O
OraLabora
Guest
Read the CCC.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Cardinal Tagle: There is no ‘formula for all’ on Communion for the divorced and re-married
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
P
ProVobis
Guest
I’ll take that as a “We don’t know.”Read the CCC.
It all goes back to confession, though. Or at least some spiritual counseling if confession is impossible.
B
Brendan
Guest
That is available, is called confession..
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?
.
The people involved can confess their sin, indicate their repentance and seek the Grace to not commit the sin again.
Any divorced and remarried couple can avail themselves of this today. And when they do that, they can avail themselves of the Eucharist.
That is current Church teaching today. Not slamming of doors involved.
And it is fully pastoral as well, as it is the leading of the flock on the path of goodness and away from sin. Exactly what a good Shepherd is called to do.
And this is also true for other sins, the fornicator, the masturbator, the pornography addict. or any other manner of grave sin.
But like all of those, it requires that the person affected recognize that their actions are sinful, even if they lack culpability.
Why do you reject this obvious solution? It is Just, it is pastoral, it is fully inline with the teachings of Christ. It allows for each case to be individually reviewed by their confessor.
Everything that you asked for.
J
JimG
Guest
In cases involving reduced culpability due to force of habit, such as alcoholism, masturbation, even fornication, the idea is to keep confessing the sin, and finally eliminate the habit, not to merely accept the habit as permanent and irreformable. I don’t think that would apply to second marriages, where the idea is precisely not to eliminate the habit, but to keep it in force in order to preserve the (2nd) marriage.
I would be much more open to the idea that a lack of faith at the outset of the marriage so weakened a person’s ability to give proper consent to a true marriage that true marital consent was absent from the beginning.
If a first marriage ends in abandonment, that seems to me to be evidence that valid consent was not given from the outset. I would be less likely to concede that fact in the case of a marriage which had lasted decades before one party or the other suddenly found someone else more to their liking.
And if a second marriage is to be judged based upon its apparent godliness–if one judges it to have proven itself over time, then it seems one must also judge it to be validly contracted. And if a second marriage is judged to be validly contracted through external evidence, a concurrent judgment that the first marriage was invalidly contracted is in order. What seems to me impermissible is to judge both the first and second marriages to be simultaneously valid; or simply to judge the first marriage to be valid but no longer binding.
Each case is to be judged on an individual basis. On that I agree. That is what tribunals do now. One can offer new grounds for considerations based on new social conditions. One can streamline the process. One can almost presume invalidity in many cases. What one ought not to do is simply to disregard the permanence of marriage as of no consequence.
I would be much more open to the idea that a lack of faith at the outset of the marriage so weakened a person’s ability to give proper consent to a true marriage that true marital consent was absent from the beginning.
If a first marriage ends in abandonment, that seems to me to be evidence that valid consent was not given from the outset. I would be less likely to concede that fact in the case of a marriage which had lasted decades before one party or the other suddenly found someone else more to their liking.
And if a second marriage is to be judged based upon its apparent godliness–if one judges it to have proven itself over time, then it seems one must also judge it to be validly contracted. And if a second marriage is judged to be validly contracted through external evidence, a concurrent judgment that the first marriage was invalidly contracted is in order. What seems to me impermissible is to judge both the first and second marriages to be simultaneously valid; or simply to judge the first marriage to be valid but no longer binding.
Each case is to be judged on an individual basis. On that I agree. That is what tribunals do now. One can offer new grounds for considerations based on new social conditions. One can streamline the process. One can almost presume invalidity in many cases. What one ought not to do is simply to disregard the permanence of marriage as of no consequence.
G
graciew
Guest
I am.sorry. I.read it wrong in my tiny screen and slow signal. I thought you had referred to the Philosophy and.Apologetics forum.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.
I am listening to you all but my mind is busy not with Communion or culpability but how to bring families to the Church. The rest goes for our busy patient priests… and for the Synid fathers.
I believe in integration of the families and Reconciation and meeting people where they are and walking together. And above all I sincerely care for the children.and youth. Their families are " valid " .and the only one for them. And by no.fault of their own their lives are often shattered. They need healing too.
They deserve a mother and a father.And sometimes the only father they know is a second husband,cause their father left them as babies. So sad.So this needs to be taken into account for.me.
Who talks about their feeling of being abandoned and their loneliness ?
I have already said I know of one annulment in all my life. And only one who tried ,and failed about 30 years ago.
This makes me wonder.too.
Sorry again ,Longing Soul ! Sometimes I am in my cloud !
B
Brendan
Guest
No there is no circumstance where sin is a necessity. God gives us grace, especially in the Sacrament of Reconcillation, to move beyond sinIn cases involving reduced culpability due to force of habit, such as alcoholism, masturbation, even fornication, the idea is to keep confessing the sin, and finally eliminate the habit, not to merely accept the habit as permanent and irreformable. I don’t think that would apply to second marriages, where the idea is precisely not to eliminate the habit, but to keep it in force in order to preserve the (2nd) marriage.
Faith is not the item of question here. It is possible for atheists to validity contract a natural marriage, which is also permanent.I would be much more open to the idea that a lack of faith at the outset of the marriage so weakened a person’s ability to give proper consent to a true marriage that true marital consent was absent from the beginning.
What I will admit is that a lack of KNOWLEGE of the permanence of marriage would be a valid consideration for a tribunal. If one or both parties did not view marriage as a permanent state, that one or both did not enter into marriage with the intent of remaining in marriage, that would certainly be a consideration.
That is insufficient evidence. if given evidence of a homosexual couple that have remained together for many years, would that indicate that they too validly contracted marriage? And that the Church would have to change it’s teachings because of that? Longevity is a sign of compatibility or fortitude, not of a valid contract of marriage.And if a second marriage is to be judged based upon its apparent godliness–if one judges it to have proven itself over time, then it seems one must also judge it to be validly contracted.
Agree 100%Each case is to be judged on an individual basis. On that I agree. That is what tribunals do now. One can offer new grounds for considerations based on new social conditions. One can streamline the process.
That I would disagree STRONGLY with. It would run counter to the concept of the indissoveablilty of marriage. It should NEVER fall to someone to have stand up in front of a Catholic tribunal and prove their marriage was valid . The burden of proof should always have to fall on those who claim it is not.One can almost presume invalidity in many cases. .
G
graciew
Guest
Agree 100%
QUOTE]
Streamlining may also mean a.faster “no”. So that tribunals are left free time to deal faster too with the cases that merit attention.
T
Tigg
Guest
This is truth. Although addictions and compulsions can lessen the strength of free will, it is fact that the necessary human struggle against temptation and sin must be engaged. Capitulation cannot be an option. I would think the true pastoral approach would be to enforce and encourage resistance with the hope of eventual victory. I do not see how this could possibly apply to 2nd marriages.In cases involving reduced culpability due to force of habit, such as alcoholism, masturbation, even fornication, the idea is to keep confessing the sin, and finally eliminate the habit, not to merely accept the habit as permanent and irreformable. I don’t think that would apply to second marriages, where the idea is precisely not to eliminate the habit, but to keep it in force in order to preserve the (2nd) marriage.
P
pnewton
Guest
This is an excellent question. Presumption is also sinful. We should all live as a race where only the winner receives the crown for ourselves, and understand that God is greater of more mercy than we can fathom for others. The last thing we need to do is presume on that mercy.How is one certain of this reduction?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.