Pope Francis "No More Business as Usual"

[RPRPsych]

The Pope also hinted that he wants to see an end to the so-called “wafer wars,” in which Catholic politicians who support abortion rights are denied Holy Communion. His comments could also be taken as another sign that he plans to reform church rules that prevent divorced Catholics from receiving the Eucharist. (from the linked article)

In one passage that could have implications for clerics who refuse to offer Communion to divorced people or to politicians who support abortion rights, he writes that the Eucharist, the central rite of Catholicism, “is not a prize for the perfect but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak.” (from an L.A. times article)

Am I the only one who finds that disturbing? To my understanding, it is an infallible teaching of the Church that we are not to receive communion when in a state of mortal sin. I suspect (and hope) that the Holy Father’s words are being misinterpreted (which is more than possible, given that both of the above come from secular sources), but if they are not and this is truly the implication of what he has written, is that not leading people into “eating and drinking judgment upon themselves”?

Fear not. I’ve read the entire document. All he means is that we shouldn’t be scrupulous about avoiding Communion (after all, the act of receiving the Eucharist itself cleanses us from venial sin.) He is not saying anything about politicians or “wafer wars” - in fact, he comes down strongly on those who support abortion (see my signature; the quote is from the document!). CNN is just daydreaming and adding its own spin to what the Pope said.

 

[TimothyH]

Fear not. I’ve read the entire document. All he means is that we shouldn’t be scrupulous about avoiding Communion (after all, the act of receiving the Eucharist itself cleanses us from venial sin.) He is not saying anything about politicians or “wafer wars” - in fact, he comes down strongly on those who support abortion (see my signature; the quote is from the document!). CNN is just daydreaming and adding its own spin to what the Pope said.

CNN could spin the earth in the opposite direction from which it actually spins.

-Tim-

 

[travissbeloved]

CNN could spin the earth in the opposite direction from which it actually spins.

-Tim-

LOL

 

[maklavan]

The Pope also hinted that he wants to see an end to the so-called “wafer wars,” in which Catholic politicians who support abortion rights are denied Holy Communion. His comments could also be taken as another sign that he plans to reform church rules that prevent divorced Catholics from receiving the Eucharist. (from the linked article)

In one passage that could have implications for clerics who refuse to offer Communion to divorced people or to politicians who support abortion rights, he writes that the Eucharist, the central rite of Catholicism, “is not a prize for the perfect but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak.” (from an L.A. times article)

Am I the only one who finds that disturbing? To my understanding, it is an infallible teaching of the Church that we are not to receive communion when in a state of mortal sin. I suspect (and hope) that the Holy Father’s words are being misinterpreted (which is more than possible, given that both of the above come from secular sources), but if they are not and this is truly the implication of what he has written, is that not leading people into “eating and drinking judgment upon themselves”?

You seem to be confusing infallible teaching with perceived infallible teaching.The clergy have got into the habit of presenting their pet views as infallible,to prevent dissent but,in fact infallibillity is strictly limited and clearly defined. The matter of who can or cannot receive Communion is one of discipline,and could be changed.

 

[ProVobis]

CNN could spin the earth in the opposite direction from which it actually spins.

Or they could translate it back into Italian and see if the Pope recognizes what he said.

 

[ProVobis]

The matter of who can or cannot receive Communion is one of discipline,and could be changed.

Why is that? Because Judas was allowed to receive?

 

[TimothyH]

Or they could translate it back into Italian and see if the Pope recognizes what he said.

Oh, too funny. I am picturing His Holiness reading the reverse translation, scratching his head and saying, “Wha…? How did they get that???”

 

[RPRPsych]

CNN could spin the earth in the opposite direction from which it actually spins.

-Tim-

Maybe they could come up with a new slogan: “CNN: Violating the law of conservation of angular momentum, because it’s too conservative.”

 

[JReducation]

The Pope also hinted that he wants to see an end to the so-called “wafer wars,” in which Catholic politicians who support abortion rights are denied Holy Communion. His comments could also be taken as another sign that he plans to reform church rules that prevent divorced Catholics from receiving the Eucharist. (from the linked article)

In one passage that could have implications for clerics who refuse to offer Communion to divorced people or to politicians who support abortion rights, he writes that the Eucharist, the central rite of Catholicism, “is not a prize for the perfect but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak.” (from an L.A. times article)

Am I the only one who finds that disturbing? To my understanding, it is an infallible teaching of the Church that we are not to receive communion when in a state of mortal sin. I suspect (and hope) that the Holy Father’s words are being misinterpreted (which is more than possible, given that both of the above come from secular sources), but if they are not and this is truly the implication of what he has written, is that not leading people into “eating and drinking judgment upon themselves”?

This is not a dogma at all. It’s Canon Law. The pope can change it, if he so chooses to do.

But my feeling is that this not all that he said. I think the quote may be missing something. You know how the media edits, cuts and pastes.

 

[FAB]

Ok, so I finally did the logical thing and went to the Vatican website and read the exhortation for myself. I can now verify that my suspicions were correct. Here is the concerned passage in its entirety:

47. The Church is called to be the house of the Father, with doors always wide open. One concrete sign of such openness is that our church doors should always be open, so that if someone, moved by the Spirit, comes there looking for God, he or she will not find a closed door. There are other doors that should not be closed either. Everyone can share in some way in the life of the Church; everyone can be part of the community, nor should the doors of the sacraments be closed for simply any reason. This is especially true of the sacrament which is itself “the door”: baptism. The Eucharist, although it is the fullness of sacramental life, is not a prize for the perfect but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak.[51] These convictions have pastoral consequences that we are called to consider with prudence and boldness. Frequently, we act as arbiters of grace rather than its facilitators. But the Church is not a tollhouse; it is the house of the Father, where there is a place for everyone, with all their problems.

There is no mention of any of the particular things the secular press references (i.e., communion for public officials who support abortion rights), and in fact the language I have highlighted suggests to me a need to carefully consider such cases as may require restriction. So, to those of you who shared my concerns, I think we can collectively breathe a sigh of relief.

There may not be a specific reference but this line

But the Church is not a tollhouse; it is the house of the Father, where there is a place for everyone, with all their problems.

Seems to indicate that all have to be welcomed into the church and

The Eucharist, although it is the fullness of sacramental life, is not a prize for the perfect

is to be given as a means of

powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak.

.
Who is in more need of healing than those who support abortion, those who are divorced and remarried? His phrase

simply any reason

needs to be fleshed out as to what he means. I am certain that it is coming.

someone, moved by the Spirit, comes there looking for God, he or she will not find a closed door.

this needs to be lived. I work with RCIA and most often what holds a person from coming into the fullness of the church are previous marriage situations, often years in the past. This is one of those closed doors not need to be opened.

Dcn. Frank

 

[saveusfromhell]

There may not be a specific reference but this line Seems to indicate that all have to be welcomed into the church and is to be given as a means of .
Who is in more need of healing than those who support abortion, those who are divorced and remarried? His phrase needs to be fleshed out as to what he means. I am certain that it is coming.
this needs to be lived. I work with RCIA and most often what holds a person from coming into the fullness of the church are previous marriage situations, often years in the past. This is one of those closed doors not need to be opened.

Dcn. Frank

yeah and as soon as the pope were to allow people who support abortion receive communion then the world will take it to mean that the church has no problem with abortion. in fact the common perception and we all have seen it, is that the church now points to sour puss catholics who still regard abortion and same sex as sinful, as the enemy
people who have an inappropriate relationship with money should be thrown into the sea with a milstone around their neck and the church doesn’t want their money which would seem to indicate them but who am I to judge gay lifestyle,

 

[ProVobis]

I know what you mean. The papacy has never been under such a microscope before–I mean, same-day translations of instantaneous electronic communications? Wow. That’s a demand that barely dates back five years.

Indeed. One wonders what they would have done with Paul VI’s “Smoke of Satan” comment.

 

[SuperLuigi]

I’m floored that at this time in history, translation skills have not advanced enough to be able to accurately present the Pope’s words in the world’s languages.

My friend, the skills are there, but the media has an agenda to weaken the Catholic Church because it remains stalwart against their academic utopian view.

I’m not sure anymore what the Pope has actually said. The comment about trickle-down economics really really bothered me a lot–but did he really mean what the American translations said that he meant? Maybe he should stop talking entirely, and just DO. It wouldn’t be unheard of in Catholic tradition, would it?

Ugh…and to think we were talking over each other on the other thread. uch:

You cannot, cannot trust the mainstream media to report on what the Pope says. They WANT him to say that abortion, contraception and so-called “gay marriage” are fine and that capitalism is always bad.

They are counting on people interpreting that from their reports.

 

[SuperLuigi]

Maybe they could come up with a new slogan: “CNN: Violating the law of conservation of angular momentum, because it’s too conservative.”

They just might if it would get the Democrat Party more votes.

 

[ProVobis]

You cannot, cannot trust the mainstream media to report on what the Pope says. They WANT him to say that abortion, contraception and so-called “gay marriage” are fine and that capitalism is always bad.

They are counting on people interpreting that from their reports.

In a way it’s a reminder of the way things were in the 60’s. The media misinterpreted Progressio Populorum (“ok to use conscience”) inter alia and the fact that the Pope assembled a group of moral theologians to decide the issue into making everyone think the allowance of ABC was inevitable. Imagine the shock when they found out the truth through Humanae Vitae. Suddenly the Pope found himself a lot of enemies.

 

[esieffe]

Yeah, we’ll see what the reaction is when people realize he’s talking about individual giving and not cheap arm-chair, couch charity where you show up at the polls in the West every few years to vote for false promises and policies that fail the poor and do nothing but make the fortunate feel good expecting corrupt government to do all the heavy lifting.

Ahh yes, but this group always has existed and always will. As to the “voting in the west” portion of your post, sadly I have no defense, not that it needs one, it is what it is, as we say in the west. “center Americans” are doing our best to make our displeasure known with the political realities, but so far for both parties, we have gained little in the way of true results.

This is just another reason why I think the Holy Father’s message is so important, not just the “feel good” statements he has made, but ALL of it.

 

[esieffe]

Ok, so I finally did the logical thing and went to the Vatican website and read the exhortation for myself. I can now verify that my suspicions were correct. Here is the concerned passage in its entirety:

47. The Church is called to be the house of the Father, with doors always wide open. One concrete sign of such openness is that our church doors should always be open, so that if someone, moved by the Spirit, comes there looking for God, he or she will not find a closed door. There are other doors that should not be closed either. Everyone can share in some way in the life of the Church; everyone can be part of the community, nor should the doors of the sacraments be closed for simply any reason. This is especially true of the sacrament which is itself “the door”: baptism. The Eucharist, although it is the fullness of sacramental life, is not a prize for the perfect but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak.[51] These convictions have pastoral consequences that we are called to consider with prudence and boldness. Frequently, we act as arbiters of grace rather than its facilitators. But the Church is not a tollhouse; it is the house of the Father, where there is a place for everyone, with all their problems.

There is no mention of any of the particular things the secular press references (i.e., communion for public officials who support abortion rights), and in fact the language I have highlighted suggests to me a need to carefully consider such cases as may require restriction. So, to those of you who shared my concerns, I think we can collectively breathe a sigh of relief.

Thank you for bringing that out! I can only do so much computer screen reading before my eyes start bothering me!

 

[esieffe]

This is not a dogma at all. It’s Canon Law. The pope can change it, if he so chooses to do.
.

Can he really?! Wow. I thought important doctrinal changes had to be done by a council. Before I converted [being the son of an Episcopal Priest] I thought I knew “more than the average convert” but clearly I still have much to learn! I have the “green book” on my beside table, right next to my Catholic study Bible. There is much information to digest.

 

[prodigalson2011]

This is not a dogma at all. It’s Canon Law. The pope can change it, if he so chooses to do.

Are you sure about that? I know you’re a religious and all, but I have to disagree here. St. Paul seems pretty clear about it when he says, “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” (1 Cor. 11:27)

Further, the catechism calls this a sacrilege: “Sacrilege consists in profaning or treating unworthily the sacraments and other liturgical actions, as well as persons, things, or places consecrated to God. Sacrilege is a grave sin especially when committed against the Eucharist, for in this sacrament the true Body of Christ is made substantially present for us.” (CCC 2120)

Sacrilege is never simply a matter of violating canon law, so far as I know. It’s always an objectively evil act which profanes something holy.

But my feeling is that this not all that he said. I think the quote may be missing something. You know how the media edits, cuts and pastes.

If you read my later post (higher up on this page), you’ll see I came to that conclusion myself after reading the exhortation in its entirety.

 

[JReducation]

Are you sure about that? I know you’re a religious and all, but I have to disagree here. St. Paul seems pretty clear about it when he says, “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” (1 Cor. 11:27)

Further, the catechism calls this a sacrilege: “Sacrilege consists in profaning or treating unworthily the sacraments and other liturgical actions, as well as persons, things, or places consecrated to God. Sacrilege is a grave sin especially when committed against the Eucharist, for in this sacrament the true Body of Christ is made substantially present for us.” (CCC 2120)

Sacrilege is never simply a matter of violating canon law, so far as I know. It’s always an objectively evil act which profanes something holy.

If you read my later post (higher up on this page), you’ll see I came to that conclusion myself after reading the exhortation in its entirety.

Paul and the Holy Father are not talking about the same thing. Paul is speaking about a person who is guilty of profaning the Eucharist, because he is conscious of personal culpability and still receives.

The Holy Father’s reference to the wafer wars or whatever the term was is about people who are objectively guilty, but subjectively they may not be culpable. If the person is not subjectively culpable, Paul’s statement does not apply and the only thing between the person and the Eucharist is Canon Law. The pope can change Canon Law or he can restate it so that it is clear that it only applies to those who are subjectively culpable.

Can, will and should are not the same words. We have to remember this. Will he do this? I have no idea. Should he do it? I have no idea either. I’m not allowed to have an idea or an opinion on this matter. We have been ordered to not think about this matter and not to have an opinion of our own on this specific subject under penalty of grave mortal sin. We’re only allowed to have the same opinion as the pope. So I’m waiting for his opinion as are 1.7 million Franciscans. Well those Franciscans who are faithful Catholics anyway.

Obedience is such a wonderful thing. It is very liberating. If it’s not a sin, you put your feelings and thoughts aside and do, think and feel as you’re told. Would that everyone were able to do this. It’s heaven on earth.