Catholic Replies
Q. Would you please identify the Church document that places restrictions on where prayer petitions are announced at Mass? — J.M., New York.
A. The document is The General Instruction of the Roman Missal, which says that the Prayer of the Faithful takes place after the Profession of Faith and before the bringing up of the gifts to begin the Offertory. Paragraph 71 says that “it is for the Priest Celebrant to regulate this prayer from the chair. He himself begins with a brief introduction, by which he calls upon the faithful to pray, and likewise he concludes it with an oration. The intentions announced should be sober, be composed with a wise liberty and in few words, and they should be expressive of the prayer of the entire community. They are announced from the ambo or from another suitable place, by the Deacon or by a cantor, a reader, or one of the lay faithful. The people, for their part, stand and give expression to their prayer either by an invocation and in common after each intention or by praying in silence.”
Paragraph 70 says that “the series of intentions is usually to be: for the needs of the Church; for public authorities and the salvation of the whole world; for those burdened by any kind of difficulty; for the local community. Nevertheless, in any particular celebration, such as a Confirmation, a Marriage, or at a Funeral, the series of intentions may be concerned more closely with the particular occasion.”
Q. I seem to recall that in 2004 Pope Benedict XVI gave Theodore Cardinal McCarrick a message to convey to American bishops regarding handing out Communion to pro-abortion American Catholic politicians. What was the message and did the then Cardinal McCarrick render it to the bishops in the Pope’s exact words? — A.G., Maryland.
A. Actually, the letter you’re talking about was sent to USCCB Task Force Chairman Cardinal McCarrick by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, then-prefect of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. This was a year before Ratzinger would become Benedict XVI. In the letter entitled “Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion,” the prefect said:
“Regarding the grave sin of abortion or euthanasia, when a person’s formal cooperation becomes manifest (understood, in the case of a Catholic politician, as his consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws), his Pastor should meet with him, instructing him about the Church’s teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist.”
The letter went on to say that “when ‘these precautionary measures have not had their effect or in which they were not possible,’ and the person in question, with obstinate persistence, still presents himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, ‘the minister of Holy Communion must refuse to distribute it’ (cf. Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts Declaration Holy Communion and Divorced, Civilly Married Catholics [2002], nn. 3-4). This decision, properly speaking, is not a sanction or a penalty. Nor is the minister of this Holy Communion passing judgment on the person’s subjective guilt, but rather is reacting to the person’s public unworthiness to receive Holy Communion due to an objective situation of sin.”
Rather than giving each bishop a copy of Cardinal Ratzinger’s letter, McCarrick paraphrased the letter for the bishops and distorted what it said. He said in an interim report that “there is significant concern about the perception that the sacred nature of the Eucharist could be trivialized and might be turned into a partisan political battleground. Expecting a minister of Holy Communion to make these judgments would create great pastoral difficulties. We do not want to encourage confrontations at the altar rail with the Sacred Body of the Lord Jesus in our hands. This could create unmanageable burdens for our priests and those who assist them and could turn the Eucharist into a perceived source of political combat.”
McCarrick said that “we also fear it could push many people farther away from the Church and its teaching, rather than bringing it closer. In light of these and other concerns, the Task Force urges for the most part renewed efforts and persuasion, not penalties.”
In an interview later with Barbara Kralis, then-Archbishop of St. Louis Raymond Burke said that the contents of the Ratzinger letter were not made known to him or to the other bishops attending the 2004 meeting. He said that “we were told that, according to Cardinal Ratzinger, the application of canon 915 [those “who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion”] was up to the prudent judgment of each bishop. The text of the memorandum would have been very helpful at the meeting in Denver. Knowing now about the memo, I am disappointed it was not given to us at the meeting of the Bishops’ Conference.”
Q. If God is so powerful, why doesn’t He just take away all sin on earth forever? Then He won’t need to worry about losing His children. — B.O.M., Massachusetts.
A. Remember that God did create the world with no sin in it, but then Adam and Eve, at the tempting of the Devil, disobeyed God and brought sin into the world. God gave Adam and Eve free will, so they could have said no to the Devil’s temptation, but they said yes. We and every person on Earth are in the same situation. We could say no to sin, and that would take away all sin on Earth forever, but the same freedom that can say no to sin can also say yes.
God gave us free will so that we could choose to love Him, but He does not force us to love Him, which means that we can reject Him. He gives us all the grace and help we need to make good choices, but we can ignore that grace, turn our backs on God, and make bad choices. God thinks so much of the freedom He has given us, however, that He is willing to risk us using that freedom to reject Him. He is not a puppeteer who keeps us dancing on the end of a string, with no control over our own lives. No, He loves us so much that He wants us to choose Him freely and will not force us to do so.
Free will is a mystery that we will not fully understand until we get to Heaven, so let’s resolve to use our freedom wisely so that we can attain the glory of Heaven.
Q. In the parable of the gold coins (Luke 19:12-27), Jesus tells of a nobleman going on a journey to become king who gives each of his ten servants a gold coin to invest while he is away. On his return, one servant had earned ten additional coins, a second servant five coins, but a third one hid his coin and earned nothing because he was afraid of the nobleman. The new king then commanded that this man’s coin be given to the one who had ten, saying that “to everyone who has, more will be given, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away.” He then ordered the execution of those who opposed his elevation to king. Can you explain the meaning of this parable? — C.W., North Carolina.
A. While it sounds like the modern-day expression that the rich get richer, while the poor get poorer, what Jesus is actually doing is stressing the need for diligence and responsibility. Neither fear nor laziness can excuse one from doing his duty. He is also talking about those who have greater knowledge of the Kingdom of God and have the responsibility to proclaim that Kingdom far and wide. If they do so, they will be given even greater gifts and responsibilities. On the other hand, if they hide away the good news of the Kingdom and keep others from learning about it, what knowledge they do have will be taken away from them and given to more reliable disciples.
As for executing all of his enemies, this seems very harsh to us today, but it’s how things were done in the ancient world, and how they are done in some parts of the world today. The king in Jesus’ parable shouldn’t be taken as an image of Jesus. The Lord includes unsavory characters in His parables without endorsing all that they do.
However, the parable does convey a warning that those who do not want Jesus to reign over them will not be part of His Kingdom. When Jesus comes again at the end of time, He will reward generously those who were faithful servants, but those who were unfaithful will be excluded from His Kingdom.
