Posted on 07/28/2016 10:15:50 AM PDT by ebb tide
Announcement highlights tensions between Francis and Polish hierarchy after closed door meeting last night
A senior bishop has said that the Church in Poland will refuse communion to divorced and remarried Catholics despite the landmark family document from Pope Francis which opened up the possibility.
Archbishop Stanislaw Gadecki, the President of the Polish Bishops’ Conference, said that giving communion could not be allowed following a period of pastoral discernment - something which Francis has advocated - adding that if remarried divorcees had a valid first marriage they cannot receive the eucharist.
His remarks came just hours after the Pope’s arrival in Krakow for a global gathering of young Catholics and highlighted the tensions between Francis and Poland’s hierarchy. “This [communion for divorced and remarried] cannot be solved in a confessional box in two minutes or even a couple of years,” the archbishop told journalists at a briefing last night. “This is a path for the priests and the laity to walk together knowing that if a marriage has been validly concluded there is no ground to administering communion to remarried divorcees.”
The archbishop cited John Paul II’s document on the family - where communion for divorced and remarried was effectively ruled out - and said that Francis’ text, issued following two synod gatherings, had taken into account the Polish hierarchy’s recommendations. These, he added, “retain the truth of the gospel that we cannot deliberately overstep Christ’s precept against divorce.”
Archbishop Gadecki also pointed to Francis’ desire for local churches to have a say: “The Holy Father says the general laws are very hard to enforce in each country - the Pope speaks about decentralisation, that is the conferences in individual countries might interpret papal encyclicals looking at their own religious and cultural situations,” Archbishop Gadecki said in a briefing to journalists last night.
On the day of his arrival the Pope had a closed-doors meeting with the bishops where no speeches were made - in the past Francis has used such gatherings in Mexico and the United States to upbraid national hierarchies. But given that the legacy of his polish predecessor John Paul II looms large during his visit the Pope sought to avoid any public clashes.
Self-correction: and this is not “excommunication” of the twice-married couple. It’s just the ordinary, perennial rule: don’t receive Communion while you’re in an ongoing adulterous union, which is a state of serious sin.
Interesting, yes, but that’s not dirty, nor little, nor a secret.
The presence or absence of children has no bearing on whether or not a marriage is null. It has everything to do with whether or not the 2 spouses both entered into a valid marriage at the time of their wedding. It is only an issue if one (or both) of them refused to have children, since agreeing to being open to have children is one of the requirements of a valid marriage.
This is one of many common misconceptions about annulment, along with the mistaken idea that any children of the marriage would be made illegitimate (also not true). I would imagine that many Catholics believe that there is no point in pursuing annulment if they have children. Hopefully with all of the discussions going on, more people will be inspired to seek annulment when appropriate. This would be a valid, Catholic way of bringing these people back into communion with the Church.
Love,
O2
Hungary is even better.
Whoever told her that is absolutely incorrect. She should make an appointment to speak with her priest or deacon or someone who handles annulment at the archdiocese. There are also usually seminars set up once or twice a year in most areas. My recommendation would be to find a procurator to work directly with her. This may be a deacon in the parish or a lay person.
There is no guarantee that an annulment is granted, but if the only reason she has not pursued it was because of the existence of children, then she was misinformed and should speak with someone directly involved in the process.
An internet search can give lots of information about potential reasons why a marriage might be null, but the best advice will come from whomever she chooses as a guide. Annulment is not quick, and it is not easy, but it is worth the effort.
Love,
O2
You should anyways.
You’d love it there.
See this is the problem; an annulment being difficult to obtain when the evidence of adultery and abandonment are clearly established is a poor emulation of Christ’s commands. This bureaucratic process pins the victim down despite the simple Truth of Christ thus the frustration level reaches the point of, in my sister-in-laws case, to leave for another Church. The Church needs to seriously fix the red tape. One simple conversation and a copy of the divorce decree stating the reasons (Which in Florida you do) should be enough. This is probably one reason why Pope Francis is getting looser with the Communion restrictions, however the fix should pertain to the bureaucracy.
I might move there anyway. The southern part of the country in the Tatras is beautiful.
I would even consider Slovakia. I like the fact that Bratislava is a relatively small city for a European Capital, but it’s only an hour away from Vienna.
The Catholic Church does not believe in dissolving a valid, sacramental marriage for any reason. Christ said ‘what God has joined, let no man set apart’.
Annulment is not the same as divorce. It is not based on what happened during a marriage. It is based only on whether or not the marriage was entered into validly. A valid Catholic marriage between baptized people is sacramental, and that is the part about ‘God has joined’. Annulment is based on whether or not all of the conditions were met for the marriage to be sacramental, including whether or not the 2 spouses were of the right disposition to enter into a valid marriage at the time of the vows.
The fact that one spouse is unfaithful or even if they civilly divorce and marry again, that does not necessarily mean that that spouse did not truly intend to remain faithful and married for life at the time of the vows. What it does prove, is that at some point the spouse who acted this way did decide that fidelity and permanence were not necessarily a part of their marriage, and what the annulment process does is investigate whether those beliefs were present at the time of the vows or not.
It is not an easy process, and it shouldn’t be easy. I do believe that it has become more cumbersome and time-consuming than necessary though, mainly because the numbers of annulment investigations are increasing beyond the capacity of the tribunals. The failure of the Church to refuse to marry couples who are not properly educated and disposed is also a big contributor to the overflow, but that is a different subject.
If in your sister-in-law’s case she has not been through the annulment process, she should still consider it if she indeed wishes to return to full communion with the Catholic Church. The information she was given was not correct, and the process will never happen if she never starts it. How much time and effort is it worth to return to the true Church of Christ?
In the meantime, she is welcome at any Catholic Church. If she is not remarried and not in an ongoing adulterous relationship, she is fully able to participate in the sacraments, including Reconciliation and Communion. Otherwise she is still welcome, but being in a condition of ongoing serious sin, she should not receive Communion.
Love,
O2
Disclaimer: I am not a Canon lawyer and don’t play one on TV, and there are some generalizations above which do not pertain to every situation. YMMV.
I was in Slovakia several years ago and found the food, music and the people to be enchanting.
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.