new Q&A post

You have questions, I have answers. Ask.

This entry was posted in commentary. Bookmark the permalink.

36 Responses to new Q&A post

  1. jbbt9 says:

    Ron, when we pray the Gloria at Mass, we say ” And on earth peace to men of good will. ” Why do we limit the prayer to people of GOOD will.

    • Ron Conte says:

      Persons who are not of good will are, I suppose, not in the state of grace, and so would not have peace. We could wish peace to everyone, but it would not be received by everyone:
      [Matthew]
      {10:12} Then, when you enter into the house, greet it, saying, ‘Peace to this house.’
      {10:13} And if, indeed, that house is worthy, your peace will rest upon it. But if it is not worthy, your peace will return to you.

  2. justin1745 says:

    Many people in my life (colleagues at work, friends) are secular, often atheists or agnostics. They use the Lord’s name in vain frequently, perhaps as often as several times per hour for the length of time I am with them. What is required of me as a Catholic in terms of my response? Do I need to correct them (or at least express displeasure) once, every time, or none of the times as they aren’t believing Christians?

    • Ron Conte says:

      I would not correct them. It is not at all likely to do any good, so you are not obligated. The more important thing to do is to witness to Christ by being Christ-like. Then perhaps they will see that the Faith helps human persons become better persons.

    • Michael says:

      Anytime I hear someone use the Lord’s name in vain, I say an ejaculation silently to myself such as “Blessed be the Lord.” I like to believe it helps repair the offense given to God.

    • Ron Conte says:

      noun. “an abrupt, exclamatory utterance.”

  3. Jonathan says:

    By affirming that the “Orthodox churches” are true particular churches, Vatican II denied the unity of the church. “We profess ONE, Holy, Catholic and apostolic church.”

    Furthermore, the notion that the soul of the church is larger than the body is manifestly contradicted by Pius XII encyclical, the Mystical Body of Christ, which asserts the Mystical. Key is absolutely identical with the Roman church.

    How do you reconcile this with traditional doctrine?

    • Ron Conte says:

      Faithful Catholics submit their minds and hearts to the teaching authority of the Church, esp. in Ecumenical Councils. We are not judges over Vatican II. Your conclusion that Vatican II denied the unity of the Church falsely accuses a Council of heresy. If your understanding conflicts with Church teaching, you are the one in error. Choose to have faith, and do not subjugate faith to the reason of fallen sinners.

  4. Jonathan says:

    Concerning my previous question, it was a legislate inquiry regarding how you reconcile the traditional doctrine concerning the unity of the church and how it is reconcile with VII documents.

    I’m presenting the argument as traditionalist would pose to see how you would respond to it. I’m not of the opinion that the council erred on the matter, just looking for a thorough reply.

    • Ron Conte says:

      Sorry. It sounded pretty bad, the way it was worded. The Church is not identical to the members of the Catholic faith, and the Catholic clergy. When there is division among the baptized, they are all members of the same Church. The Orthodox schismatics have preserved all 7 Sacraments, so the word Church is used, whereas the Protestants have not preserved most Sacraments, so the word Church is not used. It does not imply that the Orthodox are a separate Church. They are members of the one Church, which is lead by the Roman Pontiff. In addition, all persons in a state of grace are at least implicit members of the Church.

  5. John Platts says:

    There are some commentators who claim that Pope Francis should be removed from the papacy due to the way that he handled situations involving Catholic priests, bishops, and cardinals who have committed grave sexual sins (including homosexual acts, sexual abuse, and other grave sexual sins). What is your position regarding these commentators who claim that Pope Francis should be removed from the Papacy?

    • Ron Conte says:

      They do not have the authority to judge the Pope, nor to remove him. Popes err, and no one can judge them but God. However, I do not assume that every accusation against Pope Francis is true. In the current climate, conservatives exaggerate their complaints against him. Who was Pope when McCarrick rose to power? JP2 and then B16, and they are not blamed.

  6. Carlo says:

    Do you think it is possible that it is the current scandal and not a teaching of Pope Francis that will be the cause of a schism as you have mentioned in your eschatology on the future?

  7. You said the Damned cannot sin.
    Do they not hate God?
    Is not that a sin?

    • Ron Conte says:

      They cannot commit sinful acts. They are devoid of grace and love, and they are in a state of blasphemy, but they do not commit blasphemy or other sins. They do not hate God; they are devoid of love of God, but prevenient grace keeps them from every sin, including hatred of God. At the particular judgment, they were given infused knowledge of the sins of their lives, so they cannot blame God for anything.

  8. Jonathan says:

    Would you willing to provide your interpretation of the phrases “subsists in” and “elements of sanctification” used in Lumen Gentium in a separate article?

    In what sense does the mystical body of Christ subsist in the Catholic Church?

    • Ron Conte says:

      The Catholic Church cannot pass away. The other Christian churches or communities, in so far as they have sacraments or correct teachings, are a part of the Catholic Church, without realizing it. Other believers and non-believers are also members of the Church, if only implicitly. The body of Christ is the Catholic Church, in its open and hidden forms. The body of Christ subsists (exists, continues) in the Catholic Church because the other Christian communities are only a part of the body in so much as they resemble the Catholic Church. The elements of sanctification are any aspects of the true faith which the non-Catholics may have, such as the state of grace, the virtues, true teachings, the sacraments, etc.

  9. Matt says:

    What is the “generative faculty?” [The rest of this long comment has been deleted by Ron Conte]

    • Ron Conte says:

      Please stop asking sexually-explicit questions. If you would like to know my understanding of Church teaching on this subject, see my book The Catholic Marriage Bed. I’m not going to answer questions of this type in the Q&A posts any more.

  10. Matt says:

    Yes, I didn’t think you’d want to answer… but everything I said are things couples do.

    Well I’ll ask these last three questions.
    1. I have never heard a Pope talk explicitly on these things… they always use “vague language” like “procreative” and don’t go into explicit detail. The best I’ve found is Denzinger about toys, but it doesn’t define the generative faculty in explicit detail either. So how will I ever figure out the answer? Do you answer these explicit questions in your book… are they just your “opinion?”

    Because you say anything that is non-generative faculty is okay because it’s not sexual per se: but if no documents explicitly define these terms, like a manual would, how will I ever be able to deduce this… there are multiple potential definitions!!!

    3. MOST IMPORTANT: If I cannot figure out the answer, can I safely assume the most “liberal” interpretation? Or is one obligated to take the more restrictive one (say on sensual kissing)?

    Now, I have finally gotten busy. This will likely be my last post. Bye. Thanks for answering.

    • Ron Conte says:

      See my book The Catholic Marriage Bed. See this post, which has a brief summary of Church teaching on the subject:
      https://catholicism.io/2018/07/25/church-teaching-on-marital-sexual-ethics/
      A sexual act is defined in various documents as the deliberate use of the generative faculty. I did not say that everything non-generative is OK. Acts which are not per se sexual acts can still be sins. The only moral sexual act is natural marital relations open to life. Climax cannot be sought by husband or wife outside of the natural act, not even shortly before or after natural relations. And unnatural sexual acts are immoral regardless of whether they include climax or not.

      If you cannot figure out if an act is a mortal sin or not, you are obligated to refrain. If you do not know whether a food item is poison or not, you should not eat it. So the stricter interpretation obligates when you do not know. Why don’t you email me and I’ll give you a free copy of my book.

Comments are closed.