Francis urges priests not to push cohabiting couples away

[ProVobis]

But that’s not what I’m talking about here. I’m not talking about those who refuse to repent, but those who do repent and seek union with Christ, but are banned from receiving the Holy Eucharist. I can see situations where a couple who are divorced and remarried, and have become repentant, but are not allowed to receive Holy Communion in the Catholic Church. What happens to them ? We all know that they either join another religion or give up religion all together. I think Pope Francis is looking at ways to bring them back into the Church.

Jim, I’m not too sure allowing them to receive Communion is the simple answer. As noted by my pastor, most of the kids these days will never step into the church after their first communion. Now these presumably aren’t cohabiting. Interestingly enough, though, I find many more kids at the Spanish Masses where they receive but the older folks (not the over 55’s you’ll get at the English Masses) don’t present themselves for Communion. Perhaps it’s the culture that accepts the divorced and marrieds, not the Communion. Just my observation, though.

 

[manualman]

You have mistranslated the commandment. Correctly translated it says thou shalt not murder. Also you are trying to change the subject from the redefinition of the word usury.
In the past the word usury meant charging interest on a loan - any amount of interest.
You have redefined usury to mean today charging exorbitant interest on a loan.

Sigh, I’m not changing the subject, I’m trying to teach you to think in terms of principles instead of unthinking rules. It’s this simple: When the world economic system had no inflation and negligible opportunity cost, ANY charging of interest was a sin of usury. In today’s world of perpetual inflation and cash-based economic endeavors, a lender at zero interest experiences a genuine and actual loss. That was NEVER the intent of the moral principle.

What changed was NOT the moral principles of the church, but the functioning of human economic systems.

 

[Tigg]

But that’s not what I’m talking about here. I’m not talking about those who refuse to repent, but those who do repent and seek union with Christ, but are banned from receiving the Holy Eucharist. I can see situations where a couple who are divorced and remarried, and have become repentant, but are not allowed to receive Holy Communion in the Catholic Church. What happens to them ? We all know that they either join another religion or give up religion all together. I think Pope Francis is looking at ways to bring them back into the Church.

I’m jumping right in here without having read this thread. If a re-married couple is sincerely seeking union with Christ, they are not necessarily banned from receiving Communion – ***If ***they are asking for an annulment and have done their work through the proper channels, have been to Confession and have agreed to abstain from sex during the waiting period of the Tribunal. So I’m curious - If they are just hoping their first marriages will be ignored by the Church and their second ones somehow blessed - how can this possibly work as to the dissolution of a Sacrament whose very character is a permanent covenantal relationship?

 

[ProVobis]

In today’s world of perpetual inflation and cash-based economic endeavors, a lender at zero interest experiences a genuine and actual loss. That was NEVER the intent of the moral principle.

What changed was NOT the moral principles of the church, but the functioning of human economic systems.

I would agree with this. If anything, the banks do the nominal saver an injustice by NOT paying him interest on his deposit, while they are free to take his money and invest it to THEIR advantage. And it’s not necessarily to lend money to others either.

 

[WorkingParent]

What follows is just my 2 cents worth. Take what you like and leave the rest.

In a 12-step program, addicts and alcoholics are frequently encouraged to come to meetings even before they believe that the 12 steps will work for them. If they come, nobody is going to make them talk, or admit to any faults, or even admit to having a problem. Nobody is going to call them out of their poor choices and bad behavior. On the other hand, they certainly aren’t going to be told. “You should drink more. Doing drugs is fine.”

Instead, they will simply be welcomed. No more and no less. And if a newcomer does want to discuss their poor choices and bad behavior, he or she be heard and helped and (this is important) offered love.

It is very powerful for a newly sober alcoholic to see a room full of happy, healthy, sober people, some of whom have been sober for decades. It makes it possible to see that there is another way to live. “Bring the body and the heart will follow.”

I think what Pope Francis is trying to bring more bodies into the Church so more hearts will follow.

 

[Tomdstone]

Sigh, I’m not changing the subject, I’m trying to teach you to think in terms of principles instead of unthinking rules. It’s this simple: When the world economic system had no inflation and negligible opportunity cost, ANY charging of interest was a sin of usury. In today’s world of perpetual inflation and cash-based economic endeavors, a lender at zero interest experiences a genuine and actual loss. That was NEVER the intent of the moral principle.

What changed was NOT the moral principles of the church, but the functioning of human economic systems.

It is simply false to say that there was no inflation in the high middle ages.
flowofhistory.com/units/west/10/FC71

 

[Tomdstone]

I think you lack historical perspective. You are also responding this terms emotional content, not its diversity of meaning. I am not referring to anything recent or any slavery within that has been practiced in the last few centuries, with the possible exception of incarceration and drafted military service, two generally acceptable forms of slavery.

So enslaving people today is a mortal sin, but was not so in the past? This supports my point.

 

[josethomas]

Of late I have come across a post stating that some priest was excommunicated for supporting gay marriage etc. The church position has not changed. The Pope is also for the time being bound by it I suppose, as admittedly he is also a son of the church. What has changed is the approach it seems. Let those who sin come to the church. Church is also supposed to a place for sinners. After all, all are sinners, and Pope also admits that he is so. Then the only option on understanding the love of God and church teaching is to repent and convert, and become true sons and daughters of the church, instead of being name sake Christians. Our Father in heaven also loves the sinner so that he is also to have salvation in our Lord and saviour Jesus Christ. This is what the Gospel is all about. Then repent convert and have salvation in Jesus Christ. Pope is inviting all in this regard without judging them, since if they have sinned we are also sinners some how or the other. Actually the concern of the thread posters seem to be that Chruch should not take an indifferent position in such matters. Such concern also makes sense, but if we understand that Pope has not changed the church stand, but only invited others to understand the church stand, the attempt can only be an act of missionary zeal and not giving room for indifference in moral matters, a sort of moral relativism, condemned by Pope Benedict.

 

[manualman]

It is simply false to say that there was no inflation in the high middle ages.
flowofhistory.com/units/west/10/FC71

Teaching on usury was not new in the middle ages. It dates back to very early days of the church. One can certainly criticize the church for be slow to respond to economic changes, but that’s substantially different than reversing a moral principle.

 

[KimberlyCat]

What follows is just my 2 cents worth. Take what you like and leave the rest.

In a 12-step program, addicts and alcoholics are frequently encouraged to come to meetings even before they believe that the 12 steps will work for them. If they come, nobody is going to make them talk, or admit to any faults, or even admit to having a problem. Nobody is going to call them out of their poor choices and bad behavior. On the other hand, they certainly aren’t going to be told. “You should drink more. Doing drugs is fine.”

Instead, they will simply be welcomed. No more and no less. And if a newcomer does want to discuss their poor choices and bad behavior, he or she be heard and helped and (this is important) offered love.

It is very powerful for a newly sober alcoholic to see a room full of happy, healthy, sober people, some of whom have been sober for decades. It makes it possible to see that there is another way to live. “Bring the body and the heart will follow.”

I think what Pope Francis is trying to bring more bodies into the Church so more hearts will follow.

Very well said. Excellent example. The Pope wants more people to come to Mass. We need to welcome everyone in hopes that they learn about the Sacraments especially the Sacrament of Matrimony and get married in The Church.

 

[Slaney]

The last shall be first & the first shall be last, both receive the same wages …

 

[Misplaced_Book]

Pew Watching is a sport nobody should be engaged in.

It is not our place to speculate about the sin of anyone, lest we place ourselves on a judgement seat and are in turn judged.

 

[SaintAugustine]

Pew Watching is a sport nobody should be engaged in.

It is not our place to speculate about the sin of anyone, lest we place ourselves on a judgement seat and are in turn judged.

How does “pew watching” come into play here? The Pope was addressing priests.

 

[Corki]

How does “pew watching” come into play here? The Pope was addressing priests.

The whole topic is about how we welcome cohabiting couples as a Church. Marriage is a public act, so for many people is living together without being married. There is no speculating here. The question is how do we (as a parish, especially the pastor) address couples who have made their irregular circumstances well known.

 

[stuart12]

It is a particularly difficult issue in our age. The Church’s teachings are utterly clear on the matter however. Unfortunately, too many people, including those raised as Catholics do not consider it a big deal. This leads to problems especially when couples are '‘locked’ together financially or especially if they have a child. Such a situation may appear to them as a great obstacle to return to the Faith. If only we had more clarity in the past about such things.

 

[ProVobis]

Pew Watching is a sport nobody should be engaged in.

It is not our place to speculate about the sin of anyone, lest we place ourselves on a judgement seat and are in turn judged.

Unfortunately it doesn’t work that way. Anyone who doesn’t present him/herself for communion is looked at suspiciously, even by those who pretend not to notice. I blame some of that on those “holier-than-thou” nuns who asked us week after week why we didn’t receive at the Sunday Mass.

 

[CradleJourney]

Unfortunately it doesn’t work that way. Anyone who doesn’t present him/herself for communion is looked at suspiciously, even by those who pretend not to notice. I blame some of that on those “holier-than-thou” nuns who asked us week after week why we didn’t receive at the Sunday Mass.

They actually ASKED?!? :bigyikes:

 

[ProVobis]

They actually ASKED?!? :bigyikes:

Indeed. The common answer became “Because I didn’t go to confession” and she left it at that.

 

[Misplaced_Book]

Unfortunately it doesn’t work that way. Anyone who doesn’t present him/herself for communion is looked at suspiciously, even by those who pretend not to notice. I blame some of that on those “holier-than-thou” nuns who asked us week after week why we didn’t receive at the Sunday Mass.

Sure, because we are all sinners. But, it is still wrong…I don’t know what this person talked about with their Spiritual Father, or when they went to Confession, or their state within the Church. And neither does anyone else.

 

[commenter]

I read the link from the OP, and the following caught my attention:

“…“I would be scared to feel more important, you know? That I am scared of, because the devil’s cunning eh? He’s cunning and he makes you feel like you are in power, that you can do this and that …but like St. Peter says, the devil prowls around like a roaring lion…”

The Pope is talking about the devil! He is not referring to the devil as a literary symbol, or a vague climate of selfishness, or a factor of psychology or economics. The Pope is giving traditional, Catholic teaching. If my bishop referred to the devil, he would be bashed by the daily newspaper, and ridiculed even by some religion teachers, as a relic of the Middle Ages. The Pope isn’t anti tradition, he’s just focusing on some aspects of tradition we have forgotten, including the reality of Satan, Satan’s work through our ego, and, yes, the Pope also emphasizes chastity and marriage.

The Media omits things as a result of their own agenda.