[Canticle_of_Deborah]

you can well imagine how much more severe it was for separated and getting divorced women in 1963!

Prove it. If you are going to make such inferences produce documents instead of unsubstantiated anecdotes.

The 1997 clause which you claim is unfairly restrictive is aimed at those Catholics whose marriages ended due to a mortal sin. Any Catholic in a state of mortal sin should not receive Communion without first making the Sacrament of Confession, divorced or not.

[sinkspur]

The 1997 clause which you claim is unfairly restrictive is aimed at those Catholics whose marriages ended due to a mortal sin.

The clause does not say that. Indeed, it leaves the impression that divorcees may only receive the Eucharist "in certain circumstances."

The pastoral insensitivity in this clause is astounding, and would certainly not encourage a divorced, fallen-away Catholic to approach the Church, again.

[rogator]

"The 1997 clause which you claim is unfairly restrictive is aimed at those Catholics whose marriages ended due to a mortal sin. "

Even if taken out of context, this clause is inaccurate, insensitive, and does not represent Catholic belief or teaching. It does not contribute to the salvation of souls.
Bruskiewicz screwed up badly on this one. It should be called to his attention by a Nebraska freeper.
For whatever reasons, as I clearly recall from the '50s, Catholics and other folks often treated the divorced and their families like dirt. I totally believe what has been said about this treatment by the folks on this thread.
I have run into too many officious clergy to doubt any of this.