Post Francis’ post-synodal apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia in Vatican City on April 8, 2016. / Credit: Daniel Ibanez/CNA
Vatican City, Oct 3, 2023 / 14:00 pm (CNA).
The Vatican on Monday publicly released responses to 10 “dubia” submitted by Czech Cardinal Dominik Duka regarding “the administration of the Eucharist to divorced couples living in a new union.”
Originally submitted by the archbishop emeritus of Prague on July 13 on behalf of the Czech Bishops’ Conference, the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith’s response — signed both by Pope Francis and new prefect Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernández — had been issued to the Czech cardinal on Sept. 25.
At the heart of Duka’s dubia and the Vatican’s response was the practical application of Amoris Laetitia (“The Joy of Love”), Pope Francis’ apostolic exhortation issued after the 2015 Synod on the Family. The questions submitted focus on pastoral guidance for the reception of Communion by those sacramentally married but “divorced and remarried” to another person other than their spouse.
Read the text of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith’s response below, translated by CNA’s Matthew Santucci:
Response to a series of questions, proposed by His Eminence Cardinal Dominik Duka, OP, regarding the administration of the Eucharist to divorced couples living in a new union.
On July 13, 2023, a request was received by this department from His Eminence Cardinal Dominik Duka, OP, archbishop emeritus of Prague, on behalf of the Czech Bishops’ Conference, who asks a series of questions regarding the administration of the Eucharist to divorced people living in a new union.
Although some of the questions are not drafted clearly enough and, therefore, may be a harbinger of some inaccuracies, this dicastery intends to respond to help resolve the doubts raised by them.
-
Is it possible for a diocese in a union of the bishops’ conference to make decisions completely autonomously, referring to the facts cited in questions 2 and 3?
The apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia, a document of the ordinary pontifical magisterium, towards which all are called to offer the homage of intelligence and will, states that “priests have the duty to accompany [the divorced and remarried] in helping them to understand their situation according to the teaching of the Church and the guidelines of the bishop.” In this sense, it is possible, indeed it is desirable, that the ordinary of a diocese establishes some criteria which, in line with the teaching of the Church, can help priests in the accompaniment and discernment of divorced people living in a new union.
-
Can Pope Francis’ response to the question from the pastoral section of the diocese of Buenos Aires, given that the text was published in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis, be considered an affirmation of the ordinary magisterium of the Church?
As indicated in the rescript accompanying the two documents on the Acta Apostolicae Sedis, these are published “velut magisterium authenticum,” that is, as authentic magisterium (teaching).
-
Is it a decision of the ordinary magisterium of the Church based on the document Amoris Laetitiae?
As the Holy Father recalls in his letters to the delegate of the pastoral region of Buenos Aires, Amoris Laetitia was the result of the work and prayer of the whole Church, with the mediation of two synods and the pope. This document is based on the magisterium of previous popes, who already recognized the possibility for divorced people in new unions to access the Eucharist, as long as they assume “the duty to live in complete continence, that is, by abstinence from the acts proper to married couples,” as it was proposed by John Paul II or to “commit (themselves) to living their relationship … as friends” as proposed by Benedict XVI. Francis maintains the proposal of full continence for the divorced and remarried in a new union, but admits that there may be difficulties in practicing it and therefore allows in certain cases, after adequate discernment, the administration of the sacrament of reconciliation even when it is not possible in being faithful to the continence proposed by the Church.
-
Is it Amoris Laetitiae’s intention to institutionalize this solution through a permit or an official decision for individual couples?
Point 1 of the document “basic criteria for the application of chapter VIII of Amoris Laetitia” expressly states: “It is not appropriate to speak of ‘permissions’ to access the sacraments, but rather of a process of discernment accompanied by a pastor. It is a ‘personal and pastoral’ discernment” (AL, 300). It is therefore a question of pastoral accompaniment as an exercise of the “via caritatis,” which is nothing other than an invitation to follow the path “of Jesus: of mercy and reinstatement.” Amoris Laetitia opens the possibility of accessing the sacraments of reconciliation and the Eucharist when, in a particular case, there are limitations that attenuate responsibility and culpability (guilt). On the other hand, this process of accompaniment does not necessarily end with the sacraments, but can be oriented towards other forms of integration in the life of the Church: a greater presence in the community, participation in prayer or reflection groups, or involvement in various ecclesial services.
-
Who should be the evaluator of the situation given the couples in question, any confessor, local parish priest, vicar forane, episcopal vicar, or penitentiary?
It is about starting an itinerary of pastoral accompaniment for the discernment of each individual person. Amoris Laetitia underlines that all priests have the responsibility to accompany interested people on the journey of discernment. It is the priest who welcomes the person, listens to him carefully and shows him the maternal face of the Church, accepting his right intention and his good purpose to place his whole life in the light of the Gospel and to practice charity. But it is each person, individually, who is called to put himself before God and expose his conscience to him, with both his possibilities and limits. This conscience, accompanied by a priest and enlightened by the guidelines of the Church, is called to be formed to evaluate and give a sufficient judgment to discern the possibility of accessing the sacraments.
-
Would it be appropriate for these to be dealt with by the competent ecclesiastical tribunal?
In cases where it is possible to establish a declaration of nullity, the appeal to the ecclesiastical tribunal will be part of the discernment process. The Holy Father wanted to simplify these processes through the motu proprio Mitis Iudex. The problem arises in more complex situations in which it is not possible to obtain a declaration of nullity. In these cases, a process of discernment may also be possible which stimulates or renews the personal encounter with Jesus Christ, also in the sacraments.
-
Can this principle be applied to both parties of a civilly divorced marriage, or distinguish the degree of fault and proceed accordingly?
St. John Paul II had already stated that “the judgment of one’s state of grace obviously belongs only to the person involved, since it is a question of examining one’s conscience.” Therefore, it is a process of individual discernment in which “the divorced and remarried should ask themselves: how did they act towards their children when the conjugal union entered into crisis; whether or not they made attempts at reconciliation; what has become of the abandoned party; what consequences the new relationship has on the rest of the family and the community of the faithful; and what example is being set for young people who are preparing for marriage. A sincere reflection can strengthen trust in the mercy of God, which is not denied anyone.”
-
In the case of this single permission, is it to be understood that married life (the sexual aspect) must not be mentioned in the sacrament of reconciliation?
Even in the sacrament of marriage, the sexual life of the spouses is the subject of an examination of conscience to confirm that it is a true expression of love and that it helps growth in love. All aspects of life must be placed before God.
-
Wouldn’t it be appropriate for the entire issue to be explained better in the text of your competent dicastery?
Based on the words of the Holy Father in the letter of response to the delegate of the Buenos Aires pastoral region, in which it was stated that there are no other interpretations, it seems that the issue is sufficiently explained in the aforementioned document.
-
How to proceed to establish internal unity, but also to avoid disturbing the ordinary magisterium of the Church?
It would be appropriate for the episcopal conference to agree on some minimum criteria, to implement the proposals of Amoris Laetitia, which help priests in the processes of accompaniment and discernment regarding the possible access to the sacraments of some divorcees in a new union, without prejudice to the legitimate authority that each bishop has in his own diocese.
Ex Audientia Die: 25/9/2023
Franciscus
Victor Fernández
[…]
If it leads to greater religious freedom for, and respect for the human rights of, Christians in the Middle East, then the trip can be deemed a success. But sadly I will not hold my breath.
Have you seen the photo of Jorge Bergoglio kissing the infidel, anti-Christ inman while signing a blasphemous joint document with him that proves his complete apostasy?
This document entitled “Human Fraternity for World Peace and Coexistence” contained the following two abominable sentences:
The pluralism and the diversity of religions, color, sex, race and language are willed by God in His wisdom, through which He created human beings. This divine wisdom is the source from which the right to freedom of belief and the freedom to be different derives.
These two sentences include at least three heretical teachings:
that pluralism is willed by God, whereas in fact it is diversity that is the consequence of the sin introduced by man into creation, as Sacred Scripture, including Genesis, the account of the Tower of Babel, and the Epistles of St. Paul make clear
that God is the source of error and erroneous beliefs
the Heresy of Ecumenism, introduced by Josef Ratzinger and the Vatican II Anti-council, that “all religions are equally true” and that “we all worship the same god.”
[Some information for this Commentary was contributed by Vatican Information Services.]
No! God did not will a plurality of religions.
Here is what a true Catholic, a true pope teaches:
Never perhaps in the past have we seen, as we see in these our own times, the minds of men so occupied by the desire both of strengthening and of extending to the common welfare of human society that fraternal relationship which binds and unites us together, and which is a consequence of our common origin and nature. For since the nations do not yet fully enjoy the fruits of peace – indeed rather do old and new disagreements in various places break forth into sedition and civic strife – and since on the other hand many disputes which concern the tranquility and prosperity of nations cannot be settled without the active concurrence and help of those who rule the States and promote their interests, it is easily understood, and the more so because none now dispute the unity of the human race, why many desire that the various nations, inspired by this universal kinship, should daily be more closely united one to another.
A similar object is aimed at by some, in those matters which concern the New Law promulgated by Christ our Lord. For since they hold it for certain that men destitute of all religious sense are very rarely to be found, they seem to have founded on that belief a hope that the nations, although they differ among themselves in certain religious matters, will without much difficulty come to agree as brethren in professing certain doctrines, which form as it were a common basis of the spiritual life. For which reason conventions, meetings and addresses are frequently arranged by these persons, at which a large number of listeners are present, and at which all without distinction are invited to join in the discussion, both infidels of every kind, and Christians, even those who have unhappily fallen away from Christ or who with obstinacy and pertinacity deny His divine nature and mission.
Certainly such attempts can nowise be approved by Catholics, founded as they are on that false opinion which considers all religions to be more or less good and praiseworthy, since they all in different ways manifest and signify that sense which is inborn in us all, and by which we are led to God and to the obedient acknowledgment of His rule.
Not only are those who hold this opinion in error and deceived, but also in distorting the idea of true religion they reject it, and little by little turn aside to naturalism and atheism, as it is called; from which it clearly follows that one who supports those who hold these theories and attempt to realize them, is altogether abandoning the divinely revealed religion.
Pius XI
Mortalium Animos