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.
As the Scriptures tell us, Jesus Christ, of course, is an integral part of the Church He built. As the Apostle Paul (speaking of Jesus) says in Colossians 1:18a, "And He is the Head of the body, the Church". Jesus, the Head of His Church, indeed does save, and I think Catholics and Protestants alike agree with the basic message of this great old hymn, being heartily belted out here by these Baptists:
If the children are legitimate, then the marriage was valid after all.
Ooops.....
FWIW, jcon, ALL marriages are valid. It's only Catholicism that cooked up that excuse for granting church sanctioned divorce.
afvet, intercourse sets up the one flesh union that binds a man and woman together. When a couple gets married depending on whatever is recognized as a culture, that sanctifies the one flesh union.
In the OT the penalty for any sexual activity outside of marriage was the death penalty, unless it was a single virgin man and a single virgin women. Then the penalty was that they had to marry.
"No religious organization can claim to be THE church that Jesus said He would build... If that were the case, then EVERY person who was Catholic would be saved, no matter what, and no one who wasn’t saved could ever get to heaven, no matter what."
What the... Good gravy. Where to begin? I never said, implied, or thought any such thing. Isn't that called a "straw man argument"? Always refuting something the other person didn't say?
Catholics just want to have their cake and eat it too.
What a convenient religion for people who want to divorce from their spouse without calling it divorce and incurring the judgment of sin, which is what breaking that one flesh union is.
Again, you give your personal opinion without understanding.
It requires a valid marriage so that God can join them together.
So is everyone living together in a valid marriage? I don’t think so. They are living in sin.
If there was a valid marriage, then I do not believe that the Church would annul it.
So why do the protestant churches recognize divorce, if it is clear do you that God does not approve the practice/
Why should Catholics hang their heads shame? I didn’t do it?
What do you mean *recognize divorce*?
No Christian church approves of or grants divorces , or any other breaking of the marriage vows.
I don’t know of any other church which will dissolve your marriage vows by declaring them *invalid*, thus separating what God joined together.
All for a fee , er ah, *suggested donation* of course.
If you think there’s nothing in your church to be ashamed of, you are in as bad condition as it is.
Placemarker
For identifying as a Catholic.
For continuing to affiliate with an organization in which the horror stories we hear about the Catholic hierarchy are widespread and rampant and apparently not being dealt with.
For supporting it in ANY way shape, or form, which gives it your approval.
I didn’t do it?
Why are you asking me? I don't know. Only you do.
The advantage of being a follower of CHRIST and not a church is that when a local church goes off the rails, no one is obligated to stay and by appearances condone the behavior or suffer the consequences in damage done to one spiritually by following men who behave in such reprehensible, unChristlike ways.
Your comment:”No Christian church approves of or grants divorces , or any other breaking of the marriage vows.”
Most Protestant churches discourage divorce except as a last resort, but do not actually prohibit it through church doctrine.
Most protestant churches do not consider marriage a sacrament.
The Catholic Church does not dissolve a marriage, but looks at the facts and decides if it was a valid marriage in the first place.
You seem to imply that the Catholic Church provides annulments (Your opinion a divorce) for fees instead of Church doctrine on marriage. I don’t know of any situation where this is true. We should not feed the rumor mill with false statements.
Your comment: “Receiving Christ is the ONLY requirement for salvation. Christ, not the church, saves.”
As Catholics, we receive Jesus Christ in the Sacrament of the Eucharist.
I hope you don’t die in mortal sin and lose your salvation.
As Catholics, we have the Sacrament of Reconciliation to forgive our sins before we die.
Christ wants us as individuals to join together as His Church and as part of His Body (like the bond of marriage) to pray and help each other learn to love God and our neighbor.
It is only a few months for RCIA.
Big statement,I will take the first part.”I have a huge problem with the Catholic Church excusing Catholics voting Democrat because they will overlook the sin of abortion and homosexuality” .I agree.
True.
I agree,lock them up.
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.