Divoced Catholics...

[Oik]

[quote]5-October-2005 -- Catholic News Agency 

BISHOPS CALL FOR INCREASED RESPECT FOR SACREDNESS OF EUCHARIST: RECEPTION IN THE MOUTH, FOCUS ON PREPARING WITH CONFESSION

VATICAN CITY, October 5 (CNA) - As bishops today, met for the Forth General Congregation of the 11th Synod of Bishops, the issue of the sacredness of the Eucharist and how the faithful can better recognize it, took center stage for a time. Among the proposals were universal reception in the mouth and a greater focus on confession to help prepare faithful to receive.

Archbishop Jan Pawel Lenga M.I.C., from Karaganda, Kazakhstan, who was persecuted for his faith during the years of soviet communism, recalled the days when the Eucharist was forced to be celebrated in secret by the faithful. He called to mind its sacredness and discussed ways to highlight this fact.

He said that, "Among the liturgical innovations produced in the Western world, two in particular tend to cloud the visible aspect of the Eucharist, especially as regards its centrality and sacredness: the removal of the tabernacle from the center and the distribution of communion in the hand."

"Communion in the hand", he said, "is spreading and even prevailing as being easier, as a kind of fashion. ... Therefore, I humbly propose the following practical propositions: that the Holy See issue a universal regulation establishing the official way of receiving communion as being in the mouth and kneeling; with communion in the hand to be reserved for the clergy alone."

He likewise asked that "bishops in places where communion in the hand has been introduced work with pastoral prudence to bring the faithful slowly back to the official rite of communion, valid for all local Churches."

In this same vien, Bishop Lorenzo Voltolini Esti, Auxilary of Portoviejo, Ecuador, suggested that, "Refraining from the celebration of Mass on Friday in Lent would help the faithful to feel greater hunger for the Eucharistic food, and it would give priests the chance to put themselves at the disposal of the faithful for the Sacrament of Penance, thus establishing a relationship of equal dignity and necessity between the two Sacraments."

"I propose", he continued, that "it be suggested to dioceses or National Episcopal Conferences, or at least allowed to those that request it, that they establish a day of Eucharistic fasting, preferably during Lent and perhaps on Fridays."

"This should not be experienced as a day of Eucharistic absence", he clarified, "but as a period of preparation for and expectation of the Eucharist. It should not be considered as an interruption of the practice of celebrating the Eucharist each day, but as a way to give worth to the Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ, equally celebrated in Penance and in the Eucharist in the totality and complementarity of the two Sacraments."

Bishop Rimantas Norvila of Vilkaviskis, Lithuania agreed. "Without the will or the possibility of sacramental reconciliation," he said, "it becomes impossible for Catholics to experience the most profound union with Jesus Christ and the Church, favored by the Eucharist. Thus Christians reach a point where they cannot appreciate the value of the Eucharist as a source of grace and, little by little, they lose their bonds with the parish community and their closeness to the whole Church."

"At the same time," he pointed out, "without the practice of reconciliation, subjectivism tends to increase, and it becomes more difficult to evaluate personal behavior and religiosity."

Broadening reception guidelines

Others however, sought to focus the Eucharistic conversation in a different direction.

[b]Archbishop John Atcherley Dew of Wellington, New Zealand announced a formal request to offer communion to divorced Catholics who have not been reconciled with the Church, and also to non-Catholic spouses--something the Church's teaching magisterium has long forbid.

"Our Church", he said, "would be enriched if we were able to invite dedicated Catholics, currently excluded from the Eucharist, to return to the Lord's table. There are those whose first marriages ended in sadness; they have never abandoned the Church, but are currently excluded from the Eucharist."[/b]

The Archbishop also mentioned Catholics who are married to "people baptized in other Christian faiths."

"We acknowledge them to be baptized in Christ in the sacrament of marriage," he said, "but not in the reception of the Eucharist. This Synod must be pastoral in approach; we must look for ways to include those who are hungering for the Bread of Life. The scandal of those hungering for Eucharistic food needs to be addressed, just as the scandal of physical hunger needs to be addressed."
[/quote]

[url="http://www.ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=61147"]EWTN link[/url]


[b]Archbishop John Atcherley Dew of Wellington, New Zealand announced a formal request to offer communion to divorced Catholics who have not been reconciled with the Church, and also to non-Catholic spouses--something the Church's teaching magisterium has long forbid.[/b]


Um...excuse me...what?!?

Okay...so divorce is not a mortal sin?

Obviously to separate from your spouse for a legitimate reason doesn't fall under this category!

[Oik]

[quote][i]Divorce[/i]

[b]2382 [/b]
The Lord Jesus insisted on the original intention of the Creator who willed that marriage be indissoluble.174 He abrogates the accommodations that had slipped into the old Law.175
Between the baptized, "a ratified and consummated marriage cannot be dissolved by any human power or for any reason other than death."176


[b]2383[/b]
The separation of spouses while maintaining the marriage bond can be legitimate in certain cases provided for by canon law.177

If civil divorce remains the only possible way of ensuring certain legal rights, the care of the children, or the protection of inheritance, it can be tolerated and does not constitute a moral offense.


[b]2384 [/b]
Divorce is a grave offense against the natural law. It claims to break the contract, to which the spouses freely consented, to live with each other till death. Divorce does injury to the covenant of salvation, of which sacramental marriage is the sign. Contracting a new union, even if it is recognized by civil law, adds to the gravity of the rupture: the remarried spouse is then in a situation of public and permanent adultery:


If a husband, separated from his wife, approaches another woman, he is an adulterer because he makes that woman commit adultery; and the woman who lives with him is an adulteress, because she has drawn another's husband to herself.178

[b]2385 [/b]
Divorce is immoral also because it introduces disorder into the family and into society. This disorder brings grave harm to the deserted spouse, to children traumatized by the separation of their parents and often torn between them, and because of its contagious effect which makes it truly a plague on society.


[b]2386 [/b]
It can happen that one of the spouses is the innocent victim of a divorce decreed by civil law; this spouse therefore has not contravened the moral law. There is a considerable difference between a spouse who has sincerely tried to be faithful to the sacrament of marriage and is unjustly abandoned, and one who through his own grave fault destroys a canonically valid marriage.179
[/quote]

Here's what the Catechism says.

[Oik]

[quote][b]DIVORCE[/b]: The claim that the indissoluble marriage bond validly entered into between a man and a woman is broken. A civil dissolution of the marriage contract (divorce) does not free persons from a valid marriage before God; remarriage would not be morally licit (2382; cf. 1650).[/quote]

As listed in the Glossary in the CCC.

Edited October 6, 2005 by Oik

[Dreamweaver]

So, is the archbishop talking about allowing divorced (but chaste) people to receive communion? I thought that was already allowed. Its when the divorced person starts looking for a boyfriend or girlfriend that things get tricky.

Allowing a non-Catholic to receive communion? Thats just odd. If a non-Catholic understands what the Eucharist really is, wouldn't they want to join the Church fully in order to participate in all the sacraments? What if the non-Catholic were in mortal sin? It seems to me it smacks of, "being lonely in the pew during communion". Couldn't the non-Catholic go up to the priest and get a blessing like many young children do?

[dspen2005]

Communion for non-Catholic spouses is ridiculous. It was probably suggested so that talk of intercommunion among Prots and Catholics can have a viable reality.

[hierochloe]

I never accepted communion while I was divorced. It wasn't until after my annulment went through and I had been to confession. As someone else stated, I remember being told I could still receive communion as teh divorce and anullment were in progress.

When I was in high school, my Lutheran friend's mother sometime took communion. I never did think that was supposed to be allowed. Dunno if the priest even knew that she wasn't Catholic.

[toledo_jesus]

[quote name='hierochloe' date='Oct 6 2005, 03:09 PM']
When I was in high school, my Lutheran friend's mother sometime took communion. I never did think that was supposed to be allowed. Dunno if the priest even knew that she wasn't Catholic.
[right][snapback]748544[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Lutheran, Catholic, it's all the same! Let's go sing kumbayah.

[hierochloe]

I need to ask my mother if that's exactly right since she's the one who told me about it. I may be remembering it wrong. Yeah I'm old, mmkay?

[zunshynn]

[quote name='toledo_jesus' date='Oct 6 2005, 02:25 PM']Lutheran, Catholic, it's all the same!  Let's go sing kumbayah.
[right][snapback]748653[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Is that a joke?

[Cre8d4Youth]

[quote name='Dreamweaver' date='Oct 6 2005, 02:02 PM']If a non-Catholic understands what the Eucharist really is, wouldn't they want to join the Church fully in order to participate in all the sacraments? [right][snapback]748524[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I'd get a kick out of seeing any Catholic participating in [b]"all"[/b] the sacraments. Unless of course you are advocating married priests and I'm pretty sure you're not. A couple can live together and participate in all aspects of married life without being married. It is the same in the Church for certain individuals. But being married is so much more than a piece of paper and a pronouncement of being man and wife. It can't be accurately described to someone who has not experienced marraige, but I can say it is wholly different from just "living together." It is the same with the church as well (in my eyes)


[quote name='Dreamweaver' date='Oct 6 2005, 02:02 PM'] What if the non-Catholic were in mortal sin? [right][snapback]748524[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Just a hunch, but I'd assume it'd be the same as when a Catholic is in motal sin. That's between the person and God. The consequences rest upon their head and are none of my concern.

[quote name='Dreamweaver' date='Oct 6 2005, 02:02 PM'] It seems to me it smacks of, "being lonely in the pew during communion". [right][snapback]748524[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Don't speak from my shoes unless you've worn them and changed the Oder-eaters!

Edited October 7, 2005 by Cre8d4Youth

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='hierochloe' date='Oct 6 2005, 03:09 PM']I never accepted communion while I was divorced. It wasn't until after my annulment went through and I had been to confession. As someone else stated, I remember being told I could still receive communion as teh divorce and anullment were in progress.

When I was in high school, my Lutheran friend's mother sometime took communion. I never did think that was supposed to be allowed. Dunno if the priest even knew that she wasn't Catholic.
[right][snapback]748544[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

As long as you do not remarry after divorce you can recieve Holy Communion.