Posted on 09/27/2017 5:52:38 AM PDT by ebb tide
Liar....liar......pants on fire!!
I am not a theologian, just a run of the mill Catholic. But I hate when the church doles out its services as a reward. Jesus does not do that. He often rewarded sinners. As far as I am concerned the church should not be in the business of limiting the path to god.
I understand if the church feels that people are not taking a sacrament seriously, you may withhold because its not a sacrament if people don’t take it seriously. Hence Pre-Cana showed up, as a way to get people to take marriage seriously.
But to punish people for one sin by withholding a separate sacrament is just not in the biblical teachings. And lay Catholics really have no right to judge each other. God holds that job for himself.
Continual fornication outside of sacramental marriage is not just "one sin".
Even bishops can lie.
I get it, but our job is to love God and love our neighbor as we love God. Our job is not judge of our neighbor.
Loving your neighbor doesn't mean sleeping with her.
Do you not sin every day? Yet you are allowed to take communion are you not?
I have a difficult time believing this, too.
Woodward and Bernstein were right. Follow the money.
This is all about attracting divorced and remarried Catholics back to the weekly collection basket. The Cardinals know this, and the overwhelming majority are on board.
Any thoughts that Bergoglio is going to be deposed or corrected through the Dubia are a pipedream.
Do you not sin every day? Yet you are allowed to take communion are you not?
Otherwise, if the sin is venial, or minor, such as telling a white lie, or yelling at your wife, then it does not prevent you from receiving.
I am not a theologian, but a lay person.
Interesting how they cite JPII as the inspiration to do what he explicitly said should not be done? The spin and double speak is amazing.
Not judging does not mean just go along with whatever they do. Real love means taking up the difficult task of calling out someone for doing wrong. If we fail to take the loving act of warning someone away from sin then we have to answer for that.
From the prophet Ezekiel 33:8-9:
If I tell the wicked, “O wicked one, you shall surely die,” and you do not speak out to dissuade the wicked from his way the wicked shall die for his guilt but I will hold you responsible for his death. But if you warn the wicked, trying to turn him from his way and he refuses to turn from his way, he shall die for his guilt but you shall save yourself.
These bishops and priests who encourage this will have much to answer for.
Are you free to sin at will, thus never repenting then feel entitled for cheap Grace? Many are called but few are chosen. Christ is not a sucker for the cheap Grace express and “dogs” swallowing vomit.
This is actually true to some extent. In JPII's Code of Canon Law (1983), there is no mention of excommunication of the divorced and remarried. However, the 1917 Code of Canon Law mentions that such couples could be excommunicated.
Ok, warn the wicked. But don’t deny them church. Your job is not judge, you have no punishment in your arsenal, just advise.
The Sacrament of Penance is always readily available to them, if they decide on true repentance for their sins and a firm resolve to sin no more. But pertinacious sinners can't be pampered to.
Using your logic unrepentant rapists, child-molesters, homosexuals, murderers, abortionists, et al, should not be denied the sacraments.
Are you really a Catholic?
Should the Catholic Church not deny a homosexual "couple" the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony?
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.