What Pope Francis said about Communion for the divorced-and-remarried [CNA]

  • Thread starter Thread starter CNA_News
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CNA_News

Guest
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/i..._7_2016_Credit_Daniel_Ibanez_2_CNA.jpgVatican City, Sep 13, 2016 / 03:46 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Daniel Ibanez/CNA.Vatican City, Sep 13, 2016 / 03:46 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Pope Francis has written a private message approving the Buenos Aires bishops’ response to the divorced-and-remarried inspired by his apostolic exhortation on the family.

The pastoral response said ministry to the divorced-and-remarried must never create confusion about Church teaching and the indissolubility of marriage, but may also allow access to the sacraments under specific limits. These may include specific situations when a penitent in an irregular union is under attenuated culpability, as when leaving such a union could cause harm to his children.

The bishops of the Buenos Aires region had written basic criteria for their priests about the Pope’s post-synodal exhortation Amoris laetitia, which was released April 8 following two synods on the family.

The Pope discussed these criteria in a Sept. 5 letter addressed to Bishop Sergio Alfredo Fenoy of San Miguel, a delegate of the Argentina bishops’ Buenos Aires Region.

“The text is very good and makes fully explicit the meaning of the eighth chapter of ‘Amoris Laetitia’,” Pope Francis said. “There are no other interpretations. And I am sure it will do a lot of good. May the Lord reward you for this effort of pastoral charity.”

He said pastoral charity “moves us to reach out to those who have drifted away, and once we have met them, to begin a path of welcoming, accompaniment, discernment and integration into the ecclesial community.”

The Buenos Aires document, also dated Sept. 5, aimed to offer “minimal criteria” on the discernment of the possible access to the sacraments by penitents who are divorced and in a new union. Every bishop may clarify, complete, or establish limits on these criteria in his own diocese, the document said.

This advice must not be understood as “unrestricted access” to the sacraments or as if “just any situation would justify it,” the document said.

“What is proposed is a discernment which adequately distinguishes each case,” it said.

It emphasized a process of discernment for a penitent accompanied by a pastor. The pastor must emphasize the fundamental proclamation of Christ. This path calls for the priest to show pastoral charity in welcoming the penitent, listening carefully to him, and accepting the penitent’s “upright intention and good purpose to place his entire life in the light of the Gospel and to practice charity.”

“This path does not necessarily end in the sacraments, but rather it can guide one to other ways of joining more in the life of the Church,” it said. This include a greater presence in the community, participation in prayer groups, and commitment to various ecclesial services for those who have divorced-and-remarried.

“When the concrete circumstances of a couple make it feasible, especially when both are Christians with a faith commitment, it is possible to propose that they try to live in continence,” the document said.

“In other more complex circumstances, and when a decree of nullity cannot be obtained, the mentioned option may not in fact be feasible. Nevertheless, a path of discernment is equally possible.”

The Buenos Aires document did suggest that penitents in a limited number of circumstances, after careful discernment, could access the sacraments.

“If one comes to recognize that in a specific case, there are limitations that attenuate responsibility and culpability, particularly when a person believes that he would fall into a subsequent fault of harming the children of the new union, Amoris laetitia opens up the possibility of access to the sacraments of Reconciliation and Eucharist. These sacraments in turn dispose the person to continue to mature and grow with the power of grace.”

Adequate discernment of each case deserves “special care” in examples such as a new union that arose from a recent divorce or the situation of someone who has consistently failed in his family obligations.

The document also warned of situations where a person justifies or flaunts one’s situation “as if it were part of the Christian ideal.”

“In these more difficult cases, we pastors must accompany with patience, trying to find some way of reinstatement,” the Buenos Aires document said.

The document stressed the importance of the examination of conscience as well as the need to avoid confusion about Church teaching.

In some cases it may be appropriate that access to the sacraments takes place in “a discreet manner” when conflicting situations can be foreseen.

“But at the same time the person should not stop accompanying the community so that he or she grows in a spirit of understanding and of welcome, without this involvement creating confusion regarding the teaching of the Church about the indissolubility of marriage.”

Pope Francis’ Sept. 5 letter to the Buenos Aires bishops reflected on the difficulties of discernment.

“We know this is tiring, it is a matter of a ‘person to person’ pastoral ministry, not satisfied with programmatic, organizational or legal mediations, however necessary. Simply: to welcome, accompany, discern, integrate. Of these four pastoral attitudes the least cultivated and practiced is discernment; and I consider formation in discernment, personal and communitarian, in our seminaries and rectories to be urgent,” he said.

He added that the apostolic exhortation was “the fruit of the work and prayer of the entire Church, with the mediation of the two synods and the Pope.”

The eighth chapter of Amoris laetitia had prompted much discussion and apparently conflicting views.
Full article…
 
And the discussions of these particular Bishops in Latin America reflect what is happening all over the world as Bishops meet regionally and nationally to integrate the post-synodal apostolic exhortation into the pastoral care of the People of God. Each Bishop, in his respective diocese, assisted by the theologians and the canonists as well as informed by the meetings with his brother Bishops, in turn provide guidance to the presbyterate.

It is actually quite unremarkable, calm, and devoid of excitement in our meetings.
 
And the discussions of these particular Bishops in Latin America reflect what is happening all over the world as Bishops meet regionally and nationally to integrate the post-synodal apostolic exhortation into the pastoral care of the People of God. Each Bishop, in his respective diocese, assisted by the theologians and the canonists as well as informed by the meetings with his brother Bishops, in turn provide guidance to the presbyterate.

It is actually quite unremarkable, calm, and devoid of excitement in our meetings.
I suppose it gets a bit more hyped up on the internet when you attach a title of “popeng Francis changes church teaching”, which of course, he has done no such thing

it’s hard for me to envision scenarios where continence is not feasible but I’m not priest and certainly have not dealt with the scope of issues that could occur in a marriage. I just feel that if a situations is serious enough, it might be best for the couple to separate, which would eliminate the problem of communion anyways. i.e. if there is abuse, danger of death, threats ETC…

i understand culpability may be diminished in some cases but how long can a person really claim that, especially if they are discerning with a priest? maybe at first, for a little while but I’m sure they more their faith grows, eventually it would get to the point of mortal sin.

i really think this should stay in the rare exception cases, which is probably what it is meant for in the first place. used very sparingly
 
I think this is infallible since the Pope officially endorsed this. The Church never has universal laws. Its laws are always for a certain part of the Church, yet its laws can never be evil.
 
I am already confused just reading the article. It says the ministry to the divorced and remarried must never create confusion about the indissolubility of marriage. But it also says that they may be allowed access to communion under certain limits. It says that the Buenos Aires document aimed to offer minimal criteria on the possible access to the sacraments by those divorced and remarried. It also says that every bishop may clarify, complete, or establish limits in his own diocese. Yet it says of the Argentine bishops’ document that ““There are no other interpretations.”

Has the doctrine of marital indissolubility changed, or not?
 
I think this is infallible since the Pope officially endorsed this. The Church never has universal laws. Its laws are always for a certain part of the Church, yet its laws can never be evil.
  1. No it would not be infallible. That is not how infallibility works.
  2. Yes the Church has universal laws.
 
And the discussions of these particular Bishops in Latin America reflect what is happening all over the world as Bishops meet regionally and nationally to integrate the post-synodal apostolic exhortation into the pastoral care of the People of God. Each Bishop, in his respective diocese, assisted by the theologians and the canonists as well as informed by the meetings with his brother Bishops, in turn provide guidance to the presbyterate.

It is actually quite unremarkable, calm, and devoid of excitement in our meetings.
Fotgive me Father, if I misunderstood what you have said about meetings being devoid of all excitement as bishops attempt to integrate AL into pastoral care.

Does anyone voice concern that this is a clear break from tradition…to allow the Most Precious Body and Pure Blood to be consumed by those who are objectively in the state of deadly sin? That the practice, newly given authoritative leniency, could be and is the cause of grave scandal regarding our duties toward our God?

God sent His Only-Begotten Son to suffer and die so that we could enter the gates of Heaven that had been justly closed by sin. Jesus lovingly offered every last drop of His Blood to show us how serious is our offense. But He loves us even more! His very Body and Blood in the vulnerable state of bread and wine, He left, so that we might eat of It unto life everlasting.

The Shepherds are duty-bound to teach us the fullness of the truth: unchanged since Apostolic times. Shouldn’t the focus be on treating the Sacred Species with the honor and respect the Church used to insist upon? To make reparation for the presumptive manner we now casually approach the Sacred Table?

Just because we live in a godless society where the “rights” of the People of God are primary, doesn’t excuse us when we must stand before the Judgement Seat of God and make an accounting of how we gave God His due. How we treated and led others to treat the Body and Blood of His Son is surely going to be judged severely! Mitigating circumstances and pastoral accompaniment are now excuses to allow men and women to eat and drink unto their condemnation?
 
MODERATOR REMINDER

No matter how tempting it is especially as an anonyous poster on the Internet, do not pass judgement on others. You do not have the authority to do that; when you do and if it comes to the moderating staff’s attention you will receive a warning, infraction or suspention

No derogatory statements about Catholic clergy
 
After reading about all of this, the best way I can interpret what is being said is this: Receiving the sacraments after a divorce and remarriage is OK in some cases but no one can agree on exactly what those cases are, and if you are divorced and remarried, and have sex with your spouse then receive communion you may or may not be committing a mortal sin but nobody knows for sure if you are or not.

Understand?
 
After reading about all of this, the best way I can interpret what is being said is this: Receiving the sacraments after a divorce and remarriage is OK in some cases but no one can agree on exactly what those cases are, and if you are divorced and remarried, and have sex with your spouse then receive communion you may or may not be committing a mortal sin but nobody knows for sure if you are or not.

Understand?
No that is not what it is saying.
 
Then what is it saying? In plain English.
Best to read their actual document.

It seems yes in some* very complex singular cases* - the Priest carefully discerns that the person is not culpable for mortal sin though the matter is grave (etc) - the person may be admitted to the Sacraments possiblilty.

This sort of thing is not new - it happens and is permitted in other cases involving grave matter too. The Priest discerns the penitent is not culpable for mortal sin and instructs them to received Holy Communion even if they fall into Y.

What would be new (if this is the case) is that where before this discernment was not permitted even in such very complex singular cases - it would seem now (if this interpretation remains the case and is set) - to be “possible” in those very particular certain cases.

The normal general discipline though has not changed. Only it would be some pastoral provision would be added for such rather exceptional singular cases.

But again this is a local document in draft form as I understand it.
 
laws of the latin rite are not universal. All laws made by a Pope are infallible
 
laws of the latin rite are not universal. All laws made by a Pope are infallible
Fr Gerald Murray was interviewed on ‘World Over Live’ on EWTN and talked about this letter from the Pope etc. and Fr Gerald Murray said, “The Pope has given a permission, he’s not given a commandment, so as a Priest I don’t have to follow this and say someone comes up to me and says I’m living in an adulterous second marriage and I’d like to receive Communion, and I’ll say no unless you live as brother and sister, if unless you split up, then you can return to the Sacraments.”

So now conceivably one Priest from Argentina or perhaps elsewhere may allow a divorced and remarried person in a circumstance to receive Communion and another Priest elsewhere may not?

This whole issue in my view really needs further clarification, ideally from the Vatican.
 
laws of the latin rite are not universal. All laws made by a Pope are infallible
If you knew both codes, you would know that there are laws which are common to both the Western code and the Eastern code…not least because there are ecclesiastical laws which derive from Divine Positive Law as well as Natural Law. Indeed, in both codes, there are canons which enunciate Divine Positive Law and Natural Law, doing so as pass through elements, thus incorporating them into the codes.
 
There is no official document format that a Pope has to use to approve laws, and also some
laws are needed for only one part of the faithful or one rite but, if approved by the Pope as this one is, they are protected by the Holy Ghost. This is Catholic teaching and to deny this
is to place oneself in the same camp as those who struggle with the remarriage issue
 
laws of the latin rite are not universal. All laws made by a Pope are infallible
Teachings may be infallible, but law is not. Law is authoritative within the jurisdiction where it is applicable - which may be within a particular rite, or may be within the universal Church.
There is no official document format that a Pope has to use to approve laws, and also some
laws are needed for only one part of the faithful or one rite but, if approved by the Pope as this one is, they are protected by the Holy Ghost.
Although I strongly agree that obedience to promulgated law is essential, Church law is not protected by the charism of infallibility (although the teaching underlying it may be). This is a category error. That doesn’t mean we can ignore legal provisions, as you say, but canon law is not magisterial teaching - it just reflects magisterial teaching. In this case, Amoris Laetitia, whose method of delivery to us indicates it’s status as such.

Respectfully, there is something of a tendency to both overuse and misuse ‘infallibility’ as support for an argument or opinion here on CAF. This is despite the fact that most Catholics really don’t seem to have a full understanding of the doctrine, and it is indeed extremely complex. We should be cautious. 🙂

In Christ,
Withburga
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top