S
stacie
Guest
I think it is safe to say that my knowledge of the Bible is inferior to C.S.Lewis’ - and what he says on physical and spiritual sins makes a lot of sense.
- Status
J
jeannetherese
Guest
Wasn’t that a reference to divorce/remarriage situations? This Pew Survey (2013) addresses this to some extent.
The image is from the survey:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
You can read the article here:
https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/d...arriage-on-the-rise-in-the-us-pew-report-says
The image is from the survey:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
You can read the article here:
https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/d...arriage-on-the-rise-in-the-us-pew-report-says
Okay, maybe I should have said “motley past many couples bring to the altar”. That’s what I meant. I certainly didn’t mean “each and every” couple. It should be quite obvious to any observer that not all non-Catholic spouses bring serially monogamous histories to their marriages.HomeschoolDad:
You may want to go back and look at post, I believe 67, where I quoted and bolded where you pointed out the “motley past couples bring to the alter”, saying especially those of a certain age… That insues that you have an issue with non-Catholic weddings, in general.
But since you brought it up, yes, I do have “an issue” with many marriages, both Catholic and non-Catholic. So did the Virgin Mother of God. So should anyone else who believes in her Fatima message.
Our Lady of Fatima said to Jacinta “many marriages are not good; they do not please Our Lord, and they are not of God”. She said it, I didn’t. I have the very same “issue” Our Lady had. She did not specify why they are “not good” and “not of God”, but I can think of a few “problem areas”:
- Invalid marriages involving fornication, adultery, or both
- Contraception and sterilization
- The use of pornography within marriage (many husbands do this as a way of acting out fantasies, maybe a few wives too)
- Women marrying men just for their money
- Unnatural acts that are enjoyed by many, many couples
- One or both spouses “cheating on” the other
- “Swinger” couples, what used to be called “wife-swapping” or “key parties” (this is much more prevalent than I ever realized — there’s a lot of this goes on under the radar!)
- “Throuples”, where a couple brings a third pseudo-spouse into the marriage (this is getting to be a “thing”)
- Polygamy (it’s still very much around)
- Couples aborting “oops babies” when contraception fails and they just can’t face raising one more
- Husbands who beat their wives (and sometimes the other way around)
- Husbands who force their wives to violate their conscience regarding contraception (and possibly other things)
I doubt Our Lady was talking about “gay marriage”, because that is no marriage at all. Nobody in the 1910s or 1920s ever heard of such a thing. They’d have said anyone was crazy, if they brought up such a possibility.
You are a very astute reader, but I am not going to keep refining my verbiage and clarifying my comments. I have written what I have written, and the reader can take it or leave it. Have a pleasant weekend. I intend to. The weather is beautiful where I live today, and I’m going to get out there and enjoy it. Pax tecum.
Well, there you go, then. Quod erat demonstrandum.
Thanks so much. My SWAGs are usually pretty much on the money. Sixty years of living and observing.
T
TC3033
Guest
I was kinda waiting for this link. Is there anything newer than 7yrs ago?
I guess we should never attend a wedding “because 2nd wedding”…
HomeschoolDad:
J
jeannetherese
Guest
There is, but I wonder you might trust Pew a bit more than the Guardian?
Here’s another one on serial marriages:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
www.pewresearch.org
Here’s another one on serial marriages:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Chapter 2: The Demographics of Remarriage
Age Remarriage is on the rise for Americans ages 55 and older, even as younger generations who have taken the plunge once are becoming less likely to have
www.pewresearch.org
T
TC3033
Guest
That’s a bit helpful, but skews the 35+ as was brought up, also is this “non-Catholics” only as was prescribed up thead?
J
jeannetherese
Guest
If they are truly close friends then they will understand your reservations and this will not become an issue.
If the matter does come up, as you have noted, you cannot participate.
Politely decline and keep them in your prayers. The most gracious gift you can give them is commending them both to Our Lord.
Each of us must walk our own path to God and sometimes that path includes a time of rejections.
Should this be their case, continue to hold them close in prayer, trusting that the Hound of Heaven will continue to pursue them. Trust in the Lord and His timing which will not always correspond with the timing you want Him to have.
C
cecilia56
Guest
Thank you for the resource. As I said, I decided from the beginning that I am not attending the wedding. I came on here for suggestions of how to explain this to my friends, and I suppose for some reassurance that I’m not alone in this 
C
cecilia56
Guest
Thank you, I agree that saying “I’m busy” isn’t an option as we are fairly close, and it would really only be avoiding the problem. Although it was one of my first thoughts 
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
Again, we were no where told to go and admonish every sinner we encounter. We must be in a position of authority over that person.
J
jeannetherese
Guest
Authority? Where is the doctrine which states that?
It wasn’t in the compendium, or in the USCCB or in the Catholic Encyclopedia.
What source are you using?
It wasn’t in the compendium, or in the USCCB or in the Catholic Encyclopedia.
What source are you using?
D
Dobby
Guest
I would attend as well without a lecture. If this person is someone I loved and cared about, I would want to be a part of her day.
J
jeannetherese
Guest
The O.P has stated that she cannot participate in the wedding.
She’s looking for the best way to say no.
She’s looking for the best way to say no.
C
cecilia56
Guest
It’s true, I wouldn’t be comfortable attending or being part of the wedding, as I am an over-thinker and it would bother my conscience quite a bit. But it’s more than just comfort; being at the wedding would mean I am celebrating and being witness to what I believe is wrong, destructive, and ultimately a path to unhappiness.
You are right in that I didn’t help the relationship begin or grow, but in attending the wedding I would be endorsing the relationship, if by nothing else then by my lack of disagreement.
If it were her birthday or graduation or anything that actually celebrated her, or her partner for that matter, I wouldn’t have a problem going. But this is an event celebrating their relationship and the sin they are committing, and it’s not something I can be a part of.
I agree that we should, humbly acknowledging ourselves as sinners, show charity to our friends and do what we can to help them on their journey. Unfortunately, I think attending the wedding would be the opposite of that. This isn’t just any event; it’s a celebration of something sinful, and attending it without dispute is an endorsement of the sin. Ultimately, that will lead my friend not only away from happiness but away from God. Also, if I can put aside my beliefs so easily, what worth does that really place on them? Who would want to learn about my faith if my actions showed I didn’t believe it?
Going and endorsing something that I believe is sinful would be the opposite of loving my friend. I care about her and don’t want to take part in something that will ultimately be bad for her.
O
otjm
Guest
When I used the term “accept the Church’s teachings” I did not intend specifically to indicate heretics. The first incident would be in Chapter 5 of Acts; 1-11. One can move from here through a number of parts of the Epistles of Paul. Again, Paul does not speak of them as heretics; but certainly straying from the Gospels.
F
Freddy
Guest
I think the problem is that you think it’s ok and so would a few posters but most don’t. It seems that people have to…make up their own minds (the horror!).Freddy:
I don’t think there is a problem with any of these. In none of the examples are you being asked to approve of what is being done.
If nothing else, this thread has indicated that life is not black and white and people interpret what the church teaches in ways that align with their personal feelings.
I say full marks to the op for trying to maintain her friendship whilst being true to what she believes (even though I think it’s nonsensical that she is taught that she shouldn’t). But you only have to vary the situation slightly from attending a marriage, which is a celebration of the commitment of two people, to attending an anniversary, which is…um…a celebration of the commitment of two people to get two different opinions.
People argue all day and well into the evening about morality being absolute and not relative. But ask virtually the same question in two different ways and you get two different answers.
Last edited:
Sorry, I’m not seeing any “not accepting the Church’s teachings” here. Sin, yes. Failure to accept the Church’s teaching, no. People sin every day of their lives, without denying that what they are doing is sinful.HomeschoolDad:
When I used the term “accept the Church’s teachings” I did not intend specifically to indicate heretics. The first incident would be in Chapter 5 of Acts; 1-11. One can move from here through a number of parts of the Epistles of Paul. Again, Paul does not speak of them as heretics; but certainly straying from the Gospels.
In our age, where many people pretty much believe whatever they want to, and re-imagine God and His truth to suit their lifestyles, they do both —with the serpent’s help, Eve tried that (“you will not die!”), and it didn’t work out so well. But that’s not what’s happening here.
Luke 5:1-11 (DRV):
5:1 But a certain man named Ananias, with Saphira his wife, sold a piece of land,
2 And by fraud kept back part of the price of the land, his wife being privy thereunto: and bringing a certain part of it, laid it at the feet of the apostles.
3 But Peter said: Ananias, why hath Satan tempted thy heart, that thou shouldst lie to the Holy Ghost, and by fraud keep part of the price of the land?
4 Whilst it remained, did it not remain to thee? and after it was sold, was it not in thy power? Why hast thou conceived this thing in thy heart? Thou hast not lied to men, but to God.
5 And Ananias hearing these words, fell down, and gave up the ghost. And there came great fear upon all that heard it.
6 And the young men rising up, removed him, and carrying him out, buried him.
7 And it was about the space of three hours after, when his wife, not knowing what had happened, came in.
8 And Peter said to her: Tell me, woman, whether you sold the land for so much? And she said: Yea, for so much.
9 And Peter said unto her: Why have you agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? Behold the feet of them who have buried thy husband are at the door, and they shall carry thee out.
10 Immediately she fell down before his feet, and gave up the ghost. And the young men coming in, found her dead: and carried her out, and buried her by her husband.
11 And there came great fear upon the whole church, and upon all that heard these things.
Yes, people can and do differ in how they evaluate concrete moral situations — what is called casuistry. We can make up our own minds, or if in doubt, we can call upon a priest or spiritual director. But at some point, we have to become our own free agents — we’re not expected to call from the checkout aisle at the grocery and say “hey, spiritual director, HomeschoolDad here, should I get paper or plastic?”.
(And yes, for some people, that could be a moral issue. Just ask Greta Thunberg.)
Last edited:
- Status