Debate rages on Communion to cohabiting couples
Keeping a distance... The Church's stand on cohabitation has led to an animated debate.
The bishops have made it clear that cohabiting people cannot receive Holy Communion but, as Kurt Sansone finds, the debate also has a grey shade
Fr Ġorġ Dalli may have created controversy by saying he could not deny Holy Communion to a cohabiting woman but his words echoed similar sentiments by a senior cardinal on divorced Catholics last year.
The former Archbishop of Milan and veteran Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini had urged the Church to find solutions for admitting divorced Catholics who remarried to the sacraments.
“There are some Catholics who are today in an irreversible and innocent state. They have taken on new obligations to children from a second marriage and there is absolutely no reason for going back. Indeed, such a choice would not be wise,” Cardinal Martini had said.
His thoughts were published last year in the book We’re All In The Same Boat, a compilation of dialogues between him and Fr Luigi Maria Verzé, founder of the San Raffaele University and Hospital in Milan.
Cardinal Martini also made it clear he was not talking about all divorced Catholics because the Church “must not favour flimsiness and superficiality but rather promote fidelity and perseverance”.
In many ways, what Fr Dalli said on television two weeks ago has semblance to the words of Cardinal Martini, only the subject was not divorce but cohabitation.
However, the priest’s exact words were taken out of context in the debate that ensued after the Xarabank programme, which also prompted the bishops to issue a statement reminding cohabiting couples they could not receive the Eucharist even though they were welcome in the Church.
Fr Dalli was answering a question by programme host Peppi Azzopardi about a woman’s particular case when he uttered the controversial words: “I would be abusing my power were I not to administer Holy Communion.”
Subsequently, Fr Dalli also drew a distinction between the different reasons that led people to cohabit and insisted he could not condemn a married woman who was abandoned with three children and who found meaning and love in a new relationship.
Faith was a personal relationship with God, he added, and people had their conscience.
These words seem to have been lost in the “circus” that ensued, according to Fr Ġwann Xerri, a Dominican.
“I am quite upset and hurt with the way all this issue is being dealt with. It is very sad how callous and discriminatory we can be,” Fr Xerri said.
He refrained from putting cohabiting couples all in the same basket insisting there was no such thing as a “cohabiting people”.
“My experience tells me there is a unique individual with her particular history in a unique relationship with another individual, who is also a unique person with a particular history, and their unfathomable personal and joint journey of faith with yet another person, God!”
The personal touch in dealing with cohabiting people was also raised by Fr Paul Galea, senior lecturer at the University’s Faculty of Theology, who said prohibition was “certainly not the right way to engage” with these couples.
“Nothing replaces the personal pastoral encounter either in the confessional or in a counseling setting,” Fr Galea said.
However, he did point out that prohibition to receive Holy Communion was based on two arguments: upholding the moral teaching and reducing scandal.
“The difficulties arise with couples who presumably live a life like married people without actually being married. According to Christian morality, sexual activity is licit only between married couples. Engaging in sexual relationships before or outside marriage goes against the sixth commandment, if not against the ninth,” Fr Galea said.
His concern was also about scandal and the Church being perceived as condoning cohabitation if it administered Holy Communion.
“If the couple is known to be living in an irregular state this could create problems of a pastoral nature by setting a bad example or scandal to those who know them,” he said.
He insisted it could also be interpreted as “open defiance” of Christian morality and the priest who, “knowingly or unknowingly, gives them Holy Communion could be interpreted as approving of their behavior”.
Fr Galea did call for a different approach, “imbued with understanding and love” to engage with those cohabiting and help them reach a solution that respects both moral law and their conscience.
“People who understand the reasons behind the prohibition rather than feel offended often feel challenged to do something about their situation and try to change as much as it is possible,” he said.
The moral dilemma was also posited by sociologist Fr Joe Inguanez, who widened the discussion beyond cohabitation, which he described as a “loaded word”.
“Is it correct for a Catholic who is having extramarital sexual relations to receive Holy Communion? Our bishops have given a clear reply. In my view, when anyone appeals to his conscience, one cannot avoid giving very serious consideration to the teaching of the bishops,” Fr Inguanez said.
Requirements are not equivalent to denials, he added, pointing out that the Church’s teachings have consistently taught that one had to be in a state of grace to receive certain sacraments.
“I think the best way of dealing with people on any matter, but more so in questions of conscience, is through a loving search for truth. The avoidance of truth on the part of either saints or sinners is a way of blocking communication with God and men,” Fr Inguanez said.
The Church’s stand on cohabiting couples and their eligibility for Holy Communion is bound to remain a bone of moral contention inside the walls of religious officialdom as much as for the flock of people outside those walls.
However, according to Fr Xerri a myriad of issues from the civil regulation of cohabitation to matters of faith and intimate processes are being stitched together, confusing the arguments at stake.
“They are being put in the same electric mixer and from this only something very indigestible can come out,” he said.
It is possibly the aftereffect of eating the indigestible that has led to Fr Dalli’s words being lost in translation.
What they said
Fr Ġorġ Dalli
“The Eucharist is not mine. I would be abusing my power were I not to administer Holy Communion. What shall we tell this woman... abandon your children and leave this man? If in her conscience she feels Christ is inviting her to participate in the Eucharist nobody has the right to interfere with her conscience.”
The bishops
“We wish to affirm that everybody – these couples included – is welcome in the Church... however, the Catholic Church reiterates that those couples who live together outside of marriage are not to receive the Eucharist. The Church does not impose this as a form of punishment but, rather, because their way of living is not in conformity with the Sacrament of Christian marriage.”
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
'No need for early election if PM's...
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
130 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Joe Zammit
May 29th 2010, 21:19
If God is condemning sexual acts outside marriage, he is pointing clearly that those people, whoever they are, who are committing these acts are committing something condemned by God, and committing something condemned by God separates you from God and puts you on the path to hell. That is grave sin.
Cohabitation is grave sin and cohabitants, since they commit sexual acts outside marriage, are committing grave sins, condemned by God.
Conversion for cohabitants is possible: Repentance, the Sacrament of Confession and get married in the Catholic Church.
Steve Pace
May 29th 2010, 20:49
@ Joe Zammit - "God is judging cohabitants. God gave us the Ten Commandments, among which there are the Sixth and Ninth Commandments. These commandments of God prohibit any sexual act, internal or external, under pain of grave sin. So God himself condemns cohabitation. Cohabitants KNOW that they are living in sin. If they want to acquire grace, they can go to Confession, receive the Sacrament of Marriage from the hands of the Catholic Church and thus they can start receiving Holy Communion worthily.
Once again you persist in your fallacious arguments . YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE JUDGING COHABITANTS. Jesus is condemming sexual acts outside marriage ( sibject to interpretation )
The two are not the same , but in your bid to drive your point thruogh you repeat ad nausium the same mistake .
Joe Zammit
May 29th 2010, 20:31
In St John’s gospel, Jesus summarized the reasons for receiving Communion when he said:
"Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is real food, and my blood is real drink. He who eats my FLESH and drinks my BLOOD abides in me, and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me. This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever" (John 6:53–58).
Because of the gravity of Jesus’ teaching on receiving the Eucharist, the Church encourages Catholics to receive frequent Communion, even daily Communion if possible, and mandates reception of the Eucharist at least once a year during the Easter season. Before going to Communion, however, WE MUST SEE THAT WE ARE IN THE STATE OF GRACE.
Steve Pace
May 29th 2010, 20:50
Making sure you are at Grace with God includes 8 other commandments and more...and not just one or two you seem to be obsessed with .
Joe Zammit
May 29th 2010, 21:12
Yes, of course, Steve. We must be in the state of grace by obeying ALL Ten Commandments. I'm speaking of the grave sin of cohabitation because that is the topic under discussion: Communion to cohabiting couples.
Joe Zammit
May 29th 2010, 20:27
The Holy Eucharist is the most important of the seven sacraments because, in this and in no other sacrament, we receive the very body and blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ. Innumerable, precious graces come to us through the reception of Holy Communion.
Communion is an intimate encounter with Christ, in which we sacramentally receive Christ into our bodies, that we may be more completely assimilated into his. The Eucharist builds the Church. It deepens unity with the Church, more fully assimilating us into Christ (1 Cor. 12:13; CCC 1396).
The Eucharist also strengthens the individual because in it Jesus himself, the Word made flesh, forgives our venial sins and gives us the strength to resist mortal sin. It is also the very channel of eternal life: Jesus himself.
John Farrugia
May 29th 2010, 20:08
ha ha Mr caruana. To me, as is rather obvious, it seems that your bowels need a check up. The only irritation i get in my bowels is from righteous , self praising and judgemental. people of your sort. I can just imagine what sort you are you don't have to give us all poor mortals a self portrait. Thank you. Frankly no one s interested how and what you do with and in your life. And I unlike yourself will not judge. You should do the same for a change. It will certainly be the right path to becoming a better person. And please do make a distinction between what we ve all been thought as children and Christ teachings. Unfortuanetely the church has far too dark a history whether past or present for me to regard as an authority over God, let alone you.
Andrea Axisa
May 29th 2010, 19:37
Jesus did not come for the good but for the so called sinners.
For me the Holy Communion is just symbolic. I am told that the Church preaches Jesus's teaching. The difference between the church and Jesus is that one sets up rules like the Farizej, the hypocrites, and the other teaches us about peace and faith.
This is really outrageous. It is like being invited to a dinner but the 'boss' tells you that you couldn't eat.
I say to cohabiting couples that they are doing nothing wrong and that God judges and not bishops. If I am one of them and I wanted to have the Holy Communion no bishop has the right to stop me.Most say, "But why?He is the Bishop!He decides these things"
My answer is that if in the eyes of those Farizej they are sinners, then they need the Holy Communion most, and not those ''''''scandalized''''''.
Its like doing a 1+1 sum, its all common sense, really.
The church has simply too much influence in Malta. Thats why the Maltese mentality has been backwards since the middle ages.
Joe Zammit
May 29th 2010, 20:23
God is judging cohabitants. God gave us the Ten Commandments, among which there are the Sixth and Ninth Commandments. These commandments of God prohibit any sexual act, internal or external, under pain of grave sin. So God himself condemns cohabitation. Cohabitants KNOW that they are living in sin. If they want to acquire grace, they can go to Confession, receive the Sacrament of Marriage from the hands of the Catholic Church and thus they can start receiving Holy Communion worthily.
Andrea Axisa
May 29th 2010, 21:47
You are a shining example of what i said in my last sentence.
You seem to live in the middle ages, where it is not your actions that count but who is the most pious. You are saying that those cohabiting couples are not worthy of the Holy Communion?
Then who is worthy? You? The most 'holier than thou'?
I repeat, Jesus did not come to save you. He came to save us and them who u wrongfully call sinners.
Giancarlo Refalo
May 29th 2010, 18:42
All this makes me sick to my stomach. Recently, although I strongly believe in God and His love and goodness I feel less and less drawn to the church. Unfortunately, whereas GOD is perfect, the church is composed of humans, who are fallible in their humanity.
40 years ago one could not eat 12 hours before communion.
nowadays one shouldn't eat 1 hour before communion.
Has the Eucharist changed? I doubt it. What's changed is the church. it has adapted to the times.
It is considered scandalous to work on a sunday. I'm a pilot. should all flights be grounded on sundays?
How can we define scandal nowadays?
Unless the church decides to... so to speak... Grow up, I fear it will continue to repel more and more good, well meaning people.
Joe Zammit
May 29th 2010, 20:17
The hour fasting is a Church law and not of divine origin. Christ set up his one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church and gave her the right and duty to make laws even under pain of sin.
Receiving Holy Communion in the state of grace is of divine origin. No one can receive Holy Communion in grave sin, otherwise the sinful communicant will be receiving from God his or her own condemnation. Cohabitation is grave sin.
Pule' Carmel
May 29th 2010, 18:31
I can compassionately appreciate the fact that any person may find incompatibility with his husband or wife and so separate, whereby s/he may start devising own rules for convenience. But what if these new unconventional rules would now introduce a freedom of behavior, whereby the conventional family neighborhood gets a disillusioned new queen bee and drones come full of nectar in big cars where the activity is so obvious that a disturbing factor exists that interfere with the normal cycle of what is expected in a family neighborhood even in a secular society. I find this transient behavior of disillusioned people, sometimes is not as pure as one expects it to be. I am compassionate towards such issues, but this transient behavior or temporary flirtation can go uncontrolled in some neighborhoods even at the place of work, where it becomes obvious that the individual concerned, are going through a disturbed stage, and what appears to be neutralizing potion of allergria to them, leaves a wrong impression to the children in the neighborhood. I do not mind if they would at least follow secular human rules which leaves the neighborhood appearing a little cleaner.
Andreas Reiff
May 29th 2010, 12:37
If you follow the Church's rules because you believe in, then accept its ruling and forget about receiving communion. However if you believe, that your practise of religion, and with it the definition of sin and forgiveness, is between God and you personally, then go and receive communion in a church where people do not know you. You will have to bear the consequences, and not your church, or your parish priest, or whoever. That is, if there will be any. I believe, God prefers you to remain a member of his flock with all your good and bad, and as such receive communion than leave the pack and everything behind and find another faith. Because that is an alternative too.
Joe Zammit
May 29th 2010, 20:10
Receiving Holy Communion in a grave sin boils down to a sacrilege and to asking God's condemnation on you. St Paul speaks clearly about this.
We must receive Holy Communion, i.e., Jesus himself, worthily and worthily means in the state of grace. Cohabitation (or concubinage) is a grave sin and cohabitants are living in the state of grave sin. They can heal their sinful life easily, by getting married in the Catholic Church.
Steve Pace
May 29th 2010, 12:01
@ Alfred Gatt - "for us here in Malta, we are to be guided by our Bishops. They are Christ's representatives for us and we are obliged to follow their guidance, if we want to be Catholics"
The interdiction of the bishops onto labour party in the 30's and sixties proves your point .
Hail our Maltese bishops !
Dawn Cummings
May 29th 2010, 11:33
@Simon Cutajar
Thanks for your comment.
It is pleasing to see that you put your individual situation, personal happiness with your partner and love for your children above the strict rules of the maltese church.
I honestly admire your courage to have built a family outside marriage since this in Malta will hunt you with talks behind your back and pointing fingers from other scandalised catholics.
Although not being a catholic myself, I think that God prefers you living and caring for your family than to abandon them, ask for forgiveness of your grave sin and receiving the Eucharist again whilst your children are missing their daddy.
Joe Zammit
May 29th 2010, 11:26
Par. 2390 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches: "In a so-called free union, a man and a woman refuse to give juridical and public form to a liaison involving sexual intimacy.
The expression "free union" is fallacious: what can "union" mean when the partners make no commitment to one another, each exhibiting a lack of trust in the other, in himself, or in the future?
The expression covers a number of different situations: concubinage, rejection of marriage as such, or inability to make long-term commitments. All these situations offend against the dignity of marriage; they destroy the very idea of the family; they weaken the sense of fidelity. They are contrary to the moral law. The sexual act must take place exclusively within marriage. Outside of marriage it always constitutes a grave sin and excludes one from sacramental communion."
Steve Pace
May 29th 2010, 12:17
Your problem with cohabitation seems to always draw to the same conclusion . That these couples spend 24/7 having sex. Using your own argument it means that unless a couple is having sex outside marriage than there is no problem. In one of your earlier blogs and comments you went as far as saying that even if couple are in the grace of God than they should recieve communion away from people so as not to give scandal.
Please stop trying to project an infalible image of immaculate behaviour , you stumble in your own blunders .
josianne den ridder
May 29th 2010, 10:58
Such a petty church
Chiara Frendo
May 29th 2010, 10:48
I consider myself to be a Roman Catholic (although not a frequent mass goer), on the premise that my personal morals seem to be assimilated to this Religion however NOT EQUATED. This issue of cohabitation being a case in point.
What I cannot understand is why is it that Marriage should legitimizes the receiving of the Eucharist. So the fact that my 'neighbour' who sins by living in his selfish world, thrives on other people's misfortunes and lies yet married is more in a position to receive the Eucharist than a couple co habiting for their own reasons? Possibly desertion by previous partner.
I am of the strong belief that co habiting prior to marriage may serve to strengthen the relationship. If i were to co habit with my partner I am denied receiving the Eucharist, but if I then marry I am re invited. Does this not seem barbaric?
There is no such thing as a perfect Christian, so with the Church's reasoning anyone who does not conform to the Christian morals (=Everyone) -is denied the Eucharist. Who does this leave then? Priests??Oh they are not so pure either!
simon cutajar
May 29th 2010, 09:08
Jien trabejt f'ambjent religjuz u ma nisthix nighd li ma jidispjacini xejn . Sfortunatament , jien wiehed minn dawk is- separati w illi nighx ma persuna ghal dawn l-ahhar ghaxar snin u ninsab kuntent . Rabejna familja sew u t- tfal kollha immoru il- quddies imma jien ma immurx . jien minnix mistieden ghal ikel ghalura maghndix ghalfejn nersaq l-hemm . Il- kuxjenza tieghi inhossa nadifa u hadd maghndu jindahhal x'ghandi naghmel . Nahseb li l-knisja ahjar tnaddaf it- trab li ghanda taht it-tapit milli toqod fit- tieqa tara lin- nies ghadejjin mit-triq u tiponta subghaja lejhom .
John Farrugia
May 29th 2010, 07:56
As to the Guru Mr Caruana who seems to be the personal PA to Jesus Christ and who seems to have no sin Whatsoever so has every right to be given communion, I say thank you for the enlightenment. Now that we have been shown the light by himself and our bishops ,separted individuals should force their ex spouses to re concile. Whatever the reason for separation was. They are to accept any abuse or disrespect they had endure once again and hope that their ex spouse will soon die so that they will be free. Because utimatley they got separted becasue its trendy no??!!! and they actually thought it was cool.
Seriously !!!!????? Spare us poor mortals and sinners Mr Caruana
What also puzzles me is that the church can issue or grant an annullment. Meaning that the marriage never existed ?!. Or is it should have never happened? in any case what one has to do then is erase all that has actually happened. Very simple no? But If that is the case, then what happened to " what God unites no man can devide"? "God works in mysterious ways"?! Its sounds like an escape clause to me.
charles caruana
May 29th 2010, 15:09
Mr Farrugia, if you want to argue, than do it with your brains not with your bowels, especially when they are upset. Thanks but no thanks for your generous accolades of Guru and ‘personal PA to Jesus Christ’ and your kind ‘seems to have no sin’ is, I assure you, wide off the mark! ‘Poor mortal and sinner’ that I am, I often have to stay away from Holy Communion, unless I repent and confess my mortal sins. I repeat what I said, Christ’s love is as demanding as it is merciful, as any true love is. Your tirade about ‘separated individuals’ and my alleged attitude to them is pure projection, full of gratuitous assertions. I only interpreted a parable.
As for your puzzlement re annulment, you sound genuinely confused, and I can do no better than recommend the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Mikiel Sciberras
May 29th 2010, 07:34
Far from being a national issue, this is a NON-ISSUE.
What is wrong with the Maltese people anyways? It is obvious that if you are not following in the strict rules of the Catholic Church, then this means that you do not believe in the teachings of the Catholic Church. And if you do not believe in the Church's teachings, why would you want to go to Communion? The problem is thereby solved. Do not go to Church or Mass or any of the other religious rigmarole, which the Maltese seem to do on automatic pilot like the fabled lemmings.
The Maltese are still bothered by convention and what other people think of them and to the pressure that is found in Maltese society to conform and in this context to participate in the rituals of a religion that many (in secret) do not believe in.
Perhaps it is high time that the Maltese define themselves in other ways. Being a citizen of Malta doe not mean that you have to bear allegiance to another State and to pretend to be 'more Catholic than the Pope". Separate Church and State. Government should uphold this fundamental principle of Democracy in Malta.
Steve Pace
May 28th 2010, 19:52
@ Joseph Micallef - Part 2 - "Luke 18: 9-14- 9 He then spoke this parable addressed to those who believed in their own self-righteousness while holding everyone else in contempt: 10 "Two men went up to the temple to pray; one was a Pharisee, the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee with head unbowed prayed in this fashion: ‘I give you thanks, O God, that I am not like the rest of men- grasping, crooked, adulterous- or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week. I pay tithes on all I possess. 13 The other man, however, kept his distance, not even daring to raise his eyes to heaven. All he did was beat his breast and say, ‘O God, be merciful to me, a sinner.’ 14 Believe me, this man went home from the temple justified but the other did not. For everyone who exalts himself shall be humbled while he who humbles himself shall be exalted."
charles caruana
May 28th 2010, 21:34
Precisely! The tax collector acknowledged his sin, asked for mercy, repented and rejected his sin! That is why he went away justified. Do you think he went back to cheating in his tax collecting and still felt justified? Think again!
Steve Pace
May 29th 2010, 12:03
Careful now Mr Caruana .... For the phrase "He then spoke this parable addressed to those who believed in their own self-righteousness while holding everyone else in contempt:"
may very well apply to you .
charles caruana
May 29th 2010, 14:27
Of course it may apply to me, Mr Pace – that is why I approach Holy Communion with love and hope, but also fear and trembling, as St Paul advised us in working for our salvation. What I missed in your wise warning (which I take seriously) is a little but important phrase: ‘may very well apply to you’ (and me!) .
charles caruana
May 28th 2010, 19:10
@Joseph Micallef-As if any relationship, both divine and human, including that of love, did not have its rules and conditions! Is your love for your wife, children, and parents without rules? Do you act towards them as you feel like it at any moment, without any rules of decency or obligation, because you decide how and when and why to love? Do you think that God’s love has nothing to do with laws and rules? Then you are worshiping an idol of your own, not the God of Christ and his Church. Christ claimed he came to fulfil and perfect the Ten Commandments, not abolish them, as Fr Dalli, speaking in his own name and certainly not that of the Church, seemed to imply by calling the Ten Commandments anachronistic. Joe Zammit is a far better and reliable guide to Christ’s teaching. If you think of Christ as a wishy-washy God ready to bend his principles to any and all human desire and close one eye to any unrepented sin, you are only revealing your ignorance of the Gospels, where Christ is both tender and severe, forgiving and demanding. Love cannot be divorced from truth.
Steve Pace
May 28th 2010, 18:53
@Joe Zammit. The conclusion one can come to reading your latest blunder is that all those cohabiting couple who do not have sex are perfectly ok . Not that i agree with you on most points but on this one i do. The problem is that your statement goes directly against what the bishops have said in their statement since they are comdemming living together as well. Again not that i agree with them either .
Joe Zammit
May 29th 2010, 11:20
Steve, read how the Catholic Church guides cohabitants according to the Letter sent by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to all bishops of the world. In this case she is speaking about the divorced and remarried, but for the Church these remarried are cohabitants because she does not recognise their invalid second marriage.
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_14091994_rec-holy-comm-by-divorced_en.html
Joe Zammit
May 28th 2010, 16:50
The New Testament speaks clearly of Jesus prohibiting any one already validly married to leave his or her partner and enter into another sexual relationship. He called this new relationship adultery and the perpetrator adulter or adulteress.
In the New Testament we read also of the Ten Commandments of God which Christ summed up in the Love of God and Love of neighbour. Among these Ten Commandments there are the Sixth and Ninth Commandments which prohibit under grave and mortal sins all sexual acts, internal and external, outside a valid marriage.
So Christ is telling us clearly that sexual acts outside marriage GO AGAINST LOVE ITSELF. In sexual acts outside marriage there is no love but lust!
ray sacco
May 28th 2010, 13:44
why all this fuss, as if nobody knew that the catholic church is still living in the middle ages! the catholic church has the right to invoke it's own rules in it's own house! even if these rules are to forsake the heavy sinners such as the 'pogguti' and gays while protecting those who have some slight faults such as paedophiles! the church is still their house! who ever does not agree with these rules, just ignore them and don't go there!
A.Attard
May 28th 2010, 14:55
@Ray Sacco
and you still live in the prehistoric
ray sacco
May 28th 2010, 17:30
@a.attard: and how did you come to that conclusion?
ray sacco
May 29th 2010, 20:05
@a.attard:
i invite you for a cup of tea in my cave, if you are humble enough to accept the invitation of a sinner!
gaffarena joseph
May 28th 2010, 10:54
Another negative position from our local church authorities.
As far as I, know I, learned from the church,that in the eye of our lord we are all the same.
Are we or not?
At this hour of darkness for the church,it will be better if they will do their utmost to find all those lost sheep,instead of doing more harm to cohabiting couples and others,that are still loved by our God.
We have two new archbishops now,with modern thinking,but as far as I, know we only witnessed only smiles om their face,and nothing positive when it comes to re unite those
sheep that left the herd,and never came back.
K J Vella
May 28th 2010, 08:21
Why is the Church so prissy here in Malta? Isn't their's an interpretation? If you take the New Testament as the message of Christ: the man prompted peace, forgiveness and reconciliation and performed miracles on anyone who asked without compunction as to his/her state of sin! Why this? And then, why does the Maltese Church take so long to pass judgement in annulment cases (even more than 10 years) when in other countries the process is over in a maximum of 18 months unless there are issues? Shouldn't the Church make all vehicles available for assisting cohabitating couples? Anyway, what is wrong with cohabitation? Is it the turn of heterosexuals now to get the rough end of the stick? Or isn't the Church happy any more with turning gay people into evil "witches".
Steve Pace
May 28th 2010, 08:11
@J.J Greg . "If a divorced Catholic couple is legally remarried but not through the church due to the long waiting annulment procedure has yet come to light. The couple is therefore condemned as adulterers in the eye of the church."
I suspect the answer to your quest for truth lies in the following section of the article.
"“My experience tells me there is a unique individual with her particular history in a unique relationship with another individual, who is also a unique person with a particular history, and their unfathomable personal and joint journey of faith with yet another person, God!”|
at least as a catholic i find consolation in these words. At least more and more members of clergy are coming out and proving that they have life experience, unlike the sad situation with certain bloggers whose only interest is to slap everyone in the face with Grave sins and mortal sins and feel very happy in their comfort zone.
I was thinking this week about an event which took place 2000 years ago. The romans condemmed Jesus to die following the extreme pressure put but the law abiding pharisees .
Steve Pace
May 28th 2010, 08:02
@J.Farrugia
"As much learned as he is he is not preaching the true gospel of Jesus Christ. He is in the wrong and he has to admit it."
Prosit . Well said. Finally someone who is making sense. Ok Chaps. Let's all not go to Mass anymore since the guy preaching the gospel of Jesus is just saying a bunch of cr.p .
Joe Zammit
May 27th 2010, 21:31
Any sexual act outside marriage is grave sin, whether committed by a cohabitant, married person, single, layman or priest. To be forgiven, of course, there is repentance and the Sacrament of Confession. In hell there are lay people and priests, as there are in heaven after all.
A priest can drop out from his priesthood. The Sacrament of Holy Orders will remain on him for ever, even if he goes to hell. But he can stop leading a priestly life and get married. This is possible. But once he is married, he cannot divorce!
There is no contradiction between the Sacraments of Marriage and Holy Orders. After all, the Catholic Church herself has in the East married priests. And she is accepting married Anglican priests who turn into her fold.
JJ Creg
May 27th 2010, 21:18
If a divorced Catholic couple is legally remarried but not through the church due to the long waiting annulment procedure has yet come to light. The couple is therefore condemned as adulterers in the eye of the church.
Isn’t adultery as such has already ‘qualified’ them for a church annulment?
What is the hassle that needs going about to investigate their former marriage before an annulment is granted, since they have been crowned as adulterers.
victor pulis
May 27th 2010, 20:22
No 3. Scandal is a grave sin. So even if cohabitants are in the state of grace, they can receive Holy Communion in a place where no one knows them.
This one really takes the cookie!
Is receiving the sacrament an affront to God or to man? Whereever they go to receive communion God will be watching. so it's all a hypocritical show
John G.Micallef
May 27th 2010, 18:39
Huwa kollu veru dak li qal Fr.Dalli fuq il kohibizzjoni li hadd ma ghandu d-dritt jindahal fil-koxjenza ta dak li jkun, pero, jibqa l-fatt li, l-knisja ghanda d-dritt u d-dover li ddawwal il-koxjenza tal-membri taghha skond il-ligijiet taghha, sew ghal dak li hu tajjeb u wisq izjed ghal dak kollu li hu hazin. Huwa fatt li, l-kohibizzjoni hija dnub u ikkundanata mill-knisja u ghalhekk, min jippersisti f'dan li stat, peress li jkun qed jghix fi stat ta dnub, il-knisja ma tippermettilux jircievi l-Ewkaristija tghid x'tghid il-koxjenza tieghu/taghha allavolja jkun jixtieq li jaghmel hekk, sakemm jibqa f'dan li stat tad-dnub ta kohibizzjoni. Li trid ticcara l-knisja huwa x'ghandu jkun d-dover tas-sacerdot, jichadx jew joffrix l-Ewkaristija lil persuna tkun qed tghix f'dan l-stat ta kohibizzjoni meta huwa (is-sacerdot) jkun konxju ta dan u meta din il-persuna tkun qeda tisfida l-istruzzjonijiet mahrugin mill Kurja pubblikament u titla titqarben daqs li kieku kienet mizzewga legalment. Dan ikun skandlu jew le? Is-sacerdot jista jichdila l-Ewkariistija f'dan il-kaz jew le, inkluz ukoll din ic-cahda fil-pont serjissimu tal-mewt jekk din il-persuna tibqa tippersisti f'dan l-istat hazin ta kohibizzjoni u ma tindimx ?
Roderick Cordina
May 27th 2010, 18:07
To all those defending the priests: So those priests that go against the 6th sacrament (Ordni Sagri) by leaving the priests vest and marry after a promise they made with JESUS (not an ordinary woman), can they still receive the holy communion?
If yes, as it is than not all sacraments are equal.
Joe Zammit
May 27th 2010, 17:19
The case under consideration is simple:
No 1. To receive Holy Communion a person must be in the state of sanctifying grace. So the question arises: are cohabitants in the state of grace? The answer is simple: if they are engaging in sexual acts they are NOT in the state of grace because the sexual act is reserved only to validly married couples, and cohabitants are not married.
No 2. If cohabitants are refraining from sexual acts, are they in the state of grace? The answer is simple as well: if they have children as a valid reason to remain together and they cannot marry each other, they are in the state of grace, but if they have no children and they do not want to heal their relationship with a valid marriage, they are NOT in the state of grace.
No 3. Scandal is a grave sin. So even if cohabitants are in the state of grace, they can receive Holy Communion in a place where no one knows them.
Joseph Micallef
May 27th 2010, 19:55
Joe Zammit - rules rules laws and more laws. God is not laws and rules but love. If I were cohabiting he would certainly not send me away if I wanted to be one with him. But if you still want to live by your laws and rules be my guest. Many want to live by the knowledge that God is love and not a judge. The least you can do is respect their ideas and be humble enough to ask yourself whether in fact you are so right after all. That's all. With all due respect, the church you are dipicting is repulsive!
Michael Vella
May 27th 2010, 20:45
How pathetic can you get !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
S. Calleja
May 27th 2010, 22:17
No 3 sounds more like a case of keeping up appearances.
Joe Zammit
May 27th 2010, 16:58
This is the Catholic Church speaking. Par. 4 of the letter sent by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to all bishops of the world about the divorced and remarried states:
"The faithful who persist in such a situation may receive Holy Communion only after obtaining sacramental absolution, which may be given only "to those who, repenting of having broken the sign of the Covenant and of fidelity to Christ, are sincerely ready to undertake a way of life that is no longer in contradiction to the indissolubility of marriage. This means, in practice, that when for serious reasons, for example, for the children's upbringing, a man and a woman cannot satisfy the obligation to separate, they 'take on themselves the duty to live in complete continence, that is, by abstinence from the acts proper to married couples'"(8). In such a case they may receive Holy Communion as long as they respect the obligation to avoid giving scandal."
S. Calleja
May 27th 2010, 22:26
Lengthy arguments are weak, since they try to persuade via confusion and lack of understanding, rather than simple, clear thought.
Joe Zammit
May 27th 2010, 16:45
Regarding divorced and remarried Catholics the Catholic Church has a document ad hoc.
I refer to those who want to read more on what the Catholic Church teaches regarding the reception of Holy Communion by divorced and cohabitants to the LETTER TO THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH CONCERNING THE RECEPTION OF HOLY COMMUNION BY THE DIVORCED AND REMARRIED MEMBERS OF THE FAITHFUL to be found in the following website:
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_14091994_rec-holy-comm-by-divorced_en.html
Joe Zammit
May 27th 2010, 16:40
Our dear bishops made clear what the Catholic Church infallibly teaches on who can receive Holy Communion worthily. Holy Communion is not a sweet; it is Christ himself present in Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. As a matter of fact we adore Holy Eucharist as it is God Himself.
It's not a pleasure for the Church to consider anyone in sin, but cohabitation is sinful and cohabitants can heal their sinful life by, say, getting married. They have chosen to be together but they also know that every sexual act outside marriage is a grave sin. They know that.
They know as well that they can convert. Conversion means turning humbly and lovingly to God and deciding to live up to the laws of God.
J.Bonnici
May 27th 2010, 16:16
Why bother going to church in the first place?
J Schembri
May 27th 2010, 15:58
Can someone please explain, why a priest who has a lover (s) or has raped innocent kids is allowed to celebrate Mass & administer communinion. Just cause he is a priests thisgives him the right to continue to sin and practise his religion.?? What does our religion say about that.? So the public can't sin and practise religion BUT a priest can. ! what does that say about the state of our church. ?
victor pulis
May 27th 2010, 15:50
“If the couple is known to be living in an irregular state this could create problems of a pastoral nature by setting a bad example or scandal to those who know them,”(Fr. Paul galea) said.
Perhaps that is why certain priests advise cohabiting couples to attend mass and receive holy communion in a church where they are not known! Not known by whom? God?!
Alfred Gatt
May 27th 2010, 15:14
The Church does not condemn but she is there to guide us. Notwithstanding Cardinal Martini's thoughts on the matter of divorced persons admission to the Sacraments, for us here in Malta, we are to be guided by our Bishops. They are Christ's representatives for us and we are obliged to follow their guidance, if we want to be Catholics. Persons can express opinions but ultimately whilst we follow our conscience, it has to be realised that our consciences must be formed and informed. It is not merely a question of what I think.
We are to respect people who are cohabiting, although respecting them does not mean we are condoning their situation. We can never be judges but there has to be regulation for the sake of the truth. The Church does not deny that these are very difficult situations.However, as Fr Paul Galea rightly pointed out: prohibition to receive Holy Communion was based on two arguments: upholding the moral teaching and reducing scandal.
victor pulis
May 27th 2010, 19:16
for us here in Malta, we are to be guided by our Bishops. They are Christ's representatives for us
And who is cardinal Martini representing then?!! Oh what a farce!
victor rodenas
May 27th 2010, 14:49
Is it correct for a Catholic who is having extramatrimonial sexual relations to receive Holy Communion ?You might tell me,no it is not correct and you stop there. That is the problem,because we are being selective ,why it is only about one sin then.If the Bishop said,all those who year in year out evade(steal) in income tax,vat,etc, take sick leave when they are not really sick,take false oaths etc, .......these people cannot receive Communion ,without first having paid all that they stole during their life,.....then ,I will agree (in most cases)with the Bishops. But then only small innocent children will be eligable for Communion.Untill this happenes,the Bishops will be selective and the argument will not be fair.
Chris Mifsud
May 27th 2010, 14:08
Where did these Bishops come from? (Especially the Gozo Bishop)
It seems they are trying their best to drive even more people as far away from the church as possible, not that it bothers me.
B Galea
May 27th 2010, 13:41
Dun George Dalli, during Xarabank, adviced the viewers to look for a good restaurant or pizzeria! Is HE the good pizzeria? Are all his other colleagues bad restaurants handing out bad pizzas? Dun Gorg, I'm sure, meant well. He was refering to particular cases where the persons involved, where not at fault of what had happened to their original marriage. But the way he splashed it out on a TV station for all to hear, sounded as if anything goes one and for all!
One cannot expect to leave his/her legitimate family capriciously, disrubt another family and pretend, as if nothing happened, and that he/she can contintue to receive Holy Communion.
All the Church asks it's followers is based on the interpretations of Christ's teachings. Ofcourse Jesus loves us sinners...otherwise why should He had to die on the cross? But although he loves the sinners, it does'nt mean He loves sin. Just as He was the one to established the Holy Eucharist, He was also the one who established the sacrament of confession - not the Church - so that whoever feels the need to receive Him would do so in a pure manner.
fabien sant fourneir
May 27th 2010, 13:39
"...Engaging in sexual relationships before or outside marriage goes against the sixth commandment, if not against the ninth,” Fr Galea said."
isnt the 6th commandment though shalt not kill!? what does it have to do with extramarital relations?!?
John Doneo
May 27th 2010, 13:37
To all those who do not think that people who are cohabiting!!! If you do not want to go by the laws of the catholic church, then you should renounce it completely and do not use it. Have just a civil wedding, do not baptise your children, or their first communion.Example.. if you buy a car you have to tax it, insure it,and you have to obey the laws of the land, NO IFS OR BUTS. You want to be a CHATOLIC then you have to obey the COMMANDMENTS. You have a choice, Be a catholic or an atheist, no one is twisting your arms.
David Caruana
May 27th 2010, 13:35
"We wish to affirm that everybody – these couples included – is welcome in the Church"
Of coarse they're welcome - and their donations are even more welcome!!
This is a lot of nonsense, how can you tell someone that he/she is welcome to join for dinner but they won't be allowed to eat?!
Joe Grima Brussels
May 27th 2010, 13:14
@ Lenny Degiorgio
No Lenny. A man who cheats on his wife CANNOT receive Communion, if he intends to continue doing it.
As for the alleged paedophile priests, they have been held from administering the Sacrament.
While a TRULY REPENTENT rapist, killer, robber, CAN receive it, if he has changed his way. They might in future fall again, but their duty is to avoid temptation. If a cohabiting couple go for confession, with the intention of going back together after confession, where is their repentence?
You know the words: 'Lead us not into temptation...' And this is not MY word, or the Bishop's, but Jesus'!
So, you see, it is NOT 'Typically Maltese', but typically Jesus' teachings!
Jesus was very clear at the well when he met the woman: 'That man is not your husband...'
Jesus ALWAYS condemned the sin, not the person, and ALL THOSE SINNER who turned towards him were embraced by him.
According to you, was Jesus 'narrow minded?'
Joseph Cauchi
May 27th 2010, 12:50
.
Why do we have to be so DOGMATIC?
It’s true the Church when it speaks, it speaks for the Universal world and therefore this is acceptable.
However, Jesus Christ the Founder based his Church on LOVE, when He gave us the new commandment to Love our neighbour and our enemy.
Jesus is Love and as we all know that Love conquers everything, even DOGMAS!
JC.
j n ebejer
May 27th 2010, 12:43
One understands the statements the Church has to give.
But then I believe that, each individual would do good to discuss his own particular situation with his spiritual director.
Doing so in public on a newspaper tends to cause more harm than good to oneself or to whoever may interpret things otherwise than intended to mean.
As regards the Scriptures, well, not to be able to discern anything positive about the Jesus's principles presented in these, irrespective one believes or not, is truly surprising. Much regarded philosophers and men of knowledge, non believers have expressed admiration for at least some some principles presented -irrespective of afterlife or whatever. But who knows, some wisest of them who irreverently wants to reduce these to fables has appeared amongst us. I beg to be more humble and admit that yes principles presented in these make much sense.
Joseph N Attard
May 27th 2010, 12:38
We Christians tend to call Muslims 'fundamentalists'. Yet some of the postings below could not come from anyone who is anything but a Catholic fundamentalist. The Inquisitors were absolutely certain that they were acting to save souls. Perhaps some of the contributors below would have agreed with their bone-smashing, flesh-ripping actions, which after all were carried out in the name of God.
J.Cauchi
May 27th 2010, 12:37
@Julian ---Int qieghed sew siehbi!! Ghax ma tghidilniex bl-intelligenza kollha tieghek x'ghandha taghmel mara li giet abbuzata u msawta jew ragel li l-mara qalbithielu jew mizzewweg li l-mara tieghu (jew vice versa) jabbuzaw mit-tfal. X'jaghmlu dawn sur Julian?? Jo0qghodu fiz-zwieg u jqattghu hajjithom f'infern!! Kemm hu facli titkellem sur julian. Imma kemm huwa inqas facli li tghix it-tragedji li jghaddu minnhom hafna familji!!!
Dominic Chircop
May 27th 2010, 12:34
Am I right in assuming that when the bishops refer to a Christian marriage, they are uncluding those married civily among the pogguti ?
If so, shame on the bishops !
And shame on Gonzipn for turning Malta into a theoceacy !
Ramon Casha
May 27th 2010, 12:17
Why just cohabiting couples? What about couples (married or not) who use condoms or other contraceptives and intend to continue using them?
Or is this intended to derail the government's plans on introducing cohabitation laws?
anton cassar
May 27th 2010, 12:17
Allura nghid jien..........Dawk il-miljuni li ma jhaddnux ir-religjon Kattolika u ovvjament ma jimxux mas-sagramenti,dawn kollha ha jitlfu ruhhom? Ghaliex qed nghid hekk, hemm xi haga li ma tinkwadrax.Donnha il-knisja trid tittrattana ta mzazzen u l-verita hi xi haga ohra totalment differenti.
A.Camilleri
May 27th 2010, 12:10
i got married in a registrar in the uk, been happily married for 40yrs now, luckily am not religious, how many cpls have been married in church and have a miserable marriage, i know quite a few myself!!
Luciano Mule Stagno
May 27th 2010, 11:58
while I am no expert I seem to remember being taught that anyone "living in sin" whether cohabiting or married should refrain from receiving communion. However I agree with Fr.Dalli that the decision is not his (or any other priest's) but rather the individual's. So no priest should withhold Eucharist from anyone even if he suspects they are living in sin or even knows they are co-habiting (which could technically be platonic or the person could have very recently changed course in their life).
"thou shall not judge"... which is exactly what a priest would be doing if he withheld communion.
Christopher Xuereb
May 27th 2010, 11:46
There is one conundrum that this ongoing debate has brought up for me. At the risk of veering off point, might I ask those who appear to be well steeped in catholic lore what the position of cohabiting couples is with respect to eternal life.
If a cohabiter cannot find it within himself (I use the male gender to refer to both genders) on his death bed to feel regret or sorrow for the love and companionship that an otherwise adulterous relationship has given him (knowing full well over the duration of the relationship that he was living in sin), is that person destined to eternal damnation?
Joe Grima Brussels
May 27th 2010, 11:43
@ Sharon Camiller
Yes, you are right. Mr Farrugia has no right to say that you are in sin. BUT JESUS HAS:
He told the woman at the well 'That man is not your husbnd.'
So, do not take any notice of what Mr Farrugia says, BUT DON'T CONTRADICT JESUS!
Gerard Cassar
May 27th 2010, 11:37
The seven sacraments are: 1. maghmudija, 2.Grizma tal-isqof,3. qrar u 4 tqarbin,5 grizma tal-morda, 6. ordni sagri, 7zwieg.
Holy Mass by itself is not a sacrament the taking of the Eucharist is a sacrament (Holy Communion).
A. Falzon
May 27th 2010, 11:34
I am seperated. So I can go to church but not recieve Holy Communion, as after I leave church I go home and 'sin'. I would like to invite the Archbishop to dinner, but I would only serve an empty plate. Why?? As the archbishop will have lunch and dinner the next day. I feel the same when I cant recieve Holy Communion. Now I dont bother to go to church and just pray at home or whereever I feel in need to be with God.
Salim Saddi
May 27th 2010, 11:33
I personally think that the catholic churches has specific rules. It is also deeply rooted in traditional and generally conservative. Whoever is not in agreement with these rules, can decide to go engage in other forms of spirituality. On the other hand, i do not think it is totally fair that you want to be a member of a "club" and you decide to make your own rules if the ones in existence (which have been there before you joined) are not appealing to you.
This is not to say that the Catholic church should not do anything about it. Things have changed in the past. However for now these are the rules. If people decide to do the same with the civil law, then anarch would ensue.
M Vella
May 27th 2010, 11:30
fully agree with rbuttigieg.
@ Julian Micallef - you cannot generalise - afterall it is partly the fault of the church for not doing intense psychological examinations before a couple gets married. It is only done after you get an annulment and want to remarry.
Well done Fr. Dalli - I'm sure God knows the good you are doin even though society looks at you as an outcast!
By the way - the church forgot to mention CONFESSION - if you sin and confess everyone is allowed to receive holy communion, we are all sinners irrespective what the sin is, this sounds like the interdeath...of the 70s!
Please open your minds!
Ian C Ellul
May 27th 2010, 11:28
Kollox beda minn Xarabank u minn Fr Gorg Dalli. Wonder why?
Andy Towler
May 27th 2010, 11:17
All this shows is how irrelevant the church is to normal everyday life, and how hypocritical, inconsistent and power-crazy it continues to be.
I am also really surprised that newspapers such as the Times are giving it so much attention.
Alison Bezzina
May 27th 2010, 11:16
This is just the tip of the iceberg. Catholicsm has written itself into one insipid and warped mess. Give us a break!!
http://www.timesofmalta.com/blogs/view/20100525/alison-bezzina/losing-my-religion
Joe Grima Brussels
May 27th 2010, 11:12
@ Lenny Degiorgio.
No, alleged paedophiles CANNOT GIVE Holy Communion. I believe that the first thing that the Church authorities did on hearing of these alleged abuses was to stop the priests from performing the Sacraments.
No, a husband cheating on his wife cannot receive Communion, if he intends to keep on doing it.
A TRULY repentant rapist, killer or thief CAN receive Holy Communion, if he has a change of heart. Jesus condemned the ACTIONS of the woman at the well, the adulteress, the Pharisees, and the tax collector, BUT WELCOMED THEM WITH OPEN ARMS ON THEIR REPENTENCE!!!!!
So, you see, it is not 'typically Maltese, but TYPICALLY JESUS' TEACHINGS.
The main difference here is that if a cohabitating couple go to confession, and they INTEND to go back together, it means that they are not truly repentant.
A sinner may receive Holy Communion ONLY if he is truly repentant. He may fall again in future, BUT THE MAIN TOPIC IS, as we say: 'Lead us not into temptation...' (and these are Jesus' words, not mine, or the Church's, or the Pope's!
Julian Micallef
May 27th 2010, 11:03
Qedin Sew, koppji jkissru zwieg taghom, jmorru ma partner iehor u mbad tehel il-knisja, donnu tort ta' knisja . Ahjar jinbena relazjoni b'sahhitha lewwel qabel ma jizzewgu. Insomma jekk tkun qed tghix fi dnub kif trid li tkun tista titqarben. Hafna paroli fi vojt u mbad ikun minn hu kontra knisja ghax tkun soda fi twemmin taghha u ma jaqbelx ghall widnejh.
martin saliba
May 27th 2010, 13:32
Jien lijlek ma nafejk u naigurak li xi dnub ghandek int u titqarben xorta. Jekk tighid fuq in nies , tiskarta it taxxa , ma thalas vat fuq kollox ect ect. dawn kolla dnbiet u mux bizejjed li tmur tqer trid taghmel tajjeb ghall dak li tkun ghamilt hazin. kull minn joghli idejh andu xi xomm siehbi allura mu ghahjar ma noluix ?? Jien mux ed nighid ghlik personali ghax forsi int wiehed mill dawk il ftitt perfetti , ed nighid ghall probablli 99.9% tal populazjoni.
Joseph Micallef
May 27th 2010, 16:02
Nassigurak li l-ebda koppja ma tiehu gost tkissier iz-zwieg! Billi tghid li ahjar tinbena relazzjoni soda minn qabel ma qed tghid xejn ghax nemmen li l-maggoranza ghalhekk jidhlu ghaz-zwieg - ghax jemmnu li ghandhom relazzjoni soda. U taf min ibaghti l-aktar? Min jemmen fli tghidlu il-knisja u jipprova jibqa sod bla ma jkollu intimita qabel iz-zwieg u bla ma jmur jghix mal-partner qabel jizzewweg. Persuni bhal dawn ghandhom aktar cans isibu sorpriza wara z-zwieg li ma toghgobhomx u jkun tard wisq!
R Zampa
May 27th 2010, 11:01
God is Love so if you are cohabiting,divorced or remarried and you are in love ,true love,than there is God between you,because as I said before God is love
J Farrugia
May 27th 2010, 11:23
No mna. dont lile. You are not teaching the truth. you dont even know the face of God how can you say that God is between two persons who love each other but are in an adulterous situation? I'm not sure that God will bless such a union. Otherwise the sacrifices of other couples are all in vain. Is this right? Off course not. But God is full of love to those who abide by His Commandments.
Joseph Micallef
May 27th 2010, 16:06
Exactly my thoughts. I cannot imagine God or Jesus telling anyone "Go away - you cannot be one with me because you are cohabiting!" - If truly God is love that is. If God is a judge and an executioner then its another story. But I still believe that God is love.
rbuttigieg
May 27th 2010, 11:00
so its not even an issue of cohabitation but of having sexual encounters. with that reasoning then most couples should not be allowed to marry in the first place as they would have been having sexual encounters way befor being married!!!!
hawduni ha nifhem
C Conti
May 27th 2010, 10:59
John 6:54
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.
Including "Sinners" ?!
1 Corinthians 11:27 (Paul)
Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord.
One passage by John and another passage by Paul (in the first Century) ...and 2000 years later the controversy rages on !!
Personally I would say that Jesus Loves the Sinner and Hates the Sin and will finally Judge us in His abundant MERCY !!
Albert Gatt
May 27th 2010, 11:26
Anka x-xitan jaf jikkwota l-bibbja. Tajjeb nghid lil dan li l-bibbja l-inqas jaqraha ma jaf, ahseb u ara jipprova jinterpreta kif jaqbel lilu, li kemm San Pawl kif ukoll San Gwann it-tnejn jaqblu li min jiekol il-hobz u jixrob il-kalci ta' Kristu minghajr ma jkun jixraqlu, jkun hati tal-Gisem u d-Demm ta' Kristu. I rest my case.
Joseph Micallef
May 27th 2010, 15:56
May I just remind you that, if I am not mistaken it was St. John who said, "He who is perfect sins 7 times a day"! So according to this reasoning nobody should have communion ever!
robert zammit
May 27th 2010, 10:50
as far as I know Mass is a sacrament in itself, so if one cannot receive communion, the bishops are saying that separated / cohabiting people should stay away from Mass also ! This is really one way of turning people away from the Church ! As kids we were thought that the mercy of God is limitless, yet the Bishops of these islands are doing God's work and limiting his mercy for Him ! how dare they ?????
A. Farrugia
May 27th 2010, 11:15
From the little I know, Mass is not a sacrament. Receiving the eucharist is...
Sacraments are:
Christianing (mghamudija), Holy Communion (tqarbin), Confession (qrar), Confirmation (grizma), Last rites (grizma tal-morda), marriage (zwieg) and ordination (ordni sagri).
C pisani
May 27th 2010, 11:49
Mass in itself is a ritual NOT a sacrament - mass was not set up by Christ but is a collection of prayers praising God, asking for forgiveness etc. the Sacrament as such is communion - or the eurcarist - as started by Christ at the passover.
therefore the church is not banning people fomr participating in mass, or if you'd rather term is as the ritual of prayers and praise, but from receiving communion - the sacrament itself.
hope that's some clarification
anthony cassar
May 27th 2010, 12:03
mass is not a sacrament!
Wilfred Camilleri
May 27th 2010, 12:31
There are seven sacrament and the mass is not one of them. The seven sacraments are : Baptism, Confirmation, Holy Communion, Marriage, Holy Orders, and Anointing of the sick.
Paul Konti
May 27th 2010, 20:34
@ Wilfred Camilleri
Inadvertently, no doubt, you left one out; the sacrament of reconciliation. This is a very important sacrament that, unfortunately, some people have put aside. We must keep in mind that, when we partake in a sacrament, we receive GRACE.
We are all sinners. Through the sacrament of contrition, we 'make peace' with God. But... anyone who remains in a state of sin and does not make amends, in my humble opinion, should not receive Holy Communion.
ASpiteri
May 27th 2010, 10:36
Another non-issue turned into a major national issue!
A big well-done to all journalist working so vigorous in propping up this farce!
The significance of the Catholic Church is swiftly fading away from the majority of people’s life and its rituals like Holy Communion are nothing but ceremonies. The Catholic Church is nothing more than a powerful institution; it doesn’t reflect the people’s ambitions at all.
Only the fanatics who are so naive in believing the fables of the Bible still take the Church seriously!
C Zammit
May 27th 2010, 10:50
Well said! The more I read about this, the more I realize how wonderful it is to be an atheist!
Albert Gatt
May 27th 2010, 11:32
If the Church is powerful how come it doesn't use its powerful forces, say the Guardia Svizzera? The Church uses only the word of God as written in the Gospels. So you think that the Church is fading away into obscurity. For people like you who dont have a life to take care of, it may be so. That's why in this world there is so much dishonesty, crime, and suicides. because God is dead for such people. And such people make other people's lives a hell on earth, raping their own children, killing, stealing, beating, all types of bad things, which Godless persons do because they have no conscience at all. And even if all the people stay away from the church, the Catholic faith will never disappear. It has God's promise that even if all hell breaks lose, the Church will survive. The people NO.
Wilfred Camilleri
May 27th 2010, 12:34
The Church is not swiftly fading away as you claim. In fact, the Church has grown world-wide in the last year. It's only in your imagination that it is!
@C Zammit Being an atheist is your choice. Enjoy it while you are in this world!
Kevin Cassar
May 28th 2010, 20:27
@ Albert Gatt Your comment has no grounds and is based on ignorance. I challenge you and whoever agrees with you to come with me to any prison in the world, and we will ask each convict whether or not they believe in God. I'm very confident you'll find that your conclusions were wrong and that reality is the other way round. If we find that there are more "Godless" persons in jail, I will buy you dinner every day for the rest of your life. Just because your faith is based on no evidence does not give you the right to make false accusations with no evidence at all.
Charles Sammut
May 27th 2010, 10:35
It is time that people liberated themselves from the shackles of religion. God (for those who believe in such a being) does not need bishops or mullahs, rabbis or sorcerers to reach our conscience. One can find spirituality by simply going up on the roof on a clear, moonless night and gazing at the miniscule part of the Universe that one can see with the naked eye. This never fails to cut me down to size and make me realize how puny we really are.
However, if you love your neighbour, it is best not to get caught.
Joseph Cauchi
May 27th 2010, 10:58
@ Charles Sammut,
I liked the last sentence!
JC.
Albert Gatt
May 27th 2010, 11:39
If such marvels of nature cut you down to size, it seems that you HAVE a conscience and it screams to you that someone created all this marvel for you to enjoy and for others without God and without a conscience, to destroy! With a little bit of logic and deep thinking, you will find WHO this being created all this? Science? Technology? There must be someone who brought this into being, something GOOD, something which we cannot fathom HIS face, but certainly EXISTS. Another thing: can you possible put on the same scales, catholic Bishops, or priests or whatever, with Mullahs, or sourcerers, who preach anarchy and stupidities respectively. And who issue edicts for people to kill a human being? Have you ever heard a catholic priest ordering the murder of killing of a human being? I never heard such horror.
Wilfred Camilleri
May 27th 2010, 12:36
Indeed! One is puny in the sight of God. And God is the One who sent his apostles, disciples, and their successors to preach and administer the sacraments through Jesus Christ.
Lenny Degiorgio
May 27th 2010, 10:33
This is so typical Maltese. So a cohabiting couple cannot receive communion because it is against the sanctity of the church however a husband cheating on his wife or vice versa can. A rapist, murderer or thief can also receive communion and in cases even pardons from the church. So called paedophiles in the church can GIVE communion. How narrow minded is this?
Claire Bonello
May 27th 2010, 10:57
@Lenny Degiorgio .....Anyone who is in a state of sin (and this includes murderers, paedophiles, thieves etc) who has not repented is not supposed to give or receive communion. Where on earth did you get the impression that paedophiles are allowed to give communion? If they have not been caught offending, then presumably no-one (except the victim) would know that they are paedophiles so how can they be stopped?
C. Sapiano
May 27th 2010, 11:03
Its not typical Maltese. This is the worldwide rule that applies to everyone. You are wrong to blame the Maltese Church. If you do not agree with it you may argue as much as you like but you cannot blame the Maltese Church or the Maltese people.
Lenny Degiorgio
May 27th 2010, 11:27
@ Claire Bonello
Anyone who has not repented is not SUPPOSED to receive communion however they do if they are catholic. I'm quite sure when mass is held in prisons it's never empty. What better place to house criminals than prisons?
As for your second question about peadophiles giving communion here's an interesting read for you: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_people_of_the_clergy_have_been_convicted_of_sexual_abuse This is one of MANY
As for your third question, how can they be stopped. Well they can't. In Malta cohabitants are not allowed to receive communion because it's such a small community so the parish priest would know they cohabitate but how would he know who cheats and steals and deals drugs to minors? I'm sure these people have not repented but still take communion. I have no problem with anyone taking or not taking communion, it's the hypocrisy of the church that annoys me.
Joss Galea
May 27th 2010, 10:29
and what about priest who stop being priest because they met a woman...aren't they going against the Sacrament and denying the vow they took before God to become priest and serve Him in that way? Are they allowed to receive Holy Communion? What about somebody who doesn't talk to his parents anymore?. What about a drug dealer, a murderer, a burglar, abusers etc etc? This is Hypocricy from The Church. I believe in the Church of Christ where he accepted everyone. let's not forget Mary Magdalene, she was a sinner and Christ accepted her in His Church, And that's only one example!
Emmanuel Vella
May 27th 2010, 10:48
But please do not forget that the last words Jesus said to her were," Sin no more."
J Farrugia
May 27th 2010, 10:25
It is useless to continue this debate. The Cathecism of the Catholic Church is there for all to read and see. Irrespective of what Cardinal Martini stated. The last word rests with the theological council and with the Cathecism of the Church. Not grey shades or brown or black. Only one truth. How can a person living in continuous state of sin, be allowed (if known) to receive any sacrament? He/she would be in continual contempt of the sacred sacraments. No ifs no buts. Just one plain truth. The Bishops have spoken according to the teachings of Christ and the scriptures. So it is useless for one to say I will not deny the sacraments to a woman living in sin. Who is this Dun Gorg Dalli? Who is this priest? As much learned as he is he is not preaching the true gospel of Jesus Christ. He is in the wrong and he has to admit it. otherwise I hope that sanctions against this rebel priest are taken. Dont continue to confuse the people's minds. Some people are experts at all.
G.Micallef
May 27th 2010, 10:39
“Judge not, that ye be not judged (Matthew 7:1).”
A Grech
May 27th 2010, 10:46
You are absolutely correct....
"How can a person living in continuous state of sin, be allowed (if known) to receive any sacrament?"
That person should remain forever with his / her abusive / drunk / rapist / mollesting / drugged partner. Shame on them. Even bigger shame that they pretend to continue being Christians.
They should be labelled and banned from civilsed society at large. Just like the lepars, they should be segregated.
What cheek.
J Farrugia....we need more true peole like you to stand up and show us the true meaning. Although I understand that there could be a few who see things differently...wonder why...crazy people!
J Farrugia - I missed one point. Sorry for asking but which religion do you practice?
sharon camilleri
May 27th 2010, 11:01
mr farrugia
And who are you to tell me I'm livin in sin... just because my marriage or my partner's broke down
Michael Vella
May 27th 2010, 11:12
Yes, it is really useless to continue with this debate.
The majority are realising/ have realised that the archaic and outdated teachings of the church are totally irrelvant - and consequently they are living their lives accordingly.
J Farrugia
May 27th 2010, 11:19
It's not me who's telling you so. It's Jesus Christ who tells you so, if you care to read the Gospel of Christ. But I wonder if you care to do so. Some people want their faith to be a sort of 'a la carte menu'. Sorry but this is not on. And those who want to be cynical and ridiculous may continue to do so. At their own personal expense.
J.Debono
May 27th 2010, 12:23
Well said! I am remembering an episode in St.Pio's life when a woman who was having an affair with a married man went to confession to him. St.Pio refused to give her absolution and foretold to her that the man was going to die of cancer within 3 months and lose his soul as a result of their affair. The woman was obviously shocked, returned the next day to St.Pio and made a proper confession and ended her relationship with the man. 3 months later the man died as St.Pio had foretold but he died united with his wife and family.
May God have mercy on us.
Wilfred Camilleri
May 27th 2010, 13:04
@ C Zammit No one is judging. Anyone who is in a state of mortal sin should not receive Holy Communion. If the confess and repent then they can.
@ sharon camilleri No one is. One is in sin if he/she breaks God's commandments regardless of their circumstances. A marriage can break down but how hard has the two partners tried to reconcile? These days it seems that the easy way out is to walk away. If there is abuse or infidelity then the partner that is the victim has the right to take action. However as long as the marriage is still in effect (Let no man out asunder what God has put together.) , both partners cannot remarry or commit adultery if they truely believe.
Fabien Sant Fournier
May 27th 2010, 13:46
"How can a person living in continuous state of sin, be allowed (if known) to receive any sacrament?"
Exactly! We should stone these sinners just like they used to do in the old testament!!
Angela Falzon
May 27th 2010, 14:18
How dare you judge me and tell me i am living in a "continous state of sin"? I respect God and nature and I think I am a good person. Instead it would be a shame to call Christians all those paedophiles, who you call priests, who are caught red- handed abusing children. Just because you go to church on Sunday does not make you any better than me or the person who is cohabiting.
Joseph Micallef
May 27th 2010, 15:52
Sure as you say "some people are experts at all" and you seem to be one of them!
victor pulis
May 27th 2010, 15:57
How can a person living in continuous state of sin, be allowed (if known) to receive any sacrament?
Does that include the sacrament of confession? reading your comment sounds like listening to Thomas Torquemada the the 15th century Spanish inquisitor. i bet you would enjoy an auto de fe!
Joe Grima
May 27th 2010, 17:43
J Debono. These are the sort of fairy tales that the Cathiolic Church has built itself on over the centuries- fairy tales based on fear and threats. People are more enlightened now than those addressed by St Pio in his time, that is if St Pio ever existed. I am surprised that you are that guillble to swallow a fantasy tale such as this one and to repeat it in these columns where people of, at least, average intelligence congregate
victor pulis
May 27th 2010, 20:18
@ J Debono
Are these the kind of sickening stories you hope will persuade people to return to the church? When I hear these tales I continue to be convinced of my beliefs. The church is replete with such tales about 'saints' many of whom were anything but saints. The were canonised only because they did some favour or otherto the church like Constantine the 'great' who murdered his wife (boiled her alive) killed his brother in law and his nephew among other crimes and was only baptised on his deathbed. let's not forget the famous secret of fatima which turned out to be an anticlimax.