Which Church teachings do you struggle to accept?

  • Thread starter Thread starter kozlosap
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I struggle to accept original sin (what is more innocent than a newborn?) and hell (I believe in it, but I just dont want to think of people suffering there, especially not those we love or those who have contributed to making our world a better place.) I had a young friend die and he was gay. I know what an amazing person he was and the kindness he showed others. I want to see him again someday. I know I am no better than him, you know? However, I know I am undercatechised (is that a word?) and so I tell myself that it will make sense in the future - Now we see through a glass darkly and all that.
 
Natural family planning, it uses natural means like abstinence during fertile periods instead of abc. The Church promotes nfp.
Did you understand the part where she said her husband had a vasectomy? Why should she learn about nfp if one of them has been surgically sterilized?
 
Okay, so I’m not a Catholic (although it’s looking like I might convert in the near future) but it’s not what they did say, but what that didn’t say, and that would be clear instructions on lying.

Now I understand that the general rule is “lying is wrong”, but that doesn’t really help in hypothetical situations like Nazis looking for Jews or ISIS looking for Christians and you have to make a choice on what to tell them.

Some people say that they don’t have a right to the truth, so you don’t have to tell them it. Some people say to use mental reservation, which seems like an elaborate way of justifying a lie. Some people say to tell them the truth in such a way that they are deceived (“Jews? That would be crazy if there were Jews in my house!”), which seems like your trying to find a loophole rather than following the spirit and letter of the law. Some people say to remain silent, and others say to just tell the truth.

It would be really nice if there was a statement from the church specifically regarding what to do in such a situation.
 
One teaching I find difficult concerns the chosen people. What prompted God to choose the Jews, but not other groups?
 
Just an update for me. ( not that anyone cares lol) but ever since my conversion to orthodoxy I have been able to accept the christian teaching on premarital sex and masturbation.
God has truly shown me the light. I dont know what I was thinking!

However I will NEVER accept the roman Catholic teaching on contraception and divorce. Sorry but there is nothing sinful about these things.

Contraception:
A husband and wife have the right to have sex however they want. The marriage bed is undefiled as it says in the bible. There is also nothing in the bible against contraception and PLEASE dont come at me with onan. Thats not what he was doing. St John chrysostom talked about How sex is NOT just for creating babies. He talked about the other purposes of sex. I. Suggest you read his beautiful homily on marriage.
The roman catholic church just has a neurotic view towards sex im sorry but this is the truth and it is partially why I left the RC for tthe EO. However I had other reasons too. Marital sex is a wonderful gift. To try to place restrictions on it is very damaging. Accordingto the roman cCatholic view anything other than popping out babies is a mortal sin. Im sorry that just doesnt sound rig.ht. not to mention under pope paul 6 most bishops wanted to legalize it! And pope john paul one wanted to legalize it as well.

Divorce.

Let me be clear. I hope I personally NEVER get a divorce and it is something that is a negative thing which should be avoided. However I believe there are times when it is permissible. I always thought it was cruel of the RC church to force someone to stay married to a spouse who cheats on them and severely abuses them. One of the purposes of a marriage is to grow in love together and to assist in each others salvation. But if it becomes that one spouse is a hinderance to the other persons salvation then that person has every right to divorce and find happiness with another person.
If a marriage is simply not working out then its not good to force the spouses to stay together. Also in the early church divorce was allowed. So it IS a part of church tradition. So even you roman catholics have to admit that it can be changed back at any time.

So there. I hope I didn’t come off as offensive. Just an update. But then again I dont even know if this thread applies to me anymore since I am no longer roman Catholic.
 
…However I will NEVER accept the roman Catholic teaching on contraception and divorce. Sorry but there is nothing sinful about these things.

Contraception:
A husband and wife have the right to have sex however they want. The marriage bed is undefiled as it says in the bible. There is also nothing in the bible against contraception and PLEASE dont come at me with onan. Thats not what he was doing. St John chrysostom talked about How sex is NOT just for creating babies. He talked about the other purposes of sex. …

According to the roman Catholic view anything other than popping out babies is a mortal sin. I’m sorry that just doesn’t sound right.
It doesn’t sound right because it isn’t right. Heaven only knows where you “learned” that sex should only be had for popping out babies! You are entirely free to make decisions about the number of children you would seek to have, you just aren’t free to disrupt the nature of the marital act by separating its unitive and procreative aspects. Hence - when a child is not desired at the present time, avoid sex during the fertile time of the month.
Divorce
…if it becomes that one spouse is a hinderance to the other persons salvation then that person has every right to divorce and find happiness with another person.
I’m not totally clear on what actions of one party are such as to hinder the salvation of the other…but the Church recognises there can be occasions when separation is necessary, and it recognises that there are occasions when the civil/legal divorce procedure may be necessary. [See the Catechism for details.] The Church does however say that remarrying is not possible if the first marriage is valid. This derives from Jesus’ own words “What God has joined together, let no man separate”. Thus, the only path to a licit remarriage is to determine that the parties did not fully and properly commit from the outset (annulment process).
If a marriage is simply not working out then its not good to force the spouses to stay together.
Remaining together is not demanded when the circumstances render this unviable.
Also in the early church divorce was allowed. So it IS a part of church tradition. So even you roman catholics have to admit that it can be changed back at any time.
Jesus addressed this directly, saying that the reason that Moses allowed “divorce” (implying remarriage) was that because the people at the time were “unteachable”.

I am not trying to persuade you to change your opinion, but the correct Church position should at least be known.
 
It doesn’t sound right because it isn’t right. Heaven only knows where you “learned” that sex should only be had for popping out babies! You are entirely free to make decisions about the number of children you would seek to have, you just aren’t free to disrupt the nature of the marital act by separating its unitive and procreative aspects. Hence - when a child is not desired at the present time, avoid sex during the fertile time of the month.

I’m not totally clear on what actions of one party are such as to hinder the salvation of the other…but the Church recognises there can be occasions when separation is necessary, and it recognises that there are occasions when the civil/legal divorce procedure may be necessary. [See the Catechism for details.] The Church does however say that remarrying is not possible if the first marriage is valid. This derives from Jesus’ own words “What God has joined together, let no man separate”. Thus, the only path to a licit remarriage is to determine that the parties did not fully and properly commit from the outset (annulment process).

Remaining together is not demanded when the circumstances render this unviable.

Jesus addressed this directly, saying that the reason that Moses allowed “divorce” (implying remarriage) was that because the people at the time were “unteachable”.

I am not trying to persuade you to change your opinion, but the correct Church position should at least be known.
I learned the roman Catholic view on marital sex from reading roman catholic sources. Theyre pretty depressing to say the least. Humanae vitae basically forbids anything other than missionary type sex. I think the popes and monks of the past just tried to force their personal sexual tastes on others. Since they were celibate all the various sexual techniques seemed strange to them because they didnt understand them. Why does sex have to be unitive? I dont get it
I dont mean to get too graphic here but manual stimulation is technically unitive. As long as children are not exculded from the marriage why is it a sin to use contraception? I know ive said this before but the roman Catholic opposition to contraception is based on bad science. They think that spilling the male seed is tantamount to an abortion. But this is not true.
I dont think it is a realistic view of sex that youre supposed to have missionary for the rest of your life.

I ofcourse disagree with you that a marriage is " indissoluble".
The bond can be broken. Jesus even said that adultery is grounds for divorce. " it is unlawful for a man to divorce his wife EXCEPT FOR CAUSE OF ADULTERY “. Remarriage is possible. It is an act of mercy that divorce and remarriage is allowed. Yes Jesus said that line " what God has brought together let no man separate” but he never said that God cannot separate it. I would say more but It would be orthodox reasoning and it would be pretty pointless since you dont believe in the orthodox view of marriage to begin with. The RC and OC/EO have differing views on exactly what marriage is. But this is issue is kind of a personal one for me. My parents hated eachother but they never divorced because they were afraid of being barred from communion. They never cheated on eachother but still their hollow marriage always made me sad. I always really wished that they could just divorce and find their true loves.
Besides before the break in the church divorce and remarriage was allowed three times. It was the RC church who only changed it after the great schism with the Anglican church. So as I said divorce and remarriage are a part of church tradition.
 
I learned the roman Catholic view on marital sex from reading roman catholic sources.
Hard to believe, given so many of your facts are wrong.
Iknow ive said this before but the roman Catholic opposition to contraception is based on bad science. They think that spilling the male seed is tantamount to an abortion.
I assume you made this up. There is no such basis to be found in Church teaching.
I dont think it is a realistic view of sex that youre supposed to have missionary for the rest of your life.
All that is required is that the man finishes inside the woman.
My parents hated eachother but they never divorced because they were afraid of being barred from communion.
I won’t respond to most of your “divorce” comments, other than to say they also exhibit errors. Divorce bars no one from communion. A remarriage (if the original marriage is not found to be null) does.
 
The Church does however say that remarrying is not possible if the first marriage is valid. .
What percentage of Roman Catholic marriages are valid? Is a Roman Catholic ever sure that his marriage is valid or is it always possible that ten or more years from now the Catholic Church will declare that you were not ever married?
 
What percentage of Roman Catholic marriages are valid? Is a Roman Catholic ever sure that his marriage is valid or is it always possible that ten or more years from now the Catholic Church will declare that you were not ever married?
Marriages are taken as valid unless and until it’s determined not to be by the relevant tribunal. As far as I’m aware, the only party who instigates such a review is the couple themselves. They ask for a determination, and one is provided after appropriate review.

If you were 17 and pressured into a marriage because you were pregnant etc. etc. and thus were not giving full consent freely, the facility to seek a determination may be welcome.
 
Marriages are taken as valid unless and until it’s determined not to be by the relevant tribunal.
But if a person were validly married already, and he attempted a second marriage, and no one in the country knew about the first marriage, would you be right if you took the second attempted marriage as valid because it had not been determined to be invalid by a church tribunal? The second attempted marriage would be invalid, even though a church tribunal had not yet heard the case.
 
I learned the roman Catholic view on marital sex from reading roman catholic sources. Theyre pretty depressing to say the least. Humanae vitae basically forbids anything other than missionary type sex. I think the popes and monks of the past just tried to force their personal sexual tastes on others. Since they were celibate all the various sexual techniques seemed strange to them because they didnt understand them. Why does sex have to be unitive? I dont get it
I dont mean to get too graphic here but manual stimulation is technically unitive. As long as children are not exculded from the marriage why is it a sin to use contraception? I know ive said this before but the roman Catholic opposition to contraception is based on bad science. They think that spilling the male seed is tantamount to an abortion. But this is not true.
I dont think it is a realistic view of sex that youre supposed to have missionary for the rest of your life.

I ofcourse disagree with you that a marriage is " indissoluble".
The bond can be broken. Jesus even said that adultery is grounds for divorce. " it is unlawful for a man to divorce his wife EXCEPT FOR CAUSE OF ADULTERY “. Remarriage is possible. It is an act of mercy that divorce and remarriage is allowed. Yes Jesus said that line " what God has brought together let no man separate” but he never said that God cannot separate it. I would say more but It would be orthodox reasoning and it would be pretty pointless since you dont believe in the orthodox view of marriage to begin with. The RC and OC/EO have differing views on exactly what marriage is. But this is issue is kind of a personal one for me. My parents hated eachother but they never divorced because they were afraid of being barred from communion. They never cheated on eachother but still their hollow marriage always made me sad. I always really wished that they could just divorce and find their true loves.
Besides before the break in the church divorce and remarriage was allowed three times. It was the RC church who only changed it after the great schism with the Anglican church. So as I said divorce and remarriage are a part of church tradition.
 
I learned the roman Catholic view on marital sex from reading roman catholic sources. Theyre pretty depressing to say the least. Humanae vitae basically forbids anything other than missionary type sex. I think the popes and monks of the past just tried to force their personal sexual tastes on others. Since they were celibate all the various sexual techniques seemed strange to them because they didnt understand them. Why does sex have to be unitive? I dont get it
I dont mean to get too graphic here but manual stimulation is technically unitive. As long as children are not exculded from the marriage why is it a sin to use contraception? I know ive said this before but the roman Catholic opposition to contraception is based on bad science. They think that spilling the male seed is tantamount to an abortion. But this is not true.
I dont think it is a realistic view of sex that youre supposed to have missionary for the rest of your life.

I ofcourse disagree with you that a marriage is " indissoluble".
The bond can be broken. Jesus even said that adultery is grounds for divorce. " it is unlawful for a man to divorce his wife EXCEPT FOR CAUSE OF ADULTERY “. Remarriage is possible. It is an act of mercy that divorce and remarriage is allowed. Yes Jesus said that line " what God has brought together let no man separate” but he never said that God cannot separate it. I would say more but It would be orthodox reasoning and it would be pretty pointless since you dont believe in the orthodox view of marriage to begin with. The RC and OC/EO have differing views on exactly what marriage is. But this is issue is kind of a personal one for me. My parents hated eachother but they never divorced because they were afraid of being barred from communion. They never cheated on eachother but still their hollow marriage always made me sad. I always really wished that they could just divorce and find their true loves.
Besides before the break in the church divorce and remarriage was allowed three times. It was the RC church who only changed it after the great schism with the Anglican church. So as I said divorce and remarriage are a part of church tradition.
At last, someone with the same views as me
 
But if a person were validly married already, and he attempted a second marriage, and no one in the country knew about the first marriage, would you be right if you took the second attempted marriage as valid because it had not been determined to be invalid by a church tribunal? The second attempted marriage would be invalid, even though a church tribunal had not yet heard the case.
Yes. Marriages are presumed valid till determined otherwise. Doesn’t mean they really are. All sacramental records for a Catholic are held in one place, which makes it difficult to get married in the Church twice
 
Marriages are presumed valid till determined otherwise. Doesn’t mean they really are.
Is it true that 95% of all Catholic marriages, tested by the American Catholic marriage tribunal, are invalid? Why are so many Catholic marriages invalid, but the Eastern Orthodox marriages are generally valid? Would Jesus be more pleased with the Catholics who have so many invalid marriages, or with the Eastern Orthodox who have fewer invalid marriages?
 
Is it true that 95% of all Catholic marriages, tested by the American Catholic marriage tribunal, are invalid? Why are so many Catholic marriages invalid, but the Eastern Orthodox marriages are generally valid? Would Jesus be more pleased with the Catholics who have so many invalid marriages, or with the Eastern Orthodox who have fewer invalid marriages?
Cases don’t make it to the tribunal unless they show a reasonable prospect of the outcome sought. I would doubt that there is much variation in the factors that underpin validity from one faith to another.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top