Pope Francis on Divorce and Remarriage

[TheAdvocate]

Still, but how do you deal with the Orthodox approval of contraception? One shouldn’t assume that Eastern theology is applicable or even preferable to the theological traditions of the Catholic Church. And I am saying that with heaps of respect for the Orthodox.

And if divorce is suddenly a-ok, and marriage isn’t forever, then what why what was the point of opposing King Henry the 8th?

First of all, the good news is, the Orthodox are not unanimous when it comes to their position on contraception, so if there were unification, that could still be ironed out.

(Actually, their position is that contraception is wrong and should not be practiced, but that a couple may practice it only for a just reason having first consulted with their pastor. I put this in parenthesis because I don’t want this thread to become about contraception when in fact it is about divorce and remarriage.)

 

[TheAdvocate]

I don’t believe my statement conveyed such a sentiment.

And again. The concern is in regards to assessment of current Western practice, and ‘impatience’ with it; Beal makes a few statements that are quite evidently from a they-can-do-it-why-can’t-we standpoint (to put it mildly). Making such overtones is part of what the censor looks for.

+Sebastian

While he does editorialize, the historical facts remain.

 

[TheAdvocate]

First of all, the good news is, the Orthodox are not unanimous when it comes to their position on contraception, so if there were unification, that could still be ironed out.

(Actually, their position is that contraception is wrong and should not be practiced, but that a couple may practice it only for a just reason having first consulted with their pastor. I put this in parenthesis because I don’t want this thread to become about contraception when in fact it is about divorce and remarriage.)

And I think we both know that just because of the Orthodox practice, that doesn’t mean that suddenly they think divorce is A-OK. They do reserve the right not to grant a remarriage.

 

[Starsweeper]

First of all, the good news is, the Orthodox are not unanimous when it comes to their position on contraception, so if there were unification, that could still be ironed out.

(Actually, their position is that contraception is wrong and should not be practiced, but that a couple may practice it only for a just reason having first consulted with their pastor. I put this in parenthesis because I don’t want this thread to become about contraception when in fact it is about divorce and remarriage.)

I used to be Orthodox and I know of no rule prohibiting contraception between married couples. For example I took this quote directly from the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese website so you can’t get more official-

“The possible exception to the above affirmation of continuity of teaching is the view of the Orthodox Church on the issue of contraception. Because of the lack of a full understanding of the implications of the biology of reproduction, earlier writers tended to identify abortion with contraception. However, of late a new view has taken hold among Orthodox writers and thinkers on this topic, which permits the use of certain contraceptive practices within marriage for the purpose of spacing children, enhancing the expression of marital love, and protecting health.”
goarch.org/ourfaith/controversialissues

My point is not to derail this thread, but to show that the Orthodox Church is more than just the Catholic Church- now with icons and incense! There’s more to it than that, and while we have way more that unites us than divides us, not everything they do or believe in is 100 percent kosher by Catholic standards.

 

[TheAdvocate]

I used to be Orthodox and I know of no rule prohibiting contraception between married couples. For example I took this quote directly from the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese website-

“The possible exception to the above affirmation of continuity of teaching is the view of the Orthodox Church on the issue of contraception. Because of the lack of a full understanding of the implications of the biology of reproduction, earlier writers tended to identify abortion with contraception. However, of late a new view has taken hold among Orthodox writers and thinkers on this topic, which permits the use of certain contraceptive practices within marriage for the purpose of spacing children, enhancing the expression of marital love, and protecting health.”
goarch.org/ourfaith/controversialissues

My point is not to derail this thread, but to show that the Orthodox Church is more than just the Catholic Church- now with icons and incense! There’s more to it than that, and while we have way more that unites us than divides us, not everything they do or believe in is 100 percent kosher by Catholic standards.

I’m not denying that this is the position of the GREEK Orthodox Church. All I said was that there is no unanimity among them with regard to this. Here’s my source:

orthodoxwiki.org/Contraception

 

[irishpatrick]

Does anyone detect a hint of something **much larger **going on in the Pope’s recent statements? It seems that perhaps (and I mean perhaps) the time of mercy is coming to an end. Recall Saint Faustina’s Diary…the time/day of Mercy is not infinite.

It would seem to me that if the end of the day/time of mercy is somewhat near, then everyone, including the Pope, should be trying to get as close to Lord as they can–no matter how imperfectly. In other words, maybe we all need to start clinging to the Lord’s Divine Mercy immediately, because after the day/time of the Lord’s Mercy, comes the time/day of His justice.

Just my personal guess…might mean nothing.

 

[Starsweeper]

I’m not denying that this is the position of the GREEK Orthodox Church. All I said was that there is no unanimity among them with regard to this. I don’t have sources at this time, but I will look into it. (And I’d love to hear from an Orthodox…please chime in if you are listening!)

What does it matter? My point still stands. The fact that the Orthodox believe in “X” does not mean that it’s some kind of imprimatur for Catholics to follow suit. Besides, I doubt there is any official disagreement on contraception between the Orthodox churches. Between individuals, certainly, but from what I know from the actual formal teaching of the Churches, I think they stand pretty unified on that front that it is allowable in marriage.

 

[Starsweeper]

Does anyone detect a hint of something **much larger **going on in the Pope’s recent statements? It seems that perhaps (and I mean perhaps) the time of mercy is coming to an end. Recall Saint Faustina’s Diary…the time/day of Mercy is not infinite.

It would seem to me that if the end of the day/time of mercy is somewhat near, then everyone, including the Pope, should be trying to get as close to Lord as they can–no matter how imperfectly. In other words, maybe we all need to start clinging to the Lord’s Divine Mercy immediately, because after the day/time of the Lord’s Mercy, comes the time/day of His justice.

Just my personal guess…might mean nothing.

I thought that too (I’m a huge Divine Mercy fan!). Although I don’t think the current Church teaching that marriages are forever unless validly entered is unmerciful. Divorced people can go up for communion, they just can’t remarry if their first marriage was valid. As someone who is single myself, I for one know that we all have to carry our cross to carry in this life and it can be very difficult at times. Although, in fairness, I don’t know at all what the Holy Father meant by his statement, so I can’t say.

The more I think about it, the more I feel like the key word from his original interview is “pastoral”. I suspect Pope Francis was speaking of reforming the pastoral issue of streamlining annulments, rather than introducing divorce and remarriage, which would be firmly in the doctrinal realm.

 

[PeopleB4Things]

Excuse me, the Church is an infallible institution, in the proper sense of the term.

Those of us born into the faith and have been active Catholics for decades know that your assertion is a tad off base. Hubris is not our thing. Our thing is humility born out of love and out of recognition of our own sinfulness. Everyone is a sinner and sinners don’t always make the right choices. People joked that beloved Pope John Paul II was the apology pope. For example, in 1995 the pope apologized for the Church’s role in the religious wars and the burnings at the stake after the Protestant Reformation. In 1993 he apolgized for the Church’s involvement in the African slave trade. He made over 100 apologies on behalf of the Church. As a Church, we’ve interpretted our own teachings, encyclicals, degrees, cathecism etc. to condone murder and other sinful acts. If we as a Church can do that and have done that, we are not infallible.

Also, anyone who lives their faith knows that Catholicism is not just a bunch of rules, but a lifestyle and a way of thinking. I had the wonderful opportunity to listened to a priest tell how he said mass to himself everyday as a prisoner of war kept for years in solitary. And he did so without wine and often without bread. No real Catholic would ever tell this priest that his masses were invaild because he was unable to follow the exact rules. Catholicism is so much more than the rules. To deny this priest or anyone else the leeway to practice as they can are missing the point of our faith.

 

[irishpatrick]

Those of us born into the faith and have been active Catholics for decades know that your assertion is a tad off base. Hubris is not our thing. Our thing is humility born out of love and out of recognition of our own sinfulness. Everyone is a sinner and sinners don’t always make the right choices. People joked that beloved Pope John Paul II was the apology pope. For example, in 1995 the pope apologized for the Church’s role in the religious wars and the burnings at the stake after the Protestant Reformation. In 1993 he apolgized for the Church’s involvement in the African slave trade. He made over 100 apologies on behalf of the Church. As a Church, we’ve interpretted our own teachings, encyclicals, degrees, cathecism etc. to condone murder and other sinful acts. If we as a Church can do that and have done that, we are not infallible.

Also, anyone who lives their faith knows that Catholicism is not just a bunch of rules, but a lifestyle and a way of thinking. I had the wonderful opportunity to listened to a priest tell how he said mass to himself everyday as a prisoner of war kept for years in solitary. And he did so without wine and often without bread. No real Catholic would ever tell this priest that his masses were invaild because he was unable to follow the exact rules. Catholicism is so much more than the rules. To deny this priest or anyone else the leeway to practice as they can are missing the point of our faith.

I suppose I feel the most important sentence was: “I think the time for mercy has come as John Paul II predicted by introducing the Feast of Divine Mercy.”

 

[TheAdvocate]

What does it matter? My point still stands. The fact that the Orthodox believe in “X” does not mean that it’s some kind of imprimatur for Catholics to follow suit. Besides, I doubt there is any official disagreement on contraception between the Orthodox churches. Between individuals, certainly, but from what I know from the actual formal teaching of the Churches, I think they stand pretty unified on that front that it is allowable in marriage.

If you saw the link I posted, you’d see that there is disagreement. If you were to get all the Orthodox hierarchs in one room, I doubt they’d all be united on the issue.

Anyway, this thread is now off topic.

 

[TheAdvocate]

Those of us born into the faith and have been active Catholics for decades know that your assertion is a tad off base. Hubris is not our thing. Our thing is humility born out of love and out of recognition of our own sinfulness. Everyone is a sinner and sinners don’t always make the right choices. People joked that beloved Pope John Paul II was the apology pope. For example, in 1995 the pope apologized for the Church’s role in the religious wars and the burnings at the stake after the Protestant Reformation. In 1993 he apolgized for the Church’s involvement in the African slave trade. He made over 100 apologies on behalf of the Church. As a Church, we’ve interpretted our own teachings, encyclicals, degrees, cathecism etc. to condone murder and other sinful acts. If we as a Church can do that and have done that, we are not infallible.

Also, anyone who lives their faith knows that Catholicism is not just a bunch of rules, but a lifestyle and a way of thinking. I had the wonderful opportunity to listened to a priest tell how he said mass to himself everyday as a prisoner of war kept for years in solitary. And he did so without wine and often without bread. No real Catholic would ever tell this priest that his masses were invaild because he was unable to follow the exact rules. Catholicism is so much more than the rules. To deny this priest or anyone else the leeway to practice as they can are missing the point of our faith.

I appreciate your (name removed by moderator)ut, but please start a thread on infallibility. This thread is about the pope’s statements regarding divorce and remarriage, and the Orthodox approach to it. Let’s stay on topic. Please don’t consider me rude, but I’ve seen one too many thread derailed—meaning most of them.

 

[57thDimension]

While he does editorialize, the historical facts remain.

Again, I’m not disputing the historical facts being presented (and historical fact does not equate to moral acceptability, by the way) - I’m frankly more concerned with why they’re being presented by Beal.

+Sebastian

 

[Starsweeper]

If you saw the link I posted, you’d see that there is disagreement. If you were to get all the Orthodox hierarchs in one room, I doubt they’d all be united on the issue.

Anyway, this thread is now off topic.

You’re missing my point as I’ve said before. It’s that not every the Orthodox do can or should be cut and pasted onto Western theology. That was my sole purpose in bringing up up contraception.

I did look at your link, and I followed the links to the official pages of Russian, Greek, Orthodox Church of America. All of which said that they allow artificial contraception in marriage in some capacity as long as it is not abortifacient in nature. It is part of a “new consensus”. Individuals, though, most definitely hold differing viewpoints on it.

 

[CradleJourney]

. When the commission of eight cardinals meets at the beginning of October we will discuss how to proceed. The Church is taking a very close look at pastoral initiatives for marriage. My predecessor in Buenos Aires, Cardinal Quarracino always used to say: “I consider half of today’s marriages to be invalid because people get married without realising it means forever. They do it out of social convenience, etc…” The issue of invalidity needs to be looked into as well.”

vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/the-vatican/detail/articolo/gmg-26831//pag/2/

It is my hope and my belief in reading this that it is the procedures and rules for annulments that will be looked at rather than changing the teachings of the Church. And I personally feel changes are greatly needed.

For any other mistake - any other sin - no matter how severe - reconciliation is available through any priest at anytime in private.

For people who have left the church and desire to return who have made mistakes regarding marriage - they must face the annulment process involving not only themselves, their current spouse, their former spouse(s), their witnesses, the defender of the bond, the Tribunal, and who knows else. Their mistake is fully documented on paper and in interviews. There is no “kind and number” recitation - but a probing, heart wrenching sometimes, examination of emotional wounds and events that they have to explain to someone they have never seen who will sit in judgement over them. And it’s not a quick or guaranteed resolution like the one receives in the sacrament of penance but a long and uncertain drawn out process.

Obviously this is easier for some people than others - but look at the number of posters here who are afraid of going to confession. Think how much more is asked of those who need to apply for annulment - and then wonder how many of our brothers and sisters have completely given up on the Church because of this obstacle that many do not fully understand?

Are we really so willing to just tell them that “hey - you made your choices - deal with it?” That “if you’re not willing/able to complete this embarrassing, gut-wrenching, paperwork heavy process on your own - oh well, then - guess you’re not fit to be a Catholic?”

Surely, there is a way to still protect the sacrament of matrimony while bringing a more compassionate, simpler path of reconciliation to those who need an annulment than the one size fits all circumstances system filled with paperwork and rules but no counseling method that currently exists?

I absolutely support the Church’s teaching on marriage and the need for an annulment before a second “marriage” (which, of course would really be the first and only marriage if the previously one is annulled). It is the only thing that makes sense to prevent the Church from contradicting herself - which she never does.

But surely we can do this in a better manner - and that’s what I feel our beloved Pope is trying to discern.

 

[kag1982]

I never said God wanted her to stay with him. But then, neither of us two know what God wants. Excuse me, the Church is an infallible institution, in the proper sense of the term. If the Church grants an annulment, the matter is settled. If she doesn’t, the marriage was valid. That’s all it’s about.

I certainly hope not given some of the decisions made in the past… anti-Semitism, the Inquisition, the Crusades.

 

[Peebo]

Are we really so willing to just tell them that “hey - you made your choices - deal with it?” That “if you’re not willing/able to complete this embarrassing, gut-wrenching, paperwork heavy process on your own - oh well, then - guess you’re not fit to be a Catholic?”

Wow…good luck on this…I wrote a similar thread on this same subject some time ago…and the answer is yes…maybe not in such blunt terms…but that is exactly what some Catholics will tell you…

 

[Starsweeper]

It is my hope and my belief in reading this that it is the procedures and rules for annulments that will be looked at rather than changing the teachings of the Church. And I personally feel changes are greatly needed.

For any other mistake - any other sin - no matter how severe - reconciliation is available through any priest at anytime in private.

For people who have left the church and desire to return who have made mistakes regarding marriage - they must face the annulment process involving not only themselves, their current spouse, their former spouse(s), their witnesses, the defender of the bond, the Tribunal, and who knows else. Their mistake is fully documented on paper and in interviews. There is no “kind and number” recitation - but a probing, heart wrenching sometimes, examination of emotional wounds and events that they have to explain to someone they have never seen who will sit in judgement over them. And it’s not a quick or guaranteed resolution like the one receives in the sacrament of penance but a long and uncertain drawn out process.

Obviously this is easier for some people than others - but look at the number of posters here who are afraid of going to confession. Think how much more is asked of those who need to apply for annulment - and then wonder how many of our brothers and sisters have completely given up on the Church because of this obstacle that many do not fully understand?

Are we really so willing to just tell them that “hey - you made your choices - deal with it?” That “if you’re not willing/able to complete this embarrassing, gut-wrenching, paperwork heavy process on your own - oh well, then - guess you’re not fit to be a Catholic?”

Surely, there is a way to still protect the sacrament of matrimony while bringing a more compassionate, simpler path of reconciliation to those who need an annulment than the one size fits all circumstances system filled with paperwork and rules but no counseling method that currently exists?

I absolutely support the Church’s teaching on marriage and the need for an annulment before a second “marriage” (which, of course would really be the first and only marriage if the previously one is annulled). It is the only thing that makes sense to prevent the Church from contradicting herself - which she never does.

But surely we can do this in a better manner - and that’s what I feel our beloved Pope is trying to discern.

Excellent post, I cosign this. I have no problem with annulment reform, it’s the doctrinal shift from annulment to straight up divorce that would be theologically problematic for the West.

 

[Peebo]

It is my hope and my belief in reading this that it is the procedures and rules for annulments that will be looked at rather than changing the teachings of the Church. And I personally feel changes are greatly needed.

For any other mistake - any other sin - no matter how severe - reconciliation is available through any priest at anytime in private.

For people who have left the church and desire to return who have made mistakes regarding marriage - they must face the annulment process involving not only themselves, their current spouse, their former spouse(s), their witnesses, the defender of the bond, the Tribunal, and who knows else. Their mistake is fully documented on paper and in interviews. There is no “kind and number” recitation - but a probing, heart wrenching sometimes, examination of emotional wounds and events that they have to explain to someone they have never seen who will sit in judgement over them. And it’s not a quick or guaranteed resolution like the one receives in the sacrament of penance but a long and uncertain drawn out process.

Obviously this is easier for some people than others - but look at the number of posters here who are afraid of going to confession. Think how much more is asked of those who need to apply for annulment - and then wonder how many of our brothers and sisters have completely given up on the Church because of this obstacle that many do not fully understand?

Are we really so willing to just tell them that “hey - you made your choices - deal with it?” That “if you’re not willing/able to complete this embarrassing, gut-wrenching, paperwork heavy process on your own - oh well, then - guess you’re not fit to be a Catholic?”

Surely, there is a way to still protect the sacrament of matrimony while bringing a more compassionate, simpler path of reconciliation to those who need an annulment than the one size fits all circumstances system filled with paperwork and rules but no counseling method that currently exists?

I absolutely support the Church’s teaching on marriage and the need for an annulment before a second “marriage” (which, of course would really be the first and only marriage if the previously one is annulled). It is the only thing that makes sense to prevent the Church from contradicting herself - which she never does.

But surely we can do this in a better manner - and that’s what I feel our beloved Pope is trying to discern.

Good luck on this Cradle Journey…I wrote a post to this on a similar thread some time ago… it was made pretty clear in replies to my post that things like compassion…forgiveness…are not an issue…you either accept the churchs teaching as is…or …tough…I’m sure not all Catholics think like that…maybe even our good Pope Franics

 

[Just_Lurking]

I did look at your link, and I followed the links to the official pages of Russian, Greek, Orthodox Church of America. All of which said that they allow artificial contraception in marriage in some capacity as long as it is not abortifacient in nature.

This seems to be right in line with the Winnipeg statement, which was an official statement of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops.