I doubt that this will happen. The media going astray? Even the Catholic source that you are quoting?
Wouldn’t that depend on why the divorce happened?
The wife could have had an abusive husband or an adulator for a husband or even one that went to the store and never came back, should that woman upon remarriage be denied?
Are divorced husbands not held to the same standards?
What if the woman was divorced and converted to Catholicism?
Should she be denied?
Sorry not getting this at all, for me communion is between you and God not you and a man.
For a website that questions everything the spews forth from the MSM I’m constantly amazed how FR takes what it says about the Church at face value. The Church is always discussing and considering the Will of God. This is no different and I’m sure the discussion will come to the same conclusion the Church has for millennia.
The Church isn’t a private club with rules for the membership. We are the Family of God following where He leads. We do not take of the Body of our Lord when living in a state of sin... not because the Church doesn’t like it but because we condemn ourselves when we do (1 Cor 11:29). The Church is looking out for you, not barring you from lunch.
The only question is whether or not remarried couples are living in sin. We have mechanisms in place already to determine the answer and heal the wounded.
The only ones attending a ‘service’ at a Novus Ordo Church Of The New Religion, will be homosexuals, pedophiles and aged Catholics who haven’t bought a hearing aid yet and are functionally blind.
Why should a man or woman for that matter be denied communion because their cheating, lowdown, backstabbing wife or husband dumped them for someone else?
I fail to see what point it makes other than rubbing salt in an open wound.
I call BS on this one.
He has indicated that we need to be more pastoral on this issue, but being more pastoral does not mean condoning adultery.
From his press conference on the return flight from WYD:
Quote
Gian Guido Vecchi: Holy Father, during this trip you have spoken many times about mercy. In regard to access to the sacraments of divorced persons who have remarried, is there a possibility that something will change in the discipline of the Church? That these sacraments be an occasion to bring these people closer, rather than a barrier that separates them from the other faithful?
Pope Francis: This is a subject that is always asked about. Mercy is greater than the case you pose. I believe this is the time of mercy. This change of era, also so many problems of the Church – such as the witness that’s not good of some priests, also problems of corruption in the Church, also the problem of clericalism, to give an example — have left so many wounds, so many wounds. And the Church is Mother: she must go to heal the wounds with mercy. But if the Lord does not tire of forgiving, we have no other choice than this: first of all, to cure the wounds. The Church is Mother and must go on this path of mercy. And find mercy for all. But I think, when the Prodigal Son returned home, his father didn’t say: “But you, listen sit down: what did you do with the money?” No! He had a feast! Then, perhaps, when the son wished to speak, he spoke. The Church must do likewise. When there is someone … not just wait for them: go to find them! This is mercy. And I believe that this is a kairos: this time is a kairosof mercy. But John Paul II had this first intuition, when he began with Faustina Kowalska, the Divine Mercy … he had something, he had intuited that it was a necessity of this time. With reference to the problem of Communion, it’s not a problem, but when they are in a second union, they can’t. I think that it’s necessary to look at this in the totality of matrimonial ministry. And because of this it’s a problem. But also –a parenthesis – the Orthodox have a different practice. They follow the theology of the economy, as we call it, and give a second possibility, they allow it. But I think this problem – I close the parenthesis – must be studied in the framework of matrimonial ministry. And because of this, two things: first, one of the subjects to be consulted with these eight of the Council of Cardinals, with whom we will meet, the 1st, 2nd and 3rd of October, is how to go forward in matrimonial ministry, and this problem will arise there. And, a second thing: Fifteen days ago, the secretary of the Synod of Bishops was with me, for the topic of the next Synod. It was an anthropological topic, but speaking and speaking again, going and returning, we saw this anthropological topic: how faith helps the planning of the person, but in the family, and to go, therefore, to matrimonial ministry. We are on the way for a somewhat profound matrimonial ministry. And this is everyone’s problem, because there are so many, no? For instance, I’ll mention only one: Cardinal Quarracino, my predecessor, said that for him half of all marriages are null. Why did he say this? Because they get married without maturity, they marry without remembering that it’s for the whole of life, or they marry because socially they must marry. And the matrimonial ministry also comes into this. And also the judicial problem of the nullity of marriages, this must be reviewed, because the Ecclesiastical Tribunals are not enough for this. The problem of the matrimonial ministry is complex. Thank you.
End quote
Here he’s talking about looking to see if the first marriage was, in fact, valid. And, if not, willingly granting a decree of nullity so that it isn’t an impediment.
No talk at all about granting divorced and remarried people access to communion. But, the liberal press (including the liberal Catholic press) apparently can’t grasp that.
It will get a lot worse under this pope. We are just witnessing the first year.
CCC 2386: It can happen that one of the spouses is the innocent victim of a divorce decreed by civil law; this spouse therefore has not contravened the moral law. There is a considerable difference between a spouse who has sincerely tried to be faithful to the sacrament of marriage and is unjustly abandoned, and one who through his own grave fault destroys a canonically valid marriage.
Therefore, an "innocent spouse in a marital break-up has the same possibility to receive Communion as other Catholics, with the usual conditions (being free from mortal sin in other areas of life, going to Confession if not, Eucharistic fast and so on)."
I have never believed that people should stay in an unhappy marriage just to stay in the Church.
I also do not believe that God meant man or woman to live alone the rest of their lives because they could not live in an unhappy marriage.
Many, Many, Catholics are living with women or men and going to communion now. Many are making up their own rules and attending Church anyway.
If a person married again after divorce and goes to confession and states he is living in what the Church calls an adulterous relationship, is he not blessed by the priest and his sin forgiven? Can he not then have communion the next morning and go right back to what he was doing?
Many will argue that at confession we promise to sin no more. I consider that a bad argument.
If it was a good argument we wouldn’t have to go to confession at all because we would sin no more..
No. Most people go to confession whenever they go and know in their mind that they will do the same things they went for the first time again as soon as the opportunity arises.
To me it is the greatest hyprocrisy to go to confession and say I will do it no more. We all know this and yet those pious will argue that I am wrong.
I see nothing wrong in people marrying again after a divorce. I have been married 50 years and will stay that way until death, but mine was a good marriage, if it had not been I would have moved on, and done what I thought right in my conscience.
Francis is slapping the entire Catholic faith right in the mouth.
Isn’t going to happen.
You can tell if you are reading an uninformed reporter’s scribbling if he refers to “the Catholic Church’s ban on...” whatever.
There is no “ban” on contraception, no “ban” on abortion, no “ban” on bigamy (which is what this article is about). Just as there is no “ban” on murder, no “ban” on stealing, and no “ban” on lying.
Perhaps these secular reporters would get the point if one were to ask: “When is modern society going to lift its ban on racism. How about lifting the ban on sexism? Why doesn’t society lift the ban on molesting children?”
Isn’t going to happen.
You can tell if you are reading an uninformed reporter’s scribbling if he refers to “the Catholic Church’s ban on...” whatever.
There is no “ban” on contraception, no “ban” on abortion, no “ban” on bigamy (which is what this article is about). Just as there is no “ban” on murder, no “ban” on stealing, and no “ban” on lying.
Perhaps these secular reporters would get the point if one were to ask: “When is modern society going to lift its ban on racism. How about lifting the ban on sexism? Why doesn’t society lift the ban on molesting children?”
If a Pope is ‘infallible’ then how come this one is going against all the other ones?
Are there any Christian groups that accept divorce and remarriage but not birth control within marriage? I wonder also if there are any that accept birth control within marriage but not divorce and remarriage.
FReegards
It can do no good, and a great deal of harm, to deal in speculation this way. The marriage bond in a valid sacramental marriage is indissoluble until the death of one of the partners. People are supposed to know that before they get married. It's a matter of a vow.