Question from Judy on 2/27/2008:
Where do I find this?
Answer by Judie Brown on 2/27/2008:
Judy
the answer to your question is found in Louis deMontfort's wonderful book which EWTN has put on line at http://www.ewtn.com/library/Montfort/Handbook/Consecr.htm
Judie Brown
Question from Dwight on 2/23/2008:
A priest who was administering Communion during a recent Mass confronted my elderly mother as she received "in the hand," she responded Amen and the sign of the cross, and began to walk away as everyone does, when all of the sudden the priest sternly blurts out "eat it now."
My elderly mother has been a devout Catholic her entire life, helping others and being a good example, always mentioning the love of Jesus to others who may be struggling with lifes difficulties. Recently my mother has been struggling with her own health and is on some medications which make it hard for her to swallow, but she doesn't let that stop her from attending Mass and receiving holy Communion. She has dealt with the medical problems by receiving Communion in the hand and then returning to her seat in the pew where she reverantly and carefully breaks the bread and eats it slowly and prayerfully in two or four pieces, adoring and contemplating the Eucharist.
The priest said in a loud voice "eat it now," to which my mother stopped in her tracks and turned back to him and said "I have difficulty swallowing Father, I need to break it and eat it slowly back at the pew." The priest ignored her plea and again repeated even more sternly "eat it right now." My elderly dad was next in line, having been married for close to 60 years to my mother, he jumped to her defense and told the priest, "She has trouble swallowing, she is going to eat it, Father". All of this was taking part in front of a packed Sunday Mass with everyone watching and listening. The priest said "No, eat it now."
My mom started crying and placed the Eucharist in her mouth to obey the priest and walked the long walk back to her pew in total humiliation and embarrassment, tears were streaming down her face as she slowly walked the entire length of the aisle. She felt hurt that the priest would show such anger towards her, an ill person attempting to receive Communion, her most joyous occassion in life.
Now as I try and research the rules on this subject, I find that in the wake of the "on the tongue/in the hand, standing/kneeling issues," Pope John Paul II had deep feelings on imploring priests and clergy to be mindful, understanding and patient towards the "people that make up the Church," reminding them that "Happy are those who are called to his Supper." Also reminding them of the parable of the wedding guests where many did not attend and offered many excuses, but let us rejoice for those that are here.
From what I understand, during the times of the early Church it was not uncommon for some to take the bread with them back to their homes, this is not what my mother was doing, but why can't someone who is remaining in the Church eat the bread at his own pace? Did Jesus force the apostles to immediately eat the bread , or did he allow them to take a piece of bread and think and contemplate before placing it in their mouths? Was there a time limit in effect or could one person take a moment longer to think about what he was doing?
My mother is very careful to respect the Eucharist and not allow any to fall from her hand. A person who is celebrating in the Mass should be allowed to "take ... and eat," this is not a "force feeding" and priests should understand that some of the people receiving "take ... and eat" at differnt paces.
Any thoughts on this confrontation?
Answer by Catholic Answers on 2/26/2008:
Dwight--
I'm very sorry to hear that your mother went through such an embarrassing situation. It certainly sounds like the priest could have handled the situation more gently than he did.
You must understand though that, while the priest handled the situation badly, in principle alone (as distinguished from pastoral care) he was right. Those receiving Communion in the hand at Mass must consume it immediately. They may not take it back to their seats. The reason for this is to protect the Eucharist from theft and sacrilegious abuse by those who would spirit it away for who-knows-what purpose. If your mother is unable to consume the Eucharist immediately upon reception during Mass, she should not receive Communion at Mass.
This does not mean that your mother cannot receive Communion at all. Those unable to receive Communion at Mass due to illness may request that an extraordinary minister come to their home with Communion. In that situation, with an EMHC looking on, those unable to consume right away may consume the Eucharist at their own pace. In your mother's case, one possible solution would be that she could attend Mass while not receiving Communion, and then later receive Communion at home from an EMHC.
That said, again I must assure you, assuming your report of the situation is accurate, that the priest handled the situation badly. Barking orders at an elderly lady who has just explained to him the reason why she was returning to her seat with Communion was not the way to deal with this. Perhaps he could have quietly invited her to sit in the front row to consume the Eucharist at her own pace and then to meet with him after Mass to discuss the situation further. At that point, in private, he could have explained the reasons why she could not receive Communion in the manner she had been doing so and suggested acceptable alternatives.
When you pass on this information to your parents, urge them to try to forgive the priest and to attribute his terse manner to a desire to protect the Eucharist and an inability to think of an alternative way to do so in the heat of the moment. God bless.
Michelle Arnold
Catholic Answers
Question from Carol on 2/21/2008:
My ex-husband died. Am I considered a widow in the eyes of the Catholic Church? (He committed adultery. Priest gave me permission to seek a civil divorce based on the adultery.)
Answer by Catholic Answers on 2/21/2008:
Carol--
I'm very sorry for your loss. May God be with you during this difficult time.
The Church considers civil divorce the equivalent of legal separation and tolerates it when there is just cause to seek it in order to protect a spouse and children and to settle matters of estate and custody arrangements. Unless an annulment is later granted, the Church considers the couple still married. So, if you and your ex-husband did not have an annulment from the Church, then his death would mean that you are now a widow. God bless.
Michelle Arnold
Catholic Answers
Question from Terry on 2/20/2008:
Is it wrong to attend a commitment ceremony of two gay people? How does the Church feel about this?
Answer by Catholic Answers on 2/20/2008:
Terry--
The Church has unequivocally stated that same-sex unions are impossible (source). Given that, I cannot recommend attending a same-sex "commitment ceremony" under any circumstances whatsoever.
Michelle Arnold
Catholic Answers
Question from Tony on 2/7/2008:
I have noticed that not only the priest but also nuns and extraordinary ministers have been performing the blessings of the throats (on feast of St. Blaise) and applying the ashes on Ash Wednesday. Is this okay or should only the priest be performing these functions? I only remember the priest doing these functions in the past.
Answer by Catholic Answers on 2/7/2008:
Tony--
Yes, the blessing of throats and distribution of blessed ashes may be done by a lay minister.
Michelle Arnold
Catholic Answers
Question from Henry on 2/7/2008:
During the Pope's Ash Wednesday service, ashes were sprinkled on top of the head rather than being traced in the form of a cross on the forehead. Can you explain the differences in this custom and why?
Answer by Catholic Answers on 2/7/2008:
Henry--
Recommended reading:
Why are ashes sprinkled on the head in some places?
Michelle Arnold
Catholic Answers
Question from Christian on 2/5/2008:
I am Lutheran but my girlfriend is Catholic. I have been told by numerous people, including a priest, that Lutherans cannot receive Communion in a Catholic church because the beliefs are different. Growing up Lutheran, I was taught that we are receiving the actual body and blood of Christ when we receive communion.
The people I spoke with were under the impression that Lutherans receive a "representation" of the body and blood of Christ, which is incorrect. The spoken words at both masses, Lutheran and Catholic, are identical as well. Can I receive Commmunion at a Catholic church? If not, why?
Answer by Catholic Answers on 2/5/2008:
Christian--
Although there are extraordinary circumstances in which a Lutheran may receive Catholic Communion, under ordinary circumstances he may not. Receiving Catholic Communion indicates by his action that the communicant believes and accepts all that the Catholic Church teaches and is in full communion with the Church. In other words, that he is a Catholic. Generally speaking then, to receive Catholic Communion when one is not in full communion with the Catholic Church is to deceive with your body.
Some Lutherans may believe that their communion is the actual body and blood of Christ, but, objectively speaking, Lutheran communion is not a valid Eucharist. It is not really Christ's body and blood because the celebrant does not have the valid holy orders necessary to confect the bread and wine into Christ's body and blood. Thus, despite surface similarities between the services, a Lutheran communion service is not the same thing as a Catholic Mass.
If you would like to receive Catholic Communion, I encourage you to consider studying Catholicism to see if you could in conscience become a Catholic. Jesus Christ longs to be sacramentally one with all those who believe in him; he simply asks that we approach him on his terms and not our own. God bless.
Recommended reading:
Pillar of Fire, Pillar of Truth
How to Become a Catholic
Michelle Arnold
Catholic Answers
Question from Kristina on 2/6/2008:
When we receive the ashes on Ash Wednesday, are we supposed to leave them on until the day is over or do we immediately wash them off? My priest says one thing and my father says another.
Answer by Catholic Answers on 2/6/2008:
Kristina--
It's up to you when you take off the ashes. To the best of my knowledge, the Church does not state how long they should be worn.
Michelle Arnold
Catholic Answers
Question from jim on 2/26/2008:
Because of the soon to be released complete Orthodox Study Bible, I have ordered a copy so that I can have a Bible that includes all the books used by Eastern Catholics (our Old Testament canon is the same as the Orthodox). However, I'm somewhat weary of the anti-Catholic bias that is sure to be included. Is there any chance of a Catholic Bible being published which includes our books not included in the Latin canon? Are there any plans for such a project, and if not, what would it take to get one started?
Answer by Fr. John Echert on 2/27/2008:
I am not aware of such a project and can only imagine it would be done for one of two reasons: as an "ecumenical project" or as an edition for scholars and a few others with your interest. Problem is that with an "ecumenical" edition you will find bias as well and who knows if there is enough market for a scholarly edition. On the whole, however, I would not expect a Catholic publisher to pursue this because it would lend confusion to your typical Catholic who would not distinguish between canonical works and the others.
Thanks, Jim
Father Echert
Question from Mystical Rose on 2/24/2008:
Hi, Father Levis!
A few weeks ago, I caught one of Fr. Corapi's talks about the Catechism, specifically how to make a good examination of conscience using the Ten Commandments. In a nutshell, he mentioned that because we now know how smoking cigarettes is so very detrimental to the health of our bodies, that it is considered a mortal sin. At the time I saw this, I had already quit, but only just a few days before seeing Fr. Corapi's talk on EWTN. I immediately thought, "I can't wait to get to confession", as I had been smoking since I was 18 yrs. old (I'm 48 now).
I went to confession and discussed what I had heard Fr. Corapi say, and was told by my confessor that smoking being a mortal sin was only Fr. Corapi's opinion.
I am confused. Although I am no longer smoking (going on just 3 weeks -- but striving to make it for the rest of my earthly life!), I am concerned about friends and family members who continue to smoke.
If you were to hear this in the confessional, what would your reponse be?
Thank you for listening, Father!
I say this very respectfully ... I love you, Father Levis!
Answer by Fr. Robert J. Levis on 2/25/2008:
Rose, Individual priests make their own personal judgments on certain matters, e.g. smoking. No, it is almost universal, folks start the habit for many reasons (many of them good), they get caught up in it; no, I have never considered it a serious sin,a mortal sin. God knows no one should smoke, it is a fault, a venial sin at most. Actually years ago I started to smoke a pipe mainly to put smokers who come for counselling at ease. Nice way to relax them, "George, do you have a match?" I quit when I burnt enough tiny holes in my black coat and cassock. Fr. Bob Levis
Question from David Warszewik on 2/24/2008:
Dear Father Levis;
I am 10 years old and was wondering how old Adam and Eve were when they were kicked out of the garden of Eden? Love the show!
David Warszewik
Answer by Fr. Robert J. Levis on 2/25/2008:
David, A great question! I don't know the answer. I bet you stump your teachers too. Fr. Bob Levis
Question from Sarah on 2/24/2008:
Father Bob As parents, our lives have been devoted to living and teaching our children the Catholic faith. Almost overnight, our 21 year old daughter has told us that she no longer believes anything we have taught her. She has told us we are terrible parents and that she hates us. She is quickly sliding into a life of sin and refuses any offers of help. We have been enduring such deep pain and suffering from her venemous words and actions. We still love her deeply. Can our suffering be united with Christ and offered in reparation for her sins? Can this be applied to the living and must the recipient be in a state of grace to benefit? Please pray for her.
Answer by Fr. Robert J. Levis on 2/25/2008:
Dear Sarah, Try to realize America is suffering from a cultural revolution, especially among the young, from high school on. Try to be patient. Restrain your criticism of your daughter at this time, and until she seeks help. Be sure to be patient with her in spite of the anger, disappointment, fear reigning in your heart for her. Pray, pray more; in time she will return. The 21 years of your training are only temporally eclipsed. Surrender her to Mary, and relax. This is only a phase, try not to lengthen it. Fr. Bob Levis
Question from Nicole Kyle on 2/24/2008:
Is the Anglican Catholic Church affiliated with the Roman Catholic Church and is it okay for a Roman Catholic to belong to this church?
Answer by Fr. Robert J. Levis on 2/25/2008:
Nicole, There are a very few Anglican Churches that have come over to Roman Catholicism (in TExas and Maryland, I think). YOu must ask the members of these Church about their relationship with Rome to answer your question.Fr. Bob Levis
Question from laura on 2/25/2008:
Thank you, Father for letting us know about sins/smoking cigarettes. I, too smoke lightly due to stress and nervousness-I can be quite a timid soul. I knew a priest who smoked, and with whom I once bummed a cigarette off of. I was hoping that it wasn't a mortal sin-the smoking cigarettes part. I am planning on making an appointment soon to see about going on Wellbutrin or something to help me quit altogether. My oldest daughter has been pestering me about my smoking (I don't smoke in my vehicle or my house outside of the utility room on nasty days). I really want to live a good christian life and want to do the right thing for me and my rugrats. Thanks, again for your input. Oh, one question-is light profanity a bad sin-you know-using the sh-- word or other light cursing (not using God's name in vain)? I try not to curse-I even lately have been saying "ships high in transit" to substitute for it, mainly because of the lent season. Thanks, Father for any input. I don't know what I would do without your wise advice, with sincere appreciation, laura
Answer by Fr. Robert J. Levis on 2/25/2008:
Laura, I know the language of many if not most Service Personnel would make a sailor blush. So, Laura, don't try to keep up with this just to be Air Force. The others admire you 1000% for your clean language. "Ships high in transit" brings a big smile to my cracked lips! Laura continue to be a good Christian in an otherwise secular world. Don't let the cigs get hold of you. Cancer, you know.Fr. Bob Levis
Vatican City, Feb 25, 2008 / 04:01 pm (CNA).- Commenting on the latest Oscars awards, the Vatican daily L' Osservatore Romano said in an opinion column that the most awarded movies portray the image of a hopeless America.
The article, written by Gaetano Vallini, says that the awards night was dominated by two visions of evil, two instances of using images to portray evil.
"On one side, the story of perdition, described by Paul Thomas Anderson in 'There Will Be Blood,' on the other, a contemporary Western, with a modern incarnation of evil, 'No Country for Old Men,' produced by Joel and Ethan Coen," each one of them receiving eight nominations.
L'Osservatore says that, aside from the awards given to these two films, Hollywood has been dominated this year "by dark films, filled with violence but mainly with hopelessness."
The author of the column asks if this is not a "sign of the times." "Maybe,” Vallini wrote.
“Since there were films capable of expressing different emotions in the running, with brave openness, like Juno, directed by Jason Reitman, which tales the story of a teenager who decided to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term, or 'The Diving Bell and the Butterfly', from Julian Schnabel, a secular hymn to life despite grave disabilities."
From a movie-making perspective, the author finds “No Country for old Men” "well crafted, with a solid story line and a compelling rhythm."
However, Vallini found the Cohen brothers’ story "marked by absurd and mindless acts of violence, a world in which there is no place for old values."
"In the film, moral conscience is lacking, and perhaps deliberately, it faintly appears in the sheriff. Too little to justify so much gratuitous violence," he noted.
The film reviewer also pointed to the unbalanced portrayal of the Cohen brothers saying, "Even if in the Cohen movie there is no complacence in showing the evilness of a killer … there isn't the slightest sign of credible compassion either."
In this way, L'Osservatore says, "the American dream is obliterated, described by the directors in bold strokes, without offering any anchor for hope, no hope for the future;" unlike the original novel, "in which the author leaves some room open for hope."
Vallini says that "this clearly pessimistic view that the United States offers of itself through the movies "seems to be shared by the jury of the Academy awards, which has awarded a film that leaves no doubts about its goal, which is to show the decline of modern society, the decay of values."
"The voyage is over. So are the illusions. In short, not a very encouraging sign," he adds.
L'Osservatore, nevertheless, expresses optimism in the fact that "the 'Oscars' of the independent films, which don't have to respond to the big Hollywood producers, have awarded Juno as the best film, best original screenplay (with Ellen Page as best actress), and 'The Diving Bell and the Butterfly' for best direction and photography." "In short, an award for [a film] which, going against the mainstream, tells about the beauty of life."
Question from Richard D'Orlando on 2/21/2008:
Any catholic can become a Eucharistic minister just by saying yes when asked by any pastor. Eucharistic ministers were introduced for the sole purpose of distributing Holy Commuion , when no priest was available. We now see many of these "ministers" giving out Holy Commuion, as well,as opening the tabernacle door at any time the priest is present or not, to give out the Eucharist. My question is this: Do you think that all these Eucharistic ministers have helped in watering down the truth that the Eucharist is the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity Of Jesus Christ, by being handled by those whose hands are not consecrated? If Saint Thomas Aquinas, a Dr. and Saint in heaven, said in his Smuma Theologica, " Out of respect for this sacrament, only that which is consecrated, is to touch the sacred Host", meaning, only the hands of the consecrated priest, how can we disregard this saint's teaching today, if he is a Dr. and saint of the Catholic church? Can we merely explain it away with wishful thinking that it was just this saints opionion? Connected to this question is all of the changes that have helped ruin our Mass. Richard D'Orlando, Nahant, Massachusetts. email: goretti6@earthlink.net
Answer by Fr. Robert J. Levis on 2/22/2008:
Dear Richard, Without doubt, you express truth here. Some of these people have scandalized many others. Even we priests are reminded of this dignity we enjoy and are corrected by Scripture: "Imitamini quod tractatus." Imitate what you are doing. If and when the EEM is well prepared this scandal should not occur. We priests need help, we are fewer in number and older now. But there is no excuse for the nonchalant EEM whose attitude is sinful. Fr. Bob Levis
Question from catholic on 2/22/2008:
Hello Father, What are the required duties of retired priests who are living in a parish rectory with another active priest? Are retired priests obligated to perform masses a few times a week? We have a retired priest living in our parish with our active priest, but it seems he's been doing more of the masses than our active parish priest. Is this allowed for him to do more masses than our own priest does in one week? Catholic
Answer by Fr. Robert J. Levis on 2/24/2008:
Catholic, A retired priest is relativey free to continue his priestly duties as he is able. Some are ill and can do little; others are well and very active. Priests work details out by themselves in service to the faithful. Fr. Bob Levis
Question from laura on 2/22/2008:
Hi, Fr Levis-hope all is well with you. Is it possible for the devil to attack you spiritually? The reason I am asking is a lot of bad things has happened to me and my family-to top it off-my house I brought 4 yrs ago-it passed the inspection-now has 3 roof leaks and the folks who came to clean out my vents said that it shouldn't have passed inspection. My son's ceiling has mold in the ceiling and it needs to be replaced. My oldest daughter, who never gotten sick has missed 32 days of school last year-all medically related, 23 this year and was diagnosed with asthma last year. She never had these problems before I moved here. I am looking for the paperwork from the inspection so that I can talk to base legal and hopefully find a lawyer who will take my case on a contingency basis. I really can't afford to go in debt anymore-trying to get out of the hole. Today, my son got suspended from school for a day for his bad behavior-hopefully maybe the chaplain can have a word with him and get him turned around. It's like my whole life has been cursed and I still have faith that things may still turn around for me and my family. I really deserve a break. I was just wondering if Satan can attack in this manner. If he does, what can I do to hopefully have blessings once again flowing in my home for me and my family. Don't get me wrong-there are a few brights spots in my life-just started my home business and I have a wonderful job coach (it's registered with the better business bureau and is very reputable) and my oldest despite her health issues made the junior scholar program (will take college classes this summer) and is doing well in honors courses. She's in 8th grade yet her national scores put her up with the college students. Thanks, Father for any insight-oh the roof and structure damage-my former father-in-law hopefully can help me out with that-I am broke! Please keep me and my family in your prayers and I'll remember you in mine-thanks for everything, laura
Answer by Fr. Robert J. Levis on 2/24/2008:
Laura, I am sure the devil can't come within a country acre of you, your children, even the house. God is too good to permit satanic harm befalling you or your family. All these nasty things come with winter, so not to worry. God bless you. Fr.Bob Levis
Question from Mary Jo Smith on 2/5/2008:
Which days are the Holy Days of Obligation?
Answer by Rev. Mark J. Gantley, JCL on 2/20/2008:
According to the universal law of the Catholic Church, the following are holy days of obligation: every Sunday, Christmas, Epiphany, Ascension, Body and Blood of Christ, Mary Mother of God, Immaculate Conception, Assumption, St. Joseph, Saints Peter and Paul, All Saints (canon 1246.1).
Depending on the decision of the conference of bishops in a particular country (with Vatican approval), some of these days are transferred to the nearest Sunday or are suppressed as days of obligation (canon 1246.2).
For the days of obligation in the United States of America, go to: http://www.usccb.org/norms/1246.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recent Articles:
The Edge
Questions for Father General
Neighbors Near and Far
Will McCain Oppose 845 Billion-Dollar Earmark?
A Family Friendly Small Business Nightmare
Thou Shalt Not Say "Adultery"
>>See more The Edge articles
Russell Shaw
Religion in the Campaign
The Future of the Jesuits
Saved by Hope
A Blunt Attack Upon the Family
Pro-lifer’s Dilemma
>>See more Russell Shaw articles
February 26, 2008
One of the genuinely hopeful developments in Catholic life in recent years has been the spread of Eucharistic adoration. Parishes across the country have begun to offer opportunities for people to meditate and pray before the Blessed Sacrament. In some places, Eucharistic adoration is a 24/7 program while elsewhere it takes place several days a week. It's a great idea.
Or at least, quite a few of us think it is. But apparently not all. It may come as a shock to people who cherish Eucharistic adoration, but there are some who have reservations about the practice. It's worth considering why.
Recently I read a magazine article by an articulate critic — the name hardly matters — who can reasonably be taken as representative of the rest. His point was simple and, simply on its own terms, impossible to quarrel with: The Mass is the most important act of Christian worship, and it's wrong to let adoration of the Blessed Sacrament overshadow it.
That's perfectly true. Just as it's perfectly true that this overshadowing may sometimes have been a problem in the past and may sometimes be a problem even today.
Many years ago, I lived in a parish where it was the practice to distribute communion before the first morning Mass. That was done, I assume, to oblige early risers who needed to head off to work. The intention was good, but there was a danger of conveying the impression that "receiving communion" by itself was an adequate substitute for "going to Mass."
But that was way back when. A few years ago, in response to something I'd written about the clergy shortage and the growing unavailability of Mass in some places, an intelligent layman whom I know made a remark that jarred me. What difference does it really make, he asked, as long as there's a communion service? If you can receive the Blessed Sacrament, that's all that really counts.
The only possible reply to this is, of course, that the heart of the Eucharistic celebration — the Mass — is Jesus' covenant-forming action made present for our participation here and now. This is, or at least it should be, the absolute center of our Christian lives. In case of need, communion outside Mass is excellent. But it just isn't comparable to participation in the Eucharistic celebration that includes receiving communion.
Eucharistic adoration shouldn't be allowed to overshadow that. But just here is where critics of Eucharistic adoration tend to miss the point.
Adoring the Blessed Sacrament exposed on the altar is not an action separate and apart from participating in the Eucharist. On the contrary, it's a way of continuing and extending that participation beyond the sacramental act itself. This is what Eucharistic adorers are in fact doing.
Participating in Mass and engaging in Eucharistic adoration, properly understood, are not in competition, much less in conflict. They are two aspects of the same profound reality. Pope Benedict XVI expresses that idea beautifully in his apostolic exhortation Sacramentum Caritatis ("The Sacrament of Charity"), published in March of last year.
"Eucharistic adoration," he writes, "is simply the natural consequence of the Eucharistic celebration, which is itself the Church's supreme act of adoration.... The act of adoration outside Mass prolongs and intensifies all that takes place during the liturgical celebration itself."
And the Pope quotes from a talk he gave to the Roman Curia in 2005: "Only in adoration can a profound and genuine reception [of communion] mature" (Sacramentum Caritatis, 66). If you haven't given it a try yet, it's time that you do.
Part of a series
BY Mark Shea
March 2-8, 2008 Issue | Posted 2/26/08 at 12:27 PM
I used to be a pagan. Not a neo-pagan with phony stilted semi-Tolkienesque speech (“Bright blessings! Merry meet!” “An it harme noone do as thou wilt”). Nor was I an adherent of some recently minted group of Gaia-worshippers playing dress-up in their Society for Creative Anachronism costumes and pretending they are living by Ye Olde Religion like somebody from The Da Vinci Code’s central casting department.
No. I was a real pagan, which is to say, I was like jillions of other kids raised in American suburbia in the 1960s and ’70s, so remote from God that I didn’t even know it was God I was seeking.
I was not baptized as a child. My religious formation consisted of a couple of trips to Sunday school. Mine was on the Air Force base where I spent my very early childhood. There, I learned that Jesus was a strange man with long hair, and (for some reason) I became convinced that you weren’t supposed to say his name. Beyond that, I knew nothing except that I vaguely associated him with organ music I disliked and pictures from dreary nursing homes.
It gave me an aversion to religiosity that I retain to this day.
To the rigorous spiritual formation I got in that long-ago Sunday school was added “A Charlie Brown Christmas,” some excitingly lurid Jack Chick tracts at Halloween, a lot of science fiction and fantasy (notably “The Twilight Zone” and “Star Trek”), a stab at reading the Bible when I was 13 (I started at Genesis 1 and plowed on through until I made it to Genesis 3), and various dabblings in the occult as a teen.
I darkened the door of a church perhaps 10 times in my life, usually because that was where the PTA meeting was and my Mom dragged me along.
Once, I went to a Catholic church with a friend on Good Friday — the weirdest possible day to encounter Catholics in their natural habitat.
My moral and intellectual formation consisted more or less of TV, plus things I’d read in Omni magazine and the speculations on ghosts, UFOs and “spirituality” that I picked up from my friends. I declared myself a disbeliever in “organized religion” in an oh-so-crushing tone of voice when I was a sophomore in high school. And shared the general media’s contempt for Christian hypocrites (a redundant term, I assumed) typified by Frank Burns on “MASH.”
I was never an atheist because I didn’t have enough faith for it.
I considered myself “spiritual” but had not the vaguest idea how to articulate what that meant. I carried around a burning sense of deep, inarticulate longing for I knew not what and a strange, haunting sense that there was something behind things, like that odd “Twilight Zone” episode where the little girl falls into another dimension.
I couldn’t look at the world and attribute it to Nothing. And I couldn’t look at the world for long and not feel an intense sense of desire for … I knew not what.
I mention all this autobiography not in a fit of narcissism, but because it’s a glimpse into where I think a great many of our neighbors live as well.
C.S. Lewis once remarked that he was a converted pagan living in a nation of apostate Puritans. To a very large extent, that is the situation in which American Christians find themselves now.
For all the foofaraw about the terrible imminent theocracy from the secularist media and all the brazen boasting from some Evangelicals about the supposed Reconstructionist Reconquista of America, the reality is that American culture is looking less and less Christian with the passing years. Catholics live in an American culture that was never Catholic, which once was Protestant, and which now is effectively post-Christian.
To see the rot on the cultural front, just turn on your television and try telling yourself this culture is more Christian than ever.
And since the de-Christianization of our culture is not coinciding with a massive uptick in the number of Jewish and Muslim converts, the conclusion I reach is that more and more Americans (particularly the young ones) are becoming (or never ceasing since birth to be) pagans.
If that is so, it is probably a good idea to ask how we might proclaim the gospel to a Pagan. In my next column, we will.
BY Father Thomas D. Williams, LC
March 2-8, 2008 Issue | Posted 2/26/08 at 2:04 PM
Unless you’ve spent the last few years in a mountain hermitage, you have almost certainly run into the latest rash of anti-God books.
And a rash it is, since the very mention of a Supreme Being makes these professional atheists break out in hives. But they are scratching all the way to the bank, as several of these recent diatribes have become best-sellers, showing once again that religion-bashing never truly goes out of style.
In the wake of The Da Vinci Code, a series of books have jumped on the lucrative religion-debunking bandwagon.
It started with The God Delusion, by Richard Dawkins, and has been followed by Sam Harris’ Letter to a Christian Nation, Daniel C. Dennett’s Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon, and more recently by Christopher Hitchens’ 2007 work God Is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything.
These best-sellers are accompanied by reams of lesser works, attesting to the power of atheism as the newest cottage industry.
Though varying slightly in tone and emphasis, these books bear a remarkable resemblance to one another.
First, they all latch onto the worst historical errors of religious people and extrapolate them to apply to all believers everywhere.
Thus the meekest Buddhist monk off in Nepal is guilty by association of the crimes of the most fanatical Islamic suicide bomber, and Francis of Assisi and Billy Graham are tarred with the same brush as Osama Bin Laden and the Ayatollah Khomeini. All religions (and believers) are thrown together into the same pot as if they were interchangeable. No attempt is made to distinguish between religious fanaticism and religious belief.
The authors jump to the conclusion that the root of any problem isn’t the radical strain of religion in question, but belief in God itself.
Second, all of these authors toss impartiality out the window in their passionate campaign against God.
One of the more irritating aspects of these books is the studious avoidance of arguments and examples that would contradict their preconceived thesis. The selection of data is so thoroughly biased that one often has the sensation of reading cheap propaganda.
From their biblical citations to their historical examples, the neo-atheists pick and choose their information with barely a veneer of objective investigation.
One example that illustrates this well is the authors’ silence concerning the many marked benefits of religion to humanity. The atheists deliberately ignore the mountain of evidence available — empirical evidence — that ties charity to religious and specifically Christian belief. The founding of schools, hospitals, orphanages, universities, hospices and general aid to the poor has marked Christianity from the outset, yet finds no acknowledgement in these works. Whenever they are forced to acknowledge some good action of a religious person, they are quick to say that such benevolence was done in spite of their religion rather than because of it.
Third, despite the facade of novelty presented by these authors, there is really nothing new in the arguments they raise.
They seem to be only now discovering Sigmund Freud or Friedrich Nietzsche or Charles Darwin and presenting their findings as if they had unearthed the Holy Grail, when, in fact, these arguments have been mulled over and often surpassed in the intervening 150-odd years since these thinkers had their heyday. The result is that they present their warmed-over criticisms with the flourish of a comic fencer confidently declaring touché at every turn, while never really striking his opponent.
The fact is that, try as I might, I could not find in these books one pro-atheist argument that hadn’t already been better expounded by Voltaire or Comte or Feuerbach or Marx or Russell or Freud himself — all of which had already received ample attention, and thoroughly compelling refutation.
This is especially important for those who wonder whether these new atheists have discovered a fatal flaw in Christianity and in religion in general that could topple religious belief. In reality, it’s just the new, K-Mart version of the same old song and dance.
In the following weeks, I will address some of the recurring criticisms against God and religion found in the neo-atheist tracts.
This series bears the title A Theologian Answers the Atheists About God. Though I am answering the objections of atheists, these essays are not written especially for them. I am writing rather for Catholics who may feel threatened by these books, and who are looking for answers to share with their friends or others who may challenge them on these points.
Many Catholics instinctively know the criticisms raised in these books are specious, but lack ready answers to reply to those who come at them with such protests.
I hope to supply them with the answers they seek, and in this way to respond to the call of the great apostle Peter, who urged Christians: “Always be ready to make your defense to anyone who demands from you an accounting for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and reverence” (1 Peter 3:15-16).
Vatican, Feb. 26, 2008 (CWNews.com) - The Congregation for the Causes of Saints has announced plans for a consistory on March 1 to schedule the canonization of four new saints. They are:
Blessed Gaetano Errico (1791- 1860), an Italian priest;
Blessed Maria Bernarda Butler (1848-1924), a Swiss nun;
Blessed Alfonsa of the Immaculate Conception (1910- 1946), born Anna Muttathupandathu, an Indian nun; and
Blessed Narcisa de Jesus Martillo Moran (1863- 1869), an Ecuadorian lay woman (1833-1869).
Question from Christian on 2/5/2008:
I am Lutheran but my girlfriend is Catholic. I have been told by numerous people, including a priest, that Lutherans cannot receive Communion in a Catholic church because the beliefs are different. Growing up Lutheran, I was taught that we are receiving the actual body and blood of Christ when we receive communion.
The people I spoke with were under the impression that Lutherans receive a "representation" of the body and blood of Christ, which is incorrect. The spoken words at both masses, Lutheran and Catholic, are identical as well. Can I receive Commmunion at a Catholic church? If not, why?
Answer by Catholic Answers on 2/5/2008:
Christian--
Although there are extraordinary circumstances in which a Lutheran may receive Catholic Communion, under ordinary circumstances he may not. Receiving Catholic Communion indicates by his action that the communicant believes and accepts all that the Catholic Church teaches and is in full communion with the Church. In other words, that he is a Catholic. Generally speaking then, to receive Catholic Communion when one is not in full communion with the Catholic Church is to deceive with your body.
Some Lutherans may believe that their communion is the actual body and blood of Christ, but, objectively speaking, Lutheran communion is not a valid Eucharist. It is not really Christ's body and blood because the celebrant does not have the valid holy orders necessary to confect the bread and wine into Christ's body and blood. Thus, despite surface similarities between the services, a Lutheran communion service is not the same thing as a Catholic Mass.
If you would like to receive Catholic Communion, I encourage you to consider studying Catholicism to see if you could in conscience become a Catholic. Jesus Christ longs to be sacramentally one with all those who believe in him; he simply asks that we approach him on his terms and not our own. God bless.
Recommended reading:
Pillar of Fire, Pillar of Truth
How to Become a Catholic
Michelle Arnold
Catholic Answers
Question from Terry on 2/20/2008:
Is it wrong to attend a commitment ceremony of two gay people? How does the Church feel about this?
Answer by Catholic Answers on 2/20/2008:
Terry--
The Church has unequivocally stated that same-sex unions are impossible (source). Given that, I cannot recommend attending a same-sex "commitment ceremony" under any circumstances whatsoever.
Michelle Arnold
Catholic Answers
Question from Jeff on 2/23/2008:
Does the Church have a unified position on celebrating St. Patrick's Day during Holy Week? Our bishop has asked us to refrain while I note that other dioceses have received the approval of their bishops.
Answer by Catholic Answers on 2/26/2008:
Jeff--
So far as I know, there is no one edict from the Church on the issue. As a matter of prudence though, it would seem better for Catholics to place Holy Week observances above St. Patrick's Day and not organize their own St. Patrick's Day parades or events until the Easter season. However, if a parade is scheduled as a cultural observance by secular officials, it is not wrong for a Catholic to participate if he wishes.
Michelle Arnold
Catholic Answers
Question from Nicole Kyle on 2/24/2008:
Is the Anglican Catholic Church affiliated with the Roman Catholic Church and is it okay for a Roman Catholic to belong to this church?
Answer by Fr. Robert J. Levis on 2/25/2008:
Nicole, There are a very few Anglican Churches that have come over to Roman Catholicism (in TExas and Maryland, I think). YOu must ask the members of these Church about their relationship with Rome to answer your question.Fr. Bob Levis
Question from S Ruth on 2/25/2008:
Recently I watched a program of Father Corapi's on the 10 Commandments and the 5th commandment hit me like a rock, for years I have smoked cigarettes and usually less then a pack a day,and when I startd the cigarettes were tobacco,not all of the chemicals that are in them today, and yes,I knew deep in my heart that I should quit but I have tried many times to quit, and did for awhile and each time the "will" would give in and I would start back at the habit. This year for my Lenten giving up,I am trying another approach. So, according to Fr. Corapi, I am committing a Mortal Sin, by still smoking, because,we now have knowledge the cigarettes cause cancer. Am I and others going against the the 5th commandment ? Are we all going to hell?
Answer by Fr. Robert J. Levis on 2/25/2008:
Ruth, No, not to my mind. Please read my response to this smoking "sin" in my post of yesterday. Quit smoking if you want to grow (and not to die early. I buried my brother at 52 and my sister at 60. Both heavy smokers.) Fr Bob Levis
Question from eduard on 2/2/2008:
Dear Father, I am really confused with the capitalization of letters when writing pronouns for Mary. Should I capitalize beginning leters for pronouns for Mary? Should I capitalize beginning letters for Mary's "womb, heart, grace, etc."? Thanks
Answer by Fr. Jay Toborowsky on 2/14/2008:
No, it is not necessary.
Question from Adrian on 2/13/2008:
Not every civil marriage is a Church marriage. This much is obvious. But, is every Church marriage automatically a civil marriage?
Why would I ask? Well, I am a US Permanent Resident (green card holder) who would like to marry a foreign student (who is here on a student visa). Because of immigration regulations and waiting lists, this is a complicated process which could take years to complete. But, since we can do without the civil benefits of a civil marriage, I wonder if it would be possible to have a Church marriage now, to be followed by a civil ceremony some years in the future.
I understand that the priest at a Church wedding acts as a witness for the Church and the State, but is it possible for him to act as a witness for the Church alone if those to be married are not seeking State recognition?
Thanks for providing this Q&A service. It is greatly appreciated.
Answer by Fr. Jay Toborowsky on 2/14/2008:
As far as I know (and as far as I have been taught), clergy in the United States must have a civil marriage license before they will marry a couple. Now, Canon Law does allow for what are called "secret marriages" whereby the marriage is recorded by the Church but not recorded in any government records. But these are rare exceptions done, not for the couple's sake, but for the clergyman's sake in places where there might be persecution of the Church. The bottom line is that, in the United States, you cannot have a Church marriage without it being recognized by the civil government.
Question from Laurel DeStefano on 1/22/2008:
I've noticed over the years as I read the lives of various saints, especially of married women saints, that some of them seemed to neglect their motherly duties in order to found religious houses or do the work of God. St. Jane de Chantal, St. Paula, and St. Elizabeth Seton come to mind. Most faithful Catholic mothers I know would never consider such a thing as leaving her child voluntarily, as they would consider that their first duty. Is there something cultural that I just don't understand? Also, can you recommend any saint biographies about married saints? Thank you.
Answer by Fr. Jay Toborowsky on 2/26/2008:
I don't know of any biographies that you ask about.
Question from Margo on 2/13/2008:
HELP. I have been moral disappointed by our parish priest regarding some issues of truth. I am finding it very difficult to receive Communion from him. I know this is wrong, but what should I do?
Answer by Fr. Jay Toborowsky on 2/26/2008:
You should get over it, and realize that, for whatever faults he may have as a man and a human being, he is another Christ supernaturally. After all, how long does the actual reception of Holy Communion take? three seconds? In choosing not to receive Holy Communion from him, you're insulting "the priest" more than "the man".
Question from JB on 1/23/2008:
Is it right to sprinkle blessed salt around a room before a retreat starts? Can you put blessed salt in your food? Is it right to bless water that will be consumed to make juice or coffee at this retreat? What do we do with the extra juice and coffee? Could you please advise me on the teaching of the Catholic Church on this matter. Where do we find it. If it is appropriate, what are the prayers that the priest should use in Blessing the salt and water. Thank-you. JB
Answer by David Gregson on 2/19/2008:
Sprinkling blessed salt around a room would be like sprinkling holy water. It is permitted.
Yes, you can sprinkle blessed salt on food. Likewise, holy water. However, it would be out of place to mix holy water with juice or coffee. For one thing, if it becomes less than 50% of the liquid it is mixed with, there is room for doubt whether it would retain its character as holy water. For another, it is incorrect to suppose that the more holy water you use, the more beneficial it is. Otherwise, a house would be more fully blessed if it were hosed down with holy water, rather than just sprinkled in significant places.
The Book of Blessings has the prayers for blessing water and salt.
Question from JB on 1/23/2008:
Is it right to sprinkle blessed salt around a room before a retreat starts? Can you put blessed salt in your food? Is it right to bless water that will be consumed to make juice or coffee at this retreat? What do we do with the extra juice and coffee? Could you please advise me on the teaching of the Catholic Church on this matter. Where do we find it. If it is appropriate, what are the prayers that the priest should use in Blessing the salt and water. Thank-you. JB
Answer by David Gregson on 2/19/2008:
Sprinkling blessed salt around a room would be like sprinkling holy water. It is permitted.
Yes, you can sprinkle blessed salt on food. Likewise, holy water. However, it would be out of place to mix holy water with juice or coffee. For one thing, if it becomes less than 50% of the liquid it is mixed with, there is room for doubt whether it would retain its character as holy water. For another, it is incorrect to suppose that the more holy water you use, the more beneficial it is. Otherwise, a house would be more fully blessed if it were hosed down with holy water, rather than just sprinkled in significant places.
The Book of Blessings has the prayers for blessing water and salt.
Question from laura on 2/25/2008:
Hi Judie-just wanted to mention that I read in one of the internet news that there was this British artist who, after aborting her twins was so overcome with remorse that she ended up committing suicide. She felt bad and wanted to be where her babies are. How sad-yet the planned parenthood and other abortion supporters don't want this out-the psychological effects on women who choose to abort, or kill their child/ren through abortion. Makes you wonder-just wanted to let you know-if I can find a way to e-mail this news headline to you, I will. Thanks for letting me share this tragic story-laura
Answer by Judie Brown on 2/26/2008:
Dear Laura
The story is indeed tragic, and when I heard of it I wrote the following:
WILFULL NEGLECT LEADS TO SUICIDE
Emma Beck, a 30 year old artist with everything to live for is dead. She committed suicide after having her twins aborted at a clinic in England. This is indeed a tragic story of what can happen when two people become involved and one of them totally rejects the other. But there is far more to this story than meets the eye. The London Telegraph reported (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/22/nartist122.xml) that Emma left a suicide note in which she wrote:
“I should never have had an abortion. I see now I would have been a good mother.”
Her note goes on to say “I told everyone I didn’t want to do it, even at the hospital. I was frightened, now it is too late. I died when my babies died. I want to be with my babies; they need me, no one else does.”
Emma Beck aborted her twins because her boyfriend did not want them. She aborted her twins because her abortionist did not make sure she had adequate counseling. She aborted her twins because nobody was willing to love and affirm her in her hour of need. Emma’s decision, clearly made under duress and without benefit of proper counseling, sealed her fate.
After the abortion Emma’s general practitioner knew how distressed Emma was. She told the media that she made every effort to encourage Emma to see a counselor, but Emma refused. I believe that to the abortionist who carried out the surgery without assuring proper counseling ahead of time, Emma was simply just another “pregnant woman” with a “problem” that had to be solved. Prior to the abortion, the abortionist is reported to have said that the situation was discussed with Emma and the abortionist knew that she felt alone and unsupported. But … since there was no counselor available to see Emma prior to the abortion, the abortionist claims to have given Emma a phone number to call. Further, the abortion clinic spokesman claims “I am satisfied that everything was done to make sure that Emma consented to the operation.”
This blasé statement tells me a whole lot! Of course they wanted to make sure she consented; without her consent no money would be paid! But how did she consent? Obviously she did so without benefit of appropriate counseling.
If we consider the fact that Emma had no counseling whatsoever, and apparently no support to carry her babies to term by any member of her family, not to mention her boyfriend, it becomes painfully clear that isolated from all manner of love and caring, Emma simply could not go on. Her suicide note makes that perfectly clear. The medical examiner in this case, who declared Emma’s death a suicide, said “It is clear that a termination can have a profound effect on a woman’s life.”
That word “termination” is another red flag. The very use of that word suggests to me that far too many, even in the aftermath of a tragedy like this one, will not provide one scintilla of thought to the possibility that had Emma had positive, pro-baby, pro-mother counseling prior to her decision, she and her twins would be with us now.
It should also be obvious to one and all that not only does a mother who aborts her children suffer greatly and in many ways, but that she too often realizes after the fact that rather than being the mother of a living child, she has by her own decision become the mother of a dead child. This reality is what brought Emma Beck to her tragic end.
Emma Beck’s death should give us all pause to consider how much genuine unselfish love is required of each of us, but particularly those involved in a procreative act that results in a child being conceived. For far too long sex outside of marriage has been accepted as the norm and our sexually saturated society has met the news of tragedies like this one with little to no consideration of the root causes. It is high time that those of us in positions of responsibility within the pro-life movement started drawing the word pictures that are necessary to protect and preserve the dignity and the very life of future Emma Becks.
This sad story can only provide a better outcome for future expectant mothers when we pro-lifers begin connecting the dots and avoid opposing surgical abortion in a vacuum. Each of us has an obligation to make it clear that sex outside of marriage is wrong and contraceptive practice is evil. We know that abortion is but a fruit of the tree of so-called sexual freedom and that many simply do not want to hear it. Be that as it may, let us not be silent about the obvious.
Please remember Emma Beck in your daily prayers.
Judie Brown
Gospel Commentary for 3rd Sunday of Lent
By Father Raniero Cantalamessa, OFM Cap
ROME, FEB. 22, 2008 (Zenit.org).- To the Samaritan woman, and to all those who in some way find themselves in her situation, Jesus makes a radical proposal in this Sunday's Gospel: Seek another "water," give meaning and a new horizon to your life.
An eternal horizon! "The water I shall give will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life." Eternity is a word that has fallen into disuse. It has become a type of taboo for the modern man. It is believed that this thought can distance us from the concrete historical commitment to change the world, that it is an escape, a "wasting on heaven the treasures destined for the earth," as Hegel said.
But what is the result? Life, human suffering, everything becomes immensely more absurd. The measure has been lost. If the balance of eternity is missing, all suffering, all sacrifice seems absurd, disproportionate, it "unbalances" us, it crushes us. St. Paul wrote, "This momentary light affliction is producing for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison." Compared to an eternity of glory, the weight of tribulation seems "light" to him (to him, who suffered so much in life!) precisely because it is "momentary." In fact, he adds, "What is seen is transitory, but what is unseen is eternal" (2 Corinthians 4:17-18).
The philosopher Miguel de Unamuno (who, moreover, was a "secular" thinker), responded to a friend who reproached him that his search for eternity was prideful or presumptuous with these words, "I don't say that we deserve a beyond, nor that logic demonstrates it. I say simply that we need it, deserving it or not. I say that what happens does not satisfy me, that I thirst for eternity, and without it, I don't care about all of this. Without it the joy of living no longer exists [...] It is too easy to affirm, 'It's necessary to live, it's necessary to resign oneself to this life.' And those who don't resign themselves?"
It is not the one who desires eternity who shows that he doesn't love life, but rather the one who doesn't desire it, given that he resigns himself so easily to the thought that this must end.
It would be of tremendous benefit, not only for the Church, but also for society, to rediscover the sense of eternity. It would help to re-encounter balance, to relativize things, to not fall into despair before the injustices and the suffering that exists in the world, even while fighting against them. To live less frantically.
In the life of each person there has been a moment in which he has had a certain intuition of eternity, even if hazy. One must be attentive to avoid seeking the experience of the infinite in drugs, in unrestrained sex and in other things in which, in the end, only remain disappointment and death. "Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again," Jesus told the Samaritan woman. It is necessary to seek infinity in that which is above, not that which is below; above reason, not below it in irrational intoxications.
It is clear that it is not enough to know that eternity exists; it's necessary as well to know what to do to get there. To ask oneself, as the rich young man of the Gospel, "Master, what must I do to inherit eternal life?" Leopardi, in the poem, "The Infinite," speaks of a wall that hides the ultimate horizon. What is this wall for us, this obstacle that impedes us from gazing toward the ultimate horizon, toward the eternal? The Samaritan, that day, understood that she should change something in her life if she wanted to obtain the "eternal life," because shortly thereafter, we find her transformed into an evangelizer who tells everyone, without shame, what Jesus had told her.
Question from Frank on 1/28/2008:
Hi EWTN,
According to the Torah (first five books of the bible)i cannot seem to grasp Genesis 1:26
The latter chapter/verse:
Then God said: "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness."
I always believed that the word "us" meant the Trinity ~ meaning God, Jesus & the Holy Spirit.
However, if the above is correct why do the Hebrew/Jewish people not accept Jesus as the son of God?
Furthermore, is the english translation of the Hebrew Torah concerning Genesis 1:26 worded differently than what i have read in the NAB (Catholic bible).
Finally, in the event the wording is exact what do the hebrew/jewish define when confronted with the word "us"?
God bless EWTN
Answer by David Gregson on 2/21/2008:
I'm not sure, but Jewish exegetes may take the same line as some liberal Christians, interpreting the "us," in "Let us make man in our image," as God conferring with the angelic hosts. It's not a very convincing interpretation, since it's only God who does the creating.
As to why the Jews didn't anticipate the Trinity, the primary thrust of the Old Testament was that there is only one God, not many, as the pagans believed. With this emphasis on God's singularity, the concept of a plurality of Persons in the one God (even though hinted at in some texts) was the last thing that would have occurred to them. It took an event as radical as the Incarnation to reveal the fullness of the truth about God, and then only to those who had the eyes to see.
Question from Cristal on 2/20/2008:
Having many wives or husbands or cheating on your spouse is called adultery and i know its a mortal sin but the other day i was reading the bible and it said that abraham had a wife named sarah and she couldnt have children so she told abraham to make a baby with her servant and he did and i kept reading further and realized that many people in the bible had commited adultery and my question is this, if today having many wives or cheating on your spouse is called adultery and its a mortal sin and god doesnt like us comitting adultery than why back when abraham and his decendents were around why wasnt it a mortal sin and why didnt god tell them not to do it if its so bad ,why were they allowed to do it and not told its bad?
Answer by Fr. John Echert on 2/21/2008:
The practice of polygamy of the Patriarchal period of the Old Testament was not the ideal but it was not adultery, that is marital unfaithful, as such. The intent of the situation you describe was to allow a descendant to be born of the line of Abraham through the servant girl, who was serving as a sort of surrogate mother for Sarah, who was beyond the normal years of conception. Still, God did not plan to achieve his promise in this deficient manner and Sarah herself later conceived by her husband. Polygamy as well as divorce and remarriage were tolerated by God for a time, in the Old Testament, but Jesus re-established the original order of creation when he commanded one husband and wife in an inseperable union of marriage.
So was the action of Abraham a sin? The Church Fathers would not regard it a mortal sin, but venial at most, and certainly short of the ideal and original order.
Thanks, Cristal
Father Echert
Question from Anon on 2/13/2008:
Dr. Geraghty. I have been sober (ie, have not had any alcohol of any sort) in Alcoholics Anonymous for 27 years. The fundamental belief in AA is that we are sober by the Grace of God, and I certainly do believe that. It seems to me that what I receive from God daily is an Actual Grace to stay away from alcohol.
This fits in with Catholic teaching regarding just what an Actual Grace is. I thought that I'd make that comment because it allows Catholic teaching to match with AA's 'Higher Power.' Thank you. Anon
Answer by Richard Geraghty on 2/18/2008:
Dear Anon,
Thank you for the note.
Dr. Geraghty
Question from Debra on 2/17/2008:
Dr. Geraghty, Did Christ mean by "carrying your cross" that living his will would be hard or that we should have cross's? Some people have heavy cross's but many do seem to go through life with a good, solid family, good kids that don't get into trouble, good jobs they don't lose, good health, at least until old age, etc. Are they not "carrying a cross" or is it just living a life that is counter to our culture that is hard, a cross?I would hate to think that needing a crisis is necessary after Christ died such a horrible death for us,to have salvation. Can you help me understand this more?
Answer by Richard Geraghty on 2/23/2008:
Dear Debra,
You can be sure that everyone has a cross to bear in life even though it does not seem that way to us. We have only a limited viewpoint. The fact that Christ suffered so much on the cross was not to make life easier for us. It was to follow his example and not be crushed by the trials which will come to everyone one way or the other. The easy life will be in heaven, not on earth.
Dear Debra,
You can be sure that everyone has their cross to bear while they are on this earth. It may not seem that way to us because we have a limited view of life. Christ died such a horrible death on the cross, not to give us a easy life on earth, but to endure the pain that the devil and others will inflict on those trying to be faithful to Christ. The completely easy and absolutely happy life will be in heaven.
Dr. Geraghty
Custos Says New Problem Is Accommodating Growing Numbers
ROME, FEB. 24, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Pilgrims are returning to the Holy Land, affirmed the Franciscan Custos of the region, who says he is happy to face the new problem of accommodating the growing numbers.
Father Pierbattista Pizzaballa expressed his contentment about increased pilgrimages to the holy sites at a conference on the situation of the Middle East organized Wednesday by the Community of Sant'Egidio. Cardinal Leonardo Sandri, prefect of the Congregation for Eastern Churches also participated in the conference, which was titled "Christians in the Middle East: Between Future, Tradition and Islam."
The Sant'Egidio event, attended by Andrea Ricardo, the founder of the community, aimed to bring to international attention the plight of Christians in the Middle East.
Father Pizzaballa reported good news, "The great novelty of 2007 is this: Last year there has been a grandiose return of pilgrims and the prospects for 2008 are even greater."
Now then, he said, a growth in the number of pilgrims has a corollary: "The problem we have for the future is that the infrastructure is not adequate for an enormous number of pilgrims. It is a positive problem, because it means that at least in this sense, the crisis has ended."
Cardinal Sandri said that pilgrimages to the Holy Land are one of the three ways to help the area and the minority group of Christians that live there, just 1% of the population, a total of 170,000.
He named "prayer, solidarity and the pilgrimages as well, with a presence in these places together with our Christian brothers and sisters."
A voice
Cardinal Sandri's participation in the conference was another step in his campaign to bring aid and attention to Christians in the Middle East.
Last week, the cardinal sent a letter to all the bishops of the world asking them to support the Good Friday collection for the Church in the Holy Land.
He told the Italian bishops' SIR news agency that he hopes to "create a communion of prayer but also motivate pilgrimages to make tangible the closeness of all the Churches in the West."
"We have to work through the press to spread the word about the suffering of Christians in the East and their situation of martyrdom," he added. "I don't speak of persecution; there are laws that protect religious freedom but there are those who fall in the trap of violence."
The Christians, Cardinal Sandri said, "are a minority who find it difficult to live their faith due as well to the conflicts."
"To pray is a way of defending them," he affirmed. "But it is necessary to also create awareness among the authorities of our countries so they act in favor of a stable peace. To make those who work in dialogue and negotiation note that a reciprocity exists. We are open to there being -- like in the West -- openness for our Christians."
Question from Mrs. H. on 2/19/2008:
Dear Dr. Geraghty,
I am writing to ask this question, and am not certain if it is a matter of philosophy. But I will ask anyway. Our 12 year old son has been having moments of turning away from the Church. He has always loved the Church and spoke many times about being a priest. His love for prayer and the Church was obvious to many including an order of priest and brothers who my husband and I just found out were regularly pressuring him to become a priest. My son would attend day retreats with this order and throughout the day they would take our son aside from the group walking away from the group into buildings and behind groups of trees and tell him over and over he should be a priest. This order went so far as to come to our home and tell us that if we did not send our son to preseminary school (theirs) the teenage years would roll in and he would be badly influenced by other kids and well...Our son now wants nothing to do with becoming a priest and sometimes not Church at all. He was so put off and intimidated by these encounters. How do we help our son to not turn his back on the Church or his faith? Thank you so much for your time. God Bless You!
Answer by Richard Geraghty on 2/23/2008:
Dear Mrs. H.,
The priests were not very prudent in pressuring your son. It may take a while for him to understand that priests are not perfect. I suppose he will have to discover that for himself. Every Catholic has to discover that because everybody, clergy and lay folk, are sinners. Nevertheless, Christ has chosen Catholics to be his choice flock in leading the rest of the world into the one fold. That is quite mysterious, this choice of God's. It certainly isn't because Catholic are by nature are somehow superior creatures who are worthy of God's choice. Here the initiative is with God who has a particular role for everybody in the salvation of mankind.
Dr. Geraghty
Question from Jimmy on 2/19/2008:
After consuming the Host, the accidents are changed metabolically as per usual, the substance, The Trinity infuses us with grace and remains unless the person has grave, un-confessed sin(s)in which case Our Lord leaves the person immediately. Also, if a person is lukewarm in faith, or grossly inattentive, the grace received is much reduced.Our Lord stays with us always unless or until one commits a mortal (grave) sin. As we are created in the image and likeness of God's Spiritual Form, this will make much more sense one we are in heaven. IMHO This is after all, just what Jesus promised.
Answer by Richard Geraghty on 2/23/2008:
Dear Jimmy,
You have spoken well.
Dr. Geraghty
Question from Murphy on 2/19/2008:
I have occasionally seen this term used as a self-descriptor on this site, most recently in a post on February 18th entitled "Evangelize", when clearly the poster is an American. I understand that this is a cultural reference and that the person is of Irish extraction. But as a Catholic born and raised and living in Ireland - and therefore also an 'Irish Catholic' - I wonder what the term means in an American context. What nuance is being conveyed to the reader when an American says they are 'Irish Catholic'? And why is it used in preference to simply Catholic or Roman Catholic?
Answer by Richard Geraghty on 2/23/2008:
Dear Murphy,
My folks were born on the other side and so I suppose they would say that they were just Catholics. But in a place like New York City their kids see all kinds of Catholic who are not Irish. They see all kinds of people who are not Catholic. So you put the two together and you have an Irish Catholics. I suppose the kids experience more diversity than the Irish did in the old days.
Dr. Geraghty
Question from Kevin on 2/19/2008:
Hi Judie.
I attended the Pro-life rally in Washington with my child in January and was amazed at the size of the crowds. I believe the numbers reported in the mainstream media were grossly understated. In other words, I got to experience first hand what you and many others have been saying for years.
I was amazed at the turnout, and when I had a free moment away from keeping track of the kids in our group, I could help but not wonder if our kids would not be the ones who would help in overturning abortion. I also could not help but feel that my vote for Pro-Life candidates really does matter. And,that the future may be in better hands when our kids take over steering the ship.
I firmly believe that the Blessed Virgin Mary will stop this evil in God's time. Perhaps, God is wanting us to prepare the way for the next generations to make things right. Perhaps, the good that comes out of this evil is that people turn toward God. Perhaps it forces us to take a close look at ourselves and be honest about what we see. Or, that we pray more in hopes that people will choose life and will not be taken in by thinking they are not ending a life. Or, preventing one from ever happening.
My dear Father was a working man, blue collar thru and thru. Until 1973 after abortion became legal. From that point on, he saw a different Democratic party. He was not exactly overjoyed with the Republican party but always encouraged us to vote for Pro Life candidates, Democrat or Republican.
When faced with criticism about being a one issue voter, he would simply say that any country or individual allowing someone to legally kill an unborn child had no integrity, period. This is where it started and ended with him. And that wars or other terrible disasters or tribulations would eventually come out the other end as we continuously attempt to derail God's plan for Goodness and Life.
My point: Setting a constant good example in defending life and praying do work. Perhaps we are not praying enough as a country. God heard the pain of many in the Old Testament and acted. He heard the prayers after years of terrorism in Ireland, and the threat of the Soviet Union for 40 plus years, and suddenly it all just stopped. God wills that it is time for injustices to stop, once we start paying enough attention and ask for His help. What appears at times to be the smallest and most useless of alternatives to us (prayer) may be the most powerful of all.
Thank You.
Answer by Judie Brown on 2/20/2008:
Dear Kevin
Your father sounds like a most amazing man and I am sure you are extremely proud of him. I also think you are absolutely correct about the power of prayer. We do not pray enough, we do not trust the Lord enough and when we do, we will be awestruck by the changes that will occur in our nation.
God be with you, Kevin!
Judie Brown
Question from James Klaus on 2/20/2008:
I was looking for the place in Omaha NE (I think it is John Paul II Institute or ??) to get information on a fertility problem. Can someone help me on this? (Maybe it is somewhere else?)I'd like an email address if available. Thanks Jim
Answer by Judie Brown on 2/24/2008:
Dear James
Here is the contact information for the Pope Paul VI Institute:
Pope Paul VI Institute 6901 Mercy Road Omaha, Nebraska 68106 (402) 390-6600 Fax: (402) 390-9851
Hours: Monday-Friday 9:00am—5:00pm (CST)
WEB SITE: http://www.popepaulvi.com/
email: advancement@popepaulvi.com
Judie Brown
Question from robin on 2/21/2008:
the biggest problem I have in explaining why abortion is wrong is proving the egg/sperm combination is actually a human being. The pro-choice friends I have always come back with "But you can never know for sureeee." How can I fight this? I can say that life has to start somewhere and it would make sense that it begins with an egg/sperm, and then they just say "yeah but you can't say that for sure, therefore you cannot judge other people." As a pro-lifer, they do a good job making me feel like i'm "judging" other people and that I'm "speculating" when life begins.
When they start to feel like i'm making good points with when life begins, they change the subject to rape, mothers life in jeopardy, etc. It seems impossible that these people will get it, they have so many ways to get around the fact that abortion is wrong.
How do you debate with these people who say with "absolute certainity" that nobody knows anything with absolute certainty????
Thanks! Robin
Answer by Judie Brown on 2/24/2008:
Dear Robin
take a look at this article: When do human beings (normally) begin? by Professor Dianne Irving: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_01lifebegin1.html
Also, take a look at this excellent material on YOUTUBE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAcoL67W9b0 and This one narrated by John Willke, MD: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qY2TS4wi2U&feature=related
Judie Brown
Catechesis Program to Precede '09 Tour
LONDON, FEB. 20, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor requested that the relics of St. Thérèse be brought to his country, and says he is delighted that the visit will become a reality in 2009.
The relics of the French Carmelite and doctor of the Church are to visit England and Wales from Sept. 16 to Oct. 7, 2009.
"I am delighted that the relics of St. Thérèse are to visit England and Wales next year," Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor said. "I have always been deeply moved by St. Thérèse' 'little way.' It is in fidelity to the small things of everyday life, animated by the love of Christ, that we achieve true holiness.
"I am sure that the intercession of St. Thérèse will be of great spiritual benefit to the people of our country."
The cardinal, who is archbishop of Westminster, requested the visit on behalf of the bishops of England and Wales.
A nationwide program of catechesis on the life and spirituality of the saint will precede the autumn visit. The program will focus on prayer, the call to holiness, family life, vocation and evangelization.
The initiative is under the direction of Bishop Arthur Roche of Leeds and Bishop Malcolm MacMahon of Nottingham.
Bishop Roche said: "St. Thérèse is a much-loved saint all over the world, but nowhere more than in Britain. There will be widespread joy among Catholics that her relics are to visit our country, along with an expectation of many graces to be received.
"But this visit is for all Christians; and indeed people of any faith or none will be most welcome to come in pilgrimage to pray at Thérèse's side. I pray that this visit will help many people to find their way to God, and help our society to find the way to true peace through justice and compassion for all."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recent Articles:
The Edge
A Family Friendly Small Business Nightmare
Self-Sacrifice in the Defense of Life
Lourdes and the Modern World
Questions St. Ignatius Would Ask the New Jesuit General
Sovereign Wealth Follies
>>See more The Edge articles
February 21, 2008
Journalist Pamela Druckerman didn't think it would be hard to discuss sex issues with Alain Giami of the French National Institute of Health and Medical Research.
After all, he was one of the top sex researchers in a nation known for its freewheeling, laissez faire attitudes about matters of the heart. However, Giami silenced her when she used a dangerous word.
"What do you call 'infidelity'? I don't know what 'infidelity' is," he said, in what the former Wall Street Journal correspondent later described as a "rant."
"I don't share this view of things, so I would not use this word," he added, and then delivered the coup de grace. "It implies religious values."
Thank goodness Druckerman didn't say "adultery." For most researchers, this term has become a judgmental curse that cannot be used without implying the existence of the words "Thou shalt not commit." This issue came up over and over as she traveled the world doing interviews for her book, Lust in Translation: The Rules of Infidelity from Tokyo to Tennessee.
"If I asked someone, 'Have you ever committed adultery?', it was like God entered the room at that moment," said Druckerman, reached at her home in Paris. "That really is the religious word, 'adultery.' I had to start saying 'infidelity' or use a more careful combination of words."
While she didn't set out to write a book about sex and religion, Druckerman found that in large parts of the world — from Bible Belt cities to Orthodox Jewish enclaves, from Islamic nations to post-Soviet Russia — it's hard to talk about infidelity without talking about sin, guilt, confession, healing and a flock of other religious topics.
However, she also reached a conclusion that many clergy will find disturbing. When push comes to shove, cheaters are going to do what they're going to do — whether God is watching or not.
What does faith have to do with it? Not much. That's the bad news. The good news is that there is evidence that adultery is nowhere near as common as most religious people think it is.
Take, for example, the numbers that many consider "gospel" on this issue — the claims by sex researcher Alfred Kinsey in the mid-20th Century that half of American men and a quarter of women have cheated on their spouses.
While some writers keep using these statistics, Druckerman said they are "extremely problematic."
Recent studies offer a vivid contrast. In the early 1990s, she noted, 21 percent of American men and 10 percent of women said they had cheated while married. In 2004, 21 percent of men and 12 percent of women said they had strayed at least once.
Meanwhile, 3.8 percent of married French men and 2 percent of married French women say they've had an affair during the past year — in one of the world's most secular nations. And in highly religious America? The parallel figures are 3.9 percent of the married men and 3.1 percent of the women.
While Americans remain obsessed with adultery, this now seems to be rooted in this culture's commitment to an "ubermonogamy" built on the all-powerful doctrines of modern romance, argued Druckerman. Lacking shared religious convictions — while living in the era of no-fault divorce — millions of Americans have decided that having a happy, fulfilling, faithful marriage is an entitlement, a kind of sacrament in and of itself.
If a marriage crashes, both religious and non-religious Americans usually place their faith in another substitute for the old structures of faith and family. They turn to professional counselors linked to what Druckerman calls the "marriage industrial complex," where, for a price, repentance and restoration can take place in public or in private. Ask Bill Clinton about that.
All of this represents the reality of America's "sexual culture," which, while it may have Puritanism in its DNA, has also been shaped by the modern sexual revolution.
"Even when I talked to religious people about adultery, they weren't really worried about God, about God striking them down for their sins," concluded Druckerman. "Americans just don't think that way now. Even the religious people were more worried about what their families, or perhaps the people in their religious communities, would think of them. ...
"When it comes to matters of infidelity, Christian Americans act more like Americans than they do like Christians."
Beijing, Feb. 21, 2008 (CWNews.com) - Chinese government officials have confirmed that they are engaged in quiet negotiations with the Vatican, hoping to improve ties and eventually restore diplomatic relations.
"The Chinese side has had contact with the Vatican," Liu Jianchao, a spokesman for the Chinese foreign ministry, told reporters in Bejing on February 21.
Although there have been numerous reports of unofficial talks during the past few years, Chinese officials had not openly acknowledged those talks until this week. Liu spoke to reporters after China's top religious-affairs official, Ye Xiaowen, discussed the Rome-Beijing negotiations during a visit to the US.
Ye told reporters in Washington, DC, that China was firm in making two demands. Before diplomatic relations could be established, he said, the Vatican must withdraw diplomatic recognition from Taiwan and acknowledge China's right to govern the international affairs of the Catholic Church there.
Ye said that Beijing has received assurances that the Holy See is prepared to meet China's demand regarding ties with Taiwan. "We have known from various channels that Vatican has indicated that this is not a difficult issue," he said.
However the question of Church governance poses a more difficult challenge. In his June 2007 letter to the Church in China, Pope Benedict XVI (bio - news) made it clear that the Vatican could never accept the authority of "entities that have been imposed" upon the Church, or forms of Church leadership "desired by the state and extraneous to the structure of the Church." The Pope was clearly referring to the Patriotic Catholic Association, set up by the Communist government to supervise Catholic activities in China.
Ye Xiaowen hinted that Beijing may be open to compromise on the question of Church leadership, telling reporters that "this point can be discussed." In recent months a tactic agreement seems to be in place, under which the government has quietly allowed the appointment of bishops approved by the Holy See. During his visit to the US, Ye Xiaowen met in Washington with Archbishop Pietro Sambi, the veteran Vatican diplomat who now serves as apostolic nuncio to the US. The Chinese official declined to reveal the content of his discussions with Archbishop Sambi, citing a mutual agreement to keep the talks confidential. But there is little doubt that he and the archbishop pursued the question of Rome-Beijing ties.
Beijing's insistence on a "one-China policy," which precludes diplomatic relations with the Holy See as long as there is a Vatican enovy in Taiwan, is not a serious obstacle, informed source in Rome have confirmed. When the papal representative was forced to leave China after the Communist takeover there, a diplomatic post was established in Taipei. (The Vatican's representative in Taiwan today holds the title of chargé d'affaires rather than ambassador-- although Taipei's envoy in Rome is accredited as the "ambassador" to the Holy See.) Vatican diplomats have always viewed this as a temporary arrangement and indicated that the Holy See would prefer to have a representative on the mainland. In October 2005, Cardinal Angelo Sodano (bio - news)-- then the Vatican Secretary of State-- told reporters: "If we could have ties with Beijing, then-- not tomorrow but tonight-- the nuncio-- or rather the chargé d'affaires who is now in Taiwan would head for Beijing."
Question from Kevin on 2/19/2008:
Hi Judie.
I attended the Pro-life rally in Washington with my child in January and was amazed at the size of the crowds. I believe the numbers reported in the mainstream media were grossly understated. In other words, I got to experience first hand what you and many others have been saying for years.
I was amazed at the turnout, and when I had a free moment away from keeping track of the kids in our group, I could help but not wonder if our kids would not be the ones who would help in overturning abortion. I also could not help but feel that my vote for Pro-Life candidates really does matter. And,that the future may be in better hands when our kids take over steering the ship.
I firmly believe that the Blessed Virgin Mary will stop this evil in God's time. Perhaps, God is wanting us to prepare the way for the next generations to make things right. Perhaps, the good that comes out of this evil is that people turn toward God. Perhaps it forces us to take a close look at ourselves and be honest about what we see. Or, that we pray more in hopes that people will choose life and will not be taken in by thinking they are not ending a life. Or, preventing one from ever happening.
My dear Father was a working man, blue collar thru and thru. Until 1973 after abortion became legal. From that point on, he saw a different Democratic party. He was not exactly overjoyed with the Republican party but always encouraged us to vote for Pro Life candidates, Democrat or Republican.
When faced with criticism about being a one issue voter, he would simply say that any country or individual allowing someone to legally kill an unborn child had no integrity, period. This is where it started and ended with him. And that wars or other terrible disasters or tribulations would eventually come out the other end as we continuously attempt to derail God's plan for Goodness and Life.
My point: Setting a constant good example in defending life and praying do work. Perhaps we are not praying enough as a country. God heard the pain of many in the Old Testament and acted. He heard the prayers after years of terrorism in Ireland, and the threat of the Soviet Union for 40 plus years, and suddenly it all just stopped. God wills that it is time for injustices to stop, once we start paying enough attention and ask for His help. What appears at times to be the smallest and most useless of alternatives to us (prayer) may be the most powerful of all.
Thank You.
Answer by Judie Brown on 2/20/2008:
Dear Kevin
Your father sounds like a most amazing man and I am sure you are extremely proud of him. I also think you are absolutely correct about the power of prayer. We do not pray enough, we do not trust the Lord enough and when we do, we will be awestruck by the changes that will occur in our nation.
God be with you, Kevin!
Judie Brown
Question from Anonymous on 2/19/2008:
Every year at the Easter Vigil Mass my parish drops a banner down in front of the crucifix depicting the risen Christ, which remains throughout the Easter season. This makes it nearly impossible to view the crucifix behind it for the next eight weeks. I expressed my concern to the priest one Sunday, and he made it clear he had no intention of removing it until the end of the Easter season. Is it actually permissible to obstruct the symbol of our salvation with a banner depicting a different viewpoint?
Answer by Fr. Robert J. Levis on 2/20/2008:
Anon, This arrangement is solely the decision of the local priests, not of the Church. Fr.Bob Levis
Question from Christian on 2/5/2008:
I am Lutheran but my girlfriend is Catholic. I have been told by numerous people, including a priest, that Lutherans cannot receive Communion in a Catholic church because the beliefs are different. Growing up Lutheran, I was taught that we are receiving the actual body and blood of Christ when we receive communion.
The people I spoke with were under the impression that Lutherans receive a "representation" of the body and blood of Christ, which is incorrect. The spoken words at both masses, Lutheran and Catholic, are identical as well. Can I receive Commmunion at a Catholic church? If not, why?
Answer by Catholic Answers on 2/5/2008:
Christian--
Although there are extraordinary circumstances in which a Lutheran may receive Catholic Communion, under ordinary circumstances he may not. Receiving Catholic Communion indicates by his action that the communicant believes and accepts all that the Catholic Church teaches and is in full communion with the Church. In other words, that he is a Catholic. Generally speaking then, to receive Catholic Communion when one is not in full communion with the Catholic Church is to deceive with your body.
Some Lutherans may believe that their communion is the actual body and blood of Christ, but, objectively speaking, Lutheran communion is not a valid Eucharist. It is not really Christ's body and blood because the celebrant does not have the valid holy orders necessary to confect the bread and wine into Christ's body and blood. Thus, despite surface similarities between the services, a Lutheran communion service is not the same thing as a Catholic Mass.
If you would like to receive Catholic Communion, I encourage you to consider studying Catholicism to see if you could in conscience become a Catholic. Jesus Christ longs to be sacramentally one with all those who believe in him; he simply asks that we approach him on his terms and not our own. God bless.
Recommended reading:
Pillar of Fire, Pillar of Truth
How to Become a Catholic
Michelle Arnold
Catholic Answers
