Bishops: Integrate remarried Catholics into Church life

[gilliam]

The 2015 Synod of Bishops on the family has wrapped up its work and the bishops have voted on a final document to be given to Pope Francis. In the past three weeks, 270 cardinals, archbishops, and priests from around the world, joined by lay observers, have discussed and debated a host of issues, including letting divorced and civilly remarried couples return to Communion, using less harsh language in reference to gays and lesbians as well as couples living together outside of marriage, preparing couples better for the challenges of married life, and supporting them more during marriage.

Crux is translating the document and will post information about each topic section-by-section, so check back frequently for updates.

Divorced and civilly remarried Catholics
While not advocating that divorced and civilly remarried Catholics should receive Communion, the bishops nonetheless declared that the Church should figure out whether they can be included in any elements of Church life from which they are now excluded.

They also said that they should be more integrated into the life of the Church and not made to feel that they have been excommunicated — not only for their sake, but for the sake of their children.

“They are baptized, they are brothers and sisters, and the Holy Spirit pours out gifts and charisms on them for the good of all,” the bishops wrote. “….taking care of these people is not a weakness in its own faith and its witness as to the indissolubility of marriage; indeed, the Church expresses its own charity through this care.”

This section of the final report was adopted by a vote of 187-72.

cruxnow.com/church/2015/10/24/synod-updates-divorced-remarried-catholics-must-be-more-integrated-into-church-life/

 

[_Abyssinia]

Catholic Herald:

At times, the working document seemed almost embarrassed by the settled doctrine of the Church on the indissolubility of marriage, on the conditions necessary for the worthy reception of Holy Communion, and on the virtues of chastity and fidelity.

The final report reaffirms the Church’s doctrines on marriage, Holy Communion and the possibility of living virtuously in the post-modern world. And it does so without cavil, even as it calls the Church to a more effective proclamation of the truths it bears as a patrimony from the Lord Jesus himself, and to more solicitous pastoral care of those in difficult marital and familial circumstances.

catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2015/10/24/letters-from-the-synod-special-edition-october-24/

 

[frangiuliano115]

Interesting.

Over here it was reported that the decision was to determine on an individual case by case basis if the remarried couple could participate in the eucharist.

Will be reading up on it.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Synod Final Document: English Translation of Hot-Topic Paragraphs

aleteia.org/2015/10/24/synod-final-document-english-translation-of-hot-topic-paragraphs/

 

[frangiuliano115]

Synod Final Document: English Translation of Hot-Topic Paragraphs

aleteia.org/2015/10/24/synod-final-document-english-translation-of-hot-topic-paragraphs/

Read it.

I understand from 84/85/86 that it is, in fact, going to be judged on a personal case by case method.

I’m torn about this, but in the end I feel like some consideration must be given. I have a friend whose husband left HER with 3 small children. She’s alone right now, but what if she met someone that could help her raise her 3 small children and accompany her through life?

OTOH Jesus did say divorce is wrong. It’s a conflict…

Fran

 

[Inquiringperson]

Read it.

I understand from 84/85/86 that it is, in fact, going to be judged on a personal case by case method.

I’m torn about this, but in the end I feel like some consideration must be given. I have a friend whose husband left HER with 3 small children. She’s alone right now, but what if she met someone that could help her raise her 3 small children and accompany her through life?

OTOH Jesus did say divorce is wrong. It’s a conflict…

Fran

There might be a way for your friend to get an annulment, and she can always ask for financial help to offset any potential costs of the annulment (which shouldn’t be too expensive).

 

[frangiuliano115]

There might be a way for your friend to get an annulment, and she can always ask for financial help to offset any potential costs of the annulment (which shouldn’t be too expensive).

You bring up a good point.

I don’t know if the conditions exist for an annulment. No one can except the two parties.

But this might be the way things will go - after all, how many persons really know what they’re doing when they get married? Do they all want children? Do they all understand in their head that they have to remain faithful? Do they understand that it’s forever? Do they really understand that it’s a covenant between them and God?

I don’t think so. So maybe annulments will become easier to get and then remarriage will be possible. Just a thought. And a possible solution.

Fran

 

[_Abyssinia]

Read it.

I understand from 84/85/86 that it is, in fact, going to be judged on a personal case by case method.

I’m torn about this, but in the end I feel like some consideration must be given. I have a friend whose husband left HER with 3 small children. She’s alone right now, but what if she met someone that could help her raise her 3 small children and accompany her through life?

OTOH Jesus did say divorce is wrong. It’s a conflict…

Fran

Fr Thomas Petri says:

@petriop: Only mention in #Synod2015 document of the Eucharist regarding divorced is for those who are divorced but remain faithful to marital bond

twitter.com/petriop/status/657992920478457856

@petriop: Nothing in the document opens doors to communion for remarried. t.co/PwVDIBIXbN

twitter.com/petriop/status/657969444220719104

 

[gilliam]

Read it.

I understand from 84/85/86 that it is, in fact, going to be judged on a personal case by case method.

I’m torn about this, but in the end I feel like some consideration must be given. I have a friend whose husband left HER with 3 small children. She’s alone right now, but what if she met someone that could help her raise her 3 small children and accompany her through life?

OTOH Jesus did say divorce is wrong. It’s a conflict…

Fran

Remember: these are ideas for the Holy Father to consider, these are not decisions.

 

[JimG]

You bring up a good point.

I don’t know if the conditions exist for an annulment. No one can except the two parties.

But this might be the way things will go - after all, how many persons really know what they’re doing when they get married? Do they all want children? Do they all understand in their head that they have to remain faithful? Do they understand that it’s forever? Do they really understand that it’s a covenant between them and God?

I don’t think so. So maybe annulments will become easier to get and then remarriage will be possible. Just a thought. And a possible solution.

Fran

Of course, in the United States at least, it seems that annulments are already rather easy to obtain. And if your observations about people’s state of mind (or absence thereof!) when marrying are correct, they might become even easier. From your description, it sounds as though nearly every marriage is null, but I hope it isn’t that bad.

Still the recommendations, as I read them, do not have to do with making annulments easier, but letting people essentially decide for themselves, with the help of their confessor, whether or not the prior marriage was null.

If that’s the case, would this internal forum decision on the part of one spouse only, mean that the other spouse is also bound by it? After all, a person can’t be both validly married and not married to the same person at the same time.

 

[OraLabora]

Remember: these are ideas for the Holy Father to consider, these are not decisions.

Thanks it is very important to state this clearly. The Holy Father will have the final word, and we’ll all be bound to obedience no matter where he lands on these issues.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Of course, in the United States at least, it seems that annulments are already rather easy to obtain. And if your observations about people’s state of mind (or absence thereof!) when marrying are correct, they might become even easier. From your description, it sounds as though nearly every marriage is null, but I hope it isn’t that bad.

Still the recommendations, as I read them, do not have to do with making annulments easier, but letting people essentially decide for themselves, with the help of their confessor, whether or not the prior marriage was null.

If that’s the case, would this internal forum decision on the part of one spouse only, mean that the other spouse is also bound by it? After all, a person can’t be both validly married and not married to the same person at the same time.

@FrancisXRocca: @JamesMartinSJ But there is nothing in the internal forum language that says the process could lead to suspending law on the matter

twitter.com/francisxrocca/status/658072670932725760

 

[_Abyssinia]

Of course, in the United States at least, it seems that annulments are already rather easy to obtain. And if your observations about people’s state of mind (or absence thereof!) when marrying are correct, they might become even easier. From your description, it sounds as though nearly every marriage is null, but I hope it isn’t that bad.

Still the recommendations, as I read them, do not have to do with making annulments easier, but letting people essentially decide for themselves, with the help of their confessor, whether or not the prior marriage was null.

If that’s the case, would this internal forum decision on the part of one spouse only, mean that the other spouse is also bound by it? After all, a person can’t be both validly married and not married to the same person at the same time.

Crux:

Section 86. The second section on the divorced and remarried was adopted by a vote of 190 to 64.

How to figure out how divorced/remarried Catholics can participate more fully in the Church? They should have an “internal forum,” or private conversation, with their priest, who will help them understand their situation and what steps they can take.

Over the years, advocates of allowing divorced and remarried Catholics to receive Communion often have suggested that permission could be given through the “internal forum,” meaning a private exchange with a priest or a bishop, so the reference to the internal forum could be read as encouraging that view, likely explaining why it drew among the highest number of “no” votes of any section of the report.

As written, however, it’s not entirely clear that receiving Communion is the form of “fuller participation in the life of the Church” to which the paragraph refers.

cruxnow.com/church/2015/10/24/synod-updates-divorced-remarried-catholics-must-be-more-integrated-into-church-life/

I think internal forum just means guiding the persons, helping them, etc. It doesn’t necessarily mean Communion. And as Fr Petri says:

@petriop: Nothing in the document opens doors to communion for remarried. t.co/PwVDIBIXbN

twitter.com/petriop/status/657969444220719104

 

[Thomas_White]

Still the recommendations, as I read them, do not have to do with making annulments easier, but letting people essentially decide for themselves, with the help of their confessor, whether or not the prior marriage was null.

If that’s the case, would this internal forum decision on the part of one spouse only, mean that the other spouse is also bound by it? After all, a person can’t be both validly married and not married to the same person at the same time.

I wondered about this too since it seems perplexing. I don’t know what it might mean in the instance of the internal forum (the forum of conscience), but one person petitions a marriage tribunal, and the partner to the marriage might not want an anullment or even participate in the tribunal. But the judgment of the tribunal applies to both parties.

 

[JimG]

I wondered about this too since it seems perplexing. I don’t know what it might mean in the instance of the internal forum (the forum of conscience), but one person petitions a marriage tribunal, and the partner to the marriage might not want an anullment or even participate in the tribunal. But the judgment of the tribunal applies to both parties.

Yes, the judgment of the tribunal applies to the status of the marriage itself. So if such a decision about validity is effectively made and is binding, in the internal forum, it would seem that such a decision would have to be communicated to the other party, since they have an interest in the status of the marriage. For that reason, I don’t expect that such a decision will be delegated to the internal forum. But as has been noted, these are at this point only recommendations for consideration.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Fr James Bradley:

@FrJamesBradley: 2/4 Paragraph 84 makes no new claim about civilly remarried persons, adopts language of accompaniment in Sacramentum Caritatis 29. #Synod15

twitter.com/frjamesbradley/status/658098750775250944

@FrJamesBradley: 3/4 Paragraph 85 makes no new claim re: civilly remarried and Holy Communion; it must be read with PCLT Declaration referenced. #Synod15

twitter.com/frjamesbradley/status/658098866030551042

@FrJamesBradley: 4/4 Paragraph 86 makes no new claim re: “internal forum solution”; accompaniment is to aid understanding of objective situation. #Synod15

twitter.com/frjamesbradley/status/658099040165502976

 

[frangiuliano115]

Of course, in the United States at least, it seems that annulments are already rather easy to obtain. And if your observations about people’s state of mind (or absence thereof!) when marrying are correct, they might become even easier. From your description, it sounds as though nearly every marriage is null, but I hope it isn’t that bad.

Still the recommendations, as I read them, do not have to do with making annulments easier, but letting people essentially decide for themselves, with the help of their confessor, whether or not the prior marriage was null.

If that’s the case, would this internal forum decision on the part of one spouse only, mean that the other spouse is also bound by it? After all, a person can’t be both validly married and not married to the same person at the same time.

Yes. You bring up another point I had never thought of - the other spouse.
Sin is personal. Well, it’s all complicated. I feel like the Pope might go along with the synod because he’s very pastoral and seems already to lean in that direction.

But then Abyssinia’s links seem to contradict this. Going up for adult catechism lesson in a couple of weeks and I’m sure Fra Lorenzo will be speaking on this since catechists need to know what to answer when people ask.

Maybe we’ll just have to wait and see to be sure…

Nice Sunday to all
Fran

 

[pnewton]

Synod Final Document: English Translation of Hot-Topic Paragraphs

aleteia.org/2015/10/24/synod-final-document-english-translation-of-hot-topic-paragraphs/

I am glad you posted this. It gives a different side to this document than I found at the EWTN website. This idea of an “internal forum” is not something that all Catholics I know (including priest) believe to be a legitimate means of dealing with those who are remarried. I know this has been practiced in places, so in that sense practice will not change. But I think this is the first time (if approved) the internal forum will have universal ecclesial recognition.

I also not that the role of discernment is left with the pastor (lucky him) with his responsibility being to adhere to his bishop and doctrine. I find it interesting that canon law was exclude, but I guess that is the “internal” part.

 

[Thomas_White]

I am glad you posted this. It gives a different side to this document than I found at the EWTN website. This idea of an “internal forum” is not something that all Catholics I know (including priest) believe to be a legitimate means of dealing with those who are remarried. I know this has been practiced in places, so in that sense practice will not change. But I think this is the first time (if approved) the internal forum will have universal ecclesial recognition.

I also not that the role of discernment is left with the pastor (lucky him) with his responsibility being to adhere to his bishop and doctrine. I find it interesting that canon law was exclude, but I guess that is the “internal” part.

“Of itself, the power of governance is exercised for the external forum; sometimes, however, it is exercised for the internal forum alone, so that the effects which its exercise is meant to have for the external forum are not recognized there, except insofar as the law determines it in specific cases” (1983 code of Canon Law, Can. 130).

There was at one time a specific reference concerning the internal forum with respect to divorced and remarried Catholics receiving communion. However, in essence the certain judgment of conscience is recognized by canon law if not externally.

 

[pnewton]

“Of itself, the power of governance is exercised for the external forum; sometimes, however, it is exercised for the internal forum alone, so that the effects which its exercise is meant to have for the external forum are not recognized there, except insofar as the law determines it in specific cases” (1983 code of Canon Law, Can. 130).

There was at one time a specific reference concerning the internal forum with respect to divorced and remarried Catholics receiving communion. However, in essence the certain judgment of conscience is recognized by canon law if not externally.

I stand corrected. I had not read this. I like the way the synod document defines this process, both opening it, and limiting it.