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

"Father, Should I Attend That Mass?" Advice on Attending Non-SSPX Latin Masses

By
 + JMJ I see that the 'resistors' are in a tizzy because Fr. Robinson used them as an example instead of the sedevacantists. What is interesting is that you can apply the exact same reasons against going to a sede mass as that of the 'resistors'. Namely: On the other extreme are those situations where an SSPX priest knows that a certain non-SSPX traditionalist venue is a grave danger to the faith . Frankly, most, if not all, of the Resistance Masses would fall into this category. In many cases, the behavior of these priests has been and continues to be scandalous, by their (A) spirit, their (B) preaching, and their indiscriminate conferral of the (C) priesthood and (D) episcopacy. To attend a Mass with such ongoing scandals poses a serious danger to the souls of the faithful. Yep, looking at A,B,C and D the shoe fits. On this basis the "resistors" = "sedevacantists". P^3 Courtesy of SSPX.org   A companion article to a recent "Questions with ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Correcting Caricatures of the SSPX

By
 + JMJ Introduction First, a little background on the FSSP St. John Vianney Chapel in Mission Hill Kansas.  After the 1988 consecrations and the foundation of the FSSP there was a consistent trend of Dioceses allowing the SSPX to run chapels and churches near SSPX locations. As with any 'organizational change' there were those who didn't agree with the change and no longer sought the sacraments from the SSPX. I heard from friends that in that era there was a lot of anger and tension (on both sides) between the St. Mary's SSPX and Mission Hill FSSP.  Second, there have been caricatures of the SSPX position (some are evident below) in which personal opinions of SSPX priests and laity are taken as the official position or conflated with those of sedevacantists or 'resistance'. Recent Perspectives of the SSPX Position In the shadow of the consecrations a fever pitch accusations and opinions how surfaced - many of which include caricatures of the SSPX positions, of w...
Post a Comment
Read more

SSPX: Why Is the SSPX So Criticized?

By
 + JMJ As long as you are ok with what happens in other Catholic Churches, Traditional Catholics will be left 'alone'.  This is a paraphrase of words spoken by an Archbishop to Traditional Catholics (with a sprinkling of SSPX) who had requested the Traditional Latin Mass under Summorum Pontificum. This reflects that attitude of the Church towards anyone who takes issue with some of the ambiguities of Vatican II and the post-conciliar magisterium.  If you reject the papacy but are ok with V2, the New Mass, and what Rome has stated since 1965 - then you are welcome. Question some of the more abiguous statements and ask for Rome to realise that a circle is not a square - then you are in for a world of hurt. This is where the SSPX exists and has existed from almost its very first moments. Pointing out contradictions with previous magisterium is not acceptable - under any condition. Why? Because it will cause the whole V2 house of cards to fall. I guess only when the contradic...
Post a Comment
Read more

Stories: Early Days of Tradition Part 8 - Convention Centre Chapel

By
 + JMJ I came to Tradition a few years after they had bought a chapel. My wife told me of the earlier years when Fr. Normandin would come to town and Mass would be held in a room at the convention centre.  He'd start by blessing the room and then proceed with Mass. This went on for a while before the one of the faithful found a small hall that would suit just fine. They pooled their money and bought the building.  Then came the work as the retiree's refinished the floor, setup the sactuary. Oh, did I mention that I heard that the hall had been used by a motorcycle gang? The floor needed a lot of work.  I remember seeing pictures of the founders working to make the hall into a fitting place for the Sacrifice of the Mass. That little chapel would be a refuge like many others serviced by Fr. Normandin.  From Thunderbay, Ontrario to Nanaimo, British Columbia - the SSPX chapels are all the results of Fr. Normandin's missionary work in those desperate times. Without h...
Post a Comment
Read more

How many more must die for the throne? or How to combat FUD!

By
 + JMJ How many more must die for the throne? (Movie Quote: Prince Caspian) The Spread of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt I've seen a lot of FUD spreading across the intergnat on various stats etc.   So let's put this in context ... especially the perspective of those people in positions of authority who need to make decisions to protect the lives of their citizens. Yep, this is going to be that type of post.  Like it or not the leaders of our governments have their authority from God.  So, as Catholics should know, you need to have a very good reason to deliberately disobey the orders of their superiors. This is basic St. Thomas Aquinas ... so don't blame me for discussing things from a Catholic perspective. The leaders of our countries have taken action to protect the vulnerable of our countries.   As much as the young and not-so-young may whine and complain - I have to ask how many more of our elderly have to die? What the armchair virologists and ec...
10 comments
Read more