Posted on 07/19/2016 10:11:31 AM PDT by marshmallow
SPRINGFIELD, Illinois, July 18, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) — A Catholic bishop simultaneously skewered those celebrating supposed changes in Church doctrine and defended a fellow bishop who instructed Catholics in his diocese to follow the Church’s teaching on sexual morality.
Responding to a “misleading” Associated Press article that ran in Illinois' State Journal-Register, Bishop Thomas Paprocki of Springfield, Illinois, wrote in the same newspaper that the guidelines Philadelphia Archbishop Charles J. Chaput issued on proper disposition to receive Holy Communion “are certainly correct” because they uphold Biblical teaching.
The AP article pitted Chaput’s actions against Pope Francis. The article said Chaput "is closing the door opened by Pope Francis to letting civilly remarried Catholics receive Communion, saying the faithful in his archdiocese can only do so if they abstain from sex and live 'as brother and sister.'"
Earlier this month, Chaput issued diocesan guidelines for the implementation of Pope Francis’ controversial exhortation Amoris Laetitia, which many Catholic theologians and philosophers have warned could undermine the Church’s moral teaching.
“As with all magisterial documents, Amoris Laetitia is best understood when read within the tradition of the Church’s teaching and life,” Chaput wrote, and the document should be read in continuity with the Church’s longstanding teaching that divorced and civilly remarried Catholics may receive Holy Communion provided they live as “brother and sister.”
“As I explained in my statement about the Apostolic Exhortation of Pope Francis on April 8, the date it was issued, ‘There are no changes to canon law or church doctrine introduced in this document,’” Paprocki wrote. “I addressed this conclusion in greater detail in my column in our diocesan newspaper, the Catholic Times, on May 1, explaining that in-flight press conferences on an airplane, apostolic exhortations and footnotes ‘by their very nature are not vehicles for introducing or..........
(Excerpt) Read more at lifesitenews.com ...
Chaput and Paprocki ARE in conflict with the Pope and all his hand-picked spokesmen, because Chaput and Paprocki are repeating the teaching of the Catholic Church.
I'd glad that their consciences consider that all right.
The Pope, obviously, knows that he isn't a mind/soul reader. He doesn't ASSUME that those sinners remarried Catholics haven't been to see a priest or gone to confession.
I had an aunt, Irish Catholic, who married a divorced man, my uncle, the youngest of seven children. She HAD gone to a priest...
BTW, do get all toasty when you sit near the fire?
Bwaahaha! Sorry, I couldn't resist.
Post #2 ~ Chaput and Paprocki ARE in conflict with the Pope and all his hand-picked spokesmen, because Chaput and Paprocki are repeating the teaching of the Catholic Church. ~
Papal Exhortations, and press interviews can NOT alter Church teaching, but CAN alter peoples’ perceptions Clergy and Laity alike.
It is unfortunate that our Pope is so reckless in his statements, and this must be resolved immediately.
This is not about mind-reading. It’s about publicly-known facts.
If a a person is in a “marriage” that is invalid because of a previously-existing valid marriage, he cannot be absolved unless he fulfills the conditions specified by Abp. Chaput.
He must be denied Communion because of the publicly-known facts. No one is claiming the ability to read minds.
If your aunt was invalidly, “civilly” married, and was told by a priest that she was free to receive Communion, that priest was lying to her. If he gave her “absolution” in Confession, he was committing a gravely sacrilegious act.
The Pope is lying, encouraging invalid “absolutions,” and sacrilegious Communions.
The Church will get through this crisis with help of faithful laity and clergy who have yje courage to oppose the Pope’s dishonest “teaching.”
Doesn’t matter if they go confess or not, because if they continue to live as a “married couple”, they are in a continual state of sin, which shows there is no contrition. Sins can’t be forgiven if there is no contrition, it doesn’t matter whether you go to a priest and confess them or not.
I don't plan on sitting in judgment on ANYone. It reminds me of Jesus' sermon about the "boulder" in MY eye.
Thank goodness God is our judge and not....
So, is it safe to assume that you agree with Francis’ heresy? Because you seem to be.
Again, this isn’t about judging anyone’s soul, or mind-reading. It is about publicly-known facts.
St. Paul says that people who receive Communion when they are living in a manner contrary to Christ’s teaching are committing grave sin, causing scandal, and are getting sick and dying.
You seem to be saying that you thank God you are not a bad Christian like St Paul.
You seem to be a Catholic who has not read much or given any thought to these issues. Or else your understanding of them has been distorted by dishonest priests.
Well, Jesus is the one who taught us the proper standards with with to judge these things and commanded us to hold ourselves to those standards, so I don’t think you’ll find much help appealing to him about these matters.
What if they publicly say they live together but don’t have sex? What if they privately tell a priest this and no one else? I ask because I don’t know.
FReegards
Post #11 ~ CLOUDMOUNTAIN posted :
I had an aunt, Irish Catholic, who married a divorced man,
my uncle, the youngest of seven children. She HAD gone to a priest...
Regarding the papacy or any religious leader (anywhere) I often think that WE get to hear and read what the media WANTS us to hear and read. Or, am I being too cynical?”
St. Paul says that people who receive Communion when they are living in a manner contrary to Christ’s teaching are committing grave sin, causing scandal, and are getting sick and dying.
Your reply:
~ You seem to be saying that you thank God you are not a bad Christian like St Paul.
You seem to be a Catholic who has not read much or given any thought to these issues. Or else your understanding of them has been distorted by dishonest priests. ~
I usually agree with the honorable Mr. McGowan; but not this time - I thought your reply was unnecessarily presumptive and judgmental.
†Dominus vobiscum†
Pax tibi. You seem to need it.
To whom else would I turn? Jesus is the way, the truth and the life.
I try not to judge others, even if I disapprove of their behavior. I won't cast the "first stone," but YOU, go ahead, cast away.
Who is asking you to “judge” or “cast stones”? This is about whether they should receive communion in the Catholic church.
You’re not even Catholic, are you?
=====================================
Born, baptized and bred Catholic.
Catholic school for 12 years plus kindergarten.
Attend daily Mass Sundays through Fridays.
Lead the daily rosary before Mass when it's my turn.
Married in the Church as well, by my Catholic priest first cousin.
Have lunch a few times a year with a retired priest who was the FIRST priest to talk about Church history in his sermon.
Buried my poor, dear sweet hubby in the Church and buried him in a Catholic cemetery. I bought a DOUBLE plot for both our ashes...when it's my turn.
Why are you raising the issue of judgment? Are you suggesting that denial of Communion requires judgment? It doesn't. All that is required is a reading of Catholic teaching such as Familiaris Consortio.
Have you read this apostolic exhortation? If not, click on the link and read it.
This is Pope St. John Paul II talking and here's a relevant excerpt:
However, the Church reaffirms her practice, which is based upon Sacred Scripture, of not admitting to Eucharistic Communion divorced persons who have remarried. They are unable to be admitted thereto from the fact that their state and condition of life objectively contradict that union of love between Christ and the Church which is signified and effected by the Eucharist. Besides this, there is another special pastoral reason: if these people were admitted to the Eucharist, the faithful would be led into error and confusion regarding the Church's teaching about the indissolubility of marriage.
Reconciliation in the sacrament of Penance which would open the way to the Eucharist, can only be granted to those who, repenting of having broken the sign of the Covenant and of fidelity to Christ, are sincerely ready to undertake a way of life that is no longer in contradiction to the indissolubility of marriage. This means, in practice, that when, for serious reasons, such as for example the children's upbringing, a man and a woman cannot satisfy the obligation to separate, they "take on themselves the duty to live in complete continence, that is, by abstinence from the acts proper to married couples."
Feel free to cut and paste any of JPII's words which you feel are too "judgmental".
Chaput and Paprocki are simply reiterating what is written in Familiaris Consortio, which should be entirely noncontroversial to a Catholic. As JPII says, the practice of not admitting the divorced and "remarried" to Communion is based on Scripture, not on "judgment".
You list a whole lot of things you do or have done, but being Catholic is more about what you believe, isn’t it?
I am not Catholic myself, even though I was born into that church and baptised there, because I don’t agree with all their doctrines. It sounds to me like you disagree with their doctrine on communion, so...
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.