Most U.S. Catholics hope for change in church rule on divorce, Communion

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
gilliam said:
The Vatican synod on the family concluded over the weekend – with somewhat inconclusive results that were open to multiple interpretations.

While there were many topics of conversation – including homosexuality, cohabitation and contraception – much of the focus fell on Catholics who have been divorced and remarried without an annulment, and the debate over whether the church would allow them to receive Communion. The synod’s final document, with each paragraph approved by at least two-thirds of the 265 voting bishops in attendance, did not take a clear stance on the issue, but some observers expect Pope Francis may leave it up to local parishes.

http://www.pewresearch.org/files/2015/10/PF_15.09.02_CatholicSurvey_pies640px-1.png

pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/10/26/most-u-s-catholics-hope-for-change-in-church-rule-on-divorce-communion/
Click to expand...
Too bad we don’t have poll numbers on acceptability of Golden Calf worship during the Exodus. My guess is it had a pretty strong showing, 60% - 70%?
 
It means nothing when the “most” being cited hold heterodox beliefs.
 
DaddyGirl said:
Here’s the entire poll in case anyone’s interested. It’s INTENSE. Wow.

pewforum.org/2015/09/02/u-s-catholics-open-to-non-traditional-families/

.
Click to expand...
Just looking at the first question they are showing their own bias. So they ask “What is your opinion of children being raised by a mother and father” and the only choices are

Acceptable and as good as any other arrangement
Acceptable but not as good as some others
don’t know
not acceptable

No option for saying it’s the ideal and preferred arrangement. Really? And they are asking Catholics where the foundation of the family is a married mother and father and yet that option is only allowed to be chosen including the clause " as good as any other". I can see how some people being called might not fully understand the implications of choosing that answer out of the limited choices,
 
There is one “change to church rule” in this field that I would like to see, and that is the restoration of the word “fornication/porneia” in Matt. 19:9 to its original meaning of all non-marital sexual activity, instead of only “Oops! I just discovered that I’m married to my half-sister.” This would allow the Church to recognize that an unfaithful spouse has already broken the bond of marriage, and that an ensuing divorce is only a civil recognition of that fact.
 
DaddyGirl said:
Would this make the other 83 percent “heretics”?

(Heretic: belief or opinion contrary to orthodox religious (especially Christian) doctrine)

.
Click to expand...
A heretic actual has a clue but holds an incorrect doctrine.
They can be extremely righteous in some cases.

These people mentioned in tha Polls run the gammit from sadly misinformed to pure apostate.
Sorry but the Church would be better off without them as they are.
You don’t approach Christ on your terms
We welcome everyone especially sinners with a slight requirement.
You want to change that’s your reason tor becoming a member of the Body of Christ
The primary step for every Christain
Is Repentence
No Christain can truly get on the road to justification or Salvation without that step

Why is that concept do difficult to grasp.
 
Michael1978 said:
…the Truth does not change even if no one believes it. The Doctrines of the Church do not change even if no one follows them. Those that deny that homosexual acts, birth control, abortion, etc. are sins are blinded by the world, the flesh and devil, and they heap judgment upon themselves by denying the Truth. We pray that they will reconcile themselves to God, will confess their sins and amend their lifestyles. The Bible tells us that “if we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.” But if we do not even acknowledge that a sin is in fact a sin, then we are precluded from mercy because we do not seek it.
Click to expand...
👍 Excellent post.
 
DaveBj said:
There is one “change to church rule” in this field that I would like to see, and that is the restoration of the word “fornication/porneia” in Matt. 19:9 to its original meaning of all non-marital sexual activity, instead of only “Oops! I just discovered that I’m married to my half-sister.” This would allow the Church to recognize that an unfaithful spouse has already broken the bond of marriage, and that an ensuing divorce is only a civil recognition of that fact.
Click to expand...
So any person that’s had sex before getting married is now incapable of entering into a valid marriage? That’s what you want?
 
The fact that Catholics today in the United States have forgotten about their duty to obey Church teaching can be blamed solely on the modernist spirit of Vatican II. Also the majority of Americans today have no respect towards Christ because of the secular culture and it’s deeply anti Christian bias.

If Catholics were properly taught the Faith at the parish level then We as the Church would not be having the crisis in Faith today.
 
Trad_Catholic27 said:
The fact that Catholics today in the United States have forgotten about their duty to obey Church teaching can be blamed solely on the modernist spirit of Vatican II. Also the majority of Americans today have no respect towards Christ because of the secular culture and it’s deeply anti Christian bias.

If Catholics were properly taught the Faith at the parish level then We as the Church would not be having the crisis in Faith today.
Click to expand...
No, it’s not because of Vatican II. In American, it’s because of the Americanism heresy that started in the 1850s and reached it’s peak in the 1950s and 1960s, just before Vatican II.

Then, when some of the teachings of Vatican II were misunderstood by the Americanist and the Modernists… things got crazy.

Europe had a different issue, mostly due to relativism after both World Wars.

Read American Church: The Remarkable Rise, Meteoric Fall, and Uncertain Future of Catholicism in America by Russel Shaw (forward by Archbishop Chaput), published by the Ignatius Press amzn.to/1PXzKRw

Very enlightening book.

God Bless!
 
DaddyGirl said:
They either feel it was an error made by men many centuries ago when hammering out the doctrine details…or they feel that perhaps they were correct for that time period, but now 2000 years later some of the doctrines need to be adapted to the evolving world.
In the same way that many teachings, laws, and rules of Judaism were let go of or adapted for a new world 2000 years ago because we had outgrown them or changed our beliefs as people.
.
Click to expand...
As I keep saying, if you keep meeting the world halfway, you soon will begin to lose your identity. It wasn’t that long ago that the Catholic Church was actually looked on as the moral leader of the world.
 
Trad_Catholic27 said:
The fact that Catholics today in the United States have forgotten about their duty to obey Church teaching can be blamed solely on the modernist spirit of Vatican II. Also the majority of Americans today have no respect towards Christ because of the secular culture and it’s deeply anti Christian bias.

If Catholics were properly taught the Faith at the parish level then We as the Church would not be having the crisis in Faith today.
Click to expand...
I think liberals and dissenters do know the teachings of Jesus but like protestants they look to separate Jesus from His Church, the Catholic Church. In that way they can say they don’t agree with ‘Church teaching’. The disciples who walked away from Jesus knew exactly what He was saying…and they couldn’t accept this hard teaching.
 
Then that would make them formal heretics because they would be rejecting Christ and His Divine Laws along with His Catholic Church. The fact that Catholic Universities don’t teach the Faith at all today is because of the Americanists desire to throw off their Catholic Faith because they felt that Catholicism was holding them back from being accepted by a large majority of the american public in other words they chose Caesar instead of Christ.

Thank you Phil for reminding me of the important role that Americanism had with the crisis in the Church in the United States
 
ProVobis said:
As I keep saying, if you keep meeting the world halfway, you soon will begin to lose your identity. It wasn’t that long ago that the Catholic Church was actually looked on as the moral leader of the world.
Click to expand...
Anthony Esolen has somewhat modified the parable of the prodigal son to fit modern times. The father in this case meets the son halfway, repeatedly.

thecatholicthing.org/
 
Cider said:
So any person that’s had sex before getting married is now incapable of entering into a valid marriage? That’s what you want?
Click to expand...
If you would be so kind as to re-read my post, you will see that I was referring to an unfaithful spouse, which means that a marriage has taken place, and that one of the spouses has committed adultery, which is a subset of fornication, the catchall term for all sexual sins.
 
DaveBj said:
There is one “change to church rule” in this field that I would like to see, and that is the restoration of the word “fornication/porneia” in Matt. 19:9 to its original meaning of all non-marital sexual activity, instead of only “Oops! I just discovered that I’m married to my half-sister.” This would allow the Church to recognize that an unfaithful spouse has already broken the bond of marriage, and that an ensuing divorce is only a civil recognition of that fact.
Click to expand...
I agree.
 
johnnyc176 said:
I think liberals and dissenters do know the teachings of Jesus but like protestants they look to separate Jesus from His Church, the Catholic Church. In that way they can say they don’t agree with ‘Church teaching’. The disciples who walked away from Jesus knew exactly what He was saying…and they couldn’t accept this hard teaching.
Click to expand...
I think this is true in many if not most cases. And it is a key point. A deliberate rejection/redefinition of fundamental aspects of the faith, such as we see in liberal Protestantism or in prosperity gospel. (we have “immorality gospel” 😉 - our beef is with moral teachings against fornication and adultery, not the anti-wealth ones) I would also just say there are many Protestants who do follow the letter of Christ. I would be more careful and say that liberal or dissenting Catholics resemble “liberal Protestants.”
 
DaddyGirl said:
I think many of these Catholics in the poll understand fully what the doctrine is and were taught all about it “at the parish level” and understand all the “concepts”… I think they just don’t agree with it.
They either feel it was an error made by men many centuries ago when hammering out the doctrine details…or they feel that perhaps they were correct for that time period, but now 2000 years later some of the doctrines need to be adapted to the evolving world.
In the same way that many teachings, laws, and rules of Judaism were let go of or adapted for a new world 2000 years ago because we had outgrown them or changed our beliefs as people.
We no longer, you know, thought it was necessary to stone people to death for adultery in the middle of the village.

That’s what the Catholics I know tell me, anyway.

Take the Vatican priest, Charamsa, as an example of this…he’s the one who recently told reporters and his boss at the Vatican that he’s gay and has a boyfriend, etc.

He is definitely well-versed in the faith and “the road to salvation” details…but…he disagrees with a fundamental teaching.

.
Click to expand...
:rotfl: Yeah, God should change to agree with my views. That’s not really how Faith works
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top