T
TEPO
Guest
You see what happens to people when you turn your back to them? The same goes for individuals as for the Church.
- Status
L
LongingSoul
Guest
I’m happy to accept what the Church comes up with out of these synod discussions regarding family issues. I don’t think it is at all admirable to characterise people taking this stance as “advocating for unrepentant sexual sinners to be admitted to communion”. Prior to the synod, I had known about this area of concern among the pastoral clergy, but had never ‘advocated for change’ myself. My cue is taken from the Church herself. In fact Pope Francis who wants these issues aired and examined for the light of the Holy Spirit to comfort or heal. People are genuinely suffering and it is natural for others to desire the very best that God has to give to His suffering people. Theology like all the other academic disciplines, is ever evolving from age to age with the goal of revealing the Truth about God to the contemporary world. Why do you feel the need to prevent this Truth seeking by the Church? Do you have such little faith in the Church as guided by the Holy Spirit to be a sound guide and parent in faith to us? This process has been part of the Church throughout its history and I feel privileged to have been part of a generation that is getting a glimpse behind the doors. Hopefully they will stay open and we can all learn to tune out the white noise of those trying to sabotage the process.
E
Ender
Guest
E
Ender
Guest
I haven’t seen a simple and direct explanation from him; do you have a link to it? What I have seen of his is an attempt to change the nature of the sin involved from the ongoing sin of adultery to the one time sin of remarriage. Is this what you’re referring to?
Ender
S
Sirach2
Guest
That is extremely judgmental and not at all what was being advocated by many in the synod. It is puzzling how you made that huge leap to characterize these people, and even more problematic to state it as though it is true.
I have read the book, and I know the position of Card. Kasper and those who agreed with him. He believed that there may be an opening (his exact terminology) for those who truly repented of the tragic mistake of their first marriage, and love God with their whole hearts, and desire to follow his will, aided with the strength of the Eucharist. He stated clearly that communion is not meant for everyone.
S
Sirach2
Guest
Read my previous post.
T
TEPO
Guest
Permission granted under special circumstances, where the Priesthood would either allow or deny a 2nd sacramental marriage without divorce being a part of the first sacramental marriage. It could be considered under the idea that children are sometimes conceived throughout multiple marriages… There then those families could be given permission to enter the Body of Christ through forgiveness for the benefit of the Children and all involved.
T
TEPO
Guest
I dont know that God would want a ‘divorced’ and ‘remarried’ person to break-up a second marriage where children are actually involved. That would suggest that it is not actually a family or that children are not actully meant to share their lives together with mother and father -but we know they are. 
…maybe the Priesthood can decide on an Individual Basis, who can or cannot be married to two people? Perhaps only Bishops could do it by sitting down ALL involved and checking for traces of potential Catholicity, whether it is possible or not and whether it is in everyones interest… This could be done on an individual basis -not a general allowance for just anyone.
…maybe the Priesthood can decide on an Individual Basis, who can or cannot be married to two people? Perhaps only Bishops could do it by sitting down ALL involved and checking for traces of potential Catholicity, whether it is possible or not and whether it is in everyones interest… This could be done on an individual basis -not a general allowance for just anyone.
H
Hoosier_Daddy
Guest
hmmmm. Well, the aspect I am speaking to is the attitude by Catholics, the Media and some on this thread that one need not repent of anything. Of course I think Kasper is wrong and I have no idea how one can repent of something but continue in the exact sin they are repenting of? The Church already has this option. How can one repent of attempting a second marriage and committing adultery and then continue to do so?
Perhaps you can explain it to me. But I stand by what I said( and it is not "the horrible “J” word) To say that this is a sexual sin, where one chooses sex over God. Like so many sins. How indeed would it differ if a homosexual couple attempted marriage and adopted children? Should they also have this option? How about incestuous marriages? Why would this option be closed to them but not to others? How is that merciful or fair?Either way you are having someone admit they had no marriage, either the adulterous one they are currently in or their valid first, second or (like my grandma) 8th.
P
ProVobis
Guest
And who’s to say they are not doing that already. Consider Catholic marriages in a growing U.S. Catholic population:
1965: 352,458
1970: 426,309
1975: 369,133
1980: 350,745
1985: 348,300
1990: 326,079
1995: 294,144
2000: 261,626
2005: 207,112
2010: 168,400
2014: 154,450
There is a decline in World Catholic marriages as well.
cara.georgetown.edu/caraservices/requestedchurchstats.html
H
Hoosier_Daddy
Guest
So we are left with figuring out what “God Wants”? Ok well, he was pretty clear about that when he elevated marriage to a sacrament.I dont know that God would want a ‘divorced’ and ‘remarried’ person to break-up a second marriage where children are actually involved. That would suggest that it is not actually a family or that children are not actully meant to share their lives together with mother and father -but we know they are.
…maybe the Priesthood can decide on an Individual Basis, who can or cannot be married to two people? Perhaps only Bishops could do it by sitting down ALL involved and checking for traces of potential Catholicity, whether it is possible or not and whether it is in everyones interest… This could be done on an individual basis -not a general allowance for just anyone.
Now, the problem I see here is one that plaugues modern Catholics and Christians of all sort. How do we know what God wants? Well, for too many it just becomes “what do I think God wants” And it is not at all funny how that seems to coincide to a libido on so many occasions.Again, what if that married family with children are two homosexual men? The children will be damaged there as well.
So do you advocate for homosexual married men with children be offered this same blind eye?Like a poster above me stated, even Kasper is advocating a repentance. A repentance would involve a couple saying they wished they had never married or had children.
Lets see where the line for that sincere repentance starts at any church.And on a personal note, why should this hypothetical couple’s mistake be afforded the same validity as my devout, Catholic marriage? Doesn’t that really demean my marriage? My sacrament and my sacrifice of living a Holy life?
J
JimG
Guest
All this is understandable, as is the desire to treat a stable second marriage with compassion. The issue which has not, as far as I can see, been addressed is this: what then is the status of the first marriage bond? Is it dissolved? Is it declared null? Is it valid? Are both marriage bonds valid simultaneously?
J
JimG
Guest
Actually, this is pretty much the way it was presented to us way back when I was in high school: if you marry, you’d better be sure to marry the right person, because you are married for life. If you divorce (civilly) you are still married for life to the first partner, and can not remarry. As a result we all took marriage quite seriously. Perhaps we ought to be going more in that direction rather in the direction of more laxity.
T
TEPO
Guest
It has to be about the Family… That has to be the main focus, nothing else.So we are left with figuring out what “God Wants”? Ok well, he was pretty clear about that when he elevated marriage to a sacrament.
The difference here is that homosexual unions are intrinsically evil. Having two sacramentally wedded wives at the same time is not an intrinsic evil.Again, what if that married family with children are two homosexual men? The children will be damaged there as well.
Matthew 20: 1 - 16
H
Hoosier_Daddy
Guest
:banghead:
T
TEPO
Guest
The Laws of the Church are not meant to be guidelines for teaching the Catholic faith. They are more like tools for applying the Catholic faith in the world.
So, why assume that the Faith itself, and Catholicity itself must change if the Canon laws change? The same principle will always apply of a marriage being between one man and one woman, because that will always be standard Catholicism. It was Gods intended plan.
So, why assume that the Faith itself, and Catholicity itself must change if the Canon laws change? The same principle will always apply of a marriage being between one man and one woman, because that will always be standard Catholicism. It was Gods intended plan.
F
FollowChrist34
Guest
At least we have an extra hour today to chat.
Hang in there buddy!
T
TEPO
Guest
A logical route to take from here, is: will the loosening of the Canon Laws help or hinder Gods plan of salvation. This is the most difficult question, ultimately, and the most important. It’s very complex because everyday people cannot answer whether it will help a few and hinder tbe majority or help the majority and hinder a few. If salvation is the goal, then how will the Holy Spirit guide the Church through this Synod on the Family?
…or is salvation not the goal of the Church on earth?
…Perhaps it’s to teach? Is there a primary, secondary, tertiary…?
T
TEPO
Guest
Im feeling a loss for sure.At least we have an extra hour today to chat.
i didnt want to be the one to take this route, but after being ignored, this became the result. Perhaps there is a larger lesson to be learned about what happens when the Church ‘ignores’…? Perhaps this synod is a detailed evaluation of that -and how the world reacts to feeling ‘left behind’.
F
FollowChrist34
Guest
From the moment I realized I believed Jesus Christ was actually the Son of God, I have not felt left behind. Downhearted on occasion, yes, confused, afraid, sad, mad, yes, I am human. But I’ve never doubted that God is love and I’ve never felt left behind. I would argue the same applies to you and everyone else, Synod, divorce, remarriage, irregular union issues aside. Tempest in a teapot in the grand scheme of things…cheers…Im feeling a loss for sure.
- Status