PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

Pope Francis tells divorced woman she should be allowed Communion


fpraven88

In the Starting Line-Up
Joined
Dec 18, 2012
Messages
3,153
Reaction score
839
Pope Francis reportedly told a woman “living in sin” with a divorcee that she is free to take Holy Communion, in what appears to be a significant departure from Catholic teaching.

Jacqui Lisbona, who is from the Pope’s homeland of Argentina, wrote to the Jesuit pontiff to tell him that she had been refused Communion by her local priest, who objected to the fact that she was married to a previously divorced man.

Prohibited from marrying in church, they had instead opted for a civil ceremony.

“[The priest] told me that every time I went home, I was going back to living in sin,” she said.

In her letter, Mrs Lisbona, who has two teenage daughters with her current husband after 19 years of marriage, said she was worried that if she did take Communion – perhaps in a church where she was not known to the priest - she would be “violating Church rules”.

Related Articles
The Pope, who since being elected 13 months ago has established a reputation for phoning ordinary Catholics out of the blue in response to letters they have sent, called her at her home in the central region of Santa Fe on Easter Monday.

He reportedly told her: “A divorcee who takes communion is not doing anything wrong.”

In a rebuke to the local priest who refused her the Sacrament, he added: “There are some priests who are more papist than the Pope.”

When asked whether the remarks attributed to the Pope were correct, a Vatican spokesman told The Telegraph: “We would neither confirm nor deny that - this was a private telephone call made by the Holy Father and we would not divulge the details.”

But the reported remarks were in line with the position taken by Pope Francis in recent months – that the Church should treat divorcees and their partners with more compassion.

The remarks may indicate that the Pope, who has struck a much more inclusive tone than his predecessor, Benedict XVI, on issues ranging from homosexuality to same-sex unions, is testing the water with the intention of changing the Church’s position.

The surprising exchange was first revealed by Mrs Lisbona’s husband, Julio Sabetta, who said he first answered the call from the Pope, before handing the phone to his wife.

“One of the most wonderful things in my life has just happened – receiving a telephone call from none other than Papa Francesco,” he wrote on his Facebook page.

“We’re Catholics, we believe in God, and though we don’t go to Mass every Sunday, every evening we thank the Lord for our family and our work,” Mr Sabetta, a pastry chef, said.

The phone call from the Pope came six months after Mrs Lisbona sent her letter to him. Introducing himself as “Father Bergoglio” – his given name is Jorge Mario Bergoglio – the South American pontiff said he was sorry it had taken him so long to make the call.

“It is an issue we are discussing in the Vatican, because a divorcee who takes communion is not doing anything wrong,” the Pope reportedly said during a conversation lasting 10 minutes.

The Catholic Church currently maintains that unless a first marriage is annulled, Catholics who remarry cannot receive Communion because they are essentially living in sin and committing adultery.

Such annulments are often impossible to obtain, or can take years to process, a problem that has left many Catholics feeling rejected by the Church.

Since being elected in March last year, Pope Francis has on several occasions called for a more merciful approach to the problem.

In February he said divorced and separated couples should not be excluded from Church activities, in remarks which also raised speculation that he may one day lift the ban on divorcees receiving Communion.

He told a group of Polish bishops that priests should “ask themselves how to help (divorced couples), so that they don't feel excluded from the mercy of God, the fraternal love of other Christians, and the Church's concern for their salvation.”

He has also called on the Church hierarchy to re-evaluate the way that priests and bishops can engage with the children of same-sex couples and divorcees, urging them to "consider how to proclaim ************ to a generation that is changing".

The push for a more inclusive approach towards divorced Catholics has been led by Cardinal Walter Kasper, a German theologian, who has called for "openings and changes" in how the Church confronts the issue.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/rel...ed-woman-she-should-be-allowed-Communion.html

So you mean we shouldn't discriminate against women if they've ever had a divorce?

Huh, what a revolutionary concept.

The fact that we still have people here that would disagree with him and would have condoned and defended and protected any Pope that would've said otherwise is quite concerning.
 
Condescending rebuttal from everybody's least favorite Opus Dei radical in 5, 4.....
 
Well before getting too giddy, if he did say what is being speculated about:

A letter Pope Francis sent to the bishops of Argentina in late March is getting note from a pro-life Catholic group that says it is encouraging for pro-life advocates because it says pro-abortion politicians should not be eligible for communion in the Catholic Church.

In the letter, Pope Francis directed the Argentinean bishops to govern the Church there following the Aparecida Document.

T

he text states, in part, “[people] cannot receive Holy Communion and at the same time act with deeds or words against the commandments, particularly when abortion, euthanasia, and other grave crimes against life and family are encouraged. This responsibility weighs particularly over legislators, heads of governments, and health professionals.

http://www.lifenews.com/2013/05/07/pope-francis-pro-abortion-politicians-ineligible-for-communion/
 
Back to the OP...
In a rebuke to the local priest who refused her the Sacrament, he added: “There are some priests who are more papist than the Pope.”

I believe he might include some who have not taken their vows in this category as well.

PFnV
 
Yeah and I'm not even a catholic, although I do have a sibling who is the head of a religious order.....


Funny watching lefties trying to reinvent the church they despise.
 
Funny watching lefties trying to reinvent the church they despise.

Almost as funny as watching a rightie trying to justify a church he left behind years ago.

I mean, if you're so determined to protect it, why leave it?
 
I don't despise the present Catholic church. In 100 years, they'll be okay with abortion (and it will always have been so.) The church is just very slow to change. Back when I cultivated the beard I used to say "I have no problem with any organization that convinces 500 million women to kneel and worship a bearded Jewish man." Then the beard got gray, the hair mainly fell out, etc. But it was good while it lasted.
 
Funny watching lefties trying to reinvent the church they despise.

I despise hypocrisy not the RFC.......but the RFC is full of hypocrisy so it deserves my contempt.
You're exactly what's wrong with politics in this country. You go the political line at all costs and in place of arguing a point on merit you throw out typical lefty/progressive when you cannot.
 
I despise hypocrisy not the RFC.......but the RFC is full of hypocrisy so it deserves my contempt.
You're exactly what's wrong with politics in this country. You go the political line at all costs and in place of arguing a point on merit you throw out typical lefty/progressive when you cannot.



Well it is clear from your post that you hate religion in general due to whatever atheist belief you have.

For my own part I am happy to let people believe what they believe, be it atheist, agnostic ,Christian Buddhist, Hindu, whatever. YMMV.
 
Well it is clear from your post that you hate religion in general due to whatever atheist belief you have.

For my own part I am happy to let people believe what they believe, be it atheist, agnostic ,Christian Buddhist, Hindu, whatever. YMMV.

I notice that you didn't list Islam.
 
Well it is clear from your post that you hate religion in general due to whatever atheist belief you have.

For my own part I am happy to let people believe what they believe, be it atheist, agnostic ,Christian Buddhist, Hindu, whatever. YMMV.

If you paid attention at all you would know I'm not atheist and that I'm very happy to let people believe what they want as long as they grant me that same right. The problem is RI Phelps Fan and people like him don't do that. He calls what I believe "Burger King" religion even though it predates his religion. He claims people like me who don't have a strict doctrine like he does are worse than Phelps and the WBC.

You're such an apologist for any conservative policy even ones you really shouldn't care about if your Taoist claims were true
 
It is interesting to see one of the biggest deniers of all things religious/religion is following on the curtails of a relative, who is supposedly the head of a religious order... the reality is things will change significantly in the next 25 years in the Catholic Church.

As someone who watched and lived through the transition of St. John XXIII.. it's coming.
 
It is interesting to see one of the biggest deniers of all things religious/religion is following on the curtails of a relative, who is supposedly the head of a religious order... the reality is things will change significantly in the next 25 years in the Catholic Church.

As someone who watched and lived through the transition of St. John XXIII.. it's coming.


As usual, you don't know what you're talking about....especially when it comes to the RCC.

The only thing that changed during the "transition" of John 23 were devotions and disciplines. Devotions and diciplines routinely change in the church. Not a single doctrine of the RCC was contradicted by Vactican 2.
 
As usual, you don't know what you're talking about....especially when it comes to the RCC.

The only thing that changed during the "transition" of John 23 were devotions and disciplines. Devotions and diciplines routinely change in the church. Not a single doctrine of the RCC was contradicted by Vactican 2.

Yet it is interesting to note that John XXIII gave very little notice when convening V2 and this caught the Curia by surprise. His reasoning was that "it was time to open the windows of the Church to let in some fresh air," and invited Christians outside the church to participate and this is scarcely within RCC doctrine as was his famous saying that 'We were all made in God's image, and thus, we are all Godly alike," which is borderline heresy.

Still waiting for your reply in the other thread.
 
Yet it is interesting to note that John XXIII gave very little notice when convening V2 and this caught the Curia by surprise. His reasoning was that "it was time to open the windows of the Church to let in some fresh air," and invited Christians outside the church to participate and this is scarcely within RCC doctrine as was his famous saying that 'We were all made in God's image, and thus, we are all Godly alike," which is borderline heresy.

Still waiting for your reply in the other thread.


Your answer is exactly why I didn't bother replying. You say you have a background in theology and it's obvious you do not have a background in theology based upon your answer.

You don't understand the difference between dogma, doctrine, discipline or devotion. Look them up and then come back and tell me which specific dogmas or doctrines Vatican 2 contradicted. Let me save you some time by saying that you're wasting your time looking for those contradicted doctrines. At the very least though, understanding the difference between dogma, doctrine, discipline, and devotion might help you so that's worth looking up.

BTW, as for your "borderline heresy" comment....from the Catholic Catechism:

355 "God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him, male and female he created them."218 Man occupies a unique place in creation: (I) he is "in the image of God"; (II) in his own nature he unites the spiritual and material worlds; (III) he is created "male and female"; (IV) God established him in his friendship.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s2c1p6.htm
 
Last edited:
Your answer is exactly why I didn't bother replying. You say you have a background in theology and it's obvious you do not have a background in theology based upon your answer.

You don't understand the difference between dogma, doctrine, discipline or devotion. Look them up and then come back and tell me which specific dogmas or doctrines Vatican 2 contradicted. Let me save you some time by saying that you're wasting your time looking for those contradicted doctrines. At the very least though, understanding the difference between dogma, doctrine, discipline, and devotion might help you so that's worth looking up.

BTW, as for your "borderline heresy" comment....from the Catholic Catechism:

355 "God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him, male and female he created them."218 Man occupies a unique place in creation: (I) he is "in the image of God"; (II) in his own nature he unites the spiritual and material worlds; (III) he is created "male and female"; (IV) God established him in his friendship.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s2c1p6.htm


First off, you are confusing theology with catechism. You keep quoting from catechism and that is not theology.

And yes that's borderline heresy, because while the catechism you quote from does state that Man is "in the image of God," he is still not God, and to insinuate that was to be accused and charged with heresy by the Catholic Church as many were; Meister Eckhart, for example, wouldn't differentiate between man and God and was charged with heresy (later retracted).
 
First off, you are confusing theology with catechism. You keep quoting from catechism and that is not theology.

And yes that's borderline heresy, because while the catechism you quote from does state that Man is "in the image of God," he is still not God, and to insinuate that was to be accused and charged with heresy by the Catholic Church as many were; Meister Eckhart, for example, wouldn't differentiate between man and God and was charged with heresy (later retracted).


I'm sorry I wasted my time trying to educate you. My bad....I won't make that mistake again.
 


Monday Patriots Notebook 4/15: News and Notes
Patriots News 4-14, Mock Draft 3.0, Gilmore, Law Rally For Bill 
Potential Patriot: Boston Globe’s Price Talks to Georgia WR McConkey
Friday Patriots Notebook 4/12: News and Notes
Not a First Round Pick? Hoge Doubles Down on Maye
Thursday Patriots Notebook 4/11: News and Notes
MORSE: Patriots Mock Draft #5 and Thoughts About Dugger Signing
Matthew Slater Set For New Role With Patriots
Wednesday Patriots Notebook 4/10: News and Notes
Patriots Draft Rumors: Teams Facing ‘Historic’ Price For Club to Trade Down
Back
Top