Posted on 03/08/2014 8:49:47 AM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
Dear Dr. Moynihan,
In your latest Letter from Rome, commenting on the new appointments to the College of Cardinals, you report rather nonchalantly that "[Archbishop Gerhard Ludwig] Müller is also known for having said that the Church's position on admitting to divorced and remarried Catholics to the sacrament of Communion is not something that can or will be changed. But other German Church leaders, including Cardinal Walter Kasper, have recently gone on record saying the teaching may and will be changed."
Your brief, matter-of-fact report on this controversy reminds me of the tip of an iceberg. It alludes to, but does not reveal the immensity of, a massive, looming threat that bids fair to pierce, penetrate and rend in twain Peter's barque – already tossing perilously amid stormy and icy seas. The shocking magnitude of the doctrinal and pastoral crisis lurking beneath this politely-worded dispute between scholarly German prelates can scarcely be overstated. For what is at stake here is fidelity to a teaching of Jesus Christ that directly and profoundly affects the lives of hundreds of millions of Catholics: the indissolubility of marriage.
The German bishops have devised a pastoral plan to admit divorced and remarried Catholics to Communion, whether or not a Church tribunal has granted a decree of nullity of their first marriage. Cardinal-elect Müller, as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, has not only published a strong article in L'Osservatore Romano reaffirming the perennial Catholic doctrine confirmed by John Paul II in Familiaris Consortio; he has also written officially to the German Bishops' Conference telling them to rectify their heterodox pastoral plan. But the bishops, led by their conference president and by Cardinal Kasper, are openly defying the head of the CDF, and predicting that the existing doctrine and discipline will soon be changed!
Think of the appalling ramifications of this. If German Catholics don't need decrees of nullity, neither will any Catholics anywhere. Won't the world's Catholic marriage tribunals then become basically irrelevant? (Will they eventually just close down?) And won't this reversal of bimillennial Catholic doctrine mean that the Protestants and Orthodox, who have allowed divorce and remarriage for century after century, have been more docile to the Holy Spirit on this issue than the true Church of Christ? Indeed, how credible, now, will be her claim to be the true Church? On what other controverted issues, perhaps, has the Catholic Church been wrong, and the separated brethren right?
And what of Jesus' teaching that those who remarry after divorce commit adultery? Admitting them to Communion without a commitment to continence will lead logically to one of three faith-breaking conclusions: (a) our Lord was mistaken in calling this relationship adulterous - in which case he can scarcely have been the Son of God; (b) adultery is not intrinsically and gravely sinful - in which case the Church's universal and ordinary magisterium has always been wrong; or (c) Communion can be given to some who are living in objectively grave sin - in which case not only has the magisterium also erred monumentally by always teaching the opposite, but the way will also be opened to Communion for fornicators, practicing homosexuals, pederasts, and who knows who else? (And, please, spare us the sophistry that Jesus' teaching was correct "in his own historical and cultural context", but that since about Martin Luther's time that has all changed.)
Let us make no mistake: Satan is right now shaking the Church to her very foundations over this divorce issue. If anything, the confusion is becoming even graver than that over contraception between 1965 and 1968, when Paul VI's seeming vacillation allowed Catholics round the world to anticipate a reversal of perennial Church teaching. If the present Successor of Peter now keeps silent about divorce and remarriage, thereby tacitly telling the Church and the world that the teaching of Jesus Christ will be up for open debate at a forthcoming Synod of Bishops, one fears a terrible price will soon have to be paid.
Fr. Brian W. Harrison, O.S.
St. Louis, Missouri
“If the present Successor of Peter now keeps silent about divorce and remarriage, thereby tacitly telling the Church and the world that the teaching of Jesus Christ will be up for open debate at a forthcoming Synod of Bishops, one fears a terrible price will soon have to be paid.”
Fr. Brian Harrison is one great priest. He’s swimming upstream against these neo-Modernists, but his take-no-prisoners style is certainly refreshing.
there’s no indication in scripture that divorced people can’t remarry, especially the one who didn’t cheat/wasn’t abandoned.
> there’s no indication in scripture that divorced people
> can’t remarry, especially the one who didn’t cheat/wasn’t
> abandoned.
From the words of Jesus Himself ...
Mt 5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
Mt 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
Mr 10:11 And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her.
Mr 10:12 And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.
Lu 16:18 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.
jesus noted exceptions and they are allowed to remarry.
> jesus noted exceptions and they are allowed to remarry.
The only exception I see is fornication, which encompasses basically any kind of sex outside of marriage as defined by God, one man with one woman for life.
This is a very difficult subject, indeed.
In 1st Corinthians chapter 7, Paul indicates that abandonment is also legitimate grounds for divorce, but he reasserts what Jesus said about it in Romans 7:3
Ro 7:3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.
But was Christ speaking of a civil divorce?
> But was Christ speaking of a civil divorce?
Christ was talking about sexual morality in the sight of God.
Split hairs all you want. He said what He said. It’s plain enough for all to understand.
No, I’m not splitting hairs. My point is that when Christ spoke of “divorce” He was speaking of getting one from the religious authorities, not the civil authorities (like the Catholic teaching on annulments). He, in no way meant, “yeah, you can go get a divorce from the Roman authorities and that’s way cool with God.”
In an effort to be more popular, some misguided and wrongheaded Catholics (from the laity, to even some members high in the Church hierarchy, such as Cardinal Walter Kasper), foolishly seek to change teachings first laid down by Jesus Christ, and are aiding and abetting Satan, the father of all lies.
Man does not tell God what is right and wrong (no matter how high he is in the Church hierarchy) -- God tells man what is right and wrong, and anyone who thinks otherwise is simply wrong.
If I'm not mistaken, the writer of this letter to the editor, Fr. Brian W. Harrison, is a convert to Catholicism who is prominently featured at the
and in EWTN's Marcus Grodi's book,
"Journeys Home" -- Collected and Edited By Marcus Grodi
God bless Fr. Harrison for standing up for the Truth in these crazy and perilous times.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
