Chicago's Cupich on divorce: Pastor guides decisions, but person's conscience inviolable

  • Thread starter Thread starter DaveBj
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

DaveBj

Guest
ncronline.org/news/vatican/chicagos-cupich-divorce-pastor-guides-decisions-persons-conscience-inviolable
The Catholic church has to respect decisions divorced and remarried people make about their spiritual lives after they examine what their conscience is telling them to do, Chicago’s Archbishop Blase Cupich said during a press briefing.

Cupich – one of nine Americans attending the ongoing Oct. 4-25 Synod of Bishops and one of four personally appointed by Pope Francis – said that when he counsels divorced and remarried persons he always tries “in some way to understand them.”
Citing the Latin root for the word reconciliation – which indicates not only forgiveness but a seeing of eye-to-eye – the archbishop said: “If that’s the case, then not only do I have to understand them but I also have to see how they understand me.”
“I try to help people along the way,” said Cupich. “And people come to a decision in good conscience.”
“Then our job with the church is to help them move forward and respect that,” he said. “The conscience is inviolable. And we have to respect that when they make decisions and I’ve always done that.”
🍿

(And yes, I am aware of the political leanings of the source.)
 
There is a lot of talk about the primacy of the conscience and the inviolability of the conscience. I would just note that the conscience is that aspect of the intellectual faculty of the soul by which we make moral judgments about specific actions.

A properly formed conscience is one which incorporates the objective moral law into its judgments. And it is, of course, the responsibility of everyone to have a properly formed conscience. Because a poorly formed conscience can lead us astray. A conscience which judges an evil action to be good or neutral is just as dangerous as a loaded weapon in the hands of an emotionally unstable person.
 
There is a lot of talk about the primacy of the conscience and the inviolability of the conscience. I would just note that the conscience is that aspect of the intellectual faculty of the soul by which we make moral judgments about specific actions.

A properly formed conscience is one which incorporates the objective moral law into its judgments. And it is, of course, the responsibility of everyone to have a properly formed conscience. Because a poorly formed conscience can lead us astray. A conscience which judges an evil action to be good or neutral is just as dangerous as a loaded weapon in the hands of an emotionally unstable person.
👍

This is exactly the point I made in my Facebook comment on this report.
 
We must not forget the required step of forming the conscience properly. Hopefully he works to do that in his discussions with those in this situation. Because if their conscience is telling them to ignore Church teaching, their conscience is malformed.

I wonder if there has been any discussion on how to properly form consciences. There seems to be plenty of discussion about accepting the decisions of poorly formed consciences.
 
👍

This is exactly the point I made in my Facebook comment on this report.
Good! Too often, it seems to me, individual conscience is taken as though it were a direct revelation from God to an individual. But it is not. It is a moral judgment, and can only be correct when properly formed according to objective moral norms. Lord knows my own conscience has led me astray sometimes, but only because I first led it astray by disregarding objective morality.
 
I would agree with him about “getting to know” the people and trying to “see eye-to-eye” and “move them forward.” That’s great.

The question remains: does “respect” mean that we have to do whatever the person wants (as far as receiving Sacraments)? Does it mean I have to actually support the decision? I don’t think so.

Dan
 
I would agree with him about “getting to know” the people and trying to “see eye-to-eye” and “move them forward.” That’s great.

The question remains: does “respect” mean that we have to do whatever the person wants (as far as receiving Sacraments)? Does it mean I have to actually support the decision? I don’t think so.

Dan
What kind of decisions could Archbishop Cupich mean?

Decisions made by those who are divorced and remarried shouldn’t be respected if they are decisions that hamper their soul. Should a divorced and remarried couples’s decision to not live as brother and sister, but to have a sexual relationship, be respected? NO! Surely Archbishop Cupuch wouldn’t respect such a decision either.

Sadly, I find some of what Archbishop Cupich says here, concerning.
 
What kind of decisions could Archbishop Cupich mean?

… Should a divorced and remarried couples’s decision to not live as brother and sister, but to have a sexual relationship, be respected? NO! Surely Archbishop Cupuch wouldn’t respect such a decision either.

Sadly, I find some of what Archbishop Cupuich says here, concerning.
I think he would respect it and I think he is of the mind that the couple (as individuals, of course) is able to determine whether or not there is anything sinful about such relations.

Dan
 
I think he would respect it and I think he is of the mind that the couple (as individuals, of course) is able to determine whether or not there is anything sinful about such relations.

Dan
Makes one wonder what the point of a Church is if just about everything, even whether one really got married and needs to stick to their vows before God, is up to personal conscience.
 
Makes one wonder what the point of a Church is if just about everything, even whether one really got married and needs to stick to their vows before God, is up to personal conscience.
The job of the Church is to lead the flock to God. The conscience places a large part in doing that. From the Catechism:

CHAPTER ONE
THE DIGNITY OF THE HUMAN PERSON

ARTICLE 6
MORAL CONSCIENCE

1776 “Deep within his conscience man discovers a law which he has not laid upon himself but which he must obey. Its voice, ever calling him to love and to do what is good and to avoid evil, sounds in his heart at the right moment. . . . For man has in his heart a law inscribed by God. . . . His conscience is man’s most secret core and his sanctuary. There he is alone with God whose voice echoes in his depths.” (GS 16.)

I. THE JUDGMENT OF CONSCIENCE

1777 Moral conscience,(Cf. Rom 2:14-16.) present at the heart of the person, enjoins him at the appropriate moment to do good and to avoid evil. It also judges particular choices, approving those that are good and denouncing those that are evil. (Cf. Rom 1:32.) It bears witness to the authority of truth in reference to the supreme Good to which the human person is drawn, and it welcomes the commandments. When he listens to his conscience, the prudent man can hear God speaking.

1778 Conscience is a judgment of reason whereby the human person recognizes the moral quality of a concrete act that he is going to perform, is in the process of performing, or has already completed. In all he says and does, man is obliged to follow faithfully what he knows to be just and right. It is by the judgment of his conscience that man perceives and recognizes the prescriptions of the divine law:

Conscience is a law of the mind; yet [Christians] would not grant that it is nothing more; I mean that it was not a dictate, nor conveyed the notion of responsibility, of duty, of a threat and a promise. . . . [Conscience] is a messenger of him, who, both in nature and in grace, speaks to us behind a veil, and teaches and rules us by his representatives. Conscience is the aboriginal Vicar of Christ. (John Henry Cardinal Newman, “Letter to the Duke of Norfolk,” V, in Certain Difficulties felt by Anglicans in Catholic Teaching II (London: Longmans Green, 1885), 248.)
1779 It is important for every person to be sufficiently present to himself in order to hear and follow the voice of his conscience. This requirement of interiority is all the more necessary as life often distracts us from any reflection, self-examination or introspection:

Return to your conscience, question it. . . . Turn inward, brethren, and in everything you do, see God as your witness.(St. Augustine, In ep Jo. 8,9:PL 35,2041.)
1780 The dignity of the human person implies and requires uprightness of moral conscience. Conscience includes the perception of the principles of morality (synderesis); their application in the given circumstances by practical discernment of reasons and goods; and finally judgment about concrete acts yet to be performed or already performed. The truth about the moral good, stated in the law of reason, is recognized practically and concretely by the prudent judgment of conscience. We call that man prudent who chooses in conformity with this judgment.

1781 Conscience enables one to assume responsibility for the acts performed. If man commits evil, the just judgment of conscience can remain within him as the witness to the universal truth of the good, at the same time as the evil of his particular choice. The verdict of the judgment of conscience remains a pledge of hope and mercy. In attesting to the fault committed, it calls to mind the forgiveness that must be asked, the good that must still be practiced, and the virtue that must be constantly cultivated with the grace of God:

We shall . . . reassure our hearts before him whenever our hearts condemn us; for God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything.(1 Jn 3:19-20)
1782 Man has the right to act in conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions. “He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience, especially in religious matters.” (DH 3 § 2)

There is a lot more here:
vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a6.htm
 
Makes one wonder what the point of a Church is if just about everything, even whether one really got married and needs to stick to their vows before God, is up to personal conscience.
He is quoted on that very subject. From the article:
“What we heard is that in different cultures, especially in the East, that word [indissolubility] says too much for people – or it’s too hard of a word to understand,” said the archbishop. “People understand life-long fidelity, but it seems to be too much of juridical term to describe the richness and complexity of what a marriage means for people in their culture.”
“I had never heard that before, but I get it,” he said. “Because what it conveys is not the indissolubility of a wedding band but handcuffs.”
 
The job of the Church is to lead the flock to God. The conscience places a large part in doing that. From the Catechism:
I’m well aware.
1778 Conscience is a judgment of reason whereby the human person recognizes the moral quality of a concrete act that he is going to perform, is in the process of performing, or has already completed. In all he says and does, man is obliged to follow faithfully what he knows to be just and right. It is by the judgment of his conscience that man perceives and recognizes the prescriptions of the divine law:
That’s key. Conscience today is equated with FEELINGS, not reason. Do 60 percent of Catholics think Homosexual marriage, abortion, and divorce and remarriage is okay because of their use of reason, or because it feels bad to think marriage is only between a man and a woman, a woman should have to carry a child to term, and a divorced man can not remarry to someone they love? Does one really think they delved intellectually into the objective reasons for the Church’s position in these matters? Don’t pastors have an obligation to call people out on this?

The modern idea of conscience as understood by many.
Conscience is a judgment of feelings whereby the human person recognizes the emotional content of a concrete act that he is going to perform, is in the process of performing, or has already completed. In all he says and does, man is obliged to follow faithfully what he feels. It is by the judgment of his conscience that man perceives and recognizes his own wants.
 
I’m well aware.

That’s key. Conscience today is equated with FEELINGS, not reason. Do 60 percent of Catholics think Homosexual marriage, abortion, and divorce and remarriage is okay because of their use of reason, or because it feels bad to think marriage is only between a man and a woman, a woman should have to carry a child to term, and a divorced man can not remarry to someone they love? Does one really think they delved intellectually into the objective reasons for the Church’s position in these matters? Don’t pastors have an obligation to call people out on this?

The modern idea of conscience as understood by many.
I think the Archbishop knows what the conscience is and note that reason isn’t necessarily equal to conscience
 
This is wonderful news for us with certain reoccurring “Sins” it is obvious that I have been born with this predilection. Now I just have to allow my conscience to harden sufficiently like it was in my younger years when my I thought nothing was wrong with certain activities I took pleasure in. 🤷
 
This is wonderful news for us with certain reoccurring “Sins” it is obvious that I have been born with this predilection. Now I just have to allow my conscience to harden sufficiently like it was in my younger years when my I thought nothing was wrong with certain activities I took pleasure in. 🤷
Or you can follow the Catechism that I linked to and listen to the archbishop.
 
He is quoted on that very subject. From the article:

“What we heard is that in different cultures, especially in the East, that word [indissolubility] says too much for people – or it’s too hard of a word to understand,” said the archbishop. “People understand life-long fidelity, but it seems to be too much of juridical term to describe the richness and complexity of what a marriage means for people in their culture.”
That’s kind of odd… If people understand life-long fidelity, it seems that they would be able to understand a life-long commitment.

Besides that, sometimes, handcuffs are a good thing, given our fallen nature.

Dan
 
VATICAN CITY (CNS) — Chicago Archbishop Blase J. Cupich told reporters that something his mother once said might give the Synod of Bishops a way to balance the need to affirm church teaching while reaching out to those who are struggling.

The archbishop said Oct. 16 that his mother was asked if she loved one of her nine children more than the others. “Only if they need it,” she responded.

“That’s the way mothers speak,” the archbishop said, and that is the way the church needs to speak to families, especially to those who feel excluded or in need of extra attention. “The greatest contribution bishops can make to families is to act and speak like families act and speak,” he said.

At the same time, he said, the Catholic Church cannot “accompany, integrate and reconcile” people whom it does not know and with whom it is incapable of communicating.

“If we are going to really accompany people, we have to first of all engage them. In Chicago, I visit regularly with people who feel marginalized, whether they are the elderly or the divorced and remarried, gay and lesbian individuals, also couples. I think that we need to really get to know what their life is like if we are going to accompany them.”

But underlying all the outreach activity, he said, “We have to believe in the mercy of God and the grace of God to trigger conversion.”

The questions of ministry to homosexuals has come up in the synod, Archbishop Cupich said. “That discussion, it is clear to me, needs to mature in the life of the church. If we are really going to accompany people, we have to first of all engage them.”

cnstopstories.com/2015/10/16/archbishop-family-ministry-is-giving-more-love-to-those-most-in-need/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top