Cardinal Dolan: don't expect "dramatic change" on Communion for divorced and remarried

cruxnow.com/church/2014/09/06/ny-cardinal-predicts-no-change-on-communion-ban-for-divorced-remarried/

One hot-button issue is whether divorced and remarried Catholics ought to be able to receive Communion. Should people be expecting a dramatic change?

Probably not. Personally, I don’t see how there could be [a dramatic change] without running up against the teaching of the Church. What I hope the synod does instead is look at the bigger picture, figuring out ways to reintroduce people to the romance and adventure of a faithful, loving marriage.

Good for the cardinal for his clarity here.

Very glad to read this. Though Card Dolan is often a bit confusing (for me at least).

I notice there are a quite a few other issues in that article. It struck me somewhat that the bishops advising him to close parishes haven’t revealed lower per-capita donations and higher costs in the merged parishes. But that’s another thread.

:thumbsup: Glad to hear one of the princes of the Church clearly defending her teachings.

As a divorced (annulled but not remarried) woman, I have been deeply disturbed by priests, bishops, and cardinals – whose sound bites make the mainstream press – talking about allowing Holy Communion for divorced and remarried. It always feels like a punch to the gut when I read their comments.

Thanks be to God for this brief defense of the faith by Cardinal Dolan!

Gertie

My mother’s priest and deacon state there is no problem in her receiving. Her husband- not married in the Church was received into the Church while I am sure they knew this. He is also a member of the K of C.

You know, for me it’s not a big deal as I don’t see it as part of my responsibility, but it does seem strange that enforcing the rules seems kind of arbitrary.

So, your mother is on her 2nd marriage (but, not in the Church) and is receiving without an annulment? Did I understand correctly? :confused:

And if that is the case, what is the priests explanation for this being ok?

Since you mentioned the above, as a coincidence… I have seen a couple of divorced men on their 2nd marriages, part of the K of C, taking Holy Communion. I just assumed they had an annulment, until one said that was not the case in a retreat Q & A session, I was puzzled… Thanks in advance for the clarification.

I don’t notice who receives Communion.

I really don’t see it as any of my business who is in what status in the Church. I have more than enough sin to occupy my mind.

I do believe that such an approach taken by different clergy is pretty confusing.

Again, what I brought up above came up during a retreat type situation, with questions being asked on different subjects, and this came up. I was not the one asking the questions. But, this is a confusing topic, that gets brought up in RCIA & in different retreats. And like you mentioned, the approach is different, so people get confused…:o

Amen to all of the above with a slight qualifier. Often times one can’t help but have knowledge of the personal circumstances of others through friendships, etc. If I know, it is fairly certain others know as well. Scandal is a very grievous sin and must be stopped by the clergy through catechizing. May God have mercy on those who do not teach the faith, but confuse, and mercy on those who fail to administer true charity by admonishing the sinner.

Had another thought - one needs to ask if they have done all they can to know what the Church actually teaches, as opposed to listening to the occasional renegade priest or deacon. The truth of the matter is not hidden at all.

Nope, not right. In the 60’s priests were allowing consciences in matters of using artificial birth control. Didn’t make it okay then, nor now.

oops…the bolded ABOVE should read: and mercy on those who fail to administer true charity by NOT admonishing the sinner.

Of course, we didn’t expect a “dramatic change” regarding the presence of gay organizations in the New York St. Patrick’s Day parade, but then…

That is not a fair comparison. Changing a practice that strikes to the heart of sacramental theology on marriage and the Eucharist is not even in the same league as who gets to march in a parade (especially a parade that has no official ties to the Catholic Church).

Any change would be a dramatic change.

Therefore, do not expect any change. :slight_smile:

EDIT: Hey, you just hit 3000 posts. Congrats! :slight_smile:

I agree that any change to the actual teaching or theology would be a “dramatic” change.

But what I think (or maybe hope) he means is that a small change would be something like adjusting the administrative procedures for anullments.

Is there any way that the annulment process could be streamlined and made quicker in a good way that didn’t violate the Catholic Church’s teaching on marriage?

Thanks!

There’s always room for improvement.

But it shouldn’t be automatic either. Some things do need time and one can’t simply undo everything in one day.

I share your sentiments exactly, especially the bolded.

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