Dubia Submitted to the Holy Father

[Guest]

At very least, very very least, our priests should be advised and trained fully in offering tremendous compassion indeed to those who are having major struggles with celibacy - and to make that advice and training very public in The Church with complete transparency for all without complex legalistic type jargon which only confuses those 'in the pews' - and sufficiently confused, it seems to me, we have a tendency to do what we think is right personally and ignore all the jargon and complexities we do not have a hope to understand any which way.

3 minutes ago, PhuturePriest said:

I have no doubt such a thing is incredibly difficult and was so for you. Thank you for sticking it out with God even when it was really difficult -- it's certainly a testament of faith and fidelity for everyone to look to, especially us seminarians and priests.

I was posting as you were.  Thank you for the kind words, but it was Grace all the way, not me ... and I would hate to have to write about the journey.  I really would!

I very much understand that it is not only laity who can have tremendous struggles with celibacy.  My hope is that no person who is really trying to stay on the straight and narrow with tremendous struggles is not sent away with "trust in God" - it is like giving a bottle of water to a person dying of thirst, but that person cannot unscrew the top.  If you know what I mean.  

I must add, PP - in the time I have been in the pham phamily, I have truly watched you grow and it is has been wonderful and a privilege.  You are gonna make a jolly darn good priest methinks.    Alternatively, as God may Will, a darn good lay person.  Although my money is on the priesthood - we need young jolly darn good priests.

[Nihil Obstat]

Those in a state of manifest grave sin include those who are living in adulterous unions (typically), politicians who publicly support abortion, people who have entered into "gay marriages", people along those lines. Public sins. Public by their very nature. 

Whether or not guilt can be imputed subjectively to those people is not strictly the point. They are barred from communion because of the public and grave nature of their situations. It is, in part, to protect the Church from scandal.

So yes, in theory it is entirely possible that someone is barred from receiving holy Communion under canon 915, and yet is not in a state of mortal sin. In practice I would argue that such a situation is unlikely. Knowledge and consent are not terribly high hurdles to overcome.

[Guest]

42 minutes ago, Nihil Obstat said:

Knowledge and consent are not terribly high hurdles to overcome

I am not so sure at all as any sort of sweeping generalisation...............

I may as well get it all out having come this far…………… glug! 

 

My journey to a completely celibate state was fraught with failure.  I not only had bipolar to contend with, I had the pressure of passion due to the fact that for 15 years I had been sexually active in my marriage.  There were nights when (despite Rohypnol prescribed for sleep – I was diagnosed as insomniac but often could not tell they why i.e. my Catholicism) I could not sleep with the temptation looming up that I knew would put me to sleep.  Sometimes I lost sometimes I won.  Too embarrassed to go to Confession to a priest I knew, I would seek out parishes where I was not known and did not know the pp (I had a vehicle then).  I was vulnerable to any man that came along that offered friendship and warmth – but in reality only wanted to exploit.  I was totally estranged from my family and friends because I suffered an active mental illness and separated and then divorced (he divorced me) with my children taken from me because of MI (probably a good move back then but it almost destroyed me into total despair).   

 

Finally I was unable to work either and was plunged into poverty and homelessness.

 I was almost continually psychotically ill and either in a psychiatric hospital or a psychiatric ward.  Not that that was much help either because my Faith was regarded as a pathology from which I needed to be cured.  Hence I had to fight for my Faith too in the PMH system then.  Public Mental Health eventually, eventually (years on) did come round and insight that my Faith was supportive to me and put it in writing.  After many years in the system and many struggles with the system, if they felt I was well enough, I could walk to daily and Sunday Mass.  If not, then very often the local pp would bring me Holy Communion and hear my Confession.

 

Many years after all the above I had a car accident and because I suffered bipolar I had to see their) psychiatrist (accident not my fault.  He turned out to be a psychiatrist who knew me when he practiced in Public Mental Health.  I was in his waiting room reading a book (will never forget it) titled “The Sea of Faith”.  When I was ushered into his surgery, he asked me what I was reading.  When I showed him the book, his remark was “Do you still read that nonsense?”  I replied “I never gave it up”.

 

With all the times in Confession and out, I tried to explain my position re celibacy and purity with a priest; it was never helpful at all.  Finally my then SD who happened to be a priest religious and theologian living and lecturing then in our seminary, helped me over time to understand that all the failures in my journey to celibacy were not mortally sinful at all.  But I had a long struggle with the black and white of Catholic Teaching and laws before I came to understand and internalize my moral position.   After eventually acquiring a copy of The Catholic Catechism (expensive and I did not have a computer then) I began to have a fuller understanding of why I would not have been in the state of mortal sin at all – that state that separated me from God and His Church, from Jesus denying me Holy Communion.  But to that point the journey really was horrific for me and one where I felt estranged from all that I loved.  It was never a problem of anything but not understanding and comprehending moral theology back then and all tied up in legalism...........and I am not alone I know even today.  Full consent came into the picture because of "The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest." CCC1860

 

Yep! We need young jolly good priests who have heart, understanding, compassion and a loving and merciful disposition close to the Heart of Jesus Himself “Jesus meek and humble of heart, make my heart like unto Thine and please remember me when I die”. 

Eventually our hierarchy due to age just must give way to those young now and hopefully with a better understanding of both theology and life in general in all its aspects.  We will continue to grow and change (growth is change) as a Church with deeper and then deeper again insights until the end of time:

“The Advocate, the holy Spirit

that the Father will send in my name - he will teach you everything

and remind you of all that (I) told you”

 John Chapter 14

Come Holy Spirit, come and bless and inspire our Pope Francis.

(Will be putting a link to this post into to my thread: "Home Mass Private Vows" in Open Mic)

[Nihil Obstat]

Yours is perhaps not a situation representative of the majority.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Nihil Obstat said:

Yours is perhaps not a situation representative of the majority.

I agree very much so as a perhaps.  However, it is a situation perhaps representative of a minority, even if only a tiny minority of the minority, it is far more than sufficient for attention and note.  We cannot know for sure in that full knowledge and full consent in all instances in a person's journey may not be sufficiently clear at all for infallible invariable absolute culpability at all times.  I am not comfortable with a generalisation that "knowledge and consent are not terribly high hurdles to overcome". 

God alone knows and thankfully He is All Infallible and Invariable Absolute Love and Mercy.  We are only weak and fallible in all things including knowledge and law making in the big picture and scheme of things.  Whereas we cannot go wrong with totally empty hands fully dependant on God's Love and Mercy, in Jesus and His Church.  This is not presumption since one presumes nothing whatsoever, rather one hopes against hope as one picks up any pieces and journeys onwards in confident trust.  The Holy Spirit in the journey does not abandon anyone whatsoever who is dependant on God and His Love and Mercy.  All is well, all is well and all shall be well (St Julian of Norwich)

 

 

Edited November 21, 2016 by BarbaraTherese

[Guest]

This is why I think Pope Francis is advocating that priests meet people where they are at and be prepared to journey with them knowing that “where two or three are gathered in My Name, there I am in the midst of them” i.e. The Holy Spirit and The Father also.  It is not at all difficult I don’t think to extend that into a meditation with implications.  It is a journey undertaken in confident trust dependant very peacefully and simply, without rush and bother, on The Holy Spirit in Divine Providence at work with every person involved, self included for sure.

I too as a lay person am anointed as priest, prophet and king according to my lay status.  I too must be a good shepherd prepared to "leave the other 99 and go after the one who is lost” (without getting ridiculous).  Not at all difficult to extend that into a meditation with implications either.

In the Psalms written under the Inspiration of The Holy Spirit, it can be seen with great clarity in word for word where God’s Mercy flows from His Justice.  And it is prayed every cycle of the four week Psalter.  No time to look up the reference just now.  But I will if anyone wants it - and probably will anyway knowing me ..... eventually.  

4 hours ago, Nihil Obstat said:

to protect the Church from scandal.

Hasn't enough scandal come from that noble desire!

Edited November 21, 2016 by BarbaraTherese

[Guest]

All the law can do for us is reveal the fact that we are sinners.  St James Chapter 2:

 

However, if you fulfill the royal ⁴ law according to the scripture, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself," you are doing well.

But if you show partiality, you commit sin, and are convicted by the law as transgressors. For whoever keeps the whole law, but falls short in one particular, has become guilty in respect to all of it.

For he who said, "You shall not commit adultery," also said, "You shall not kill." Even if you do not commit adultery but kill, you have become a transgressor of the law.

So speak and so act as people who will be judged by the law of freedom. ⁵ For the judgment is merciless to one who has not shown mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment.

 

We are in need of being rescued from the condemnation of laws which continually condemn for we are indeed nothing but sinners and sinful somewhere or other and therefore a transgressor of the whole of The Law - as well as hopefully saints somewhere or other thanks to God's Abundant Grace and Mercy.  And we have been rescued indeed by Jesus, Our Saviour of Love and of Mercy.  Just think of the fact that as long as we go to Confession sorrowful and regretful and with a firm intention to try to sin no more, we are forgiven and God then also forgets.  We have a clean slate.  That is The Love and Mercy we are offered.  Mind boggling!  How honoured and treasured to be called into The Church.

 

Perhaps The Church might split down the middle of those on the side of law and only law - and those on the side of Love and Mercy, which is not the absence of law and laws.   Pope Benedict might be correct that in the future we need to anticipate a Church that is very small and no longer powerful including politically.  A Church returning to basics and a future not of sorrow -

 

"And so it seems certain to me that the Church is facing very hard times. The real crisis has scarcely begun. We will have to count on terrific upheavals. But I am equally certain about what will remain at the end: not the Church of the political cult, which is dead already, but the Church of faith. She may well no longer be the dominant social power to the extent that she was until recently; but she will enjoy a fresh blossoming and be seen as man's home, where he will find life and hope beyond death"

Catholic Education Resource Centre "The Church Will Become Small" - Pope Benedict

________

.......off me pulpit........until next time

Bon soir

[Nihil Obstat]

OnePeterFive ran an interview (not their own interview, but a translation from an Italian site) with a Polish bishop that touches on the dubia.

"In what appears to be the first (of hopefully many) prelates to speak out publicly in favor of the Four Cardinals Letter, Auxiliary Bishop Józef Wróbel of Lublin, Poland, said in an interview with Michele M. Ippolito of La Fede Quotidiana that “The four cardinals were right to ask for clarification on Amoris Laetitia. If anything, it is only just to answer them.”"

Quote

 

[Your] Excellency [Bishop] Wrobel, what do you think of the letter of clarification on Amoris Laetitia sent by four cardinals to the Pope?

They have done well and they have exercised correctly the provisions of canon law. I think it is not only a right, but even a duty. It would have been just to answer to their observations. They asked no questions about the next day’s weather, but on issues concerning the Church’s teaching and therefore the faithful.

The doubts regarding AL, do you find them pertinent?

As I said before, a clarification on the document, and especially on chapter 8 is opportune. The text effectively lends itself to various interpretations, it’s ambiguous.

 

 

Edited November 22, 2016 by Nihil Obstat

[Jack4]

On 11/22/2016 at 8:09 AM, Nihil Obstat said:

In what appears to be the first (of hopefully many) prelates to speak out publicly in favor of the Four Cardinals Letter...

The number's up to three now. 

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/third-bishop-backs-four-cardinals-i-was-overwhelmed-with-similar-questions

I knew +Schneider would come in!

[Nihil Obstat]

Bishop Schneider is a man we can trust. One of our best.

[Guest]

http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1351414?eng=y&refresh_ce  "In its Declaration of June 24, 2000, the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts seeks to clarify Canon 915 of the Code of Canon Law, which states that those who “obstinately persist in manifest grave sin, are not to be admitted to Holy Communion.” The Pontifical Council’s Declaration argues that this canon is applicable also to faithful who are divorced and civilly remarried. It spells out that “grave sin” has to be understood objectively, given that the minister of the Eucharist has no means of judging another person’s subjective imputability.

Thus, for the Declaration, the question of the admission to the sacraments is about judging a person’s objective life situation and not about judging that this person is in a state of mortal sin. Indeed subjectively he or she may not be fully imputable or not be imputable at all."

Some time back Nihil corrected me re Canon 915 and was correct in doing so.  Thanks Nihil - I was wrong. 

However, I cannot for the life of me understand how a person not in the state of mortal sin can be denied Holy Communion and possibly declared by implication to be cut off from The Church and a relationship with God.  That sentence is horrendous to say the very least and commonly a sentence reserved for those guilty of mortal sin alone.

Canon 915 seems to me possibly to be a step to prevent Catholic teaching (not sure if it is a doctrine) from scandal i.e. those known to be in a situation of grave matter being permitted Holy Communion.  Where the former is concerned (preventing The Church from scandal), there just might be another scandal inherent in the Canon i.e. that The Church can protect Herself from possible scandal by dreadful severe sentences for those who might be outside of Catholic Teaching (or doctrine, whatever) in a public type of manner and although possibly not guilty of mortal sin.  The Church does have the right to do so "Whatever you shall bind upon earth, it is bound also in Heaven".  But can The Church do so on an anything at all type of basis including to protect Herself?

Non comprehendo.

_________

 

Edited November 28, 2016 by BarbaraTherese

[Nihil Obstat]

Public sins call for a public response. If one lives, publicly, in a state which objectively contradicts Church teaching, then such a person should be publicly corrected through our sacramental discipline.

In addition the restriction from Communion is meant to be corrective.

[Guest]

A good portions of Catholics are completely ignorant of Scripture. St Paul explicitly says receiving Communion without examining your conscience brings judgement on yourself. He goes on to say that's why certain people even have illnesses and problems. There's a reason why we are only required to take Communion once a year. It's so we can make 100% sure we are in a state of grace when we go up to receive. Not saying you should only receive once a year but you should be completely sure you have no unconfessed grave sins when you do receive. 

Just now, Josh said:

A good portions 

*portion 

Preventing someone from receiving who is known to have unrepented grave/mortal sins is doing them a huge favor. I remember when I first joined here in 03 that point got drilled in my head. I remember Dust saying he would tackle someone going up to receive who hadn't repented of grave/mortal sins.

Edited November 28, 2016 by Guest

[Jack4]

32 minutes ago, Josh said:

A good portions of Catholics are completely ignorant of Scripture.

Hmmm.. I've heard these words somewhere... (lick here)

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Josh said:

St Paul explicitly says receiving Communion without examining your conscience brings judgement on yourself. He goes on to say that's why certain people even have illnesses and problems.

"Certain people" might have illnesses and problems for the reasons you state.  St Paul in the quotation to which you refer I am presuming uses "some" people - both imply that there is no universal generalization that illnesses and problems are always connected directly/solely to sin, although some or even many might be for sure.  "If you say you are without sin you are deceiving yourself.......(and) you make God a liar and His Word is not in you " 1 John Ch8

Illnesses and problems, sufferings, have positive meanings in our lives.  One only has to contemplate a crucifix.

Many of our great saints suffered illness.  Some who come to mind are St Teresa of Avila, St Therese of Lisieux, St Bernadette, St Pope John Paul II to mention a few.  This is not to state that the latter were all sinless and impossible - but it does indicate that those who suffer illnesses and/or problems could become great saints.  St Augustine, for example was thought to have perhaps suffered depression and we know for sure that he had committed terrible sins.  He repented, turned his life around, and became a great saint indeed.  Hence even those of us who have committed mortal sins need not despair, rather repent and turn life around.

I would never contest and always uphold in every way that those in the state of mortal sin cannot receive The Blessed Eucharist.  It is to receive The Body and Blood of The Lord unworthily and is the mortal sin of sacrilege as well as the original mortal sin i.e. two mortal sins.

Edited November 28, 2016 by BarbaraTherese