Skip to main content

Communion of Saints and Pope Francis' Audience of Feb 2, 2022

Image
By
 +
JMJ

Introduction

 Pope Francis has, as usual, make some statements that are controversial. Before delving into them, I think it is critical to understand the Teaching of the Catholic Church on this matter before attempting any assessment of what Pope Francis said this time.

Context - Church Teaching

In explaining the Communion of Saints Ott wrote in Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma:

For the purpose of creating the right context to assess Pope Francis' statement, we shift from what is the "Communion of Saints" to who shares in this Communion:

Catechism of Trent - Those Who Share In This Communion:The advantages of so many and such exalted blessings bestowed by Almighty God are enjoyed by those who lead a Christian life in charity, and are just and beloved of God. As to the dead members; that is, those who are bound in the thraldom of sin and estranged from the grace of God, they are not so deprived of these advantages as to cease to be members of this body; but since they are dead members, they do not share in the spiritual fruit which is communicated to the just and pious. However, as they are in the Church, they are assisted in recovering lost grace and life by those who live by the Spirit; and they also enjoy those benefits which are without doubt denied to those who are entirely cut off from the Church.

So the members of Christ's Body (living and dead) have different degree's of participation in the Communion of Saints. Who are these members?  Again I turn to Ott:

...

 In summary, the members of the Church of Christ participate in a communion, participating in the graces provided via the Sacraments helping each other through their good works.  The members of the Church of Christ include the baptized who have not separated themselves from the Church by schism, heresy or been excommunicated.

Assessment of Pope Francis' Statement

Now on Feb 2, 2022 Pope Francis held an audience and amongst other things, said the following words:

What, then, is the “communion of saints”? The Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms: “The communion of saints is the Church” (no. 946). What a beautiful definition this is! “The communion of saints is the Church”. What does this mean? That the Church is reserved for the perfect? No. It means that it is the community of saved sinners . The Church is the community of saved sinners. This is a beautiful definition. No one can exclude themselves from the Church (Point 1). We are all saved sinners (Point 2). Our holiness is the fruit of God’s love manifested in Christ, who sanctifies us by loving us in our misery and saving us from it. Thanks always to him we form one single body, says Saint Paul, in which Jesus is the head and we are the members (cf. 1 Cor 12:12). This image of the Body of Christ and the image of the body immediately makes us understand what it means to be bound to one another in communion: “If one member suffers”, writes Saint Paul, “all suffer together; and if one member is honoured, all rejoice together. Now you are the body of Christ and, individually members of it” (1 Cor 12:26-27). This is what Paul says: we are all one body, all united through faith, through baptism, all in communion: united in communion with Jesus Christ. And this is the communion of saints. ... They too [the dead] are in communion with us. Let us consider, dear brothers and sisters, that in Christ no one can ever truly separate us from those we love because the bond is an existential bond, a strong bond that is in our very nature; only the manner of being together with  each of them changes, but nothing and no one can break this bond. “Father, let us think about those who have denied the faith, who are apostates, who are the persecutors of the Church, who have denied their baptism: Are these also at home?”. Yes, these too, even the blasphemers, everyone.(Point 3) We are brothers. This is the communion of saints. The communion of saints holds together the community of believers on earth and in heaven. (Source: Vatican.va)

 The first point is whether or not someone can exclude themselves from the communion of saints.  This would mean something beyond just being a dead member of the Catholic Church. So, how does one break communion?  Is it even possible?  Is the difference between formal and material heresy taken into account?   As noted below material heretics aren't automatically excluded from the Church. 

Looking at the present code of Canon Law we find:

Can. 751 Heresy is the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him. (Source: Vatican)
My understanding is that to have an obstinate denial or doubt, one has to have been admonished by the Catholic Church to make it pertinacious. I have also heard that someone just has to 'know' that their position contradicts that of the Church and hold to it obstinate in the face of such knowledge.

Both matter and form of heresy admit of degrees which find expression in the following technical formula of theology and canon law. Pertinacious adhesion to a doctrine contradictory to a point of faith clearly defined by the Church is heresy pure and simple, heresy in the first degree. But if the doctrine in question has not been expressly "defined" or is not clearly proposed as an article of faith in the ordinary, authorized teaching of the Church, an opinion opposed to it is styled sententia haeresi proxima, that is, an opinion approaching heresy. Next, a doctrinal proposition, without directly contradicting a received dogma, may yet involve logical consequences at variance with revealed truth. Such a proposition is not heretical, it is a propositio theologice erronea, that is, erroneous in theology. Further, the opposition to an article of faith may not be strictly demonstrable, but only reach a certain degree of probability. In that case the doctrine is termed sententia de haeresi suspecta, haeresim sapiens; that is, an opinion suspected, or savouring, of heresy (see THEOLOGICAL CENSURES). (Source: New Advent)
So, I'm pretty certain that someone can withdraw from the Membership of the Body of Christ subjectively by committing the sin of heresy or schism and objectively by a visible act.  The line between material and formal is still a little blurry for me.

Looking at Pope Francis' second point that we are all 'Saved Sinners'. I don't know if this translation is correct and it seems to be an oxymoron. Yes we are sinners and we participate in the redemption, however are we 'saved' - meaning not going to Hell?  Well that isn't definite at this point in time. A portion of the Church is 'saved' meaning not going to Hell - that's the Saints in Heaven and the Souls in Purgatory. The jury is still out on the rest of us and the damned as not part of the Communion of Saints.

Last point, I can see that Pope Francis is probably coming from an excessively optimistic perspective that the heretics (denied a Truth of the Faith), apostates et al don't have full knowledge of what they are doing.  That doesn't change the fact that these acts, even in the current Code of Canon Law and Catechism of the Catholic Church, at least objectively exclude them from the Communion of the Saints.  These people are in a worse state that those who are in a state of mortal sin (ie dead members).

Conclusion

So I conclude that Pope Francis is off the rails in this regard and has simply taken the words uttered by Pope St. John Paul II (Link Universal Salvation Pope JP2)  to their ultimate conclusion - Universal Salvation.

Does that make him a heretic?  Well here's the interesting thing, Ott listed the definition of the members of the Church (see above) as Sent Certa, not De Fide.  So messing this up isn't heresy in the true sense of the word. It's theological error, he's contradicting sooooo many previous Popes and Teaching ... again, but doesn't seem to have crossed that big H line.

 Maybe I missed something ... looking forward to the comments on this one.

P^3

Reference

Catechism of the Catholic Church: 946 After confessing "the holy catholic Church," the Apostles' Creed adds "the communion of saints." In a certain sense this article is a further explanation of the preceding: "What is the Church if not the assembly of all the saints?"477 The communion of saints is the Church.Source: CCC_946


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What the heck is a congregation of "Pontifical Right"

By
+ JMJ In a discussion with a friend the question occurred to me that I didn't actually know was is involved in being a religious order of 'pontifical right'. I had a vague notion that this meant they reported to Rome as opposed to the local diocese. I'm also aware that, according to the accounts I have heard, the Archbishop received 'praise' and the written direction to incardinate priests directly into the SSPX.  This is interesting because it implies that the SSPX priests were no longer required to incardinate in the local diocese but in the SSPX. This is something that belongs to an order of 'pontifical right'. Anyway here's some definitions: Di diritto pontificio is the Italian term for “of pontifical right” . It is given to the ecclesiastical institutions (the religious and secular institutes, societies of apostolic life) either created by the Holy See or approved by it with the formal decree, known by its Latin name, Decretu
Post a Comment
Read more

The Curious Case of Steve Skojec and the Dangers of Deep Diving into the Crisis Sub-Titled: The Failings of Others

By
 + JMJ It's been a while now since Steve Skojec sold 1P5 and abandoned the Catholic Faith. I've been a 'Trad' since 1982 and in those 40+ years I seen this death-spiral before with a similar end point. It seems that anyone who jumps into the fray unprepared for the enormous task of righting wrongs will, eventually, become discouraged by not the task but the people who surround them.   I remember when Skojec complained of the treatment his family received from a traditional priest.  This seems to have been the start of the end for him. So what can we learn from the likes of Steve Skojec, Michael Voris (maybe?), Louie Verrecchio, Gerry Matatix and other celebrity Catholics? Probably quite a lot about what not to do. First, don't burn out on the crisis?  When you burn out, on work or anything else, little things assume a more greater importance than they are due.   This is one of my 'canary in the coal mine' signals that I've been stretching myself too thin
Post a Comment
Read more

De Veritate - St. Thomas Aquinas - What is necessary to believe explicitly?

By
I was recently introduced to a work of St. Thomas De Veritate ( Source ) in the course of an argument concerning the minimum content of explicit faith.  When I submitted the following quote as proof: Theological faith, that is, a supernatural faith in Revelation, is necessary, and this is an effect of grace (D 1789); nemini unquam sine ilIa contigit iustificatio (D 1793). As far as the content of this faith is concerned, according to Hebr. 11, 6, at least the existence of God and retribution in the other world must be firmly held, necessitate medii (by the necessity of means) with explicit faith. In regard to the Trinity and the Incarnation, implicit faith suffices. The supernatural faith necessary for justification is attained when God grants to the unbeliever by internal inspiration or external teaching a knowledge of the truths of Revelation, and actual grace to make the supernatural act of faith. Cf. De verite 14, I I.Ott - Fundamentals of Dogma p241 In response my opponent wrot
Post a Comment
Read more

Gary Campbell - Former SSPX Priest

By
 + JMJ I've come across Gary Campbell's articles on Where Peter Is and noticed that he seems to have very strong biases, assumptions and reactions to anything that runs against these. Driven by curiosity I have found a copy of his letter to Bishop Fellay explaining his reasons for leaving the SSPX only five years after his ordination in Winona. I was surprised to learn that I was present for his ordination. Given this, I was interested in reviewing his letter to Bishop Fellay. There will be two versions in this post. The unblocked and blocked letter. The unblocked is, obviously the full letter. The block, meaning unnecessary text will be blocked out, is a technique I use to remove ancillary text while focusing on key phrases. After completing my read, I believe that the root of much of what caused the issues with Fr. Campbell could be the seeds of the 'resistance' that, when the same perceptions were challenged by continued negotiations with Rome resulted in the necessa
Post a Comment
Read more

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

By
+ 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
Post a Comment
Read more