Breaking: pope declares troubling interpretation of al ‘authentic magisterium’


I understand that which is a no, no, now.

If you are divorced, not annul by the Church, remarried, you can’t receive Communion. It’s that simple, and nooooooo Bishops can say you do. AL says now you can. So it’s quite a leap, one a simple Catholic like me has to graple with. I will tag along but to take a paradigm shift is not soooooo easy as you might think on issue as important and as sacred as the Communion. Unless of course, if you do not care.


First, Amoris does not, and never has, said you can now receive communion. Neither does the declaration from Buenos Aires. That is the hype, not the reality. Second, this type of situation have never been simple.


Civilly divorced and remarried
And it doesn’t say that all these divorced and remarried people can receive Communion.
It is very measured and it goes to why such a person couldn’t receive communion, because they are living in mortal sin.
But this is for people who through some way or what have you, are not living in mortal sin.
Please do not insinuate that I do not care about


No, but I read a lot of Jack Chick tracts when I was a kid. I don’t think such things are appropriate now that I am Catholic.



Using the CCC (emphasis mine)
1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man “takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin.” In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.

That said,

It’s never in history been so easy as it is today, for people to gain information. Just watch how fast a person can get an answer on their phone about a subject they might have never even heard of. It’s been estimated that by 2020, 7 billion smart phones will be in circulation.


Information does not eliminate ignorance, and ease of information may not increase culpability. Consider the context in which I started, that of a non-Catholic Christian. Such a one would not look into the Catechism for understanding of marriage, but to his pastor, who might very well teach that his first marriage was a legitimate case of divorce and re-marriage is not only allowed, but encouraged.

So in a case like this, the man or woman might still be in a state of grace before God, living in a second marriage.


Haven’t early Fathers declared there will be an anti-pope and that hes basically the beast? What of St. Malachy’s prophecy about supposed false popes and the end? Being in RCIA, im not sure what to think of all this. What do we do if the Pope changes this?


But a non-Catholic Christian wouldn’t be receiving the Eucharist anyway, right?
And if his/her spouse is Catholic, as a Catholic they would know the situation involved grave sin, even if the non-Catholic spouse did not recognize it as such.
So the Catholic spouse should refrain from receiving because of objective sin, and the non-Catholic spouse should not receive because non-Catholics do not receive anyway.

I know, it’s late and I’m probably missing something, but seriously, I just don’t see where a non-Catholic would ‘insist’ that his or her ‘second’ spouse, if Catholic, ‘had to receive communion’ anyway. . .


yet we can’t legitimize one remaining in error, when/if error is there, no matter who promotes it.



Critiquing in a civil manner is allowed. But please be mindful of our forum rules:

Do not incite animosity towards anyone, especially the clergy.

You may wish to respond to something by disagreeing with it. That’s fine. But remember to criticize ideas, not people.

Users who persistently violate the rules will be banned.


This topic was automatically opened after 8 hours.


The St. Malachy “prophecies” are not reliable, and probably were not written until centuries after their claimed date.


Also I don’t think the prophecy of St Malachy says that.
It says the last pope will lead us through much trouble or something like that


Once again I apologize for the disrespectful post about Pope Francis


Of course not. Besides being the criteria of being without fault the other part of invincible ignorance is the ignorance.


My advice to anyone who is focused on future prophecy, end times and apocalyptic literature is to remember the parable of the virgins waiting the bridegroom. Focus on keeping your own oil ready at all times, meaning one’s own spiritual readiness. Either Jesus comes back or we die. Either is possible at any time.


I have no trouble with allowing divorced and re-married communion under certain conditions.

The conditions are probably very common. I have attended many marriages. All except one was in a Christian Church. In every case the couple was cohabiting prior to marriage. I suspect that those who did not take Christian faith seriously also did not take marriage vows seriously. The marriages were not valid.

Today’s society teaches that marriage is almost like going steady, but, with a legal contract to help establish property rights. Till death do you part, unless someone falls out of love with the other, or no longer feels fulfilled, or even meets someone better…very sad.


Only a decree of nullity by a Church tribunal can definitively determine that.


A decree of nullity by a Church tribunal is not necessary. Canon law was changed in 2015. There is a shorter process. One of the situations that can allow the shorter process is:

“lack of faith resulting in the simulation of consent to be married or an error that determines the will regarding one of the requirements of marriage”

The bishop himself is a judge. The responsibility rests solely with him.

Here’s a link from

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit