The Narrow Path Ministries

I've been away for a while. Has there been any discussion here or on the radio on the pope's position on divorce?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I did not hear what his position is. Has he altered the historic Catholic position?

My understanding was that he wanted to make a way for divorced Catholics to receive communion, or some such thing. Essentially saying that non-annulled Catholics would not necessarily be kept from communion. I don't think it was a monumental change, maybe symbolically, but not practically. In Protestant terms, no biggie. It seems more of a "This is our ideal doctrinal stance, but we understand things don't always play out that way."

Regards, Brenden.

My understanding was that he wanted to make a way for divorced Catholics to receive communion, or some such thing. Essentially saying that non-annulled Catholics would not necessarily be kept from communion. I don't think it was a monumental change, maybe symbolically, but not practically. In Protestant terms, no biggie. It seems more of a "This is our ideal doctrinal stance, but we understand things don't always play out that way."

Regards, Brenden.







Yes I think he reasoned that we don't live in a perfect world!

You can read about the Pope's actual position here:

Pope offers hope to divorced Catholics

I'm still plodding through the "build-up," but so far I don't agree with what the Washington Post article had to say, for example, as to birth control. As I read it, so far he has condemned in no uncertain terms any form of birth control as anathema to be compared with same sex marriage. In fact, he treated it the same way and used it as one of the reasons to condemn same sex marriage just before saying that any support or silent assent by a priest to such situations would lead both of them to the pit.

So, as with anything, I suppose the only way to get at what he says is to read it ourselves.

Certainly, if the Post's assessment is correct, the many headlines suggesting he is simply accepting divorced couples into communion may not be accurate. If that's what he does here, that says more about the Pope's view of communion and repentance/restoration than it does divorce.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Darin, what do you mean by the "build-up"? Is it the Washington Post article itself, or is it something else, perhaps an introduction to the encyclical itself?

Michelle wrote:Darin, what do you mean by the "build-up"? Is it the Washington Post article itself, or is it something else, perhaps an introduction to the encyclical itself?

So far, the first half of the encyclical. He's a bit long-winded. So far it's quite like others I've read. The first half is very edifying, and sounds almost like an evangelical protestant (though stilted). Then, he falls off a cliff with his ill-advised socialistic morality and social policy ramblings. Withholding judgment on this one until I get there, but I predict the same.

Hi Darin, you wrote: As I read it, so far he has condemned in no uncertain terms any form of birth control as anathema to be compared with same sex marriage.

Actually, there is one form of birth control that has always been acceptable in the Catholic Church—the rhythm method.

Paidion wrote:

Hi Darin, you wrote: As I read it, so far he has condemned in no uncertain terms any form of birth control as anathema to be compared with same sex marriage.

Actually, there is one form of birth control that has always been acceptable in the Catholic Church—the rhythm method.

Yes, but that's quite inconsistent, since the doctrine is anything that doesn't leave open the possibility of pregnancy is evil - even withdrawal (he cites Onan). Of course, the only thing that doesn't leave open the possibility of pregnancy is abstinence. So, if rhythm is acceptable, I can't imagine anything being acceptable if they're willing to be consistent (which has never seemed to be a priority).