If you look at the working document the Vatican released earlier this summer, you will see that the Bishops are not being empowered to change doctrine or anything like that. The most likely results, in my opinion, will be a streamlined annulment process for certain types of divorced persons to hasten their return to the Sacraments and enhanced outreach to remarried Catholics to encourage them to engage in the annulment process in the first place.
Church doctrines cannot change.
Hm? Such people are not denied communion now.
There is talk about it but it is not necessarily clear the Synod will move in that direction. That said, the talk isn’t exactly dying down so I would say you (and all of us) should pray for the Synod, that it will not do anything to endanger the faith of ordinary people.
Even those who are the guilty party in a divorce can return to Communion after a sincere Confession. It’s not the divorce that keeps people from the Sacrament; it’s the subsequent “remarriage” outside of the Church.
I don’t you have anything to be worried about. They will not question or change doctrine. They have already signaled that they think the lack of acceptance of doctrine is poor understanding of the faithful (should be faithless, I guess) and the solution is better teaching, and better pastoral care.
It’s interesting that you say the synod is “not a rule making body”. Would this be the same for example for the Synod of Jerusalem in the 70’s AD I believe it was? Before ecumenical councils?
Definitions of words and types of bodies have changed over the years. That was actually called the “Council” (NOT Ecumenical) of Jerusalem, and had a completely different purpose, plus it was nearly 2000 yrs ago and during the infancy of the Church! I believe a Synod can make recommendations for changes to laws, but it takes the pope to approve any changes, as he is the supreme law-giver for the Church…even when an Ecumenical Council is in place.
I’m trying not to worry about it. You cannot effect what will occur there. The Bishops will either stay faithful to doctrine or they will not. The Church will either pull ever closer to the world, or be the light on the hill. By their fruits, we will know them.
That is not correct. Anyone in a state of mortal sin may NOT receive Communion. That is doctrine. Whatever mortal sin it is (e.g. Adultery) does not matter. It is doctrine, and NOT practice.
I think we can all agree that adultery is grave matter. I think where the wiggle room might be is on the issue of culpability (remembering the three conditions for a sin to be mortal). It could very well be that the aggrieved party in a divorce that re-married outside the Church, has remained faithful to the new spouse for many years, and has a family with that spouse, might be seen as having subjectively diminished culpability for an objectively grave sin.
We have to trust that the Magisterium will remain faithful to Christ’s teachings in a way that will consider the pastoral care of a very large and growing demographic. So I prefer “just in time worrying”. Why worry about something that hasn’t even happened yet?
Well one thing that cannot be allowed change, change in canon law or not, is those in mortal sin to receive the body and blood.
Hi,
That is simply not correct. You don’t earn reduced culpability by having a family with and staying faithful to a mistress.I think we can all agree that adultery is grave matter. I think where the wiggle room might be is on the issue of culpability (remembering the three conditions for a sin to be mortal). ** It could very well be that the aggrieved party in a divorce that re-married outside the Church, has remained faithful to the new spouse for many years, and has a family with that spouse, might be seen as having subjectively diminished culpability for an objectively grave sin**.
I’m thinking the synod might lean in that direction: study each individual case pastorally, and determine the degree of culpability. Objectively, it is adultery. Subjectively, being (albeit invalidly) married and faithful to that spouse for many years, certainly isn’t same as, say, a married man on a business trip looking to hookup with someone in a bar.
Or it may not go that way at all. It may be as was said, a streamlined annulment process. Who knows?