Posted on 04/24/2014 1:48:53 PM PDT by NYer
After yesterday’s media confusion about a phone call Pope Francis made to a woman in Argentina regarding her reception of Communion, Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi today made a statement confirming that the phone call did take place, but indicating that reports about what was said may not be reliable and have no bearing on Church teaching.
It has been widely reported that Pope Francis called Jaquelina Lisbona of San Lorenzo, Argentina on Easter Monday in response to a letter she sent him last fall. The Holy Father allegedly told her that she may receive Communion despite being married to a man who is divorced.
Today Father Lombardi stated:
Several telephone calls have taken place in the context of Pope Francis’ personal pastoral relationships.
Since they do not in any way form part of the Pope's public activities, no information or comments are to be expected from the Holy See Press Office.
That which has been communicated in relation to this matter, outside the scope of personal relationships, and the consequent media amplification, cannot be confirmed as reliable, and is a source of misunderstanding and confusion.
Therefore, consequences relating to the teaching of the Church are not to be inferred from these occurrences.
Meanwhile, Catholic News Agency has more information on the situation, including details about the couple in question and quotes from a local priest, who called the suggestion that the Pope had given permission for Lisbona to receive Communion “absurd.”
[Julio Sabetta, Lisbona’s husband] was married into the Catholic church in 1985, but got legally divorced in 1992. In 1994, he was re-introduced to Jaquelina – they had been boyfriend and girlfriend in their teens – and the two started to live together in a civil union. Since then, they had two children, Candela and Josefina, aged 17 and 14, respectively.
Six years ago, during Candela's preparation for her confirmation – both daughters have been baptized, received first Holy Communion and have been confirmed – the local pastor at that time, who has been erroneously described as having left the priesthood by some news sources, told Jaquelina that she could not receive Communion because of her marital status.
Last September, encouraged by a friend, she decided to write Pope Francis about her situation and her desire to receive Communion.
The story of the Pope's “permission” to Jaquelina to receive Communion was first posted on Monday evening by Sabetta on his Facebook Page when he wrote: “Today one of the most beautiful things happened to me since the birth of my two daughters, I got a call in my home from none other than Pope Francis, it was a big emotion, we cannot figure it out yet, this call was originated by my wife who sent him a letter and he took his time to call her and talk to her and I can assure you that we he talks, he gives you total peace. Thanks God for this blessing!” …
What the Pope exactly told Jaquelina is a matter of controversy. Speaking to La Red, Jaquelina said that after talking for about ten minutes with the Pope, he allegedly told her that there are some priests that are “more Papist than the Pope” and that she should “go to confession and start taking communion at a different parish.”
In a second interview, overwhelmed by the international attention and the phone calls from around the world, she confirmed that she received “permission” to receive Communion by the Pope, but she complained: “this was supposed to be discrete, now I don't think I will be able to go anywhere now.”
Since Wednesday, Jaquelina has not been available for comments. …
Sabetta instead has been happy to respond to the press. According to his version: “Francisco told my wife that she was free from all sin, that she should go to communion, that she should go with peace of mind, since a divorced who goes (to Communion) is doing nothing wrong.”
“He only told her to go to communion to another parish to avoid frictions (with the pastor.)”
But the pastor of San Lorenzo's church, Fr. José Ceschi, said late on Wednesday that the alleged “permission” to receive communion given by the Pope is “absurd.”
Speaking to local radio station La Ocho, Fr. Ceschi said that “first of all, I am very happy to know that the Pope called someone in San Lorenzo, the Pope surprises with these calls and people is so surprised, and that makes me happy. I do believe in the call, but what is hard to believe is that he gave her permission to go to communion.”
“The Pope would never do that, is impossible. If he is coming from a previous sacrament and they are living together is absolutely impossible,” Fr. Ceschi told the radio station.
“What happens is that the Pope, like all bishops and priests, needs to be father, mother and teacher, always with an open heart, while telling things as they are.”
Speaking of his predecessor, who told Jaquelina that she could not receive communion, the priest noted that “Fr. Sergio was right, if a previous sacrament of marriage is involved, the Church cannot go beyond what Jesus has taught.” …
“Again, I believe that the call happened, I just don't believe the Pope would go over the head of the (local) bishop – it is absurd,” he reiterated.
FYI, my response is Post #99.
I love scripture and enjoy citing it, in context, rather than as an isolated statement. Your quotation comes from the 1st Book of John, chapter 2. You realize, no doubt, that in quoting from this, you are following tradition because someone had to decide which books belong in the Canon of the New Testament. Early Christian tradition identified this work as a letter of John the apostle. Because of its resemblance to the fourth gospel in style, vocabulary, and ideas, it is generally agreed that both works are the product of the same school of Johannine Christianity.
So what was the purpose of the original text? The letter is intended to combat certain false ideas, especially about Jesus, and to deepen the spiritual and social awareness of the Christian community (1 Jn 3:17). Some former members (1 Jn 2:19) of the community refused to acknowledge Jesus as the Christ (1 Jn 2:22) and denied that he was a true man (1 Jn 4:2). Essentially, the letter was intended to address a heresy.
As such, your citation does not fit the current discussion.
As far as I'm concerned, that's what we're talking about here. The idea that the Holy Spirit can't directly teach you the truth is not Biblical. Jesus said that by continuing in the his word, you will know the truth and 1 John says the anointing of the Holy Spirit will teach you, not man.
Another man-made rule that keep God's people in bondage.
“The Pope would never do that, is impossible. If he is coming from a previous sacrament and they are living together is absolutely impossible,” Fr. Ceschi told the radio station.**
BTTT! The truth comes out and all the Catholics who believed the lies have egg on their face.
Just wow. From Catholics who take all kinds of verse out of context to support their church's doctrines......
As such, your citation does not fit the current discussion.
IOW, it contradicts Catholic teaching so must be dismissed as being irrelevant.
You belive in Scripture, correct?
Then why don't you believe this?
John 21: (We'll be using the KJV today to keep things on even footing): "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen."
The Bible Itself declares that it doesn't contain everything.
Are you mind reading John or the Holy Spirit now?
How do you know it was written to combat whatever the Catholic church calls heresy?
As a matter of fact, John tells us why he wrote what he did and it was this.....
John 20:30-31 Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
*If*? That's really set in concrete.
How does this priest know what the pope would ever do or not do?
There's a big difference between *he would never do THAT* and *he DID NOT do that*.
It sounds too much like the mother of a gangsta thug who raped and murdered someone and the family goes on about what a sweet boy he is and how he wouldn't hurt a fly.
The priest there is just stating his opinion. It's not necessarily truth and was not stated as such.
What’s that got to do with taking verses out of context?
And how does that give someone blanket permission to make stuff up and call it truth?
All it needs to contain is enough to lead someone to Christ for salvation and to thoroughly equip them for the work of Christ.
And it does that.
For salvation. The book of John is enough.
John 20:30-31 Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
Scripture is able to make one wise for salvation and thoroughly equip the man of God.
2 Timothy 3:14-17 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.
the truth shall make you free (John 8:31-32).
the rest of the story...
And now once more Jesus spoke to them, I am the light of the world, he said. He who follows me can never walk in darkness; he will possess the light which is life. 13 Whereupon the Pharisees told him, Thou art testifying on thy own behalf, thy testimony is worth nothing. 14 Jesus answered them, My testimony is trustworthy, even when I testify on my own behalf; I know whence I have come, and where I am going; you do not know whence I have come, you do not know where I am going. 15 You set yourselves up to judge, after your earthly fashion; I do not set myself up to judge anybody. 16 And what if I should judge? My judgement is judgement indeed; it is not I alone, my Father who sent me is with me.
So if Jesus does not judge them (at this time) why should you judge the Catholic rules?
The rules are the guidelines that help Catholics follow our Lord for over 2000 years. Jesus followed HIS FATHER obediently and we need to do the same.
The Catholic Church is full of saints and sinners and we see the sinners, especially the clergy. While I don’t have any statistics, I believe (hope) that as a percentage more Catholics have reached Heaven than any other group. This is the Sunday of DIVINE MERCY, and I hope GOD has a high percentage of people that LOVED HIM despite their sins.
PEACE BE WITH YOU.
Judging what people do including their rules, is not judging and condemning the people themselves.
The rules are the guidelines that help Catholics follow our Lord for over 2000 years. Jesus followed HIS FATHER obediently and we need to do the same.
That's what Scripture is for.
Jesus condemned all the added rules and regulations that the Pharisees added to Scripture. It interfered with men's relationship with God.
If Catholic rules are different from Scripture, they are wrong.
If they are supported by Scripture, they are redundant and not needed.
So your Church created by man or yourself is telling the Catholic Church created by Jesus what is right and wrong!
Perhaps you should reread: “Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. And I say to thee: That thou art Peter [Kipha, a rock], and upon this rock [Kipha] I will build my church [ekklesian], and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven.
You are amazing! Perhaps you should examine what the Lord said to the Pharisees.
Prove that the Catholic rules are wrong! Just your opinion.
Show some logic and reason.
Why should you worry about the rules that Catholics try to follow? You have free will to either follow them or not, No one is forcing you, but you are trying to tell others that they are wrong. In my opinion, that may be a sin if you are not truthful or right.
PEACE BE WITH YOU.
Judging what people do including their rules, is not judging and condemning the people themselves
...I THINK YOU HAVE A GUILTY CONSCIENCE!
You may want to reread your comment.
So you want to judge the rules that Catholics follow in their Church created by Jesus that has grown for over 2000 years. Yes, we have our problems and we are sinners. Actually the Catholic Church wants sinners to come to our Church.
Yes, we are trying to follow Jesus so that we can join him in Heaven. We should all work towards that and help others.
We are not perfect, but I don’t feel that we are hindering others from seeking GOD by judging the tenets of a Church that they do not belong.
PEACE BE WITH YOU.
First wrong assumption is that the church that Jesus said he would build is the Catholic church.
And yet there is no reference to Catholicism in Scripture.
Jesus never said He would build the Catholic church. He just said *church*, not specifying the denomination.
Rome’s claim to be the OTC, is its own opinion and at odds with the EO who claim THEY were the original church and the Roman church is the schismatics.
So who’s right?
I have. He said this....
Matthew 23:1-11 Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat, so do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do. For they preach, but do not practice. They tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on people's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to move them with their finger. They do all their deeds to be seen by others. For they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long, and they love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues and greetings in the marketplaces and being called rabbi by others. But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brothers. And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Neither be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Christ. The greatest among you shall be your servant.
Ephesians 2:4-9 But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved—and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
What I don't like are their man-made rules that put an artificial barrier between God and his beloved people who Jesus, His only begotten Son who He loves, died for.
If you can't tell the difference between judging people and judging people's actions, that's your problem, not mine.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.