“Murder, adultery, and any other sins, no matter how serious, are forgiven by Jesus, especially through the Sacrament of Reconciliation, and the forgiven sinner receives communion. The issue in the matter of divorce and remarriage is one’s conscious decision (for whatever reason) to persist in a continuing situation of disconnection from the command of Jesus.”
What doesn’t seem Christian: The Church will offer absolution and Holy Communion if the remarried person divorces their current, innocent spouse.
Many sins are forgiven that can’t be rectified. Seems like some re-marriages should persist, at least out of love for the spouse, and that if remorse is evident, forgiveness should occur. Does it seem like the Church is being a bit Pharisee-like? Thoughts?
“Many sins are forgiven that can’t be rectified. Seems like some re-marriages should persist, at least out of love for the spouse, and that if remorse is evident, forgiveness should occur. Does it seem like the Church is being a bit Pharisee-like? Thoughts?”
No, it does not.
The sin here is the act of remarrying after a civil divorce in a valid marriage. The sin is because one who validly married may not marry another while his [first] spouse still lives. The second marriage is not marriage, but rather, adultery. This is what Jesus says.
So, the man who is thusly “married” goes to Confession, tells the priest, “Father forgive me, for I have sinned. I am married civilly to someone but my first wife is still living.”
And the priest endeavors to act precisely as Jesus acted, “Your sins are forgiven, go and sin no more.”
And the man goes home to his second wife and they continue on in a married way, which is sin, which is continued adultery. With not even the slightest attempt to turn away from sin, ignoring entirely the command of Jesus to, “go and sin no more.”
The man remains in an objective state of committing grave evil, the matter of mortal sin. Publicly.
“The Church will offer absolution and Holy Communion if the remarried person divorces their current, innocent spouse.”
The Church teaches that where separation in the second marriage would lead to other bad consequences - harm to children from the second marriage, or lack of support for the second wife - the couple, may in some circumstances, continue to live together, continue to form a household, but must live continently, that is, as brother and sister, not as husband and wife. Under these circumstances, the couple may then receive the Blessed Sacrament.
This is a hardship for the couple, a burden. But it fulfills what Jesus says, “Go and sin no more.”
If the couple are unwilling to try this, then at least objectively, it doesn't appear that they have repented of the sin of remarrying after divorce in a valid marriage.
But let's get down to brass tacks. Most folks who are remarried when they still have a valid first marriage hanging out are not repentant of their sin. They don't view it as a sin. Many who are remarried will say that their second marriage is actually a good thing, not a sinful thing, that it is not a sin, that they have not entered into an adulterous relationship.
If such a person goes to the priest to confess, what, then, does he confess? “Father forgive me, for I have sinned. I am remarried, but it's really a good thing, not a sin at all, so please give me absolution so I can go to Communion.”
That's incoherent. These folks are not saying, “Please forgive me and look the other way at my continuing sin.”
Their real view of things seems to be more on the order of: “Recite your mumbo-jumbo prayer of absolution over me so that I can go back to Communion. I'm not doing anything wrong in the first place.”
What, then, is there to forgive? No sin is even acknowledged..
sitetest
What sitetest said. He said exactly what I would have said, but much more clearly than I would have said it.
Sitetest, what do you think of Cardinal Collins’ interview as a whole?
You can go to Mass and not take Communion, do you know that at one time people were so in tune with the truth of the Eucharist that they would not take Communion because they did not feel worthy of it? The Church had to insist that you had to take it at least at Christmas and Easter.
Communion is not a communal thing, believe it or not. Not in the true sense of "we the people". For a Catholic you are literally entering into a union that is so intensely intimate, that if you think about it to much, you'd not be able to do it.