M
MariaCameron
Guest
Hi,
I just heard Trent Horne describe Tim Staples’ defense of the pope’s position that there can be a situation where a person could be advised to receive communion even when living in objective sin.
The example given was of a woman who had left a marriage and was in a situation where if she did not engage in sexual intercourse with a man who is objectively not her husband then she would endanger her life or that of her children to some degree.
The example is a difficult one and I am sure it is realistic. It is tragic. However, right after that call Trent explained to a caller that it was never permissible to do an evil, in this case to was contracept, to achieve a good, in that case it was to avoid serious health complications.
I cannot understand why what is true in one case ie: an evil, communion in the state of objective sin, can be allowed for a good. In this case I don’t even see what is the good that is achieved.
I just heard Trent Horne describe Tim Staples’ defense of the pope’s position that there can be a situation where a person could be advised to receive communion even when living in objective sin.
The example given was of a woman who had left a marriage and was in a situation where if she did not engage in sexual intercourse with a man who is objectively not her husband then she would endanger her life or that of her children to some degree.
The example is a difficult one and I am sure it is realistic. It is tragic. However, right after that call Trent explained to a caller that it was never permissible to do an evil, in this case to was contracept, to achieve a good, in that case it was to avoid serious health complications.
I cannot understand why what is true in one case ie: an evil, communion in the state of objective sin, can be allowed for a good. In this case I don’t even see what is the good that is achieved.