Bishop Paprocki: The bishops must discuss worthiness to receive the Eucharist
“Sadly, there are some bishops and cardinals of the Church who not only are willing to give holy Communion to pro-abortion politicians, but who seek to block the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops from addressing the question of Eucharistic coherence….”
Bishop Thomas Paprocki, Diocese of Springfield, Illinois
Washington D.C., May 26, 2021 / 12:59 pm (CNA).
Another U.S. bishop has reproached efforts to delay discussion of “Eucharistic coherence” by the whole conference.
“Sadly, there are some bishops and cardinals of the Church who not only are willing to give holy Communion to pro-abortion politicians, but who seek to block the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops from addressing the question of Eucharistic coherence,” stated Bishop Thomas Paprocki of the Diocese of Springfield in Illinois on Wednesday.
The question of “Eucharistic coherence,” he added, “has taken on heightened urgency with the election of President Biden, a Catholic who promotes the evils of abortion, same-sex marriage, and transgenderism.”
In a recent letter, Cardinal Blasé Cupich of Chicago and other bishops asked the president of the U.S. bishops’ conference, Archbishop Jose Gomez of Los Angeles, that deliberations on “Eucharistic worthiness and other issues raised by the Holy See” be delayed until the bishops can meet again in-person.
Individual bishops have recently addressed the application of canon law to situations of Catholic public officials who support permissive abortion laws. President Joe Biden is a Catholic and supports taxpayer-funded abortion, and individual bishops have argued both for and against denying him Holy Communion because of his continued support for legal abortion.
Bishop Paprocki noted in his Wednesday statement that the phrase “Eucharistic coherence” appeared in the 2007 Aparecida Document of the Latin American and Caribbean bishops – which then-Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, now Pope Francis, had a “crucial role” in developing.
In that 2007 document, the bishops noted the role of public officials in defending the sanctity of life on issues such as abortion and euthanasia. When Catholic officials support these “grave crimes against life and the family,” they are not to present themselves for Communion, the bishops said.
“We must adhere to ‘eucharistic coherence,’ that is, be conscious that they cannot receive Holy Communion and at the same time act with deeds or words against the commandments, particularly when abortion, euthanasia, and other grave crimes against life and the family are encouraged,” the document stated.
Bishop Paprocki further stated that the teaching on “Eucharistic coherence” is also part of canon law.
According to canons 915 and 916, “a person who is conscious of grave sin is not to celebrate Mass or to receive the Body of the Lord’ and that those ‘who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion,’” Bishop Paprocki said.
“This is not a judgement of the interior disposition of person’s soul, which only God can judge, but pertains to the person’s external actions in relation to objectively grave sins,” he said.
With the spring meeting of the bishops approaching, Archbishop Gomez had written to the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on March 30. He informed the congregation that the U.S. bishops would be discussing Eucharistic consistency at their upcoming spring meeting, addressing the situations of Catholic public officials who support permissive laws on grave evils such as abortion and euthanasia.
On May 7, the prefect of the congregation – Cardinal Luis Ladaria – wrote back, telling Archbishop Gomez that if the bishops were to consider any “national policy” on Communion including these situations, they would need to first dialogue extensively and serenely among themselves to ensure they were united on the Church’s teaching.
Cardinal Cupich noted the Vatican’s call for dialogue and unity in his recent letter, and argued that the virtual nature of the bishops’ June meeting would not be conducive to discuss the matter at hand.
“The serious nature of these issues,” he said, “makes it impossible to address them productively in the fractured and isolated setting of a distance meeting.”
“We strongly urge that the bishops gather in person regionally or by province” to discuss the Vatican’s letter, he added, before the conference as a whole were to consider a teaching document on the Eucharist.
Then in a May 22 memo to all U.S. bishops, Archbishop Gomez explained that their upcoming meeting will include a deliberation and vote on whether or not to begin drafting a teaching document on the Eucharist; the vote, he clarified, will not be on final approval of any such document. Furthermore, he said, the proposed discussion “reflects recent guidance from the Holy See.”
The proposed document, he said, would focus on the centrality of the Eucharist to Christian life. An outline of the proposed document, included in Gomez’ memo, included the teachings of the Church on the Eucharist such as understanding it as “sacrifice,” the need for beautiful liturgies, the works of mercy, and a call to conversion.
It also included a section on “Eucharistic Consistency” and St. Paul’s teaching that Catholics must examine themselves before receiving Communion. The proposed section would focus on the “nature of eucharistic communion and the problem of serious sin.”
Bishop Paprocki approved of the effort to discuss the Eucharist at the bishops’ upcoming meeting.
“I fully support the decision of Archbishop Gomez and the Executive Committee of the USCCB to proceed with discussion of the topic of Eucharistic coherence at our June meeting to authorize the Committee on Doctrine to draft a document on this important subject for debate, amendment, and vote at our November meeting,” the bishop said.
He joined other bishops, including Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone of San Francisco and Archbishop Samuel Aquila of Denver, who decried attempts to delay discussion of Eucharistic coherence.
“I’m deeply grieved by the rising public acrimony among bishops and the adoption of behind-closed-doors maneuvers to interfere with the accepted, normal, agreed-upon procedures of the USCCB,” Archbishop Cordileone stated on Tuesday.
“Those who do not want to issue a document on Eucharistic coherence should be open to debating the question objectively and fairly with their brother bishops, rather than attempting to derail the process,” he added.
Archbishop Samuel Aquila of Denver stated, “St. Paul is clear that there is danger to one’s soul if he or she receives the body and blood of our Lord in an unworthy manner.”
“As bishops, we are failing in our duty as shepherds if we ignore this truth and how it is manifesting itself in today’s society, especially with regards to those in prominent positions who reject fundamental teachings of the Church and insist that they be allowed to receive Communion,” Archbishop Aquila said.
The USCCB working group on Biden’s presidency did recommend a teaching document on the Eucharist, but maintained that any discussion of Communion for pro-abortion politicians must be included with the Church’s teaching on general worthiness to receive Communion among all Catholics.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Pope Francis speaks to the crowd on June 12, 2022 gathered in St. Peter’s Square in Rome for the recitation of the Angelus on Trinity Sunday. / Vatican Media
Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Jun 12, 2022 / 07:47 am (CNA).
Speaking on Trinity Sunday, Pope Francis said that celebrating the Trinity is “not so much a theological exercise, but a revolution in our way of life.”
“God, in whom each person lives for the other in a continual relationship, in continual rapport, not for himself, provokes us to live with others and for others,” he said.
In his address prior to the recitation of the Angelus, Pope Francis reflected on Sunday’s Gospel reading, from the 16th chapter of John. In the reading, Jesus is speaking to the apostles about the coming of the Holy Spirit. “I have much more to tell you, but you cannot bear it now. But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all truth,” the Lord says.
Jesus tells the apostles, “Everything that the Father has is mine; for this reason I told you that he will take from what is mine and declare it to you.”
“We notice that the Holy Spirit speaks, but not of himself: He announces Jesus and reveals the Father,” Pope Francis said to thousands of pilgrims gathered in St. Peter’s Square June 12.
“And we also notice that the Father, who possesses everything because he is the origin of all things, gives to the Son everything he possesses: He keeps nothing for himself and he gives himself fully to the Son,” he said.
Pope Francis added that “the Holy Spirit speaks not of himself; he speaks about Jesus, he speaks about others. And the Father does not give himself, he gives the Son. It is open generosity, one open to the other.”
The Holy Father then invited the crowd to do a self-examination.
“When we speak, we always want to say something good about ourselves, and often, we only speak about ourselves and what we do,” he said. “How often!”
Giving examples, Pope Francis said that people often say “I have done this and that” and “I had this problem.”
“We always speak like this,” he said.
He added, “How different this is from the Holy Spirit, who speaks by announcing others, and the Father the Son! And, how jealous we are of what we possess. How hard it is for us to share what we possess with others, even those who lack the basic necessities! It is easy to talk about it, but difficult to practice it.”
He encouraged the crowd to question whether “our life reflects the God we believe in.”
Leading the crowd in self-examination, the pope asked, “do I, who profess faith in God the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, truly believe that I need others in order to live, I need to give myself to others, I need to serve others? Do I affirm this in words, or do I affirm it with my life?”
The one, triune God must be manifested in deeds, not words, he said.
“God, who is the author of life, is transmitted not so much through books as through witness of life,” Pope Francis said. “He, who, as the evangelist John writes, ‘is love’ (1 Jn 4:16), reveals himself through love.”
Pope Francis encouraged the crowd to think about “good, generous, gentle” people they have met and reflect on their way of thinking and their actions.
By doing this, “we can have a small reflection of God-Love,” he said. “And what does it mean to love? Not only to wish them well and to be good to them, but first and foremost, at the root, to welcome others, to be open to others, to make room for others, to make space (for) others. This is what it means to love, at the root.”
To better understand the Trinity, the Holy Father encouraged the crowd to consider each name of the three persons of the Trinity, “which we pronounce every time we make the sign of the cross: Each name contains the presence of the other.”
“The Father, for example, would not be such without the Son; likewise, the Son cannot be considered alone, but always as the Son of the Father. And the Holy Spirit, in turn, is the Spirit of the Father and the Son,” he said.
“In short,” Pope Francis added, “the Trinity teaches us that one can never be without the other. We are not islands, we are in the world to live in God’s image: open, in need of others, and in need of helping others.”
After praying the Angelus at noon, Pope Francis called for a round of applause for the recent beatification of Sister Paschalis Jahn and nine sister martyrs of the Congregation of the Sisters of St. Elizabeth, who were killed at the end of World War II by Red Army soldiers.
Although the women knew the danger they were putting themselves in by attending to the sick and elderly, Pope Francis said, they did it anyway because of their Christian faith.
“May their example of faith to Christ help us all, especially Christians who are persecuted in various parts of the world, to bear witness to the Gospel courageously,” he said of the new blessed.
Pope Francis also spoke about the “great regret” he felt for having to postpone his scheduled trip in early July to the Democratic Republic of Congo and South Sudan due to issues he is having with his leg.
“I truly feel great sorrow for having had to postpone this trip, which means so much to me,” he said. “I apologize for this. Let us pray together that, with the help of God and medical attention, I will be able to be with you as soon as possible. Let us be hopeful!”
Speaking of World Day against Child Labor, Pope Francis called for all to work to “eliminate this scourge “so that no child is deprived of his or her fundamental rights and forced or coerced to work.”
The Holy Father also said that the Ukrainian people remain “vivid in my heart,” speaking of the Russian-Ukrainian war.
“Let the passage of time not temper our grief and concern for that suffering population,” he said. “Please, let us not grow accustomed to this tragic situation! Let us always keep it in our hearts. Let us pray and strive for peace.”
A defining theme of Pope Francis’ papacy has been his urging of humanity to better care for the natural environment, which he has done most prominently in his landmark 2015 encyclical Laudato Si’ and numerous subsequent writings and speeches.
The pope’s emphasis on this topic — especially his foray into climate science via his recent encyclical Laudate Deum — has variously drawn both praise and consternation from Catholics in the United States, about half of whom do not share Pope Francis’ views on climate change, according to surveys.
In Laudate Deum, which was released in October as a continuation to Laudato Si’, Francis wrote that the effects of climate change “are here and increasingly evident,” warning of “immensely grave consequences for everyone” if drastic efforts are not made to reduce emissions. In the face of this, the Holy Father criticized those who “have chosen to deride [the] facts” about climate science, stating bluntly that it is “no longer possible to doubt the human — ‘anthropic’ — origin of climate change.”
The pope in the encyclical laid out his belief that there must be a “necessary transition towards clean energy sources, such as wind and solar energy, and the abandonment of fossil fuels.” This follows a call from Pope Francis in 2021 to the global community calling for the world to “achieve net zero carbon emissions as soon as possible.”
He further lamented what he called “certain dismissive and scarcely reasonable opinions [on climate change] that I encounter, even within the Catholic Church.”
In light of the new encyclical — which extensively cites the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) — Pope Francis was invited to speak at this week’s United Nations Climate Change Conference, known as COP28. Though the 86-year-old pope was forced to cancel his trip due to health issues, the Vatican has indicated that he aims to participate in COP28 this weekend in some fashion. It announced today that Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin will represent the pope at the conference.
While various Catholic groups have welcomed the pope’s latest encyclical, some Catholics have reacted with persistent doubts, questioning whether the pope’s policy prescriptions would actually produce the desired effects.
How do Americans feel about climate change?
According to a major survey conducted by Yale University, 72% of Americans believed in 2021 — the latest available data year — that “global warming is happening,” and 57% believe that global warming is caused by human activity.
More recent polling from the Pew Research Center, conducted in June, similarly suggests that two-thirds of U.S. adults overall say the country should prioritize developing renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar, over the expansion of the production of oil, coal, and natural gas. That same survey found that just 3 in 10 adults (31%) say the U.S. should completely phase out oil, coal, and natural gas. The Yale study found that 77% of U.S. adults support at least the funding of research into renewable energy sources.
Broken down by party affiliation, Pew found that a large majority of Democratic and Democratic-leaning independents — 90% — favor alternative energy sources, while just under half, 42%, of Republicans and Republican-leaning adults think the same. Within the Republican cohort, however, 67% of Republicans under age 30 prioritize the development of alternative energy sources, compared with the 75% of Republicans ages 65 and older who prioritize the expansion of oil, coal, and natural gas.
In terms of the expansion of alternative energy sources, two-thirds of Americans think the federal government should encourage domestic production of wind and solar power, Pew reported. Just 7% say the government should discourage this, while 26% think it should neither encourage nor discourage it.
How do America’s Catholics feel about climate change?
Surveys suggest that Catholics in the United States are slightly more likely than the U.S. population as a whole to be skeptical of climate change, despite the pope’s emphatic words in 2015 and since.
A separate Pew study suggests that 44% of U.S. Catholics say the Earth is warming mostly due to human activity, a view in line with Pope Francis’ stance. About 3 in 10 (29%) said the Earth is warming mostly due to natural patterns, while 13% said they believe there is no solid evidence the planet is getting warmer.
According to the same study, 71% of Hispanic Catholics see climate change as an extremely or very serious problem, compared with 49% of white, non-Hispanic Catholics. (There were not enough Black or Asian Catholics in the 2022 survey to analyze separately, Pew said.)
One 2015 study from Yale did suggest that soon after Laudato Si’ was released, U.S. Catholics were overall more likely to believe in climate change than before. That same study found no change, however, in the number of Americans overall who believe human activity is causing global warming.
Pope Francis’ climate priorities
Beyond his groundbreaking writings, Pope Francis has taken many actions during his pontificate to make his own — admittedly small — country, Vatican City, more sustainable, including the recent announcement of a large order of electric vehicles, construction of its own network of charging stations, a reforestation program, and the continued importation of energy coming exclusively from renewable sources.
Francis has often lamented what he sees as a tepid response from developed countries in implementing measures to curb climate change. In Laudate Deum, he urged that new multinational agreements on climate change — speaking in this case specifically about the COP28 conference — be “drastic, intense, and count on the commitment of all,” stating that “a broad change in the irresponsible lifestyle connected with the Western model would have a significant long-term impact.”
The pope lamented what he sees as the fact that when new projects related to green energy are proposed, the potential for economic growth, employment, and human promotion are thought of first rather than moral considerations such as the effects on the world’s poorest.
“It is often heard also that efforts to mitigate climate change by reducing the use of fossil fuels and developing cleaner energy sources will lead to a reduction in the number of jobs,” the pope noted.
“What is happening is that millions of people are losing their jobs due to different effects of climate change: rising sea levels, droughts, and other phenomena affecting the planet have left many people adrift. Conversely, the transition to renewable forms of energy, properly managed, as well as efforts to adapt to the damage caused by climate change, are capable of generating countless jobs in different sectors.”
‘Leave God’s creation better than we found it’
Dr. Kevin Roberts, president of the Washington, D.C.-based Heritage Foundation think tank, told CNA that he has noticed a theme of frustration and confusion among many Catholics regarding the Holy Father’s emphasis on climate change.
A self-described outdoorsman and former president of Wyoming Catholic College, Roberts spoke highly to CNA of certain aspects of Laudato Si’, particularly the pope’s insights into what he called “human ecology,” which refers to the acceptance of each person’s human body as a vital part of “accepting the entire world as a gift from the Father and our common home.”
Dr. Kevin Roberts, president of the Heritage Foundation. Courtesy of Heritage Foundation.
“I like to think [Pope Francis] personally wrote that, because I could see him saying that,” Roberts said of the passage, which appears in paragraph 155 of the encyclical. Roberts said he even makes a point to meditate on that “beautiful and moving” passage during a retreat that he does annually.
That portion of Laudato Si’ notwithstanding, Roberts said he strongly believes that it detracts from other important issues, such as direct ministry to the poor, when Pope Francis elevates care for God’s natural creation as “seemingly more important than other issues to us as Catholics.” He also said he disagrees with Pope Francis’ policy prescriptions, such as a complete phasing out of fossil fuels, contained in Laudate Deum.
“We of course want to pray for him. We’re open to the teaching that he is providing. But we also have to remember as Catholics that sometimes popes are wrong. And on this issue, it is a prudential matter. It is not a matter of morality, particularly when he’s getting into the scientific policy recommendations,” Roberts said.
Roberts said the Heritage Foundation’s research and advocacy has focused not on high-level, multinational agreements and conferences to tackle the issues posed by climate change but rather on smaller-scale, more community-based efforts. He said this policy position is, in part, due to the historical deference such multinational conglomerates of nations have given to China, the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases overall.
He said agreements within the U.S. itself, with businesses and all levels of government working together, have produced the best results so far when it comes to improving the environment. He also pointed to examples of constructive action that don’t involve billions of dollars, such as families making the choice to spend more time outdoors or engaging in local activities that contribute to environmental conservation and community life, such as anti-litter campaigns and community gardening. The overarching goal, he said, should be to “leave God’s creation better than we found it.”
Roberts — who said he personally believes humans likely have “very little effect” on the climate — said he was discouraged to read other portions of Laudato Si’, as well as Laudate Deum, that to him read as though they had come “straight out of the U.N.” Despite his criticisms, Roberts urged his fellow Catholics to continue to pray for the Holy Father and to listen to the pope’s moral insights.
“I just think that the proposed solutions are actually more anti-human and worse than the purported effects of climate change,” he added.
‘A far more complex issue’
Greg Sindelar, a Catholic who serves as CEO of the Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF), a conservative think tank that studies the energy industry, similarly expressed concerns to CNA about the potential impact of certain climate change mitigation policies on human flourishing.
Like Roberts, Sindelar spoke highly of certain aspects of the pope’s message while expressing reservations about some of the U.N.-esque solutions proposed in Laudate Deum.
“I think the pope is right about our duty as Catholics to be stewards and to care for the environment. But I think what we have to understand — what we have to balance this with — is that it cannot come at the expense of depriving people of affordable and reliable energy,” Sindelar said in an interview with CNA.
“There’s ways to be environmentally friendly without sacrificing the access that we all need to reliable and affordable energy.”
Greg Sindelar is CEO of the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a think tank in America’s leading energy-producing state. Courtesy of Texas Public Policy Foundation
Sindelar said TPPF primarily promotes cheap, reliable access to energy as a means of promoting human flourishing. The free-market-focused group is skeptical of top-down governmental intervention, both in the form of regulation and incentives or disincentives in certain areas of the energy sector.
When asked what he thinks his fellow Catholics largely think about the issue, Sindelar said many of the Catholics he hears from express the view that government policies and interventions rarely produce effective solutions and could potentially hinder access to energy for those in need.
“I think it’s a far more complex issue than just saying we need to cut emissions, and we need to transfer away from fossil fuels, and all these other things. What we need to do is figure out and ensure ways that we are providing affordable and reliable electricity to all citizens of the world,” he reiterated.
“When the pope speaks, when the Vatican speaks, it carries a lot of weight with Catholics around the world, [and] not just with Catholics … and I totally agree with him that we need to be thinking about the most marginalized and the poorest amongst us,” Sindelar continued.
“[But] by going down these policy prescription paths that he’s recommending, we’re actually going to reduce their ability to have access to that,” he asserted.
Sindelar, while disagreeing with Pope Francis’ call for an “abandonment of fossil fuels,” said he appreciates the fact that Pope Francis has spoken out about the issue of care for creation and has initiated so much public discussion.
“I think there is room for differing views and opinions on the right ways to do that,” he said.
Effective mitigation efforts
Susan Varlamoff, a retired biologist and parishioner at St. John Neumann Catholic Church in the Atlanta area, is among those Catholics who are committed to Pope Francis’ call to care for creation and to mitigate the effects of climate change. To that end, Varlamoff in 2016 created a peer-reviewed action plan for the Archdiocese of Atlanta to help Catholics put the principles contained in Laudato Si’ into action, mainly through smaller, more personal actions that people can take to reduce their energy usage.
Retired biologist Susan Varlamoff. Photo courtesy of Susan Varlamoff
The Atlanta Archdiocese’s efforts have since garnered recognition and praise, Varlamoff said, with at least 35 archdioceses now involved in an inter-diocesan network formed to exchange sustainability ideas based on the latest version of the plan from Atlanta.
“It’s fascinating to see what everybody is doing, and it’s basically based on their talents and imaginations,” Varlamoff said, noting that a large number of young people have gotten involved with their efforts.
As a scientist, Varlamoff told CNA it is clear to her that Pope Francis knows what he’s talking about when he lays out the dangers posed by inaction in the face of climate change.
“He understands the science, and he’s deeply concerned … he’s got remarkable influence as a moral leader,” she said.
“Part of what our religion asks us to do is to care for one another. We have to care for creation if we’re going to care for one another, because the earth is our natural resource system, our life support, and we cannot care for one another if we don’t have that life support.”
Responding to criticisms about the financial costs associated with certain green initiatives, Varlamoff noted that small-scale sustainable actions can actually save money. She offered the example of parishes in the Atlanta area that have drastically reduced their electric bills by installing solar panels.
“[But,] it’s not just about saving money. It’s also about reducing fossil fuels and greenhouse gas emissions, and protecting the natural resources for future generations,” she said.
Moreover, Varlamoff said, the moral imperative to improve the natural environment for future generations is worth the investment. “When [Catholics] give money, for example, for a social justice issue like Walking with Moms in Need or special needs, the payback is improving lives. We’re improving the environment here,” she emphasized.
Cupich is running the show. Francis will make sure of that!
Let’s see the names of the other bishops who signed on to Cupich’s letter. And how about some investigative reporting from CNA? Who else is behind this? John Carr? Bryan Heir? Who at USCCB now is managing the outcome? It’s not Gomez? Where are Tobin, Gregory and Farrell in all of this? Let’s get some journalism going here and not just carefully manicured press releases.
I do not understand what is to prevent Bishops Paprocki and Cordileone (Strickland, others?) from saying something along the lines of “If you are an elected official who has voted for ‘abortion rights’, don’t bother coming to receive the Eucharist, not until you are ready to repent and publicly denounce that position.”
.
We read: “Cardinal Cupich noted the Vatican’s call for dialogue and unity in his recent letter, and argued that the VIRTUAL nature of the bishops’ June meeting would not be conducive to discuss the matter at hand.”
So, a lemming-follower of the “virtual Council” (marketed through the media) versus the real Vatican Council (found in the Documents), now protests against a “virtual” June meeting…How ever would Cupich commandeer the microphone as he did over the past USCCB President, Cardinal DiNardo, not so long ago.
Cupich should no more be a Cardinal than I should! He is a distraction to the establishment, when the USCCB FINALLY decides to do something. My God Bless him and keep him….far away from the USCCB! I wish he would just simply shut up! He never says anything helpful or in any way according to the Church Doctrines. He is a Cardinal??
It seems urgent that bishops address the matter of Public Officials who promote and support objective grave sin regarding their demand to receive the Holy Eucharist.
As Bishop Paprocki said: “This is not a judgement of the interior disposition of person’s soul, which only God can judge, but pertains to the person’s external actions in relation to objectively grave sins,” This matter can be handled urgently and separately. Archbishop Gomez’ proposal below is a stall tactic to draw this matter out as long as possible, so that Cupich/Ladaria et al can maneuver the outcome.
This should be separate and can be worked out later where they can again include the worthy reception of Holy Communion in that teaching document.
Archbishop Gomez indicates that “The proposed document would focus on the centrality of the Eucharist to Christian life. An outline of the proposed document, included in Gomez’ memo, included the teachings of the Church on the Eucharist such as understanding it as “sacrifice,” the need for beautiful liturgies, the works of mercy, and a call to conversion.”
Why is so much time being wasted by the bishops on a matter that has been settled by Canon Law for a long time? Their teaching authority demands that they do just that. Cite the Canon Law and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and be done!
Exactly! Quit debating this. They’ve been “dialoguing” for over 50 years with liberal nuns, trying to get them to change their ways. How is that going? It’s time to refuse Communion to heretics like Biden, Pelosi, et al. If they don’t comply, excommunicate them.
The Statement should read, if you are a Baptized Catholic wo denies The Sanctity of human life from conception to natural death, and/or denies The Sanctity of the marital act within The Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, per Catholic Canon 750, do not present yourself to receive The Holy Eucharist, for you are no longer in communion with Christ and Hs One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church, due to your denial of The Unity Of The Holy Ghost.
If I remember correctly, among his “Chinamen” (Chicago-ese slang for one’s political sponsor(s); the New York equivalent is “rabbi”) in the U.S. hierarchy were Cardinal Theodore McCarrick (then Archbishop emeritus of Washington, D.C.), Cardinal Donald Wuerl (then Archbishop of Washington, D.C. – currently Archbishop Emeritus of same), and Cardinal Sean O’Malley, OFM Cap. (then the Archbishop of Boston – currently Archbishop pro-tem (he turned 75 two years ago)).
In short, some of the most prominent of “Bernardin’s boys” among the U.S. hierarchy engineered his being made a Cardinal – the same ones, in fact, who had engineered his appointment as Archbishop of Chicago in the fall of 2014, though his name was most certainly NOT on any of the “terna” lists submitted to Pope Francis. They used their “clout” to persuade Pope Francis to override the process – and we Catholics in the Archdiocese of Chicago have been suffering under the vicious, madcap tyrannical reign of His Royal Highness and his jackbooted toadies and lickspittles (truly a cabal of evil men and women) ever since.
Cardinal Cupich wants the bishops to wait until they next meet in person because then he can pressure those on the fence face-to-face about “Eucharistic Coherence.” A virtual call renders him less effective because he can only state his opinion and argue. He can’t cajole.
“A virtual call renders him less effective because he can only state his opinion and argue.”
I’d suggest it’s even worse than that: he will simply state his opinion and then try to strong arm others. He won’t argue, precisely because he is incapable of good argument.
Among the greatest moral scandals, if not the greatest in the history of Catholicism is this pontificate’s determined resistance to clarify whether it’s for or against politicians clerics laity who openly support murder of the innocent to receive Christ the very Author of each slain innocent life. It leads one to believe it’s not at all concern with division, division already exists. And that based primarily on Amoris Laetitia, and Vatican tolerance of open communion to all whatever their sensitivities. This must be the final red line as to where the pontiff stands. Bishop Paprocki, among the best of our hierarchy, rightly insists on an affirmation of Church doctrine, while offering discussion with dissenters at the June USCCB conference. Thankfully we’re finally witnessing bishops strongly defending the faith. We pray they remain steadfast and prevail. What can a pontiff do if he disagrees, issue a decree? No pontiff has the authority to prevent a bishop from defending the faith, the very essence of his Apostolic mission as defender of the faith.
One can know through both our Catholic Faith and reason, that the fact that God, The Most Holy And Undivided Blessed Trinity, Through The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, (not Caesar, John Locke or King John) Is The Author Of Love, Of Life, And Of Marriage, And Thus The Author Of Our Inherent, Unalienable Right To Life, To Liberty, And To The Pursuit Of Happiness, is not a matter of opinion.
As I read this article all I could picture was the USCCB as a fibrilating heart. One chamber is pushing out of synch with the other chamber and nothing is getting done.
Less than 1/4 (67 including Waffle Dolan) of USA active Cardinals and Bishops support a long drawn out procedure on discussion of worthiness to receive the Eucharist. Surely out of the 207 remaining prelates there must be a hundred lions. Then again, Christ healed 10 lepers and only 1 returned in gratitude.
Past time for the lion-hearted to take courage in hand and fight for The Lord and his Church. St. Peter, all ye Holy Apostles and Martyrs, pray for us. Amen
Cupich is running the show. Francis will make sure of that!
Let’s see the names of the other bishops who signed on to Cupich’s letter. And how about some investigative reporting from CNA? Who else is behind this? John Carr? Bryan Heir? Who at USCCB now is managing the outcome? It’s not Gomez? Where are Tobin, Gregory and Farrell in all of this? Let’s get some journalism going here and not just carefully manicured press releases.
I do not understand what is to prevent Bishops Paprocki and Cordileone (Strickland, others?) from saying something along the lines of “If you are an elected official who has voted for ‘abortion rights’, don’t bother coming to receive the Eucharist, not until you are ready to repent and publicly denounce that position.”
.
Kathryn, Nothing prevents them and, in fact, they have done just what you ask.
We read: “Cardinal Cupich noted the Vatican’s call for dialogue and unity in his recent letter, and argued that the VIRTUAL nature of the bishops’ June meeting would not be conducive to discuss the matter at hand.”
So, a lemming-follower of the “virtual Council” (marketed through the media) versus the real Vatican Council (found in the Documents), now protests against a “virtual” June meeting…How ever would Cupich commandeer the microphone as he did over the past USCCB President, Cardinal DiNardo, not so long ago.
Cupich should no more be a Cardinal than I should! He is a distraction to the establishment, when the USCCB FINALLY decides to do something. My God Bless him and keep him….far away from the USCCB! I wish he would just simply shut up! He never says anything helpful or in any way according to the Church Doctrines. He is a Cardinal??
a Saruman.
It seems urgent that bishops address the matter of Public Officials who promote and support objective grave sin regarding their demand to receive the Holy Eucharist.
As Bishop Paprocki said: “This is not a judgement of the interior disposition of person’s soul, which only God can judge, but pertains to the person’s external actions in relation to objectively grave sins,” This matter can be handled urgently and separately. Archbishop Gomez’ proposal below is a stall tactic to draw this matter out as long as possible, so that Cupich/Ladaria et al can maneuver the outcome.
This should be separate and can be worked out later where they can again include the worthy reception of Holy Communion in that teaching document.
Archbishop Gomez indicates that “The proposed document would focus on the centrality of the Eucharist to Christian life. An outline of the proposed document, included in Gomez’ memo, included the teachings of the Church on the Eucharist such as understanding it as “sacrifice,” the need for beautiful liturgies, the works of mercy, and a call to conversion.”
Who are the 60 bishops backing the Cupich stall ?
Why is so much time being wasted by the bishops on a matter that has been settled by Canon Law for a long time? Their teaching authority demands that they do just that. Cite the Canon Law and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and be done!
Exactly! Quit debating this. They’ve been “dialoguing” for over 50 years with liberal nuns, trying to get them to change their ways. How is that going? It’s time to refuse Communion to heretics like Biden, Pelosi, et al. If they don’t comply, excommunicate them.
The Statement should read, if you are a Baptized Catholic wo denies The Sanctity of human life from conception to natural death, and/or denies The Sanctity of the marital act within The Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, per Catholic Canon 750, do not present yourself to receive The Holy Eucharist, for you are no longer in communion with Christ and Hs One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church, due to your denial of The Unity Of The Holy Ghost.
Who recommended Cupich for Cardinal??
If I remember correctly, among his “Chinamen” (Chicago-ese slang for one’s political sponsor(s); the New York equivalent is “rabbi”) in the U.S. hierarchy were Cardinal Theodore McCarrick (then Archbishop emeritus of Washington, D.C.), Cardinal Donald Wuerl (then Archbishop of Washington, D.C. – currently Archbishop Emeritus of same), and Cardinal Sean O’Malley, OFM Cap. (then the Archbishop of Boston – currently Archbishop pro-tem (he turned 75 two years ago)).
In short, some of the most prominent of “Bernardin’s boys” among the U.S. hierarchy engineered his being made a Cardinal – the same ones, in fact, who had engineered his appointment as Archbishop of Chicago in the fall of 2014, though his name was most certainly NOT on any of the “terna” lists submitted to Pope Francis. They used their “clout” to persuade Pope Francis to override the process – and we Catholics in the Archdiocese of Chicago have been suffering under the vicious, madcap tyrannical reign of His Royal Highness and his jackbooted toadies and lickspittles (truly a cabal of evil men and women) ever since.
Former Cardinal McCarrick.
a woke leftist
Cardinal Cupich wants the bishops to wait until they next meet in person because then he can pressure those on the fence face-to-face about “Eucharistic Coherence.” A virtual call renders him less effective because he can only state his opinion and argue. He can’t cajole.
“A virtual call renders him less effective because he can only state his opinion and argue.”
I’d suggest it’s even worse than that: he will simply state his opinion and then try to strong arm others. He won’t argue, precisely because he is incapable of good argument.
Among the greatest moral scandals, if not the greatest in the history of Catholicism is this pontificate’s determined resistance to clarify whether it’s for or against politicians clerics laity who openly support murder of the innocent to receive Christ the very Author of each slain innocent life. It leads one to believe it’s not at all concern with division, division already exists. And that based primarily on Amoris Laetitia, and Vatican tolerance of open communion to all whatever their sensitivities. This must be the final red line as to where the pontiff stands. Bishop Paprocki, among the best of our hierarchy, rightly insists on an affirmation of Church doctrine, while offering discussion with dissenters at the June USCCB conference. Thankfully we’re finally witnessing bishops strongly defending the faith. We pray they remain steadfast and prevail. What can a pontiff do if he disagrees, issue a decree? No pontiff has the authority to prevent a bishop from defending the faith, the very essence of his Apostolic mission as defender of the faith.
Fr Peter Morello, PhD,
You well diagnosed the nub of the matter. Thank you.
One can know through both our Catholic Faith and reason, that the fact that God, The Most Holy And Undivided Blessed Trinity, Through The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, (not Caesar, John Locke or King John) Is The Author Of Love, Of Life, And Of Marriage, And Thus The Author Of Our Inherent, Unalienable Right To Life, To Liberty, And To The Pursuit Of Happiness, is not a matter of opinion.
As I read this article all I could picture was the USCCB as a fibrilating heart. One chamber is pushing out of synch with the other chamber and nothing is getting done.
Less than 1/4 (67 including Waffle Dolan) of USA active Cardinals and Bishops support a long drawn out procedure on discussion of worthiness to receive the Eucharist. Surely out of the 207 remaining prelates there must be a hundred lions. Then again, Christ healed 10 lepers and only 1 returned in gratitude.
Past time for the lion-hearted to take courage in hand and fight for The Lord and his Church. St. Peter, all ye Holy Apostles and Martyrs, pray for us. Amen