K
KMG
Guest
I quoted what Augustine said. Divorce is from from the Devil. That’s Augustine.
Last edited:
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
R
Roseeurekacross
Guest
Do you go against the Holy See and Canon Law? Do You go against what is written about Divorced people sharing in the Eucharist and Church Ministry, even if a divorced , civily divorced person is not in mortal sin?I quoted what Augustine said. Divorce is from from the Devil. That’s Augustine.
Do you believe all divorced people are evil and from the devil
Last edited:
K
KMG
Guest
Please go back and read what I wrote again. I quoted Saint Augustine.
P
paperwight
Guest
IIRC, Augustine also said that sexual intercourse in marriage was a venial sin.I quoted what Augustine said. Divorce is from from the Devil. That’s Augustine.
Do you proclaim that as well?
K
KMG
Guest
Augustine is quoted in the traditional liturgy for today. That is all I posted.
The reactions of some to a simple note about a doctor of the Church, indeed one of the 4 great doctors of the West, is fascinating.
The reactions of some to a simple note about a doctor of the Church, indeed one of the 4 great doctors of the West, is fascinating.
R
Roseeurekacross
Guest
Kmg you simply cannot run around saying divorced people are in mortal sin, grave mortal sin. Especially when the Holy See disagrees with you.
You are promoting error.
Perhaps you can show us the relevant Catechism and Canon Law to back this up.
You are promoting error.
Perhaps you can show us the relevant Catechism and Canon Law to back this up.
Last edited:
K
KMG
Guest
Oh I see. Quoting something a great doctor of the Church wrote is somehow “promoting error.” This would be hilarious if it weren’t so sad.
R
Roseeurekacross
Guest
Kmg Show us where Canon Law says what you claim, and the Magisterium.
K
KMG
Guest
What did I “claim”? I quoted a passage from a doctor of the Church. I noted a passage of Sacred Scripture has been cut from the liturgy, despite an expanded Lectionary.
Funny how feverish a reaction one gets to simple facts.
Funny how feverish a reaction one gets to simple facts.
O
otjm
Guest
I suppose one could dig out something indicating that 1500 years ago, slavery was accepted by the Church; it has about as much bearing to the teachings of the Magisterium as does your quote from st. Agustine. and that is not a feverish response. One could also pull out a quote from St Thomas Aquinas where he was wrong about the Virgin Mary.
The fact is, neither of them were the Magisterium.
I suspect that if scholarly work was done on the Lectionary, it also showed what was added into it, as well as what was withdrawn. Since you don’t cite your scholarly work, we are left with your cat-and-mouse game of implications as to why that was done.
One is left with the question of why you made the implications, veiled or otherwise. If you are proposing some sort of conspiratorial reworking of moral theology by the last three popes, you might be better advised to post in a different blog, one given to conspiracies. I don’t think anyone here really wants to play in that sandbox.
The fact is, neither of them were the Magisterium.
I suspect that if scholarly work was done on the Lectionary, it also showed what was added into it, as well as what was withdrawn. Since you don’t cite your scholarly work, we are left with your cat-and-mouse game of implications as to why that was done.
One is left with the question of why you made the implications, veiled or otherwise. If you are proposing some sort of conspiratorial reworking of moral theology by the last three popes, you might be better advised to post in a different blog, one given to conspiracies. I don’t think anyone here really wants to play in that sandbox.
O
OraLabora
Guest
To be clear, civil divorce may or may not be a mortal sin. A man runs off with his secretary and divorces his wife. He may be guilty of mortal sin. His wife, not so much.
A civil divorce may be the result of a general breakdown of charity for which both parties are responsible. Certainly grave matter, but also certainly forgivable in the confessional. It need only be confessed once, then the person is again in a state of grace, and able to receive the Eucharist with a clear conscience, provided that they remain chaste.
A divorce may be due to an abusive alcoholic spouse who is a “mean drunk”. The alcoholic spouse joins AA and sobers up. The other spouse may not be interested in reconciliation, but the sobered up alcoholic stays dry, stays chaste, and confesses his/her role in the divorce. State of grace, able to receive the Eucharist with a clear conscience.
Now divorce and remarriage is a different matter. Perhaps that is what you meant. To be clear, this is what the CCC says about divorce:
A civil divorce may be the result of a general breakdown of charity for which both parties are responsible. Certainly grave matter, but also certainly forgivable in the confessional. It need only be confessed once, then the person is again in a state of grace, and able to receive the Eucharist with a clear conscience, provided that they remain chaste.
A divorce may be due to an abusive alcoholic spouse who is a “mean drunk”. The alcoholic spouse joins AA and sobers up. The other spouse may not be interested in reconciliation, but the sobered up alcoholic stays dry, stays chaste, and confesses his/her role in the divorce. State of grace, able to receive the Eucharist with a clear conscience.
Now divorce and remarriage is a different matter. Perhaps that is what you meant. To be clear, this is what the CCC says about divorce:
Divorce
2382 The Lord Jesus insisted on the original intention of the Creator who willed that marriage be indissoluble.173 He abrogates the accommodations that had slipped into the old Law.174
Between the baptized, "a ratified and consummated marriage cannot be dissolved by any human power or for any reason other than death."175
2383 The separation of spouses while maintaining the marriage bond can be legitimate in certain cases provided for by canon law.176
If civil divorce remains the only possible way of ensuring certain legal rights, the care of the children, or the protection of inheritance, it can be tolerated and does not constitute a moral offense.
2384 Divorce is a grave offense against the natural law. It claims to break the contract, to which the spouses freely consented, to live with each other till death. Divorce does injury to the covenant of salvation, of which sacramental marriage is the sign. Contracting a new union, even if it is recognized by civil law, adds to the gravity of the rupture: the remarried spouse is then in a situation of public and permanent adultery:
If a husband, separated from his wife, approaches another woman, he is an adulterer because he makes that woman commit adultery, and the woman who lives with him is an adulteress, because she has drawn another’s husband to herself.177
2385 Divorce is immoral also because it introduces disorder into the family and into society. This disorder brings grave harm to the deserted spouse, to children traumatized by the separation of their parents and often torn between them, and because of its contagious effect which makes it truly a plague on society.
2386 It can happen that one of the spouses is the innocent victim of a divorce decreed by civil law; this spouse therefore has not contravened the moral law. There is a considerable difference between a spouse who has sincerely tried to be faithful to the sacrament of marriage and is unjustly abandoned, and one who through his own grave fault destroys a canonically valid marriage.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.