CDF official affirms teaching on absolution, Communion for the remarried

  • Thread starter Thread starter _Abyssinia
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

_Abyssinia

Guest
In a letter written three days after the conclusion of the recent Synod of Bishops, the secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith affirmed St. John Paul II’s teaching on absolution for those who have remarried outside the Church.
Click to expand...
Asked by a French priest whether a priest may “grant absolution to a penitent who, having been religiously married, has contracted a second union following divorce,” Archbishop Luis Ladaria Ferrer responded that “we cannot exclude a priori the remarried divorced faithful from a penitential process that would lead to a sacramental reconciliation with God and, therefore, also to Eucharistic Communion.”
Click to expand...
catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=23232
 
catholicculture.org/news/…?storyid=23232

He continued:

Pope John Paul II, in the Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio (n. 84) envisaged such a possibility and detailed its conditions: “Reconciliation in the sacrament of Penance which would open the way to the Eucharist, can only be granted to those who, repenting of having broken the sign of the Covenant and of fidelity to Christ, are sincerely ready to undertake a way of life that is no longer in contradiction to the indissolubility of marriage. This means, in practice, that when, for serious reasons, such as for example the children’s upbringing, a man and a woman cannot satisfy the obligation to separate, they take on themselves the duty to live in complete continence, that is, by abstinence from the acts proper to married couples.”

Archbishop Ladaria then outlined the steps in the penitential process:

•“Verify the validity of the religious marriage in the respect of truth, all the while avoiding giving the impression of a kind of ‘Catholic divorce.’”
•“See eventually if the persons, with the aid of grace, can separate from their new partners and reconcile with those from whom they had separated.”
•“Invite remarried divorced persons who, for serious reasons (for instance, children), cannot separate from their partner to live as ‘brother and sister.’”

“In any event, absolution cannot be granted if not under the condition of being assured of true contrition, that is, ‘a sorrow of mind, and a detestation for sin committed, with the purpose of not sinning for the future’ (Council of Trent, Doctrine on the Sacrament of Penance, c. 4),”
…

Peace
 
As I understand it, the couple will have to abstain from conjugal relations or they’ll have committed a sin.
 
I would think that Archb. Ladaria could have written that response while on auto-pilot. *Pace *Card. Kasper, there aren’t all sorts of new and unheard-of circumstances, or new insights into the doctrine of the faith, which now suddenly require a new answer to this all-too-ancient question.

Dan
 
Wow…they even referenced the Council of Trent! 👍 But c’mon, a penitent heart for sin and a firm resolve to sin no more is 4th grade catechesis.

I can see Item #2 in the penitential process causing a real stir…the blogosphere must be lighting up right now:
“See eventually if the persons, with the aid of grace, can separate from their new partners and reconcile with those from whom they had separated.”
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:
 
Early days… We have 10 months to go before the next synod, and then the synod itself. The question is far from being definitively resolved (well, it is, but it also isn’t if you get my meaning).
 
The discussion is still ongoing of course, but it does seem like key players are mobilizing in defense of orthodoxy. I am very proud of those stepping up; it is happening faster and more visibly than I expected.
 
I do think that if the communion for the re-married proposal is not getting enough support to be a viable option, then there won’t be a dramatic announcement from the Pope. Rather it will sort of gradually fade away with smaller, subtler things like this. We’ll see.
 
FollowChrist34 said:
The discussion is still ongoing of course, but it does seem like key players are mobilizing in defense of orthodoxy. I am very proud of those stepping up; it is happening faster and more visibly than I expected.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think if the communion proposal is losing steam, we’ll find out about it in more subtle ways like this, rather than as some big announcement from the Pope.
 
McCall1981 said:
Yeah, I think if the communion proposal is losing steam, we’ll find out about it in more subtle ways like this, rather than as some big announcement from the Pope.
Click to expand...
Come to think of it, gradualism fell by the wayside very quietly, didn’t it. It wasn’t in the final document which wasn’t translated for so long. I fretted about it unnecessarily for weeks.

Well, I can handle some fine tuning to the annulment process as it stands. If that is all this comes to, thanks be to God. Maybe we can actually focus on the so-called family issues going forward. It’s not as if we don’t have enough moral and social disintegration out there beyond this Kasper proposal. Talk about a lack of perspective.
 
I’m confused about the discipline imposed on people who fall in this category of divorced, remarried, etc.

I see the divorce as a sin and the remarriage as a sin – ok. But, why can’t these be simply confessed and absolved like all of our other horrendous sins.

In the language of the gospel, the Church seems to be “retaining” some sins. What other sins are “retained.”

(whose sins you shall forgive are forgiven, who sins you shall retain are retained." there might be a big bucket of retained sins – what else is in this bucket?)
 
sirach2v4 said:
I’m confused about the discipline imposed on people who fall in this category of divorced, remarried, etc.

I see the divorce as a sin and the remarriage as a sin – ok. But, why can’t these be simply confessed and absolved like all of our other horrendous sins.

In the language of the gospel, the Church seems to be “retaining” some sins. What other sins are “retained.”

(whose sins you shall forgive are forgiven, who sins you shall retain are retained." there might be a big bucket of retained sins – what else is in this bucket?)
Click to expand...
Absolution requires the person to both confess the sin, and to have a firm resolution to not commit that sin anymore. So if you, say, stole something, you confess to stealing and resolve to not steal any more, and are forgiven. With remarriage, the person could confess adultery, but they could not resolve to not commit the sin anymore unless they were to leave the relationship, or resolve to live “as brother and sister”. In other words, you can’t truly be sorry for your remarriage while having no intention of changing the behavior youre confessing.

So if you cheat on your spouse, you can be forgiven for that act of adultery. But if you remarry, you can’t be forgiven because you intend to remain in a state of adultery that is ongoing.

It’s definitely a tough situation, and it does seem unfair at first glance, like a murderer can walk in and be instantly forgiven, while a person in a loving remarriage can’t, but the difference is the “ongoing state” part of it.

As for other examples, I think things like entering a homosexual marriage or having an immoral job (maybe like working in an abortion clinic). You would have to first leave these situations in order to be absolved. My understanding is that anything that puts you in an ongoing state of sin would fall into this catagory.
 
McCall1981 said:
. My understanding is that anything that puts you in an ongoing state of sin would fall into this catagory.
Click to expand...
Yes, some have suggested that time be run backward, to unmarry the original couple from their current marriages and somehow reconcile and reunite them.

Has this EVER happened? (This happens on tv, young and the restless, all the time) What about the damage of divorcing the current spouses and going back to the original spouses? Would those divorces be sins or are they “free” because of the backward trajectory?

Wouldn’t re-marriage be beyond the point of return to the original marriage? How could the second divorce not be wrong? How does anyone get absolution for THAT divorce?

I’m thinking too, of the case of the arch/bishop who finally resigned after admitted fathering a child. Does he have to be unordained a bishop and unordained a priest to get absolution?

Or, is the church an oligarchy where the people who make the rules don’t have to follow them?
 
sirach2v4 said:
Yes, some have suggested that time be run backward, to unmarry the original couple from their current marriages and somehow reconcile and reunite them.

Has this EVER happened? (This happens on tv, young and the restless, all the time) What about the damage of divorcing the current spouses and going back to the original spouses? Would those divorces be sins or are they “free” because of the backward trajectory?

Wouldn’t re-marriage be beyond the point of return to the original marriage? How could the second divorce not be wrong? How does anyone get absolution for THAT divorce?

I’m thinking too, of the case of the arch/bishop who finally resigned after admitted fathering a child. Does he have to be unordained a bishop and unordained a priest to get absolution?

Or, is the church an oligarchy where the people who make the rules don’t have to follow them?
Click to expand...
From the perspective of the Church, if the first marriage was valid, then the second “marriage” is not actually a marriage. So if the person goes back to their first spouse, they aren’t “divorcing” the second spouse because they were never actually married to that person in the first place.

If a person has a valid first marriage, then remarries and has children a problem comes up because ask them to abandon the children. In that case, the remarried couple is allowed to stay together for the sake of the children, and is needs to resolve to live as brother and sister, that is, refrain from marital relations.

About the Bishop fathering a child example, the same moral principals apply to a Bishop as to anyone else, but I’m not sure of the specifics of how that situstion would be resolved.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top