Editor’s Note: D.M. has e-mailed to us the following thoughtful comments:
“In a recent reply regarding the bishops and our borders, you noted that our immigration system is ‘badly broken.’ To me that was a bit like hearing the proverbial fingernails on a blackboard. It seems to me that those who seek to dominate all of us use the refrain, ‘It’s broken,’ to help achieve their ends.
“Some examples: Our heath-care system is ‘badly broken’ and we’ve got to fix it; hence, the Affordable Health Care Act. Look at the negative impact it has had on the Church. The climate is also ‘badly broken’ and we’ve got to fix it. Who knows where that fix will end? Fixing our ‘badly broken’ immigration system is just another attempt. The hope by many of those proposing essentially ‘open borders’ is that it will swell the voting totals of those seeking total domination.
“Now to a more serious point. Although I have not seen the description ‘badly broken’ used in regard to our Church, recent information, surveys, and statistics would seem to present the perfect opportunity to use the term to attempt to create changes in the Church. I understand that for every person entering the Church, ten are leaving. There are now 40 million former Catholics in the U.S., that is, one in eight. Isn’t this the perfect opportunity to claim the Church is ‘badly broken’ and needs to be fixed? Especially in light of the same-sex ‘marriage’ phenomenon, among other attacks that the Church is currently enduring.
“In my opinion, in all of the above the issue is leadership or lack thereof. Regarding immigration, I’m not so sure it is ‘badly broken.’ Rather, our system is simply not enforced by the current administration. Regarding the Church, I believe our leadership has been somewhat lax, over my lifetime at least, in teaching the truths of our faith and in representing our faith in the public square.
“I say the above with the belief that most of our bishops are good and well intentioned, but they, like all of us it seems to me, want to be loved, and they think that teaching the hard truths of our faith will somehow turn people away from the Church. In response to that thought, I say just look at the numbers who have left.”
Q. I have always thought that no one who lived before the time of Christ could get to Heaven until He died on the cross. But what about Old Testament figures Enoch and Elijah, who apparently went to Heaven prior to the time of Christ? — M.H.D., New York.
A. In the Book of Genesis (5:4), we read that at the end of his life, “Enoch walked with God, and he was no longer here, for God took him.” In 2 Kings (2:11), it says that as Elisha and Elijah walked along the River Jordan, “a flaming chariot and flaming horses came between them, and Elijah went up to heaven in a whirlwind.” So what are we to think?
Writing about this in the May-June issue of Catholic Answers Magazine, Jimmy Akin said that “the obvious answer, I’ve always held, is that they were exceptions. As a general rule, heaven was not open to those who lived before the time of Christ. But God is omnipotent, and he can make exceptions if he chooses” (p. 5).
Akin said that in a general audience on July 21, 1999, Pope St. John Paul seemed to confirm this:
“The depiction of heaven as the transcendent dwelling place of the living God is joined with that of the place to which believers, through grace, can also ascend, as we see in the Old Testament accounts of Enoch (cf. Gen. 5:24) and Elijah (cf. 2 Kings 2:11).”
“It thus seems,” said Akin, “that John Paul II — who is now himself in heaven — acknowledged the exceptional nature of Enoch and Elijah’s admission to that blessed realm” (p. 6).
Q. A parochial vicar in our parish, a native of Thailand, brings his dog to church and allows it to remain in the sanctuary during Mass and sit next to Father while he distributes Communion. I searched my Catechism, Catholic dictionaries and encyclopedias, and your two volumes of Catholic Replies, but could not find anything about animals in the sanctuary.
When I called the parish office, I was told the reason was that “there was no one in the rectory to watch the dog, and they wanted the priest to be comfortable.”
Is this all part of the New Evangelization — to accommodate priests from foreign countries who perhaps have different customs from ours? Or should I be concerned with possible desecration of the altar? — C.M.B., Massachusetts.
A. We are not surprised that you could not find anything about this in the various books you consulted. After all, the authors of those books could not have anticipated this odd situation and therefore would not have commented on it. But to answer your question, no, this is not part of the New Evangelization or a possible desecration of the altar. It is just an unnecessary and inappropriate distraction from holy Mass. It would be one thing to have a guide dog for a blind priest while he was celebrating Mass, but couldn’t the dog in question be left in the sacristy during Mass? Does this priest take the dog everywhere he goes — even in the confessional or on sick calls or visits to the dying?
We hope not, and it would seem to us that Fido could be trained to be on his own some of the time, especially during Mass.
Q. How do we answer the accusation that Catholics who believe they are eating the body and drinking the blood of Jesus are practicing cannibalism? — E.C., via e-mail.
A. This is not a new charge, but one that surfaced following Jesus’ eucharistic discourse in chapter six of John’s Gospel. Recall that Jesus said, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood true drink” (6:3-55).
John tells us that many of those who heard these words walked away from Jesus, murmuring, “This saying is hard; who can accept it?” (6:60).
This is the only time in the Gospels that people walked away from Jesus, and note that He did not call them back and say that He was only speaking metaphorically or symbolically. No, He was being literal. So how do we respond to those who would walk away from the Lord today? Here are some helpful comments from an appendix to the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible New Testament, Second Catholic Edition:
“The crowd is thinking of cannibalism, i.e., the sin of eating a human corpse, an idea thoroughly repugnant to them (Deut. 28:53). This is a misunderstanding. Jesus gives us, not his mortal flesh as it was during his earthly ministry, but his glorified humanity as it was after rising from the dead. This is why he calls himself the ‘living bread’ (6:51). . . .
“Jesus is speaking literally and sacramentally. If he were speaking metaphorically or figuratively, his words would echo a Hebrew idiom where consuming flesh and blood refers to the brutalities of war (Deut. 32:42; Ezek. 39:17-18). . . .
“Drinking the blood of animals is forbidden under the Old Covenant (Gen. 9:4; Lev. 17:10-13; Deut. 12:16). To do so is to consume ‘life’ that is merely natural and of a lower order than human life. Jesus’ injunction does not fall under these prohibitions. The ‘life’ he imparts is not natural but supernatural; it does not pull us down to the level of animals; it elevates us to become sharers in his divine nature (2 Peter 1:4 [CCC, n. 1391]).”
Q. I received a notice from a priest that the usual offering for a Mass in this diocese would be $10 starting in July, that the bishop and priests had agreed to this. I thought a Mass offering was given out of love and stemmed from a time when priests didn’t have much to live on. The practice continues today, but I have never before been told how much I must offer. Is it normal and right for a price to be set for a Mass? — C.S., via e-mail.
A. Just as parishes set amounts for weddings and funerals, so, too, they can set amounts for memorial Masses. It is a suggested offering to give people some guidance, and not an obligatory fee. In fact, if a person cannot afford the amount suggested, the priest will celebrate the Mass for nothing. These free-will offerings provide a significant amount of income to a parish, and it is not unusual for a parish to suggest a specific amount.
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress