| We hope you enjoy your visit! You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harrassment, and crude or sexually-explicit language. If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Cohabitees receiving Communion | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Friday, 2. January 2009, 13:47 (862 Views) | |
| Angus Toanimo | Friday, 2. January 2009, 13:47 Post #1 |
![]()
Administrator
|
I'd report him, Mairtin, for that. Giving Holy Communion to someone whom he knows not to be in a state of grace is one of the worst things he could do. Instead of preparing the co-habiting couples for marriage and full participation in the sacramental life of the Church he is sending out a message that Canon Law doesn't matter, that Sin doesn't matter, that HE condones the co-habiting and sinning and that receiving Our Lord in a state of mortal sin is ok - all of which are so very wrong. The fact that he gives Holy Communion to co-habiting couples that he knows about implies that he probably doesn't believe in the Real Presence. I think compared to that, the leaving the sanctuary for the SoP pales into insignificance. Edited by Angus Toanimo, Friday, 2. January 2009, 14:13.
|
![]()
| |
![]() |
|
| Angus Toanimo | Friday, 2. January 2009, 13:49 Post #2 |
![]()
Administrator
|
I don't. Priests like that need to be laicised. |
![]()
| |
![]() |
|
| Mairtin | Friday, 2. January 2009, 14:07 Post #3 |
|
I'm inclined to agree with you, Gerry, but who are you are I to decide that one is a reportable offence and the other isn't? I actually have mixed feelings this particular one, I really like the idea that the consecrated Host should not be left unattended yet I find something very cold and unchristian about the idea that at a funeral mass, for example, the priest should not be able to shake hands with the chief mourners I'm glad to see that the Church is probably going to resolve that issue by moving the Sign of Peace to an earlier part of the Mass although that's not the reason for changing it. |
![]() |
|
| Mairtin | Friday, 2. January 2009, 14:22 Post #4 |
|
Now, why does that not surprise me at all, Patrick
I'll try to stay way from the argument that they are not necessarily in a state of mortal sin, we've flogged that horse to death elsewhere
I disagree - I think Our Lord would be far more upset by somebody being driven away from Him - perhaps irreparably - than He would be by them being in an unworthy state ... particularly when you consider that none of us are actually worthy.
No he's not, I don't think believe there is one person in that parish - including those co-habiting - who thinks that he approves of it or considers it okay.
With respect, Patrick, that's utter crapology - as I've already said, he's one of the most devout priests I've ever met, I just wish my own faith were half as strong as his.
Empty even more churches ... then blame it all on Vatican II, eh Patrick? |
![]() |
|
| Clare | Friday, 2. January 2009, 14:43 Post #5 |
|
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
|
Only in cases where the sin is publicly known, as in the case mentioned here. I imagine priests often have to give Communion to people they know not to be in a State of Grace, because if the sin is known only to the priest from the confessional, he would violate the seal if he refused to give Communion. |
|
S.A.G. Motes 'n' Beams blog Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz! | |
![]() |
|
| Clare | Friday, 2. January 2009, 14:50 Post #6 |
|
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
|
His actions are failing to convey the gravity of the sin. How can cohabiting Catholics go to Communion unless they are misinformed about the gravity of the sin? The priest's job is not to keep people in ignorance. Besides, how can Catholics not know that pre-marital sex is a mortal sin? They've been badly catechised. And they've been taught that "nice" people don't sin, and they're "nice" so they don't sin. Sorry, but "nice" people do sin. And it's high time modern man got that fact into his arrogant head. |
|
S.A.G. Motes 'n' Beams blog Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz! | |
![]() |
|
| Angus Toanimo | Friday, 2. January 2009, 14:54 Post #7 |
![]()
Administrator
|
I didn't think that it would....
Yes, you would be very wise, I guess, to not even contemplate suggesting that they are not necessarily in a state of mortal sin
Don't you think that someone receiving Him in a state of grave sin, aided and abetted by one of His priests in full knowledge of the lack of grace of the communicant, is driven even further from Him?
If he doesn't consider it ok, he should show this by refusing them Holy Communion, and as I said previously, preparing for marriage and full participation in the sacramental life of the Church.
It isn't crapology. Anyone with a true belief in Transubstantiation would pay the due respect and fulfil all the conditions necessary to receive - and, in the case of the priest with full knowledge of the communicant's sin(s), refuse Holy Communion.
Not everything bad within the Church is a result of Vatican II. |
![]()
| |
![]() |
|
| Angus Toanimo | Friday, 2. January 2009, 14:59 Post #8 |
![]()
Administrator
|
Yes, this is obviously publicly known, hence what I have said.
I'm not so sure. The seal of the confessional, as far as I know, is only broken if the priest divulges to another person what was confessed. |
![]()
| |
![]() |
|
| Mairtin | Friday, 2. January 2009, 15:11 Post #9 |
|
With respect, I think you both need to refresh yourselves on the three conditions for mortal sin. To take just one example; a woman is cohabitating with a man with whom she has had children. She now regrets having got into that situation and would like to end the relationship but she is also frightened of the effect on the childen. Her partner can be quite violent so she is terrified of refusing him sex whilst living with him. By continuing the relationship whilst trapped into it by her emotional state of terror, is that woman committing mortal sin? |
![]() |
|
| Mairtin | Friday, 2. January 2009, 15:16 Post #10 |
|
Patrick I know nothing about your marital or family situation but if you have children and one of them, who is a really good person whom you love very dearly, decides to cohabit with somebody, would you cut yourself off from them whilst they are in that relationship? |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Friday, 2. January 2009, 15:16 Post #11 |
|
Deleted User
|
Is it not a miserable state of affairs that we have people in the pews prepared to fire off moaning letters to bishops about priests for minor " offences" which most people don't notice. It is an incredibly mean-spirited thing to do. John |
|
|
| Angus Toanimo | Friday, 2. January 2009, 15:21 Post #12 |
![]()
Administrator
|
No, because they are my children and I have unconditional love for them. But, I would not condone their relationship or give them my blessing AND I would point out that, whilst in that relationship, they cannot participate fully in the sacramental life of the Church and help them understand what they could do to rectify their situation. That would be my duty and obligations fulfilled as a Catholic parent. Edited by Angus Toanimo, Friday, 2. January 2009, 15:21.
|
![]()
| |
![]() |
|
| Angus Toanimo | Friday, 2. January 2009, 15:23 Post #13 |
![]()
Administrator
|
Knowingly giving Holy Communion to a communicant that is not in a state of grace (where the sin is publicly known) is not a "minor offence"! |
![]()
| |
![]() |
|
| Angus Toanimo | Friday, 2. January 2009, 15:24 Post #14 |
![]()
Administrator
|
Mairtin, Why move the goalposts? Why not deal with the case in hand? |
![]()
| |
![]() |
|
| Mairtin | Friday, 2. January 2009, 15:49 Post #15 |
|
It sounds to me that as a good and loving parent, you would basically put that single issue aside and try to maintain as good and as normal as relationship as you can in other aspects of your life with them. I agree with you completely - that is exactly what I have done when I have actually been faced with that very situation except that I have not tried to "help" them by lecturing them about Church law and the threat to their souls, they already know exactly how I feel about that. Now, if you and I in our human imperfection can put aside a single issue in the context of our total relationship with our children, what make you think that Our Father as a perfect parent cannot or will not do that? |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Archived Discussions · Next Topic » |






9:19 AM Jul 11