Posted on 02/15/2018 9:40:06 AM PST by ebb tide
The Cardinal Patriarch of Lisbon, Manuel Clemente, has published an official statement in which he endorses giving Holy Communion to those who are divorced and invalidly remarried in some circumstances.
The statement, posted on the patriarchate’s website, is called “Note regarding the reception of chapter VIII of the apostolic exhortation ‘Amoris Laetitia.’” According to the cardinal, the note’s purpose is to implement the teaching of Amoris Laetitia in light of two other documents: “the correspondence between the bishops of the Pastoral Region of Buenos Aires and the guidelines given to the priests of the Diocese of the Pope (Rome) by its cardinal-vicar.”
Cardinal Clemente offers numerous quotations of the three documents to justify giving Holy Communion to those in adulterous remarriages, including the letter of the bishops of the Pastoral Region of Buenos Aires, which has been placed into the Acts of the Apostolic See by the pope. Clemente quotes the letter’s claim that the option of living in celibacy “may not, in fact, be feasible” and that “there are limitations that diminish responsibility and culpability (cf. 301-302), particularly when a person judges that he would fall into a subsequent fault by damaging the children of the new union.”
The cardinal concludes that under “exceptional circumstances” there is the “sacramental possibility” (that is, the possibility of receiving Holy Communion) “in conformity with the apostolic exhortation [Amoris Laetitia] and the above-cited documents.” He adds that “discernment” should be continued “always adjusting practice more in accordance with the Christian matrimonial ideal, and better sacramental coherence.”
Pope Francis’ novel doctrine permitting Holy Communion for those in adulterous second marriage has been questioned and denounced widely by Catholic clergy and laity, particularly theologians and canon lawyers. The Church’s law continues to require that those who are conscious of mortal sin not present themselves for Holy Communion, and that priests refuse communion to those who publicly known to be living in habitual mortal sin.
The bishops of Kazakhstan have released a ringing rejection of Francis’ doctrine, and have reaffirmed the Catholic Church’s “two thousand-year-old sacramental discipline,” which prohibits giving Holy Communion to people in a public state of mortal sin. Other bishops and also cardinals have joined their names to their declaration
Clemente’s statement comes in the wake of comments the cardinal made to the press in December, when he told Agencia Ecclesia that divorced and remarried Catholics who want to begin receiving the sacraments will have to follow a “very long” process which isn’t a “quick, immediate, simple” decision. However, the cardinal added that “in some cases, with discretion and with the consent of the bishop, they can return to the sacramental life,” citing the authority of Pope Francis.
Already in Portugal the Archdiocese of Braga has followed Clemente’s lead, announcing late last year that it will give “access to the sacraments” to “divorced and remarried Christians,” without any reference to the need to give up the sexual act, affirming that “the Archdiocese of Braga will establish a group for accompanying Christians who are divorced and remarried, which will make access to the sacraments possible, in accordance with a process of individual discernment.”
The archdiocese’s embrace of the practice of giving Holy Communion to adulterers was condemned in January by eminent canon lawyer Edward Peters, who wrote: “It doesn’t matter what reasons might be offered by the storied Archdiocese of Braga for its plan to authorize the administering of holy Communion to basic divorced-and-remarried Catholics. If that is . . . their plan, they are wrong,” continues Peters. “Patently and gravely wrong. Just like the Maltese. Just like the Germans. And just like a few others if only in terms of the wiggle room they allow themselves in these cases, as do, say, the Argentinians.”
God accepts them even if the Catholic Church does not (John 6:37).
“in some circumstances” = if they offer to put enough in the collection plate.
God accepts them even if the Catholic Church does not (John 6:37).
Perhaps. But the Catholic Church recognizes the union for what it is (Mark 10:7-12).
The screams of jealousy can be heard all the way from Rome.
So then what you are saying is that the Megachurches care more about the money than the written words of Jesus Christ?
Matthew 7:21
Do you believe Hell is empty?
Ummm...
Matthew 19:9
Under Roman Catholicism King David and Bathsheba would not have their marriage recognized nor could they receive Communion.
If the church protect pedophiles as priests then all morality from the organization is hypocrisy.
Sadly and unfortunately, no, but certainly not populated with those that come to Jesus (John 6:37).
For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.John 3:16-18.
Jesus Christ is THE issue for time and eternity. God executed the full condemnation and punishment for the sins of the whole world on the body of his beloved Son in Christ's perfect sacrifice on the cross (1 John 2:2). Man was tangled up hopelessly in sin utterly unable to extricate himself. Thus God in his great mercy decidedly dealt with the sins of the whole world 2000 years ago on the cross.
The only issue that remains is Christ. Christ is the determining factor for our time and eternity. What sends people to Heaven is their receiving Christ. What sends people to Hell is their sad and unnecessary decision to reject the Christ and his free gift of forgiveness and salvation thus dying in their sins.
Why do you think God destroyed Sodom?
Right, and Christ is in their lineage. I'll go with the grace of God and his word and leave unscriptural Catholic doctrine to others.
I suppose it's a good think that David and Bathsheba weren't Catholic then, isn't it?
But now
God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and has committed unto us the word of reconciliation.2 Cor 5:19.
So you're argument is juvenile. It's like arguing that Moses is in Hell because he was never baptized in the name of the Holy Trinity.
What does the New Testament say about divorce?
Something about being unequally yoked with a non-believer?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.