Here we are referring to those Catholics who are divorced and remarried without an annulment. Pope Francis has permitted those persons and others in irregular situations to possibly receive Communion, even if they are still struggling with objectively grave sins, which may not be actual mortal sins. A person who reasonably believes that they are guilty of actual mortal sin, and has not repented, cannot receive Communion. But the discipline that Pope Francis has chosen applies only to those who may not have that full culpability of actual mortal sin.

The important thing to understand on this topic is that no one can be certain if they themselves or another persons is in the state of grace or not, and even judging in ones own case is not certain. You might think your sin was mortal, when it did not have full culpability. And many persons commit grave sins without thinking that they are sinning gravely or at all. So discipline for Communion must take into account that communicants cannot be sure if they are in the state of grace or not.

On the other hand, the opponents of Pope Francis speak as if anyone guilty of certain objectively grave sins must not be in the state of grace. They wrongly equate the objective act with actual mortal sin. Then most other objectively grave sins are ignored by them on the topic of Communion, especially their own sins of possibly committing schism, heresy, or grave scandal to the faithful by opposing the Pope.

Read this discussion at Catholic World Report. The article explains the situation regarding Amoris Laetitia fairly well, but then reaches false conclusions. Pope Francis simply chose a different discipline that his predecessors. One Pope is not bound by previous Pope’s decisions on discipline.

There is a difference between doctrine and discipline. And Francis did not permit those conscious and unrepentant from actual mortal sin to receive Communion, but only some persons who may be guilty of objectively grave sins without full culpability. This is explained at length in Amoris Laetitia n. 301-303. There is no “crisis in the Church”, as the linked article claims, caused by permitting persons, struggling with objectively grave sins, to receive holy Communion, if they may still be in the state of grace. Note well that Francis clearly recommended such persons to their pastor for Confession as well as guidance: see 227, 305, and note 351. The latter states: “In certain cases, this can include the help of the sacraments.” Not in all cases, but in certain cases, the person in an irregular situation can receive the Sacraments. And then the rest of the text of note 351 mentions first Confession, and then Communion.

Pope Francis’ position is that Catholics in a state of grace may receive holy Communion, “in certain cases” even if they are guilty of objectively grave sin, as long as they might not have the full culpability of actual mortal sin. This discipline does not contradict any Church teaching, as Catholics in the state of grace are generally permitted to receive Communion. And it is factually false as well as uncharitably judgmental to assume that all persons outwardly guilty of an objectively grave sin must necessarily inwardly lack the state of grace. An objectively grave sin does not deprive one of grace, unless it was committed with full knowledge and full deliberation.

As for the opponents of Pope Francis, their refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff is the objectively grave sin of schism, which carries the penalty under Canon law of automatic excommunication, and therefore of denial of holy Communion.

And the sins of the opponents of Pope Francis are worse than the sins possibly committed by some of the divorced and remarried (we don’t know in specific cases). For those who publicly obstinately perseveringly oppose the Roman Pontiff are harming souls by grave scandal, as well as committing schism. The sins of the papal accusers are made worse by being public, scandalizing a vast number of persons, by being a sin against the Vicar of Christ and the Church, and worse still if accompanied by contempt or malice toward the Pope. Then some of these accusers of Pope Francis also refuse submission to any teaching of any Pope or Ecumenical Council contrary to their own minds. Some reject the indefectibility of the Church. Some reject the papal charisms including the charism of truth and never-failing faith. And yet they speak as if they were presenting revealed Truth without possibility of error; and they do not accept correction from the Roman Pontiff or the body of Bishops led by him.

The point here is that those who vehemently oppose holy Communion for poor sinners struggling in a difficult situation, sinners without the full culpability of actual mortal sin, are themselves guilty of worse sins. They are hypocrites, who would deny Communion to persons in a state of grace (despite objectively grave sins), while they themselves certainly are committing public objectively grave sins, of a worse type (sins against religion). Under their own proposed discipline, they should not receive Communion. They are like the Pharisee in the temple, denigrating the publican:

[Luke]
{18:9} Now about certain persons who consider themselves to be just, while disdaining others, he told also this parable:
{18:10} “Two men ascended to the temple, in order to pray. One was a Pharisee, and the other was a tax collector.
{18:11} Standing, the Pharisee prayed within himself in this way: ‘O God, I give thanks to you that I am not like the rest of men: robbers, unjust, adulterers, even as this tax collector chooses to be.
{18:12} I fast twice between Sabbaths. I give tithes from all that I possess.’
{18:13} And the tax collector, standing at a distance, was not willing to even lift up his eyes to heaven. But he struck his chest, saying: ‘O God, be merciful to me, a sinner.’
{18:14} I say to you, this one descended to his house justified, but not the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled; and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.”

Now if the Church under a future Pope decides to adopt the discipline of denial of Communion for anyone guilty of objectively grave sin, until they make a good Confession, many persons will be unable to receive and may fall away from attending Mass and eventually fall away from the Faith entirely. Consider the many objectively grave sins that are unfortunately common in the Church today:

* refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff and the Ecumenical Councils
* malice or contempt toward the Pope or the Bishops
* grave sins of omission regarding attending Mass, praying, fasting, etc.
* sex outside of marriage, unnatural sexual acts within marriage
* contraception, abortifacient contraception, abortion
* pornography, masturbation
* homosexuality, transgenderism
* rejection of Church teaching on faith and morals on various questions
* voting in a way that is deliberately contrary to Catholic teaching
* and many other sins

If a strict discipline for Communion were to be instituted, most Catholics would not be able to receive holy Communion. The inability to receive Communion may lead to many of these persons falling away from attendance at Mass and then falling away from Catholicism or Christianity entirely. So the discipline proposed, at least implicitly proposed, by the opponents of Amoris Laetitia is imprudent and possibly could do much harm. More important is the fact that they are rejecting the discipline authoritatively chosen and instituted by the Roman Pontiff.

Ronald L Conte Jr