Divorced and Remarried

[Starofthesea21]

The sermon I heard this past Sunday focused a great deal on the situation surrounding the decision by the German bishops to begin a process to allow for divorced and remarried Catholics to receive communion.

The priest asserted that the Church has had law allowing this certain certain circumstances since the early 1900’s. I looked into this as I had never heard of this before and found that this was only allowed if the pastor is said situation deemed that scandal would not be caused and the couple would live as brother and sister. The priest failed to mention this important part of the canonical law.

My question is, am I just unable to find what he is talking about or did the priest leave leave out the requirements that the church laid out. This would make more sense that the couple would have no longer be living as a man and wife but could still provide for any children.

It would not make sense to me to have a stipulation that allows for a couple to continue to live with someone they are not sacramentaly married to and receive communion.

 

[eddie_too]

how would a pastor know if a man and woman were living as brother and sister?

what is a man and woman living together have both resolved to live as brother and sister but succumb to temptation (much like any other catholic who fornicates, masturbates or commits adultery)?

adultery, masturbation and fornication are all able to be forgiven in the sacrament of reconciliation.

which is more scandalous, to judge the souls of a man and woman living together outside of wedlock; or, for the man and woman to live together outside of wedlock?

 

[Starofthesea21]

how would a pastor know if a man and woman were living as brother and sister?

what is a man and woman living together have both resolved to live as brother and sister but succumb to temptation (much like any other catholic who fornicates, masturbates or commits adultery)?

adultery, masturbation and fornication are all able to be forgiven in the sacrament of reconciliation.

which is more scandalous, to judge the souls of a man and woman living together outside of wedlock; or, for the man and woman to live together outside of wedlock?

All of those sins are able to be forgiven that is true. However, the penitent must resolve to commit the sin no more. And no one is judging. It is a priest’s duty to help souls get to heaven and if they are complicit in mortal sin then they are not doing their job.

 

[neweggs]

In the eyes of God marriage is tell death you part, as the vows you said at the Alter. Re marring is wrong, receiving Holy Communion is wrong,and many Catholics don,t like that the Pope want,s too change that,May Jesus have Mercy on those that are not doing God,s will… Mary please come too the aid of others that don,t follow God,s word,s Amen

 

[PluniaZ]

In the eyes of God marriage is tell death you part, as the vows you said at the Alter. Re marring is wrong, receiving Holy Communion is wrong,and many Catholics don,t like that the Pope want,s too change that,May Jesus have Mercy on those that are not doing God,s will… Mary please come too the aid of others that don,t follow God,s word,s Amen

The Pope does not want to change that. To even suggest that is an insult to His Holiness Pope Francis I.

 

[mikeghiorso]

Please speak to your Pastor about this matter. It is really too complicated to be dealt with on this forum. It is what Pope Francis, and others before him, have termed “the internal forum.”

 

[kozlosap]

The Pope does not want to change that. To even suggest that is an insult to His Holiness Pope Francis I.

Papa Francis lived in the real world for his entire life, not part of the rarified corps of Vatican administrators. As a pastor, he dealt with the issue of marriage and divorce on a routine basis. One of his first moves when he was chosen was to streamline the annulment process so that a person isn’t first broken hearted by a failed marriage and then brokenhearted by the ridiculous hoops they must jump through in order to receive an annulment. Imagine being married to a man or woman who beats you on a regular basis, yet you have to prove to the marriage tribunal that the marriage wasn’t valid from the time you said “I Do”. I personally do not understand those Catholics who do not want those with failed marriages to have full access to the Eucharist whether they have had an annulment or not.

 

[PluniaZ]

Papa Francis lived in the real world for his entire life, not part of the rarified corps of Vatican administrators. As a pastor, he dealt with the issue of marriage and divorce on a routine basis. One of his first moves when he was chosen was to streamline the annulment process so that a person isn’t first broken hearted by a failed marriage and then brokenhearted by the ridiculous hoops they must jump through in order to receive an annulment. Imagine being married to a man or woman who beats you on a regular basis, yet you have to prove to the marriage tribunal that the marriage wasn’t valid from the time you said “I Do”. I personally do not understand those Catholics who do not want those with failed marriages to have full access to the Eucharist whether they have had an annulment or not.

They can have full access to the Eucharist, provided they abstain from sex. That has always been, and always will be, the teaching of the Holy Roman Catholic Church.

 

[MaryT777]

Papa Francis lived in the real world for his entire life, not part of the rarified corps of Vatican administrators. As a pastor, he dealt with the issue of marriage and divorce on a routine basis. One of his first moves when he was chosen was to streamline the annulment process so that a person isn’t first broken hearted by a failed marriage and then brokenhearted by the ridiculous hoops they must jump through in order to receive an annulment. Imagine being married to a man or woman who beats you on a regular basis, yet you have to prove to the marriage tribunal that the marriage wasn’t valid from the time you said “I Do”. I personally do not understand those Catholics who do not want those with failed marriages to have full access to the Eucharist whether they have had an annulment or not.

Well stated. The annulment process was a long nightmare for me. I respect Papa Francis for realizing that perhaps the process could be streamlined or evaluated individually by a local Pastor.

Mary.

 

[RCinMT]

Papa Francis lived in the real world for his entire life, not part of the rarified corps of Vatican administrators. As a pastor, he dealt with the issue of marriage and divorce on a routine basis. One of his first moves when he was chosen was to streamline the annulment process so that a person isn’t first broken hearted by a failed marriage and then brokenhearted by the ridiculous hoops they must jump through in order to receive an annulment. Imagine being married to a man or woman who beats you on a regular basis, yet you have to prove to the marriage tribunal that the marriage wasn’t valid from the time you said “I Do”. I personally do not understand those Catholics who do not want those with failed marriages to have full access to the Eucharist whether they have had an annulment or not.

Great. Then we’ve hit an important milestone in Church history: individuals can now decide what is sin and, if the individual feels in good conscience, than he/she can receive communion. Sure, the Church might still say something is a sin but out in the real world why try to live up to Church teaching?

I propose that we make a new word for this “new way”. Let’s call it…protestantism. That sounds like a good name. Hope it’s not already taken…

 

[Stat_Crux]

The Pope does not want to change that. To even suggest that is an insult to His Holiness Pope Francis I.

Agreed. Nobody is using Amoris Laetitia to suggest that Catholics in a Sacramental Marriage can divorce or have their union dissolved whilst both members are still living. The Doctrine on the Indissolubility of Marriage remains unchanged by Amoris Laetitia.

Instead some Bishops, Priests and Cardinals are saying that the valid Marriage doesn’t even matter any more, and can be completely ignored, and that you can repeatedly have sex with whoever you like and remain in a state of grace so long as you consider yourself to “be at peace with God”. In other words; it’s the subjectivism that Pope St John Paul II and Benedict XVI spent their lives warning us about over and over and over again.

The Pope has, so far, refused to correct them or answer the Five Dubia raised by the four Cardinals.

 

[Gorgias]

Imagine being married to a man or woman who beats you on a regular basis, yet you have to prove to the marriage tribunal that the marriage wasn’t valid from the time you said “I Do”.

I know! How silly is that??? I mean, if you wanted to see that abusive spouse receive justice for their abuse, you wouldn’t have to prove to the court that the allegations were true, would you??? Umm… erm… uhh… nevermind. I mind, I guess that, in the interest of justice, you would have to prove the allegation to the relevant authorities. Who woulda thunk it?

I personally do not understand those Catholics who do not want those with failed marriages to have full access to the Eucharist whether they have had an annulment or not.

The question isn’t “access to the Eucharist with an annulment”… it’s “access to the Eucharist in the context of an invalid marriage.”

 

[po18guy]

The true question is whether or not those who believe they were married were actually married, as Christ established the Sacrament. Church teaching on marriage and marriage prep classes may not have established the fact that Sacramental marriage is indissoluble. Conversely, societal pressures teach that it is an easily broken contract. Thus, those who civilly divorced may not have understood what marriage is - and therefore were not actually married (with full consent of their will) per the Sacrament. This may not be strictly their fault, as we well recognize. However, in addressing this, we are treading on thin ice, as the world has crept deeply into the Church in recent decades.

The real problem began when civil government asserted power over a Sacrament of the Church. Combine that with 1,000 years of east-west schism and 500 years of western division in which the Sacraments have slowly been redefined if not discarded. In many cases, marriage is ‘the last man standing’, and it is barely recognizable. It is clear that a worldly spirit is seeking with all force to further divide the faithful and eliminate the Sacraments.

 

[rcwitness]

Papa Francis lived in the real world for his entire life, not part of the rarified corps of Vatican administrators. As a pastor, he dealt with the issue of marriage and divorce on a routine basis. One of his first moves when he was chosen was to streamline the annulment process so that a person isn’t first broken hearted by a failed marriage and then brokenhearted by the ridiculous hoops they must jump through in order to receive an annulment. Imagine being married to a man or woman who beats you on a regular basis, yet you have to prove to the marriage tribunal that the marriage wasn’t valid from the time you said “I Do”. I personally do not understand those Catholics who do not want those with failed marriages to have full access to the Eucharist whether they have had an annulment or not.

As far as I understand Church Teaching, a marriage cannot be unnuled because of domestic abuse. A civil divorce (and separation) is encouraged, and probably a restraining order too. That doesn’t require an annulment.

 

[JRS_88]

As far as I understand Church Teaching, a marriage cannot be unnuled because of domestic abuse. A civil divorce (and separation) is encouraged, and probably a restraining order too. That doesn’t require an annulment.

I’ve never heard of this before.
You’re saying the Church doesn’t grant annulments in the case of domestic abuse?
If that is true, then that is truly a mess.
That’s withholding the Eucharist from an abuse victim. How is that acceptable? What message does that send to the abuse victim?

Maybe I’m misunderstanding you.

 

[alphomega]

I’ve never heard of this before.
You’re saying the Church doesn’t grant annulments in the case of domestic abuse?
If that is true, then that is truly a mess.
That’s withholding the Eucharist from an abuse victim. How is that acceptable? What message does that send to the abuse victim?

Maybe I’m misunderstanding you.

The “church” has no ability to dissolve a valid marriage. A tribunal through investigation may find a valid marriage never took place hence an annulment.

The Church doesn’t withhold the sacraments. One separates ones self from the sacraments and the grace that flows from them when they commit mortal sin. Your example does not necessarily put the abused in mortal sin.

 

[Ubenedictus]

I’ve never heard of this before.
You’re saying the Church doesn’t grant annulments in the case of domestic abuse?
If that is true, then that is truly a mess.
That’s withholding the Eucharist from an abuse victim. How is that acceptable? What message does that send to the abuse victim?

Maybe I’m misunderstanding you.

Abuse doesn’t nulify a valid marriage. An annulment cannot distroy a valid marriage, it can only declear a marriage never happened, the issues to the considered for annulment are usually what happened before or during the wedding not what happens after a valid marriage is contracted.

 

[Phemie]

I’ve never heard of this before.
You’re saying the Church doesn’t grant annulments in the case of domestic abuse?
If that is true, then that is truly a mess.
That’s withholding the Eucharist from an abuse victim. How is that acceptable? What message does that send to the abuse victim?

Maybe I’m misunderstanding you.

Abuse may be a symptom of an invalid marriage but in and of itself does not make an invalid marriage. What matters is what happened at the time the couple spoke their vows. Did they understand what they were undertaking? Were they both acting of their own free will? Were they both intending to be faitfhful, in it until death, and accepting of children?

 

[thistle]

I’ve never heard of this before.
You’re saying the Church doesn’t grant annulments in the case of domestic abuse?
If that is true, then that is truly a mess.
That’s withholding the Eucharist from an abuse victim. How is that acceptable? What message does that send to the abuse victim?

Maybe I’m misunderstanding you.

Nothing that happens during a marriage are grounds for annulment. Grounds for annulment apply only prior to a marriage.
It is possible that something that happens during a marriage might be used to support any actual grounds for annulment but in and of themselves they are not grounds.

 

[rcwitness]

I’ve never heard of this before.
You’re saying the Church doesn’t grant annulments in the case of domestic abuse?
If that is true, then that is truly a mess.
That’s withholding the Eucharist from an abuse victim. How is that acceptable? What message does that send to the abuse victim?

Maybe I’m misunderstanding you.

A victim of abuse from a spouse is permitted, and encouraged, to separate themselves from the violent spouse. They are able to receive Communion still…