Objective state vs subjective culpability

  • Thread starter Thread starter angell1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

angell1

Guest
could someone please help me understand? for example, in fc, pope st. john paul II states that the divorced and remarried could not receive communion due to their objective state in life contradicting christ’s teaching. so how is this only a practice like everyone says? but the church also teaches that we may not always be culpable of mortal sin. so what is the purpose of only focusing on the objective? can someone please help clarify?
 
angell1 said:
…
Click to expand...
It is not all objective.

FC states: “if these people were admitted to the Eucharist, the faithful would be led into error and confusion regarding the Church’s teaching about the indissolubility of marriage.”

Note that these cases are covered.

Catholics in Civil Marriages: “the pastors of the Church will regrettably not be able to admit them to the sacraments.”

Divorced Persons Who Have Remarried: “the Church reaffirms her practice, which is based upon Sacred Scripture, of not admitting to Eucharistic Communion divorced persons who have remarried”
Three cases are:
  • those who have sincerely tried to save their first marriage and have been unjustly abandoned
  • those who through their own grave fault have destroyed a canonically valid marriage.
  • those who have entered into a second union for the sake of the children’s upbringing, and who are sometimes subjectively certain in conscience that their previous and irreparably destroyed marriage had never been valid.
(Reconciliation in the sacrament of Penance which would open the way to the Eucharist, can only be granted to those who, repenting of having broken the sign of the Covenant and of fidelity to Christ, are sincerely ready to undertake a way of life that is no longer in contradiction to the indissolubility of marriage.)
 
Last edited:
ok, but doesn’t al now allow for those who are judged not guilty of mortal sin to receive communion? that would be based on diminished culpability, fc does not make that allowance, so how does that not contradict?
 
@angell1, you have a very long history of scrupulous posts, and you’ve been advised not to ask these questions here, since it won’t help you.

@camoderator
 
i, honestly, am not trying to be scrupulous, just want to understand, there are literlaly only 4 more days of caf left, this has nothing to do with my own personal situation anyways, so nothing really to be scrupulous about
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top