Archbishop Chaput: divorced/remarried must live as brother and sister to receive Communion [CC]

[godisgood77]

If you claim that, you are not seeing with the eyes of the Church.

Of course, you mean seeing with the eyes of Brendan

You and I disagree… +Chaput and I disagree… I’m happy to not be in his diocese anymore.

 

[Brendan]

Of course, you mean seeing with the eyes of Brendan

Nope, simply via the teachings of the Church. Nothing more, nothing less. As I mentioned before, I was present when a Papal Nuncio, the direct representative of the Pope to a nation, briefed local bishops on the day AI was released. The Nunico had received his copy two weeks before, and had received a briefing from the Pope himself on how to present it to the bishops.

I was fortunate to be able to ask questions during this briefing.

My question was “Does this change any of the teachings of Familiaris Consortio on the divorced and remarried being able to receive Communion”

The answer was “Nothing has changed, only how we talk about it”

Given that I can see no reason why the Pope would lie to his Nucios, nor why the Nucios would lie to me and the bishops present, such must be the teaching of the Church. I do not have the authority to claim otherwise, neither do you.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=13829151&highlight=nuncio#post13829151

You and I disagree… +Chaput and I disagree… I’m happy to not be in his diocese anymore.

We might disagree, but that does not alter the fact that +Chaput is an excellent bishop.

 

[godisgood77]

I apologize, you are right. I have been too cavalier and contrarian in my statements. My disagreement should not devolve in to pettiness. I guess it’s easy to fire off hasty posts on these phones… Thanks for the correction.

I guess my disappointment stems from a feeling that +Chaput’s guidelines are contrary to some of the what the Pope is trying to achieve. I believe it to be fairly explicit, but grant that there are other opinions out there. The negative reading I have is likely colored by my time and experience with +Chaput in Denver where he backed kicking a young student out of school for the sins of the parents (more precisely a gay couple) coupled… I grant that. I’m just disappointed that his guidelines exclude people from holding positions of responsibility which seems to me to be a very broad exclusion and may include things like CCD and marriage prep; seems like a possibility. If that does not come to bare… I’ll be happy.

Pax

 

[godisgood77]

Nope, simply via the teachings of the Church. Nothing more, nothing less. As I mentioned before, I was present when a Papal Nuncio, the direct representative of the Pope to a nation, briefed local bishops on the day AI was released. The Nunico had received his copy two weeks before, and had received a briefing from the Pope himself on how to present it to the bishops.

I was fortunate to be able to ask questions during this briefing.

My question was “Does this change any of the teachings of Familiaris Consortio on the divorced and remarried being able to receive Communion”

The answer was “Nothing has changed, only how we talk about it”

Given that I can see no reason why the Pope would lie to his Nucios, nor why the Nucios would lie to me and the bishops present, such must be the teaching of the Church. I do not have the authority to claim otherwise, neither do you

Here is Pope Francis on whether anything has changed…

Frank Rocca (Wall Street Journal): Thanks, Holy Father. I see that the questions on immigration that I had thought to ask you have been asked and answered by you very well. If you permit me, I’d like to ask you another question about an event of recent days, which was your apostolic exhortation. As you well know, there has been much discussion about on one of the many, I know that we’ve focused on this a lot…there has been much discussion after the publication. Some sustain that nothing has changed with respect to the discipline that regulates access to the sacraments for the divorced and remarried, that the Law, the pastoral praxis and obviously the doctrine remain the same. Others sustain that much has changed and that there are new openings and possibilities. For a Catholic who wants to know: are there new, concrete possibilities that didn’t exist before the publication of the exhortation or not?

Pope Francis: I can say yes, many. But it would be an answer that is too small. I recommend that you read the presentation of Cardinal Schonborn, who is a great theologian. He was the secretary for the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, and he knows the doctrine of the faith well. In that presentation, your question will find an answer.

 

[pnewton]

I’m just disappointed that his guidelines exclude people from holding positions of responsibility which seems to me to be a very broad exclusion and may include things like CCD and marriage prep; seems like a possibility.

I too found that somewhat excessive, but the I am not the bishop of Philadelphia. Perhaps he sees a need where others do not. Also, this may change somewhat with time, if shown to be excessive. I can understand the reason you may not want them as extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion, but the exclusion for something totally non-liturgical, like parish council, belies the idea they are part of the parish, when in fact they are Catholics in good standing.

But for the most part, what he wrote was quite generous. I note in particular:

Undertaking to live as brother and sister is necessary for the divorced and
civilly-remarried to receive reconciliation in the Sacrament of Penance, which could then open
the way to the Eucharist. Such individuals are encouraged to approach the Sacrament of Penance
regularly, having recourse to God’s great mercy in that sacrament if they fail in chastity.

 

[phil19034]

The negative reading I have is likely colored by my time and experience with +Chaput in Denver where he backed kicking a young student out of school for the sins of the parents (more precisely a gay couple) coupled…

First - I might be wrong, but I’m under the impression that it was actually the Pastor who denied the child to return the next year, and the Archbishop supported his Pastor.

I don’t know any of the specifics.

However, I did hear former Pro Bowl Quarterback Rich Gannon talk about a similar situation at a Men’s Conference. He was attending a Parish Council meeting and the council was talking about all the kids who attend Catholic School but don’t come to Mass. They were also talking about the demand for the school and the need for a potential waiting list for the school. So Rich Gannon chimed in and said (paraphrase)

This is simple… if you don’t bring your kids to Sunday Mass, you go to the end of line so the families who bring their kids to Mass take priority. And if a waiting list is needed, the kids who don’t come to mass will be the ones on the waiting list, or are simply not accepted.

I don’t know what the situation was in Denver, but I’m 100% sure there was a lot more to the story other than having gay parents. Perhaps, they didn’t want their child taught Catholic Social Teaching, or something to that effect. If they were complaining to the pastor in private, the pastor would NOT make it into international news.

I would be willing to bet that the Archbishop took the heat of the pastor, and the pastor didn’t publicly disclose the real reason they didn’t allow the child to return.

I grant that. I’m just disappointed that his guidelines exclude people from holding positions of responsibility which seems to me to be a very broad exclusion and may include things like CCD and marriage prep; seems like a possibility. If that does not come to bare… I’ll be happy.

Pax

Why the double standard? If we hold Deacons and Church employees to a set standard in regards to their public life, why would we not apply that same standard to volunteers?

If the action is unbecoming of a Deacon or Parish Administrator, then it should be unbecoming of an EMHC, Lector, Altar Server, Parish Council Member, and committee chair.

God Bless

 

[irenaeus1]

If a person is divorced, then remarried without an annulment repents and amends his or her life exactly as the Church prescribes, they would still be excluded in +Chaput’s Archdiocese…that is not forgiveness, that is a scarlet letter.

I believe you are confusing forgiveness with sin’s consequences, whether natural or structured. A murderer can repent and be forgiven but still have to serve his prison sentence. If they have sincerely repented and received absolution in the Sacrament of Confession, then yes, they are forgiven. Not even absolution necessarily remits all the temporal punishment due to God, though the sin is forgiven.

 

[godisgood77]

I believe you are confusing forgiveness with sin’s consequences, whether natural or structured. A murderer can repent and be forgiven but still have to serve his prison sentence. If they have sincerely repented and received absolution in the Sacrament of Confession, then yes, they are forgiven. Not even absolution necessarily remits all the temporal punishment due to God, though the sin is forgiven.

I don’t think I’m confusing forgiveness with consequences… I’m just appalled that +Chaput would exclude an entire group of people for the remainder of their lives from holding any position of responsibility in his diocese. I believe that punishment to be onerous and overly severe and a poor Christian example.

 

[otjm]

I agree - for all the effort they went through at the synod for two years in a row, it doesn’t seem that much new really came of it. If this is the end result of the synod (at least for Philadelphia) they could have saved themselves the trouble. This is absolutely no different than things were before. Nothing groundbreaking here - just the Archbishop restating Church doctrine.

The synod cannot be reduced to one simple item - that of the issue of admission to Communion.

The Pope’s “summary”. if you will, was a long one; but the only issue that has received much press time has been that issue. Reading the rest of his document (and that part was relatively short) is worthwhile.

 

[otjm]

He can’t be re-assigned fast enough. Think the pope had him squarely in mind when he made his comments about “conservative” elements in the Church.

Let’s tell everyone they’re too sinful to even bother showing up at Church, that should reverse the devastating demographic trends that are undeniably in front of us!

Brilliant.

A) he follows the Magisterium, therefore he is neither conservative nor liberal.

B) Your second paragraph I will assume is an emotional response, as that is not what the Church teaches.

 

[otjm]

Actually, the outrage is based on the fact that the faithful are hearing the Pope and are following his direction, but Ab Chaput wrote his guidelines as if the Pope never wrote AL with the authority of the Petrine Office behind it.

No; they are hearing the liberal secular press telling them what the press desires.

As someone said, if tomorrow the Pope, by a miracle, walked on the water of the Tiber, the next day the headlines would read “Pope can’t swim!”

 

[deaconjohnO]

Of course, you mean seeing with the eyes of Brendan

You and I disagree… +Chaput and I disagree… I’m happy to not be in his diocese anymore.

Chaput is wildly popular in my Archdiocese which is more than 1000 miles away from his Archdiocese. I hope he gets the red hat. There is a very large Catholic Conference in a neighboring diocese this fall. Chaput is the keynote/main event. The conference is in an arena that holds 15,000 people…it has been a sellout. To be honest I have never met or heard of anyone disliking him. Why the vitriol?

 

[Ender]

Excluding people permanently from the possibility of holding positions of responsibility regardless of state in life is exclusion. There is no amount of mental circus tricks that can change that.

People are barred from leadership positions not regardless of their state of life, but only because of it.

If a person is divorced, then remarried without an annulment repents and amends his or her life exactly as the Church prescribes, they would still be excluded in +Chaput’s Archdiocese…that is not forgiveness, that is a scarlet letter.

This is not accurate. If people amend their lives as the church requires then they may be forgiven and return to full participation in the life of the church.Those who do not amend their lives cannot be forgiven, cannot receive communion, and cannot assume specific roles within the church. The problem is that amending ones life in this context means living as brother and sister, which is precisely what the “remarried without an annulment” group objects to.

At face value, there is a contradiction between AL and +Chaput.

There may be a contradiction between +Chaput and your interpretation of AL, but there is no contradiction between +Chaput and church doctrine.

Ender

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

So what did people think about his statement that says that gay couples while needing to stop having sex don’t actually have to break up?

 

[Brendan]

I don’t think I’m confusing forgiveness with consequences… I’m just appalled that +Chaput would exclude an entire group of people **for the remainder of their lives from holding any position **of responsibility in his diocese. I believe that punishment to be onerous and overly severe and a poor Christian example.

If the separate, and no longer present themselves as being married, then there is no bar.

The decision is entirely on them.

 

[otjm]

So what did people think about his statement that says that gay couples while needing to stop having sex don’t actually have to break up?

Is there a difference between that, and making the same requirement of a couple, at least one of whom was married prior, divorced, and has not received a decree of nullity? The Church holds that neither is a valid marriage.

 

[jeannetherese]

So what did people think about his statement that says that gay couples while needing to stop having sex don’t actually have to break up?

It seems to be in keeping with the Church’s teachings on chastity in relation to one’s state in life.
May God bless all who visit our thread.
Amen.

 

[kozlosap]

So what did people think about his statement that says that gay couples while needing to stop having sex don’t actually have to break up?

Sounds to me like he is saying that the RULES apply to all couples!

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

Sounds to me like he is saying that the RULES apply to all couples!

I meant the gay couples can stay gay couples which is distinct from this forum where people claim a SSA individual has to run away from anything which might seem like a romantic relationship in the slightest or in general getting too attached to someone.

 

[Peebo]

This whole question of divorced/remarried Catholics…those living in homosexual relationships…receiving communion …while there is clear church teaching on this… non the less it doesn’t seem that teaching is being strictly adhered to in some …if not many circumstances…I can relate one example…a cousin of mine (does not live here in the US) is living in a homosexual relationship…he would be one of the most generous caring and loving people I know…loves the Catholic Church…donates his own time and expense helping at overseas Catholic missions…his partner has gone through RCIA at their church…he was recently received into the Catholic Church and confirmed by the Arch Bishop of the city where they live…they both are quite involved in their local parish…of course I don’t know for sure if they are living celibate lives together…while I personally don’t agree with that sort of relationship I find it hard to fault him because at least in his caring and compassion…and his charity work he exemplifies what Christ commanded us to do …to love your neighbor as yourself…I know what the church teaches on these matters…so I don’t need a lecture on who can and who can’t receive communion thank you…I’m just pointing out one example of why some Catholics probably have a hard time accepting that teaching either for their own circumstances or for those they know…and yet they may be leading good Christian lives except they are out of communion with the church…to be perfectly honest I agree more with the Orthodox approach to divorce and remarriage…although as a Catholic I abide by the church teaching.