http://magister.blogautore.espresso...stants-words-of-kasper-or-rather-of-the-pope/ Communion For All, Catholics and Protestants. Words of Kasper, Or Rather of the Pope 16 feb > Italiano > English > Español > All the articles of Settimo Cielo in English * The obscurity with which Pope Francis loves to speak and write on the most controversial questions is one of the constants of his magisterium, an obscurity that reached its summit in the response that he gave on November 15, 2015 to a Lutheran woman married to a Catholic, who was asking him if she too could receive communion at Mass: > Sì, no, non so, fate voi. Le linee guida di Francesco per l'intercomunione con i luterani But the doubts over his real thought are promptly dispelled by the personalities and interpreters closest to him, cardinals, bishops, theologians, Jesuits, journalists. Here, in fact, is what was said a few days ago, with regard to intercommunion between Catholics and Protestants, by the pope's favorite cardinal, the German Walter Kasper, in an interview broadcast on Italian state television: A: Today we are no longer enemies, we are friends, we are brothers and sisters. We have begun this ecumenical way and we have taken many steps in the meantime. We have good hope that one day we will even reach full communion. Even now we already have a great deal of communion among us. Q: A communion at the Eucharistic table as well? A: Yes, shared communion in certain cases, I think so. If [two spouses, one Catholic and one Protestant] share the same Eucharistic faith - this is the presupposition - and if they are interiorly disposed, they can decide in their conscience to receive communion. And this is also the position, I think, of the current pope, because there is a process of coming together; and a couple, a family, cannot be divided in front of the altar. These comments from Kasper can be heard from the 8:08 to 9:32 minute mark of the broadcast “Protestantesimo” of January 31, 2017, on Rai2. * Meanwhile there continue the unending efforts aimed at reiterating in the name of the pope that yes, in spite of the obscurities and doubts that it raises, the apostolic exhortation “Amoris Laetitia” is “clear” in admitting the divorced and remarried to communion, even if they continue to live “more uxorio.” To summarize, the first one Francis publicly assigned the task of interpreting his thought in this way was Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, in the official presentation of “Amoris Laetitia” on April 8, 2016. Then, on September 5, it was the pope himself who wrote to the bishops of the region of Buenos Aires a letter of approval for their permissive stance. A few days later, on September 19, it was Cardinal Agostino Vallini, the pope’s vicar for the diocese of Rome, who laid down for his priests, at the Cathedral of Saint John Lateran, analogous instructions previously approved by his direct superior. It was then “L'Osservatore Romano,” on January 14 of this year, that published with an evident impulse from on high the go-ahead to communion for the divorced and remarried given by the bishops of Malta. On February 2, again “L'Osservatore Romano” gave extensive coverage to the even more “liberal” guidelines published by the bishops of Germany. On February 10, once more the newspaper of the Holy See published the presentation made by Cardinal Lluís Martínez Sistach, archbishop emeritus of Barcelona, of a book of his entitled “Cômo aplicar Amoris laetitia,” written in “thanksgiving” to the pope for how he “is bringing up to the present time the teaching of the Church.” And most recently, on February 15, “L'Osservatore Romano” reproduced the praise bestowed by the theologian Maurizio Gronchi on a booklet by Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio on the “innovations” of the eighth chapter of “Amoris Laetitia,” a booklet presented as agreeable to the pope if not in fact requested by him. So much, until now, for the “pars construens,” which as can be noted has seen an acceleration in recent days in conjunction with “recent events” (a manifesto and a fake front page of “L'Osservatore Romano” in ironic denunciation of papal inconsistencies) that have led the nine cardinals of the council that assists Francis in governing the Church to manifest their “adherence and support” to him on February 13. But in the communication of strategy of Francis there is also the “pars destruens,” meaning the persistent and disdainful refusal to respond to the doubts submitted to him by four cardinals on the obscure points of “Amoris Laetitia,” as well as the ostracism that has fallen on Cardinal Gerhard L. Müller, prefect of the congregation for the doctrine of the faith and himself the bearer of interpretations distasteful to the pope simply because they are firm on the previous magisterium of the Church. (English translation by Matthew Sherry, Ballwin, Missouri, U.S.A.)
The line of thinking on this has never made one whit of sense to me. How can you go to Holy Communion if you can't go to confession? Lutherans have no valid sacrament of confession. How could they be permitted to The Eucharist? I suppose all these Lutherans are sinless? Here is the answer. If you yearn for The Holy Eucharist...convert. If it doesn't matter to you that much then don't receive. If you are only receiving because your spouse is receiving then that is no good reason at all.
The following was posted in the comments section of the OnePeter5 article linked on another thread: St. Cyprian wrote, over 1800 years ago, the following: "Moreover, beloved brethren, a new kind of devastation has appeared; and, as if the storm of persecution had raged too little, there has been added to the heap, under the title of mercy, a deceiving mischief and a fair-seeming calamity. Contrary to the vigour of the Gospel, contrary to the law of the Lord and God, by the temerity of some, communion is relaxed to heedless persons,-a vain and false peace, dangerous to those who grant it, and likely to avail nothing to those who receive it. They do not seek for the patience necessary to health nor the true medicine derived from atonement. Penitence is driven forth from their breasts, and the memory of their very grave and extreme sin is taken away. The wounds of the dying are covered over, and the deadly blow that is planted in the deep and secret entrails is concealed by a dissimulated suffering. Returning from the altars of the devil, they draw near to the holy place of the Lord, with hands filthy and reeking with smell, still almost breathing of the plague-bearing idol-meats; and even with jaws still exhaling their crime, and reeking with the fatal contact, they intrude on the body of the Lord, although the sacred Scripture stands in their way, and cries, saying, "Every one that is clean shall eat of the flesh; and whatever soul eateth of the flesh of the saving sacrifice, which is the Lord's, having his uncleanness upon him, that soul shall be cut off from his people."22 Also, the apostle testifies, and says, "Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of devils; ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table and of the table of devils."23 He threatens, moreover, the stubborn and froward, and denounces them, saying, "Whosoever eateth the bread or drinketh the cup of the Lord unworthily, is guilty of the body and blood of the Lord."24 16. All these warnings being scorned and contemned,-before their sin is expiated, before confession has been made of their crime, before their conscience has been purged by sacrifice and by the hand of the priest,25 before the offence of an angry and threatening Lord has been appeased, violence is done to His body and blood; and they sin now against their Lord more with their hand and mouth than when they denied their Lord. They think that that is peace which some with deceiving words are blazoning forth:26 that is not peace, but war; and he is not joined to the Church who is separated from the Gospel. Why do they call an injury a kindness? Why do they call impiety by the name of piety? Why do they hinder those who ought to weep continually and to entreat their Lord, from the sorrowing of repentance, and pretend to receive them to communion?"
Latest News Cardinal Müller: bishops should not give ‘contradictory interpretations’ of doctrine by Staff Reporter posted Friday, 17 Feb 2017 Cardinal Gerhard Muller, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CNS) Cardinal Müller said that nobody could alter the way the sacraments work Cardinal Gerhard Müller, the Vatican’s doctrinal chief, has said that local bishops cannot reinterpet Church teaching subjectively. In an interview with the German magazine Rheinische Post, Cardinal Müller said it was “not his style” to criticise publications by bishops. However, he added, “I do not think it is particularly beneficial for each individual bishop to comment on papal documents to explain how he subjectively understands the document.” In recent weeks, the bishops of Malta and Germany have issued guidelines permitting Communion for the remarried. The Maltese bishops said that it might be “impossible” for some couples to avoid sex, and that people could not be refused Communion if they discerned that they were “at peace with God”. However, several bishops have affirmed the traditional teaching that the remarried cannot receive Communion, except when they endeavour to live “in complete continence”. Cardinal Müller has recently endorsed the traditional teaching. He has also pointed to magisterial teaching, most recently that of John Paul II, Benedict XVI and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which says continence is necessary. The cardinal told an Italian magazine that this teaching was “not dispensable, because it is not only a positive law of John Paul II, but he expressed an essential element of Christian moral theology and the theology of the sacraments.” Theologians distinguish between positive law, which can be changed, and divine law, which cannot. Cardinal Müller thus effectively said that Communion for the remarried was against God’s law. In the new interview, he said: “It cannot be that the universally binding doctrine of the Church, formulated by the Pope, is given different and even contradictory regional interpretations. The basis of the Church is the unity of faith. The Church no longer experiences a new revelation.” Cardinal Müller also said that, in order to be absolved of adultery, a penitent must resolve not to sin again. He said: “No one can alter the sacraments as a means of grace according to their own choice – for example, so that the sacrament of Confession can be given without the intention to sin no more.” Elsewhere in the interview, the cardinal said that he thought papal resignations would remain a rare exception in future. He also said that it was important to honour Church leaders because of their role, not just because of their human qualities. “Everyone is weak and mortal,” the cardinal said. “Jesus did not choose the wisest, the richest, and the most prominent among his apostles, but simple people, craftsmen, fishermen. We depend on the grace of God and not on what we achieve every day. “That is why it is important not to look for supermen in the pope, the bishops, or priests, and, if they cannot fulfil these exaggerated expectations, turn away disappointed in the Gospel and the Church. Everyone needs forgiveness. But the grace of God proves itself in human weakness. We do not worship the Pope because of his human achievements, but because Christ has given him a special ministry for the whole Church.” The cardinal paid tribute to Pope Francis’s “moral authority”, pointing out that the Pope was recognised by atheists as “an authentic guide”.
Next Blow: The well-informed Italian blog AnonimiDellaCroce writes that before the end of April Pope Francis' Council of Cardinals will gather again. For this date, a kind of pastoral letter will be ready in order to prepare the people of God for a liturgical ecumenism which has, at its core, intercommunion with Lutherans who do not even believe in the reality of the consecrated host. https://www.gloria.tv/video/wUgE6NPCyFe168oaFrTjp1Gt3
I know I have posted this a few times before and I will continue to post it many times more, as it is the ultimate objective of Satan, which deals with destroying the Mass. Everyone must understand this, lest you loose your own salvation. Messages to Verne Dagenais in the book God Speaks Will You Listen https://www.scribd.com/doc/22505473/God-Speaks-Will-You-Listen 6/27/07 Now let me clear up an area of confusion for you. Daniel 12:11. And from the time when the continual sacrifice shall be taken away and the abomination unto desolation shall be set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred ninety days. The continual sacrifice is the mass and the abomination of desolation is when the doctrine of the mass is changed in my church- the Roman Catholic Church. If you study church history, this doctrine of the mass is the one Satan has tried to destroy. From the time of the early church until now. Anyone who teaches you my holy Eucharist is symbolic or I am not present in a consecrated host, is not doing the will of my Father and is a False Prophet. Do not follow them, no matter who they are. I told you to beware of false prophets who come to you in the clothing of sheep. Satan has caused schism in my church, by allowing false interpretations... This is how you can recognize the abomination of desolation. A False Prophet or anti pope will proclaim the Protestant doctrine of the mass to be correct. This is the one teaching that will change. The rest of my churches teachings can stay the same. Satan knows how to deprive my children of everlasting life, deprive my children of my presence. This is how the man of sin, the son of perdition will sit in the temple of God.Reference II Thessalonians 2:4-10. He will attempt to lead my people to deny my presence in the Eucharist and to teach the mass is only a symbol. This is antichrist. This will bring the wrath of God on the children of disobedience. This will cause the unleashing of the bowls of divine justice. My sacrifice of the mass daily holds back my Father’s justice. 11/6/07 The complete fulfillment of the prophecy from Daniel of the abomination of desolation will occur: when the continual sacrifice of the mass is abolished by the false prophet and the Anitchrist. Acceptance of the protestant doctrine of the mass by an anti-pope will be the fulfillment of the prophecy. The temple of God is my Holy Roman Catholic Church.
I'm not trying to address Communion for non-Catholics, just the potential for their sins to be forgiven, even without confession... http://www.ewtn.com/v/experts/showmessage_print.asp?number=370862 "Perfect contrition. Sorrow for sin arising from perfect love. In perfect contrition the sinner detests sin more than any other evil, because it offends God, who is supremely good and deserving of all human love. Its motive is founded on God's own goodness and not merely his goodness to the sinner or to humanity. This motive, and not the intensity of the act, less still the feelings experienced, is what essentially constitutes perfect sorrow. A perfect love of God, which motivates perfect contrition, does not necessarily exclude attachment to venial sin. Venial sin conflicts with a high degree of the perfect love of God but not with the substance of that love. Moreover, in the act of perfect contrition other motives can coexist with the perfect love required. There can be fear or gratitude, or even lesser motives such as self-respect or self-interest, along with the dominant reason for sorrow, which is love for God. Perfect contrition removes the guilt and eternal punishment due to grave sin even before sacramental absolution. However, a Catholic is obliged to confess his or her grave sins at the earliest opportunity and may not, in normal circumstances, receive Communion before he or she has been absolved by a priest in the sacrament of penance." [Fr. John Hardon, SJ, Pocket Catholic Dictionary] http://www.therealpresence.org/archives/Grace/Grace_002.htm Course on Grace Part One Grace Considered Extensively by Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J. ... Chaplains during the last war were often disturbed about the number of Catholic boys who did not know the act of perfect contrition, or thought it was too hard to make. For they realized that this act could mean eternal life for many boys. They wished that all our young people would be taught its power and importance, taught how to make it, taught to make it regularly, so that if they ever really needed it to regain sanctifying grace, it would do just that for them. This act can be of vital importance to non-Catholics. For if they should fall into mortal sin after baptism, it is the only way for them to regain sanctifying grace. It would be a great act of charity, if Catholics told their Protestant and Jewish friends about this act of perfect contrition: what kind of love of God it involves, what kind of sorrow for sin it means, and how to make it.
Jeanne, you are very right that is is possible for God to forgive people without the sacrament of confession. Theologians disagree on how easy it actually is to make a "perfect contrition". Many saints have worked for years to be able to make one. Just saying the words of the act of contrition does not release one from mortal sin. If it did there would be no need for confession. One needs to do it with pure sorrow for offending God. This is not easy. Even though God may forgive people without confession, the Church in her wisdom has always dealt with objective states. No person, not even a priest, can know the interior of another person's soul. This is why we are taught not to judge another person's interior motives. So before anyone can receive Holy Communion they must go to confession if there is any mortal sin on your soul. This is Church teaching. No one should be led astray into thinking an act of contrition will suffice. Confession is a must to be sure of release from mortal sin through God's grace. I am not, by the way, saying you were trying to lead people astray Jeanne. I know you would not do that. I just don't want people skimming through this thread and getting the wrong impression that all they need do is make an act of contrition and they are released from mortal sin.
There's a reason why the Church taught that salvation for non-Catholics is possible but that they are in a deficient position (the Church's term, not mine) to gain salvation. Perfect contrition is very rare.
Thank you for posting this Dolours! For those who would like to read the rest and reference, I googled and found it. It's St Cyprian of Carthage, Treatise 3 paragraph 15 http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/050703.htm
As time goes on my knotted stomach stays in knots. Very good friends of mine are Lutheran. They are a married couple. the husband was telling us once that he was walking his elderly mother up to communion. I have never attended their church so I am not sure how they receive communion but it sounded similar. His mother took a host as she passed by a table of some sort and the host dropped. My friend kind of pushed the host to the side under a pew not wanting to embarrass his mother and she got another. In relaying the story to us he was commenting on how degraded his mother had become in just a year or so. My eyes popped wide open and I asked him what happened to the host? And he said, "I don't know". Now, he is a really good person. I don't know the state of his soul BUT I do know that he does not have the same understanding of the Eucharist as I do. So I am not sure how any of this nonsense is even being considered. I do know many Anglicans and Lutherans say they have the same understanding but judging from my friends response,
We call it , 'Communion', because it is a sign that we all one family. Since we are separated how can we be one? It is before time. Say I got my house keys copied and gave them to everyone in my street since I considered them all family. Everyone would think I was mad. Giving Communion to those outside the Church is a little like giving the house keys away. We also know as Catholics we must be in state of grace before receiving he Lord. To achieve this we go to regular Confession. Part of the deal. Well if non Catholics are in a state of grace without confession what is the point of confession? If they are not in a state of grace why give communion? If say a Lutheran or Anglican can receive communion what is the point of being Catholic? We might as well be Lutherans ourselves since the Eucharist is the heart of the Faith. You see? Doing this guts out the very rationale , the heart of our Faith, the reason for our existence as a Church. It trivializes everything in the name of a false, 'Mercy'
Every Seminary student is told (I understand that they are still told this) that they may not confer blessings until they are ordained to the Diaconate (it infuriates me to see Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion purporting to do so when a non-Catholic presents themselves with crossed arms at Communion in front of them - as I have seen several times in my local church). Pope Francis happily accepts and sometimes positively seeks blessings from laymen purporting to be 'bishops/ministers/priests' who are not Catholic. When he knelt before Justin Welby (Anglican 'archbishop of Canterbury') for a blessing he then stood and said with a smile 'absolutely null and utterly void' which were the words with which Pope Leo XIII dismissed the claims of the Anglican clergy to valid orders. This clearly sent a message to Welby - 'I don't care what the Church teaches about your orders, I regard them as valid'. So we have a Pope who clearly believes that most men/women claiming orders (including the notorious 'prosperity gospel' preacher that he welcomed to the Vatican, Kenneth Copeland) actually have valid orders of some kind. 'Bishop' Tony Palmer - RIP, who was not even an Anglican but a member of some offshoot of Anglicanism associated with Copeland's religious business corporation, was buried on the Pope's orders as a Catholic Bishop in a Catholic church. CAN YOU SEE WHERE THIS IS GOING?
