Cardinal Kasper: Sacraments for remarried divorcees only in "special cases"

  • Thread starter Thread starter CutlerB
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I find no one on this thread that fits that description. Perhaps you are thinking of another thread?Sure, right after you point me to where Christ said “communion” or “sacrament”.😉

What does the Church teach regarding receiving the Eucharist while in a state of mortal sin (and yes, adultery would fall into that category)?

Does the Church have the power to bind and loosen on this earth?

Peace

Tim
So Christ did not bar the divorced from the sacraments?

If the Church does loosen the current prohibition, is it your view that would go against the direct teaching of Christ?
 
I know exactly what martin was doing and why…he may have been wrong but the church wasnt the most holy place at the time…

when I asked the question about catholics what I meant was if I was born a methodist and followed the rules and lived a good life and died but had never taken catholic communion or confessed my sins would I go to hell?
No, of course not. Nor does the Church teach that.
 
So Christ did not bar the divorced from the sacraments?
Of course He did. He did it through His Church.
If the Church does loosen the current prohibition, is it your view that would go against the direct teaching of Christ?
No. If the Magisterium, in communion with the Pope, allows people with grave sin to receive communion while in that state, that WILL be the direct teaching of Christ. However, that will not happen because Christ has already made His will known.

Peace

Tim
 
Of course He did. He did it through His Church. \quote]

OK, so we agree the Church is not “over-riding” Jesus, just making a doctrinal adjustment like the many others made in the last 2000 years.
No. If the Magisterium, in communion with the Pope, allows people with grave sin to receive communion while in that state, that WILL be the direct teaching of Christ. However, that will not happen because Christ has already made His will known.
 
Orogeny;11744085:
Of course He did. He did it through His Church. \quote]

OK, so we agree the Church is not “over-riding” Jesus, just making a doctrinal adjustment like the many others made in the last 2000 years.

OK, well I don’t think many Catholics (even in the hierarchy) would agree that everything the Church says about the administration of the sacraments is the “direct teaching of Christ.” That said, I guess we will have to wait and see what happens.
See thats my point right there the people who have made decisions on things through out the years have made stuff up…some of it morally good and some not so good…we are pretty good at weeding it out to get to the good stuff. Rules have been made and because of the establishment these rules then get tied to the whole coined term “divinely inspired” thus infalable. People then believe blindly that everything that comes out of the churches mouth is in facto a direct teaching of christ because the church says so (dont question). That just isnt so and for that reason through out the years we have seen some serious atrocities in the name of god! Its similar to the Gospels and the big debate these days about who actually wrote many of them since most of them date well after the original 12 died. they tied their names to them to give them weight and authority.

You see I do believe the church itself was divinly inspired. God did establish a church on Peter. The way I explain it to people is Jesus set the Corner stone and the appostles built the foundation. It was then left up to man to take it from there. We did a pretty good job minus about 200-700 years of some questionable popes depending on how you feel about that. Cant deny that we had some whopers. I do believe that in order to get ahold of a huge establishment man had to create a structure, rules, guidelines and we did it to align as much to the teachings of christ and the apostles as we could. BUT there are things about the instution that are simply mans interpretation of what happened. Remember this all was an oral tradition for hundereds of years pre bible. Did god preach about divorce and marriage…sure he did but he didnt tell us how to accomplish it, all the rituals, and sayings, processes, and retreats, payment of fees, how the letterhead was supposed to be set up, that we have installed and those are man made. If you say we cant change or traditions your crazy if you dont look at the orthodox and Roman split or vattican II froma purley Roman side. All these things are man created man inspired and just because they come from with in the church doesnt mean they are infact christ teachings. Now I dont need someone to pull 9 different things out of the gospels from different areas that show me otherwise because honestly when you yank a bunchof different stuff that may or may not be talking about a particular topic anyone can spin it to tie directly into anything we talk about. Could we be wrong about marriage probably not we will never now but just because Jesus said something it doesnt mean that there were not reasons why someone couldnt follow it to the letter. I dont believe he left us here with out any options.

Did Jesus give a hard line on mariage? sure he did but being God he had to understand that evil is still here where we dwell and that evil can and will invade our relationships if we let them. Are we going to condemn the inocent party of a marriage that fails because of evil deeds? You dont think that god knew that satan could destroy that bond that was created between the two simply because we are human and weak? Dont you think this compassionate god would shelter this woman and want her to be happy? Some may be happy with following the catholic teaching and some may not and seek love elsewhere is one going to heaven and one going to hell? I certainly dont think so. I think we were given options and a brain and morals to know whats right and wrong but I think man tries to be too literal sometimes and not allow the good to come of something becuase we are stubborn and made a decision a long time ago and wont change it. Honestly I dont think god is that cruel because he wants us to go to heaven. Hey thats just my opinion.
 
I’m sorry, eightydeuce82, but I can’t help you. You keep insisting that the Church is wrong about adultery and no discussion has seemed to have made any impact on you.

I’m not interested in responding to the same questions over and over.

Your parents/grandparents and anyone else who is divorced and re-married without an annulment are committing adultery. If they receive the Eucharist with grave sin on their soul (and adultery IS a grave sin), they condemn themselves. The Church is not the one condemning them.

Peace

Tim
 
I’m sorry, eightydeuce82, but I can’t help you. You keep insisting that the Church is wrong about adultery and no discussion has seemed to have made any impact on you.
I agree, and that is why I rejoice in the certainty that the doctrine on the indissolubility of marriage will never ever change, despite what those who advocate it keep insisting.
 
I agree, and that is why I rejoice in the certainty that the doctrine on the indissolubility of marriage will never ever change, despite what those who advocate it keep insisting.
I dont think the church is going to change either nor am I advocating for it. If god wants it to happen and in the words of star trek he will make it so…all im getting at is that man is falable and we are the church and the church is us if we dont discern or critically think about something then we are doing ourselves an injustice. I cant change my family situation it is what it is but I will hold firm that in my opinion we do have options and not all of those options are going to lead us to hell…alot will but not everything.
 
I dont think the church is going to change either nor am I advocating for it. If god wants it to happen and in the words of star trek he will make it so…all im getting at is that man is falable and we are the church and the church is us if we dont discern or critically think about something then we are doing ourselves an injustice. I cant change my family situation it is what it is but I will hold firm that in my opinion we do have options and not all of those options are going to lead us to hell…alot will but not everything.
Yes, men are fallible.
But the Church’s infallibility is not rooted in men, but in God. He prevents her from erring.
Yes, the Church is the People of God.
But “we”, as the laity, do not “discern” doctrine. That is the Bishops’ and the Pope’s job. That is the sense in which we were using the term “the Church” here, when we talked about doctrine and teaching.
 
Yes, men are fallible.
But the Church’s infallibility is not rooted in men, but in God. He prevents her from erring.
Yes, the Church is the People of God.
But “we”, as the laity, do not “discern” doctrine. That is the Bishops’ and the Pope’s job. That is the sense in which we were using the term “the Church” here, when we talked about doctrine and teaching.
Right who came up with the infalabe thing?
 
really where did jesus say that everything that the “church” does is infalable?
I did not say that He said that “everything the Church does is infallible”, nor does the Church teach that. Are you rejecting Papal and Ecclesial Infallibility now, Sir? I mean really not some kind of devil’s advocate cop-out.
 
I did not say that He said that “everything the Church does is infallible”, nor does the Church teach that. Are you rejecting Papal and Ecclesial Infallibility now, Sir? I mean really not some kind of devil’s advocate cop-out.
nope not rejecting anything at all just wondering is all. Not to mention papal infalibility has only been used a couple of times if you dont include the saints.
 
nope not rejecting anything at all just wondering is all. Not to mention papal infalibility has only been used a couple of times if you dont include the saints.
Good, so this is hypothetical. May I then suggest you visit the main page of this site, www.catholic.com and type in “Papal Infallibility” into the search field. They can explain it far better than I can. Besides, that would go off-topic again.

Indeed, it hasn’t been engaged too often, although I think the exact number of times is subject to debate. I am aware of at least one case that is undisputed (The Assumption), and it seems to be generally agreed upon that the proclamation of the Immaculate Conception made use of the Pope’s charism, but beyond that, I think there is debate.

The Saints are not infallible in any case.
 
really where did jesus say that everything that the “church” does is infalable?
Jesus didn’t mention the Trinity either, nor His dual nature, nor the New Testament itself, nor anything about Marian doctrine, Popes, Saints, Councils, Bishops, Priests, and on and on.

Are those things questionable too?
 
Jesus didn’t mention the Trinity either, nor His dual nature, nor the New Testament itself, nor anything about Marian doctrine, Popes, Saints, Councils, Bishops, Priests, and on and on.

Are those things questionable too?
What I was refering to with the saints is that there is a line of thinking that the popes decliration of sainthood for someone is infact him using infalibility.
 
Jesus didn’t mention the Trinity either, nor His dual nature, nor the New Testament itself, nor anything about Marian doctrine, Popes, Saints, Councils, Bishops, Priests, and on and on.

Are those things questionable too?
My answer to that is did man creat those things? If so then yes they are questionable…but in my opinion…to not discern them would be bad. Doesnt mean they are anything less divinly inspired just that you have thought about the connection.
 
What I was refering to with the saints is that there is a line of thinking that the popes decliration of sainthood for someone is infact him using infalibility.
Oh, that’s what you mean. I thought you meant the writings of the Saints. As far as I know, yes, the canonisation of Saints is an act of the Extraordinary Magisterium, which engages Infallibility.
 
Oh, that’s what you mean. I thought you meant the writings of the Saints. As far as I know, yes, the canonisation of Saints is an act of the Extraordinary Magisterium, which engages Infallibility.
Yea aparently some didnt manke the connection to making someone a saint and papal infalibility…this was discussed on catholic answers where some thought just the imaculate conception and the trinity were the only papal infalable statements. Maybe there is more…but its not many excluding the saint stuff. Its that point that protestants use that well the pope is infalable and can say what he wants like “the door is now green” when in reality its red but the people have to follow this because the pope said it and its infalable. The pope can make mistakes thats a fact…maybe we wont know for many years but hes is infact a man after all a sinner.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top