Which Pope said this?

Which Pope said this?

«Piety, however, grew cold, and especially afterward because of the widespread plague of Jansenism, disputes began to arise concerning the dispositions with which one ought to receive frequent and daily Communion; and writers vied with one another in demanding more and more stringent conditions as necessary to be fulfilled. The result of such disputes was that very few were considered worthy to receive the Holy Eucharist daily, and to derive from this most health-giving Sacrament its more abundant fruits (…) To such a degree, indeed, was rigorism carried that whole classes of persons were excluded from a frequent approach to the Holy Table

(…)

The poison of Jansenism, however, which, under the pretext of showing due honor and reverence to the Eucharist, had infected the minds even of good men, was by no means a thing of the past. The question as to the dispositions for the proper and licit reception of Holy Communion survived the declarations of the Holy See, and it was a fact that certain theologians of good repute were of the opinion that daily Communion could be permitted to the faithful only rarely and subject to many conditions.»

Pope St. Pius X

Sacra Tridentina

Pedro Gabriel

Pedro Gabriel, MD, is a Catholic layman and physician, born and residing in Portugal. He is a medical oncologist, currently employed in a Portuguese public hospital. A published writer of Catholic novels with a Tolkienite flavor, he is also a parish reader and a former catechist. He seeks to better understand the relationship of God and Man by putting the lens on the frailty of the human condition, be it physical and spiritual. He also wishes to provide a fresh perspective of current Church and World affairs from the point of view of a small western European country, highly secularized but also highly Catholic by tradition.

10 Shares

3 thoughts on “Which Pope said this?

  1. And?

    When and where in the last 50 years did “writers vied with one another in demanding more and more stringent conditions as necessary to be fulfilled”?

    The only movement in the last 50 years was to less and less demanding conditions.

    To equate those who just wanted to keep the conditions as stringent as they had been some decades ago with some people of the past who opted for more and more stringent conditions is wrong.

    1. Pope St. Pius X did, however, loosen the conditions. So it was not a matter of people wanting to impose more stringent conditions. Those stringent conditions had been imposed centuries before.

      And yes, in the last 50 years writers did indeed “vied with one another in demanding more and more stringent conditions as necessary to be fulfilled”. When? In the past 2 years. Those who oppose Amoris Laetitia are indeed demanding more stringent conditions than necessary, since the Pope has said those conditions are not necessary and they are demanding them anyway.

      “And?”

      And people who are opposing the pope’s actions regarding the Eucharist should do a bit of soul searching on whether or not they are not being led by that Jansenist spirit Pius X here decries.

      1. “And yes, in the last 50 years writers did indeed “vied with one another in demanding more and more stringent conditions as necessary to be fulfilled”. When? In the past 2 years. Those who oppose Amoris Laetitia are indeed demanding more stringent conditions than necessary, since the Pope has said those conditions are not necessary and they are demanding them anyway.”

        False, even by your own words.

        The first quote requires several people vying with each other for more and more strident conditions.

        But by your own words the people only opted for more strident conditions with no implication of vying each other for more and more strident conditions.

        And besides, if it is only since 2 years and only in opposition to AL, then the more fitting description would be, that AL loosened the conditions somewhat and the opponents opt for keeping the conditions as they were up to AL.

        People vying with each other would require some group A opting for e.g. the conditions as directly pre-AL while some group B option for some conditions stricter than that; but there is no such group B (at least of any relevance).

        Sorry, this probably sounds pretty unfriendly; but that is the state of the AL discussion. The AL defenders say something which in the view of the critics is simply factually incorrect already – and usually tilted in a way not nice for AL critics.

        But i guess it is perceived the same way the other way round.

        “And people who are opposing the pope’s actions regarding the Eucharist should do a bit of soul searching on whether or not they are not being led by that Jansenist spirit Pius X here decries.”

        Been there; done that; nope. I – and from what i perceive others as well – are just lead from a “this doesn’t add up”- spirit and a “ok, maybe this might add up in a very complicated way; but it will be completely and easily exploitable and will be exploited by all those trying to finally get the Church to agree to contraception, abortion, socialism, forced population control, euthanasia”-spirit.

        Why does that make my Jansenist if i expect that AL will be abused to promote evil and that i will expect that few will be able to mount an effective defense?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *