Toronto cardinal: Catholic teaching on divorce not changing

  • Thread starter Thread starter _Abyssinia
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

_Abyssinia

Guest
Catholic teaching on divorce and remarriage is “not open to change” as it is faithful to Jesus but the Church can do better in helping those suffering in this area, says Cardinal Thomas Collins of Toronto.
“Although it would not be right for them to receive the sacraments, we need to find better ways to reach out to people in this situation, to offer them loving assistance,” the cardinal said in an interview published on the Word on Fire blog June 25.
He said one form of help would be a wider realization that receiving communion is not obligatory at Mass.
ewtnnews.com/catholic-news/World.php?id=10285
 
A voice of reason and faith.

Look at that, the Church’s unchangeable truths are actually unchangeable. :bigyikes:

Good for Cardinal of Toronto. :thankyou:
 
Thank you Cardinal Collins!

I’m very glad that he explicitly mentioned the issue of reception of the Sacraments.
 
This is good news, but we need to hear more statements like this from other bishops.
 
“He said one form of help would be a wider realization that receiving communion is not obligatory at Mass.”

Mmmm, that’s good to hear from a bishop. I worry sometimes that we tend to think of the Eucharist as a fix we have to get daily. Gotta get our fix.

I wonder too if one way to help that realization is to resurrect some of the old practices that make it more difficult to receive communion. For instance, resurrecting the three-hour communion fast. If nothing else, this would give those who cannot receive communion plausible deniability for not receiving it in the eyes of others, who might otherwise be inclined to question the state of their souls.
 
“He said one form of help would be a wider realization that receiving communion is not obligatory at Mass.”

Mmmm, that’s good to hear from a bishop. I worry sometimes that we tend to think of the Eucharist as a fix we have to get daily. Gotta get our fix.

I wonder too if one way to help that realization is to resurrect some of the old practices that make it more difficult to receive communion. For instance, resurrecting the three-hour communion fast. If nothing else, this would give those who cannot receive communion plausible deniability for not receiving it in the eyes of others, who might otherwise be inclined to question the state of their souls.
I agree with the quote from the Bishop as well. Abstaining from communion actually helped me.

But, the last thing we need is more legalism. What would a 3 hour communion fast accomplish except to place a difficult burden on people? Christ wasn’t too keen on people in power placing difficult burdens on people.
 
I agree with the quote from the Bishop as well. Abstaining from communion actually helped me.

But, the last thing we need is more legalism. What would a 3 hour communion fast accomplish except to place a difficult burden on people? Christ wasn’t too keen on people in power placing difficult burdens on people.
I grew up with a three hour fast. It wasn’t that much of a burden.
 
I grew up with a three hour fast. It wasn’t that much of a burden.
I’ll second that. Especially if one goes to a Saturday vigil Mass nowadays. Really, how hard is it to eat lunch even as late as 2 p.m. if one attends a 5 p.m. vigil (receiving communion around 5:45 or so)?

As for mornings, there’s always the 8 or 9 a.m. Mass and then brunch by 9:15 to 10:30 (hardly a huge deal when so many people would cheerfully ‘sleep late’ on Sundays until then or later!) And if one’s children/grandchildren get one up at 5 or 5:30 a.m. (raises hand) and Mass is at 8 a.m., well, if one is up at 5 then one could grab a bite before 5:30 as well). If not, again, so one has water only for the next 4-5 hours but then one can eat.

I’ll bet our Muslim friends want to shake their heads at us --they go an entire day without ‘breaking the fast’ until evening, for a whole month at a time.

In the cases of people who are diabetics or have other health issues, they are already ‘clear’ to eat when they need to anyway, so we’re just talking about Joe and Jane Average, who one day a week if they attend an 8 a.m. Mass either have to get up early at 5 and grab a bite, or have to wait (having some nice ice cold water in the summer at any time, or my grandpa’s favorite of hot water in the winter --his drink of choice during Lent when he gave up coffee as well) until after Mass, some time in that case around 9:30 or so.

I guess being ‘old’ I can’t understand why for years and years, decades and decades, centuries and centuries, people who were young and old, rich and poor, sick and healthy, routinely fasted, until the mid 20th century from MIDNIGHT on, then for 3 hours, and now for a puny one hour UNTIL COMMUNION (not even ‘until Mass’). . .and somehow they were all just fine.

Again, we also aren’t talking of ‘poor little children’ (if they’re under age 7 in the Latin rite, they don’t receive communion so they don’t fast), or ‘poor sick people’ (they also need not observe the fast.) We are talking of plain ordinary people who quite possibly would stand in line for hours to get tickets to a concert armed with nothing but a water bottle, but when it comes to ‘church’ they simply can’t imagine going for THREE WHOLE HOURS without Starbucks, Dunkin Donuts, etc. 🤷
 
I’ll bet our Muslim friends want to shake their heads at us --they go an entire day without ‘breaking the fast’ until evening, for a whole month at a time.
Makes Catholics look like wimps, for sure.
 
I guess being ‘old’ I can’t understand why for years and years, decades and decades, centuries and centuries, people who were young and old, rich and poor, sick and healthy, routinely fasted, until the mid 20th century from MIDNIGHT on, then for 3 hours, and now for a puny one hour UNTIL COMMUNION (not even ‘until Mass’). . .and somehow they were all just fine.
Yeah, none of us died! 😉
 
“He said one form of help would be a wider realization that receiving communion is not obligatory at Mass.”

Mmmm, that’s good to hear from a bishop. I worry sometimes that we tend to think of the Eucharist as a fix we have to get daily. Gotta get our fix.
Some places in Europe have solved this already. If we would stop with the ushers and going row by row, no one would notice. I just had a friend who returned from Spain…everyone went up (seemingly at once for Communion) and stood around the priest (NO rows) …he arbitrarily gave communion in no special order. You don’t necessarily return to the same seat, but you can return to the same row. (Ladies, take your purses with.) She said it was certainly different but no apparent chaos was noticed at all.
 
Some places in Europe have solved this already. If we would stop with the ushers and going row by row, no one would notice. I just had a friend who returned from Spain…everyone went up (seemingly at once for Communion) and stood around the priest (NO rows) …he arbitrarily gave communion in no special order. You don’t necessarily return to the same seat, but you can return to the same row. (Ladies, take your purses with.) She said it was certainly different but no apparent chaos was noticed at all.
I haven’t been in a parish where they used ushers for Communion in almost 40 years but people still do the row by row in every North American parish where I’ve attended Mass. I haven’t seen a mass rush since we stopped kneeling at the rail for Communion.
 
I haven’t been in a parish where they used ushers for Communion in almost 40 years but people still do the row by row in every North American parish where I’ve attended Mass. ** I haven’t seen a mass rush since we stopped kneeling at the rail for Communion.**
Then let’s bring back those rails! 😉
 
I agree with the quote from the Bishop as well. Abstaining from communion actually helped me.

But, the last thing we need is more legalism. What would a 3 hour communion fast accomplish except to place a difficult burden on people? Christ wasn’t too keen on people in power placing difficult burdens on people.
Well, like I just said, if absolutely nothing else, it gives people who are not (yet) worthy to receive communion plausible deniability for failing to receive it. Right now, receiving communion is so ridiculously easy that the only possible reason for not receiving it, if you are a fully-initiated Catholic, is guilt of mortal sin. In that sense, staying in the pews is like broadcasting to the world, “Hey, I’m a masturbator/thief/spousal abuser/adulterer/etc.!” which is obviously a very powerful pressure not to remain in the pews. I suspect this motivates the unapproved practice of getting in line for mere blessing.

I have, in the past, in the presence of people I’m close to (like my girlfriend), deliberately “accidentally” eaten something (like a breath mint) on the way to Mass so that I would have a plausible excuse not to receive communion, when in fact I wasn’t receiving because I needed to make use of Confession first.
 
Well, like I just said, if absolutely nothing else, it gives people who are not (yet) worthy to receive communion plausible deniability for failing to receive it. Right now, receiving communion is so ridiculously easy that the only possible reason for not receiving it, if you are a fully-initiated Catholic, is guilt of mortal sin. In that sense, staying in the pews is like broadcasting to the world, “Hey, I’m a masturbator/thief/spousal abuser/adulterer/etc.!” which is obviously a very powerful pressure not to remain in the pews. I suspect this motivates the unapproved practice of getting in line for mere blessing.
Some of us call it the herd mentality and you don’t have to follow that. Suggestions to expand the fast to three hours seem reasonable in light of the reasons you give, although it is to be noted half of those at a Spanish Mass don’t go up for communion, and I think nothing less of those who don’t.
 
I agree with the quote from the Bishop as well. Abstaining from communion actually helped me.

But, the last thing we need is more legalism. What would a 3 hour communion fast accomplish except to place a difficult burden on people? Christ wasn’t too keen on people in power placing difficult burdens on people.
I don’t think this is a very good argument because I don’t think a 3 hour communion fast is a difficult burden. If you have legitimate reasons why you need to eat, like pregnancy or illness or advanced old age or whatever, well then, those are already taken care of in the law.

And as others have said, a 3 hour fast gives people a silent way of not implicating themselves of mortal sin. A 1 hour fast is so easy for me that I can eat on the way to Mass and still be able to receive, and I don’t live far from my parish at all. A 1 hour fast doesn’t give very good cover to people who sin. Of course, that’s not the “point” of a fast, but an added benefit, however a 3 hour fast is nonetheless not a difficult burden imo but is an eminently reasonable one. I don’t think Christ would have anything bad to say about this. If the fast was 16 hours or something, maybe, but not 3. Especially not in rich countries where most people don’t have issues not getting enough to eat in the first place.
 
But, the last thing we need is more legalism. What would a 3 hour communion fast accomplish except to place a difficult burden on people? Christ wasn’t too keen on people in power placing difficult burdens on people.
Oh, how soft we have become. I sometimes wonder if the Church has actually done a favor for her people or not, by relaxing so many of the disciplines we used to have. I truly think it has diminished the spiritual exhortations that mortification and penance are the way to control our passions and bring us to holiness.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top