Two more cardinals back Communion for divorced and remarried

  • Thread starter Thread starter Vouthon
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
muffindell said:
Well I’m in eternal sin because I remarried.
Click to expand...
Eternal sin? What does that mean?
In effect I have been booted out of the RC church, I cannot receive the most important sacrament of HC, My head is hung low, sorry if I don’t fit in the club through no fault of my own
Click to expand...
How is it that you see this as “through no fault of your own”?

And, with all due respect, you don’t seem to be hanging your head low. You seem to be proclaiming that what you have done is not a sin at all.

Do you think that these verses in Scripture are made up?

I say to you,* whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery.”–Matthew 19:9

He said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”–Mark 10:11
I want no part of a church that cannot see past this huge problem that effects so many lives.
Click to expand...
What you are saying is that you want no part of Christ and His very hard teaching.

You want to find a church that conforms to your own tastes and likes.
 
PRmerger you are so holier than thou, I agree with muffinndell, although im not in that situation , the church has alienated many catholics.
 
Burdock said:
PRmerger you are so holier than thou, I agree with muffinndell, although im not in that situation , the church has alienated many catholics.
Click to expand...
There is no need to name call. We are not holier than though. We do strive however to be Holy. And the Church guides that. But do you really think that in all of history, now, when marriage has been trampled on and is under attack that the right answer so as not to alienate Catholics is to further weaken it?

Those who commit adultery do so of their own choice. I find it somewhat pretentious that they then demand God conform and accept their sin. Where is the forgiveness? Where is the repentance? All I see is people choosing against God for sex.🤷
 
Im talking about those who are the INNOCENT party, why b on earth should they be denied communion if they remarry.
 
Burdock said:
Im talking about those who are the INNOCENT party, why b on earth should they be denied communion if they remarry.
Click to expand...
IF they remarry? Why would they? Don’t they too feel that even though the other party left and abandoned them that their marriage meant something? Or that the next one should mean more than we have a paper that says we can sleep together without sin?

Marriage has to be more than just a broken promise…

I am suprised (though not really given the state of marriage in today’s society) that the argument is not “mercy” which is Kaspers argument, but rather, no sin at all. Or Sin, but no repentance and/or consequence. The pride of those who seem to think that their choices have no meaning shocks me.
 
muffindell said:
Well I’m in eternal sin because I remarried. In effect I have been booted out of the RC church, I cannot receive the most important sacrament of HC, My head is hung low, sorry if I don’t fit in the club through no fault of my own and ultimately in the search for love, for that I do not seek forgiveness. Alas, at least I am still Christian and can hold my head up high. I want no part of a church that cannot see past this huge problem that effects so many lives.
Click to expand...
Not to be rude but what about me? What about those of us who are validly married and believe in what the Church has taught? What about those of us who hold the Eucharist to be the Body of God Almighty and feel it is worthy of cleanliness and respect? What of those of us who took vows in front of God and His Church and have held on to the meaning of “Sacrament” as something sacred? What of us who will be hurt, scandalized and harmed for the “mercy” of those who have gone outside of the fold. Like I posted earlier. The Shepard leaves the 99 for the 1. But at what point does the Shepard leave the 99 at risk of scandal and the wolves of the world. The wolves by the way, who are howling so loud that we cannot even define marriage as between one man and one woman. Now not only are we debating homosexual unions, but also adulterous ones as well. So not only can we not define marriage as one MAN and one WOMAN, we are now to doubt ONE man and ONE woman?

No, it cannot be, not in this day and age when we need the clarity and Truth of Jesus in our world, we do not need the confusion and lies of the world…

This is where the Church must see that She will lose souls on both sides if radical changes are decided upon. Your soul, and mine hang in the balance. And our eyes should be on Christ.
 
Hoosier_Daddy said:
IF they remarry? Why would they? Don’t they too feel that even though the other party left and abandoned them that their marriage meant something? Or that the next one should mean more than we have a paper that says we can sleep together without sin?

Marriage has to be more than just a broken promise…

I am suprised (though not really given the state of marriage in today’s society) that the argument is not “mercy” which is Kaspers argument, but rather, no sin at all. Or Sin, but no repentance and/or consequence. The pride of those who seem to think that their choices have no meaning shocks me.
Click to expand...
The question is, what is real? There are significant numbers of pastoral clergy who’ve felt a strong sense that this particular group ie the remarried who have embraced the faith and matured in it in the environment of their 2nd marriage… may be falling through the cracks of a policy designed to safeguard the important truths of Christian marriage. Their question is how can we address these marriages that in all ways except for this one anomaly, witness to faith and love.

Pope Benedict back in the 90’s, asked the question that perhaps there is something in the first marriage that could be looked at regarding the phenomenon of celebrating the sacrament without faith. In our modern world where Catholics are not nurtured within the tribal bosom of Catholic community but are being fed ‘truths’ from many different sources outside the Church… it is conceivable that while all looks good on the outside, the participants may not be fully grasping the basic ideals of sacramental marriage.

The Church has to look at what is real… not just what is legal. That strong sense that this particular phenomenon is a thorn in flesh of Catholic marriage meaning, makes it important to at least look for a more thorough theological explanation of why this suffering must exist for some people. I feel really touched by this group as well. I cannot imagine not being able to receive communion for the entirety of marriage. My own marriage has been a trial, but I’m able to fully value that marriage is more than just your happiness, only by virtue of my solid Catholic upbringing and can be sustained by the sacraments in this life as a great comfort. I feel deeply sorry for those who didn’t have the same early nurturing in faith and have found themselves trapped by sins that have long since been regretted.
 
Burdock said:
PRmerger you are so holier than thou, I agree with muffinndell, although im not in that situation , the church has alienated many catholics.
Click to expand...
Careful, Burdock. It is good for you to be here and in dialogue with knowledgeable Catholics.

It would be a shame for you to be banned.

Try to make the arguments not personal, but rather address the concepts.

I notice that no one has been able to refute the fact that Jesus says divorce and re-marriage is adultery.

That’s not my rule.

I would really love it if my friends who married losers could start over with their new sweethearts.

But, alas, that’s not my law. I have to subscribe to what Christ said.

Not make up laws that are more likeable.
 
Burdock said:
Im talking about those who are the INNOCENT party, why b on earth should they be denied communion if they remarry.
Click to expand...
Because THERE IS NO MENTION OF THE INNOCENT PARTY being able to re-marry in Jesus’ law.

Much as I would like it to be that way…I can’t change what Jesus decreed.
 
Hoosier_Daddy said:
I am suprised (though not really given the state of marriage in today’s society) that the argument is not “mercy” which is Kaspers argument, but rather, no sin at all. Or Sin, but no repentance and/or consequence. The pride of those who seem to think that their choices have no meaning shocks me.
Click to expand...
Yes. It is astonishing how the paradigm has changed. Quite sinister, really.

No one acknowledges that divorce and re-marriage is a sin. Rather, it is something that ought to be celebrated and proudly proclaimed!

Was this something that was part of the culture 1000 years ago, I wonder? Did anyone who was Catholic demand that she could re-marry her new lover because, hey, God wouldn’t care if she commits adultery, as long as this new sweetheart makes her happy.
 
PRmerger said:
I notice that no one has been able to refute the fact that Jesus says divorce and re-marriage is adultery.
Click to expand...
Jesus didn’t go into the nuances that constitute annulment so that has been given the Church to define from age to age. The average Joe is not that omnipotent or omniscient to be able to judge the quality of a first marriage and definitiverly accuse individuals of adultery. That is for the Church to determine through due process and God in heaven to judge ultimately.
 
I understand the naysayers in this discussion but I really don’t think the church is suddenly going to say Jesus teaching is nullified, they just aim to reach out to the divorced and remarried. In the end we all will stand in judgement before the Lord, we all have sins, if divorce and remarriage is not one of yours be happy, your scale may be lighter than others.
 
PRmerger said:
Yes. It is astonishing how the paradigm has changed. Quite sinister, really.

No one acknowledges that divorce and re-marriage is a sin. Rather, it is something that ought to be celebrated and proudly proclaimed!

Was this something that was part of the culture 1000 years ago, I wonder? Did anyone who was Catholic demand that she could re-marry her new lover because, hey, God wouldn’t care if she commits adultery, as long as this new sweetheart makes her happy.
Click to expand...
To be fair, this doesn’t define the problem that is being addressed by the synod discussions. They are talking about people who’ve divorced, remarried, begun families and in the environment of loving marriage and community of family, have experienced the conversion of faith that’s enabled a proper understanding of the sacrament of marriage. There is absolutely no possibility of a general rule change regarding all divorced and remarrieds and that has been catagorically stated numerous times. The discussion is specifically addressing the suffering of those whose subsequent maturity in faith puts them in a painfully unresolvable situation for the entirity of the married life.
 
LongingSoul said:
Jesus didn’t go into the nuances that constitute annulment so that has been given the Church to define from age to age. The average Joe is not that omnipotent or omniscient to be able to judge the quality of a first marriage and definitiverly accuse individuals of adultery. That is for the Church to determine through due process and God in heaven to judge ultimately.
Click to expand...
Amen!

The Church, meaning the laity as well as the ordained, presumes that all first marriages are valid, until proven otherwise.
 
OraLabora said:
True but indissoluble marriage is itself based on a Bible verse.
Click to expand...
No. The Catholic Church does not glean its doctrines from a book, no matter how holy.

Rather, the Bible reflects the teachings of the Church that were given once for all to the saints.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top