Does God call people to be separate from Catholic Eucharist

[rcwitness]

Of course not! I’d prefer it over indirectly.

 

[Alex337]

Thank you I’m still new to my church so I don’t always know everything verbatim unless it’s something that has applied to me.

The solemnisation of a marriage is only its beginning. Life brings many pressures that test the resilience of marriage and need to be faced by the married couple with support from the meeting. Sometimes they lead, despite our best efforts, to a recognition that a marriage has irretrievably ended; sometimes, in consequence, there is a possibility of remarriage after divorce.

Quakers insist that those joining in marriage must unconditionally intend their commitment to be lifelong. However, married couples can expect their commitment to be continually tested, and they must respond by continually reaffirming it. This will be easy sometimes, more often complicated, and sometimes very difficult indeed. The commitment of marriage must be founded on love and truth, so that a couple can trust one another to make peace in their marriage by harmonious resolution of conflict, not by denying or avoiding conflict. The support of the meeting for a troubled marriage can be crucial in preserving it.

Nevertheless, there will be times when a marriage simply cannot be preserved, and Friends recognise the validity of civil divorce and the dissolution of civil partnership. Good grounds for divorce do exist, and in particular one spouse cannot sustain a marriage alone when the other has withdrawn their commitment (in whatever way). The remarriage of a divorced person is, however, a sensitive issue (see 16.40); Quaker testimony to truth and integrity requires evidence of complete commitment. It is important that a pre-marital meeting for clearness (see 16.37–16.39) should lead to discernment that a divorced person is approaching remarriage with the intention of making a genuine lifelong commitment, whatever the reasons for their past experience may have been.

 

[rcwitness]

Thank you I’m still new to my church so I don’t always know everything verbatim unless it’s something that has applied to me.

The solemnisation of a marriage is only its beginning. Life brings many pressures that test the resilience of marriage and need to be faced by the married couple with support from the meeting. Sometimes they lead, despite our best efforts, to a recognition that a marriage has irretrievably ended; sometimes, in consequence, there is a possibility of remarriage after divorce.

Quakers insist that those joining in marriage must unconditionally intend their commitment to be lifelong. However, married couples can expect their commitment to be continually tested, and they must respond by continually reaffirming it. This will be easy sometimes, more often complicated, and sometimes very difficult indeed. The commitment of marriage must be founded on love and truth, so that a couple can trust one another to make peace in their marriage by harmonious resolution of conflict, not by denying or avoiding conflict. The support of the meeting for a troubled marriage can be crucial in preserving it.

Nevertheless, there will be times when a marriage simply cannot be preserved, and Friends recognise the validity of civil divorce and the dissolution of civil partnership. Good grounds for divorce do exist, and in particular one spouse cannot sustain a marriage alone when the other has withdrawn their commitment (in whatever way). The remarriage of a divorced person is, however, a sensitive issue (see 16.40); Quaker testimony to truth and integrity requires evidence of complete commitment. It is important that a pre-marital meeting for clearness (see 16.37–16.39) should lead to discernment that a divorced person is approaching remarriage with the intention of making a genuine lifelong commitment, whatever the reasons for their past experience may have been.

Thank you. I’m still uncertain what Jesus commanded, according to this post.

What did Jesus Teach about divorce and remarriage?

 

[Alex337]

It looks like in cases of immorality it’s okay. But to be frank some Quakers aren’t Christian, so their understanding of the divine would be different again.

 

[rcwitness]

It looks like in cases of immorality it’s okay. But to be frank some Quakers aren’t Christian, so their understanding of the divine would be different again.

I think nearly every divorce contains immorality in both spouses.

The Catholic Church acknowledges some civil divorces are necessary to ensure safety and health of the family.

Dissolving a valid, consumated Christian marriage is absolutely prohibited by Jesus. It simply cannot happen, despite what the Christian may believe, hope, want, or understand.

The denominations are divided on this issue. What does Jesus Teach???

He says a case of “porneia” can be divorced. A Christian married couple are not joined by “porneia”, but the Sacrament of Christ in the priesthood of those two Christians!

 

[Alex337]

Cool. I thought if the woman had been unfaithful Jesus said something about it?

“But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.”

What’s the “except for sexual immorality” bit mean?

I’m also not totally sure how this relates to my faith.

 

[rcwitness]

Cool. I thought if the woman had been unfaithful Jesus said something about it?

“But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.”

What’s the “except for sexual immorality” bit mean?

I’m also not totally sure how this relates to my faith.

This relates to what Jesus Teaches. It’s not one way or the other. Either there is exceptions by the Lord to remarry or there is not.

Yes, the exception is called “porneia” in Greek.

Porneia is unlawful, or immoral sexual sin.

These cases of a couple contracting a marriage that is immoral, according to the faith, are not bound by God.

 

[Alex337]

Yeah, I know, but I think I mentioned that not every Quaker is Christian?

 

[rcwitness]

Ok. I’m not sure what that has to do with anything.

I don’t believe Jesus calls us to a church (communion) which holds to doctrines which are opposed to His Teachings.

 

[SnowRose]

I think nearly every divorce contains immorality in both spouses.

The Catholic Church acknowledges some civil divorces are necessary to ensure safety and health of the family.

Did you just state that having a violent and abusive spouse means you’re immoral for wanting a divorce? That both are at fault? Really?

 

[Alex337]

Yeah, I know. And that’s okay by me. I figure God calls you to a church that makes sense to you after all.

I also don’t think God wants abused folks to stay with their abusers and that many things can make a marriage not be what it once was. People change and perhaps they’re simply no longer the people who married each other.

 

[rcwitness]

rcwitness:

I think nearly every divorce contains immorality in both spouses.

The Catholic Church acknowledges some civil divorces are necessary to ensure safety and health of the family.

Did you just state that having a violent and abusive spouse means you’re immoral for wanting a divorce? That both are at fault? Really?

No, I didn’t. This is only a civil divorce, for protection. It’s when the a spouse wishes to dissolve the marriage when it is a sin

 

[Wannano]

Ok. I’m not sure what that has to do with anything.

I don’t believe Jesus calls us to a church (communion) which holds to doctrines which are opposed to His Teachings.

Hold that thought and when you’ve exhausted your search for divorce/remarriage I have another challenge for you.

 

[Wannano]

SnowRose:

rcwitness:

I think nearly every divorce contains immorality in both spouses.

The Catholic Church acknowledges some civil divorces are necessary to ensure safety and health of the family.

Did you just state that having a violent and abusive spouse means you’re immoral for wanting a divorce? That both are at fault? Really?

No, I didn’t. This is only a civil divorce, for protection. It’s when the a spouse wishes to dissolve the marriage when it is a sin

If a spouse wants to dissolve a marriage it is not a sin if an Anullment can be achieved, right?

 

[rcwitness]

Yes. Although I don’t prefer the term achieved, but declared.

In a case of invalid marriage, it was never binding, according to the faith.

 

[Wannano]

Yes. Although I don’t prefer the term achieved, but declared.

In a case of invalid marriage, it was never binding, according to the faith.

An invalid marriage means not performed in the presence of a Catholic priest or what constitutes an invalid marriage?

 

[SnowRose]

Ok.
You deny the right to dissolve an abusive marriage.

Thank you for clearing that up for everyone.

 

[rcwitness]

Principally when one or both spouses are not eligible to marry, or marry each other.

Then, yes, lack of formapplies to Catholics. But non-Cat Christians are validly joined in the Sacrament.

 

[rcwitness]

Ok.
You deny the right to dissolve an abusive marriage.

Thank you for clearing that up for everyone.

What on Earth are you talking about?

 

[Alex337]

SnowRose:

Ok.
You deny the right to dissolve an abusive marriage.

Thank you for clearing that up for everyone.

What on Earth are you talking about?

It does look a lot like you’re saying abuse cannot end a marriage in anything but the law. So the person remains, essentially, trapped in that marriage.