San Diego's Bishop McElroy strongly encourages Communion for divorced/remarried [CC]

[TCEL]

This will be applied to all sin eventually

Maybe if priests started teaching ToB from the pulpit, great strides could be made as far as education is concerned.

There’s something very amiss if people who support communion for divorced/remarried don’t simultaneously and vociferously support aggressive ToB education. If the diagnosis is incorrect, the chance the cure is correct is only tenuous at best. We don’t need sex-ed, we need education on how marriage and the Eucharist are connected, which is deeply related to ToB.

 

[patricius79]

I agree with both of you (Hoosier Daddy and TCEL).

The Church teaches that we need both the clergy and Christian faithful to proclaim the spiritual worship of keeping the Commandments.

To violate any commandment is to violate them all, as the Church teaches. Keeping the commandments frees us from sin and gives us hope through Jesus Christ!

To violate any commandment not only hurts ourselves, but the whole community and Christ, as the Church teaches. We can be absolved and given infinite mercy if we confess with the resolution to stop sinning.

I find it troubling that anyone would claim that matters of adulterous unions are merely private or between a person and their pastor only, and that the laity should stay completely out of it… We are all one in the Body of Christ and must love each other with the love of Mary and Jesus.

The clergy and and the laity need affirm that those in irregular marriages must always live in continence, as the Church teaches, and to separate unless there is an adequate reason why they cannot.

CCC 2038 In the work of teaching and applying Christian morality, the Church needs the dedication of pastors, the knowledge of theologians, and the contribution of all Christians and men of good will. Faith and the practice of the Gospel provide each person with an experience of life “in Christ,” who enlightens him and makes him able to evaluate the divine and human realities according to the Spirit of God.80 Thus the Holy Spirit can use the humblest to enlighten the learned and those in the highest positions.

We need Mary to help us to live and love the truth!

 

[Don_Ruggero]

However dubious their quality as news sources may be, they appear to have gotten this one right.

The November 13 Bulletin of San Rafael parish contained this:*The delegates spoke movingly to the need for the Church…to assist those who are divorced and remarried and cannot receive an annulment to utilize the internal forum of conscience in order to discern if God is calling them to return to the Eucharist.
*The same information also appeared in the bulletins of St. Thomas More church and St. Joseph Cathedral. Since they all state that the position came from the diocesan synod there is little reason to doubt either the source or the accuracy of the statement. One can only wonder what to other situations the “internal forum of conscience” may be applicable.

Ender

Have you been part of a synod? If you had, you would know exactly the role of these participants and what their various statements actually carry and also what they do not carry in terms of effect. In the context of the synodal process, participants may make most intervention they wish and petition for anything, actually.

As the Synod of Bishops means and effects ultimately what the Pope is pleased to enact from it – taking into account what various Synod Fathers said in favour of a proposition or position and what others said in opposition to the same…and even setting aside the thoughts of everyone to choose a course of action the Synod Fathers neither envisioned nor advocated – so in a diocesan synod, it is the Bishop of the Diocese who will determine, by his authority, what emerges from this synod by his own promulgation .

As for your last comment, moral theologians as well as canonists do not have to “wonder” at the vast scope of situations that potentially can be resolved within the internal forum…and that are resolved within the internal forum.

 

[Richca]

Originally Posted by St Francis View Post

From the article you quoted: assist those who are divorced and remarried and
cannot receive an annulment to utilize the internal forum of conscience
in order to discern if God is calling them to return to the
Eucharist.

The so-called internal forum solution is to discuss one’s situation with a priest and thus evaluate one’s situation to see whether one is objectively in a state of sin or not. Prior to this time, the Vatican has expressly said this is not a possibility:
7. The mistaken conviction of a divorced and remarried person that he may receive Holy Communion normally presupposes that personal conscience is considered in the final analysis to be able, on the basis of one’s own convictions(15), to come to a decision about the existence or absence of a previous marriage and the value of the new union. However, such a position is inadmissable(16). Marriage, in fact, because it is both the image of the spousal relationship between Christ and his Church as well as the fundamental core and an important factor in the life of civil society, is essentially a public reality.

1. It is certainly true that a judgment about one’s own dispositions for the reception of Holy Communion must be made by a properly formed moral conscience. But it is equally true that the consent that is the foundation of marriage is not simply a private decision since it creates a specifically ecclesial and social situation for the spouses, both individually and as a couple. Thus the judgment of conscience of one’s own marital situation does not regard only the immediate relationship between man and God, as if one could prescind from the Church’s mediation, that also includes canonical laws binding in conscience. Not to recognise this essential aspect would mean in fact to deny that marriage is a reality of the Church, that is to say, a sacrament.
   from a letter written expressly to address this issue.

That same document says

This means, in practice, that when for serious reasons, for example, for 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’"(8). In such a case they may receive Holy Communion as long as they respect the obligation to avoid giving scandal.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_14091994_rec-holy-comm-by-divorced_en.html

Bold text my emphases.

The magisterium already addressed the issue and decided about it and yet we are going back to the same issue contradicting and disregarding the magisterium’s previous teaching?

 

[Mongo]

And nothing said regarding those that can not get an annulment remaining abstinent before they could receive Communion?

It is assumed that abstinence isn’t required because it is a pointless statement if the audience is remaining abstinent. There is no barrier to communion.

 

[Randolph]

Father, with every due respect: Would you kindly provide for us you informed understanding of number 301 of AL?

My question is as follows: “Would those divorced Catholics in an irregular second marriage who persist in continuing the grave sin of adultery be permitted to receive the Eucharist?”

For an answer, ‘yea’ or ‘nay’ would suffice.

I like the point and the direction of your question. The teaching of Christ is simple and clear. Christ chose fishermen and simple peasants as his apostles to spread his message. Christ and St. Paul spoke with absolute clarity on your question. The answer is “no”. It came directly from Christ and it’s a doctrine of the Church. No accusations of legalism, fundamentalism or lack of mercy can ever change Christ’s teaching. Christ gave the Church the authority to bind. But the duty and obligation of the church is bind with Christ–not against Him. No synods–universal or local–can contradict Christ. It seems the so -called “internal forum” can be mis-used for purposes that weaken or even contracdict the teaching of Christ.

One needs not be a theologian, nor has to attend a synod, to grasp the teaching of Christ. Apostles and most early church fathers did not have fancy degrees.

 

[ARSpade]

I love this “internal forum of conscience”.

I mean, once upon a time I thought that in order to be a good Catholic I had to turn away from, for example, my view that the death penalty should be the default punishment for most crimes, but now thanks to all the AL talk I’ve realized that I’m okay because that’s just my conscience talking. And my conscience is inviolable. Execute 'em all, God will know his own.

It is funny how everybody is only applying this stuff to sex related issues when we can use it for so much more.

 

[graciew]

I love this “internal forum of conscience”.

I mean, once upon a time I thought that in order to be a good Catholic I had to turn away from, for example, my view that the death penalty should be the default punishment for most crimes, but now thanks to all the AL talk I’ve realized that I’m okay because that’s just my conscience talking. And my conscience is inviolable. Execute 'em all, God will know his own.

It is funny how everybody is only applying this stuff to sex related issues when we can use it for so much more.

You are right. The AL" talk"....

" Once upon a time" we used to read the source too. . . at least .Or have a friend " summarize" in full speed what the “lesson” was at break time in case we became the " lucky" one whose name resonated as thunder in the room . In which case, to cut the painful short,we could say " I 'm sorry. I didn’t study for today". And row it upstream for the next one…
The internal forum of conscience is complicated to grasp.It is for me at least,though I have tried read different documents and sources…Not something one can you know. ,learn at full speed at " break time".
I would not " execute them all" if I were you just in case…

 

[zz912]

I find the actual texts that are published by His Excellency to be quite well written and thoughtful.

In contrast, I find agenda driven commentary offered by certain websites, which I do not consider to be “news” in spite of the self-proclaimed assertion that it is, to be at best of dubious quality and minimal value…especially when contrasted to the bishop’s own writings or his statements that emanate from the diocese itself.

Since it is so unreliable, could you give us a synopsis of what the Bishop actually said/taught on this topic? It would be immensely helpful to understand.

For example a couple of pertinent questions, is he teaching/directing that unmarried couples should refrain from sexual relations before receiving the Eucharist?

Are divorced/remarried couples being directed to refrain from sexual relations before receiving the Eucharist?

Are active homosexual couples being directed to refrain from sexual relations before receiving the Eucharist?

Your illumination on the Bishop’s teaching will be helpful.

 

[Thomas_White]

You are right. The AL" talk"…
" Once upon a time" we used to read the source too. . . at least .Or have a friend " summarize" in full speed what the “lesson” was at break time in case we became the " lucky" one whose name resonated as thunder in the room . In which case, to cut the painful short,we could say " I 'm sorry. I didn’t study for today". And row it upstream for the next one…
The internal forum of conscience is complicated to grasp.It is for me at least,though I have tried read different documents and sources…Not something one can you know. ,learn at full speed at " break time".
I would not " execute them all" if I were you just in case…

CCC 1776 is helpful for an understanding of the inner forum. Therein is found the voice of one’s conscience and a reflection of the moral law. Praying the Rosary is very helpful in this respect. It is a contemplative prayer. In my experience, meditating on the individual Mysteries can be quite illuminating.

 

[graciew]

CCC 1776 is helpful for an understanding of the inner forum. Therein is found the voice of one’s conscience and a reflection of the moral law. Praying the Rosary is very helpful in this respect. It is a contemplative prayer. In my experience, meditating on the individual Mysteries can be quite illuminating.

Thank you,Thomas,I will do that.

 

[pnewton]

I find it troubling that anyone would claim that matters of adulterous unions are merely private or between a person and their pastor only, and that the laity should stay completely out of it… We are all one in the Body of Christ and must love each other with the love of Mary and Jesus.

That same reasoning could be used to mandate all confessions be public and in front of the Church, which it was for a time. While our sin does affect others, there is no logical leap that all must know.

Besides, this statement assumes as fact the one thing that is not known. Namely, is the current union actually adulterous.

 

[pnewton]

From the article you quoted: *assist those who are divorced and remarried and
cannot receive an annulment to utilize the **internal forum of conscience
***in order to discern if God is calling them to return to the
Eucharist.

The so-called internal forum solution is to discuss one’s situation with a priest and thus evaluate one’s situation to see whether one is objectively in a state of sin or not. Prior to this time, the Vatican has expressly said this is not a possibility:

This is totally irrelevant, as the Holy Father himself used the term. Your use of the phrase “so-called” is itself a form of dissent from the authority of the Pope. You are the first I have seen to raise the possibility that the Pope cannot even change discipline.

 

[goout]

Maybe if priests started teaching ToB from the pulpit, great strides could be made as far as education is concerned.

There’s something very amiss if people who support communion for divorced/remarried don’t simultaneously and vociferously support aggressive ToB education. If the diagnosis is incorrect, the chance the cure is correct is only tenuous at best. We don’t need sex-ed, we need education on how marriage and the Eucharist are connected, which is deeply related to ToB.

I don’t see TOB being taught in parishes to any great degree for a couple of reasons.
It’s deeply grounded in philosophy, and philosophy is just too demanding and exacting a science for us in this time.
While TOB is very deep in it’s philosophical grounding, it is profoundly simple in it’s conclusions. It doesn’t leave much wiggle room.

 

[St_Francis]

CCC 1776 is helpful for an understanding of the inner forum. Therein is found the voice of one’s conscience and a reflection of the moral law. Praying the Rosary is very helpful in this respect. It is a contemplative prayer. In my experience, meditating on the individual Mysteries can be quite illuminating.

The problem with conscience is that it can be well-formed or badly formed. In a later paragraph of this section it says: “We call that man prudent who chooses in conformity with this judgment [of conscience].”

Well, if he has a badly formed conscience, he doesn’t act prudently and does bad things! That is a problem!

Additionally, it says still later: “Man has the right to act in conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions. 'He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience, especially in religious matters.'53”

Aside from religious matters, if a person’s conscience tells him to kill someone, what, we’re not supposed to “force him to act contrary to his conscience”?

I realize that later in the discussion it describes the malformed conscience, but it doesn’t really say what we to make of that.

Moreover, we have had, at least in the US, a complete collapse for a few generations of moral and theological teaching, which to me indicates that a lot of Catholics have malformed consciences ( which I struggle against myself as I was raised secular). ETA: Consider “Catholics” for “Choice” and Robert Hannsen.

I understand the logic (which has not been explained by anyone publically, afaict) but I don’t see how opening up the internal forum is a good thing.

 

[St_Francis]

This is totally irrelevant, as the Holy Father himself used the term. Your use of the phrase “so-called” is itself a form of dissent from the authority of the Pope. You are the first I have seen to raise the possibility that the Pope cannot even change discipline.

Sorry about that, it was not my intention. For the 20-odd years previous to AL, the internal forum was a so-called solution to the problem of being unable to obtain a decree of nullity. It was not a true solution because the Vatican had forbidden its use.

 

[goout]

The problem with conscience is that it can be well-formed or badly formed. In a later paragraph of this section it says: “We call that man prudent who chooses in conformity with this judgment [of conscience].”

Well, if he has a badly formed conscience, he doesn’t act prudently and does bad things! That is a problem!

Additionally, it says still later: “Man has the right to act in conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions. 'He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience, especially in religious matters.'53”

Aside from religious matters, if a person’s conscience tells him to kill someone, what, we’re not supposed to “force him to act contrary to his conscience”?

I realize that later in the discussion it describes the malformed conscience, but it doesn’t really say what we to make of that.

Moreover, we have had, at least in the US, a complete collapse for a few generations of moral and theological teaching, which to me indicates that a lot of Catholics have malformed consciences ( which I struggle against myself as I was raised secular). ETA: Consider “Catholics” for “Choice” and Robert Hannsen.

I understand the logic (which has not been explained by anyone publically, afaict) but I don’t see how opening up the internal forum is a good thing.

It seems the teaching of the CCC on the role of conscience assumes a knowledge of the prime role of sound moral evaluation on the part of the reader.
It fails to anticipate the confusion resulting from relativism, where a person cannot distinguish the proper role of individual conscience from the objective moral principles that inform it.

I would imagine that future revisions may take this into account.

 

[St_Francis]

It seems the teaching of the CCC on the role of conscience assumes a knowledge of the prime role of sound moral evaluation on the part of the reader.
It fails to anticipate the confusion resulting from relativism, where a person cannot distinguish the proper role of individual conscience from the objective moral principles that inform it.

I would imagine that future revisions may take this into account.

Yes, there are many things I have learned about the formation, one way or the other, of the conscience that to me illuminate the reality, but don’t really jibe well with the idea of “primacy of conscience.”

 

[graciew]

It seems the teaching of the CCC on the role of conscience assumes a knowledge of the prime role of sound moral evaluation on the part of the reader.
It fails to anticipate the confusion resulting from relativism, where a person cannot distinguish the proper role of individual conscience from the objective moral principles that inform it.
Po
I would imagine that future revisions may take this into account.

Would this be covered in CCC 1783 ?
Is this what you are referring to?
I will disengage from this topic of conscience for the moment . There is the concept of synteresis too.
I ve tried before and I am stuck. And it is more of an intellectual interest but not really a need to know at this moment.
I ll stay with the rosary part for now.

 

[TCEL]

I don’t see TOB being taught in parishes to any great degree for a couple of reasons.
It’s deeply grounded in philosophy, and philosophy is just too demanding and exacting a science for us in this time.
While TOB is very deep in it’s philosophical grounding, it is profoundly simple in it’s conclusions. It doesn’t leave much wiggle room.

But if people start hearing the conclusions, at least they might delve deeper. It isn’t too difficult to draw connections between Christ on the cross and the Church, compared with husband and wife. Who isn’t attracted to the idea of a lover pouring out body, blood, and soul? Our pop culture is saturated with the story line.

It’s ridiculous to not try harder. We have gifts we aren’t using. It’s maddening.