German bishops: most Catholics perceive Catholic teaching on divorce, remarriage as 'merciless' [CWN]

[FormerXCatholic]

I am German, and I do not remember that commercial.

I think it was banned after a few short airings.

 

[Usige]

It should be noted that many of those who have heard of Natural Law think it’s “outdated”, or “erroneous”. Some take another bent on it and say “since man exerts influence on nature, Natural Law changes”. An absolute minority says “I stand with the Church”.

I shake my head when I hear things like that. It’s like saying that arithmetic is outdated. Maybe you think the language to describe it is archaic, but the underlying concept is just as valid now as when someone first put two rocks together and “invented” counting. Basic math is no more mutable then natural law. Basic math stems from observation of the world just as natural law does. It so sad that people think it can and should be changeable.

 

[mdgspencer]

0ops… It doesn’t say who wrote this report.
Apparently, it isn’t an official statement of the bishops’ conference in Germany. The same thing has happened repeatedly in the U.S. A statement in such a case is said by the media to be from U.S. bishops–that isn’t from the bishops. It from some small group, mostly of laypeople, sometimes a subcommittee, in the U.S. Catholic conference with no authority to speak for the U.S. bishops.
Notice that this “report” doesn’t identify the source of this report at the beginning or at the end, which I expect would give people second thoughts about it.

 

[Usige]

0ops… It doesn’t say who wrote this report.
Apparently, it isn’t an official statement of the bishops’ conference in Germany. The same thing has happened repeatedly in the U.S. A statement in such a case is said by the media to be from U.S. bishops–that isn’t from the bishops. It from some small group, mostly of laypeople, sometimes a subcommittee, in the U.S. Catholic conference with no authority to speak for the U.S. bishops.
Notice that this “report” doesn’t identify the source of this report at the beginning or at the end, which I expect would give people second thoughts about it.

It’s actually on the first page. My German is a bit rusty but it looks to say it is published by Dr Hans Langendorfer SJ, Secretary of the German Bishop’s Conference. The report itself is form the German Bishop’s conference website itself and the first page says its a press release from the German Bishop’s conference. The link thanking everyone is on the main page of the German Bishop’s Conference page and includes both the German and English versions.

CutlerB (or anyone else that speaks German) please correct me if I miss read it.

 

[CutlerB]

It’s actually on the first page. My German is a bit rusty but it looks to say it is published by Dr Hans Langendorfer SJ, Secretary of the German Bishop’s Conference. The report itself is form the German Bishop’s conference website itself and the first page says its a press release from the German Bishop’s conference. The link thanking everyone is on the main page of the German Bishop’s Conference page and includes both the German and English versions.

CutlerB (or anyone else that speaks German) please correct me if I miss read it.

It is an official document of the conference. Fr Langendörfer SJ is the Secratary of the Conference.

Here is the official English version of the report:

dbk.de/fileadmin/redaktion/diverse_downloads/presse_2014/2014-012b-ENG-Fragebogen-Die-patoralen-Herausforderungen-der-Familie.pdf

 

[manualman]

It is an official document of the conference. Fr Langendörfer SJ is the Secratary of the Conference.

But that doesn’t address the other poster’s point. More than once in the past we’ve seen USCCB official documents approved by a cabal of staffers and a select group of bishops approved deliberately at a poorly attended meeting.

There can be more to the story, in other words. It would be interesting to hear just how many German bishops actually voted to approve the document.

 

[Usige]

But that doesn’t address the other poster’s point. More than once in the past we’ve seen USCCB official documents approved by a cabal of staffers and a select group of bishops approved deliberately at a poorly attended meeting.

There can be more to the story, in other words. It would be interesting to hear just how many German bishops actually voted to approve the document.

CutlerB and I were merely speaking to the fact that this is an official release from the German Bishop’s Conference. One assumes that the secretary of a national Bishop’s conference only makes releases that have been approved by the conference or the head of the conference.

I am curious if everyone looks for vote tallies from everything that comes out of the USCCB or Vatican curial departments. Instead don’t we accept that official statements have the authority of those they represent unless there is good reason to doubt it?

I guess what I’m asking is what story do some people think this report is hiding?

 

[CutlerB]

But that doesn’t address the other poster’s point. More than once in the past we’ve seen USCCB official documents approved by a cabal of staffers and a select group of bishops approved deliberately at a poorly attended meeting.

There can be more to the story, in other words. It would be interesting to hear just how many German bishops actually voted to approve the document.

I have not heard of such a case from the German Bishops. The burden of proof is on those who claim there is reason to doubt the veracity/legitimacy of the report.

Meanwhile, the Bishop of Trier, Stephan Ackermann, has voiced the suggestion to change the Church’s sexual ethics.

See here (German): katholisch.de/de/katholisch/themen/news/page_news.php?id=27638

My translation:

Ackerman in favour of changes to sexual ethics
In the face of great differences between Catholic teaching and the reality of the lives of many faithful, Bishop of Trier, Stephan Ackermann, sees the necessity for change in the Church’s sexual morals. It was no longer befitted the times to view a new marriage after a divorce as permanent mortal sin, he told the Mainz “Allgemeine Zeitung” of thursday.

Furthermore, it was no longer tenable to categorise every kind of pre-marital intercourse as grave sin. “We need to strengthen people’s awareness of their responsibility, but then we must respect their choice as a matter of conscience”. The recently evaluated Vatican survey among Catholic faithful had shown that the Catholic Church’s moral teaching was widely understood as “morals of prohibition” and “far removed from [real] life”.

“We cannot entirely change the Catholic teaching, but we can come up with criteria on the basis of which we say: ‘It is justifiable in this and that specific case’”, says the Bishop. It could not be accepted that there was only the ideal on one side, and condemnation on the other. Furthermore, the distinction between natural and artificial contraception was somewhat artificial. “No one understands that anymore, I’m afraid.” (dpa)

 

[Usige]

I have not heard of such a case from the German Bishops. The burden of proof is on those who claim there is reason to doubt the veracity/legitimacy of the report.

Meanwhile, the Bishop of Trier, Stephan Ackermann, has voiced the suggestion to change the Church’s sexual ethics.

See here (German): katholisch.de/de/katholisch/themen/news/page_news.php?id=27638

Wow! And people wonder why the laity reject Church teaching when those entrusted to proclaiming the Truth see it as malleable and subject to a fallen world view.

 

[manualman]

Seriously! What is it about sex that so easily makes people conclude that any hard teaching is a wrong teaching? We don’t apply that line of reason to OTHER forms of human behavior.

“After exhaustive study of the issue, we bishops have found that pretty much ALL of the faithful are guilty of having told lies, including priests and bishops. Given this evidence, we hereby conclude that God screwed up on this one and lying is declared, in fact, not to be innately sinful anymore.”

You don’t hear rot like the above on other issues. Why always about sex? Yeah it’s a hard teaching. Yeah, a lot of people screw it up. Yeah, it says something sad about the nature of man. You know, like that perhaps all of mankind is sinful. Perhaps tracing that characteristic back to some traumatic event early in human history to the point where we ALL suffer from it’s effects. Maybe it’s so bad even that God will become incarnate to offer Himself for our sins and thereby grant us the opportunity to be remade and restored if we repent.

Hey, that all sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

 

[CutlerB]

Meanwhile, the Bishop of Trier, Stephan Ackermann, has voiced the suggestion to change the Church’s sexual ethics.

See here (German): katholisch.de/de/katholisch/themen/news/page_news.php?id=27638

Here is my translation of the complete original article, which can be read at allgemeine-zeitung.de/politik/rheinland-pfalz/trierer-bischof-stephan-ackermann-sieht-veraenderungsbedarf-in-der-moral-und-sexualethik-der-katholischen-kirche_13848816.htm

The Bishop of Trier, Stephan Ackerman, sees the clear necessity of change in the Catholic Church’s sexual morals. In a conversation [interview?] with this newspaper, Ackermann commented on the results of a survey the Vatican conducted among Catholic faithful in German dioceses. The results show that the moral teaching of the Catholic Church is widely understood as one of “prohibitions” and one that is “far from real life”.

Not just black and white
“We need to strengthen people’s awareness of their responsibility, but then we must respect their choice as a matter of conscience”, says Ackermann. It was, for example, no longer appropriate [German literally: “according to the times”] to call a new marriage after a divorce persistent mortal sin, and not to provide possibilities for remarried divorcees to be admitted to the Sacraments ever again. “We will make proposals in that regard”, said the Bishop. It was not tenable to view every kind of pre-marital intercourse as grave sin, either. “We cannot entirely change the Catholic teaching, but we can come up with criteria on the basis of which we say: ‘It is justifiable in this and that specific case’. It is not acceptable that we have the ideal on the one side, and merely condemnation on the other.”

On the topic of family planning and contraception, the Bishop declared: “The differentiation between natural and artificial contraception is somehow artificial itself. No one understands that anymore, I’m afraid.”

As in all questions of sexual morals, the Church must appeal to each person’s sense of responsibility also in the area of homosexuality. “The Christian view of man sees the sexes’ polarity as the norm [German somewhat obscure], but we cannot just say homosexuality was contrary to nature.” Homosexuality may, however, not be lived out in promiscuity or the satisfaction of urges [Triebbefriedigung].

Commitment to celibacy
The Catholic Church still holds to marriage as solely between a man and a woman, but when civil partnerships foster commitment/faithfulness and responsibility, “then we can’t ignore that awareness of responsibility”, says Ackermann. A blessing of homosexual couples as in the Evangelical Church “is not our solution”.

Celibacy was “not a dogma” canonically, but being a priest entails the profession of this lifestyle in every case. He could not foresee how this would develop in future, states Ackermann.

 

[Ender]

Wow! And people wonder why the laity reject Church teaching when those entrusted to proclaiming the Truth see it as malleable and subject to a fallen world view.

Given the way this topic was presented (viz. “Catholic teaching…”) this perspective was probably inevitable. The church has taken a position on priestly celibacy, and could if she chose, change it. The church position on divorce, however, is not hers to change. It is nothing less than her understanding of what God’s position on divorce is, and this presents Catholics with two options: accept it as God’s command or accept that the church has failed her mission of “authentically interpreting God’s law” and look elsewhere.

While it is not irrational for a Catholic to believe the church is not what she claims to be it makes no sense at all for a bishop to go down that path.

Ender

 

[SuperLuigi]

Couldn’t care less what “most Catholics” think.

I’m only interested in the Truth.

EOM

 

[Pulvis]

This episode continues to show the fruits of modernist intentions inserted into the Church under the guise of " the spirit of Vatican2". The destruction of proper catechesis along with weak hierarchy and wishy washy support of Church teachings has gutted the faith of millions. The faith is a war against evil. If you do not properly prepare yourself and your troops for battle, you lose and die. Right now, the Church is loosing miserably.

 

[Mulligan2]

Seriously! What is it about sex that so easily makes people conclude that any hard teaching is a wrong teaching? We don’t apply that line of reason to OTHER forms of human behavior.

“After exhaustive study of the issue, we bishops have found that pretty much ALL of the faithful are guilty of having told lies, including priests and bishops. Given this evidence, we hereby conclude that God screwed up on this one and lying is declared, in fact, not to be innately sinful anymore.”

You don’t hear rot like the above on other issues. Why always about sex? Yeah it’s a hard teaching. Yeah, a lot of people screw it up. Yeah, it says something sad about the nature of man. You know, like that perhaps all of mankind is sinful. Perhaps tracing that characteristic back to some traumatic event early in human history to the point where we ALL suffer from it’s effects. Maybe it’s so bad even that God will become incarnate to offer Himself for our sins and thereby grant us the opportunity to be remade and restored if we repent.

Hey, that all sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

Your analogy doesn’t really work, as lovemaking is intrinsically good, while lying is intrinsically bad. But I understand the point you’re trying to make.

From my perspective, the reason for the findings in the report has to do with the fact that many people don’t “automatically accept” the church teachings on sex the way people did in the past. I suspect they know the church teachings, but they don’t believe them because the teachings don’t match with their instinctive, intuitive, and personal beliefs on the topic.

I don’t think the finding in the report are exclusive to Germany. I suspect the reports from different regions will yield similar results.

 

[kelvinf]

Here is my translation of the complete original article, which can be read at allgemeine-zeitung.de/politik/rheinland-pfalz/trierer-bischof-stephan-ackermann-sieht-veraenderungsbedarf-in-der-moral-und-sexualethik-der-katholischen-kirche_13848816.htm

I can’t believe he is saying that certain sins should no longer be sins because they are not zeitgemäß. Typical leftist talk! I wonder what Bible he reads.

I first became skeptical about this Bishop when he appeared on Günther Jauch to talk about the Bishop of Limburg.

 

[kelvinf]

This episode continues to show the fruits of modernist intentions inserted into the Church under the guise of " the spirit of Vatican2". The destruction of proper catechesis along with weak hierarchy and wishy washy support of Church teachings has gutted the faith of millions. The faith is a war against evil. If you do not properly prepare yourself and your troops for battle, you lose and die. Right now, the Church is loosing miserably.

Well said!

 

[CutlerB]

I can’t believe he is saying that certain sins should no longer be sins because they are not zeitgemäß. Typical leftist talk! I wonder what Bible he reads.

I first became skeptical about this Bishop when he appeared on Günther Jauch to talk about the Bishop of Limburg.

I wouldn’t call him a Leftist, but I see what you mean. To be honest, I think the Bishop is just as worried about the Church as we are and he means well. There are, however, some issues in the reasoning itself and the ideas that inform it, which need to be addressed.

The Bishop of Limburg thing was an incredible case, no doubt. Some of his brother Bishops disappointed me in their comments, among them the Bishop of Trier, that is correct.

When the Synod comes, I hope the German Bishops are put in their place and the matter is finally put to rest. I feel our Bishops here have gone soft in often running after what people want them to say. Jemandem nach dem Mund reden would be the German expression.

 

[josh987654321]

I think people percieve it as ‘merciless’ as they don’t know how annulments work, or what the annulment process is like. Which I don’t really know either so I am unsure whether I think it merciless or not.

The biggest problem for me is, I have an uncle, who is not Catholic, and has been previously divorced, he is married now with his wife who has also been previously divorced, they raise 3 kids together (1 biological to the father and the other two biological to the mother), they are a happy family.

Now the problem lies here, He is Christian (not sure what protestant denomination) but not Catholic, and if I were to teach him and invite him home to the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, what would be expected of the Prodigal son in order to return home? would the Church demand the break up of this household?

The other problem, I don’t know whether entirely true or not, but if a married woman’s husband has an affair on her, or vice versa and she divorces him, I don’t believe it is entirely right to say she can never marry again as Jesus did say “unless they commited a terrible sexual sin.” But I don’t really care about whether I think it okay or not, I only care about whether Christ would think it okay or not.

I also believe that putting ‘ultimatums’ on the prodigal son as in “do this or that or you cannot come back home” is a problem. When the Prodigal Son returned, the father didn’t say “You need to do this or that before I will take you back” but I also realise that it also doesn’t say he had any kind of ‘bagage’ so to speak either.

I believe on one hand we need to show mercy and provide a way back home for all those divorced and remarried couples who didn’t realise the gravity of “till death do you part” and now realise the error of their previous ways, while on the other hand we need to emphasise the gravity of “till death do you part” for all newly weds/those entering marriage.

How to do that idk, but I believe providing these prodigal son’s with a way back is most important and I am not sure whether the Church is doing that atm in regard to divorced and remarried couples.

May I ask what advice you guys would give regarding the situation above about my uncle? would this prodigal son be required to break up his household in order to return home?

Anyway these are my thoughts, please let me know what you think.

Sorry for the length of this post.

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[Memaw]

Surveys show a huge percentage of high school students don’t know what decade - or what century - the Civil War or Great Depression happened in. This does not disprove the value of teaching history.

I suspect most Catholics have never heard of the concept of “dying to self” either. Most of us have never heard of “conversion” except maybe someone who switches denominations; most of us have never heard the term “renewal” except maybe someone who goes to a seminar where they become more open minded about religion, family, and everything else. The fact that most Germans (and Americans) are ignorant of whatever the media chooses to ignore does not disprove the truth of the doctrines they are ignorant of.

AMEN, God Bless, Memaw