Ed Peters on Card. Kasper on Pope saying half of marriages are not valid

The distinguished canonist Ed Peters writes about the reckless comments made by Card. Walter Kasper the other day at Fordham University.  My emphases and comments.

Even if the pope said it, it was reckless to repeat it

Cardinal Kasper, in a lengthy interview that shows no let-up in his push to change Church discipline on marriage said, among other things, I’ve spoken to the pope himself about this, and he said he believes that 50 percent of marriages are not valid.[?!?]

I am stunned at the pastoral recklessness of such an assertion. Simply stunned. [As we all should be!]

Suppose the cardinal had claimed that “50 percent of ordinations are not valid”. [!] Would not such a claim, coming from an internationally-renowned prelate and attributed to a pope, have a shattering effect on the morale of deacons, priests, and bishops around the world? Would not especially those clergy laboring under vocational difficulties immediately conclude that their difficulties were the consequence of having been invalidly ordained, whereupon most of them would just give up? And would not those preparing for holy orders be paralyzed with fear over proceeding to ordination until whatever is behind such a massive invalidity rate were discovered and remedied? Of course they would.

Well, if tossing out a comment to clergy alleging rampant invalidity of holy orders would be pastorally unthinkable, by what right does the cardinal casually tell laity that 50% of their marriages are invalid—even if the pope did say it? Does turmoil among married persons in the wake of such a remark not matter to any except those who suffer it? As I said, I am stunned that such a remark was made, [IN PUBLIC!  Sometimes priests will kick ideas around in private as they discuss problems today, but that doesn’t mean they a) think everything they kick around and b) would be so abysmally dumb as to repeat the conversation from their pulpits on Sunday.] even if it was a mere repetition of another’s views.

But, no matter who said it—and I have no patience left for this string of ‘guess-what-the-pope-supposedly-told-me’ disclosures—let me outline several reasons why the claim that ‘half of all marriages are null’ is not just reckless, it’s also wrong.

I preface my remarks thus: I worked in diocesan tribunals for more than 10 years and concluded that hundreds of the marriage cases I saw therein were canonically null; I have been married for nearly 30 years; and I have seen, in my own family and among my closest friends, dozens of successful and failed marriages, some of those latter being canonically null, others just ruined. In short, my perspectives here are at least as professionally credentialed and as personally experienced as anyone else’s. [Haudquaquam dubitandum’st.]

1. Marriage is, before anything else, a natural contract. Any claim, therefore, about “marriage”—including the shocking claim that half of all marriages are invalid—must be true about marriage as entered into by the great majority of the world’s population; that, or it must be abandoned. So, does Cdl. Kasper really think that half of the marriages around the world are invalid? If not, he should never have expressed himself so.

2. But perhaps the prelate only had in mind sacramental marriages (marriages entered into by two baptized persons) when he asserted that half of all marriages are null. But, if sacramental marriage perfects natural marriage and if grace builds on nature, what would make Christian marriage less stable than natural marriage?

Actually, a few things come to mind.

Some Catholic marriages are invalid for reasons having nothing to do with natural law, because they were, say, entered into by boys under age 16 contrary to Canon 1084 or by renegade priests contrary to Canon 1087. But those invalid marriages represent a proverbial drop in the bucket of invalid unions; their presence hardly allows one to claim that half of all marriages among the baptized, or even among Catholics, are invalid.

Admittedly one source of canonical nullity has no foundation whatsoever in natural law, yet accounts for thousands of invalid marriages among Catholics: what I have described as the outdated requirement of canonical form. But, while this requirement allows tens of thousands of Catholics to walk away from ‘marriages’ that we would require Protestants (and indeed all non-Catholics) to honor, violation of form does not occur in numbers that would make half of all marriages, even among Catholics, let alone among Protestants, to say nothing of non-Christians, invalid. Not even close.

Or perhaps Cdl. Kasper wants to take on the “automatic sacramentality” point of Church teaching on marriage (see 1983 CIC 1055), and from there tease out a contractual invalidity argument for any sacramentum fidei attentatum sine fide, but I’ve seen nothing so complex offered yet.

Well, there is much more to say, but keeping in mind that this is only a blog post, let me conclude by reminding all that a long, long, tradition of Church teaching recognizes humans’ natural capacity for marriage, reminds Christians that the grace of matrimony adds to the stability of marriage, and presumes the validity of all marriages unless and until it is proven otherwise.

In short, the validity of marriage far exceeds the odds one enjoys in a coin toss.

Posted in HONORED GUESTS, Liberals, One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity, The Drill | Tagged , , , ,
73 Comments

ASK FATHER: Sister started Mass without the priest

From a reader…

QUAERITUR:

On Friday, my family and I arrived at Mass (NO) a few minutes early and took our usual places. When Mass was about to begin, a Sister (non-identifiable) came out to announce that the priest was running a few minutes behind, but that he told her to begin without him. She said we would begin with the First Reading. Then she asked us all to stand and she began the Penitential Rite. I looked at my family, told them to follow me, and we walked out. I don’t know how long it took the priest to arrive but I was stunned to say the least, and angry. What, if anything, can or should be done? We attend this Mass during the week and, thankfully, an FSSP Mass on Sundays about 45 min away. Thank you, Father, for any advice you can offer.

Ahhh! Beginning Mass without the priest….

That’s sort of like beginning a baseball game without a pitcher.

Sure, the umpire can squat down behind home plate, the base coaches and the officiating crew can take their places, the vendors can start hawking beer and popcorn up and down the stadium, and the fans can hurl invectives or cheers down upon the field of play. The announcer can even pretend to describe a few plays, while making banal comments about the weather and the state of the fans.

No one would mistake that for a baseball game.  They’d walk out.  They’d demand their money back.  The League would probably get involved and discipline the one responsible for allowing it to happen.

How much better – if Father was delayed – would it have been for Sister to lead the faithful in a decade of the rosary, or a litany, or a prayer for vocations, rather than pretend to “begin Mass” without the priest.

I think a politely worded letter of inquiry (“Is it an accepted custom here, when the priest is late, for someone else to start saying Mass until the priest shows up?”) sent to the pastor and the chancery office might be called for.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, Crackit Gaberlunzie, Liberals, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000 | Tagged ,
23 Comments

What is Card. Baldissieri up to?

Edward Pentin, of the National Catholic Register, quoted an antipasto of an article in De Standaard (and HERE) about an interview with a Belgian publication, Tertio, given by Pope Francis’ head of the Synod of Bishops, Lorenzo Card. Balidissieri.

Reportage gives the impression that St. John Paul’s Magisterium, particularly in Familiaris consortio, is outdated.

What did Baldissieri say?

“Familiaris consortio van paus Johannes Paulus II van 1981 vormt het laatste grote document van de afgelopen dertig jaar over deze thematiek. De kerk is niet tijdloos; ze leeft te midden van de wederwaardigheden van de geschiedenis en het evangelie moet gekend en beleefd worden door mensen van vandaag.” ….

Familiaris Consortio by Pope John Paul II in 1981 is the last major document of the past thirty years on this topic. The church is not timeless; she lives amidst the vicissitudes of history and the gospel must be known and experienced by people today.

Baldissieri doesn’t exactly say directly that St. JPII’s Magisterium on the family is outdated. But he does, as I read it carefully, insinuate it. It is, after all, 33 whole years old!

I am not sure what Card. Baldissieri, is up to.  He plays a key role in the selection of experts and theologians who will be allowed to address the bishops during the synod.  From that position, Card. Baldissieri could, for example, arrange the slate of experts and theologians so that one side of the debate is greatly favored and the other is, effectively, suppressed.

That said, no one in their right mind would so bluntly call into question St. John Paul II’s Magisterium.

Posted in Francis, Liberals, One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity | Tagged , , , , , ,
38 Comments

Rome/NYC – Day 15: My view for awhile

It is almost always a nice day when I leave a city I like.

20140507-120935.jpg

So, back to the USA and some appointments in NYC.

20140507-121025.jpg

Yes, Bergoglio class, in case you were wondering.

I have my noise blocking earbuds ready and my fully loaded Kindle. My sweater is at hand and I have a bottle if water. I suppose I could now write my name on all my limbs.

There is a priest monk from Norcia on board, too! Nice to see him. They are great. I had some of their beer when I visited the Domus Australia. See that post. Incredible beer.

Posted in On the road, What Fr. Z is up to |
9 Comments

Back to the Future: LCWR nuns and “Conscious Evolution” and gnosticism

Card. Müller, when addressing the LCWR nuns, spoke about problems with their Faith.  He was not being political.  He was not picking on them as “women”.

Card. Müller was effectively asking them: Do you want to be Catholic?

What the nuns are into is, basically, warmed-up gnosticism. Because we really want to be living in the 2nd century rather than the 21st.  We need a new Irenaeus!

Card. Müller spoke to them about how they have gotten into “conscious evolution”.  Let’s call it CE.   This is pure crap, of course, and spiritually dangerous and some of these nuns are in it up to their necks.

Do you want to do a little reading around the issue?

HERE

An evolutionary spirituality is emerging, experienced as the impulse of evolution, the process of creation, the implicate order, a patterning process coming through our own hearts. It is felt as the sacred core of the evolutionary spiral, the evolving godhead arising, or even incarnating within each of us as our own impulse to co-create. It is the “creator-within” expressing itself uniquely through each person as a new form of “social cosmogenesis.” The generating power of universal evolution is guiding us toward a more synergistic, cooperative democracy.

HERE – Wow…..

At the heart of Gnostic Christianity, as taught in the Sophian Tradition, is the view of Yeshua (Aramaic for Jesus) as a human being who embarked upon a spiritual or mystical journey and became Self-realized or Enlightened; hence attained Supernal or Messianic Consciousness. According to the Sophian Gospel he was not born Christ, but became Christed by the reception of teachings and initiations from his Spiritual Teachers and engaging in spiritual practice and spiritual living. It is said that Yeshua was, indeed, the incarnation of a Great Soul and that he had accomplished the divine labor of Self-realization or Enlightenment in previous lives. Nevertheless, incarnate in the world as a Light-bearer, he had to sojourn the Path to Enlightenment as any other human being. In so doing he became a living example of the Path to Self-realization or Enlightenment and was empowered to teach others how to attain Supernal or Messianic Consciousness.

HERE

This emerging human has been called by many names. Teilhard de Chardin called it the Ultra Human, or Homo progressivus, in whom the “flame of expectation burns, attracted toward the future as an organism progressing toward the unknown.” Sri Aurobindo, the great Indian evolutionary sage, called this the Gnostic Human, the individual in whom the Consciousness Force itself, the supramental power of universal creativity, incarnates and begins to transform the body/mind into the very cells that evolve beyond the human phase.

Others have called this Homo noeticus, a being of gnosis or deep knowing of the Field out of which we are co-arising. Or Homo divina, as Sister Judy Cauley puts it. Or the universal human, connected through the heart to the whole of life, awakening from within by the core of the spiral of evolution. The implicate order is becoming explicate in us, turning into the essential self, animated by a passionate life-purpose to express our creativity.

 

Posted in Liberals, Magisterium of Nuns, Women Religious | Tagged , , , ,
47 Comments

The canonization of Vatican II continues: Paul VI beatification in October

I read today at Vatican Insider that the Congregation of the Causes of Saints has approved unanimously (what else) a miracle through the intercession of Ven. Paul VI.

I suppose now the only thing left to do is beatify the Pope everyone forgets to remember and the set will be complete… at least until the pool grows by one more.

This morning, cardinals and bishops of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints gave their final approval for the late Pope’s healing of an unborn child

ANDREA TORNIELLI
VATICAN CITY
Giovanni Battista Montini’s beatification is near: this morning cardinals and bishops of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints unanimously approved the miracle attributed to the intercession of the Italian Pope from Brescia, who died in August 1978. The year which marked the canonization of two Popes – John XXIII and John Paul II – will also be the year of Paul VI’s beatification. In the next few days Pope Francis will be promulgating the decree on the miracle attributed to the late Pope and the date suggested for the actual beatification is 19 October. The beatification is expected to take place in Rome on the occasion of the concluding ceremony of the Extraordinary Synod of Bishops on the Family: [HEY!  This is the canonization of HUMANAE VITAE too!] it was Paul VI himself who established the Synod in September 1965 in response to a request made by the Council fathers. [And what a day’s work that was.] It should be noted that next August will mark the 50th anniversary of the publication of Paul VI’s first big encyclical, the “Ecclesiam Suam”, which he wrote and edited entirely by himself.

The miracle attributed to the intercession of Paul VI was witnessed in the United States in 2001. It involved the healing of an unborn child, which was found to have serious problems and a high risk of brain damage: the foetus’ bladder was damaged and doctors reported ascites (presence of liquid in the abdomen) and anhydramnios (absence of fluid in the amniotic sac). All attempts to correct the problem proved futile and in the end the doctors said the child would either die in the womb or it would be born with severe renal impairment. Abortion was offered as an option but the mother refused. Instead, she took the advice given to her by a nun who was a friend of the family and had met Montini: she decided to pray for Paul VI’s intercession using a fragment of the Pope’s vestments which the nun had given her.

Ten weeks later the results of the medical tests showed a substantial improvement in the child’s health and it was born by Caesarean section in the 39th week of pregnancy. The case was presented to the former Postulator of the Cause, the Jesuit Paolo Molinari – who passed away last week – in Rome. Faith weekly Credere revealed that the diocesan inquiry was launched in 2003 and all witnesses agree that the case in question cannot be explained scientifically.

The child has made it to thirteen and his health is constantly monitored to ensure that his psychophysical state is normal. [Healing miracles have to be sudden, complete and lasting.] Doctors are especially keeping an eye on the child’s renal function. On 12 December last year the medical consultation of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints headed by Professor Patrizio Polisca, confirmed the impossibility of explaining the healing and the dicastery’s theologians gave their approval last 18 February. [Along with the doctors’ and scientists’ statement that the healing can’t be explained, then theologians have to judge whether people were praying to Paul VI, and not, for example, to “Jesus, Mary, Joseph and all the saints and holy angels, and St. Rita and St. Jude, and Paul VI, and Fulton Sheen and Pauline Jaricot and….] Benedict XVI promulgated Paul VI’s heroic virtues on 20 December 2012.

In honor of Paul VI, Pope Francis should, at the beatification, bring back the sedia gestatoria, far humbler than the expensive Popemobile and far greener.

If it was good enough for St. John XXIII and Bl. Paul VI, it is good enough for any Pope!

YouTube thumbnailYouTube icon

Posted in Saints: Stories & Symbols | Tagged ,
43 Comments

Another ugly development in the matter of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate

I saw this at Rorate:

The latest chapter in the ‘visitation’ of the Franciscans of the Immaculate

The Agenzia Nazionale Stampa Associata reported last Friday that the 81-year-old Fr. Stefano Manelli, founder and first Minister General of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, was forbidden from going to Frigento (Avellino) on May 1 in order to visit the grave of his parents and to celebrate Mass.

His parents, Settimio (d. 1978) and Licia (d. 2004), became “Servants of God” in 2008 and 2009 respectively.

According to ANSA, the ban was decreed by the Apostolic Commissioner Fidenzio Volpi.

So, let me get this straight.

The old priest wanted to visit the grave of his parents, whose causes are underway. He wanted to say Mass, which sounds like what most priests would want to do.

The Kommisar would not let him.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged
23 Comments

Rome – Day 14: Store windows and raw red meat

Some last errands before I leave Rome.

I went to a Vatican “Bank” ATM to check on the status of my account, which I have maintained since the 80’s.

20140506-235452.jpg

I spent time in the Augustinianum library today. It is the best of its kind.

20140506-235503.jpg

If anyone thinks that there is a new liturgical style on the ascendency, and that style is simple cum ugly, guess again. If you want to see the trend, look in clerical shop windows. You will see what us actually selling, a far kore accurate indicator of liturgical trends.

20140506-235800.jpg

20140506-235809.jpg

20140506-235815.jpg

For supper I met a young priest who is a reader of the blog. Nice fellow, very bright. Canonist. He confirmed a lot if what I have been hearing and concluding, We are at a place PETA would hate.

20140507-000259.jpg

A fitting last meal for Roma:

20140507-000354.jpg

Tomorrow the last phase begins as I meander home.

Posted in On the road, SESSIUNCULA, What Fr. Z is up to | Tagged
6 Comments

Fr. Z: Science Fiction Novel Star! UPDATE

UPDATE: Since I posted this, I have finished the second volume.  Fun.  It is sort of like…. Galaxy Quest meets…. The Magnificent Seven.  It’s like… Stargate meets… Indiana Jones.

As I mentioned, there is a character in the book named after yours truly.  While I think the real me might have done one or two things differently, I have a couple pretty good moments including what may be the best one-liner in the book.

And I didn’t die!  There’s hope that I will be carried over into the third book of the trilogy.

Now for my original post:

_____

I have mentioned the writer Chris Kennedy.

He has put out, first, a duet of rollicking fun about the Chinese invading Seattle and a ragtag group who save the day (the Magnificent Seven could take a lesson).  He continued with the ragtag group in a trilogy sequel of rollicking fun in a science fiction mode.

He has taken to putting real people into his books, as “red shirts”.

Many of them die in glory!

I, your humble writer, am a character in the second book of the trilogy.  I am a “BLACK SHIRT”!

The book is all about me, actually….

well, no.  I am a just character in the book.

I don’t know yet if I will die.  Die in the book, that is.  I know I am going to die.

SO ARE YOU! Go to confession.

That said, I think I make it to the third book.

I suggest you start reading Kenney’s fun books with this.

This ain’t Heinlein, people.  But it’s fun.

An excerpt from the new book from my iPhone capture of a Kindle page (one of many) wherein I, your scribe, am featured.

20140426-023614.jpg

Spoiler: While priests were not accustomed to carry edged weapons, I get to have a very famous sword.

 

Posted in Lighter fare, On the road, SESSIUNCULA, What Fr. Z is up to | Tagged , , , , ,
17 Comments

Divorce, remarriage, Communion. Wherein Fr. Z rants.

Let’s make this clear from the start.

People are going to sin. Nevertheless, we must uphold doctrine.

This is what is going to happen with the divorce/remarriage Commmunion thing.

The Holy Father, Pope Francis, will eventually uphold the Church’s teaching and discipline that those who “marry” again after a divorce, that is, those who live in an adulterous relationship, cannot receive Holy Communion.

I don’t see any way around that. Furthermore, one of the main duties of every Pope is to say “No!”. It shouldn’t surprise us when they do.

In the meantime, bishops and theologians and parish priests and armchair theologians and journalists will write and talk and write and talk and worry and spout and write and talk some more about “compassion” and “solutions” and so forth. There will be a tsunami of options and articles crashing around by the time the Holy Father affirms that people who are divorced and “remarried” cannot receive Communion. As a matter of fact, it may come to pass that there will be so much confusion, so much damage done in the lead up to the Pope’s affirmation of traditional teaching, that his affirmation may not make a lot of difference to people.

So, I repeat:

People are going to sin. Nevertheless, we must uphold doctrine.

That’s the way we have always done this. That’s the way Jesus did it.

Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at it, said to them, “Do you take offense at this? Then what if you were to see the Son of man ascending where he was before? It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you that do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the first who those were that did not believe, and who it was that would betray him. And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.” After this many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with him. Jesus said to the twelve, “Do you also wish to go away?” Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life; and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you, the twelve, and one of you is a devil?” He spoke of Judas the son of Simon Iscariot, for he, one of the twelve, was to betray him. [Read John 6]

So, the Church will teach the truth – something that makes liberals and writers and readers of the National Schismatic Reporter have night sweats because they think anyone should have sex with anything – and people will, in their weakness and under the pressure of today’s confused culture, sin a lot – something that makes conservatives have night sweats because they fear for the eternal souls of so many who are falling away from the Faith.

It has ever been so.

This is what happened in the lead up to and in the wake of Humanae vitae. Everyone under the sun was telling Pope Paul VI that the Church had to change its teaching about contraception. Debate raged, committees committed, newsies spun. By the time Paul VI eventually issued the definitive Humanae vitae, confusion reigned. Bishops and priests far and wide defied the Pope and Humanae vitae‘s clear teaching. They stopped teaching what the Church teaches and, instead, from behind their hand or in the confessional whispered to people “just go ahead and use it”. So they did. Priests told people to sin or at least so soft-peddled the Church’s teaching that it seemed to make no difference. And in so doing, they undermined the Church’s Christ-given authority and put the souls of millions in danger as well as, perhaps, damning themselves.

That was fused together with social upheavals outside the Church, which were welcomed by the guardians of the sheepfold, into the Church, as well as titanic changes to our sacred worship, which left people with the sense that, “If Mass can change, then everything is up for grabs.”

It looks like history is repeating itself. By the time Pope Francis affirms what we all know to be true, many will then just say … as they are saying now… “Just go ahead and receive Communion.”

But in those circumstances receiving may actually endanger their salvation.

Worth it?

In effect, there may result what Card. Kasper infamously suggested to the bishops in the extraordinary synod during his looooong and rather flimsy ramble about Communion for the “remarried”. Effectively, he said that there could/should be a “tolerated, but not accepted” solution. That is: “The Church won’t accept your new status, because you are obviously committing adultery and Christ made it clear that you couldn’t ‘marry’ again with your spouse still on this side of the grass, but – hey! – we will hold our noses and watch you go to Communion anyway. You can be a kind of pity case or second class Catholic. We will tolerate you, but not accept you.”

I wonder how that is going to go over when people figure out how condescending that uncompassionate compassionate “solution” is.

Remember: Marriage is a public act with all sorts of consequences, including juridical effects. This is why people, when they marry, must do so precisely by the book, using exact language for vows, before witnesses. This is why what happened is written down in official registers. We don’t just hold hands and jump over broomsticks. Until the Church’s proper authority determines that there was never a sacramental marriage in the first place, the marriage is presumed to be valid. It must be demonstrated, to a point of moral certainty, that there isn’t a sacramental bond. That is, a couple can’t just say, “We were never married”, and then do whatever they please. Priests can’t just say, but they do, “Wellllll…. whatever. Let’s just pretend.”

As for the so-called “internal forum” solution… let us underscore that it is internal forum, usually something explored – very rarely – in confession, with great discretion and secrecy. Moreover, just like Christ told the adulterous woman – people are expected to amend their lives. If they live together, for the sake of raising child for example, they do so as brother and sister. If they receive Communion somewhere, they do so where they are not known to others in the congregation, so as to avoid scandal. Will it happen that they might occasionally have sex during this arrangement? Sure! It could happen. Hey, we are human and we fall. We sin. Let’s call it what it is. That’s why we have a Church. Thereafter, they take up their resolve again and try to live holy lives, with the suffering that will entail.

Come to think of it, a similar thing might apply to homosexuals. If we can wrap our heads around the fact that the very concept of true “friendship” is being distorted these days (as “marriage” is), two people of the same sex who in some way are committed to each other, and who have certain inclinations, may wind up sinning together. It happens. Life is messy and people are weak. But let’s not deny the truth. We uphold and defend and teach clear Catholic doctrine. We clearly point to the natural law. But we recognize that people are sinners in need of the Church’s help and, in compassion, we help them to live better lives after they get up off the ground.

You might object that they shouldn’t be living together, because the temptation is greater. Yes, that is so. They are playing with fire. It is better to avoid occasions of sin. But, again, there is nothing in the teaching of the Church that says that friends of the same sex can’t live together and even give each other power of attorney or whatever. And if they can manage to do it, live together without committing sins that cry to heaven, well… I am sooooo tempted to say

“Who I am to judge?”

People make mistakes. We are not angels. People sin. People suffer. That doesn’t mean we lie to them about what sin is and what their state is. No. We tell them the truth and then, with great concern and compassion, help them with clear teaching, a strong and certain Catholic identity, the sacraments Christ gave us as the ordinary means of our salvation, and encouragement.

We sinners move forward, up the hard, rocky, thorny, path and we refuse the smooth, broad and seemingly easier path down to Hell.

And another thing!

All the talk about stream-lining the process for examining marriages and “annulment” must be looked on with great skepticism. Putting the marriage in the first place took a process, with obligatory steps. Showing that the marriage was defective in that process takes time, study, expertise. Should we, in our compassion, make the process go faster? Okay. We are going to need a lot more canon lawyers. Want mercy? Train canonists. But wait… no… if people don’t cooperate in the process then canonists have to wait for documents, interviews…. No matter what we do, this is going to be messy.

But let me make something clear to priests out there who may be thinking, “Well, the Church isn’t moving fast enough. I’ll just stop telling people to go through the “annulment” process. I’ll stop sending cases in. Instead, I’ll be compassionate! I’ll just tell the divorced and remarried that they are good to go. No worries. Have a great life and go to Communion whenever. We are, after all, medieval!”

I think such a priest, who may think he is well-motivated, is a candidate for eternal separation from God in Hell for leading people so astray.

I tremble for such men, I truly do.

By this time you are saying “But Father! But Father!”, while wringing your hands, “You must really hate compassion! You are mean. We know you are mean because you hate Vatican II and puppies and… and… kitties… and Vatican II!”

Lying to people about the state of their marriage and their disposition to receive the Eucharistic Lord in Holy Communion is not compassion.

It is not a “war on mercy” to insist that we get to the truth of marriage cases. It isn’t charitable to say to people who are objectively, openly, living in sin that they are not living in sin. It isn’t merciful to ditch the entirely reasonable process that the Church, in her wisdom, has put together through centuries of experience and, yes, true compassion.

The fact that we sin doesn’t make the Church wrong.

Posted in "But Father! But Father!", Hard-Identity Catholicism, New Evangelization, One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity, Wherein Fr. Z Rants |
51 Comments