America Mag: Top Ten Takeaways from “Amoris Laetitia”

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

gilliam

Guest
  1. The church needs to understand families and individuals in all their complexity.
  2. The role of conscience is paramount in moral decision making.
  3. Divorced and remarried Catholics need to be more fully integrated into the church.
  4. All members of the family need to be encouraged to live good Christian lives.
  5. We should no longer talk about people “living in sin.”
  6. What might work in one place may not work in another.
  7. Traditional teachings on marriage are affirmed, but the church should not burden people with unrealistic expectations.
  8. Children must be educated in sex and sexuality.
  9. Gay men and women should be respected.
  10. All are welcome.
    americamagazine.org/issue/top-ten-takeaways-amoris-laetitia?utm_content=buffer694cc&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
 
My top takeaway:

Pope Francis understands Jesus’ message.
 
JimG said:
There are two things to keep in mind. Adultery is not an unforgivable sin. And marriage is permanent until death.
Click to expand...
Provided the marriage is valid. If a person who is not well formed in Catholicism is married in the Church and the Church fails to see that this person does not understand the teaching on marriage and marries them. Is the marriage valid?

It would seem this is the case and is happening often. Where does the responsibility lie? With the bride and groom only? If it’s a Catholic marriage, doesn’t the Church bear some of the responsibility before the sacrament is given in ensuring the marriage is well formed from the start, or do they marry any Catholic who comes along. Is the Church doing enough to form marriages?

How much formation do clergy get for their vocation. How much do married couples get for theirs.
 
1Lord1Faith said:
Provided the marriage is valid. If a person who is not well formed in Catholicism is married in the Church and the Church fails to see that this person does not understand the teaching on marriage and marries them. Is the marriage valid?

It would seem this is the case and is happening often. Where does the responsibility lie? With the bride and groom only? If it’s a Catholic marriage, doesn’t the Church bear some of the responsibility before the sacrament is given in ensuring the marriage is well formed from the start, or do they marry any Catholic who comes along. Is the Church doing enough to form marriages?
Click to expand...
It would be a very serious matter for any priest to deny marriage to a couple who requests it and where no impediments exist. Most dioceses have formal marriage preparation programs, far more extensive than what was required in the past. If it were me, which it isn’t, my first question to each person would be: “Do you understand that marriage is permanent until death? Do you understand that if you civilly divorce, that does not affect this marriage, and you could never remarry in the Church?”

Actually, that is something I was taught in high school. But ultimately, it is up to the bride and groom to understand the attributes of marriage: permanence, fidelity, openness to life.

If it turns out later that they divorce, a tribunal will have to decide whether or not there is sufficient evidence to declare that the marriage was null.
 
JimG said:
It would be a very serious matter for any priest to deny marriage to a couple who requests it and where no impediments exist. Most dioceses have formal marriage preparation programs, far more extensive than what was required in the past. If it were me, which it isn’t, my first question to each person would be: “Do you understand that marriage is permanent until death? Do you understand that if you civilly divorce, that does not affect this marriage, and you could never remarry in the Church?”

Actually, that is something I was taught in high school. But ultimately, it is up to the bride and groom to understand the attributes of marriage: permanence, fidelity, openness to life.

If it turns out later that they divorce, a tribunal will have to decide whether or not there is sufficient evidence to declare that the marriage was null.
Click to expand...
If the formation of marriage vocations were taken as seriously as the formation of religious vocations by the Church, I don’t think there would be so much divorce. The Church offers very little guidance with it’s Sacraments, except for Holy Orders. Marriage must be taken more seriously by the Church or ought not to condemn those who have divorced and felt the need to remarry.

I don’t mean denying Catholics the Sacrament, I mean marrying them without enough formation. Dispensations do not need to be given to marry every Catholic to a non-Catholic outside of a church; that’s one example I can think of.

The Church needs to rethink it’s stance on divorced and remarried Catholics if it will not take on more responsibility for the formation of marriages or the validity of a failed one.
 
If “America” announced that the sun comes up in the east, I would be looking for it to come up in the west.

Everybody should read the encyclical, but nobody should accept "America"s word for what it says or means.
 
1Lord1Faith said:
If the formation of marriage vocations were taken as seriously as the formation of religious vocations by the Church, I don’t think there would be so much divorce. The Church offers very little guidance with it’s Sacraments, except for Holy Orders. Marriage must be taken more seriously by the Church or ought not to condemn those who have divorced and felt the need to remarry.

I don’t mean denying Catholics the Sacrament, I mean marrying them without enough formation. Dispensations do not need to be given to marry every Catholic to a non-Catholic outside of a church; that’s one example I can think of.

The Church needs to rethink it’s stance on divorced and remarried Catholics if it will not take on more responsibility for the formation of marriages or the validity of a failed one.
Click to expand...
I at least partially agree with what you say here, The real vocation crisis in the Church is in the vocation of marriage. We see it in the declining marriage statistics, in the rising divorce statistics, in the decrease in the numbers of children, which will lead to demographic winter and collapse of the social order. But you can only catechize the willing, and I can’t see marriage being routinely denied. And the Church has no authority to change doctrine on the permanence of marriage, which comes from Jesus himself.
 
1Lord1Faith said:
If the formation of marriage vocations were taken as seriously as the formation of religious vocations by the Church, I don’t think there would be so much divorce.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but there would be fewer people getting married in the first place.
 
on_the_hill said:
Maybe, but there would be fewer people getting married in the first place.
Click to expand...
Maybe this would be a good thing. We can’t cater to the world, their ideals, it weakens what is true.

In Fatima, The Blessed Mother said that "Many marriages are not of God and do not please Our Lord "

I feel certain that if we polled most Catholics who are married most of them would not understand what a marriage “of God” would be. SO, what does it mean “What GOD PUT TOGETHER, let no man tear asunder” mean, how is that? God put together… not, " what two people decided upon since the other seems like a reasonable spouse". Most of the marriages in the Bible (Old Testament) are where both people know they were put together by God… some of them weren’t ideal situations. People would tell St. Joseph not to marry that woman Mary because she was found with child and possibly ‘loose’ and not worthy of being a good spouse- a bad risk! God instructed Hosea to marry Gomer,a prostitute, and even told Hsea to go buy her back after she left him for the wayward life again! Tobias found Sarah and were married* the next day*. So why does modern society, and especially Catholics, not cite these strange anomalies when counseling those considering marriage. I know WHY they don’t because it seems problematic, but should they be doing that? " What GOD put together…"

In the marriages spoken about in Scripture both people have some sort of inner knowing (spiritual) that this person completes their vocation to God in life. I think most people today are not willing to wait that long for that person, nor to they believe in God (enough) to believe a love like that is true and that God would send it when you are serious about God. I’m not speaking of romantic fantasy movie type love here either- but the love of those couples who are examples to us in Scripture.

Our marriages should mirror God, *for *God… and easily, because it is OF God, with gratitude for the great gift of a spouse. The notion of marriage has been so disparaged over the last two or three decades. I don’t know many young people today that know how its ‘really supposed to be’, or if they do, they don’t believe its possible. If they do, they are young people with an active faith in Jesus.

I believe the problems we are having now stem from the fact that teaching on marriage and lack of understanding of God has brought us to where we are today with much confusion over annulments, so on and so forth. Its sheer confusion, with lots of feet being stepped on left, right and center. I’m certain my comments on this here would not be welcome to most people also. Most people would not want to be told your marriage is not right in the eyes of God. Your marriage does not please God.
 
on_the_hill said:
Maybe, but there would be fewer people getting married in the first place.
Click to expand...
Actually, the rate of marriage in the U.S. has fallen precipitously, except at the higher education / income levels. Living together - for years - has become socially acceptable if not actually normative. The revolution continues.
 
1Lord1Faith said:
…

The Church needs to rethink it’s stance on divorced and remarried Catholics if it will not take on more responsibility for the formation of marriages or the validity of a failed one.
Click to expand...
I think this nails it, however I do place responsibility on the couple themselves. I don’t believe a lot of them really have a solid faith formation to get married, and some just marry in the church to appease older Catholic family members. Some couples don’t really believe so much as they do want some sort of faith backing because they believe its a good idea, but don’t know what they really believe and don’t take the time to really commit or research the notion of faith themselves.

Marriage has to be two people committed to God first. They have to meet in God, who is Love. Everything else is just puny, lukewarm.
 
Well, considering that to be married in my church you have to register at least nine months in advance, there arent any couples getting married the day after they meet.

Another thing to consider is that the marriages in the OT were the only ones written about. There’s no way of knowing the circumstances of all the others.

And how is a priest to know that two people are inspired by God to marry? He can only take their word for it.
 
on_the_hill said:
Well, considering that to be married in my church you have to register at least nine months in advance, there arent any couples getting married the day after they meet.
Click to expand...
But not in the church… which is necessary for it to be recognized. (by God)
on_the_hill said:
Another thing to consider is that the marriages in the OT were the only ones written about. There’s no way of knowing the circumstances of all the others.
Click to expand...
Yes, but we are given The Word of God for instruction and reproof. If it was written, it has purpose.
on_the_hill said:
And how is a priest to know that two people are inspired by God to marry? He can only take their word for it.
Click to expand...
He doesn’t… this is the same of how it is now anyway… so no difference. The couples have responsibility… this is why they have pre-canna classes, I suspect. To make sure the couples know their responsibility.
 
From the article, we read the following. Does the text really match the heading or the interpretation put on it in the article?
  1. The role of conscience is paramount in moral decision making. (The magazine heading)
The Pope actually said:

“Individual conscience needs to be better incorporated into the church’s practice in certain situations which do not objectively embody our understanding of marriage”

Then the magazine article goes on to interpret Pope Francis’ statement thus:

“That is the traditional belief that individual conscience is the final arbiter of the moral life has been forgotten here. The church has been “called to form consciences, not to replace them” (37). Yes, it is true, the Pope says, that a conscience needs to be formed by church teaching. But conscience does more than to judge what does or does not agree with church teaching. Conscience can also recognize with “a certain moral security” what God is asking (303). Pastors, therefore, need to help people not simply follow rules, but to practice “discernment,” a word that implies prayerful decision making.” (The magazine article itself again)

I am not persuaded that the Church actually teaches that “conscience is paramount” or that “individual conscience is the final arbiter of the moral life”. The Catechism doesn’t put it that way, as I read it. There is quite a bit in the Catechism about conscience and its importance, but it also says:

‘1799 Faced with a moral choice, conscience can make either a right judgment in accordance with reason and the divine law or, on the contrary, an erroneous judgment that departs from them.’

-and-

"1801 Conscience can remain in ignorance or make erroneous judgments. Such ignorance and errors are not always free of guilt. "

So, it seems to me asserting that individual conscience is “paramount” or “the final arbiter of the moral life” is not quite consistent with the Catechism or what the Pope actually said, either one. While the Church’s teachings on conscience are subtle and nuanced, saying conscience is the “final arbiter” of the “moral life” is closer to the protestant view of the autonomy of conscience than the Catholic view that the prompting of conscience can be flawed and must be guided by the clear teachings of the Church.

It certainly seems to me if there is a very clear moral teaching of the Church; e.g., that voluntary abortion is intrinsically wrong; that is, wrong in itself and every time, then it does not seem to me a conscience that tells one it’s okay to do it, for example, because one feels “burdened with a baby”, and feels that’s justification enough, despite knowledge of the Church’s teaching, can possibly be the proper “final arbiter” of the moral choice to abort or to not abort.

Granted, a protestant or a Jew might have received other moral teaching from his religion about voluntary abortion, and might, because of the way it’s so “sanitized” in this society, might not receive the messages of natural law about it. I get that. But a Catholic who knows the Church’s teaching?

I have a lot of trouble with this article’s interpretation of the Pope’s statement.
 
How late is too late to get an annulment?

For example, a young couple in their late teens get hastily married because they are starried-eyed in love, then after two or three years they realize it was a mistake. For whatever reason, the Church agrees the marriage never really existed in spirit so it approves the annulment request.

On the other hand, a couple has been married for, say, 25 years and the “magic” has simply gone out of the relationship and they have emotionally drifted apart. What are the chances they would get an annulment approved?
 
JimG said:
I at least partially agree with what you say here, The real vocation crisis in the Church is in the vocation of marriage. We see it in the declining marriage statistics, in the rising divorce statistics, in the decrease in the numbers of children, which will lead to demographic winter and collapse of the social order. But you can only catechize the willing, and I can’t see marriage being routinely denied. And the Church has no authority to change doctrine on the permanence of marriage, which comes from Jesus himself.
Click to expand...
I have never divorced, and I am reasonably confident I never will be. (If my wife hasn’t done it yet, I doubt she’s likely to do it) But I have seen a lot of them, and I do think a lot of times marriages have not been entered into properly, perhaps more now than previously.

I actually helped a man with his annulment. He was so inarticulate that he couldn’t do the paperwork himself. He had married long ago to a woman he had gotten pregnant because “that’s what you did” back when he was a young man. The woman was protestant and totally rejected, even demeaned the man’s Catholicism. She, herself, had been diagnosed bipolar. She filed the divorce against him because she thought her lover was better in bed than her husband. (she actually said that in court)

I felt a bit nervous about even filling out the paperwork with him, delving into his married life and all that. I’m not a canon lawyer. I just know how to ask questions and how to write. But the pastor knew I did, so I felt a little better about that.

So, should his annulment have been granted or not? (It was, and fairly quickly) Did this annulment fit a category of canon law or not? I don’t actually know, because I don’t know the bases for annulment to speak of. Anyway, he married a Catholic widow in the Church after it was granted.

But in my mind, that wasn’t a glaring case, like a marriage forced at the point of a gun or something. But it was clearly flawed from the very start, and in more than one way.

How seriously, I wonder, do young (and maybe not so young) people really approach marriage nowadays? Is it possible that a very large number of them are legitimately flawed from the Church’s standpoint or, for that matter, from God’s?

But at the same time, I wonder if it isn’t easier to “blindly” follow the teachings of the Church in almost everything else, then confess and repent if we fail, than it is to go through the wranglings of conscience that might simply end up with a rationalized, but wrong, answer?
 
Lost_Sheep said:
How late is too late to get an annulment?

For example, a young couple in their late teens get hastily married because they are starried-eyed in love, then after two or three years they realize it was a mistake. For whatever reason, the Church agrees the marriage never really existed in spirit so it approves the annulment request.

On the other hand, a couple has been married for, say, 25 years and the “magic” has simply gone out of the relationship and they have emotionally drifted apart. What are the chances they would get an annulment approved?
Click to expand...
As I understand it, length of marriage is not a factor, nor is whether or not the couple think the marriage was a mistake.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top