Cardinal Wuerl: The Catholic Church is moving from legalism to mercy

[gilliam]

I thought the Synod reviewed this issue as part of the overall three week discussion, no? And voted on the paragraphs in the final report with reference to it? Opined if you will, as requested by the Pope. I can see this (name removed by moderator)ut could be perceived as “opening a door” or “closing a door.”

Cardinal Dolan is simply stating the Synod didn’t address it in the final report. That isn’t opening or closing anything. It is not addressing something. The state of the ‘door’ remains the same, right now that is closed.

 

[KSU]

Not sure what “opened the door” means in this context. The door was closed by the previous pope and a Synod doesn’t have the power to open it. The only one who can right now is Pope Francis and we won’t know if he does until the Apostolic Exhortation is released.

I’m lost. If the door was closed by B XVI, even Pope Francis can’t open it. Right?

 

[FollowChrist34]

Did Fr. Martin give examples of the conflicts in Scripture where Jesus trumped the law for the sake of mercy?

Matthew 5:18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished.

(Love, love, love)
(Love, love, love)
(Love, love, love)

There’s nothing you can do that can’t be done
Nothing you can sing that can’t be sung
Nothing you can say but you can learn how to play the game
It’s easy

There’s nothing you can make that can’t be made
No one you can save that can’t be saved
Nothing you can do but you can learn to be you in time
It’s easy

All you need is love
All you need is love
All you need is love, love
Love is all you need

(Love, love, love)
(Love, love, love)
(Love, love, love)

All you need is love
All you need is love
All you need is love, love
Love is all you need

There’s nothing you can know that isn’t known
Nothing you can see that isn’t shown
There’s nowhere you can be that isn’t where you’re meant to be
It’s easy

All you need is love
All you need is love
All you need is love, love
Love is all you need

All you need is love, all together now
All you need is love, everybody
All you need is love, love
Love is all you need

Love is all you need
Love is all you need
Love is all you need

 

[Lormar]

Last night, Cardinal Wuerl was interviewed by Raymond Arroyo on EWTN’s The World Over.

The Cardinal was requested, twice, to say whether or not the Synod opened the door to possible reception of the Eucharist by those in irregular marriages. He replied at length about mercy being at the center of the Faith, etc., but offered no clarification regarding the question.

I didn’t watch the show, but I have noticed a few others do that - give a lengthy answer that doesn’t answer the question at all.

More and more I see the important of letting your yes be yes, and your no be no. Anything more than than is often superfluous.

 

[FollowChrist34]

Cardinal Dolan is simply stating the Synod didn’t address it in the final report. That isn’t opening or closing anything. It is not addressing something. The state of the ‘door’ remains the same, right now that is closed.

He is specifically saying that the final proposals of the Synod do not alter that teaching, not that they didn’t address it. He noted that, if the Church is to remain faithful to the teaching of Christ, this cannot change.

 

[dans0622]

I’m lost. If the door was closed by B XVI, even Pope Francis can’t open it. Right?

I’d think it is better to say that “the door” has never been opened and so nobody has had to close it. As Cardinal Dolan implied, it can’t be opened…the “closed door” is a “necessary consequence.”

Dan

 

[KSU]

Love, Love, Love

Oh, yeah? Well what about Mercy? It trumps love, you know.

 

[FollowChrist34]

I’d think it is better to say that “the door” has never been opened and so nobody has had to close it. As Cardinal Dolan implied, it can’t be opened…the “closed door” is a “necessary consequence.”

Dan

Well said. Since when are teachings doors?

 

[FollowChrist34]

Oh, yeah? Well what about Mercy? It trumps love, you know.

I couldn’t find any Beatles songs about mercy - you’ll just have to settle for love. Besides, ambiguity is the new truth - get used to it. Close enough. Think of it as a door, a bridge.

 

[Lormar]

Canon law also involves the application of disciplines, that are not doctrine written in stone, and also the application of simple administrative housekeeping that is neither doctrine nor discipline.

The Synod made clear that no doctrine will change, i.e. a valid sacramental marriage is indissoluble.

There is, however a lively theological debate-at a pay grade well above ours I would add-as to whether readmission to the sacraments for the remarried is an intrinsic part of the doctrine, or is itself a discipline where in certain limited cases a penitent could be readmitted without doing injury to the doctrine.

It is clear from the subsequent comments of some cardinals that this issue is not settled: some say readmission is not possible according to the report, some say the report opens the door to that possibility.

Clearly then, it will fall on the Holy Father to decide. When he does, it will behoove us to acquiesce to that decision in humble obedience, no matter what side he comes down on.

I was taught that one could only receive Holy Communion when they are in a state of Sanctifying Grace. Mortal sin casts out Sanctifying Grace. Adultery is a mortal sin.

Has the Church changed its teaching on this that I might not be aware of?

 

[KSU]

I didn’t watch the show, but I have noticed a few others do that - give a lengthy answer that doesn’t answer the question at all.

More and more I see the important of letting your yes be yes, and your no be no. Anything more than than is often superfluous.

That’s a very charitable way of quoting Jesus on that topic

 

[OraLabora]

I was taught that one could only receive Holy Communion when they are in a state of Sanctifying Grace. Mortal sin casts out Sanctifying Grace. Adultery is a mortal sin.

Has the Church changed its teaching on this that I might not be aware of?

Adultery is grave matter for mortal sin. Culpability depends on the two other factors.

 

[gilliam]

Adultery is grave matter for mortal sin. Culpability depends on the two other factors.

Life isn’t always black and white

It isn’t adultery if the first marriage was invalid.

Another view is that if enough penance has been put in the culpability is lessened (say the person has been in a second faithful marriage for 35 years and the first marriage was abusive and only for 1 year.)

 

[KSU]

I’d think it is better to say that “the door” has never been opened and so nobody has had to close it. As Cardinal Dolan implied, it can’t be opened…the “closed door” is a “necessary consequence.”

Dan

 

[dans0622]

…
The reporter is trying to sum up in a few words what he meant with that phrase.
.

And I think he did a bad job.

Dan

 

[Brendan]

The door was closed by the previous pope and a Synod doesn’t have the power to open it. .

I would clarify that statement as “The door was closed by the previous PopeS” as in plural.

It wasn’t just Pope Benedict, every Pope in the last century has addressed that issue in one way or form.

They all came to the same conclusion.

 

[Ender]

Canon law also involves the application of disciplines, that are not doctrine written in stone, and also the application of simple administrative housekeeping that is neither doctrine nor discipline.

True enough. It is not the disciplines that are the concern.

The Synod made clear that no doctrine will change, i.e. a valid sacramental marriage is indissoluble.

I agree here as well. What we are witnessing is not a call for the doctrines to be changed, rather it is a call for them to be circumvented.

There is, however a lively theological debate-at a pay grade well above ours I would add-as to whether readmission to the sacraments for the remarried is an intrinsic part of the doctrine, or is itself a discipline where in certain limited cases a penitent could be readmitted without doing injury to the doctrine.

First, there is no problem with the penitent being readmitted to communion. That is allowed today. The issue is with the readmission of the impenetent. Second, there has not been any debate at all about the relevant doctrines; there has only been vague suggestion and innuendo, and the reason for this is that the doctrines involved here are old, settled, and clear.

It is clear from the subsequent comments of some cardinals that this issue is not settled: some say readmission is not possible according to the report, some say the report opens the door to that possibility.

The report is a model of ambiguity. It means whatever people want it to mean.

Clearly then, it will fall on the Holy Father to decide. When he does, it will behoove us to acquiesce to that decision in humble obedience, no matter what side he comes down on.

This situation gets curiouser and curiouser.

Ender

 

[Ender]

I understand. But with respect to a marriage case presented to a tribunal, there are a multitude of technicalities involving time limits, appropriate diocesan jurisdiction, interpretations of provisions of Canon Law translated to English from the authorized Latin text (the only text that has force of law) and so on. These are not matters of doctrine, but can be significant in judging whether or not a marriage is found null and void under Canon Law. This can involve something as remote from doctrine as whether or not a letter was sent within a specific time period, whether a certified mail receipt was signed or where one party resides.

And no one has raised any concerns about these issues. The process for determining the validity of a marriage is an entirely different conversation than the one about offering communion to those who are unrepentant about entering a second marriage before the first one has been declared invalid.

Ender

 

[Ender]

I haven’t disagreed with you. I’m just extremely uncomfortable claiming that we should pay more or less attention to giving mercy to some who are repentant over others who are also repentant.

That’s not what is at issue here. The mercy being spoken of is for the unrepentant. That’s the difference.

Ender

 

[gilliam]

I would clarify that statement as “The door was closed by the previous PopeS” as in plural.

It wasn’t just Pope Benedict, every Pope in the last century has addressed that issue in one way or form.

They all came to the same conclusion.

Who other than Benedict and John Paul addressed this question?