Pope Francis (A defense)

Discussion in 'Pope Francis' started by Mark Dohle, Mar 14, 2017.

  1. fallen saint

    fallen saint Baby steps :)

    I said if they followed church rules. That means annulment. They can receive the holy sacrament of communion. Now the rules is the real issue.

    Your friend
    Brother al




     
  2. padraig

    padraig Powers

    If someone receives communion sacriligeously it is not Apostasy per se.

    If someone teaches that it is permissible to receive the Body and Blood of Christ of Christ Sacriligeously, then that is indeed Apostasy. For it is against the Age Old Teachings of the Magisterium and Scripture.

    As for instance the German Bishops are currently doing.

    If authorities in the Vatican permit such Apostasy amongst people like the German Bishops, considering there is nothing wrong in this, then I would consider this Apostasy too.

    1 Corinthians 11:27

    Sharing in the Lord's Supper
    …26For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes. 27Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28Each one must examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup.…

    [​IMG]

    http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_P42.HTM

    1385 To respond to this invitation we must prepare ourselves for so great and so holy a moment. St. Paul urges us to examine our conscience: "Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself."216 Anyone conscious of a grave sin must receive the sacrament of Reconciliation before coming to communion.
     
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2017
    sterph likes this.
  3. padraig

    padraig Powers

    You cannot make a snake a rose bush by calling it a flower. You cannot make that which is intrinsically evil good by calling it good. Not even the Church can do such a thing. We are not talking about the rules of a Golf Club here.
     
  4. Julia

    Julia Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us.

    Sigh. I thought this was a positive thread.

    Anyway. I was thinking about all the reactions to what is coming to our attention about what the Pope said and did not say. And how canon lawyers are now in on the fight. And it occurred to me.

    Luther had a valid reason for his frustration with how the Church was operating in his day. He tried and failed to get his point across, so off he went in frustration and indignation and used the newly invented printing press to lambast the Pope of his time as well no doubt the Cardinals, Bishops and Priests who were not 'coming out' on Luther's side so to speak.
    We all know the disaster which followed when so many Catholics at that time, got on board with Luther, and left the one true Church. Why do you think that happened. I believe it was because the ordinary people were already feeling frustrated and angry over the way things were done. I think one of the complaints was the buying of indulgences, so if you could afford it you got a ticket to Heaven. We all know surely money can't buy Heaven.

    I feel that if we allow ourselves to be drawn into what appears to be a breach of Faith, Morals and Tradition, we risk losing the Grace of God to persevere through this Storm, and could wind up like the protestants before us feeling like we are righteous in rebelling against the One True Church.

    Please leave one little thread where some can look for what is good about the Pope. And keep watch and pray for all this confusion and anger to pass.

    How many of us would attack our 80 year old grandfather no matter what he came out with. And would we change our lifestyle and beliefs based on his comments, if they seemed somewhat out of touch with our own informed conscience. Let us pray for papa Francis. Charity covers a multitude of sins after all, or have we forgotten about Charity.
     
  5. Dolours

    Dolours Guest

    First of all, Julia, I think you might benefit from reading the attached article on the myths about indulgences. https://www.catholic.com/tract/myths-about-indulgences

    It has never been possible to buy our way into heaven, and the Church has never said otherwise, not now and not in Luther's time. Bishops abused indulgences in Luther's time. Clergy abuse children in our time. Neither practice has ever been Church teaching.

    It is possible to gain an indulgence through the corporal works of mercy, such as helping the poor. From the Vatican's website: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/t...rc_trib_appen_pro_20000129_indulgence_en.html
    "or support by a significant contribution works of a religious or social nature(for the benefit of abandoned children, young people in trouble, the elderly in need, foreigners in various countries seeking better living conditions)"


    Acts of penance

    For at least one whole day

    — Either abstain from unnecessary consumption (smoking, alcohol, etc.);

    — or fast,

    or abstain from meat (or other food according to the specific norms of the Bishops' Conferences), and donate a proportionate sum of money to the poor.



    Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament is entitled to a great deal more consideration and protection than our grandparents. Among other things, Luther rejected Church teaching on purgatory and remission of sin. The reason the four Cardinals have submitted the dubia that Pope Francis refuses to answer is to save the Church following in Luther's footsteps which appears ever more likely.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 20, 2017
    SgCatholic and little me like this.
  6. Dolours

    Dolours Guest

    I have changed the above post because I pressed the submit reply button before I had finished typing it.
     
  7. padraig

    padraig Powers

    I am neither confused nor angry. I wish to God I were. I wish this were all some nightmare that is not really happening.

    I at least have no desire to be the dog that did not bark.
     
    Julia likes this.
  8. DeGaulle

    DeGaulle Powers

    To assert that such reception would not be a grave sin, on the other hand, would be apostasy, would it not?
     
  9. fallen saint

    fallen saint Baby steps :)

    It's not apostasy...grave sin is grave sin. Apostasy is denial of God.

    :(

     
    Michael Rafael likes this.
  10. Dolours

    Dolours Guest

    No. Apostasy is repudiation of the Christian faith. A Christian converting to Islam or Judaism would be an apostate although they still believed in God.

    It is grave sin to encourage a person living a sinful life to receive the Eucharist without repentance and firm purpose of amendment. While it isn't apostasy, it could well be indicative of heresy or, indeed, apostasy.
     
    little me likes this.
  11. Jarg

    Jarg Archangels

    Here is something positive and sound from our holy father, reminding us that in the order of love God is first, not man. Also reminding us for the need for frequent confession and the reality that excorcisms are not part of the past but very much necessary in today's world.

    https://cruxnow.com/vatican/2017/03/16/love-well-according-pope-francis-starts-god/

    https://cruxnow.com/vatican/2017/03/19/pope-confesses-hears-confessions-lenten-service/

    https://cruxnow.com/vatican/2017/03/17/pope-francis-dont-hesitate-use-exorcist-necessary/
     
  12. josephite

    josephite Powers

    Apostasy........the abandonment or renunciation of a religious or political belief or principle.

    Heresy............“adherence to a religious opinion contrary to church dogma.”


    FS in your original post, you addressed the question of communion to divorced no mention of annulment.

    If you meant the marriage was annulled..... when you stated...... And they have followed the rules of the church...

    Then what is your question?

    Because:

    A Catholic person who has had their first marriage annulled and then remarries does not have restrictions [ie living in adultery] on reception of Holy Communion!

    As their first marriage is found null and void that is it never existed

    A married person can not marry another by state law without a divorce; they recieved a divorce decree from the secular state
    An annulment is issued by the Catholic Church after investigation by the church which finds the first marriage never existed and [Only after the couple are divorced by the State]. So of course they can recieve Holy Communion like the rest of the faithful if in a state of grace!
     
  13. fallen saint

    fallen saint Baby steps :)

    Apostasy........the abandonment or renunciation of a religious or political belief or principle.

    So I guess I was right. In the Catholic pretext...denial of God.

    Thank you
    :( :)


     
  14. Praetorian

    Praetorian Powers

    It is surely a sacrilege though Fallen Saint. It is a defilement of the Holy Eucharist. You wouldn't throw the Eucharist in the gutter would you? Of course not. How much more of a defilement is it then to give it to someone who is committing mortal sin, is aware of the gravity of the matter and has no intention to stop?
    Grave indeed.

    We are not talking about people who went through a proper annulment process and got remarried. The issue is over people with a valid first marriage, who now are in an adulterous relationship with someone else who is not their spouse. They must be aware of the gravity of the situation because they are supposed to be "counseled" by a priest before they can receive the Holy Eucharist. Most importantly they do not agree to amend their lives by stopping sexual relations with the person who is not their spouse. They have every intention to commit adultery again after they receive. Thus they cannot have received proper absolution from their sin in the sacrament of Reconciliation before receiving. A firm purpose of amendment is necessary to receive absolution otherwise the confession is a sacrilege as well.

    I know you are orthodox enough to see the problem here Fallen Saint.
     
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2017
    josephite likes this.
  15. Dolours

    Dolours Guest

    josephite and Praetorian like this.
  16. fallen saint

    fallen saint Baby steps :)

  17. Dolours

    Dolours Guest

    Denial of the Trinity. They may still believe in the God of Abraham who is the first person of the Blessed Trinity, but, yes, once they reject Christianity they are rejecting God the Son who is one with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit.
     
  18. sparrow

    sparrow Exitus ~ Reditus

    Interesting page on what apostasy is:
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/christ...s-apostasy-a-biblical-definition-of-apostasy/
     
  19. Fatima

    Fatima Powers

    "Trashing the pope" and speaking the truth are not synonymous. Jesus said, I am "truth" and scripture says God is the "same yesterday, today and always". Thus truth does not change and Jesus has spoken clearly on the 6th commandment and scripture, which says any man who brings another Gospel, let him be anathema. No one that I have read has condemned Pope Francis, but pointing his error based on biblical and magisterial teachings is done so for love of His truth. How does anyone who profess to be Christian not understand this?
     
  20. Julia

    Julia Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us.

    Dolours, I think you threw the baby out with the bath water in replying to my post.

    In a nutshell, I was saying. Luther started off with valid concerns as to what was going on in the Church in his day. He ended up losing his Faith. And I feel we are in danger of doing the same if we carry on passing judgement.

    As for fasting; the first fast is to do away with the angry word and the clenched fist. Then God might be interested in our desire to please Him, not smoking or not drinking or maybe not spending time on the internet. Whatever floats your boat. 'Rend your heart, not your garments' comes to mind.

    The Cardinals and Bishops in the Church have the authority to question the Holy Father if they see something that they feel is not keeping with the tradition of Faith and Morals. We the lay people have a duty to keep those traditions and pass them on to those around us and those for whom we have a responsibility.

    We offend Almighty God when we all act like a bunch of Pharisees. Getting into the details of the law and the spirit of the law.

    I thought this thread was a positive thread, and safe to interact on. But it feels like the smoke of satan seeps in everywhere. And I don't want to have to answer to God for supporting an attack on the Holy Father. I am naieve enough to believe Jesus can take the Pope out in an instant if He, Jesus feels that is required for the good of the Church. Since He has not done this, I am trusting in Jesus coming to sort out the mess we are in.

    This is the third crisis of Faith in my lifetime, and each time it was deemed the Pope might have been wrong; but each of the two times previously the advice to stay with the Pope proved to be the one that kept me in the Faith. I don't believe in the final analysis it will be any different this time either.

    We are asked to pray for the Pope. If we hold resentment or doubt or frustration or anger in our hearts, our prayers are no use to God or man. We would be better of singing and dancing and boozing with the rest of society; because we will end up losing our souls if we follow the anger route through this storm.
     
    IXOYE4me and Michael Rafael like this.

Share This Page