Protestant marriages, Catholic marriages?

[Publisher]

I think he is saying that it is the same fr Protestants as Catholics. If a person knows the teaching and ignores it, there is no one to “force” them to behave properly, or to stop them from receiving the Eucharist.

Exactly…I understood Rinnie’s statements of what this Protestant was doing, somehow indicated this was something no Catholic would do and only occured among Protestants…otherwise…why was the question of “How can this be?” stated…the answer…“It “can be” for Protestants the same way it “can be” for Catholics.”…I wanted to understand where Rinnie was going and what conclusions she was attempting to draw with her story of a Protestant woman who received communion in a state of “mortal sin.”

 

[rinnie]

No, is there someone stationed preventing those in mortal sin from taking communion? Are there Catholics who attend mass living in mortal sin who receive communion? If so…“How can this be?” to use your words about a Protestant living in sin with her third or fourth husband and receiving communion…I dare say this is not a “Catholic” or “Protestant” issue…and there are members of both traditions who do so.

Your question of “How can this be?” just struck me as though such a thing was peculiar to only Protestants and that it didn’t occur among Catholics…that is where I was going with my questions.

Oh Okay I see what you are saying. Yes this can not be. It is not the teaching of the RCC. If a person does go to communion and are not in the state of grace they have passed judgement on themself. BUt the Church teaches this. The CHurch has done its job they have taught the truth.

But what I am saying is this women does not see the problem, because she know’s no better. The Church say’s nothing. It is common practice for the Church. How can you blame her when the Church lets her marry remarry etc. And does not teach about mortal sin, and venial sin?

 

[rinnie]

[SIGN][/SIGN]

Exactly…I understood Rinnie’s statements of what this Protestant was doing, somehow indicated[SIGN][SIGN] this was something no Catholic would do and only occured among Protestants…otherwise…why [/SIGN][/SIGN]was the question of “How can this be?” stated…the answer…“It “can be” for Protestants the same way it “can be” for Catholics.”…I wanted to understand where Rinnie was going and what conclusions she was attempting to draw with her story of a Protestant woman who received communion in a state of “mortal sin.”

If that is what you think I said Publisher, please let me correct it at once. Many Catholic’s have done this I am sure. But my point is the teaching of the RCC is that it is forbidden.

IF a person knows that they are in the state of Motal sin and go up to take the Eucharist they have put themself in a very very grave matter. Its like they have took one mortal sin and compounded it on top of another.

The Church teaches this is my point!

 

[Bluegoat]

[SIGN][/SIGN]

If that is what you think I said Publisher, please let me correct it at once. Many Catholic’s have done this I am sure. But my point is the teaching of the RCC is that it is forbidden.

IF a person knows that they are in the state of Motal sin and go up to take the Eucharist they have put themself in a very very grave matter. Its like they have took one mortal sin and compounded it on top of another.

The Church teaches this is my point!

Protestant groups also teach that we are responsible for our inner relation to sin.

Some do not have a Eucharist, or do not believe in the real presence. So that part of the equation is not so important - confessing right before the Eucharist. But they still teach that we are culpable if in a state of sin and that we need to confess to God and be forgiven. Some Protestants are actually much more harsh about this than Catholics are.

As for wht that woman didn’t get it. She may really have not thought she was in a state of sin. She may have not realized the significance of the Eucharist (or her church might have a different teaching about the Eucharist), or she may have had a bad pastor who did not teach well. These things happen in Catholic churches too.

There are a few Protestant groups who have a pretty lax idea of what is sinful. Some might not care if she lived with someone she was not married to, they might not think it was sinful.

It would be easier to guess if we knew her denomination.

 

[rinnie]

Protestant groups also teach that we are responsible for our inner relation to sin.

Some do not have a Eucharist, or do not believe in the real presence. So that part of the equation is not so important - confessing right before the Eucharist. But they still teach that we are culpable if in a state of sin and that we need to confess to God and be forgiven. Some Protestants are actually much more harsh about this than Catholics are.

As for wht that woman didn’t get it. She may really have not thought she was in a state of sin. She may have not realized the significance of the Eucharist (or her church might have a different teaching about the Eucharist), or she may have had a bad pastor who did not teach well. These things happen in Catholic churches too.

There are a few Protestant groups who have a pretty lax idea of what is sinful. Some might not care if she lived with someone she was not married to, they might not think it was sinful.

It would be easier to guess if we knew her denomination.

And what is getting worse now we are going to Non-Denomination. Its like sin does not exist, and we are all getting in. ITs sad. Just another large piece of the ROCK that Jesus built broken off again. Sometimes I think we can all come back together. Then it seems like we are just drifting further apart.

All because People reject Authority. Authority given by CHrist to the Church.

 

[Publisher]

Oh Okay I see what you are saying. Yes this can not be. It is not the teaching of the RCC. If a person does go to communion and are not in the state of grace they have passed judgement on themself. BUt the Church teaches this. The CHurch has done its job they have taught the truth.

But what I am saying is this women does not see the problem, because she know’s no better. The Church say’s nothing. It is common practice for the Church. How can you blame her when the Church lets her marry remarry etc. And does not teach about mortal sin, and venial sin?

And you know the church she attends has not? I know of no Protestant church that condones divorce and remarriage. It may be allowed in the sense that the offending party is not disfellowshipped…or disiplined…as her behavior and life IS a matter between her and God…the church can only point the way…they can’t MAKE her walk down the path.

 

[Publisher]

And what is getting worse now we are going to Non-Denomination. Its like sin does not exist, and we are all getting in. ITs sad. Just another large piece of the ROCK that Jesus built broken off again. Sometimes I think we can all come back together. Then it seems like we are just drifting further apart.

All because People reject Authority. Authority given by CHrist to the Church.

We are the Church…we don’t reject the authority of Christ…just the authority of any single religious body…I realize YOU believe the CC has the authority given to them by Christ…those of us who are Protestant…and Orthodox do not. I seriously doubt we will ever come under one umbrella organization…if we are joined with Christ…no matter how imperfectly we are in your opinion…WE STILL are joined together IN CHRIST.

 

[ChosenAndCalled]

I can tie these both together. I am an elder in my denomination, the Presbyterian Church in America. Years ago we excommunicated a man who left his wife and divorced her for no reason. At a session meeting I asked what we were to do if he presented himself for comunion. We knew him to be barred from the table, but did not think it would be proper to cause a scene. Our pastor reminded us that the occasion was solemn and sacred and we were not to disrupt it by causing a scene. The man knew himself to be ineligible, so he would be taking sin upon himself, not those serving him.

How cunning, I tied together the marriage thing and the communion thing.

 

[magnolialady]

Prayer Warrior, Being a protestant for over 30 years and now Catholic for a few months I hope I can answer your question. I truly think most Protestants and many Catholic’s do not understand what becoming “one flesh” really means. If they did they would not divorce but it happens across the board in all Christian faiths including Catholic. Most main stream Protestant churches quote many scriptures concerning this “one flesh reunion” at the marriage ceremony as well as teach it and preach it. Our Sunday’s reading Oct 4th speaks about our world today, just as it has been since Moses. Mark 10:2-16 or 2-12… The Pharisees approached Jesus and asked, "Is it lawful for a husband to divorce his wife? They were testing Him. He said to them in reply, “What did Moses command you?” They replied, “Moses permitted a husband to write a bill of Divorce and dismiss her.” But Jesus told them, “Because of the hardness of your hearts he wrote you this commandment. But from the beginning of creation, God made them male and female. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. So they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, no human must separate.” Many, many years ago many Protestant faiths made it hard for a couple to divorce. They all believe that a man and woman enter into a covenant relationship with God when they said their wedding vows and “become one”. But, it’s a long story and most Protestant churches have made it easy since the 19th and 20th centuries and really do not get involved if a couple makes the decision to divorce. It saddens me. This is one area of the Catholic church I appreciate and I hope the Magisterium will continue to keep doing things the way they have for many, many centuries. I think the Cathoilc Church gets a really bad opinion from the world these days when they try to live by God’s word. They try to make it hard for those to divorce because they do take God’s word to heart. I do know several Catholic’s that did divorce and they worked with the church to reconcile their past marriage and took the church’s advice to go through the process. They all shared it was a hard, but wonderful experience. Sticking with it they all recieved a healing and was able to move on in their Christian journey being better for it. You know we all sin and fall short, but our Lord’s mercy and grace can turn things around if we just surrender and look to the cross.

 

[rinnie]

Prayer Warrior, Being a protestant for over 30 years and now Catholic for a few months I hope I can answer your question. I truly think most Protestants and many Catholic’s do not understand what becoming “one flesh” really means. If they did they would not divorce but it happens across the board in all Christian faiths including Catholic. Most main stream Protestant churches quote many scriptures concerning this “one flesh reunion” at the marriage ceremony as well as teach it and preach it. Our Sunday’s reading Oct 4th speaks about our world today, just as it has been since Moses. Mark 10:2-16 or 2-12… The Pharisees approached Jesus and asked, "Is it lawful for a husband to divorce his wife? They were testing Him. He said to them in reply, “What did Moses command you?” They replied, “Moses permitted a husband to write a bill of Divorce and dismiss her.” But Jesus told them, “Because of the hardness of your hearts he wrote you this commandment. But from the beginning of creation, God made them male and female. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. So they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, no human must separate.” Many, many years ago many Protestant faiths made it hard for a couple to divorce. They all believe that a man and woman enter into a covenant relationship with God when they said their wedding vows and “become one”. But, it’s a long story and most Protestant churches have made it easy since the 19th and 20th centuries and really do not get involved if a couple makes the decision to divorce. It saddens me. This is one area of the Catholic church I appreciate and I hope the Magisterium will continue to keep doing things the way they have for many, many centuries. I think the Cathoilc Church gets a really bad opinion from the world these days when they try to live by God’s word. They try to make it hard for those to divorce because they do take God’s word to heart. I do know several Catholic’s that did divorce and they worked with the church to reconcile their past marriage and took the church’s advice to go through the process. They all shared it was a hard, but wonderful experience. Sticking with it they all recieved a healing and was able to move on in their Christian journey being better for it. You know we all sin and fall short, but our Lord’s mercy and grace can turn things around if we just surrender and look to the cross.

Very well put! Thank-you!

 

[rinnie]

[SIGN][/SIGN]

We are the Church…we don’t reject the authority of Christ…just the authority of any single religious body…I realize YOU believe the CC has the authority given to them by Christ…those of us who are Protestant…and Orthodox do not. I seriously doubt we will ever come under one umbrella organization…if we are joined with Christ…no matter how imperfectly we are in your opinion…[SIGN]WE STILL are joined together IN CHRIST.

[/SIGN]

I agree with you. We may not agree on all of the teaching’s yet but we do agree with One Christ. And you are correct we see the RCC as one single Body of Christ. I think that you have hit on a good point. We do not see the Church as a building or religious body we see the Church as Jesus himself.

See in the RCC you cannot take Jesus out of the Church anymore than you can take the church out of Jesus. They are one. It is just God revealed himself in 3 Persons. But still one God. And the HS is just as much a part of God as Jesus. We as RC see the HS as the Church, Just because you cannot see God every sunday he is there in the HS. I know you cannot understand this, it can be difficult. But we do not see the Pope as an authority figure on his own. It is just the HS uses his physical being to teach us. That is why the teaching of the RCC has to be perfect because it is the HS that is guiding us not the Pope. The Pope is just the human figure that tells us what the HS tells him. No more No less!

Just like the HS came upon Peter at the first Church its never changed. Peter never had authority on his own, just like the Pope has none on his own. The Pope was chosen by God just like Peter. So to us when you reject the Pope its just like rejecting Peter. There is no difference, because the HS is the same HS that guided Peter. Do you understand what I am saying?

No one can take that away. Because Jesus promised us that. SO please do not think that we believe that the Pope has any power that was not given to him by God. Just like Peter had no power but what was given to him by God. And that power is the HS.

 

[Reuben_J]

…for most Protestants, “Catholic annullment” is the “Protestant” version of “divorce”.

I think through the discussion the issue of … Protestant mariagges, Catholic marriages has become quite clear. I just want to touch on this again, just to tie up the loose end.

Annulment is not divorce whether we like it or not. It is not like the Church is using annulment as a loophole, an escape route for a divorce. No, it is never meant to be that way.

It would be extremely hypocritical and does not make any sense for the Church which disallows divorce to come up with something that’s the same as divorce. In all my years in my archdiocese I have yet to meet a couple whose marriage had been annulled, and it is a huge, very huge archdiocese. Sure annulment has been granted but it is extremely rare in the church. Why, because it is extremely difficult to establish that a marriage has not taken place for married couple.

Just because the marriage is not valid in the eyes of the church does not mean it is not a marriage. Talking about the validity of marriages seems to confuse things here. In Catholic marriage, all marriages are valid if they go through the process of the Sacrament and yet it can be established in unique case that the marriage had actually not been established. And annulment may be granted. But to have such situation is extremely rare and that explains why annulment is very, very rare.

Figures have come up to show the number of annulments and it seems to increase especially in the US, but let’s be perspective. We are talking about millions and millions of Catholic marriages and the annulments are actually a speck of dust in the endless sea of Catholic marriages.

But let look at the rational why the Church does not allow divorce. Mt 19 (paraphrase) - it was not like that in the beginning. Moses granted the writ of dismissal in the case of divorce (in cases of adultery) because you are hard headed (unteachable). The Church takes the position ‘**in the beginning’ **as intended by God; not the position of hard headed Christians. This is blunt statement, but that’s what it all about. So, no divorce because that was not what God wanted.

Catholic annulment can never be compared to Protestant divorce. It is not a code word for divorce and never will be. They are not the same things.

God bless.

 

[Publisher]

I think through the discussion the issue of … Protestant mariagges, Catholic marriages has become quite. I just want to touch on this again, just to tie up the loose end.

Annulment is not divorce whether we like it or not. It is not like the Church is using annulment as a loophole, an escape route for a divorce. No, it is never meant to be that way.

It would be extremely hypocritical and does not make any sense for the Church which disallows divorce to come up with something that’s the same as divorce. In all my years in my archdiocese I have yet to meet a couple whose marriage had been annulled, and it is a huge, very huge archdiocese. Sure annulment has been granted but it is extremely rare in the church. Why, because it is extremely difficult to establish that a marriage has not taken place for married couple.

Just because the marriage is not valid in the eyes of the church does not mean it is not a marriage. Talking about the validity of marriages seems to confuse things here. In Catholic marriage, all marriages are valid if they go through the process of the Sacrament and yet it can be established in unique case that the marriage had actually not been established. And annulment may be granted. But to have such situation is extremely rare and that explains why annulment is very, very rare.

Figures have come up to show the number of annulments and it seems to increase especially in the US, but let’s be perspective. We are talking about millions and millions of Catholic marriages and the annulments are actually a speck of dust in the endless sea of Catholic marriages.

But let look at the rational why the Church does not allow divorce. Mt 19 (paraphrase) - it was not like that in the beginning. Moses granted the writ of dismissal in the case of divorce (in cases of adultery) because you are hard headed (unteachable). The Church takes the position ‘**in the beginning’ **as intended by God; not the position of hard headed Christians. This is blunt statement, but that’s what it all about. So, no divorce because that was not what God wanted.

Catholic annulment can never be compared to Protestant divorce. It is not a code word for divorce and never will be. They are not the same things.

God bless.

I’m sure you are correct as to the stance of the CC…the Catholic stance allowing annullments when certain issues are submitted to make the “marriage” invalid is a Cathlic belief. A “marriage” declared “null” due to improper form or some impediment due to “intent” after thirty years and multiple children…is a “divorce” in most Protestant minds…I understand the Catholic position of annullments…there is no “remarriage” when a decree of nullity is issued as a “marriage” hasn’t “really” occured…no matter the time frame or the quantity of children issued from this “invalid marriage”…just a “second wedding”…which may or may not be valid…

I submit that while there is no Protestant “equal” “sacramentally” to “annullment” in most cases…if a Protestant marriage breaks up for the very same reasons a Catholic marriage would be declared “null”…but the Protestant uses a civil court to declare “divorce”…it’s really an “annullment” IF the same reasons would have been used by Catholics for their annullment process…Understood Catholics do not believe their annullments are really divorces…even if Protestants do.

 

[cyber1call]

I’m sorry if I repeat someone else, but I’m late to this discussion and don’t have time to read all of the posts above.

It seems very clear that God hates divorce (Malachi 2:16) and Jesus makes it pretty clear with the Sermon on the Mount among other places that divorce is contrary to God’s will.

Yet, it seems that there are at least TWO valid reasons for divorce if one goes by Scripture.

First, if one of the marriage partners is unfaithful. (Matt 5, Matt 19 for example.) Now personally, and this is only my own opinion, I think the concept of “unfaithfulness” is not necessarily limited to adultery. I think abuse and abandonment also qualify as unfaithfulness.

Second, if someone becomes a believer and the other spouse wants a divorce, then Paul says that is permitted. (1 Cor 7) Now Paul is very clear that the believing spouse is obligated to try and keep the marriage together, but also clearly states that if the unbelieving spouse does leave that the other is no longer bound to them (1 Cor 7:15).

Another point I’d like to make would be the status of people who are divorced as unbelievers then become followers of Christ. If even a new believer becomes a “new creation” as Paul explains in 2 Cor 5, then as the Apostle says, the old has been replaced by the new. So I think whatever has happened before coming to Christ is just what would have been expected by a sinner, even if it’s the sin of divorce. I’ve never understood why divorce (or other public sins like homosexuality for instance), especially those that took place before believing, have so much greater weight as sins than other secret sins. I guess that’s human nature–but as followers of Christ we’re supposed to have new, spiritual natures!

 

[otjm]

Where I have a bone to pick with the Church is that I don’t believe it issues enough prohibitions. There are plenty of people out there who are entitled to decrees of nullity because, at the time they married, they were incapable of forming a lifelong bond. I’m not so sure that all of them are now able to do so.

The difficulty is that there are no statistics I am a ware of which treat that part of a decree of nullity, and unless you actually see the documentation, you have no means of determining how often the tribunal either sets a specific rule concerning it, or a serious suggestion. the evidence ends up being anecdotal and qualified by the truthfulness and veracity of the party answering the question.

 

[DCManTommy]

[SIGN][/SIGN][/SIGN]

I agree with you. We may not agree on all of the teaching’s yet but we do agree with One Christ. And you are correct we see the RCC as one single Body of Christ. I think that you have hit on a good point. We do not see the Church as a building or religious body we see the Church as Jesus himself.

See in the RCC you cannot take Jesus out of the Church anymore than you can take the church out of Jesus. They are one. It is just God revealed himself in 3 Persons. But still one God. And the HS is just as much a part of God as Jesus. We as RC see the HS as the Church, Just because you cannot see God every sunday he is there in the HS. I know you cannot understand this, it can be difficult. But we do not see the Pope as an authority figure on his own. It is just the HS uses his physical being to teach us. That is why the teaching of the RCC has to be perfect because it is the HS that is guiding us not the Pope. The Pope is just the human figure that tells us what the HS tells him. No more No less!

Just like the HS came upon Peter at the first Church its never changed. Peter never had authority on his own, just like the Pope has none on his own. The Pope was chosen by God just like Peter. So to us when you reject the Pope its just like rejecting Peter. There is no difference, because the HS is the same HS that guided Peter. Do you understand what I am saying?

No one can take that away. Because Jesus promised us that. SO please do not think that we believe that the Pope has any power that was not given to him by God. Just like Peter had no power but what was given to him by God. And that power is the HS.

Rinnie you have done a fantastic job, holding the line against destructive subterfuge which is guided by humanistic pride for loyalties to cultural and human-inspired organizations. Congratulations. This is not easy. You have a powerful faith and understanding to match. I will add some thoughts which no one has considered yet as I have faced similar deceptions (however well intended) in the past.

 

[Reuben_J]

I’m sure you are correct as to the stance of the CC…the Catholic stance allowing annullments when certain issues are submitted to make the “marriage” invalid is a Cathlic belief. A “marriage” declared “null” due to improper form or some impediment due to “intent” after thirty years and multiple children…is a “divorce” in most Protestant minds…I understand the Catholic position of annullments…there is no “remarriage” when a decree of nullity is issued as a “marriage” hasn’t “really” occured…no matter the time frame or the quantity of children issued from this “invalid marriage”…just a “second wedding”…which may or may not be valid…

I submit that while there is no Protestant “equal” “sacramentally” to “annullment” in most cases…if a Protestant marriage breaks up for the very same reasons a Catholic marriage would be declared “null”…but the Protestant uses a civil court to declare “divorce”…it’s really an “annullment” IF the same reasons would have been used by Catholics for their annullment process…Understood Catholics do not believe their annullments are really divorces…even if Protestants do.

I am glad to hear this, if not for anything but for the fact that Christians (both Catholics and Protestants) hold that the Sacrament of Matrimony is scared. That when God joint the two to become one flesh no man shall take them apart. Yet in reality many Christian marriages fell apart and what ‘God has united men divided’.

The question would be, how can this be so for Christians, that we blatantly transgress this commandment? If marriage had taken place, united by God, how then can we divide? Catholic stance would be that we cannot. No Christian marriages should end up in divorces unless there is no marriage had taken place in the first instance.

 

[DCManTommy]

I’m sure you are correct as to the stance of the CC…the Catholic stance allowing annullments when certain issues are submitted to make the “marriage” invalid is a Cathlic belief. A “marriage” declared “null” due to improper form or some impediment due to “intent” after thirty years and multiple children…is a “divorce” in most Protestant minds…I understand the Catholic position of annullments…there is no “remarriage” when a decree of nullity is issued as a “marriage” hasn’t “really” occured…no matter the time frame or the quantity of children issued from this “invalid marriage”…just a “second wedding”…which may or may not be valid…

I submit that while there is no Protestant “equal” “sacramentally” to “annullment” in most cases…if a Protestant marriage breaks up for the very same reasons a Catholic marriage would be declared “null”…but the Protestant uses a civil court to declare “divorce”…it’s really an “annullment” IF the same reasons would have been used by Catholics for their annullment process…Understood Catholics do not believe their annullments are really divorces…even if Protestants do.

It’s clear that you have not listened to much of what was said, constantly reverting to your ‘30 year marriage’ hypothetical personal story which does not speak at all to the concepts.

You truly DO NOT comprehend the difference between CIVIL DIVORCE and CATHOLIC ANNULLMENT. I don’t believe you ever will, because I think your pride in human-organizational membership may block you from proper usage of your reasoning, I say this sincerely - this information is primarily for anyone else reading, and not Publisher.

People, follow this conceptually so that you are not deceived by Publisher’s fuzzy thinking (the same that is offered over and over by many protestants). We will follow this straght from concepts through to real history and statistics that show how the concepts truly manifest in widespread evil versus widespread good.

There is an institution called the state. In Liberal Democracy, we have decided to separate this organization from the Church. Both state and Church have interest in the binding agreement called marriage. Simply put: Catholics believe that both Church AND state have certain authorities regarding the protection of that agreement - whereas the vast majority of protestants DO NOT.

Protestants only yield authority to the state, and fashion themselves their own personal pope. They decide what is biblical based on their limited understanding of scripture and theology, mostly with immature exegesis. And so they believe that their own ego possesses this capability to assess the SAME THINGS that highly vetted, deliberating, and trained Catholic priests do in the process of annullment. After all, we are operating upon nearly the same bible, correct? (Protestant one, minus the pages ripped from the spine by Luther’s followers, to expunge elements of The Word that contradicted Luther’s crusade against indulgences thus purgatory)

The reason that formal assessment and rules for annullment do not exist in the majority of protestant churches is because such honor to biblical authority and legalism is by virtue discouraged based on the revisionist doctrine of Luther. Even if the protestant were to consult a church “authority” there would be no consequence to following (or not following) the advice of the so-called “holy person” of their protestant church.

As Publisher has admitted, the ultimate “tribunal” or “decision making” rests with the married individual, rather than with holy persons who are well studied and capable scholars of our faith.

A Catholic on the other hand must defer to the authority of those WHO ARE capable of taking all of the evidence into consideration and WHO DO have a scholarly command of the bible. Just as any individual in a Liberal Democracy is subject to the rule of the state regarding secular items concerning divorce, so too, does the humble Catholic defer, respect, and honor the authority of the Church as the sacred teachers commissioned by Jesus, and its command of The Word.

Opponents including Publisher have tried to confound this superior and biblical treatment of marriage in Christian doctrine by pointing to ridiculous anecdotal cases - a very cheap trick. The same has been used to negate legalism in public safety, spouting emotional personal stories about failures of the system, or absurd hypothetical boundary conditions, to attempt to negate the overall goodness of the system at large, and diverge from the nominal situation. Shame on you for this tactic. It falls on the ground, uneffective.

Regardless of whether there are substandard anecdotal cases in the Catholic system of annullment, it will always be a superior system to Protestant doctrine by virtue of logical tests and correct exegesis. The Catholic system requires those in marriage who are oft driven by temptations and evil of the world, and humanistic desires to be vetted by capable and scholarly protectors of the faith, so that the incredible sacredness of the bond of marriage and family, honored by Jesus is also protected.

 

[BarbGl]

I have been divorced for many years. Shortly after my divorce, I applied for and received an annulment. I did that, not because I wanted to get married right away, but because I felt it would be healing to me, which it was.

Whereas my Catholic marriage was annulled, one of my daughters married a non-Catholic and has never had an opportunity to be in a Catholic marriage. She has been with this man for over 13 years now and has a stable, loving home. Because the Church won’t accept her with this marriage, she left the Church and found a Protestant church to go to. It bothers her, as she had a really good experience in Catholic school, but she feels she has no choice, as her husband, though a good man, refuses to become Catholic. The sad thing is, her children are being raised in that Protestant church and will never have the experience of the sacraments or any of the Catholic life.

Over the years, I have thought a lot about my own annulment, my daughter’s situation, and others’ difficulties over marriage. I think that the Church really needs to look at this problem because it is affecting what happens to the future generations. Nobody really wants to get a divorce, and many people would still be Catholics if the marriage rules were different. I understand very well the principles that are being upheld, but the Lord is also a merciful and forgiving God. I really do hope that the leaders in our Church find some way to help these people.

 

[DCManTommy]

I’m sure you are correct as to the stance of the CC…the Catholic stance allowing annullments when certain issues are submitted to make the “marriage” invalid is a Cathlic belief. A “marriage” declared “null” due to improper form or some impediment due to “intent” after thirty years and multiple children…is a “divorce” in most Protestant minds…I understand the Catholic position of annullments…there is no “remarriage” when a decree of nullity is issued as a “marriage” hasn’t “really” occured…no matter the time frame or the quantity of children issued from this “invalid marriage”…just a “second wedding”…which may or may not be valid…

I submit that while there is no Protestant “equal” “sacramentally” to “annullment” in most cases…if a Protestant marriage breaks up for the very same reasons a Catholic marriage would be declared “null”…but the Protestant uses a civil court to declare “divorce”…it’s really an “annullment” IF the same reasons would have been used by Catholics for their annullment process…Understood Catholics do not believe their annullments are really divorces…even if Protestants do.

The interests of the state and Church regarding the agreement of marriage have some overlap, but overall, the underlying concerns are entirely different. One has a basis of property, humanistic comfort, and ‘fairness’; the Catholic church and Jesus require adherence to The Word, irrespective of the prior humanistic motivations.

Protestants are forced to obey the decisions of the state. As for what is intended by The Word? They fashion themselves their own pope. Devout Protestants will do what they can in their mind to try and make their decisions biblical, but as usual, are subject to widely disputable conclusions which are influenced by “wishful thinking” and humanistic excuses and explanations as the the conclusions they arrive at.

It is easy to see how this Protestant system degrades into a game of “make myself my own personal shrink”. Is the conclusion biblical in the end? Maybe in the mind of that individual. But we all know, there is only one truth, there is only one correct answer in the eyes of God. Either the conclusion was unbiblical, or it was not.

Do you wish to rest the salvation of your soul upon such mind games, conversations in your head, and personal authority and ego and pride? This is what Protestants do.

No thanks, my faith is with the capable Catholic Church and its priests every single time.

Let’s take a look at what this Protestant “personal pope-dom” has done over time in Liberal Democracy. As we have seen, morals and religion play a key role in determining culture. There is a complex interplay, but the foundation of the sensibilities of a culture involves their religion, history, environment, and government.

Since the advent of Liberal Democracy, Europe was overrun by atheism and Protestantism. In addition, America is a Protestant nation, through and through. Shall we truly observe the great impact that these religions have had on the family? The permissiveness of divorce and remarriage?

The family unit in Protestant nations has degraded to conditions that have not been observed for centuries - yielding and inferior even to some pagan cultures that historically needed strong families for survival. Look at the divorce rate in Japan. Another very strong family culture - one that is held together by orthodoxy, shame, religion, and rules!!! Similar to Catholic nations in that Italy, Latin America, and South America also hold marriage to be sacred, hold the insitution accountable to the rules and sensibilities of the culture.

Look to the disgraceful Protestant bible belt of America - highest divorce rate in the world. This is the grand Christian achievement of the Protestant doctrine? What’s worse, it’s like a plague, spreading to previously strong Catholic cultures and communities - for it is true, this is a complex interplay. Can a Catholic family survive, living in a Protestant nation, surrounded by governmental and cultural norms that violate and disrespect what they hold sacred? Will their children overcome the pressure of society and hold strong to the truth of the Catholic faith, including its treatment of family and marriage?

So what was the foot in the door for the devil, for evil? It was the Protestant notion that you are your own pope. It was the Protestant disregard for the sacraments, treating marriage not as a sacred bond, but as a truly legal action (you must go through it before you do it), and then divorce in the same permissive manner. Marry, divorce, marry, divorce. 3-times married isn’t so uncommon in Protestant culture, or their agnostic and atheist offspring now is it? So tell me, who are the ones yielding to legalism? Yet they yield to legalism of the state and legalism of cherry-picked verses of the bible, out of context, but justified in their own mind as far as they can understand as amateur biblical scholars.

The slipperly slope, thus traversed, we are here today, with a weak family and huge social problems as the spreading evil of Protestant divorce, confusion, chaos of dogma, and personal pope-dom have run their course through Liberal Democracies and continue to spread evil.

On the contrary, shall we continue as Catholics to defer to the authority of true biblical scholars in regards to whether or not our marriage and/or annullment is biblical? You better believe it. History proves we are right. Sociology proves we are right. Culture proves we are right. But most importantly, the bible proves we are right as it has since The Word was written.

Did we need the humanistic evidence of history and culture? No. Protestants need to feel the pain and evil of their failures so that they can correct their flawed theology and come closer to rejoining Jesus’ Church. As for the Catholics out there living in Protestant nations - continue to hold true to the faith and avoid the tempting influence of the Protestant culture.