Posted on 08/22/2016 5:58:11 PM PDT by ebb tide
"The Eucharist is not a sacrament for the sinner but the sacrament of reconciled sinners. Just as it is the source and principle of mercy. I hope I have been clear!
Nicola Bux, August 13, 2016 at a youth meeting in Schio. The theologian spoke on the theme "The sacraments are not a joke." The Eucharist is not a sacrament for the divorced and remarried, but for reconciled sinners. The liturgist Nicola Bux is one of the most reputable practitioners of the liturgical science and is one of the leading supporters of Benedict XVI's intended liturgical renewal. He is a lecturer at the Theological Faculty of Puglia and the local Institute of Religious Sciences, consultor of the Congregation for Doctrine of the Faith and the Congregation for the Causes of Saints and spiritual assistant of the St. Josef Brotherhood of Bari. Under Pope Benedict XVI. he was also a consultant of the Office for the Liturgical Celebrations of the Pope .
Same with you.
BWAHAHAHA!!!!
It is totally beyond the comprehension to a Catholic that someone could learn about their church and reject it.
It is not such a compelling belief system that people feel they can't resist joining.
A priest who used his position to molest and rape children is still a priest. FRoman Catholics always come back with *Once a priest, always a priest*, and *They're just sinners, just like the rest of us*, and other nonsense excusing why they are not immediately defrocked and thrown in jail.
Probably the same way you dare to know the state of his soul or my soul or anyone else's soul and tell us that we're going to hell because we aren't practicing Christianity the way you approve of.
That's all it takes to get a marriage annulled in the Catholic church?
It sure seems that Catholicism doesn't take marriage all that seriously if they hand out Catholic sanctioned divorces for reasons like that.
Jesus taught that sin in the heart is the same as having done it, that looking at a woman to lust is the same as adultery and that hatred was equivalent to murdering someone in your heart.
So you're going to try to convince us that you don't sin any mortal sins ever in your heart? That you have perfect control of your heart at all times?
When are you going to be canonized?
Wait...you believe in mortal sin now?
No, I’m no saint. I sin. A lot. Doesn’t mean I commit mortal sins on the regular. Which is what HJ insists I and all other Catholics do.
Anyone not a member of the Catholic Church at the time of their death is not saved unless they are in invincible ignorance and God wills to save them. That is Catholic teaching. That is not my assumption nor my personal belief like HJ’s assumption and belief that I commit mortal sins on the regular.
Once again, annulment is not divorce. Catholics believe that ‘What God has joined, let no man put asunder’, which means if a Catholic marriage is sacramental, it is permanent until the death of one of the spouses. However, if the marriage was not sacramental, then the spouses were never ‘joined by God’, so it was null from the beginning.
For a sacrament to attach, Catholics believe that there must be proper matter, and proper form. Baptism, for example requires matter (water) and form (I baptize you in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit).
A defect in form will render the marriage null, so if the marriage takes place outside of the church, if there is no priest or deacon present as a witness, etc., an annulment will be granted if requested. (Some of these things can be dealt with ahead of time by a dispensation, but I am generalizing here for clarity).
Proper ‘matter’ for a marriage is two informed, willing, adult, non-closely-related people of opposite sex who are properly disposed to receive and grant a sacrament. Both parties must be baptized, willing to enter into a lifetime commitment, open to children, and must be agreeable that those children be raised in the Catholic faith.
If one of the spouses intended to stay together but believed that if things ‘didn’t work out’, divorce would end the marriage, then the vows were invalid. If one said they were open to children but really weren’t, the vows were invalid. If one spouse was not properly educated in the requirements and full meaning of the sacrament of marriage, then the vows were invalid. If one was in a state of ongoing mortal sin, the vows were invalid.
Simply getting a divorce does not mean that the marriage is invalid. If both spouses met all of the criteria at the time of the vows, then the vows are valid and annulment will be denied. Changing your mind after the vows have been said does not invalidate them.
However, if one or both spouses have remarried after divorce, it is obvious that at least now, they do not believe in the permanence of the first marriage. The question is whether that belief was present at the time of the vows or not, and that is what is investigated when an annulment is requested.
And yes, evidence that a person lied while taking a vow ‘til death do us part’ is ‘all it takes’ to get an annulment (which I know you know is not a ‘Catholic sanctioned divorce’, but thanks for trying to be insulting anyway).
Love,
O2
God never put the requirement of being sacramental into marriage anywhere in Scripture. That is completely a fabrication of Catholicism.
Breaking marriage vows is breaking marriage vows.
Call it what you wish and try to white wash it as *annulment* but it’s still breaking marriage vows, semantic gymnastics by the Catholic church notwithstanding.
Well I suppose there are reprobates out there who really know what they're rejecting, but isn't it beyond your comprehension that someone could learn about Our Lord and reject Him? So too for us, we can't imagine that anyone who loves Our Lord could reject the fullness of His Truth, which is found in the Catholic Church.
Adolf Hitler was baptized and raised a Catholic until he apostatized soon after childhood. What's your point?
Yes, if you marry in the Catholic church, divorce and remarry without an annulment, (unless you marry the same person)you are committing adultery because you are still married in the eyes of God and the church. That is Catholic doctrine, it applies to Catholics.
The fact that others receive communion when they are not in a state of grace does not have any bearing on this. “Everybody does it” is not a valid excuse. In the Catholic Church, the Eucharist is where you are joined with Christ AFTER you are reconciled by the Sacrament of Reconciliation. “Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord.”
Catholics consider every Christian marriage valid until it is proven not valid. Nobody is going to come looking for you and question your marriage. If Catholics married outside of the Catholic Church obtain a civil divorce and later wish to be married in the Catholic Church, they will be granted an annulment with minimal effort as the first marriage lacked proper form and is thus non-sacramental.
It becomes more complicated when the first marriage was in the Catholic Church, however, it is not terribly expensive (only $500 in my archdiocese) and those who cannot pay are not turned away, so the myth of annulments being bought for “big dollars” is just that. It is the perpetuation of these myths that keeps divorced people from seeking annulments that might very well be properly granted, allowing them back into communion with the church.
The logic is not circular. If both spouses believed in the permanence of Catholic marriage at the time of the vows, at least on those grounds the marriage is valid and sacramental, and annulment will not be granted regardless of someone changing their mind later and obtaining a civil divorce.
The divorce itself is not sufficient evidence to show that the vows were spoken invalidly, however, especially if one spouse remarries after a divorce, it is obvious that they currently don’t believe the vows that they professed during their first wedding, so it is logical to investigate WHEN they stopped believing in the permanence of marriage, before or after the vows were taken.
As for ‘emotionless souls’, do you believe that every unmarried person fits that description? Because the Bible clearly shows that sexual relations outside of marriage are sinful, so every unmarried person is called to be celibate. Married people separated from their spouses for any reason are also called to be celibate. Do you believe that life without sexual relations is meaningless, impossible, abnormal, emotionless? Deployed military and their spouses, those whose partners are ill or disabled, widows and widowers, are these all emotionless souls? Have humans no capacity for self-control?
Love,
O2
“God has joined” = Sacramental
Love,
O2
If vows were not entered into validly, honestly, and with the proper disposition and knowledge, they are not binding.
Love,
O2
Sorry, ...to his wife...should be...with his wife...
I have provided th list of the mortal sins that are Catholic doctrine and yes, being human beings I believe without question that the vast majority of human beings commit at the very least one of these a month on the low end... Given masterbation is a mortal sin, there are entire populations of folks who are violating that one far more often than once a month... Not doing your Sunday obligations? Well given there are something like 65 million Catholics in America but nowhere near that many show up for mass each Sunday... Pretty clear that’s a wide swath as well add lust and coveting and lying (yes even a little white lie) and the rest yes the overwhelming majority of human being alive are going to commit at least one of these mortal sins at least once a month if not several times a week... Yet based on confessional numbers it’s pretty clear that the overwhelming majority of Catholics who receive communion have a mortal sin they have not confessed at the time they take the Eucharist.
If you believe you are above reproach on these matters then as I said you probably aren’t human anyway and don’t need to worry about your soul.
If you believe you are free from the urges and impulses that we all share as human beings and never engage in deceit even for what you perceive as good intentions or lusts or coveting or any of the other sins we all fall victim to, then by all means continue to be holier than though... Jesus had a few choice words about those who make sure they are seen in Temple if memory serves.
No one is saved but through Gods grace and none of us, even those who believe they are the most pious are remotely worthy of saving... That’s the simple truth of being Human. You can’t buy your way to heaven with good deeds... You can’t buy it with a pious life. The cost of our salvation is higher than anything we could ever manage to pay.. It is only through Gods eternal grace that any of us will ever see his Kingdom.
So please continue to believe that you are not guilty of the same failings all of humanity is guilty of, that you are the exception the rule and you are somehow above the very things that make is the flawed creatures we all are. Me, I live in the real world, where Even those with the kindest and most giving hearts still find ourselves guilty of these mortal sins, because we understand that we are failed and fallen creatures and while we strive to live up to the example set by Christ we all know that this is an example none of us ca. Ever actually acheive.
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.