Francis urges priests not to push cohabiting couples away

[Otche_Nash]

If I were to “go to them and tell them to repent”, how many of these people would follow me back to the Church and God? Close to none.

Did Jesus ask for a drink first and offer her the “living water” or demand the adulterous woman at the well repent first?

Oh come on, this is bordering on ridiculous. His primary job is to guard and convey received truth clearly and unambiguously to his flock. HH’s comments have to be spun ad nauseam, because they don’t carry Catholic water on their own. The grave error of papal idolatry is being exposed by divine grace. The church has suffered antipopes. And during those times, ‘obedient’ souls were led astray, because their obedience was tainted, self-motivated. “Those who have ears, let them hear.”

 

[Phemie]

Yes, I can’t recall any sermons harshly condemning anyone, whether they were gay or cohabiting, or anything else. You are probably right that many people simply don’t see what they are doing as wrong. By the same token they cannot expect that the Church will change it’s teachings to say that wrong is right or to change the teachings on marriage. Those teachings come from Christ.

I’m reminded of a priest who came to our parish to replace while Fr. was away on holidays a few years ago. It was time for the Advent Penitential Service and I mentioned that I was not particularly happy with the Examination of Conscience that we’d received from a publisher. He gave me one that was truly based on the 10 commandments and actually named sins. We used that and people were upset and said those things shouldn’t have been mentioned (homosexual activity, contraception, etc.) Why, because we don’t like to be told that stuff we do is sinful? Better to have a touchy-feely “Did I fail to recycle thus affecting Mother Earth?” type examination of conscience and congratulate ourselves for being green than to face the fact that, yes, we are sinners?

 

[Phemie]

The Church changed its teaching on grounds to grant a marriage annulment. A hundred years ago, an annulment was granted only for extremely serious reasons, such as proof that someone was already married or that he was castrated. The proof is when you look at the statistics of the number of annulments granted before VII and the number of annulments after VII. In the USA it has increased by thousands of percentage points. Today, who is denied an annulment? The rejections are rather few in number. The only case I heard of was of a public figure who already was granted two annulments, and the third one was denied.

While the number of annulments has increased drastically, so has the rate of divorce which is no different today for Catholics than it is for non-Catholics. Such was not the case before the late 60s and 70s.

Until you have all the hard statistics such as “Number of annulments applied for annually before 1964 vs number after 1964” and “Percentage of annulments granted vs refused pre and post 1964” you can’t really judge how things have changed or become more lax.

 

[JRRTFAN]

I understand what His Holiness is saying and I realize the deficiencies in the popular media reportage.

What I don’t get is where His Holiness has experienced these constant exhortations against gays and lifestyle sin. I am 60 years old and it would not be an overstatement to say I have been at Mass on 99.9% of the Sundays since the age of 6. That’s a lot of parishes, a lot of priests and a lot of homilies. I can’t ever recall such a homily. The only time I hear “sin” mentioned is at the Penitential Act at the beginning of Mass, and even that is often changed to: “the times we have failed” rather than sin. Maybe it’s different in South America.

 

[Lapey]

Oh come on, this is bordering on ridiculous. His primary job is to guard and convey received truth clearly and unambiguously to his flock. HH’s comments have to be spun ad nauseam, because they don’t carry Catholic water on their own. The grave error of papal idolatry is being exposed by divine grace. The church has suffered antipopes. And during those times, ‘obedient’ souls were led astray, because their obedience was tainted, self-motivated. “Those who have ears, let them hear.”

Let those who have eye read this and know you took my comments out of context unless you just want to start an argument. Furthermore, are you implying or stating that Pope Francis is an anti-pope?

PS. I have been out of this conversation for the majority of it and only made limited comments; if you had read the entire thread you would have seen this. Please reconsider your attempt to criticize others, especially the Holy Father. (Check the forum rules.)

PSS. His entire job is the salvation of souls. This is what I was told directly before ordination, if you don’t see yourself being a part of the mission of saving souls this is not for you.

 

[Tigg]

So after one “has arrived” at sainthood they can judge? In light of Pope Francis comment, “who am I to judge,” can we assume that some here are holy than the pope?

The verse is not misused when one listens to what the Holy Father has said of late. He is trying to teach us that we need to preach the Gospel, not The Law.

This seems to be what everyone is saying, and it bothers me. Why have we understood this as pitting the pastoral approach against the doctrinal? As if one is more important than the other or that one is right and the other is wrong. As if Christ’s love and mercy somehow will not allow for His justice. Christ never compromised His message – He offered forgiveness of sins only when the message was accepted and repentance occurred. There can be no change of heart if one is not aware of moral deficiency and Scripture is extravagant with passages exhorting us to understand the statutes and bend our will to God.

I do not see Catholics bludgeoning others and condemning. I do, however, see Christians falsely accused of being judgmental and of hatred and bigotry when they offer Truth. I doubt feigned love out of fear of offending will do much to help the hardened sinner . And we do not convert others - not really. It is the communication between the soul and God that does – ultimately, it is only the language of grace and illumination that forces the sinner to his knees.

 

[clem456]

This seems to be what everyone is saying, and it bothers me. Why have we understood this as pitting the pastoral approach against the doctrinal? As if one is more important than the other or that one is right and the other is wrong. As if Christ’s love and mercy somehow will not allow for His justice. Christ never compromised His message – He offered forgiveness of sins only when the message was accepted and repentance occurred. There can be no change of heart if one is not aware of moral deficiency and Scripture is extravagant with passages exhorting us to understand the statutes and bend our will to God.

I do not see Catholics bludgeoning others and condemning. I do, however, see Christians falsely accused of being judgmental and of hatred and bigotry when they offer Truth. I doubt feigned love out of fear of offending will do much to help the hardened sinner . And we do not convert others - not really. It is the communication between the soul and God that does – ultimately, it is only the language of grace and illumination that forces the sinner to his knees.

Is it even possible to pit the pastoral vs the doctrinal?
Doctrine is in the service of love. There is no either-or. There is not one without the other. It’s a practical issue. Two theologians will speak to one another about doctrine and they are accomplishing something. Two laymen of different faiths, prolly not.

Simply, if one is not in a position to understand or hear doctrine, it is pointless to try and impose it on them. It would be akin to purposely speaking in French to a person who understands only English, when one is able to speak to them in English, but refuses to do so. This approach can be arrogant.
We are called to talk to people and minister to them where they are, not from where we would like them to be, or where we think they should be. Frequently we find that others who are un-churched or of different faiths have something to say to us.
Are our own ears open?

 

[Corki]

So after one “has arrived” at sainthood they can judge? In light of Pope Francis comment, “who am I to judge,” can we assume that some here are holy than the pope?

The verse is not misused when one listens to what the Holy Father has said of late. He is trying to teach us that we need to preach the Gospel, not The Law.

I don’t think the Holy Father has ever said not to preach the Law but rather to preach the Law in the context of the Gospel.

 

[pnewton]

I do not see Catholics bludgeoning others and condemning. I do, however, see Christians falsely accused of being judgmental and of hatred and bigotry when they offer Truth. I doubt feigned love out of fear of offending will do much to help the hardened sinner . .

Maybe you missed post 159 (the one I responded to) which was an apologetic of acceptable judgement, something the Holy Father does not deem acceptable.

So, who is feigning love?

 

[pnewton]

I don’t think the Holy Father has ever said not to preach the Law but rather to preach the Law in the context of the Gospel.

I missed that part of the last few messages.

What is the Law in context of the Gospel? If one preaches the Law of Christ it is the Gospel, as opposed to the Law of Moses. I think we Catholics sometimes get this whole thing backwards and think we become holy by avoiding sin, instead of being able to avoid sin because we are able to increase our holiness. We do not want to be some sort of modern Judaizers, converting people to a set of precepts.

No, you are right Corki, the Holy Father never suggested we not teach morals. What he is saying is that we need to preach the Gospel as primary.

 

[Mark121359]

This seems to be what everyone is saying, and it bothers me. Why have we understood this as pitting the pastoral approach against the doctrinal? As if one is more important than the other or that one is right and the other is wrong. As if Christ’s love and mercy somehow will not allow for His justice. Christ never compromised His message – He offered forgiveness of sins only when the message was accepted and repentance occurred. There can be no change of heart if one is not aware of moral deficiency and Scripture is extravagant with passages exhorting us to understand the statutes and bend our will to God.

I do not see Catholics bludgeoning others and condemning. I do, however, see Christians falsely accused of being judgmental and of hatred and bigotry when they offer Truth. I doubt feigned love out of fear of offending will do much to help the hardened sinner . And we do not convert others - not really. It is the communication between the soul and God that does – ultimately, it is only the language of grace and illumination that forces the sinner to his knees.

Amen and well said! And I completely agree with you Tigg. Excellent post!

Peace, Mark

 

[Mark121359]

This seems to be what everyone is saying, and it bothers me. Why have we understood this as pitting the pastoral approach against the doctrinal? As if one is more important than the other or that one is right and the other is wrong. As if Christ’s love and mercy somehow will not allow for His justice. Christ never compromised His message – He offered forgiveness of sins only when the message was accepted and repentance occurred. There can be no change of heart if one is not aware of moral deficiency and Scripture is extravagant with passages exhorting us to understand the statutes and bend our will to God.

I do not see Catholics bludgeoning others and condemning. I do, however, see Christians falsely accused of being judgmental and of hatred and bigotry when they offer Truth. I doubt feigned love out of fear of offending will do much to help the hardened sinner . And we do not convert others - not really. It is the communication between the soul and God that does – ultimately, it is only the language of grace and illumination that forces the sinner to his knees.

Amen and well said! And I completely agree with you Tigg. Excellent post! Unfortunately many today wrongly equate giving correction with being judgmental, and so they avoid from giving it, out of a false sense of charity.

Peace, Mark

 

[commenter]

…
Simply, if one is not in a position to understand or hear doctrine, it is pointless to try and impose it on them.
**(actually everybody, even 5 year olds, are in a position to understand doctrine on some level. Some religion texts offer doctrine. Some don’t. Some religion texts encourage change. Some don’t.) ** - BOLD ADDED BY COMMENTER
we are called to talk to people and minister to them where they are, not from where we would like them to be, or where we think they should be.

]actually we are called to tempt everyone we encounter, towards movement in the direction of sainthood. It isn’t loving or humble to leave people unchanged. Every report i have read of an encounter with a saint, the person reported being challenged to change. The sad reality is that many churches today say “come as you are, stay as you are”./]

 

[CompSciGuy]

Unfortunately they’ll see it as an invitation to the Eucharist.

This is what I am concerned about… I appreciate Pope Francis’ outreach to those who have left the Church because of sin but I wonder what he would have to say with regard to receiving communion in that state. Is encouraging such a couple not to take communion an example of pushing them away in his eyes? Or encouraging them to stop cohabitating?

 

[CompSciGuy]

Hopefully the Pope will open the Eucharist to divorced and remarried couples, who have a desire to get closer to Jesus.

It makes no sense to use the sacrament as a whipping tool to make people conform.

But that’s just me.

Jim

I’m just going to put this little piece from the Catechism here for your own religious education:

"To respond to this invitation we must prepare ourselves for so great and so holy a moment. St. Paul urges us to examine our conscience: "Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself.“218 Anyone conscious of a grave sin must receive the sacrament of Reconciliation before coming to communion.”
CCC 1385

Hope that helps. Cheers!

 

[JimG]

While the number of annulments has increased drastically, so has the rate of divorce which is no different today for Catholics than it is for non-Catholics. Such was not the case before the late 60s and 70s.

Until you have all the hard statistics such as “Number of annulments applied for annually before 1964 vs number after 1964” and “Percentage of annulments granted vs refused pre and post 1964” you can’t really judge how things have changed or become more lax.

When it comes to declarations of nullity, I wonder whether there are more of them simply because there are more null marriages taking place? At one time nearly every couple making vows viewed marriage as a permanent, life-long, binding commitment of fidelity and openness to life. I’m thinking that the percentage of those who take vows with clear intention to marry with that understanding has seriously dropped. If so, the rise in annulments must correspond to the increase in null marriages.

 

[Jessie5000]

Unfortunately they’ll see it as an invitation to the Eucharist.

I wish I had the same spiritual gift as you. To be able to see into the hearts of those and know they will see it as invitation to the eucharist is really a powerful gift. The pope is simply wise. I thought God could only read the inner working of human hearts. I stand corrected

 

[Corki]

I wish I had the same spiritual gift as you. To be able to see into the hearts of those and know they will see it as invitation to the eucharist is really a powerful gift. The pope is simply wise. I thought God could only read the inner working of human hearts. I stand corrected

Sarcasm is not very useful online.

 

[ProVobis]

I wish I had the same spiritual gift as you.

Actually I’m of the old school, Polish school at that. Don’t go to communion unless I’ve gone to confession. When I see everyone going to communion but me, what else can I feel but unholy and unsaintly? Is this what you call a spiritual gift?

 

[sodak]

So you’re saying that all couples who divorced and then remarried without an annulment, are committing fornication ?
God Bless Pope Francis.

Jim

Not fornication, adultery.