Posted on 03/08/2013 9:01:51 PM PST by daniel1212
Caracas, Venezuela, Mar 6, 2013 / 12:01 pm (CNA).- A source in Venezuela has revealed to CNA that President Hugo Chavez died “in bosom of the Church” and received spiritual direction and the sacraments in his last days.
In announcing Chavez’s death to the nation on March 5, Vice President Nicolas Maduro said the Venezuelan leader died “clinging to Christ.” The source in Venezuela told CNA that during the last weeks of his life, Chavez requested spiritual direction and asked to receive the sacraments.
Ever since he assumed power in 1999, Chavez butted heads continuously with the Catholic Church over statements by the bishops warning of the risks and excesses of his Socialist agenda. In 2002, Chavez accused the Venezuelan bishops of being a “tumor” for his revolutionary goals and demanded that the Vatican not intervene in the internal affairs of the country.
In recent years, Chavez occasionally took part in the religious services of distinct denominations, but he surprised the press in April 2012 when he showed up at a Catholic church in his hometown of Barinas to attend Holy Week services. He wore a rosary around his neck and prayed for strength to fight his illness. Last July, Chavez made public his request to meet with the Catholic bishops.
After Chavez’s death, the Archdiocese of Caracas, led by Cardinal Jorge Urosa who is currently in Rome for the conclave, sent its condolences
The secretary general of the Bishops’ Conference of Venezuela, Bishop Jesus Gonzalez de Zarate, called for national unity. “At this time let us all put forth our best sentiments,” he said during an interview on Venezuelan television. “Death is not the end of our life,” he added. “Death only opens the way to a life of complete happiness, at the side of God our Father.”
...and despite (or perhaps because of), Savino was elected to the second-highest position in the Catholic church.
My religion hold this teaching because it is fully Biblical.
Consider the parable of the Prodigal Son who had received his inheritance and squandered it in sin. Upon his repentance, he was joyously received back into the home of his father. He had lost his inheritance and regained it through repentance.
Or consider St. Paul’s warnings in Corinthians when he speaks of the Jews who were struck down in the desert after being saved from slavery by God, because they desired evil things even though they drank from the rock which was Christ.
Try again.
I have no problem with the masses for Chavez or Kennedy or am being contentious with anyone. I am asking questions that’s all.
Politicians are not the only ones to separate what they profess from what they practice, it’s just much more public with them. You are correct about one thing, receiving the Sacraments does not signify repentance as St. Paul so notes when he says that one who partakes in the body and blood of Christ unworthily brings judgement upon themselves.
They were Catholics, therefore it is right and fitting that the Church should be mindful in praying for their souls and commending them to the mercy of God.
Of course it does. Catholics even quote the part where they claim Jesus gave Catholic clergy the right to retain or remit sins, which they claim very effectively destines a soul to heaven or hell.
I merely find it amusing to hear non Catholics condemning Chavez because of the way he lived his life even though he was a professed Christian, when those very same Christians decry Catholics for saying that one must have good works as well as faith.
Talk is cheap. Professing Christ and living like he does means nothing. Being a Catholic does not equate to being a professed Christian.
Being a follower of Christ does not by default mean being a follower of Catholicism, nor does being a follower of Catholicism by default mean being a follower of Christ.
If he was a professing Christian, having to professed repenting and accepting Christ, his life showed no fruit of it.
Besides, the article was posted about how the RCC treats men like Chavez as members in life and death. Daniel has posted the Catholic church's own policies in dealing with people who live like those men do and does not follow through with what they claim to teach.
As usual.
The thread has been sidetracked to get the attention off that point.
Jesus definitely gave His power to forgive sins to those He chose to lead His church,
Peace be with you, as my Father sent me, so I send you. And with that He breathed on them and said, Receive the Holy Spirit. Whose sins you forgiven, they are forgiven. Whose sins you retain they are retained. "John 20:21-23.... Pretty clear to me.
The Church does not claim they effectively destine a soul to heaven or hell. That is a misstatement of Catholic doctrine and teachings. Not surprising as every time I engage with a non Catholic here, the incredible ignorance of true Catholic teachings is more and more revealed.
Besides, the article was posted about how the RCC treats men like Chavez as members in life and death. Daniel has posted the Catholic church's own policies in dealing with people who live like those men do and does not follow through with what they claim to teach.
Both men were in fact members and were chastised in life for their errors though never ex communicated officially by the Church. Of course, they may have effectively ex communicated themselves by their actions, but they were still members of the faith and therefore, they were buried with the hope and prayers of the Church that they may be saved.
If the Church reserved funerals for only those who had no sin upon death, there would likely be no funerals as we are all sinners.
The thread has been sidetracked to get the attention off that point.
In what way has it been sidetracked?
The discussion is about whether or not Chavez should have been given a Catholic funeral and that is what I have been discussing.
He probably isn’t going directly to heaven even if he did make an honest contrition at the end of his life. He probably has tremendous cleansing by fire (equivalent to hellfire) to just get near the pearly gates and only God knows how many centuries it would take to burn off his sins. He will reap what he sowed.
Actually it was the Georgian Orthodox Church and he flunked out of seminary.
Jesus answered some of your questions in chapter 7 of the gospel of Matthew:
15 “Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 You will [k]know them by their fruits. [l]Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? 17 So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 So then, you will [m]know them by their fruits.
21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. 22 Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many [n]miracles?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.
I fully agree that not everyone who calls upon the Lord’s name will indeed enter the heavenly kingdom. We are known by our fruits, which I believe means the works that we do, in our actions and words.
I don’t know if Chavez rests in the Lord or burns with Satan and though I did not like or support him, I have no problem with praying for his soul or offering a mass for the repose of his soul.
Chavez was a sinner as we all are, but he was also a believer in Jesus and as such, wouldn’t his faith alone be enough to save him?
Non Catholics say faith alone, but here in this thread, seem to be judging his faith by his actions, which is exactly what the Church teaches.
But the point is that, Chavez was Catholic, he did meet with a priest for weeks before his death and we do not know the intimate details of those meetings. If he asked for the Sacraments, it is likely he confessed and was given absolution which would mean that he was eligible to have a funeral mass.
The Bible tells us there is no sin greater than God’s mercy. Who are we to judge otherwise?
It’s not like he did something evil like going to Latin mass or believing in Transubstantiation.
It’s not like he did something evil like going to Latin mass or believing in Transubstantiation.
‘He was a believer in Jesus’.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Are you intentionally playing the role of the devil’s advocate or what? I suggest re-reading my previous post several dozen times.
Faith alone is enough, and IF you truly have that faith, it will show by your fruits! BUT THE FAITH triggers the fruit. If there was ever someone without the genuine fruits of a faith in Jesus then it was Chavez regardless of what he professed with his tongue.
Thank you. I stand corrected. I did know he was a Georgian but did not know that Georgia had its own Orthodox Church separate from the Russian Orthodox Church. Now I know.
God bless you and yours!
But that is what Cardinal Law personally told me.
In context , by not effectually recognizing other members as part of the Body of Christ. But as correct intent is necessary on the part of the priest, and may be only assumed, this may give ocassion to doubt as to whether one had received the sacrament.
That such are now in purgatory would be a false hope .
You're right. He might have repented. Yet should Christians celebrate as though he had?
Then what's the point of claiming the authority to do so other than a control mechanism to keep the masses in line with hanging their eternal destiny over their heads for non-compliance to the RCC?
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.