Posted on 06/24/2015 9:13:23 AM PDT by TomServo
Our religion is FAMILY FIRST!!!!!!!!!!!!
.....................................................................
Jesus first, then family will fall in place.
The Catholic Collegeville Commentary states: “Jesus’ teaching on marriage and divorce in Matthew 19, verses 4–9 first cites Gen 1:27 (v. 4) and Gen 2:24 (v. 5) to the effect that in God’s original plan of creation marriage was indissoluble and no human agent could end such a union (v. 6). In the Old Testament (see Deut 24:1–4) divorce was allowed only as a concession to human weakness. This was not God’s original intention (vv. 7–8). Once again Jesus assumes the role of the authoritative interpreter of the law, and in verse 9 he forbids divorce and remarriage absolutely, except for the case of porneia — most likely a marriage contracted within the degrees of kinship forbidden by Lev 18:6–18 (see the commentary on Matt 5:32 below). There is little doubt that Jesus regarded marriage as indissoluble (see Mark 10:11–12; Luke 16:18; 1 Cor 7:10–11)” (Bergant, D., & Karris, R. J. (1989). The Collegeville Bible Commentary: Based on the New American Bible with revised New Testament. Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press).
“The antithesis concerning divorce seems to repeal or reject the permission and procedure found in Deut 24:1. According to Jesus, divorce is not allowed (see Luke 16:18; 1 Cor 7:10–11; Mark 10:2–12; Matt 19:3–12). The Matthean versions of Jesus’ teachings on divorce include some kind of exception: “unless the marriage is unlawful” (5:32; 19:9). The Greek word is porneia, which refers to some sort of sexual misconduct or irregularity. In Acts 15:20, 29 porneia has to do with marriages contracted within the degrees of kinship forbidden by Lev 18:6–18, and thus technically incestuous unions” (Bergant, D., & Karris, R. J. (1989). The Collegeville Bible Commentary: Based on the New American Bible with revised New Testament. Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press).
Where in the Bible does it say that a wife has to stay with her husband until he kills her? Because that has happened...
Catholics could always divorce—they used to need to discuss it with their pastor, who would inform the bishop, before they did it, but they could divorce.
What Catholics can not do is to remarry unless their first marriage has been determined to have been null (commonly known as “getting an annulment”). This was the case before V2, and is the case now.
Apparently the don’t like the taste of gnat .....
Well, the first thing to remember is that what we generally hear about what the Pope says is filtered through an anti-Catholic media :) Even Catholic news services seem to report what AP or Reuters report.
The second thing is that the Pope will not always speak in a way that seems to is to be consistent, because the Church teaches in a different way and teaches different things.
So the Church will make USA liberals uncomfortable with its stance on sexual morality, but it will also make USA conservatives uncomfortable with its stance on the need for oversight and “referee-ing.”
Personally, I expect to find something quite different in the document than what I have read about it so far!
I don't think that statement is ridiculous at all. The Left has always used exceptions to pry apart rules that are sound. As I pointed out earlier, allowing the focus to be shifted away from the rule and toward the exception (even if it's in the Catechism) only weakens your position. Ask Todd Akin how it worked out for him.
I could never figure out why the Catholic church would kick out, (or whatever they do), anyone who got divorced regardless of the circumstances.............
This may be one of the major points Catholics and non Catholics are at odds
We biblical non Catholics of Sola Scriptura, regard "doctrine" as teaching, not suggestion.
If there is an exception to a doctrine, it is not doctrine, but a denominational teaching.
I don't think there is any argument among Catholics and non Catholics regarding salvation ... "Ye must be born again"
I think that is a clear and dogmatic doctrine ... ye must be ...
Now, the way "ye must be" comes under argument and debate, but the fact of the mustness is not questioned
There are things that are doctrine ... and things that are denominational teachings and the two oftimes conflict.
“We biblical non Catholics of Sola Scriptura, regard “doctrine” as teaching, not suggestion.”
In reality you “non Catholics of Sola Scriptura” simply choose whatever interpretation of scripture suits you. That’s why some - Presbyterians - will baptize children, but Baptists (oh, the irony of their name) won’t. Baptism is clearly doctrinal in scripture but all you “non Catholics of Sola Scriptura” can’t agree on what that doctrine is.
“If there is an exception to a doctrine, it is not doctrine, but a denominational teaching.”
Don’t tell Christ that - since He Himself said there was an exception to His teaching of no divorce (Matthew 19:9).
get a brain cell
And baptism clearly follows acceptance of Jesus .... something an infant can’t do
“How do you democrats convolute so easily “Sola Scriptura” and “pick and choose” .... really ....get a brain cell”
Between the two of us you’re more likely to be a Democrat.
Check this out:
Matthew 11, Verse 11
Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.
Mary was not “the greatest human” after all, it turns out that John the Baptist gets that honor. So why don’t they pray to him?
“And baptism clearly follows acceptance of Jesus .... something an infant can’t do”
That’s what you say.
Lutherans, following Sola Scriptura, say otherwise.
Presbyterians, following Sola Scriptura, say otherwise.
Anti-Catholicism: Lead paint chips for the Protestant mind.
WHY was Jesus baptized ?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.