OVIEDO, Spain — Those who think Pope Francis’ recent apostolic exhortation changed the Church’s discipline on holy Communion for the divorced and remarried are reading him wrong, according to the head of the Vatican’s doctrinal office.
Cardinal Gerhard Müller emphasized in a May 4 speech that the Pope wanted to offer “hope for the family” in Amoris Laetitia, through the Church’s promotion of “the culture of the family” and the “culture of the bond” based, “first of all, in the indissoluble love of a man and a woman open to the transmission and upbringing of life.”
“We discover here the great mission and challenge of the Church for the family. … The family needs to live within the Church, where it is reminded of the great vocation that it has received and the love that enlivens and sustains it is commemorated.”
The cardinal, who is prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), spoke at the Metropolitan Seminary of Oviedo in Spain. Throughout his speech, which was published at Chiesa May 11, he used the image of the Church as Noah’s ark, offering salvation to all amid a flood.
According to Cardinal Müller, the Pope is concerned with the question of “how to give hope to those who live in alienation and especially those who have lived the drama and the wound of a second civil union after a divorce.”
He countered the claim that Amoris Laetitia has eliminated Church discipline on marriage and has permitted in some cases the divorced and remarried “to receive the Eucharist without the need to change their way of life.” He placed Francis’ apostolic exhortation in the context of previous papal writings, including St. John Paul II’s Familiaris Consortio and Reconciliatio et Paenitentia and Benedict XVI’s Sacramentum Caritatis.
“This is a matter of a consolidated magisterial teaching, supported by Scripture and founded on a doctrinal reason: the salvific harmony of the sacrament, the heart of the ‘culture of the bond’ that the Church lives.”
The prefect of the CDF said that if Pope Francis’ exhortation “had wanted to eliminate such a deeply rooted and significant discipline, it would have said so clearly and presented supporting reasons.”
“There is, however, no affirmation in this sense; nor does the Pope bring into question, at any time, the arguments presented by his predecessors, which are not based on the subjective culpability of our brothers, but, rather, on their visible, objective way of life, contrary to the words of Christ.”
The reason for this discipline is “the harmony between the sacramental celebration and Christian life. … Thanks to this, the Church can be a community that accompanies, welcomes the sinner without thereby blessing the sin, and thus offers the foundation so that a path of discernment and integration may be possible.”
The cardinal also countered claims that Footnote 351 of the document offers the sacraments to those “living in an objective situation of sin.”
“The basic principle is that no one can truly desire a sacrament, that of the Eucharist, without also desiring to live in accord with the other sacraments, including that of marriage,” the cardinal added. “One who lives in contrast with the marriage bond is opposed to the visible sign of the sacrament of marriage; in that which touches his bodily existence, even if he should be subjectively not culpable, he makes himself an ‘anti-sign’ of indissolubility.”
“And precisely because his bodily life is contrary to the sign, he cannot be part, in receiving Communion, of the supreme Eucharistic sign, where the incarnate love of Jesus is revealed.”
Changing the discipline on the sacraments, “admitting a contradiction between the Eucharist and marriage, would necessarily mean changing the profession of faith of the Church, which teaches and realizes the harmony among all the sacraments, just as she has received it from Jesus.”
“On this faith in indissoluble marriage, not as [a] distant ideal but as concrete reality, the blood of martyrs has been shed,” he said.
Cardinal Müller recalled that “it is true that the relationship between the spouses must grow and mature; that it will have its stumbles and will need forgiveness. From this point of view, it will always be imperfect and in progress. But on the other hand, as a sacrament, marriage gives the spouses the full presence of the love of Jesus between them, the bond of an indissoluble love, until death, like that of Christ and his Church.”
Invoking the imagery of Noah’s Ark and the flood, Cardinal Müller said Pope Francis is “sensitive to the ‘flood situation’ of the contemporary world.”
He said the Pope has “opened all possible windows of the boat and has invited all of us to throw ropes from the windows in order to pull the castaway onto the barque.”
To give holy Communion to those who visibly live contrary to the sacrament of marriage would not be opening another window, he said. Rather, it would open “a leak in the bottom of the boat, allowing the sea to enter in and endangering the navigation of all and the service of the Church to society.”
“Rather than a way of integration, it would be a way of the disintegration of the ecclesial ark, a way of water,” the cardinal said. Preserving this ark preserves “our common home that is the Church.”
“The consistency between the sacraments and the Christian way of life guarantees … that the sacramental culture in which the Church lives and which she proposes to the world remains habitable,” he said. “It is only in this way that she can receive sinners, welcoming them with care and inviting them on a concrete journey that they may overcome sin.”
He said divorced-and-remarried persons should “decline to establish themselves in their situation” and should be “ready to illuminate it in the light of the words of Jesus.” Others should not “make peace with the new union.”
“Everything that may lead to abandoning this way of life is a small step of growth that must be promoted and enlivened,” he said.
Those in a new union who abstain from receiving Communion and work to conform to the Eucharist are also “protecting the dwelling of the Church, our common home,” he said.
In discussing Amoris Laetitia’s presentation of discernment for those who are in irregular unions, Cardinal Müller pointed out that the goal of this discernment is “the goal that the Church proclaims for all. … It consists in returning to the fidelity of the marriage bond, thus entering anew into that dwelling or ark, which the mercy of God has offered to the love and desire of man.”
“Discernment is necessary, therefore, not for selecting the goal, but for selecting the path. Having clearly in mind where we want to take the person (the full life that God has promised us), one can discern the ways by which each one, in his particular case, may arrive there.”
The process of discernment is directed, he said, “with patience and mercy, to revivifying and healing the wound from which these brothers (and sisters) suffer, which is not the failure of the previous marriage, but, rather, the new union established.”
As for the “integration” of those who are divorced and remarried, Cardinal Müller said it is “essential that the word of God be proclaimed in the process. … Thus these baptized persons will shed light, little by little, on this second union that they have begun and in which they live.”
This could include the possibility of reviewing the nullity of their sacramental marriage, he said, and a possible “assumption of certain public ecclesial offices.” He emphasized that the criterion is “the person’s journey of concrete growth toward healing.”
For Cardinal Müller, the key to interpreting Amoris Laetitia is its exegesis of the “hymn to love” in 1 Corinthians 13: “According to it, only in the light of true and genuine love (AL, 67) is it possible ‘to learn to love’ (AL, 208) and build a dwelling for desire.”
Cardinal Müller also reflected on the broader cultural context.
Men and women’s desire for a family today, if it does not have any reference in God’s plan, “ends up closed off in itself and is incapable of growing toward the promised goal. It is obvious that this desire is then multiplied in the variegated ‘models’ or types of family, in which desire, disoriented, loses its way,” he said.
In this environment of fluid relationships, “the Church must be able to create a favorable dwelling, environment and culture in which the family may grow,” he maintained, calling this “a culture of love.”
“The Church encourages this culture of love precisely in her sacraments, which constitute her. She will be able to offer hope to men, to all, even to the most alienated, as long as she remains faithful to this dwelling that she has received from Christ,” said the cardinal.
“In the waters of fluid modernity, the Church can offer a hope to all families and to all of society, like Noah’s Ark,” Cardinal Müller concluded. “She recognizes the weakness and need for conversion of her members.”
“Precisely for this reason, she is called to maintain, at the same time, the concrete presence in her of the love of Jesus, living and active in the sacraments, which give the ark its structure and dynamism, making it able to plough through the waters. The key is to develop, and the challenge is not a small one, an ‘ecclesial culture of the family’ that may be a ‘culture of the sacramental bond.’”



View Comments
Comments
Join the Discussion
Ruthann, our Founding Fathers recognized that our unalienable Rights have been endowed to us from the moment of our creation by God, not Caesar; it is not possible to separate The Blessed Trinity from the Constitution because to do so would mean that our unalienable Rights are not, in essence, unalienable.
@ Nancy D.
The website you listed is about country and politics—-and is more appropriate to what the Supreme Court has done to this nation and its citizens with Separation of Church and State which pushed God and Christ out—-fomenting a dislike and avoidance of Christianity. It has also allowed the legalization of 4 mortal sins altering respect for the male and female gender and traditional marriage.
Explain how the article led you to “a recycling of Arian heresy”—and by whom.
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2016/05/the-world-they-say-is-new-is-as-old-as.html#more
Let no one deceive you; to deny The Word of God Is Divine, is to deny The Divinity of our Lord and Savior, Jesus The Christ
What we are witnessing is a recycling of The Arian Heresy, which denies that God, The Ordered Communion Of Perfect Complementary Love, The Most Holy And Undivided Blessed Trinity, Is The Author of Love, of Life, of Marriage.
There Is only One Spirit Of Perfect Complementary Love Between The Father And The Son.
Noah’s Ark is not an truthful comparison—-the Cardinal has changed the biblical narrative. There were no ropes cast out the windows of the Ark to “castaways”—-only birds were eventually released to see if any dry land could be found.
Noah accepted God’s instructions and God’s Will that he and his family had lived according to God’s laws—-and because of that—- they alone had earned the right to be saved. As it is narrated in the Bible—-they were the only ones to be saved. There were no rescues by men who presumed they were more “merciful” than God.
God is the ultimate Good Shepherd and the ultimate Judge. The penalty for some grave sin is excommunication. The very fact that Catholicism upholds the marriage vows taken—-especially “until death do us part”—-makes any excuse for a second, adulterous marriage to another person—-a contrived lie that would be a waste of a pastor’s time.
I suggest that Jesus Christ knew this when He gave us His Doctrine that made no concessions—-and no amount of words by men—-in high positions or low—-is ever going to change it. But some words by man have the power to endanger Church and the souls of mankind.
“The prefect of the CDF said that if Pope Francis’ exhortation ‘had wanted to eliminate such a deeply rooted and significant discipline, it would have said so clearly and presented supporting reasons.’”
Maybe. But what if, just speaking hypothetically, the Pope had wanted to provide enough room for “liberals” to claim victory, all the while obscuring the document’s novel teachings just enough to assure “conservatives” that nothing is changing? If that were the author’s goal, I think the document would have come out just the way it did.
http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/the-angel-of-peace-at-fatima-a-message-of-mercy/
If during the flight from Lesbos to Rome, to the question of whether for the divorced or remarried there now is or is not the possibility, formerly precluded, of receiving communion, the pope responded with a peremptory and for once unmistakable: <u>“Yes. Period,”</u> and once again proposed Schönborn as the main exegete of the post-synodal exhortation, and Card. Schönborn said in the Presentation of the post-Synodal apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia: the logic of pastoral mercy, 08.04.2016:
what relevance is there to the interpretations of the likes of Cards Burke, Nichols, and Müller? And unless they be brave like Paul before Peter, they not only fail in their duty as shepherds when the sheep are being ravaged, they cause great harm because their interpretations and statements make it seem as if there’s ‘nothing to see here’ when just the opposite is the case.
This is excellent. It clarifies AL. Clarification is always a good thing, and yet it does not mean that AL is written in an unclear way.Pope John Paul II also wrote clearly in Familiaris Consortio, and yet Pope Francis clarifies and develops Church teaching about those in irregular situations (without changing Church discipline regarding the divorced and remarried; he helps to understand what the practice of the Church is, and to reject its rigorist deformation.) There is as far as I see no criticism of AL or of Pope Francis here, and those who are expressing disdain for the Pope have no reason to include Cardinal Muller in their ranks.
“...if Pope Francis’ exhortation “had wanted to eliminate such a deeply rooted and significant discipline, it would have said so clearly…”
“Clearly”? Then why is it necessary to have a continual multitude of dissenters and the usual cadre of “papal explainer’s of what he really meant to say?” Why then, the need then for such defensive clarification articles as this?
Perhaps because ambiguity, not clarity is the expected norm from Pope Francis.
One example: in the inarguable words of Cardinal Burke, marriage is not an ideal, it is a sacrament. Why is that simple truth only recently so difficult to acknowledge?
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.