At synod, Cardinal Marx openly promotes Communion for divorced-and-remarried

[gilliam]

Vatican City, Oct 16, 2015 / 05:23 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- After years of both direct and indirect remarks on the subject, German Cardinal Reinhard Marx issued his most direct statement yet in favor of offering Communion to the divorced-and-remarried.

In an Oct. 14 address to his fellow bishops from around the world, gathered at the Synod in Rome, he said that “we should seriously consider the possibility – based on each individual case and not in a generalizing way – to admit civilly divorced and remarried believers to the sacrament of Penance and Holy Communion.”

This should be permitted, he continued, “when the shared life in the canonically valid marriage definitively has failed and the marriage cannot be annulled, the liabilities from this marriage have been resolved, the fault for breaking up the marital lifebond was regretted and the sincere will exists to live the second civil marriage in faith and to educate children in the Faith.”

Cardinal Marx’s statement follows years of increased calls from several of the German bishops for a change in the Church’s rules.

The Catholic Church acknowledges that marriage is indissoluble – that is, ended only by death, particularly in marriages between baptized persons, which are sacramental. The Church allows couples to seek an annulment in cases where they do not believe that a true marriage ever existed to begin with, for various reasons including immaturity, psychological illness and deception. However, if a sacramental marriage does exist, it cannot be broken by civil divorce.

Therefore, if a divorced person enters a new civil marriage – unless the Church has declared the nullity of their first union – they are in an adulterous union with their new partner, since they are still sacramentally bound to their original spouse. As a result, they may not receive sacramental Communion, as adultery is a grave sin.

catholicnewsagency.com/news/at-synod-cardinal-marx-openly-promotes-communion-for-divorced-and-remarried-63236/

 

[_Abyssinia]

The fact is, the issue of giving Communion for the divorced and remarried is an issue of division among the Synod fathers, not of unity. There shouldn’t be any changes on the giving of Communion to the divorced and remarried.

Would the Church ask a Priest like Fr Brian W. Harrison to partake in a “penitential process” he sees as “sacrilegious abuse of the sacrament” and any others that may feel similar?

Edward Pentin tweeted:

@EdwardPentin: #Synod father speaking anon: “Germans and a few French are the major force pushing reform, trying to change doctrine on divorce-remarriage”

twitter.com/edwardpentin/status/655164321463455745

 

[JimG]

This should be permitted, he continued, “when the shared life in the canonically valid marriage definitively has failed and the marriage cannot be annulled, the liabilities from this marriage have been resolved, the fault for breaking up the marital lifebond was regretted and the sincere will exists to live the second civil marriage in faith and to educate children in the Faith.”

So this leaves the couple in the second marriage in an admittedly invalid marriage. Yet it is proposed that they are not barred from communion. Why not? A subsequent quote gives the reason:

“The cardinal questioned whether sexual acts in the second union “without exception be judged as adultery? Irrespective of an appraisal of the concrete situation?”

In other words, the cardinal seems willing to make the assumption that continued sexual relations within an invalid sexual union does not constitute adultery.

A quite remarkable proposition.

 

[LongingSoul]

Well Pope Francis asked for complete honesty and courage in expressing views at the synod. The Germans and French are at least following the brief.

 

[LongingSoul]

So this leaves the couple in the second marriage in an admittedly invalid marriage. Yet it is proposed that they are not barred from communion. Why not? A subsequent quote gives the reason:

“The cardinal questioned whether sexual acts in the second union “without exception be judged as adultery? Irrespective of an appraisal of the concrete situation?”

By using the term ‘canonically valid marriage’ he’s contrasting the Church law with the original natural law understanding which the Church law presupposes. Adultery was an offense to marriage prior to the Church law which defines it.

Whether there’s any theological merit to doing that will remain to be seen. I do get where they are coming from though.

 

[Trad_Catholic27]

The Church’s teaching will not change on this matter because God will not allow it.

The reason is because if it did the Church would be allowing adulterous relationships a stamp of approval and weaking Holy Matrimony even more than Same Sex Marriage.

God guide the Synod on the Family to protect the teaching on marriage and It’s unbreakable bond amen

 

[Mongo]

By using the term ‘canonically valid marriage’ he’s contrasting the Church law with the original natural law understanding which the Church law presupposes. Adultery was an offense to marriage prior to the Church law which defines it.

Whether there’s any theological merit to doing that will remain to be seen. I do get where they are coming from though.

I don’t follow. How does this support the cardinals position?

 

[Good_Tidings]

I can’t think of who needs to receive communion more.

That is a problem I have always had: that the people who need it most are not allowed to receive it. Most of the divorced people I know are not the ones who initiated the divorce themselves. I’m so glad the church is thinking about this. I hope that it works out.

 

[Colorad007]

Well Pope Francis asked for complete honesty and courage in expressing views at the synod. The Germans and French are at least following the brief.

So non-German prelates who honestly think that Jesus Christ is a surer guide than Walter Kasper are not being honest or courageous?

 

[Colorad007]

I can’t think of who needs to receive communion more.

That is a problem I have always had: that the people who need it most are not allowed to receive it. Most of the divorced people I know are not the ones who initiated the divorce themselves. I’m so glad the church is thinking about this. I hope that it works out.

It isn’t an Advil, much less a magic cookie. Those who receieve Holy Communion in a state of sin are seriously harming themselves. So you cannot say “they need it more” because it simply isn’t true.

 

[Elizium23]

I can’t think of who needs to receive communion more.

That is a problem I have always had: that the people who need it most are not allowed to receive it. Most of the divorced people I know are not the ones who initiated the divorce themselves. I’m so glad the church is thinking about this. I hope that it works out.

How about their invalid attempt at marriage and subsequent adulterous cohabitation? Is that also imposed on these poor innocent people against their will?

 

[LongingSoul]

I don’t follow. How does this support the cardinals position?

The question that Pope Benedict had raised for examination a couple of times was the phenomenon of ‘celebrating the sacrament without faith’ and how that affected canonical validity. That leads to the question of whether such a situation can be regarded similar to a non Catholic natural marriage when being reviewed for nullity. It hasn’t had theological support in the past but that doesn’t always mean that there will never be.

 

[LongingSoul]

So non-German prelates who honestly think that Jesus Christ is a surer guide than Walter Kasper are not being honest or courageous?

Archbishop Coleridge related an incident from the synod last week…

“I’ll quote one bishop, and this scandalized me, who said, “This synod basically has to choose between the way of Jesus and the way of Walter Kasper.” It wasn’t in the public session, but it was said. I don’t scandalize easily, but that did it.”

The Pope invited Cardinal Kaspers ideas and asked for them not to be afraid to speak fully and openly.

 

[Trad_Catholic27]

The Church’s teaching will not change on this matter because God will not allow it.

The reason is because if it did the Church would be allowing adulterous relationships a stamp of approval and weaking Holy Matrimony even more than Same Sex Marriage.

God guide the Synod on the Family to protect the teaching on marriage and It’s unbreakable bond amen

 

[MaryT777]

I can’t think of who needs to receive communion more.

That is a problem I have always had: that the people who need it most are not allowed to receive it. Most of the divorced people I know are not the ones who initiated the divorce themselves. I’m so glad the church is thinking about this. I hope that it works out.

Yes, it is particularly hard when a Catholic chooses divorce against the hopes and wishes of a spouse and then they end up in a situation where if the marriage was valid and if they choose to remarry of course they cannot Commune.

Now many can say “Ah, but they don’t need to remarry.” That’s a valid point, they can remain celibate and single their whole life but when someone is put in that predicament due to the decision of someone else it’s very difficult.

I think the Synod is doing a good job discussing the issue openly and noting that those in these situations need pastoral care.

I don’t believe the Synod should change the position of the Church on this matter but I do think we are doing a good job of at least noting it’s a real issues in the church; the care of the divorced.

Mary.

 

[DaveBj]

I can’t think of who needs to receive communion more.

That is a problem I have always had: that the people who need it most are not allowed to receive it. Most of the divorced people I know are not the ones who initiated the divorce themselves. I’m so glad the church is thinking about this. I hope that it works out.

It isn’t an Advil, much less a magic cookie. Those who receieve Holy Communion in a state of sin are seriously harming themselves. So you cannot say “they need it more” because it simply isn’t true.

What they need more than being allowed to receive Holy Communion is to reconcile their live with the teachings of the Church.

 

[Corki]

So this leaves the couple in the second marriage in an admittedly invalid marriage. Yet it is proposed that they are not barred from communion. Why not? A subsequent quote gives the reason:
In other words, the cardinal seems willing to make the assumption that continued sexual relations within an invalid sexual union does not constitute adultery.

A quite remarkable proposition.

This completely ignores the issue of the civil marriage being a sin itself as are all marriages of Catholics outside of the Church. By this reasoning (the Cardinal’s not yours, Jim), the Church would not prevent anyone who chooses to marry outside the Church from partaking of the Sacraments. Surely a couple in a civil marriage that** also** has in place another, canonical, marriage isn’t in a better place than a couple that **only **has a civil marriage.

 

[Corki]

What they need more than being allowed to receive Holy Communion is to reconcile their live with the teachings of the Church.

And this brings up a question I have not heard mentioned in the Synod recaps. What about Confession? A person who remarries civilly after a divorce isn’t just “barred” from Communion, he/she is unable to receive absolution due to the continued situation. How can they ever be fully reconciled with the Church if they can’t receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation?

 

[ProVobis]

And this brings up a question I have not heard mentioned in the Synod recaps. What about Confession? A person who remarries civilly after a divorce isn’t just “barred” from Communion, he/she is unable to receive absolution due to the continued situation. How can they ever be fully reconciled with the Church if they can’t receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation?

Exactly!

 

[graciew]

Exactly!

There we are!