New priest praised Amoris Laetita in Homily today


So today in mass our new priest praised Pope Francis and what he said about giving the eucharist to divorced and remarried couples who haven’t received an annulment. He said what people fail to understand is that Pope Francis may have been thinking about extreme circumstances where only a handful of people may be admitted to the sacraments again. The priest also said to remember that Jesus ate with tax collectors and if there’s one thing about Jesus is that He is always inviting people to Him, and Pope Francis had that in mind when he wrote Amoris Laetitia. I’m just stunned.
Am I the only one who thinks he’s wrong?


From what you relate, I don’t see where he said anything inaccurate about AL.


I just think AL goes against church teaching when it gives the OK to give communion to remarried people who haven’t gotten an annulment

Am I wrong for thinking this?


He is 100% right.

Chapter 8 of AL is written to apply to a very narrow set of circumstances.

Those who wish to apply it to a broad group (whatever their motives) are just plan wrong.


Ah. My bad. I thought it was against church teaching to give it to anyone who hasn’t gotten an annulment yet and who is still married. Sorry


It is against church teaching to admit a person who had a valid first union and then divorced and remarried (unless they are living as brother and sister).

Chapter 8 of AL addresses complicated situations where validity of the first union is legitimately in question but cannot be or was not addressed by the annulment process or someone was somehow forced into or is stuck in a second marriage.

I’m glossing over a lot of detail. It’s best to read it for yourself. It’s not very long.


but until a marriage is annulled it’s presumed valid, right?


Pope Francis outlines an approach for moving forward under difficult circumstances. His premise is that there are some situations that the annulment process cannot fairly judge.


Pope John Paul II’s Familiaris Consortio has already addressed this. Regardless of whether the person has potential grounds of the internal forum to call into question the validity of the first marriage, if that marriage has not been declared null and he cannot leave the second union for a just cause, he may receive Holy Communion under two conditions: 1) he must practice complete continence within the second union, because the presumption of validity remains for the first marriage and the second is invalid, and 2) he may receive Holy Communion only privately to avoid scandal. What Amoris Laetitia seems to suggest is that there may be a solution by which divorced and “remarried” Catholics who are not practicing complete continence may be readmitted to Eucharistic Communion—indeed, this is what @FloridaCatholic seems to be troubled about.


As I have said several times on these forums: Pope Francis’ premise is that there are some situations that cannot be accurately judged through the annulment process. Therefore, if a couple follows the process he suggests and if at the end of it the first marriage is not valid the couple should be able to receive (likely in private) and in accordance with guidelines set further by their Bishop.


That is irrelevant; prior to Amoris Laetitia, this very issue—marriages whose validity could be challenged in the internal forum—had been addressed several times by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts. If this was “only” what Amoris Laetitia meant to introduce, then it should be pointed out that there would be no novelty, for in Familiaris Consortio, John Paul II had already laid down the guidelines for the reception of Holy Communion by continent divorced and “remarried” Catholics without having to leave the second spouse. If this were the case with Amoris Laetitia, then there would have been no Dubia. What makes it so controversial is that it raises the possibility of admitting incontinent divorced and “remarried” persons to Holy Communion.


Familiaris Consortio still applies, Florida Catholic. There’s still a lot of questions about Amoris Laetitia – that was what the Dubia was for.

Many bishops and pastors have been using “primacy of conscience” to justify dissent from Church teaching for decades now. This is wrong. Regardless of what kind of wiggle room Pope Francis is trying to allow in this matter, people will absolutely abuse it.


I’m just kind of bleh about this new priest. My old priest was so orthodox and very devout


There is a difference between what AL says and what others want it to say or think that it says (and I am including the Dubia writers as well).

Yes, JPII reaffirmed the church’s practice regarding communion and the remarried at that time, but he did not definitively close the issue. AL builds on FC it does not tear it asunder.

AL is meant to be narrow not broad. It treats those special cases the JPII said needed to be treated with discernment. It charts a way forward through discernment to assessing the validity of a prior marriage or duress in a second marriage. AL does not allow people to toss aside the Church teaching and pass out communion to every person who demands it. These cases are meant to be dealt with very carefully and discreetly.


I’m sorry, but I completely fail to see the relevance of Amoris Laetitia to the tribunal system of assessing marriage validity. Indeed, it is not even a legislative document.

According to the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts:

“Those faithful who are divorced and remarried would not be considered to be within the situation of serious habitual sin who would not be able, for serious motives—such as, for example, the upbringing of the children—‘to satisfy the obligation of separation, assuming the task of living in full continence, that is, abstaining from the acts proper to spouses’ (Familiaris consortio, n. 84), and who on the basis of that intention have received the sacrament of Penance. Given that the fact that these faithful are not living more uxorio is per se occult, while their condition as persons who are divorced and remarried is per se manifest, they will be able to receive Eucharistic Communion only remoto scandalo”.

Those who have civilly “remarried” while having grounds of the internal forum to doubt the validity of their first marriage are included in this category, if they live in complete continence within the second union. Clearly, if Amoris Laetitia was simply affirming this, there would be no Dubia and no controversy; thus, it becomes clear that Pope Francis is going further than this.

And again, Amoris Laetitia has pretty much nothing to do with assessing the nullity of a marriage.


So would it be wrong if I left this parish and went to a parish that was more conservative


Under canon law, parishes are determined by territory, so unless you move house, you cannot become a member of another territorial parish. However, you may attend Mass wherever you wish, provided it is celebrated according to an approved Catholic Rite.


I suggest you reread chapter 8. Pope Francis specifically discussed validity of prior marriages.

Like I said, there is what AL actually says and then there is what people want it to say ( as fits their motives).


well this parish isn’t even close to where I live anyway.


That’s strange, I know people who travel far to their parish and they get envelopes and everything. They’re not parishioners?

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