Why are you not Catholic?

[steve_b]

Any of you come “this close” to embracing Catholicism, but haven’t been able to? How come?

Did any of you start as Catholic but ended up converting to Eastern Orthodox or Anglican or Lutheran or something else? Why?

Any of you “cafeteria Catholics” and are comfortable with it? How did you reconcile that?

Just trying to find my place in this world!

Consider the following

Going back in history It doesn’t take much homework to see which is the Church Jesus established #34. THAT’s the Church He gave all His promises to. THAT’S by definition the Church everyone is to be in, because it is also the pillar and foundation of truth [1 Timothy 3:15](1 - - Bible Gateway Timothy+3:15&version=RSVCE). Jesus wants perfect unity John 17:20-23 in His Church, such that if one won’t listen even to His Church that He established, then they are an outsider to HIM as well. Which is why outside of His Church there is no salvation.

In essence then, a person who chooses not to be Catholic, dissents from Our Lord’s teaching. They in essence are saying to Jesus MY WILL BE DONE.

As Paul wrote

• Rom 16: 17 I appeal to you, brethren, to take note of those who create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the doctrine which you have been taught; avoid them. 18 For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites,[b (Rom 16 RSVCE - Personal Greetings - I commend to you - Bible Gateway)** and by fair and flattering words they deceive the hearts of the simple-minded. 19 For while your obedience is known to all, so that I rejoice over you, I would have you wise as to what is good and guileless as to what is evil; 20 then the God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet.**
• And scripture says very clearly, if a person dissents from Our Lord’s Church, and dies outside it, heaven will not be in that person’s future
• Gal 5: 19 Now the works of the flesh are plain: … dissension, … and the like. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

Keep in mind, Paul is NOT writing to pagans here. He’s writing to the baptized, in the Church. If that is what happens to those who dissent and join some other “church” of some dissident human origin, will it not go just as badly for those who know this truth yet won’t enter the Church? That’s dissent as well. And now we see where the following comes from 846

 

[spedteacherita]

Posted by lonegreywolf20 View Post
God already blesses us abundantly and get this, I do not need to be Catholic to receive His abundant blessings

My friend, I have never before received such animosity from a wishing of God’s blessing. This clearly shows a certain level of bitterness on your part and that you are obviously not truly at peace with yourself or with God.

May God, the Blessed Trinity, guide you back to His peace and the fullness of His Truth and Love in the Holy Catholic Church!

I’m sorry, Richard, but truly I don’t see any animosity toward a wishing of God’s blessing as you saw in his response. He was just explaining to you that he doesn’t have to be Catholic to be in the midst of God’s abundant blessings. One could look at it that way but, seriously, I only saw his response as sharing how he feels. I also cannot see any bitterness; neither can I see that he is not at peace with himself or with God. I see that He exudes God’s love with the first part of his response.

God bless you!!

Rita

 

[spedteacherita]

Why were her first two weddings annuled?

Was she unable to annul her Catholic marriage, then?

If so, why is she attempting another marriage?

Do you think she was honest with the tribunal?

RC, you would have to ask those who approved the annulments that question…it’s awful crazy I think. She is not an active Catholic so this is not going to impede her marriage that is going to happen.

I’m not familiar with annulments (and I don’t get along with her) so I cannot tell you what was said before a tribunal. I think a red flag for them would be the need to annul the one marriage (which was done in a Protestant church and they had 2 wonderful kids). I guess we see it from the outside and someone else may not totally understand situations. I would suggest that the Catholic Church make the candidates have some sort of counseling before any annulment be agreed to. I know it only messed her life up more…

 

[Denise1957]

For converts - did a time come when you just said “OK, I assent, and will trust the Holy Spirit to make this plain to my heart and mind?” Because I cannot make this so, by virtue of my own reason.

Yes, and for me it was after nearly two years of study, attending Mass, and prayer - especially the Rosary. I haven’t read all of the catechism and probably never will (only bits and pieces). I realized that even though there were things I couldn’t understand or grasp by reasoning, I felt that the Church was right about so many things which made sense, that if some things didn’t make sense, it was okay, and probably due to my faulty understanding or reasoning process. Then I just prayed for awhile to ask God to let me know if I should convert or not. After that I felt that I should convert. The conversion process (instruction) included what I need to know to stay in a state of grace, and why the Church believes as she does, among other things of course.

 

[QuestLove]

My sister had 2 marriage anulled so she could have a Catholic wedding . He ended up getting married to her within the Catholic wedding…guess what? They divorced within 2 years because he was developing dimentia…she needed counseling not annulments! She is presentally is engaged once again…I don’t think the Catholic Church served her well…

Blessings!

Rita

I wonder what is the maximum number of annulments one can get?

 

[PRmerger]

I wonder what is the maximum number of annulments one can get?

There is no maximum.

That’s like saying, “What’s the maximum number of times you can be baptized with Pepsi and it be considered invalid?”

 

[Horton]

I wonder what is the maximum number of annulments one can get?

Annulments are not something one “gets”. Once a petition is sent to the tribunal the marriage is investigated to determine if the marriage was valid at the time of the wedding vows. If found to be invalid, a decree of nullity is issued. The are many reasons a marriage can be declared invalid and a simple search of these forms could provide some of those reasons.

So how many times can a person be married invalidly? It depends how many times they want to be.

I just want to add that if a Catholic is marrying and divorcing multiple times I’m sure at some point a priest or deacon would speak to the person to determine their reasons for the issue.

 

[mek42]

So, why do so many priests mess up and grant marriages which must later be annulled? Feel free to explain how I don’t properly understand what an annulment is.

 

[Thorolfr]

So, why do so many priests mess up and grant marriages which must later be annulled? Feel free to explain how I don’t properly understand what an annulment is.

And what about the children of an annulled marriage? Since the marriage technically never existed, does that mean they were born out of wedlock?

 

[Horton]

So, why do so many priests mess up and grant marriages which must later be annulled? Feel free to explain how I don’t properly understand what an annulment is.

I’m not sure this falls back on the priests. People lie, especially when they want something like marriage. The parish will check the records to verify each person is free to marry. Most often people who want to marry and know they aren’t able to marry within the Church so they marry outside the Church.

An “annulment” is basically a decree that a valid marriage took place for various reasons.

And what about the children of an annulled marriage? Since the marriage technically never existed, does that mean they were born out of wedlock?

Children born of a marriage are always considerd ligitimit regardless of what happened to the marriage.

 

[mek42]

Ok. I’ll freely admit I have not researched canon law regarding annulment. Let me pose a scenario that, while hypothetical here and now, is very plausible. Say two Catholics get properly validly married (no lies, etc.). They have a child and one of the parents engages in combat while serving in the military. Upon return from combat, the serviceperson becomes abusive, severly physically abusive - but was not at all abusive before ths combat experience. If the now abusive spouse is unable / unwilling to receive effective treatment, what options are available to the other parent and child that are acceptable to the Church?

If annulment is an option, then annulment is functionally equivalent to yes-fault divorce. Otherwise, the child must be raised by a single parent or is sentanced to an abusive upbringing. Since the Church places a heavy emphasis on the benefits of a traditional, loving family, these last two options seem logically inconsistant with Church teaching.

 

[Tomdstone]

Ok. I’ll freely admit I have not researched canon law regarding annulment. Let me pose a scenario that, while hypothetical here and now, is very plausible. Say two Catholics get properly validly married (no lies, etc.). They have a child and one of the parents engages in combat while serving in the military. Upon return from combat, the serviceperson becomes abusive, severly physically abusive - but was not at all abusive before ths combat experience. If the now abusive spouse is unable / unwilling to receive effective treatment, what options are available to the other parent and child that are acceptable to the Church?

If annulment is an option, then annulment is functionally equivalent to yes-fault divorce. Otherwise, the child must be raised by a single parent or is sentanced to an abusive upbringing. Since the Church places a heavy emphasis on the benefits of a traditional, loving family, these last two options seem logically inconsistant with Church teaching.

I would say that a divorce is more honest. That would be my view. In the scenario which you present, the marriage was valid from the start, so IMHO, an annulment, or saying that there was no marriage from the beginning, would amount to a dishonest divorce in that case.

 

[PRmerger]

And what about the children of an annulled marriage? Since the marriage technically never existed, does that mean they were born out of wedlock?

Yes.

 

[PRmerger]

So, why do so many priests mess up and grant marriages which must later be annulled?

Because priests do not “grant marriages”. They witness them. The couple grant marriage to each other.

Since most Catholic marriages are not annulled, I’d say that priests mostly get it right, rather than “mess up”, don’t you?

 

[PRmerger]

Ok. I’ll freely admit I have not researched canon law regarding annulment. Let me pose a scenario that, while hypothetical here and now, is very plausible. Say two Catholics get properly validly married (no lies, etc.). They have a child and one of the parents engages in combat while serving in the military. Upon return from combat, the serviceperson becomes abusive, severly physically abusive - but was not at all abusive before ths combat experience. If the now abusive spouse is unable / unwilling to receive effective treatment, what options are available to the other parent and child that are acceptable to the Church?

The spouse could divorce the abusive spouse.

 

[mek42]

The spouse could divorce the abusive spouse.

I thought divorce was not allowed?

In this situation the non-abusive spouse could divorce and remarry in the Church?

 

[SalusaSecondus]

I thought divorce was not allowed?

In this situation the non-abusive spouse could divorce and remarry in the Church?

Divorce is permitted, it’s remarrying that’s the problem.

 

[PRmerger]

I thought divorce was not allowed?

Divorce is allowed, mek.

In this situation the non-abusive spouse could divorce and remarry in the Church?

No. Jesus said that if you divorce and re-marry, it is adultery.

Originally posted by Jesus: Mark 10:11 He said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her;

 

[rcwitness]

RC, you would have to ask those who approved the annulments that question…it’s awful crazy I think. She is not an active Catholic so this is not going to impede her marriage that is going to happen.

I’m not familiar with annulments (and I don’t get along with her) so I cannot tell you what was said before a tribunal. I think a red flag for them would be the need to annul the one marriage (which was done in a Protestant church and they had 2 wonderful kids). I guess we see it from the outside and someone else may not totally understand situations. I would suggest that the Catholic Church make the candidates have some sort of counseling before any annulment be agreed to. I know it only messed her life up more…

I was asking you because you have made the conclusion that the Church was at fault for confirming that her marriages were invalid.

The Church is not responsible for any dishonesty or false intentions she may have offered the tribunal. The tribunal is merely confirming, and by the information provided them, the marriage to have been Sacramental or not. Jesus said, “What God joins together, let no man put asunder.” God does not put a Catholic together with another outside His Church.

If you do not know the details of her annulment, you should not slander the Church. Especially when she is not in good standing with the Church. It is a very serious error if she had been dishonest with them. Even as Annas was, as recorded in Acts 5

 

[SalusaSecondus]

I’m glad to hear that you are interested in the Catholic Faith! Did you know that Martin Luther himself had a devotion to Our Lady? Here are some quotes for you.

catholicbridge.com/catholic/martin_luther_on_mary.php

As you can see, he taught on the Feast of the Assumption and also had taught that Our Lady was preserved from all stain of sin.

May I ask what other doctrines you find questionable?

Okay, so you have an authority in place that interprets scripture. That’s interesting! In the Catholic Church, we call our teaching authority the Magisterium.

Yes Martin Lither did have a a enervation for Mary. But one of the quotes in the article is misleading.

“The veneration of Mary is inscribed in the very depths of the human heart.
(Sermon, September 1, 1522)”.

If you read the sermon in question, you will see Luther is doing the opposite of what Catholic apologists claim. He is attempting to ween people off of venerating Mary.