A viewer asks: “I have an interesting question to add to the question of Communion. I can say that when my first marriage ended, I felt that I was no longer welcome in the Catholic Church. My understanding was that divorced persons were not welcome to participate in this sacrament. I did, and do not, have any faith in the process of annulment, which I believe is justified only if the price can be paid. Could it be that dark manipulation of beliefs of what Creator would allow has cost the Church some believers unnecessarily?”

This has not only cost the Church believers but has harmed many, many, such believers with punishment that is truly not warranted. People come together for many varied reasons and, in addition, are suffering greatly from unfinished and unhealed karmic traumas and potentials that govern much of their behavior and the behavior of those they interact with. In the mix of possibilities, it is extremely difficult for anyone to reach a state of being where they are untroubled and so will inevitably engage in relationships with troubled individuals. This simply goes without saying. Under those circumstances, all bets are off concerning whether a marriage can survive, when the participants may not only have their individual foibles, limitations, and idiosyncratic behavior that is evident only after a time, and their partner may begin experiencing serious buyer’s remorse, so to speak, not to mention their unpredictable degree of flexibility they enjoy to cope with such eventualities and find a path to maintain the relationship in spite of revealed drawbacks. With the complex nature of human beings and the complexity of the interplay of all the swirling karmic forces always at work, there are many, many opportunities for clashes and severe disappointments and outright failures, where retreat is the better part of valor and the dissolution of a marriage the highest and best option to save the participants from their errors in joining together in the first place. Even though they may take sacred vows pledging undying loyalty to the bonds of matrimony, this is unrealistic when so much about life is clearly uncertain and unpredictable. Under these real-world circumstances, there needs to be an escape clause, a way to save the self, and this is literally the case in many instances where a partner’s buried karma begins to cause friction and even acts of violence that could threaten the life of their partner if given free rein. This happens many, many times. To remain with such a partner to honor even a sacred vow is, in our view, non-divine. Sacred vows have other dimensions that, in a sense, can be considered subclauses of a contract. In other words, the vows apply when people are in earnest, unencumbered, and wanted by their partner, but may be nullified when there is a change in status that becomes a liability and a threat to happiness or even existence if a person is in danger. A life lived in drudgery and lack of fulfillment because one is with the wrong partner and proves to become a stultifying arrangement serves no one. It does not serve the divine nor the individuals themselves. It only makes sense to nullify the marriage contract so life can begin anew with other options. This is only reasonable and sensible in a loving world following the principles of a loving God. With this perspective, the inflicting of a punishment on someone who breaks the rules and divorces their spouse, to then be denied Holy Communion, which is a sacred act of renewal, commitment to a divine path in its highest expression, and divine purpose, is condemning that person to a diminishment of their soul potential to maintain its divine status and growth. That is a higher price than is sensible when the idea of the universe is not to punish but to reward or find alternative arrangements where rewards are again feasible and possible because a person has realigned their thinking and their actions to be on a divine path once again and will be in the flow of Creator’s love in a way that is effortless and endlessly uplifting—that is the ideal. Anything that creates a discord needs to be worked on and corrected and given every opportunity by those who can help support the individuals affected by the circumstance bringing the discord. It serves no one to be a source of condemnation and denial of a fundamental tool for remaining on the divine path with renewed vigor, as embodied in the intentions behind the ritual of Holy Communion, to have a regular infusion of holy intention and a sharing of the idea of Christ Consciousness as well as the every embodiment of its actual energy. To punish someone who cannot love another because a relationship has become unworkable and thereby lost the love that formerly was gained from the commitment to marriage, by denying love further from the divine, which is an actual birthright of the human being, and condemn them to further deprivation is a non-divine principle and a non-divine act, and this needs to be rethought so all can remain in divine alignment even with a change of life partners. There are rules of etiquette and rules that support ethical conduct. This is not difficult to figure out in the case of marital partnerships and their dissolution and how they would best be handled to leave the parties with a minimum of hurt feelings, but rather a sense of renewed possibilities they can engage with and pursue the goal of love in new ways. This will serve their soul growth and the divine as well.