German bishops have voted “overwhelmingly” in favour of producing a “guide” for Protestant spouses on reception of Holy Communion under certain conditions.
At their spring conference in Ingolstadt, the German bishops’ conference agreed that a Protestant partner of a Catholic can receive the Eucharist after having made a “serious examination” of conscience with a priest or another person with pastoral responsibilities, “affirms the faith of the Catholic Church,” wishes to end “serious spiritual distress,” and has a “longing to satisfy a hunger for the Eucharist.” 
Cardinal Reinhard Marx, president of the German bishops’ conference, said Thursday that such a guide was a “positive step.” He said there had been an “intense debate” during which “serious concerns” had been raised, according to Katholisch.de, the website of the German bishops’ conference.
He added the bishops were not giving general approval but that the guide pertained to individual decisions. He said the bishops wanted to continue with this issue “in a high profile way,” but that the guide would merely be a “pastoral handout” and that “we don’t want to change any doctrine.”
The bishops believe the guidelines should help pastors to clarify whether such cases are of an exceptional kind, in line with the meaning of canon 844 § 4 which regulates when a non-Catholic may receive Holy Communion. 
The canon states:
“If the danger of death is present or if, in the judgment of the diocesan bishop or conference of bishops, some other grave necessity urges it, Catholic ministers administer these same sacraments licitly also to other Christians not having full communion with the Catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who seek such on their own accord, provided that they manifest Catholic faith in respect to these sacraments and are properly disposed.”
Cardinal Marx rejected the idea that such a step would amount to a path that would call Protestants to conversion, otherwise known as an “ecumenism of return or conversion.” In other words, he stressed that the document does not mention that Protestants may receive Holy Communion only if they convert. He also said much would be left to the discretion of the local bishop, and consequences he might draw from the guide. He said only the bishop himself may establish new laws in this area.
The guide was prepared by the bishops’ commission on questions of faith and ecumenism, and will be published in the coming weeks. Cardinal Marx said Vatican approval is not necessary because it was only a matter of pastoral assistance.
The Evangelical Church in Germany (EKD) responded by saying the decision was “an important step on the road of ecumenism.”
“For people who not only share their faith in Jesus Christ, but also their lives with each other, this is a real relief,” the EKD’s Council Chairman Heinrich Bedford-Strohm said Thursday. “The decision makes it clear that the need of inter-confessing couples to be able to stand together at the Lord's table is heard and appreciated by the bishops’ conference,” he said.
A source with knowledge of the matter in Germany told the Register the bishops were bringing up the “famous single-case again” which as far as he was concerned has been a “quiet and discreet practice in Germany for quite a while.” He also criticized the EKD for already taking it further than the bishops seem to intend, and viewing it as green lighting intercommunion for all couples.  
In comments to the Register last year, an Italian theologian warned that if the Church were to change its rules on shared Eucharistic Communion it would ”go against Revelation and the Magisterium”, leading Christians to “commit blasphemy and sacrilege.”
Drawing on the Church’s teaching based on Sacred Scripture and Tradition, Msgr. Nicola Bux, a former consulter to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, stressed that non-Catholic Christians must have undertaken baptism and confirmation in the Catholic Church, and repented of grave sin through sacramental confession, in order to be able to receive Jesus in the Eucharist.
The German bishops’ move echoes comments made by Pope Francis in November 2015 when he appeared to suggest that a Lutheran married to a Catholic could receive Holy Communion based on the fact that the Lutheran wife was baptized and would be acting in accordance with her conscience.
He told Evangelical Lutherans in Rome that the woman should “talk to the Lord” about receiving holy Communion “and then go forward,” but added that he “wouldn’t ever dare to allow this, because it’s not my competence.”

Readers who may be au fait with Church affairs to some extent will understand the import of this, and why it falls into "DILEMMAS for the Faithful", especially since it follows from the controversy over Amoris Laetitia's seeming allowance to permit divorcees to receive the sacraments. My intention though is to deliver this news without too much analysis or hype [ I will elucidate in a second part to this post]. So here, I offer one comment by a canon lawyer, Dr. Edward Peters ............

This one is licit, strictly speaking, but such a bad idea that the canon allowing it probably needs to reformed. Once again, the German bishops are acting, but the law was convenient so it was respected.
Canon 844 § 4 allows baptized non-Catholics to receive holy Communion if “grave necessity urges” the local bishop or (here) the conference of bishops to allow such reception, provided further only that those seeking holy Communion claim (as most can) to satisfy some practical and minimal credal criteria. Effectively, then, the canon expects the “grave necessity” requirement to keep the Communion rite at Mass from turning into a free samples line.
The problem, obviously, is about when (besides, one might concede, at the time of death, an option already allowed under a different part of the canon) is it ever gravely necessary for non-Catholics to receive holy Communion? Not, when might it be helpful or decorousor embarrassment-squelching to receive holy Communion, but when is it necessary for them to receive, and gravely necessary to boot?
I suggest, Never. Even Catholics are required to receive holy Communion only once a year (c.  920). 
But, unless the canon is establishing a criterion that can never be satisfied, what does the clause “grave necessity” mean? Apparently, pretty much whatever a bishop or (here) conference of bishops decides it means, including, as the Germans have decided, non-Catholic spouses who assert “serious spiritual distress” and a “longing to satisfy hunger for the Eucharist”—albeit, exactly the kind of healthy spiritual ferment that has occasioned countless baptized persons over the centuries to seek full communion with the Catholic Church. So much for that motivation.
Nevertheless this ruling falls narrowly within the law, I think, suggesting that maybe the law’s desire to legislate on an admittedly “hard case” has resulted in a bad law. As hard cases usually do. Other “hard cases” will doubtless follow. Just watch.
A last thought. How the Germans’ ruling on non-Catholic spouses receiving holy Communion will combine with their recent provisions for divorced-and-remarried Catholics receiving holy Communion—well, it makes the head spin.

Interestingly, Dr. Peters gave a few brief thoughts on the same blog regarding divorcee communicants immediately preceding his thoughts above, which are worth reading in this context so that we, the faithful, can note the trending theme of the Vatican's sentiments ..........

This is simply wrong. The German bishops as a whole (and not just an executive committee thereof) have approved the administration of holy Communion to divorced-and-remarried Catholics under the malleable conditions typical of these times. ThinkMalta. The only mildly remarkable thing here is that this latest degradation of sacramental discipline has caused so few ripples in Catholic media. But I suppose that no one really expected the German hierarchy to act other than to authorize disobedience to an inconvenient canon law, regardless of how unanimous the tradition behind that canon might be.

There we have it  -  the news and a comment. Readers can now resume normal activities, however I feel compelled to add a second part hereunder as an offering towards understanding current dynamics in the Catholic Theocracy of today. Read on if you wish.

                 ==============================================================
It would not be unreasonable to categorize Catholics broadly as [1] practicing faithful, and [2] nominal Catholics who claim some affiliation, occasionally practice, try to live 'good' lives, and base their beliefs on uninformed personal opinion.

Of those who are [1] practicing faithful, these can be loosely said to fall into various levels of engagement, beliefs and concern, viz., [a] very engaged in both practice and awareness of church affairs, [b] devoted to what they know of Catholic doctrine towards principally living in accord with the Gospel, and [c] attending to a basic requirement of the sacramental life.



Of those, mainly of the group [1] and [a] who are very involved, knowledgeable and active in the many aspects of the Christian life and try to keep abreast with the 'political' side of the Church, these are gravitating into various philosophical groups over recent times due to the noticeable unrest and controversy within the Church in the light of the Vatican's Paradigm Shift that some will claim re-introduces Modernism. Roughly, there are three positions evident among such faithful:
* those obedient to the Pope and Magisterial pronouncements
* those who have developed some concerns with the direction of the Church and are now known to "Review & Resist" or the R&R group, which is largely compliant but who are not loathe to voice their concerns or even to disregard some church positions
* the Sedavacantists [ the Chair of Peter is vacant and no Pope since VaticanII is legitimate] who believe that VII contradicts traditional dogma, that through heresy the subsequent Popes have self-excommunicated, that the Novus Ordo [New Order of liturgy, i.e. Mass] is heretical to some extent but that ordained priests still legitimately consecrate the Host [which is why they still attend Mass but preferably the Latin Mass].

That said, there are now many Catholic Orgs which propound their views on the state of the Church and are at sharp variance with each other and with the Vatican. Therein there is an imminent danger of schism. Perhaps the most disturbing dynamic has become, not these various organs which have taken a particular stance, but the conflict and enmity between the Prelates themselves as well as a multitude of ordinary bishops and priests. This is evident at the highest levels: one one side would appear to be the Pope, Bshps Cupich, Parolin, Marx, Serondo et al, while the resistance is lead by Sarah, Burke, Muller and others who have signed to the Dubia and to a "please explain" of the Pope. Additionally, many in the laity are concerned with a possible Lavender Mafia, Rainbow sympathisers, financial corruption, Communist & Freemason infiltration and the seeming pandering to Islam, Jews and Protestants. This amounts to a distressing situation for us Faithful, but fortunately the majority continue to live as closely as we can to Christ, according to the Gospel and nourish our spirits in the sacraments.

I will not attempt to interpret the matters in part one of this post or to offer personal views. To further my intent in this series of posts of delivering information and awareness, I leave references and links below to that end with no intention of swaying opinions this way or that. Many links will illustrate the depth of acrimony that we ought be aware of and will hopefully motivate us to pray earnestly for our leaders.

The link following is the Canon Law that was changed by John Paul II in 1983 which is now being used by the German Bishops to include non-Catholics in the reception of Communion [esp. sec 2,3&4].........

Here is a sample reaction of an Org called Rorate Caeli to the announcement of German Bishops ........

Abp. Chaput talks about the crisis in the Church and proffers some advice ......

EN News calls the bishops "heretics" ........

The site, Novus Ordo Watch is sedevacantist, and gives a comprehensive summary of the matter in its own virulent and sarcastic style ............

Fr. Cekada gives the case of the sedevacantists .............

From the usually moderate but very Catholic Life Site News ...........

Featured Image

JMJ pray for us.