Tuesday, April 22, 2014
SCHISMATIC cATHOLICS ON THE RIGHT AND THE LEFT BUT CUT FROM THE SAME CLOTH
We tend to obsess on sexual sins but harbor more resentment towards some types of sexual sins than others. I consider sin to be something that should be hidden and only bright to the light of the confessional and the seal of the confessional. So I am annoyed with sinners who think they can live publicly as sinners, flout that sin and ask for acceptance of their sin and parade to Holy Communion in a state of mortal sin, although they want that label removed and the sin accepted publicly. That's down right wrong.
But when sinners for whatever reason present themselves for Holy Communion but no one really knows if they've been to confession or not and actually that is no one's business other than the sinner, then their additional sin in going to Holy Communion without absolution is between them and God.
I was taught as a child, when most people did not go to Holy Communion at any given Sunday Mass, that we should not judge why that person didn't go and simply presume they had broken the fast. Many of us knew very devout Catholics in second illicit marriages who went to Mass faithfully, prayed daily and sometimes went to daily Mass but never received Holy Communion because of their illicit sexual lifestyle. Some of these people may have been in closeted homosexual relationships. But most Catholics didn't stick their nose in other people's business and avoided the sins of gossip and calumny.
I think everyone was glad and edified by their piety and recognition of their sinfulness by not going to the communion rail during Mass.
Today, even many traditional Catholics are Jerry Springer types in wanting to expose and tell all of others sins and sinners are the same way with their own sins. This, as well as our casual blue jean culture has denigrated our Catholic dignity at worship and in terms of humility.
But the more distressing element I have found with one or two who send comments, and perhaps they are trolls or schismatics belonging to a variety of breakaway groups, such as the SSPX, but they make an art of criticizing and denigrating Pope Francis. I'm scandalized by their coloring book catholicism which emboldens them to disrespect the current pope when all Catholics are called to respect not only the office of the papacy but also its current occupant. We don't have to agree with any particular pope's style of papacy or personality, thus those progressive coloring book catholics criticized Pope Benedict, but their public rather than private criticisism is wrong. The same with those pseudo-traditionalists or conservative coloring book catholics who criticize Pope Francis and his style of papacy and personality. Disagree with it and denigrate it in private, don't bring one's disdain of another human being, be he pope or the janitor to the public realm. Detraction, calumny and uncharitableness are serious matter, even coloring book catholics should know this, and when done with full consent of the will and publicly (as well as privately, even in thought) is a mortal sin.
In the areas of faith and morals, we are obliged as Catholics to respect and obey the pope and his successors as well as the bishops in union with him in the areas of faith, morals and canon law.
Our disagreement with any particular pope's style and personality or pastoral sensibilities should be respectful and sober. Thus I can say that I liked Pope Benedict's recovery of many elements of papal "bling" and would have preferred that Pope Francis would have maintained it. A progressive Catholic might say that it is high time that a pope start bringing simplicity and poverty back to the papacy as well as pastoral sensitivities that are inclusive and embracing of sinners.