Two more cardinals back Communion for divorced and remarried

[1newcatholic]

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.

… So “no one can change Jesus’ teaching against divorce and remarriage in the Bible” (repeated like a chant on this and other threads) BUT “We don’t get our doctrines about divorce and remarriage from the Bible”…

Ugh.

Tighten up your double standards guys–either the Church bases its teachings about divorce and remarriage on Jesus and the Bible OR it bases it on the authority of the Magisterium BUT you can’t have an ironclad rule based on a literal reading of isolated proof-text scriptures AND a general appeal to the body of Catholic tradition when it suits you.

 

[PRmerger]

… So “no one can change Jesus’ teaching against divorce and remarriage in the Bible” (repeated like a chant on this and other threads) BUT “We don’t get our doctrines about divorce and remarriage from the Bible”…

Ugh.

Tighten up your double standards guys–either the Church bases its teachings about divorce and remarriage on Jesus and the Bible OR it bases it on the authority of the Magisterium BUT you can’t have an ironclad rule based on a literal reading of isolated proof-text scriptures AND a general appeal to the body of Catholic tradition when it suits you.

I understand it can be confusing.

But you need to understand where the CC gets her teachings.

What is your understanding regarding this?

 

[LongingSoul]

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.

The Catechism conveys it this way…

"II. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRADITION AND SACRED SCRIPTURE

**One common source. **. .

80 "Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together, and communicate one with the other. For both of them, flowing out from the same divine well-spring, come together in some fashion to form one thing, and move towards the same goal."40 Each of them makes present and fruitful in the Church the mystery of Christ, who promised to remain with his own “always, to the close of the age”.41

. . . two distinct modes of transmission

**81 **"Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit."42

"And [Holy] Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching."43

**82 **As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, "does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence."44 …

The Magisterium of the Church

85 "The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ."47 This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.

**86 **"Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it. At the divine command and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication and expounds it faithfully. All that it proposes for belief as being divinely revealed is drawn from this single deposit of faith."48

**87 **Mindful of Christ’s words to his apostles: “He who hears you, hears me”,49 the faithful receive with docility the teachings and directives that their pastors give them in different forms."
​

 

[PRmerger]

The Catechism conveys it this way…

"II. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRADITION AND SACRED SCRIPTURE

**One common source. **. .

80 "Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together, and communicate one with the other. For both of them, flowing out from the same divine well-spring, come together in some fashion to form one thing, and move towards the same goal."40 Each of them makes present and fruitful in the Church the mystery of Christ, who promised to remain with his own “always, to the close of the age”.41

. . . two distinct modes of transmission

**81 **"Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit."42

"And [Holy] Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching."43

**82 **As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, "does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence."44 …

The Magisterium of the Church

85 "The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ."47 This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.

**86 **"Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it. At the divine command and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication and expounds it faithfully. All that it proposes for belief as being divinely revealed is drawn from this single deposit of faith."48

**87 **Mindful of Christ’s words to his apostles: “He who hears you, hears me”,49 the faithful receive with docility the teachings and directives that their pastors give them in different forms."
​

Amen!

 

[PRmerger]

.Tighten up your double standards guys–either the Church bases its teachings about divorce and remarriage on Jesus and the Bible OR it bases it on the authority of the Magisterium BUT you can’t have an ironclad rule based on a literal reading of isolated proof-text scriptures AND a general appeal to the body of Catholic tradition when it suits you.

You seem to have a little bit of ignorance about your new Catholic faith.

So it is good for you to be here.

All of our teachings come from Jesus, through His Apostles, to the Church.

You left that out as a choice.

They do not come from the Bible.

As our Catechism says, we are NOT a religion of the Book.

We do not distill our doctrines from a book, no matter how holy.

Rather, the Bible reflects the teachings of the Apostles.

 

[ProVobis]

Tighten up your double standards guys–either the Church bases its teachings about divorce and remarriage on Jesus and the Bible OR it bases it on the authority of the Magisterium BUT you can’t have an ironclad rule based on a literal reading of isolated proof-text scriptures AND a general appeal to the body of Catholic tradition when it suits you.

To put it in simple terms, the Church wrote the New Testament and compiled the Old Testament. Double standard here is a stretch.

 

[JimG]

Where in the bible are annulments mentioned?

Annulments are not mentioned in the bible. But the permanence of marriage is. So what is the implication here? Should the Church categorically quit granting annulments? If it did, that would certainly not help the situation that many people find themselves in.

 

[1newcatholic]

You seem to have a little bit of ignorance about your new Catholic faith.

So it is good for you to be here.

All of our teachings come from Jesus, through His Apostles, to the Church.

You left that out as a choice.

They do not come from the Bible.

As our Catechism says, we are NOT a religion of the Book.

We do not distill our doctrines from a book, no matter how holy.

Rather, the Bible reflects the teachings of the Apostles.

“The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.”

So the living Magisterium is fully invested with the authority of Jesus Christ to interpret scripture for the faithful…

… until the faithful decide that they will interpret the words of Jesus for themselves over against the Magisterium…? Because that’s the double standard I’m talking about. You don’t get to tell the Magisterium what Jesus meant–in fact it goes the other way around.

So if the Magisterium arrives at a conclusion you hate about a traditional rule you cherish…

… do you obey or do you Protest?

 

[PRmerger]

“The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.”

So the living Magisterium is fully invested with the authority of Jesus Christ to interpret scripture for the faithful…

… until the faithful decide that they will interpret the words of Jesus for themselves over against the Magisterium…? Because that’s the double standard I’m talking about

Has there been a Catholic here who has proposed that she gets to interpret the words of Jesus for herself over the Magisterium?



I certainly haven’t proposed that.

. You don’t get to tell the Magisterium what Jesus meant–in fact it goes the other way around.

Very Catholic, this!

So if the Magisterium arrives at a conclusion you hate about a traditional rule you cherish…

… do you obey or do you Protest?

I certainly don’t protest. What about you?

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

"
So if the Magisterium arrives at a conclusion you hate about a traditional rule you cherish…

… do you obey or do you Protest?

The Magisterim has arrived at TONS of conclusions I may personally not like or understand. Yet I obey and I trust because it is the one True Faith. It does not dogmatically error. BUT if that were shown to be false. If the Church contradicted the faith or God Himself, I would have no choice but to not follow a false Church. Thankfully we have God’s promise that this will not happen. Which is why all the hubub is academic. Because the Church cannot do what the media and the culture and even some Catholics on this thread think She can. What I do question, and I think others do as well is if this is the message that the world needs right now in regards to marriage. I can certainly question the direction and emphasis this has gone. I can do that with a clear conscience with access to the sacraments. Sacraments that others seem to not understand.

 

[1newcatholic]

Has there been a Catholic here who has proposed that she gets to interpret the words of Jesus for herself over the Magisterium?

…

I certainly don’t protest. What about you?

Whatever personal opinions or questions I have, I defer to the teachers of the Church. Even if I hypothetically thought that it would probably be okay to make some kind of adjustment for people from families in crisis, I would obviously still accept the judgment of the church. I have very low expectation that something dramatic will happen in the immediate future, but I am glad that there are public figures in the Church saying positive things about marriage. I think when my kids and their pastors reflect on the conversation we’re having now, they will hear more than one voice. That’s enough for me.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Whatever personal opinions or questions I have, I defer to the teachers of the Church. Even if I hypothetically thought that it would probably be okay to make some kind of adjustment for people from families in crisis, I would obviously still accept the judgment of the church. I have very low expectation that something dramatic will happen in the immediate future, but I am glad that there are public figures in the Church saying positive things about marriage. I think when my kids and their pastors reflect on the conversation we’re having now, they will hear more than one voice. That’s enough for me.

Why should the Church speak with many voices. I hope they hear one voice and that voice proclaims God’s Truth.

 

[PRmerger]

Whatever personal opinions or questions I have, I defer to the teachers of the Church. Even if I hypothetically thought that it would probably be okay to make some kind of adjustment for people from families in crisis, I would obviously still accept the judgment of the church. I have very low expectation that something dramatic will happen in the immediate future, but I am glad that there are public figures in the Church saying positive things about marriage. I think when my kids and their pastors reflect on the conversation we’re having now, they will hear more than one voice. That’s enough for me.

I’m not sure how this follows from our discussion.

Are you perhaps confusing me with another poster, because your posts seem to be arguing with me, yet I can’t figure out what, exactly, you’re responding to in my posts, and if you’re agreeing with me or objecting to something I’ve proposed?

 

[sttcatherinefan]

Annulments are not mentioned in the bible. But the permanence of marriage is. So what is the implication here? Should the Church categorically quit granting annulments? If it did, that would certainly not help the situation that many people find themselves in.

I think that what is being discussed is the hypocrisy associated with arguing that people cannot divorce and remarry because of Jesus’ words in the Gospel and then supporting a rather wide definition of annulments. If you want to go by Jesus’ exact words in the Gospel, then no one should be getting an annulment unless someone is force marched down the aisle or it is a situation like with Jacob where he is tricked into marrying the wrong girl. If you do agree with the wide criteria for annulments, then what is being discussed isn’t that different from that criteria. It just strikes me as being a more humane process.

 

[TEPO]

You seem to have a little bit of ignorance…

Lets practice what we preach. The topic please.

 

[TEPO]

My only question is why did jesus christ allow multiple wives under mosaic law after adam and eve represented true marriage between one man and one woman without going to hell accordi g to the law.

i didnt realise unrepentant sinners were allowed in heaven.

 

[TEPO]

Perhaps a remarried catholic could fall into the same category as a OT jew with two spouses. In essence, a divorced and remarried Catholic man who is sorry for his sins could be considered as having two wives and still recieve communion.

…now let the attack begin.

 

[TEPO]

Perhaps a remarried catholic could fall into the same category as a OT jew with two spouses. In essence, a divorced and remarried Catholic man who is sorry for his sins could be considered as having two wives and still recieve communion.

…now let the attack begin.

What else could the cardinals be thinking?

 

[Origen52]

I can think of exactly One.

But to be fair, he was also truly God.

 

[1newcatholic]

The Magisterim has arrived at TONS of conclusions I may personally not like or understand. Yet I obey and I trust because it is the one True Faith. It does not dogmatically error. BUT if that were shown to be false. If the Church contradicted the faith or God Himself, I would have no choice but to not follow a false Church. Thankfully we have God’s promise that this will not happen. Which is why all the hubub is academic. Because the Church cannot do what the media and the culture and even some Catholics on this thread think She can. What I do question, and I think others do as well is if this is the message that the world needs right now in regards to marriage. I can certainly question the direction and emphasis this has gone. I can do that with a clear conscience with access to the sacraments. Sacraments that others seem to not understand.

Maybe you do have a unique personal understanding of the mysteries of the Eucharistic sacraments.

I agree that its not likely that a dramatic change is likely–I’m just happy the issues are at least being discussed. Perhaps I’m am just more reluctant than you are to make declarations about what the Church can and cannot do.

I’m not sure how this follows from our discussion.

Are you perhaps confusing me with another poster, because your posts seem to be arguing with me, yet I can’t figure out what, exactly, you’re responding to in my posts, and if you’re agreeing with me or objecting to something I’ve proposed?

My general sense of the conversation is that you have repeatedly asserted that the Church cannot do X, and I have tried to politely drive home the point that we don’t get to tell the leaders of the church what to do–we can certainly voice our opinions, but the lines we laypeople draw in the sand are kind of meaningless.