The Pope has tried to wave through communion for divorced-and-remarried http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/09/pope-tried-wave-communion-divorced-remarried/ It is out there in the mainstream. There are some in the secular who understand better than many Catholics the chaos that is brought about by ambiguity. Jesus Christ was absolutely clear on His teachings on marriage. 'But I say to you' - the eternal Word gives us His word on marriage. Round holes cannot be put into square pegs I am afraid.
What weird times we live in.[/QUOTE] For all we know Pope Francis might believe the same thing of same sex 'couples'.
Certain parts of what then Pope Benedict said seem to have been omitted. Look at the full version - "Another priest raised the topic of Communion for the faithful who are divorced and remarried. The Holy Father answered him as follows: We all know that this is a particularly painful problem for people who live in situations in which they are excluded from Eucharistic Communion, and naturally for the priests who desire to help these people love the Church and love Christ. This is a problem. I shall not attempt to give an answer now, but in any case two aspects are very important. The first: even if these people cannot go to sacramental Communion, they are not excluded from the love of the Church or from the love of Christ. A Eucharist without immediate sacramental Communion is not of course complete; it lacks an essential dimension. Nonetheless, it is also true that taking part in the Eucharist without Eucharistic Communion is not the same as nothing; it still means being involved in the mystery of the Cross and Resurrection of Christ. It is still participating in the great Sacrament in its spiritual and pneumatic dimensions, and also in its ecclesial dimension, although this is not strictly sacramental. And since it is the Sacrament of Christ's passion, the suffering Christ embraces these people in a special way and communicates with them in another way differently, so that they may feel embraced by the Crucified Lord who fell to the ground and died and suffered for them and with them. Consequently, they must be made to understand that even if, unfortunately, a fundamental dimension is absent, they are not excluded from the great mystery of the Eucharist or from the love of Christ who is present in it. This seems to me important, just as it is important that the parish priest and the parish community make these people realize that on the one hand they must respect the indissolubility of the Sacrament, and on the other, that we love these people who are also suffering for us. Moreover, we must suffer with them, because they are bearing an important witness and because we know that the moment when one gives in "out of love", one wrongs the Sacrament itself and the indissolubility appears less and less true. We know the problem, not only of the Protestant Communities but also of the Orthodox Churches, which are often presented as a model for the possibility of remarriage. But only the first marriage is sacramental: the Orthodox too recognize that the other marriages are not sacramental, they are reduced and redimensioned marriages and in a penitential situation; in a certain sense, the couple can go to Communion but in the awareness that this is a concession "by economy", as they say, through mercy which, nevertheless, does not remove the fact that their marriage is not a Sacrament. The other point is that in the Eastern Churches for these marriages they have conceded the possibility of divorce too lightly, and that the principle of indissolubility, the true sacramental character of the marriage, is therefore seriously injured. On the one hand, therefore, is the good of the community and the good of the Sacrament that we must respect, and on the other, the suffering of the people we must alleviate. The second point that we should teach and also make credible through our own lives is that suffering, in various forms, is a necessary part of our lives. I would call this a noble suffering. Once again, it is necessary to make it clear that pleasure is not everything. May Christianity give us joy, just as love gives joy. But love is always also a renunciation of self. The Lord himself has given us the formula of what love is: those who lose themselves find themselves; those who spare or save themselves are lost. It is always an "Exodus", hence, painful. True joy is something different from pleasure; joy grows and continues to mature in suffering, in communion with the Cross of Christ. It is here alone that the true joy of faith is born, from which even they are not excluded if they learn to accept their suffering in communion with that of Christ." "When read in its entirety, one sees clearly that no confusion on the matter has been introduced." Benedict stated......"None of us has a ready-made formula, also because situations always differ." He then went on to give an example of those who were in a similar situation to mine..though I had not remarried. He also said that this 'situation' could be looked into. Was there in fact something missing, he asks, when a person gets married "for the sake of tradition?" He personally thought this was a case for "invalidity" and thought it should be studied further. Now if it was all as 'cut and dry' as some say then.....there is no further need for study. Pope Benedict also said "I shall not attempt to give an answer now" Obviously meaning..and this is so important to remember.. it is not so straight forward as some make out! You also have to remember the teaching of the Church which tells us that there are circumstances which mitigate moral responsibility CCC 2352
"There are two issues involved, I believe. The first and most important is the enormity of the gift. In the early Church, sickness and death was at times associated with receiving Holy Communion without examining one's conscience and repenting of sin. We must realize the gift the Father offers. As Carmel333 says: This is REALLY the body and blood of Christ! "It should go without saying that we must approach the altar in reverence, humility, and awe! But then, I said it." Absolutely! Scripture also tells us that we are not in a position to judge, Mario. Now supposing I had remarried after my annulment and certain people in my Church were not aware of this...would they have been correct if they had judged me as an adulteress? Of course not. We have no idea what happens in people's lives...no idea how innocent or guilty they are. We would be horrified if we could feel what the Lord feels when some people in serious sin receive Him in Holy Communion. These sinners are not always adulterers..they could be those who spread scandal and gossip on the internet! "Secondly, isn't the intent of the Pope to encourage priests to lead the divorced and remarried in a type of examination that will encourage a grasping of the truth and repentance (no free pass for receiving Holy Communion here) " Yes...those remarried who are already receiving the Lord in Holy Communion, without discernment, will be told of the consequences of doing this. The priest will help them form their consciences so that they can be absolutely certain in conscience that their previous broken marriage had never been valid..or was in fact a real marriage. "It is important, however, to ensure that this window is not seen as providing unrestricted access to the sacraments or as if any situation could justify it. What is being proposed is a discernment that adequately distinguishes between cases. " People need to be guided in placing themselves and "their consciences before God" (Argentinian Bishops) "It is concern over a possible faulty process relative to the second point that is at the heart of this debate. But even deeper is the awareness of apostates within the Church that will use this to their advantage. We must beg the Lord for His protection and wisdom, and for clarity from the Magisterium. I am reminded of what Paul said to the leaders of the Churches when at Miletus. Maranatha!" Yes we should be concerned..but there is also concern that abuses take place in the External forum too. Do I know that my annulment decree is genuine? Here I am left to trust my conscience..just as in the internal forum. Did I tell the whole truth? Maybe the marriage tribunal people were too lax..ah the list goes on!
Janet, you seem to deliberately avoid the points raised up. As I mentioned in my earlier post on this thread - Also, as Frodo pointed out - St. John Paul II stated communion to divorce/remarried couple - without annulments cannot be admited to the sacrament. However, as my earlier post mentioned, the Buenos Aires bishops state otherwise, and this was praised by Pope Francis! I post it below:
There is no circumstance where this can be decided outside of the annulment process. This has been stated as such, just a few decades ago, by a saint, in an apostolic exhortation. Do you disagree? Read the following..... Before he became Pope, Cardinal Ratzinger stated that sometimes a Catholic must follow her conscience, even when this means disagreeing with the Pope. "Over the pope as the expression of the binding claim of ecclesiastical authority there still stands one's own conscience, which must be obeyed before all else, if necessary even against the requirement of ecclesiastical authority. Conscience confronts [the individual] with a supreme and ultimate tribunal, and one which in the last resort is beyond the claim of external social groups, even of the official church" (Pope Benedict XVI [then Archbishop Joseph Ratzinger], Commentary on the Documents of Vatican II, ed. Vorgrimler, 1968, on Gaudium et spes, part 1,chapter 1.).
6) "In other, more complex cases, and when a declaration of nullity has not been obtained, the above mentioned option may not, in fact, be feasible. Nonetheless, a path of discernment is still possible. If it comes to be recognized that, in a specific case, there are limitations that mitigate responsibility and culpability (cf. 301-302), especially when a person believes they would incur a subsequent wrong by harming the children of the new union, Amoris Laetitia offers the possibility of access to the sacraments of Reconciliation and Eucharist (cf. footnotes 336 and 351). These sacraments, in turn, dispose the person to continue maturing and growing with the power of grace." Yes... this is what we have been discussing...If a person is unable to get an annulment due to certain factors..lack of witnesses etc, then the person can be led on a path of discernment in the internal forum. This is definitely not to say that the person will be happy with the outcome after a period of soul searching, rather the person will be shown the path they can take in order to participate in the Church in some way...even if they cannot receive Holy Communion. "In canon law, internal forum, the realm of conscience, is contrasted with the external or outward forum; thus, a marriage might be null and void in the internal forum, but binding outwardly, i.e.,in the external forum, for want of judicial proof to the contrary." Something even more shocking.... "This emphasis on the primacy of conscience is part of a long and continuous Catholic tradition. Almost 800 years ago Saint Thomas Aquinas taught that if one has carefully considered all options and believes in good conscience that one must do a certain act or refrain from doing a certain act then it is a sin not to follow the command of one's conscience, no matter what the official teachings of the Church happen to be. In other words, ultimately, the authority of one's "well-formed conscience" supersedes the authority of the Church. In forming their consciences, then, Catholics prayerfully ask the five questions mentioned, and act accordingly, even when their actions go contrary to the Church's official teaching -- on annulments or any other moral issue. http://www.arcc-catholic-rights.net/internal_forum_1.htm
Frodo...I checked out your link but it doesn't mention annulments. http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-p...hf_jp-ii_spe_19970124_plenaria-pc-family.html
Whether he did or didn't isn't really a big deal. What is a big deal is the thought that Catholics are just going through the motions. I did that too..and many other I know. This leads me to think that perhaps too many are 'missing' that certain something which validates the marriage.
Please Janet, let us stop cherry picking excerpts. It is quite clear in the body of Pope Benedict 's work that he did not think that divorced/remarried could receive communion. If he did - as you propose - then why did he never say such in any exhortations/encyclicals or any other binding papal document? As for conscience... have you studied his theology on it, or have you simply googled statements in order to try to back up your (erroneous) claims? Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger Presented at the 10th Workshop for Bishops February 1991 Dallas, Texas You have yet again failed to answer the questions. Do you agree with St. John Paul II? Or was he too much of a Pharisee?
I am very active in a Catholic marriage ministry where we try to save those at the divorce table. I can assure you, there are some VERY bright people who are fairly regular church goers who are still not sold on this. We try to work on that and talk about it a lot. I think they may kind of know it, but when you hear every day, day after day, that love is a feeling, and emotion and when it goes you just get divorced and find it elsewhere. You hear that every day watching tv, it sinks in and it takes a lot to change that train of thought.
Funny... I never gave you a link... And you have not addressed the points yet again... Serious question: Are you willing to honestly and sincerely debate the merits of you position, or is this just going to be a spinning and strawman debate? It almost seems, dare I say, a bit trollish. Let me make this as clear as possible: St. John Paul II APOSTOLIC EXHORTATION FAMILIARIS CONSORTIO "However, the Church reaffirms her practice, which is based upon Sacred Scripture, of not admitting to Eucharistic Communion divorced persons who have remarried. They are unable to be admitted thereto from the fact that their state and condition of life objectively contradict that union of love between Christ and the Church which is signified and effected by the Eucharist." DO YOU THINK SAINT JOHN PAUL II WAS IN ERROR?
I am talking about the couple taking their vows on their wedding day and saying the words 'until death us do part'. I think most people who say these words know what it means!!
That's better. Now I can answer you. Of course he wasn't in error. Those whose first marriages are valid can not receive Holy Communion.
