Cardinal Tagle: There is no ‘formula for all’ on Communion for the divorced and re-married

[pnewton]

No you are making a huge error already discussed in the thread.

To be culpable of mortal sin you need 3 requirements:

1. grave matter
2. full knowledge of it being grave matter
3. consent of the will to do it anyway.

It is my understanding that communion is denied based on the object state of mortal sin, not the actual state of mortal sin.

 

[Tigg]

Ora, marriage doesn’t guarantee a life free of loneliness. Or a life filled with total bliss. But if one finds satisfaction with another outside of a valid marriage why would he or she need the sacraments again?

This leads us to a deeper thought here… is it because of mans reluctance to follow the cross of Christ and his eagerness to justify his own sin in the pursuit of happiness that we are in this mess?

 

[LongingSoul]

But if one finds satisfaction with another outside of a valid marriage why would he or she need the sacraments again?

What a very strange way of seeing the sacraments. The truth is that people are more able to appreciate a relationship with Christ through their earthly relationships. In suffering one can more deeply appreciate His suffering for us. In forgiving others we are more able to experience Gods forgiveness of us. ‘Blessed are the merciful, they shall have mercy shown them.’

The types of situations being addressed by this question are those who through the experience of the marital union and family have grown in faith to appreciate more deeply communion with Christ. The longing for Communion is a natural and holy response to the experience of communion in the human relationship.

 

[ProVobis]

What a very strange way of seeing the sacraments.

I see seven sacraments. If one is undermined, then the rest lose their meaning as well, the way I see it. Read Tigg’s point.

The longing for Communion is a natural and holy response to the experience of communion in the human relationship.

Yes, but does communion become an end in itself, when salvation (and the other points the Pope makes) should be the ultimate goal? Or should this question be asked in the Philosophy or Apologetics fora?

 

[graciew]

A " case by case" , needs to take a bit of all this into account , Longing Soul. For me. We are the result of a convergence of many factors. How is your understanding or relationship with God different from.the one we have/ had with our earthly father if we do not stop to pray and think about it, for example ?
So I do not believe it is off topic but helps understand.ourselves and others , and get.closer to God. As I see it.

 

[Jon_S_1]

Interesting First Thing Article today regarding this issue. I believe Fr Moloney in his response to Cardinal Kaspers letter, makes a huge mistake when in his arguments he always uses the example of a husband who leaves and deserts his wife and kids as the one who we are postulating as “receiving mercy”.

He never once mentions the abandoned spouse, who likewise can’t receive communion, as the object of mercy as it would make no sense in his comparing the divorced to pedophile priests, which in and of itself is disgusting.

I usually expect more from First Things…

firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2015/03/cardinal-kasper-responds-to-first-things-review-of-mercy

 

[JimG]

Interesting First Thing Article today regarding this issue. I believe Fr Moloney in his response to Cardinal Kaspers letter, makes a huge mistake when in his arguments he always uses the example of a husband who leaves and deserts his wife and kids as the one who we are postulating as “receiving mercy”.

He never once mentions the abandoned spouse, who likewise can’t receive communion, as the object of mercy as it would make no sense in his comparing the divorced to pedophile priests, which in and of itself is disgusting.

I usually expect more from First Things…

firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2015/03/cardinal-kasper-responds-to-first-things-review-of-mercy

It is just an exchange of letters, Cardinal Kasper responding to a review of his book by Fr. Moloney, followed by Fr. Moloney’s response to Cardinal Kasper’s letter. The two letters seem chiefly to disagree about Cardinal Kasper’s treatment of mercy as an “essential” attribute of God, a view that Cardinal Kasper seems to disavow in his letter.

As to abandoned spouses, I knew of a case wherein a man abandoned his long time spouse and eventually married a secretary with whom he had become enamored. He applied for an annulment; his wife did not, as she accepted their marriage as valid. His application for a decree of nullity was granted (to my surprise—but then I am not privy to the details of the case.) He then married the secretary, in the Church. His wife never remarried, as she considered her original marriage valid. She of course, would have no problem with receiving communion in any case, decree of nullity or not, since she never broke her marriage vows.

 

[Phil502]

It seems to me that a lot of people think that those divorced and remarried Catholics who are longing for the Sacraments of Confession and Communion are the ones that decided to break off their first marriage. I really wonder what the greater number is who want to come back, the people who wanted out or the people abandoned. I realize it’s not all as simple as that but often it is.

I like to think that those that did not care about the Vows they made in front of God are not in a big hurry to come back to him. I just think the mindset is different. The huge drop-off in Church attendence bears this out, people are shifting away into what they short-sightedly call a “spiritual” worship, away from the Church itself.

Yes some of us got married again, sure we could have stayed alone. Those of you with successfull marriages, do you not find that you are a better version of yourself when you commit to someone, would you ever throw that away? Why is that so hard to understand? People are willing to try again to gain that closeness with another even if they have been hurt and abandoned.

We are lucky to have Annullments but I think most people stay away because they don’t want to relive all that especially when it’s been a lot of years since the first marriage ended. For all you who say, hey just go get an annullment, I suggest you take a look at the questions and imagine yourself 10 years out of a relationship trying to answer them.

This is why this is tough on a lot of people, the Church tries to balance out Justice and Love in it’s attempt to make us all better people in Christ. I guess my point is, try to take it easy on the people in this situation because I believe most of us are pretty decent people who are not trying to “game” the system, as if you could pull one over on the Lord anyway.

 

[LongingSoul]

Yes, but does communion become an end in itself, when salvation (and the other points the Pope makes) should be the ultimate goal? Or should this question be asked in the Philosophy or Apologetics fora?

My understanding is that communion like all the other sacraments are external signs of internal grace. Aquinas says “… grace presupposes nature…”. That implies that the state of faith and the relationship with God exists in the human experience, prior to the ritual of sacrament. For the sacrament to be real, it must have an object of faith to illumine and nourish.

So communion is not a thing that can *create *a relationship of faith with God… its purpose is to shine light and give form to what already exists.

This is my raw understanding of why the issue of remarrieds and communion keeps pushing to be looked at. In some cases, because of the human experience of fullness and natural marriage, a truth about a prior marriage that has no external manifestation, is coming to light. In other words, a thing exists is actually sacramental but with no legal definition or pathway. To me, it is right to follow the Truth to try and see where it is leading.

 

[ProVobis]

…
So communion is not a thing that can *create *a relationship of faith with God… its purpose is to shine light and give form to what already exists.

This is my raw understanding of why the issue of remarrieds and communion keeps pushing to be looked at. …

The Poles (and some others) use an oplatek (unconsecrated wafered bread) as a form of communion at Christmas time. Some, including me, claim this can accomplish the same purpose without the risk to profanity or sacrilege. I offer it as a possible solution.

 

[LongingSoul]

A " case by case" , needs to take a bit of all this into account , Longing Soul. For me. We are the result of a convergence of many factors. How is your understanding or relationship with God different from.the one we have/ had with our earthly father if we do not stop to pray and think about it, for example ?
So I do not believe it is off topic but helps understand.ourselves and others , and get.closer to God. As I see it.

I’m not really sure what you are saying, graciew? Pope Francis invited the discussion regarding remarried and communion to address a particular situation. I don’t believe that he would envisage a situation where the remarrieds in question didn’t actually demonstrate in their own experience (as witnessed in the internal forum), the presence of a genuine grace calling for recognition. Pro Vobis presumes that the legal status of the marriage is the sum total of the truth of the situation… but perhaps there is more to it.

 

[Brendan]

The Church has said constantly that there is no question of a change in the general rule regarding marriage and its indissolubility. This is addressing individual situations pastorally. If you look at the way civil law on the one hand upholds the gravity of the crime of murder, yet on the other hand makes allowances for culpability when trying and sentencing the criminal. In some rare cases, women who’ve endured relentless physical abuse at the hands of their husband… have planned and executed his murder and been found guilty of murder (to some degree)… but not sentenced to prison. Culpability can be so severely reduced where some crimes occur, that the punishment can be forgone altogether.

So what culpability are we referring to. If we are discussing the attempt at remarriage, then I agree with you.

If we are discussing attempts at the marital act, then I disagree, that is what my post was referring to.

Unlike murder, for a sexually active couple outside of a valid marriage, the immoral act is repeated. Each attempt at the marital act is an incidence of adultery or fornication.

I agree that the couple should be directed towards the annulment process. A lack of knowledge about the nature of marriage for the first attempt at marriage can certainly be grounds for a declaration of nullity.

But if the tribunal determines that the previous marriage was valid.

What then?

That is where my post came in, if there is a lack of culpability, then the Church is morally obligated to see that knowledge of grave matter is imparted and the clear teachings on the indissovablity are conveyed.

 

[OraLabora]

Unlike murder, for a sexually active couple outside of a valid marriage, the immoral act is repeated. Each attempt at the marital act is an incidence of adultery or fornication.

The Church allows for culpability to be reduced by force of acquired habit. Alcoholics, masturbation, etc.

I curious to know why you think habitual conjugal relations would be any different?

 

[angelic06]

There’s a solution there to that situation, but it doesn’t play with the spirit of Ecumenicalism that we so love today. Although it would, of course, play with all those mean old councils people don’t like to talk about anymore.

Simply declare that since many of the non-Catholic churches, due to their stance on divorce and gay “marriage” and aboriton, have gone so far from Christ’s teaching that the Pauline privilege now applies to them (I guess it would apply to any of their “baptisms” too). Or, specifically in their case, that since the marriage wasn’t Catholic it didn’t exist because those churches can’t do a valid marriage due to their terrible views on the idea.

They’ll get mad that we’re calling them unbelievers and such, but they’ll get over it and many of them are dying out anyway.

But occasionally you will find that there are Protestants who do take their wows seriously, and who have wanted to be in a serious marriage since their “I do”. To take the approach that that Protestant marriages shall be presumed to be invalid from the start is insulting. And no, I am not one of the “ecumenicalists” who believes we should bow to every view out there. Quite the contrary.

The solution: tribunals to sort out the invalid marriages, including those resulting from possibly defective baptisms. And I remind everyone that this solution already exists. If anything, I take issue with the tribunals handing out too many declarations of nullity. Indeed, almost anyone’s marriage can be declared “invalid” if one (or very often, both) of the parties wants it.

Eventually, we have to ask ourselves how seriously we believe Christ’s admonition “What God has put together, let no one put asunder.”

 

[angelic06]

The Poles (and some others) use an oplatek (unconsecrated wafered bread) as a form of communion at Christmas time. Some, including me, claim this can accomplish the same purpose without the risk to profanity or sacrilege. I offer it as a possible solution.

If you go to a Byzantine Catholic church, non-Catholics and those not spiritually prepared to receive Holy Communion may receive antidoron (blessed bread) at the end of Divine Liturgy. But Holy Communion is still offered to those so prepared to receive the Lord.

Now, as for oplatek, I offer this attached link to Wikipedia for those unfamiliar with the tradition, including myself.

 

[ProVobis]

If you go to a Byzantine Catholic church, non-Catholics and those not spiritually prepared to receive Holy Communion may receive antidoron (blessed bread) at the end of Divine Liturgy. But Holy Communion is still offered to those so prepared to receive the Lord.

Now, as for oplatek, I offer this attached link to Wikipedia for those unfamiliar with the tradition, including myself.

Thanks for the link. I like this part:

The tradition traces its origins to the times of early Christianity (see Antidoron) and is seen as a non-sacramental foreshadowing of the liturgical partaking of the Holy Eucharist (Host), unleavened bread consecrated into the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ. As a Christmas custom the “opłatek” originated in Poland and was spread widely as far back as the 17th century. It was the part of the szlachta’s (Polish nobility) culture and the custom had spread throughout the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and neighbouring countries. In the 19th century in the aftermath of the partitions of Poland it gained patriotic subtexts as the common wish during sharing of “opłatek” became the wish for Poland’s regaining its independence. Since that time “opłatki” are often embossed with religious images. In the 20th century “opłatek” custom went beyond families and gained another meaning: the meeting of present or past co-workers or students.

 

[Brendan]

The Church allows for culpability to be reduced by force of acquired habit. Alcoholics, masturbation, etc.

I curious to know why you think habitual conjugal relations would be any different?

I think they are very similar actually. In each case, the Church has an obligation to educate the sinner on the need to cease the behavior and end the harm that it is doing to their soul.

Similarly, they are both actions that the Church must always condemn, and never condone.

Do you not agree?

Each of those actions, like fornication and pornography, distort the sexual powers reserved to couples in a valid marriage and are grave offenses against God. The guilt imbuded by individuals in certain circumstances might be lessened but they remain counter to God.

Thus they will forever be opposed by the Church

 

[OraLabora]

I think they are very similar actually. In each case, the Church has an obligation to educate the sinner on the need to cease the behavior and end the harm that it is doing to their soul.

Similarly, they are both actions that the Church must always condemn, and never condone.

Do you not agree?

Each of those actions, like fornication and pornography, distort the sexual powers reserved to couples in a valid marriage and are grave offenses against God. The guilt imbuded by individuals in certain circumstances might be lessened but they remain counter to God.

Thus they will forever be opposed by the Church

Yes I agree that the Church must point the way to the fullness of Christian perfection.

But we’re talking about imperfect people receiving the sacraments. ISTM there’s a great logical disconnect if we allow, say someone addicted to masturbation, access to the sacraments because his culpability is reduced to venial, or he repeatedly returns to confession for the same thing but keeps falling…

…and yet we deny remarried couples the same access to sacramental grace for exactly the same thing: a habit that they have difficulty breaking.

Don’t you agree that a pastoral approach would not be to slam the door shut in all cases, but rather review each situation on a case-by-case basis?

We can’t say that sacramental grace may be allowed for some classes of grave sexual sin, and not allowed for other classes. I think again we need to draw a distinction between someone committing objective adultery on the spouse they currently live with, and someone committing objective adultery, against a long-lost spouse that abandoned them many years ago. In the first case the culpability is obvious, but in the second, not so much.

And on that note I really do think I have nothing more to say on the subject, I will let the Magisterium and the Holy Father do their jobs. The situation doesn’t affect me directly in any way and I can live with the outcome either way but I’m not sure that’s the case for everyone.

 

[ProVobis]

… say someone addicted to masturbation, access to the sacraments because his culpability is reduced to venial…

How is one certain of this reduction?

 

[LongingSoul]

So what culpability are we referring to. If we are discussing the attempt at remarriage, then I agree with you.

If we are discussing attempts at the marital act, then I disagree, that is what my post was referring to.

Unlike murder, for a sexually active couple outside of a valid marriage, the immoral act is repeated. Each attempt at the marital act is an incidence of adultery or fornication.

I agree that the couple should be directed towards the annulment process. A lack of knowledge about the nature of marriage for the first attempt at marriage can certainly be grounds for a declaration of nullity.

But if the tribunal determines that the previous marriage was valid.

What then?

That is where my post came in, if there is a lack of culpability, then the Church is morally obligated to see that knowledge of grave matter is imparted and the clear teachings on the indissovablity are conveyed.

If the pastoral approach does reflect the degree of culpability involved, I would imagine that it relates to the situation as a whole. The persons first marriage, its breakdown, the second marriage, it’s flourishing in a godly way. From my understanding this situation seems to relate to specific couples. Not so much those who first up had marriages that were lacking in form or matter… but those couples from Catholic families who knew all the technicalities of Catholic marriage they should know… were raised in the Church by Catholic parents, married in the Church according to the unwritten expectations involved etc. etc. These are the difficult cases to determine null. So much is hidden and perhaps difficult to express but involve a fundamental lack of faith despite all the external obvious signs of validity. As Card. Ratzinger noted in his observation… this is quite a modern phenomenon with the breakdown of a strong culture of Catholicism binding the Catholic community.

There is no formula to detect lack of faith in these circumstances. It comes to light even to the people themselves, when understanding comes. I’m not suggesting it’s impossible to have faith without understanding… but when there is a cultural failing to support faith, lack of understanding becomes a cause for severely reduced culpability in approaching marriage.