With this semi official Vatican release, this pope has, in writing, and confirmed by the Vatican, endorsed admitting those in irregular (i.e., adulterous and objectively mortally sinful) unions to the Holy Eucharist. There are no more pretenses that it's all just misinterpretation or media spin or that he's just trying to flush out the heterodox; the Kasper agenda is his personal agenda. A line has been crossed. We can no longer be silent. Choose sides now, as if your eternal life depended on it. Because it does. http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/201...e_bishops_document_on_amoris_laetitia/1257635
Brian, I have NOT read it. I am guessing you have. So this is not an attack on anyone, just a question. I agree with you, allowing communion to remarried and those in mortal sin cannot be allowed But according to this which I read, this does not.. Just asking to get better clarification. Yes I should read it, but I am going to have a hard time finding the time to do so. http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/new...ot-allow-communion-for-remarried-says-bishop/ The Bishop of Portsmouth has described the Pope’s exhortation Amoris Laetitia as a “magnificent” document, “breathtaking in scope”, and urged everyone, “clergy and people”, to read and study it. But Bishop Philip Egan clarified that it did not change Church teaching on the subject of Holy Communion for the divorced and remarried. In a pastoral letter he said: “Does the Pope say the divorced and civilly remarried may now be readmitted to Holy Communion? No. “What he says is that instead they need a good priest to reach out to them, to accompany them, to help them discern their situation before the Lord and to enable them to develop, to change and to take their proper place in the Church’s life and mission,” the bishop said.
Brian, In Fr. Z's blog he writes about this issue and includes an update. Maybe a clarification is ahead... Did Pope Francis really write that letter? Posted on 12 September 2016 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf UPDATE: I have found a “news story” (but not really) at the site of Vatican Radio by Philippa Hitchen saying something about the letter. HERE Also, in today’s L’Osservatore Romano of 12-13 September there is an unsigned piece on p. 7 which makes reference to the letter. HERE Does this entirely put the question to bed? Probably. Unsigned articles in L’Osservatore are usually quasi-demi-semi-hemi official. This is not quite as good as a response directly from the Holy See Press Office, but I think we have to go with it. Yes, the Pope really wrote that letter. And, yes, the Pope really endorsed the Argentinian document which opens the door to the divorced and remarried who do not use the brother and sister option to both the Sacrament of Penance and, hence, to reception of Communion. Pope Francis, in his letter to the Argentinian bishop, the seeming chairman of the bishops who composed the document, confirms that the document “nella sua pienezza… in its entirety” shows “il senso del capitolo VIII dell’esortazione apostolica … the intent of chapter VIII of the Apostolic Exhortation”. Here is the deal. Again, we do NOT have here the doors thrown open to official approval of Communion for anyone in any circumstance whatsoever. This is not carte blanche. As a matter of fact, if we want to be fair to what has been written (rather clumsily and unclearly), were someone, some couple, to read and take seriously – with the help of a good, faithful priest – what Amoris said, and what the Argentinian thing said, not many people would be able to discern that they can honestly receive Communion. I’ll also repeat that, those who are rightly disposed toward the Church’s teaching and laws will work with all of this in continuity with the Church’s entire body of teaching, in obedience and fidelity. Those who are not inclined to obedience and fidelity will continue to do whatever the heck they want, no matter what any Pope writes. However, it seems to me that the way that this has all been handled, and the way this all will surely be reported, will open the door to abuses, abuses which I – for one – cannot fathom that any Pope would intend! More on this later. http://wdtprs.com/blog/2016/09/did-pope-francis-really-write-that-letter/
Bottom line? "However, it seems to me that the way that this has all been handled, and the way this all will surely be reported, will open the door to abuses, abuses which I – for one – cannot fathom that any Pope would intend! "More on this later." http://wdtprs.com/blog/2016/09/did-pope-francis-really-write-that-letter/
Pope Francis on the correct interpretation of the “Amoris Laetitia” The bishops of Buenos Aires have sent their priests a document on integrating remarried divorcees (with admission to the sacraments on a case-by-case basis). Francis has written them a letter praising them for their work: the text is “very good” and “fully captures the meaning of chapter VIII” of the exhortation" 12/09/2016 ANDREA TORNIELLI VATICAN CITY The “text is very good and fully captures the meaning of chapter VIII of the‘Amoris Laetitia’. There are no other interpretations”. For the first time, Pope Francis puts his opinion on the correct interpretation of the post-synodal exhortation on the family, in writing, in a letter sent to the bishops of Argentina. As is known, the document in the eighth chapter is about the integration of “wounded” and irregular families and calls for a process of discernment which could lead to readmission to the sacraments depending on each individual case, without venturing into the realm of casuistry or hammering rules into people. The papal document has been subject to a variety of interpretations. Some commentators were quick to claim that previous norms essentially remained unchanged. The Pope had already given a verbal response to this on the return flight from the Greek island of Lesbos last April. He was asked whether there were any real new possibilities for access to the sacraments that did not exist prior to the publication of the “Amoris Laetitia” encyclical. “I could say “yes” and leave it at that”, Francis had replied. “But that would be too brief a response. I recommend that all of you read the presentation made by Cardinal Schönborn, a great theologian.” The document which the bishops of Buenos Aires sent to members of the clergy at the start of September was a letter outlining a set of criteria based on the eighth chapter of the exhortation and in particular on the possibility for divorcees who enter a second union to gain access to the sacraments. First of all, it states that it is not proper to “speak about ‘permission’ for accessing the sacraments but rather about a process of discernment under the guidance of a pastor. Along this path, “the pastor should accentuate the fundamental announcement, the kerygma, that stimulates or revives a personal encounter with Christ”. This “pastoral accompaniment” requires the priest to show “the maternal face of the Church”, accepting the honest intention of the penitent and his sincere intention to live his life according to the Gospel and practice charity”. This path “does not necessarily lead to the sacraments but can lead to other forms of greater integration in the life of the Church: a stronger presence of community, participation in prayer or reflection groups, a commitment to different areas of service within the Church.” In the fifth point made in their document, the bishops of Buenos Aires explain: “Commitment to continence could be considered as an option when the concrete circumstances of a couple allow it, especially when the two are Christians following a path of faith,” leaving “open the possibility of accessing the sacrament of reconciliation in such cases”. This possibility is already present in the teachings of John Paul II. In the following paragraph they explain that in the case “of other more complex circumstances and when it is not possible to obtain a declaration of annulment, the abovementioned option (continence, Ed.) may not be viable. Despite this, a path of discernment is still possible. When there is acknowledgement, in a concrete case, of the existence of limitations that diminish the degree of responsibility and culpability – particularly when a person believes they would commit another mistake that could harm any children born into the new union - ‘Amoris Laetitia’ introduces the possibility of access to the sacraments of reconciliation and the Eucharist.” “These in turn allow the person to continue to mature and grow through the strength of grace,” the document goes on to say. It is important, however, to ensure that this window is not seen as providing unrestricted access to the sacraments or as if any situation could justify it. What is being proposed is a discernment that adequately distinguishes between cases. Some cases require special attention, for instance, situations where a new union is forged shortly after a divorce or where a person repeatedly falls short of their commitments towards the family. Or in cases where a person defends or brags about their own situation as if it formed part of the Christian ideal.” People need to be guided in placing themselves and “their conscience before God,” especially “when it comes to their behaviour towards their children or towards the abandoned spouse. When there are injustices that remain unresolved, access to the sacraments is particularly controversial.” Finally, bishops observe that “should access to the sacraments be granted in some cases, it could make sense for this to be kept confidential, especially when conflict is foreseen”. At the same time, however, “the community needs to be given guidance so that it can grow in a spirit of understanding and openness”. The Pope’s response came on 5 September, praising them for their work, “a true example of the accompaniment of priests”. The key phrase of his letter followed: the document issued by the bishops of Buenos Aires “is very good and fully captures the meaning of chapter VIII of the ‘Amoris Laetitia’. There are no other interpretations. I am sure it will do much good”. Regarding the “path of welcome, accompaniment, discernment and integration,” he said: “We know it is tiring, this is ‘hand-to-hand’ pastoral care, where programmatic, organisational and legal mediation is not enough, albeit necessary”. http://www.lastampa.it/2016/09/12/v...s-laetitia-3BCM11NC8042x26J6mQfeP/pagina.html
From St. Pope John Paul II: As I wrote in the Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris consortio, the divorced and remarried cannot be admitted to Eucharistic Communion since "their state and condition of life objectively contradict that union of love between Christ and the Church which is signified and effected by the Eucharist" (n. 84). And this is by virtue of the very authority of the Lord, Shepherd of Shepherds, who always seeks his sheep. It is also true with regard to Penance whose twofold yet single meaning of conversion and reconciliation is contradicted by the state of life of divorced and remarried couples who remain such. http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/JP970124.HTM
A Bizarre Papal Move Robert Royal WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2016 So now we know. We knew before, really, but didn’t have explicit confirmation. The long, agonizing slog, however, is finally over: from Pope Francis’ invitation to Cardinal Kasper to address the bishops in Rome in February of 2014 to the pope’s letter last week to some Argentinean bishops affirming guidelines they had developed in a joint document that, in “exceptional cases,” people divorced and remarried (living in an “adulterous” relationship as we believed for 2000 years in Western Christianity), may receive Holy Communion. This whole affair is bizarre. No other word will do. As I wrote on this page many times before the two Synods on the Family, daily during those events, and subsequently, it was clear – at least to me – that the pope wanted his brother bishops to approve some form of what came to be known as the Kasper Proposal. That he did not get such approval – indeed, that he got significant pushback from bishops from various parts of the globe – visibly angered him, and even led him into a bit of snark at the close of the second Synod, that some opinions had “at times” been expressed there, “unfortunately, not in entirely well-meaning ways.” Well, one man’s not entirely well-meaning ways is another’s conviction about remaining faithful to the words of Jesus. And since then and even after the publication ofAmoris laetitia, Catholics – indeed, the whole world – have been embroiled in tumultuous and fruitless speculation on whether things had changed or not. Even the notorious footnote 351 of Amoris laetitia, for all the worries it caused traditional Catholics, did not really come out and say what the pope evidently thought. The puzzlement was understandable. Has a pope ever changed something of such significance via confused footnotes and, now, a private letter to a small group of regional bishops? In that obscure context, he’s quite categorical: “The document is very good and completely explains the meaning of chapter VIII of Amoris Laetitia. There are no other interpretations.” [Emphasis added.] I say again: bizarre – both in process and substance. It took several days before it was even certain that the letter to the Argentinean bishops – leaked, only later confirmed by the Vatican – was authentic. Pope Francis has no trouble making bald public statements such as “who am I to judge,” and “if you don’t recycle go to Confession.” He rails, often rightly, against careerism and gossip and division within the Curia, but suddenly becomes gun-shy when it comes to marriage and family? As Hungarian Cardinal Peter Erdö said frankly during the Synods, it all just comes down to a choice: either you give a certain group of people Communion or you don’t. Even now that Francis has said yes, we keep hearing that there are qualifications and nuances and limits. The pope has several times refused to comment on the change in order, as he’s said, to avoid giving “a simplistic answer.” But quite apart from the fact that he’s done so on many other matters, he at least appears to believe that it will be possible in practice to finesse this process, through accompaniment, discernment, all those words that have no clear limits. The Argentine bishops themselves have warned that the change applies only to exceptional cases: “it’s necessary to avoid understanding this possibility as an unrestricted access to the sacraments, or as though any situation might justify it.” But while they’ve recognized the danger, they haven’t avoided it. In the world today, everyone thinks he’s a special case, and pity the poor parish priest or local bishop in the future who seems “too rigid” by not granting enough people special status. A Catholic has a right to ask for a little accompaniment and discernment of his own about what the Church teaches – particularly which principles define that “exceptional status.” To take a case that will not long remain hypothetical: what about the gay couple who are committed to one another and experienced same-sex attraction their whole lives, through no fault of their own? When the first Synod started down that path, it was regarded as extremist and quickly abandoned by the small number of bishops who wanted to push it. But without some clear principles to distinguish such cases from others, why not? In the Church’s 2000-year history – a history of apostles, martyrs, confessors, great saints, brilliant doctors, profound mystics – none thought this new teaching Catholic. Some even died to defend the indissolubility of marriage. For a pope to criticize those who remain faithful to that tradition, and characterize them as somehow unmerciful and as aligning themselves with hard-hearted Pharisees against the merciful Jesus is bizarre. I’ve lived long enough in Washington and spent sufficient time in Rome not to trust what a journalist says some leader – secular or religious – told him in private. But I’m convinced that when Eugenio Scalfari – the eccentric editor of La Repubblica, the socialist paper in Rome the pope reads daily – said that Francis told him he would allow all who come to receive Communion, he may not have gotten the words exactly right. But he caught the drift. Indeed, Catholics have a new teaching now, not only on divorce and remarriage. We have a new vision of the Eucharist. It’s worth recalling that in January the pope, coyly, not ruling it out, suggested to a group of Lutherans in Rome that they, too, should “talk with the Lord” and “go forward.” Indeed, they later took Communion at Mass in the Vatican. In a way, that was even more significant. A Catholic couple, divorced and remarried, are sinners, but – at least in principle – still Catholic. Has intercommunion with non-Catholic Christians also been decided now without any consultation – almost as if such a momentous step in understanding the Sacrament of Unity hardly matters? I say this in sorrow, but I’m afraid that the rest of this papacy is now going to be rent by bands of dissenters, charges of papal heresy, threats of – and perhaps outright –schism. Lord, have mercy.
In commenting on the last sentence of the article above, it seems apparent to me (as a person who believes the Antichrist and False Prophet arises on the scene soon), that the False Prophet or Anti-pope, forthcoming, will take what Pope Francis has spoken and use it to his advantage to make it an outright doctrine of his that communion will be for all. Pope Francis will not develop his teaching any further on this subject, but I'm afraid his adversary will. Let us pray not. We will know this False Prophet, as he will change nothing else in the Mass, except leaving out the essential sacrificial part of the Mass, which is necessary for a valid consecration. The rest of the Mass will stay the same.
Great light in understanding this newest development can be found here: http://www.catholic.com/radio/shows/open-forum-40727 As you listen to this Open Forum Q & A with Colin Donovan fielding questions, especially listen in at about minute 11. Where we read and to whom we listen shapes our understanding and interpretation of the words of the Vicar of Christ, Pope Francis. God bless and keep him. Prayers for all here. Colin B. Donovan, STL, is Vice President for Theology at EWTN and host of the Friday edition of Open Line (3-5 pm ET) on the EWTN Global Catholic Radio Network. A layman, Mr. Donovan has the Licentiate in Sacred Theology, with a specialization in moral theology, from the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas (Angelicum) in Rome, where he wrote on the Donation of the Spouses in Marriage. He earned the B.Th. from the Seminary of Christ the King in Mission, BC, Canada, and the BA in Biological Science from Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
I thought I remembered some alleged prophecy saying that the Pope would make a big blunder, and then recover from it. Could this be the blunder? I think the prophecy was that it would occur last year, though, so perhaps not.
Times are so difficult and confusing. If they are difficult and confusing for professional theologians , Cardinals and Bishops how much more for ordinary Catholics such as ourselves. But even ordinary Catholics are enlightened bny the Holy Spirit , through prayer and with all humiltiy and charity can, I suppuose offer an opinion (even if a somewhat hesitant opinion) on all this. I would rather as it goes not have to offer an opinion. I would prefer the situation in the Church be such as it were say in the reign of Pope Benedict or Pope St John Paul when such confusion , such considerable and complete confusion did not reign. Being able then simply to concentrate as I would wish in the calmer, more prayerful waters of prayer , spirituality, mysticism and mystiical phenomena about which I at least know a little about what I am talking about. This rather than these controversial isues in which \\\\\\i admit I feel myself in very deep and troubling waters. In the first place I think it is safe to accept that the Holy Father's letter was generally as represented here? http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/new...ests-support-for-communion-for-the-remarried/ This been taken as a given my eyes were drawn to one particular section in the letter which I found of some quite considerable concern and which very much drew my attention...and I quote: '...although parish congregations also should be helped to “grow in a spirit of understanding and welcome.” Well as soon as I read this the first question that immediately arises is of course , 'Why would the congregations in Catholic parishs be opposed to such moves? ' The common sensed answer is of course would be that they would be scandalised and think such actions were gravely wrong and immoral. But why would Cahtolic congregations think such actions are gravely wrong, if, as some commentators suggest, the Church is simply continuing on with what it has always done? If it is always done why might the Holy Father expect such a bad reaction and ask Boishops to prepare for it? I mean the two things simply do not sync. To say that the Holy Father , 'Has not changed Doctrine' is simply to miss the elephant in the room. It is not a matter of officially changing Doctrine. That is not the suggestion. The reaosn why ordinary Catholics would be upset and outraged as the Hoyl Father appears to indicate is that there appears to be a chnage thorugh the back door , through the pastoral way such cases are handled. So lathough Church Teaching may not be changed the way things are handled is as though Church teaching had changed. This is the rub and why the Holy Father indicates the ordinary Catholic folk might be troubled , scandlised and even outraged. But I have a seocnd even more troubling concern from this sentence of the Holy Father: '...although parish congregations also should be helped to “grow in a spirit of understanding and welcome.” It seems to me that there is an enocuragement here to a reeducation of the Faithful from the normal Traditional understanding of the Teaching of the Church to the presnt one. Or in otherwaords to switch folks from being Conservative and orthodox to being Liberal and heteordox. I wouldn;t be so concerned if there were not a whole series of issues and statements from the Hoyl Father and the Cardinals he has surounded himself with and placed on the very highest positions in the CHurch. These people are out and out heretics. The Holy Father placed them in the postions of control. Sigh . I am not going to go into a rant about this. But given all this we seem to come down to the Holy Father wanting ordinary simply Catholics to be ' Reducated. I am sorry but when I think of reducation I immeidatlety drift to Communist camps where dissidents get, 'Reducated', by the thought police because I and people like me , 'Are not thinking and understanding right' I am sorry I do not not require to be reeducated and my understanding of things is perfectly fine thank you very much. Sigh I am goingt to leave this post for I feel my blood pressure sky rocketing yet again. http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael...ffirms-no-communion-divorced-persons-who-have John Paul II, who served as Pope from 1978 to 2005 and was canonized a saint in 2014 by Pope Francis, declared in 1981 that the Church “reaffirms her practice” of not allowing divorced and remarried persons to receive Communion because to do so would contradict Church teaching and lead the faithful “into error and confusion” about the “indissolubility of marriage.” He also stated that pastors are forbidden, “for whatever reason or pretext even of a pastoral nature, to perform ceremonies of any kind for divorced people who remarry.” In his letter, Familiaris Consortio, On the Role of the Christian Family in the Modern World, Pope St. John Paul II explains that because “more and more Catholics” are getting divorced and remarried, the Church, “which was set up to lead to salvation all people,” must make “untiring efforts” to help the divorced attain the “means of salvation.” Some spouses are “unjustly abandoned,” and there are “those who through their own grave fault have destroyed a canonically valid marriage,” said the Pope, adding that there are people who also remarry “for the sake of the children’s upbringing.”
You know judging the radical direction the Church is taking in the present pontificate comes down to strategy and tactics. strategy ˈstratɪdʒi/ noun noun: strategy; plural noun: strategies 1. a plan of action designed to achieve a long-term or overall aim. "time to develop a coherent economic strategy" synonyms: master plan, grand design, game plan, plan of action, plan, policy, proposed action, scheme, blueprint, programme, procedure, approach, schedule; More tactics, set of tactics "the government's economic strategy" 2. the art of planning and directing overall military operations and movements in a war or battle. "he was a genius when it came to military strategy" synonyms: the art of war, military science, military tactics; generalship "the process could revolutionize military strategy" Strategy is the overall plan. Tactics are the simple moves taken to achieve the aims of the strategy. I would be much , much less concerned about things like communion for the divorce if I did not see it as part of a much , much bigger plan and that plan being to marry the Church , the Bride of Christ to the modern world. Or on other words make the Bride of Christ a Whore. For that is what all this amounts to. There is nothing new in such a plan. It occured again and again in the Old Testament when the CHosen People were led to prostitue themselves to spirit of the then Pagan World. Frankly too the cowardice of many Cardinals and Bishops to speak out. That irks a lot, it really , really does. Them and professional Catholics and bloggers and supposed prophets and so on; I mind this less than the fence sitters who try to earnestly hunt with hounds and run with the fox. These people drive me crazy. Sigh . But there you are. The way of the world. Cowardice and self interest, nothing new.
Fatima, would you mind clarifying your thoughts? Do you feel that this False Prophet will keep the Mass as it now is with the exception of allowing ALL to receive Communion? You feel that our next pope will indeed be the False Prophet/Anti-Christ, and we will know him because of such a change within the Church. This is a different thought from those who feel we will be deceived and not be aware of the Anti-Christ. If this were to become reality, we would not be left wondering who that A/C is, as has been suggested to be more of a political figure by some. Interesting...
From the beginning, God has chosen prophets to reveal his messages from heaven. Both the old and new testaments speak of this throughout. I strongly believe that the messages in the book God Speaks Will You Listen are from God and they are giving us the information God wants us to know about our times. Here is just one message that teaches what I have said on the Mass. From the prophecy www.godspeakswillyoulisten.org 6/27/07 "Now let me clear up an area of confusion for you. Daniel 12:11. And from the time when the continual sacrifice shall be taken away and the abomination unto desolation shall be set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred ninety days. The continual sacrifice is the mass and the abomination of desolation is when the doctrine of the mass is changed in my church- the Roman Catholic Church. If you study church history, this doctrine of the mass is the one Satan has tried to destroy. From the time of the early church until now. Please read the next comments carefully. In my present church, there is much confusion regarding Vatican II. This is from Satan, not from me. Answer me a question: if the Holy Father calls an ecumenical council with all the bishops of the world and the Holy Spirit is guiding the church, how can that council be of Satan? It was not. My people do not understand the working of my Holy Spirit. Remember, I told you to beware of false prophets who come to you in the clothing of sheep. Satan has caused schism in my church, by allowing false interpretations to abound concerning Vatican II. My words do not change. I am going to give you a clue to share with my people. Satan hates the doctrine of the mass and the doctrines concerning my Blessed Mother. These are the two areas he has been trying to destroy. The Vatican II Council reaffirmed both of these doctrines. This council was not convened by hell, but by my Holy Spirit. A council or a Pope who destroys and denies my mass and my Blessed Mother’s privileges is from hell. This is how you can recognize the abomination of desolation. A false prophet or anti pope will proclaim the protestant doctrine of the mass to be correct. This is the one teaching that will change. The rest of my churches teachings can stay the same. Satan knows how to deprive my children of everlasting life, deprive my children of my presence. This is how the man of sin, the son of perdition will sit in the temple of God. Reference II Thessalonians 2:4-10. He will attempt to lead my people to deny my presence in the Eucharist and to teach the mass is only a symbol. This is antichrist. This will bring the wrath of God on the children of disobedience. This will cause the unleashing of the bowls of divine justice. My sacrifice of the mass daily holds back my Father’s justice. Luke 18:8. But yet the Son of man, when he cometh, shall he find, think you, faith on earth? Will I find any of my children, who I recognize with my life in them? Will there be faith left in my holy sacrifice? These are the questions which need to be pondered. My son, a false Christian church will be forced on the people. A gospel of prosperity and a make you feel good gospel will be preached. My churches can be filled with people, but the churches will be dead because I am not there. Without my presence in the churches, God does not dwell in the churches. Then, these sheep who hear my voice will be forced to worship in underground churches where I will be present. This truly is the abomination of desolation and antichrist. Then I will come with the brightness of my coming, destroy this false church, and restore my church according to my will. Then you will see an era of peace. A Eucharistic era of peace where I will reign in the hearts and mind of my people in the holy Eucharist. You must believe all these words I am teaching you and the teachings of my church or you will not enter my era of peace. Ponder these words or I may say to: I NEVER KNEW YOU. The words of the Lord. I bless you Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. AMEN".
I respect Colin Donovan, but it appears he may be mistaken here. I listened to Colin's response (thanks for the audio clip btw) and several time he makes explicit reference for the need for the couple in an irregular marriage to remain continent (see 13:42 & 14:20). However the Argentinian's Bishops letter, which subsequently received papal approval, speaks of situations where the commitment to continence does not exist (see section 6). This approach is a clear break from church tradition.
Yet, Frodo, Colin Donovan makes his explicit reference based on his interpretation of the Argentinian Bishops' document. Here's another article supporting Colin Donovan's understanding of the document. It's clear to me the expectation is that no dogma or doctrine has been changed. Rather, there is an accompaniment of each couple to explore their particular situation with the goal of drawing them back to Christ within the full teaching of the Church. Obvious to me, to receive the Holy Eucharist one must be continent. Pope Francis on the correct interpretation of the “Amoris Laetitia” Published: 14 September 2016 Image source: Shutterstock The bishops of Buenos Aires have sent their priests a document on integrating remarried divorcees (with admission to the sacraments on a case-by-case basis). Francis has written them a letter praising them for their work: the text is “very good” and “fully captures the meaning of chapter VIII” of the exhortation" The “text is very good and fully captures the meaning of chapter VIII of the‘Amoris Laetitia’. There are no other interpretations”. For the first time, Pope Francis puts his opinion on the correct interpretation of the post-synodal exhortation on the family, in writing, in a letter sent to the bishops of Argentina. As is known, the document in the eighth chapter is about the integration of “wounded” and irregular families and calls for a process of discernment which could lead to readmission to the sacraments depending on each individual case, without venturing into the realm of casuistry or hammering rules into people. The papal document has been subject to a variety of interpretations. Some commentators were quick to claim that previous norms essentially remained unchanged. The Pope had already given a verbal response to this on the return flight from the Greek island of Lesbos last April. He was asked whether there were any real new possibilities for access to the sacraments that did not exist prior to the publication of the “Amoris Laetitia” encyclical. “I could say “yes” and leave it at that”, Francis had replied. “But that would be too brief a response. I recommend that all of you read the presentation made by Cardinal Schönborn, a great theologian.” The document which the bishops of Buenos Aires sent to members of the clergy at the start of September was a letter outlining a set of criteria based on the eighth chapter of the exhortation and in particular on the possibility for divorcees who enter a second union to gain access to the sacraments. First of all, it states that it is not proper to “speak about ‘permission’ for accessing the sacraments but rather about a process of discernment under the guidance of a pastor. Along this path, “the pastor should accentuate the fundamental announcement, the kerygma, that stimulates or revives a personal encounter with Christ”. This “pastoral accompaniment” requires the priest to show “the maternal face of the Church”, accepting the honest intention of the penitent and his sincere intention to live his life according to the Gospel and practice charity”. This path “does not necessarily lead to the sacraments but can lead to other forms of greater integration in the life of the Church: a stronger presence of community, participation in prayer or reflection groups, a commitment to different areas of service within the Church.” In the fifth point made in their document, the bishops of Buenos Aires explain: “Commitment to continence could be considered as an option when the concrete circumstances of a couple allow it, especially when the two are Christians following a path of faith,” leaving “open the possibility of accessing the sacrament of reconciliation in such cases”. This possibility is already present in the teachings of John Paul II. In the following paragraph they explain that in the case “of other more complex circumstances and when it is not possible to obtain a declaration of annulment, the abovementioned option (continence, Ed.) may not be viable. Despite this, a path of discernment is still possible. When there is acknowledgement, in a concrete case, of the existence of limitations that diminish the degree of responsibility and culpability – particularly when a person believes they would commit another mistake that could harm any children born into the new union - ‘Amoris Laetitia’ introduces the possibility of access to the sacraments of reconciliation and the Eucharist.” “These in turn allow the person to continue to mature and grow through the strength of grace,” the document goes on to say. It is important, however, to ensure that this window is not seen as providing unrestricted access to the sacraments or as if any situation could justify it. What is being proposed is a discernment that adequately distinguishes between cases. Some cases require special attention, for instance, situations where a new union is forged shortly after a divorce or where a person repeatedly falls short of their commitments towards the family. Or in cases where a person defends or brags about their own situation as if it formed part of the Christian ideal.” People need to be guided in placing themselves and “their conscience before God,” especially “when it comes to their behaviour towards their children or towards the abandoned spouse. When there are injustices that remain unresolved, access to the sacraments is particularly controversial.” Finally, bishops observe that “should access to the sacraments be granted in some cases, it could make sense for this to be kept confidential, especially when conflict is foreseen”. At the same time, however, “the community needs to be given guidance so that it can grow in a spirit of understanding and openness”. The Pope’s response came on 5 September, praising them for their work, “a true example of the accompaniment of priests”. The key phrase of his letter followed: the document issued by the bishops of Buenos Aires “is very good and fully captures the meaning of chapter VIII of the ‘Amoris Laetitia’. There are no other interpretations. I am sure it will do much good”. Regarding the “path of welcome, accompaniment, discernment and integration,” he said: “We know it is tiring, this is ‘hand-to-hand’ pastoral care, where programmatic, organisational and legal mediation is not enough, albeit necessary”. Andrea Tornielli (From Vatican Insider)
The Alberta Canadian Bishops step up for a clarification. Written by Mark Mallett On the Divorced and Remarried THE confusion these days stemming from the Synod on the Family, and the subsequent Apostolic Exhortation, Amoris Laetitia, is reaching a bit of a feverish pitch as theologians, pundits, and bloggers go back and forth. But the bottom line is this: Amoris Laetitia can only be interpreted in one way: through the lens of Sacred Tradition. Enter: the Alberta Bishops of Canada. In a new document that cuts through the sophistries and mental gymnastics of those who wish to use Amoris Laetitia as an instrument to undermine Church teaching, the Alberta Bishops’ new document,Guidelines For the Pastoral Accompaniment of Christ’s Faithful Who Are Divorced and Remarried Without a Decree of Nullity, is a brilliant and simple stroke of clarity. It embraces both the important vision of Pope Francis to become vessels of God’s mercy to our broken generation, while showing them the only path forward: the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Below, I link to the entire document, which is brief. However, I will quote the most lucid and critical passages, which should form a working document for colleges of bishops throughout the world. It may happen that, through media, friends, or family, couples have been led to understand that there has been a change in practice by the Church, such that now the reception of Holy Communion at Mass by persons who are divorced and civilly remarried is possible if they simply have a conversation with a priest. This view is erroneous. Couples who express it should be welcomed to meet with a priest so that they hear proposed anew “God’s plan [pertaining to marriage] in all its grandeur” (Amoris Laetitia, 307) and thus be helped to understand the correct path to follow toward full reconciliation with the Church. …The gentle and clear guidance of the pastor as he helps the couple to form a right conscience will assist them greatly to live in accordance with their objective situation. Should the tribunal process result in a declaration of nullity, they will understand the need to proceed toward the celebration of the Sacrament of Matrimony. In the case where the tribunal upholds the validity of the first union, obedience in faith to the indissolubility of marriage as revealed by Christ will make clear to them the actions that must follow. They are bound to live with the consequences of that truth as part of their witness to Christ and his teaching on marriage. This may be difficult. If, for example, they are unable to separate for the sake of the care of children, they will need to refrain from sexual intimacy and live in chastity “as brother and sister” (cf. Familiaris Consortio, 84). Such a firm resolution to live in accordance with the teaching of Christ, relying always on the help of his grace, opens to them the possibility of celebrating the sacrament of Penance, which in turn may lead to the reception of Holy Communion at Mass. —from Guidelines For the Pastoral Accompaniment of Christ’s Faithful Who Are Divorced and Remarried Without a Decree of Nullity, September 14, 2016, Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross To read the entire document, click here: Guidelines For the Pastoral Accompaniment of Christ’s Faithful Who Are Divorced and Remarried Without a Decree of Nullity
Ahh the Beautiful Truth! Is music to my ears! God Bless the Alberta Bishops of Canada, Mark Mallett and djmoforegon and of course our Holy Father Pope Francis. May the Lord preserve him and give him life and make him blessed upon the earth and deliver him not up to the will of his enemies. Amen.
I don't really want to disturb the peace and quiet following the above two or three posts but I do feel that truth requires me to point out that the advice coming from the Canadian bishops differs significantly from that of the Argentinian bishops whose letter to their priests has been strongly endorsed by Pope Francis as containing a proper understanding of ‘Amoris Laetitia’. Shortly after the publication of his exhortation, Pope Francis was asked if there were new, concrete possibilities that didn’t exist before the publication of the exhortation or not? His reply was: "I can say yes, many. But it would be an answer that is too small". In fact, one wonders what 'new possibilities' are present in the Canadian bishops document. I can see why Mark Mallett has highlighted the Canadian document but I don't think it helps us in understanding what Pope Francis is trying to teach us.
