# The Pope's new Exhortation: Hey, be more welcoming of the sinners! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 8, 2016, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-popes-new-exhortation-hey-be-more-welcoming-of-the-sinners/751582 "2016-04-08T18:57:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![purplehearingaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/7bcc69/32.png) [@purplehearingaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/purplehearingaid)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2016, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-popes-new-exhortation-hey-be-more-welcoming-of-the-sinners/751582/21 "2016-04-10T15:52:10Z")
With the Catholic church sexual abuse scandal and having to pay settlements the Pope may had to loosen up a little to bring more $$$ back into the church . There was talk of having to sell a church in my city , I am not sure if this happen or not. The Catholic church really isn’t in any shape to call people sinners when they coved up the sexual abuse scandal for years ! And it still going on. ---
**Author:** ![Yersenia\_Pestis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/e495f1/32.png) [@Yersenia\_Pestis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yersenia_Pestis)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2016, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-popes-new-exhortation-hey-be-more-welcoming-of-the-sinners/751582/22 "2016-04-11T00:38:06Z")
Honestly, the pope is literally saying: “stop criticizing and start being loving with others” I see it as a big F you to all those jerks who pretend being religious while judging others (and constantly watching Fox News, haha) ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2016, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-popes-new-exhortation-hey-be-more-welcoming-of-the-sinners/751582/23 "2016-04-11T03:27:10Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > He’s better than most by a long shot, but I’ll continue to ignore his words and policies concerning SSM, abortion and birth control, thank-you-very-much! So do most Catholics. Studies show that most Catholics (in the USA, Canada, & Europe, at least ) don;t foll the church teachings on these issues. And on abortion, it’s more than studies – medical documentation shows that Catholic girls/women get more abortions than other religions (and that’s just legal ones) – possibly because of the church stand on birth control. > [@Tamerlane](#): > > He’s pissing off a lot of conservative Catholics. So if he is pandering, it is pandering to a different audience than the supporters of the previous two Popes. But conservative Catholics are largely older ones. They aren’t contributing as much money any more, and aren’t producing new keds to be future church members. So they are the past of the church, not the future. After all, younger, liberal Catholics can always just go to the local Episcopal/Anglican church, and find nothing different except the position on these issues (and women priests). ---
**Author:** ![chacoguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/50afbb/32.png) [@chacoguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chacoguy)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2016, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-popes-new-exhortation-hey-be-more-welcoming-of-the-sinners/751582/24 "2016-04-11T04:07:15Z")
> [@Critical1](#): > > Now understand that the church is rabidly anti birth control in all forms and in Africa they would rather people die than use a condom. They tell people everywhere that condom use is a sin you will burn in hell for. That is a false statement. [Cite.](http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/18/health/zika-pope-francis-contraceptives/) ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2016, 11:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-popes-new-exhortation-hey-be-more-welcoming-of-the-sinners/751582/25 "2016-04-11T11:12:50Z")
> [@gigi](#): > > As does willfully missing Mass: > > "The Catechism of the Catholic Church states that teaching clearly in No. 2181: “The Sunday Eucharist is the foundation and confirmation of all Christian practice. For this reason the faithful are obliged to participate in the Eucharist on days of obligation, unless excused for a serious reason (for example, illness, the care of infants). Those who deliberately fail in this obligation commit a grave sin.” > > Gravity of matter, of course, is just one of the three necessary conditions for a mortal sin — the others being complete consent of the will and full knowledge of the sinful character of the act or omission." > > [Is missing Mass a mortal sin? – CatholicPhilly](http://catholicphilly.com/2013/05/think-tank/catholic-spirituality/understanding-the-bible-is-missing-mass-a-mortal-sin/) The obligation is for once a year, though. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2016, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-popes-new-exhortation-hey-be-more-welcoming-of-the-sinners/751582/26 "2016-04-11T13:26:58Z")
> [@](#): > > Quoth **John Mace** : > > It doesn’t work IRL? Of course it works, excellently well in fact, if you use it. But then, all birth control methods only work if you use them. If someone intends to use a condom, but then forgets to bring one, or doesn’t bother to stop by the drugstore, or whatever, does that count as a failure of the condom method? ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2016, 1:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-popes-new-exhortation-hey-be-more-welcoming-of-the-sinners/751582/27 "2016-04-11T13:44:26Z")
Pope Francis would make a good Episcopalian (that’s intended as a compliment). It’s not the believer’s job to judge or condemn anyone - God alone judges and there is no condemnation in Christ. Maybe divorce is a sin; maybe it’s not; IMO it probably is sometimes and isn’t other times. But all I need to worry about is: would it be a sin for _me_ to divorce? Because that’s all I can control and God will judge me on what I can control. Whenever someone wants to argue about whether or not “X” is a sin, I pull out Romans 14. The original context was: is it okay for Christians to eat meat that has been sacrificed to idols? But I’ve found it works for divorce, gay marriage, and a whole host of other issues of disagreement in the church. With my emphasis underlined: > [@](#): > > Accept the one whose faith is weak, without quarreling over disputable matters. One person’s faith allows them to eat anything, but another, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. The one who eats everything must not treat with contempt the one who does not, and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted them. Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To their own master, servants stand or fall. And they will stand, for the Lord is able to make them stand. > > One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind. Whoever regards one day as special does so to the Lord. Whoever eats meat does so to the Lord, for they give thanks to God; and whoever abstains does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. For none of us lives for ourselves alone, and none of us dies for ourselves alone. If we live, we live for the Lord; and if we die, we die for the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord. For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living. > > You, then, why do you judge your brother or sister? Or why do you treat them with contempt? For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat. It is written: > “‘As surely as I live,’ says the Lord, > ‘every knee will bow before me; > every tongue will acknowledge God.’” > > So then, each of us will give an account of ourselves to God. > > Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in the way of a brother or sister. I am convinced, being fully persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for that person it is unclean. If your brother or sister is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy someone for whom Christ died. Therefore do not let what you know is good be spoken of as evil. For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and receives human approval. > > Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a person to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother or sister to fall. > > So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who does not condemn himself by what he approves. But whoever has doubts is condemned if they eat, because their eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin. ---
**Author:** ![Totenfeier](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/4bbf92/32.png) [@Totenfeier](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Totenfeier)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2016, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-popes-new-exhortation-hey-be-more-welcoming-of-the-sinners/751582/28 "2016-04-11T16:28:02Z")
Skammer, I agree with you 100% on Romans 14; I have felt that way for a long time. I only wish that Paul had always held himself to the height of insight he displays here! ---
**Author:** ![Inner\_Stickler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inner_stickler/32/318_2.png) [@Inner\_Stickler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inner_Stickler)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2016, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-popes-new-exhortation-hey-be-more-welcoming-of-the-sinners/751582/29 "2016-04-11T16:50:08Z")
> [@Nava](#): > > The obligation is for once a year, though. :dubious: I’m pretty sure Catholics are obliged to go to Mass every Sunday. ---
**Author:** ![Cyros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a698b9/32.png) [@Cyros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyros)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2016, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-popes-new-exhortation-hey-be-more-welcoming-of-the-sinners/751582/30 "2016-04-11T17:07:53Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Of course it works, excellently well in fact, if you use it. But then, all birth control methods only work if you use them. If someone intends to use a condom, but then forgets to bring one, or doesn’t bother to stop by the drugstore, or whatever, does that count as a failure of the condom method? I am almost 100% (hehe) sure that the statistics for condom failure do include such things as incorrect use and failure to use 100% of the time. A quick [cite](http://goaskalice.columbia.edu/answered-questions/explanation-condom-failure-rates) speaking of the difference between typical use statistics and perfect use statistics. ---
**Author:** ![quiltguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/e47774/32.png) [@quiltguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/quiltguy)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2016, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-popes-new-exhortation-hey-be-more-welcoming-of-the-sinners/751582/31 "2016-04-11T18:30:09Z")
The obligation for once a year, as per **Nava** , was for receiving Holy Communion. Many non-regular communicants would make the effort during Lent/Easter, to satisfy what was called, in my day way back when, your “Easter Duty.” I’m assuming that’s still the thing. ---
**Author:** ![gigi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a587f6/32.png) [@gigi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gigi)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2016, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-popes-new-exhortation-hey-be-more-welcoming-of-the-sinners/751582/32 "2016-04-11T19:26:56Z")
> [@Skammer](#): > > Pope Francis would make a good Episcopalian (that’s intended as a compliment). It’s not the believer’s job to judge or condemn anyone - God alone judges and there is no condemnation in Christ. Maybe divorce is a sin; maybe it’s not; IMO it probably is sometimes and isn’t other times. But all I need to worry about is: would it be a sin for _me_ to divorce? Because that’s all I can control and God will judge me on what I can control. Do you believe that the church has any role in providing guidelines on what is sinful? What would you use to judge whether it is a sin for you to divorce? ---
**Author:** ![gigi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a587f6/32.png) [@gigi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gigi)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2016, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-popes-new-exhortation-hey-be-more-welcoming-of-the-sinners/751582/33 "2016-04-11T19:30:13Z")
> [@quiltguy](#): > > The obligation for once a year, as per **Nava** , was for receiving Holy Communion. Many non-regular communicants would make the effort during Lent/Easter, to satisfy what was called, in my day way back when, your “Easter Duty.” I’m assuming that’s still the thing. Correct, as mentioned. The obligation to **attend Mass** is all Sundays and Holy Days of Obligation; the obligation to **receive Communion** is at least once a year during the season of Easter, with the assumption that you are a Catholic well-disposed to receive. ---
**Author:** ![thelurkinghorror](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7c8e57/32.png) [@thelurkinghorror](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thelurkinghorror)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2016, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-popes-new-exhortation-hey-be-more-welcoming-of-the-sinners/751582/34 "2016-04-11T19:39:38Z")
> [@BrotherCadfael](#): > > We have a gay couple who attends our church. At least, everyone assumes they are. Nobody makes a big deal about it. Including our priest. In my childhood church, a woman regularly offered prayers for “the gay community” - and not in a “mend your ways, sinners!” fashion for years with nobody saying anything. Granted this is was in one of the top 10 lefties cities in the US. > [@Critical1](#): > > Look into the number of aids related deaths in Africa yearly, ask yourself how many of those could have been prevented by simple condom use. Now understand that the church is rabidly anti birth control in all forms and in Africa they would rather people die than use a condom. They tell people everywhere that condom use is a sin you will burn in hell for. > No I dont think hes a good guy, he just says things that make Catholics and christians in general feel good. Its basic pandering 101. Are you under the impression that people in Africa would start using condoms if the Pope said it was cool? The top 5 HIV countries and the percentage of the adult 15-49 population who has HIV/is Catholic: 1. Swaziland - 26.5% / 20% 2. Botswana - 23.4% / 7% 3. Lesotho - 23.3% / 45% 4. South Africa - 19.1% / 7.1% 5. Zimbabwe - 14.9% / 17% Do you think the discrepancy can be explained by your claim? Education and access to condoms seems more likely, and two of these countries are liberal democracies with less superstitious people and still have high rates. Meanwhile, although numbers vary depending on how you define it, [a majority of American Catholics use some form of “artificial” birth control](https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-claim-that-98-percent-of-catholic-women-use-contraception-a-media-foul/2012/02/16/gIQAkPeqIR_blog.html). Facts are more useful than wild claims. ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2016, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-popes-new-exhortation-hey-be-more-welcoming-of-the-sinners/751582/35 "2016-04-11T21:25:02Z")
> [@gigi](#): > > Do you believe that the church has any role in providing guidelines on what is sinful? What would you use to judge whether it is a sin for you to divorce? Yes, absolutely the church has a role in providing guidance and instruction - but not judgment and condemnation. So the church can say “we understand that God’s design for marriage is one man and one woman. Here is our reasoning based on scripture and tradition of the church.” But if the church member comes back and says “based on my reading of scripture and spirit-led discernment, I disagree and believe that God blesses my same sex marriage,” then the response from the church (and other Christians) ought to be, “then we disagree, but grace and peace be upon you. Welcome to the Eucharistic table.” I realize this is much closer to a Protestant model vs. Roman Catholic model of ecclesiology. But by recognizing that clergy need to respond to issues like divorced/remarried members on a case-by-case basis, he is inching toward this type of model. Which is a good thing. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2016, 11:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-popes-new-exhortation-hey-be-more-welcoming-of-the-sinners/751582/36 "2016-04-12T11:21:53Z")
> [@Skammer](#): > > Yes, absolutely the church has a role in providing guidance and instruction - but not judgment and condemnation. So the church can say “we understand that God’s design for marriage is one man and one woman. Here is our reasoning based on scripture and tradition of the church.” But if the church member comes back and says “based on my reading of scripture and spirit-led discernment, I disagree and believe that God blesses my same sex marriage,” then the response from the church (and other Christians) ought to be, “then we disagree, but grace and peace be upon you. Welcome to the Eucharistic table.” For instance, to the statement “based on my reading of scripture and spirit-led discernment, I disagree and believe that God blesses my having sex with 8 yo altar boys”, the church should answer : “then we disagree, but grace and peace be upon you. Welcome to the Eucharistic table?” Either you agree with this (the church doesn’t pass moral judgment on anything) or you want in fact the CC to be accepting only in cases you personnally approve of, IOW you want the church to replace its moral teachings by yours. ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2016, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-popes-new-exhortation-hey-be-more-welcoming-of-the-sinners/751582/37 "2016-04-12T13:30:59Z")
That’s a great argument, **clairobscur** , and if I had more time I would like to write a whole essay in response because it’s such a deep topic to get into when we’re talking about sin and grace and the mystery of the Eucharistic feast. I will try to respond more fully later, but here are my first thoughts in response to your objection: 1. I did not say the church should not pass moral judgment on anything. I said it should not judge _people_. I’m okay with the church saying “divorce is a sin,” “gay marriage is a sin,” “gambling is a sin,” “abortion is a sin,” “eating meat sacrificed to idols is a sin.” I may agree or not; I might think it depends on the circumstances - but I do believe that’s an important function of the church. I \*don’t[/] believe the church can pronounce someone condemned or beyond the reach of God’s grace for these or any other sins. 2. The difference between a child sex abuser and a divorcee or partnered gay person or eating meat sacrificed to idols is an obvious component: a third party who is a victim of the abuser’s sin. The church (as it has hopefully learned by this point) must do what it can to protect innocent victims. Ongoing abuse or victimization or other criminal activity must be condemned and stopped. The _person_ must not be condemned, but the church must not tolerate behavior that intentionally harms God’s children. Note that Romans 14 says “Accept the one whose faith is weak without quarrelling over _disputed_ matters.” It would be hard to argue that the depravity of child abuse is much disputed, despite the church’s documented reluctance to address it until recently. 3. I think I believe that with that in mind - yes, the abuser should be allowed to participate in communion, the primary sacrament of God’s loving grace. The abuser is a damaged person. Who is more needful of the grace of God than we are at our most wretched? The body of Christ, the Bread of Heaven. The blood of Christ, the Cup of Salvation. 4. Participation in communion should in no way be seen as a tacit endorsement or tolerance of the abuser’s sin - just as it is not the church’s endorsement of my sin or yours. I would pray that the Holy Spirit would reveal the person’s sin to them - as I pray for myself. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2016, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-popes-new-exhortation-hey-be-more-welcoming-of-the-sinners/751582/38 "2016-04-12T13:52:50Z")
> [@Mithril](#): > > I kind of wish there was something more definite here. I am a (very bad) Catholic, and recently divorced. Easter was the first mass I attended since my divorce in October (hey, I said I was very bad). In an abundance of morality, I didn’t receive Communion because there are conflicting ideas about whether the divorce itself takes away the right, or if it is remarriage. Either way, my intent is not to live single forever and ever, so I decided that I probably shouldn’t receive Communion. > > It made me really sad. Although I am a \*very \*bad Catholic, it always felt like something that I might want to go back to at some point in my life. But, the rules as of two weeks ago didn’t allow for me to go back at a full participatory level. The new apolistic exhortation doesn’t seem to change the rules formally or informally. It seems to only ask for compassion for those in less than ideal situations (note that I have not read the whole thing, just news releases about it). I’m all about compassion, but I would like to feel like I am following the rules and not relying on a priest to look the other way. My understanding is that you are not divorced as far as the catholic church is concerned. You guys are just really really really separated. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2016, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-popes-new-exhortation-hey-be-more-welcoming-of-the-sinners/751582/39 "2016-04-12T13:54:42Z")
> [@Mithril](#): > > I thought that was the case, but I did some digging and found that at least some Catholic sources indicated that my giving up on my marriage was a betrayal of the bond that God blessed and thus made me ineligible for Communion. The same site said that a woman who is beaten by her husband should not seek a divorce, but is encouraged to live separately while being willing to forgive if the man changes (genders from the website, not from me). Perhaps I stumbled on some ultra-conservative Catholic information. I certainly trust \*\*Bricker \*\*more than a random website. > > The fact does remain that I do plan on remarrying someday, and will do it without the slightest compunction because I don’t think that people should be obligated to grow old alone because they had a marriage that was unfixable. But I do acknowledge that if I want to participate in Catholicism, I morally have to play by the Catholic rules. To that end, I wouldn’t even seek an annulment because there was nothing about my marriage that truly gives me an adequate reason for annulment, even though it has gotten easy enough to get an annulment that I could get a canonical lawyer to arrange it for me. One of the areas where the pope seems to be breaking new ground and saying things that the church hasn’t been saying all along for the last few centuries is in the area of annulments. My understanding is that the goalposts are shifting. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2016, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-popes-new-exhortation-hey-be-more-welcoming-of-the-sinners/751582/40 "2016-04-12T13:56:48Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > He’s better than most by a long shot, but I’ll continue to ignore his words and policies concerning SSM, abortion and birth control, thank-you-very-much! I think that’s what they call a cafeteria catholic. You pick and choose stuff a la carte. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-popes-new-exhortation-hey-be-more-welcoming-of-the-sinners/751582.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-popes-new-exhortation-hey-be-more-welcoming-of-the-sinners/751582.md?page=3)