Latest Q and A post (closed)

The older Q and A is still open, so that we can finish any discussions there, or move the topic to the new post. Thanks.

Ron Conte

This entry was posted in commentary. Bookmark the permalink.

33 Responses to Latest Q and A post (closed)

  1. Francisco says:

    Do all faithful Catholics need to be members of a particular community or group within the Church?

  2. Francisco says:

    Two more questions:

    1) If, without his knowledge, a priest consecrates a gluten free host (or a host missing one of the ingredients to be valid matter) that looks like a normal one, and give Communion to a congregation, they all have not received the Body of Christ (even though they all think that they did)?

    2) Even the tiniest of the particles (individual particle) of a consecrated host is the complete Body of Christ?

    • Ron Conte says:

      1. If the consecration is not valid, then it is not the body of Christ; it remains just bread, even if the priest does so out of ignorance.
      2. a particle of break or a drop of wine must be sufficient to still be bread. If the particle is so tiny it cannot be considered bread, then it is not the Body of Christ. And pieces of a host are the Body of Christ (I mean, of course, the whole real Presence) only when the host is broken. When it is whole, it is one Christ.

    • Tom Mazanec says:

      Taking this to the extreme, the wine is evaporating. If invisible portions of wine were the Blood of Christ, millions of molecules a microsecond of The Blood would be wafting into the air.

  3. Tom Mazanec says:

    Since Baptism is necessary for the other Sacraments, if a person had not received the Sacrament as an infant but thought he had, and becomes a Priest and ultimately a Bishop, would all his Marriages and Ordinations be invalid?

  4. Erlin Maci says:

    Jesus say things like in Luke 18:19 “why do you call me good?, God alone is good”.And in John 5:30 he says “By myself I can do nothing. I judge only as I hear, and my judgement is just because I come not to do my will but the will of the one who sent me.”

    What I’m asking is why does Jesus make statements like these that seem to contradict other statements where he says he’s God? I think I know the answer but I wanted to see your explanation. These are objections that a muslim raised in a youtube comments section to claim that Jesus is not God and never claimed himself to be God. He also pointed to Luke 11:20 and Mark 11(the story about Jesus cursing the fig tree).

    • Ron Conte says:

      In the first quote (Lk 18:19), He is saying the truth that God alone is good. The fact that He is God is something known to Jesus, but not to his questioner. So he is testing the faith of the man. Why call me good? Do you think I am the Messiah, or not? Do you know that the Messiah is God, or do you think he is merely a prophet?

      In the other quote, Jesus points out the difference between the persons of the Trinity. All that the Son is, as the Second Person, is from the Father. They are co-equal as God, since they have the same Divine Nature. But as Persons, Jesus depends entirely on the First Person for all that He is. The second person proceeds from the first person.

      I don’t see why the curse of the fig tree would argue against divinity.

  5. Erlin Maci says:

    You basically said they’re equal in one sentence and then said they’re not in the following sentence. I’m not sure what procession means in relation to God if God is eternal.You said Jesus is equally God but depends on the father for everything that he is. To me that’s a contradiction(equality and complete dependancy) and is implying Jesus is either not God or God with less power than the first person. Where was the second person of the trinity while Jesus was going through the natural stages of human development? How did he continue to be coequal with God while being zygote/embryo/fetus at the same time? Was Jesus just a spirit before becoming Jesus the man with a human body and soul or do we believe Jesus body and soul existed before time?

    • Ron Conte says:

      The human nature of Jesus is finite, and is certainly less than the Divine Nature in many ways. I was speaking of the Persons of the Trinity, and of the One Divine Nature. It seems like a contradiction, but both assertions are true: Jesus is equally God as concerns the Divine Nature, and Jesus depends entirely on the Father for all that he is, since the second person proceeds from the first person.

      The human soul of Jesus was created at the time of his Incarnation which was also his virgin conception. So, in the same instant, his body was created, he soul was created, and the Divine Nature was united to his body and soul (his human nature). Before that, and for all eternity, Jesus existed as the second person of the Trinity.

  6. Francisco says:

    – Erlin Maci

    None of these verses Luke 18:19 or John 5:30 say or suggest that Jesus is not God. I understand that this was brought up by another person and has nothing to do with you; but, in general, Scripture needs to be interpreted in light of all Sacred Scripture, not by cherry picking verses here and there otherwise Scripture can easily be misinterpreted to mean anything else. There are many Bible passages where it clearly tell us that Jesus is God: (John 1:1, 1:14), (John 1:15 – here John the Baptist refers to the Messiah, Jesus (John 1:29-30), as ‘existing before him’, even though Jesus was conceived and born (in His human nature) after him (Luke 1:36-37)), (John 8:24, 8:58 – in reference to Exodus 3:14, Isaiah 43:11), (John 20:28-29) (John 4:25-26), (Matthew 2:11 – Jesus is worshipped), (Matthew 12:6), (Matthew 14:33 – Jesus is worshipped), (Matthew 16:16-17), (John 10:30), (John 11:25-27), (Luke 2:11), (Colossians 1:15-16), (Colossians 2:9), (Philippians 2:5-6
    Philippians 2:10 – here St. Paul echoes Isaiah 45:22-24), (1 John 5:20), (Titus 2:13).

    Now, granted, Jesus may not have been going around all the time saying “I’m am God” in this particular straightforward way (though in John 8:58 He clearly says so), but most of the time He said so in a “Jewish way”, so that the ancient Jew would understand that He is claiming to be God. Actually, claiming to be God was the reason He was condemned to death by these particular Jews for blasphemy (Mark 14:55-64). Instead than simply saying “I’m God”, most of the time Jesus wanted the people to find out or reason themselves that He is indeed God. For example, when John the Baptist sent his disciples to ask whether Jesus is the Messiah or not, He did not reply by simply saying something like: “Yes, tell him that I am the Messiah”, but instead, He responded in a way that John the Baptist reason and conclude for himself that He is indeed the One by merits of what He do rather than of what He simply says (Matt 11:1-6). Also in the event of the cure of the paralytic “only God can forgive sins” (Matt 9:1-8). “The ‘Son of Man’ has authority to forgive sins” (Mark 2:10), with this, Jesus implicitly reveals to the Jewish audience that He is “the Son of Man” which alludes to Daniel 7 where “the Son of Man” appears to be of Divine nature:

    {7:9} I watched until thrones were set up, and the Ancient of days sat down. His garment was radiant like snow, and the hair of his head like clean wool; his throne was flames of fire, its wheels had been set on fire.

    {7:13} I watched, therefore, in the vision of the night, and behold, with the clouds of heaven, one like a *SON OF MAN* arrived, and he approached all the way to the Ancient of days, and they presented him before him.
    {7:14} And he gave him power, and honor, and the kingdom, and all peoples, tribes, and languages will serve him. His power is an eternal power, which will not be taken away, and his kingdom, one which will not be corrupted.

    Finally, for not making this post too long, we also have to understand that Jesus has two natures, Divine and human. Jesus is 100% God and 100% man (this is called the hypostatic union). Jesus is like us but sin in His human nature, so in His human nature He grew in wisdom like a regular human (Luke 5:52). Jesus knows all in His Divine nature. The Holy Trinity, One God, is a communion of Persons, there is order in God. The family is a reflection of the Holy Trinity. The father is the dead of the family, the wife is the heart of the family and children are the fruits of the love between father and wife, their roles are different, but their dignity is the same for all of them have been created in image and likeness of God.

    • Francisco says:

      I meant the father is the “head” of the family in my comment above.

    • Erlin Maci says:

      Why does God have a wheelchair made out of fire as his throne? …Lol… Is daniel calling God an old man? He is described that way though isn’t he, as having grey hair and stuff or no?

    • Erlin Maci says:

      Yeah, I forgot about the part that describes the hair on his head is like clean wool which means God the father has a head and hair like we do which is odd but it makes sense I guess. But the angels are something else. They have alot of freakish features and faces. So I guess we look more like God than the angels do.

    • Ron Conte says:

      Those descriptions are figurative. God the Father does not have a body, or a head, or hair. Angels also do not have bodies.

    • Erlin Maci says:

      What is he like then? When its said that Moses spoke to God face to face is that figurative too? How do you know what’s literal and what’s figurative?

    • Ron Conte says:

      The Divine Nature is unlike anything else. We know from the teaching of the Church what is figurative and what is literal. Yes, when Moses spoke to God face-to-face, that is figurative.

    • Francisco says:

      Erlin Maci – Yes like Ron said, those descriptions are figurative. We also know that because some of the attributes of God are that He is Omnipotent (all powerful – Job 11:7-11; Job 37:23), Omniscient (all knowing – Hebrews 4:13; Luke 12:7), so descriptions such as “God rested”, or “God “remembered” and the like, are figurative, not literal because God does not literally gets tired or forgets something. Regarding Daniel’s description, it was a vision that he had, so there are many figurative elements in it. For example, in Daniel 8:16 ff the Angel Gabriel reveals him what the vision means.

  7. Matt says:

    During apparitions of Fatima, the Virgin Mary was asked to cure crippled and lame children. She said that some will not be healed because God does not have confidence in the parents. This seems as though God’s healing is conditional if the parents fully convert. How is that fair to the crippled child who may be without mortal sin? In the New Testament, Jesus healed so many without conditions.

    • Ron Conte says:

      If God behaved in a way, at all times, that seems fair to fallen sinners, He would not be God. I don’t know the specific reason for that decision, but I trust in the absolute fairness of God.

  8. Matt Z. says:

    Is the “seamless garment” view a heresy or just misleading? There are those that take the seamless garment view to make things not intrinsically evil to the level of intrinsically evil. Also, there are those that never speak against intrinsically evil acts and but constantly rail against acts where due to the circumstances may be just.

    • Ron Conte says:

      The “seamless garment” view, that intrinsically evil acts are to be equated with acts on the same subject, which are wrong by the circumstances, is a grave error. I don’t know if it should be considered a heresy.

    • Tom Mazanec says:

      What is the difference between “heresy” and “grave error” and the level of this particular example?

  9. Ron Conte says:

    heresy is contrary to a truth, divinely-revealed and taught infallibly by the Magisterium. Some serious errors fall short of that standard.

    • Matt Z. says:

      The true meaning of the seamless garment I dont believe is heresy.

      See here:

      Its the people that twist it into a heresy and a grave error by confusing the Churchs teaching on intrinsically evil acts.

    • Ron Conte says:

      There are lots of errors in Mark Shea’s understanding of Catholicism, including that article. Shea thinks that we may “reasonably hope” that all human persons “perhaps” are saved. He errs by calling human persons sacred in an unqualified way. In the truest and fullest sense of the sacred, God alone is sacred. We are sacred, in a lesser sense, because we are all made in God’s image. But the more sinful we are, the less sacred we are. Our nature remains in God’s image, but that image is obscured when free will chooses unrepentant grave sin. The souls in Heaven are more fully sacred, and the souls in Hell, much less so. Second, God does not will us for our own sake. He willed to create us, and the angels, for His sake. God is our greatest good and our end.

      That article has a lot of unsupported rhetoric. He ends the article fairly well. Murder is always wrong; the death penalty is permissible, but should be avoided. The seamless garment should not be taken to imply that all acts against life are intrinsically evil.

  10. Tom Mazanec says:

    In a persecution, is it acceptable to be a secret Christian, like in the Catacombs or Edo japan? Isn’t this implicitly lying by omission? Shouldn’t such Christians accept Martyrdom?

    • Ron Conte says:

      It is not lying to hide your Christian faith, in a nation where Christianity is severely persecuted. Christians should neither run toward martyrdom, nor sin gravely to avoid it.

    • Francisco says:

      Tom – The marthys of the Church were killed because they were caught and could not escape. But if they had the opportunity to escape, they could morally do so because we have the right to love and defend our lives as well. Notice that Jesus could have been stoned to death prior to His crucifixion but He *escaped* when He had the opportunity. He ended up on the Cross because it was the will of the Father, yes, but also because He was caught by *many* Roman soldiers. They could not humanly overpower them or escape unless through a Divine intervention, so He was arrested. Also, Sts. Steven, Paul, and other Saints like Edmund Campion, Thomas More, John Fisher, and many other Saints ended up being murdered because they got caught and thus accepted martyrdom. But if they had the opportunity to escape, as some Saints actually did, they could morally do so.

Comments are closed.