C
childofmary1143
Guest
lifesite.net/ldn/2007/mar/07031303.html
Pope: “Bishops are Bound to Reaffirm Constantly” Life and Family Values
Pope: “Bishops are Bound to Reaffirm Constantly” Life and Family Values
- Status
M
mary_bobo
Guest
Very good news. Now let’s sit back and watch the fireworks.
C
Chickamauga
Guest
The ball is in the bishops’ court now. I hate to say it but I betcha most of them will just try to ignore it and keep their “don’t say, don’t tell” policy going with the likes of Pelosi, Kennedy, Kerry, Guiliani, etc., etc., etc. It may ultimately be up to we in the congregation to set off the fireworks and if (when) many bishops don’t get solidly behind the Pope on this issue.
H
Ham1
Guest
Unfortunately, this isn’t worded anymore strongly than anything in Christifidaeles Laici or Evangelium Vitae. There is nothing in the document that would “force” a Bishop to deny Communion.
It is more an exhortation to the politicians themselves to align their positions with the Truth. It is saying that politicians must “introduce and support laws inspired by values grounded in human nature” and that “Bishops are bound to reaffirm constantly these values as part of their responsibility to the flock entrusted to them.”
I don’t think there is anything here that will make certain Bishop’s have a sudden change of policy. Let us continue to pray for our Shepherds.
It is more an exhortation to the politicians themselves to align their positions with the Truth. It is saying that politicians must “introduce and support laws inspired by values grounded in human nature” and that “Bishops are bound to reaffirm constantly these values as part of their responsibility to the flock entrusted to them.”
I don’t think there is anything here that will make certain Bishop’s have a sudden change of policy. Let us continue to pray for our Shepherds.
R
rlg94086
Guest
I agree Ham1…here is the excerpt from the document (emphasis mine)…
In the FoxNews article others on the thread have linked, is the following:
IOW…the Bishops still decide what to do with “the flock entrusted to them.”
K
kangnamdragon
Guest
What are the major changes to the Mass in this document?
K
kangnamdragon
Guest
The Latin language
- None of the above observations should cast doubt upon the importance of such large-scale liturgies. I am thinking here particularly of celebrations at international gatherings, which nowadays are held with greater frequency. The most should be made of these occasions. In order to express more clearly the unity and universality of the Church, I wish to endorse the proposal made by the Synod of Bishops, in harmony with the directives of the Second Vatican Council, (182) that, with the exception of the readings, the homily and the prayer of the faithful, such liturgies could be celebrated in Latin. Similarly, the better-known prayers (183) of the Church’s tradition should be recited in Latin and, if possible, selections of Gregorian chant should be sung. Speaking more generally, I ask that future priests, from their time in the seminary, receive the preparation needed to understand and to celebrate Mass in Latin, and also to use Latin texts and execute Gregorian chant; nor should we forget that the faithful can be taught to recite the more common prayers in Latin, and also to sing parts of the liturgy to Gregorian chant. (184)
J
John28
Guest
lacrossetribune.com/articles/2007/03/13/newsupdate/6update.txt
Pope firm on priests’ celibacy requirement
By The Associated Press
.
VATICAN CITY - Pope Benedict XVI on Monday reiterated the Church’s ban on Communion for divorced Catholics who remarry and left it up to bishops whether Catholic politicians should receive Communion if they support abortion rights or gay marriage.
In a 131-page document, the Pope upheld the Vatican’s requirement for celibacy for priests in the Latin rite Church. “Priestly celibacy lived with maturity, joy and dedication is an immense blessing for the Church and for society itself,” the Pope wrote.
The document embraced recommendations made by bishops at a 2005 meeting at the Vatican that rejected any change to the celibacy requirement. The Pope acknowledged the shortage of clergy in some parts of the world, but said bishops should “on no account” lower admission standards to seminaries.
The Pope also acknowledged “the painful situations” of divorced Catholics who can not receive Communion after they remarry. The Catholic Church does not permit divorce and views such faithful as living in sin if they remarry and consummate their new marriages.
If efforts to annul the first marriages fail, and the couple continue to live together in their new marriage, “the Church encourages these members of the faithful to commit themselves to living their relationship … as friends, as brother and sister,” the Pope said. He was reiterating a stance held by his predecessor, John Paul II, that divorced Catholics who remarry may not have sex with their new partners if they want to receive the Eucharist.
The question of whether Catholic politicians who support stands that conflict with Church teaching should be denied Communion gained attention during the 2004 US presidential election campaign, when St Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke said he would deny the Eucharist to Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry, a Catholic supporting abortion rights.
The Pope said local bishops must deal with these cases. “Catholic politicians and legislators, conscious of their grave responsibility before society, must feel particularly bound … to introduce and support laws inspired by values grounded in human nature,” he wrote.
Pope firm on priests’ celibacy requirement
By The Associated Press
.
VATICAN CITY - Pope Benedict XVI on Monday reiterated the Church’s ban on Communion for divorced Catholics who remarry and left it up to bishops whether Catholic politicians should receive Communion if they support abortion rights or gay marriage.
In a 131-page document, the Pope upheld the Vatican’s requirement for celibacy for priests in the Latin rite Church. “Priestly celibacy lived with maturity, joy and dedication is an immense blessing for the Church and for society itself,” the Pope wrote.
The document embraced recommendations made by bishops at a 2005 meeting at the Vatican that rejected any change to the celibacy requirement. The Pope acknowledged the shortage of clergy in some parts of the world, but said bishops should “on no account” lower admission standards to seminaries.
The Pope also acknowledged “the painful situations” of divorced Catholics who can not receive Communion after they remarry. The Catholic Church does not permit divorce and views such faithful as living in sin if they remarry and consummate their new marriages.
If efforts to annul the first marriages fail, and the couple continue to live together in their new marriage, “the Church encourages these members of the faithful to commit themselves to living their relationship … as friends, as brother and sister,” the Pope said. He was reiterating a stance held by his predecessor, John Paul II, that divorced Catholics who remarry may not have sex with their new partners if they want to receive the Eucharist.
The question of whether Catholic politicians who support stands that conflict with Church teaching should be denied Communion gained attention during the 2004 US presidential election campaign, when St Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke said he would deny the Eucharist to Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry, a Catholic supporting abortion rights.
The Pope said local bishops must deal with these cases. “Catholic politicians and legislators, conscious of their grave responsibility before society, must feel particularly bound … to introduce and support laws inspired by values grounded in human nature,” he wrote.
R
rlg94086
Guest
None that I can see…if your parish is following the rubrics properly.
Latin is encouraged, Gregorian chant is encouraged, etc. But, these have been encouraged before. Maybe more parishes will listen this time. 
The document is basically an emphasis on the importance of the Eucharist in our lives and guidelines on proper reverence.
Part Two is the section on how the Eucharist is celebrated…including the Mass, our participation, and adoration:
R
rlg94086
Guest
Me too! Having been born in 1965 and converted in 1990, this Latin stuff is new to me. Luckily, our priest, who is younger than I am, took previous encouragement from Rome to heart.
G
gilliam
Guest
BOLOGNA, Italy, March 13 — Pope Benedict XVI strongly reasserted Tuesday the church’s opposition to abortion, euthanasia and gay marriage, saying that Roman Catholic politicians were “especially” obligated to defend the church’s stance in their public duties.
“These values are nonnegotiable,” the pope wrote in a 130-page “apostolic exhortation” issued in Rome that represents a distillation of opinion from a worldwide meeting of bishops at the Vatican in 2005.
“Consequently, Catholic politicians and legislators, conscious of their grave responsibility before society, must feel particularly bound, on the basis of a properly formed conscience, to introduce laws inspired by values grounded in human nature,” the pope wrote.
nytimes.com/2007/03/13/world/europe/13cnd-vatican.html?ex=1331438400&en=ed105adafd87105f&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
“These values are nonnegotiable,” the pope wrote in a 130-page “apostolic exhortation” issued in Rome that represents a distillation of opinion from a worldwide meeting of bishops at the Vatican in 2005.
“Consequently, Catholic politicians and legislators, conscious of their grave responsibility before society, must feel particularly bound, on the basis of a properly formed conscience, to introduce laws inspired by values grounded in human nature,” the pope wrote.
nytimes.com/2007/03/13/world/europe/13cnd-vatican.html?ex=1331438400&en=ed105adafd87105f&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
J
John_Hiner
Guest
Am I being too sensitive? This article seems to undermine belief in the Real Presence, by its phrasing, both in the title and in the text.
Is this unsophisticated writing, intentional dissent, or something else?
Spiritus Sapientiae nobiscum.
John Hiner
Is this unsophisticated writing, intentional dissent, or something else?
Spiritus Sapientiae nobiscum.
John Hiner
K
Kristen
Guest
It seems to me that the headline and explanation in the article are instructive in tone (“back to basics”), not reflective of clumsiness or dissent. Mostly, the writer seems to be paraphrasing and quoting the Pope himself, in fact! Keep in mind that the average news article is written for the 7th grade level, so don’t expect deep theological writing in a mainstream Catholic paper.
A while back, I was in the Catholic newspaper biz myself. My experience is that most of its reporters are sincere Catholics, though sometimes with a weak understanding of the finer points of the Faith. The National Catholic Reporter and its ilk are the exception, not the rule.
Kristen
A while back, I was in the Catholic newspaper biz myself. My experience is that most of its reporters are sincere Catholics, though sometimes with a weak understanding of the finer points of the Faith. The National Catholic Reporter and its ilk are the exception, not the rule.
Kristen
K
KatieD
Guest
I heard about this on Relevant Radio this morning. I believe that it was left to the bishops to make decisions regarding Holy Communion for Catholic politicians who support abortion (and other anti-Church policies).
On the other hand, they said that those who have been divorced and remarried outside of the Church are not to receive the Eucharist. I understand and support this teaching (and have actually been through the annulment process so I know how difficult it is). What I don’t understand is why it is so easy for the average “Joe” to be denied the Eucharist until his marital situation is addressed, but it seems so difficult to tell those politicians who advocate abortion, same-sex marriage, etc. that they are not to receive.
On the other hand, they said that those who have been divorced and remarried outside of the Church are not to receive the Eucharist. I understand and support this teaching (and have actually been through the annulment process so I know how difficult it is). What I don’t understand is why it is so easy for the average “Joe” to be denied the Eucharist until his marital situation is addressed, but it seems so difficult to tell those politicians who advocate abortion, same-sex marriage, etc. that they are not to receive.
J
John_Hiner
Guest
It is difficult to accept this, when the “fine point” in question is the very issue being explained by the papal exhortation. The verb “see . . . as” in the title and the phrase “who is present in the bread and wine” are both significant misstatements of the doctrine of the Real Presence. Arguably they reflect the sort of casual disbelief in the doctrine against which the Pope is writing.
Is it not clear that “*See *Eucharist *as *real presence” insinuates that this “seeing” is an act of fancy rather than a discernment of the objective truth? Why would the more accurate phrase “See Real Presence in the Eucharist” not be preferred – it even has the same number of characters?
As for the reference to Christ as being “present in the bread and wine,” this is a direct misstatement. There is no “wine,” and the sense in which there is “bread” is metaphorical. This is a central matter, not a mere point of detail.
It also seems to me that such casual misstatements are effective in subliminally persuading the majority of readers, Catholic or otherwise, that the Real Presence is not to be seriously believed. If the usual member of the Roman Rite takes First Communion at six or seven years of age, then 7th-grade writing should be expected to express the Real Presence accurately – or at least to notice that there is no “wine” on the altar after the Consecration.
Spiritus Sapientiae nobiscum.
John Hiner
M
Maratom
Guest
G
Grace_Angel
Guest
Of course the Holy Father must stand his ground on abortion and homosexuality and gay unions (I dont want to say marriage) what else can he do? Abortion is killing of a child in its earliest stages of formation and at times older still. Gay unions are sin against “life” and sexuality. What else can he say. They dictums cannot ever change irrespective of wants them changed.
Grace Angel.
I
InnocentIII
Guest
I see this document as laying the necessary groundwork for the recovery of the liturgy as an organic development. It must be remembered that many Catholics are in the position of Russians born after 1917 - they have known only the Novus Ordo especially in its debased form practised in many modern or progressive parishes. A return to an organic liturgy linked to the past will seem to them as great and as unsettling a revolution as was the switch to the vernacular / versus populam etc to my generation of Catholics. The recovery of the liturgy will take time and involve blending the best of the Novus Ordo with the best of the Tridentine rite. The document is essentially a reflection on the role of the Eucharist but there are three clear points that are indicative of the desire to work towards a reintergration of the liturgy into the Catholic tradition.
It has been said it takes a day to destroy and a lifetime to build. The Holy Father seeks to rebuild not destroy and I think it is important that we continue to support him with our prayers and loyalty.
- The document clearly promotes greater use of Eucharistic Adoration and the concomittent placing of Tabernacles where devotion can best take place. This has already been shown to promote greater respect for the Blessed Sacrament. An example is Cardinal Rigali’s recent Pastoral about the move to restore Tabernacles to the Sanctuary , a move he himself has endorsed within his own Cathedral. The presence of the Blessed Sacrament in the main worship area of the church is an important step to restoring devotion to Our Eucharistic Lord and the document makes it harder to argue for "out of sight, out of mind’ reservation.
Any move now to restore the primacy of Latin to the liturgy is bound to fail as older priests have forgotten and many middle-aged and younger priests have never learnt Latin. The document is thus taking a first step by strongly requesting that future priests be trained in Latin so that in time Latin can be truly restored to the liturgy.
It has been said it takes a day to destroy and a lifetime to build. The Holy Father seeks to rebuild not destroy and I think it is important that we continue to support him with our prayers and loyalty.
K
katy
Guest
My guess is that a marriage situation is more clearcut than a polititian supporting abortion. Jesus was very emphatic. I can see how there might be questions about what constitutes supporting abortion, and whether supporting legislation that is not good but better than nothing is OK.
U
Unitas
Guest
Any latin buffs here? I’m still a wee learner.
The part in paragraph 62 where it says,“such liturgies could be celebrated in Latin.”
On the cafeteria is closed, it’s mentioned that in the german and italian translations, that “it is good/favorable” for the liturgy to be celebrated in latin. This is very different than “could be.”
The original latin of this sentence is,“aequum est ut huiusmodi celebrationes fiant lingua Latina;”
I think it says, “plainly is as such celebrations we encourage/allow/declare the latin language”
I could be way wrong, like I said I’m a newbie to latin, and I’m lacking a decent definition of “fiant”.
Can anyone help me out here?
The part in paragraph 62 where it says,“such liturgies could be celebrated in Latin.”
On the cafeteria is closed, it’s mentioned that in the german and italian translations, that “it is good/favorable” for the liturgy to be celebrated in latin. This is very different than “could be.”
The original latin of this sentence is,“aequum est ut huiusmodi celebrationes fiant lingua Latina;”
I think it says, “plainly is as such celebrations we encourage/allow/declare the latin language”
I could be way wrong, like I said I’m a newbie to latin, and I’m lacking a decent definition of “fiant”.
Can anyone help me out here?
- Status