Papal exhortation avoids clear statement on Communion

[kyrie03]

There is one priest who apparently said that. I knew some priests who might have likewise said that, but they have either retired and are in the 80s+, or have gone on to their judgement. I think it is a bit beyond anyone’s experience to say that there are many priests who will “cave in”. That is an extremely strong statement to be saying about our priests, one that borders on libel. I understand you are upset, and I do not suggest wrongfully so; but that simply is an inappropriate statement unless you can back it up with facts.

There are about 17,000 priests in the US. Many? 5,000? 2,000? 750? 250?

10?
The comment is inappropriate, at the minimum.

It’s ironic that harsh judgements are freely and easily doled out to those attempting to walk in the way of righteousness. There doesn’t seem to be much accompaniment or empathy to encourage one not to stray from the straight and narrow road that leads to salvation.

roseofshannon explained her personal struggles to keep whole that which God has joined together and how difficult this is due to loose attitude she has experienced adopted by those in authority in the Church, combined with the story of her father’s divorce and Church remarriage without an annulment. Where is the mercy extended to her, to her father struggling with cancer and seemingly not motivated to repent before he faces his Judge? Where is the true mercy for those for those who counsel and act in a manner that doesn’t align with God’s revealed Truths? Is our definition of happiness in this life and our attempts to make crosses easy for everyone worth the possibility that acting thus could be depriving souls of eternal happiness in heaven? She is begging for clarity, for bread….and we cast stones?

The one consolation I can find in all of this is that Satan must know his time is short. Persecution of those who attempt to love and live the Commandments is severe. It seems as if our own Mother the Church is harsh and unloving. And there are so many pitfalls….to pride, doubt, anger, discouragement, etc…. Let us ALL take up our crosses and pray for each other so that, regardless of our personal failings and selfish opinions, we may all meet in the Heavenly Kingdom to adore, love, and praise God for all eternity! Let us commit to conforming our hearts and minds to God’s unchangeable truths, not to novel ways or mitigations . Life on earth is short, pray that none of us throw eternal life away in pursuit of earthly joys.

 

[otjm]

It’s ironic that harsh judgements are freely and easily doled out to those attempting to walk in the way of righteousness. There doesn’t seem to be much accompaniment or empathy to encourage one not to stray from the straight and narrow road that leads to salvation.

roseofshannon explained her personal struggles to keep whole that which God has joined together and how difficult this is due to loose attitude she has experienced adopted by those in authority in the Church, combined with the story of her father’s divorce and Church remarriage without an annulment. Where is the mercy extended to her, to her father struggling with cancer and seemingly not motivated to repent before he faces his Judge? Where is the true mercy for those for those who counsel and act in a manner that doesn’t align with God’s revealed Truths? Is our definition of happiness in this life and our attempts to make crosses easy for everyone worth the possibility that acting thus could be depriving souls of eternal happiness in heaven? She is begging for clarity, for bread….and we cast stones?

The one consolation I can find in all of this is that Satan must know his time is short. Persecution of those who attempt to love and live the Commandments is severe. It seems as if our own Mother the Church is harsh and unloving. And there are so many pitfalls….to pride, doubt, anger, discouragement, etc…. Let us ALL take up our crosses and pray for each other so that, regardless of our personal failings and selfish opinions, we may all meet in the Heavenly Kingdom to adore, love, and praise God for all eternity! Let us commit to conforming our hearts and minds to God’s unchangeable truths, not to novel ways or mitigations . Life on earth is short, pray that none of us throw eternal life away in pursuit of earthly joys.

If we want to talk about casting stones, I think that making an allegation that many priests are going to be willy nilly granting pseudo decrees of nullity is a stone that does not need to be thrown. I have read her comments (and those of Don Ruggero also) and I am not unsympathetic to her pain and concern; but that does not justify vilifying other priests or spreading rumors.

I don’t know if in school you ever sat in a circle, and someone whispered a comment to the next person; by the time it got to the other end of the circle, it usually had little to do with the original statement.

Many people are not critical readers; her comment is out there for someone else to misinterpret, and next thing someone will be saying that many priests are doing so. Our Holy Father has made a long Exhortation and requested further discussion of the matters (there really is more than one matter in the document) by bishops and theologians. He did not change current law.

Let me repeat that: he did not change current law. Nothing has been codified. To presume that “many” priests are going to be going off on their own is totally unnecessary.

I am all for mercy. Obviously the Holy Father considered this a first priority, for all of us, but especially his brother bishops and priests.

I also happen to be for charity; and charity doesn’t suggest that allegations such as this be made without evidence.

 

[TMC]

It’s ironic that harsh judgements are freely and easily doled out to those attempting to walk in the way of righteousness. There doesn’t seem to be much accompaniment or empathy to encourage one not to stray from the straight and narrow road that leads to salvation.

roseofshannon explained her personal struggles to keep whole that which God has joined together and how difficult this is due to loose attitude she has experienced adopted by those in authority in the Church, combined with the story of her father’s divorce and Church remarriage without an annulment. Where is the mercy extended to her, to her father struggling with cancer and seemingly not motivated to repent before he faces his Judge? Where is the true mercy for those for those who counsel and act in a manner that doesn’t align with God’s revealed Truths? Is our definition of happiness in this life and our attempts to make crosses easy for everyone worth the possibility that acting thus could be depriving souls of eternal happiness in heaven? She is begging for clarity, for bread….and we cast stones?

The one consolation I can find in all of this is that Satan must know his time is short. Persecution of those who attempt to love and live the Commandments is severe. It seems as if our own Mother the Church is harsh and unloving. And there are so many pitfalls….to pride, doubt, anger, discouragement, etc…. Let us ALL take up our crosses and pray for each other so that, regardless of our personal failings and selfish opinions, we may all meet in the Heavenly Kingdom to adore, love, and praise God for all eternity! Let us commit to conforming our hearts and minds to God’s unchangeable truths, not to novel ways or mitigations . Life on earth is short, pray that none of us throw eternal life away in pursuit of earthly joys.

Why are you so sure that your opinion amounts to walking in the path of righteousness, while those that disagree with you are of Satan? Have you perhaps considered the chance that those holding other views may be sincere in their faith? And maybe even correct?

 

[pnewton]

Why are you so sure that your opinion amounts to walking in the path of righteousness, while those that disagree with you are of Satan?

I would like to think that most of us attempt to walk in the path of righteousness. My question is how in the world is it “harsh judgment” to say that a comment is inappropriate? It was neither harsh nor a judgment. Rather, it is appropriate that the faithful show respect to the priests, even if we do not agree with them, and never, ever assume the worst of all priests. Such predictions are inappropriate, in my opinion.

 

[kyrie03]

Why are you so sure that your opinion amounts to walking in the path of righteousness, while those that disagree with you are of Satan? Have you perhaps considered the chance that those holding other views may be sincere in their faith? And maybe even correct?

Am I that difficult to understand?
I’m calling no one Satan…how you came to that conclusion from my post is unreal! Did you not read where I asked for prayers that we ALL meet in heaven?! Yes, I pray for and love you and wish for your eternal happiness. Please, pray for me, too!
I am stating what Church tradition has always been regarding reception of Communion for D&R. I posed question whether or not a Pope has more authority than a clearly taught, long-standing tradition that has universally been practiced by all the faithful… Does not the tradition itself have precident? Does not Pope John Paul II’s clear apostolic exhortation forbidding Communion for D&R have primacy? Some say AL changes no such tradition. But a careful reading of AL provides enough “wiggle room” for this tradition to be changed for some D&R, who don’t have an annulment, who are not separated, and who practice periodic continence (the infamous footnote that is causing all of the debate).
I intimated that roseofshannon was attempting to walk the path of righteousness amidst her own divorce and her father’s divorce and remarriage. The path that leads to heaven is narrow. I pray we ALL attempt to walk that way. But how can one walk that way if they are confused as to the truth? I don’t judge you, or anyone…Christian charity demands I attempt to believe the intentions of others are praiseworthy.
I apologize if I have offended you or anyone else, in my attempt to defend and point out the tradition and the rejection of its practice today. The TRUTH sets us free. May we all live, love and teach the truth.

 

[kyrie03]

I would like to think that most of us attempt to walk in the path of righteousness. My question is how in the world is it “harsh judgment” to say that a comment is inappropriate? It was neither harsh nor a judgment. Rather, it is appropriate that the faithful show respect to the priests, even if we do not agree with them, and never, ever assume the worst of all priests. Such predictions are inappropriate, in my opinion.

I agree. Respect is due all priests and those in authority. We are to assume they have the best intentions. The same love and respect is also due to past popes and the universally held Magisterial teachings and traditions practiced by the faithful since Apostolic times. It seems on these forums that defense of Pope, bishops and priests is rightly insisted upon. The same cannot be said of the traditional practices developed and guided through time by the Holy Spirit. When actions of those in the hierarchy contradict or reject such an established tradition, it is good to point out and defend the tradition.

I found it “harsh” to label as “libel” what roseofshannon was expressing. That’s my personal opinion.

 

[pnewton]

The same cannot be said of the traditional practices developed and guided through time by the Holy Spirit.

I think the operative phrase here is “through time.” We have few traditional practices, if any, that have remained unchanged through the ages. Even Sacrament have changed in practice over the ages. I do not defend those practices I do not think best. I do not expect anyone to defend practices they do not think best even if it is the Holy Father that does it. It is fine to disagree. It is not good to say a practice contradicts doctrine, unless it is a clear case, as in, a case where one can point out the specific doctrine, not a synthesis from doctrine or established practice.

 

[TMC]

Am I that difficult to understand?
I’m calling no one Satan…how you came to that conclusion from my post is unreal! Did you not read where I asked for prayers that we ALL meet in heaven?! Yes, I pray for and love you and wish for your eternal happiness. Please, pray for me, too!
I am stating what Church tradition has always been regarding reception of Communion for D&R. I posed question whether or not a Pope has more authority than a clearly taught, long-standing tradition that has universally been practiced by all the faithful… Does not the tradition itself have precident? Does not Pope John Paul II’s clear apostolic exhortation forbidding Communion for D&R have primacy? Some say AL changes no such tradition. But a careful reading of AL provides enough “wiggle room” for this tradition to be changed for some D&R, who don’t have an annulment, who are not separated, and who practice periodic continence (the infamous footnote that is causing all of the debate).
I intimated that roseofshannon was attempting to walk the path of righteousness amidst her own divorce and her father’s divorce and remarriage. The path that leads to heaven is narrow. I pray we ALL attempt to walk that way. But how can one walk that way if they are confused as to the truth? I don’t judge you, or anyone…Christian charity demands I attempt to believe the intentions of others are praiseworthy.
I apologize if I have offended you or anyone else, in my attempt to defend and point out the tradition and the rejection of its practice today. The TRUTH sets us free. May we all live, love and teach the truth.

I came to that conclusion from your comment that Satan’s time is short. I assume you mean that Satan is behind the current events in the Church. If not, what would that possibly mean?

I think we are all trying to walk the path of righteousness. If my post to you expressed annoyance, it is because it certainly came across as suggesting that those that disagree with you are not righteous. In particular, your comment that the Church is unloving seemed to express that thought. If that is not what you meant, then I apologize for my confusion.

 

[RPRPsych]

Hmm, paths of righteousness…

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think there was Someone who once said that even when we do what we are commanded, we are not entitled to praise; we are unworthy servants, simply doing what the Master asked us to…

I think He also said something about “already having your reward” if one wished for open recognition…

How many Saints received adulation in their lifetime, even from the Church itself?

Think about it…

 

[kyrie03]

I came to that conclusion from your comment that Satan’s time is short. I assume you mean that Satan is behind the current events in the Church. If not, what would that possibly mean?

I think we are all trying to walk the path of righteousness. If my post to you expressed annoyance, it is because it certainly came across as suggesting that those that disagree with you are not righteous. In particular, your comment that the Church is unloving seemed to express that thought. If that is not what you meant, then I apologize for my confusion.

Let me expand on what I meant to clear up confusion. Satan seeks to deceive, to lead souls away from the eternal happiness that he lost. Pitfalls are for everybody. Right now attacks seem to be most severe for those attempting to instill traditional values and practices into the lives of their children. Society is attacking traditions. We turn to the Church for guidance. Some of the practices that used to protect the doctrines are ambiguous and somewhat disconnected from the truths they are supposed to protect. This is what I said….

Persecution of those who attempt to love and live the Commandments is severe. It seems as if our own Mother the Church is harsh and unloving

I love our Church….I can only assume you do, too. I love the traditions the Church has developed and taught even if I don’t always understand them. I see the Truths of our Catholic Faith becoming more difficult to understand and live as the practices and traditions instituted to protect us from falling into unrighteous living are rejected, changed, or ignored. Those who voice legitimate concern in defense of keeping traditions that protect doctrines are often misunderstood to be rejecting authority, to be acting like Pharisees, to be sowing discord in the Church, etc…. There are many in Holy Mother the Church who are quick with harsh reprimands and who don’t understand that the motivation is to defend the traditions and doctrines that have been handed down by our ancestors.
I don’t judge anyone as purposefully walking away from righteousness. I see the path to perfection as narrow, difficult to follow, and easily disregarded as unnecessary. Traditions were instituted precisely to help us recognize the path and follow it. I pray that as each of us grows in our love for God and the observance of His Commandments, society changes to give Almighty God the honor due Him! Sadly, society seems to have a greater influence on us That is why I believe time is short.

 

[OraLabora]

Let me expand on what I meant to clear up confusion. Satan seeks to deceive, to lead souls away from the eternal happiness that he lost. Pitfalls are for everybody. Right now attacks seem to be most severe for those attempting to instill traditional values and practices into the lives of their children. Society is attacking traditions. We turn to the Church for guidance. Some of the practices that used to protect the doctrines are ambiguous and somewhat disconnected from the truths they are supposed to protect. This is what I said….

Before I start: I am not directing this comment at anyone specific and this isn’t even remotely directed at you personally. The thing is, that the Lord left us with the most important commandment, to love the Lord God with all our strength and to love one another as He loved us (the two are inseparable; one cannot exist without the other). When we talk about “worthiness” to receive communion, we need to be in communion with Him at another level: in communion with our neighbours, no matter how difficult it may seem at times, because Christ is found in them. It’s one of the foundational elements of Benedictine hospitality: the ability to see Christ Himself imprinted on the soul of every single human being, bar none. We often fail miserably in that commandment, and I am guilty as charged, Your Honour. IMHO that particular form of communion should be a prerequisite for considering ourselves worthy of approaching Our Lord in His presence made very real on the altar. At the very least when we say “Lord, I am not worthy to receive you…” our unworthiness is our failure to carry out that commandment.

We cannot see traditional practices and traditions of the Church as the be all and end all of fulfilling that commandment. In fact I see far too often the contrary on various forums like this one: Satan uses those traditional practices and commandments to instil a false sense of piety in folks that distract them from the most important commandment of Our Lord.

I do know that some with a more traditional bent do indeed carry out this commandment such as Brendan and his work in Africa and this does not apply to them. For others I cannot possibly know this disposition in regards to this commandment, but I have seen some pretty uncharitable behaviour among some folks who purport to be highly pious, as if traditional piety alone is required for salvation; I hope I am wrong and their outward behaviour is not a reflection on the state of their souls. If it were all that were required for salvation, they’d be assured their place in heaven, but alas it isn’t and that is Satan’s deceit fully at work. On the other hand I’ve seen some very “modern” Catholics embody that very commandment. Many of the sisters that were called out on doctrinal matters in the US, for instance, were the sole source of social services in their communities.

Doctrine and practices are very important to the unity of the Church, there is no doubt about that. But they should be in the service of the Church and its members, not the goal of the Church and its members. Salvation comes only through Christ, that is faith in Him and essentially what Matthew 25: 31-46 teaches us about how to execute the greatest commandment.

So I just wanted to show the other side of the coin of Satan’s deceit. While perhaps what you say is true about traditions and practices, the opposite is equally true, Satan uses those traditions and practices to turn people away from their greatest duty. The pitfalls are everywhere, not just where you suggest.

 

[otjm]

Let me expand on what I meant to clear up confusion. … Right now attacks seem to be most severe for those attempting to instill traditional values and practices into the lives of their children. Society is attacking traditions. We turn to the Church for guidance. Some of the practices that used to protect the doctrines are ambiguous and somewhat disconnected from the truths they are supposed to protect.

Confusion might be cleared up if you would state specifically what some of the doctrines are which you feel either are being attacked, or discarded. I am at a loss to understand what traditions protected what doctrines.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Confusion might be cleared up if you would state specifically what some of the doctrines are which you feel either are being attacked, or discarded. I am at a loss to understand what traditions protected what doctrines.

I also am at a loss to understand what is meant.

 

[St_Francis]

From what I could tell on this thread, some people seemed to think that AL would allow the use of the IFS or similar to allow someone who had divorced and remarried to receive the Eucharist without an annulment and blessing of what would legally be the second marriage.

Since I thought ( having been told by a canon lawyer–priest that the IFS considered the grounds for annulment and reasons one could not obtain one, I was concerned as I described earlier in the thread.

(And I would like to clarify that I never thought a priest would intentionally do anything wrong if this were permitted, simply that priests are human and not infallible, so I hope I was not one of those who offended you, Fr Ruggero, altho given some of the responses I received, I fear I may not have been sufficiently clear, possibly due to my misunderstanding of the IFS.)

I have since discovered that the IFS and some of what other posters on this thread seem to think is implied in AL is that there is not even a consideration of the first marriage, but that if the situation is in some unspecified way in alignment with something that no one can describe, that a D&R person could receive the Eucharist with no change to his or her situation.

So to me, that is attacking the institution of marriage as a sacrament by God. I do not understand how anyone could wish for such a thing.

I reiterate that I have been arguing that the IFS should not be permitted against people who seemed to think that is what the footnote implied. I do not take a stand on what AL or the footnote says, because I don’t know the intented meaning of the Pope.

 

[otjm]

From what I could tell on this thread, some people seemed to think that AL would allow the use of the IFS or similar to allow someone who had divorced and remarried to receive the Eucharist without an annulment and blessing of what would legally be the second marriage.

Since I thought ( having been told by a canon lawyer–priest that the IFS considered the grounds for annulment and reasons one could not obtain one, I was concerned as I described earlier in the thread.

(And I would like to clarify that I never thought a priest would intentionally do anything wrong if this were permitted, simply that priests are human and not infallible, so I hope I was not one of those who offended you, Fr Ruggero, altho given some of the responses I received, I fear I may not have been sufficiently clear, possibly due to my misunderstanding of the IFS.)

I have since discovered that the IFS and some of what other posters on this thread seem to think is implied in AL is that there is not even a consideration of the first marriage, but that if the situation is in some unspecified way in alignment with something that no one can describe, that a D&R person could receive the Eucharist with no change to his or her situation.

So to me, that is attacking the institution of marriage as a sacrament by God. I do not understand how anyone could wish for such a thing.

I reiterate that I have been arguing that the IFS should not be permitted against people who seemed to think that is what the footnote implied. I do not take a stand on what AL or the footnote says, because I don’t know the intented meaning of the Pope.

By IFS do you mean the Internal Forum?

 

[St_Francis]

By IFS do you mean the Internal Forum?

Yes, sorry about that.

 

[kyrie03]

Confusion might be cleared up if you would state specifically what some of the doctrines are which you feel either are being attacked, or discarded. I am at a loss to understand what traditions protected what doctrines.

The tradition that is being changed, the doctrine that is being rejected in at least some cases, is the prohibition for the divorced and civilly remarried to partake in Communion.

Here is what Pope John Paul II said in his apostolic exhortation, Familiaris Consortio, paragraph 84:

However, the Church reaffirms her practice, which is based upon Sacred Scripture, of not admitting to Eucharistic Communion divorced persons who have remarried. They are unable to be admitted thereto from the fact that their state and condition of life objectively contradict that union of love between Christ and the Church which is signified and effected by the Eucharist. Besides this, there is another special pastoral reason: 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.
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. This means, in practice, that when, for serious reasons, such as for example the children’s upbringing, a man and a woman cannot satisfy the obligation to separate, they "take on themselves the duty to live in complete continence, that is, by abstinence from the acts proper to married couples."

Contrast that to what Pope Francis says apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia, paragraph 298 and its footnote 329:

The divorced who have entered a new union, for example, can find themselves in a variety of situations, which should not be pigeonholed or fit into overly rigid classifications leaving no room for a suitable personal and pastoral discernment. One thing is a second union consolidated over time, with new children, proven fidelity, generous self giving, Christian commitment, a consciousness of its irregularity and of the great difficulty of going back without feeling in conscience that one would fall into new sins. The Church acknowledges situations “where, for serious reasons, such as the children’s upbringing, a man and woman cannot satisfy the obligation to separate”.329
329 John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio (22 November 1981), 84: AAS 74 (1982), 186. In such situations, many people, knowing and accepting the possibility of living “as brothers and sisters” which the Church offers them, point out that if certain expressions of intimacy are lacking, “it often happens that faithfulness is endangered and the good of the children suffers” (Second Vatican Ecumenical Council,
Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World Gaudium et Spes, 51).

Tradition or practice, according to Pope John Paul II, does not allow for ANY reception of Communion based on Sacred Scripture’s clear teaching on what constitutes adultery and grave scandal to the faithful. New practice according to Pope Francis is to not pigeonhole divorced into overly rigid classifications (such as how Pope John Paul II classified them?). Paragraph 84 of FC stating that “complete continence” is one of necessary requirements for D&R to receive Communion is completely ignored. How Gadium Spes-allowing married couples to practice periodic continence as a means to prevent pregnancy for grave reasons is analogous to Amoris Laetitia-allowing adulterous couples to practice periodic continence is confusing and even scandalous. The footnote to justify living as brother and sister is deceptive because NFP is not objectively wrong; being D&R without an annulment is objectively wrong….the 2 cannot are not comparable.

 

[kyrie03]

Before I start: I am not directing this comment at anyone specific and this isn’t even remotely directed at you personally. The thing is, that the Lord left us with the most important commandment, to love the Lord God with all our strength and to love one another as He loved us (the two are inseparable; one cannot exist without the other). When we talk about “worthiness” to receive communion, we need to be in communion with Him at another level: in communion with our neighbours, no matter how difficult it may seem at times, because Christ is found in them. It’s one of the foundational elements of Benedictine hospitality: the ability to see Christ Himself imprinted on the soul of every single human being, bar none. We often fail miserably in that commandment, and I am guilty as charged, Your Honour. IMHO that particular form of communion should be a prerequisite for considering ourselves worthy of approaching Our Lord in His presence made very real on the altar. At the very least when we say “Lord, I am not worthy to receive you…” our unworthiness is our failure to carry out that commandment.

We cannot see traditional practices and traditions of the Church as the be all and end all of fulfilling that commandment. In fact I see far too often the contrary on various forums like this one: Satan uses those traditional practices and commandments to instil a false sense of piety in folks that distract them from the most important commandment of Our Lord.

I do know that some with a more traditional bent do indeed carry out this commandment such as Brendan and his work in Africa and this does not apply to them. For others I cannot possibly know this disposition in regards to this commandment, but I have seen some pretty uncharitable behaviour among some folks who purport to be highly pious, as if traditional piety alone is required for salvation; I hope I am wrong and their outward behaviour is not a reflection on the state of their souls. If it were all that were required for salvation, they’d be assured their place in heaven, but alas it isn’t and that is Satan’s deceit fully at work. On the other hand I’ve seen some very “modern” Catholics embody that very commandment. Many of the sisters that were called out on doctrinal matters in the US, for instance, were the sole source of social services in their communities.

Doctrine and practices are very important to the unity of the Church, there is no doubt about that. But they should be in the service of the Church and its members, not the goal of the Church and its members. Salvation comes only through Christ, that is faith in Him and essentially what Matthew 25: 31-46 teaches us about how to execute the greatest commandment.

So I just wanted to show the other side of the coin of Satan’s deceit. While perhaps what you say is true about traditions and practices, the opposite is equally true, Satan uses those traditions and practices to turn people away from their greatest duty. The pitfalls are everywhere, not just where you suggest.

Ora, I do not disagree.
Love of God is the greatest and most important Commandment. How one worships God (gives to God his due) and sees God’s reflection in EVERY human (treating the least as Christ Himself) is what is necessary for salvation.
I also do not see the practice of traditions as the end all be all….that is giving to tradition the honor that belongs to God alone.
The concern I am trying to raise is the concern that Pope John Paul II addressed in Familiaris Consortio……that scandal of the faithful -leading them into error and confusion will result when traditions (such as Communion for D&R) are changed.

 

[phil19034]

The tradition that is being changed, the doctrine that is being rejected in at least some cases, is the prohibition for the divorced and civilly remarried to partake in Communion.

Here is what Pope John Paul II said in his apostolic exhortation, Familiaris Consortio, paragraph 84:

Contrast that to what Pope Francis says apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia, paragraph 298 and its footnote 329:

Tradition or practice, according to Pope John Paul II, does not allow for ANY reception of Communion based on Sacred Scripture’s clear teaching on what constitutes adultery and grave scandal to the faithful. New practice according to Pope Francis is to not pigeonhole divorced into overly rigid classifications (such as how Pope John Paul II classified them?). Paragraph 84 of FC stating that “complete continence” is one of necessary requirements for D&R to receive Communion is completely ignored. How Gadium Spes-allowing married couples to practice periodic continence as a means to prevent pregnancy for grave reasons is analogous to Amoris Laetitia-allowing adulterous couples to practice periodic continence is confusing and even scandalous. The footnote to justify living as brother and sister is deceptive because NFP is not objectively wrong; being D&R without an annulment is objectively wrong….the 2 cannot are not comparable.

kyrie03 - we have understand who was the proper audience for that paragraph. It is my understanding that the proper audience for that paragraph by Pope Francis was the Priests and Bishops, not all the Faithful. While St. Pope John Paul II’s words were meant for all.

The problem is many priests did treat most divorced & remarried (without annulment) the same way. That is, they were more or less ignored. What I mean me by that is: parishes often didn’t work on ways to reach out to them in order to help them come into right relationship with the Church via annulment or helping them to understand why they should live as Brother & Sister. And if they were not willing to live as Brother & Sister, at least making them feel at home even though they still are not to receive communion.

It’s human nature to ignore an issue. The divorced and remarried (without annulment) have felt abandoned by the Church for many reasons.

Pope Francis wants priests to have continuous contact with Catholics in irregular marriages until the point they are no longer in an irregular marriage (regardless of how long that takes).

Anyway, this is how I read him.

God Bless!

 

[otjm]

The tradition that is being changed, the doctrine that is being rejected in at least some cases, is the prohibition for the divorced and civilly remarried to partake in Communion.

Here is what Pope John Paul II said in his apostolic exhortation, Familiaris Consortio, paragraph 84:

Contrast that to what Pope Francis says apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia, paragraph 298 and its footnote 329:

Tradition or practice, according to Pope John Paul II, does not allow for ANY reception of Communion based on Sacred Scripture’s clear teaching on what constitutes adultery and grave scandal to the faithful. New practice according to Pope Francis is to not pigeonhole divorced into overly rigid classifications (such as how Pope John Paul II classified them?). Paragraph 84 of FC stating that “complete continence” is one of necessary requirements for D&R to receive Communion is completely ignored. How Gadium Spes-allowing married couples to practice periodic continence as a means to prevent pregnancy for grave reasons is analogous to Amoris Laetitia-allowing adulterous couples to practice periodic continence is confusing and even scandalous. The footnote to justify living as brother and sister is deceptive because NFP is not objectively wrong; being D&R without an annulment is objectively wrong….the 2 cannot are not comparable.

actually, it appears that the issue is not entirely as you indicate. And the parts which differ have been laid out in this and similar threads. It really helps if one understands all of the issues, not just a few.

This subject has been hashed out thoroughly, no law has changed, no new procedure is in place due to the Exhortation, and continuing to hash out the errors that keep popping up pushes endurance to the limits.