Communion alone is ‘not the solution’ for divorced and re-married Catholics, says Pope Francis

[Dawnia]

Once you are remarried even if you were the victim in the divorce, you are known as an adulterer. So now you say to repent, this to you is don’t have sex with your second spouse? This is a solution for you? Or is the solution a long drawn out Annulment process instead. Have you ever looked at the Annulment questions? If so what is your opinion on answering them accurately, say after 10 years or more?

That’s just it, the person is NOT remarried. You cannot be remarried if you’re still married. Civil marriage has no effect on religious marriage. If you want someone to blame, blame the government who allows people to abandon their spouse for no justifiable reason. It is not up to the Church to turn a blind eye to sin because individuals don’t want live with the consequences of their actions.

I have been through the annulment process and answered the questions more than 10 years after I was married. Honesty, not accuracy, is the standard for filling out the forms.

A solution would be to sever civil and religious marriage. And do a better job of Catechesis, including the fact that for Catholic’s a civil marriage is not a marriage.

 

[ProVobis]

I waited 13 years. My faith was challenged along the way. I would argue that there are many - most - devout Catholics who have at times questioned their faith in some way. Some merely wait because it’s a theater of pain every time they think about their failed marriage.

I hear you. It took me almost that long too. And it is painful, no doubt about it.

 

[bisco1]

i find it hard to believe most catholics, going into their first marriage, even with poor catechesis, don’t understand that they cannot be married twice, except for death and annulment. it’s not that complicated.

i suspect more often than not, that their faith is weak when they are younger, and their desire for God grows with age and maturity. a lot probably only got married in the church the first time because of parental pressure.

 

[tigerprowl]

i find it hard to believe most catholics, going into their first marriage, even with poor catechesis, don’t understand that they cannot be married twice, except for death and annulment. it’s not that complicated.

i suspect more often than not, that their faith is weak when they are younger, and their desire for God grows with age and maturity. a lot probably only got married in the church the first time because of parental pressure.

Sigh…

My faith was strong when I was married in the Catholic church. My faith had nothing to do with my ex-wife deciding to cheat, lie, deceive, and leave the marriage.

 

[bisco1]

well, i certainly can’t put myself in your shoes, God bless.

 

[tigerprowl]

well, i certainly can’t put myself in your shoes, God bless.

I see what you’re saying and in some cases, I am sure both parties were not mature enough. Divorce is so easy to do that, without guidance, I can see how it is easy for a couple to act like they’re still dating and just up and say “oh well, not working. Moving on.”

However, I feel that there are arguably *more" divorces resulting from one party to snap the covenant of marriage like a twig, be it through adultery, physical or mental abuse, rape, molesting children, etc.

Again, I am not looking for an Easy Button by any stretch of the imagination. Wouldn’t less divorced individuals, such as the second example above, leave the church if they knew that they can find a more compassionate support system?

 

[ProVobis]

I see what you’re saying and in some cases, I am sure both parties were not mature enough. Divorce is so easy to do that, without guidance, I can see how it is easy for a couple to act like they’re still dating and just up and say “oh well, not working. Moving on.”

However, I feel that there are arguably *more" divorces resulting from one party to snap the covenant of marriage like a twig, be it through adultery, physical or mental abuse, rape, molesting children, etc.

Again, I am not looking for an Easy Button by any stretch of the imagination. Wouldn’t less divorced individuals such as the second example above leave the church if they knew that they can find a more compassionate support system?

Certainly. I know of a few families, and happily married at that, who’ve left the Church. Or at least most of its members who don’t go to Church.

 

[bisco1]

everything in the church should be compassionate, merciful, charitable and loving. i haven’t experienced the annulment process, so i can’t speak to it. it sounds like pope francis is feels there is room for improvement. Jesus didn’t leave room for your situation, so the church has to do the best they can to interpret.

 

[otjm]

First, they shouldn’t be waiting 10 years if they are serious about their faith. Second, I found the questions challenging, thought provoking, and healing. Sorry if others found them too much of a bother.

Hey - go easy!

There are any number of reasons someone might not apply for 10 years. It is a common perception that it takes at least two years of healing after the death of a spouse before one has returned to a fairly normal state; the grief process takes its own time And the grief process over a divorce is very similar to that over a death; and not everyone goes through that in 2 years - some seem to never heal.

Additionally, a whole lot of people who have gone through a divorce have any number of reasons (children being one of the major ones) for not dealing with a tribunal; it simply is not on the radar.

 

[ProVobis]

Hey - go easy!

There are any number of reasons someone might not apply for 10 years. It is a common perception that it takes at least two years of healing after the death of a spouse before one has returned to a fairly normal state; the grief process takes its own time And the grief process over a divorce is very similar to that over a death; and not everyone goes through that in 2 years - some seem to never heal.

Additionally, a whole lot of people who have gone through a divorce have any number of reasons (children being one of the major ones) for not dealing with a tribunal; it simply is not on the radar.

All this can be taken into consideration during the annulment process. As I’ve stated, I waited 10 years to start the process myself. But that was because no one had told me what it would involve or where to go. But heck, it took me 14 years to find out the Latin Mass wasn’t abrogated so maybe these things can be disseminated better? Just sayin…

 

[pnewton]

The reason I think the question of Communion might be reconsidered, or perhaps other avenues opened, is that the nature of mortal sin stains us so that we cannot receive communion. It is not objective mortal sin that severs our communion with God, but actual mortal sin. Objective mortal sin might be venial, or not even sin, subjectively, depending on the knowledge of the person. Likewise, I asked earlier and I never heard if anyone knew the answer, is the status of a previous marriage objective? Is the marriage annulled, or is it recognized as being null? If the former, then there really can be no wrong answer as the authority of the Church allows for nullification, right or wrong, either for discipline or mercy. If the latter, then the second marriage would not be adultery, objectively speaking.

I know that not every issue can be addressed by this tribunal. However, I see every person who is able to draw closer to God through any change made as one victory.

 

[ProVobis]

I know that not every issue can be addressed by this tribunal. However, I see every person who is able to draw closer to God through any change made as one victory.

I might have been relieved the process was over after 2-3 years but I never thought of it as a victory of any sorts. I can understand people celebrating for every occasion but I don’t think there were angels in heaven dancing over me. There were certainly no extra graces bestowed nor sins absolved.

 

[otjm]

All this can be taken into consideration during the annulment process. As I’ve stated, I waited 10 years to start the process myself. But that was because no one had told me what it would involve or where to go. But heck, it took me 14 years to find out the Latin Mass wasn’t abrogated so maybe these things can be disseminated better? Just sayin…

I don’t disagree, in the least.

 

[otjm]

The reason I think the question of Communion might be reconsidered, or perhaps other avenues opened, is that the nature of mortal sin stains us so that we cannot receive communion. It is not objective mortal sin that severs our communion with God, but actual mortal sin. Objective mortal sin might be venial, or not even sin, subjectively, depending on the knowledge of the person. Likewise, I asked earlier and I never heard if anyone knew the answer, is the status of a previous marriage objective? Is the marriage annulled, or is it recognized as being null? If the former, then there really can be no wrong answer as the authority of the Church allows for nullification, right or wrong, either for discipline or mercy. If the latter, then the second marriage would not be adultery, objectively speaking.

I know that not every issue can be addressed by this tribunal. However, I see every person who is able to draw closer to God through any change made as one victory.

The Church does not annul the marriage; it decrees that the marriage was null from the beginning. In other words, it says that the impediment that existed on the day of the marriage prevented any valid marriage from occurring, and (effectively) what happened was a simulation.

However, I would presume the issue about Communion that is being carried over is one where the Church cannot find an impediment to have existed; if it could find one, then there would be no need for the “Orthodox option” or something similar. And perhaps that would only be applied where there is not a definite, clearly shown impediment, but neither was there no indication whatsoever of an impediment.

We will have to wait and see - unless someone has a clearer crystal ball than mine. Some speak as if they did - and maybe so.

Or maybe not.

 

[pnewton]

The Church does not annul the marriage; it decrees that the marriage was null from the beginning. In other words, it says that the impediment that existed on the day of the marriage prevented any valid marriage from occurring, and (effectively) what happened was a simulation.

That’s what I would have guessed. If that is the case, then even objectively what some are calling adultery is not adultery as the previous marriage is not valid even before the declaration of nullity. In which case, there will be in some cases no objective impediment to communion.

 

[pnewton]

There were certainly no extra graces bestowed nor sins absolved.

There is always grace available in the Holy Sacrament. This is why receiving communion is vitally important for so many. If we open the possibility for Reconciliation, then sins can be absolved. That is a victory.

 

[otjm]

That’s what I would have guessed. If that is the case, then even objectively what some are calling adultery is not adultery as the previous marriage is not valid even before the declaration of nullity. In which case, there will be in some cases no objective impediment to communion.

However, all marriages are presumed valid until shown invalid. Objectively there would be no adultery; but that is unknown without a decision.

 

[ProVobis]

There is always grace available in the Holy Sacrament. This is why receiving communion is vitally important for so many. If we open the possibility for Reconciliation, then sins can be absolved. That is a victory.

But in my case I always had those sacraments available to me. I just made sure I lived apart from those I was dating.

From a theological standpoint though what did I gain from losing the graces bestowed on me through Matrimony? I guess one could obviously claim they were nullified as well as the marriage. IOW, never existed in the first place.

 

[pnewton]

However, all marriages are presumed valid until shown invalid. Objectively there would be no adultery; but that is unknown without a decision.

Is it always unknown? What if the party knows the marriage was invalid? This may not be the case always or even often, but it can be the case, and has been the case at times.

 

[Memaw]

Even if it’s obvious, the process of answering questions that involve your childhood and your ex-spouse and such should be beneficial to establishing and developing future relationship(s). Seeing the process as a cut-and-dry, yes-or-no one does not do it justice to the Church which has spent the time and money to set up tribunals, etc. or to those who wish the Church to consider their situation IMO.

I have “walked through” the annulment process several times, with friends and they found them to be very healing. Learned to forgive and trust God. God Bless, Memaw