This is my analysis of the ten working groups (thanks for the links McCall1981) on the subject of Communion for remarried divorcees. The point of this exercise is to try and get an idea of the proclivities of the synodal prelates as a potentially useful pointer of what to expect at the next synod.
Admittance of divorced remarrieds to Communion.
French Group A: Rejected.
On the question of remarried divorced persons and the Sacraments of Reconciliation and of the Eucharist, our text states that it is important ânot to change the doctrine of the Church on the indissolubility of marriage and the non-admission of remarried divorced persons to the Sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist, but to apply this constant doctrine of the Church to the different and painful situations of our time, with a renewed look of compassion and mercy on persons.â
French Group B: No accord. Some for, some against.
In regard to the possibility of access to the Sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist, certain Fathers argued, in a perspective at once doctrinal and pastoral, in favour of the present discipline in virtue of its doctrinal foundation, constantly confirmed by the Magisterium of the Church. Other Fathers, inspired by the same doctrinal and pastoral concerns proposed to the Magisterium of the Church the adoption of another discipline, but with very precise conditions (cf. n. 47 of the Relatio Post Disceptationem)
English Group A: Rejected.
We did not recommend the admission to the sacraments of divorced and re-married people, but we included a very positive and much âneeded appreciation of union with Christ through other means.
English Group B: Accepted.
It recommended the examination of possible paths of repentance and discernment by which, in particular circumstances, a divorced and remarried person might participate in the sacraments; and about providing alternatives, such as a deeper appreciation of the classical wisdom and value of spiritual communion.
English Group C: Not Rejected.
We understand that for many their situation in life may not be a free choice, that economic circumstances limit many people in that which can be achieved, that the prevailing culture itself can limit free choice. In dealing with the detail of each section of the document, and closely examining the wording, we were conscious that we may well be losing sight of the necessity for the document to express the welcome, acceptance and the love for those in difficult and painful circumstances, those who are searching for truth and for those longing for the comfort of Christâs healing.
Italian Group A: No definite commitment, though leaning against.
In regard to admission to the Sacraments of Penance and the Eucharist, the Fathers of the Circle, although sensitive to the problem, propose that the argument be studied again in the light of n. 84 of Familiaris Consortio, in order to specify eventual conditions that are different from the present discipline.
Italian Group B: Not rejected.
⌠it is important to reach a coherent and unitary vision of the problem without falling into unilateral perspectives deprived of the necessary historical and theological support. This is true both for the proposals of penitential courses as well as for a correct discouragement of practices proper to the Orthodox Churches. To see in what way they can be transported to the Latin Church requires a pondered study, a non-conflictual presentation and a common solution in communion.
Italian Group C: Accepted:
On the access of divorced persons to the Sacraments, the Circle voted on a proposal, approved by a majority of votes, that opens this possibility in specific conditions and in moments defined by ecclesial and family lifeâŚ
Spanish Group A: Not rejected.
Remarried divorcees are mentioned, but nothing about them not receiving Communion.
The acceptance of the previous considerations encourages us to exhort civil matrimonies and divorced persons who have remarried, to second Godâs call until they attain the fullness of communion and of divine grace.
Spanish Group B: Not rejected. The text is prepared to admit the possibility:
We have considered it good and necessary, as indicated in the text itself, that some topics be studied in âad hocâ inter-disciplinary commissions on the most important subjects. Pastors and experts in Theology and Law will have to come to clearer proposals on topics such as the eventual admission of remarried divorced persons to Eucharistic Communion and the juridical processes of matrimonial nullity, among other topics that were addressed and which, undoubtedly, must be an indispensable component for the forthcoming Ordinary Synodal Assembly.
âRejectedâ or âAcceptedâ means the contentious point was directly addressed and answered.
âNot rejectedâ means the subject matter of the contentious point came up but the point was not itself answered.
The tally is:
2 groups clearly accept the proposal
2 groups clearly reject it
1 group undecided (split vote)
1 group non-committal though leaning against the proposal
2 groups non-committal but prepared to consider the possibility
2 groups non-committal full stop
Assign a half vote each way to the undecided group, and make the two last groups go one each way, and you have 5 1/2 for and 4 1/2 against, which pretty much corresponds to the actual vote.
!!