Addressing absurdity of divorced & remarried couples receiving communion

  • Thread starter Thread starter imo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

imo

Guest
The Church teaches that whoever is in mortal sin cannot receives the Body of Christ. Period. (CCC 1457)

However, multiple dioceses are now accepting “under certain cases” that divorced people that live in a sexually active second union can receive communion!!!

How can someone who is having sex with a person that he is not married to can not be in mortal sin?

This makes me, sincerely, very very frustrated. How can the Church and their bishops approves something that is so clearly, directly and unquestionable against Catholic teaching?

Please, let us stop with sophisms and address the absurdity of this.


 
Last edited:
It’s sad how most of the Church has forgotten that you can’t receive Communion in mortal sin. All the part-time Catholics who commit 51 mortal sins a year by skipping every Sunday mass just walk in on Easter and communicate like there’s nothing to it. I’ll guarantee you the confessionals aren’t nearly as packed during Holy Week as the Church is on Easter.
 
Exactly. Here this happens in Christmas. The church that is usually semi empty became full and communion queues gigantic… But when you realize that some bishops themselves seems to be approving this. I don’t know, it is complicated.
 
imo said:
The Church teaches that whoever is in mortal sin cannot receives the Body of Christ. Period. (CCC 1457)
…
Click to expand...
The first article limits to: “the case in which there is the moral certainty that the first marriage was null but there are not the proofs to demonstrate this in a judicial setting”.
 
Not all remarried people are in mortal sin, even if they are sexually active with their new “spouses”. Grave matter, full consent and full knowledge are required for a sin to be mortal.
While there certainly is a grave matter (adultery) and I assume church-attending remarried Catholics also have full knowledge, there is still the full consent part that needs to be examined.
Some have children with their new “spouses” and there might be other reasons why leaving the new union would be very difficult or even impossible. So it’s safe to say that even if someone entered their new union with a full consent, they are not necessarily staying in it with full consent.
However, even if a remarried, sexually active person is not in a state of mortal sin, I personally believe that it’d be inappropriate for them to receive Communion, because it could be a source of scandal and also because being sexually active with someone whom you’re not married to is objectively against the Church teaching (even if the person is not fully consenting).
 
There could also be situations where the first marriage could be invalid but the invalidity being unable to be proved in the external forum.
 
How can a person continue to be sexually active for a long period of time without full consent? It is a human or an animal? Sorry, if you live with someone and keep having sex with her you are in full consent, short of abuse/rape/mental illness situations…
 
So the Church wants proof to its bureaucratic documents but not for protecting the Body of Christ from impurity? In this case just the conscience it is enough. Hmmmm…

Anyone, we know that probably the majority of cases are just divorced people that are in a second union, please let stop kidding ourselves so that we can have more peace of mind.
 
imo said:
This makes me, sincerely, very very frustrated. How can the Church and their bishops approves something that is so clearly, directly and unquestionable against Catholic teaching?
Click to expand...
I used to get worked up about the possibility of mortal sin by others, but never found peace until I looked inwardly and concentrated on making amends for, and avoiding my own sin.
 
Last edited:
I read @chasingcars comment as the couple had full consent to engage in the sexual act, but not full consent to engage in adultery since they didn’t realize that was what they were doing.
 
That (“moral certitude”) is what tribunals base their judgments on many, many times.

What constitutes this, is already controversial. Now, it’s going to be afforded to the divorced, themselves?

So if the Church affords them this freedom of internal freedom, as to approve giving Communion to them, why would they not give them a decree of nullity?

There seems to be a theological imbalance here.
 
The problem isnt “worrying about other’s sin” but standing against perpetuated and approved scandal.

The last two Popes, and their clergy in high positions, were calling for reform of these abuses happening. The current leaders in Rome are doing the complete opposite!
 
This makes no sense. These situations are being approved as through pastoral guidance! This means there cant be ignorance of the Church’s Teaching.

How can a couple, who is discussing their situation with their pastor, not aware this sexual relation, with someone other than their recognized spouse by the Church, is adultery?
 
Step one: don’t get news from “Lifesite” which is notoriously unreliable and loose with the facts.

Step two: understand that the internal forum solution is not new.
 
Ammi said:
The problem isnt “worrying about other’s sin” but standing against perpetuated and approved scandal.
Click to expand...
I’m not convinced, given the remainder of your post:
Ammi said:
The last two Popes, and their clergy in high positions, were calling for reform of these abuses happening. The current leaders in Rome are doing the complete opposite!
Click to expand...
The “last two Popes” and all subsequent Popes are the Vicar’s of Christ when they serve, and while it is easy for us to second guess their actions, they are the heirs to the chair of Saint Peter, not us.
 
Last edited:
Ammi said:
There is a limit to a Pope’s authority.
Click to expand...
And who decides that limit in these cases? You and I?

The limit case, not to be confused with infallibility, because I never implied or stated that, is often used to argue against decisions made by the Holy See that one does not agree with.

Disagreement is one thing, but to assume the Pope is just plain wrong is another.

The administration of the Church is not a Democracy…if it were, we would be one of tens of thousands of Protestant denominations.
 
Last edited:
I was told by two priests that it is not a mortal sin to be divorced and you can still receive communion unless there is of course any relations going on. Also as a caveat, I’ve had counsel that my marriage is very likely null based on circumstances.
 
When five Dubia is brought to the Pope, by four Cardinals (and many other clergy) and it is ignored, that shows a lack of conviction to a profound degree.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top