First, I would like to say that I have been "lurking" at your forum for quite some time now and applaud your efforts! I have had a question put to me by more than a few of my non-Catholic friends: Since we Catholics believe that God Himself is present in the Eucharistic bread and wine, and it is NOT a symbol, then why would almighty God permit His Devine body and blood to be handled by an individual who is corrupted by sin? (specifically, those priests who were guilty of molesting children and continued to say Mass).They refer to the Old Testament passages, where even the High Priests were not permitted to enter the Holy of Holies when the spirit of God has entered the Ark of the Covenent or he would be struck dead...so here you have the real and true presence of God being TOUCHED, not only by mere mortals, but ones who are full of unrepented sin...since we cannot enter into the presence of God with sin, then how can this be? My understanding has always been (for over 45 years anyway) that prior to saying the mass, priests partake of the sacrament of Penance and therefore, just as anyone else, enter into that state of grace given to us via the sacrament by God..indeed, it IS a wonderment that through the sacrifice of Jesus, we CAN receive the Eucharist!!!! Yet, even I am somewhat a loss to comprehend how an unrepentant priest can be permitted by God to touch the holy Eucharist and still live. What are your thoughts?

-- Lesley (martchas@hotmail.com), December 18, 2002

Answers

That is a very good question. I too would like to know the answer to that question.

-- Tim, the Baptist (tlw97@cox.net), December 18, 2002.

Dear Lesley,

All during His life on earth, Jesus touched, and allowed Himself to be touched by the unholy and the unclean, so He does not shy away from contact with sinners - which is good news for all of us! This is a major distinction between the Old Testament concept of God as the untouchable, unseeable, and unknowable - and the New Testament revelation of God in the flesh - "a man like us in all things but sin". If Jesus did not allow the Eucharist to be consecrated by sinners, there would be no Eucharist. The Apostles, to whom He originally gave the power and the commission, were all sinners, and so too every member of the Church, including every priest, bishop, and Pope since then. It is certainly true that a priest who celebrates Mass in a state of mortal sin commits another mortal sin of sacrilege. And it is therefore likewise true that a priest who is in such a spiritual state should receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation before celebrating Mass. However, this is a matter of his own personal morality, and is between him and God. It does not affect either the validity of the sacrament, or the graces we receive through the sacrament. This is necessarily so, for otherwise we could never know for sure if we had actually received a valid sacrament or not. As for allowing his divine body and blood to be handled by corrupt individuals, just look at Calvary! He allowed violence to be committed upon His sacred body and blood, so that those who believe in Him might have eternal life. He still does so today.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), December 18, 2002.

Now, that's a good answer..thank you very much!

-- lesley (martchas@hotmail.com), December 18, 2002.

Hi, Paul

"It is certainly true that a priest who celebrates Mass in a state of mortal sin commits another mortal sin of sacrilege."

I don't think this is the case for all situations. What if a Priest lives hundreds of miles away from another priest. I don't think it would be commiting sacriledge to celebrate Mass for his parish as long as he repents, and makes a Act of Perfect Contrition, and goes to Confession at the first chance he gets.

Just for the record Lesley, I am not talking about a child molestor, but there are other mortal sins.

God bless you.

David S

-- David (David@excite.com), December 18, 2002.

Dear David,

Granted, exceptions are possible for extreme circumstances. This is true not just for priests, but for any Catholics who rarely have the opportunity to see a priest in person.

Peace! Paul

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), December 18, 2002.

Lesley, who was the first priest to receive Holy Communion while not in a state of grace -- but not be struck dead by God?

Judas Iscariot, who then left Mass early.

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), December 19, 2002.

J.F.....yes, come to think of it, he did leave early, didn't he? LOL...seriously, the question was not so much concerning the faithful receiving the body and blood of Christ as sinners..that's a whole different topic, but the hang up was concerning the priest who has the actual "power" to perform the turning of the ordinary bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ while in a "knowing" state of totally unrepentence...the man knows he is in a state of mortal sin, doesn't care and knows he will do the act again, perhaps that very day. Judas never had the opportunity to act in this manner concerning the Eucharist. Anyway, I'm quite satisfied with the first answer..I'm getting old and cannot think fast on my feet any longer..LOL. Judas sure is a great example though as far as leaving mass early!!!!!! I used to tell my children why would you go to a feast and leave before dessert was served?

-- lesley (martchas@hotmail.com), December 19, 2002.

May I add to what Paul has so expertly stated?

Three New Testament saints come to mind here. Saint John the Baptist, Saint Peter, and Saint Thomas. Jesus Christ certainly loved all three; and what's more He forgave sinners whenever He healed them. NOT ONE deserved to be touched, much less healed by the Son of God. Yet always Jesus was gracious and forgiving.

John the Baptist knew Jesus from childhood. He held Him to be so Holy that it was unworthy of him (John) to even untie the strap of Jesus' sandal. --But Jesus humbly submitted to John's baptism --PUBLICLY!

Saint Peter was a man of ''unclean lips''-- (Luke 5:8) and wouldn't let Our Lord wash his feet; he knew Who Jesus was-- GOD. Yet Christ washed Peter's feet, and those of all the apostles!

Saint Thomas was unable to believe Jesus could have arisen from the dead! Then He said to thomas, ''Bring here thy finger, and see my hands, and bring here thy hand and put it into my side; and be not unbelieving but believing'' (John 21:27).

Our Lord had compassion on them, even though all were sinners. He has the same love and compassion for us. Not only we who adore Him here. He loves the ones who cause scandal, who cause Him offense. Yes, even the unworthy priests who hold him in sinful hands. It isn't ONLY a matter of our own lowly estate; not a single one of us deserves to even share the same air with Him!

It's the wonderful truth of His immolation for every one of us. For Jesus nothing is too good to give us!

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), December 19, 2002.

May I interject a slightly different angle to this discussion?

The same concern being expressed here based on the priests state of grace also applies to the receptient's state. To ingest the Eucharist is ingesting the holy Body and Blood of Christ. While people are obviously in various states of grace while receiving and with few reported instant deaths, we can safely assume that such a penalty doesn't exist . . . or does it? Didn't Paul explain to the Corthinian church that many were weak and had even prematurely died because they received the Eucharist without recognizing the Body of Christ? So there is a penalty, even if it's slower and more gracious than the Old Testament yank-the-dead-priest-out-of-the-Holy-of-Holies- with-a-rope approach. Perhaps these priests have indeed been paying a physical and spiritual price for their sins as perhaps are people everywhere who are suffering maladies that could be the result of continuing to receive the Eucharist while continuing in unrepented sin. I'm not suggesting that all maladies or premature deaths are caused by this, but I am suggesting that pehaps it's an all-too-often overlooked source of problems. Perhaps when someone falls ill, the first recommended step should be to repent from all sin and make things right with others and then receive the Eucharist with a clean heart - ya never know.

Just a thought.

David

-- non-Catholic Christian (dlbowerman@yahoo.com), December 19, 2002.

Hi David,

That would certainly seem to agree with James 5:14-15 ...

"Is anyone among you sick? Then he must call for the elders of the church and they are to pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer offered in faith will restore the one who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up, and if he has committed sins, they will be forgiven him".

Today, finally, many in the medical professions are coming to appreciate the integral relationship between spiritual wellbeing and physical wellbeing.

Paul

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), December 19, 2002.

I will still remember how I met father Shanley. Father Jerry told us Father Shanley was saying goodbye to Saint Anne's Church (my church back then)in San Bernardino. At the end of mass, I ask him to bless my children. I saw his face, like he didn't want to do it, but he still did. 3 years later he was arrested in san Diego and accused of child molestation going back to the 70s. His case started all the accusations against the Church. I wonder if his blessing for my children was valid up until this date.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), December 19, 2002.

Well; make up your mind. Was it or wasn't it, Elpidio?

Are you asking this forum, or do you have some idea?

We want that man put behind bars. Our holy priesthood is never involved in those things; every good priest has a conscience. You know very well one or two out of a thousand is an anomaly; you're a mathematician. If innuendo paid you a hundred bucks a day, I think you'd be a millionaire by now. Is my math correct?

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), December 19, 2002.

A priest doesn't "bless" your child or anyone else. In "giving a blessing", a clergyman simply invokes the blessing of God on someone; it is god who does the actual blessing. If a blessing is sincerely requested from God, it is granted, no matter who requests it. Was Fr. Shanley sincere? I don't know, and neither does anyone else but God.

Peace! Paul

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), December 19, 2002.

Lesley, you wrote, in response to me: "Judas sure is a great example though as far as leaving Mass early!!!!!!"

I think that it is Dr. Scott Hahn who calls it, "doing the Judas shuffle."

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), December 20, 2002.

Thanks for clarifying that , Paul. I can argue either way from scripture. Have a blessed christmas.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), December 20, 2002.

Dear Elpidio,

Any question can be argued both ways from scripture. That's why we have denominations. It is also why we have the true Church, the pillar and foundation of truth.

I hope your Christmas too will be a happy and holy one.

Peace! Paul

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), December 20, 2002.