"forced to commit adultery"

[rcwitness]

Why is Holy Matrimony archaic? Isn’t it the term used for the Sacrament?

So your brother can choose to live for an indefinite period of time, being acceptable to the Church, but at any moment choose to abandon???

That would be an abuse of the Pauline privilege, no?

 

[BlackFriar]

If you believe I am mistaken say something with substance or do some research and improve your understanding of the difficulties I have observed in your somewhat simplistic view of how a Catholic marriage is identified/defined. Simply asking more questions doesn’t solve the difficulties I have observed to you.

 

[rcwitness]

If you don’t want to answer my questions, dont. But don’t demand people dialogue in a manner you prefer.

 

[BlackFriar]

OK, you are unable to justify your comment that “Holy Matrimony” (whatever it is you really mean) is easy to recognise.
Nor do you understand the Pauline privilege.

In short, you just confirmed my observation that recognising a valid Catholic marriage is fraught.
So what hope re making salient observations re 2nd marriages.

 

[rcwitness]

You tried to (as usual) make things sound so complicated that only a brilliant lawyer, or theologian could possibly know, and used your brothers situation as an example of some sort of exception to a rule. But I’m not convinced things are that complicated. And I’m not convinced your brother could just leave his wife and be free of the obligation of Holy Matrimony.

Holy Matrimony is based on the Christian priesthood of spouses, and the consent before God to wedd one another.

There are Petrine and Pauline privileges. Once those privileges are consented to, there is no turning back. That is Holy Matrimony

 

[BlackFriar]

You tried to (as usual) make things sound so complicated that only a brilliant lawyer, or theologian could possibly know

Your view that it is easy to determine who is free to remarry and who is not is simply not credible.
If it were we would not need tribunals nor seminarians doing numerous papers in canon law and sacramental theology, nor refreshers for PPs.

Is it so hard to accept that theologically untrained autodidact lay people still don’t have what it takes to fully understand or weigh in on these matters.

Your own continually flawed views continue to witness to this self evident truth:

There are Petrine and Pauline privileges. Once those privileges are consented to, there is no turning back. That is Holy Matrimony.

Please. My validly married Catholic brother would take strong issue with you here for suggesting that he is not in “Holy Matrimony.”

It doesn’t take brilliant lawyers or theologians…it simply takes a comprehensive targeted education from those experienced in these matters.
You clearly are not.

There’s really nothing more to say if you cannot accept the obvious truth of what I observe.

 

[rcwitness]

When I say “Holy Matrimony”, I mean Sacrament. Natural marriage is not Holy, but natural. When God binds couples for life, He is called on through Christian faith.

I guess that a Christian marrying a non Christian, with a dispensation, is not Holy Matrimony (Sacrament). That is a strange situation. If your brother has issue with that, I believe it’s not with me, but our Church.

People are complicated, not Holy Matrimony.

 

[Subrosa]

Your wife is not the sinner, you are for 1. forcing her into a situation that she did not choose, and 2. Becoming an adulterer because, in the eyes of God, you are still married to her.

 

[jcrichton]

I concur with your example–but this would be a matter of health issue (Alzheimer’s and other mental disorders causes people to become paranoid and to strike at their caregivers/spouses/children.

…as for the red flags… I think that this is not so sketched on stone since many people learn early on to behave according to what is expected and not according to their deep-seated misconstructs–it’s the old “bait and switch.”

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Wow, that’s interesting… I thought that a habitual abuser would lose all claim to the Sacramental Marriage by constantly beating up on the victim/s.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

I understand what you are saying… but I have had encounters with people who have been abused and people who, to my estimation are abusive, and they do not report the abuse (victim) or they believe it is their right to “correct” the wife (usually it is a male abuser) so from their perspective it is ok to slap the woman around ‘when she steps out of line.’ (That argument was as recent as a few weeks ago.)

So how would the Church uncover a history of abuse if both the perpetrator and victim/s do not report it or accept it as abuse?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Hi, Annie!

To quote, you can highlight the whole content or partial content or even just a word:

I haven’t figured out how to quote or even to copy more than one word in this new kind of board, so please excuse my not doing so.

…as you highlight a “quote” box appears on the top left side of the highlighted material and you can click it to quote it:

For example

…so bring the curser to the beginning of the text you want to quote, right click the muse, slide to the end of the text you want to quote, release the mouse, and click on the quote box:

I guess I see the process

…hope this helps!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Actually, an abusive relationship is only fun for the abuser. A womanizer will cheat not because of a need for sex but of the ego to possess.

So what recourse does a person have other than to remain a victim for the life expectancy of the marriage?

Divorce is the only solution in many situations. The problem is that most “divorcees” have not taken their vows seriously enough to understand that both spouses are supposed to Love one another in
God.

It’s the old “fools rush in.”

Yet, while divorce may be the necessary solution to an abusive relationship, neither spouse is free to remarry–that’s where adultery/forced to commit adultery comes in.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Is it so hard to accept that theologically untrained autodidact lay people still don’t have what it takes to fully understand or weigh in on these matters.

Is this not why the Catholic Church requires a period of instruction by a Priest–is it not to educate the unlearned about the seriousness of the Sacramental Marriage?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[BlackFriar]

I guess that a Christian marrying a non Christian, with a dispensation, is not Holy Matrimony (Sacrament). That is a strange situation.

You are now saying my brother is not in a holy marriage and its strange.
Where do you get off on these foolish assertions.

You continue to tie yourself in knots…are you sure things are as simple as you assert?

Lets also review your assertion re my brothers marriage and alleged use of the Pauline privilege. You also made a mistake there too didnt you?

 

[BlackFriar]

Yet, while divorce may be the necessary solution to an abusive relationship, neither spouse is free to remarry

This is nonsense.
Tribunals regularly allow what you universally deny for the reasons stated.
The simpleness of your approach to this complex matter is astonishing.

 

[rcwitness]

rcwitness:

I guess that a Christian marrying a non Christian, with a dispensation, is not Holy Matrimony (Sacrament). That is a strange situation.

You are now saying my brother is not in a holy marriage and its strange.
Where do you get off on these foolish assertions.

You continue to tie yourself in knots…are you sure things are as simple as you assert?

Lets also review your assertion re my brothers marriage and alleged use of the Pauline privilege. You also made a mistake there too didnt you?

Apparently the Church says your brothers marriage is not Sacramental. I still think it would be wrong of him to remarry, if they divorced, because he willingly entered into the situation. But I won’t argue with the Church’s judgment.

As for my “mistake”, yes perhaps in a sense. I was using the “privileges” in the positive sense. Meaning, it is a privilege to marry or remain married. But I think you are recognizing that they are actually a “privilege” to divorce. I just think marriage is a privilege, while divorce shouldn’t be called a privilege, but a right, maybe. Does that make sense?

 

[rcwitness]

If it helps any, I don’t think it’s strange that your brother loves his wife, and wanted to be with her. I actually find it strange that the Church will allow for their marriage, but not call it a Sacrament.

 

[rcwitness]

I also know people who just simply told the tribunal that they never intended to be faithful. But the Church hands out annulment ts like candy.

There has to be evidence that the condition existed prior to vows, and was a serious addiction/disorder which was not held in remorse or disclosed to the victim spouse.

This is where I think the tribunals compromise the law of Matrimony.

But like I said, when it involves two people who want out, and will lie because they know it will get them an annulment, then it all stinks to high heaven.

 

[BlackFriar]

If it helps any, I don’t think it’s strange that your brother loves his wife, and wanted to be with her. I actually find it strange that the Church will allow for their marriage, but not call it a Sacrament.

I do know what the Church thinks of my brother’s marriage and I have no problem with that.
His vows can be called holy and its also called matrimony.
You believe otherwise.

The problem is not with the Church but with you who identify holiness and sacramentality as the same.
You also use the archaic expression “holy matrimony” but are unable to clearly define what you really mean. You also mistakenly apply the Pauline privilege to my brother’s potential right to remarry when Pauline privilege has nothing to do with the matter.

And you still maintain that identifying a valid marriage (ostensibly to deny marrying again) is a simple matter.

Yet you continue to tie yourself in knots here and are unable to answer reasonable questions…
So I think my point is made - that identifying “Holy Matrimony” is not easy at all my friend.

So if you want to continue asserting simplicity by all means clarify the questions I have asked you.

1. How one recognises a “Holy Matrimony” such that one may never marry again.
2. Find a Magisterial source that says my brother’s type of marriage is not holy.
3. Why you think the Pauline privilege could have anything to do with my brother possibly remarrying again.