Sui “divorced and remarried”. New note of the fathers of Patmos island
ABOUT DIVORCED AND RESPONDED. NEW NOTE FROM THE FATHERS OF DELL’ISLE OF PATMOS
.
The fear of some, that if the Pope were to grant communion to divorced and remarried would be an attack on the indissolubility of marriage, it has no dogmatic foundation; and in this way is confused the civil law with the ecclesiastical law.
.
.
Giovanni Cavalcoli, ON
Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo
.
.
Jesus said to them,: «For the hardness of your heart he [Moses] wrote this standard for you. But at the beginning of creation God created them male and female; for this man will leave his father and mother and the two will be one flesh. So they are no longer two, but only one flesh. So let man not separate what God has joined " [MC. 10, 5-9]
.
.
.
Giovanni Cavalcoli, ON
A point that needs to be highlighted and on which perhaps we have not insisted enough in the answers and in the contradictions, is that the expression "divorced and remarried”, now in use, it is a wrong expression from the point of view of Catholic morality, taken as it is from the language of civil law, admitting divorce, while we know well how the Gospel forbids it.
Without wanting to reject this expression, which is now impossible, however, to truly illuminate the question in the light of Catholic morality, we Catholics should say, according to the traditional language of the Church, that they are adulterous concubines. If therefore they have dissolved the previous marriage from a civil point of view, and if this marriage was a sacrament, it is clear that such a marriage, if it is valid, remains valid.
The fear of some, that if the Holy Father were to grant Communion to the divorced and remarried, he would therefore make an attack on the indissolubility of marriage, it has no dogmatic foundation; and in this way civil law is confused with ecclesiastical law.
The possible granting of Communion, it would not at all suppose on the part of the Church that the previous religious marriage is to be considered dissolved, even if there was a civil divorce, while it always remains very valid for eternity, if it was an authentic sacrament.
Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo
So this is the real picture in which, according to Catholic morality, this serious question of the divorced and remarried must be placed in a convenient and fruitful way. Those who therefore support the opportunity to be granted Communion, he must demonstrate that this concession not only does not involve or suppose anything wound, sacrilege or prejudice towards the validity of the previous marriage, but that can harmonize, in spite of everything, with a convenient respect for this previous link, so as to draw from this past commitment, now no longer practicable, however paradoxical this may seem, strength to live the new coexistence in grace.
What, in fact, can connect and create continuity between the former union and the current one, although objectively in contrast with each other, it is consciousness, as it is supposed, to have lived in grace in the previous union and to live in grace in the new one, despite the past sin of adultery, which, however, is now supposed to be forgiven by God.
The Church could impose on cohabitants the obligation to maintain, if it is possible, good relations with the previous spouse, to support it economically, if it needs e, if it is possible, to take care of any children they had in their previous marriage.
In the new bond the remarried will have to keep an objective memory, calm and friendly of the previous spouse, ready to forgive the wrongs received, even if the spouse retains hostile feelings and does not forgive.
Therefore none damnation of memory; on the contrary, even if it can cost their pride or understandable resentment, the two should always remind God of the previous spouse and thank God for all the good and gifts from God received in the previous marriage. They will also have to remind God with gratitude of all the good they have wanted, perhaps for many years, all happy events and all positive experiences.
Indeed, even if men have tried to divide with vain and false "civil laws" what God had united, the sacred bond freely contracted by the couple before God at the moment of the celebration of the sacrament, it is absolutely indissoluble, because no one can separate what God wanted to unite for eternity, so much so that the spouses who have separated, to be worthy of the heavenly reward, they must hope to be reconciled and reunited in heaven forever, renewing the sacred commitments trampled on in this world.
Stoltissima, scandalous, shameful, A wise sect and therefore unworthy of the Christian name was the proposal, on the occasion of the Synod, by the theologian Giovanni Cereti, who dared to base the couple's admission to the sacraments on a supposed right of the couple to "annul the sacramental sign of marriage", once she found it impossible to maintain the union. On the contrary, it is precisely in the name of respecting the dignity of the sacraments as ordinary means of salvation, that the Church maternally and providently always works everything possible to ensure the possibility of salvation even in the most degraded and disordered human situations, aware that God extends his mercy far beyond the limited though precious sacramental practice of the Church.
.
From the island of Patmos, 2 November 2015
.
.
Rev. Fathers,
finally you have made a synthesis of the question with “language of the Catholic Church” and calling the events and situations, the protagonists with their own name everything is simplified and does not lend itself to misunderstandings.
Unfortunately, even in the Church the language used and even the methods of approaching the problems of today's man are carried out in a social key- anthropological according to “secular perspective of the world”, anzichè quella imperniata sulla fede ed il rapporto con Dio.
A questo riguardo è molto interessante quanto ha scritto oggi Stefano Fontana: http://www.lanuovabq.it/it/articoli-cari-padri-del-sinodo-se-questi-sono-i-metodi-14297.htm
Mi spiace constatare la deriva che una rivista telematica come la vostra ha preso. So che questo commento vuol dir poco o niente e non ho la presunzione di farvi cambiare idea, quindi non mi dilungherò molto.
Non sono d’accordo e sono persino deluso: era grazie a voi ed in particolare di Lei, dear father Ariel, che mantenendo la mente aperte a certe idee ed alla cattolicità ho evitato di prendere una deriva strettamente di tradizionalismo (da non intendersi con tradizione). E’ invece contro la tradizione che voi (in my opinion, per quanto vale) state andando.
Per questo aimé, and in the only way materially possible for me to protest against this drift, I announce that I will no longer make donations (albeit small figures) to your magazine.
With best regards,
Gianluca M.
Dear Gianluca.
Try to read carefully what we have written, keep in mind that none of us have wished for what we are accused of, such as giving the Eucharist to the divorced, which we do not do in the exercise of our sacred ministry, indeed we repeat to people in certain situations of “irregularities” to abide by what the Church has said up to now in this regard.
Don't fall into the mistake of confusing “hypothesis” from “study opinions”, with affirmations or with it “shop” of certainties, when we said, written and repeated such things:
if many of the Fathers gathered at Nicaea and thereafter in the other great dogmatic councils of the Church, they had said: «There is no arguing about this!», thus acting accordingly, today we would not have, I am not referring to the evolution of the discipline of the Sacraments over the centuries, we would not even have had the correct perception of the Incarnation of the Word, of the human and divine nature of Christ God [hypostasi]? But there's more: we wouldn't even be Christians, but only a "heretical sect" of Jews-Jesuits that developed in ancient Judea and then spread around the world.
and again:
In a conciliar or synodal assembly, as the Fathers of the Island of Patmos have been repeating for weeks on these columns, all possibilities must be explored and examined, even the most absurd; even those bordering on heresy, because discussing does not at all mean "sanctioning","to establish", "modify", "Deny" or "cancel" the disciplines in any way, least of all to undermine the dogma or the substance of the sacraments.
If these statements are not clear enough, then it means that she does not read them; and if the law is not willing to implement them.
The case, Unfortunately, the problem is not ours, but all of his own.
Your goal, like that of Bergoglio, is to lead as many souls as possible to final impenitence and therefore to hell. Heresy, they are the ones you affirm about communion for the divorced and remarried (adultery).
Dear Mr. Bazzorini.
Luckily for his first attempt to fire inside the premises of the former Holy Office, today Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, or in those of the Ecclesiastical Tribunal, all the fire-fighting systems would be triggered immediately, why otherwise, if not, she would have burned us alive a long time ago.
father ariel, please, try to keep this Mr.. Bazzorini, it is a mythical element that gives us lots of laughs for free, for which we are very grateful.
Don Vittorio
… I would propose a real humorous column, kind of titling it: “the bazzorinata of the week”.
In my opinion it would have been very successful.
If the eternal salvation of souls were not involved, which is a very serious matter, you know what a laugh I would have at the nonsense written on this site about the divorced and remarried? come on, don vittorio, it is right that you take it ironically: it is an indication that you and the Catholic Doctrine are poles apart and you don't even know why you became a priest.
Listen to me, you great idiot: I'll explain immediately why I became a priest and what I do. While you fool around in fantasy Catholicism I work from morning to night as a chaplain in a large cancer hospital. So if you come and see me, I'm dragging you by the ear into the pediatric oncology ward, and it will be me, baby behind baby, cancer behind cancer, leukemia behind leukemia slamming your face on reality, perhaps letting your sick head pass all the hateful and bad bullshit you are sowing around, today on the pretext of “Mass of Paul VI”, tomorrow “on the heretic Pope Francis”, then again on “sacrament of marriage”, etc .. etc ..
Ah, by the way: and take your lace friends with you&laces, so we take out the missal of Saint Pius V and explain to the children in the terminal stage of brain tumor that to go to heaven we must celebrate the … “always mass”.
Don Vittorio