There is a close connection between baptism and confirmation as is evidenced in Hebrews 6:2. This connection is so close in fact that the early Christians normally conferred these two sacraments during the same rite (they still do in Eastern Rite Catholic and Orthodox celebration of the rites). In truth, the Holy Spirit is given in both rites but the function of the Holy Spirit in each is different. In baptism, we are made members of Christ's Body, but in confirmation we are given the power of God to bear fruit in our Christian life and to draw others into the Church. Because this bearing of fruit requires some maturity, the Latin Rite Catholic Church has chosen to confer this sacrament at an age in which maturity is evident. Confirmation, like baptism, imprints on the soul an indelible spiritual mark, and for this reason, it cannot be repeated.

Baptism in the Spirit takes many forms and has different effects from one person to another. It can manifest itself at a definite moment in the form of a conscious moment or it can be hidden and only gradually be made aware to the recipient and those around him/her. Baptism in the Spirit can happen several times to a person at different ages as different manifestations become evident. We should always be eager to encounter the power and love of God in our lives, not only sacramentally but spiritually as well.

Recommended reading:
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1994, paragraphs 1212, 1285-1321

EUCHARIST

Q. Why do you believe that it is the Body and Blood of Christ?
Q. Where is the proof of the Eucharist in the Bible?

As I have said before, you cannot use the Bible to "prove" anything to those who choose not to believe. That said, there are many passages which show the Eucharist to be much more than a symbol very clearly.

The first place to look is John 6:25-71 where Jesus promises the Eucharist. This account, which occupies 2/3 of the chapter, describes Jesus' exchange with a crowd of disciples; probably numbering several thousand as this event follows the feeding of the 5,000 (most of the preceding 1/3 of the chapter) and these disciples have followed Him seeking more of this miraculous bread. After all, Moses provided bread for those who followed him during their wanderings in the desert. Jesus tells them that He is the bread of life that came down from heaven and those who come to Him will never be hungry. The disciples do not understand and grumble because Jesus has said that He comes down from heaven, but they know that He is a man; they know His parents. Jesus again tells them that He is the living bread which came down from heaven and anyone who eats this bread will have eternal life. The disciples understand Him literally and begin to dispute among themselves because they don't understand how He can give them His flesh to eat. Jesus then underscores this literal interpretation by stating four times [in four successive verses (53-56)] that they must eat His Flesh and drink His Blood or they will not have everlasting life. The Greek verb used in these four verses for "eat" is much stronger than the verb used earlier in this discourse; in this case it literally means "chew, gnaw"; hardly a word to be taken symbolically. Jesus then tells the disciples that the "Spirit gives life, the flesh counts for nothing". In other words, stop worrying about food for your flesh and start worrying about food for your Spirit (notice that he talks about "the flesh" and not "My flesh"; He is talking about the flesh of John 3:6). Then many of His disciples left Him–the only place in Holy Scripture where people cease to follow Him for a reason of doctrine–they have understood Him literally and He, who understands perfectly, does not seek to change or modify their understanding; because there is no misunderstanding. Jesus then asks His apostles if they wish to leave too but Peter, speaking for the rest, tells Him that although they don't understand, they will continue to follow Him because they know that He has been sent by God for their salvation. It is interesting to note that this is the first time in the Bible where it is noted that Judas Iscariot will later leave to betray Him (Judas didn't believe that Jesus could give His Flesh to eat and His Blood to drink and so left at the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted).

The second place to look is one of the Gospel accounts of the Last Supper so let's turn to Mark 14:17-26. This account is where the promise of John 6 to give His Body and Blood is fulfilled and it starts off by pointing out that Judas will leave to betray Him, the second time in the Bible that Judas' betrayal is mentioned. During the Passover liturgy the presiding elder explains the significance of the elements. Following this custom Jesus takes the bread, and later the cup, and after giving thanks (the Greek word is eucharisteo) departs from the customary significance and instead says "this is My Body . . . this is My Blood." When God speaks, what He pronounces comes into being (God said "Let there be light . . . "). He then says that His Blood is the blood of the covenant which is poured out for many. This is the only time in Jesus' recorded life where He uses the word "covenant"; a word which when used in the Jewish liturgical sense, means the forming of an irrevocable sacred family bond. Just as during the original Passover the blood marked the homes of the members of God's family, so now, drinking His Blood marks the members of His family.

The third place to look is 1 Corinthians 10:16-17 where St. Paul tells us that when we partake of the bread and the cup we participate in the Body and Blood of our Lord and that we are united because we all eat of the same loaf which is Christ. It is awfully hard to "partake of" and "participate in" something which is only figurative rather than real.

The final place to look is 1 Corinthians 11:23-30. Here, St. Paul reminds us that although he was not present at the Last Supper, he received revelation directly from the Lord. St. Paul then gives us the same account of the happenings at the Last Supper with the clarification from Jesus to "do this in remembrance of Me." Remembrance for a Jew is a lot more than looking back fondly on a past event, when a remembrance (memorial) sacrifice is offered, the participants are made present at the original event and participate in that event. Here, Jesus is telling His apostles to institute a perpetual memorial sacrifice for Him. St. Paul then goes on to warn the Corinthians, most of whom believe that the Eucharist is truly the Body and Blood of Christ, that they are to exclude themselves from participation in the meal if they do not recognize that it is the real presence of the Lord or they will eat and drink damnation upon themselves. These words would not have been spoken, because there would be no need for the warning, if the Eucharist were a mere symbol.

Does this "prove" the Eucharist? It convinces me, because I have only three choices: 1) It is true; 2) The Bible is wrong; or 3) Jesus lied. Of the three choices, only the first one is acceptable.

Recommended reading:
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1994, paragraphs 1322-1419
Currie, David B., Born Fundamentalist, Born Again Catholic, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, CA, 1996, pages 35-49
Staples, Tim, "How to Explain the Eucharist", Catholic Digest, St. Paul, MN 55164, September 1997, pages 75-78
Hahn, Scott & Suprenant, Leon J. (Editors), Catholic for a Reason, Emmaus Road Press, 1998, pages 159-180

Q. When you go to Communion are you completely saved through Christ?

Reception of the Eucharist in a worthy manner makes us one with Christ. As such we have a pledge of heavenly bliss and of the future resurrection of our body. Jesus said in John 6:56:

"He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him" (KJV).

By having Jesus dwell in me, He feeds my soul and increases its supernatural life by reinforcing the power of my will so I can withstand the temptations of sin. By receiving the Eucharist in a worthy manner my soul is purged of venial sins and the temporal punishments due to sin.

By receiving the Eucharist in a worthy manner, I refer to not being in a state of mortal sin, all mortal sins I may have committed having been confessed and forgiven in the sacrament of penance. If I were to die before I commit any sins after worthy reception of the Eucharist, I would be saved. It is my responsibility to avoid sin and having received the Eucharist in a worthy manner, I am strengthened to avoid sins in the future as I journey down the path toward my salvation.

Recommended reading:
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1994, paragraphs 1391-1401, 1407, 1416
Ott, Dr. Ludwig, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, TAN Books and Publishers, Rockford, IL 61105, 1974, pages 394-396

Q. Why do we receive Communion?

Aside from the reasons cited in the answer to the preceding question (being united with Christ, receiving supernatural life for my soul and reinforced power to resist sin for my will, being purged of venial sin and the temporal punishment for my sins) the only other reason is because Jesus told me to and I am obedient. We must always remember that each time we receive Holy Communion we receive God's graces and the more grace we receive the easier it is to resist the temptations of sin.

Q. Is a person who doesn't believe that the Eucharist is truly the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus really a Catholic?

No, they are not. Although we may not understand the doctrines of the Catholic Church, we must accept them. The Catholic faith is not a cafeteria style faith where we can go down the line of dogmas taking some of this, some of that, a double portion of something else, and avoiding the things we don't like. There are many things about which we do have a choice as to whether to accept them or not (Marian apparitions and devotion to the Sacred Heart, for example) but the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist is not among them.

Examples of dogmas (those truths that the Catholic Church requires the faithful to accept as doctrine revealed by God), although not by any means a complete list, are: the divinity of Christ, the Blessed Trinity, the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, the Immaculate Conception, and the bodily assumption of Mary.

Recommended reading:
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1994, paragraphs 88-94

PENANCE/RECONCILIATION/CONFESSION

Q. What is Penance?

There are two paths which lead to heaven, which is our final goal. Both paths were given to us by Jesus in His infinite mercy. The first path is that of innocence: When we were baptized, the stain of original sin and all our individual sins were washed away and we became absolutely pure in God's eyes. If we have been able to retain that baptismal innocence, avoiding even the slightest sin, this is the path by which we will enter heaven. Those of us who have not retained our baptismal innocence, who have stained our white baptismal garment by sin, must follow the second path, the path of penance. Through the sacrament of penance those who fall into sin after baptism are restored to God's grace.

Penance is not only receiving God's forgiveness, it is also an instrument of reconciliation with our brothers and sisters. The goal of this sacrament is conversion and change in our lives. In this respect, the sacrament of penance is one of the most powerful -- potentially the most powerful – instruments in the Church for spiritual growth and continuing conversion in our lives. God loves us always and will always forgive us but we must respond to the message Jesus gave us: "The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!" (Mark 1:15, NIV) A significant part of that message of good news is the commandment to love one another, to be reconciled with our brother (Matthew 5:23-24).

Recommended reading:
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1994, paragraphs 1422-1498

Q. Why do you have confession?

We have confession because we are sincerely sorry for our sins against God and our brothers and sisters. The Gospels tell us that when Jesus walked this earth not only did He forgive people of their sins, He told them that they were forgiven. If He had not told them so, they would not have had certainty that their sins had in fact been forgiven. After His death and resurrection, on that first Easter Sunday, the first commission that Jesus specifically gave to his Apostles was the responsibility and authority to forgive men's sins:

"Again Jesus said, ‘Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.' And with that he breathed on them and said, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.'" (John 20:21-23, NIV).

How was Jesus sent? With full power and authority from His Father to bring about reconciliation between mankind and God, including the power to forgive individual sins. Jesus has begun the process of reconciliation and has appointed individuals to continue His work as His ambassadors. How are they to know which sins to forgive and which to retain? They must hear them in order to decide. The person seeking forgiveness will know that they have been forgiven when they have been told.

Q. Why do you confess sins to a priest?
Q. Why must we confess our sins to a priest and how can he forgive us our sins?
Q. If Jesus will forgive the truly repentant, why confess to a priest?

Our sins are confessed to a priest because that's the way the Bible tells us that our sins are forgiven by God. In the answer to the preceding question we saw that Jesus commissioned the apostles with the authority and responsibility to forgive sins. When they forgave sins it wasn't they who were doing the forgiving, it was Jesus.

"He that heareth you heareth me, and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me." (Luke 10:16, KJV)

Of the fact that this authority and responsibility was passed on to others by the apostles is not in question because we are told

"Is any one of you sick? He should call the elders of the church to pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise him up. If he has sinned, he will be forgiven." (James 5:14-15, NIV)

This is what we call the sacrament of the anointing of the sick for those with a physical illness but the next verse clarifies this even more. This verse starts with the word "therefore" which should cause us to look to see what it is "there for": it is providing a summary of the teaching just concluded.

"Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man is powerful and effective." (James 5:16, NIV)

Who are these "each other?" None other than the sick person and the elder of the church (some translations use "presbyter" rather than elder, the Greek is presbyteros from which the word "priest" is derived). When the spiritually ill, those who have sinned, confess their sins to the priest the sins are forgiven and the healing process begins.

Recommended reading:
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1994, paragraphs 1461-1467
Drummey, James J., Catholic Replies, C. R. Publications, Norwood, MA 02062, 1995, pages 196-197
Rumble, Rev. Dr. Leslie & Carty, Rev. Charles Mortimer, Radio Replies, First Volume, TAN Books & Publishers, Rockford, IL 61105, 1979, paragraphs 824-840

Q. If you truly believe Jesus is present in the Eucharist, why do you have to see a priest for confession and why can't we confess to Jesus in adoration?
Q. Why can't I pray to God for forgiveness instead of telling a priest?

Because that's not the way that Jesus Himself set it up. His first act on that first Easter Sunday was to tell His apostles that He wanted them to forgive men's sins and to give them the power and authority to do so in His Name (John 20:19-23). If we are truly His followers, we must do exactly what He tells us to do. He makes the rules, we simply obey.

Q. Not married in the church. Want to go to confession.

Surprising as it may sound, anyone can go to confession. Only Catholics who are willing to try to overcome their sinful nature can receive absolution. For all others, including Protestants, a meeting with the priest (and Christ) in the confessional can be a very valuable counseling session which will begin to re-order their lives.

Q. Some churches have group confessions. Since you are the only priest and seem to be overworked, why not give it a try? Is group confession legal?

Group confessions with general absolution without private confession are not to be performed except in cases where there is imminent danger of death or in serious necessity (such as members of the military who are going to a battle zone). The diocesan bishop is to decide when these conditions are present. The law of the Church (Canons 962 and 963 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law) says that anyone who has received absolution in this manner must go to private confession as soon as possible thereafter and may not receive general absolution again until after they have confessed their sins privately.

Recommended reading:
Stravinskas, Rev. Peter M. J., The Catholic Answer Book 2, Our Sunday Visitor, Huntington, IN 46750, 1994, pages 154-155

Q. What is the meaning of "Christ died for our sins?"

It is true that Jesus died for our sins (1 Corinthians 15:3). It is also true that Jesus bore our sins in His body on the cross so we might die to sin and live to righteousness (1 Peter 2:24). When we read these verses without the benefit of an Old Testament understanding of what is being addressed, we misunderstand the covenant discipline of suffering.

Since the sin of Adam and Eve, the sin of disobedience, heaven was closed to humanity (Genesis 3:24). Even though heaven was closed, God still communicated directly with His creation. However, since the sin of the golden calf, God's chosen people were no longer treated as part of His family, but rather as His servants or slaves; he no longer communicated with them directly but through intermediaries (Exodus 33:3). In both cases, the reason for the estrangement was that mankind had so strained their covenant family relationship with God that the punitive curses associated with the covenant had come into play. Because of the sin of Adam and Eve, suffering entered into the world; fruit-bearing became painful [both in giving birth and working to provide for the family (Genesis 3:16-19)]. Because of the sin of the golden calf, no longer was the firstborn of the family the priest of the family, now only Levites were priests (Exodus 32:28-29) and bloody sacrifices were required in order to approach God. (Leviticus 1:2). These sacrifices were public, costly, and ineffective.

When we say "Christ died for our sins" we are not talking necessarily about the sins we personally commit as we live our lives, but the sins of humanity; of Adam and Eve, of the Israelites. The sins which estranged God's creation from Him. Jesus did what Adam should have done, He obeyed His Father. In Jesus' passion He suffered in a garden, His brow sweating blood, and on the cross he wore the crown of thorns grown in the ground cursed because of Adam's sin. In His death upon the cross Jesus, our High Priest, entered the heavenly tabernacle and offered His own body as the perfect sacrifice to atone for the separation caused by the golden calf. This sacrifice of self-donating love opened heaven (Luke 23:45) and made it possible for us to have our sins forgiven (John 20:23).

It is not a case of "Jesus did it all, there is nothing more I can do." Because of Jesus' sacrifice for our sins, He showed us that it is possible for us to obey God, to have our sins forgiven and enter heaven. He showed us self-donating love, how to suffer in a redemptive way, to make our death united with His and to bring grace to other people.

Recommended reading:
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1994, paragraphs 1499, 1521

Q. When was mandatory confession started and who did it?

As illustrated in the answer to an earlier question in this chapter where James 5:14-15 was discussed, confession has been mandatory since Jesus instituted the sacrament. In fact, in the early Church, sins were confessed to the presbyter (priest/bishop/elder) in front of the entire congregation. It wasn't until around the 5th century that private, rather than public, confession became the norm. The Fourth Lateran Council (1215) ordered annual reception of penance and the Eucharist and the Council of Trent (1545-1563) required confession of the kind and number of sins.

Q. When was the last time you went to confession?

The frequency of visitation to the sacrament of confession is a highly personal matter between the penitent and God. This is not the type of question which any person is obligated to answer in any manner other than as stated in the first sentence. This said, if you wish to disclose the frequency of your visitation to this sacrament you may do so. The Bishop of Birmingham (Alabama) has disclosed that he goes to confession approximately every six weeks, more often if he feels the need. The Pope has disclosed that he goes to confession at least once a week.

SACRAMENT OF THE SICK

Q. What is anointing of the sick?

The sacrament of the anointing of the sick is the second of two healing ministries which Jesus gave to His Church, the first being the sacrament of penance. This sacrament is based upon James 5:14-15 where Jesus says:

"Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him." (KJV)

In ancient times, no sharp distinction was made between physical health and spiritual health; those who were physically ill suffered mentally as well and those who suffered from guilt or depression often displayed physical symptoms too. The same is true today. In fact, the word "salvation" is derived from the Latin salus which means "health." Jesus restored health to the body and to the soul when He walked this earth, and left His Church the ability to do likewise as it carries on His ministry; Acts 9:34 for instance tells of Peter healing in Jesus name.

A few years ago this sacrament was called "extreme unction" and was administered only when the recipient was thought to be dying. At that time, it was part of the last rites for the dying: making one's last confession, receiving one's last Communion (viaticum), and receiving one's final anointing. Since the Second Vatican Council, the emphasis of this sacrament has been changed from that of the dying, to those in serious need. Thus, anyone who is going to have an operation or who is advanced in years can request the sacrament. This sacrament can be repeated as illness worsens or new disabilities manifest themselves.

Recommended reading:
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1994, paragraphs 1499-1532

Q. If a person has not been to Church or practiced his faith for many years are they forgiven their sins on receiving the last rites?

The "last rites" (last confession, last Eucharist, and last anointing), like all sacraments, are always effective. What impedes the effectiveness of the sacraments is the disposition of the individual receiving them. If the person receiving the sacraments is not truly repentant for their sins and open to God's forgiveness, that forgiveness is not forthcoming.

Recommended reading:
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1994, paragraph 1523
Rumble, Rev. Dr. Leslie & Carty, Rev. Charles Mortimer, Radio Replies, Third Volume, TAN Books & Publishers, Rockford, IL 61105, 1979, paragraphs 908-911

Q. What if there is no priest around when you die, and you don't get the last blessing?

God, in His infinite justice and mercy, always reads the disposition of the heart. If the individual was truly repentant for their sins and open to the effectiveness of the sacraments, even though they were unable to receive them, their sins will be forgiven.

HOLY ORDERS

Q. Jesus started the priesthood and not started the preacher? (Go out and preach my faith)

The first thing to remember is that Jesus came not to abolish the law and the prophets (the Old Testament) but to fulfill them (Matthew 5:17). The Old Testament priesthood was one which had a high priest, other priests to assist him, and the laity for whom they performed their duties. The duties of the priests in the Old Testament might be most accurately described as one of offering sacrifice, making atonement, making access to God, and teaching (although much of the responsibility of teaching had been at least partially handed over to the scribes). The high priest was specifically charged with offering sacrifice for the people (Leviticus 16:15-16, 24). The Old Testament (Covenant) sacrifices were ineffective, but this does not nullify the need for sacrifice in the New Covenant.

Jesus is our New Covenant high priest (Hebrews 4:14) and as high priest in heaven He offers His sacrifice in our behalf (Hebrews 5:1). Only in Jesus is the ultimate character of the priesthood fully revealed: He offered the sacrifice of His body on the altar of the cross once, He is continually making atonement for our sins through the continued presentation of His sacrifice to the Father (Revelation 5:6) thereby allowing us access to the Father. He also taught His apostles, and through their successors and those they appoint He teaches us.

The Old Testament high priest had an ordained priesthood to assist him. When Jesus told His apostles at the last supper "Do this in remembrance of me" (Luke 22:19, KJV/NIV) He was specifically directing (and ordaining) them to perform a particular Jewish priestly act: offer a memorial sacrifice. In this case, because only His own body is the sacrifice sufficient to open heaven, He has also told them "This is my body which is given for you" (Luke 22:19, KJV). He is not telling them to kill Him again, He is telling them to join in His once for all sacrifice (a Jewish memorial sacrifice made the participants present at the original event, even many generations later).

Like the Old Testament (Covenant) laity who brought their sacrifices to the altar, all New Covenant believers share, in some measure, in the priesthood of Jesus. We have realized the blessings of the covenant that God made with the Israelites at Mount Sinai; we are a royal priesthood, a chosen people, a holy nation, a people belonging to God (Exodus 19:5-6; 1 Peter 2:9). But the sacrificial requirement of the priesthood was not done away with even for us when the New Covenant was instituted. This is why we are told to offer ourselves as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God (Romans 12:1).

Preaching (teaching) was (and is) only one small part of the duties of a priest. Teaching is also one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit which is given to members of Christ's body, the Church (not just those who are ordained) (1 Corinthians 12:28-29). The ordained priest's primary responsibility is to offer the memorial sacrifice of Jesus in order to make Him present for us so that we can join in His covenant relationship with God the Father. The great commission to baptize and teach (in that order) (Matthew 28:19-20), to which the questioner refers was given to the eleven first, but as disciples, it is also the commission of every follower (that's what "disciple" means) of Jesus (this is why any person can baptize if an ordained priest is not available).

Recommended reading:
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1994, paragraphs 1536-1600

Q. Were priests ever allowed to marry?

In the early Church, priests were allowed to marry. Tertullian writes in A.D. 213 "Peter alone [among the Apostles] do I find married, and through mention of his mother-in-law. I presume he was a monogamist; for the Church, built upon him, would for the future appoint to every degree of orders none but monogamists. As for the rest [of the Apostles}, since I do not find them married, I must presume they were either eunuches or continent." Since the Second Lateran Council (A.D. 1139) all candidates for priestly ordination in the Latin Rite have been required to take the vow of celibacy. To this day, married men in the Eastern rites of the Catholic Church (Uinates, Marionites, etc.) are allowed to be ordained (once they are ordained, an Eastern rite priest cannot marry even if widowed). No married Eastern rite priest can be ordained a bishop. The Orthodox Church has the same rules as the Eastern Rite Catholics.

As far back as the second century there is a strong endorsement of celibacy as the Apostolic Constitutions state "If a Priest or Deacon is not already married, he can never contract marriage."

Recommended reading:
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1994, paragraph 1580
Rumble, Rev. Dr. Leslie & Carty, Rev. Charles Mortimer, Radio Replies, First Volume, TAN Books & Publishers, Rockford, IL 61105, 1979, paragraphs 1193-1195

Q. If the Church is experiencing a shortage of vocations, why will it not consider allowing priests to marry?
Q. Why don't priests get married?
Q. Why can't priests marry, but an Episcopal priest can marry and then become a Catholic married priest?

The celibate priesthood is a rule of the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church. As a rule, rather than dogma, it could be changed. Such a change is unlikely in the foreseeable future, even with a shortage of vocations in Europe and North America, as numerous vocations are coming from Africa and Asia. It may be that those countries who once provided foreign missionaries will be on the receiving end from the countries which they evangelized.

The rule of celibacy is based on the example set by Jesus and on the teachings of Saints Matthew and Paul:

"For there are some eunuches, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuches which were made eunuches of men: and there be eunuches which have made themselves eunuches for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it." (Matthew 19:12, KJV)

"It is good for a man not to marry. But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband . . . I wish that all men were as I am [celibate]. But each man has his own gift from God: one has this gift, another has that. Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried as I am. But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion . . . I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord's affairs--how he can please the Lord. But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world--how he can please his wife--and his interests are divided." (1 Corinthians 7:1-2,7-9,32-34, NIV)

There are those who say "It is not natural for a priest not to be married." To them I would reply "You are quite correct; it is not natural -- it is supernatural. It takes a supernatural grace to live the celibate life. A grace that only God can give."

As to those clergy from other denominations who convert and choose the Catholic priesthood as their vocation, each case is reviewed individually by the Holy See in Rome before and an exception to the rule is granted. This exception allows them, although married, to receive priestly ordination in the Latin Rite but if their wife dies, they must then live a celibate life.

Recommended reading:
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1994, paragraph 1579

Q. Why no woman priest? I'm very happy to see girls on the altar, why aren't women allowed to preach?
Q. Were there ever woman priests?

There have never been woman priests in the Church founded by Christ. There were priestesses in the pagan religions which abounded at the time of Christ. There have been women who claimed to be priests, even in the early Church. Of these Tertullian writes:

"And the heretical women themselves, how shameless are they! They make bold to teach, to debate, to work exorcisms, to undertake cures, and perhaps even to baptize. Their ordinations are casual, capricious, and changeable." (Demurrer Against the Heretics, 41,5-6, A.D. 200)

The prohibition against women preaching can be found in 1 Timothy 2:12:

"But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence." (KJV)

and also in 1 Corinthians 14:34-35:

"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church." (KJV)

As chauvinistic as this sounds in our liberated modern world, women were not allowed to speak in the synagogue in Jesus' time and He, who was not afraid to correct any impropriety in God's eyes, never spoke against this practice and His apostles followed His example. Neither did He choose a woman to be one of His apostles. As Pope John Paul II said in his Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (May 1994):

"In order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church's divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women, and that this judgement is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful." (emphasis added).

Q. What is a deacon and what is his function? We like him.

A deacon is an ordained member of the clergy with limited faculties. He cannot, for example, confect the Eucharist, hear confessions, or administer the sacrament of the sick. The deacon's job is that of service to the bishop and priests in the celebration of the divine mysteries, above all the Holy Eucharist, in the distribution of Holy Communion, in assisting at the blessing of marriages, in the proclamation of the Gospel and preaching, in presiding over funerals, and in dedicating themselves to the various ministries of charity. Deacons are ordained "to the bishop" and, like priests are assigned by the bishop to the parishes they serve. Deacons can be the only witness and representative of the Church at a wedding and weddings so performed are as lawful and legal as those performed by a priest or minister. Likewise, a deacon can perform a sacramental baptism for which a baptismal certificate is issued.

Recommended reading:
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1994, paragraphs 1569-1571

Q. The 11 Apostles I remember but the 7 Deacons I don't recall.

The origin of the diaconate can be found in Acts 6:1-6.

MATRIMONY

Q. Why oppose divorce?

Civil divorce by itself is not the problem. The problem occurs when remarriage takes place. In the Holy Scriptures we read:

""Haven't you read," he (Jesus) replied, "that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,' and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'? So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate." ‘Why then,' they asked, ‘did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away' Jesus replied ‘Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery.'" (Matthew 19:4-9, NIV)

"They said, "Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away." "It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law," Jesus replied. "But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.' ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.' So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."...'Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.'" (Mark 10:4-9, 11-12, NIV)

"Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery." (Luke 16:18, NIV)

It is not the Church which does permit divorce it is God, who has revealed it through the mouth of His Son. This does not mean that a man and a woman must live together in an abusive relationship. The Church recognizes that there are situations where physical, emotional or spiritual harm may come to a partner if they remain under the same roof. The Church, in these cases, recommends and supports separation of bed and board for the individuals involved. This separation may even take the form of a civil divorce but remarriage is forbidden as they are still married in the eyes of God.

Recommended reading:
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1994, paragraphs 1601-1666
Rumble, Rev. Dr. Leslie & Carty, Rev. Charles Mortimer, Radio Replies, First Volume, TAN Books & Publishers, Rockford, IL 61105, 1979, paragraphs 889-890, 892-895

Q. Is a second marriage breaking a commandment or breaking a law of the Church?

As we saw in the answer to the preceding question, it is breaking a commandment. Those involved in the second marriage are breaking the sixth one (the seventh as Protestants number them): "You shall not commit adultery."

Q. On the question of divorce, Jesus said there was only one exception: Lewd conduct or sins of chastity. Why does the Church not honor these words of Christ?

This "exception" is in Matthew 19:9, but it really isn't an exception. If one reads this verse carefully, paying special attention to the punctuation, you will notice that although divorce may be allowed for marital unfaithfulness (the Greek word is pornea), remarriage even in the case of this "exception" is not allowed. If remarriage were allowed, the exception clause would be located after the statement about remarriage rather than before it. Again, the problem is not with the divorce, but the remarriage.

Recommended reading:
Rumble, Rev. Dr. Leslie & Carty, Rev. Charles Mortimer, Radio Replies, First Volume, TAN Books & Publishers, Rockford, IL 61105, 1979, paragraphs 892-895

Q. Can a person who was married in Church and got a divorce, and then got married again, and when the second husband died married for a third time, receive Communion after the first husband has died? Can I receive Communion now?

It would appear that the physical impediments to having your (third) wedding blessed by the Church have been removed, at least on your side of the marriage. If this is your current husband's first marriage, then all impediments may well have been removed. I would recommend that you make an appointment with your parish priest to discuss your situation and receive absolution if it is your sincere desire to return to full communion with the Church.

Q. Is someone who was married to a non-Catholic in the Church, considered married in the eyes of the Church?

Any marriage witnessed by the Church is valid in the eyes of the Church. In fact, any first marriage between baptized non-Catholics performed in any Christian setting is presumed to be valid by the Catholic Church until a decree of nullity is obtained.

Recommended reading:
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1994, paragraphs 1633-1637, 1640

Q. Please explain annulments.
Q. How is it possible for Catholics to be married in the Church 2 or 3 times while their ex's are still alive?

An annulment (decree of nullity) is a finding by the Church that a sacramental (as opposed to civil) marriage never existed, therefore the parties were never married in the eyes of God. There are many things which could contribute to finding a marriage null such as coercion or grave external fear (a shotgun wedding for instance), lack of consent due to the mental instability of one of the parties, lack of consent because one of the parties considered marriage to be a legal short-term relationship which could be abandoned at will, or lack of consummation.

Recommended reading:
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1994, paragraphs 1635-1632
Rumble, Rev. Dr. Leslie & Carty, Rev. Charles Mortimer, Radio Replies, First Volume, TAN Books & Publishers, Rockford, IL 61105, 1979, paragraphs 897-905

Q. Does an annulment make your children illegitimate in the church?