Cardinal George Pell has said the final report of the recent synod did not make an opening for the divorced and civilly remarried to receive Communion.
Cardinal Pell said the text of the report has been “significantly misunderstood” and has no direct reference to the matter.
Cardinal Pell said that “the discernment that is encouraged in paragraph 85 in these particular matters has to be based on the full teaching of Pope John Paul II” and the teaching of the Church in general.
Other synod fathers have said the final report represented an opening to discernment, on a case-by-case basis, of the possibility of eventual absolution and Communion for some divorced and civilly remarried Catholics.
Cardinal Pell said the document’s mention of the “internal forum” . . . “cannot be used to deny objective truth”.
Asked why the document does not clearly say that the door is closed to Communion for the divorced and civilly remarried, Cardinal Pell replied: “I think that is a good question, and I think that the document does say that”, however not explicitly.
The ban on Communion for civilly remarried Catholics, he said, “is implicit, really present in the document, but not spelled out as much as some of the fathers would like”.
The paragraphs in the synod’s final report that deal with the question of pastoral care for civilly remarried Catholics received the largest number of “no” votes, but still gained the necessary two-thirds majority.
Cardinal Pell said the synod fathers could have achieved “an even deeper consensus with a bit more clarity”.
The Australian prelate was asked whether the Pope will settle the issue of Communion and provide a definitive interpretation to the document
He responded: “Whether he will or he won’t depends, I suppose, on how he sees this document; whether it is clear enough, whether it expresses adequately the mind of the Church.”
“We don’t want it to be in the situation of some of the other Christian churches where one or two issues were fought about publicly for years and years and years,” he added.
Sources