Yes! In South America there are many young girls being forced into marriage. The Pope is very aware of this because he receives all the heartbreaking letters from women who have left the first union and have remarried.
Ha ha. I will try to remember that josephite. David did try to explain that to me some weeks ago but I am none too good with this way of posting
That is why the Orthodox Churches are viewed as "separated brethren" they have separated from Christ's true Church. Reunion will come about after the tribulations.
No it wasn't taken out of context. Now let's go to your quote......"In fidelity to the words of Jesus Christ(5), the Church affirms that a new union cannot be recognised as valid if the preceding marriage was valid." "If the preceeding marriage was valid" Of course they cannot receive Holy Communion if the first marriage was valid.
I know....but it still has to be proven if the person was going through the external forum process. Supposing the parents had died? She could go the internal forum route..One thing she won't have is a certificate of the annulment decree. You see how many examples we could give whereby a marriage was never valid...yet some are unable to use the marriage tribunal. For the few that have taken this route God is their judge.
So, it is obvious then that AL has created confusion! Someone in an 'irregular union' may be deemed after 'accompaniment' in one diocese/country, to be able to receive Communion, but with the same situation/factors, be deemed unable to do so in another diocese/country.
You are joking, right? The very next part of the letter goes on to explain why this is wrong! Did you read it? What is your agenda here?
This is a blatant lie from the evil one. A lie told to snare persons into sin. Stop repeating this lie. For your sake and for anyone else's sake who may heed your advice. This is the Church's teaching on this doctrine, it is well worth to read and study the whole letter: Concerning the Reception of Holy Communion by Divorced-and-Remarried Members of the Faithful The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith October 14, 1994 said, 6. Members of the faithful who live together as husband and wife with persons other than their legitimate spouses may not receive Holy Communion. Should they judge it possible to do so, pastors and confessors, given the gravity of the matter and the spiritual good of these persons(10) as well as the common good of the Church, have the serious duty to admonish them that such a judgment of conscience openly contradicts the Church's teaching(11). Pastors in their teaching must also remind the faithful entrusted to their care of this doctrine. 7. The mistaken conviction of a divorced-and-remarried person that he may receive holy communion normally presupposes that personal conscience is considered in the final analysis to be able, on the basis of one's own convictions, to come to a decision about the existence or absence of a previous marriage and the value of the new union. However, such a position is inadmissible. Marriage, in fact, both because it is the image of the spousal relationship between Christ and his church as well as the fundamental core and an important factor in the life of civil society, is essentially a public reality. 8. It is certainly true that a judgment about one's own dispositions for the reception of Holy Communion must be made by a properly formed moral conscience. But it is equally true that the consent that is the foundation of marriage is not simply a private decision since it creates a specifically ecclesial and social situation for the spouses, both individually and as a couple. Thus the judgment of conscience of one's own marital situation does not regard only the immediate relationship between man and God, as if one could prescind from the Church's mediation, that also includes canonical laws binding in conscience. Not to recognise this essential aspect would mean in fact to deny that marriage is a reality of the Church, that is to say, a sacrament."
Have you read the who document Janet? Please do if you haven't and you will see that you have taken that paragraph (3) out of context because that paragraph was describing new 'innovative pastoral approaches' that had crept into Church practise and that is why Pope Benedict issued this pastoral letter. Paragraph 3 explains the innovative pastoral approaches that were being used in some dioceses --- So paragraph 4 then highlights that these new practises were wrong because they broke with the tradition of the Church. 4. Even if analogous pastoral solutions have been proposed by a few Fathers of the Church and in some measure were practiced, nevertheless these never attained the consensus of the Fathers and in no way came to constitute the common doctrine of the Church nor to determine her discipline. It falls to the universal Magisterium, in fidelity to Sacred Scripture and Tradition, to teach and to interpret authentically the depositum fidei. And then Pope Benedict goes on to explain what the Church really teaches ---- With respect to the aforementioned new pastoral proposals, this Congregation deems itself obliged therefore to recall the doctrine and discipline of the Church in this matter. In fidelity to the words of Jesus Christ(5). This norm is not at all a punishment or a discrimination against the divorced and remarried, but rather expresses an objective situation that of itself renders impossible the reception of Holy Communion: "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 his Church which is signified and effected by the Eucharist. Besides this, there is another special pastoral reason: if these people were admitted to the Eucharist, the faithful would be led into error and confusion regarding the Church's teaching about the indissolubility of marriage"(7).
Janet's summary of the situation regarding the remarried that Amoris Laetitia now recognizes is accurate. You may not like it and you may think the Pope's exhortation, following the special synod, is a 'mistake' but following many complaints that the document was unclear, the teaching within it is now becoming clear.
I was not quoting an article. What I'm pointing out is that based on the example of how differently the Canadian bishops and Buenos Aires bishops have interpreted Chapter 8 of AL, there will be differences in implementation of the 'pastoral accompaniment and discernment' of people in 'irregular unions'. The bishops of Buenos Aires have declared for the first time in Church history that an ill-defined class of people living in adultery may be absolved and receive Holy Communion while remaining in that state.
Yes most marriages are not the IDEAL of what God intended by any means, but Jesus told me that valid marriages are an act of the free will. He said He considers even the first marriages of atheists valid. God set up marriage as a covenant between heaven and earth if you will. Between God Himself and a man and a woman. He treats us like the intelligent creatures we are and hold us to our word in this matter. So it may be comforting to utter that " gee, really you know, very few marriages in this day should be considered valid" it is NOT the truth. We are expected to honor our word to not only God, but to the person in which we entered this covenant of marriage with. All of us. Not just Catholics but Jesus expects honor from ALL His children in this matter.
Wrong. There is no mention anywhere in Amoris Laetitia of an internal forum solution in regards to divorced/remarried/communion as proposed by some. Please provide a quote. Is it ambiguous? You bet. But thankfully the Church has spoken many, many times before this - so if you read the links and citations of some of the Church documents provided by some here (hint, hint) it becomes very clear that the so called "internal forum solution' is not available.
The position became clear when Pope Francis endorsed the Argentinian bishop's guidelines on AL. The pope's letter to the bishops said they accurately explained what Amoris Laetitia taught and captured its full meaning. "There are no other interpretations," he said. I copy the Bishop's guidelines, highlighting the 'internal forum' possibility: Basic criteria for the implementation of chapter VIII of Amoris laetitia Dear priests, We have received with joy the exhortation Amoris Laetitia, which calls us, above all, to encourage the growth of love between spouses and to motivate young people to opt for marriage and a family. These are important issues that should never be disregarded or overshadowed by other matters. Francis has opened several doors in pastoral care for families and we are called to take advantage of this time of mercy with a view to endorsing, as a pilgrim Church, the richness offered by the different chapters of this Apostolic Exhortation. We will focus for now on chapter VIII, since it refers to the “guidelines of the bishop” (300) in order to discern the possibility of access to the sacraments of the “divorced who have entered a new union”. We deem it convenient, as Bishops of the same Pastoral Region, to agree on some minimal criteria. We present them without prejudice to the authority that each Bishop has in his own Diocese to clarify, complete or restrict them. 1) Firstly, we should remember that it is not right to speak of giving “permission” for access to the sacraments, but rather of a discernment process under the guidance of a pastor. This is a “personal and pastoral discernment” (300). 2) In this journey, the pastor should emphasize the fundamental proclamation, thekerygma, so as to foster or renew a personal encounter with the living Christ (cf. 58). 3) Pastoral accompaniment is an exercise of the via caritatis. It is an invitation to follow “the way of Jesus, the way of mercy and integration” (296). This itinerary calls for the pastoral charity of the priest who welcomes the penitent, listens to them attentively and shows them the maternal face of the Church, at the same time as accepting their righteous intention and goodwill in placing their whole life under the light of the Gospel and in practising charity (cf. 306). 4) This path does not necessarily end with receiving the sacraments, but may lead to other ways of achieving further integration into the life of the Church: a more active presence in the community, participation in prayer or reflection groups, or giving time to church activities etc. (cf. 299). 5) Whenever feasible, and depending on the specific circumstances of a couple, and especially when both partners are Christians walking together on the path of faith, the priest may suggest a decision to live in continence. Amoris Laetitia does not ignore the difficulties arising from this option (cf. footnote 329) and offers the possibility of having access to the Sacrament of Reconciliation if the partners fail in this purpose (cf. footnote 364, recalling the teaching that Saint John Paul II sent to Cardinal W. Baum, dated 22 March, 1996). 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. 7) But we have to avoid understanding this possibility as an unlimited access to the sacraments, as if all situations warrant it. The idea is to properly discern each case. For example, special care is called for in “a new union arising from a recent divorce” or in “the case of someone who has consistently failed in his obligations to the family” (298). Also, when there is a sort of justification or ostentation of the person’s situation “as if it were part of the Christian ideal” (297). In these difficult cases, we should be patient companions, looking for ways of integrating them (cf. 297, 299). 8) It is always important to guide people to stand before God with their conscience, and for this the “examination of conscience” proposed by Amoris laetitia 300 is very helpful, specifically in relation to “how did they act towards their children” or the abandoned partner. Where there are unresolved injustices, providing access to sacraments is particularly scandalous. 9) It may be right for eventual access to sacraments to take place privately, especially where situations of conflict might arise. But at the same time, we have to accompany our communities in their growing understanding and welcome, without this implying creating confusion about the teaching of the Church on the indissoluble marriage. The community is an instrument of mercy, which is “unmerited, unconditional and gratuitous” (297). 10) Discernment is not closed, because it “is dynamic; it must remain ever open to new stages of growth and to new decisions which can enable the ideal to be more fully realized” (303), according to the “law of gradualness” (295) and with confidence in the help of grace. Above all, we are pastors. This is why we would like to welcome the following words of the Pope: “I also encourage the Church’s pastors to listen [to the faithful] with sensitivity and serenity, with a sincere desire to understand their plight and their point of view, in order to help them live better lives and to recognize their proper place in the Church” (312). With love in Christ, The Bishops of the Area
This only shows the Holy Spirit at work, not allowing error to be explicitly taught in an exhortation. It also shows that a pope's personal opinion on a matter can be in error. But if you want to follow the likes of blind, confused, or otherwise bishops, by all means have at it. If you don't want to read the Church's teachings about this doctrine, fine. But don't say you weren't warned. Don't try to pass this off as official Church teaching endangering the souls who may be influenced by your illogical arguments - and be forewarned: You may not like where you end up.
