Chicago prelate: Let gay and divorced Catholics take part

[Sy_Noe]

I was referring to what is actually practiced. Have you ever witnessed someone whom the priest or minister refused communion? Now that I think about it, I actually have but it had nothing to do with their marital state or abortion or anything like that.

Oh ok I misunderstood what you meant. No I personally haven’t unless I count hearing a priest at a Christmas Eve Mass announcing who was not to come forward.

 

[Rau]

I have. It’s closed to anyone who does not walk in lockstep with the Catholic Church on what the Catholic Church believes is mortal sin, on what the Catholic Church believes it means to be in a state of grace, and it’s closed in those cases even if one discerns the body and believes in transubstantiation.

Since the Catholic Church brings the sacrament to you…who do you think might nominate the circumstances in which it may be received?

And the very person responsible for “closing” the sacrament to himself is the very person empowered to re-open it.

 

[LongingSoul]

Yup, despite the much longer confessional lines. As a server I saw we seldom had more than two railfuls of communicants in a full church. Now you are practically forced to go; that’s the problem.

This is one of those things that I feel loath to judge. The fact that the Priests themselves don’t deter the congregation from coming to communion, is significant to me. I’m well aware that there must be a lot of people in an objective state of sin in the communion line especially regarding contraception… but I always feel that despite their ignorance, there is something positive about their presence at Mass.

In a similar vein, the Priest in my local parish holds the Third Rite of reconciliation twice a year before Easter and Christmas. It doesn’t go in the bulletin but he always comments that it will go ahead unless the Archbishop puts his foot down. The Archbishop must turn a blind eye to it because it always goes ahead and is always packed to the rafters.

I don’t know whether I’ve been wrongly catechised all my life… but I understand the sacraments in a way that they are like food for the soul. I do understand the importance of the requirements to be met to receive and strictly adhere to them… but at the same time I feel I’ve been given something in my upbringing that not everybody gets and want others to have too. There is the issue of culpability.

As I say, I adhere to all the rules strictly myself, but there’s that aspect of it that wants others to have something of what I am blessed to have. Call it a weakness, but that’s how I experience it.

 

[Sy_Noe]

Since the Catholic Church brings the sacrament to you…who do you think might nominate the circumstances in which it may be received?

And the very person responsible for “closing” the sacrament to himself is the very person empowered to re-open it.

Oh I have no problem with any faith community nominating its circumstances and then of course people react to any faith community in various ways based on their beliefs, their conscience, their life experiences within a community, based on any number of things.

 

[Demetra2]

‘If we are going to really accompany people, we have to first of all engage them,’ says Archbishop Cupich

More…

Yes, let’s encourage them in their sin instead of encouraging them to flee from sin. This point of view just boggles the mind. It is as if this Cardinal thinks the laity is just too frail and weak to withstand the truth. The truth therefore should just be an ideal which for the many will be unattainable. So in the opinion of this Cardinal the church should adapt and change and weaken it’s stance instead of challenging the laity to embrace truth and freedom from sin. Yeah, I am so inspired by this. Time for the Church Militant to just say “NO”!

 

[nodito]

Please explain to me how standing fast on the commandments of Almighty God and the teachings of Jesus are considered “unsustainable”.
If the Gospel, the Bible and the comandments are not sustainable, the Christianity is nonexistent. There is no middle ground. There is truth, and there is heresy. Period.

I think the point is that we can still “stand fast on the commandments” while being creative in how we approach others in mercy. It doesn’t mean either keeping things exactly the same or throwing out the baby with the bathwater. There are possibilities, like Phil’s, that maintain Church teaching but are innovative enough to affect a positive change.

 

[nodito]

These Bishops say the most silly things. Saying that to call Holy Matrimony indissoluble is too “juridical” and like “handcuffs” is ridiculous. The word indissoluble is expressing the truth in a single word, if people see it as handcuffs then they need to change their perspective on their marriage. It is absurd that he is praising a sacrilege of the Blessed Sacrament that was condoned by a priest, it isn’t like adultery isn’t a mortal sin anymore.

Of course people that are living lives contrary to Church teaching are going to feel marginalized since the Church is condemning their way of life. The only way to fix that is to make them change their lives or to make them feel comfortable in their sin. This Bishop is advocating for a false mercy.

I’m not sure which bishop you’re quoting or responding to. Archbishop Coleridge has also said the the term “indissoluble” is less than helpful because it doesn’t mean the same thing to everyone who hears it. I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that you have studied the faith more seriously than most (your screen name is in Latin, for goodness sake!). When you hear indissoluble, it leaves an impression on you that is possitive. But it’s a “negative” word in the sense that it defines what marriage is not - dissoluble. Thus, some people perceive this feature of marriage as less as a gift from God to married couples (which it is) than as an oppressive force at work trapping them to failed marriages. The bishops are looking for new ways of conveying the same truths but in a way that is more relatable.

 

[josh987654321]

Only two weeks ago we had this reading, 4/Oct/2015
The Gospel of Mark 10:1-11:

Divorce

10 Jesus then left that place and went into the region of Judea and across the Jordan. Again crowds of people came to him, and as was his custom, he taught them.

2 Some Pharisees came and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?”

3 “What did Moses command you?” he replied.

4 They said, “Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away.”

5 “It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law,” Jesus replied. 6 “But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.’ 7 ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, 8 and the two will become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two, but one flesh. 9 Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

10 When they were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this. 11 He answered, “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. 12 And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.”

It’s as if people have done a 180 and are now accusing Jesus of being ‘hard of heart’.

Let’s especially pray for the Synod, the Cardinals and our Holy Father Pope Francis.

St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle. Be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the Devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray, and do thou, O Prince of the heavenly hosts, by the power of God, cast into hell Satan, and all the other evil spirits, who prowl about the world seeking the ruin of souls. Amen.

 

[josh987654321]

Sacred Heart of Jesus - St Margaret-Mary Alacoque

http://s15.postimg.org/uc0cy5a0r/st_margaretmary2.jpg

Jesus to St Margaret-Mary Alacoque

"Behold the Heart which has so loved men that it has spared nothing, even to exhausting and consuming Itself, in order to testify Its love; and in return, I receive from the greater part only ingratitude, by their irreverence and sacrilege, and by the coldness and contempt they have for Me in this Sacrament of Love. But what I feel most keenly is that it is hearts which are consecrated to Me, that treat Me thus. Therefore, I ask of you that the Friday after the Octave of Corpus Christi be set apart for a special Feast to honor My Heart, by communicating on that day, and making reparation to It by a solemn act, in order to make amends for the indignities which It has received during the time It has been exposed on the altars. I promise you that My Heart shall expand Itself to shed in abundance the influence of Its Divine Love upon those who shall thus honor It, and cause It to be honored."
ewtn.com/library/CHRIST/FIRSTFRI.TXT

Eucharistic Miracles of Argentina, Buenos Aires, 1992 - 1994 - 1996

Buenos Aires, 1992 - 1994 - 1996 (part 1) - (PDF: 1.46M)
Buenos Aires, 1992 - 1994 - 1996 (part 2) - (PDF: 1.42M)
Buenos Aires, 1992 - 1994 - 1996 (part 3) - (PDF: 1.25M)

Eucharistic Miracle of Italy, Lanciano, 750 A.D.

Lanciano, 750 A.D. (part 1) – (PDF: 186k)
Lanciano, 750 A.D. (part 2) – (PDF: 194k)

Eucharistic Miracle of Poland, Sokólka, October 12, 2008

Sokólka, October 12, 2008 (Part 1) – (PDF: 1.41M)
Sokólka, October 12, 2008 (Part 2) – (PDF: 1.31M)
Sokólka, October 12, 2008 (Part 3) – (PDF: 1.41M)

The following links are from therealpresense.org

God Bless You

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

Receiving Communion is not the answer. And this is coming from someone who used to not be able to receive.

The change I think will help make people not feel “left out” would be returning the Communion fast to 3 hours (or more).

That way more people will be sitting in the pews (refraining from communion) and less people will feel like “only the mortal sinners miss communion.”

I personally believe this would be the most merciful change, and could have a positive impact with believe in the Real Presence

B R I L L ! ! ! ! !

This is the sort of thing I was getting at in my “is spiritual communion a booby prize” thread.

I’m going to make a point of sometimes staying in my pew grinning radiantly (a practice I invented when I had qualms and quandaries) thanksgiving for all sorts of things and awestruck by God’s move in history.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Yup, despite the much longer confessional lines. As a server I saw we seldom had more than two railfuls of communicants in a full church. Now you are practically forced to go; that’s the problem.

Why is that a problem ?

If Christ calls a person to receive Him in the Holy Eucharist, who are we to say they should stay in the pew ?

I too remember before Vatican II many people remaining in the pews and the long lines at confession, usually just before Easter so people could do their Easter Duty.

What a shame.

Imagine having the opportunity to receive our Divine Savior in the Sacred Sacrament and a guilt conscience prevents the person from accepting the invitation.

Vatican II began to teach Jesus’ inclusiveness, not exclusion.

I never want to go back to pre-Vatican II days where people obeyed like guilty sheep and had essentially no experience of God’s mercy.

As Pope Francis calls next year the year of Mercy, I pray people will feel God’s love as never before.

Its the only thing that will change the world.

Jim

 

[josh987654321]

Why is that a problem ?

If Christ calls a person to receive Him in the Holy Eucharist, who are we to say they should stay in the pew ?

Until a ‘married’ homosexual couple, or someone advocating for abortion (Catholics for Choice), or someone thinks it’s just symbolic etc claim they are being called to receive, then I think we are all to say they should just stay in their pews.

I too remember before Vatican II many people remaining in the pews and the long lines at confession, usually just before Easter so people could do their Easter Duty.

What a shame.

It’s only a upsetting I believe if they were there for the wrong reasons, but ‘shame’ is the very last thing that comes to mind with the faithful in Eucharistic Adoration and long confession lines.

Imagine having the opportunity to receive our Divine Savior in the Sacred Sacrament and a guilt conscience prevents the person from accepting the invitation.

Guilt/Forgiveness isn’t an issue, it’s the fact that people are sinning and have no guilt, nor seek forgiveness.

Vatican II began to teach Jesus’ inclusiveness, not exclusion.

Satan and His lies should never be included in such ‘inclusiveness’, and I believe we all must be on guard here, even a dash of salt can turn the water foul.

Forgive the sinner, not the sin, be inclusive of the sinner, not the sin.
Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen 'Love is not tolerance':

Christian love bears evil, but it does not tolerate it.

It does penance for the sins of others, but it is not broadminded about sin.

The cry for tolerance never induces it to quench its hatred of the evil philosophies that have entered into contest with the Truth.

It forgives the sinner, and it hates the sin; it is unmerciful to the error in his mind.

The sinner it will always take back into the bosom of the Mystical Body; but his lie will never be taken into the treasury of His Wisdom.

I never want to go back to pre-Vatican II days where people obeyed like guilty sheep and had essentially no experience of God’s mercy.

I don’t know much about pre-Vatican II other than it was all in latin and personally I’m glad it’s in English, however, I know no different.

As Pope Francis calls next year the year of Mercy, I pray people will feel God’s love as never before.

Its the only thing that will change the world.

Jim

I hope this has helped

God Bless You

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

… the very person responsible for “closing” the sacrament to himself is the very person empowered to re-open it.

1. On top of which grace is supposed to BYPASS the sacraments AS WELL (see my last post).
2. In view of most people’s life histories “responsible” often isn’t such a cut-and-dried category as some people would like to kid themselves on others’ behalf. What about why most annulments get allowed, or why many young people with same-sex on-sexual attraction get kidded by worldly propaganda into having the rest of the “gay” package foisted on them probably against a background of whatever family dynamics they have grown up among, to take only two examples from this field alone.

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

… the very person responsible for “closing” the sacrament to himself is the very person empowered to re-open it.

1. On top of which grace is supposed to BYPASS the sacraments AS WELL (see my last post).
2. In view of most people’s life histories “responsible” often isn’t such a cut-and-dried category as some people would like to kid themselves on others’ behalf. What about why most annulments get allowed, or why many young people with same-sex non-sexual attraction get kidded by worldly propaganda into having the rest of the “gay” package foisted on them probably against a background of whatever family dynamics they have grown up among, to take only two examples from this field alone.

 

[ProVobis]

Why is that a problem ?

You may be okay with a herd mentality but God still judges us one by one. We’re not saints yet (that’s a fact) so this “communion of saints” stuff needs some revisiting IMO. Besides that the last time I checked presumption (I hope you know what this is) is grave matter and that alone can make you improperly disposed. But I’m not judging, just sayin…

 

[gilliam]

Just to be clear: The archbishop in the OP was only suggesting that gay and divorced Catholics take part in dialog with the bishops. If you want to know how to have a better outreach to homosexual and divorced Catholics, it makes sense to actually talk with them.

That makes sense to me.

ROME — One of the pope’s handpicked delegates participating in the Synod of Bishops said that deliberations would benefit from inviting those who feel marginalized in the Church, such as divorced and remarried Catholics and gay and lesbian couples, to offer their experience to bishops firsthand.

“I did have those voices as part of my consultation,” said Chicago Archbishop Blase Cupich. “But I do think that we could benefit from the actual voices of people who feel marginalized, rather than having them filtered through the voices of other representatives or the bishops.”

 

[gilliam]

People are reading more into the headline than is actually there. It would be great if we all read the articles before commenting. Just a suggestion.

 

[JimG]

Why is that a problem ?

If Christ calls a person to receive Him in the Holy Eucharist, who are we to say they should stay in the pew ?

I too remember before Vatican II many people remaining in the pews and the long lines at confession, usually just before Easter so people could do their Easter Duty.

What a shame.

Imagine having the opportunity to receive our Divine Savior in the Sacred Sacrament and a guilt conscience prevents the person from accepting the invitation.

Vatican II began to teach Jesus’ inclusiveness, not exclusion.

**I never want to go back to pre-Vatican II days where people obeyed like guilty sheep and had essentially no experience of God’s mercy.**As Pope Francis calls next year the year of Mercy, I pray people will feel God’s love as never before.

Its the only thing that will change the world.
Jim

Do you mean, because they went to confession more frequently? What is the sacrament of Penance but an experience of God’s mercy? Of course they experienced God’s mercy! That’s the whole point of getting in the confession line!

 

[Sy_Noe]

This is one of those things that I feel loath to judge. The fact that the Priests themselves don’t deter the congregation from coming to communion, is significant to me. I’m well aware that there must be a lot of people in an objective state of sin in the communion line especially regarding contraception… but I always feel that despite their ignorance, there is something positive about their presence at Mass.

In a similar vein, the Priest in my local parish holds the Third Rite of reconciliation twice a year before Easter and Christmas. It doesn’t go in the bulletin but he always comments that it will go ahead unless the Archbishop puts his foot down. The Archbishop must turn a blind eye to it because it always goes ahead and is always packed to the rafters.

I don’t know whether I’ve been wrongly catechised all my life… but I understand the sacraments in a way that they are like food for the soul. I do understand the importance of the requirements to be met to receive and strictly adhere to them… but at the same time I feel I’ve been given something in my upbringing that not everybody gets and want others to have too. There is the issue of culpability.

As I say, I adhere to all the rules strictly myself, but there’s that aspect of it that wants others to have something of what I am blessed to have. Call it a weakness, but that’s how I experience it.

I liked your description of food for the soul. And I’m not so sure it’s a weakness or bad thing that you are loath to judge. Considering those you mentioned who practice contraception and yet are in line for the Eucharist, I have a hard time imagining that many are unaware of the Church’s teaching. So I’m thinking those who are aware, perhaps disagree with the Church’s teaching on contraception. So even though they might well be aware of what the Catholic Church teaches, do they truly fully know in their hearts that it is a grave matter? And my understanding about mortal sin is that a person must have full knowledge of an act being grave and still willingly commit the act. So I don’t know but you might be doing the right thing in leaving the judgement of what they truly fully know in their hearts to God.

One thing I did not know about was the 3rd rite of reconciliation even being a possibility in the Catholic Church. I think I have heard of general absolution during Lutheran services. I actually think it might not be a bad thing that your archbishop turns a blind eye and doesn’t put his foot down. Look at all the people who are packed to the rafters. They are there for a reason. It would appear some form of reconciliation clearly means something to them. Besides, some people are more introverted or just aren’t comfortable with the one on one confession. I know I never was. And the 3rd rite gives them a way. I applaud your priest and bishop for providing them a way. God bless them.

 

[rmartensjr]

Receiving Communion is not the answer. And this is coming from someone who used to not be able to receive.

The change I think will help make people not feel “left out” would be returning the Communion fast to 3 hours (or more).

That way more people will be sitting in the pews (refraining from communion) and less people will feel like “only the mortal sinners miss communion.”

I personally believe this would be the most merciful change, and could have a positive impact with believe in the Real Presence