Ask a Priest

5,442 Responses

Kevin, on June 10, 2013 at 9:21 pm said:

Fr. Joe,

I am a catechist working with HS students in the Washington, DC, Archdiocese. I stumbled across your blog while searching for information on the Catholic interpretation of Revelation. Often in my class, students will ask me questions regarding Revelation (often indirectly by asking about something from popular literature that perpetuates misinterpretations). At the end of the last school year, one of my students asked about doing a unit on Revelation and I am considering this. However, to do so I was looking for a good work that would help me in understanding the imagery. I understand that much of the imagery is intended to signify the persecution of Christians first by Nero and then by Domitian (I just found a reference in The Catholic Encyclopedia which refers to a belief by many early Christians and pagans that Nero did not die, but was going to return and continue his depravities–and that some thought that Domitian was a Second Nero). But I do not have a detailed study of the imagery that ties into the teachings of the Church. Can you suggest such a work?

FATHER JOE: Here are some works…

Revelation (Sacra Pagina) by Wilfrid J. Harrington.

The Book of Revelation: A Catholic Interpretation of the Apocalypse by John Tickle.

The Book of Revelation (New Collegeville Bible Commentary: New Testament) by Catherine A. Cory.
Hendra from Indonesia, on June 10, 2013 at 6:53 pm said:

How can we fear God when He loves us so much?

He gave us His only son who showed the ultimate compassion by being born in an animal barn, taught sinners, washed the feet of disciples, suffered great humiliation & abuse, and died on the cross for our sins. He is pure infinite love, never imposing always present for us. How can we not be joyous, in love and worship Him?

My fear is to be without Him, not being able to follow Him but not of Him.

Thank you Father Joe, for putting up with the demands of running this site and be a beacon across continents. You are helping us construct our own faith through your sharing of the wisdoms of saints, catholic scholars and yourself. Jesus is indeed working through you.
Alex, on June 9, 2013 at 4:38 am said:

Thanks for your response Fr. Joe. The thing in particular that I was struggling with is that sacraments are by definition instituted by Christ. In what way did Christ institute marriage? Just by his presence at Cana?

FATHER JOE: The wedding feast at Cana was the occasion where our Lord provided the first miraculous sign of his public ministry. This certainly communicates something of the gravity that he gives marriage. But the Church would also point to our Lord’s words against divorce in Matthew. He is rescinding the Mosaic writ of divorce. He tells us that this was not the way things were supposed to be. As the new Adam he is healing the breech caused by the fall in Genesis. Our entry into this new life is baptism. We are forgiven and by grace made brand new. Most people will live out their discipleship in marriage. All relationships, but especially that of marriage, are radically changed because you have a man and woman who share their faith in Christ. St. Paul makes the analogy that wives should obey their husbands as they would Christ. He tells husbands to love their wives as Christ loved the Church, embracing the Cross. Both are called to a unique and life-giving sacrificial love. When you look at all these elements, it was clear to the Church that marriage was a divine mystery or sacrament.
Alex, on June 8, 2013 at 8:11 am said:

Hi Fr. Joe, you stated in another comment (at least I think it was you) that many Protestants don’t have “sacramental” marriage because they view the scriptural case as weak. Don’t worry, I trust the Church completely, but I’ve been thinking about this for a few days and was hoping to hear your thoughts about this.

FATHER JOE: I do not recall saying this. It may be that certain Protestants, while viewing marriage as a covenant relationship, do not (themselves) regard marriage as a sacrament. However, given that there is a sufficient appreciation of the nature of marriage, the Catholic Church regards the unions of baptized Protestants as true marriages and as having the nature of sacraments. Remember, that a marriage between a Catholic and a Protestant requires a dispensation; as long as they are both baptized, it may be a sacrament. If a Catholic should marry an unbaptized person and/or unbeliever, the marriage is regarded as a binding natural bond (although a dispensation is still required). The marriages of non-believers, Jews, Moslems, etc. are regarded not as sacraments but as natural bonds. A sacrament signifies a mutual faith in Christ. Annulment cases in the Catholic Church are made possible because some people (so-called Catholics included) maintain radically false views of marriage (anti-life, non-supportive, selfish and hedonistic, infidelity, etc.). Some poor people seem incapacitated by human weakness and immorality so that they are rendered incapable of fulfilling the obligations of sacrificial love and marriage.

For my own part: the only Gospel reference to marriage that I came to mind was the wedding at Cana — this is certainly proof that God is not opposed to marriage, but is that sufficient to justify a sacrament? I know that the Church’s tradition is another font of revelation, but it seems that the Church did not do weddings at all until the 4th century, and did not require the presence of an ordained minister until the last few centuries.

FATHER JOE: Remember, the couple marry themselves. The priest is the Church’s main witness to the bond. Current Church law parallels civil law in requiring two other witnesses. Marriage in the Church is generally required of Catholics precisely because it is regarded as a sacrament and the Church has the right to regulate her sacraments. It also insures that we know who is and is not married. In days past, this protected both the indissolubility of marriage as well as the rights of spouses (particularly women). The early Church (after recognition by the empire) faced the issue of men abandoning their wives. When challenged about this, the men argued that they were not married, just cohabitating and fornicating. There was often little evidence to disprove such arguments. Eventually the Church had enough of it. Thus, the bonds are witnessed to this very day and a sacrament is given its due.
brandon, on June 7, 2013 at 11:43 pm said:

Now please don’t take my words badly; I truly mean no offense to you, or the followers of the Catholic path. I just don’t like how denominational views muddy the views of the true path of God, and goes against the teachings of Yeshua.

FATHER JOE: Please do not take me wrong, and I mean no personal attack against you; however, you seem blind to the fact that your own view of God and Jesus is “denominational.” I am unsure what authority preserves your truth; certainly Catholicism has institutional safeguards to back up her claims. But what do you have? Even the New Testament, is the Church’s gift to you. Jesus is the Way and the Truth and the Life. But also, as the body of Christ, the Church has been known since apostolic times as also the Way. It is the Way of Christ. Like the men on the road to Emmaus and the healed blind man— they followed Jesus on the Way. Discipleship in the Church is not simply a denominational view. I am reminded of so-called “non-denominational” churches. They are nothing of the kind. The ones that profess the Trinity, Jesus as the Son of God, and have legitimate faith and baptism can be regarded as Christian or Protestant; the rest are assorted cults.

Father, you are misguided about demons.

FATHER JOE: The devil you say!

It says in Genesis that the angels fornicated with human women and created evil offspring that were giants.

FATHER JOE:

The last I heard all the giants were dead. More important and dangerous are the devil’s offspring who attack the Catholic Church and the unborn child.

Some authorities contend that the giants are a connection to mythical Hellenic figures. The creation of the Nephilim is a bit contrived— the stuff of Hebrew legend not unlike our own folk stories. Angels, bad or good, are pure spirits and it is hard to imagine that they would either be attracted to or have the potential to be creative with human females. Scientists tell us that there was an overlap between modern humans and Neanderthals until the latter’s disappearance some 30,000 years ago. This or some other race of men (where the record is lost) is certainly possible. Jews believed that the giants were destroyed by the primordial flood. I cannot say that it is a matter that I have given much thought.

If you tell people who truly do need spiritual freedom from possession or harassment from dark spirits to talk to a local bishop or diocese then you and the rest of the Catholic priests are being unbiblical.

FATHER JOE: There is nothing unbiblical about deferring to the apostles or bishops of the Church about such weighty matters. Priests can certainly pray for healing and spiritual deliverance; but full-blown exorcisms require the permission of higher ecclesiastical authority. The procedures are important so as to make sure it is not merely a problem of mental derangement or drugs. The law would also hold us accountable. Thus, medical and psychological intervention is vital.

You all so enjoy following your own rules and regulations rather than God’s.

FATHER JOE: No, what you really mean is that I follow lawful authority in Christ’s Church while you would supplant it with your own and condemn those who do not agree with your false personal interpretation.

Yeshua (the one called “Jesus”) told his true followers to cast out demons, not to beg and hope for an official of some church to wait for given authority from a man who claims to be a intercessor for our God.

FATHER JOE: Here is where your prejudice is showing. The true followers of Christ are precisely the authorities appointed by Christ in his Church. The ministry and mediation of priests was established by Christ. We are told to baptize in the name of the Trinity. We are told to celebrate the Lord’s Supper (the Mass) “in remembrance” of him. We are given the power to forgive sins as “ministers of reconciliation.” We can anoint the sick and bring spiritual healing to others. Read your Bible more closely!

The pope is a man elected by men, a title only for our Messiah Yeshua.

FATHER JOE: Jesus said to Simon, you are Peter (ROCK/KEPHAS) and on this ROCK I will build my Church. We are promised that the gates of hell will never prevail against the Church. Christ keeps his promises. The Church is still here and so is Peter, now called the Pope (his successor).

If you believe I am wrong, then prove it with evidence from the Holy Bible.

FATHER JOE: Actually you have shown no understanding of Scripture. Rather, you only illustrate a desire to spam a priest’s website with your prejudice. In any case, the Catholic Church embraces the two fonts of revelation: Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. Both are interpreted by the Spirit-protected Magisterium or teaching authority of the Catholic Church.

If you can’t prove the Catholic agenda with words from the Bible then they are misguided concepts of man, no better than the paganism which is so integrated into the Catholic holidays and beliefs.

FATHER JOE: Please, you (yourself) never once cited the Bible in your comment. The liturgical year helps us to re-walk salvation history. You have only a miscarried view of the Church, aborted upon the last page of the New Testament. But the Church is alive still. All her holy days and celebrations emphasize the great mystery of our salvation in Christ. You would deride as paganism the holy mission of the Church and her faith in the Lord. By these words you will be judged by God, not by me.

I am not looking down on my brothers of faith, but merely reproving them for their straying from the true path of our God Yahuah.

FATHER JOE: You are doing nothing of the kind. Where is the humility in your words? Your tone smacks of hubris. I submit to just authority; you submit to no one. I view myself as a servant of the Bible; you would make yourself its master.
tutti, on June 7, 2013 at 3:56 pm said:

Hello Father, I have a question about tattoos. I have wanted to get a tatoo for some time and I was wondering if would be considered a mortal sin on my soul. I want to get it to cover scars on my arm. I was depressed about a year ago and I harmed myself. Shortly after that my husband and I began attending the Catholic Church and soon entered the RCIA program. I felt at that sad time in my life I was led to the Church and things fell into place. One day I was was reading a quote from St. Augustine about how in his deepest wounds God’s glory dazzled him. I love that quote and I wanted to know if I could get that tatooed on my arm to cover the scars where I cut myself. Thank you for your time.

FATHER JOE:

My personal view is that tattoos mutilate the body; however, it appears that the Church’s Magisterium has no absolute prohibition against them. In any case, you should be cognizant of the following:

Nothing should be done that harms the health or integrity of the body.

While Leviticus 19:28 may be an antedated “subjective” ritualistic law, please note that certain Jews, Protestants and Catholics would cite it in opposition to tattoos.

Tattoos should not celebrate the vulgar or violent or satanic.

Laser and acid treatments to remove them are painful, expensive and leave scars. Tattoos should be regarded as permanent. Are you willing to mark your body with an image or message which one day may embarrass or trouble you? Note also that the body changes and skin stretches. Do you really want to live with a message or image on your skin? Will it affect friendships? Even if you want to express a religious message, do you really want to make your body into a billboard?

What do tattoos say about the dignity of bodily persons?

If the Lord is alive in our heart, mind and soul… then why do we need anything written upon the skin?

But the decision is yours.
Nick, on June 5, 2013 at 9:05 am said:

Hello Father. I recently lost a young loved one after praying frequently for their recovery. Because of this, I have begun to lose my faith in God; I feel as if the prayers from the bottom of my heart were ignored. Why and how can I rediscover my faith? Thank you for your time, Nick

FATHER JOE: I think part of the challenge we face is in the notion of “rediscovering” faith. The fact that our faith is challenged or that we have stumbles is evidence that where we were before did not have the best footing. Coming back to faith or growing in faith means finding more secure ground, like finding higher land in a flood. Christianity grows, even along with detours and getting lost, or else it dies. A child’s faith is beautiful, but too many try to make it suffice as they become adults. Ours is not the genii or gimme-god. Our posture in faith and prayer has to emerge from a profound humility in the face of divine providence and the mystery of our mortality or death. God hears all prayer, but do we hear God? Every person that Jesus healed in the Gospels still eventually died. Life here is precious but very short. Our faith would remind us that there is so much more waiting for us on the other side of death. The liturgy speaks about it as that place where we can put aside suffering and sickness and where all tears can be wiped away. That is our hope. As Catholics we pray both for the living and the dead. I would urge you to keep your dead friend in prayer; remember, death is not the end of the story.
Fredo, on June 5, 2013 at 8:07 am said:

Dear Father Joe, I know there probably isn’t a way to read the bible, but how do I read it. By that question I mean what is the best way to read the bible. I don’t want to jump around from revelation to genesis, you get the point I don’t just want to pick here and there. Is there like a chronological order or anything? It be nice of you if you gave me a list or a link. I want to read the whole bible this time, I only read the gospels, acts, revelation and genesis, but I want to read the whole thing.

FATHER JOE: If you plan to read the whole Bible I would read the book in the order that is compiled, starting with Genesis. While it does not include everything, some Catholics read the Scriptures of the day used at Mass.
Joana, on June 4, 2013 at 2:17 am said:

G’mornin Father. Faith healers and quack doctors, are they considered or given the power to anoint a sick person?

FATHER JOE: God can heal whom he wills and use believers who pray over others to do so. However, there are many frauds out there. The Anointing of the Sick is a ministry reserved to Catholic priests. God may grant physical healing but the spiritual healing of the soul is far more important. The Anointing of the Sick or Extreme Unction is often associated with Viaticum (Holy Communion) and the Sacrament of Penance (Absolution). These three sacraments are sometimes called the Last Rites, particularly if the sick person subsequently dies.
Jannie, on June 3, 2013 at 3:04 am said:

Years ago I was married and my husband drank and ran around. He was even sent to jail on charges of assaulting another. We had two children. While I was carrying the second one he decided that he would leave. He pretended that he was going to get another job in a different state and move us later. I heard from him one time after he left; only after someone had caught him cheating again.

Honestly, I did ask him not to come back. I didn’t mean it. I was just very angry, like any normal person. He did not come back. I did not hear from him until our youngest daughter came and ask if she could use my credit card to find her dad online!

I let her use it. Two weeks later she came to me and asked me to verify this person on the computer. I did and realized it was the same person, my husband from the past. Shocked, all I could say was yes. His sister called me and I explained that we found him. She called and talked to her other brother and he “confirmed” it was him. Shocked, she called him. He called me to talk and then wanted to know if he could talk to the children.

I couldn’t believe my eyes when he walked through the doors of a restaurant. The waiter asked if I needed a drink. I realized I must have had that look as though I had seen a ghost. The kids where confused as to whether they wanted to know him and his wife or not. He told me he was a [d.n.] (deacon) in the church and I was stunned about how that could be! This was especially so given that he married the same woman twice and committed all these sins against her. The question is, can he deny his family, be divorced twice and still be allowed to get and annulment and get remarried in the Orthodox Church? That is my question! And is it justifiable?

FATHER JOE: The last part is unclear, are you saying that he is a deacon in the Orthodox Church and not the Catholic Church? The Eastern Orthodox churches permit a penitential second marriage. There are also some Anglican breakaway churches that pander to ex-Catholics while aligning themselves with Orthodoxy. If you simply mean orthodox Christian, i.e. Roman Catholicism, then it is highly unlikely he would have been ordained. Further, if there had been an annulment, some effort would have been made to contact you. Is it possible that he is being deceptive, to you, the Church or both?
roslyn, on June 3, 2013 at 2:30 am said:

My husband (recently converted to Catholicism) and I separated within the last month and I just found out he has created a profile on match.com and has “interacted” with several candidates. When I confronted him he said it is okay for him to be on such sites because he is seeing what is out there and that “it’s okay for him to dream.” I am born and raised Catholic and believe what he is doing is sneaky and a sin. As a priest— what is your “two-cents” on this?

FATHER JOE: There are many questions unanswered that would complicate any response I might make. What was the cause of the separation? Which spouse most insisted upon it? Were either of you seeking a divorce? It has been my experience that except for protective purposes, separations are most often a bad idea leading to permanent estrangement. It is morally wrong for your husband to either date or to research possible candidates for romantic relationships. However, it also wrong to deny spousal affection and support, something that frequently drives men and women into the arms of others. Separation and divorce are only initially sins for those who wrongly destroy their marital relationships by walking away. It is possible that fault rests with one spouse or both spouses. In either case, unless the validity of the marriage is disproven, they are both morally obliged to keep the marriage vows in reference to the sin of adultery. Those who wrongly separate and divorce their spouses break the marriage vows even if there is no other love interest, just by denying the physical and emotional affection that is the spouse’s due. This is an aspect of the “marriage duties” that priests counsel couples about in marriage preparation. A woman who denies her husband the marital act or sexual intimacy is violating their covenant. Similarly, a man addicted to pornography or flirtatious to other women has also wounded the bond they share. You may be perfectly innocent of wrong; but I do not know. As for your husband, now that he is a Catholic-Christian, he is obliged to be faithful to you until “death-do-you-part.” It is bad enough that you do not share the marriage bed; but adultery escalates this to a whole other level of sin. The one is passive by inactivity; the latter is active by transgression. If abuse is not part of the picture then my advice is simple. He should come home and the two of you should be faithful to each other… period.
maria, on June 1, 2013 at 3:54 pm said:

Father,

Thank you again for your quick responses! I do apologize for asking so many question. We do have a statue of our mother in our garden outside and there is where we sit to pray. When we pray the rosary my husband starts with the creed, 3 hail mary’s, our father, and petition. I say the glory, mysteries, our father, and the forgive us our sins, and the final prayer…then each one of our children pray the hail mary’s taking turns. It maybe that I am asking too much by expecting a kneeling, closing eyes, and so forth kind of prayer and they might not be ready for that. Most of my children participate in a chorus at church in which my husband is in charge. We also make them dress accordantly. We also bow before taking communion, but have always wondered why so much difference between the country’s even on religion purposes. Well thank you father for all your help. I really appreciate all the help you bring to us, may God bless you and keep you here longer so that you can answer more questions.

Thank you.
maria, on June 1, 2013 at 1:09 pm said:

Father,

Thank you for your quick answer. I understand and I will ask in my parish.

I have another quick question. I have seen families with little children praying (example, the Rosary) and it seems to me that they really enjoy it. As a child I always enjoyed going to Mass and praying. But, when we make our children pray every day, it seems to me like they are being forced. How could I make prayer time more meaningful and less “boring”? My children range from age 2-16.

FATHER JOE:

Prayer has to be geared to a child’s age and maturity. Many parents start with bedtime and mealtime prayers. Catholics should start with such staple prayers like the Hail Mary, Glory Be, Our Father, Guardian Angel Prayer and an Act of Contrition. Children also learn by example. You can pray with your children. Some make a circle and others hold hands. You can also make up prayers so that the children will get used to talking to God. Many families have prayer corners in their homes or little shrines. They keep their rosaries, holy cards, statues, prayer books and bibles there for easy access. Such areas can be personalized by the household members. The Church offers all sorts of prayer forms and sacramentals. Be creative in how you pray and make it interactive. Children get bored because they are sometimes reduced to spectators or just going through the motions. Have children take turns leading prayer (even the little ones). The guidance is yours but there is so much you can do. Remember also the witness you render to them by your daily life and posture before God.

A child might talk to God like this: “Dear God, I love you and you are wonderful. Thank you for all the gifts you have given me, especially my family. I am sorry for the few bad things I did today and I will try to do better tomorrow. Please help daddy at work and make mommy feel better. Help me to be good and to forgive Billy for taking my pencil. Forgive me too. Keep us all safe and happy. Amen.”

Is it right to force children to pray and/or to go to Mass? Are you not within your rights as a parent to make your children eat and to wear proper clothes against the elements. Would you be a good mother if you allowed your children to starve or to catch cold in the winter from exposure? Your charge is both over their bodies and over their souls. So yes, you can make them say the regimen of prayers and go to Mass. When they become adults and leave your home then matters will pass into their hands. Hopefully they will live out the gift of faith that you passed on to them. Then your role will be to gently admonish and to pray for them.

I have another question. Since the Church specifies Sunday Mass, my sixteen-year-old thinks that daily Mass is unnecessary. I am trying to get him to understand the importance of daily Mass and taking the Eucharist every day. I understand that Sunday Mass is important but why is it that the Church doesn’t really encourage people to attend every day? Is it not as important?

FATHER JOE: Participation at Mass on Sundays and Holy Days of Obligation bind us under pain of mortal sin as a precept of the Church. While we are not required, Christians are encouraged to attend daily Mass, but many people cannot because of family and work responsibilities. Sunday Mass is linked to the moral imperative of the Decalogue to keep holy the Sabbath Day. Christians understand this as the Sunday Observance when we commemorate our Lord’s resurrection. The Mass is the re-presentation in an unbloody way of the sacrifice of Calvary. The Eucharist is the Real Presence of the Risen Christ, body and blood, soul and divinity. So yes, every Mass (even the 20 minute weekday version) is an incredible gift. We should love God so much that we want to do more than that which is minimally required. He wants us with him. He wants us at his Supper.

Also, I read the column on the topic of taking the Eucharist by hand and I have always wondered why people are allowed to take it by hand. I was taught to take the Eucharist by the mouth since I started catechism in Mexico. It was not until I came to this country that I first saw how people where allowed to take it in their hands. I actually have never agreed. Now my children have been taught through catechism to take the Eucharist by hand. I taught them to not take it by hand. They argue that their catechism teacher told them to do it by hand even after what I had said.

FATHER JOE: Ah, you are sneaking in more questions. Communion in the Hand is permitted by the Holy See and promulgated by the American bishops; however, Communion on the Tongue is still normative. You are within your rights as a parent to insist upon the traditional form. Communion in the Hand is an option but cannot be mandated by the priest or catechist. The children may feel awkward because most of their friends are receiving in the hand. (Having said this, I do feel that catechists must teach the proper manner of such reception; too many receive in the hand in a manner that violates the guidelines or rubrics.)

Why does the Church teach our children that way?

FATHER JOE: First, Communion in the Hand is the restoration of a primitive Christian practice. There are many who would like to return to earlier forms as practiced by the apostolic and patristic communities. Second, while the person is “ministered to” by the priest, deacon or extraordinary minister; picking up the host already given and self-communicating signifies an active element to our Christian discipleship. It was argued that Christians had become too passive. I am not sure that the symbolism has registered given the casual or even cavalier way in which some people seem to approach the sacrament. My personal preference for communicants is upon the tongue.

And why is kneeling not encourage or allowed?

FATHER JOE: Some critics argue that the communion line is a better expression of the corporate nature of the Church as a pilgrim community. They contend that the haphazard coming of individuals to the altar rail signifies a more privatized faith. I am not sure how the change has added much. Every person must search his soul to determine if he or she is worthy to come forward. A few churches still have kneeling but the issue at present is logistics. Rails with kneelers are either unused or missing. People are lined up and some can’t kneel and get back up. Others might be tripped. Recently, the bishops introduced a bow before receiving Holy Communion as a substitute for the reverence of kneeling. Everything is geared to make the communion line move quickly. My worry is that the movement row-by-row in lines might be intimidating to those who would rather not receive communion because of their spiritual state.
Ariel, on June 1, 2013 at 4:42 am said:

Thanks for answering my question so quickly. Here’s another: the Church obviously has numerous teachings on numerous topics that come from the Bible, divine inspiration, etc. But what is the difference between the Catechism and Canon Law? It seems the Catechism is more authoritative and some of the Canon Laws aren’t always followed, but I could be wrong.

FATHER JOE: Canon Law is the collection of ecclesial regulations, some which reflect natural and divine positive law, and others which are human laws to insure the good order of the Church and the rights of Christians. The Catechism is a compendium of the teachings of the Catholic Christian faith. They are very different books.
Carrie., on June 1, 2013 at 2:36 am said:

Father, on May 19, I posted a question about baptizing my son for my mother’s benefit. In that post I mentioned that I am now a Unitarian. Your response was so generous and I appreciate your consideration. You posed two questions. 1. Was my concern over my son going to hell, mine or my mothers? She is the one who is very concerned over my sweet angel’s fate. I am secure in the grace of God. 2. While I don’t agree with the entire Unitarian doctrine, I am free to do so and still be a part of the community. My concern is whether I could raise my son to believe in marriage equality, women’s reproductive rights, and the New Testament parables from Jesus all together–as a Catholic? I feel strongly about these values and feel it would be sin to lie. I feel a bit stuck….

Thank you so much!

Carrie

FATHER JOE:

Catholics dissent on a great deal these days. Formal separation might sometimes be the more honest avenue, although I would contend that the Church preserves the truth about the matters you mention. Human beings are not the absolute measure of things.

Marriage is defined by nature, inspired Scripture and ultimately by the Church as a covenant between a man and a woman. No matter how much we might wish it were otherwise, we are powerless to change it. Instead of a law in harmony with such objective truth, today there is the attitude that truth is derived from consensus or is purely juridical or legislative. Already in Australia there was an effort by a man to change the law so that he might legally marry his pet goat. Here there is the growing movement to restore pagan polygamy (multiple spouses) and to have provisional marriage licenses that automatically expire after five years unless renewed. The Church can have none of it. The question becomes, how far will you bend? The Church does not oppose friendship. But we believe that sexual relations should be reserved to married heterosexual couples.

As for women’s “reproductive” rights, they begin and end with the marriage bed. The Church is convinced, and modern medicine only further confirms, that the unborn child is fully human and as such has rights, too. I certainly support freedom and the liberty to make good choices; but there is no more foundational freedom than the right to life. Take away a person’s life and he or she has no more choices. The Church must be the voice for those who are marginalized and speechless. The Church is pro-woman, and some of those women are in the womb. There is no such thing as a legitimate pro-choice or pro-abortion or anti-life Christianity. A proper understanding of the “parables” about the kingdom and the Gospel of Life makes this very clear. Yesterday, we celebrated the Feast of the Visitation. Here is a LINK TO THE HOMILY I gave. Note that it is understood as an encounter, not between two people but four: Mary, Elizabeth and the unborn Christ and unborn John the Baptizer. The incarnation is foundational to Christian faith and yet it is the mystery most assaulted by the promotion and commission of abortion. But people do not like to hear such things that challenge modern presuppositions. That is why some would reduce the Bible to a collection of nice stories (parables) but not as God’s revelation to mankind. Similarly, the Church and believers are often rejected or impugned because our discipleship would make us a sign of contradiction.

I would urge you to study the issues more closely, and not just from those who hate the Church. Read what the Church actually says. Pick up the universal Catechism. Then if you walk away, you will do so intelligently, and not merely as one deceived by a secular and humanistic modernity. Peace!
maria, on May 31, 2013 at 7:31 pm said:

Father, I have a quick question. I have a somewhat a big family; we are a family of nine. My husband and I believe in natural planning; but although we try our very best to follow the directions, I guess we don’t do such a good job since I have had about 5 of my children unplanned. I can’t afford to pay for classes. I guess what I am really trying to ask is would it be a sin if we just restrain ourselves from any intimacy or use birth control since we will not be using it just for lust? We live in a very small house and we struggle to provide for our children from clothes, shoes, school projects, extracurricular activities, all the way to even pay for catechism and confirmation classes. I want to keep a good relationship with God, my marriage, and children but it has come to a point where I can’t afford to try and try different natural methods and be stressing every month with a maybe. What can I do? Thank you for all your help! I really appreciate you taking the time to answer all this questions that are sometimes hard to ask our priest since they always seem to be busy. Thank you.

FATHER JOE: I find a number of things you say a bit surprising. First, while small fees might be requested, I know in my archdiocese financial concessions are made so that no couple would be denied natural family planning education. Either those offering the classes, the diocese or your home parish should assist with any expense. Second, while there are various forms of NFP, there are not so many that one would need to go from program to program. NFP implies the periodic abstention from the conjugal act during the woman’s fertile periods. When it reflects a pro-life and pro-family attitude, there is no sin in such responsible parenthood. Of course, if NFP is pursued because of a contraceptive mentality or selfish reason, then what is good can become sinful. Third, while NFP is permitted because no actual barrier alienates the spouses or corrupts the marital act, such is not the case in artificial birth control. The surrender to divine providence is missing. The elements of donation and acceptance are subtracted. Contraceptive intercourse neither consummates nor renews the marriage covenant. Contraceptive use between couples is forbidden to Catholics who want to remain in good standing with the Church and God. NFP means understanding your fertility as a couple and asking for the proper discipline to live it out. It may not always be easy but few important things in this world are. NFP allows couples both to get pregnant and to space births. Contraceptives do not serve such a dual purpose. As a priest, there is no other answer I can give you. I will keep you all in prayer.
Ariel, on May 31, 2013 at 6:50 pm said:

Father,

I recently learned that if you have either past or forgotten sins, you should mention them once remembered in the confessional. I had a number of remembered sins and I proceeded to confess them after my regular sins and I stated they were past or forgotten sins. The priest said not to and that it was okay to forget and to trust God’s forgiveness. I didn’t want to be disobedient or disrespectful so I said okay. He asked if that was all and I said yes other than those. He absolved me as well. Was this confession sacrilegious because I didn’t confess everything? Also, what should I have done differently? Should I have said I learned we should confess I confessed past or forgotten sins? I had never confessed those sins before, by the way. Thanks!

FATHER JOE: People may confess a mortal sin that was previously forgotten; however, as long as you came in good faith and contrition, all your sins were forgiven (even forgotten ones). I worry sometimes that the scrupulous have a hard time accepting the truth of the priest’s absolution.
Robert and Georgia Hunt, on May 29, 2013 at 11:00 pm said:

God sent me to this web site. My wife son daughters had a long relationship with Father Lubey. We were allowed to see a Jesus-statue shed blood while in his presence. Angels and Saint Anthony of Padua handed him papers after he stepped out of the marble column in the lower level of the Shrine Basilica in Washington DC. When he came to North Carolina, he often slept at our home. In our flower patch next to the statue of Our Lady of Fatima his prayers allowed each of us to see the sun spin as at Fatima. He helped our Aunt June see her departed husband Ducky as she rested in the Lord. Doors at the Franciscan Monastery were opened at his knock even after hours. I am now 73 years old and terminally ill. For the past 22 years, Father Lubey has directed me to compose a book of pre-Vatican prayers, and now if time is granted I’ll include the new Mass. At present it contains the 1963 Mass. I will only finish it if God through our Mother’s prayers obtains the time for me. You are free to call Robert or Georgia Hunt at [deleted]. We will share many stories though his love. He gave us the Rosary he obtained from the Pope. My spelling is so bad, please excuse it. God Bless You. Oh yes we have the books and other items he gave us. He is in the book in the section on the holy persons.

FATHER JOE: This dear priest married my parents and baptized me. He placed me as an infant on the high altar and prayed that I might be a priest. Toward the end, he visited my Father at the house to tell Daddy goodbye. They were like brothers. The next day Fr. Lubey passed. He knew he was going to die. He regarded every priest as a healing priest. I am not sure about some of the things you say, but I can add that I miss him very much.
gerhardebersoehn, on May 29, 2013 at 10:59 pm said:

Jesus resurrected “on the day The Seventh Day Sabbath of the LORD GOD” else God NEVER, “on the day the Seventh Day Sabbath RESTED.” It is as easy as that; as simple as that; as indisputably TRUE as that. Catholics and Protestants ALL are liars and deceivers. Both parties are in the dark— in pitch black dark as of hell. Only the modern day Wednesday crucifixionists find themselves DEEPER together with Satan in the glowing heart of hell’s furnace pit.

FATHER JOE: Are you a radical Seventh-day Adventist? And yet, how can this be given that you speak of hell, something in which the SDA church does not believe? Maybe you are a church of one? You are quick to condemn a lot of people who think differently than you do. Your comment is a bit confused, but I think I can decipher it. You seem to be saying that the traditional Hebrew Sabbath takes precedence because the “day the Lord rested” after creation cannot be replaced by the “Lord’s day of the resurrection.” However, the ancient Church did not regard things this way. Especially after the expulsion of Jewish Christians from the synagogues and the great inrush of Gentile converts, the Sunday quickly became the chief day of worship and remembrance. Most Protestant churches concur with their Catholic brethren about the importance of the Sunday observance. The theory and those who hold it of a Wednesday crucifixion is not really part of this discussion; although it is lamentable that you would also condemn them, too.
Nessa, on May 29, 2013 at 10:58 pm said:

Father Joe, why do Catholics make the sign of the cross every time they pass by a church?

FATHER JOE: It is a sign of reverence toward the Blessed Sacrament that is reserved in the church.
joe, on May 28, 2013 at 1:04 am said:

Father, does it invalidate confession if I acted as if i did not get a penance and asked for one? The priest gave me a penance and then proceded to lead me in the prayers. Feeling a little disconnected, odd, and really not participating in it with him, I felt dissatified and felt like I did not do the penance and “acted” as if I did not receive one. I then proceeded to ask for one. Is this a lie that invalidates confession; if not then what kind of lie does? Thank You!

FATHER JOE: Sorry, I cannot make sense out of what you are saying. How is it a lie if the priest remembers the penance and gives you an additional one? To whom are you lying? Why did you need help with your prayers? You should have the Act of Contrition and other prayers memorized. It seems to me that you are suffering from a form of scrupulosity.
James, on May 27, 2013 at 12:40 am said:

Can I choose Aquinas as a confirmation name?

FATHER JOE: Yes, but the full name of the saint would be Thomas Aquinas. He would become your Confirmation patron.
Telfer, on May 25, 2013 at 1:52 am said:

I am getting a feeling that Catholics think that God needs a bureaucracy as human governments do. That is why He needs all these Saints to help Him.

FATHER JOE: No, it isn’t that God needs help. We belong to God and he can use us as his instruments. The fact is we need help. We are called by God to both a personal and corporate relationship with Christ. We do not come to God alone.

My premise is, He does not, He is omnipresent.

FATHER JOE: There are many modes to God’s presence. God is in everything but God is not everything. He keeps us in existence. He is present in his Word, in the sacraments and in the Church. He also lives in us and in the saints by grace.

Furthermore, I think it cheapens Jesus’s sacrifice when you have to add all these mediums, including Mary, between us and him.

FATHER JOE: Quite the opposite, while Christ is the saving Mediator, the various lesser degrees of mediation or intercession constitute an expression of the divine will and harken back to the Incarnation, itself. God becomes a man so that by grace we might be divinized. We can share the divine likeness and life. We become temples of the Holy Spirit. Jesus is conceived by the Holy Spirit and enters this world through a human mother. He becomes a part of a family and community. He draws to himself apostles and disciples to spread the Good News and to minister in his name. Translations are made of the Bible; sacred tradition and faith are passed from generation to generation. The Church celebrates the divine mysteries at the hands of her ministers. Take all this way and if a person should somehow not perish from hunger, thirst, exposure or what have you, then he or she might just as well end up worshipping a tree or pretty rocks. Short of spectacular personal revelations, we would be lost.

It is pretty much saying that Jesus’s death and resurrection was not enough, therefore more is needed.

FATHER JOE: Christ’s saving work is indeed the victory over sin and death. But such is not sufficient if no one should ever preach to me the saving name or make possible my formation in faith. We are men, not angels. The communion of the saints pray for us just as we intervene for each other. We are redeemed by Christ but not everyone will be saved. You and I and the saints have a role to play within the context of divine providence. You are trying to tell God that he cannot use us or the Church or the saints for his purposes.

The reason the veil was torn in half in the temple between us and the holy of holies when he died was, we no longer needed anyone or anything between us and God, except Jesus.

FATHER JOE: Actually, it was to signify that the breech caused by sin had been healed. Christ is the bridge between heaven and earth. Christ is the one high priest. However, he empowered his apostles and later his priests to participate in his one priesthood. Every Mass is a re-presentation of the one-time offering of Christ. This gives us access to his saving sacrifice and his sacrament: the bread of life and the chalice of salvation.

Putting back obstacles between us and God is like trying to mend the veil again.

FATHER JOE: Saints, sacraments, ministers, etc. are not obstacles or hindrances; rather, they are ways that God extends his ministry in space and time. God’s work is not locked in human history or reserved to a small part of the planet. These things facilitate union with him. You have got a great deal quite wrong.
Baily, on May 24, 2013 at 1:25 am said:

Have you heard of the west boro baptist church? I don’t get them. How should I react to the way they live and speak. Is it bad for me to want them to go to hell? They are twisting the word of god.

FATHER JOE: They have attacked my blog and the Catholic Church. They are filled with hate. I have to wonder about the state of their minds given the absurdity of some of their statements and actions, exploiting the grief of hurting people. Hating them would get us nowhere. They are not even worthy of hate. I pity them and pray for them. They are very far from the mind and heart of Christ. I pray and hope that hell is a lonely and mostly empty place. But divine justice is real and so is human iniquity. God’s will be done.
Debra, on May 23, 2013 at 8:50 am said:

Dear Father Joe,

I fell deeply and madly in love with the Catholic Church several years ago.

Without going in to great detail I am unable to obtain annulments to my previous two marriages (no witnesses).

I am currently married now to a Catholic man and attend Mass and pray for spiritual communion.

I have never been baptized. Now, I was told I have terminal cancer and three or four months to live.

Can I now be baptized and possibly receive communion and anointing. I love the Catholic Church so much.

Thank you and God Bless.

FATHER JOE:

Many questions make it hard to answer you.

You were married twice before but you have no witnesses whatsoever? By law there had to be at least two witnesses for the ceremonies. Are there any family members still living who could share thoughts about you getting married or who were privy to the problems? Did any neighbors hear you fighting? Are there any children from these prior bonds? I suspect maybe you defined witnesses too narrowly.

How closely did you work with the priest assisting you in writing your requests, depositions and essays? Where are these documents now? Were the cases ever formally submitted to the Tribunal or did you just give up?

You write that you are in an “attempted marriage” now with a Catholic. While it is noble that you go to Mass, you are correct that the most you can do is remain in your pew and pray for a spiritual communion. Your “spouse” is in the same situation. Were you married in a religious or civil ceremony? Was he married before?

It is noted that you were never baptized. In certain situations marriages can be dissolved in favor of the faith for a potential convert. Did no one explore this possibility with you? Were any of the prior bonds to a Catholic? Were any of the prior bonds witnessed by a priest or deacon in the Catholic Church?

You would have to speak to your local priest now that the juridical process seems mute. You may not have enough time remaining for either an annulment or a dissolution. As your condition worsens, and marital intimacy is no longer possible between you and your “husband,” the priest should be at liberty to give you Baptism, Confirmation and Holy Communion. That is about the best that can be done since any other leniency would compromise the teaching from Christ about the indissolubility and permanence of marriage. Please talk to your local Catholic priest immediately.

I will keep you in prayer.