Divorced people are not "outside" the church

[JReducation]

**
It is important for divorced couples “to have the chance to live a life of faith, … to see that their suffering is a gift for the Church, because they also help others to defend the stability of love, of Marriage; … theirs is a suffering in the community of the Church for the great values of our faith”.**

Suffering, for whatever reason one is suffering, has redemptive value if it is offered with the suffering of Christ. Divorced couples need to have a chance to offer their suffering united to that of Christ. They should not be told that because their suffering is due to objective sin has no merit or redemptive value. This simply is not true. Redemptive suffering receives its value, not from the state of one’s soul, but from it union with the sufferings of the Redeemer.

Those who suffer because they so wish to receive Christ in the Eucharist, but are unable to do so, must be informed that their suffering has value, when it’s united to the suffering of Christ. Their suffering need not be in vain. They can even choose to bear with their suffering in the hope of their own salvation.

This last paragraph is truly for the CAF Catholic. It’s telling us that we need to teach more than just sin. We need to teach people who are in an objective state of sin and can’t get out, what they can do to draw closer to Christ and to us.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[Canuck000]

Lots of good information here and I thank you all! I really need to talk with the priest, I plan to ask my inquiry teacher this weekend also.
One more question, I understand that when I start RCIA classes this fall, I’m going to need a sponsor. My husband, whom is from a very old style catholic family wishes to be my sponsor. I’m sure he’d be fantastic as already had been as far as many questions. He’s talked with me regarding Catholicism often over the years, but never once suggested I convert. However, he’s very excited that I have decided.
I read somewhere, that your sponsor must be a catholic in good standing This of course may be a problem, since he’s married to me, outside of the church. Is it possible that he could be my sponsor?

 

[clem456]

**
It is important for divorced couples “to have the chance to live a life of faith, … to see that their suffering is a gift for the Church, because they also help others to defend the stability of love, of Marriage; … theirs is a suffering in the community of the Church for the great values of our faith”.**

Suffering, for whatever reason one is suffering, has redemptive value if it is offered with the suffering of Christ. Divorced couples need to have a chance to offer their suffering united to that of Christ. They should not be told that because their suffering is due to objective sin has no merit or redemptive value. This simply is not true. Redemptive suffering receives its value, not from the state of one’s soul, but from it union with the sufferings of the Redeemer.

Those who suffer because they so wish to receive Christ in the Eucharist, but are unable to do so, must be informed that their suffering has value, when it’s united to the suffering of Christ. Their suffering need not be in vain. They can even choose to bear with their suffering in the hope of their own salvation.

This last paragraph is truly for the CAF Catholic. It’s telling us that we need to teach more than just sin. We need to teach people who are in an objective state of sin and can’t get out, what they can do to draw closer to Christ and to us.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

Amen Amen Amen

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Others are more knowlegable in this area than I, but thought a marriage outside the Church does not need to be annulled because the Church doesn’t recognize it to begin with. Or it may be true in some cases and not others,depending on denomination etc…?

A CATHOLIC who marries outside the Church is not validly married due to defect of form.

But two Protestants marrying each other–well they are presumed to be validly married. So even if they divorce, and one becomes Catholic, that now-Catholic’s marriage as a Protestant is still PRESUMABLY VALID. And that now-Catholic, should s/he seek to marry, would need to seek a decree of nullity from that earlier Protestant marriage.

Same goes for any nonCatholic man and woman (whether it is Protestant and Jewish, Baptist and Hindu, atheist and Muslim, etc.). Provided they are marrying according to the legal requirements of their place of residence and to whatever is required by their faith tradition, they are presumably validly married.

 

[Elizium23]

Sacramental: For a marriage to be a sacrament it must be valid. It must take place between two baptized Catholics, this actually includes the Orthodox as well. The witness to the marriage must have faculties to witness the marriage. Only the local diocesan bishop can grant faculties to a Catholic to witness a marriage and only an Orthodox Metropolitan can grant faculties to an Orthodox Christian to witness a marraige.

Two Baptists whose marriage is witnessed by a Baptist pastor, can be validly married, even though the marriage is not a sacrament. The same holds true for two Jews, etc.

I thought that a valid marriage between two baptized Christians was a sacramental marriage. I am not aware of a requirement to be Catholic or Orthodox.

 

[johndoe100]

There is a lot of good information about marriage here, but don’t get too confident. The Parochial Aministrator (the priest in charge of the parish) must approve everything first. Be forewarned that the parish priest’s opinion can differ greatly from what is found on the Internet, so don’t be demanding. They have plenty of leeway because on the Canon Laws being stacked on top of one another without the old law being deleted from the record. What I did was move around a little until I found a priest who really thought that I had repented enough and wanted to get me back in.

 

[Dom_Passeri]

This last paragraph is truly for the CAF Catholic. It’s telling us that we need to teach more than just sin. We need to teach people who are in an objective state of sin and can’t get out, what they can do to draw closer to Christ and to us.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

When you say “can’t get out” you must mean “without difficulty”. God can solve any problem and God doesn’t want people to be/remain in a state of mortal sin. Instead of drawing closer to Christ on our terms, shouldn’t we strive to do so on His? It’s the age-old “I’ll accept my crosses, Lord, as long as they’re the crosses of my choosing.” What about “Not my will, but Thy will be done”? God doesn’t will anybody to sin and he doesn’t will anybody to remain in sin or go to hell…

If we truly love our spouses, we would do everything in our power to get sanctifying grace back into ourselves and our spouse, even if it means living in separate bedrooms as brother and sister. Yes, it’s hard, but not as hard as an eternity separated from God. Obviously this isn’t a judgement of people in these tough spots. I’m not judging, I’m just saying that living in a state of mortal sin is dangerous and should be corrected, not side-stepped. We get the point: no finger pointing, no jeering and shunning etc. But that goes for everybody. Love the sinner etc, plus the Golden Rule / Greatest Commandment. Yes, they’re still Catholics, but what does that matter if they remain obstinately in a state of grave sin?

“For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?” It is interesting that two verses later we see the phrase “adulterous and sinful generation”. Anyway, I guess I’m done here. I love the pope, and I pray for him daily. In regard to divorced and re-married people there needs to be both charity and truth. [charity] Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth with the truth (1 Corinthians 13:6)

 

[Jeanne_S]

That was my question. How to you charitably correct somebody in circumstances like this?

An acquaintance of mine shared that she converted to Catholicism,when she remarried twenty some years ago.She was a widow,however,the man who is now her husband was divorced.Therecwere some hangups with the annulment process,cost,etc.So,they never per sued completion of the annulment.Her statement"God knowswhat’s in our hearts".She participates fully in the Catholic faith,receiving communion.I am very conflicted as to how to approach this subject with her.

 

[Dom_Passeri]

Maybe tell her that’s what all the drug dealers and murderers say…

 

[odile53]

It’s a beautiful time if one is intellectually inclined., because the popes are giving us the benefit of the doubt. We’re not simpletons. There is much that we don’t know, because it was not taught to us; but now the pope is putting it on the table so that we can study it as he has. That’s pretty exciting.

I find it exciting to spend 10 - 12 hours a day over several books comparing and contrasting in order to understand what Pope Benedict has said on this or that point. It gets my blood going. I think it’s awesome.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

A HUGE thumbs-up to this! I for one am really sick and tired of Catholics being painted by others as semi-illiterate dolts. It’s refreshing to my spirit that the Holy Fathers have determined that average Joe or Jane Catholic are perfectly capable of understanding high-level teaching, and have set the bar high.

 

[ProVobis]

Even those who cannot receive Holy Communion, because objectively they are living in sin, can make spiritual communion and benefit from the Eucharist that way. Spiritual communion exists precisely for those who are unable to receive the physical sacrament. These folks should be taught and encouraged to do so.

Br JR, good advice all the way around.

Living in sin doesn’t necessarily mean dying in sin.

Death, after all, terminates a marriage, even a non-sacramental one.

 

[Dom_Passeri]

Living in sin doesn’t necessarily mean dying in sin.

Exactly. One can always confess their sins AND amend their ways before they die (this is recommended).

 

[JReducation]

I thought that a valid marriage between two baptized Christians was a sacramental marriage. I am not aware of a requirement to be Catholic or Orthodox.

No. It’s only a sacrament in the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, because we have the sacrament of marriage.

When you say “can’t get out” you must mean “without difficulty”. God can solve any problem and God doesn’t want people to be/remain in a state of mortal sin. Instead of drawing closer to Christ on our terms, shouldn’t we strive to do so on His?

The Holy Fathers are very clear that there are circumstances in which the couple can’t back out of. For example, if there are children involved. As much as the Church wants you to fix your marital status, she does not want you to do the right thing by doing the wrong thing, which would be tearing apart a family. One does not do an evil in order to achieve a good. For this reason, the Holy Father begins by saying that this is a very painful situation for the Church. The Church, in conscience cannot demand that parents break up a family. Children have a right to live in a home with a mother and father. The sins of the parents cannot be allowed to bring down destructive consequences on the children.

There are other situations as well. I know a couple where she had a stroke and is severely disabled. There is no one to care for her, except her husband The Church is not going to ask him to abandon her when she needs him. Though in this case, I believe that they may be living celibate lives due to her disability. I’m not privy to that.

The Holy Father is telling us that it’s easy for us to tell everyone else what to do because this or that is a sin, but that the Vicar of Christ sees other realities and other parts of the picture that we don’t see and that he acknowledges that these other realities are genuine difficulties that cannot be ignored.

We, as faithful Catholics, must give assent to the Vicar of Christ in such matters when he makes such judgments. He is not asking or recommending that anyone do anything immoral. The damage has been done. His is not even asking for our opinion. If I know Benedict XVI as well as I think I do, he does not give two cents for our opinion on this matter. When he wants our opinions, he will ask.

This is a situation in which he is telling us what he expects us to do and how he expects us to respond to people in these situations. At times, we must step back and simply follow directions. We often have a tendency to try to argue with popes as if we were their equals in intelligence and authority. We’re not.

If Pope Benedict is making this statement and he’s saying that there are difficulties in the way of fixing a situation, it’s because he knows something or some things that we don’t know. Let’s be cooperative and learn from him rather than shoot back at him with bible quotes as if we actually knew how to interpret scripture better than a pope.

Having spent time in this man’s classroom, long before he was pope, I can tell you that I do not want to challenge him in theology or morals. He can run circles around us. The only other person that was as good as he is in theology is now dead, that was Bl. John Paul II. Right now, we don’t have another theologian of his caliber. I’ll share an experience that someone else had with Cardinal Ratzinger.

The Cardinal wrote some theological statement and someone who thought that he knew enough theology to challenge him tried to do so. In less than 20 minutes the Cardinal had reduced him to dust in front of an entire classroom of people. The person almost cried. He’s a very soft spoken man, but a very deep thinker and never speaks without knowing that he’s right and that he can prove it. On the other hand, he has a demeanor that is interesting. He is of the opinion that popes need not prove themselves to anyone.

This kind of statement is meant to be a catechetical statement, not a discussion point.

Br JR, good advice all the way around.

Living in sin doesn’t necessarily mean dying in sin.

Death, after all, terminates a marriage, even a non-sacramental one.

I never thought of it that way. That’s a very good insight. Thanks. I’ll have to throw that one at one of my friends who is a moral theologian and see what he thinks. I like the thought.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[JReducation]

Exactly. One can always confess their sins AND amend their ways before they die (this is recommended).

Actually, even if you are divorced and remarried. If you are on your deathbed. You are allowed to

a) Go to confession, if you are able to do so and to receive the Viaticum

b) Receive the Sacrament of the Sick, which also absolves from sin, if you are repentant.

No priest in his sane mind is going to deny you a deathbed confession. Legend has it that both Henry VIII and Luther asked for a priest on their deathbed. I have never seen proof for or against it.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[Dom_Passeri]

The Holy Fathers are very clear that there are circumstances in which the couple can’t back out of. For example, if there are children involved. As much as the Church wants you to fix your marital status, she does not want you to do the right thing by doing the wrong thing, which would be tearing apart a family.

Likewise, we must not do the wrong thing by doing the right thing, which would be continuous adultery (for the sake of raising children as a mother/father team). Sin is never necessary, and sin has no rights. I’m afraid I only see one possibility for “spouses” with children to stay together, and that is by living as brother and sister…separate rooms. Certainly, keep the family together, mother and father raise the children, but don’t continue in the sin.

One does not do an evil in order to achieve a good.

Precisely, JReducation, and therefore achieving the good (keeping family together for the sake of children) cannot and must not include any further adultery. Plain and simple. Chastity must be observed since they are not, in fact, married.

For this reason, the Holy Father begins by saying that this is a very painful situation for the Church. The Church, in conscience cannot demand that parents break up a family. Children have a right to live in a home with a mother and father. The sins of the parents cannot be allowed to bring down destructive consequences on the children.

You are making this perfectly clear: the parents need to stop sinning. Mortal sin is the worst thing for man. The mother of St. Louis IX, king of France said “I love you my dear son, as much as a mother can love her child; but I would rather see you dead at my feet than that you should commit a mortal sin.”

We often have a tendency to try to argue with popes as if we were their equals in intelligence and authority. We’re not.

Is that the “royal” we? Or we here at CAF, or just “people” in general?

If Pope Benedict is making this statement and he’s saying that there are difficulties in the way of fixing a situation, it’s because he knows something or some things that we don’t know. Let’s be cooperative and learn from him rather than shoot back at him with bible quotes as if we actually knew how to interpret scripture better than a pope.

All I have done so far is point out a few very basic facts that every Catholic knows.

In less than 20 minutes the Cardinal had reduced him to dust in front of an entire classroom of people. The person almost cried. He’s a very soft spoken man, but a very deep thinker and never speaks without knowing that he’s right and that he can prove it. On the other hand, he has a demeanor that is interesting. He is of the opinion that popes need not prove themselves to anyone.

As an aside, this sounds exactly like one of my old profs who I think would generally be considered “pope” of his field. I love these old guys! I’ll tell you what, I’ve always been the class clown, and while everybody else was shaking in their boots in his presence, I got him, along with the rest of the room, to laugh on several occasions where I was supposed to be the one being reduced to tears, and I’m pretty sure I could literally get Pope Benedict XVI to do the same. Come to think of it, I studied with this prof around the time of the Pope’s election. He’s almost three years the pope’s senior. What a venerable fellow.

 

[JReducation]

Likewise, we must not do the wrong thing by doing the right thing, which would be continuous adultery (for the sake of raising children as a mother/father team). Sin is never necessary, and sin has no rights. I’m afraid I only see one possibility for “spouses” with children to stay together, and that is by living as brother and sister…separate rooms. Certainly, keep the family together, mother and father raise the children, but don’t continue in the sin.

Precisely, JReducation, and therefore achieving the good (keeping family together for the sake of children) cannot and must not include any further adultery. Plain and simple. Chastity must be observed since they are not, in fact, married.

You are making this perfectly clear: the parents need to stop sinning. Mortal sin is the worst thing for man. The mother of St. Louis IX, king of France said “I love you my dear son, as much as a mother can love her child; but I would rather see you dead at my feet than that you should commit a mortal sin.”

Is that the “royal” we? Or we here at CAF, or just “people” in general?

All I have done so far is point out a few very basic facts that every Catholic knows.

As an aside, this sounds exactly like one of my old profs who I think would generally be considered “pope” of his field. I love these old guys! I’ll tell you what, I’ve always been the class clown, and while everybody else was shaking in their boots in his presence, I got him, along with the rest of the room, to laugh on several occasions where I was supposed to be the one being reduced to tears, and I’m pretty sure I could literally get Pope Benedict XVI to do the same. Come to think of it, I studied with this prof around the time of the Pope’s election. He’s almost three years the pope’s senior. What a venerable fellow.

My point is, when Pope Benedict gives a catechetical instruction, don’t mess with him. Take him at his word and do exactly as he says. He’s a genius. He’s also very intolerant, not in a bad kind of way. He does not tolerate questions, especially not questions about anything that he says.

I went to school under this man long before he was Pope Benedict. I’m an old man now. I never saw the person whom he reduced to tears, but I knew that person and he never went back to finish his theology course. I did see him throw students out of his classroom who said, "But Dr. Ratzinger, the Church says . . . " He would look over his glasses and point to the door. That was it. If you wanted a degree, you took notes, shut your mouth and did what he said. Years later, when in pastoral practice or further theological research, you found out that he was right and that what you had thought the Church had always said was not what the Church had always meant. It was rather strange. But then again, going to school at any of the pontifical universities in Rome was a very unique experience. It’s a completely different Catholic Church. Very orthodox, but not what we have been taught as orthodox.

I found out that what we had been taught back here in the USA and outside of Rome was the surface, but every word and every idea had levels of nuances. Men like Dr. Ratzinger were very knowledgeable of those nuances.

That’s why I never even question what he says or stop to say, "But the Church has always said . . . " or "The bible says . . . " Why bother? I know form experience, that he’s right and I’m wrong. I have completely misunderstood what the Church and the bible say. I don’t go there nor do I encourage others to do so. Instead, I encourage others to trust him. He’s bright and he’s very orthodox.

What makes him very different is that he’s not a Thomist. He dislikes Aquinas’ method, though he agrees with his conclusions. He has developed his own methods which is based on Bonaventure and Augustine.

I just remembered a poor Dominican who brought up Aquinas method in one of Dr. Ratzinger’s classes. Dr. R looked at him and said, “Yes. That’s how St. Thomas did it.” Then he moved right on to his method. Everyone suddenly had a coughing attack. Dr. R just looked at us over his glasses, as he tends to do, with a little smirk on his face.

Just trust the man. If he says that there is more here than meets the eye and he says that this is what he wants us to do at the parish level and not more than this. Let’s just do what he says. He has an idea. He’s interesting that way. He has many ideas that he does not always share in their entirety. I think much of it is because he assumes that you should be able to figure it out on your own or that you don’t need that information.

A perfect example was the mess with the comment that he made about the ancient Mohammedans. He simply assumed that his audience knew what he meant, which they did not. That’s the way he speaks. He’s fascinating.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[Dom_Passeri]

My point is, when Pope Benedict gives a catechetical instruction, don’t mess with him. Take him at his word and do exactly as he says. He’s a genius. He’s also very intolerant, not in a bad kind of way. He does not tolerate questions, especially not questions about anything that he says.

Who’s messin’ with him? I’m not. I didn’t contradict him. Like I said, I just pointed out a couple things that he didn’t say…A few practical things on the subject of the supreme law of the Church.

That’s why I never even question what he says or stop to say, "But the Church has always said . . . " or "The bible says . . . " Why bother? I know form experience, that he’s right and I’m wrong. I have completely misunderstood what the Church and the bible say.

If that is so, then the last 2000 years would have been better spent by popes making clear statements. If you have completely misunderstood what the Church and the bible say, then who, oh who, can possibly be in heaven other than theologians of the highest degree. And who would want to even be there!?

I don’t go there nor do I encourage others to do so. Instead, I encourage others to trust him. He’s bright and he’s very orthodox.

I put my trust in the Lord. If I am as a little child compared with Dr. R, then I will bypass him and suffer myself to go straight to Jesus, a place I’d be welcomed into, instead of dismissed and pointed out the closest door…

Anyway, since you didn’t respond to the particulars of my post I’m just going to assume that you don’t have anything to add or correct.

 

[sasg]

There are two kinds of marriages

Valid: A valid marriage is binding until death and indissoluble. It makes no difference that it is outside of the Catholic Church. Any marriage between two people of the same faith who marry in their faith is valid and can never be dissolved.

Sacramental: For a marriage to be a sacrament it must be valid. It must take place between two baptized Catholics, this actually includes the Orthodox as well. The witness to the marriage must have faculties to witness the marriage. Only the local diocesan bishop can grant faculties to a Catholic to witness a marriage and only an Orthodox Metropolitan can grant faculties to an Orthodox Christian to witness a marraige.

Two Baptists whose marriage is witnessed by a Baptist pastor, can be validly married, even though the marriage is not a sacrament. The same holds true for two Jews, etc.

Can you please cite sources for this? I think this may not be accurate.

Can. 1055 §1. The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life and which is ordered by its nature to the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring, has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament between the baptized.

§2. For this reason, a valid matrimonial contract cannot exist between the baptized without it being by that fact a sacrament.

Note it does not say Catholic, it says baptized. Therefore if Baptists who are validly baptized have valid marriages, their marriages must also be sacraments.

Also, regarding the indissolubility of marriage, do you have a source that says “Any marriage between two people of the same faith who marry in their faith is valid and can never be dissolved”?

Can. 1141 A marriage that is ratum et consummatum can be dissolved by no human power and by no cause, except death

Yet the conditions for matrimonium ratum et consummatum are:

Can. 1061 §1. A valid marriage between the baptized is called ratum tantum if it has not been consummated; it is called ratum et consummatum if the spouses have performed between themselves in a human fashion a conjugal act which is suitable in itself for the procreation of offspring, to which marriage is ordered by its nature and by which the spouses become one flesh.

This seems to say that to be ratum, a valid marriage must be “between the baptized”. Marriage between unbaptized people (or one baptized and one unbaptized) is not ratum, and therefore the conditions of indissolubility do not apply. This understanding is confirmed in Canon 1143:

Can. 1143 §1. A marriage entered into by two non-baptized persons is dissolved by means of the pauline privilege in favor of the faith of the party who has received baptism by the very fact that a new marriage is contracted by the same party, provided that the non-baptized party departs.

As well as the application of Canon 1150 in the “Petrine Privlege”:

Can. 1150 In a doubtful matter the privilege of faith possesses the favor of the law.

When two people marry outside the Catholic Church, one Catholic and one non - Catholic, the marriage is not valid, because a Catholic cannot marry outside of the faith.

This is true only if the Catholic does not obtain a proper dispensation, per Can 1125-1129. vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_P41.HTM#4.1.0.7.6.0.1125

In other words, with the proper dispensation, a marriage between a Catholic and a validly baptized non-Catholic is ratum (and a sacrament, and after consummation, indissoluble), and a marriage between a Catholic and a non-Christian is valid, although not ratum and therefore dissoluble in accordance with Can 1150.

Therefore you could say these are the types of marriages:

• Invalid (not a marriage) - some impediment exists and is not dispensed or not dispensable. This is not a marriage, and impedes reception of the sacraments.
• Valid, non ratum - at least one party must not be validly baptized in any Christian denomination. Can be either consummatum or non consummaturm; the difference is not relevant to the dissolubility of the marriage (non ratum, therefore dissoluble). This is not a sacrament, but is valid and recognized by the Church, and would not impede reception of the sacraments.
• Valid, ratum, non-consummatum - both parties must be validly baptized in any Christian denomination, and if one party is Catholic, it must have the proper form or dispensation from canonical form. A valid marriage and a sacrament, but dissoluble because it is not consummated.
• Valid, ratum, consummatum - same as above, but indissoluble, except through death.

Of course none of this changes your original point, that divorced people are not outside the Church. In fact, some divorced people can even validly remarry within the Church (valid, non-ratum and ratum, non-consummatum marriages).

 

[Irishgal49]

People living this situation are immersed in it, and the percentages really don’t matter to them. To them it is not an abstract sociological problem to be solved but a very real situation they deal with in their personal lives.

The Holy Father has just said that these people, “can be spiritually united to Christ” and that it is important for divorced couples “to have the chance to live a life of faith.”

I think our attitudes towards a person in this situation is important. It must be very difficult for those who realize that they have made a mistake, repent but because of children or some other situation cannot break off the relationship, and so abstain from recpetion. To willingly make the choice to kneel in the pew while everyone else goes up to recieve shows great reverence for the Eucharist, and great faith and trust in God.

-Tim-

Beautifully said Tim!

 

[Irishgal49]

I’m not the Holy Father and will not attempt to speak for him. I can only share what I have seen done, which is very good. I have seen parishes that have support ministries for divorced and remarried Catholics. The one that I’m thinking about, the folks get together every week and discuss their spiritual journey with one of the deacons. They pray together and they address such issues as raising their children Catholic and preparing them for the sacraments. They address important issues such as how to help the children understand that that mom and dad’s situation is outside of the norm. It can be very tempting for parents such situation to simply give children the impression that what they learn about married and remarriage is nonsense. You need help to explain to the children that the Church’s teaching is the truth and that mom and dat’s situation is not the norm. There is a balance, the Church is good and her teachings are true, but that does not make mom and dad evil people. This kind of ministry addresses such issues.

They address concerns about children born to two marriages. This is very important. These men and women need to know what to do and how to be responsible parents, regardless of their marital status. They need to deal with issues of forgiveness. There is a lot of anger and hostility in divorce.

Thought the tribunal must always rule in favor of the bond, that does not mean that there is a bond. What it means that the couple who applied for a decree of nullity was unable to prove that there was not bond… Just because you can’t prove it, does not mean that it’s not real. People who have applied for a decree of nullity and have been denied have to live with the doubt and they have to become reconciled to the fact that the Church is not against them, but simply protecting the bond. People often take it as a personal rejection and walk away from the Church. These ministries help these folks distinguish between the Church being protective of the bond, not really against them as people. The tribunal’s conclusion is not a reflection on you as a person. It’s just that you were unable to prove your claim. You may be a saint, for all we know.

There is a lot that can be done at the parish level, because there are many many issues.

Actually, that’s what His Holiness is trying to clarify. He’s saying that because one objectively is in a state of sin, does not mean that one is outside of the Church. There are two different realities. A baptized Catholic will always be a Catholic and always has a right to be part of the Church, even if he or she cannot receive the sacraments. That person cannot be denied this right, nor should they feel that they do not have a right to be there. That’s what he’s saying.

He’s saying that the Church has never said that divorced and remarried people are excommunicated. They continue to be fully Catholic and fully members of the Church by virtue of their baptism. They don’t have to right to receive the sacraments, because of an objective situation of sin. However, he is explaining that the situation is objective. We have no idea what the truth is. Only God knows if the person is truly in a state of sin. We can only describe what we see, not what we don’t see. We should not make any attempt to judge people or exclude people based on assumptions. We must stick with the law. There is no law that says that a divorced and remarried Catholic is no longer Catholic.

As to his state of grace, that’s an assumption that we may never make. We can only say that objectively, from all appearances, it would seem that this person is living in sin. Are they really living in sin? The Holy Father is not saying yes or no, because he’s not God and neither are any of us. We can only say what it looks like. That’s the best we can do. The rest is up to God.

But we must encourage the person to unite his sufferings and his desire for the Eucharist to the sufferings of Christ on the cross during the mass and let Christ sort it out.

There is also the option of annulment. More classes on how this can be obtained (or at least considered) is vital to helping some divorced people resolve their situation. This is never guaranteed but certainly should be explored. More divorce support groups are badly needed. I came back to the church after a 9 year absence. I had married again outside the church, sadly my first husband was deceased and I was living apart --getting a divorce from husband #2. The priest, misunderstanding that my 1st husband was deceased basically told me “I’m very sorry but I can’t help you” and that was that. I was persistent and sent him an email detailing my situation and he told me he had misunderstood and to “go to confession somewhere and you can be reunited to the church”. He never reached out to me. I had this feeling that he was saying, “go somewhere else”.

I have spent over a year and finally found a divorce support group–only one in our Diocese. That parish has a strong commitment to helping the divorced. The priest comes in during one class and explains annulment and I think that’s wonderful. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that there are over 2000 members there. I understand the majority who attend church are married with families but at least mention us in the intercessions once in a while–there are widowed people too–and those who choose to be single…affirming us in our singleness would be very helpful. Remind us that God loves us–I have been struggling with horrible loneliness, it’s nice to be reminded that I’m cared about–by God and the Church I love.

Lorrie