Editor’s Note: We are in the process of reducing our supply of books and are offering them to interested readers at a substantial discount. The books available, all in mint condition, are Catholic Replies and Catholic Replies 2 (both $17.95), All Generations Will Call Me Blessed and Who Do You Say That I Am? (both $10.95), and Catholicism & Reason (Apologetics), Catholicism & Scripture (Salvation History), and Catholicism & Life (Commandments and Sacraments), each $14.95.
The books can be had for 50 percent off for 1 to 25 books, 60 percent off for 26 to 50 books, and 70 percent off for over 50 books. You can learn more about each of these books by visiting www.crpublications.com. Don’t order from the website, however, since it automatically charges full price. If you know pastors, schools, home schools, or parish religious education programs who would benefit from these books, please have them get in touch with us at the address below. All orders must be paid by check.
Q. When the Blessed Virgin died, she rose to Heaven body and soul. But only souls exist in Heaven, so what happened to her body? — J.B., Pennsylvania.
A. It went to Heaven along with her soul, and she is the only person in Heaven with a body, except possibly for Elijah, who went to Heaven in a fiery chariot (cf. 2 Kings 2:11). As far back as the sixth century, St. Gregory of Tours wrote that the Lord Jesus came to Earth at the end of the Blessed Virgin’s life and commanded that her holy body “be taken in a cloud into Paradise, where now, rejoined to the soul, it rejoices with the Lord’s chosen ones, and is in the enjoyment of the good of an eternity that will never end.”
In his 1950 infallible proclamation of the Assumption of Mary into Heaven, Pope Pius XII said that the new feast “shows, not only that the dead body of the Blessed Virgin Mary remained incorrupt, but that she gained a triumph out of death, her heavenly glorification after the example of her only begotten Son, Jesus Christ” (Munificentissimus Deus, n. 20).
Q. In view of some of the things that are taught in public schools these days, is it permissible for a Catholic to teach there? — J.C., California.
A. Sure, as long as he or she does not teach something contrary to faith or morals. In fact, a Catholic teacher who is faithful to Catholic beliefs could be a positive influence on the students. For example, one of our daughters is a high school English teacher who has been teaching Dante’s Inferno to advance placement students for years. In her presentations, she talks about Hell, Purgatory, and the various sinners that Dante has assigned to the different circles of Hell. She has had some very interesting discussions about murderers, suicides, adulterers, fornicators, homosexuals, liars, the greedy, the envious, and so on.
Our daughter is not admonishing her students to avoid these evils, but in teaching from what is considered to be a literary masterpiece, she is able to use the words and ideas of Dante to convey some sound moral and ethical principles that her students might not otherwise hear.
A positive aspect of the classes, she said, and one which surprises the students, is the existence of a just, merciful, loving God who allows man free will to choose the sins which Dante catalogues, but who also offers the ability to repent. She said that “the poem’s universality, that we are all human beings made in the likeness of God, is what speaks most strongly to the students and allows all of us to make our way through such challenging and sometimes unbearable descriptions of human suffering.”
She feels that the journey through Hell can be less frightening “when we understand that we live in a universe created by a just and merciful God who is always there for us if we let Him into our lives.”
Q. In chapter 15 of the Acts of the Apostles, it says that the apostles, after deciding that Gentiles did not have to undergo circumcision before becoming Christians, sent a letter to Gentiles in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia, explaining what Gentiles were required to do. The letter said: “It is the decision of the Holy Spirit and of us not to place on you any burden beyond these necessities, namely, to abstain from meat sacrificed to idols, from blood, from meats of strangled animals, and from unlawful marriage. If you keep free of these, you will be doing what is right.” I understand the first and last prohibitions, but can you explain the other two? — B.N. via e-mail.
A. From the time of Moses, blood was seen as the seat of life, as something sacred. So Jews were forbidden to drink blood or to eat meat not properly drained of blood. Gentile converts were expected to avoid these pagan practices and observe at least a minimal code of religious purity.
According to the Council of Florence in 1442, the food restrictions were only a temporary measure to help Jews and Gentiles to get along in the early Church. Once the circumstances that made these rules necessary no longer existed, the restrictions were relaxed.
Q. A family member posted on Facebook the following statement from Sr. Joan Chittister: “I do not believe that just because you are opposed to abortion, that that makes you pro-life. In fact, I think in many cases your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed. And why would I think that you don’t? Because you don’t want any tax money to go there. That’s not pro-life, that’s pro-birth. We need a much better conversation on what the morality of pro-life is.” Could you please tell me who Sr. Joan Chittister is so I can forward your answer to our misguided family member? — D.A., Guatemala.
A. So using tax money to kill babies is a good thing? And isn’t it unjust and biased to ignore the thousands of pro-life groups and persons working hard to make sure that children allowed to be born are properly fed, housed, and educated?
But this kind of false rhetoric is typical of Sr. Joan Chittister, an 84-year-old Benedictine nun who has written dozens of books and hundreds of articles, given many speeches and interviews, and promoted radical feminism and various other left-wing causes. Back in the 1970s and 1980s, she was active in women’s groups that dissented vigorously from Church teachings on women priests, nonmarital sexual relations, contraception, abortion, and homosexuality. For the details about what Donna Steichen called “the hidden face of Catholic feminism,” see Steichen’s book Ungodly Rage.
At the first Women in Church conference in Washington in 1986, Sr. Joan was a featured speaker. She deplored patriarchy in all its forms, saying that “we live in a society where they turn away women from their empty seminaries in droves while, in a sacramental Church, people are denied the sacraments. We live in a society where a girl-child…may not even carry a cruet to the altar…the Church that teaches that ‘the gates of hell shall not prevail against it’ can apparently be brought to its knees by a little eleven-year-old girl” (Ungodly Rage, p. 127).
When asked by a reporter afterwards if she thought that the Church in America “as institution” was ready to stand in opposition to Rome, Chittister replied: “Do you want an answer or a prayer? Oh God, I hope so” (Ibid., p. 128).
The tenor of the conference was indicated by a thousand nuns applauding Sr. Madonna Kolbenschlag’s description of the Blessed Trinity as “a good ole boy, associating intimately only with two other divine males,” who has “legitimated religious bigotry, racism, classism, imperialism, clericalism, and all the other isms you can think of” (Ibid., p. 124).
A past president of the feminist Leadership Conference of Women Religious, Chittister is currently co-chair of the Global Peace Initiative of Women and editor of an online column for the National Catholic Reporter, long infamous for its dissenting views on Catholic teachings.
In a column written on January 2, 2019, Sr. Joan accused President Trump of “destabilizing” the government. She said that “presidential gravitas has been blown to the wind. So should we take him seriously or not? Presidential commitment to the welfare of the entire country, rather than the militarization of its particular parts, has been reduced to equal mixtures of party politics and gross racism. So is he a national president or a factional president? As a result, too much of what purports to be presidential leadership feels like presidential whim or, worse, presidential agitation. So, is the country safe or not?”
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress