Friday, 20 April 2018

GERMAN BISHOPS AT WAR



Communion for Protestants has split the German Church – and now it's the Vatican's problem
Jon Anderson Catholic Herald

The German Church has been thrown deeper into controversy after seven bishops appealed to the Vatican against new guidelines that would allow Protestant spouses of Catholics to receive Holy Communion. If adopted, these rules would significantly relax the existing ones.
Cardinal Rainer Maria Woelki of Cologne, Archbishop Ludwig Schick of Bamberg and the bishops of Görlitz, Augsburg, Eichstätt, Passau and Regensburg have signed a three-page letter to Archbishop Luis Ladaria, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), and Vatican ecumenical chief Cardinal Kurt Koch. They have asked for a ruling on whether the text approved at the February meeting of the German bishops’ conference (DBK) has exceeded the national bishops’ competence and breached canon law.
Notably, the letter was sent without prior consultation with DBK president Cardinal Reinhard Marx. Five of the seven bishops are also from dioceses in Bavaria, where Cardinal Marx is president of the state bishops’ conference. For his part, Marx has rejected the seven bishops’ questions and stressed that the guidelines were only a draft and could yet be altered. He had previously said that the new document was merely a “pastoral handbook” and that “we don’t want to create any new dogma”.
The seven bishops’ letter is not unprecedented, but such an initiative is unusual. The last time Rome was formally asked to intervene in the German Church’s internal disputes was in 1999, when the majority of bishops voted to remain part of the state pregnancy counselling service. Cardinal Joachim Meisner appealed directly to Pope John Paul II and secured a Vatican ruling overturning their decision. But that was a solo effort from Meisner, the leader of the German Church’s almost defunct conservative faction. An appeal to Rome by seven relatively centrist bishops is a dramatic development.
Non-Catholic spouses receiving Communion isn’t, of course, an issue confined to Germany. Tony Blair famously received Communion regularly before his conversion, despite it being against the rules (as Cardinal Basil Hume later reminded him). In Germany the practice is quite common, just as it is common for civilly remarried divorcees to receive Communion, and there is a clear link with the Amoris Laetitiacontroversy. But, as we saw with Pope Francis’s apostolic exhortation on the family, there is a difference between having an important rule that is widely disregarded, and changing the rule – even just to allow exceptions, because exceptions have a way of becoming the new norm. And, where the sacraments are concerned, the stakes are high.
The new German guidelines are framed as providing for exceptions to be made on a case-by-case basis, after the communicant has gone through a process of discernment under the guidance of a priest. Ultimately, it would come down to the individual’s conscience – that is, Protestant spouses wishing to receive Communion should decide for themselves whether they should be able to. There is an obvious similarity with the proposal for allowing Communion for remarried divorcees put forward by future cardinals Walter Kasper and Karl Lehmann in 1993, which was the basis for Cardinal Kasper’s intervention at the two family synods preceding the publication of Amoris. The superiority of conscience over the law is a common German Catholic position.
Why has the opposition been much sharper over intercommunion than over Communion for divorcees? There was resistance to Amoris from Cardinal Gerhard Müller, then prefect of the CDF, but he had very little support from German bishops. One reason could be that the arguments over divorce have been well aired since the 1993 proposal, and so the ground had been prepared. Or it could be that the case for admitting Catholics in irregular marriages seems more plausible than that for admitting spouses who aren’t Catholic at all, since the conditions under canon law for non-Catholics are both more explicit and quite strict. It could simply be that, as often happens in the Church, the modernising faction has gained the upper hand and pushed its agenda further and faster than the centre ground would bear.
The guidance on Communion for Protestant spouses is supposed to rest on Canon 844 (4) of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, which states that “If the danger of death is present or if, in the judgment of the diocesan bishop or conference of bishops, some other grave necessity urges it, Catholic ministers administer these same sacraments licitly also to other Christians not having full communion with the Catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who seek such on their own accord, provided that they manifest Catholic faith in respect to these sacraments and are properly disposed.”
This does, however, raise the question of whether someone’s distress at not being able to receive Communion really counts as a “grave necessity” under the meaning of 844 (4). And “manifest[ing] Catholic faith in respect to these sacraments” is not obvious in the case of spouses who have not become Catholic and do not wish to do so.
Canon 844 (4) does soften the language of the 1917 Code, which stated bluntly that it was “forbidden to minister the Sacraments of the Church to heretics and schismatics, even though they are in good faith and ask for them, unless they have first renounced their errors and been reconciled to the Church”. This isn’t very diplomatic, but it does make clear that participating in the sacraments is a sign of unity within the Church.
The more fundamental problem with intercommunion is that, even if the form is similar, different religious communities often have very different understandings of what Communion means. The same issue can apply with other sacraments like baptism or marriage. For example, the Catholic Church recognises baptisms as valid if they are in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit – but, crucially, this has to involve an actual belief in the Trinity. The Church doesn’t recognise Mormon baptism, even though it uses the same words, because Joseph Smith’s theology denies the Trinity.
The same issue applies with Communion. Either the sacrament is the Body and Blood of Christ, or it is not. If it is viewed simply as a symbolic remembrance of Christ’s sacrifice, that is another thing entirely.
This is why, under established Catholic teaching, intercommunion is possible with the Orthodox Churches – though limited in practice – but not with most Protestant denominations, simply because they don’t agree with the Catholic view of what Communion actually is.
Many other religious communities practise closed communion, restricting the sacrament to their own members. However, some large Protestant denominations practise open communion – crucially including the EKD, Germany’s main federation of Protestant churches. This means that the Catholic spouse in a mixed marriage can receive communion in a Lutheran church, but not vice versa. That creates a social pressure, which is part of the context for the German bishops’ decision.
Probably a larger motivation is the long-term decline of Christian life in Germany. Thanks to the country’s church tax system, both the Catholic and Protestant churches are extremely wealthy, but largely empty of worshippers. The current rate of Mass attendance in Germany is around 10 per cent, and the Lutherans, who have gone much further in accommodating German secular culture, have even lower rates of observance.
The shortage of vocations is so severe that, despite importing large numbers of priests from India, the German Church is now pushing for parishes led by lay pastoral workers to fill the gap.
Nobody in Germany seems to have a clear idea of how to arrest the decline, except for further relaxing the Church’s expectations of the faithful. This approach has been tried for decades with little success, with observance and vocations continuing to decline and record numbers of Catholics formally leaving the Church in order to opt out of paying the church tax. Ironically, although the German Church is making it easier for non-Catholics and those in irregular marriages to receive Communion, the sacraments are denied to Catholics who don’t pay the church tax.
The Vatican missed an opportunity to clarify the interpretation of Amoris Laetitia by not responding to the dubia (“doubts”) submitted by four cardinals. The dubia on intercommunion from Cardinal Woelki and the other six German bishops provide another opportunity to clarify whether historic Catholic teaching still applies.
Either a positive or negative response will be revealing, and have an impact well beyond Germany.
PAT:

This is a very interesting dispute in Germany but it affects the Catholic Church in every country including Ireland.




When Jesus Christ celebrated the First Eucharist at The Last Supper - he as the celebrant was a Jew and all those who received the Bread and Wine from him were also Jews!

Over time - and with manmade laws and thinking - the Eucharist or Holy Communion in the RC Church was reserved for Catholics only - and those Catholics had to be in the state of grace and not in "mortal" sin.

Every Sunday at my 12 noon Mass at The Oratory in Larne the congregation is comprised of people who used to attend Mass in "official" Catholic church and is also comprised of others who used to be members of "Protestant" congregations like Anglicans and Presbyterians.

And EVERYBODY who wishes to comes forward and received Holy Communion in the form both of the "Bread" and the "Wine".

I have never in my life, thank God, refused anyone Holy Communion.

We bishops and priests do NOT OWN the Eucharist. It belongs to God and therefore I think it is a most serious thing for a priest to refuse Holy Communion to anyone who sincerely wishes to receive it with all due respect.

And at all the Wedding Masses I celebrate all over the country and the world I invite all who wish to receive Holy Communion to come forward - pointing out that Holy Communion is a gift from God, a way of uniting us with God and a source of spiritual healing and nourishment.

The RC Church does not OWN the Eucharist. God owns it. 

It is not a reward for BEING GOOD.

It is food for the spiritually hungry and healing for the spiritually and physically infirm.

Some people say: "Let's wait for Christian unity before we share Holy Communion".

I say: "Let's create Christian unity by sharing Holy Communion".


------------------------------------


103 comments:

  1. Well, we have all the guidance we need in Scripture.(Corinthians Ch.1 11,27)
    I think it is very important to make sure that the Blessed Eucharist is received with all the reverence due to the Real Presence and never received casually or trivially without proper appreciation. I think the responsibility for this reverence is shared both by the priest/Eucharistic Minister who presents it and by the recipients who approach the altar . I am a lay person but I feel this very strongly and I genuinely strive to give good example concerning this , particularly if there are impressionable children nearby who will do the what the adult does, for better or for worse. It is many years since I last heard a priest even briefly remind the congregation about the enormous privilege it is to receive the Blessed Eucharist and how to prepare well beforehand and give thanks afterwards. I think they could do a LOT better in that respect. I can't get up and preach and so I have to fully utilise the power of good example but I know how powerful that can be. It's a challenge I undertake gladly but it has to have humility as well in my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It sounds if those bishops don't know their Canon Law very well!
    I would refer them to Law 844 § 3
    Oh dear...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But then the First Law in any business is, "Never Refuse Cash".

      German's Church Tax means that the RCC loses financially if it enforces stiff rules on divorce, contraception and similar; it's driving away its “paying customers”.

      And it needs all the supporters it can muster. Gay rights campaigners are calling for the Church Tax to be abolished.

      Delete
  3. Communion is not like petrol unleaded or super unleaded. It is Jesus gift to feed his people. To say I got the real one demeans the Sacrament

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 04.43: Sean, a most rudiculous analogy. As Catholics we believe in the Real Presence, not a pretend presence: Real. Do not foist your new theology on us. Do not be like Pat, with an anything goes, as you like it theology. Makey up. We have a most powerful, deep and inspiring teaching through the centuries on the meaning of the Eucharist. Let's not devalue exactly what we know, believe and cherish: Christ, truly present in the Eucharist.

      Delete
    2. I believe in the Real Presence.

      Delete
    3. Sean Page, you do come out with some total rubbish. You are just supporting an argument that justifies you renouncing your Catholicism to join a Protestant Church. Anglicans don’t see the Eucharist as Real whereas we do, get over it.

      Delete
    4. 09:22, is Jesus' presence any less 'real' in the human heart? Or in anything else? Is Jesus less God in the human heart and more God in the Eucharist?

      The 'Real' in the phrase 'Real Presence' is not exclusionary, but emphatic. Did you not know this? It is a counterpoint to those who believed that the Eucharist was merely symbolic. Did you not know this either?

      Delete
    5. 11.23: Magna, As Catholics we believe in the Real (True) Presence of Christ, Body and Soul, in the Eucharist.I don't require a lecture from you to know exactly what I understand by EUCHARIST. Stop being a petulant, condescending idiot, always feeling above everyone. I believe Christ is also present when we seek to emulate his virtues and way of life - when we absorb them into our "hearts". Very different from simply being supposedly more knowledgeable and imagining Christ is present, as in your case because of your inherent hatred of others. The "virtues" you imagine you have are anathema to Christ

      Delete
    6. 11:47, whoo-hoo hullabaloo! Calm yourself, dear.

      I never said I didn't believe in the 'Real Presence', a phrase more related to Counter-Reformation theology than to anything else.

      Yes, I do believe that Jesus is corporeally present in the Eucharist, under the appearance of bread and wine, and is not corporeally present elsewhere. But his divine nature is present everywhere: God is therefore accessible everywhere, and to everyone.

      To me, belief in the Real Presence flows naturally from belief in the Ressurrection: Jesus rose from death bodily, not spiritually (since he is eternal. Jesus is, therefore, infinitely human as well as infinitely divine.

      Delete
  4. It beggers belief that the church would facilitate inter-denominational marriage but the refuse communion to a spouse.

    On a lighter note this blog has for years helped me move from the narrow-minded catholicism I was raised in. It has helped me realise what matters.

    My greatest turn off from the Church are the posters who comment in abhorrent tones and words to defend the institution. They are as bad as the indifferent "leader" we know as Roman Catholic Bishops. If this is the effect of traditional Catholicism than what is the point.

    Thank you +Pat for real leadership and for the taste of salvation.

    ReplyDelete
  5. All very good points Pat and it is without doubt that tge Roman church has been corrupted and blinded by its own earthly desires to be the master of all.
    As one who one who has recently excluded themselves from tge control of tge Roman church I have debated the whole communion issue and would side with you and your own thoughts.
    Having the faith to believe in the Gospel and tge words of God is a sure a decider in the argument for me.
    The desciples complained to Jesus that there was those about preaching in his name and doing wonders yet not part of them, of course the answer was simple if they are not against us then they are for.
    When the blinkers of the RC's domination on it's members fully wanes, it will only then that the winds of change promised in the Vatican Councils will occur. The old guard is dying and Jesus will prevail and clear the Temple courts again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank goodness you have excluded yourself from the Catholic Church because you sound more like a Presbyterian.

      Delete
    2. I have been excluded from the Church of Rome.

      Not from the Catholic Church, which is greater than Rome.

      Delete
    3. 10:06

      Ladies and gentlemen, Bishop Pat Buckley

      Delete
    4. Big Hank at 08.12, when the new Temple is created, will you be in the front seats like the Pharisees of old, or humbly at the entrance door, seeking God's mercy? Just wondering after reading your self righteous piece!

      Delete
  6. Pat says:

    Anything goes.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I mentioned before in a post that at a papal mass I attended in Azerbaijan in 2002, lots of covered young Turkish Muslim women went up for communion and received it from the priests. It was clear they weren't Christian, nevermind Catholic and that was in a fairly small location on Baku's waterfront. Indeed, I couldn't receive communion myself due to the scrum on their part.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And who has authority to refuse Jesus from anybody except Jesus alone.

      Delete
  8. The way Holy Communion is treated by the Roman church is a disgrace. I can never imagine Jesus turning anyone away. These man made laws are an utter disgrace. I like the "open communion" policy of churches. Any man or woman who wants to partake of the bread and wine should not be denied it.

    Why also Pat does the Roman church deny the cup to its followers who attend Mass? In the protestant churches, the cup of wine is shared to all who want to receive it. Some may not, as they do not wish to partake of alcohol, but it should be there. Instead it is reserved for the priest and the lucky few who are Eucharistic Ministers. Why is this?

    Pat, can you also tell me about the issue of communion in the hand. I was watching a Michael Voris "Vortex" video from his Church Militant YouTube channel, and he is utterly opposed to communion in the hand, why?

    Thank you and God Bless

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My understanding is that when possible the Roman church is supposed to offer both the Host and the Chalice to Mass goers.

      I have been doing that here at The Oratory for 32 years now.

      Again, as far as I know, all Catholics are entitled to take Communion in the hand.

      Its just that different priests have different "hang ups" and impose them on people.

      Delete
    2. St Paul would disagree with you. He warned anyone eating and drinking the Body and Blood of the Lord unworthily that they are eating and drinking damnation unto themselves. It doesn’t get more serious than that.

      The Holy Eucharist is not a free for all. Whether we like it or not, there are standards set by God (not the “Roman Church”) throughout the Scriptures e.g. the 10 Commandments for starters.

      If you are deliberately flouting God’s commandments and you approach the Blessed Eucharist you are doubly damning your soul to Hell.

      The Lord Jesus Himself warns, “do not give unto dogs what is holy”. You must be properly disposed and in the state of grace to receive Our Lord in Holy Communion. It is God’s gift to His Church meant for His children.

      It is a terrible thing to approach the Lord in Holy Communion carelessly, thoughtlessly, irreverently, unworthily. It is a most terrible sacrilege and could cost you your immortal soul.

      Delete
    3. 'Do not give unto dogs what is holy'? Have you any idea of the meaning here?

      If it meant what you appear to believe, then Jesus was self-contradictory since, according to the Synoptic Gospels,Jesus gave his body and blood to Judas Iscariot when he knew what Iscariot was about to do.

      Delete
    4. @11:54 - take it up with the Lord. He said it.

      Delete
    5. Judas Iscariot left the upper room BEFORE Jesus "took the bread, blessed it and... etc" Once Jesus uttered the words "One of you will betray me.." Judas knew his plan was rumbled

      Delete
    6. 12:12, did he? Really? Be very careful of taking gospel attributives too seriously and too literally. That proverbial remark appears only in Matthew, the writer of which is notorious for attributing to Jesus things which, in the broader context of his mission, we can reasonably conclude he did not say.

      Delete
    7. 13:07, you told only a small part of the truth here. John's gospel alone has Iscariot explicitly leave the Passover meal early; the Synoptics do not. On the contrary, they implicitly place Iscariot throughout the meal.

      And that's gospel!😆

      Delete
    8. When the apostles came out of the Last Supper with Jesus, they were on the way to the Gethsemane garden when they MET Judas who had left the upper room to quickly go as arranged and bring the enemies of Jesus into the spot where Judas knew He would go after the meal. As Jesus and the eleven came into view, Judas told the enemies to watch carefully to see which one he, Judas kissed and they would know which one to arrest "That is he, bind him fast.."

      Delete
    9. 15:14, name your source(s) for your post.

      John's gospel, even though it has Judas Iscariot explicitly leave the meal at some point, does NOT tell us at what point, that is, whether it was before or after the offering of bread and wine as Jesus' 'body' and 'blood'.

      The weight of evidence, from John's gospel alone, favours the view that Iscariot did indeed receive the bread and wine in this way. For example, the author has Jesus quote Psalm 41: 9: 'He who ate my bread has lifted his heel against me.' (John 18) After this, the author has Jesus dip 'a morsel' (bread) in wine, and hand it to Iscariot. NOWHERE AFTER THIS SCENE ARE WORDS RECORDING WHAT CATHOLICS CALL 'THE CONSECRATION'.

      Why would the author of John omit such vital and decisive words had it been his intention to show that Iscariot left the gathering before receiving Jesus 'body' and 'blood'? The author's account here does suggest that the act of consecration had already occurred, and that Iscariot had been present (and, indeed, had received the Eucharist from Jesus). This understanding is the only one that makes sense of the words, in this context, the author of John attributes to Jesus: 'He who ate my bread has lifted his heel against me.'

      Delete
    10. 10.27. We speak of respect for Communion but for some First Holy Communion has changed to a social and party event which is moving further away from the true nature of the Sacrament. Wheres the Real Presence in all of this

      Delete
  9. I would like to thank the poster away back at 1.46 for sincere and inspirational words. I fully agree with them.
    There have been a lot of the usual misconceptions trotted out. Of course, people assume they know what the Canon Law (second) poster was getting at but they assumed wrongly, didn't they?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Pat, I know a Catholic Priest in a Northern Diocese who has sold consecrated Hosts to devil worshippers by post. Not many will believe this but sadly it’s true. I wouldn’t be surprised if some Priests are engaging in black magic plus gay sex as part of that. It has happened in Rome and it’s happening in Ireland. This same Priest is also a regular user of drugs. People don’t know the half of it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have come across such happenings.

      Delete
    2. Once people start to stray even a little, it becomes easier to stray even further . It is a particular triumph for the Evil One when he secures a priest who should have been a leader in the community and the Church.
      Once the "salt loses its flavour" the rest will soon become careless too and quickly fall away with the continued onslaughts of temptation. The Evil One knows that temptation to pride and arrogance in people will bring him quickest results and most gratification, perhaps because that was how he, himself fell from grace. It is also the device he used to tempt Eve(mankind) and the tactic he tried even on Jesus made Man when he tempted Him on the mountain . Never forget, however that he is powerless in face of your daily Rosary..

      Delete
    3. My nephew is caught up with the Occult in a big way and we are powerless to stop him. He goes to Communion on Sunday, receives in the hand but takes the host away in his pocket. We are heartbroken at the prospect of what he is using it for but it’s happening in Co. Fermanagh. We can’t tell the Priest because of the shame it would bring on our whole family.

      Delete
    4. The rosary means nothing to Beelzebul. It has no power over anyone.

      Delete
    5. Prayer, particularly the Rosary is more powerful by far....

      Delete
    6. My cousin is using ouji boards and it's frightening. Not helped by drug taking. He was an altar boy but no longer believes in going to Church.

      Delete
    7. Bishop Pat @11.52 We have written to the Bishop about the Priest selling consecrated Hosts by post to people involved in the occult. A family member is involved with him. The Bishop will not respond to us despite evidence given. What more can we do?

      Delete
    8. Send me all the names and details at

      bishopbuckley1@outlook.com

      Delete
    9. I think people get carried away sometimes and like to think they can elicit a response from you(añd from the rest of us) by stating something especially designed to shock. Don't be too quick to rush to believe . However,I think your tactic of asking for exact names will either call the bluff, or else verify.

      Delete
    10. I’m sending you the details Bishop Pat via your email. It’s a young Armagh Priest.

      Delete
    11. Good. I will get it to Eamon Martin personally.

      Delete
    12. 19.00 Unbelievable. How is he functioning day to day. Has nobody done anything

      Delete
  11. 'The sacraments are denied to those who don't pay the Church tax.' What a monstrous conceit! A stark contrast to Christ's giving freely of himself, for everyone, in the Eucharist, the fruit of his passion, death, and ressurrection. This is pure evil, and yet these niggardly German clerics are fixated on the possibility that the Ronan w***'s laws (Canon Law) may have been breached. JC!

    This is something the Vaticsn should rule on rather than the petty case these German prelates have presented it with. But the Vatican will do no such thing, not where huge amounts of revenue are concerned.

    The Roman W***E hasn't changed, hasn't repented. And she never will, since her God is, and nearly always has been, Mammon.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Bishop Buckley said, in his post 20 April 2018 09:37, said, "I believe in the Real Presence".

    Pat, what you're actually saying is that you believe in the SUBSTANTIAL PRESENCE of Jesus in the bread and wine.

    Protestants believe in the REAL PRESENCE of Jesus among them whenever they are gathered together in prayer - "For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them", Matthew's gospel, chapter 18, verse 20.

    Until Luther and the Council of Trent the question of the Substantial Presence was a matter of theological debate, not of heresy.

    And it's sad that it's still regarded now as an issue of Salvation rather than as something that there can be honest differences of opinion about.

    Watch this 57-secod YouTube video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYJIJqgCKhc

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I believe in the Substantial Presence but am aware that that is a philosophal and theological term that does not fully explain the greatness if the Mystery.

      Delete
    2. @13.12 Protestants make it up as they go along. They have changed the goal posts so many times. What do they do with the bread and wine (as they see it) after a Service (as they call it), wine down the sink or drain and the bread left outside for the birds. Says it all really. Anglicans are lay men and women dressed up.

      Delete
    3. 13:35, we ALL are 'lay men and women' where Christ is concerned, since he is the only one who could atone for sin and is, therefore, the only 'priest'.

      No ordained priest can do anything more than a lay priest (common priesthood) can do. An ordained priest cannot baptise, cannot forgive sin, cannot transubstantiate, etc, since the one who can do these things is the one and only source of sacramental grace. (Read the prologue of John's gospel.)

      The ordained priest is...well...just a prop, really.😆

      Delete
    4. I don't respond to trolls. Only to acknowledge your diatribe.

      Delete
    5. Stop giving oxygen to the troll Magna who has just woken up from his stupor and is now intent on abuse of everyone on here for the rest of the day. Do not respond to him.

      Delete
    6. So you don't believe in the Real Presence then, Magna?

      Delete
    7. 15:02, check out my post at 12:16.

      Delete
    8. 14.38: Magna, your theology and spirituality, like you, are fake. Your comnentary is spurious and make belief. Read all the documents of Vatican 11: reacquaint yourself with proper, true Eucharistic theology. You teach heresy. Just because you were thrown out of the seminary and prevented from priesthood doesn't give you any justification for spewing heresy and making up your own theology. Join Pat at Larne's makey up world...and you can believe in anything you like because you stand for nothing.

      Delete
    9. Mags, 14.38: so you think priests are just a prop! At least it's a more significant role than what you have since being denied Priesthood. It grates eternally as a humiliation in your heart that you were prevented from being "just a prol". Tough luck. I thank God every moment for allowing me, despite my sins and flaws, for being - "just a prop" - but a significant one. Jealousy make you a very envious person and repeated bouts of it destroys your humanity.

      Delete
    10. Pat at 13.27: If you read the gospel of today for the True Catholic Mass, any doubts you have about the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist will be answered for you. (John:6: 52-59). Reflect and pray....

      Delete
    11. Dear prop at 18.19..you are a disgrace to the priesthood.
      What sort of priest would chastise Mags.
      You should pray for him if you had any humility and respect for God’s creations.
      He was created by God just as you were.
      Those words to Mags are...actually I’m beyond sad for you.

      Delete
    12. 18.37 you are Mags

      Delete
    13. 18.37: While feigning sympathy for Mags, look at his vitriol over time. He doesn't give a damn about the integrity of those he attacks with such savagery. Save your sympathy and prayers for more worthwhile people. I do not agree with your assessment of me as a disgrace to the priesthood. Sorry, but I have self respect at all times and treat others with courtesy. However, Maggie, I'm afraid incurs deserved opprobrium.

      Delete
    14. 20:19, if you are a priest, then you're a poorly educated one. And not bright. Seminarist course, was it?

      Thing is: how the hell can 18:37 'feign sympathy' for me and yet 'save...sympathy' for me? You're confused, aren't you? Perhaps a lie-down may help. Then again, perhaps not.

      Moron.

      Delete
    15. 21.00: Magna: Always easy to know when you are outclassed by others - you resort to obnoxious behaviour. I have, thankfulky, received more than a seminarist education - degrees in Arts, Philosophy and History. Unlike you, my education has taught me to have respect and tolerance for others and to use my skills, gifts and abilities for the good of others. Magna, I know you never recovered from being flung out of the seminary, thus being denied the gift of priesthood. Oh what a sad world you've had since seminary days! Poor thing.

      Delete
  13. To Anonymous at 11.47
    If what you say is true and can be proven then you have a a firm obligation to report this Priest that has apostasied to the Bishop in his northern Diocese so that this Priest can be excommunicated without delay. This is a horrible act.
    Very concerned and shocked lay person

    ReplyDelete
  14. These differences of opinion may seem to be about the Sacred Scriptures but actually they're more differences about the opinions of 'Church Fathers'who lived three and four hundred years after the time of Christ.

    Luther, Calvin and the rest were seminary-educated Catholic priests with the ideas of Augustine, Aquinus and the similar thoroughly drilled into them.

    I was a Roman Catholic myself until pretty late in life, and I didn't reject Roman Catholicism in order to be ensnared by Calvanism.

    I read what God says, in the Bible, and go by that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do you read the Petrine promises in your Bible and John, chapter 6?

      Delete
    2. No harm to you 14:04, but you need night classes at the Belfast Biblical College. John Calvin, who made Geneva (and through his spiritual descendants) and later, Glasgow and Belfast symbols of joy and tolerance, live and get live, was always a layman.

      Delete
    3. And Luther didn't attend a seminary.

      Delete
  15. To the people that have commented on matters of blasphemy and disrespect to Our Lord in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament if the Bishop concerned does not reply go to Archbishop Eamonn Martin this is a very serious matter. To the family who know that a family member is willfully disregarding the Sacred Host please stop this person. You must know how much more injury these actions cause to Our crucified Lord I will pray about this matter tonight

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We have written to Archbishop Martin - no response thus no interest.

      Delete
    2. I e-mailed Martin last year. Not even an acknowledgement from the ignoramus.

      Delete
  16. I would never take communion from the chalice.
    Yuck at others saliva yuck
    As for people abusing the host
    The presence of god is only there momentarily ....in the moment
    So no amount of devil craft with a concentrated host is irrelevant.
    Of course it’s very disrespectful.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As long as the host keeps the form of bread it is the body of Christ.

      Delete
    2. Absolutely not22.47
      It is only the body of Christ when being received.s

      Delete
    3. 22.47. Ok so where does it go when the form changes

      Delete
    4. Cod theology by 01:22. What about the Hosts in tabernacles and monstrances?

      Delete
  17. I think you are exaggerating 16.46
    Our Lord can’t be injured.
    The people doing this are disrespectful and should be reprimanded.
    But don’t go being alarmist .
    I’m sure they will stop going to mass soon....problem solved

    ReplyDelete
  18. I'm amazed when I go to Presbyterian church Communion Services to see how much more reverently than do Catholics. In fact, in Presbyterian churches you must prove that you are not only a Presbyterian but also a Communicant member (many Presbyterians never receive Communion, considering themselves unworthy.

    In the Anglican church, in Ireland at least, most receive on the knees at rails.

    How have we arrived at the situation whereby Protestants with a different Eucharist theology receive more reverently than Catholics.

    And the Orthodox are appalled by Catholics queuing up and taking the Host in the hand, standing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Perhaps we should reinstate the midnight fast before receiving Communion. Or flagellate ourselves as well. Would this satisfy your lust for reverence, you numbskull?

      Delete
    2. That's not very ecumenical.

      Delete
    3. The Orthodox are much more into fasting. Lax post-Vatican II Catholics are not, of course.

      Delete
  19. My day has been made complete by learning that, many years hence (I hope), HRH The Prince of Wales will succeed HM The Queen as Head of the Commonwealth.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I will be in with touch you Bishop Pat. There is a serious case to answer for in Dromore. I will furnish you with the facts In due course.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Why don't these German Protestants who are so keen to receive Holy Communion just become Catholics?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What? You can't answer your own daft question? Seriously? 😅

      Delete
    2. No, seriously. What is the answer?

      Delete
  22. Magna Carta XXII20 April 2018 at 21:56

    Magna Carta blue is stumped.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 'Stumped'? More homo-slang, I suppose.😕

      Delete
    2. No no Magna. I am not the poster who originally wrote it but "stumped" means that you are puzzled by something and can't come up with an answer e.g. "I really enjoyed the crossword but the last two clues had me completely stumped!"

      Delete
    3. Pump the stump. I imagine you do it three or four time a day. What a man!

      Delete
    4. Then what am I stumped by? (Supposedly)

      Delete
    5. 23:02 owned you, Magna blue, you moronic, sem course ignoramus. Who hasn't heard of "stumped", you idiot.

      What I've just written is an example of how MC blue usually comments.

      Delete
    6. 10:24, in your wildest dreams, pal. (And probably not even there.😆)

      Delete
  23. Pat, why do you have a picture saying OLAS is a liberal Jew, who, like liberal Catholics, were invented in the 1960s. Have you not heard of the "jot & tittle" versicle?

    http://biblehub.com/matthew/5-18.htm

    ReplyDelete
  24. +Pat, you owe your devoted readers a good Gaynooth scandal after reading this interminable blog. Honestly, I thought I'd die of boredom.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Same here. He's so easily distracted.

      Delete
    2. The days of Gaynooth scandals are over. There are few sems there now and the deans are keeping a beady eye on them. Pat's blog is a sort of e-dean and the fear of exposure by it is keeping the lads on best behaviour.

      They are keeping their heads down until ordination and then they can let rip, with the worst that can happen to them is a sojourn in the US.

      Plus, Maynooth is closing.

      Delete
  25. The most sacred heart of Our Lord Jesus Christ in its human dimension can be wounded and hurt by our indifference and disrespect to Him. The Divine dimension of Our Lord Jesus can be saddened by the mockery and disrespect of men. The flippant way that some of these posts are referring to the Blessed Sacrament are very alarming to me.
    It is grossly offensive to Christ and to His Sacrament of the Eucharist. The Sacred consecreated Hosts are the Body of Jesus. The actions of people taking the Host out of Mass etc are diabolical.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 23:19, are you one of those communicants who approach for the Eucharist on your knees, inconveniencing everyone else, including the elderly priest who has to bend down to accomidate your showy piety?

      Delete
  26. Pat, why are the likes of Rory Coyle rewarded by very expensive treatment/holiday in America? A lay teacher, medic or social worker who did what they did would be sacked for gross misconduct.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because these bastardos are ontologically superior and better than everyone else. That's why! Don't you know ANYthing? (Duh!😆)

      If you wanna protest, then stop crossing their sweaty palns with your hard-earned silver. Let the lazy bastardos work for a living. For a change!😆

      Delete