Divorce in the Catholic Church - in light of the Pope

[Nine_Two]

Her main functional title in the affair was Aunt of the regnant Holy Roman Emperor.

GKC

It is also notable that not only was he Holy Roman Emperor, he was the most powerful man to hold that title (or even live in Europe) since Charlemagne. He had already sacked Rome once and Charles had lands adjacent to the Papal States while Henry was across the continent and over a straight. There was never any doubt who Rome would side with in the affair.

 

[Nine_Two]

I have seen headlines of news stories that have said something along the lines of “Pope Francis says divorced and remarried couples are allowed communion” or “Pope changing the standards on divorce and remarriage”… Which is not at all an accurate representation of what actually happened. So for those, yes. His words were definitely twisted and exaggerated.

Speaking as someone who used to be a journalist, and has some knowledge of the news industry - a story should never be judged on its headline. They are written by editors (not reporters) with the goal of grabbing readers, not informing. They are often incorrect or misleading.

 

[patsa]

Speaking as someone who used to be a journalist, and has some knowledge of the news industry - a story should never be judged on its headline. They are written by editors (not reporters) with the goal of grabbing readers, not informing. They are often incorrect or misleading.

touche

 

[GKC]

It is also notable that not only was he Holy Roman Emperor, he was the most powerful man to hold that title (or even live in Europe) since Charlemagne. He had already sacked Rome once and Charles had lands adjacent to the Papal States while Henry was across the continent and over a straight. There was never any doubt who Rome would side with in the affair.

True, as to essence. Though the actual sacking of Rome came as a surprise to him.

GKC

 

[SAVINGRACE]

Speaking as someone who used to be a journalist, and has some knowledge of the news industry - a story should never be judged on its headline. They are written by editors (not reporters) with the goal of grabbing readers, not informing. They are often incorrect or misleading.

I wish we (public) would be more discerning when it comes to the news and not believe everything we read.

 

[shelby_sun]

Please don’t take this the wrong way but you anger should not be directed to the Church but to your parents.

The point is they were going to get divorced one way or another. And there was something missing in the marriage from the get go, a marriage that should have never taken place in they eyes of what marriage is in the Church.

With that said it has nothing to do with you. The Church acknowledges you and loves you and shares in your tragedy.

I am sorry but that is unfair and probably untrue statement. People, situations, standards of living, etc. change over time. Just because people divorce after 30 years of marriage doesn’t mean the marriage was flawed from the very beginning. I don’t believe God sees it that way either, not a bit!!! The tragedy is that people say things as you have said.

By the way, when I brought this up to a priest I work with, a Jesuit priest, he said the woman should pray and follow her conscious on whether to take communion or not. He is 88 years old and should be canonized someday. So I certainly believe that Pope Francis could have said what was reported. As he did not teach it from the pulpit, it is none of our business.

People receive communion every Sunday as sinners. Who can say they have not received Holy Communion with out going to confession after a sin? We are all sinners. Everyday we fail in someway to live up to God’s wants, whether it is not being nice to someone, ignoring someone we don’t want to talk to, not being grateful enough for what we have, or failing to love ourselves. The vast majority of those receiving Communion every Sunday are sinners at that moment they just want to focus on everyone else!