A
agnes_therese
Guest
That’s wonderful, it does work well sometimes.
BUT – I’ll bet your father wasn’t telling your mother that her Popes were false and her Mass invalid. And that’s what the OP is in for with this girl.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
BUT – I’ll bet your father wasn’t telling your mother that her Popes were false and her Mass invalid. And that’s what the OP is in for with this girl.
T
tskrobacz
Guest
Is it not a BAD idea for you to assert the wrongfulness of a relationship having never met the man or woman but based simply on the OPs question? This type of righteousness is what Matt 6:1 warns against.BOTH are important. And marrying someone in schism is a BAD idea.
And don’t put “believes” in quotes like that.
We are all called to Love and let God direct our path. It is neither right nor wrong for the OP to marry one to whom his heart is drawn. Suggesting that it is otherwise because of some “teaching” or your personal beliefs is to totally miss the point of the teaching.
Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’** 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”**
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
You could, but it may not be a wise course to follow.Am I allowed to date a woman who rejects the authority of the Roman Pontiff and all the sacraments?
Could I marry her?
Women have powerful influence over men in spiritual matters, and it is HIGHLY likely that you will end up leaving the Catholic Church if you marry her. Even if you remain Catholic, your marriage will be filled with tension over the proper education and rearing of children, the celebration of holidays, the use of contraception, etc.
Scripture says that “for this reason a man shall leave his mother and father and be united with his wife.” It’s the man who leaves everything he knows for her. She will never leave her parents or her church.
If you want to avoid huge heartache later, endure a small heartache now and break of the relationship.
T
TheRealJuliane
Guest
Is it not a BAD idea for you to assert the wrongfulness of a relationship having never met the man or woman but based simply on the OPs question? This type of righteousness is what Matt 6:1 warns against.
We are all called to Love and let God direct our path. It is neither right nor wrong for the OP to marry one to whom his heart is drawn. Suggesting that it is otherwise because of some “teaching” or your personal beliefs is to totally miss the point of the teaching.
Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’** 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”**
I am greatly concerned about your comment. In our Church, it is definitely NOT encouraged to seek out a person of another faith, or no faith, to marry. I believe that you are mocking our faith and I rebuke that strongly. “Some teaching” you say? That teaching comes from 2,000 years of the Church that Jesus Christ founded.
Per the forum rules:
Non-Catholics are welcome to participate but must be respectful of the faith of the Catholics participating on the board.
By the way, what experience do you have with this? Are you married to someone of another faith, or no faith? Tell us what you know about this subject.
C
Crescentinus
Guest
Here’s my take on the issue.
If your fiance wants to convert you and your family away from Catholicism, then it stands to reason that the marriage would not end well.
If your fiance wants to convert you and your family away from Catholicism, then it stands to reason that the marriage would not end well.
T
tskrobacz
Guest
Your notion of church is the institutional church which will always attempt to define those that are “in” and those that are “out”. St. Thomas Aquinas said: The church is precisely the state of communion of the whole world" and “The body of the church is constituted by the people who existed from the beginning of the world until now.” -I am greatly concerned about your comment. In our Church, it is definitely NOT encouraged to seek out a person of another faith, or no faith, to marry. I believe that you are mocking our faith and I rebuke that strongly. “Some teaching” you say? That teaching comes from 2,000 years of the Church that Jesus Christ founded.
Per the forum rules:
Non-Catholics are welcome to participate but must be respectful of the faith of the Catholics participating on the board.
By the way, what experience do you have with this? Are you married to someone of another faith, or no faith? Tell us what you know about this subject.
This communion does not exist when religious people use doctrine and dogma to exclude. It exists only and precisely when that same doctrine and dogma is used to include all people at all times.
Wherever there is faith, hope, and charity, there is church and there is God.
B
brb3
Guest
Yes, u can bring her to Mass, then RICA, then Cathedral wedding !Am I allowed to date a woman who rejects the authority of the Roman Pontiff and all the sacraments?
Could I marry her?
T
TheRealJuliane
Guest
I ask you again, what is your direct experience with marrying a person who belongs to another faith, has no faith, or is in schism with the Catholic Church?Your notion of church is the institutional church which will always attempt to define those that are “in” and those that are “out”. St. Thomas Aquinas said: The church is precisely the state of communion of the whole world" and “The body of the church is constituted by the people who existed from the beginning of the world until now.” -
This communion does not exist when religious people use doctrine and dogma to exclude. It exists only and precisely when that same doctrine and dogma is used to include all people at all times.
Wherever there is faith, hope, and charity, there is church and there is God.
T
tskrobacz
Guest
I’ve been happily married for 27 years and was raised in the Catholic church. I work with a national scholar in a Franciscan think tank in Chicago and have studied the mystics, wisdom traditions and saints for years. You?I ask you again, what is your direct experience with marrying a person who belongs to another faith, has no faith, or is in schism with the Catholic Church?
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
This warm, fuzzy definition of “church” is appealing to those who essentially want to go their own way, but it is not terribly useful for those who are earnestly seeking to follow God as closely as possible.Your notion of church is the institutional church which will always attempt to define those that are “in” and those that are “out”. St. Thomas Aquinas said: The church is precisely the state of communion of the whole world" and “The body of the church is constituted by the people who existed from the beginning of the world until now.” -
This communion does not exist when religious people use doctrine and dogma to exclude. It exists only and precisely when that same doctrine and dogma is used to include all people at all times.
Wherever there is faith, hope, and charity, there is church and there is God.
Fortunately, there is so much more than a loose association of believers.
Christ promised the gates of hell would never prevail against his Church (meaning that it would always exist). Several factors in the text show he was talking about a visible communion.
First, Jesus made Peter head of this Church (Matt. 16:18), yet Jesus was certainly not making Peter the head of an invisible Church. It is Christ’s own prerogative to be head of the invisible communion of Christians stretching from heaven to earth (Eph. 5:23). Therefore, he must have made Peter the head of a visible, earthly church. (We will not argue here that Jesus made Peter the head; even if one disagrees, the remaining arguments prove our case.)
Second, Jesus gave Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 16:19), which are for use in Church government (compare Isa. 22:22 – the only Old Testament parallel to this verse). But one cannot govern an invisible communion of believers, only a visible one.
Third, Jesus gave Peter the power of binding and loosing (Matt. 16:19), which Matthew 18:17-18 indicates is used in Church discipline. But one cannot exercise Church discipline over an invisible body. Indeed, Matt. 18:17-18 refers it to public excommunication, in which an individual is treated by the church as “a gentile or a tax collector” (that is, as an unbeliever).
Fourth, Jesus explicitly stated that Peter would exercise the power of binding and loosing on earth. This shows his authority is an earthly one, over an earthly Church.
Fifth, Jesus promised the gates of hell would not prevail against his Church (Matt. 16:18), meaning that it would never perish. But it would be ridiculous to promise that an invisible Church would not pass out of existence since some of the Church’s members are in heaven and Christ’s heavenly Church cannot pass away by its very nature. Only a visible, earthly communion needs a promise that it will never perish.
There are thus abundant reasons to conclude that the Church Jesus was discussing in Matthew 16:17-19 was a visible communion of believers, and, since only the Catholic Church goes back that far, only it can be the one Christ founded.
Hope this helps. :tiphat:
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
What does ECC stand for?I’ve been happily married for 27 years and was raised in the Catholic church. I work with a national scholar in a Franciscan think tank in Chicago and have studied the mystics, wisdom traditions and saints for years. You?
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Oh, good. So, you’re familiar with Church documents such as Dominus Iesus which states in part:I’ve been happily married for 27 years and was raised in the Catholic church. I work with a national scholar in a Franciscan think tank in Chicago and have studied the mystics, wisdom traditions and saints for years. You?
- Therefore, there exists a single Church of Christ, which subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him.58 The Churches which, while not existing in perfect communion with the Catholic Church, remain united to her by means of the closest bonds, that is, by apostolic succession and a valid Eucharist, are true particular Churches.59 Therefore, the Church of Christ is present and operative also in these Churches, even though they lack full communion with the Catholic Church, since they do not accept the Catholic doctrine of the Primacy, which, according to the will of God, the Bishop of Rome objectively has and exercises over the entire Church.60
“The Christian faithful are therefore not permitted to imagine that the Church of Christ is nothing more than a collection — divided, yet in some way one — of Churches and ecclesial communities; nor are they free to hold that today the Church of Christ nowhere really exists, and must be considered only as a goal which all Churches and ecclesial communities must strive to reach”.64 In fact, “the elements of this already-given Church exist, joined together in their fullness in the Catholic Church and, without this fullness, in the other communities”.65 “Therefore, these separated Churches and communities as such, though we believe they suffer from defects, have by no means been deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church”.66
The lack of unity among Christians is certainly a wound for the Church; not in the sense that she is deprived of her unity, but “in that it hinders the complete fulfilment of her universality in history”.67
T
TheRealJuliane
Guest
That wasn’t what I asked. Don’t need what you do for a living, don’t care what you have studied. Evidently you do not identify as Catholic any more. What faith is your spouse, please? What is “ECC?”I’ve been happily married for 27 years and was raised in the Catholic church. I work with a national scholar in a Franciscan think tank in Chicago and have studied the mystics, wisdom traditions and saints for years. You?
I am not the one who is advocating for a Catholic to marry a sedevacantist, so my background isn’t relevant. But since you are, yours is very relevant.
If you are interested, you can find my background on most of my recent posts.
T
tskrobacz
Guest
We can agree to disagree with your attempt to use doctrine to disuade the OP from following his heart and prayerfully seeking God’s will in his specific situation. I can however agree with your tagline…there surely is no “outside the Church”…To talk about salvation “outside the Church” is like talking about swimming outside the water.” – Mark Shea
M
Michael_Francis
Guest
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
- Status
- Not open for further replies.