Don Nicola Bux on Amoris Laetitia: "The Eucharist is Not a Sacrament for the Sinner"

Eponymous Flower ^ | August 19, 2016

[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 .

[omegatoo]

Yes, in the case of adultery and abandonment there will have to be an annulment process. And yes, it is frustrating at times, and yes it is difficult, but it shouldn’t be easy. And no, there is no guarantee that an annulment will be granted even under those circumstances, if neither spouse had a ‘defect’ which made the vows untruthful or made them otherwise incapable of entering into a sacramental union at the time of the marriage.

The actions that happen after the vows are not by themselves proof of invalidity, but again, at some point one spouse decided that marriage was not permanent or didn’t require fidelity to the spouse, so annulment will try to determine if that state of mind was present at the vows or not.

Also, not every marriage where there is infidelity or even temporary abandonment is hopeless, some people are able to reconcile, so automatically declaring a marriage ended because of these things doesn’t always make sense.

If there is not a formal process by the church in which a person is married, how else is a church marriage ended? Can anyone simply say, ‘my spouse cheated so now I am no longer married’? What if the cheating spouse truly regrets what happened and wants to reconcile? Who arbitrates? Does a civil divorce end church marriages? Are Christian marriages no different than civil marriages? As a Catholic, I can’t imagine a less formal way of dealing with this which would not be extremely inconsistent and confusing.

Love,
O2

[bonfire]

My inlaws were married/divorced to eachother twice then both went on and married others. At the end of his life my father in law sought out a willing priest who would have his current marriage to the love of his life annulled. Course he stayed with his current wife while she lovingly cared for him until he died. When I asked how she felt about what he had done she replied: “whatever made him feel better as it really meant nothing”.

I had no words other than, “Alrighty then”.

[rollo tomasi]

Should be easy is the point. Once the marriage bed was defiled by adultery, there is no more marriage. A covenant was broken, hence null and void. Yet must jump through idiotic bureaucratic hoops that are not Biblical at all and based on flimsy tradition/historiography where Catholic influence is completely separated from civil law to boot.

[MHGinTN]

Thanks for the ping, but I have lots of fence posts to argue with if I ever decline so far.

[MHGinTN]

A little leaven leaveneth the whole loaf. The rto began creeping into the religion of catholiciism bery eary on. The True CHURCH Jesus is building still cannot have rot because it is spiritual AND it is directed by the person of The Holy Spirit.

On the other hand, the institutional church began rotting early , even as Paul was still alive, and Jesus addressed a few in the first three Chapters of The Revelation of John.

Polycarp walked to Rome to oppose the heresies rising in the church at Rome.

[Elsie]

Don Nicola Bux on Amoris Laetitia: "The Eucharist is Not a Sacrament for the Sinner"

Likewise; the ROOT meal (the PASSOVER; onto which the much consumed eucharist has been grafted) wasn't for the Gentile; but for the Israelite.

[Elsie]

You’re not a Catholic and you have no clue as to what the Catholic Church teaches.

You are not a Protestant and really know why your chosen religion HATES Luther.

[Elsie]

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.

I have lied,
I have stolen things.
I have committed adultery,
I have been remarried;
I'm sure I've hated someone once or twice.

Woe is me!

How can I EVER make it to heaven???

[ebb tide]

You are not a Protestant and really know why your chosen religion HATES Luther.

I'm proud to not be a heretic and I have every reason to hate Luther as much as I hate Mohammed. If anything, I hate Luther more for he apostatized from the one, true Church.

[Zuriel]

**God did this to David, whom Bathsheba was his second of three wives,**

1st wife....Michal (1Sam 18:27. She had no children)
2nd wife....Abigail (widow, 1Sam 25:42)
3rd wife....Ahinoam (1Sam 25:43)

David also had sons from Maachah and Haggith. (don’t know if they were considered wives)

The above were with David while he was king in Hebron (1Chron. 3:1-4)

Bathsheba became David’s wife after he moved to Jerusalem. (!Chron. 3:5)

[Mark17]

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.

I know when I was a Catholic, I committed mortal sins by the truckload, every day of the year. Many of my Catholic high school classmates were more evil than I was.
Now, things are different. I have true faith in Jesus, and now, the only sin I love to commit, is the sin of presumption, by having complete confidence in my assurance of salvation. If people have no assurance of salvation, that's on them.

[omegatoo]

No, many marriages survive adultery, so although adultery might be a justification for divorce, it is not that cut and dried. It is not the act of adultery that ends the marriage, it is the response to that act that determines if the marriage survives or not. What if the cheating spouse is truly sorry and repentant, should the other spouse not be encouraged to forgive?

Also, is the adulterer free to remarry? If so, why would not a spouse who is tired of their marriage just purposefully cheat, or even just claim to have cheated so the marriage is then ended? What about the people who just don’t want to live together anymore and obtain divorces, are their marriages valid until someone commits adultery? Does that instantly invalidate their marriage? What if neither commits adultery after the divorce, can they validly marry again since the original marriage is still in force? As cumbersome as the Catholic system can be, if there is no structure, it seems like there can be a lot of putting asunder of things joined by God.

Catholic marriages are not completely separated from civil law, as I don’t believe you can marry in a Catholic church without a civil license, but the sacrament is not a part of civil law, which is why a civil divorce does not end a Catholic marriage. And anyone who chooses to marry in the Catholic Church is made aware of the ‘idiotic bureaucratic hoops’ beforehand. Otherwise they were not properly prepared for the marriage and their vows, taken in ignorance, would be null.

The hoops are worth the trouble when they bring a Catholic back into communion with their church.

Love,
O2

[boatbums]

 And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with publicans and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and drinketh with publicans and sinners?  When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance. (Mark 2:16,17)

[Mark17]

Woe is me!

How can I EVER make it to heaven

Well Els, it looks like you are up a creek, so you might try true faith in Jesus Christ. Oh wait, I believe you have. 😇😀😆😄😎 Your fire insurance is paid up. 🔥

[boatbums]

Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is explained in Matthew 7:13-26. A Christian who knowingly sins with the expectation of expecting forgiveness is blaspheming the Holy Spirit/taking God's name in vain/challenging God/being a God unto themselves.

That can't be the sin of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit because it can NEVER be forgiven, remember?

[SubMareener]

I think Rollo meant Matthew 12:31-32

31 “Therefore I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men.
32 “Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.

Nelson, Thomas. Holy Bible, New King James Version (NKJV) (p. 948). Thomas Nelson. Kindle Edition.

See also, Mark 3:28-30 and Luke 12:10.

[boatbums]

Please, Don’t Call Protestants Christians

Why not? If someone has believed in and trusted Jesus Christ as Savior and follows Him, JESUS calls him a Christian. Only elitist snobs who don't believe what God's word says contend someone outside their own church isn't a Christian. Seeing as ONLY God sees a person's heart, HE knows who really belongs to Him. Sure, not all Protestants just like not all Catholics are genuine Christians. Are you a Christian?

[boatbums]

Well there’s one that we talked about. ;o)

[boatbums]

Too bad they don’t seem to get it that ALL sins are “mortal” which means “subject to death”. ALL have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. Without the grace of God to redeem us, we would ALL be going to hell no matter how pious we imagine we are.

[boatbums]

Here’s another one. ;o)