Kathy I only just noticed your conribution. I was very moved by your "humiliating experience". This extremely painful experience was obviously a great gift of grace from God for the learning of a deeper Christian wisdom and "ethics" (and of course the gift of a compatible, loving partner - though that may have been a secondary purpose in God's mind!) that God granted you. Well done that you responded and let go of your pride (even if "forced to" as it were) .
There is apparently a row in progress between Archbishop Mueller (who recently reminded the Church of the teaching on this matter and particularly one German Archdiocese which had permitted a 'conscience clause' on the use of the sacraments by those who have divorced and remarried upon its own authority) and Cardinal Marx who apparently objects to Ab. Mueller reminding that archdiocese of (current?) Church teaching. The intervention by Cardinal Marx apparently implies that Abp. Mueller is anticipating the decisions of the Extraordinary Synod on the Family which might change the situation. Read the links on: http://marymagdalen.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/public-spat-and-papal-correction.html
My understanding for an annulment is the conclusion by the priest/bishop after examining the 'marriage' they conclude with certainty that the marriage was never blessed by God for some major fraudulent reasons between the spouses. Obviously more technical then that, but that in a nut shell.
That clarifies some things we simply speculated upon before: (1) AB Mueller "consulted" with Pope Francis before publishing his positional statement in LR late last month. (2) AB Mueller had actually written this article in June 2013 (before Pope Francis's in flight interview back from latin America). (3) There is tension between the Papal Eight (certainly the German "prop") and the CDF over this issue. Of course, at the moment, AB Mueller is quite right to enforce current practice. However it is now clear that the Pope means change (despite the fact he allowed AB Mueller to re-publish) and he is not going to let AB Mueller (ie the Vatican Apparatchek) simply unilaterally prevail in the long term. This matter will be debated come late 2014 and the present position/practice is by no means to be considered set in stone. Sparks will fly with Pope Francis as referree, himself biased towards the valid pastoral plight of many otherwise faithful "remarried" Catholics.
Interesting observations but I think that you will find that the words 'Thou shalt not commit adultery' actually ARE literally set in stone.
Just always remember: No matter what ANYONE says is ok, we NEVER have to sin. If in doubt, don't. Take the narrow gate and think of eternity for yourself. Never presume on God's mercy if you willfully hear what you want to hear. Sin ALWAYS seems black and white until it becomes something we ourselves get caught up in. Then the devil steps in to muddle the lines. Stay true to Jesus and DON"T sin. That's the test......
Agreed. Our eternal salvation is a pearl of great price. satan wants us to exchange it for the baubles and trinkets of this life! Our Blessed Lord established sacramental marriage and thus elevated it above natural marriage. So we Catholics are given a Divine assistance to honour our vows. To whom much has been given much will be expected.
Steve, by "present position/practice" I refer to the Pope's pastoral concern for the plight of "remarried" Catholics and their inability to receive Communion. He clearly accepts that there are significant numbers of non-existent previous "marriages" out there that cannot be officially recognised as such due to purely technical difficulties - yet under present discipline they are denied Communion for life (or by renouncing their current stable marriage). While AB Mueller believes denial of Communion to such person's is set in stone...clearly the Pope and at least one of his P8 Cardinals (most likely all) presently do not. That is one major reason why Pope Francis called the Synod of 2014.
There is confusion over the term marriage in the secular world. There are registry weddings which I call paper weddings because the couple sign their names and the state recognises this as a marriage. But God is not mentioned and in reality the piece of paper can be torn up and the couple divorce. Then at the next level are Protestant church marriages that do include God but are merely blessings. Divorce is possible since Protestants do not believe marriage is sacrament. Thus far we merely have natural marriage in the natural order. Marriage as instituted by Christ is sacramental. Thus, the sacramental exchange between the spouses is a covenantal bond blessed by God in a permanent union so that the two become one in the sight of God - His grace manifest and ministered by the Church made freely available a gift of Divine love. Thus, the marital bond is elevated to the supernatural level beyond the mere natural order. Christ is present really and truely in a sacramental way in such marriages, the hidden guest so in Catholic sacramental marriage the two become one in Christ. The spouses administer the sacrament to each other in the marital vows. When a marriage has been elevated to the supernatural level then it is a permanent and unbreakable bond. When the Church grants an annulment after due process then it is making a judgement that there was no sacramental exchange due to some impairment such as duress etc in other words no valid exchange of vows took place and the marriage was not valid initially.
I see that we share some assumptions here: 1. That the Pope would not have called the Synod if he wanted to retain the 'status quo'. I think that this is perfectly clear because it has excited such expectations from the 'modernisers' in the Church that they would be (and would show) extreme displeasure if the 'status quo' were to be retained. The Pope isn't a fool - and has been fairly clear that he wants change in this area of Church (teaching?/discipline?). 2. I do not know the 'leanings' of the appointees but bow to your belief that they are 'comfortable' (at least) with the idea of change. Though we would disagree on whether or not this is a good thing - shouldn't all viewpoints be heard on such a matter? What does intrigue me is the kind of changes that are possible without incurring the extreme displeasure of the 'orthodox' Catholics. (I don't expect you to agree with my labels but no doubt you will create your own - 'realists' and 'fuddy-duddys' perhaps - it doesn't matter). The Synod members' choices appear to me to be fairly limited (and I am certainly open to correction) but would seem to be/include: 1. To allow divorced and 'remarried' Catholics to apply their own conscience in the matter of the Sacraments. This has been unofficially (and schismatically?) applied already in one German Archdiocese - and may have been intended as a proposed solution to the Synod members). This would inevitably open up the 'conscience clause' to be applied to any other conceivable 'situation' (homosexual partnerships, abortion etc.) and can be expected therefore to be that favoured by the most 'modernist' minds in the Synod. 2. The Greek Orthodox Church (though not the much larger Russian Orthodox) recently changed their practice to allow artificial contraception for grave reasons if a priest permits it. A similar dispensation might be introduced in the Church to allow the Sacraments to a divorced and remarried person after counsel from a priest who agrees to such a 'dispensation' after hearing all the circumstances (would depend very much on which priest one visited). 3. To broaden the grounds for annulment (e.g. to abusive relationships, mental or physical incapacity of one partner to live out a married life arising after marriage, etc. etc. - in which case a change in the marriage vows might be appropriate - 'for better or worse'?) 4. To go for the Eastern Orthodox option of accepting that divorce is evidence of the 'death' of a marriage and accepting this is the case on a second occasion but not on a third (not sure why - someone could be very unlucky?). What is clear to me is that, whatever the outcome, a significant number in the Church can probably be expected to be deeply unhappy. If the decision is perceived to change the teaching on marriage handed down since the Apostles (on one side) or to be insufficiently 'generous' on the other then there will be conflict. If changes come (and I expect them to) and this then encourages - as it inevitably would - the demand for more innovations by the 'progressives', especially in areas of sexual morality, then catastrophe is very close.
The Archdiocese of Frieburg in Germany has declined to heed the instruction of Abp. Muller, head of the CDF, to follow Church teaching in the matter of the divorced/remarried and the Sacraments. The archdiocese can be regarded as being in schism. Their spokesman quotes the Pope's talk with South American religious in which he said that they should not worry too much about CDF instructions as the basis of their refusal. I believe that other north European dioceses will follow Frieburg's 'lead'. This way lies chaos. The German Church is the richest in the world because everyone who call themselves 'Catholic' are subject to special Church Tax deductions that are then passed to the Church. In order not to be subject to the tax one has to actually decide that one is not a Catholic and issue instructions accordingly. Few do apparently. Several German dioceses are major shareholders in Germany's major 'porn' producer, Weltbild, and this situation has gone on for decades. http://protectthepope.com/?p=9165 http://eponymousflower.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/weltbild-scandal-bishops-respond.html
Good points. As per my prev exposition of the Ratzinger Hyotheses I would see disscusion and possible change only within the confines of the open points that Card Ratzinger enumerated for further discusssion back in 1998. If that is so then the only possible grounds for changing current Communion practice wrt divorced/"remarried" would be more limited than what you suggest above: WRT your Ground1: "Conscience" (epikeia) Yes this is a real possibility. But note that Card Ratzinger required objective grounds for individuals making this decision in the face of an inconclusive Marriage Tribunal process. It may not be a purely subjective case of "my heart tells me its alright to go to Communion.": "nemo iudex in propria causa (no one is judge in his own case), marital cases must be resolved in the external forum. If divorced and remarried members of the faithful believe that their prior marriage was invalid, they are thereby obligated to appeal to the competent marriage tribunal so that the question will be examined objectively and under all available juridical possibilities... Admittedly, it cannot be excluded that mistakes occur in marriage cases...Here it seems that the application of epikeia in the internal forum is not automatically excluded from the outset...This question, however, demands further study and clarification. Admittedly, the conditions for asserting an exception would need to be clarified very precisely, in order to avoid arbitrariness and to safeguard the public character of marriage, removing it from subjective decisions." Ground2&4: Greek Orthodox Approaches Card Ratz does not see a lot of merit in this approach as he believes many GO Churches have gone too far here and seem to effectively deny the indisollubility of Christian Marriage: "On doctrinal grounds, the praxis of the Eastern Churches separated from Rome cannot be taken up by the Catholic Church, as it is the result of a complex historical process, an increasingly liberal — and thus more and more removed from the words of the Lord — interpretation of several obscure patristic texts which were significantly influenced by civil law. Furthermore, the claim is incorrect that the Church simply tolerated such a praxis. Admittedly, the Council of Trent did not pronounce any explicit condemnation. The medieval canonists, however, consistently spoke of the praxis as improper." Ground3: Broadened Grounds for Annulment. Yes Card Ratz does see room for movement here but prob not the way you suggest. He is suggesting that mere Baptism is not itself sufficient to effect a sacramental marriage between two Catholics. He suggests that one must personally believe as well. If it can be shown the person never believed in God - then the marriage may not be sacramental and hence able to be dissolved. "“those who were married in the Church for the sake of tradition ... when I was Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, I invited various Bishops’ Conferences and experts to study this problem: a sacrament celebrated without faith. Whether, in fact, a moment of invalidity could be discovered here because the Sacrament was found to be lacking a fundamental dimension, I do not dare to say. I personally thought so, but from the discussions we had I realized that it is a highly complex problem and ought to be studied further. But given these people’s painful plight, it must be studied further” Re if these go through more "innovations" will be demanded... Well of course they will, those of this world intrinsically cannot see the hidden root from whence these changes will come, so they think the Cardinals will let qnything go if they bay loudly enough. I don't think so. If the above changes come about it will be because they are shoots of a sound evolution of a unified, traditional seedbed that already exists but is below the ground. Such shoots will not be "innovations" but further clarifying in the light of new conditions/pastoral needs. As has been the case with Church discipline wrt slavery and Annulments - things not directly addressed in NT times.
The German Church has announced that it intends to 'go it alone' on this matter and are preparing to offer the Sacraments to divorce and 're-married' from March next year. The Church will be in schism from that point. This could be the fulfillment of part of the Akita warning about conflict between members of the hierarchy. It will also be, in my view, the first of many independent changes to teaching by some Bishop's conferences who have no authority to do so. Rueter's Report: Fuerst was the most explicit of several German bishops to rebuff Archbishop Gerhard Mueller, head of the Vatican doctrinal office, who last month ruled out any change after Freiburg archdiocese in Germany unveiled its own reform proposals. "We want to approve new guidelines at our plenary meeting in March," Fuerst told the Central Committee of German Catholics, an influential group of lay faithful, on Saturday in Bonn. Catholics who divorce and remarry in a civil ceremony are barred from receiving communion under Vatican doctrine that applies to the worldwide Church. Many of them see this as a sign of rejection and drift away from the faith. Fuerst said this complaint was one of the most frequent that German bishops have heard since they launched a broad drive to consult the faithful following a shocking wave of revelations in 2010 about sexual abuse of minors by priests. "Expectations (of reform) are great, and impatience and anger are greater still," he said, adding that a working group of bishops has been debating the issue since then.
I am a divorced Catholic who has not received an annulment so quite frankly it was a relief to see the Pope's message on remarriage. Because I have often wondered what is left for us poor divorced catholics whose exes have moved on and remarried , what is left for spouse left behind to do??? Sit in a corner till the second coming ??? It leaves me little choice. An annulment is not that easy to acquire .... you have to prove that your marriage was invalid.
Yes I have tried for many years... it is just a daunting process... the questionnaire alone is enough to discourage anyone and you have to write in great detail the pain of things you rather forget in order to prove that ones marriage was invalid.
"Catholics who divorce and remarry in a civil ceremony are barred from receiving communion under Vatican doctrine that applies to the worldwide Church. Many of them see this as a sign of rejection and drift away from the faith." very true!! So i have not remarried in order that I may receive Communion worthily.
That is a tough one Carib for you. All I can think of is wow as to your devotion and desire for the eurcharist trumps the desires and human wants and needs of this world. It is very inspiring even though it must be extremely hard for you!! I will pray for your annulment process that what God wills to be done will be done for you!
Thank You Andy I really appreciate that I have been divorced 10 years now and I am fairly young, lol, so I have asked this question many times from my church leaders here and they can never give me a straight answer other than pray and stay close to God. Yes and my desire for the Eucharist has stopped me from remarrying because I do not want to do the wrong thing in the eyes of the Church. If the Pope gives a Universal pardon on this as an act of mercy many of us divorced Catholics will appreciate this because we are the spouses who are left behind.
