US cardinal voices doubts on Vatican reform, Communion for divorced
- Status
P
Polycarp1
Guest
Wouldn’t a person who is divorced and remarried civilly have to correct that situation and repent of it before receiving Holy Communion?
Mark:10 Back in the house the disciples questioned him again about this, and he said to them, ‘Whoever divorces his wife and marries another is guilty of adultery against her. And if a woman divorces her husband and marries another she is guilty of adultery too.’
C
CarmelJerome
Guest
I hate the way headlines are used to inculcate falsehoods- this one is composed in such a way as to make it appear that Francis has packaged reform of the curia with knocking out normal guidelines on communion requirements. More stuff from the Boston Globe ’ s propaganda arm.
P
PaulfromIowa
Guest
Yes, Christ’s teaching against divorce and remarriage is quite clear. But virtually all of the non-Catholic Christian churches have abandoned that teaching. There are many in the Catholic Church who want us to do the same.
P
PTL
Guest
Yes.
The Cardinal is favoring to modify the annulment process, he does not think the liberal proposal of simply allowing Communion for the divorced and remarried makes any sense. I am glad the cardinal will be at the coming Synod.
B
boar2roar
Guest
I don’t know if that doesn’t defeat the whole point anyway then. Like many things that the church has changed, “modifying” or streamlining" will likely be abused to the fullest extent and in practice be used as an annulment on demand situation or just divorce with a semantics label dropped on it.
P
PTL
Guest
It depends on how to modify it. I heard proposal of “speeding up the process” which is very reasonable. The current annulment process could take years. Speed it up only makes sense - either to grant or deny the annulment, not to drag on for years. There is also proposal of making it free of charge so people do not have to pay money for annulment. That seems to make sense also.
P
ProVobis
Guest
First, there has to be the manpower in order to facilitate the processing. How are you going to get pro bono services to do this? Second, much of the burden falls on the petitioner himself and to the witnesses he prescribes. If one takes 6 months to answer the questions, we shouldn’t expect the tribunal to answer back within a week.
And yes, anyway will seem like an eternity if he or she waits and waits and waits… Just sayin.
P
pnewton
Guest
Every time this comes up (the streamlining part), I like to point out that there are cases that can be decided almost prima facei. If there was just a way to divert the “duh” cases, it would free resources to deal with the more complex ones. While I am at it, why not address the root and create more cases that are clear. During prenuptial counseling, make sure all that is necessary for a sacramental marriage is discussed, echoed back by the parties, *signed off on *by both parties and the priest, then placed in the diocesan record?
BTW - Cardinal DiNardo is my favorite. I am partial, being in his diocese and seeing he will be at my parish this Saturday.
BTW - Cardinal DiNardo is my favorite. I am partial, being in his diocese and seeing he will be at my parish this Saturday.
P
PTL
Guest
Talking about manpower, how could a bishop have the time and energy to talk to each individual who is divorced and remarried to decide if the case is mortal sin or not? If the annulment process has to collect evidence for evaluating the validity of the previous marriage, how could a bishop make such a decision in a few meetings? If such ‘reform” is not watering down the solemnity of marriage, what is?
P
ProVobis
Guest
Fair point and I don’t have an easy solution. The thing is we can’t water down the solemnity of the other sacraments either; that solemnity seems to be on shaky ground as it is. It seems prior to the 60’s this whole matter wasn’t much of a problem as most didn’t receive communion back then but now virtually everyone receives.
P
pnewton
Guest
I do not see how reform is watering down. There is nothing sacred about any set amount of time. The only goal is to arrive at the understanding of the state of the marriage, whether it was valid or not, not the amount of time it takes. The bishop does not need a personal role for this to happen.
Pro bono? Hmm. I can see where there could be a role for the laity to do work (secretarial) for free to make this doable, especially those laity who have availed themselves of the services. However, anything beyond would require specialized training, yet if it were very specialized, it might not need as much training.
Pro bono? Hmm. I can see where there could be a role for the laity to do work (secretarial) for free to make this doable, especially those laity who have availed themselves of the services. However, anything beyond would require specialized training, yet if it were very specialized, it might not need as much training.
P
PTL
Guest
You are right! None of the solemnity of Sacraments should be watered down.
It is gravely wrong to call a mortal sin not a mortal sin for the sake of letting everyone receive the Holy Eucharist. By doing so, it waters down both the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony and the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist. When divorced and remarried Catholics can easily receive Communion without annulment procedure, the flood gate for divorce will be further wide open, the divorce rate for Catholics could go up for there is one less thing to worry about.
S
Sirach2
Guest
By way of an opposite opinion, also from a U.S. Cardinal, it is helpful to know that others disagree.
http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/the-vatican/detail/articolo/39155/
Cardinal Wuerl’s response to Burke (and dissenters)
“One of the things I have learned though over all of these years since those early naïve days in 1961 is that on closer examination there is a common thread that runs through all of these dissenters. They disagree with the Pope because he does not agree with them and therefore follow their position.”
This is the conclusion the Archbishop of Washington Cardinal Donald Wuerl arrives at in an article published on his blog, titled: “The Pope, Touchstone of Faith and Unity”
The US cardinal’s comment focuses on those within the Church who express their opposition to the Pope. Wuerl does not name names but says he has received “an interview” and “an article” “by brother bishops” by email. An interview Cardinal Leo Raymond Burke gave to a French television programme sparked a debate in recent days. In the interview, the cardinal stated that he intended “to stand up to” the Pope if he decided to open up to the possibility of granting remarried divorcees access to the sacraments.
Wuerl says he was present at last Sunday’s Angelus which was attended by thousands of people and recalled that "this enormously popular and revered successor to Peter spoke about the tenderness of Jesus, his loving compassion and at the same time our need to be caring and compassionate to our fellow human beings.
http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/the-vatican/detail/articolo/39155/
Cardinal Wuerl’s response to Burke (and dissenters)
“One of the things I have learned though over all of these years since those early naïve days in 1961 is that on closer examination there is a common thread that runs through all of these dissenters. They disagree with the Pope because he does not agree with them and therefore follow their position.”
This is the conclusion the Archbishop of Washington Cardinal Donald Wuerl arrives at in an article published on his blog, titled: “The Pope, Touchstone of Faith and Unity”
The US cardinal’s comment focuses on those within the Church who express their opposition to the Pope. Wuerl does not name names but says he has received “an interview” and “an article” “by brother bishops” by email. An interview Cardinal Leo Raymond Burke gave to a French television programme sparked a debate in recent days. In the interview, the cardinal stated that he intended “to stand up to” the Pope if he decided to open up to the possibility of granting remarried divorcees access to the sacraments.
Wuerl says he was present at last Sunday’s Angelus which was attended by thousands of people and recalled that "this enormously popular and revered successor to Peter spoke about the tenderness of Jesus, his loving compassion and at the same time our need to be caring and compassionate to our fellow human beings.
S
Sirach2
Guest
To take it one step further, this article on Pope Francis’ opinion is also worth a read.
Pope Francis Slams ‘Prejudiced Mentality’ Of Believers Who Fearfully Cling To Religious Laws
huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/15/pope-francis-homily_n_6687610.html?utm_hp_ref=tw
Pope Francis Slams ‘Prejudiced Mentality’ Of Believers Who Fearfully Cling To Religious Laws
huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/15/pope-francis-homily_n_6687610.html?utm_hp_ref=tw
P
Pulvis
Guest
Fr. Gaurnizo
L
LongingSoul
Guest
You continue to misrepresent what is being talked about. The Pope, the Church, the Cardinals and Bishops (at least the honest ones), have stressed that this is not an examination aimed at changing the general rule regarding marriage and divorce. This issue is addressing a very specific group of people. Those who having lived through a marriage, divorce and remarriage… have experienced a conversion to true faith evidenced by their relationship with the Church. They live the life of faith regardless of whether their new marriage can be regularised or not.
The local bishops won’t be faced with every divorced remarried couple in their area of which of course there will be many. This issue is only regarding the some who have been living their conversion to faith already.
Pope Francis I imagine pays huge attention to the experiences of faith as being a true manifestation of God at work in peoples lives, since discernment of spirits in making life choices is a very important part of Ignatian spirituality.
It is these particular people than can show everyone by their life experience, the real difference between the marital love that fully appreciates the meaning of the sacrament of marriage… and the marriage that whilst being full of feeling and conducted by a Priest, is not worthy of sacramental ordination.
The question is, what special esteem can we give these marriages that gives value to the real good in them. That can highlight for young people how true godly love manifests in a marriage.
The reality is that the attitude that we often have towards these people is that they are irredeemable adulterers. That they deserved their fate since they weren’t as holy and perfect as us. That their marriages are valueless and without any redeeming quality. Is that really what God and nature is telling us? Is it only situations that the official process deems redeemable, that are genuinely redeemable?
The Pope and many good, educated and holy people in the Church think there are anomalies still to be addressed for the good of Catholic marriage in the future.
Rev 3:22 “He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.”
S
Sirach2
Guest
Edit:
This is a better version, more detailed.
zenit.org/en/articles/pope-francis-homily-at-mass-with-cardinals–2
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Read the article. Despite the very clear slant, I still see absolutely nothing that the Pope said as being against the Catholic faith --much of the words are taken out of context and it’s the writers of the article who then plaster their ‘interpretation’ of what they think is ‘meant.’ So I’m still not worrying.
You know what? I am a Pope Benedict XVI girl (my grandfather came from Bavaria back at the beginning of the 20th century), I love Latin (but I certainly don’t hate the OF and attend it regularly), and back in the early years of CA, when Benedict BECAME Pope, I simply could not understand the attitude of many who seemed to think that Benedict was advocating all sorts of anti-Catholic teachings, that he was hard, harsh, ‘ossified’, only out for ‘justice’ without any thought of the individual, etc. Because here I was, reading the same things and hearing the same things they heard, but I never heard that kind of ‘attitude’.
Now here I am, listening to the attitude of many who seem to think that Francis is advocating all sorts of anti-Catholic teachings; that he is ‘heretical’, ‘mushy’, ‘a loose cannon’, only out for ‘mercy’ and thinking so much of the individual that he crafts a new theology for each person and most of them contradict the theology for others. . .
and here I am, reading the same things and hearing the same things they hear, but again, I don’t hear that kind of attitude.
And now I know why people back in 2005 were full of ‘concern’ about Pope Benedict. . .and why people today are full of ‘concern’ for Pope Francis.
It’s not the Pope who’s the problem. The problem is us. . . because most of us are all too ready to listen to those who are saying what we agree with, and of being manipulating into thus accepting as ‘truth’ things which aren’t really so. And there are all too many who are ready, willing, and able to aid in manipulation, some out of ignorance, some out of misguided zeal for ‘truth’, and some sadly out of a wish to split the Church and its people.
Just as people of a ‘liberal bent’ back in say 2007 were convinced that Pope Benedict was ruining the Church’s true mission of social justice and peace by harping on absolute morality, people of a conservative bent in 2015 are being manipulated into being convinced that Pope Francis is ruining the Church’s true mission of teaching Christ’s truths by harping on 'getting dirty and focusing on the poor". And the fact is, Pope Benedict was NOT ruining the Church then, and Pope Francis is not ruining it now. And Pope Benedict was just as convinced of the need for the Church to minister to the poor as Pope Francis is convinced of the need to teach Christ’s truths.
But hey, if we can get one whole segment of the Church to feel at odds with another whole segment, and get them arguing over issues and stubbornly claiming that the other group is wrong, and demanding that their way be the only way. . .then the Church (just like the US Congress) can be stymied into doing virtually nothing for anybody. And even though most of the people in the Church (just like most of the people in the US) recognize what is happening, and are trying their darndest to search out what is ‘really happening’, it’s getting harder and harder to find unbiased sources, and to be ‘heard’ over all the people who are yammering out their violent disagreements.
K
KSU
Guest
Every knowledgeable Catholic learned long ago never to waste time with the dishonest spin by LA STAMPA or the HUFF POST (or their ilk, e.g., The National Catholic Reporter). The fish wrap media is no friend of the Church; it pushes its sensationalist propaganda to diminish peoples’ trust in the permanence of traditional (small t) teachings of the Church. Its message to unwary, orthodox Catholics is the opposite of “Be not afraid”, i.e., it’s message is “Be very afraid: ‘Conservative’ prelates are undermining the enlightened, progressive Pope and his enlightened, progressive supporters.”
The only thing new about Francis is his very Jesuit
method of operation (which even he has acknowledged has its weaknesses). Liberals will come to rue the day Francis was elected.- Status