If someone is divorced and remarried outside of the church, and they live in the same household as brother and sister with their spouse, can that person go to communion? I know someone who was told that one could only go to communion in this case if a specific exception was made (as in the case of the couple still having young children to raise) by the bishop. The couple in question have no children of their own and none at home.
People are told lots of things by lots of people. Some are qualified to give an opinion. Some are not. Some give correct opinions. Some do not. Some have a legitimate reason to give an opinion. Some do not.
The situation which you describe appears to involve the so called “internal forum solution.” I am unaware of any reason in Church law or from the facts as you relate them why the bishop’s intervention is required in such a situation. Your acquaintance might want to ask the person who gave that opinion to show where it is found in Church law. But I think it will not help nor will such a law be found.
The original opinion giver is apparently confused over the norms in the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s circular letter to bishops, On the Reception of the Holy Communion by the Divorced and Remarried Members of the Faithful (Epistola ad Catholicae Ecclesiae Episcopos de receptione communionis eucharisticae a fidelibus qui post divortium novas inierunt nuptias), September 14, 1994, n. 4. What is said, in translation is this:
The faithful who persist in such a situation may receive Holy Communion only after obtaining sacramental absolution, which may be given only “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, for example, for 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’. In such a case they may receive Holy Communion as long as they respect the obligation to avoid giving scandal.”
So the parties need to contact their parish priest about that and he will provide further details and clarification. It is normally understood though, that the couple have approached, or should approach, a tribunal to begin the investigation of nullity for the former marriage(s). That can be discussed with the priest.
Also, if they did go through their annulments, and one party was too ill at the time the annulment came through and was unable to actually consummate a (Catholic) marriage, would they not be able to validate their marriage?
Marriage is not made valid by consummation but by the consent of the parties who are qualified to marry and express that consent in a legitimate form of the celebration (canon 1057 §1). The marriage would simply be valid and non consummated until then (canon 1061 §1). But recall that when Catholic parties who needed “annulments” got them after they were already civilly married, they still need to give proper marital consent anew through canonical form (with due regard for the possibility of a dispensation from form, etc.) Only by that means would Catholic parties enter into a valid marriage since the former civil marriage would not become valid by the mere granting of annulment(s). Such a validation can also be effected by means of the radical sanation mentioned correctly by Texas Roofer. Since the radical sanation is a privilege rather than the exercise of a right, its granting will depend on the diocesan bishop. Some grant them. Some prefer not to.
