. All other beings have to have a cause, a beginning, a start.

Dr. Geraghty

Mary the virgin

Mary the virgin
Question from on 07-28-2007:
Hi, could you please tell me Who old was the bless virgin Mary was when she had Jesues? Thank you God bless.
Answer by Richard Geraghty on 07-28-2007:
Dear John,

The age I have heard is about sixteen years of age.

Dr. Geraghty

Fr Corapi

Fr Corapi
Question from on 07-19-2007:
I was watching Fr Corapi last week and he said "there, but for the grace of god, go I." My question is what does this mean.
Answer by Richard Geraghty on 07-28-2007:
Dear Ken,

He means that if he was not given the grace of God, he would stayed in the life of sin that he had chosen for many years.

Dr. Geraghty

Married Priests

Married Priests
Question from on 07-21-2007:
Isn't it likely that the church will simply grant this priest an annulment, after his divorce? They are given out quite freely in modern times. God bless...
Answer by Robert J. Flummerfelt, J.C.L. on 07-27-2007:
Hi M.L.,

The granting of annulments is never a sure bet. It always depend on the person's individual circumstances and facts. Annulments are NOT gifts for being good Catholics and are not giving to the 'bad' party. We have legal requirements for various grounds and only if the evidence proves that one or both parties' consent was invalidly proffered is a marriage declared as being invalid.

There are no guarantees.

My own experience tells me that the high number of annulments is not because we are granting them so easily, but because unfortunately, people marry under invalidating circumstances. Unfortunately, our culture's values do not help in this realm either.

Peace and best wishes, Bob

becoming one flesh

becoming one flesh
Question from on 07-21-2007:
After years of searching I have yet to obtain a good explanation for 1 Corinthians 6:16. I hope you can help. St. Paul cites Genesis 2:24 in stating that when a man unites with a prostitute they become a one-flesh union. This ontological union of two persons apparently occurs with sexual intercourse whether or not the couple is married. Therefore, is the state of becoming one-flesh a permanent act? Are they always one flesh? If not, how long exactly are two persons one-flesh after they have intercourse? When would the man and the prostitute in 1 Corinthains cease to be one-flesh? Is there an expiration of one-fleshness after intercourse that brings them back to being two-flesh? I'm not being facetious; I truly want to understand the nature of the one-flesh union in the light of scripture and nature, particularly when a couple is not legally married. Thank you for your help.
Answer by Fr. Matthew Habiger - NFP Outreach on 07-27-2007:
Dear PJ,

Here are my reflections upon 1 Corinthians 6, which also include a study of the theology of the body. I hope this helps you.

“The body is not meant for immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. Do you not know that you bodies are members of Christ? Shall I take therefore the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never!” (vv. 13-15).

Paul is saying that we are to shun all sexual immorality. Our bodies (we are bodied persons) are meant for the Lord. God wants us to be in total communion with Him. As bodied-persons we do this through our bodies as well as through our spirit-souls. We belong to the Lord. “You are not your own; you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body” (vv. 19-20)

Thus it is totally wrong to misdirect our bonding by abusing our sexuality in whatever way. We belong to the Lord. There are only two appropriate expressions of sexuality: 1) as a faithful married person, and 2) as a celibate single person.

As to your question about the duration of being two in one flesh, I think that Paul is thinking of more than the spousal act here and now. He is thinking of the bondedness that exists between a husband and wife. This persists throughout their entire married life. The spousal act renews and gives expression to this bondedness. A married couple now lives in a shared life; they are no longer unattached, uncommitted, or totally free agents.

In a similar way, we are bonded with the Lord. “But he who is united to the Lord becomes one spirit with him” (v. 17). In Ephesians 5, Paul uses the imagery of marriage to express the union between Christ and us. Marriage and the spousal act are full of meaning for us and our relationship with God.

That is what makes fornication, adultery, homosexual acts and other forms of sexual abuse so wrong. It is abusing our sexual powers. It is making lies with our bodies. It makes a mockery of the marital act. It is making sexual pleasure the absolute goal of our lives. It is the rejection of God’s plan for us as bodied persons, and a rebellious attempt to redesign that plan.

In fornication or adultery, a person is giving to another what was meant to be given only in the committed relationship of marriage. Such a union cannot last, because it is not built upon a solid foundation. After their tryst, the individuals still remain unattached, uncommitted, and totally free agents.

I hope this helps you.

Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

Rosary rallies planned for Fatima anniversary

Rosary rallies planned for Fatima anniversary

Hanover, PA, Jul 27, 2007 / 10:51 am (CNA).- Ninety years after the Marian apparitions in Fatima, Catholics in the United States are gearing up to commemorate the anniversary with 2,000 public square rosary rallies.

The American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property and its America Needs Fatima campaign are coordinating the event, set for Oct. 13, the day of the Miracle of the Sun.

More than 537 Catholics have already volunteered to hold peaceful rosary rallies in their respective cities, said Robert Ritchie, executive director of America Needs Fatima.

The Catholic group's web site (www.tfp.org) offers material to start a rosary rally, such as posters, banners, rosaries, and a detailed map that indicates rally locations by state. It also lists over 20 universities and colleges where students have started Campus Rosary Crusade chapters to pray the rosary in public locations each month.

"An amazing network is forming to honor the Mother of God and to pray for the conversion of America," said Ritchie. "It's important to remember that Our Lady of Fatima appeared asking mankind to stop offending God in order to avert punishment. She asked for prayer, penance and amendment of life. However, God continues to be offended. Just consider how abortion, pornography, blasphemy and sins against nature are so widespread.

"If anything can reverse the moral crisis in society, it's the power of the Rosary," he said.

Ends Justify the Means

Ends Justify the Means
Question from on 07-20-2007:
I know that the Church teaches that we can never do a wrong act, even if it is to bring about a good result. Well, elsewhere I recently read a question asking if someone should work on Sunday when asked to do so by the boss (at a nonessential business, such as a restaurant). The answer given was that it is OK to work on Sunday if declining to do so might jeopardize your job. But this doesn't seem right -- if we're called to uphold the Commandments, the possible loss of a job would simply be the risk we take in order to practice our Christian faith, right? On the other hand, if the answer given is correct, then couldn't the same attitude be taken with other Commandments if we are pressured to violate them?
Answer by Fr.Stephen F. Torraco on 07-23-2007:
The essential point of the third Commandment is to fulfill one's obligation to worship God. If a person attends Mass on Saturday night or Sunday and is required to work on Sunday, that person has not violated the third Commandment. In fact, the person can offer up his or her work as an act of love in service to others. This is very different from deliberately failing to fulfill one's Sunday obligation, and different from deliberately violating any of the other Commandments."

Ten Commandments

Google Reader (8)

Ten Commandments
Question from on 07-13-2007:
When I was small, I attended Catholic School, and the time, Nuns were the only ones teaching in Catholic Schools. But at that time, things were more simple, more innocent it seems (this will give away my age).But the way mortal sin was understood by some of us were, only the sins covered by the Ten Commandments were considered to be "mortal sins". Would you be able to eleborate more on this, whether the seven deadlly sins, etc, are included in the ten commandments? Thanks, Ignorant Yet
Answer by Fr.Stephen F. Torraco on 07-16-2007:
According to the Church's teaching, one of the three conditions for a sin to be mortal is that the action or omission has to be a serious matter. (The other two conditions are that the person must know this and the person must freely consent to the action or omission.) The serious matter is delineated by the Ten Commandments. The seven deadly sins are included in the Ten Commandments. The deadly sin of sloth (sadness caused by thought of God) violates the first and possibly the third Commandment. The deadly sins of envy, greed, lust, and gluttony violate the ninth and tenth Commandments. Lust can lead to the violation of the sixth Commandment. Greed and gluttony can lead to the violation of the seventh Commandment. Envy can lead to the violation of the eighth Commandment. The deadly sin of anger violates the fifth Commandment. The deadly sin of pride violates the first Commandment. You can examine these connections further by turning to Part 3 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church where the Ten Commandments are presented.

rosary during mass?

Google Reader (8)

rosary during mass?
Question from on 07-14-2007:
Is it ok to say the rosary during mass? Sometimes I try to give myself a head start by saying it during the "down time" at mass (bringing up the gifts, and after I've done my prayers after Communion) but in my heart I feel like maybe I should just be focusing on the mass ... Thank you so much for your forum... it is such a blessing to all of us thirsting for knowledge and a deeper relationship with the Lord. God Bless You always!
Answer by Rev. Mark J. Gantley, JCL on 07-16-2007:
I am not sure that it is best to pray the rosary during the Mass. I see it more appropriately prayed before or after Mass. If you pray it during the readings at Mass, then one would not be paying attention to the readings. If you pray it during the consecration, then one is distracted from paying attention to the consecration. It seems like praying other prayers during Mass would distract from full and conscious participation in the Mass. (Of course if the priest is giving a never-ending boring homily, then ....)

Definition of Pro Life?

Google Reader (8)

Definition of Pro Life?
Question from on 07-16-2007:
Does the church defing pro life as conception to birth, or conception to a natural death? My person definition is until a natural death.
Answer by Judie Brown on 07-17-2007:
Dear Hummer

The Church defines the total existence of a person's life as beginning at inception (conception/fertilization) and ending naturally with death.

Your opinion is correct.

Judie Brown

Animals at Mass

Google Reader (8)

Animals at Mass
Question from on 07-16-2007:
Last week when I went to Mass, I was shocked when the woman in front of me had a dog with her. I noticed it was wearing a vest saying "Puppy in training" and was going to be a service animal. It was sitting on a blanket chewing on rawhide bones and rolling under the pew. I asked the ushers about it and they told me that she is constantly bringing puppies in training to Mass and that this was a "special circumstance".

My question is, is this allowable or should I say something? And if I'm bound to say something, where do I start?? I understand that people with special needs have service animals at their disposal, but are they allowed in the sanctuary during Mass? Is this woman allowed to bring a dog in that isn't for her, but rather "in training"?

Thank you for your help!

MT
Answer by Rev. Mark J. Gantley, JCL on 07-16-2007:
There aren't any norms regarding having animals at Mass. Prudence and common sense need to dictate what is to be done.

If the dog is (or is training to be) a seeing eye dog or something similar, then I understand the need to have the animal with one during Mass. Otherwise, I don't see why one would bring pets to church.

I would say that this matter should be handled by the local pastor.

Message at Fatima

Google Reader (8)

Message at Fatima
Question from on 06-14-2007:
Dear Gentleman,

If the Most Blessed Virgin stated that sins of immorality are what hurts Our Lord the most and that most souls go to Hell because of these types of sins, why did she not ask for the conversion of Europe and the U.S. rather than Russia? It seems that democracy and capitalism do a better job at enabling immoral practices and atheistic beliefs than any tyranny. Also I understand that though most Russians could not practice their faith publicly, the faith was strong among the people in their hearts.

Thanks.
Answer by David Gregson on 07-17-2007:
The major threat to the Faith at the time Our Lady spoke at Fatima was Communism, of which Russia was the primary proponent. Although the Faith survived in Russia, it was much diminished by Marxist teaching, the closing of churches and monasteries, and State strictures on practice of the Faith. In Europe and the U.S., the Faith is presently disparaged by some politicians and often in the media, and an anti-Christian world view is propagated, but Christians aren't really impeded from practicing their Faith.

Capitalism, while often practiced without moral responsibility, is not inherently opposed to Christianity, the way Communism is. Much less is democracy opposed. I suspect that a large part of the problem in the West is not Capitalism, but the failure of parents to teach their children the Faith, leaving them easy prey to immoral commercial interests.

Moment of Death

Google Reader (8)

Moment of Death
Question from on 07-11-2007:
Dr. Geraghty,

I am a little confused about saving grace at the moment of death. If GOD offers all sinners a last chance at salvation at the moment of death, would that not mean that if we choose to accept that offer, even if we died in a state of mortal sin, we would still be saved?

Thank You
Answer by Richard Geraghty on 07-18-2007:
Dear Jay,

The Church does not tell us anything specific about what happens at the moment of death. What it does tell us that if we die in the state of grace, which means that we have no mortal sins on soul, we will get to heaven either immediately or via a trip through purgatory. If one dies in the state of mortal sin, then there is no hope for heaven.

Dr. Geraghty

Course In Miracles

Google Reader (8)

A Course In Miracles
Question from on 07-11-2007:
I have been introduced (through an acquaintance) to an interesting book called "A Course In Miracles". Some of what I have read online seems to make some sence, but I am wondering if the Catholic church has taken note of this publication, and if so, what are the conclusions as to it's validity? Is it a book I may study in length? I will put no book ahead of the Bible, and no religion ahead of the Catholic faith, but I must confess this book has some interesting points to be considered. Will it conflict with my Catholic teachings? Thank you for your attention to this question..... God bless..............Michael
Answer by Richard Geraghty on 07-18-2007:
Dear Michael,

To know what the Church teaches, you do well to learn those teachings from the Church herself. Since you have already read some of the book on line, why not check out its teachings by consulting a Catholic web site dealing with the same topic. The course on miracles is definitely not a Catholic book. Since parts of it have grabbed your interest, check it out from a Catholic point of view. There is sure to be significant differences.

Dr. Geraghty

Wedding bands

Google Reader (8)

Wedding bands
Question from on 07-18-2007:
Someone recently told me that Catholics HAVE to get married with wedding bands made only of gold. She was talking about recent weddings she's been to (within past 10 years). I got married in 1966 and have never heard of such a rule. Can you shed any light on this?
Answer by Catholic Answers on 07-18-2007:
Mary--

Ask your friend to show you where the Church requires Catholics to only use gold wedding bands. As she has made the assertion, it is her responsibility to substantiate it.

Michelle Arnold
Catholic Answers

Vatican City State has ventured forth into the digital world

Google Reader (5)

VATICAN CITY, July 19 (CNA) - The Vatican City State has ventured forth into the digital world today by launching a sharply designed Internet portal. The new site (www.vaticanstate.va) comes as a response to the ever increasing number of requests by pilgrims and tourists for information about the world’s smallest city state.The new website, will run alongside the official Holy See website (www.vatican.va), and has been implemented in five languages (Italian, English, French, Spanish and German) with Portuguese soon to be added.

Our Lady of Loreto

Google Reader (5)

Our Lady of Loreto
Question from on 07-19-2007:
Dear Father, I want to put a statue of Our Lady of Loreto(The Black Maddona statue found in the Holy House) on my Alter. I've searched and searched but never found a statue of her. Is it against Church Law to have a statue of her.
Answer by Rev. Mark J. Gantley, JCL on 07-20-2007:
I don't know of any prohibition of such a statue. Perhaps it is just not a popular image and therefore no statues of her a made (or made only infrequently).

converting without RCIA

Google Reader (5)

converting without RCIA
Question from on 07-20-2007:
Is it possible to become Catholic without RCIA if you are a baptized adult that has studied the faith on your own for several years? I have several health problems and will soon have surgery and would like to convert first. Would it be allowed without formal instruction? Thank you.
Answer by Rev. Mark J. Gantley, JCL on 07-20-2007:
"RCIA" stands for the Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults. It is basically the rites and ceremonies that are the steps for an adult to enter the Church.

I think what you are asking for is to be received into the full communion of the Catholic Church without completing the usual catechetical requirements that are connected with the RCIA program. I would say that you should discuss this with your local priest. Considering your medical situation, he may be agreeable. I would suggest that you offer that he test you to evaluate your level of knowledge of the faith. If it is adequate, then he may be agreeable.

guidelines after mass

Google Reader (5)

guidelines after mass
Question from on 07-16-2007:
Dear Fr. Gantley,

Thank you very much for all you do. After mass today I went to light a candle in honor of the Blessed Mother as always. Specially today is her feast of OUR LADY OF MOUNT CARMEL as I was praying Father turn the lights off( to conserve energy, and he always turn it off after mass that i'm aware of and leave He had done this before as i was in prayer before the Blessed Mother in which i can understand to conserve energy, but it is dark only the candle was lit on, so I finnished my prayer and left. Father is it okay to pray in the dark at church? Thank you and God Blessed EWTN. mona
Answer by Rev. Mark J. Gantley, JCL on 07-20-2007:
It's OK to pray in the dark.

It seems unwise for the priest to turn the lights out on people when they are still in church. This seems dangerous and might lead to injury and liability issues. At the very least, he should warn those still present that he is going to do this.

Blessed Oil

Google Reader (5)

Blessed Oil
Question from on 07-16-2007:
Is there blessed oil, other than Chrism oil, that can be used by lay people for anointing. I asume that since you can bless other things like a Crucifix or a religious medal you could bless oil, but is blessed oil outside the Chrism oil a sacramental; could be used like holy water or blessed salt?
Answer by Rev. Mark J. Gantley, JCL on 07-20-2007:
The only provision in the Book of Blessings for blessing of oil is in a section on blessing food items. So the oil that is being blessed is meant for cooking, not anointing.

The Instruction On Certain Questions Regarding the Collaboration of the Non-Ordained Faithful in the Sacred Ministry of Priest, issued jointly by several congregations in 1997, article 9 states: "Since they are not priests, in no instance may the non-ordained perform anointings either with the Oil of the Sick or ony other oil."

20th century papal biographies

Google Reader (5)

20th century papal biographies
Question from on 07-09-2007:
Could you provide a list of recommended papal biographies for the 20th century? For example, it is hard to find a biography of Pope Pius XII. It seems most books written about him today are simply answering charges against him rather than providing a general information.

Thank you
Answer by Matthew Bunson on 07-21-2007:
The list is a rather long one, so readers are also encouraged to offer their own suggestions for their favorite works.

Pope Leo XIII: Leo XIII by William Kieffer; The Life of Pope Leo Xiii: From His Personal Memoirs by Monsignor Bernard O'Reilly.

Pope St. Pius X: Pope Saint Pius X by Yves Chiron; Pope St. Pius the X by F. A. Forbes.

Pope Benedict XV: Benedict XV: The Unknown Pope and the Pursuit of Peace by John F. Pollard; The life of Benedict XV by Walter H Peters.

Pope Pius XI: Pius XI,: Apostle of peace by Lillian Browne Olf; His Holiness Pope Pius XI by René Fontenelle.

Pope Pius XII: POPE PIUS XII by Louis De Wohl; Man of Peace: Pope Pius XII by Margherita Marchione; Shepherd of Souls: A Pictorial Life of Pope Pius XII by Margherita Marchione; and Pope Pius XII: Architect for Peace by Margherita Marchione.

Pope Bl. John XXIII: Journal of a Soul: The Autobiography of Pope John XXIII; John XXIII: Pope of the Century by Peter Hebblethwaite.

Pope Paul VI: Paul VI: The First Modern Pope by Peter Hebblethwaite.

Pope John Paul I: The Smiling Pope: The Life And Teaching Of John Paul I by Raymond Seabeck and Lauretta Seabeck; Illustrissimi: Letters from Pope John Paul I by Pope John Paul I.

Pope John Paul II: Witness to Hope by George Weigel; Pope John Paul II Life: A Tribute by Robert Sullivan; Man of the Century: The Life and Times of Pope John Paul II by Jonathan Kwitny; His Holiness: John Paul II and the History of Our Time by Carl Bernstein, Marco Politi.

Pope Benedict XVI: Pope Benedict XVI: The Conscience of Our Age by Fr. D. Vincent Twomey; We Have a Pope! Benedict XVI by Matthew Bunson.

7 types of angels

Google Reader (5)

7 types of angels
Question from on 07-09-2007:
I'm a first grade CCD teacher & I would like to introduce my students to the type of angels, their names and what they do. Thank you for your help. Kathy Norcia
Answer by Matthew Bunson on 07-21-2007:
There is considerable variety among different angelologists as to the specific ordering of the hierarchy or choirs of Angels. The Old Testament mentions only two orders, angels and archangels. St. Jerome, meanwhile, had seven orders; St. Ambrose had nine. The most influential Christian writer in the early determination of the choirs was Dionysius the Areopagite in the 6th century. In his work, the Celestial Hierarchy, he proposed that there are nine choirs: seraphim, cherubim, thrones, dominations, virtues, powers, principalities, archangels, and angels. He was subsequently supported by St. Thomas Aquinas who argued further that not only are there nine choirs of angels but that they are divided into three triads, each possessing three choirs and having specific purposes.

The first triad holds the seraphim, cherubim, and thrones, with the object of contemplating the perfection and glory of God. The second triad is made up of dominations, virtues, and powers, and is concerned with the plurality of universal causes, that is they are concerned with the ordering of the Universe (hence they are termed angels of creation). The third triad holds the principalities, archangels, and angels, with the function of ordering specific causes, meaning that they are taken up with the most minute ordering of the universe. One of their chief functions is to care for the welfare of humanity.

Angels cannot become human because they are purely spiritual beings with intelligence and free will. That means they have no bodies and do not depend upon matter for their existence. Humans, on the other hand, are composed of a material body that dies and a spiritual soul that is immortal. Angels are God’s messengers and servants. Humans were created in the image and likeness of God to praise, reverence, and serve him in this life and attain eternal life. While we are different from angels, that does not mean we cannot remember that angels are our friends, helpers, and supporters, most so the guardian angels.

Thank you for your questions, and I hope that your students are helped.

God bless.

St, Peter' body

Google Reader (5)

St, Peter' body
Question from on 07-05-2007:
Dear Mr. Bunson, I have heard and read the history of St. Peter's Basilica - that it was built upon the tomb of St. Peter. I also know that St. Peter's and St. Paul's bodies were once buried next to each other until they got moved to separate, different sites. Somebody told me that only half of St. Peter's body is buried in the tomb inside the Basilica, half is buried somewhere else, and the head of St. Peter is buried somewhere else. Is it true? It sounds incredible that the Church would allow that to happen to the body of the Prince of Apostles. Thank you very much for your kind assistance, and may God bless you and your ministry. Elizabeth
Answer by Matthew Bunson on 07-21-2007:
I would encourage you to visit the excellent site: http://www.stpetersbasilica.org/Necropolis/MG/TheTombofStPeter-1.htm

You will find a comprehensive discussion of the topic.

Married Priests

Google Reader (5)

Married Priests
Question from on 07-16-2007:
To Whom it May Concern:

I know of a married priest(formerly an Anglican) that is on sabbitcal currently because of a potiential civil divorce with his wife.

What could happen to him, his wife or maybe ex, and family.
Answer by Rev. Mark J. Gantley, JCL on 07-20-2007:
The Vatican statements of 1980-81 allowing former Anglican/Episcopalian priests to enter the Catholic Church and be ordained as priests even (on a case by case basis) even if they are married do not address the issue of the possibility of divorce.

It would seem that the diocesan bishop must evaluate the situation and make provision for the case.

works of mercy

Google Reader (4)

works of mercy
Question from on 07-16-2007:
What are the spiritual works of mercy?

What are the corporal works of mercy?

Thanks!
Answer by Fr.Stephen F. Torraco on 07-17-2007:
The corporal works of mercy, based on Christ's prediction of the Last Judgment (Matthew 5:3-10), are: feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, clothe the naked, shelter the homeless, visit the sick, visit those in prison, and bury the dead.

The spiritual works of mercy are: convert the sinner, instruct the ignorant, counsel the doubtful, comfort the sorrowful, bear wrongs patiently, forgive injuries, and pray for the living and dead.