Posted on 03/30/2019 8:12:59 AM PDT by Salvation
Question: I had reason to hope my niece was going to convert to the Catholic faith. But there were so many obstacles the Church set up that discouraged her. She was asked to go to classes, and they told her that her marriage was not valid and she would need an annulment. Further, it was necessary to wait until Easter, etc. The nearby evangelical church set up no such obstacles, and she was able to join at once and be considered a member. I hear so much talk of evangelization today, but I share my niece’s frustration. Can we not streamline this process?
— Name withheld
Answer: There is a kind of appealing simplicity that you describe in many Protestant denominations. But there are problems with the approach that should give us pause. Ultimately evangelization is more about conversion than mere membership. We are summoned to embrace the saving teaching of the Lord and to walk according to it.
Because adults make informed decisions, the Church considers it important to teach them the fundamentals of the Faith so that they can know what it is they are agreeing to when they enter the Church. Although some of the Scriptures portray an almost instant, on-the-spot baptism, the consensus in the early Church shifted to a lengthy, three-year period of instruction (called the catechumenate) prior to baptism. This likely was because of the insight that quick conversions often led to quick departures or a falling away when the true demands of discipleship became known.
Instructions are most insisted upon for those who are unbaptized. In the case of those who are baptized and come from different Protestant denominations, the length and content of instructions will depend on their background. It is up to the discretion of the pastor who discerns with each individual what is needed. It is certainly not required for those already baptized to “wait until next Easter.”
The concerns about a person’s marital status are rooted in the very words and teachings of Jesus himself. He teaches without ambiguity that for a person to marry, then divorce and enter another marriage, puts them in an ongoing state of adultery in the “new” marriage (cf. Mt 5:32; Mt 19:1-9; Mk 10:11-12; Lk 16:18, etc). He adds rather firmly, “What God has joined together, let no one divide” (Mt 19:9).
It will be further noted that when the Lord was evangelizing the woman at the well, he brought her to a moment of conversion, and she asked for the gift of faith. But the Lord Jesus saw fit to first raise with her the fact that she had been married five times and was now living with a man outside of marriage. Her conversion would not be complete or adequate until she was willing to live chastely. Then the graces could flow.
For reasons of their own, many Protestant denominations have decided to practically overlook such passages. But the Catholic Church takes the Lord’s teaching on these matters rather seriously, as he clearly intended that we should. In some cases, after an investigation based on evidence, the Church may use its power to bind and loose, to indicate that the previous marriage was not “what God has joined,” and it recognizes the first marriage as null. A person’s current marriage then can be blessed and recognized. But we simply cannot set the Lord’s words aside as if they were of little importance.
Thus some conversions to the Catholic faith will take some time to be faithful to the teachings of the Lord and the nature of true conversion. It is worth the diligence required.
Thank you, Rich. His peace is my daily life!
I am glad to share this with you. It is the one thing that those who criticize Catholic teaching on Mary ignore; that it begins with the understanding that Mary is a human being who, like us, was created by God. It was the will of the Father that she serve the unique role of being the mother of His only begotten Son while He was with us in the flesh.
Your thoughts about who created Her and for what purpose calls to mind a rhetorical question that a speaker at a conference raised. I don’t remember the exact words, but it was something like, “If you were God and wanted to create a woman to be the mother of your son, wouldn’t you create the most perfect woman that you could”?
So the Mary you identify as a mediatrix doing work petitioning Jesus is greater in perfection than Eve? Did this Mary need a Savior?
Once a fella decides to add anything to the Word of God, and assume it’s equal, he believes anything.
I never tried that.
“If you were God and wanted to create a woman to be the mother of your son, wouldn’t you create the most perfect woman that you could”?
.....
But this question assumes much from a human desire and ignores all the message of Scripture, that God always uses imperfect humans to carry out His plan of redemption.
The Lamb of God was perfect - exactly why He was placed upon a manger, exactly like the lamb used in the temple for atonement.
The priests of the temple were imperfect, the shepherds keeping watch for the birth of lambs were imperfect, the mother sheep (Mary), imperfect.
If any of those were perfect, a perfect lamb would be unnecessary.
The lamb (Christ) was without blemish and born to be sacrificed.
He was and is perfect.
Mary was “blessed *among* women”, but not over any other woman. She was imperfect, but God worked to deliver a perfect Lamb through her.
Ping
Mary was in constant contact with Jesus while she was with child. One could only speculate how this affected Mary, but the womb would be pure because of Who was in it, not the vessel itself.
Just a thought. YMMV
“Mary was in constant contact with Jesus while she was with child. One could only speculate how this affected Mary, but the womb would be pure because of Who was in it, not the vessel itself.”
You may be right.
Tonight I’m in Europe and it is very late... so I’m too tired and left wondering if every person Christ touched was also purified and not just healed... not enough espresso today to process this.
Mary of Nazareth wasn’t created. She was conceived in the flesh of two humans, male and female, and born.
Just a thought: Would Jesus come to a polluted place to collect His bride?... For that matter, was every thing Jesus touched made perfect, pure? Or was purity issued when He spoke a command? Lazarus was in the tomb four days when Jesus called him forth. Was Lazarus in Sheol? IIRC every time Jesus raised a dead person He did it with a command rather than laying hands upon them. In Judaism a dead body is unclean and Jesus would not violate that stricture, in my thinking anyway.
BTW, there is nothing unclean about the womb of a virgin.
I’m not arguing salvation, I’m arguing against the need for a womb from a sinless virgin to birth Jesus. Impure people do not taint Christ.
Perhaps I went a bit to far in my speculation. It was more throwing an idea out there.
Grace and Peace.
Actually, Joseph was already Mary's husband when the angel appeared to her.
Matthew 1:18-19 Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit. And her husband Joseph, being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce her quietly.
But why?
How, then, does Jesus share fully and completely in our humanity if He has the perfect mother none of the rest of us ever had or had the opportunity to have?
I learn much from your speculations and tossed in ideas, by inference of course. The fount from which wisdom pours must have a source pool.
24 When Joseph woke up,* he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife.*
I was referring to this passage...
I figured that.
However, I find it interesting that while they were betrothed, he was still considered her husband.
In our culture, betrothal has come to mean something different. It’s not the covenant. Breaking an engagement is not divorce, as it was in those days where breaking a covenant marriage, even though it was not yet consummated, was.
So basically, the angel told Joseph to go ahead with his plans.
AS a seeker; I'd want to know just HOW they have more 'info'.
Most of the 'info' that I do see; is mighty anti-biblical.
Acts 17:11 King James Version (KJV)
These were more noble than those in Thessalonica,
in that they received the word with all readiness of mind,
and searched the scriptures daily,
whether those things were so.
https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Acts%2017:11
Interesting I have no desire to have a relationship with Mary the relationship I desire is with Christ. I also notice the pronoun for Mary is capitalized in the original post - something reserved for deity. Yet the Roman’s claim they do not worship Mary. I think their priorities are way out of whack here...
It's right there in the Book:
Matthew 13:24-30 New King James Version (NKJV)
The Parable of the Wheat and the Tares
24 Another parable He put forth to them, saying: “The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field; 25 but while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat and went his way. 26 But when the grain had sprouted and produced a crop, then the tares also appeared. 27 So the servants of the owner came and said to him, ‘Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have tares?’ 28 He said to them, ‘An enemy has done this.’ The servants said to him, ‘Do you want us then to go and gather them up?’ 29 But he said, ‘No, lest while you gather up the tares you also uproot the wheat with them. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest, and at the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, “First gather together the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them, but gather the wheat into my barn.” ’ ”
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.