Questo articolo è disponibile anche in:
Italian
English
Question
To your kind attention
There are some things that disturb me within the Holy Church.
A couple of dear friends (she is divorced, he never married but is living together with her) tried to approach the Church. The priest refused to confess them and told him that, to be in the grace of God, he should leave her and find another woman.
I completely agree that they are in mortal sin, and I understand the decision not to confess them, but I honestly ask myself where the place of mercy in such a context is. One does not choose who to love, just as a homosexual does not choose his sexual orientation, so the question is this: are all divorced people who have found a new love excluded from partaking of the sacraments? Will they never be able to be saved?
How can a woman who has an abortion, that is, kills a life in the womb, receive absolution, while a divorced person cannot partake of the sacraments?
I look forward to your answer.
Sincerely,
Irene S.
Answer
Dear Irene,
1. In your statements there are some things that are right and others that need to be rectified.
I assume that what you have told me is all that the priest said to the person concerned.
Well, if the priest confined himself to only that, it is clear that he acted hastily and did not help the penitent as he should.
2. Probably, these two people live together not because they despise marriage, which indeed they would like to make, but because they know they cannot, because one of them is already married.
Aware that many marriages are celebrated in a superficial way, the priest should have suggested resorting to the ecclesiastical tribunal to verify the presence of elements that may have made the celebration null and void.
According to the legislation that Pope Francis has enacted for the ecclesiastical courts, this trial must not be protracted for a long time, but the ruling must be given within a year.
It is not difficult for experienced judges to find invalidating elements.
Once the ruling has been obtained, the two can celebrate the sacrament.
3. While waiting for this ruling, they cannot receive the sacraments if they do not try to live in chastity, as is the duty of every Christian, and if at the same time they try to avoid partaking of Holy Communion where it is known that they are simply living together.
I think that so far you agree too.
4. Then, you make statements that at the very least need to be spelled out.
You say: “One does not choose who to love”.
Of course, one does. You must choose who to love. It is not enough to let oneself be carried away by instinct.
To take an extreme case, if one falls in love with a consecrated person, it is not enough for this person to say, “I have the right to love him,” because the consecrated person as such belongs exclusively to the Lord.
Likewise, if one falls in love with a happily married woman, it is not enough for him to say, “love cannot be controlled, so I too want to (sexually) love her,” because that woman belongs to her husband with an exclusive and unbreakable bond.
I think you agree on this too.
5. Then you go on to say: “just as a homosexual does not choose his sexual orientation”.
I will not discuss the subject of homosexuality, but even just by sticking to the example you gave, if one said, “my orientation is to love many women” and, bluntly, “my orientation is to be a womanizer,” what would you say to him? That he has the right to marry many women at the same time?
And if one said, “my orientation is to (sexually) love children.” Indeed, if he said, “I fell in love with that child,” what would you say to him? That one does not choose who to love?
God gave us intelligence. As in the earthly paradise, so also now he gives us permission to eat all the fruits except the forbidden ones, because they harm us.
I think you agree on this too.
6. And here is your question: are all divorced people who have found a new love excluded from partaking of the sacraments? Will they never be able to be saved?
You know well that the Church does not express itself in a cutting way as one would infer from your words.
This is in fact what we read in Familiaris consortio nr. 84:
“The Church, which was set up to lead to salvation all people and especially the baptized, cannot abandon to their own devices those who have been previously bound by sacramental marriage and who have attempted a second marriage. The Church will therefore make untiring efforts to put at their disposal her means of salvation.
(…)
Together with the Synod, I earnestly call upon pastors and the whole community of the faithful to help the divorced, and with solicitous care to make sure that they do not consider themselves as separated from the Church, for as baptized persons they can, and indeed must, share in her life.
They should be encouraged to listen to the word of God, to attend the Sacrifice of the Mass, to persevere in prayer, to contribute to works of charity and to community efforts in favor of justice, to bring up their children in the Christian faith, to cultivate the spirit and practice of penance and thus implore, day by day, God’s grace. Let the Church pray for them, encourage them and show herself a merciful mother, and thus sustain them in faith and hope.
However, the Church reaffirms her practice, which is based upon Sacred Scripture, of not admitting to Eucharistic Communion divorced persons who have remarried. They are unable to be admitted thereto from the fact that their state and condition of life objectively contradict that union of love between Christ and the Church which is signified and effected by the Eucharist.
Besides this, there is another special pastoral reason: if these people were admitted to the Eucharist, the faithful would be led into error and confusion regarding the Church’s teaching about the indissolubility of marriage.
Reconciliation in the sacrament of Penance which would open the way to the Eucharist, can only be granted to those who, repenting of having broken the sign of the Covenant and of fidelity to Christ, are sincerely ready to undertake a way of life that is no longer in contradiction to the indissolubility of marriage. This means, in practice, that when, for serious reasons, such as for example the children’s upbringing, a man and a woman cannot satisfy the obligation to separate, they “take on themselves the duty to live in complete continence, that is, by abstinence from the acts proper to married couples.”
(…)
By acting in this way, the Church professes her own fidelity to Christ and to His truth. At the same time she shows motherly concern for these children of hers, especially those who, through no fault of their own, have been abandoned by their legitimate partner.
With firm confidence she believes that those who have rejected the Lord’s command and are still living in this state will be able to obtain from God the grace of conversion and salvation, provided that they have persevered in prayer, penance and charity.”
7. Finally, there is your last question: “How can a woman who has an abortion, that is, kills a life in the womb, receive absolution, while a divorced person cannot partake of the sacraments?”
The question is ill-posed because absolution can only be given to those who are repentant.
If a woman who had an abortion is not repentant of what she has done, she is not reconciled with God, and she cannot receive absolution.
If, on the other hand, she is repentant and she has the intention of not doing it anymore, she receives not only forgiveness, but also all the reliefs of grace.
Thus, if a divorced person is repentant of what he or she has done and is sincerely ready to undertake a way of life that is no longer in contradiction to the indissolubility of marriage, then – according to the directions of Familiaris consortio nr. 84 – he or she can partake of the sacraments.
With the hope that the teaching of the Church has brought you some more light, I gladly remember you in prayer and I bless you.
Father Angelo