You are not signed in as a Premium user; you are viewing the free version of this program. Premium users have access to full-length programs with limited commercials and receive a 10% discount in the store! Sign up for only one day for the low cost of $1.99. Click the button below.
VATICAN (ChurchMilitant.com) - The prefect of the newly established super-dicastery for Laity, the Family and Life is critical of those who oppose his liberal interpretation of "Amoris Laetitia" (AL), while sidelining the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) by brushing off doctrinal objections to AL as mere differences of opinion.
If the divorced are remarried civilly, they find themselves in a situation that objectively contravenes God's law. Consequently, they cannot receive Holy Communion as long as this situation persists. ... The faithful who persist in such a situation may receive Holy Communion only after obtaining sacramental absolution ... when for serious reasons, for example, for 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.
Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington, D.C. gave some insight into how this would eventually play out. In a video from October 2014, he predicted,
The reception of Communion is not a doctrinal position; it's a pastoral application of the doctrine of the Church. ... It involves the mercy of God, the sacrament of reconciliation, the conscience of the individual person, the state of the soul of that individual person. All of those things are quite distinct from a statement in the doctrine of the Church.
The head of Poland's bishops, Abp. Stanislaw Gądecki, also disagrees with the position held by Cdls. Farrell and Wuerl on the separation of Church teaching and personal practice. Archbishop Gądecki expressed his belief that those who wish to divide Church teaching from discipline are really about altering Church doctrine while professing to change only the application of the doctrine.
Practically all are repeating that there will be no doctrinal change. ... [O]ne cannot speak of the separation of the practice of the Church from Her doctrine, from Her teachings. The two are inseparable. I have the impression that many supporters of this modernity are in fact thinking about changing doctrine, yet calling it a change in Church discipline. ... [It] is strongly emphasized: "We accept the entire doctrine," but there immediately follows a suggestion that doctrine has nothing to do with it. This is greatly worrying me, for one and the other are saying that they want no change in doctrine. From where then, are arising these practices opposed to doctrine?