Skip to main content

It almost sounds like a horse race: Synod is split on issue of divorce

+
JMJ

There is obviously need for prayer if there is only an even split on the topic of communion for those living in an objective state of mortal sin.

P^3

source

Synod is split on issue of divorce

 
 
Cardinals and bishops at the Synod on the Family
(©LaPresse)
(©LAPRESSE) CARDINALS AND BISHOPS AT THE SYNOD ON THE FAMILY

The Vatican spokesman said participation peaked during yesterday afternoon’s session but the Synod is not counting how many are “for” or “against” communion for remarried divorcees. Meanwhile, Cardinal Coccopalmerio presented some ideas on how to make the marriage annulment process simpler

IACOPO SCARAMUZZIVATICAN CITY
The Extraordinary Synod on the Family is tackling the issue of remarried divorcees head on. The Synod Fathers have been dealing with the issue – which had emerged occasionally in previous discussions – since yesterday afternoon as they work their way through the Instrumentum Laboris, the Synod’s working document. “Participation peaked” during this very “passionate” debate, with the Synod split down the middle, between those in favour of allowing remarried divorcees to take communion in certain cases and others against. Both sides, however, are faithful to Jesus’ teaching on mercy and support the indissolubility of marriage. It is not yet time to take official counts, we don’t count who is “for” and who “against” at the Synod, Vatican spokesman, Fr. Federico Lombardi said.


Two main lines of argument emerged during the daily press briefing. One “insists on what the Gospel says about marriage: if a first marriage is valid, a remarried divorcee cannot be admitted to the sacraments, as there needs to be coherence between doctrine and faithfulness to the word of the Lord. The other line of reasoning recalls that “Jesus sees human  experiences with a merciful eye” and “takes into account” the “differences” in each “specific case”, which would make access to the Eucharist possible in some cases. Nevertheless, “even those who are most concerned about the preservation of the doctrine, are far from shut off to the suffering of people facing difficult situations.” Likewise, those who are open to allowing access to communion “do not in any way deny the indissolubility of marriage.”

This open attitude is reflected in the summaries of the debates that took place yesterday afternoon and this morning. The Holy See published these today, as usual without specifying which Synod Father presented which issue. During yesterday’s debate “a strong emphasis was placed on the importance of respecting remarried divorcees because they often find themselves in uncomfortable situations and subjected to social injustice; they suffer in silence and in many cases, attempt to gradually go back to becoming full participants in Church life. So pastoral care must not be repressive but full of mercy.” During yesterday evening’s open debate, the Synod’s participants said “it is important to carefully avoid making any moral judgment and speaking of a ‘permanent state of sin’.” Instead, an effort should be made to understand that not being admitted to the sacrament of the Eucharist does not completely rule out the possibility of Christ’s grace but is rather linked to the objective reality of a previous indissoluble sacramental bond. Hence, emphasis has often been given to the  importance of spiritual communion. However, it should also be underlined that these proposals are not problem-free. There is no ‘easy’ solution to this issue.” Today “the reflections on the issue of access to the Eucharist for remarried divorcees continued.” The Synod’s participants stressed once again that marriage is indissoluble, stating that “each case needs to be considered individually.” They also reminded remarried divorcees that “just because they do not have access to the Eucharist does not in any way mean that they are not members of the Church community.”

Fr. Lombardi said it is not possible at the moment to speak of a majority or minority vote, “we don’t count who is “for” and “against” during the Synod” and “taking counts based on participants’ speeches is absolutely out of the question” because the Church is on a knowledge-sharing journey and “everyone is listening with interest and respect.” The debates that have taken place between yesterday and today have been “great, very intense and passionate.” Synod Fathers have not only been addressing the presidents but also the Synod Fathers directly, said Fr. Rosica, the English-language spokesman for the Synod.

During the news briefing, the President of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, explained that there are three possibilities being discussed by the commission Francis set up in August – and headed by Mgr. Pio Vito Pinto – “with the purpose of simplifying and speeding up marriage annulment procedures”. These are: to eliminate the current requirement for two judiciaries to approve the annulment, the need for a “collegial judge” and finally, the “administrative procedure”, in other words the annulment approved directly by a local bishop in cases where a marriage is definitely null, the bishop knows the two individuals concerned, personally, and knows them to be trustworthy. But this does not mean the Catholic Church plans on introducing divorce as an option. During the discussions, there was an emphasis on the importance of “respecting and not discriminating against gay people”. Cardinal Coccopalmerio stressed that the Church does not accept same-sex marriage or the blessing of such unions, but it respects them. Regarding remarried divorcees, Coccopalmerio said “we must adopt the Pope’s line of thinking: to protect the doctrine but to look at each person’s situation, their needs and suffering individually” and “offer solutions to real people who are faced with serious situations that require an urgent response.”


Cardinal André Vingt-Trois opened this morning’s session by reiterating the Catholic Church’s doctrine on contraception in a secularized world. Among the many themes addressed during today’s discussions, were: paternal responsibility, “the seriousness of a crime like abortion”, violence in the family, polygamy, improved preparation for marriage, pastoral care for children and the significant way in which the family has evolved since the last Synod held in 1980, on the theme “The Christian Family”.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is it sinful to attend the Novus Ordo (New Mass) - Is it Sinful to Not Attend the Novus Ordo on Sunday?

+ JMJ A non-SSPX Catholic is upset over the SSPX statements on not attending the Novus Ordo Missae. Ladies and gentlemen, what the SSPX, or at least its website editor, is advocating is a mortal sin against the Third Commandment.  Unless the priest deviates from the language of the Sacramentary, the consecration, and thus the rest of Mass is to be considered valid.  No one may elect not to attend Mass simply because abuses are occurring therein.  Might I suggest that such absenteeism is its own abuse?  The Third Commandment binds under mortal sin.  Father So-And-So from the SSPX has no authority whatsoever to excuse attendance at Mass, be that Mass ever so unpalatable. Source:Restore DC Catholicism Well, this is interesting. First why does the SSPX issue this statement? Because it is sinful to put your faith in danger by attending a protestant service.  It is likewise dangerous to put your faith in danger by attending a protestantized mass (ie the Novus Ordo Missae

Regarding Post: Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer no longer ... now Bishop Joseph Pfeiffer (Can't see this being a problem...)

 + JMJ   I've been watching the popularity of the post about Fr. Pfeiffer's attempted episcopal consecration and its continued top listing on the 'popular posts' list at the bottom of posts.  After some thought, I decided that I don't want to be responsible for anyone joining Fr. Pfeiffer's 'group', however unlikely that would be at this time. So I have reverted the article to the draft state. If anyone wants it reinstated, I would ask that they comment on this post with a rationale for reinstatement. P^3

Fr. Burfitt on Fr. Pfeiffer's Attempted Consecration

 + JMJ   Amidst the shadows cast by the publication of Traditionis Custodes, I am working on a map of the 'resistance' splinters to put their reaction in contrast with that of the SSPX.  In the midst of this, I just came across Fr. Burfitt letter on the attempted consecration. Breaking it down (see below)  items 2 and 3 are key.  Just as the consecrating bishop is 'doubtful', even if he hadn't muffed the first attempt, Fr. Pfeiffer remain doubtful and therefore this impacts those men is attempts to 'ordain'. There were rumours that Fr. Pfeiffer was seeking episcopal consecration for years as he cast about for various bishops (also doubtful) to help him achieve this goal. I wonder how he convinced the 'doubtful' bishop to provide (twice) the doubtful consecration. What a mess!  This creates a danger to the souls of his followers and wonder where it will end. Will he go full sede and have himself 'elected' pontiff as others have done before him

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3

War: Civil Society

 + JMJ  Society seems to be ripping itself apart, both morally and socially.  Morally, the world continues its steady decline.  Israel vs Hamas The confusion over the morality of the Israel vs Hamas War is one example. It is a war and, this time, in response to the October 7th attack.  I've noticed two perspectives emerge from the two combatants.  For the Israeli, it is that they are the only Nation that is not allowed to win a war.  Public opinion is always at play in wars, but in the case of Israel against anyone in the area, public opinion quickly becomes a factor.  For Hamas and its supporters it is embodied in the phrase:  From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be Free.  This is the goal of Hamas, the elimination of the Jewish state of Israel according to its 2017 Charter (link) .  I understand that their original charter was more explicit.  Tied to this is that Hamas obviously, prioritizes its goal over the Gazans that they govern.  For this I recommend a read of Son of H