Divorce and remarriage.

  • Thread starter Thread starter asd72
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

asd72

Guest
I have having difficulty understanding something. I don’t mean to offend anyone by my question.

Is the reason that divorced and remarried Catholics, (who had not had their first marriage declared null), cannot receive the Eucharist because they are in a state of perpetual mortal sin?
 
My understanding is that the teaching supports Christ’s statement that he who divorces and remarries commits adultery.
It’s a continuous state of sin. If a person is Catholic, to live in that state is to disregard Church teaching.
Peace.
John
 
IMHO it’s not possible to be in a state of “perpetual mortal sin,” since such a phrase suggests “there’s no getting out of mortal sin,” and the Church doesn’t even declare that anyone in particular is actually in such a state to begin with, let alone that someone can’t get out of it. I believe the only really “perpetual sin” AKA “unforgiveable sin” is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. That said, I’d be curious if anyone could shed some better light on the exact answer to OP’s question.
 
“Perpetual” means self-renewing, roughly. It doesn’t have to mean eternal. As long as someone means to be treating someone as a spouse despite the fact that his true spouse is still living, he’s remaining in that continuous state of adultery that Jesus and the Church speak of.
Peace.
John
 
“Perpetual” means self-renewing, roughly. It doesn’t have to mean eternal. As long as someone means to be treating someone as a spouse despite the fact that his true spouse is still living, he’s remaining in that continuous state of adultery that Jesus and the Church speak of.
Peace.
John
Right. You can’t have contrition for a sin when you are fully intending to go back and do exactly the same thing some more.
 
“Perpetual” means self-renewing, roughly. It doesn’t have to mean eternal. As long as someone means to be treating someone as a spouse despite the fact that his true spouse is still living, he’s remaining in that continuous state of adultery that Jesus and the Church speak of.
Peace.
John
That’s my understanding also. They also can’t just ask for absolution because contrition requires a firm intent to sin no more. You cannot be absolved of adultery if you intend to return to your current legal spouse and continue an adulterous relationship.
 
That’s my understanding also. They also can’t just ask for absolution because contrition requires a firm intent to sin no more. You cannot be absolved of adultery if you intend to return to your current legal spouse and continue an adulterous relationship.
Right.
 
You can’t have contrition for a sin when you are fully intending to go back and do exactly the same thing some more.
They also can’t just ask for absolution because contrition requires a firm intent to sin no more. You cannot be absolved of adultery if you intend to return to your current legal spouse and continue an adulterous relationship.
Correct…although God is merciful His mercy is only accessed when sin is acknowledged (I have flaunted Your Law, O God) repentance takes place, (I am sorry for my sin and will turn back to You, O God) and with the help of Your grace, sin no more.
 
I have having difficulty understanding something. I don’t mean to offend anyone by my question.

Is the reason that divorced and remarried Catholics, (who had not had their first marriage declared null), cannot receive the Eucharist because they are in a state of perpetual mortal sin?
As noted above, that wording is someone awkward.

The initial grave sin is committed when the person entered into the invalid (second) marriage. In order to re-enter into Communion, the person must be absolved of that sin. But he/she can’t be absolved until he/she is ready to reform his/her life. The priest can’t give absolution. It’s that original unresolved sin that is keeping the person from the Eucharist.
 
I have having difficulty understanding something. I don’t mean to offend anyone by my question.

Is the reason that divorced and remarried Catholics, (who had not had their first marriage declared null), cannot receive the Eucharist because they are in a state of perpetual mortal sin?
From APOSTOLIC EXHORTATION FAMILIARIS CONSORTIO St. Pope John Paul II, given in 1981 :
e) Divorced Persons Who Have Remarried
  1. Daily experience unfortunately shows that people who have obtained a divorce usually intend to enter into a new union, obviously not with a Catholic religious ceremony. Since this is an evil that, like the others, is affecting more and more Catholics as well, the problem must be faced with resolution and without delay. The Synod Fathers studied it expressly. The Church, which was set up to lead to salvation all people and especially the baptized, cannot abandon to their own devices those who have been previously bound by sacramental marriage and who have attempted a second marriage. The Church will therefore make untiring efforts to put at their disposal her means of salvation.
Pastors must know that, for the sake of truth, they are obliged to exercise careful discernment of situations. There is in fact a difference between those who have sincerely tried to save their first marriage and have been unjustly abandoned, and those who through their own grave fault have destroyed a canonically valid marriage. Finally, there are those who have entered into a second union for the sake of the children’s upbringing, and who are sometimes subjectively certain in conscience that their previous and irreparably destroyed marriage had never been valid.

Together with the Synod, I earnestly call upon pastors and the whole community of the faithful to help the divorced, and with solicitous care to make sure that they do not consider themselves as separated from the Church, for as baptized persons they can, and indeed must, share in her life. They should be encouraged to listen to the word of God, to attend the Sacrifice of the Mass, to persevere in prayer, to contribute to works of charity and to community efforts in favor of justice, to bring up their children in the Christian faith, to cultivate the spirit and practice of penance and thus implore, day by day, God’s grace. Let the Church pray for them, encourage them and show herself a merciful mother, and thus sustain them in faith and hope.

However, the Church reaffirms her practice, which is based upon Sacred Scripture, of not admitting to Eucharistic Communion divorced persons who have remarried. They are unable to be admitted thereto from the fact that their state and condition of life objectively contradict that union of love between Christ and the Church which is signified and effected by the Eucharist. Besides this, there is another special pastoral reason: if these people were admitted to the Eucharist, the faithful would be led into error and confusion regarding the Church’s teaching about the indissolubility of marriage.

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.”(180)

Similarly, the respect due to the sacrament of Matrimony, to the couples themselves and their families, and also to the community of the faithful, forbids any pastor, for whatever reason or pretext even of a pastoral nature, to perform ceremonies of any kind for divorced people who remarry. Such ceremonies would give the impression of the celebration of a new sacramentally valid marriage, and would thus lead people into error concerning the indissolubility of a validly contracted marriage.

By acting in this way, the Church professes her own fidelity to Christ and to His truth. At the same time she shows motherly concern for these children of hers, especially those who, through no fault of their own, have been abandoned by their legitimate partner.

With firm confidence she believes that those who have rejected the Lord’s command and are still living in this state will be able to obtain from God the grace of conversion and salvation, provided that they have persevered in prayer, penance and charity.
w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_19811122_familiaris-consortio.html
 
A murderer who has said confession can take communion but a person who was married, divorced and remarried can give endless confessions but can’t take communion? Does that make sense on any level?

Would Jesus really deny such a couple who 1) Married and did not just live together and then tried again with a remarriage ? There are tens of thousands of people just living together, yet people who have the morals to marry rather than just live together and then later decide to become Catholics, should not have to go through all these hurdles.

Its no wonder people leave the Catholic church.
 
A murderer who has said confession can take communion but a person who was married, divorced and remarried can give endless confessions but can’t take communion? Does that make sense on any level?

Would Jesus really deny such a couple who 1) Married and did not just live together and then tried again with a remarriage ? There are tens of thousands of people just living together, yet people who have the morals to marry rather than just live together and then later decide to become Catholics, should not have to go through all these hurdles.

Its no wonder people leave the Catholic church.
Yes, St. Pope John Paul II said what was necessary is: “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.”
 
A murderer who has said confession can take communion but a person who was married, divorced and remarried can give endless confessions but can’t take communion? Does that make sense on any level?

Would Jesus really deny such a couple who 1) Married and did not just live together and then tried again with a remarriage ? There are tens of thousands of people just living together, yet people who have the morals to marry rather than just live together and then later decide to become Catholics, should not have to go through all these hurdles.

Its no wonder people leave the Catholic church.
Glo - the Blessed Mother herself said at Fatima that more people are in hell for sins of the flesh than any other sin.

Murder and Adultery both break the Ten Commandments. Also so does a child (adult or youth) who does not honor their parents. Any time the Ten Commandments are broken, one loses his/her Grace and must confess their sin in a CONTRITE manner.

If a Murder changes his ways, confesses and receives God’s forgiveness, then he will be welcome into Heaven. However, if a sexual sinner does not repent and never feels sorry, he will go to hell.

We sin anytime we choose our own desires over God’s desires for us. So yes, since Jesus (who is God) told us that we cannot divorce and remarry, the person is disobeying God and sinning.
 
A murderer who has said confession can take communion but a person who was married, divorced and remarried can give endless confessions but can’t take communion? Does that make sense on any level?

Would Jesus really deny such a couple who 1) Married and did not just live together and then tried again with a remarriage ? There are tens of thousands of people just living together, yet people who have the morals to marry rather than just live together and then later decide to become Catholics, should not have to go through all these hurdles.

Its no wonder people leave the Catholic church.
It is the teaching of **Christ, ** words from His own mouth, and the Catholic Church is the only Christian church that has not reneged on the teaching of marriage.
 
A murderer who has said confession can take communion but a person who was married, divorced and remarried can give endless confessions but can’t take communion? Does that make sense on any level?
A murderer that was not contrite and expressed every intention of continuing in his murderous ways would not be absolved and could nor receive Communion.

Likewise a person who leaves his spouse and marries another could be absolved if he was contrite and committed to rectifying the situation but not if he expressed every intention of continuing in a second (adulterous) marriage.

It makes perfect sense if you believe that marriage is a Sacrament for life.
 
A murderer who has said confession can take communion but a person who was married, divorced and remarried can give endless confessions but can’t take communion? Does that make sense on any level?

Would Jesus really deny such a couple who 1) Married and did not just live together and then tried again with a remarriage ? There are tens of thousands of people just living together, yet people who have the morals to marry rather than just live together and then later decide to become Catholics, should not have to go through all these hurdles.

** Its no wonder people leave the Catholic church.**
The Catholic Church had this position for 2000 years and has grown over one billion members. On the other hand the protestant “churches” in Europe allow divorce and remarriage and people are leaving them even faster then the Catholic Church.
 
A murderer who has said confession can take communion but a person who was married, divorced and remarried can give endless confessions but can’t take communion? Does that make sense on any level?

Would Jesus really deny such a couple who 1) Married and did not just live together and then tried again with a remarriage ? There are tens of thousands of people just living together, yet people who have the morals to marry rather than just live together and then later decide to become Catholics, should not have to go through all these hurdles.
All your questions must be rhetorical, since
Its no wonder people leave the Catholic church
follows before any response can be offered. But not so fast. The Church is not making any declaration about who precisely Jesus would deny, or whether people who cohabit are on the whole more moral.

It makes sense on this “level”: A murderer who confesses is not simultaneously in a state which contradicts his confession. A priest assumes the confession is sincere. In fact, if he knew it not to be sincere, then he wouldn’t give absolution.
It’s quite consistent, isn’t it? He likewise can hardly give absolution to one who confesses living with someone not his wife, and intending to continue the sin.

It also makes sense on this level: Jesus said (you must admit) “He who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery.” This can be objectively identified. Cohabitation isn’t so “official.”
Peace.
John
 
A murderer who has said confession can take communion but a person who was married, divorced and remarried can give endless confessions but can’t take communion? Does that make sense on any level?
I think you confuse “making sense” with “is very hard”. As the quote provided above from the Pope demonstrates, it makes perfect sense - it is sound and logical.

What is also clear is that it is very hard, particularly for someone who perhaps was a lapsed Catholic or did not understand the permanence of marriage, but now, years later wishes to return and finds themselves in a relationship (perhaps civilly married), perhaps an entirely loving relationship, which presents an impediment to full participation in the sacraments. As the Pope says, the only way to remain true to the permanence of marriage is separation or a commitment to continence. *
Would Jesus really deny such a couple who 1) Married and did not just live together and then tried again with a remarriage ? There are tens of thousands of people just living together, yet people who have the morals to marry rather than just live together and then later decide to become Catholics, should not have to go through all these hurdles.
Those Catholics who divorce and then live together rather than undergo a new civil marriage face a similar situation. Living together is wrong, but does not involve making a permanent vow.
Its no wonder people leave the Catholic church.
The only way to avoid this would be to have no restrictions on behaviour whatsoever.*
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top