K
kman
Guest
The way I look at it is that the Church is Christ. If I don’t believe every teaching of the Church, then I don’t believe every teaching of Christ. Case Closed.
- Status
S
stanley123
Guest
I have a problem with the present teaching and practice of annulments. I don’t think the present teaching of the Catholic Church on annulments is right. For example, when after fifteen years of marriage, and several children, and there was never any question of an invalid marriage, suddenly the wife meets a male friend at a class in Catholic theology and they start to spend more time together. After a while they become intimate, as the wife becomes unfaithful to the marriage. Because of her friendly relationship with the local priest, she applies for an gets an annulment, which is a permission to remarry, and a statement that her first marriage was invalid. There really was never any question of an invalid marriage until she started to have intimate relations with someone she met at a class at the Church. These annulments are quite easy to get, according to my experience with a case like this, and I would guess that this is not an isolated case. In 1930, there were about 10 annulments declared in the USA, whereas today the annulment rate is running at around 50,000 or so per year. At:
cyberstation.net/paralegal/annulment.html
one of the grounds for annulment is to have an extramarital affair. You can have an extramarital affair, and then fill out the forms for $149, and get my annulment and out of your marriage. The US Catholic magazine of April 1997 says on page 7, that of all those who apply for an annulment in the St. Paul Minneapolis area, 97% are approved, and declared invalid.
To sum up, I don’t go along with the RCC on this teaching on annulments.
cyberstation.net/paralegal/annulment.html
one of the grounds for annulment is to have an extramarital affair. You can have an extramarital affair, and then fill out the forms for $149, and get my annulment and out of your marriage. The US Catholic magazine of April 1997 says on page 7, that of all those who apply for an annulment in the St. Paul Minneapolis area, 97% are approved, and declared invalid.
To sum up, I don’t go along with the RCC on this teaching on annulments.
S
system
Guest
With all due repect, I had to comment to this. As someone who had to go through the annulment process, it is not easy. It takes about 18 months, and that is relatively a smooth one. It actually costs more around $300. An annulment or “decree of nullity” is based on the wedding day. The archbishop has to decide if on the wedding day, both people in the marriage did everything, and had the right mind set, for a valid marriage. If, on the wedding day, one or both partis did not believe they would be married for very long, then they had an intention against the marriage. If someone’s only purpose or getting married was because of a pregnancy and they were not mature enough to make the marrital vows, the marriage would be invalid. Again, we have to always remember, “Whatever you loose on Earth, shall be loosed in Heaven. Whatever is bound on Earth, shall be bound in Heaven.” We have to be able to trust in the churches authority.
There are more declarations of nullity now then there were before. That is because of the culture and people aren’t being raised the same way anymore. They do not have the same values and the same commitment. Hope this helps.
S
stanley123
Guest
vicia3:
In other words, the Church has effectively gotten around the previous teaching on the indissolubility of marriage by watering down its requirements for annulments because of the way people have been raised. I don’t agree with this essential change in Catholic teaching which has resulted in up to 50,000 annulments granted per year presently (in the USA) , as contrasted to about 10 per year in 1930 (in the USA). I don’t think it is a good idea to change Catholic teaching because of the way people have been raised.
S
system
Guest
The teachings have not changed. The people have changed. The church is a rock. You can NOT get a decree of nulity for adultery. I don’ t know where you got this information. People, due to their lack of catechises and maturity are not valid matter. Form and matter are necessary for the SACREMENT of marriage. If either one are not there, there is not a valid marriage. The church has never changed its position on this. Hope this helps
S
stanley123
Guest
vicia3:
クラミジアにはクラビットが効く！ |
In response to the dilemma facing divorced Catholics, the Church, in recent years, has made sweeping changes in the Canon Law governing Annulment and the Catholic Church.
A spouse’s extramarital affair(s), trouble holding a job, financial irresponsibility, refusal to care for the home and/or children, dependence on parents, reliance on peer approval, alcohol or drug use, run ins with the law, etc. serve to demonstrate that the spouse exhibits an antisocial personality which would prevent him/her from fully understanding or carrying out the obligations of a lifelong relationship and therefore evidence that the spouse lacked the due competence required to form a sacramental marriage.
**Following the changes in 1970, diocesan Tribunals began to accept proof of psychological problems *after the marriage ***as proof that nullifying conditions existed *at the time of the marriage *warranting an annulment.
Also see the US Catholic , April 1997 issue, p. 6, “Annullments…” You can read here that since Vatican II, the presence of psychological factors has been accepted as grounds for annulments. In other words, the Church has changed her teaching. I disagree with the present teaching of the Church on annulments, and I agree with the teaching as it was in 1930, when the grounds for granting an annulment were stricter and when in the USA, you had about 10 annulments per year. Because of the watering down of the grounds for granting an annulment, the sannulment rate has shot up to about 50,000 per year in the USA at his time, from about 10 per year in the USA in the year 1930.
“There are more declarations of nullity now then there were before. That is because of the culture and people aren’t being raised the same way anymore.”
I don’t think that either of these two reasons, the culture or the way people are being raised is a sufficient reason to make an essential change in the teaching of the Catholic Church. The change is documented by the two references I give here, and as well by the statistics, according to which of all those who apply for an annulment in the St. Paul Minneapolis area, 97% are approved.
See:
クラミジアにはクラビットが効く！ |
In response to the dilemma facing divorced Catholics, the Church, in recent years, has made sweeping changes in the Canon Law governing Annulment and the Catholic Church.
A spouse’s extramarital affair(s), trouble holding a job, financial irresponsibility, refusal to care for the home and/or children, dependence on parents, reliance on peer approval, alcohol or drug use, run ins with the law, etc. serve to demonstrate that the spouse exhibits an antisocial personality which would prevent him/her from fully understanding or carrying out the obligations of a lifelong relationship and therefore evidence that the spouse lacked the due competence required to form a sacramental marriage.
**Following the changes in 1970, diocesan Tribunals began to accept proof of psychological problems *after the marriage ***as proof that nullifying conditions existed *at the time of the marriage *warranting an annulment.
Also see the US Catholic , April 1997 issue, p. 6, “Annullments…” You can read here that since Vatican II, the presence of psychological factors has been accepted as grounds for annulments. In other words, the Church has changed her teaching. I disagree with the present teaching of the Church on annulments, and I agree with the teaching as it was in 1930, when the grounds for granting an annulment were stricter and when in the USA, you had about 10 annulments per year. Because of the watering down of the grounds for granting an annulment, the sannulment rate has shot up to about 50,000 per year in the USA at his time, from about 10 per year in the USA in the year 1930.
“There are more declarations of nullity now then there were before. That is because of the culture and people aren’t being raised the same way anymore.”
I don’t think that either of these two reasons, the culture or the way people are being raised is a sufficient reason to make an essential change in the teaching of the Catholic Church. The change is documented by the two references I give here, and as well by the statistics, according to which of all those who apply for an annulment in the St. Paul Minneapolis area, 97% are approved.
S
system
Guest
Annulment/Decree of Nullity
Marriage Is Indissoluble. The Church teaches, as does Jesus in Mt 19:9, that every Christian marriage is indissoluble except by the death of one of the spouses. No power on earth can dissolve a ratified and consummated union of two baptized Christians (one in which vows have been validly exchanged and which has been later consummated by intercourse).
A valid marriage requires the proper intention at the time that the vows are exchanged. The parties must intend to make a marriage, which by definition is a life-long communion open to new human life. These are called the unitive and procreative meanings of marriage. If either of the two meanings of marriage (an indissoluble union and procreation) are excluded by the will of either the man or the woman no marriage is made on the wedding day (canon 1096).
For example, someone who has no intention of being faithful cannot make a marriage since at the very time of exchanging vows he or she precludes the life-long fidelity that is intrinsic to marriage. This is often demonstrated right at the beginning, or shortly thereafter, by infidelity. Or, someone who intends to exclude the possibility of children does not validly marry. (Those who cannot have children due to age or infertility are NOT meant here, but only those who could bear children but intend to avoid this marital responsibility completely.)
It should be noted that if a valid marriage is made on the wedding day later infidelity or a contraceptive will would not invalidate it. It is only when the will of either party in making the marriage contradicts the Plan of God from the beginning of marriage that it is invalid. The Church accepts every marriage as valid until proven otherwise, however (canon 1060).
What a decree of Nullity Is. An annulment, properly called a Decree of Nullity, is a finding by a Church tribunal that ON THE DAY VOWS WERE EXCHANGED at least some essential element for a valid marriage was lacking, such as, one of the parties did not intend lifelong fidelity to the other person or excluded children entirely. Another example would be that one of the parties was incapable of marriage (due to some constitutional weakness, such as mental illness or some psychological condition that prevented making the marital commitment - gross immaturity, homosexuality, etc.).
None of these conditions are assumed they must be proven. A Decree of Nullity does NOT dissolve the marriage, it cannot. It is a reasoned judgement that one never existed, and as such is capable of human error. If the tribunal is fastidious to Church law and theology and the couple and their witnesses are honest, the decision can be followed in good-faith, including a new marriage. If someone is ABUSING the process through deceit, however, it would be a very grave sin for that person. A person who innocently enters a second marriage would not be guilty of sin, but the person who abused the process to fraudulently obtain a decree in order to remarry would commit adultery by remarrying.
An “annulment” does NOT concern whether the marriage was a happy one, whether one of the spouses LATER became unfaithful, or LATER decided not to have children, but only their INTENTION on the wedding day. If a marriage was made THAT day it is a life-long bond, irrespective of what happened later in the marriage. To “annul” a marriage based on “failure to achieve communion” or some other factor not recognized by the Holy See (as has been done) is not a decree of nullity at all but a divorce. Such decisions are a source of grave scandal in the Church and are both canonically and morally invalid.
The Tribunal Process. The process of obtaining a Decree of Nullity entails submitting the facts of the marriage, with supporting witnesses, to the diocesan marriage tribunal. Either party can do this. Then after a evaluation of these facts a judgment on the validity of the marriage is made. A second court, usually a neighboring diocese, must verify the judgment and it must be approved by one’s bishop. Whatever decision is made, it may be appealed to the Roman Rota (the Holy See’s court for matrimonial cases).
Since this is a voluntary process most dioceses have a fee to cover administrative costs. If this fee is a hardship an individual should ask that it be waived.
Marriage After a Decree. If a Decree of Nullity is given the couple are free to marry, unless the condition that led to the invalidity (e.g. lack of intention, mental illness, incapacitating immaturity) still exists. Then the person who has that condition is still incapable of marriage, but the other person may marry.
Marriage Is Indissoluble. The Church teaches, as does Jesus in Mt 19:9, that every Christian marriage is indissoluble except by the death of one of the spouses. No power on earth can dissolve a ratified and consummated union of two baptized Christians (one in which vows have been validly exchanged and which has been later consummated by intercourse).
A valid marriage requires the proper intention at the time that the vows are exchanged. The parties must intend to make a marriage, which by definition is a life-long communion open to new human life. These are called the unitive and procreative meanings of marriage. If either of the two meanings of marriage (an indissoluble union and procreation) are excluded by the will of either the man or the woman no marriage is made on the wedding day (canon 1096).
For example, someone who has no intention of being faithful cannot make a marriage since at the very time of exchanging vows he or she precludes the life-long fidelity that is intrinsic to marriage. This is often demonstrated right at the beginning, or shortly thereafter, by infidelity. Or, someone who intends to exclude the possibility of children does not validly marry. (Those who cannot have children due to age or infertility are NOT meant here, but only those who could bear children but intend to avoid this marital responsibility completely.)
It should be noted that if a valid marriage is made on the wedding day later infidelity or a contraceptive will would not invalidate it. It is only when the will of either party in making the marriage contradicts the Plan of God from the beginning of marriage that it is invalid. The Church accepts every marriage as valid until proven otherwise, however (canon 1060).
What a decree of Nullity Is. An annulment, properly called a Decree of Nullity, is a finding by a Church tribunal that ON THE DAY VOWS WERE EXCHANGED at least some essential element for a valid marriage was lacking, such as, one of the parties did not intend lifelong fidelity to the other person or excluded children entirely. Another example would be that one of the parties was incapable of marriage (due to some constitutional weakness, such as mental illness or some psychological condition that prevented making the marital commitment - gross immaturity, homosexuality, etc.).
None of these conditions are assumed they must be proven. A Decree of Nullity does NOT dissolve the marriage, it cannot. It is a reasoned judgement that one never existed, and as such is capable of human error. If the tribunal is fastidious to Church law and theology and the couple and their witnesses are honest, the decision can be followed in good-faith, including a new marriage. If someone is ABUSING the process through deceit, however, it would be a very grave sin for that person. A person who innocently enters a second marriage would not be guilty of sin, but the person who abused the process to fraudulently obtain a decree in order to remarry would commit adultery by remarrying.
An “annulment” does NOT concern whether the marriage was a happy one, whether one of the spouses LATER became unfaithful, or LATER decided not to have children, but only their INTENTION on the wedding day. If a marriage was made THAT day it is a life-long bond, irrespective of what happened later in the marriage. To “annul” a marriage based on “failure to achieve communion” or some other factor not recognized by the Holy See (as has been done) is not a decree of nullity at all but a divorce. Such decisions are a source of grave scandal in the Church and are both canonically and morally invalid.
The Tribunal Process. The process of obtaining a Decree of Nullity entails submitting the facts of the marriage, with supporting witnesses, to the diocesan marriage tribunal. Either party can do this. Then after a evaluation of these facts a judgment on the validity of the marriage is made. A second court, usually a neighboring diocese, must verify the judgment and it must be approved by one’s bishop. Whatever decision is made, it may be appealed to the Roman Rota (the Holy See’s court for matrimonial cases).
Since this is a voluntary process most dioceses have a fee to cover administrative costs. If this fee is a hardship an individual should ask that it be waived.
Marriage After a Decree. If a Decree of Nullity is given the couple are free to marry, unless the condition that led to the invalidity (e.g. lack of intention, mental illness, incapacitating immaturity) still exists. Then the person who has that condition is still incapable of marriage, but the other person may marry.
N
nixe
Guest
Th Catholic Church as the true ONE Church founded by Christ is infallible.
Jesus, in Matthew 28:20, Jesus said:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen
Jesus also promised the Church of the Holy Ghost to teach her all His commandments. (John 14:16)
Jesus, in Matthew 28:20, Jesus said:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen
Jesus also promised the Church of the Holy Ghost to teach her all His commandments. (John 14:16)
S
stanley123
Guest
vicia3 said:
This does not address the question of an essential change in Catholic teaching as to what are the factors recognised for an annulment. An essential change has been made in Catholic teaching on this issue, according to which soft psychological factors have been introduced as factors capable of annulling a marriage.
**Nullity of a marriage contains the following passage: **"**Many people believe that virtually any failed marriage can be annulled on the basis of incapacity and immaturity. It is not all that difficult to prove that someone was immature at the time of the marriage or did not fully understand all the obligations and developments involved in a lifelong marriage."
A
anarchocatholic
Guest
I’m happy to hear that all of you believe that George W. Bush’s war on Iraq is unjustified and does not meet just war principles.
Because that is among the many teachings of the Roman Catholic Church.
Because that is among the many teachings of the Roman Catholic Church.
S
system
Guest
I answered that question with this response: An “annulment” does NOT concern whether the marriage was a happy one, whether one of the spouses LATER became unfaithful, or LATER decided not to have children, but only their INTENTION on the wedding day. If a marriage was made THAT day it is a life-long bond, irrespective of what happened later in the marriage.
S
stanley123
Guest
vicia3:
Where I disagree with Catholic teaching is the introduction of soft psychological factors which are such that just about any marriage can be annulled.
"Many people believe that virtually any failed marriage can be annulled…"
Here’s a question, if , when looked at, 97% of marriages (in the Minneapolis St Paul diocese) are found to have deficiencies which allow for annulment, who out there is married? In other words, do you really believe it is an honest application of the Sacrament of Matrimony to say that only 3% of people who have received the Sacrament have actually received it validly, while the other 97% have received an invalid and defective Sacrament which is null and void. If 97% of Catholic Sacraments are invalid, that would seem to raise a lot of questions.
I certainly agree with this.
Where I disagree with Catholic teaching is the introduction of soft psychological factors which are such that just about any marriage can be annulled.
"Many people believe that virtually any failed marriage can be annulled…"
Here’s a question, if , when looked at, 97% of marriages (in the Minneapolis St Paul diocese) are found to have deficiencies which allow for annulment, who out there is married? In other words, do you really believe it is an honest application of the Sacrament of Matrimony to say that only 3% of people who have received the Sacrament have actually received it validly, while the other 97% have received an invalid and defective Sacrament which is null and void. If 97% of Catholic Sacraments are invalid, that would seem to raise a lot of questions.
C
contemplative
Guest
**Yes, I do. **
S
system
Guest
S
stanley123
Guest
vicia3:
Take a look at what happened after the Church changed its teaching on what factors to allow for the annulment:
1930 - about 10 annulments allowed in the USA for the year.
today - its running at about 40,000 to 50,000 per year in the USA.
This is an increase of more than four hundred thousand percent. Seems rather large to me, as does the rate of 97 percent of those who apply for the annulment (in the Minneapolis St. Paul area) are granted it. Why would it be wrong to say that this watering down of the conditions required to get an annulment, is simply a way to get around the teaching on the indissolubility of marriage?
I disagree with this because the Church has changed its teaching on what is required in order for a marriage to be annulled. Since 1964 - 1970 it has introduced soft psychological factors which were not allowed before. Because it has changed and introduced these soft psychological factors, "Many people believe that virtually any failed marriage can be annulled on the basis of incapacity and immaturity. It is not all that difficult to prove that someone was immature at the time of the marriage or did not fully understand all the obligations and developments involved in a lifelong marriage."
Take a look at what happened after the Church changed its teaching on what factors to allow for the annulment:
1930 - about 10 annulments allowed in the USA for the year.
today - its running at about 40,000 to 50,000 per year in the USA.
This is an increase of more than four hundred thousand percent. Seems rather large to me, as does the rate of 97 percent of those who apply for the annulment (in the Minneapolis St. Paul area) are granted it. Why would it be wrong to say that this watering down of the conditions required to get an annulment, is simply a way to get around the teaching on the indissolubility of marriage?
S
system
Guest
Here is the canon law from vatican.va
Can. 1141 A marriage that is ratum et consummatum can be dissolved by no human power and by no cause, except death.
Can. 1142 For a just cause, the Roman Pontiff can dissolve a non-consummated marriage between baptized persons or between a baptized party and a non-baptized party at the request of both parties or of one of them, even if the other party is unwilling.
Can. 1143 §1. A marriage entered into by two non-baptized persons is dissolved by means of the pauline privilege in favor of the faith of the party who has received baptism by the very fact that a new marriage is contracted by the same party, provided that the non-baptized party departs.
§2. The non-baptized party is considered to depart if he or she does not wish to cohabit with the baptized party or to cohabit peacefully without aVront to the Creator unless the baptized party, after baptism was received, has given the other a just cause for departing.
Can. 1144 §1. For the baptized party to contract a new marriage validly, the non-baptized party must always be interrogated whether:
1/ he or she also wishes to receive baptism;
2/ he or she at least wishes to cohabit peacefully with the baptized party without aVront to the Creator.
§2. This interrogation must be done after baptism. For a grave cause, however, the local ordinary can permit the interrogation to be done before baptism or can even dispense from the interrogation either before or after baptism provided that it is evident at least by a summary and extrajudicial process that it cannot be done or would be useless.
Can. 1145 §1. The interrogation is regularly to be done on the authority of the local ordinary of the converted party.
This ordinary must grant the other spouse a period of time to respond if the spouse seeks it, after having been advised, however, that his or her silence will be considered a negative response if the period passes without effect.
§2. Even an interrogation made privately by the converted party is valid and indeed licit if the form prescribed above cannot be observed.
§3. In either case, the fact that the interrogation was done and its outcome must be established legitimately in the external forum.
Can. 1146 The baptized party has the right to contract a new marriage with a Catholic party:
1/ if the other party responded negatively to the interrogation or if the interrogation had been omitted legitimately;
2/ if the non-baptized party, already interrogated or not, at first persevered in peaceful cohabitation without aVront to the Creator but then departed without a just cause, without prejudice to the prescripts of cann. ⇒ 1144 and ⇒ 1145.
Can. 1147 For a grave cause, however, the local ordinary can allow a baptized party who uses the pauline privilege to contract marriage with a non-Catholic party, whether baptized or not baptized; the prescripts of the canons about mixed marriages are also to be observed.
Can. 1148 §1. When he receives baptism in the Catholic Church, a non-baptized man who has several non-baptized wives at the same time can retain one of them after the others have been dismissed, if it is hard for him to remain with the first one. The same is valid for a non-baptized woman who has several non-baptized husbands at the same time.
§2. In the cases mentioned in §1, marriage must be contracted in legitimate form after baptism has been received, and the prescripts about mixed marriages, if necessary, and other matters required by the law are to be observed.
§3. Keeping in mind the moral, social, and economic conditions of places and of persons, the local ordinary is to take care that the needs of the first wife and the others dismissed are sufficiently provided for according to the norms of justice, Christian charity, and natural equity.
Can. 1149 A non-baptized person who, after having received baptism in the Catholic Church, cannot restore cohabitation with a non-baptized spouse by reason of captivity or persecution can contract another marriage even if the other party has received baptism in the meantime, without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 1141.
Can. 1150 In a doubtful matter the privilege of faith possesses the favor of the law.
Can. 1141 A marriage that is ratum et consummatum can be dissolved by no human power and by no cause, except death.
Can. 1142 For a just cause, the Roman Pontiff can dissolve a non-consummated marriage between baptized persons or between a baptized party and a non-baptized party at the request of both parties or of one of them, even if the other party is unwilling.
Can. 1143 §1. A marriage entered into by two non-baptized persons is dissolved by means of the pauline privilege in favor of the faith of the party who has received baptism by the very fact that a new marriage is contracted by the same party, provided that the non-baptized party departs.
§2. The non-baptized party is considered to depart if he or she does not wish to cohabit with the baptized party or to cohabit peacefully without aVront to the Creator unless the baptized party, after baptism was received, has given the other a just cause for departing.
Can. 1144 §1. For the baptized party to contract a new marriage validly, the non-baptized party must always be interrogated whether:
1/ he or she also wishes to receive baptism;
2/ he or she at least wishes to cohabit peacefully with the baptized party without aVront to the Creator.
§2. This interrogation must be done after baptism. For a grave cause, however, the local ordinary can permit the interrogation to be done before baptism or can even dispense from the interrogation either before or after baptism provided that it is evident at least by a summary and extrajudicial process that it cannot be done or would be useless.
Can. 1145 §1. The interrogation is regularly to be done on the authority of the local ordinary of the converted party.
This ordinary must grant the other spouse a period of time to respond if the spouse seeks it, after having been advised, however, that his or her silence will be considered a negative response if the period passes without effect.
§2. Even an interrogation made privately by the converted party is valid and indeed licit if the form prescribed above cannot be observed.
§3. In either case, the fact that the interrogation was done and its outcome must be established legitimately in the external forum.
Can. 1146 The baptized party has the right to contract a new marriage with a Catholic party:
1/ if the other party responded negatively to the interrogation or if the interrogation had been omitted legitimately;
2/ if the non-baptized party, already interrogated or not, at first persevered in peaceful cohabitation without aVront to the Creator but then departed without a just cause, without prejudice to the prescripts of cann. ⇒ 1144 and ⇒ 1145.
Can. 1147 For a grave cause, however, the local ordinary can allow a baptized party who uses the pauline privilege to contract marriage with a non-Catholic party, whether baptized or not baptized; the prescripts of the canons about mixed marriages are also to be observed.
Can. 1148 §1. When he receives baptism in the Catholic Church, a non-baptized man who has several non-baptized wives at the same time can retain one of them after the others have been dismissed, if it is hard for him to remain with the first one. The same is valid for a non-baptized woman who has several non-baptized husbands at the same time.
§2. In the cases mentioned in §1, marriage must be contracted in legitimate form after baptism has been received, and the prescripts about mixed marriages, if necessary, and other matters required by the law are to be observed.
§3. Keeping in mind the moral, social, and economic conditions of places and of persons, the local ordinary is to take care that the needs of the first wife and the others dismissed are sufficiently provided for according to the norms of justice, Christian charity, and natural equity.
Can. 1149 A non-baptized person who, after having received baptism in the Catholic Church, cannot restore cohabitation with a non-baptized spouse by reason of captivity or persecution can contract another marriage even if the other party has received baptism in the meantime, without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 1141.
Can. 1150 In a doubtful matter the privilege of faith possesses the favor of the law.
E
ekim61
Guest
I picked the last choice but that’s not really a good one either.
I left the Catholic Church some 20+ years ago and part of the reason I left was that I didn’t agree with everything they taught. I felt that if I couldn’t agree with everything then i had no business being a Catholic.
Well I found myself searching for God in many Protestant churches and I found none that I could agree with completely.
I am currently on a journey back to the Catholic church and have taken a “disagree and committ” attitude. In other words I will not fight it or make it an issue. I will try to abide by the all the teachings and not speak out against them. And hopefully by the grace of God I will agree 100% someday. I’m just taking it one issue at a time.
I left the Catholic Church some 20+ years ago and part of the reason I left was that I didn’t agree with everything they taught. I felt that if I couldn’t agree with everything then i had no business being a Catholic.
Well I found myself searching for God in many Protestant churches and I found none that I could agree with completely.
I am currently on a journey back to the Catholic church and have taken a “disagree and committ” attitude. In other words I will not fight it or make it an issue. I will try to abide by the all the teachings and not speak out against them. And hopefully by the grace of God I will agree 100% someday. I’m just taking it one issue at a time.
S
system
Guest
:tiphat: :clapping: :dancing:
I found that I was not able to understand everything until I accepted it. And then God took pity on me and explained things I didn’t agree with
D
Della
Guest
I’ve just jumped into this thread without reading all the posts–there are just too many–but for those having trouble accepting all that the Church teaches, I suggest praying for the gift of faith. Faith is a gift of God, not something we get just through reading or reason or personal wisdom. If we ask God for faith, he will give it to us. I know it worked for me, anyway. 
O
Orionthehunter
Guest
This is a badly worded poll. It should read “Do you agree with everything that the Catholic Church teaches?” or “Do you believe that everything the Church teaches is Truth inspired by God?”
In “Introduction to Christianity”, Pope Benedict uses nearly 90 pages to explain what “I believe” means. Unless you are a theologian or otherwise very learned about “everything” the Church teaches, you can’t believe it every detail as this poll implies. While a simple summary of the Pope’s writing, the Pope writes that you have to “understand” the teaching and then agree to “stand up” for the teaching for you to truly say “I believe”. While most of us might be willing to “stand up” for the Church on most issues especially those that we “understand”, there are many issues that we don’t understand.
Second, the Church teaches some things that are in the realm of “moral guidance” but the Church does allow some room for “personal prudence” so long as the person has an informed conscience. The Death Penalty is an example of this.
The second way that I suggested that the poll be worded is how I would have worded it and probably gets to the issue that the original person intended. The Pope in the aforementioned book talks about before we can say “I believe” we usually have to “assent through faith” to God and, then as Catholics, we “assent” to the Church as God’s temporal representative.
For me, I believe that the Church has been granted teaching authority to the Magisterium and the Pope by God as I think I understand what this means and I stand up for this authority given the Church. When there are specific Church teachings that I “disagree with”, dont’ understand or for some reason am unwilling to stand up for the teaching, I either just assent to the teaching (a cop out I know) or I turn to prayer for the faith to accept it, the wisdom to understand it, or the courage to stand up for it, depending on what element is missing in my heart.
Whenever a fellow Catholic says they disagree with the Church on an issue, I seldom argue the intellectual merits but just rhetorically ask them if they have turned to prayer for guidance from the Holy Spirit. Unfortunately, I have yet to have anyone say that it has been something they have struggled over in prayer but, fortunately, I have had people come to me later and say that through prayer they have resolved the issue. As we all know, the power of prayer is infinite.
P.S. In the name of giving proper attribution, the wisdom in my approach is the result of conversations I’ve had with several different Priests in my life who have always said to me to “pray about it” or to “offer my disagreement up to God” as penance for my other sins.
In “Introduction to Christianity”, Pope Benedict uses nearly 90 pages to explain what “I believe” means. Unless you are a theologian or otherwise very learned about “everything” the Church teaches, you can’t believe it every detail as this poll implies. While a simple summary of the Pope’s writing, the Pope writes that you have to “understand” the teaching and then agree to “stand up” for the teaching for you to truly say “I believe”. While most of us might be willing to “stand up” for the Church on most issues especially those that we “understand”, there are many issues that we don’t understand.
Second, the Church teaches some things that are in the realm of “moral guidance” but the Church does allow some room for “personal prudence” so long as the person has an informed conscience. The Death Penalty is an example of this.
The second way that I suggested that the poll be worded is how I would have worded it and probably gets to the issue that the original person intended. The Pope in the aforementioned book talks about before we can say “I believe” we usually have to “assent through faith” to God and, then as Catholics, we “assent” to the Church as God’s temporal representative.
For me, I believe that the Church has been granted teaching authority to the Magisterium and the Pope by God as I think I understand what this means and I stand up for this authority given the Church. When there are specific Church teachings that I “disagree with”, dont’ understand or for some reason am unwilling to stand up for the teaching, I either just assent to the teaching (a cop out I know) or I turn to prayer for the faith to accept it, the wisdom to understand it, or the courage to stand up for it, depending on what element is missing in my heart.
Whenever a fellow Catholic says they disagree with the Church on an issue, I seldom argue the intellectual merits but just rhetorically ask them if they have turned to prayer for guidance from the Holy Spirit. Unfortunately, I have yet to have anyone say that it has been something they have struggled over in prayer but, fortunately, I have had people come to me later and say that through prayer they have resolved the issue. As we all know, the power of prayer is infinite.
P.S. In the name of giving proper attribution, the wisdom in my approach is the result of conversations I’ve had with several different Priests in my life who have always said to me to “pray about it” or to “offer my disagreement up to God” as penance for my other sins.
- Status