[Dr. Sivana]

certain intuitions present in Familiaris Consortio that weren’t really made explicit in a terribly high-profile way,

That sounds like the guy in Punxsatawny who claims that only he can understand what the groundhog is saying.

[marshmallow]

Liar....liar......pants on fire!!

[poinq]

I am not a theologian, just a run of the mill Catholic. But I hate when the church doles out its services as a reward. Jesus does not do that. He often rewarded sinners. As far as I am concerned the church should not be in the business of limiting the path to god.

I understand if the church feels that people are not taking a sacrament seriously, you may withhold because its not a sacrament if people don’t take it seriously. Hence Pre-Cana showed up, as a way to get people to take marriage seriously.

But to punish people for one sin by withholding a separate sacrament is just not in the biblical teachings. And lay Catholics really have no right to judge each other. God holds that job for himself.

[I want the USA back]

Even bishops can lie.

[Flying Circus]

Interesting how they cite JPII as the inspiration to do what he explicitly said should not be done? The spin and double speak is amazing.

[piusv]

“The real revolution there happened under John Paul II, not Francis, which hasn’t really yet been understood,” said Paglia. “You have to remember that before [Familiaris Consortio], it wasn’t that the divorced and remarried just couldn’t get Communion, it was they were practically excommunicated and expelled. They were outsiders. After John Paul, everybody was inside the house … I can’t just send them out on the terrace!”

This is actually true to some extent. In JPII's Code of Canon Law (1983), there is no mention of excommunication of the divorced and remarried. However, the 1917 Code of Canon Law mentions that such couples could be excommunicated.