Posted on 06/01/2016 6:17:41 PM PDT by marshmallow
Archbishop Chaput has said that receiving the Eucharist must be preceded by turning away from serious sins
Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia has been named as chairman of the committee of US bishops working on the implementation of Amoris Laetitia, according to a statement from the US Conference of Catholic Bishops.
The news sends a signal on the question of admitting divorced and remarried people to Communion. Archbishop Chaput has said that to do so, except when the divorced and remarried live “as brother and sister”, would be “departing from Catholic teaching”.
In a 2015 article for First Things magazine, the archbishop wrote: “the Church has always insisted on the necessity of repentance for serious sins as a condition for receiving the Eucharist. Confession and genuine repentance – which includes a turning away from sin – must precede Communion”.
Archbishop Chaput said that the Church does not want to “punish” or “exclude” divorced and remarried couples. “But neither can the Church ignore the Word of God on the permanence of marriage, nor mitigate the consequences of the choices that grown people freely make. She cannot confirm human beings in patterns of behaviour that separate them from God and remain faithful to her own mission at the same time.”
The archbishop said that opening the Eucharist to the remarried would not be truly merciful and would lead to a “collapse” similar to that seen “in Europe, in those churches where the pastoral practice regarding divorce, remarriage, and reception of the sacraments has departed from authentic Catholic teaching”.
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicherald.co.uk ...
Chaput supports Communion for Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, etc. IOW, he has no business opposing Communion for adulterers.
Document, links, please.
I hate this passive voice construction.
What I'm looking for is, was it the Roman bureaucratic machinery, or was it the USCCB bureaucratic machinery?
Is that it?
Cynicism stifles grace.
bfl
The Cardinal of Bologna has come out and said that where such confusion exists, in Chapter 8, of the pope’s play station— also known as, “Amoris Laeticia” that the faithful are to give sway to the “preceding Magisterium”.
In other real words; “ignore this silly man and resume your faith with those who know the faith, found wholly and in tact, in the “preceding Magisterium” “.
HOORAY for Cardinal of Bologna!
Whatsy in Rome simply can not undo centuries of Catholic teaching.
What next, book burnings at the Vatican of antiquities and documents?
I would lean toward the Conference. They must have a way with words, favors and insinuations to “confer”, on Chaput.
He will step away from this, or be tested. Shall we pray he remains on the side of truth, that he has already spoken, and thereby passes said test? I think so.
Www.google.com
Thanks. That really helps.
Tut tut. It’s not that no one can change. It’s a matter of consistency.
It is impossible that people notoriously involved in one species of grave sin should be denied Communion while those notoriously involved in another species of grave sin should be allowed to receive Communion. Canon 915 mentions no species of sin.
The REAL difference is that those who promote abortion in public office dole out billions of $$$ to the Church, while adulterers don’t.
Arthur, I checked Google. I think maybe you have him confused with Cupich. Scrolling down Google sites, there is a title on how the two (with way too similar names) do differ, on Communion.
Archbishop Chaput rejected such Communion in such circumstances as you suggested here, and he said “it is not merciful”.
In his book—the one that’s a rip-off of John Courtney Murray—Chaput takes the usual position that Canon 915 is optional for bishops. I.e., that bishops are at liberty to commit the mortal sin of scandal.
Chaput takes the Party Line on Communion for pro-aborts. Namely: Bishops may legitimately choose to commit the mortal sin of disobeying Canon 915. That is the official position of the USCCB. Cf. Catholics in Political Life.
Certainly. But he still doesn’t have a leg to stand on.
The Conference is in ashes. You are absolutely correct to criticize on this point.
I am at my wit’s end. Two of my friends, who are converts to the Church, new converts, poorly catechized, as is the typical practice in seemingly most “modern” dioceses in the USA, have now left the Church.
I remain on the verge of backing out on my diocese, myself, and attending only the TLM, the nearest located four hours away.
It is very bad where I am. A stubborn bishop, despises TLM and mocks it.
I don’t know what is right, in my case. I am concerned for the Sabbath Day commandment, of course, but would attend as often as I could afford to make the drive and the hotel.
Mass is agony for me here. I shut my eyes through all of it to endure. Certainly there is a pseudo schism in the West, between the growing TLM and this post Vatican II and Francis mess.
I grew up with the adage “You teach what you tolerate”, and I want to be vocal that it is intolerable what is serving as Mass today.
Usually, even where the Mass is an abomination, the earliest Mass on Sunday is relatively quiet.
Wait a minute. I thought this garbage wasn’t binding. So why do we need anyone to implement something that isn’t binding?
Is there a nearby SSPX that is an option?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.