B
blackbelt
Guest
But Rc does not like the word divorce and so it is in the bible as you just qouted so they substute and give it a diffrent meening by there standars which they call annulment
- Status
E
Eden
Guest
O.S. Luke:
Marriage in the United States for Catholics is not just a Sacrament isolated from societal laws as we are required by law to apply for a marriage license and prove to the government that we are legally married for taxes, etc.
This thread was to illustrate how a bible-based faith can fall victim to the traditions of men without the guidance of the Holy Spirit through the Church.
We have bible-only after bible-only believer who comes to these forums to attack Catholicism; one of the main accusations being that the Church is full of traditions of men. Allowing divorce and remarriage clearly contradicts scripture and any church which allows allows this is following a tradition of men, not the Word of God.
In most cases, the American Church wants the civil divorce to go through before an annulment takes place because the Church does not want to be sued for “estrangement of affection”. But it is not a requirement of the Church for this to take place. It’s just the standard order in which the process goes to avoid the legal aspects of the civil side of the marriage.
Marriage in the United States for Catholics is not just a Sacrament isolated from societal laws as we are required by law to apply for a marriage license and prove to the government that we are legally married for taxes, etc.
This is all very good news, but ultimately the decision is left up to you. The theology in other Christian faiths allows for the minister’s own interpretation and decisions regarding remarriage so someone can go find another minister to marry them in the faith if they are rejected by you.
The end of the story is, the Church teaching on “annulments” is in line which scripture while “divorce” in other Christian faiths is not. I don’t think there is any way to present that in a gentle way, nor should it be because it is an affront to God’s Word.
This thread was to illustrate how a bible-based faith can fall victim to the traditions of men without the guidance of the Holy Spirit through the Church.
We have bible-only after bible-only believer who comes to these forums to attack Catholicism; one of the main accusations being that the Church is full of traditions of men. Allowing divorce and remarriage clearly contradicts scripture and any church which allows allows this is following a tradition of men, not the Word of God.
B
blackbelt
Guest
All Im trying to point out to all is that the RCC or any other denomination does not have sola scripture the only one who know is God stop following men and follow Christ
E
Eden
Guest
I don’t understand your answer.
The Church is the Bride of Christ. Christ established one, visible Church on earth and that is the Catholic Church. Following the Church, we are following Christ because his teachings are protected from corruption by the protection of the Holy Spirit.
K
Kirane
Guest
You might find out if you would read a few books on the consequences of marital breakup on the children.
See:
unitedfamilies.org/divorce.asp
By almost every measure, children from broken families fare worse than their peers in intact families. The children of divorce are more likely to engage in behaviors that lead to higher rates of crime, drug use, child abuse, poor educational performance, higher incidence of behavioral, emotional, physical, and psychiatric problems. Such behavior set in motion a downward cycle of dysfunctional behavior and despair that compounds those problems for their own children and future generations of children. Because of family breakup, increasing numbers of children live in economic insecurity and disadvantage, including fragile and unstable family households.
O
O.S.Luke
Guest
So we give into the goverment on everything? Where’s the line drawn?
Or, in all likelihood, they can get an annulment from the Catholic Church.
Nor is there a gentle way to say that in practice, the Catholic Church dresses up the unscriptural word “divorce” and rationalizes it by calling it an “annulment.” Teaching must exist in practice, else it becomes a “do as I say, not as I do” faith which is bankrupt morally and makes a mockery of the Magisterium and Church teaching.
And, in the case of the Catholic Church, how a bible- and tradition-based Church can fall victim to societal pressure. No one is immune.
I think you’ve just hit upon the heart of this thread (bold print mine).
You’ll get no disagreement from me that divorce and remarriage contradicts scripture. I see several flaws with your thinking:
- You’ve tried to paint all Protestants with one stroke. For one, not all Protestants are adherants of sola scriptura, and even those who are don’t operate from the same definition that some (not all) Catholics typically attach to them. From my own Anglican/Methodist background, we see scripture, tradition, reason, and experience as tools of the faith and informers of doctrine, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
- It seems like you’re trying to use an eye-for-an-eye mentality in defending your point (and faith) against those who would attack Catholicism. I would suggest that this is at best a dishonest reason for posting. For goodness sake, don’t sink to the level of Catholic-bashing bigots in tit-for-tat.
- Where is the Kingdom of God profited in your above premise? Are you for Christendom and the cause of Christ, and are you willing to pit yourself against followers of Christ - seperated brethern, but brethern nonetheless?
O+
K
Kirane
Guest
It doesn’t matter whether it is an annulment or a divorce, the family unit is broken in either case, and anyway, the parents have to get a divorce before the tribunal will grant the annulment.
See:
unitedfamilies.org/divorce.asp
Mounting evidence in social science journals demonstrates that the devastating physical, emotional and financial effects that divorce has on children can last well into adulthood and affect future generations.Study after study shows that children from stable family environments have better lifelong health outcomes than children who reside in alternative family situations. That does not mean that a child coming from broken home or single-parent situation cannot turn out to be a healthy, well-adjusted, contributing member of society. But the probabilities are very clear in terms of the overall spectrum.
Divorce changes the very nature of childhood. Divorce can sever the crucial bond between a child and one or both of his or her parents. And tragically, divorce has brought about a mass exodus of fathers away from close association with their children. After divorce, parental time and money invested in their children is greatly diminished. Children receive less time and attention from parents because it is now being directed towards establishing new patterns of living which may include a new spouse and/or step-family. Spending time between multiple, unstable households, children are forced to deal with a new set of problems.
Divorce disrupts a child’s relationship with a parent and often creates unresolved feelings of loss and grief that are not shared by the other parent. Divorce is a different experience for children and adults because the children lose something that is fundamental to their development — the family structure. The family comprises the scaffolding upon which children mount successive developmental stages, from infancy to adolescence. It supports their psychological, physical, and emotional ascent into maturity. When that structure collapses, the child is left impoverished, both economically and emotionally.
K
Kirane
Guest
No that is not the reason why I say it is a play on words. The definitions of divorce and annulment may differ, but the end result is exactly the same. There is no difference at all in the real world as to the end result. In both cases the couple go through a marriage ceremony, and then after a certain amount of time spent together as husband and wife, one or both decide that they want out of the marriage and apply to break the family unit. The application of the breakup is in one case via the process of diovrce, and in another case it is via the process of annulment. After the breakup has been validated (either the divorce or the annulment), the couple who were previously thought to be married are now free to leave each other and to start a new marriage with a different person. So the results of a divorce or of an annulment are excatly the same in terms of what has happened in the real world. It is only the words that are used to describe on paper the what has happened. And the children of the family will not distinguish between the two cases, because the effects of either a divorce or of an annulment are exactly the same for them in either case.
So it is poppycock to say that there is a dime’s worth of difference between what happens in the real world and real life situation when a divorce is granted versus when an annulment is granted.
And also, it should be pointed out that the number of family breakups experienced by Catholics has exploded by a factor greater than that of any other Church since Vatican II. If the Catholic Church is so concerned about family breakups, why doesn’t it do something about the scandalous annulment and divorce situation in its own Church?
B
blackbelt
Guest
the church from what the bible tells me is body of belivers all over the world Catholisim is only a denomation.
J
john_ennis
Guest
O.S. Luke:
But that wasn’t this thread.
This thread was about whether it’s a tradition of men to teach that divorce and remarriage are anything other than adultery (since Matthew says that they are).
As often happens, members of Protestant denominations don’t directly answer that question, but say that the Catholic Church is doing basically the same as the churches which allow divorce and remarriage.
And, to paraphrase one of our posters, we’re then saying “Do as I say not as I do.”
Do any one of you really mean to say, though, that actions and teaching go hand in hand? If, say, it were discovered that one of the Gospel writers actually lived a life contrary to what he wrote in the Gospel, would you then say his Gospel teachings are no longer valid?
Catholics believe the Church’s teaching is valid even if individual actions do not follow the teaching.
Nowhere in Catholic teaching is a legitimate marriage said to be dissolvable. Consistently, the Church has taught that a remarriage is adultery.
That is what Catholics cherish–the teaching. It is valid, as evidenced by it’s utter agreement with Scripture.
That is and always was Eden’s purpose for this post.
Now, do any other faith traditions adhere to the same unflinching teaching regarding divorce/remarriage?
Peace.
John
Eden’s reason for posting has been ignored in a good number of posts. The issue of whether the Catholic Church’s practice of granting of annulments has been abused, or has become “Catholic Divorce” would indeed make for an interesting and informative thread.So we give into the goverment on everything? Where’s the line drawn?
Or, in all likelihood, they can get an annulment from the Catholic Church.
Nor is there a gentle way to say that in practice, the Catholic Church dresses up the unscriptural word “divorce” and rationalizes it by calling it an “annulment.” Teaching must exist in practice, else it becomes a “do as I say, not as I do” faith which is bankrupt morally and makes a mockery of the Magisterium and Church teaching.
And, in the case of the Catholic Church, how a bible- and tradition-based Church can fall victim to societal pressure. No one is immune.
I think you’ve just hit upon the heart of this thread (bold print mine).
You’ll get no disagreement from me that divorce and remarriage contradicts scripture. I see several flaws with your thinking:
The “end of the story” is that divorce and many annulments in practice saddens God and is sinful to the intent of marriage. The sooner we confess those sins, the better.
- You’ve tried to paint all Protestants with one stroke. For one, not all Protestants are adherants of sola scriptura, and even those who are don’t operate from the same definition that some (not all) Catholics typically attach to them. From my own Anglican/Methodist background, we see scripture, tradition, reason, and experience as tools of the faith and informers of doctrine, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
- It seems like you’re trying to use an eye-for-an-eye mentality in defending your point (and faith) against those who would attack Catholicism. I would suggest that this is at best a dishonest reason for posting. For goodness sake, don’t sink to the level of Catholic-bashing bigots in tit-for-tat.
- Where is the Kingdom of God profited in your above premise? Are you for Christendom and the cause of Christ, and are you willing to pit yourself against followers of Christ - seperated brethern, but brethern nonetheless?
O+
But that wasn’t this thread.
This thread was about whether it’s a tradition of men to teach that divorce and remarriage are anything other than adultery (since Matthew says that they are).
As often happens, members of Protestant denominations don’t directly answer that question, but say that the Catholic Church is doing basically the same as the churches which allow divorce and remarriage.
And, to paraphrase one of our posters, we’re then saying “Do as I say not as I do.”
Do any one of you really mean to say, though, that actions and teaching go hand in hand? If, say, it were discovered that one of the Gospel writers actually lived a life contrary to what he wrote in the Gospel, would you then say his Gospel teachings are no longer valid?
Catholics believe the Church’s teaching is valid even if individual actions do not follow the teaching.
Nowhere in Catholic teaching is a legitimate marriage said to be dissolvable. Consistently, the Church has taught that a remarriage is adultery.
That is what Catholics cherish–the teaching. It is valid, as evidenced by it’s utter agreement with Scripture.
That is and always was Eden’s purpose for this post.
Now, do any other faith traditions adhere to the same unflinching teaching regarding divorce/remarriage?
Peace.
John
O
O.S.Luke
Guest
john ennis:
Another generalization?
O+
And, as often happens, you read what you wanted to hear. I don’t see how I could have answered the above question any more plainly than the last sentence in my post.
Another generalization?
O+
K
Kirane
Guest
To see the damage and hurt suffered by the innocent children involved in family breakups by either divorce or annulment you might want to take a look at the book: “The Unexpected Legacy of Divorce” by Judith Wallerstein: “But its in adulthood that children of
divorce suffer the most. The impact of divorce hits them most cruelly
as they go in search of love, sexual intimacy, and commitment. Their
lack of inner images of a man and a woman in a stable relationship and
their memories of their parents’ failure to sustain the marriage badly
hobbles their search, leading them to heartbreak and even
despair.”
This occurs in family breakups - whether the family unit is broken by divorce or by annulment, it makes no difference to the children involved, so you might try to do something about the exp;losiopns in annulments which have occurred in the RCC at a rate unheard of in any other Chuirch
B
blackbelt
Guest
Well what ever bibical view we see lets not forget including myself that we all serve the same Father Son and Holy Spirit
God bless you all
God bless you all
S
sandusky
Guest
Kay Cee:
Kay Cee:
It happens at times, that such a one will come from another church to our church. If we are made aware of that, we do come to that person, and encourage a return to their previous church to deal with their situation. If they will not do that, then we consider that person to still be unrepentant, and they are put out of the church.
Unfortunately, Mt 18 discipline is not widely practiced anymore, but it is at my church, and that to maintain the purity of the body. Interestingly, I was just looking at statistics concerning this, and in the past 20 years, we have done this type of discipline 135 times, for various reasons. The whole goal of that discipline is restoration through repentance; sadly, most are stiff-necked and do not repent, though a few have, and they are joyfully welcomed back into the fold.
Kay Cee:
Kay Cee:
Kay Cee:
You say:
The Lord says:
Matthew 19:9
*9 “And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife *[or her husband], *except for immorality, and marries another woman *[or man] [that one] commits adultery.”
A partner’s immorality is grounds for divorce.
It’s my pleasure, and thank you for thoughtfully reading what I have posted.
Kay Cee:
No. Again, the body is told of the unrepentant party’s sin, and he or she has usually stopped attending the church, by their own choice, well before that happens not wanting to bear their shame; the unrepentant party will not be remarried in my church; however, if he or she goes to another church, there is not much that we can do. We will notify the church that he or she is attending, if we know that they are attending another church, but even then, we cannot force the other pastor to abide by our position. We would hope that he would, but there is no assurance that he will.
It happens at times, that such a one will come from another church to our church. If we are made aware of that, we do come to that person, and encourage a return to their previous church to deal with their situation. If they will not do that, then we consider that person to still be unrepentant, and they are put out of the church.
Unfortunately, Mt 18 discipline is not widely practiced anymore, but it is at my church, and that to maintain the purity of the body. Interestingly, I was just looking at statistics concerning this, and in the past 20 years, we have done this type of discipline 135 times, for various reasons. The whole goal of that discipline is restoration through repentance; sadly, most are stiff-necked and do not repent, though a few have, and they are joyfully welcomed back into the fold.
Kay Cee:
By the time someone is put out of the church, they have usually left on their own, and in so doing they remove themselves from our authority. If they are remarried in another church, there is not much that we can do. The consequences of such actions are fully explained in advance of their being put out.
Kay Cee:
If one, or the other has committed adultery, then there is no remarriage prohibition. I understand that you do not see it that way, but scripturally, in that situation, there is no prohibition. Adultery is the biblical grounds for divorce that Christ lists; Paul lists others. As Moses did, so Paul also permits divorce, and Paul gives no admonition against remarriage. Read all of 1 Cor 7 thoughtfully. Paul does not put the body under further bondage.
Kay Cee:
What removes your responsibility from the vow is your husband’s unfaithfulness. In that situation, if the offended party wants to honor the vow that they made, I would certainly not discourage that. But I would inform them that the “unchaste” actions of their partner certainly freed them from that vow.
You say:
IMHO, according to Mt 18, that one is a Gentile and a Tax-Collector. Chesteron’s sweeping generalization is not true of every non-Catholic Church, and I am certain he knew that when he made that statement.
The Lord says:
Matthew 19:9
*9 “And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife *[or her husband], *except for immorality, and marries another woman *[or man] [that one] commits adultery.”
A partner’s immorality is grounds for divorce.
J
john_ennis
Guest
O.S. Luke:
(Correction: I do have to apologize–you did indeed state clearly your position on the wrongness of divorce and remarriage.)
I was trying to say that one should not refuse to admit that the Catholic Church’s teaching on divorce/remarriage has been consistent. By changing the argument to one about how well the Church (especially in America) has followed its own teaching…well that’s just avoiding the question.
Peace.
John
Believe me, I didn’t “want to hear” it at all. If I’ve misinterpreted you, please tell me precisely how.
(Correction: I do have to apologize–you did indeed state clearly your position on the wrongness of divorce and remarriage.)
I was trying to say that one should not refuse to admit that the Catholic Church’s teaching on divorce/remarriage has been consistent. By changing the argument to one about how well the Church (especially in America) has followed its own teaching…well that’s just avoiding the question.
Peace.
John
J
john_ennis
Guest
Amen, Blackbelt. Thank you for reminding us what’s most basic and important.
Peace.
John
S
sandusky
Guest
That is a pity, Eden, as I do not recall saying anything like that.
You are mistaken, as I have shown. Porneia is a biblical grounds for divorce, as well as the instructions from Paul (1 Cor 7), who gives no negative admonition against remarriage, and the instruction of Mt 18.
Another ill-informed caricature. We are not interested in retaining members, but we are interested in maintaining purity, and if we do that, God will cause the growth (1 Cor 3:7), and I assure you that He has done so with us.
E
Eden
Guest
Catholicism is not a denomination. It is His Church. “Denominations” are an invention of men.
E
Eden
Guest
You continue to state that porneia includes adultery. I have already told you that you are mistaken as the word for adultery is “moicheia”.
Allowing divorce and remarriage maintains purity?
Unfortunately, growth is not an indicator that you are correct. Is the fact that Islam is growing or that secularism is growing an indicator of purity and truth?
K
Kirane
Guest
john ennis:
In the case of either Protestant divorce or Catholic annulment, the couple go through a marriage ceremony, and then after a certain amount of time spent together as husband and wife, one or both decide that they want out of the marriage and apply to break the family unit. The application of the breakup is in one case via the process of divorce, and in another case it is via the process of annulment. After the breakup has been validated (either the divorce or the annulment), the couple who were previously thought to be married are now free to leave each other and to start a new marriage with a different person. So the results of a divorce or of an annulment are exactly the same in terms of what has happened in the real world. It is only the words that are used to describe on paper the what has happened. And the children of the family will not distinguish between the two cases, because the effects of either a divorce or of an annulment are exactly the same for them in either case.
The Catholic teaching on divorce is a fiction because the explosion in the breakup of the family unit has hit the Catholic Church harder than any other Church since Vatican II. The Catholic Church has created a loophole big enough to drive a truck through - the loophole of annulments. It is complete poppycock to say that there is any difference at all in the real world between an annulment and a divorce. On paper a fiction is created that there never was a marriage in the first place and thereby the Church sanctimoniously proclaims that “Nowhere in Catholic teaching is a legitimate marriage said to be dissolvable.” But a fictitious loophole has been created by the lawyers of the the Church tribunals so that just about any marriage can be annulled on the grounds of defective consent. As I said before:
In the case of either Protestant divorce or Catholic annulment, the couple go through a marriage ceremony, and then after a certain amount of time spent together as husband and wife, one or both decide that they want out of the marriage and apply to break the family unit. The application of the breakup is in one case via the process of divorce, and in another case it is via the process of annulment. After the breakup has been validated (either the divorce or the annulment), the couple who were previously thought to be married are now free to leave each other and to start a new marriage with a different person. So the results of a divorce or of an annulment are exactly the same in terms of what has happened in the real world. It is only the words that are used to describe on paper the what has happened. And the children of the family will not distinguish between the two cases, because the effects of either a divorce or of an annulment are exactly the same for them in either case.
- Status