www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News No Communion For Public Sinners In The Diocese Of Scranton

Deacon Robert summarizes Catholic Teaching quite well. Bishop Martino is simply proclaiming the Catholic Faith and applying the prescriptions given in the canons.

No one rejoices in the fact that a politican - or any other Catholic - should engage in actions that exclude himself from partaking of the Eucharist. Indeed, I morn for such people and pray for them.

It is, however, very good to see a bishop stopping politicians from using the Eucharist as a political tool. Sadly, many politicians use the Eucharist as a political tool. They reject the Catholic Faith on life issues, publicly take Communion, and try to use the photo-op to say to voters (and the world) that you can vote to keep killing babies in the womb and be a good Catholic. I will note that the Church has clearly rejected the idea that there are other issues (even added together) that would comprise a moral good that would allow voting for a moral intrinsic evil (like abortion).

I also support Bishop Joseph 100% and will pray for him.

John

If my bishop started telling people something was a mortal sin, i.e. their souls were in peril of being eternally lost, and it turns out it was just something he made up on his own; I would consider it a fairly big deal. I for one would not trust his judgment or leadership.


I would guess that if you look at what both major parties do and stand for, you can find a slew of things (and big things) that directly violate Catholic principles. If our ability to receive communion is based on our participation in politics or public life, nobody should be receiving communion ever.

Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. Therefore are there many infirm and weak among you, and many sleep.

Unfortunately, the bishops seem to only target supposed pro-abortion politicians while no one else gets the same finger pointed at them. What about divorced and invalidly remarried people, people co-habitating outside of marriage, people who attend maybe twice yearly, and who still go to communion? I know some, I've seen them take communion. These politicians are the only unrepentant, notorious sinners that need public chastisement?

Divorced Persons Who Have Remarried

84. Daily experience unfortunately shows that people who have obtained a divorce usually intend to enter into a new union, obviously not with a Catholic religious ceremony. Since this is an evil that, like the others, is affecting more and more Catholics as well, the problem must be faced with resolution and without delay. The Synod Fathers studied it expressly. The Church, which was set up to lead to salvation all people and especially the baptized, cannot abandon to their own devices those who have been previously bound by sacramental marriage and who have attempted a second marriage. The Church will therefore make untiring efforts to put at their disposal her means of salvation.

Pastors must know that, for the sake of truth, they are obliged to exercise careful discernment of situations. There is in fact a difference between those who have sincerely tried to save their first marriage and have been unjustly abandoned, and those who through their own grave fault have destroyed a canonically valid marriage. Finally, there are those who have entered into a second union for the sake of the children's upbringing, and who are sometimes subjectively certain in conscience that their previous and irreparably destroyed marriage had never been valid.

Together with the Synod, I earnestly call upon pastors and the whole community of the faithful to help the divorced, and with solicitous care to make sure that they do not consider themselves as separated from the Church, for as baptized persons they can, and indeed must, share in her life. They should be encouraged to listen to the word of God, to attend the Sacrifice of the Mass, to persevere in prayer, to contribute to works of charity and to community efforts in favor of justice, to bring up their children in the Christian faith, to cultivate the spirit and practice of penance and thus implore, day by day, God's grace. Let the Church pray for them, encourage them and show herself a merciful mother, and thus sustain them in faith and hope.

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."(180)

Similarly, the respect due to the sacrament of Matrimony, to the couples themselves and their families, and also to the community of the faithful, forbids any pastor, for whatever reason or pretext even of a pastoral nature, to perform ceremonies of any kind for divorced people who remarry. Such ceremonies would give the impression of the celebration of a new sacramentally valid marriage, and would thus lead people into error concerning the indissolubility of a validly contracted marriage.

By acting in this way, the Church professes her own fidelity to Christ and to His truth. At the same time she shows motherly concern for these children of hers, especially those who, through no fault of their own, have been abandoned by their legitimate partner.

With firm confidence she believes that those who have rejected the Lord's command and are still living in this state will be able to obtain from God the grace of conversion and salvation, provided that they have persevered in prayer, penance and charity.

Bob,

Well said. I do feel that I must say however that if Catholic teaching and practice were really carried out consistently, then almost no one would be able to receive communion. That more than 95% of Catholic couples practice contraception means that at the maximum, no more than 5% of any given parish should be receiving communion.

If my bishop started telling people something was a mortal sin, i.e. their souls were in peril of being eternally lost, and it turns out it was just something he made up on his own; I would consider it a fairly big deal. I for one would not trust his judgment or leadership.

The Church in the United States has done a poor job of forming the faith and conscience of Catholics for more than 40 years. And now we’re harvesting the results-- in the public square, in our families and in the confusion of our personal lives. I could name many good people and programs that seem to disprove what I just said. But I could name many more that do prove it, and some of them work in Washington.

The problem with mistakes in our past is that they compound themselves geometrically into the future unless we face them and fix them. The truth is, the American electorate is changing, both ethnically and in age. And unless Catholics have a conversion of heart that helps us see what we’ve become -- that we haven’t just “assimilated” to American culture, but that we’ve also been absorbed and bleached and digested by it – then we’ll fail in our duties to a new generation and a new electorate. And a real Catholic presence in American life will continue to weaken and disappear.

I would guess that if you look at what both major parties do and stand for, you can find a slew of things (and big things) that directly violate Catholic principles. If our ability to receive communion is based on our participation in politics or public life, nobody should be receiving communion ever.

Unfortunately, the bishops seem to only target supposed pro-abortion politicians while no one else gets the same finger pointed at them. What about divorced and invalidly remarried people, people co-habitating outside of marriage, people who attend maybe twice yearly, and who still go to communion? I know some, I've seen them take communion. These politicians are the only unrepentant, notorious sinners that need public chastisement?

Would everyone here be comfortable with Bishop Martino saying anyone who voted for the Democrats should be refused communion?