PHILADELPHIA —The Archdiocese of Philadelphia released “Pastoral Guidelines for Implementing Amoris Laetitia” on July 1, thus providing a clear blueprint for outreach to Catholics on the fringes of the Church, including the divorced and civilly remarried, cohabiting couples and those in same-sex relationships.
Amoris Laetitia (The Joy of Love), Pope Francis’ recent post-synodal apostolic exhortation, “calls for a sensitive accompaniment of those … who may not be living in accord with Catholic belief, and yet desire to be more fully integrated into Church life, including the sacraments of penance and Eucharist,” read the guidelines, approved by Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia — a key figure in the two-part synod of bishops on the family, which finished its work in 2015.
But while pastors are encouraged to welcome all Catholics to parish life, the document upholds Church discipline, which prohibits Catholics in irregular unions from receiving the Eucharist.
“As with all magisterial documents, Amoris Laetitia is best understood when read within the tradition of the Church’s teaching and life. In fact, the Holy Father himself states clearly that neither Church teaching nor the canonical discipline concerning marriage has changed,” explains the document, which spells out when and how Catholics in a range of difficult situations can return to the sacraments.
“Archbishop Chaput’s text is the most important episcopal response to the exhortation that has yet been published,” Christian Brugger, a professor of moral theology at St. John Vianney Theological Seminary in Denver, told the Register.
Brugger said he has not yet seen similar guidelines released by other U.S. delegates to the synod and expressed hope that the document will serve as a “model” for other dioceses in this country.
Meanwhile, Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney, who was baptized a Catholic, on July 6 criticized Archbishop Chaput for the guidelines, tweeting, “Jesus gave us gift of Holy Communion because he so loved us. All of us. Chaput’s actions are not Christian.”
July 1 Implementation
Designed for Philadelphia “priests and deacons, seminarians and laypersons who work in the fields of marriage, sacramental ministry and pastoral care regarding matters of human sexuality,” the guidelines took effect July 1.
They strongly encourage pastoral support for married couples who are able to receive the sacraments but still face an array of challenges. Likewise, sensitive consideration is given to the problems of Catholics who are civilly remarried after a divorce and others who cohabit or have entered into a same-sex union.
In its concise review of Catholic doctrine, the document upholds moral absolutes that prohibit sexual intimacy outside of a lawful marriage and tackles misconceptions about the role of the conscience in the moral decision-making process.
“Conscience stands under the objective moral law and should be formed by it, so that ‘[t]he truth about moral good, as that truth is declared in the law of reason, is practically and concretely recognized by the judgment of conscience,’” states the document, which quotes from Pope St. John Paul II’s landmark encyclical Veritatis Splendor (The Splendor of Truth). “Pastors should strive to avoid both a subjectivism that ignores the truth or a rigorism that lacks mercy.”
Call for Engagement
The second portion of the document begins with an examination of the needs of married couples who are able to receive the sacraments but may face an array of serious challenges that can threaten the stability of their union.
“Every family is a ‘domestic church,’ but no Christian family can survive indefinitely without encouragement from other believing families. The Christian community must especially find ways to engage and help families who are burdened by illness, financial setbacks and marital friction,” state the guidelines.
Catholics who are separated or divorced, sometimes through no fault of their own, also require special sensitivity from Church ministers.
“It can mean separation from one’s children, a life without conjugal intimacy, and for some the prospect of never having children. Pastors should offer these persons friendship, understanding, introductions to reliable lay mentors and practical help, so they can sustain their fidelity even under pressure,” the guidelines explain.
When appropriate, such Catholics “should be strongly encouraged to seek the assistance of a marriage tribunal of the Church,” the document advises.
Annulments “cannot be granted informally or privately by individual pastors or priests. Because marriage is a public reality, and because a determination about the validity of a marriage affects the lives, the rights and the duties of all parties touched by it, there must be a canonical process and a decision by the proper authority under canon law.”
The document offers an equally sympathetic treatment of Catholics who have divorced and civilly remarried.
“Couples should sense from their pastors, and from the whole community, the love they deserve as persons made in the image of God and as fellow Christians.”
At the same time, Church ministers are directed to help such couples make an examination of conscience that grapples with the moral choices that brought them to their present predicament.
“The divorced and remarried should ask themselves: how they have acted toward their children when the conjugal union entered into crisis; if they made attempts at reconciliation; what has become of the abandoned party,” reads the document, which suggests an array of topics for review.
The Communion Question
The guidelines also consider the contentious question introduced into the synodal process in early 2014 by German Cardinal Walter Kasper: “Can the divorced and civilly remarried receive the sacraments?” While the document offers a more developed response to this query, it also provides a concise answer: “With divorced-and-civilly-remarried persons, Church teaching requires them to refrain from sexual intimacy. This applies even if they must (for the care of their children) continue to live under one roof.”
Guidance for ministering to cohabiting couples is also included.
“Where one or another person is not capable of, or is not willing to commit to, a marriage, the pastor should urge them to separate,” states the document, which observes that some couples cohabit because of immaturity, and so are ill-prepared for marriage.
“Where the couple is disposed to marriage, they should be encouraged to practice chastity until they are sacramentally married.”
The document also makes clear that persons with same-sex attraction are loved equally by God and that the required practice of chastity, though often very difficult, is possible.
“They should be counseled, like everyone else, to have frequent recourse to the sacrament of penance, where they should be treated with gentleness and compassion,” the guidelines explain.
The document notes that many pastors already have experience working with same-sex couples who live together chastely. But the text explicitly rejects the inclusion into parish life of “two persons in an active, public same-sex relationship,” as “a serious counter-witness to Catholic belief.”
Earlier Interpretations of the Exhortation
After the Vatican released Amoris Laetitia in April, news headlines that greeted Pope Francis’ apostolic exhortation said it would result in a more “inclusive” Church.
Pope Francis wants the “Church to be more welcoming and less judgmental, and he seemingly signaled a pastoral path for divorced-and-remarried Catholics to receive holy Communion,” reported The New York Times.
Indeed, Cardinal Kasper — the retired German Church leader who roiled the synod with his proposal of an “internal forum” provision that would open the door for divorced-and-civilly-remarried Catholic to receive the Eucharist without living in continence in the second union — also welcomed the exhortation as a game changer.
Reception of the Eucharist for Catholics in irregular unions, Cardinal Kasper told the British Catholic newspaper The Tablet, would not be permitted “as a general permission, but according to a spiritual and pastoral discernment, judging case by case.”
Pope Francis did not endorse the internal-forum provision in Amoris Laetitia, and most U.S. Church leaders have shown little enthusiasm for the proposal, even as they move ahead with plans to incorporate elements of the exhortation in marriage-preparation courses and in catechetical and seminary formation.
Archbishop Chaput, one of several delegates who represented the U.S. bishops at the 2015 synod, earlier sought to reset expectations regarding the changes in store for the Church.
“It would be a mistake to misread the compassionate spirit of Amoris Laetitia as a license to ignore Christian truth on matters of substance — matters that include the Catholic teaching on marriage and the discipline of the Church in the administration of the sacraments,” Archbishop Chaput cautioned in an April 14 column in his archdiocesan newspaper.
‘Clear Christian Guidance’
Now, with the release of the concise, clear guidelines for implementation of Amoris Laetitia, Archbishop Chaput has offered a pastoral path that grounds compassion in an adherence to established Church practice. At the same time, the language of the text reflects an urgent desire to bridge the divide between alienated Catholics and their cradle faith.
This striking approach will likely generate considerable attention. At present, Archbishop Chaput is an elected member of the Vatican’s synod council, which will direct the global follow-up to the synods on the family. And as chairman-elect of the U.S. bishops’ Committee on Laity, Marriage, Family Life and Youth, he has agreed to coordinate a working group of committee chairmen that will assist the bishops with implementation of the exhortation in this country.
Brugger applauded the guidelines for providing “clear Christian guidance for caring for the souls of Catholics living in difficult or objectively sinful situations.”
Of equal importance, he added, the text “clarifies five doctrinal questions generated by Amoris Laetitia, namely, on the nature of conscience; on reception of holy Communion for civilly remarried divorcees who are unwilling to refrain from sexual intimacy; on priestly pastoral competency to ‘accompany’ divorced Catholics in the [internal] forum; on the nature of moral absolutes; and on the biblical meaning of mercy.”
Asked to comment on the substance of the guidelines, Kurt Martens, a leading canon lawyer at The Catholic University of America, told the Register: “Archbishop Chaput only applies the teaching of the Church and shows where the lines are drawn.”
“He does a good job explaining in general what it means to receive Communion” and “the relation between sin and Communion. Moreover, he does it in a pastoral way, precisely what Pope Francis has asked for,” Martens added.
That said, the canon lawyer predicted that some Catholics will look for a starkly different implementation of an inspiring and controversial papal exhortation.
“For sure, there will be people who do not like what is in these pastoral guidelines,” Martens concluded, “but they should be encouraged to read and reread Amoris Laetitia to discover what’s there and what’s not there.”
Joan Frawley Desmond is the Register’s senior editor.
View Comments
Comments
Join the Discussion
Archbishop Chaput’s “Guidelines” express basic requirements for couples in a 2nd marriage (without an Annulment of the 1st marriage) that have CREATED A FAMILY and have young children….The fact is, there IS a serious problem when young children are raised without the presence of both their mother and their father in the home. (This is why Pope Francis has given this permission to Bishops and the Archbishops.) My understanding in such cases is that both parents ARE BOUND TO ABSTAIN FROM SEXUAL UNION—-if they want to receive the Eucharist. If they fall into “temptation,” they have to go to Confession before they can receive the Eucharist. NONETHELESS, it does concern me that the Bishop of each Diocese (or Archdiocese) is to make his own additional rules for his diocese….This makes for too much room for the possibility of significant variation between archdioceses and dioceses around the world on a matter that falls under the 6th and 9th Commandments—-and one of the Seven Sacraments! This really concerns me: we are dealing with GOD’s LAW, not just “Canon Law,” AND the UNITY of the “One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church!”
Follow the bizarre logic of the custodians of the escape route from godlessness to paradise. At the holy places that define the escape route, close encounters with our loving God take place. During a close encounter, a connection is made between heaven and earth and through the connection the light of paradise illuminates the darkness of godlessness. The experience transforms sinners into saints. Yet, the custodians bar unworthy sinners from the holy places thereby preventing them from a close encounter. Only God transforms us from sinner into saint. The custodians cannot. We cannot transform ourselves. Yet, the custodians deny sinners the opportunity for transformation. Become a saint before we give you access to the holy places that define the escape route, the custodians bizarrely admonish. Sainthood, however, comes from close encounters with the living God not before them. Do not worry about God. God can protect himself from the unworthy sinner. He doesn’t need the official rules, regulations, rigmarole and red tape of the well-intentioned but misguided Bishop.
Is the job of the Church to keep sinners off the escape route from godlessness to paradise or to get sinners onto it? Is the job of the Church to bring sinners to the holy places that define the escape route or to bar sinners from them? Is the job of the Church to maximize the new exodus or to minimize it? Is the escape route a public highway, catholic in its scope, open to all including sinners or is it a private, limited access road reserved for the exclusive use of a sanctimonious subset of self-styled saints? Is the Church supposed to be grease for the wheels of the escape or an obstacle in its way? Is the Church supposed to facilitate our escape or frustrate it, filter it and foul it up? After Adam and Eve, like foolish children, ran away from their home with God in paradise and took us with them into godlessness, did God leave the door open, the porch light on and the welcome mat out in the hope we would return home after our exile in godlessness was over or did God shut the door after us and lock it? Who is your God and what is his Church?
“Furthermore, the custodians expect sinners to transform themselves into saints on their own without God’s help before the custodian will grant them access to the holy places. This restriction is bizarre because only God transforms sinners into saint and this takes place at the holy places that define the escape route. After Adam and Eve, like foolish children, ran away from their home with God in paradise and took us with them into godlessness, God left the door open, the porch light on and the welcome mat out in hope that we would return after our temporary exile in godlessness was over. He didn’t put a screen on the door to keep flies and sinners out. The good Archbishop, however, is not fond of either flies or sinners so he puts screens to keep them out.”
Oh my. Christ gave instructions, ‘cast ye not pearls before the swine’ means to not give gifts to those who refuse them. I believe the good intentions of the Archbishop, he has an obligation to serve his flock, including telling them when they are in error. Woe be unto the Archbishop Chaput if fails in this. Receiving communion unworthily is a grave sin. You are missing an important adjective, “unrepentant”, as in “... is not found of either unrepentant flies or unrepentant sinners…” If a sinner has confessed their sin, and repents, turns away from sin, they are more than welcome. The sinner who says “I have sinned and fully intend to continue sinning.” is the problem. We can pray for them, but if they do not want to give up their sin there is little anyone can do for them, even Christ.
God built an escape route from godlessness to paradise, defined the escape route with holy places, made a map of them, established a Church, entrusted the map to the Church, and gave the Church the job of facilitating our escape - not the job of frustrating it, filtering it or fouling it up. The escape route was designed to be a public highway at whose holy places we could experience close encounters with the living God. During the close encounters, God transforms sinners into saints. However, the custodians of the escape route have taken control of the public highway and privatized it. The public highway is not open to the public anymore. The escape route is no longer catholic. All are not welcome. Many are denied access. The custodians turn pilgrims away. Traffic on the escape route is shrinking. Fewer and fewer of us are going to Mass. None are going to Confession. Vocations have dried up. Churches are withering and dying. The custodians have turned the public highway into a private, limited access road reserved for the exclusive use of a sanctimonious subset of the children of Adam and Eve. Instead of maximizing the new exodus, the custodians are minimizing it. Furthermore, the custodians expect sinners to transform themselves into saints on their own without God’s help before the custodian will grant them access to the holy places. This restriction is bizarre because only God transforms sinners into saint and this takes place at the holy places that define the escape route. After Adam and Eve, like foolish children, ran away from their home with God in paradise and took us with them into godlessness, God left the door open, the porch light on and the welcome mat out in hope that we would return after our temporary exile in godlessness was over. He didn’t put a screen on the door to keep flies and sinners out. The good Archbishop, however, is not fond of either flies or sinners so he puts screens to keep them out.
@Nonya I read your post with great sadness. Priests are free to forgive the sin of abortion in confession. I know you say you are an ex-Catholic and an atheist but I think there is some remnant of faith still in you. Give Jesus a chance. He loves you still. May I suggest you contact a priest to discuss your situation? I wish I could speak with you personally. God’s blessings.
First, I wonder: How did David Carlon’s abusive language toward Deacon David’s “Comment” get posted on this NCR web page, given the Rules re. “Comments”??? Second: when the “Apostolic Exhortation of Pope Francis, “Amoris Laetitiae” (The Joy of Love), was first published on the VATICAN Web page, it contained a serious “error” in regard to CATHOLIC CHURCH Teaching regarding Marriage and Divorce—-which is based on the clear Teaching in the New Testament. The problem is: that first DOCUMENT WAS, no doubt, READ BY MANY PEOPLE (including myself) BEFORE IT WAS REMOVED and CORRECTED! So, “thank you” Deacon David for your Comment—-and “Thank you” to ARCHBISHOP CHAPUT for giving “Guidelines” as he is supposed to…, re. the “Implementation” (of the “corrected” version) of the PAPAL DOCUMENT: “The JOY of LOVE”—-in his Archdiocese.
Mayor Kenney, the so called uh, Deacon David and the assorted self willed and haughty herd of goats who arrogantly belittle the anointed shepherd of our LORD just might keep company in Hell.
Our LORD JESUS is a GOD of mercy and compassion, not an effeminate sissy who minced words about marriage, hypocrites, HIS statutes, and the impure of heart.
Pope Francis, in his homilies, public statements and in ‘The Joy of Love’ has simply announced what has been happening in the ‘internal forum’ of local churches for many years. The person who is called back to the Church in their heartfelt desire, yet cannot find a way out of a bad marriage short of divorce, is a reality faced by real pastors who minister to God’s people in the trenches. These brothers and sisters must be met where they are and helped to become fully reunited to the family. Our Holy Father has reinforced this reality and thank goodness he understands the world we live in. An interesting note is that the Eastern Orthodox are actually more progressive than the Catholic Church in this matter… Our Pope has stated correctly that the Sacraments are medicine for the sick, not a prize for the pious. Archbishop Chaput will find that many of his pastors will disobey this guidance in the name of mercy and love. Philly will also likely be without a ‘red hat’ for a while.
As you can tell, AL has caused a division in the church - needlessly. But since the Pope appears to want to subtly make Catholic doctrine optional, based on how you happen to feel that day, then the Pope has done what he wants to do - he wants to make the Catholic church into the Episcopal church, where there are no rules, and everyone puts their own spin on the words of Jesus, ignoring those that do not agree with their lifestyle and stressing only those phrases that appeal to them and their friends.
Archbishop Chaput has done a great service, and a noble service, by trying his best to take the good and accurate parts of AL, and refusing to pretend that AL has changed any doctrine, when its author did not have the courage to come out and say so.
For those that criticize Chaput, please go form your own loosey goosey religion where hippies can groove out and do their own thing.
Theresa H:
I probably should have clarified that a little better. EMHC stands for “Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion.” I know some bishops and priests enforce guidelines. Oftentimes, the laity call EMHC’s “Eucharistic Ministers”, but the proper terminology is “Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion.”
Chaput clear, Francis not. Chaput for pope.
Thank God for you, Archbishop, for stating the truth. So many do not know what the Catholic Church really teaches. They think what they are doing is okay and they don’t know it. Jesus Christ says fornicators cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven. We did not say it, our Lord says it. Sex is for intimacy within marriage and nowhere else. It is a hard saying to live as brother and sister with the one you love in an irregular marriage but with God’s grace in can be done. Even many in the Sacrament of Marriage have to live that way permanently because of illness or other reasons. Who do we love the most and foremost before all is Jesus Christ. If we love our spouse we want him/her to go to Heaven.
We should all be aware of the FACT, the clear TEACHING of the CATHOLIC CHURCH, that the POPE is “infallible” only when he PUBLICLY, “ex Cathedra,” so declares as such, some point of doctrine—-and/or, when he re-iterates something already declared “infallible.” Also, every POPE is HUMAN, he has a personality, he can even make mistakes! The fact is (I dare say: like no Pope before—certainly NOT in my long life-time), Pope Francis likes to mingle with people…, talk with people, wherever he goes and, of course, “Reporters” love this! In fact, some are just waiting for something “sensational” to pick up on….Also, Pope Francis has “said,” and even “written” a couple things that have even been published on the Vatican Web Page that have been removed….) The fact is, no Pope has been/is infallible in everything he says or writes—But (for whatever “reason”—not always “good”) people still tend to take-in every word “THE POPE SAYS,” like with no one else in this world! So, let’s not criticize Archbishop Chaput when there is good reason to speak up—-for the sake of the Church.
Seems to me Archbishop Chaput was balancing the “respect” due POPE Francis with the need to ensure the people he (the Archbishop) bears responsibility for as their Bishop—-before GOD—-re. the “Official Teaching” of the “Catholic Church”—as clearly presented in the New Testament….For sure, the Catholic Church is living in very grave/somber times. There are serious moral problems in our Civil Laws and Modern Culture and certain “concessions” on the same are seeping even into some members of the Catholic Church, including the Hierarchy….I’ll not say more, here, but recent Articles on the NCR (here) have expressed them—- After all, we DO need to be aware…, and we must pray, especially, for our Pope, our Cardinals, Bishops, and Priests and for one another these days, that we ALL be FAITH-FULL to JESUS CHRIST, OUR LORD! Also, David, what does “EMHC” stand for!?!
@Michael Futschik: you seem to have not heard of emotional affairs, which don’t require sex to be as damaging, and in some cases more so than the ones that do involve sex. True, I suspose, the Church does not appear to recognize there existence since I guess the Church is okay with divorcing your spouse, civilly remarrying another, having children, and then refraining from sex…as if that just makes it all better. I am not sure the abandoned spouse/children would see it that way, nor I am I sure that is what Jesus has in mind when he says spouses must reconcile. Justmaybe has good points that the Church really ought to address, especially in this technological age which facilitates ill advised emotional attachments. Still Chaput is trying to keep with the constant teaching of Jesus concerning adultery, which is something few seem to want these days.
A father who loves his children will discipline them. So people in irregular unions need to sort that out before being right. Sort it out. If you don’t want to go down slippery slopes, don’t go where it is slippery. Do a better job discerning before you marry the first time. If you can’t get an annulment, don’t get in a relationship the second time. We have instructions which aren’t meant to make us miserable, rather they are meant to help reach happy fullness in life.
I’m glad Archbishop Chaput has taken a stand. There’s much confusion fueled by the secular media on “Amoris Laetitia”, and most Catholics that attend Sunday Mass and hear the secular news normally don’t know any better. I hope and pray that more bishops follow along with these guidelines, such as those who serve on parish councils who are married must be in sacramental marriages.
There are probably several EMHC’s in several parishes across the United States who are divorced and remarried (i.e. by a Justice of the Peace or a Protestant minister) without an annulment, which means they are living in sin. I am not knocking those who are divorced and living chastely, because those who are divorced and living chastely are in accordance with Church teaching.
I have heard very few priests discuss that a criteria to be an EMHC is that one must be baptized, confirmed, received first Eucharist, be a practicing Catholic, and if married, marriage must be in accordance with the Church (i.e. sacramental). I do thank those priests who have enforced guidelines for godparents at baptisms, since practicing the faith is important.
I have also heard very few priests discuss with single people, and those who are “single again”, that if a decree of nullity has not been granted, one should not be dating, since the “single again” person is not available for a sacramental marriage. I have friends (and an old girlfriend) who did not begin dating after a divorce until they received a decree of nullity. The process took 12-18 months, and my friends (and my old girlfriend) told me that the annulment process was like a healing process.
If more priests (and permanent deacons) were more bold and in charity, told their flock things they didn’t want to hear, there would be less couples rushing to a priest to get married, and find “why does this take so long?” “Why do I have to file for an annulment?” “Why do I have to register in the parish and regularly attend Mass?”
Again, thank you Archbishop Chaput.
ALL divorced people are NOT allowed to remarry….: “What GOD has joined together let no man put asunder.” (Jesus Christ—-in Matt. 19:6 & Mark 10:9) Also, the 6th Commandment is: “Thou shalt NOT commit adultery.” Annulments are only granted after it has been officially determined by the “Marriage Tribunal” in ROME that the first “marriage” was NOT valid. (JESUS meant what He said!)
I am an EX-Catholic. I consider myself atheist but I agree with Mr. Chaput. I was EXCOMMUNICATED because after a vicious RAPE, I terminated a pregnancy. I am not here to be JUDGED by sanctimonious tongues but to wonder out loud, “Why have rules if they are not followed?” I am EXCOMMUNICATED because of MY CHOICES. The buck stops with ME and I take full responsibility over my actions. Remarried people need to do the same. Don’t like the rules? Leave the exclusive club for the few that play by them. Their game, their rules.
May the precious blood of Jesus cleanse us from the tyranny and bloodshed of our country on this sad day! Having observed and heard his homilies in Denver for some years, I find Archbishop Chaput, once again, somewhat vague and not very cogent in dealing with intimate relationships outside of marriage. It sounds like a half hearted apologetic to this radical Pope Francis and a very weak defense of what the Church has taught for centuries about matrimony and the sacraments. For example, at the Cathedral in Denver, CO, the Archbishop had “suggested” that it might be a good idea for “cohabitating couples” to refrain from sexual intimacy and to separate from one another. A good idea? What would St. Anathasius or St. Augustine have said about such matters of fornication and the mockery of marriage, given these so-called new family arrangements? As the Bishops of the United States have remained practically aloof and deafeningly silent regarding the horror of homosexuality and the scourge on our nation of transgender politics, I can only imagine what our Lord’s Church will look like in another one to five years. As our Lord says very clearly, “when the son of man comes, will he find any faith in all the earth?”
Although I disagree with the dissenting Mayor of Philadelphia, I find it curious that he is the only person mentioned in this article, that articulates-mentions-the Holy Name of Jesus, The Man, in whose Name, all these ecclesiastics govern/rule His Church. For men who have been schooled in the knowledge that Jesus, God Almighty-Omniscient/Omnipresent-is vitally interested in the lives of people, it seems that this is not important.
Thank God for Arch. Chaput. I would hypothesize that some bishops will follow him, but the the more progressive ones will not. Why cannot Pope Francis make things clear like Arch. Chaput? Is it because he wants to give a pass to the progressives? Is it because he is incapable?
Judging from these comments, we are about to undergo a western schism over the question of whether Catholics must follow the rules of the Church they profess to be members. As one who went through all the intricacies of the annulment process, I have profound sympathy for those in these situations but at the same time I expect the same rules to apply to all. This does not seem much of a stretch.
It’s always amazing to me how everyone who disagrees with the Catholic faith reverts back to discrimination, an unloving ideology, out of touch etc etc etc…especially from “fellow” Catholics. You can almost understand Liberals but someone raised in the Church.
The bottom line is the Catholic Church, sponsored by Jesus, is not going to change because of public opinion…and thank God for that! Truth is the truth and right is right. There is no in between when making a decision between right and wrong, no black area, and doing a wrong to make a right is never appropriate.
Call us what you will but at the end of the day, the court of personal, public opinion will not be assisting any souls attain Heaven!
I realize how trivial this comment is, but I must thank you for choosing to write “cohabiting” in your first paragraph. I’m so tired of its illegitimate cousin.
So Chaput has spoken. Will it make any difference with the divorced and re-married? Probably not.
Joan Desmond should have had found a theologian who disagrees with Chaput’s interpretation of AL and not just the mayor of Philadephia. Seems like lazy or slanted reporting to me.
I have read most of AL and some of Chaputs’s guidelines and the two are not congruent. Chaput as expected relies heavily on rules and lacks in the ideas of accompaniment and mercy.
The reality in the American Catholic church is this-the great majority of people that find themselves “living in irregular situations” simply find a sympathetic priest (and there are many) who supports their going to communion. Very simple solution not involving the out of touch hierarchy and their neurotic obsessions of who should and should not receive. All are welcome!
My pastor, a walking saint, a holy man, one who personifies mercy, a shepherd who brings home the lost sheep, a year away from his golden jubilee, said only one thing - ‘I would not want to be a priest in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia.’
And I, your Excellency, ask how you intend to determine which couples in irregular unions are refraining from sexual intimacy to deny their reception of the Holy Eucharist. You would not propose to use information gained in the sacrament of Penance, would you?
I am saddened by anyone who would deem it necessary to make a name for himself at all cost instead of letting a beautiful document for itself. A cloak of humility would fit better in this Jubilee Year of Mercy.
I pray that it will not become the model.
What an appalling document by A/B Chaput.
I see nothing pastoral about his actions or attitudes. I’m 85 now, but if I were part of a young married couple, I would see no need to even bother with going to church.
Every divorced or remarried couple and all same sex couples, not only leave the church for themselves, but they take with them EVERY future generation.
But I guess that will match up with the retiring priest cohorts, and fewer church communities.
Well this ought to be very interesting. The great divide grows even wider with Archbishop Chaput`s National release to the media on the proper interpretation of the Apostolic Exhortation followed immediately with the Pope`s appointment of Archbishop Cupich to the Congregation of Bishops whose interpretation is diametrically opposed to Archbishop Chaput`s and now the Faithful can look forward to more confusion and more than likely do what the Prelates and Priests are doing and that is, decide for yourself what is right and truthful according to one`s own conscious. In my view and with all due respect to the Chair of Peter, it will take decades to undo the damage this Pope has done to the Church in his relentless pursuit to promote an agenda.
@justmaybe - you seem to fail to understand that it’s the sex that results in the irregular situation being adulterous - not hand-holding or laughing together. And that’s the central point of the issue. If you want to complain about this, just note that Jesus started it. No one said that holding hands or laughing with someone who is not your spouse is adulterous. You are mistaken in your assessment.
“It would be a mistake to misread the compassionate spirit of Amoris Laetitia as a license to ignore Christian truth on matters of substance — matters that include the Catholic teaching on marriage and the discipline of the Church in the administration of the sacraments,” Archbishop Chaput cautioned in an April 14 column in his archdiocesan newspaper.
A compassionate spirit does not deny The Truth of Love.
One more voice in the worldwide battle over the interpretation of AL. Note that Cardinal Schonborn (who Pope Francis has said is the authoritative voice of interpretation for AL) gave an interview to Fr. Spadaro (Jesuit and close confidant of Pope Francis), published today, that directly contradicts what Archbishop Chaput has said. Schonborn says that AL is a Magisterial teaching document that represents an “evolution” of doctrine so that the absolute prohibition on partaking of the Eucharist set forth by Pope St. John Paul II and Pope Benedict is now only a “general norm” to which there are case-by-case exceptions. It looks very much like Schonborn is being rolled out to counter the narratives of Cardinal Muller, Archbishop Chaput, et. al. and regain momentum for the “door is now open” party. This is really a sad situation. Thank God for holy men like Archbishop Chaput.
“...This applies even if they must (for the care of their children) continue to live under one roof.”
Very clever even to seemingly address the purposeful misinterpretation of Article 51 of Gaudium et Spes in footnote 329 of AL. Thank so very much for the entire guidelines, Your Excellency! Sleep the sleep of the just.
Timothy O’Rourke Jr.
Forgot to add…
Demands that folks in “irregular unions” refrain from sex shows a terribly superficial and minimal knowledge of marriage. Day to day. Week to week. Diaper change top diaper change. Unemployment to illness. Weddings to funerals. Etc.
Why not demand these “irregular” couples refrain from hand-holding? From laughing together? From saying prayers together with their kids? From paying bills? From caring for grandpa together? From kissing? THAT’S what married folks do too.
The seeming preoccupation with destroying the sexual relationship of a couple evidences a narrow, even singular, understanding of what marital intimacy is and, frankly, reduces the credibility of one who even thinks that way. To quote a bishop: “Marriage is NOT all about sex.” Married folks know that.
I have read and re-read—and I could be wrong. But Archbishop Chaput’s guidance seems based upon rules, more so than on roles…
based on judging the family from a celibate’s luxury box outside the arena, more so than from inside the arena where loving women and men dare greatly…
based on the rule book calls of an umpire more so than on the expertise and performance of the players…
based on a cold, objective (and sometimes even naive and misguided) application of intimacy, more so than on lived experience…
based on love of canons, more so than on love of humans.
But most of all, I am again disappointed by the clear-cut lack of trust in the Catholic laity, evidenced by clerics who really do think—-in Archbishop Cahput’s own words, “confusion is of the devil.” In a family, in a marriage, that often is a dangerous, unfounded, and arrogant conclusion.
Trust us to work through the God-given inherent confusion as dads…moms…wives…husbands…grandparents…in-laws…lovers…If you are none of the above, you have to admit “I can’t know what I don’t know.”
Join the Discussion
We encourage a lively and honest discussion of our content. We ask that charity guide your words. By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our discussion guidelines. Comments are published at our discretion. We won’t publish comments that lack charity, are off topic, or are more than 400 words. Thank you for keeping this forum thoughtful and respectful.
Comments are no longer being accepted on this article.