Note: We were asked to promote the following text and prayer with you, our readers, and ask you and other media to please share it far and wide. It was written by Tomash Peta, Metropolitan Archbishop of the archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana; Jan Pawel Lenga, Archbishop-Bishop emeritus of Karaganda; and Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of the archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana:
Following the publication of the Apostolic Exhortation Amoris laetitia, in some particular
churches there were published norms for its application and interpretations
whereby the divorced who have attempted civil marriage with a new partner,
notwithstanding the sacramental bond by which they are joined to their legitimate
spouse, are admitted to the sacraments of Penance and the Eucharist without
fulfilling the duty, established by God, of ceasing to violate the bond of
their existing sacramental marriage.
Cohabitation more uxorio with
a person who is not one's legitimate spouse represents, at the same time, an
offense to the Covenant of Salvation, of which sacramental marriage is a sign
(cf. Catechism of the Catholic
Church, 2384), and an offense to the nuptial character of the Eucharistic
mystery itself. Pope Benedict XVI revealed such a correlation when he wrote:
"The Eucharist inexhaustibly strengthens the indissoluble unity and love
of every Christian marriage. By the power of the sacrament, the marriage bond is
intrinsically linked to the Eucharistic unity of Christ the Bridegroom and his
Bride, the Church (cf. Eph. 5:31-32)" (Apostolic Exhortation Sacramentum caritatis, 27).
Pastors of the Church who tolerate or authorize, even in individual or
exceptional cases, the reception of the sacrament of the Eucharist
by the divorced and so-called "remarried,” without their being clothed in
the "wedding garment," despite the fact that God himself has
prescribed it in Sacred Scripture (cf. Matt. 22:11 and 1 Cor. 11:28-29) as the
necessary requirement for worthy participation in the nuptial Eucharistic
supper, such pastors are complicit in this way with a continual offense against
the sacramental bond of marriage, the nuptial bond between Christ and the
Church and the nuptial bond between Christ and the individual soul who receives
his Eucharistic Body.
Several particular Churches have issued or recommended pastoral
guidelines with this or a similar formulation: "If then this choice [of
living in continence] is difficult to practice for the stability of the
couple, Amoris laetitia does
not exclude the possibility of access to Penance and the Eucharist. That
signifies something of an openness, as in the case where there is
a moral certainty that the first marriage was null, but there are not the
necessary proofs for demonstrating such in the judicial process. Therefore,
there is no reason why the confessor, at a certain point, in his own
conscience, after much prayer and reflection, should not assume the
responsibility before God and the penitent asking that the sacraments be
received in a discreet manner."
The previously mentioned pastoral guidelines contradict the
universal tradition of the Catholic Church, which by means of an uninterrupted
Petrine Ministry of the Sovereign Pontiffs has always been faithfully kept,
without any shadow of doubt or of ambiguity, either in its doctrine or its
praxis, in that which concerns the indissolubility of marriage.
The norms mentioned and pastoral guidelines contradict moreover in
practice the following truths and doctrines that the Catholic Church has
continually taught as being sure:
The
observance of the Ten Commandments of God, and in particular the Sixth
Commandment, binds every human person, without exception, always and in every
situation. In this matter, one cannot admit individual or exceptional cases or
speak of a fuller ideal. St Thomas Aquinas says: "The precepts of the
Decalogue embody the intention of the legislator, that is God. Therefore, the
precepts of the Decalogue permit no dispensation" (Summa theol. 1-2, q.100, a.8c).
The moral
and practical demands, which derive from the Ten Commandments of God, and in
particular from the indissolubility of marriage, are not simple norms or
positive laws of the Church, but an expression of the holy will of God.
Consequently, one cannot speak in this respect of the primacy of the person
over the norm or the law, but one must rather speak of the primacy of the will
of God over the will of the sinful human person, in such a way that this person
is saved, by fulfilling the will of God with the help of his grace.
To believe
in the indissolubility of marriage and to contradict it by one's own actions
while at the same time considering oneself even being free from grave sin and calming
one's conscience by trusting in God's mercy alone, represents a self-deception
against which Tertullian, a witness to the faith and practice of the Church of
the first centuries warned: "Some
say that for God it is sufficient that one accepts his will in one's heart and
soul, even if one's actions do not correspond to this: in this manner they
think themselves able to sin while maintaining the integrity of
the principle of faith and fear of God: in this way, it is absolutely
the same as if one attempted to maintain the principle of chastity, while
violating and breaking the holiness and integrity of the matrimonial bond"
(Tertullian, De poenitentia 5,10).
The
observance of the Commandments of God and in particular of the indissolubility
of marriage cannot be presented as a fuller expression of an ideal towards
which one should strive in accordance with the criterion of the good which is
possible or achievable. It is rather the case of an obligation which God
himself has unequivocally commanded, the non-observance of which, in accordance
with his Word, carries the penalty of eternal damnation. To say to the faithful
the contrary would seem to signify misleading them or encouraging them to
disobey the will of God, and in such way endangering their eternal
salvation.
God gives
to every man assistance in the observance of his Commandments, when such a
request is properly made, as the Church has infallibly taught: "God does
not command that which is impossible, but in commanding he exhorts you to do
that which you are able, and to ask for that which you cannot do, and so he
assists you that you might be able to do it" (Council of Trent, session 6,
chapter 11) and "and if someone says that even for the man who has been
justified and established in grace the commandments of God are
impossible to observe: let him be anathema" (Council of Trent, session 6,
canon 18.) Following this infallible doctrine, St John Paul II taught: "Keeping
God's law in particular situations can be difficult, extremely difficult, but
it is never impossible. This is the constant teaching of the Church's tradition"
(Encyclical Veritatis splendor,
102) and "All husbands and wives are called in marriage to holiness, and
this lofty vocation is fulfilled to the extent that the human person is able to
respond to God's command with serene confidence in God's grace and in his or
her own will" (Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris consortio, 34).
The sexual
act outside of a valid marriage, and in particular adultery, is always
objectively gravely sinful and no circumstance and no reason can render it
admissible or pleasing in the sight of God. St Thomas Aquinas says that the
Sixth Commandment obliges even in the case where an act of adultery could save
a country from tyranny (De Malo,
q.15, a.1, ad. 5). St John Paul II taught this perennial truth of the Church:
"The negative moral precepts, those prohibiting certain concrete actions
or kinds of behaviour as intrinsically evil, do not allow for any legitimate
exception. They do not leave room, in any morally acceptable way, for the
"creativity" of any contrary determination whatsoever. Once the moral
species of an action prohibited by a universal rule is concretely recognized,
the only morally good act is that of obeying the moral law and of refraining
from the action which it forbids" (Encyclical Veritatis splendor, 67).
The
adulterous union of those who are civilly divorced and "remarried,"
"consolidated," as they say, over time and characterized by a so-called
"proven fidelity" in the sin of adultery, cannot change the moral
quality of their act of violation of the sacramental bond of
marriage, that is, of their adultery, which remains always an intrinsically
evil act. A person who has the true faith and a filial fear of God can never be
"understanding" towards acts which are intrinsically evil, as are
sexual acts outside of a valid marriage, since these acts are offensive to God.
The
admission of the divorced and "remarried" to Holy Communion constitutes
in practice an implicit dispensation from the observance of the Sixth
Commandment. No ecclesiastical authority has the power to concede such an
implicit dispensation in a single case, or in an exceptional or complex
situation or with the goal of achieving a good end (as in example the education
of the children born of an adulterous union) invoking for such a concession the
principle of mercy, or the "via caritatis," or the maternal care
of the Church or affirming not to want to impose many conditions to mercy.
St Thomas Aquinas said: "In no circumstances should a person commit
adultery (pro nulla enim utilitate debet
aliquis adulterium committere)" (De Malo, q.15, a.1, ad. 5).
A norm
which permits the violation of the Sixth Commandment of God and of the sacramental
matrimonial bond only in a single case or in exceptional cases, presumably to
avoid a general change to the canonical norm, nonetheless always signifies a
contradiction of the truth and of the will of God. Consequently, it is
psychologically out of place and theologically erroneous to speak in this case
of a restrictive norm or of a lesser evil in contrast with the general
norm.
A valid
marriage of the baptized is a sacrament of the Church and of its nature has a
public character. A subjective judgment of the conscience in relation to
the invalidity of one's own marriage, in contrast to the corresponding definitive
judgment of an ecclesiastical tribunal, cannot bring consequences for
sacramental discipline, since the sacramental discipline always has a public
character.
The
Church, and specifically the minister of the sacrament of Penance, does
not have the faculty to judge on the state of conscience of an individual
member of the faithful or on the rectitude of the intention of the conscience,
since "ecclesia de occultis non iudicat" (Council of Trent, session
24, chapter 1). The minister of the sacrament of Penance is consequently not
the vicar or representative of the Holy Spirit, able to enter with His light in
the innermost recesses of the conscience, since God has reserved such access to
the conscience strictly to himself: "sacrarium in quo homo solus est cum
Deo" (Vatican Council II, Gaudium
et spes, 16). The confessor cannot arrogate to himself the responsibility
before God and before the penitent, of implicitly dispensing him from
the observance of the Sixth Commandment and of the indissolubility of the
matrimonial bond by admitting him to Holy Communion. The Church does not have
the faculty to derive consequences for the external forum of sacramental
discipline on the basis of a presumed conviction of conscience of the
invalidity of one’s own marriage in the internal forum.
A practice
which permits to those who have a civil divorce, the so called "remarried," to
receive the sacraments of Penance and the Eucharist, notwithstanding their
intention to continue to violate the Sixth Commandment and their sacramental
bond of matrimony in the future, would be contrary to Divine truth and alien to
the perennial sense of the Catholic Church, to the proven custom, received
and faithfully kept from the time of the Apostles and more recently
confirmed in a sure manner by St John Paul II (cf. Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris consortio, 84) and by Pope
Benedict XVI (cf Apostolic Exhortation Sacramentum
caritatis, 29).
The
practice mentioned would be for every rational and sensible person an evident
rupture with the perennial and Apostolic practice of the Church and would
therefore not represent a development in continuity. In the face of such a fact,
no argument would be valid: contra
factum non valet argumentum. Such a pastoral practice would be a
counter-witness to the indissolubility of marriage and a kind of collaboration
on the part of the Church in the propagation of the "plague of divorce,"
which the Vatican Council II warned against (cf. Gaudium et spes, 47).
The Church
teaches by means of what she does, and she has to do what she teaches. With
relation to the pastoral action concerning those in irregular unions, St John
Paul II said: "The aim of pastoral action will be to make these people
understand the need for consistency between their choice of life and the faith
that they profess, and to try to do everything possible to induce them to
regularize their situation in the light of Christian principle. While treating
them with great charity and bringing them into the life of the respective
communities, the pastors of the Church will regrettably not be able to admit
them to the sacraments" (Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris consortio, 82).
An
authentic accompaniment of persons who find themselves in an objective state of
grave sin and on a corresponding journey of pastoral discernment cannot fail to
announce to such people, in all charity, the complete will of God, in such a
way that they repent wholeheartedly of their sinful actions of living more uxorio with a person who is
not their legitimate spouse. At the same time, an authentic accompaniment and
pastoral discernment must encourage them, with the help of God's grace, not to
commit such acts in the future. The Apostles and the entire Church throughout
two millennia have always announced to mankind the whole truth concerning the
Sixth Commandment and the indissolubility of marriage, following the admonition
of St Paul the Apostle: "I did not shrink from the responsibility of
announcing to you the complete will of God" (Acts 20:27).
The
pastoral praxis of the Church concerning Marriage and the sacrament of the
Eucharist has such an importance and such decisive consequences for the faith
and the life of the faithful, that the Church, in order to remain faithful to
the revealed Word of God, must avoid in this matter any shadow of doubt and
confusion. St John Paul II formulated this perennial truth of the Church thus:
"With this reminder of the doctrine and the law of the church I wish to
instill into everyone the lively sense of responsibility which must guide us
when we deal with sacred things like the sacraments, which are not our
property, or like consciences, which have a right not to be left in uncertainty
and confusion. The sacraments and consciences, I repeat, are sacred, and both
require that we serve them in truth. This is the reason for the Church's law"
(Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio
et Paenitentia, 33).
Notwithstanding repeated declarations concerning the immutability of the
teaching of the Church concerning divorce, several particular churches nowadays
accept divorce in their sacramental practice, and the phenomenon is growing.
Only the voice of the Supreme Pastor of the Church can definitively impede a
situation where in the future, the Church of our time is described with the
following expression: "All the world groaned and noticed with amazement
that it has in practice accepted divorce" (ingenuit totus orbis et divortium in praxi se accepisse miratus est),
evoking an analogous saying by which St Jerome described the Arian crisis.
Given this very real danger and the widespread plague of divorce within
the life of the Church, which is implicitly legitimized by the mentioned norms
and applications of the Apostolic Exhortation Amoris laetitia; given that the aforementioned norms and guidelines
from some particular churches as a result of today's global culture
are in the public domain; given, furthermore, the ineffectiveness of numerous appeals
made privately and in a discreet manner to Pope Francis both by many faithful
and by some Shepherds of the Church, we
are forced to make this urgent appeal to prayer. As successors of the
Apostles, we are also moved by the obligation of raising our voices when the
most sacred things of the Church and the matter of eternal salvation of souls
are in question.
May the following words, with which St John Paul II described the unjust
attacks against the faithfulness of the Church’s Magisterium, be a light for
all pastors of the Church in these difficult times and encourage them to act in
an increasingly united manner: "The Church's Magisterium is often chided
for being behind the times and closed to the promptings of the spirit of modern
times, and for promoting a course of action which is harmful to humanity, and
indeed to the Church herself. By obstinately holding to her own positions, it
is said, the Church will end up losing popularity, and more and more believers
will turn away from her” (Letter to families, Gratissimam sane, 12).
Considering that the admission of the divorced and so-called
"remarried" to the sacraments of Penance and the Eucharist, without
requiring of them the obligation to live in continence, constitutes a danger
for the faith and for the salvation of souls and furthermore constitutes an
offense to the holy will of God; furthermore, taking into consideration that
such pastoral practice can never be the expression of mercy, of the "via
caritatis" or of the maternal sense of the Church towards souls that are
sinning, we make with profound pastoral
solicitude this urgent appeal to prayer that Pope Francis may revoke in an
unequivocal manner the aforementioned pastoral guidelines which are already
introduced in several particular churches. Such an act of the Visible Head
of the Church would comfort the shepherds and the faithful of the Church,
according to the mandate which Christ, the Supreme Shepherd of souls, has given
to the Apostle Peter, and through him to all his successors: "Confirm your
brethren!" (Luke 22:32).
May the following words of a holy Pope and of St Catherine of Siena, a
Doctor of the Church, be a light and a comfort for all in the Church of our
days:
"Error when not resisted, is accepted. Truth, which is not
defended, is oppressed” (Pope St Felix III, +492). "Holy Father, God has
elected you in the Church, so that you might be an instrument for the
stamping out of heresy, the confounding of lies, the exaltation of the Truth,
the dissipation of darkness and the manifestation of light" (St Catherine
of Siena, +1380).
When Pope Honorius I (625 - 638) adopted an ambiguous attitude towards
the spreading of the new heresy of Monothelitism, Saint Sophronius, Patriarch
of Jerusalem, sent a bishop from Palestine to Rome, saying to him the following
words: "Go to the Apostolic See, where are the foundations of holy
doctrine, and do not cease to pray till the Apostolic See condemn the new
heresy.” The condemnation occurred in 649 through the holy pope and martyr
Martin I.
We make this appeal to prayer conscious that our failure to do so would have
been a serious omission. Christ, the Truth and the Supreme Shepherd, will judge
us when He appears. We ask Him, with humility and confidence, to reward all the
shepherds and all the sheep with the imperishable crown of glory (cf. 1 Pet. 5:4).
In the spirit of faith and with filial and devout affection we raise our
prayer for Pope Francis:
"Oremus pro Pontifice nostro Francisco: Dominus conservet eum,
et vivificet eum, et beatum faciat eum in terra, et non tradat eum in animam
inimicorum eius. Tu es Petrus, et super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam
Meam, et portae inferi non praevalebunt adversus eam."
As a concrete means we recommend to recite every day this ancient prayer
of the Church or a part of the holy rosary in the intention that Pope Francis
may revoke in an unequivocal manner those pastoral guidelines, which permit the
divorced and so-called “remarried” to receive the sacraments of Penance and
Eucharist without asking them to fulfil the obligation of a life in continence.
18 January 2017, the ancient feast of the Chair of Saint Peter in Rome
+ Tomash Peta, Metropolitan
Archbishop of the archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana
+ Jan Pawel Lenga,
Archbishop-Bishop emeritus of Karaganda
+ Athanasius
Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of the archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana
