Cardinal Eijk: Pope Francis Needed to Give Clarity on Intercommunion

Submitted by LocutusOP on Mon, 05/14/2018 - 23:57
Author: 

Janet, Peter Aiello,  Carl Kuss, L.C ,  Judy   

Date: 
Monday, May 14, 2018 - 23:45
Article link: 
Cardinal Eijk: Pope Francis Needed to Give Clarity on Intercommunion

 

 

Posted by Janet on Saturday, May, 12, 2018 11:21 AM (EDT):

??One Holy, ecumenical, Apostolic Church??

...

Posted by Janet on Saturday, May, 12, 2018 11:57 AM (EDT):

One Holy, ecumenical, Apostolic Church-Vatican II what did you do.

Posted by Peter Aiello on Saturday, May, 12, 2018 3:03 PM (EDT):

My understanding is that Canon Law can always be changed. The more important consideration is whether the changes would be in conformity with Scripture.

...

Posted by Peter Aiello on Saturday, May, 12, 2018 3:03 PM (EDT):

My understanding is that Canon Law can always be changed. The more important consideration is whether the changes would be in conformity with Scripture.

...

Posted by Carl Kuss, L.C. on Saturday, May, 12, 2018 6:33 PM (EDT):

Judy:

This is not about giving communion to protestant spouses of Catholics in any general way (opening the floodgates, throwing pearls to the swine); but rather that in certain extraordinary circumstances it might be possible to do so a)when there is authentic, sincere and honest desire to receive communion b) when there is present in the person the faith of the Church regarding communion (a faith which excludes heresy, obviously) c) when not being able to receive communion causes serious spiritual distress d) when there is a serious examination of conscience done with regard to the issue, with the help of the pastors of the Church. In other words, the conditions could not be stricter or clearer or more in the line of what canon law and the Catechism say about this matter. Communion with the Church remains the criterion of who may receive communion, but communion with the Church is not understood in a merely juridical, exterior fashion.

The German bishops made a kind of application of what canon law says by considering the case of mixed marriages, but canon law expressly gives them the right to do this.

A small group of bishops asked whether making such an application/interpretation involves a doctrinal matter which would not be the business of the bishops conference but the business of Rome. The Pope gave a CLEAR response: the bishops may go ahead, for this is not about a docrtrinal matter reserved to Rome, but rather is rooted in sound ecumenical principles which the Church has a long history of defending, and that there are indeed good reasons for tackling it at the level of the local Church, but at the same time advising that they must strive for unanimity.

 ...

Posted by Judy on Sunday, May, 13, 2018 3:34 PM (EDT):

Carl Kuss, don’t even try, do not believe your over writing with “extraordinary circumstance” for any could to receive The Holy Communion. Your people’s infamous compassion for the extra condition for the people who won’t obey the law of catholic teaching made our church bleeding!  Heaven sake, how much more church attendees you would see to loose?  Half of church attendees are gone after modernistic movement.  Keep in mind, when catholic embrass the world, the world will tread us like a whore!  Where is respect to our Mother Church by the world?  Honestly, I believe, some modernistic Catholics are incapable to see the hard sad facts as is.  Because the ideology blinds them, the modernists are owned by Iedology.  Ideology is Cancer.
Without humble submission to Divine God after disowning the ideology, that cancer is incurable! 
Good priests ought to be available to talk what a grace and freedom is obeying God!

 

 

 

 

Own comment: 

If you are ever feeling upbeat and need to be brought down to Earth, a visit to the National Catholic Register and a look at the comments' section on one of Edward Pentin's pieces will bring you right back down to Earth.

This is neo-Catholic central and so we can expect the worst, despite Mr. Pentin's brave efforts at trying his best to show the naked truth to his readers.

What we often see in the comments' section is the kind of mental gymnastics and contortionism and sheer lack of logic that would be amusing if it was not so utterly tragic. At times I cannot help but wonder whether some of the people responding are paid agents of NOChurch or protestant groupings or freemasons; such is their enmity towards what the Church actually teaches and has always taught.

If we assume that they are genuine, then they exhibit the sort of mindless responses in defence of their NOChurch ideology which would make any Nazi , communist or British propaganda minister proud. As an example, just read the following:

A small group of bishops asked whether making such an application/interpretation involves a doctrinal matter which would not be the business of the bishops conference but the business of Rome. The Pope gave a CLEAR response: the bishops may go ahead, for this is not about a docrtrinal matter reserved to Rome, but rather is rooted in sound ecumenical principles which the Church has a long history of defending, and that there are indeed good reasons for tackling it at the level of the local Church, but at the same time advising that they must strive for unanimity.

The Church DOES NOT have a long history of defending "ecumenical principles", whatever in Hades name that means. It's history of doing this is as old as Vatican II and has been nothing short of disastrous.

The authentic Catholic Church always maintained the strict requirement of acceptance of all of the Church's doctrine before admittance to the Sacraments, and abhorred 'ecumenical dialogue', knowing full well that Christian unity can only be achieved upont he return of heretics to the One True Faith.