Posted on 12/13/2024 9:24:35 AM PST by ebb tide
The new cardinal of Algiers has welcomed Amoris Laetitia’s openness for the divorced and “re-married” to receive Holy Communion, saying that for him adultery is only “when you have two people in your life at the same time.”
In 2015, Bishop Jean-Paul Vesco, OP of the Diocese of Oran in North Africa made waves in the Catholic Church for his harsh criticism of the Church’s teaching regarding divorced and “re-married” persons. “The Church’s discipline regarding divorced and remarried couples has long troubled me, even revolted me, because of the unnecessary suffering it inflicts on individuals without consideration for their unique situations,” he stated at the time.
The Church has consistently taught that divorced and “re-married” people are not to be admitted to Holy Communion, since they are living in a state of grave sin. This teaching is enshrined in canon law.
However, in 2016, Pope Francis’ apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia infamously contained a passage allowing for divorced and “re-married” to approach and receive Holy Communion. After widespread consternation and requests for clarification from leading lay theologians and cardinals, Francis then affirmed to the bishops of Buenos Aires that this was indeed the intention of the document and that there were “no other interpretations.”
Speaking to this correspondent in Rome on the weekend he was made cardinal, 62-year-old Cardinal Vesco reiterated his criticism of the Church’s prohibition for the divorced and “re-married” to receive Holy Communion, and praised Pope Francis’ Amoris Laetitia for rejecting that prior teaching.
READ: PHOTOS: 21 new cardinals created by Pope Francis at the Vatican
“It was a huge, enormous injustice,” the French Dominican said, about the Church’s teaching prohibiting such individuals from receiving Holy Communion. (Full interview below.)
Speaking about the time before 2016, Vesco told LifeSite that “what we said, what the Church said about these women [divorced and ‘re-married’] was that they were adulterers. And that therefore they were adulterers and that if you don’t come out of this sin of adultery, well you can’t receive the other sacraments. That’s the question.”
Catholic teaching denotes adultery as “marital infidelity,” as an instance “when two partners, of whom at least one is married to another party, have sexual relations – even transient ones – they commit adultery. Christ condemns even adultery of mere desire.”
In the Gospels, Christ notes that those actively desirous of such relations are guilty of them, even if such individuals do not manage to attain their desires and have sexual relations. (Matt. 5:28)
But in Vesco’s view, “adultery” was a word too readily used in ecclesial circles prior to Amoris Laetitia’s release. “For me, adultery is when you have two people in your life at the same time.”
Vesco opined that for the Church to use the label of adultery for all cases “wasn’t true or just”:
To say adultery in all situations was simply something that wasn’t true or just. When you have one person who – as I had recently – a person who was widowed, who [then] after a while remarried with a person who was divorced: because in her life, she’s not an adulterer, neither one nor the other is an adulterer.
Vesco – Archbishop of Algiers since 2021 – welcomed Francis’ Amoris Laetitia for ushering in a signal shift in practice: “So it was good that finally, simply as is written in Amoris Laetitia, nobody can look at this [critically] because it is love.”
“It’s one thing to leave someone for someone else and leave two families in the lurch, it’s another to have been left by someone, by your partner and then one day make the choice of life again and fall in love again and rebuild something and have children. And that’s it,” commented Vesco.
READ: EXCLUSIVE: Cardinal Radcliffe defends controversial 2013 text on homosexual acts
He reiterated his criticism of the Church viewing such situations in the same light: “That was an injustice, and the Church couldn’t afford that – our Mother the Church couldn’t afford that.”
In June 2016, a group of leading theologians presented the College of Cardinals with an in-depth list of errors in Amoris Laetitia, including the admittance of the divorced and “re-married” as one of 11 heretical propositions in the document.
Then four cardinals famously issued a dubia requesting clarification from the Pope, which remains unanswered. In the meantime, the Vatican has pushed forward with implementing the norms of Amoris Laetitia and has inserted the document into the magisterium.
Speaking to this correspondent, Vesco praised Francis’ text as a way “to look at the situations of people, to discern, and then in the face of this to reconcile these people with the Church, to bring them back into the body of the Church.”
He downplayed the possibility of being seen as an advocate for divorce, saying instead that divorce is “an accident in life” which one must “repair” when it happens.
Michael Haynes: You announced that your appointment as cardinal is a good thing for Catholics and for Muslims in Algeria. How is it for the Church in a country that is heavily Muslim? Is it difficult?
Cardinal Jean-Paul Vesco: I think that as a Church, it has no power, obviously. Religious difference is difficult everywhere, for everyone. And so, inevitably, we’re confronted with this difficulty, religious difference. And it’s obviously much harder to live with for those who are natives of the country, than for the Church as such and for those who are not natives of the country.
What’s really difficult in Islam is not so much the relationship between Christians and Muslims, but the question of conversion. It really is an extremely difficult point. It’s not easy for anyone. I imagine if my brother told me I was becoming a Muslim I wouldn’t take it as good news, but it would be his life. In Islam it’s a very, very difficult point, at least in Arab-Muslim Islam.
So it remains a very difficult point and I think we don’t measure the steps taken by those who accept something like that. Because for us, basically, Christianity is made differently, it’s not constitutive of a society, while Islam it’s a state, a religion.
For us, Christ said “return to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.” So that’s a fundamental difference.
And then there’s our religion, which is a bit of a personal matter, perhaps less important. And so perhaps our tolerance could be questioned. What are the real reasons for our tolerance? There are some good ones, maybe some not so good.
Haynes: You said a few years ago that the Church’s discipline on the divorced and “re-married” made “unnecessary suffering”…
Cdl. Vesco: Ah yes, sure, it was the minimum I said. Oof!
Haynes: Has that changed?
Cdl. Vesco: It was a huge, enormous injustice.
What we said, what the Church said about these women [divorced and “re-married”] that they were adulterers. That’s the Church position.
And that therefore they were adulterers and that if you don’t come out of this sin of adultery, well you can’t receive the other sacraments. That’s the question.
But for me, adultery is when you have two people in your life at the same time.
To say adultery in all situations was simply something that wasn’t true or just. When you have one person who has – as I had recently – a person who was widowed, who after a while remarried with a person who was divorced: because in her life, she’s not an adulterer, neither one nor the other is an adulterer.
So it was good that finally, simply as is written in Amoris Laetitia, the nobody can look at this [critically] because it is love.
It’s one thing to leave someone for someone else and leave two families in the lurch, it’s another to have been left by someone, by your partner and then one day make the choice of life again and fall in love again and rebuild something and have children. And that’s it.
All these situations were one and the same, and that was an injustice. And the Church couldn’t afford that: our Mother the Church couldn’t afford that.
READ: EXCLUSIVE: Church’s youngest cardinal urges the West to rediscover ‘true connection with Christ’
And so it was good simply that the Pope [gave] Amoris Laetitia, which says to look at the situations of people, to discern, and then in the face of this to reconcile these people with the Church, to bring them back into the body of the Church. Amoris Laetitia says this, no?
That’s exactly what I want. I’m not for divorce, I’m not for…
Anyway, I’ve often been told, but then… when I was writing this book on the question of how to welcome people in this situation into the Church, I remember I was writing an article and then I was writing the book, and someone said to me, “I’ve been with my wife for 45 years. I’m married to my wife and you write things like that, practically he said to me what’s the point. I hope that it’s good what, I hope that it’s good for you, but if we’re thinking about marriage, why am I staying with my wife? Practically they would say to me, but then why in these conditions, why would I stay with my wife?”
Oh, they say it’s awful! It was just so ridiculous! It’s so ridiculous! Nobody wants to divorce, nobody wants when they get married, to say “no, no,” but it’s a huge problem for divorcees, it’s an accident in life, and an accident you have to repair, you have to reconcile, you have to understand, you have to repair, you have to repair!
The Church is not going to fix it [for you]. That was simply my position.
This interview has been lightly grammatically edited for clarity.
Ping
He picks them to get a clone as his successor.
Heretics of a feather ...
An injustice to whom?
Get the freaking annulment or you’re married in the church committing adultery
Stop
The annulment process is about determining the lawfulness of the marriage. Outside of that, the Church's position prior to Amoris Laetitia was clear and simply echoed the words of Christ Himself. Woe to prelates who contradict the Lord.
“”saying that for him adultery is only “when you have two people in your life at the same time.”””
Thanks for your reply and the reference. I was going to say “that’s called bigamy” and he might try looking it up in the Scriptures...
“Matt 19:9 I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery.”
That’s what I was taught and remember. Is that HOW they decide things? “for him”, it’s one thing while the Bible says something else? Kind of like having a “feeling” and basing judgments, verdicts, LAWS, predictions etc., on “feelings.”
I have a Catholic friend whose Catholic husband fooled around on her with several women. He wouldn’t cooperate with an annulment, so they got a divorce. He “remarried” one of his mistresses. My friend would like to get remarried, but wants to be able to receive Communion. I always wonder what can be done with situations like hers. It’s not her fault that her ex is a cheating a-hole.
She’s being a victimized wimp
What cheating husband is going to cooperate with any thing close to an annulment
She goes to the tribunal, just talks to her pastor, and gets the annulment process started
People make up all kinds of lame excuses for blaming the church
She claims adultery, and does the proof work they will require
The church is not going to deny people communion just because their spouse commits adultery and they want to move on
It’s so stupid
People want to blame the church. They need to go to church, participate, receive sacraments, do the paperwork
When people say the church won’t let them have a relationship what they mean is the church won’t grant them an annulment without the documentation and necessary cooperation
If they can’t do that then fine but at one point any Catholic has to face God and explain their choices The church cannot change that
You see video of people running away from disaster with the fear of God on their faces and those running to disaster to assist - usually firefighters, priests, nurses, family men
The difference is the effort put in to being right with God
In the case of getting out of a Catholic marriage a spouse deserted through adultery, the one left has to just get their s together, quit pretending priests and the church are mean
The church tribunal examines the case where one of the former spouses brings it to them/applies for annulment. They get statements form each. They can see the story. They ask for witnesses. They can see where one cheated on the other and sift through the bs
They determine whether one or both was not serious about the commitment from the beginning.
The one cheated on, who didn’t want the divorce has to go through the process the other one doesn’t care. Especially if they don’t respond, making it very clear to the tribunal
It’s not supposed to be pleasant it’s like any application and examination
“The floor of hell is paved with the skulls of bishops (and cardinals) and the bones of priests.” - St. Athanasius
Thank you. I will recommend to her that she move forward without the cooperation of her ex.
She has to get over depending on his cooperation. That’s correct.
Did he study theology at all? This is PROTECTING them, not punishing them.
Everywhere in the US, a civil divorce has to precede a church annulment.
The coöperation of both (putative) spouses in the annulment process is helpful, but not absolutely required. The process can proceed if only one spouse participates.
SO WHAT? Communion is just “religiosity”.
Genuflecting, crossing yourself, raising your hands in the air, speaking in tongues, sitting, then kneeling, then standing like a Yo-Yo. ALL religiosity.
Just speak to God, aloud or silently, He will hear you wherever you are. He will hear you BEFORE you speak. No need for circus acts.
It says nothing about your scallywag wife dumping you without cause on a whim, taking the kids, the house and everything else she wants.
What if she divorces you against your wishes as is the case in about 85% of divorces. Since she never took her vows seriously and you did you should not be punished for the rest of your life. You never divorced your wife she dumped you. Some allowances should be made in such cases.
I don't think they even considered no fault divorce when they laid down the law. The world was very different back then.
I think you're on the wrong thread.
Aside from that:
And one of them, when he saw that he was made clean, went back, with a loud voice glorifying God.
[Luke 17:15]
He looks gay. Sounds like he is starting a new religion.
Bergoglio killed a 2000 + year old institution.
Which is a fine case for an annulment; the more you can prove the "never" part, the better.
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.