Bishop Gerald Barnes was one of 12 bishops from around the world invited to participate in a two-day reflection and discussion of Pope Francis’ apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia (“The Joy of Love”) at Boston College.
The bishops gathered with a group of theologians on Oct. 5-6, listened to the presentation of papers on the document and had a chance to ask questions and discuss it among themselves. Much of the discussion of Amoris Laetitia in the United States has focused on a short passage in chapter eight that grants internal forum on the matter of distributing communion to those Catholics who are divorced and remarried outside of the Church. The wording essentially allows priests to discern and evaluate each case of a divorced and remarried Catholic and, depending on the circumstances, allow them to receive communion.
“It’s being sold short because we’re looking at this one connection,” Bishop Barnes says of Amoris Laetitia.
About ten percent of the discussions at the two-day event focused on the internal forum issue, Bishop Barnes said. Much more time was spent reflecting on chapters four and five of Amoris Laetitia, which focus on married love and the love that exists in family life, respectively.
“Nobody had their shields up,” Bishop Barnes said of the discussions. “It was open and honest dialogue.”
Unlike European and Asian countries, who have found ways to foster widespread discussion and implementation of Amoris Laetitia, many dioceses in the U.S. have not yet found a way to present the document in its fullness. Bishop Barnes said his participation in the Boston College conference “opened my eyes about a lot of things,” including the need for the Church to support family life and talk about its importance to sustaining the faith.
“It’s something that’s going to change the Church—in how we do things,” he said of Amoris Laetitia. “This is part of the Pope’s call to accompaniment, discernment and pastoral listening.”
Full story at Inland Catholic Byte.
What? “Present the document in its fullness? Have you read Amoris Laetitae? The bishop is correct on one thing, that AL will change the Church. No valid Catholic can hold that Christ ever suggested, or implied, that a mortal sin can be committed, and be continued to be committed, and that this/these actions are somehow sanctioned by the Church. Yes, Christ forgave the adulterous woman, but He did not ask: “Do you need Me to accompany you for a while, to discern with you your actions and whether you are getting closer to Me.”
Nope, “go and sin no more,” is what Christ said. God hates sin, including sexual sins. Those among us who are involved with fornication, homosexual sex, adultery, all that, better watch out. Stop these…
I agree with “St. Christopher” in principle. However a confessor may deal with a penitent whose marriage failed thru no fault of his/her own, was denied a declaration of nullity [hard to believe these days, seeing by personal witness how most Tribunals and Courts of Second Instance operate], and remarried for the sake of the children and is sexually active with the second spouse. I fully agree that the penitent has no right, in the objective sphere, to have a conjugal relationship. In the objective sphere, each such act is a grave sin, and, again in the objective sphere, an unwillingness to admit this and stop a present intention to continue this pattern of behavior, would, in the objective order, prevent a confessor from giving…
What you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, what you loosen on earth shall be loosened in heaven. I guess those words mean nothing to you?
Guess those words mean nothing either to Father James Martin and his supporters, who want to change the language of the Catechism and change Church doctrine.
You have no credibility here. Your games and aims are transparent.
Well said Covfefe, YFC is nothing more than a propagandist for the homosex left
Even Fr. Martin’s biggest critics have not accused him of wanting to change Church doctrine. False witness is a sin.
And why did your mind even go there?
1) Changing the language of the Catechism, explicitly advocated by Fr. Martin, would necessarily result in changing Church doctrine. You don’t go from saying homosexuality is “disordered” (bad) to “differently ordered” (neutral/good) without a wholesale revision in Church doctrine about man and woman, marriage, and the purpose and morality of sexual acts.
2) You are new here, so you probably don’t realize YFC is a big Fr. Martin supporter and a supporter of anything homosex in general, in opposition to Church doctrine.
(Part Deux) ” . . . things, go to confession, and amend your life. If you do not, it may well be that Christ will deny you a place in Heaven. Pope Francis has no authority to permit any of these sins, regardless of what he feels is a supplemental benefit from continued mortal sinning. Have all the conferences you want, foolish bishops, but you cannot prevail over Christ and the Holy Ghost.
A young Catholic wife and mother is asked by her husband for a divorce. She refuses because of her faith. He tells her unless she cooperates with the divorce, he will kill the children. She agrees to the divorce. Then he tells her, he’s going to kill her and the children anyway. She flees to somewhere she hopes he will never find her. But she is still scared. She prays every day for God to help and protect her family. In her new home, she meets a police officer and they spend time together. He asks her to marry him. She knows the faith but by marrying him she can not only have a police officer in the house, but also change her name. She also will have the additional income so she can spend more time with her kids and her kids…
will have a good family man as a father. She believes this could be the answer to her prayers. She marries him. Is she in mortal sin?
Yes, she is. Why doesn’t she request an annulment? It appears she has sufficient grounds. Deacon Vince
Deacon Vince, thank you for the answer. I think you are correct. And I think the people who say not to sin but to wait on God are correct. But, this is why Catholics who divorce and remarry go to other churches. .
A very young man fell in love with a very young lady and the got married civilly. Her parents found out and had the marriage annulled civilly. Later in life, he married a Catholic lady. They believed that she could not go to Church anymore. They had their kids baptized in the Lutheran Church which they did not attend. The kids were unchurched. Both kids married Catholics. One converted before marrying; the other died an agnostic. When their parents sex life ended, the Catholic lady went back to Church. They never…
Why not get an annulment? Because of fear of the ex being contacted, doesn’t want to illegitimize the kids, has heard it takes a long time and it is really expensive, family members would have to get involved and that the questions are really personal and bring up a lot of bad emotions.
These fears may not be legitimate but it is the “word on the street” about annulments.
Would the readers here do me a favor:
If you have ever been on the For Your Marriage website (before this) would you please leave a comment?
What EVER happened to Sanctifying Grace to see one through neigh unto impossible situations?
The Novus Ordo is all about feeling good versus following Jesus Christ in carrying whatever cross God allows to be sent to us.
Usually a great part of our making
For you…it would be a mortal sin. For me, it would be a mortal sin. For St. Christopher, it would be a mortal sin.
The internal forum solution is not that you can take communion in mortal sin. It is that even though objectively it looks like mortal sin, it may not be because the person may have acted with less than full knowledge or with less than full consent of the will. Pope Francis did not start this; Vatican II did not start this. This has been a practice in the Church since before Vatican II.
This is not what the internal forum is at all. It has not been a matter of subjective “full knowledge,” and rarely if ever of “full consent”—until the Bergoglian era.
In the internal forum, the priest may dispense from vows or impediments if a proper basis exists. Usually internal forum relates to an individual who believes that marriage vows were not valid, but cannot obtain a declaration of nullity from the marriage tribunal.
Now, under Amoris L, that is out the window. Anyone who wants a “license” to divorce and remarry — will get it.
We owe an apology to Henry VIII.
It is not true that anyone who wants a license to divorce and remarry will get it.
The Pope has said that there could be rare circumstances, like the one you mentioned, where persons could receive the sacrament, which is nothing new.
The Pope has said that “integration into the life of the Church does not mean receiving Communion.” He is critical of divorced and remarried people who just want Communion but do not want to live the faith. He sees them as wounded families who need the help of the Church.
And I accept your correction on the internal forum. Yes, the first marriage must be believed to be invalid. Thank you for catching my error.
“No trial has come to you but what is human. God is faithful and will not let you be tried beyond your strength; but with the trial he will also provide a way out, so that you may be able to bear it.” 1 Corinthians 1::13.
If she cannot get an annulment or does not want one, she should rely on the Lord, who will send people to help her, as the Prophet Elijah did for the widow without expecting her to be intimate.
Such a marriage could be considered marrying under duress. Other means of helping her should be used. Women who live with or marry a man right after divorce, especially if they do not get counseling from a good Catholic advisor or wise support group, most often marry the same type of man who left them or whom they left. Marrying a police officer is no sure way to safety.
I want to advise people to seek competent help if they need advice on their situation. Don’t ask lay people and don’t ask the internet. I know a couple where the lady was divorced and wanted to remarry but was denied an annulment. They were told by a lay person that they could marry because they had tried to go through proper channels and it hadn’t worked.
That is right. A catholic needs to go to a proper priest of the Church who knows Church laws about annulments and so forth. Each situation is different.
Nevertheless, even two priests sometimes will give different opinions. In the late 1950’s I asked my Catholic priest if I could go to my Protestant relative’s wedding in a Protestant church to a Catholic woman. He said, “No.” My relative’s Catholic friend asked his Catholic priest if he could go, and that priest told him he could go and even be the Best Man. I did not go. The marriage did end in divorce.
To make clearer my post today, Nov. 10, at 1:29 pm I meant that you were right about following the advice of a faithful, knowledgeable Catholic priest, and not laypeople nor advice columnists, as most of us do not know Canon Law nor do we know the questions to ask about such situations.
Perhaps the 8th chapter of “Amoris Laetitia” refers to the Pauline Privilege which is taken from 1st Corinthians 7:12-15. I know a man told by a priest that he could marry his girlfriend in the Catholic Church if her Protestant church had approved of her previous divorce. He, a baptized Catholic had been married before but not in the Catholic Church. These situations can be complicated. One should check with a priest versed in Canon Law.
Nobody there had to have their shields up because nobody was invited who would disagree with anyone else who was there. Everyone was already of like mind, cut from the same dissident, subversive cloth. How open and honest was the discussion if people who disagreed with the participants weren’t invited? Reporters weren’t invited to cover the presentations. Open? Honest? Bah! Come on, the lay faithful aren’t stupid, and we’re not going to accept falsehoods that you thy to shove down our throats.
Unfortunately, most of the articles online are at a news source who has been asked to remove the word Catholic from its name.
Its weird that O’Malley and Chaput did not attend but sent delegates.
There were a handful of news outlets invited to attend including a paper who has been told by their bishop to remove the word Catholic from its name.
Those weren’t news outlets: they were leftist propaganda arms, which is why they were selected. They could be relied on to present the dissident party line without question or deviation.
Given the comments so far, people don’t need pastors. They are their own pastors, throwing out the teachings of their elders, presbyters and bishops. How unbiblical. How uncatholic!
Folks, these are the Bishops who oversee you, who govern you, who guide you as sheep. Yet you revolt against them as wayword sheep when you distract others from their timeless teaching, interpreted for our time.
YFC the only reason you think these pathetic men in miters govern us is because they line up with your political agenda ie LEFTIST. You are correct I do not need and will not listen to heretics who preach mortal sin. I pray for 1 of 2 things a massive uprising against these traitors by Faithful laity and these heretics are ripped from power or there is a schism where you and every other fake catholic go the way of the mainline protestant sects and then crumble to dust. Just admit it YFC you want mortal sin blessed and affirm so your guilty conscience can be soothed.
Interpreted for our time? lol…Nice try, but we ain’t buying what you’re selling.
” timeless teaching, interpreted for our time.” This is same garbage as when liberals speak of personal “truth”. Liberal cannot recognize neither Truth nor Evil
Can’t wait for Bishops Barnes and Blaire to retire from their dioceses.
the confessor MAY be able to grant absolution on the condition that the penitent’s “invincible ignorance” prevents him/her from understanding that (1) in fact they have an ongoing sinful intention which is (2) gravely sinful in itself and (3) must be addressed with prayer and spiritual guidance, in order to form a right conscience. This approach is by no means a “Pope Francis” invention. It is the application in a concrete circumstance of the classic moral theology of the Church. Is it complicated? Yes. Unavoidably. Because while the definition of a gravely sinful act may be relatively straightforward, the persons doing those acts ARE HUMANS, COMPLEX— requiring expert and continuing guidance to bring the penitent to a…
“It’s something that’s going to change the Church,..” -Bp. Gerald Barnes on Amoris Laetitia.
So much for the indefectability of the Holy Catholic Church.
The Church’s indefectibility, therefore, means that she now is and will always remain the institution of salvation, founded by Christ. This affirms that the Church is essentially unchangeable in her teaching, her constitution, and her liturgy. It does not exclude modifications that do not affect her substance, nor does it exclude the decay of individual local churches or even whole dioceses.
A self-incriminating citation of the current “church”. Thank you.
Amoris Laetitia may change some unfaithful men, but not God’s teaching!
It’s something that’s going to change the Church—in how we do things,”
As I have always said, once the Mass was allowed to be changed in such a radical fashion, nothing is off the table. This assault on the indissolubility of marriage is a prime example. The fact this conference was held at Boston College is fitting, as BC has fallen from the Catholic Faith a long time ago. Bishops, such as Bp. Barnes, seem to have lost their faith as well. We have very few pastors who care for the eternal fate of our souls. What happened to striving to enter through the narrow gate? “Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who enter by it.” Matt 7:13
bishops are failing at their sacred vocations. Their job, as is ours, is to please God and not man.
Great that we have discovered biblical literalism.
So, what does Mt. 19:9 (“..Whoever divorces his wife, unless the marriage is unlawful, and marries another, commits adultery”); or, 1 Cor. 6-9 (“..Those who are fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, practicing homosexuals cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven?”) mean? Need to redefine (“bind and loose”) those words? = Bp. Barnes’ “this will change the Church “.
We can redefine anything to fool ourselves and hope that it will fool the Divine Judge.
Totally depressing and demoralizing. It all comes down to “Do what feels good” –the hippies have been chanting the mantra since the “sexual revolution” of the 1960s. Now it appears the Vatican has finally legitimized it.
No, the Vatican has not legitimized it. If you see that at your parish, you must stand up to it. You must be fully informed. You need to read the document and understand it.
In discussing the dignity and mission of the family, the Synod Fathers observed that, “as for proposals to place unions between homosexual persons on the same level as marriage, there are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God’s plan for marriage and family”. It is unacceptable “that local Churches should be subjected to pressure in this matter and that international bodies should make financial aid to poor countries dependent on the introduction of laws to establish ‘marriage’between persons of the same sex”.
Amoris Laetitia 251
Adoption is a very generous way to become parents. I encourage those who cannot have children to expand their marital love to embrace those who lack a proper family situation. They will never regret having been generous. Adopting a child is an act of love, offering the gift of a family to someone who has none. It is important to insist that legislation help facilitate the adoption process, above all in the case of unwanted children, in order to prevent their abortion or abandonment. Those who accept the challenge of adopting and accepting someone unconditionally and gratuitously become channels of God’s Love.
Amoris Laetitia 179
Euthanasia and assisted suicide are serious threats to families worldwide; in many countries, they have been legalized. The Church, while firmly opposing these practices, feels the need to assist families who take care of
their elderly and infirm members”.
Amoris Laetitia 48
56. Yet another challenge is posed by the various forms of an ideology of gender that “denies the difference and reciprocity in nature of a man and a woman and envisages a society without sexual differences, thereby eliminating the anthropological basis of the family. This ideology leads to educational programmes and
legislative enactments that promote a personal identity and emotional intimacy radically separated from the biological difference between male and female. Consequently, human identity becomes the choice of the individual, one which can also change over time”.
Amoris Laetitia 56
A simple web search is sufficient for one to learn what Father Martin’s agenda is. Anonymous is the one who is lying here. Stop lying, Anonymous. It is a sin to lie. The sin is compounded by its public nature and the wounds that it inflicts on the body of Christ. Your sins have caused Jesus to suffer much on the cross. Stop hurting Jesus. Love God, love your neighbor, pray more, tell the truth about your neighbor, stop sinning.
I’m so confused by all the anonymous posters posting as “Anonymous”. Would you please do the board a favor and post under different handles? It doesn’t take much to change your name from “Anonymous” to “Betty” or “Fred” or “Ethel” or “Wilbur”… you get the idea.