Monday, August 10, 2015


I suppose a memo must have been written to the bishops about the Francis effect. Perhaps the good Archbishop is trying to show his priests and others how to be less harsh and more Christ-like in dealing with difficult family situations? Who knows??? Do you?

Copied from the Deacon's Bench Blog:

Archbishop Vigneron softens tone on communion for those who support same sex marriage

From The Detroit Free Press: 
On the eve of hosting an international conference for priests and educators about outreach to gay Catholics, Detroit Archbishop Allen Vigneron has backed away from controversial comments that suggested Catholics who support gay unions and marriage should refrain from receiving the sacrament of Communion.
“Whenever it comes to Communion, the objective is never to steer a person away,” Vigneron said in an e-mail Friday to the Free Press, part of a larger statement that buoyed gay rights supporters.
In an April 2013 Free Press article, Vigneron said Catholics who back same-sex marriage and receive Communion would “logically bring shame for a double-dealing that is not unlike perjury.” But in his current statement, Vigneron recognized that faithful Catholics — dealing with gay relatives now legally free to marry in civil ceremonies and in other churches that perform same-sex marriages unlike the Catholic Church — are feeling torn.
Vigneron’s softened language comes at a key time, just weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned state bans on gay marriage and just weeks before Pope Francis, who has displayed a more welcoming, inclusive attitude about gay Catholics, is to visit the U.S. in September. Francis’ outreach has sharply divided Catholic bishops worldwide, many of whom will gather at the Vatican in October to hash out statements about gay Catholics.
“The church and her pastors are there to help harmonize these priorities — of being faithful to and open about the truth (of church teachings about sexuality), and of being loving and compassionate to fellow Catholics in their personal and family lives,” Vigneron wrote. “Given the variety of circumstances which go into a person’s particular situation, the best way forward for one person may not be best for another.”
Catholics who support gay rights hailed Vigneron’s new statement as more tolerant, open-minded, and a retreat from his previous harsh comments.
Read more. 


Jusadbellum said...

Please explain to me how it's loving and compassionate to either be silent when a relative is publicly declaring their intent to commit adultery or sodomy OR to murmur vague expressions of support of their 'happiness' which completely ignores the moral gravity of their sinful choices (and thus causes scandal among everyone else that might expect to see a defense of orthodoxy from you instead of a capitulation)?

Would we be so 'loving and compassionate' with a relative who declares their allegiance to the Ayrian brotherhood or some other racist outfit?

If my nephew announced his decision to join the local chapter of the KKK would I be expected to be silent or murmur some "adda boy, have fun"? No. But if I did out of fear for hurting his FEELINGS I would be causing scandal by normalizing a decision to indulge in sinful behavior (which, apples to apples is not as unnatural as sodomy!)

Racism is stupid. It's not a sin crying to heaven for vengeance. Superiority complexes are stupid, but they're not listed in the Gospel by Jesus as sins.

Adultery and sodomy are sins that will keep a soul from going to heaven. Love and compassion therefore doesn't really care about hurting feelings. It cares about the genuine good of the beloved.

Lefebvrian said...

Suggesting that people should make blasphemous Communions is not being "more Christ-like."

These people have lost the faith -- they no longer believe in sin or in the Real Presence. For them, reception of Holy Communion is nothing more than a political statement.

What terrible bishops we have in our times. They are absolutely useless.

Mark Thomas said...

The claim that Archbishop Vigneron had "softened" his 2013 A.D. comments in question in regard to the reception of Holy Communion by homosexual "marriage" supporters is, in a sense, an old story.

On April 9, 2013 A.D., Father John Zuhlsdorf reported the following story:

"CNN insinuates that Archbp. Vigneron “dialed back” his words about promoters of same-sex marriage and Holy Communion"

Posted on 9 April 2013 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

"There is a deeply flawed, perhaps even mendacious, piece on CNN about Archbishop Vigneron’s comments about Catholics who promote same-sex marriage and reception of Holy Communion.

"The CNN article suggests, implies, hints, that the Archdiocese of Detroit is now trying to “step back” from or “dial back” what Vigneron said, by “adding content”.

"The problem with CNN’s claim is that, well, it’s wrong. The Archdiocese, by adding content, didn’t “step back” at all."

Was Father Zuhlsdorf correct in 2013 A.D., that Archbishop Vigneron did not, the day following his (Archbishop Vigneron) comments in question, soften his tone in regard to the reception of Holy Communion by supporters of homosexual "marriage"?

Or was CNN correct in 2013 A.D. that Archbishop Vigneron had walked-back his (Archbishop Vigneron) comments in question?

You make the call.

Now, fast-forward to today. I wonder how Father Zuhlsdorf plans (should he do so) to spin Archbishop Vigneron's latest "softened" comments on the reception of Holy Communion by homosexual "marriage" advocates?

Will Father Zuhlsdorf insist that the news media were wrong again?

Mark Thomas

Anonymous said...

“'Whenever it comes to Communion, the objective is never to steer a person away,' Vigneron said . . ." Even if that person is conscious of mortal sin and lacks perfect contrition?

This approach profanes the sacrament. The goal should be to strive to develop a relationship with God and the community of the fa (and not just by the person described in the above example). It turns Communion into an empty symbol of a unity of faith and morals that doesn't in fact exist. Even fundamentalist Protestants who take their communion more seriously (albeit with radically different theology) do better than that.

If the bishop really believes this, then I submit that it is _he_ who is perverting Communion into a weapon to with which bludgeon those of orthodox belief who don't accept politically correct stances of today's culture.

Православный физик said...

Will someone say something, and stick to it, enough backpeddling

Anonymous said...

So, if the Church has a moral position that does not deal with poverty, immigration or the environment, and a priest or bishop confirms that teaching, it is now automatically harsh.

Got it.

George said...

Reading the article I got a different impression:

The conference the article references is co-organized by Courage International, ministry sanctioned by the Catholic church that counsels gay Catholics to live chaste lives, and which will feature several conservative Catholic activists, who stress the church’s teachings against same-sex unions.

Prof. Janet Smith
The conference’s other principal organizer is Catholic moral theologian Janet Smith, a professor at Detroit’s Sacred Heart Major Seminary and who is an adviser to the Vatican’s Pontifical Council on the Family.

Smith, an outspoken conservative, said that the conference is designed to “serve those who find that elements commonly found in the gay lifestyle — promiscuity, anonymous sex, heartbreak, sexually transmitted diseases — is not for them.”

Paul said...

People are not "steered" away from the Eucharist, people steer themselves away. A permissive bishop steers himself away.

How far must we fall before we realize we are not fit to receive the Eucharist? Is the fall short or is it a bottomless pit?

Who is entitled to the Eucharist?

rcg said...

Could there be more to this than the story tells? Headlines are often conclusions the author wants us to reach. By making the statement it gives the conclusion inertia and the author defends it by the structured presentation of information, that can be sequenced, phrased, and even omitted to ensure the stated conclusion is defended. The reporter may be trying to support a change in Teaching to further an agenda.

Conversely, the Bishop may have succumbed to being a manager instead of a pastor. Did he state a 'policy' or a tenet? Is it a policy in his mind, so he could 'walk it back' when it is not well received?

My cynical mind sees both of these as possibilities.

Anonymous said...

Paul, you don't understand the new "enlightened" paradigm.

Withholding Communion from people who obstinately and publicly remain unrepentant used to be known as "discipline".

But we know better now. We have let the enemies of the Church define us, so now, withholding Communion is "using the Eucharist as a weapon."

You had better learn the language of this wonderful new springtime we are experiencing.