[26] For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come. [27] Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. [28] But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. [29] For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. [30] Therefore are there many infirm and weak among you, and many sleep.
1 Corinthians 11: 26-30
It is most discomforting to see my faith reduced to a replica of everyday street-level, deceit-filled, politics.
Sadly, it is too often being treated so by the very shepherds charged by God with its defense and accurate dissemination of its apostolic and biblical truths
I wonder if a “catholic” politician who openly supports and promotes human trafficking could present himself or herself for communion.
– only if the USCCB receives government contracts.
Francis is sickening. Please dear Lord, when?
Imagine thinking that the Church’s number 1 moral problem in 2021 is rigorism. Not coincidentally, 1 Cor. 11:27-29 was omitted from the New Lectionary created after Vatican II.
https://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2016/04/the-omission-that-haunts-church-1.html#.YZZhBxxOk2w
Whereas in the lectionary that had existed since before Trent, that passage was heard regularly.
Another reminder about the dicey claims of continuity between 1962 and 1970. Not to mention how lex orandi inevitably turns into lex credendi.
And no surprise that hardcore hyper-papalist Rich Raho is trumpeting this. He might be the biggest Papa Krishna after Mike Lewis.
One more thought: did the German nuncio give the same speech to the synodal schismatics over at the Church of the Holy Kirchensteuer?
Headlines should read: Foolish bishops issue a side stepping “teaching document”.
The only “teaching document” most catholics will read is that of NBC/ABC/CBS/CNN issuing statements of full approval of communion for those who support, defend and fund that abortion up until birth, and even after.
I read “bishops were relieved not to have to deal with the issue”. Aren’t these the same lackeys who refused to deal with Pedophile priests?
Aren’t these the same lackeys who refused to deal with Pedophile priests?
No, because the problem was typically pederasty, not paedophilia, though there was some of the latter. The other problem was that the gap in time between the supposed event and the filing of an accusation was often so distended that complaints were impossible to evaluate in a satisfying way unless the accused priest confessed. The Diocese of Syracuse has gone back and forth on the case of the late Fr. James Quinn, who was accused in a lawsuit filed in 2003 of a set of transgressions taking place between 1963 and 1970. He had one accuser.
Interesting timing. We have had a sequence of readings at daily Mass from Maccabees. It starts with the capitulation, and abandonment of the holy covenant, of some of the people to worldly Gentile ways[Monday]. It is followed by Eleazar’s refusal to give bad example to young people[Tuesday]. Then we hear the story about the seven brothers and their mother[Wednesday], the revolt of Mattathias[Thursday], the rededication of the Temple[Friday], and the failure of King Antiochus to impose his designs on Judah[Saturday].
*
What a contrast with the bishop’s meeting.
What Greg B said! YES! YES! YES!!!