Posted on 01/13/2017 11:05:52 AM PST by ebb tide
After the Commission was first given to the Apostles.
Annulment is different from divorce. It means that the marriage was never real in the first place. Since that may be difficult to prove, it requires a decree of annulment from Church authorities.
Most obviously, there can be an annulment if one of the couple was already married, and their spouse was still living. So the second marriage never really took place.
There could also be an annulment if there was a SERIOUS misrepresentation by one of the spouses—for instance if one of them was gay or transgendered and neglected to tell the other beforehand.
Sexual relations in an ordinary marriage are a natural part of marriage, and are not unchaste. But they would be unchaste if one of the couple was divorced and remarried. Then the Church requires them to avoid sexual relations until the first marriage has been annulled.
I think most Catholics know all this, although this have gotten more confused in recent years when liberal priests or bishops have gotten involved.
Can’t be. No worship of Mary or prayers to Mary...no Pope. None of the stuff we see in roman catholicism today.
After the Commission was first given to the Apostles.
Was Paul not given the same commission?
Are not all Christians given the same commission? Can you not share the Gospel with the unsaved?
they are looking at a strict definition of adultery limited by the 10 Commandments not to commit physical adultery.
27“You have heard that it was said, ‘YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY’; 28but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. Matthew 5:27-28
Christ clarified the meaning of the commandment to include the mental as well as the physical.
There's not a person on this forum, if they're honest, who can deny they've committed adultery. Now our catholic friends have probably invented some rule that redefines what this means.
In the sight of God the one who looks after a woman with lust is just as guilty as the person who physically committed adultery. It shows how truly sinful we are.
And I'll bet you lunch there isn't a catholic on these threads who've cut their hand off or who've gouged out their eyes as Jesus noted below.
Do we have record of Peter, Paul or any other follower of Christ in the NT ever doing this?
No.
Why? They understood the context and the manner in how Jesus was saying this. My coach used this kind of "exhortation" all the time to motivate us to focus in a game.
29“If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30“If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell. Matthew 5:29-30
If catholics want to take John 6:52-58 as literal they have to take this passage from Matthew as literal. That they don't is telling.
Exactly. It’s FreeRepublic.
That’s why I’m free to point out that someone’s comments are irrelevant.
The issue at hand—the reception of Communion by adulterers—has nothing to do with “the traditions of men.” It has to do with the words of Jesus Christ and the words of Saint Paul.
Yeah...not a person on these forums has ever done this.
27“You have heard that it was said, ‘YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY’; 28but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. Matthew 5:27-28
And they’re free to completely ignore you.
You’re confusing the work of the Holy Spirit to lead and guide, with doctrine which explicitly and exclusively comes from Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16).
In this case, the Catholic Church is espousing doctrine not in Scripture, something Jesus specifically condemned (”teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” Mark 7:7).
Paul was not a free agent independent of the Apostles. That is why it is important to note that the Commission was given first to the Apostles. Paul was brought to the Apostles by Barnabas following his conversion, he had hands laid on him before his missionary journeys and when issues or problems arose in his ministry, he returned to Jerusalem to consult with the Apostles and ancients, i.e. those in authority in the Church. See Acts 15.
The Church was not a horizontal construct.
Are not all Christians given the same commission? Can you not share the Gospel with the unsaved?
All Christians are called to share the Gospel but not all are called to the same ministry. Some are teachers, some are prophets.... etc, etc. See Ephesians. The ordained priesthood is one such ministry. It is a special ministry within the Church through which we receive the Holy Eucharist. Those so ordained trace their apostolic succession back to the Apostles and the Upper Room with Jesus. Only those who have had hands laid on them through the successors of the Apostles may perform this ministry.
Jesus founded a Church. He expressly uses the word "Church" as in "my Church" in his discourse with Peter (Matthew 16).
The issue at hand is the Catholic Church putting itself as the arbitrator between God and man. That is false doctrine. The only arbitrator between God and man is the man Christ Jesus (1 Timothy 2:5).
He was a free agent of Christ's!
That is why it is important to note that the Commission was given first to the Apostles.
Paul was brought to the Apostles by Barnabas following his conversion, he had hands laid on him before his missionary journeys and when issues or problems arose in his ministry, he returned to Jerusalem to consult with the Apostles and ancients, i.e. those in authority in the Church. See Acts 15.
Let's revisit Acts 9.
15But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is a chosen instrument of Mine, to bear My name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel; 16for I will show him how much he must suffer for My name’s sake.” 17So Ananias departed and entered the house, and after laying his hands on him said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road by which you were coming, has sent me so that you may regain your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.” 18And immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he regained his sight, and he got up and was baptized; 19and he took food and was strengthened.
Now for several days he was with the disciples who were at Damascus, 20and
immediately he began to proclaim Jesus
in the synagogues, saying, “He is the Son of God.” 21All those hearing him continued to be amazed, and were saying, “Is this not he who in Jerusalem destroyed those who called on this name, and who had come here for the purpose of bringing them bound before the chief priests?” 22But Saul kept increasing in strength and confounding the Jews who lived at Damascus by proving that this Jesus is the Christ.
He did not wait on getting the permission from the other Apostles. Why? He already had his marching orders from Jesus as had the Apostles....go preach...the great commission.
Jesus founded a Church. He expressly uses the word "Church" as in "my Church" in his discourse with Peter (Matthew 16).
Yes...the word is ekklesia. 577 ekklēsía(from 1537 /ek, "out from and to" and 2564 /kaléō, "to call") – properly, people called out from the world and to God, the outcome being the Church (the mystical body of Christ) – i.e. the universal (total) body of believers whom God calls out from the world and into His eternal kingdom. Helps-Word Studies.
He was in no sense a "free agent".
Now there were in the church which was at Antioch, prophets and doctors, among whom was Barnabas, and Simon who was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manahen, who was the foster brother of Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. And as they were ministering to the Lord, and fasting, the Holy Ghost said to them: Separate me Saul and Barnabas, for the work whereunto I have taken them. Then they, fasting and praying, and imposing their hands upon them, sent them away. Acts 13: 1-3
This passage makes it clear that Paul's ministry was performed in obedience to the Holy Spirit which manifested in a human authority which sent Paul on a mission.
He did not wait on getting the permission from the other Apostles. Why? He already had his marching orders from Jesus as had the Apostles....go preach...the great commission.
Correct. But he did not continue in isolation as the above passage makes clear. Paul was sent by the Church. Paul, throughout his ministry, made a point of consulting with the Apostles.
And some coming down from Judea, taught the brethren: That except you be circumcised after the manner of Moses, you cannot be saved. And when Paul and Barnabas had no small contest with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain others of the other side, should go up to the apostles and priests to Jerusalem about this question. And the apostles and ancients assembled to consider of this matter. And when there had been much disputing, Peter, rising up, said to them: Men, brethren, you know, that in former days God made choice among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. Acts 15: 1-2, 6-8
That doesn't sound like a "free agent". And in the end, it was Peter who delivered the decisive oration.
Yes...the word is ekklesia. 577 ekklēsía(from 1537 /ek, "out from and to" and 2564 /kaléō, "to call") – properly, people called out from the world and to God, the outcome being the Church (the mystical body of Christ) – i.e. the universal (total) body of believers whom God calls out from the world and into His eternal kingdom.
It is that but the Church is much more than that. Within the Church there are various ministries, as previously explained.
And when they had preached the gospel to that city, and had taught many, they returned again to Lystra, and to Iconium, and to Antioch: Confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue in the faith: and that through many tribulations we must enter into the kingdom of God. And when they had ordained to them priests in every church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, in whom they believed. Acts 14: 20-22
Ordained priests, right?
Furthermore, the Church is spotless.
That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy, and without blemish. Eph 5: 27.
How does that arise if the Church is nothing more than a collection of sinful believers? It arises because the relationship between Christ and his Church is a mystical one, a supernatural one. The Church is the body of Christ who is the Head. The Head and the Body are one, inseparable.
Bass ackwards.
Before there was the New Testament, there was doctrine.
6The apostles and the elders came together to look into this matter. 7After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brethren, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe. 8“And God, who knows the heart, testified to them giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He also did to us; 9and He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith. 10“Now therefore why do you put God to the test by placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? 11“But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are.” 12All the people kept silent, and they were listening to Barnabas and Paul as they were relating what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles
13After they had stopped speaking, James answered, saying, “Brethren, listen to me.
14“Simeon has related how God first concerned Himself about taking from among the Gentiles a people for His name. 15“With this the words of the Prophets agree, just as it is written,
Who had the last say?
Peter then Barnabas and Paul and then James.
It makes me wonder if we're reading the same text.
Those “sinful believers” have been made clean by the blood of Christ. The Blood makes us clean.
“Only those who have had hands laid on them through the successors of the Apostles may perform this ministry.”
You speak not of one with first hand knowledge, but of hear say. As one with the spiritual gift of teaching no man imparted me with anything. It was and is a gift of The Holy Spirit of God through Jesus Christ that did all the gifting and teaching to me.
“he had hands laid on him before his missionary journeys”
Acts 9:17 Ananias wasn’t and apostle and he was the only one that laid hands on Paul before he started to preach.
Acts 9:20
Galatians 1 is a good starting point, but specifically Gal 1:11-12.
Then Galatians 2 will explain that Paul had already been preaching when he went to Jerusalem to meet the other apostles.
Quit reading the ccc and start reading your bible your knowledge or lack there of is showing.
Ho hum.
Hey, don’t forget they’ve put Mary in this role also.
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.