Skip to main content

Just in case you suspected that the SSPX was going to compromise ... Was Early Church Tolerant of Divorce

+
JMJ

While the head of the CDF issues unofficial statements in 'response' to the Cardinal's dubia - the SSPX promotes the Truth.

Funny that.

My belief is that when the SSPX is granted a no-compromise, Accept Us As We Are, "regularization" , something will have dramatically changed in Rome.

Even if we can't see it.

After all, we're edging into the 17th year of the Rome / SSPX discussions and upto 2012 Rome was consistent in its Mantra: Accept the Council, Accept the New Mass, Accept the Post-Conciliar Magisterium ... etc.

The SSPX has stated clearly - nope - not going to compromise.

Rome is the ones who are slowly shifting and vacillating on their mantra.

Me thinks this is a good thing!!!

P^3

Courtesy of SSPX.org



Many argue falsely that following Christ's example of mercy, Penance and Eucharist should not be denied to the divorced & remarried.

The Example of Christ

Objection


The Gospels relate that during His life on earth, Christ accepted to eat with sinners (Matt. 9:11), allowed a sinful woman to approach Him during a meal (Luke 7:37), and conversed with the Samaritan woman who was living with a man who was not her husband (John 4:9,18,27). Now refusing the sacraments to the divorced and remarried amounts to keeping them away from Christ who “will have all men to be saved” (I Tim. 2:4). In keeping with the saying sacramenta propter homines, it would be right to facilitate access to the sacraments for all men, including the divorced and remarried.

Answer


The objective of Christ’s contacts with sinners in the Gospel was to call them to conversion (Matt. 9:12-13), to forgive their sins (Luke 7:47-48) and to establish the cult in spirit and in truth (John 4:23). While Jesus did not condemn the adulteress, He did bid her to sin no more (John 8:11), for “adulterers shall not possess the kingdom of God” (I Cor. 6:9).
The sacraments were instituted for men, but they must receive them with the required dispositions: repentance for sins for the sacraments of the dead1 - including penance – and the state of grace for the sacraments of the living – including the Eucharist. If the divorced and remarried persons do not intend to renounce carnal commerce, they lack these dispositions and the sacraments of the Eucharist and penance cannot be administered to them without a sacrilege.
St. Paul preaching the Gospels - Raphael (courtesy Restored Traditions)

St. Paul’s Reproaches to the Corinthians

Objection


St. Paul reproached the Corinthians for their faults against charity in their fraternal agapes, where “one indeed is hungry and another is drunk” (I Cor. 11:21). Now the present discipline maintains the obligation for all faithful to sanctify the Lord’s day by assisting at Mass, but excludes some of them – in particular the divorced and remarried – from communion. This lack of charity is in urgent need of a remedy.

Answer


Christ instituted the sacrament of the Eucharist and taught the precept of fraternal charity during the Last Supper. That is why the early Church kept the habit of combining the celebration of the sacred mysteries with fraternal agapes. In his reproaches to the Corinthians, St. Paul clearly distinguished between those who go against fraternal charity during these agapes (I Cor. 11:18-22) and those who communicate with the wrong dispositions during the liturgy (I Cor. 11:27-29).
While the Church orders all the faithful to assist at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass every Sunday1, she places them under no obligation to receive communion every time. All the faithful are called to unite themselves to the sacrifice of Calvary renewed sacramentally on the altars: some to free themselves of the chains of mortal sin, others to continue to progress in the life of charity. But, without prejudice for the frequent communion encouraged by the Church2, only the faithful in the state of grace can receive the sacrament of the Eucharist fruitfully.
In a previous article, we explained how Church teaching about the conditions for Confession and Communion comes from Christ and the Apostles. They are consequent with the life of charity, God’s life given to us through Baptism, and the promise of eternal beatitude.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II: Dr. John Lamont

+ JMJ This is the second article from Dr. Lamont from his lecture given in May 2014. P^3 Source Part A: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny Source Part B: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny 8 May2014 The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II By John Lamont To understand how the Jesuit conception of obedience departed from earlier conceptions, it is helpful to compare it with the teaching of St. Thomas on obedience. The fundamental difference between the two is that St. Thomas considers the proper object of obedience to be the precept of the superior (2a2ae q. 104 a. 2 co., ad 3). Obedience that seeks to forestall the expressed will of the superior does not bear on what the superior wants or thinks in general, but only on what the superior intends to command. St. Ignatius’s lowest degree of obedience, which he does not consider to be virtuous, is thus what St. Thomas considers to be the only form of obedience. St. Thomas holds that St. Ignatius’s alleged higher forms of o...

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3

News Roundup February 17, 2024

 + JMJ    First wishing you a Holy Lent! As usual for this series, attached below are articles that caught my eye since the last 'Roundup'. Catholic Church In CRISIS Looking at the response to MAiD, there is a bright spot amongst all the misc issues within the Church. It is a little disheartening that only the huge issues where the world is bumping up against Church Doctrine are addressed.   The elephant in the room remains - the current and previous half dozen pontiffs have led us to this point. The academic discussion between theologians is, believe it or not, a healthy thing for the Church.  Hopefully it will gain momentum and follow the general rules academic argumentation and not devolve into name calling (as it has previously). Rome - Fiducia Supplicans The storm created by FS continues. People are starting to talk about the next conclave Hopefully this pontificate will do three things: Wake up the faithful clergy to false obedience Spawn a clarific...

Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 6c: Principles and Rules for Surviving this Crisis of the Catholic Church (Principle 2)

 + JMJ Principle 2: Know the Faith as the Catholic Church Teaches or Taught it. A knowledge of the Faith and familiarity with the history of the Catholic Church for at least the past 200 years provides a good foundation for weathering this storm. Bias, Opinions and Misbeliefs One landmine that undermines principle #2 is the mixing of personal opinion with doctrine. These opinions, beliefs by another name, are sometimes held in a death grip. In some cases they are just prejudices against various real groups such as immigrants, Jews, communists, masons etc. In some cases it extends to conspiracy theories such as sedevacantism. These firmly held beliefs prevent people from both understanding Doctrine as Taught by the Church and making the necessary distinctions. For example, which religions offer worship to the True God? Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants, Jews and Muslims. Some people suck in their breath through their teeth creating an noticeable hiss at the above statement....

The Episcopal Consecrations of 1988, 1991 and 2015 - Some Perspectives

+ JMJ In defense of the recent consecration of Fr. Faure by Bishop Williamson, some have argued that the 1991 consecration of Bishop Rangel (RIP) by the Bishops of the SSPX present an equivalent standard of action and principles.  From this they conclude that the SSPX's condemnation of Bishop Williamson's action is flawed as the principles of the 1991 consecration and that of 2015 are equivalent.