- Joined
- Sep 15, 2012
- Messages
- 29,148
- Reaction score
- 10,197
- Location
- Columbus, OH
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
I recently read an article regarding a decree from the Bishop of the Diocese of Springfield Illinois baring priests from administering the sacraments - including the eucharist in the form of Viaticum - to unrepentant married LGBT individuals. I am a non-religious LGBT person - though I have attended mass on rare occasions as I find it an environment conducive for reflection. I have no formal education in Catholic theology, but I have studied it privately and I understand this decree to be consistent with canon law (915 and 1007) - however I do not have an understanding of the basis on which the Church exercises the authority granted to Peter in such a way. Perhaps some practicing Catholics out there could help me with some questions I have regarding this.
I find it difficult to reconcile the words and actions of Jesus with canon law on this matter. Jesus invited Judas to participate in the last supper/first communion. According to the Gospel of John, he did so presumably in full knowledge of what Judas had done and administered the eucharist to Judas even though Judas did not actually confess to anything. Granted - whether Judas consumed it or not is not clear to me but it seems to have been his choice.
As I understand it, the authority to provide absolution was granted by Jesus to Peter, but the method the Church has chosen to discern how to properly exercise that authority seems to be based on what Paul - who presumably met Jesus only once as an apparition and was not explicitly granted that authority - said in his first letter to the Corinthians. Why is that? Why doesn’t mercy and compassion govern the administration of the sacraments - particularly as it relates to Viaticum - rather than a strict application of tradition as communicated by Paul? How does the Church reconcile the last supper and administering the eucharist to Judas with denial of the eucharist to unrepentant sinners?
I find it difficult to reconcile the words and actions of Jesus with canon law on this matter. Jesus invited Judas to participate in the last supper/first communion. According to the Gospel of John, he did so presumably in full knowledge of what Judas had done and administered the eucharist to Judas even though Judas did not actually confess to anything. Granted - whether Judas consumed it or not is not clear to me but it seems to have been his choice.
As I understand it, the authority to provide absolution was granted by Jesus to Peter, but the method the Church has chosen to discern how to properly exercise that authority seems to be based on what Paul - who presumably met Jesus only once as an apparition and was not explicitly granted that authority - said in his first letter to the Corinthians. Why is that? Why doesn’t mercy and compassion govern the administration of the sacraments - particularly as it relates to Viaticum - rather than a strict application of tradition as communicated by Paul? How does the Church reconcile the last supper and administering the eucharist to Judas with denial of the eucharist to unrepentant sinners?