Bishop Paprocki: Abp Chaput is Right to Deny Communion to ‘Remarried’ Catholics

LifeSite News ^ | 7/18/16 | Claire Chretien

[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..........

[Arthur McGowan]

Of course people bring these things up in Confession, but what is said in the confessional takes place in another galaxy, another universe. The priest can never mention or act upon anything he knows from a Confession. It’s totally irrelevant to this discussion.

The issue everyone is talking about is the refusal of Communion to people who are living together outside of Matrimony.

The overarching norm is: They must not be given Communion.

Exception: If they are living chastely, they may receive Communion. But, to avoid scandal, they must receive where they are not known, or let it be known that they are living chastely.

Obviously, if a couple live in a parish where 20 people know their business, and 1,000 people don’t, they have no reason to discuss any of this outside their circle of friends and family.

In my experience, third parties in the parish NEVER bring up any questions about this sort of thing with the pastor.

[Ransomed]

Thank you.

Freegards

[Arthur McGowan]

I have been reading your replies after people have painstakingly, and with crystal clarity, explained what the issue is, and why it does NOT involve making any judgments about anybody.

You keep going on about “judging people.”

You need to know that you are just too stupid to understand this issue. Therefore, you should stop discussing it.

[Arthur McGowan]

Your questions get stupider and stupider, so I know you’re a troll.

The priest asks the couple if they have an annulment, and even ask to see the decree. Or, he can pick up the phone and ask the chancery.

[Arthur McGowan]

If my calling you stupid offends you, I retract it. The alternative is that you just enjoy annoying people.

[piusv]

God oftentimes uses others to help and teach others. You have a number of Catholics telling you what the Church has always taught on this subject and you are refusing to listen. What the Church teaches is what God teaches. Therefore you are obstinately refusing to listen to God.

I think it is time for me (and the others) to shake the dust from our feet.

And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words: going forth out of that house or city shake off the dust from your feet. Matthew 10:14

[Flying Circus]

First, the priest should make it a priority that his congregation knows and understands the restriction. Good, basic catechesis is needed and often desperately lacking. The homily is a good time to hit on those subjects, though I have also experienced in eastern rite churches the priest calling the community together after the liturgy to hold a Christian Formation class as a refresher every so often.

If the priest doesn’t know and has no reason to suspect, he isn’t responsible. But if he is given reason to suspect he should ask and if there is a condition then he should council them and carefully explain why they shouldn’t take communion and why he will not give it to them. The spiritual state of his congregation is the priest’s responsibility.

[cloudmountain]

The spiritual state of his congregation is the priest’s responsibility.

How can ONE priest be responsible for the spiritual state of an entire congregation? Or for the spiritual state of even ONE person? Each person is responsible for his own spiritual state.

But, I get your drift and don't disagree.