|
Q u i c k Q u e s t i o n s
|
This Rock
Volume 4, Number 2
 February 1993 
|
|
|
How Do We Know Jesus' Private Words?
Q: If Jesus prayed in the Garden of Gethsemane while his apostles slept, who would have been there to hear and record the words of his prayer as recorded in Mark 14:32-42?
A: There are two explanations. The first is that the Holy Spirit inspired Mark and the other Gospel writers with the knowledge of what transpired in the Garden of Gethsemane, even though they were not present (or, in John's case, were snoozing). This, of course, is exactly what the Lord promised would take place (John 6:13, 14:26). The second explanation is that, after his Resurrection, during the forty days he spent conversing with and teaching his apostles and other followers, Jesus recounted to them many of his otherwise unknowable conversations and actions, some of which were later recorded in the Bible, some of which weren't. Remember, as John 20:30-31 and 21:25 point out, there were many things which Jesus said and did which are not recounted in the Bible.
Q: In Catholic literature I sometimes run across references to the "analogy of faith." Can you explain what this term means?
A: The New Catholic Encyclopedia gives this definition: "Originally a mathematical term, the Greek word for analogy means 'proportion' and was borrowed by philosophers. to refer to the relationship between concepts of things that are partly the same and partly different. It took on special importance in the concept of analogy of being (Latin: analogia entis). The analogy of faith (analogia fidei) must not be confused with this more philosophic concept..
"The phrase analogy of faith is biblical: Romans 12:6 speaks of the charism of prophecy, along with such similar gifts as ministering, teaching, exhorting. Prophets exercised one of several 'offices' within the primitive church (Acts 11:27 13:1); guided by the Spirit, they gained insight into the faith or recognized tasks to be undertaken. The Pauline injunction is given that this gift of prophecy must be exercised 'according to the proportion (Greek: analogian) of faith.' No prophet is to be accepted who proclaims anything opposed to the 'one faith' proper to the 'one body in Christ.' Such preaching would be out of proportion to, or beyond, the objective truth entrusted to the Christian community.
"The analogy of faith, therefore, has always been associated with the one unchanging faith of the Church; it is closely related to the notion of Tradition and soon became a norm for the early Christian writers. They saw a 'proportion' in the manner in which the New Testament complements the Old Testament and in which each particular truth contributes to the inner unity of the entire Christian revelation.
"Thus the phrase came to indicate a rule or guide for the exegesis of Scripture. In difficult texts, the teachings of tradition and the analogy of faith must lead the way. The Catholic exegete, conscious of his faith, recognizes the intimate relationship between Scripture and Tradition; he strives to explain Scriptural passages in such a way that the sacred writers will not be set in opposition to one another or to the faith and teaching of the Church."
Q: Astronomers claim new stars are being created all across the universe, and naturalists claim new species are constantly coming into existence, yet Genesis 2:1-2 says that God finished the work of creation. These two claims seem incompatible. Who's wrong, the scientists or the Bible?
A: Neither. It's proper to speak in two ways of God "creating," and the scientists and naturalists you mention are using the term differently than does Genesis. Let's be precise as to what Genesis says: "Thus the heavens and the earth and all their array were completed. Since on the seventh day God was finished with the work he had been doing, he rested on the seventh day from all the work he had undertaken. So God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work he had done in creation."
Notice that the passage neither says nor implies that no additional creations would be forthcoming, but simply that the Lord's initial work of creation (see Gen. 1:1-31 for details) had been completed. Common sense tells us that not everything God would create was created at that point. After all, each human soul is a later creation, since the soul is created directly by God at the moment of conception--it does not derive from the souls of the parents.
But God creates in another sense. In Genesis 1 the Lord brought into being, ex nihilo, all matter that would ever exist. Over the ensuing eons, he created the various parts of the physical universe out of that primordial matter. Stars, comets, and nebulae, for example, have formed, disintegrated, and re-formed (many times, presumably) from the same matter. The same is true of plant and animal life on earth in all its myriad forms.
We realize that that cow standing in a pasture has come into existence only recently. The cow is truly one of God's creations, though it was created by God indirectly; the constituent elements which make up its body have existed since God's initial ex nihilo creation eons ago and have been "recycled" countless times prior to making up this particular cow.
A carpenter rightly may say he has "made" a chair although, of course, he fashioned it from preexisting wood which came a preexisting tree. God is like that carpenter as he creates new stars or new human beings, yet he is unlike him because he, unlike the carpenter, also created the raw materials with which he works.
With this in mind we can see that Genesis emphasizes the finality of God's creation of primordial matter and of all the first plants and animals and human beings with which he adorned the newly-created earth, while scientists point out (whether they realize it or not) that God continues to create new things in the material realm in the sense that he fashions them from the preexistent matter of his initial creation. Both uses of the idea are correct.
Q: Recently, I went to a Mass and the priest consecrated what appeared to be a large peanut butter cookie; it certainly was leavened bread of some type. Was this a valid consecration?
A: Sadly, there are some priests who feel compelled to tinker with the rubrics of the Mass--rubrics which the Church in its wisdom set forth for good reasons. Your question comes up frequently from folks who have witnessed priests consecrate (more properly, attempt to consecrate) something other than bread at Mass. Some commit this grave abuse due to poor or heterodox theological training in the seminary, others because they know better but just want to be avant garde, thinking such innovations will endear them to the congregation and make the Mass more "relevant." Either way, this indicates a lack of belief in the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist and an obstinacy against obedience to the Church.
A noted liturgical expert Nicholas Halligan, O.P., explains the rules regarding the bread to be used for the Eucharist: "The requisite material for the celebration of the Eucharist and the confection of the sacrament is only wheaten bread, recently made whereby the danger of corruption is avoided . . . Unleavened bread alone is to be used in the Latin Rite (canons 924, 926). The bread must be made from wheat, mixed with natural water, baked by the application of fire heat (including electric cooking) and substantially uncorrupted.
"The variety of wheat or the region of its origin does not affect its validity, but bread made from any other grain [e.g. barley, corn, rice, peanuts] is invalid material. Bread made with milk, wine, oil, etc., either entirely or in a notable part, is invalid material. Any natural water suffices for validity, (e.g. even mineral water or sea water). The addition of any condiment, such as salt or sugar, is unlawful but valid, unless added in a notable quantity. Unbaked dough or dough fried in butter or cooked in water is invalid matter. . . .
"Therefore, the valid material of this sacrament must be made in the common estimation of reasonable men bread made from wheat and not mixed notably with something else that is no longer wheat. Those who make altar breads must be satisfied that they have purchased genuine and pure wheat flour. The bread must be of wheat flour and only in case of necessity a white material thrashed or crushed from wheat. It must be free from mixture with any other substance besides wheat flour and water. It is gravely unlawful to consecrate with doubtful material" (The Sacraments and Their Celebration [Staten Island: Alba House, 1986] 65-66).
Q: I was amazed to read recently where a Catholic priest theologian said that the Church is not infallible and that it has changed its doctrines. Apparently he felt Jesus' words in Matthew 18:18-19 ("Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Again, I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything for which they are to pray, it shall be granted them by my heavenly Father") mean that the Church can change its doctrines as times change.
A: No, the Church cannot change its doctrines no matter how badly some theologians may want it to or how loudly they claim it can. The doctrines of the Catholic Church are the deposit of faith revealed by Jesus Christ, taught by the apostles, and handed down in their entirety by the apostles to their successors. Since revealed truth cannot change, and since the deposit of faith is comprised of revealed truth, expressed in Scripture and Sacred Tradition, the deposit of faith cannot change.
While it's certainly true that our Lord's words to the apostles in Matthew 18:18-19 grant authority to the apostles to "bind" the members of the Church to believe the doctrines of the Church ("He who listens to you listens to me. He who rejects you rejects me and the one who sent me" [Luke 10:16]), the "loosing" spoken of in Mathew. 18:18 does not mean the apostles can modify doctrine.
The Church does not have the power to do the impossible, to change or delete divinely revealed truth which forms the deposit of faith. Rather, the concept of loosing, as it pertains to the apostles and their successors, has more to do the Church's ability to dispense individuals or the whole Church from observing certain ecclesiastical disciplines. There are many examples of this authority to bind and loose in the arena of Church discipline. Here are a few:
In the early Church married men were permitted to be ordained as priests in the West. This custom was changed in the tenth century and since then, in the Latin Rite, candidates for the priesthood must be celibate.
Until recent years it was forbidden under pain of mortal sin to eat meat on Fridays. The Church has "loosed" this discipline and now allows the faithful to eat meat on Fridays provided some other act of mortification is performed.
Prior to Vatican II, the pre-Communion fast extended from midnight until the time one received Communion; no food or water were to be consumed. This discipline was relaxed first to a three-hour fast and then to the one-hour fast the Church now observes.
Matthew 18 also refers to the Church's authority to bind and loose with regard to sin. Every priest has the authority of Christ to "loose" (absolve) penitents from their sins through the sacrament of confession (John 20:21-22, 2 Cor. 5:18-20). The priest also has the obligation, in rare cases when he sees no evidence of contrition or an unwillingness on the part of the penitent to stop committing sin, to "bind" someone in their sins by refusing to grant him absolution until he evinces genuine contrition.
The faithful may gain indulgences through corporal and spiritual acts of charity, certain prayers, and pilgrimages, and are thus, by the authority of the Church's power to bind and loose, able to receive partial or complete remission of all temporal punishment due to sin. Through indulgences the Church may loose Christians from the duty of penance which would otherwise need to be performed.
Certain forms of excommunication may be "loosed" only by a bishop or, in graver circumstances, only by the Holy See.
Priests and religious who request it can be "loosed" (dispensed) from their vows of celibacy (and, in the case of religious, the vows of poverty and obedience).
None of these issues deals with doctrine as such (since doctrine is unchangeable) but with Church discipline, government, and penance.
|
Catholic Answers
