that is bs
“John Paul II
Our starting point is what the Pope has said. John PauI II issued a document in 1981 with the Latin title Familiaris Consortio on the subject of family life. In it he made it clear that divorced Catholics enjoy full and complete union with the Church, they are not excommunicated, and may receive the Eucharist. In other words, the Pope makes it clear ‘that divorce is not a sin. Sadly, a lot of Christians are not aware of this.
He also spoke of Catholics who are divorced and remarried - his words would apply equally to a (never married) Catholic who had married someone who was divorced. These Catholics, married “outside the church” as we usually say, should not, the Pope said, consider themselves as separated from the church, “for as baptized persons they can and indeed share in its life.” Once again, the Pope’s words make it clear that they are not excommunicated.
However, speaking in a general way he said such Catholics may not participate in the eucharist. The Pope urged them to seek an annulment of the first marriage - an annulment would help them become officially eligible. What about the situation where an annulment is not possible?
The Pope here summed up concisely the official teaching. But most Catholics in this situation are not aware that the church has always had what might be called a “second level” of teaching applying at the level of conscience, which is very relevant to them.
Thus John Paul spoke of those “who are sometimes subjectively certain in conscience that their previous and irreparably destroyed marriage had never been valid”. Once again, he urged them to bring that first marriage to the tribunal. He made no further comment about what happens if this is impossible.
But the people he described include many whose marriages will never be annulled, not because their case is not a strong one, but because witnesses cannot be located, or refuse to be interviewed. Sometimes a key witness is dead. Does the church have anything to say to them?
Similarly, a Catholic married to a divorced person who is not a Catholic will, perhaps, have good reason to believe that an annulment could be granted to the first marriage of that partner - but the partner does not wish to apply to the tribunal.
There is little that the Catholic can do about it. The partner may say, very reasonably, “Look, if this annulment process only involved me, I would do it for you. But you tell me that it would mean asking friends, and my own parents, and even my ex-spouse to agree to be interviewed, and I don’t think I want to do that.” This attitude is perfectly understandable, no matter how anxious a Catholic partner might be for an annulment of that first marriage. Does the church have anything to say to them?
The conflict faced by a Catholic in either of these situations is knowing that it is very likely that the first marriage was not in itself binding but this is not going to be able to be established officially.
Good Conscience
The church does have something to say to such people. In such instances, the Catholic may make a decision which is called the internal forum solution, or good conscience solution, and may then continue to receive Holy Communion.
It should be emphasized that this is a perfectly correct moral principle, and is totally orthodox. It is not a case of people “making up their own rules”, It was explicitly referred to in l97l by the Cardinal in charge of the church’s authoritative teaching body in Rome called the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
In a letter dated 11.4.1973, which appears in the Canon Law Digest, 9:503f Cardinal Seper urged pastors of souls to “follow up with special solicitude those who are living in an irregular union, applying in the solution of such cases, in addition to other correct means, the approved practice of the church in the internal forum”.
In plainer English, the cardinal was saying that priests (and others) should take special care of people whose marriages are not recognized by the church and in addition to other correct means [such as inviting them to seek an annulment of a previous marriage], should apply the approved practice of the good conscience solution. This can enable them to receive Holy Communion.
Pope John Paul was certainly implying this outcome in his reference, quoted above, to people who are objectively certain that their marriage was not valid.
Rules
There are rules applying to the good conscience solution. They were spelt out two years after Cardinal Seper’s letter by one of his successors, Archbishop Hamer, of the same Roman congregation.
Hamer said that those who use this solution should try to live good Christian live+ and should avoid scandal by receiving the sacraments where they are not known (CLD 9:5O4f).
Note that scandal is not to be presumed. Many people have no comprehension of how any marriage can be annulled and the person be allowed to remarry in the Catholic church. Theirs is not the kind of “scandal” which is warned against. If the circumstances of a person’s second marriage are not known generally, (bearing in mind that there is no list which appear in newspaper of those who have been granted a marriage annulment) such remarried Catholics could certainly receive Holy Communion in the parish in which they live.
Another important point is that the good conscience is a decision which the church expects people to take for themselves. They may, of course, obtain help - and such help ought to be available. The decision they take is not an official one, but applies at the level of conscience: they do not proceed on the basis that “Father X said it was all right”.
Since the principles which the church tribunal applies in the granting of an annulment are not well understood generally, it is not easy for a Catholic in a second marriage which has taken place outside the church to reach such a decision about a previous marriage. Catholics have also long been used to being told not to make moral decisions on their own consciences. They often find it very difficult to take such an important step alone. But this is what the church asks.
The good conscience decision is not based merely on a desire to receive Holy Communion (although this desire obviously inspires the effort by people to look at their situation). Rather, it is based on a conviction that the first marriage was not one which ought to be seen as valid and binding, even though this will probably never be officially declared by the church.
Some find it regrettable that Catholics who have cautiously and carefully taken a good conscience decision about their second marriage, and are receiving Holy Communion, may be exposed to harsh judgement by other Catholics, and have no paper or document from the church to support them. But we can hope that in time people who are now unaware of the church’s teachings on which such decisions are based will learn about them, and be less judgemental.
However, there is probably less likelihood than they might fear, of an embarrassing social occasion in the church in which their status, what is correct in the sight of God, is going to be called into question. In fact, people whose remarriages have taken place with the church’s blessing are virtually never asked to produce a certificate which shows this.”
http://jloughnan.tripod.com/remarry4.htm