Ask a Priest

5,433 Responses

Fredo, on January 9, 2012 at 2:12 am said:

Hey I have a few questions father, first I was watching some videos in youtube from http://www.mostholyfamilymonestary.com. In the videos it says that Pope John XIII elected in 1958 was an antipope and the true pope was cardinal Siri and according to them he never denied that he was pope but to be fair never admitted to be pope. Was Paul VI a freemason, I know the question is dumb because being a freemason gets you automatically excommunicated, but again they said he was initiated in Paris. Also it said that after the 1958 papal election according to malachi martin a black mass was celebrated. It talks about vatican II and how it changed the mass, now my question is why didn’t the vatican release the third secret of Fatima when she wished the secret to be released, The secret was shown to the world decades later after the virgin desired the secret to be revealed in 1960. If the virgin told me to release something by a certain date I would do it, so I really don’t care what excuse the vatican made to reveal it later, is the virgin not wiser than we, so if she wanted the letter released by 1960 it must have been for a reason; and I think the reason must have been vatican II perhaps. Also according to them there is freemasons in the church in disguise, is this not possible in order for the great apostasy to take place, I don’t know I’m just saying if you can destroy the church from the outside, than you should join to destroyed from the inside but I’m not the expert. I want to see what is your perspective since your the expert and me well I’m just me
Finally can you please give me some advice my heart is dark, my heart is aching I feel awful, I Feel that I’m rotting in my sins, I try to read the bible but feel like a hypocrate because of my sins.
Thanks P.S. You really must be something else George Bush and saddam mentioning you way to go father

FATHER JOE: The Most Holy Family Monastery website is not a true Catholic site but belongs to a sedevacantist who is not in good standing with the Church. Indeed, It is operated by Michael Dimond, who was not even raised in the faith but converted as a youth and joined a breakaway traditionalist group. He might dress up as a religious and monk but such a status is entirely self-imposed. Neither he nor his community has any canonical standing in the Catholic Church. His rhetoric about the Pope and charges of conspiracy and freemasonry is utter nonsense. The late Malachi Martin wrote sensational books but accepted the authority of the modern popes, something that Dimond does not. It is not our place to question the authority of Rome over private revelation like Fatima. Certainly, the late Sister Lucia consented in obedience to how and when the full message of Fatima was revealed. I have a photo of her and the late Pope John Paul II together, even though he is a pope that Dimond rejects. The post-Vatican II popes were true popes and where we find Peter, we find the Church. Dimond renounces the authority of Pope Benedict XVI who is the Vicar of Christ on earth. I stand with the true Pope and not with his enemies.
Dave Freeman, on January 1, 2012 at 7:10 pm said:

Fr Joe,

Please could you explain why masturbation is a sin for a single man like me. Surely it’s widespread and relatively normal these days? Also, the priests don’t preach against any more?

Regards, Dave

FATHER JOE:

The sin of Onan in the Bible was often cited as a sign of God’s disapproval toward masturbation, although it is actually a reference to “coitus interruptus” and is mentioned in the encyclical against artificial contraception. Masturbation is an issue with which many juveniles deal when they first become sexually aware. It is regarded as a “matter” of “mortal” sin; however, immaturity, addiction, poor formation, etc. can mitigate the subjective severity. Similarly, keeping the custody of the eyes is very difficult when almost everyone is bombarded from the media with provocative images and society suffers from a heighted eroticism in fashion and behavior.

Priests do preach upon it, but we are often worried about inflicting further guilt upon religious people, especially the young, who see such struggles as evidence that they are morally sick and without worth. Masturbation can be a sign of a stunted sexual maturation. It looks inward toward self-satisfaction and pleasure while the sexual faculty was created for the marital act and self-donation to a beloved. Sexual faculties were created with the object of promoting marital fidelity and the propagation of the species. Masturbation does neither and for that reason is wrong. It is also often connected with sexual fantasies that can break down moral resolve, not to mention the sin of coveting another person’s spouse. Even in marriage, it can lead to an addiction to pornography and to virtual adultery.
Kelly, on December 12, 2011 at 7:04 pm said:

My daughter suffers from test anxiety. I just wanted to know what Saint she could pray to, to remember what she studied so when she takes a test she remembers the answers and is less anxious.

FATHER JOE: St. Dymphna is the traditional patroness against nervous disorders and anxiety.
kay, on November 30, 2011 at 9:34 pm said:

Father Joe,
I have become involved in a discussion about the death penalty. Some people say that it is a teaching of the Pope that the death penalty should be abolished and that Catholics must have “religious submission of mind and heart” to it. Others say that it is a judgement of the Pope that one is free to disagree with. The real teaching of the church is that the death penalty is to be supported because it saves the lives of the innocent. Can you tell me which of these I should believe?

FATHER JOE: I would defer to the universal catechism:

[CCC 2267] Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm – without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself – the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity “are very rare, if not practically nonexistent.”
Erika, on November 17, 2011 at 9:20 pm said:

Fr Joe,

I know according to our faith masturbation and watching pornography is a sin. I find myself in a situation where I’ve been married for a year and a half. My husband rarely has sex with me. There is always some excuse, but none are because of a health condition of any sort. My sexual frustration has gotten to the point where I’ve had dreams about other men. I’ve also at times (thought I tried to fight it) succumbed to masturbating and watching pornography. I do not want to cheat on him and will not cheat on him with another man, so I figure doing these things is “less bad” than going off and doing something stupid that could ruin my marriage. Things between us as of late have been very tense. Whenever sex happens, I find it forced, hurried, and not enjoyable in the least. I have expressed my dissatisfaction, my sadness, loneliness, my self esteem has plummeted and I’m depressed. He has always been this way so I don’t suspect infidelity on his part. I begin to worry I married the wrong guy and I hate myself after masturbating although it keeps me sane for a while. I am by no means a nymphomaniac, just a normal woman with a healthy sexual appetite. I have even talked to him in every way possible, even tried to get him to go see a doctor about it to see if there was any problem, to no avail. What can I do? I need spiritual and moral guidance as this is such a delicate manner.

Erika

FATHER JOE:

Dear Erika,

The problem with pornography and masturbation is that it sets up a situation for what one might call “virtual adultery.” You already admit that you have begun to fantasize about other men. This is not good. While sexual needs vary, a married couple must by necessity dialogue and cooperate with each other. You must define your sexual life in terms of the marital union, not in any privatized or narcissistic fashion. Lust would objectify the beloved and focus strictly upon the physical element. Passion would integrally connect the physical in the loving union with a particular person, the beloved. Your husband should want to have intercourse with you, not only to satisfy his own needs, but as part of his duty to satisfy the longings of his spouse. Open to the gift of children, it is a special element in the joy of marriage. It is also a powerful expression of love and desire for unity. If he does not feel this drive then I suspect the problem goes beyond sexual function. I would urge honesty with each other about your feelings and needs. Given that the situation is truly detrimental to your relationship, I would certainly suggest a medical evaluation and the appropriate marital counseling.

Many prayers for healing and happiness!

Father Joe
Meg, on November 6, 2011 at 9:10 pm said:

Pochola,

Please think long and hard. I married a non-Catholic 12 years ago, at the time, I have very little understanding of my Catholic faith. Over the course of our marriage, I have grown in my Catholic faith and he has stayed the same. We have a very strong struggle with our faith differences. He resents my Church in so many ways. I would love to tell you that you can focus on what is similar, but most of the time, deep down inside he wants to to convert and you want him to convert. It is better to be on the same page about the most important subject in life-FAITH.

If I understood anything about God’s design for marriage and what is taught about marriage and family through our very wise Catholic faith, I would not have married a protestant. Have you read Humanae Vitae? Christopher West has great books that are easy to understand on JPII’s Theology of the Body I would start with Theology of the Body for Beginners if you haven’t read that.

I am on the verge of separation with 5 children, I am not saying every mixed faith marriage is like mine, but please pray and discern God’s will for you and your spouse before you take your vows.

FATHER JOE: I will keep your marriage and family in my prayers.
-pochola-, on November 6, 2011 at 1:07 pm said:

Hi Father,

I would just like to ask something. I am currently having a relationship with a Christian (Born-Again) and we’re planning to get married by 2013. We are planning to have a Catholic and Christian wedding. Would this be possible?

Thanks,
P

FATHER JOE:

Dear Pochola,

There are several things that must be clarified. First, Catholics are Christians; indeed, they are the first Christians and the Catholic Church was directly instituted by Jesus Christ. Did you not know this? Only Catholics well-versed and solid in the faith should be involved in a romantic way with strong Protestant Christians. Second, has your intimate affiliation with a “born again” non-Catholic Christian compromised your faith? In other words, does he respect your beliefs or is he subjecting your religious affiliation to constant ridicule and/or attack? How these matters are resolved would have an impact on any answer I could give you.

Technically, Catholics and non-Catholics routinely get married these days. What is required? You have to see a priest for counseling and the completion of required forms. All Catholics are asked to give the Church six months notice before a proposed wedding. You will be scheduled (as a couple) for Pre-Cana classes or their equivalent. A prenuptial investigation form is filled out (for the parish registry. Baptismal certificates are requested. The marriage takes place in your Catholic parish but given that it is with a non-Catholic, there is no nuptial Mass. There can be but one ceremony. Once married, you are married. A Catholic must get permission from the chancery or bishop to marry a non-Catholic. You are required to get a dispensation to do this, promising that you will do all in your power to raise any children in the Catholic faith. The non-Catholic must be aware of this obligation and in general concurrence. Sometimes there is also a dispensation from canonical form to allow a marriage in a non-Catholic Church, but the requirement to raise the children in the Catholic faith (as well as to live it out yourself) still applies. Marriage outside the Catholic Church would not be recognized. If your intended is unwilling to accept such stipulations then you have but one real option and that is to break off the engagement. There is nothing more important than your Catholic faith.

Father Joe
Sam B, on October 5, 2011 at 8:26 am said:

I know an few individuals of the Church who’s temperance falls into condescension with the failing of others, indifference to their hurt or want, judgement in their wrong, superficiality and self-righteousness in their actions. Where instead I should find acts of sincere kindness, empathy for others woe, contempt of their own shortcomings and constantly taking up crosses in gracious humility for righteousness sake. What can be done? They a full of acts of false piety, knowledge of who in and who’s out and correction of their brethren but seem scarce in times of dire need or slow to assume they are also wanting of correction in matters of their assumed spiritual wealth. What was it that the chief priests and scribes got wrong in passing a waylaid traveler, that the consummate despised outsider, the Samaritan, got right? Why was it that the brother who said no to his master did what was correct? Why was the master so mad at the servant who failed to forgive his debtors? How did the steward find friends after he misused his masters wealth? What sort of attitude should we take about our own good deeds and spiritual knowledge? Could we always do a little better? Is their someone who outranks us in heaven, that assumed a lesser rank than we are willing to tolerate, for the sake of Love?

FATHER JOE: Every minister of the Gospel should take seriously the rebuke of the pharisees and the scandal of the Jewish priest in the parable.
Nana, on September 23, 2011 at 3:34 pm said:

Father Joe, I was converted to Christianity a few years ago but still am not baptized because of the very difficult situation that I am in. My boyfriend and I have been under the same roof for more than 14 years originally due to his finances and later due to my health. There is no sex between us because my boyfriend is impotent (and this has been so since early age and he is now 50) and there is simply no desire for any of the two of us to have other form of sex. My church says that I could only be baptized if I get my boyfriend who is now dependent on me for his finances to move out or we get married – meaning a legal marriage which I know (as a lawyer) will be and will remain a nullity for non-consummation. My boyfriend is not yet a Christian although he does go to church and attend Bible class. Father what is your advice to me?

FATHER JOE:

Dear Nana, have you been attending a Catholic church? Neither of you were previously married? I will approach your concerns as if this is the case given that I cannot speak for other denominations.

While you may believe in Jesus, we would not view you as “converted” until there is formal Christian initiation, i.e. Baptism, Confirmation and Holy Communion. You would currently be viewed as a candidate or catechumen. Having dealt with that nomenclature issue, let us look at your particular predicament.

The church you attend has told you that you cannot be baptized while there is cohabitation. The remedy they have suggested is either separation or legal marriage. On the face of it, what the church is asking is quite right. Cohabitation is regarded as wrong because it puts a man and woman in a constant and proximate danger of mortal sin. However, if the man cannot engage in the marital act, then a marriage cannot be consummated. Knowing this, why would the priest recommend an attempted marriage? You could not get married in the Catholic Church if such remained the case.

Did you explain your situation fully to the priest or minister? I sympathize with the complication of your own health and mingled finances. It is hard to make ends meet and mutual support can make a big difference. In cases where there is no sexual relationship, the Church sometimes tolerates such situations as long as the couple avoids scandal and lives as brother and sister.

My advice is this: I would urge you to talk to a local priest, either the same minister or another one. Tell him everything that you have told me. I will keep you in prayer.
This is me., on September 23, 2011 at 1:43 pm said:

I have heard many times on the lips of ‘true’ Christians and Catholics that Christianity is the true religion.

This is not true. Everyone has their beliefs and wouldn’t your god want the freedom of all people to say what they wish on ‘God’?

And the fact that everything the pope says is true, that’s a no-no. Everyone makes mistakes, everyone is wrong at one point in their lives. You learn from those mistakes.

FATHER JOE: Christianity argues for objective truth. Tolerance of any and all proposed truths, no matter how contradictory, would make everything subjective. Your statement is itself contradictory. You say on one hand that all should be free to believe as they please but on the other you would deny Christians the right to believe that theirs is the true religion. This is nonsensical. Catholics believe, and I think rightly, that theirs is the true Church instituted directly by Christ. While people are free in conscience to believe as they please, God would desire for us to know him and his Church. Wishing (your word) upon a fantasy deity would not make any difference in your life and would not save you. A false god cannot forgive your sins. Christians pray to God and worship him in truth. Regarding the Pope, the gift of infallibility only applies to solemnly proclaimed universal teachings regarding faith and morals. It would NOT include everything that comes out of his mouth. He interprets and explains those things that have already been revealed to the Church by Christ in Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. Your over-simplification is the real “no-no” and you should not criticize Catholicism while suffering from such ignorance about it. You confuse limited infallibility (a gift to the Church) with impeccability. No one says that the Pope cannot make mistakes. Even the Pope goes to regular Confession to a priest. We are all sinners. There is so much you do not understand. All I can really do is pray for you and hope that you will give these matters more serious study.
Ernest Turriziani, on September 23, 2011 at 12:50 pm said:

Hi Father Joe

I have an interest in UFO’s and alien life.
Is this contrary to Roman Catholic beliefs?

FATHER JOE: It would seem from remarks made by the Vatican astronomer that conjecture about extraterrestrial life is not incompatible with Catholic teaching. Indeed, we already believe in angels or pure spirits and such would be quite “alien” compared to human corporeal existence. However, we must be careful of any notions that conflict with Catholic doctrine and which are expressions of New Age cults.
Sam B, on September 18, 2011 at 1:46 pm said:

If the #1 rule for being a Catholic is to love, can you explain how Catholics chanting “we got Jesus” at an Ohio football game was showing love? Is saying “I’m better than you” what Jesus desires from our faith?

http://offthebench.nbcsports.com/2011/09/14/hs-football-coach-livid-over-student-sections-weve-got-jesus-chant/

Why is there a general consensus among many that I know, that Catholic’s act conceited, indifferent, self-indulgent and elitist. That they act as if I’m better than you is more important aspect of their faith than I’m good to you. Why don’t we see more Catholic sentiment being aligned with the same views as those expressed for great Marcus Aurelius, namely “He was a man who looked at what ought to be done, not to the reputation which is got by a man’s acts”

Sometimes I see Catholics get so haughty, defensive, disgusted and self-righteous that it seems that they are unwilling to leave it at the alter of the cross of Christ, who died for all mankind sins offering out undeserved love to wicked people. We are apt to take this sacrifice for ourselves in need, but shun offering it up to others when they are, because, after all, aren’t we God’s favorite?

FATHER JOE:

You make way too much of kids at a sporting event. According to the story you cite, the other school started the chanting with “We got girls!” The Jesuit all-boy’s school took pride in their Christian identity. I think the coach over-reacted. As long as there is no profanity or bigotry, I see nothing really wrong with such youthful enthusiasm. If the boys have Jesus, as they say, then there is plenty of love. I would hope, despite the competitive atmosphere, that good sportsmanship would prevail and that the rivals would shake hands after the game. Do we really want to start banning chants at sporting events? I think not.

I do not know who your friends are, but I would argue that Catholics are proud to know that theirs is the true Church instituted by Christ. We love our separated brethren but feel certain of our claims and believe that the Church is the great sacrament of salvation. Religious relativism is regarded as a grave sin. Those who do not share our views might confuse such sentiments as conceit.

It was a failure to accept the so-called toleration of the pagan Marcus Aurelius, and thus compromise the faith, that brought the early Christians to the arena for martyrdom. While previous emperors ordered that Christians should not be sought out for persecution, but arrested when they made their faith public; he intensified efforts against Christians and financial incentives were given to informers. He ordered that Christians, i.e. Catholics, be sought out and forced to accept the idolatrous cult of pagan Rome. Faithful Catholics today would stand with those martyrs and not with the stoic pagan emperor. He devalued the meaning of their deaths as senseless. Many were crucified just like our Lord. He reproached the obstinacy of Christians in his MEDITATIONS, much as you seem to do. I suppose you can chant, “I’ve got Marcus Aurelius!” I would join the boys, “We got Jesus!”
john, on August 30, 2011 at 1:31 am said:

i’m not offended in the least that the online Jewish encyclopedia implies, and directly states there was little in Jesus’s statements that were original.If he fulfilled the promise of their fathers, why wouldn’t that be so?
Melissa Tan, on August 26, 2011 at 10:38 am said:

Dear Father Joe

How to answer to a friend of mine (a protestant) regarding purgatory? She asked “please show me which verse in the Bible did mentioned about purgatory?” So, how to answer her in a nice way.

Thank you Father for your help.

FATHER JOE:

While we can show how Scripture supports Catholic teachings, we must first acknowledge that there is a difference between Protestant and Catholic hermeneutics. The sources for doctrine come from both Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. Restricting ourselves to the Bible does an injustice to the deposit of faith passed down from the apostles. Some teachings arise more from such traditions than from clear biblical exegesis. Purgatory would be among these.

Nevertheless, I have linked some information on the question which I have discussed before:

PURGATORY

PURGATORY, RELIGIOUS LIFE & THE POPE
Paul Brann, on August 25, 2011 at 4:11 pm said:

Dear Meg,
I had been in an ‘unequal’ marriage for 13 years. I would never have divorced my wife, but she did leave and divorce me. We both had faults. I now lead a single and celibate life, and it’s not particularly rewarding some days, but it is at least peaceful.
What Fr Joe says is very wise, but marriage guidance counselling only works if both attend and both are committed to work at it, and hopefully work together at it.
You did say that the marriage was like you were the child and your husband, presumably, the dominant parent. I would guess that maybe your husband wouldn’t see the need for counselling, just as my wife saw no need.
The one thing that helped me enormously was to attend an “assertive” training/counselling course. It could possibly help the marriage, but no matter that, it could help you work towards a more ‘normal’ relationship with others.
All I can suggest is that you take consolation in your role as mother, it is so important and so undervalued. I have a 20 year old foster daughter who lives with me and who has neither mother nor father and I try to be both, as appropriate and it’s hard work sometimes but so worthwhile. Rejoice that you have 5 children and do something for yourself that might help you develop into a more rounded person. I did and it helped enormously. It didn’t save my marriage but it saved my sanity.
With very best wishes,
Paul
Meg, on August 23, 2011 at 12:44 pm said:

Dear Fr. Joe,

I am a mom of 5 children. I have struggled for many years with my marriage. I have looked to the example of the saints, and in particular St. Monica and St. Rita. My husband is extremely difficult in his personality and possibly has narcissistic personality disorder, though I am no doctor, all the signs are there. He was severely abused as a child. It seems to me that many of the saints stayed and endured much pain and in the end, God took care of them. Truth is, I feel that I am no saint. I feel so tired of the constant struggles and being like a single parent. My husband feels that because he is a good provider, I should not ask or need any other help with our family. He wants to hunt and do what he wishes and is only concerned with telling everyone what to do, but will not do anything to help without being hateful. When we have ever vacationed or done things as a family he is miserable and hateful and always in a hurry. He feels that I am selfish and he is not, I know that I have my problems and I am selfish, all people are. I have stayed in this marriage for several years, trying to work on myself, the only one who I can change. We have a relationship that is very much like he is the parent and I am a child. I have been silenced and have no voice in anything. He has not been physically abusive but I feel that he is psychologically a terrorist. I just have trouble discerning God’s will. Sometimes I feel that maybe if I were to separate, that may give the motivation for him to get help. I would never ever leave my husband to divorce or find another person, I just wish that some aspect of our life could be normal. This is such a hard decision, my parish priest says that I cannot leave because it is my job to stay and endure this. I was told by our parish priest several years ago that I should get a divorce and apply for annulment immediately because I made a mistake when I married him. I sometimes look back and wonder if I should have listened to him.

Thanks for any advice you can give.

FATHER JOE:

Dear Meg,

It is very hard to give advice in forums like this. I find that much more can be learned in face-to-face discussions. Given these limitations, I could not say you should or should not have sought an annulment. Having said this, I suspect that the priest who encouraged one might have spoken too quickly. I would urge couples to do what they can to preserve their marriages. You and your husband have five children and children deserve both a mother and a father in their lives. My advice would be to seek counseling. There may be coping skills that can help you endure the coldness of your spouse. He may have issues from his childhood which need resolution. If your husband loves you as he should, then he should overcome any personal hesitation and join you for counseling. You do not have a problem; the two of you have a problem. Marriage counseling does not work unless both the husband and wife are committed to seeking help. More so than not, when one spouse seeks counseling and the other refuses, little can be done to really heal the hurt relationship. Is your husband a committed Catholic? If so, I would appeal to his Christian conscience as a man who should be willing to even lay down his life for you. Seeking advice, better communication and meeting each other’s personal needs should all be actively pursued. Providing material support is a significant element of his spousal duty; of course, so is the fostering of harmony in the home, the witness to children and his intimacy with you.

We are not promised perfect happiness in this world and every vocation has its share of joys and sorrows: we need to identify and pursue the joys that are allotted to us; find hope in the things that can change and may come into our lives; and embrace patient endurance about that which is beyond our power to alter. I will be praying for you. God bless!
JOY, on August 18, 2011 at 11:01 pm said:

With this article is says that if a woman has an abortion she is automatically excommunicated from the Catholic Church and that sin cannot be forgiven in confession without special Papal permission. I thought that the only unforgivable sin was the UN repented sin. If a woman is truly sorry for an abortion and asks forgiveness , the church will not forgive that. ????????????????????????????????/

FATHER JOE: Your facts are confused. The Church will forgive and most priests today have faculties from their bishops to both remove the censure of excommunication and give absolution for complicity in abortion. The censure is not explicitly imposed publicly but is automatic, even if no one knows about it (except the sinner and God, of course). In the old days the authority to remove the censure was restricted to the bishop and to certain orders, like the Dominicans.
Les, on August 12, 2011 at 10:47 pm said:

Father, I have a question and a comment.

Years ago I read a book by a priest that talked about the symbolism of the book of Revelation. I think it was a decades old book, at least (it spoke of the stars falling from Heaven as being fallen angels or Church Clergy (I forget), and the ships on the sea as the Churches in the sea of humanity, of which many get destroyed. Do you know the name of the priest? Now that I am a older and better grounded Catholic, I’d like to re-read it. I lost the book years ago.

My comment is this… I became Catholic after 30 years as an atheist and agnostic. I read comments by apparent cradle Catholics about how terrible (in some ways) the Church is and negative comments about the people who have given their lives to her. I want to say that there will always be wolves amongst the sheep and the only way to ensure you are not led astray is to hold fast to the teachings of Christ and stay in obedience to the teachings of the Magisterium. I have never seen any teachings of the Church that were not grounded in the earliest writings and traditions; the rest is just speculation and gossip (in my opinion). I love the Church for what it has done for me personally and for what she has done to keep Christ’s teachings alive under very trying circumstances. God bless you all and keep the Faith!

FATHER JOE: I am not sure what that book might be. There is the apocalyptic novel, LORD OF THE WORLD (1908), written by Robert Hugh Benson.
wayne, on August 12, 2011 at 2:43 am said:

Father Joe,

Thank you sir, for your site/blog.

I am a catholic that had fallen away from the Church but as of 2 years ago, have returned home. I know that history shows us that church attendance goes up and down with the times, so to speak. But with everything moving as fast as it is, media,communication, etc. and the growing hedonistic attitude of our society as a whole, I cannot help but wonder if we have not reached the time of the “great apostasty.” I fear that this is most certainly the case, and thus ever more the reason we should cling to our Catholic faith. As St. Peter said, “where else should I go, you have the words of eternal life” (paraphrase).

It is refreshing to find a priest that is not afraid to speak the truth, God bless you! Wayne
Melissa Tan, on August 9, 2011 at 2:30 pm said:

Father Joe, please explain the following:

1. If a priest left the priesthood, will he still a priest?
2. Can he still function like a priest?
3. If he resigned and got married, will he still be a priest?

I have learnt that once a person is ordained, he is configured into Jesus Chrst, a mark in his soul and he is a priest forever, is this true? If this is true, what happens if a priest is being excommunicated?

Thank you Father for your help.

FATHER JOE:

1. A priest might leave ministry but he is still a priest.

2. However, once he forfeits his faculties (charge from his bishop or superiors), he can no longer function as a priest. He is still bound by his promises or vows. If Rome laicizes a priest, again he is still technically a priest, but is treated as one would the laity.

3. If released from his priestly promises, he could even get married in the Church. Attempting to marry without laicization and the release from his promises would earn him further censure. Any such attempted marriage would be neither licit nor valid. Further, he would be cut off from the sacraments until the situation is remedied.

Ordination like baptism permanently marks the soul. A man ordained to the priesthood has been configured to or stamped for Christ. However, neither baptism nor ordination is a guarantee of salvation. Faith can sour and a man might betray his vocation. Excommunication means that a person is cut off from the Church. This is serious because we view the Church as an essential means by which we encounter the mystery of Christ and salvation.
Stella, on August 9, 2011 at 11:14 am said:

“Father” Joe

Pray for (and condescend) to women who want to reproduce together all you want. It will only make up their minds against you further and speed the out-phasing of men.

Look. Have some grace about it. You’re here and you’re male, just as you seem to prefer. If you’d been born a girl, you wouldn’t know the difference. At least then you wouldn’t have had any foreskin to be chopped off by crazies.

FATHER JOE: Your comment is silly. Grace works with nature and/or enhances it. God’s favor does not work in contradiction to the order he has given creation. Your brief argument here is not really about reproductive rights but just an expression of male-hating lesbianism.
St. Timonious, on July 30, 2011 at 12:20 pm said:

Oh Fr Joe
What does this show?
Could this be true? You can ask for one, but don’t ask me for two.
I can understand when pragmatically true, (but my Goodness! It has to be compassionate too!?).
Please Father argue this that and get in a spat. Borrow the cloaks,
just don’t touch the hats!

Oh, Fr Joe,
Am I going too low? Will I ever grow?
I think, that two wrongs just couldn’t make right
unless, the exception of course!, its a personal fight.
therefore, Fr Joe, what seeds should I sow?
much reverence then, should be thus, but is the balance for God?
or is the balance for us?
Meg, on July 25, 2011 at 12:47 pm said:

Hi Fr. Joe!

I am not sure if you have addressed this question, I looked for it but couldn’t find it.

Can you please explain to me this: In the precepts of the Church it states in the first precept that we as Catholics are encouraged to go to Mass on Sundays and holy days of obligation. The minimum requirement in the 4th precept is for Catholics to receive Holy Communion once a year during the Easter Season and to go to confession once a year. I understand that there is the minimum requirement, then there is the Church urging you to attend regularly.

There is a Baptist Church that had a discussion about this in their Sunday School and one of the church members was a cradle Catholic, who went to Catholic school, and she stated the minimum requirement, then another friend of mine who was a Catholic convert turned back to Baptist, told this woman that he thought the Catholic church had a Sunday Mass and holy day obligation. So, they had this heated discussion where she says she is right and that it is not a sin to not go to Mass on Sundays or holy days of obligation.

I just need your expertise. I am a Catholic convert so I attend Mass each and every time that it is possible because it is a privilege. I know the precepts of the Church, but I just want to explain it in a way that they can understand, because it is a little confusing.

Thanks!

FATHER JOE: The precepts give the bare minimal requirements. People should go to Confession as needed and to Mass on all Sundays and Holy Days of obligation. Because there was a time when many people hesitated to go to communion, the Church established the precept for annual reception as a minimum. If you are in a state of grace, you should receive holy communion at Mass. However, even if you do not receive holy communion, the Mass attendance is still required. Even Catholics married out of the Church and unable to take holy communion are still required to go to Mass. The deliberate missing of Sunday Mass (through no good reason) is the matter of mortal sin.
The truth, on July 16, 2011 at 1:19 am said:

RB: While on earth, Jesus never controlled great wealth. The pope controls one of the wealthiest corporations in the world.

FATHER JOE: The Holy Father is the visible head of the Catholic Church. Simply calling the Church a “corporation” reveals the great disdain you have for the community of faith established by Christ. While you try to fault the Pope for wealth that is not personally his, you are actually attacking the Church for being successful and fruitful in the commission given her by Jesus Christ. You hate it that the Church has been faithful to her missionary mandate and the transmission of the faith. There is no greater institution for good in the history of the world. Today, the Catholic Church does more in her charities for the poor and oppressed than any other religious organization. Only the United States government spends more in charity, but the Church does so with no strings attached.

RB: Jesus dressed like a common man. The pope, on the other hand, is never seen in anything but regal apparel.

FATHER JOE: Attacking the Pope because of his vestments is ridiculous. Businessmen probably have suits that cost more than the house cassock of the Pope. As for what Jesus daily wore, the Scriptures are silent. Your attack of the Pope is petty.

RB: Jesus lived in simple surroundings, but the pope views opulence at every turn.

FATHER JOE: The Pope was an academic who lived simply. While the Pope might live in a museum, his actual chambers are very stark. He surrounds himself with books. You would be better off to do the same and break out of the ignorance which fuels your prejudice.

RB: Jesus tirelessly served the multitudes, while the pope travels the world on his private jet, meeting with world leaders from every nation.

FATHER JOE: The Pope also serves the multitudes and travels the world because his flock is all over the globe. While planes are leased for special trips, the Holy Father does not own a private jet. Not only do you get facts wrong, you bear false witness. In other words, your bias is so severe that you are willing to break the commandments.

RB: Most people eventually rejected and hated Jesus because He told the truth. The pope is worshipped and adored by millions worldwide. The pope gladly welcomes the praise of men, but Jesus directed all worship to the Father, and said of Himself: “Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God” (Mark 10:18).

FATHER JOE: Many people accepted and worshipped Jesus! The Pope worships Jesus Christ and assists the Church to offer fitting sacrifice and worship around the world. The Pope is respected and loved, but we do not offer him divine worship. As I showed in a previous response to you, we can share or participate in the goodness of God. You would be like Judas complaining about the meager money wasted on Jesus when he is honored by his affluent and grateful friends: “Six days before Passover Jesus came to Bethany, where Lazarus was, whom Jesus had raised from the dead. They gave a dinner for him there, and Martha served, while Lazarus was one of those reclining at table with him. Mary took a liter of costly perfumed oil made from genuine aromatic nard and anointed the feet of Jesus and dried them with her hair; the house was filled with the fragrance of the oil. Then Judas the Iscariot, one (of) his disciples, and the one who would betray him, said, ‘Why was this oil not sold for three hundred days’ wages and given to the poor?’ He said this not because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief and held the money bag and used to steal the contributions. So Jesus said, ‘Leave her alone. Let her keep this for the day of my burial. You always have the poor with you, but you do not always have me’” (John 12:1-8). I suspect Jesus would tell you to lay off the Pope.

RB: Should popes accept the worship of multitudes? Look how “Pope” Peter reacted when Cornelius tried to worship him: “And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him. But Peter took him up, saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man” (Acts 10:25-26).

FATHER JOE: I will say it again; we do not worship the Pope. I would challenge you to find any reference at all in the universal catechism about worship of the Pope. You attack something that is not Catholic belief. Such straw man tactics are typical of the deceit from fundamentalist anti-Catholics.

RB: Pope: head of the church? The Catechism claims that: “The Pope enjoys, by divine institution, supreme, full, immediate, and universal power in the care of souls” (p. 246, #937). According to God’s Word, the pope is not the head of the true church of Jesus Christ. That position is reserved exclusively for the Lord Jesus: “For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church…” (Ephesians 5:23).

FATHER JOE: Jesus is the invisible and true head of the Church. The Pope is the Vicar of Christ and visible head. Peter is given the keys of the kingdom by Christ (Matthew 16:13-20). The resurrected Lord heals Peter and restores to him his charge to care for his flock and feed his sheep (John 21:15-17). Peter is declared ROCK and our Lord says that upon this ROCK he would build his Church.
The truth, on July 15, 2011 at 5:00 am said:

RB: I mean no disrespect toward anyone’s religion, but the Pope is not for people to worship, he is just a man in authority over his congregation, just like any Pastor of a church would be.

FATHER JOE: Catholics do not worship the Pope. He is not like other pastors but he certainly has authority over the Church.

RB: He is not holy, when I hear this I cringe, he is man not God. Only God is Holy.

FATHER JOE: The Scriptures speak about believers as saints, a word that is a variation of “holy.” We call the Pope the “Holy Father” for several reasons. We hope that he is personally and spiritually close to God. He is also called “holy” because of the role he has as the universal shepherd of Christ’s flock. We are all called to holiness. Holiness is the divine “otherness” of God. If a person becomes saintly, he is imbued and/or participates in the very holiness of God. This is an element of the transformation made possible by grace. Look at 1 Peter 1:14-16: “Like obedient children, do not act in compliance with the desires of your former ignorance but, as he who called you is holy, be holy yourselves in every aspect of your conduct, for it is written, ‘Be holy because I (am) holy.’”

RB: And when a person confesses to him, God does not hear because all forgiveness comes from the God Almighty as Jesus Christ as the mediator between people and God.

FATHER JOE: Christ is indeed the Mediator, but he has still given his priests the authority to forgive sins. Jesus was God and properly had this authority (see Matthew 9:6). Are you saying that he could not extend his ministry in the Church through his apostles and priests? It is quite clear that he gave “such authority to men” (see Matthew 9:8). Jesus tells his apostles, “‘As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.’ And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained’” (John 20:21–23). Our Lord insists, “Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Matt. 18:18). St. Paul acknowledges this power that he has received, “All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation” (2 Cor. 5:18). This power given the apostles was extended to their successors, the bishops and priests.

RB: If you desire for forgiveness of your sins, then you need to ask God directly yourself, all in the name of Jesus.

FATHER JOE: Such a privatized view of faith is foreign to the Scriptures. While lesser or venial sins might be pardoned with a simple act of contrition, St. Paul makes it clear that the shepherds of the Church functioned as “ambassadors of Christ,” bringing his mercy to believers. As with so many fundamentalists, you wrongly reduce the Church to insignificance.

RB: The word of God says, No man should be called Father, meaning non-other than your biological Father, and The God in Heaven who is our Heavenly Father.

FATHER JOE: The expression is Hebraic hyperbole to stress a point, that there is no true fatherhood that does not reflect something of God the Father (Matthew 23:9). The Pharisees and others were wrongly obsessed with titles and honors. If you are going to interpret it in an absolute and literal way, you would have to be consistent, and even refuse to call your biological male parent by the word “father” or any of its variations, like papa or daddy. Again, you find yourself in opposition to God’s Word. Regarding the biological, our Lord stresses that we must “For God said, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and ‘Whoever curses father or mother shall die’” (Matthew 15:4). Would cursing or denying your spiritual fathers also bring death? St. Stephen, a deacon and the first great martyr of the Church, defends the faith before the high priest and others. He greets them with, “My brothers and fathers, listen.” Obviously he saw no problem with titles in reference to spiritual brothers and fatherhood. St. John also saw no absolute prohibition in using the word “father” for spiritual leadership. He writes in 1 John 2:13: “I am writing to you, fathers, because you know him who is from the beginning. I am writing to you, young men, because you have conquered the evil one. I write to you, children, because you know the Father. I write to you, fathers, because you know him who is from the beginning. I write to you, young men, because you are strong and the word of God remains in you, and you have conquered the evil one.” St. Paul even refers to himself as Father Paul, “Even if you should have countless guides to Christ, yet you do not have many fathers, for I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel” (1 Corinthians 4:15). Are you even reading the Bible?