I met a Jehovah’s Witness who says that Jesus actually died on a stake, not a cross. Is there any evidence Jesus died on a cross like we see in Church?
There’s plenty.
First, if a stake were used instead of a cross, then only one nail would have been driven through Jesus’ overlapping wrists. But this doesn’t explain why John 20:25 refers to the nails that were used to affix Jesus to the cross. This means that Jesus’ arms were stretched out on a cross and one nail was driven through each arm, not one nail through both arms on a stake.
In addition, Matthew 27:37 says, “[O]ver his head they put the charge against him, which read, ‘This is Jesus the King of the Jews.’” But if Jesus were crucified on a stake, then the sign would be placed directly above his hands, not his head.
We also have evidence that the early Christians knew Jesus was crucified on a cross, not a stake. In the year A.D. 100, the epistle of Barnabas described how Jesus’ outstretched arms on the cross were similar to Moses’ outstretched arms in a battle with the Amalekites (Barnabas 12:2).
The second-century apologist Justin Martyr eloquently described the crossbeams used to crucify Jesus (Dialogue with Trypho, 40.) In the third century, Tertullian said that Christians used the Greek letter tau, or “T,” as a sign of the cross (Tertullian, Ad nationes, 1.11).
Bible scholar Larry Hurtado has even shown how Christian writers in the second century combined the Greek letters for T and R in order to create a symbol that represented the crucifixion called a staurogram (The Earliest Christian Artifacts: Manuscripts and Christian Origins, 1354-154).
So we have good evidence that Jesus died on a traditional cross, from both Scripture and tradition, and no comparable evidence to show Jesus died on a stake.
— Trent Horn
A coworker at my parish asked me if I have a bad temper or anger issues. I told her, “No, why do you ask?” She said that our pastor told her that men of my heritage have bad tempers. I asked her where he came up with that idea, and she said he told her from confessions. Isn’t it wrong to reveal something like that to someone?
It does not sound as if the priest revealed anything that violates the sacramental seal of confession. But you are correct that it is imprudent for a priest to comment generally on confessions in such a way that the faithful are led to look at each other with suspicion or fear. Unfortunately, since you did not hear this firsthand from the priest, there is not much you can do about it.
If he does happen to repeat his observation in your presence, you could say, “Father, I take that as an insult to my father and grandfather, both of whom were gentlemen.” If he apologizes, you can allow yourself to be mollified. If not, then you can write to the bishop and ask his thoughts on the matter.
—Michelle Arnold
Our priest has instructed the extraordinary ministers to come up to the altar at Communion so they can receive at the same time as the priest. When I questioned him about this, he told me the Church gives him liberty to make this change. Is this true?
It appears your priest is misinformed. The U.S. Catholic Bishops’ Liturgy Guides: Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion at Mass says the following:
“If extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion are required by pastoral need, they should not approach the altar before the priest has received Communion. After the priest has concluded his own Communion, he distributes Communion to the extraordinary ministers, assisted by the deacon, and then hands the sacred vessels to them for distribution of Holy Communion to the people.
— Peggy Frye
My husband and I were divorced a year ago. The marriage was never annulled, and I have remained chaste since then. We have begun talking about the possibility of getting back together. If that happens, do we need to be remarried in the Church? Can we still behave as husband and wife with or without a civil remarriage?
If your marriage in the Church was presumptively valid, then you cannot be “remarried” in the Church. I recommend talking to your pastor to ensure that there were no irregularities at the time of the marriage that need to be resolved. Assuming all was in order, you would need only to be remarried civilly—for civil benefits and to avoid scandal—but you may ask your pastor for a nuptial blessing.
As for conjugal relations: In theory, you could “behave as husband and wife,” as you put it. But to do so while civilly divorced, especially if the two of you have not publicly announced a reunion, could be scandalous. It might lead others to believe that you are appropriating the benefits of marriage while not repairing the apparent breach to your marriage.
It could also be spiritually beneficial to wait for your marriage to be fully regularized in the eyes of God and the state before engaging again in conjugal relations. If nothing else, waiting could be considered a penance for any harm the two of you may have caused each other or others by your marital breakdown. In any event, this is a matter that should be discussed with your pastor.
—Michelle Arnold
It is said that when one commits a mortal sin, he is out of the state of grace. Does this mean that God hates the person who commits a mortal sin, and God does so by withdrawing his grace from that person, having no more favor upon that person and desiring to condemn that person to hell?
St. Paul writes in Romans 5:8, “But God demonstrates his own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” While he hates the sin, he loves the sinner, as he demonstrated on Good Friday. His love for us is far greater than any sin we can commit. Even though mortal sins destroy one’s ability to merit good, it cannot constrain God. Even in mortal sin he can give us grace. This is what happens when we are moved to repent. He didn’t suffer and die that we might be lost. He endured much suffering that we be saved.
— Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P.
What do I say to my Pentecostal friend who says that because God is “one,” the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit must be one person, not three?
Tell him that the Bible teaches only that God is one being, or that there is only one God. The Bible never says God is one person.
The distinction is important. A being is simply a unified entity, while a person is relational in nature (i.e., the Trinity is an eternal relationship of three divine persons). Or to put it more informally—being refers to questions like “Is he real?” while person refers to questions like “Who is he?”
When it comes to God, there is one being and three persons—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. You can also share Scripture verses that show these three persons are distinct; they aren’t just one person pretending to be three persons.
As the Catholic Answers tract “God in Three Persons” eloquently puts it, “These include passages that show Jesus talking to his Father (e.g., John 17), or declaring he is going to be with the Father (John 14:12, 14:28, 16:10). One role [or “mode”] of a person cannot go to be with another role or mode of that person. It also can’t say that the two of them will send the Holy Spirit while they remain in heaven (John 14:16-17, 14:26, 15:26, 16:13–15; Acts 2:32–33).”
— Trent Horn
Who is the Catholic Jewish rabbi who appears on EWTN talking about our Jewish roots?
I have no idea, but no Catholic, whether of Jewish heritage or not, should be presenting himself to be a rabbi. The sole exception might be if a rabbi converts to Catholicism. Even then, he or she presumably would be presented as a former rabbi now retired from active service. I trust there was some misunderstanding of what you saw on EWTN.
—Michelle Arnold
Last Sunday after Mass, I noticed an EMHC who visits the sick and homebound take some hosts from the tabernacle and put them into a tissue instead of a pyx. She then put it in her coat pocket. My heart tells me that it is wrong, but people are telling me that it’s okay.
Your heart is right. Placing the sacred host into a tissue or into any receptacle other than a pyx does not befit the dignity of Christ’s Body and Blood. I recommend talking to both the person in charge of the EMHCs and the priest about what you witnessed so the problem can be immediately corrected and additional instruction can be given to the EMHCs on how to properly carry the most holy Eucharist to the sick.
“Holy Communion and Worship of the Eucharist outside Mass” says: “The Eucharist for Communion outside a church is to be carried in a pyx or other covered vessel; the vesture of the minister and the manner of carrying the Eucharist should be appropriate and in accord with local circumstances” (n. 20).
— Peggy Frye
Why is it important that Mary is “ever virgin”? The miracle is that Jesus’ conception took place in a virgin. Why would it matter if she provided him with siblings by Joseph or any other man?
It has to do with the fact that Jesus is not only man but God as well. We would never think of storing foul-smelling, dirty socks in a tabernacle that houses or housed the Blessed Sacrament. Mary’s womb became a tabernacle when Jesus was conceived in it. Any other child conceived in her womb would have been conceived in original sin, which is far more foul than dirty socks. Her womb was sanctified by his presence in it—as was she. The more we are sensitive to his divinity, the more we recognize how special Mary is.
— Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P.
My wife smokes a pack of cigarettes a week. I am worried about her health. She is not working outside of the home, so she keeps asking me for cigarette money. What should I do?
By virtue of your marriage, the money that you earn does not belong to you alone, even if you are the one who works outside the home. Your wife shares in ownership of family resources, such as your income, and has the right to make minor expenditures at her own discretion. If she is smoking a pack a week, then she is spending about $5 per week on cigarettes. For most people, five dollars per week does not constitute a major expenditure.
That said, I understand that you are concerned for your wife’s health. I can only recommend that you express your concerns. If she decides to continue smoking, you may request that she do what she can to avoid exposing others to secondhand smoke, such as smoking outside.
—Michelle Arnold
I’ve been hearing a lot about “death with dignity” lately. Shouldn’t we be allowed to end our own lives on our own terms?
Everyone agrees we should have a choice in “how” we die. By that I mean we should be able to choose where we die (in hospice, in a hospital, at home), who we want to stand by us as we end our mortal existence, and whether we will use treatment to alleviate suffering, even if it may indirectly hasten death.
We should also be treated with dignity when we die, but saying that assisted suicide (which is what “death with dignity” advocates actually support) is “dignified” implies that dying naturally is “undignified,” which is insulting to those who choose to not kill themselves.
Other people will say that the “dignity” in dying comes from the fact that the person is able to choose how they die, regardless of what choice they make. But dying in a dignified manner relates to how one confronts death, not the manner in which one dies or chooses to die. History recounts many situations of individuals who were forced to endure degrading deaths but faced those deaths in a dignified way.
Finally, we don’t truly believe everyone should be able to die on their own terms, because we routinely stop healthy people from killing themselves. But in allowing assisted suicide for the terminally ill, we are saying that their lives don’t really matter, and so we shouldn’t help them out of a suicide decision, even though we would help other people—even disabled people like paraplegics—out of such a decision.
A better approach is to say that all human life has equal value and equal dignity, and so all people should be protected from the temptation to take their own life.
— Trent Horn
Is the pyx that holds the sacred host supposed to be blessed?
Yes, the pyx should be blessed.
Book of Blessings, approved for use in the dioceses of the United States by the NCCB and confirmed by the Apostolic See, says: “Certain objects that are used in divine worship are deserving of special respect and therefore should be blessed before being used” (n. 1341).
And again: “It is proper to bless other articles used for liturgical celebration: the ciborium or pyx, the monstrance, the vestments worn by ordained ministers, such linens as the corporal and altar cloths, and hymnals and service books (Sacramentary, Lectionary for Mass, etc.)” (n. 1343).
— Peggy Frye
A friend said that after receiving the Lord Jesus in the Holy Eucharist, it is no longer necessary to make the sign of the cross, because we already have him inside our body.
The sign of the cross is an outward expression of our adoration of the Holy Trinity and also of God’s fullest human expression of his divine love for us as depicted by his Passion. It is always appropriate to acknowledge this with the sign of the cross. It is something that even the angels cannot do, since it requires a body. We cover our bodies with it as a response to his love.
— Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P.
For many years, I worked as a secretary to the rabbis and cantor at a Jewish synagogue. I have often wondered if I was committing a sin by working for a religious organization that does not believe in Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior. The most troubling part of my job was working with people who were converting to Judaism. I felt that my participation with the conversions was against Jesus.
A Christian working for a Jewish synagogue in an administrative or support capacity (e.g., maintenance crew) does not sin by doing so. For a Christian to perform administrative tasks associated with Jewish conversion is also not a sin, since it does not mean that the person who performs them is involved directly in the conversion process to a non-Christian religion. Rather, he is merely recording the fact of a conversion that others have facilitated.
But if you truly feared “that [your] participation in doing administrative tasks associated with conversion was against Jesus,” and you ignored your conscience and did it anyway, then it does not matter what the objective status of the administrative tasks was. The act of ignoring your own conscience, especially when done for personal gain, is indeed a sin and should be confessed.
—Michelle Arnold
Does God have favorites? God prefers Abel to Cain (Gen. 4:4) and in Leviticus 26:9 he looks on the Israelites “in favor”; but verses like Acts 10:34 say God “does not show favoritism.”
Acts 10:34 uses the Greek word prosopolemptes, which means “judges by looking at the face.” God shows favor to people who obey him, but he does not unfairly favor for salvation some groups just because of their heritage or “how they look.” 1 Timothy 2:4 makes it clear that God desires all men to be saved.
— Trent Horn
Is it proper for a layperson to have a “Communion service” with distribution of the Eucharist on a weekday if the priest was unable to celebrate due to bad weather, sickness, etc.?
Here’s the gist of what the USCCB has to say on the matter:
1. Whenever possible, daily Mass should be celebrated in each parish.
2. Whenever the Rite for Distributing Holy Communion Outside Mass with a Celebration of the Word is scheduled on a weekday, every effort must be undertaken to avoid any confusion between this celebration and the Mass. Indeed, such celebrations should encourage the faithful to be present at and to participate in the celebration of the Eucharist.. . .
3. When daily Mass is scheduled in a parish, it is usually not appropriate to schedule a Liturgy of the Word with Distribution of Holy Communion. This rite is designed for “those who are prevented from being present at the community’s celebration.” When necessary, the scheduling of these celebrations should never detract from “the celebration of the Eucharist [as] the center of the entire Christian life.” Such celebrations should never be seen as an equal choice with participation at Mass.
— Peggy Frye
I have been asked by many non-Catholics why Catholics wear or display the crucifix. Their point is that Jesus is no longer hanging on the cross, he is risen.
The Resurrection of Jesus demonstrated that he is truly God. But his death on the cross demonstrated how much God loves us. The cross did not redeem us; Jesus, by hanging on the cross, redeemed us. We cannot ever acknowledge this enough.
— Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P.
Jeremiah 22:28-30 says Jeconiah was childless, but 1 Chronicles 3:17-18 lists his sons, and Jeconiah himself appears in Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus. So was he childless or not?
Read the passage in Jeremiah carefully. Jeconiah was the king of Judah until the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar conquered the region and exiled him with the rest of the Jews in 601 B.C. As punishment for Jeconiah’s rebellion against God, the Lord cursed him and said, “Write this man down as childless, a man who shall not succeed in his days; for none of his offspring shall succeed in sitting on the throne of David, and ruling again in Judah” (Jer. 22:29).
Jeconiah did indeed have children, since Jeremiah earlier referred to him “and his children hurled and cast into a land which they do not know” (Jer. 22:28). Jeremiah 22:28-30 discusses only how Jeconiah was recorded as being childless in order to shame him and how none of his children would ever sit on the throne of David.
— Trent Horn
I was brought up Catholic and am also Native American. Am I allowed to have a dreamcatcher over me like my relatives when I sleep?
It depends on what your purpose is in doing so. If it is because of belief that the ornament “catches dreams,” then that is superstitious and should be rejected (CCC 2111). If it is merely considered tribal art, displayed for decorative purposes or for identification with your heritage, then there is no objection.
—Michelle Arnold
Once a deacon is assigned to a parish, can he change the parish he serves or discontinue serving the parish he was assigned to without consent of the bishop?
The short answer appears to be no. The U.S. bishops have written:
“Whenever a person is ordained, he is to serve the diocesan Church. Deacons are no different in this regard: they are assigned by the bishop to ministries for which the bishop perceives a great need, and for which the deacon may have special gifts or talents. Most often, this will be within a parish setting, just as most priests serve in a parish. Once assigned to the parish, the deacon and any other clergy assigned to the parish minister under the immediate supervision of the pastor. However, this assignment may be changed at the request of the deacon or the initiative of the bishop. (USCCB Beliefs and Teachings).
In other words, a deacon may request a new assignment, but the bishop must approve any change (and, practically, so must the pastor, since in most cases the prelate would not go against the wishes of the pastor).
— Peggy Frye
How many sons does God have? Some passages refer to angels and men as “sons of God” (Gen 6:2, Job 1:6, John 1:12), but John 3:18 says Jesus is God’s only begotten son.
A person can be a father in the sense of bringing someone into existence and being their provider and caretaker. This is the sense that God is the “father” of angels and men (Romans 8:15 says humans are children of God by adoption). However, a person can also be a father by bringing forth offspring that share his essence. Only Jesus shares the Father’s essence, or his divinity, and is the eternally begotten Son of God. In this respect, Jesus is God’s only son.
— Trent Horn
Can one receive an indulgence for praying the rosary?
Yes. A plenary indulgence can be granted for the recitation of the rosary, provided the person performing the indulged act fulfills all the norms listed below.
“A plenary indulgence is granted when the rosary is recited in a church or oratory or when it is recited in a family, a religious community, or a pious association. A partial indulgence is granted for its recitation in all other circumstances.” (The Handbook of Indulgences Norms and Grants, no. 48)
The requirements for receiving plenary indulgences are as follows:
“A plenary indulgence can be acquired only once a day, except for . . . those who are on the point of death. To acquire a plenary indulgence, it is necessary to perform the work to which the indulgence is attached and to fulfill three conditions: sacramental confession, eucharistic Communion and prayer for the intentions of the Supreme Pontiff. It is further required that all attachment to sin, even to venial sin, be absent.
“If this disposition is in any way less than complete, or if the prescribed three conditions are not fulfilled, the indulgence will be only partial” (Apostolic Constitution on Indulgences).
— Peggy Frye
If a Catholic has received last rites just prior to death, is a funeral Mass still mandatory?
Funeral Masses are never mandatory, but Catholics would be foolish to refuse one, unless there is grave reason to do so. The whole point of a funeral Mass is to offer prayer and sacrifice for the repose of the soul of the deceased, which speeds the soul along to heaven.
—Michelle Arnold
We were hit by an earthquake recently, and we received some money as a gift from some distant friends but don’t really need it. Should we accept the money, or is it wrong to refuse charity?
Why not send your friends a thank-you letter for their generosity and explain that you have passed on their gift to relief efforts in your area?
—Michelle Arnold
If the consecrated host is the body, soul, and divinity of Christ, does that mean that it is conscious? I know I do not understand this mystery, but I imagine the wafer having eyes and looking at me, which is rather creepy.
After the consecration, we do not refer to the Eucharist as an “it” but a “who.” With the Eucharist, the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. Since the bread and wine only appear to be bread and wine after the consecration at Mass, the Eucharist is the person of Jesus, who is conscious.
Because you hear a friend’s voice on your cell phone, you do not feel the need to see lips moving on it. You recognize that such imagining is not necessary and is a distraction from the reality of your friend who is trying to communicate with you. So with the Eucharist: looking at the host is looking at God—but under the appearance of bread. In heaven we will be able to look back and see ourselves adoring him when all we could see was the host, and we will realize what a taste of heaven that experience really was.
— Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P.
I have heard some people say that we should not call God “he” or that it is okay to refer to God as “she.” What does the Church teach on this subject?
It has become fashionable in recent years to refer to God as “she” or to avoid gender pronouns entirely when referring to God. However, the Catechism explains, “By calling God ‘Father,’ the language of faith indicates two main things: that God is the first origin of everything and transcendent authority; and that he is at the same time goodness and loving care for all his children. God’s parental tenderness can also be expressed by the image of motherhood, which emphasizes God’s immanence, the intimacy between Creator and creature. . . . God transcends the human distinction between the sexes. He is neither man nor woman: he is God. He also transcends human fatherhood and motherhood, although he is their origin and standard: no one is father as God is Father” (CCC 239).
So we see that while God is not a male being, we refer to God as “he” because this is how God has revealed himself to us and is the most apt way to express his relation to us as transcendent creator. Peter Kreeft and Fr. Ronald Tacelli give us another reason to understand the importance of this gendered revelation:
“Except for Judaism, all other known ancient religions had goddesses as well as gods. The Jewish revelation was distinctive in its exclusively masculine pronoun because it was distinctive in its theology of the divine transcendence. That seems to be the main point of the masculine imagery. As a man comes into a woman from without to make her pregnant, so God creates the universe from without rather than birthing it from within and impregnates our souls with grace or supernatural life without. As a woman cannot impregnate herself, so the universe cannot create itself, nor can the soul redeem itself” (Handbook of Catholic Apologetics, 104).
— Trent Horn
I grew up Catholic, received the sacraments, but later left the Church to become a Lutheran. At that time, some of my Catholic friends told me that if I left the Church I would be considered an apostate. Now that I want to return to the sacraments, what do I do?
Catholics who leave the Church for a Protestant sect (e.g. Lutheranism) are not considered apostates. Apostasy, as defined by the Church, is the total repudiation of the Christian faith (CCC 2089), in which the Catholic no longer considers himself a Christian, either by practicing a non-Christian religion (e.g., Judaism), or by rejecting Christianity for another alternative belief (e.g., atheism).
Since you have not committed the sin of apostasy but have simply lapsed from the practice of your Catholic Faith, the first step to receiving the sacraments is to go to confession.
— Peggy Frye
From the beginning of a First Friday Mass I attended, the priest played with his electronic tablet and put it on the altar. I was unhappy and chose to leave. I felt that I was not worthy to continue to attend that Mass while there was anger in my heart. Was my action correct?
I hope you do not mind, but I had to edit your question significantly for English-language readability. Ordinarily, I would not mention this, but it bears significance on the answer to your question.
I suspect that English is not your first language, and that you perhaps were attending Mass in a place outside your native culture. If that is indeed the case, then you might have misunderstood the priest’s actions. I very much doubt he was “playing” with his tablet during Mass. It is more likely he was reading the prayers of the Mass on his tablet, and then brought the tablet to the altar so that he could continue reading the prayers of the Mass. While still unusual in this culture, priests occasionally use electronic devices for the prayers of the liturgy.
Instead of judging a priest’s actions when you do not have full information about the situation, perhaps you might try to come up with a logical, charitable explanation for that which you cannot understand. Had you waited until after Mass, for example, you could have politely asked Father why he had been using a tablet during Mass.
—Michelle Arnold
I do genealogy as a hobby. A distant cousin of mine has a marriage certificate issued by Erie County, New York, in 1891. The officiant listed was a Catholic priest, and both witnesses were Catholic. The priest was serving at a chapel associated with the bishop’s residence. When the cousin tried to get verification, the priest at the cathedral said that he had no record in 1891 but did have a marriage for the couple in 1900. Can you help me?
Catholic dioceses usually maintain historical archives for marriages and other sacraments celebrated within their diocese. I recommend contacting the Diocese of Buffalo, New York (buffalodiocese.org), where this marriage evidently took place and ask if the diocese can recommend an historian or archivist who can help you interpret the document.
—Michelle Arnold
I have a Mormon friend who says that the Church teaches that we can become gods. Is this true?
Some people who believe that men can become Gods, like Mormons, cite paragraph 460 of the Catechism, which says, “The Word became flesh to make us partakers of the divine nature. . . . For the Son of God became man so that we might become God. The only begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods.”
The Catholic Church does teach that humans can, through the grace of God, acquire God’s shareable (or communicable) attributes, such as holiness or impartiality. This is what St. Athanasius, who is quoted in paragraph 460, meant when he said, “we might become God.” But St. Athanasius also said, “We become by grace what God is by nature,” or God gives us his divine life so that we resemble him but we never become him, since there is only one God (De Incarnatione, I).
Renowned historian of Christianity Jaroslav Pelikan says that the doctrine that men could become like God in holiness (or what is called theosis) was, among people like Athanasius, “not to be viewed as analogous to classical Greek theories about the promotion of human beings to divine rank, and in that sense not to be defined by natural theology at all; on such errors they pronounced their ‘Anathema!’” (Christianity and Classical Culture , 318). In other words, the Church Fathers would not have recognized the Mormon doctrine of exaltation as being a variation of their doctrine of theosis. Instead, they would have considered it grave heresy.
— Trent Horn
My sister converted to Judaism when she was married. We celebrate the Jewish holidays with my sister’s family. My son likes it, but I wonder if I should be doing this.
Under ordinary circumstances, there is no problem with Catholics joining in the celebration of Jewish holidays with their Jewish friends and family. In your case though, you have a special circumstance: Your sister apostatized from the Catholic Church, and now she is evidently raising her children as non-Christians. For you to join in as if she did nothing wrong in leaving the Church is to set a bad example for your son about the importance of his Catholic Faith. For these reasons, I cannot recommend that you continue to join these celebrations or allow your son to attend.
The problem, of course, is how to deal with your sister’s and your son’s disappointment at no longer taking part in something that has been enjoyable in the past. To your son you might explain that you are Christians and have your own holidays to celebrate. As for your sister, you will probably have to be more forthright. Explain to her that you made a mistake in accepting, without objection, her choice to leave the Church (don’t call it “apostasy,” as that will be inflammatory). Putting the emphasis on your own failure may make it easier for her to listen to your position.
As for holidays, you might suggest to both your son and your sister that your families celebrate together on secular holidays, such as Independence Day, Thanksgiving, and (the secular) New Year’s Eve.
—Michelle Arnold
In Ecclesiastes 12:7 we read “And the dust returns to the earth as it was, and the spirit returns to God who gave it.” Isn’t this verse talking about the soul and not the spirit? And if a person dies in mortal sin, how can his spirit return to God? Doesn’t it go straight to hell?
The Church teaches that God creates every spiritual soul immediately—it is not “produced” by the parents—and that it is immortal. It does not perish when it separates from the body at death, and it will be reunited with the body at the final resurrection.
Sometimes the soul is distinguished from the spirit. St. Paul, for instance, prays that God may sanctify his people “wholly,” with “spirit and soul and body” kept sound and blameless at the Lord’s coming. The Church teaches that this distinction does not introduce a duality into the soul.
“Spirit” signifies that from creation man is ordered to a supernatural end and that his soul can be raised gratuitously beyond all it deserves to communion with God. The spiritual tradition of the Church also emphasizes the heart, in the biblical sense of the depths of one’s being, where the person decides for or against God (cf. CCC 362-368).
Immediately after death, the soul returns to God for the particular judgment (cf. CCC 1022).
— Peggy Frye
What is the Church’s position on praying a single decade rosary? The reason I am asking is because it is more convenient for me to pray it this way in public.
The rosary is a private devotion. You can pray as much or as little of it as you are able. You may even use your single decade rosary to pray one decade of the rosary at a time at various parts of the day.
—Michelle Arnold