The following comes from a Sept. 22 posting on the Canon Law Blog by Ed Peters, former canon lawyer for the San Diego diocese.
There are basically two groups agitating for annulment reform, one saying that there are too many annulments, the other saying that there are too few. Let me suggest that (a) the first group is mistaken if it thinks the annulment problem lies in the annulment process (ie, Book VII of the 1983 Code and Dignitas connubii) and (b) the second group seeks not so much reform of the annulment process as its effective abolishment.
The first group (those holding that there are too many annulments), can scarcely suggest any procedural reforms (short of requiring tribunals to stamp DENIED on every annulment petition) for nothing about current canon and special law makes declaring marriage nullity easy. Under current ecclesiastical law, nullity must be proven, on specific grounds, based on sworn declarations and testimony, over the arguments of an independent officer, and confirmed on appeal. There are, that I can see, no gaps in the process through which marriage cases may slip quietly but wrongly into nullity. Not even the oft-reviled Canon 1095 (the “psychological” canon upon which most annulments around the world are based) can be written off as a mere legislative novelty for it articulates (as best positive law can) jurisprudence developed by the Roman Rota itself over the last 60 or 70 years.
No, the objections of the first group to the number of annulments being declared is, I suggest, not to the annulment process but to the people running that process. Tribunal officers are, it is alleged, too naive, too heterodox, or just too lazy to reach sound decisions on nullity petitions; they treat annulments as tickets to a second chance at happiness owed to people who care enough to fill out the forms. How exactly members of this first group can reach their conclusion without extended experience in tribunal work and without adverting to the cascade of evidence that five decades of social collapse in the West and a concomitant collapse of catechetical and canonical work in the Church is wreaking exactly the disastrous effects on real people trying to enter real marriages that the Church has always warned about, escapes me. Nevertheless that is essentially their claim: the process needs no major reform, processors do.
Neither can the second group (those holding that there are too few annulments) credibly point to specific reforms of the annulment process for (with two exceptions noted below) every phase of the current annulment process is required by natural law to serve the ends of justice (and, as Pope St. John Paul II repeatedly reminded us, the annulment process is about justice—not mercy, not charity, not warm fuzzy feelings, but justice); to eliminate any of these steps would be to gut the unavoidably juridic nature of the annulment process. Natural law requires that presumptions (here, of validity) be overturned only for specific reasons (here, grounds) demonstrated by objective information (here, declarations and testimony) weighed by independent minds (here, judges) subject to review by superiors (here, appeal). Remove any of these steps and, whatever ‘process’ one is left with, it’s not a legal one. Thus I say, push proponents of the second school to be clear, and what most of them must admit seeking is the “de-juridicization” of the annulment process. It’s their right, of course, to make such a proposal, but one should not confuse calls tantamount to elimination of a process with calls for reform of a process,
….take, on the other hand, all of the Lord’s teachings seriously and grant that people who wed should be accorded the presumption that they are married, and—no matter what one finally calls it—a juridic process to test that presumption and, in turn, to respect those teachings, is going to be required. Personally, I think the process currently in place largely (not perfectly, but largely) does both….
To read the entire posting, click here.
Receiving Holy Communion while in the State of any Mortal Sin should not be up for discussion at any Synod. (Sacrilege) – 1 Cor 11:27-29.
CCC: “1451 Among the penitent’s acts contrition occupies first place. Contrition is sorrow of the soul
and detestation for the sin committed,
together with the resolution not to sin again.”
The resolution not to sin again, is a requirement or we are not sorry at all. (This includes stopping committing adultery – sexual acts with the valid spouse of another.)
The Church must not ignore GOD’s Commandments – “Thou Shall Not Commit Adultery” and “Thou Shall Not Covet Thy Neighbor’s Wife”,
and the words of JESUS – Mk 10 6-12 and Mt 5:32 .
It is not Pastoral, nor is it Merciful to confirm anyone in continuing his/her Mortal Sin.
And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you. Go your way, and from now on DO NOT SIN AGAIN.” Jn 8:11.
What is needed is catechesis.
Not many Bishops actively and prominently encourage those in their own Diocese to read the Bible and the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition” at home.
( Hosea 4:6 -“ My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge;
because you have rejected knowledge, I reject you from being a priest to me.” )
Those who believe that their marriage was NOT VALID should contact their own Diocese Office – of the “Marriage Tribunal” for accurate information and for needed forms. Some Diocese also have this info on their own web site by searching ‘Marriage Tribunal’.
Divorced and Re-married Catholics have 3 choices.
The decision is theirs.
1) Get an annulment if their first marriage was not valid in the first place,
and then have your second Marriage blessed.
2) Live as brother and sister in the second marriage (complete continence) and be able to receive the Sacraments;
3) Choose to continue living in Mortal Sin (sexual activity with the valid spouse of another) and not be able to receive the Sacraments.
Before applying for an annulment see: CCC # 1601- 1666.
Especially important is – CCC # 1646 – 1651.
And read the Bible footnotes as well – especially the words of Jesus.
You may be able to fool other human beings, but you will not be able to fool Jesus at your own judgment.
If you truly love your civil spouse, you will want him/her to get to Heaven – this has to be a goal.
Never blame the Church (or other Catholics) for your own actions.
The Church did not choose our spouses, we did.
Take responsibility for your own actions, and your own sins.
Something is terribly wrong when it comes to annulments in the Catholic Church. My brother and his wife were divorced. His ex wife decided she wanted to be with her high school sweetheart instead. She got an annulment, which my brother didn’t want, because she told the tribunal that she really didn’t understand what marriage was! Really? She went through 12 years of Catholic education for crying out loud! Of course, she got her annulment. Now, she has broken up with her high school lover, has dated many other men that have had overnight visits with my nephews still living at home. Great example for the kids. Now, she is still sleeping with her boyfriends and gives out Holy Communion on Sundays, and is in good standing with the Catholic Church. Seriously! And don’t think this is not common with annulments. So, my brother knows he can’t date or remarry even though the annulment was given because he knows that in the eyes of God and the Church that his marriage was valid. And, by the way, now one of their sons is living and fornicating with his girlfriend and the other son is not far behind him. God help whoever was on the tribunal that declared their marriage annulled!!!!
RR, your brother will probably get to Heaven for being Faithful to God’s Commandments and the teachings of Jesus;
his (x) wife probably will not (unless she truly repents).
People can fool other human beings, but NO ONE can fool Jesus at each of our particular judgments at death.
Getting to Heaven for eternity is what life on earth is all about. Help your brother keep his eye on the prize.
Jesus told us not many will get to Heaven.
Lk 13:22-28; and Mt 7:13-14.
Here is a short excellent homily on particular judgment – for today 9/25/14.
Anne: I agree wholeheartedly! And the video was great and fitting!
God bless your brother for remaining true to his marriage vows, RR. And prayers all around – for your sister-in-law and especially your nephews.
Re the ‘annulment’ : If one can legitimately say that they do not understand the nature of Catholic marriage after 12 years of Catholic schooling and have a tribunal believe as much, it would be interesting to know whether or not the tribunal thought to send followup data to the school and diocese in question so that which is obviously lacking could be fixed.
Ann Malley: I really believe they just didn’t care. I wrote and enclosed a letter to the tribunal at one point when my brother sent the paperwork in and told them that this was a valid marriage and that I was a bridesmaid in this wedding. Along with this letter I sent pictures of the very happy bride and groom and of the wedding with a view of the bride and groom at the altar from afar. Very beautiful picture! I told them that they better look into this seriously because it was a very valid marriage. I was never called or even responded to by the tribunal. I believe if they cared enough they would have called me and questioned this whole annulment case. I was never contacted at all.
It’s difficult to say what went wrong, RR, but something is obviously wrong from the Church’s end if a young lady fully grown and educated in Catholic schools doesn’t understand what marriage is about. (Did anyone get interviewed in defense of the marriage?)
Many balk at the notion of cohesive and consistent with regard to dealing with people who are all so different and yet, when you get right down to it, we are so much more alike than we think. It just isn’t very flattering to think so.
Again, God bless and, I would say, continue to bless your brother for his living testimony of *meaning* every word of what he vowed before God. His sacrifice and witness are not wasted, even though it may seem so to many.
Ann: No! Not one person was interviewed at all! And yes, my brother will be rewarded some day. As far as her? I feel very sorry for her.
Ann Malley: As far as it being the Church’s end? Not sure. Just makes me wonder what really happened and didn’t happen. Maybe at the time my brother didn’t fight it enough. Maybe he thought why fight it because she is going to get the annulment anyway and she was going to date and possibly remarry again anyway with or without the annulment. At the time the annulment process was going on I didn’t get too involved personally, other than the letter and pictures, because my brother was so depressed and he didn’t want to talk about it. Who knows. But either way, I believe they should have called me or questioned me, but they did not. I guess in the grand scheme of things my brother is doing ok and I see him at the Latin Mass on Sunday with his rosary in hand. All I know is that annulments are given out in the Church way to much and I fear what is going to happen at the synod next month. Very scary if you ask me. I think valid marriages will be annulled even more just to bring back people to the Church and allow them to receive the sacraments. This is wrong! I do not agree with what the pope did by marrying those 20 couples who were living in sin. I have heard nothing of these couples confessing their sins or saying they were sorry for what they did. If there was no confession or sorrow from these couples, a sacrilege was committed by all of them. In the 1960’s fewer than 400 annulments were given on the Church annually and today it is in the tens of thousands yearly. As far as I’m concerned there is something extremely wrong in the Church as far as marriage and annulments!
Don’t fear what is going to happen at the Synod, RR. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t pray for the upholding of Catholic Faith and Morals by any means. But Our Lord predicted things would happen in history and they are. Just be glad for graces given, pray for those like your sister-in-law, and continue trusting in Our Lord and the Blessed Virgin.
Times of crisis are often the most loving proof of Our Lord’s tender care as they bring hidden issues to a head and force those who oppose Him to reveal themselves clearly.
God bless and thank you for your prayers and posts!
Dear RR, What a blessing for your brother to have such a loving sister! I posted some reminders to encourage everyone, including your dear brother to remember how much God loves us!
Taken from The Power of Suffering
The saints’ lives were surrounded in suffering. God used their suffering in a different way—to imitate Him and His suffering. For just as Jesus suffered for our sins and for the conversion of our souls, he allows chosen souls on earth to suffer in the same way. A powerful example of the value of suffering can be found in Saint Faustina’s Diary, Divine Mercy in My Soul. She states, “Oh, if only the suffering soul knew how much God loves it, it would die of joy and excess of happiness! Someday, we will know the value of suffering, but then we will no longer be able to suffer. The present moment is ours.” (693)
The Virgin of Lourdes told St. Bernadette, “I do not promise you happiness in this world, but in the next.” St. Bernadette’s response to suffering was, “The more I am crucified, the more I rejoice.”
A good quote upon which to meditate is from Romans 8:17-18 which states; “but if we are sons, we are heirs also: heirs indeed of God and joint heirs with Christ, provided, however, we suffer with him that we may also be glorified with him. For I reckon that the sufferings of the present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory to come that will be revealed in us.”
So the next time we feel pain, sadness, overwhelming loneliness, desperation or anxiety, rejoice! Yes, rejoice! God has chosen us to imitate in His sufferings. God has given all of us the opportunity to unite with Him and become saints. Everything that God gives to us has a purpose. Suffering should not be blamed for stripping us of every minute or hour of our life. No! Suffering is a precious gift from God. The gift that molds ordinary men and women into saints. We can choose to feel sorry for ourselves or we can choose to make our sufferings worth while. It is our choice.
Catherine: Very wise words to live by!
One very pertinent question: How were the Bride and Bridesmaids dressed for the Sacrament of Matrimony?
I am convinced that many “catholic” marriages fail because they start out wrong by telling the Mother of God to butt out!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
May God have mercy on an amoral Amerika and His Church!
Viva Cristo Rey!
Kenneth M. Fisher.
Kenneth: This wedding was 28 years ago. The styles were different then. I have to give her this one. The dresses were modest. She also had a modest dress on too but that was before strapless and sleeveless dresses were in “style.” If it were now she would have worn the strapless and sleeveless dress. The dresses were below the knee and short sleeve but covered the shoulders to midway down the arm. I would have refused to be in the wedding if I was going to wear something immodest. I have never had a tank top or sleeveless shirt on in my entire life and NEVER will. I am an extremely modest person and I don’t even wear shorts in the summer. It’s jeans and modest shirts for this woman.
My good friend and Spiritual Advisor, the late great Bishop Mark Hurley, once told me that in some Dioceses you can get an annulment on “coffee grounds”. So there you have it from a Bishop who was an Ordinary of a Diocese!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
May God have mercy on an amoral Amerika and His Church!
Viva Cristo Rey!
Kenneth M. Fisher.
Kenneth: Sad! Very sad!
Unfortunately, this is pretty typical.
If his marriage was annulled, he is free to remarry in the Church.
Technically, he is, but he knows that his marriage was valid and he doesn’t want to get off on a technicality! She got this annulment because she fooled the tribunal into thinking she didn’t know what marriage was all about. Sorry, Anonymous! But no matter what the Church said, that marriage WAS VALID in the eyes of God and His Church!!! That is what counts!
He can appeal the decision.
Anonymous: It DOESN’T matter if he appeals the annulment. This woman will continue her life and will have no problem if she didn’t get HER annulment. She will just get remarried in another church. She thinks like you do. We will all (even Protestants because we ONLY have to love God and not follow His rules or Church teachings) be able to go to heaven no matter what we do. You did tell me this. So, it is pointless for my brother to appeal this. She is the type also to not tell her priest that she has remarried in another church and she would still give out Holy Communion and be a Eucharistic minister.
Incorrect. The Church said the marriage was not valid, therefore the marriage cannot be valid in the eyes of the Church. Please stop speaking in circles, RR.
What God joins, no man can put asunder, Anonymous. God is no mocked.
Anonymous: The Church gives out annulments like candy! Yeah, right! Appeal it? They would still give it to her. A tribunal has said that, NOT God! A tribunal can only go by the information given and she said she didn’t know what marriage was all about. BULL!
Yes, Ann Malley, God does not join those who are in a previous marriage; those who are not entering the married state of their own free will; those who are mentally impaired or unable to perform the marriage act; those who do not intend a permanent, exclusive marriage.
As the other anonymous poster stated, when a tribunal finds the marriage to be invalid, it is invalid in the eyes of the Church. In the eyes of God? We can only go by the words of our Lord Jesus Christ that what they declare bound on earth is declared bound in heaven and what they declare loosed on earth is declared loosed in heaven.
What you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven. What you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Or do you not believe that God gave Peter the keys to the Kingdom?
God is not mocked, Anonymous.
Anonymous writes: “…We can only go by the words of our Lord Jesus Christ that what they declare bound on earth is declared bound in heaven and what they declare loosed on earth is declared loosed in heaven.”
And yet Ciaphas and Pilate were given authority over Our Lord in sentencing Him to death on a cross and scourging him most brutally. That is attempting to kill Truth. So in the instance of ‘coffee grounds’ annulments, I cannot help but think that there is an imitation of Christ in that ‘authority’ is being used to chasten the Faithful. The Church and the Faithful are being ‘lawfully’ abused to repair for the sins of mankind. And the Truth, despite what appearances seemed to be, did not die.
That’s why I laud the sacrifice of RR’s brother. And am rather concerned for those in the position of authority who use said authority to impose that which is unjust. Like Christ’s crucifixion. But that too was put to a vote of the people, people manipulated in ever conceivable way. We’re sheep.
In the end, however, good will come out of it. And hopefully the conversion of many hearts.
For those of you who live in the Diocese of San Bernardino, here is a recent letter that was forwarded to me: “August 28, 2014 It is with great joy and gratitude that I forward you a letter from Bishop Barnes regarding the waiving of fees for annulments from this date forward. And I would also like to clarify a few items: Whether an annulment case is currently pending or just beginning, no more payments to the Office of Canonical Services are necessary. We’re not going to reimbursement fees already paid. The waiving of fees applies to all annulment cases – defects of form, formals, Paulines, ligamens and Favors of the Faith (although the fee goes to Rome and they are not going to waive it; the Office of Canonical Services will pay it). We are working on changing all our applications to remove any mention of a fee. Please disregard that part for now; we will email corrected applications as soon as they are ready. Note that most other dioceses in the region have not waived their fees, only the Diocese of San Bernardino. This means that if a petitioner or respondent appeals a decision to the Diocese of San Diego or to the Roman Rota, they will probably be charged by those entities….. (cont.)”
(part 2) “….. The hope is that as people come back to the faith and participate more fully in the Church they contribute regularly to your parish collection. If they wish to give an offering or gift, please have them tithe to your parish, not to our office.
Our hope is to fill the valley, lower the mountain, and straighten the road as much as possible so that those seeking some kind of reconciliation through the annulment process might encounter one less obstacle along their path. I pray that many, many more cases (especially formal cases) be presented to our office. Of course, you – along with your trained advocates – are the point of contact with the people. Please be as encouraging to them as possible.”
Rev. David Andel, J.C.L.
Diocese of San Bernardino
1201 E. Highland Avenue
San Bernardino, CA 92404
Jay S. It means that everyone else in your San Bernardino Diocese that belongs to any Parish will be picking up the cost. All Diocese costs are spread among the Parishe within that Diocese.
Just like divorces, annulment proceedings have associated costs. And these costs (including investigation, canon lawyers, etc) must be paid.
Congrats, you guys now get to pay for everyone who applies – legitimately or not.
Usually fees are only waived in case of financial hardship – which make sense.
Nothing is life is free .
If it means the salvation of souls, then it is all worth it.
Jay S, – For those who can afford to reimburse your Diocese the cost, – it has no bearing on Saving Souls.
However, it would be good for every Bishop to teach the following so divorced and remarried Catholics can knowingly make their own choice.
Divorced and remarried Catholics have 3 choices.
1) If they honestly believe that their fist marriage was NOT valid, they should contact their Diocese – office of Marriage Tribunal for info and forms.
(Remembering that one can fool fellow human beings, but not Jesus at our particular judgment. Honesty is important.)
2) They can repent and live as brother and sister, and receive the Sacraments.
3) They can continue to commit adultery with the valid spouse of another, and not receive the Sacraments.
But they must continue to go to Sunday Mass and raise their children as Catholics.
Please read MAC’s first post which includes GOD’s words.
Everyone contemplating marriage, or contemplating divorce, or wanting to help themselves or others regarding marriage should read the CCC pages 400 through 415.
And the words of Jesus about divorce in the Bible.
Thank you for your response Mike. Your first 2 points seem clear to me, but I’m not sure I understand your third point: “they can continue to commit adultery” Wouldn’t that be presuming upon God’s mercy, and a very grave offense against the virtue of Hope [i.e. presumption], and thus the First Commandment? Here is CCC 1651 and the paragraph immediately preceding it: 1650 Today there are numerous Catholics in many countries who have recourse to civil divorce and contract new civil unions. In fidelity to the words of Jesus Christ – “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery”160 the Church maintains that a new union cannot be recognized as valid, if the first marriage was. If the divorced are remarried civilly, they find themselves in a situation that objectively contravenes God’s law. Consequently, they cannot receive Eucharistic communion as long as this situation persists. For the same reason, they cannot exercise certain ecclesial responsibilities. Reconciliation through the sacrament of Penance can be granted only to those who have repented for having violated the sign of the covenant and of fidelity to Christ, and who are committed to living in complete continence. 1651 Toward Christians who live in this situation, and who often keep the faith and desire to bring up their children in a Christian manner, priests and the whole community must manifest an attentive solicitude, so that they do not consider themselves separated from the Church, in whose life they can and must participate as baptized persons: They should be encouraged to listen to the Word of God, to attend the Sacrifice of the Mass, to persevere in prayer, to contribute to works of charity and to community efforts for justice, to bring up their children in the Christian faith, to cultivate the spirit and practice of penance and thus implore, day by day, God’s grace.
Also, when referencing the CCC, it’s also very important to keep in mind what Cardinal Ratzinger wrote regarding the weight of the doctrinal statements found therein. From his 1994 book INTRODUCTION TO THE CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH: “This brings us to the question already mentioned before, regarding the authority of the Catechism. In order to find the answer, let us first consider a bit more closely its juridical character. We could express it in this way: analogously to the new Code of Canon Law, the Catechism is de facto a collegial work; canonically, it falls under the special jurisdiction of the Pope, inasmuch as it was authorized for the whole Christian world by the Holy Father in virtue of the supreme teaching authority invested in him. . . .This does not mean that the catechism is a sort of super-dogma, as its opponents would like to insinuate in order to cast suspicion on its as a danger to the liberty of theology. What significance the Catechism really holds for the common exercise of teaching in the Church may be learned by reading the Apostolic Constitution Fidei depositum, with which the Pope promulgated it on October 11, 1992–exactly thirty years after the opening of the Second Vatican Council: ‘I acknowledge it [the Catechism] as a valid and legitimate tool in the service of ecclesiastical communion, as a sure norm for instruction in the faith.’ The individual doctrine which the Catechism presents receive no other weight than that which they already possess. The weight of the Catechism itself lies in the whole. Since it transmits what the Church teaches, whoever rejects it as a whole separates himself beyond question from the faith and teaching of the Church [pp. 25-27.]
Pope Franciscus is Argentinian. During his times the Argentina was officially Catholic. For example, the Constitution determined that the President of Argentina had to be a Roman Catholic. In consequence there was no divorce. Only when the Constitution changed after the Generals were removed was civil divorce allowed. I suggest this is why allowing divorce is so central to Franciscus’ main interest. He probably saw this as a great injustice, and it was, and came in determined to change this aspect of Church Law. The pope is our Legislator and there is no way of stopping Him.
From my personal point of view it is fine to admit the divorced to Communion, as they will. I have written here to great scandal that the only good thing about VC2 was the allowance of Communion without Confession, in my personal case a great help. It was true that before VC2 that in many places you had to Confess before communicating and the priest knew who you were so no cheating was allowed.
The problem that Pope Franciscus may not realize is that the World has moved on and the root cause of this discussion is cohabitation and more importantly sodomitic marriage. We have a problem. Who are we to judge if the Pope cannot?
same sex marriage has nothing whatsoever to do with civil divorce, allowing communion to divorced and remarried catholics, or anything of the sort. making things up, are we?
It is false to state that the Church or VII teaches that it is OK to receive HOLY COMMUNION while choosing to live in the state of any mortal sin.
This is absolutely false.
Read the Bible and the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition” (of 1997).
“….. let us ask ourselves if we have actually taken a few steps to get to know Christ and the truths of faith more, by reading and meditating on the Scriptures, studying the Catechism, steadily approaching the Sacraments.” Pope Francis, May 15, 2013.
” Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord.
Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself.
That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died. 1 Cor 11-27-30
CCC: ” 1457 According to the Church’s command, after having attained the age of discretion, each of the faithful is bound by an obligation faithfully to confess serious sins at least once a year.
Anyone who is aware of having committed a mortal sin must not receive Holy Communion, even if he experiences deep contrition, without having first received sacramental absolution,
unless he has a grave reason for receiving Communion and there is no possibility of going to confession.
Children must go to the sacrament of Penance before receiving Holy Communion for the first time. “
CCC: “1451 Among the penitent’s acts contrition occupies first place.
sorrow of the soul
and detestation for the sin committed,
together with the resolution not to sin again.”
Any Bishop who advocates receiving the Body and Blood of our Lord while the person purposely is living in the state of Mortal Sin, is a heretic.
Here is a very brief video of Bishop Blasé Cupich (in the News video 9/25) stating he is giving Holy Communion to those choosing to live in mortal sin.
He does not address the mortal sins of Sacrilege, or of Scandal, of his aiding and abetting in these sins.
The Church Militant video falsely states that the Bishop was removed because he spoke out against his peers. He was actually removed because he failed to remove a molester priest whom he had sheltered. Church Militant COVERED UP THIS SCANDAL in its report.
What are you talking about Anonymous?
Re-read Sylvia’s post.
You sure do like to change the subject.
She is correct that it is a Mortal Sin to receive Holy Communion while living in the state of Mortal Sin.
It is also a Mortal Sin to participate in other people’s mortal sins – even knowingly giving Holy Communion to those in the state of mortal sin.
By the way, Voris does not purposely cover up anything.
The biggest scandals are by Cardinals/Bishops who do to teach the faith, correct, and discipline as necessary.
I have been married for over fifty years, so I have a modicum of knowledge about what it takes to achieve that milestone. Personally, I think the church has it wrong on so many counts. Rooting around to determine if a marriage was sacramental on the wedding day is a waste of time. What difference does it make? It is what is happening today that makes a difference. Why should someone who is abused be required to stay in a marriage or not be granted an annulment on those grounds alone? Why should people who don’t love each other be forced to stay together? Even in a good marriage I have seen people drift apart over time. The kids go to college and the couple is left alone. Interest change. Much of church law is based on old fashion notions of marriage and divorce. I remember when I was a kid that divorce was so rare that the Priest told up we must cross the street if we saw “Mrs. X” coming. Most divorced people left town, or never returned to the church. Few people today think of having kids as the primary reason for marriage. Culture has moved along, so the church is very counter-cultural in its teachings. Science has moved along, so what difference does it make if couples use NFP or pills to avoid having children? The Synod that starts next week can go far in helping parish priest learn how to deal with this sea change of the last 30-40 years. Shouldn’t our objective be to keep or bring back as many people as possible to the church, not keep them out?
As a person who is with his spouse about half your tenure, I salute you! And I agree that the Church has much to learn from those of us who have “Made a go of it” for durations longer than would have been at all likely for couples in Christ’s time. Listening to celibate priests about how to create lifelong intimate relationships is likely to end in abject failure unless. Fortunately, we have a Pontiff who seems to get that. Except the number of married couples participating in the Synod is woefully inadequate compared to the celibate class.
What good does it to bring back people into a church if they really do not believe in its teachings? They just end up being phony, baloney Catholics or whatever.
Anne T, with all do respect, we are called to believe in Him, not in a set of sterile teachings. If you trust in Him, have Faith in him, Love Him and others because of him, and have Hope eternal because of him, that is what matters. He came to destroy the checklist mentality of the Pharisees. We would do well to cling to Him.
So, WRONG, Anonymous! Was Christ teaching “sterile” teachings when He said, “If you love me, keep my Commandments?” You CANNOT be saved if you DO NOT follow Christ’s Church and teachings. So, I can go out and sin as much as I like because after all we are only called to believe in Him and we don’t have to follow His teachings? Really? Wow! The Church says I can’t have an abortion because it is murder, but according to you it is just “sterile” teachings and as long as I love Him I can get the abortion? I can’t believe you really think that! Shakin’ my head!
The core beliefs of our faith are contained within the Creeds. They give us all that we are required to believe in order to be saved. The Church teaches far more than just the Creeds, and they are to be held by the faithful, but they are not required for salvation. This is why even protestants can be saved, my friend. Even the protestants who accept the trinitarian creeds but reject the sacramental and ecclesiological teachings of the Roman Church.
If you cannot understand metaphor, …Mous, then you may want to stop asking me for answers you are incapable of grasping.
That said, the Creed indicates One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, Mous. Protestants do not believe in this… perhaps not a problem for you in this new Church, but for those that actually believe, it is.
With all due respect, Anonymous, if you do believe in Him you will do as He asks. The fact that you and others would so lightly shift doctrine is rather a testament that you do not love Him… at least not enough to love Him the He asks to be shown love, but rather your own way.
Like kicking your spouse every morning when he/she leans in for a kiss. But hey, a kick is how you express yourself. The ‘love’ is there. So why should the abused spouse be upset. It’s not abuse. It’s just being real.
What is being advocated in the Church is an abusive relationship where one party, in this case, the creature, demands that the other party, Our Blessed Lord, Creator of Heaven and Earth, take whatever we decide to give Him, call it love no matter what, and basically shut up about the rest. What does He expect after all?! But don’t say we’re not saved. That’s a sure deal. Just like another kick come morning.
Golden calf much.
What in blazes are you talking about malley? Nobody is kicking nobody.
Anonymous: It’s bluntly clear what “malley” is talking about! I believe her name is Ann Malley. Show some respect! Great try at pretending not to understand what she was inferring by using an example! Shakin’ my head again!
I’m speaking of something you will never understand, Mous. Precisely because you have confused the letter for love.
Thanks, RR. But the ‘shakin my head yet again’ accounts for all of that which is logical falling out. But Anonymous is not alone in being accountable for his/her obtuseness as those in positions of authority promote his/her mentality. Easier to lead sheep with no taste for or knowledge of good pastures.
Sorry, RR, I misread your post and thought it was mous shaking his head again. What with eyes, ears, and other other entries to the cranium wide open I thought I’d warn him of the potential fall out.
Thanks again for posting. I’m still in awe of the posting from September 30, 2014 at 8:09 pm in which Protestants only need hold that which is required for salvation while ‘Catholics’ are required to hold those peripheral teachings of the Church. Why? I don’t know. If it isn’t necessary for salvation, what’s the point?
Malley (LOL): I figured you misread my post. I think I will become Protestant because it is much easier and I don’t have to follow any of those irrelevent, optional Church teachings anymore. After all, we are all gonna all end up in heaven, Protestants and all. Like you said, “What’s the point.” You can call me “R” for short!
Bob One, I wrote that in my last post because for you it seems to be a numbers game about how many people can be packed into a church and nothing about the virtues and holiness of loyalty, self-control, keeping oaths and promises, learning to live with the faults of a spouse, etc.. Please forgive me if I am wrong, but that is the way you come out looking to me. One thing you seem not to realize is that there are plenty of people coming into (converting to) the Church because of its strict but beautiful and meaningful teachings. In other words it stands for something when all else is falling apart. There is a saying: “Catholics leave the Church because they cannot keep the hard sayings. Protestants come into the Church because they are steeped in history.” I find it very true in most cases.
Well said, AnneT. The Catholic Church is appealing precisely because of the integrity of Her hull. Replace the solid wood planks with cheesecloth and those inside the barque are going to quickly slip out and drown. No point climbing aboard for it would just prove a ruse of safe passage. That is why the Truth does not change – sorry guys. Docile to the point of drowning is not the plan.
Satan is alive and well, with his minions inside the Church pushing sodomy, abortion, and divorce – the holy trinity of Satanism.
“The smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God.”
Pope Paul VI
June 29, 1972
Jay S. – repenting of ones sin (rather than choosing to continue in ones mortal sin) to receive forgiveness is not presumption.
God, Himself spoke very clearly. Pay attention to what HE said.
“Thou shall not commit Adultery” – GOD’s Commandment
“Thou shall not covet thy Neighbor’s wife” – GOD’s Commandment
Teachings of JESUS about divorce and remarriage – Mk 10:6-12; Mt 5:32.
Teaching of JESUS about adultery, mercy, and required repentance – “GO and Sin NO MORE” – Jn 8:11.
Those choosing to continue committing adultery – a sexual relationship with the valid spouse of another – is not repentance.
Catholics who are divorced and civilly remarried have 3 choices.
– – – 1. If they believe that their first marriage was NOT VALID, they should contact their Diocese office of Marriage Tribunal for further information and needed forms.
(Remembering that truthfulness is important because we can deceive other human beings, but not Jesus at our particular judgment.)
– – – 2. They can repent and live as brother and sister, and receive the Sacraments. (CCC #1650)
– – – 3. They can choose not to repent, and continue committing adultery with someone else’s valid spouse, and NOT receive the Sacraments, but must raise their children in the Catholic Faith. (CCC # 1651)
Receiving Holy Communion while in the state of Mortal Sin –
– – – 1. Sacrilege against the Body and Blood of our Lord.
– – – 2. Scandal for others which can be an additional mortal sin. CCC 2284, 2285, 2286, 2326.
– – – 3. Teaching of St. Paul 1 Cor 11:27-30 regarding condemnation for receiving unworthily.
Priests, Nuns, and ALL other unmarried persons are expected to live a non-sexual lifestyle.
This can also be done by the divorced and remarried if their first marriage was valid.
The choice is theirs alone. They can choose God or sex.
* * * * * * * If one truly loves their current civil spouse he/she will want him/her to get to Heaven. – THIS IS LOVE !
CCC: “1451 Among the penitent’s acts contrition occupies first place. Contrition is
sorrow of the soul
and detestation for the sin committed,
together with the resolution not to sin again.”
Love of Neighbor means helping him/her get to Heaven.
It is not merciful, nor charitable, nor pastoral to confirm anyone in mortal sin.
It is not merciful, nor charitable, nor pastoral to participate or encourage their mortal sin, or their Sacrilege.
We have a responsibility for the sins committed by others when we – – – CCC #1868.
Presumption is calling (presuming) GOD a Liar.
Read the Bible quotes above.
Repentance is required for the forgiveness of sins. Anyone choosing to continue his mortal sins is not repentant.
CCC: ” 2092 There are two kinds of presumption.
Either man presumes upon his own capacities, (hoping to be able to save himself without help from on high),
or he presumes upon God’s almighty power or his mercy (hoping to obtain his forgiveness without conversion and glory without merit). “
Jay S. – The “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition” was not accurately and officially and finally promulgated until 1997.
Here is the link to the Vatican web site which includes the ” APOSTOLIC LETTER
For quotes from Pope Saint John Paul II, Pope Benedict, and Pope Francis regarding the CCC go to: “What Catholics REALLY Believe SOURCE”
It includes: “ The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which I approved … and the publication of which I today order by virtue of my Apostolic Authority,
is a statement of the Church’s faith and of catholic doctrine,
attested to or illumined by Sacred Scripture, the Apostolic Tradition and the Church’s Magisterium. ” – Pope John Paul II CCC pg 5.
“The individual doctrine which the Catechism presents receive no other weight than that which they already possess.
The weight of the Catechism itself lies in the whole.
Since it transmits what the Church teaches, whoever rejects it as a whole separates himself beyond question from the faith and teaching of the Church. ” Cardinal Ratzinger.
This is absolutely true.