Pope Francis quote used by parish to encourage Communion while in a state of mortal sin

[cargau]

I visited the Los Angeles area this past weekend. In looking for the mass schedule at St. Monica parish in Santa Monica, I found the following in a FAQ on Mass on their website:

I haven’t been to confession nor have I been to church in years. Can I still receive Communion?

Pope Francis said, “Reception of Communion is not a prize for the perfect, but healing for sinners.” We all fall short of the glory of God, yet are called to the table to be healed. Any Catholic can come forward to receive Communion.

The page can be viewed at this link:

stmonica.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=157&Itemid=651

I was shocked to read this. Has anyone else seen this Pope Francis quote used this way?

I must say, I struggle with this issue. Jesus never withdrew from sinners because they were not worthy to receive him. In Scripture, He never withheld his love and his mercy because of the un-confessed sins of adultery or multiple husbands. When he went to Calvary, he did not single out mortal sinners and exclude them from redemption. No, he came, suffered and died for the very sinners many of you want to exclude.

In a perfect world, the sinner would sacramentally repent and be reconciled to the Church. But, this is not a perfect world. If it were, we would not have any sin in the first place.

I would ask, who needs the love and mercy of Christ more than a sinner? Denying the grace received seems to spiritually starve those who need it most. In John 6, Jesus does not say, Unless you eat my Body and drink my Blood and have not seriously sinned, you have no life within you.

I am referring, of course to one who may have committed a sin and are sorry for it with an intention of receiving absolution. Those who disregard Church teaching and consciously commit to a life of serious sin need to realize they are not in communion with the Church and deeply consider whether receiving communion possesses spiritual integrity. Of course those who would mock or desecrate the host, should not be allowed to receive.

I say I struggle with this issue because I don’t see it as black and white. I think the Church may be going through a time where it may reconsider this issue in some manner. An example of this may come out of the synod for the family coming up in October. Who knows? May the Holy Spirit always guide us…

 

[Jeanne_S]

Let’s slow down just a bit. It seems many posters are jumping to conclusions, including the OP in the title of the thread.

Nowhere do I see, in the words on the website, encouraging “Communion while in the state of mortal sin”.

It is quite possible to have not attended church for years without being in the state of mortal sin.

The state of mortal sin is not for bystanders to decide. Christ told us clearly that before pointing out the splinter in the eye of another, we should take the plank out of our own eye.

St. Augustine wrote that the more se examine ourselves, we find the sins of others are insignificant compared to our own.

Not attending Mass for years,in and of itself is a mortal sin,requiring the Sacrament f Reconciliation before receiving the Euchrist…

 

[aicirt]

I now typically go to confession every 2-3 weeks. Of my 400-family parish, the most people I’ve ever seen in line for the confessional is 3. I’m in no position to judge the state of my fellow parishioners’ souls, but I find it hard to believe the other thousand people are in God’s grace 100% of the time.

Priests these days are too focused on ear-tickling. It’s that “Spirit of Vatican II” garbage that is damning souls and withholding the Truth from Catholics.

Agree. I don’t understand being a priest if you don’t want to save souls. What is there to be afraid of? Vatican II clouded the waters from what I was taught but no where did it erase mortal sin nor the need for confession. People need instruction.

The disciplines we had before Vatican II need to return. These don’t need any intercession to do: meatless Fridays, go to confession when one has committed a mortal sin, fast from midnight on before Sunday Communion, wear a religious medal to name a few. Why? Because the world is in a horrible state and we need to show an example to fellow Catholics and to others.

 

[christofirst]

I must say, I struggle with this issue. Jesus never withdrew from sinners because they were not worthy to receive him. In Scripture, He never withheld his love and his mercy because of the un-confessed sins of adultery or multiple husbands. When he went to Calvary, he did not single out mortal sinners and exclude them from redemption. No, he came, suffered and died for the very sinners many of you want to exclude.

In a perfect world, the sinner would sacramentally repent and be reconciled to the Church. But, this is not a perfect world. If it were, we would not have any sin in the first place.

I would ask, who needs the love and mercy of Christ more than a sinner? Denying the grace received seems to spiritually starve those who need it most. In John 6, Jesus does not say, Unless you eat my Body and drink my Blood and have not seriously sinned, you have no life within you.

I am referring, of course to one who may have committed a sin and are sorry for it with an intention of receiving absolution. Those who disregard Church teaching and consciously commit to a life of serious sin need to realize they are not in communion with the Church and deeply consider whether receiving communion possesses spiritual integrity. Of course those who would mock or desecrate the host, should not be allowed to receive.

I say I struggle with this issue because I don’t see it as black and white. I think the Church may be going through a time where it may reconsider this issue in some manner. An example of this may come out of the synod for the family coming up in October. Who knows? May the Holy Spirit always guide us…

I appreciate your honesty (and courage) to post what you said here, and I am reminded of another well known quote which Pope Francis himself often uses, that the Church is a hospital for sinners. I sometimes get the feeling that some of us only want people who are already well in our hospital. I also know and follow the official teaching of the Church in this matter, but when I read the statement referenced by the OP, I do not see it as an invitation to mock or desecrate Our Lord. Honestly, people who hate or couldn’t care less about Jesus or our Church are likely to never see that webpage, since they are not interested in the first place.

 

[Regina7]

I must say, I struggle with this issue. Jesus never withdrew from sinners because they were not worthy to receive him. In Scripture, He never withheld his love and his mercy because of the un-confessed sins of adultery or multiple husbands. When he went to Calvary, he did not single out mortal sinners and exclude them from redemption. No, he came, suffered and died for the very sinners many of you want to exclude.

In a perfect world, the sinner would sacramentally repent and be reconciled to the Church. But, this is not a perfect world. If it were, we would not have any sin in the first place.

I would ask, who needs the love and mercy of Christ more than a sinner? Denying the grace received seems to spiritually starve those who need it most. In John 6, Jesus does not say, Unless you eat my Body and drink my Blood and have not seriously sinned, you have no life within you.

I am referring, of course to one who may have committed a sin and are sorry for it with an intention of receiving absolution. Those who disregard Church teaching and consciously commit to a life of serious sin need to realize they are not in communion with the Church and deeply consider whether receiving communion possesses spiritual integrity. Of course those who would mock or desecrate the host, should not be allowed to receive.

I say I struggle with this issue because I don’t see it as black and white. I think the Church may be going through a time where it may reconsider this issue in some manner. An example of this may come out of the synod for the family coming up in October. Who knows? May the Holy Spirit always guide us…

Jesus ate with sinners all the time. But he also said “Repent and sin no more.” People tend to forget about that last part.

You may see this as shades of gray, but the Church does not. To receive communion with in confessed mortal sin is sacrilege. This is a doctrine of the Church, not a Tradition and therefore cannot, and will not, ever be changed.

 

[steve_b]

I must say, I struggle with this issue. Jesus never withdrew from sinners because they were not worthy to receive him. In Scripture, He never withheld his love and his mercy because of the un-confessed sins of adultery or multiple husbands.

I would say that differently

unconfessed sins are not forgiven either.
c:

When he went to Calvary, he did not single out mortal sinners and exclude them from redemption. No, he came, suffered and died for the very sinners many of you want to exclude.

His sacrifice made it possible so that sins *could be forgiven. *Not that they are automatically forgiven
c:

In a perfect world, the sinner would sacramentally repent and be reconciled to the Church. But, this is not a perfect world. If it were, we would not have any sin in the first place.

The majority of the world unfortunately is minus 2 great fears

1. 
   *]fear of God
   *]fear of hell
   
   As a result Jesus who judges everyone, has already given us a heads up
   
   Mt 7:14 For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few
   
   IOW, Jesus said, few people actually go to heaven, the rest go to hell.
   c:
   

   I would ask, who needs the love and mercy of Christ more than a sinner? Denying the grace received seems to spiritually starve those who need it most. In John 6, Jesus does not say, Unless you eat my Body and drink my Blood and have not seriously sinned, you have no life within you.

   The conditions have already been put in place. People don’t have the authority to write their own rules.
   c:
   

   I am referring, of course to one who may have committed a sin and are sorry for it with an intention of receiving absolution. Those who disregard Church teaching and consciously commit to a life of serious sin need to realize they are not in communion with the Church and deeply consider whether receiving communion possesses spiritual integrity. Of course those who would mock or desecrate the host, should not be allowed to receive.

   Those in mortal sin who receive the Eucharist, commit sacraledge on top of their mortal sin
   c:
   

   I say I struggle with this issue because I don’t see it as black and white.

   Truth is clear. It’s not grey
   
   Ecclesiastes 10:2 A wise man’s heart inclines him toward the right, but a fool’s heart toward the left.

 

[mamlukman]

Of course it is…circumstances were not the issue…nowhere did the parish state is was okay in the state of mortal sin.

Actually it did by implication: “any Catholic” includes those in mortal sin.

 

[spiderweb]

I did a search just to see if I could find when or where Pope Francis said this to try to get some context. I can’t find it anywhere online. Maybe someone else has had some better luck. I did also send an email to St. Monica Parish asking where they got it from. Hopefully I will hear from them and that may help get to the bottom of it.

As it stands, the parish website is very misleading in directing people to receive communion without receiving sacramental confession. To me, this is like saying confession is not necessary at all for anyone regardless of whether they are in a state of mortal sin.

“Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.” (1 Corinthians 11:27)

 

[Memaw]

Until last year I didn’t know confession had anything to do with reception of Holy Communion. Most Catholics anymore are so poorly catechized that they don’t know the basic disciplines, doctrines and dogmas of the faith.

It’s up to each adult Catholic to learn their Catholic Faith. There are plenty of sources to do just that. Including Catholic Answers web. God Bless, Memaw

 

[CompSciGuy]

Let’s slow down just a bit. It seems many posters are jumping to conclusions, including the OP in the title of the thread.

Nowhere do I see, in the words on the website, encouraging “Communion while in the state of mortal sin”.

It is quite possible to have not attended church for years without being in the state of mortal sin.

The state of mortal sin is not for bystanders to decide. Christ told us clearly that before pointing out the splinter in the eye of another, we should take the plank out of our own eye.

St. Augustine wrote that the more se examine ourselves, we find the sins of others are insignificant compared to our own.

1. Mortal sin means that the sin is of grave matter, done with full consent and full knowledge.
2. We know that deliberately skipping mass is grave matter.
3. The fact that the question is even being asked indicates that the inquirer has full knowledge of this.
4. The fact that the inquirer hasn’t been to mass in a long time indicates that it was more than likely deliberate.
5. It follows then that the parish is encouraging people to receive communion in a state of mortal sin.

It’s one thing to say “judge not lest ye be judged.” It’s another thing to be completely irresponsible and go against scriptures and tell Catholics it’s OK to receive communion when they’re probably in a state of mortal sin because telling them to go to confession first would be somehow “uncharitable.” Is it less charitable to encourage them to go ahead and “eat and drink their own damnation” as 1 Corinthians 11:27-29 tells us?

 

[spiderweb]

Update from my previous post. I received a response from St. Monica’s and this is all that they said:

It’s from Evangelii Gaudium

So I found the quote in Evangelii Gaudium in paragraph 47 as follows

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.

So in my opinion they are taking this quote and applying it to something that is objectively sinful and at least implying that it doesn’t matter, or that it is helpful despite what St. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 11:29 that a person who eats the body of the Lord in an unworthy manner eats and drinks condemnation unto himself. That is why confession is the first place to go, then followed by the graces received in the Eucharist.

 

[Oneofthewomen]

So in my opinion…

And that is the problem.

Lots of “opinions” and not a lot of facts. We all know that catechesis the past 40 years has not been the greatest and that there are many people who do not know what constitutes “mortal sin”. Just because it is “grave matter” does not mean it equals mortal sin and it is way above my pay grade to tell anyone that they are in “mortal sin”.

Maybe now is the time for me to make my little 'I have been to confession and am in a state of grace" cards for us to start showing at Communion time.

 

[CompSciGuy]

And that is the problem.

Lots of “opinions” and not a lot of facts. We all know that catechesis the past 40 years has not been the greatest and that there are many people who do not know what constitutes “mortal sin”. Just because it is “grave matter” does not mean it equals mortal sin and it is way above my pay grade to tell anyone that they are in “mortal sin”.

Maybe now is the time for me to make my little 'I have been to confession and am in a state of grace" cards for us to start showing at Communion time.

If someone commits a sin that is of grave matter, they should go to confession just to be safe. You can’t rely on the idea that “well, I don’t know if this sin was done with full consent or full knowledge, so it’s OK to receive communion.” Seriously what is wrong with telling someone they need to go to confession?

 

[spiderweb]

And that is the problem.

Lots of “opinions” and not a lot of facts. We all know that catechesis the past 40 years has not been the greatest and that there are many people who do not know what constitutes “mortal sin”. Just because it is “grave matter” does not mean it equals mortal sin and it is way above my pay grade to tell anyone that they are in “mortal sin”.

Maybe now is the time for me to make my little 'I have been to confession and am in a state of grace" cards for us to start showing at Communion time.

Just to clarify, it was “In my Opinion…” that the website of St. Monica’s is in error based on how it is stated. It is not my opinion that not worshiping God on The Lord’s Day is objectively a grave evil that when done knowingly and intentionally is indeed a mortal sin.

Any and all mortal sins separate us from God. Would anyone suggest that it would be proper to receive the Eucharist before confession if they had murdered someone? I don’t think so. Yet intentionally not worshipping God and murder are both mortal sins that break the 1st and 5th commandments.

While we cannot judge an individuals soul to know that they are in a state of mortal sin, we do have the obligation to speak truthfully that certain things are indeed grave evil and if they have committed those things, they need to examine themselves and determine if they need to go to confession. In the same manner, we can’t judge if someone is in a state of grace or not so it would be equally wrong (and above my pay grade) to presume that they are in a state of grace even though they have committed objectively “grave matter”. It must at least be stated that someone who has intentionally not worshipped God, has indeed committed a grave offense even though we cannot judge if that grave offense means that they are in a state of mortal sin and separation from God. Hence they should be encouraged to seek the sacrament of reconciliation prior to receiving the Eucharist and not just presume that even though a grave evil was committed, they are nevertheless good to go as they are.

 

[aicirt]

It’s up to each adult Catholic to learn their Catholic Faith. There are plenty of sources to do just that. Including Catholic Answers web. God Bless, Memaw

True. However, when it is obvious that all ( I can’t even say “most”) are going to Communion and it is also obvious that few are going to confession, then the priest, as the authority, needs to remind the congregation about examining and making a good confession. Do it as a sermon or put it in the bulletin.

 

[mamlukman]

Thanks for the quotation from Evangelii Gaudium.

Certainly I think we can all agree with it without reservation. Vatican II tried to deal with a situation where a lot (most, if I can remember 50+ years back) of people didn’t go to Communion at all–I think the feeling of the church was that they needed to encourage people to go, so they took away the excuses–instead of a fast from midnight on, it was changed to 1 hour; they speeded up the distribution by authorizing Eucharistic ministers instead of just the priest; etc. So now 90+% go to Communion.

There was a Medieval feeling that you only took Communion at Christmas or Easter because you were “unworthy.” And of course we’re all unworthy, but the point is that the Eucharist is there to help us, and that it’s not just for the “perfect.” You can see the artifacts of that belief in the choir screens–the masses (no pun intended!) were deemed “unworthy” to observe the Mass closely. So these Medieval ideas still resonate today.

I suspect the offensive phrase got into St. Monica’s bulletin through oversight, not through some zealous heretic trying to challenge church doctrine. But clearly someone should have caught it before it went public.

 

[cargau]

Jesus ate with sinners all the time. But he also said “Repent and sin no more.” People tend to forget about that last part.

You may see this as shades of gray, but the Church does not. To receive communion with in confessed mortal sin is sacrilege. This is a doctrine of the Church, not a Tradition and therefore cannot, and will not, ever be changed.

Perhaps, receiving the Eucharist provides the graces one needs to overcome temptation. For one to be perfectly sinless is to love perfectly as Jesus did.

Certainly Dogmas are immutable. But, doctrines do change over time as we come to fuller and deeper understandings by the light of the Holy Spirit.

For example, prior to the eighth century, sacramental confession was possible only once in a person’s life. And before that, the only real means of remission of sins was baptism. That is why so many waited until the deathbed to receive baptism.

And, there once was a time when there was no opportunity for a divorced person to remarry. That was before annulments were granted because a sacramental union was found to be invalid.

So, often things are not so black and white. As we try as a people of God to more fully imitate Jesus and do his will, we must always be willing to look at things in a new way. I get that sense from the Holy Father.

 

[SyroMalankara]

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.

So far the parish erred by stating that sharing = receiving Communion. This is false. Sharing the life of the Church includes Confession and attending Mass.

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]

Absolutely. Does anyone think ‘self-medicating’ is best compared to speaking to their open-door policy available doctor?

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.

Right. So take advantage of Confession. After having the burden of sin lifted, become strengthened with the Eucharist so one is fit to run the race. No one would say run the race saddled with sin, that’s folly.

 

[adrift]

1 Corinthians 11:27

Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord

 

[Phemie]

I now typically go to confession every 2-3 weeks. Of my 400-family parish, the most people I’ve ever seen in line for the confessional is 3. I’m in no position to judge the state of my fellow parishioners’ souls, but I find it hard to believe the other thousand people are in God’s grace 100% of the time.

Priests these days are too focused on ear-tickling. It’s that “Spirit of Vatican II” garbage that is damning souls and withholding the Truth from Catholics.

In my parish of 450 families I’ve never seen anyone in line unless it was a Reconciliation service. On a regular Saturday afternoon I’m usually alone.