'Divorced and remarried Catholics – We’ve got to do something'/ Poll (Freeps needed!)

The Providence Journal / ^ | Published: September 18, 2014 08:55 AM | KAREN LEE ZINER

[enduserindy]

Well as long as its horrific for someone...

[AAABEST]

You tell people not to answer you.Like you are all knowing.

I'm certainly not all knowing. One thing I do know (I'm absolutely positive in fact) is that I'm not at all interested in anything you have to say. Neurotic, poorly written people who throw around false accusations around turn me off. I'm funny that way.

You are not in union with the church.

Are you in union with the Roman Catholic Church.I think I asked that 3 times

Are you asking me or telling me? Make up your "mind."

I actually indulged you and answered - very clearly - in black and white. Obviously you're having enormous difficulty following a simple linear conversation.

Though it probably won't stop you from asking yet again, I'll answer yet again. In fact, I'll recycle my very last post to you - verbatim:

Okay Fatima, it's really none of your business what I do in my personal life (I don't even know you) but FWIW I am a Catholic in FULL COMMUNION with my Church. Gee, my daughter even goes to the Diocese elementary.

Why not ask some poor soul who has to deal with you in real life to help you get through the paragraph? This way the question won't have to be perpetually asked and answered.

[freeangel]

Wow, I even think annulment is abused.

Annulment? Extortion, so one can enter heaven—for a price.

[MayflowerMadam]

“I even think annulment is abused.”

The concept of annulment is not Biblical in any way. It was just another vehicle for generating revenue for the Catholic church. Other concepts you’ll NEVER find in the Bible: Infant baptism. Mary worship. Granting sainthood based on someone’s mojo. Praying for, and lighting candles for, the deceased. Purgatory. It goes on...

[Alberta's Child]

Catholics have an obligation to care for people in need like that. Four of the seven corporal works of mercy apply to this case.

[markomalley]

A man and a woman marry. They produce a child. Two years later, when the child is 3 months old, the man comes home from work and tells the woman, “I made a mistake. I don’t want this. I’m divorcing you.”

He walks out. She goes home to her parents. He files for a civil divorce two weeks later.

According to the Catholic Church, what happens to the young woman? When can she remarry?

I think the first and most important thing is to look at what Jesus says about the situation:

[Mat 19:3-9 KJV] 3 The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? 4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made [them] at the beginning made them male and female, 5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? 6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. 7 They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? 8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except [it be] for fornication πορνεία, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery μοιχεύω.

Now I don't 100% agree with John Salza (the guy who has the "Scripture Catholic" website) on this.

The first definition for the word πορνεία, according to the Liddell-Scott-Jones Greek Lexicon, is "prostitution" (followed by "fornication" and "unchastity") -- it is often used as a metaphor for the idea of "idolatry".

The first definition for the word μοιχάω, according to this same souce, is "to have a dalliance with", followed by the idea of "adultery". It is also used as a metaphor for the idea of being unfaithful to God.

Salza makes the assertion that πορνεία merely talks about unlawful sexual intercourse due to either blood relations (also called incest) or nonsacramental unions. Clearly, just based upon the dictionary definition of the word, that cannot be the case...it's much broader than all of that.

What does make sense is if either of the two spouses were sexually active with others prior to the marriage. Jesus talks specifically about the woman committing πορνεία...I hope that one doesn't take it too much of a stretch to include that as a prohibition for both spouses.

Think about it here: Jesus states that the two spouses become one flesh. So if Jesus was telling the truth here (for the benefit of some here who have a hard time reading, this is merely a rhetorical device, not an implication that He wouldn't be telling the truth)...then if the two are torn asunder, it would mean that each spouse would be taking a piece of the other spouse with them when they split apart. If one of the former spouses proposed being remarried, would not the third party be not only marrying the one he was marrying...would he/she not also be marrying part of the "former" spouse? (Again...if they really become "one flesh", as Jesus said they do)

What about the πορνεία bit in verse 9, above? The spouse who had committed πορνεία would have, through the sexual relations, already become "one flesh" with one or more other people prior to this marriage...so would it even be possible for a "real" marriage in such a situation to happen in the first place?

---

In addition to the witness of Jesus, we also have the witness of St Paul:

[1Co 7:10-11 KJV] 10 And unto the married I command, [yet] not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from [her] husband: 11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to [her] husband: and let not the husband put away [his] wife.

Pretty straightforward and to the point, isn't it?

---

I haven't cited anything from Catholic doctrine, have I? Just Bible.

Let's look at the hypothetical that you stated...

The husband here clearly violated the commandment of the Lord and the teaching of St Paul. He is a scumbag and should have massive consequences from society for his actions...he should lose his job, be avoided by any or all women, and utterly shunned...shamed until he returns to his wife.

Having said that, does his actions mean that the two who actually became one flesh (as Jesus taught in Matt 19:5-6) are all of a sudden not one flesh? (If that was the case, then was Jesus' saying in Matthew 19 reliable?)

I know that's not the easiest answer in the world for the poor woman, but it is the Scriptural one.

---

Here's where the "Catholic stuff" comes into play:

The only way that they would be two fleshes rather than one is if they were never one flesh to begin with. And this is where the annulment process comes into play: it tries to examine the situation to see if there was actually a valid marriage there or not and make some kind of determination one way or the other based upon the facts that are presented and the objective criteria upon which those facts are examined.

If the process determines that the marriage wasn't valid in the first place, then the marriage is declared "null" (and void) and the two spouses are free to move on with their lives. If the marriage was determined to be valid, then, well, "What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder."

(BTW, for those who accuse "annulment" as merely being "Catholic divorce" and talk about "buying annulments" and so on...I know there have been abuses, but just because there have been individuals, including clergy [even bishops], who have abused the process doesn't mean the process is bad...it just means that there are bad people)

[usconservative]

Catholic Church uses five criteria in deciding to grant an annulment

None of which were ever applied to any Kennedy family member despite their being "Catholic."

[SisterK]

I did not limit my question to Catholics. Suppose a person does not receive the sacraments. Can they still be saved, yes or no?....YES.

[Mom MD]

Believe and be baptized. Those are Christs criteria for salvation. (non Catholic) and baptism though preferred and necessary if there is time, is not a game breaker either. Ultimately all those who call on the Name of the Lord will be saved.

Having said that Holy Communion is a huge blessing and should not be denied those with a repentant heart. I don’t believe in mortal sin, (there is only one, and it is sinning against the Holy Spirit per Paul) and while divorce is against Gods will (but permitted in some circumstances) it is a reality of life and can be forgiven like any other sin. There are many worse sins that God forgives freely forgives when repented of.

Annulments are capricious and granted by men, often based on how much money and influence you have. Another non biblical way for the RC to control their flock and extort money from people. Sorry for bluntness but you asked for the non RC view.

[trebb]

“Although the teaching of Christ and his Church about the permanence of marriage is clear and undeniable, the lived reality is that many individuals, for a variety of reasons perhaps — personal, catechetical or cultural — are ill-equipped to fulfill the demands of the law,” Bishop Tobin wrote.

Jesus walked the earth under the Old Covenant and could not preach against it - He spoke of the new Covenant that He would be the beginning of.

That said, we once again have men, using a man-made religion, making decisions about who gets to commune with God and they actually think their decisions are binding on other's souls....God must chuckle at the hubris.

[chesley]

OK. I knew that.

My real question is this: she can't receive sacraments if she remarries, but if she is in an on-going adulterous? relationship, or is just plain getting it on with some dude on a regular basis, she can?

Or am I mistaking the Church's position? I would be glad to be wrong about this, and would really like to know.

I mean, she what? Goes to confession, gets absolved, and continues the relationship and does it again, she can receive sacraments? But not in an honest marriage?

[fatima]

OK I’ll try my best.If she remarries and was married in the Catholic Church and is having relations with her husband she can’t receive Communion and if she want to it’s important she speaks to a priest.I have a Priest she can talk to if you need a number.
If she is sleeping around she can’t go to Communion.If she goes to confession Father will ask her if she is going to stop.He says”Go and sin no more”So if she keeps sinning at some point if she is going to the same confessor he will not give her absolution.

[chesley]

Thank you.

[elpadre]

absolutely not -

what it means is if someone took a vow to God and spouse, and broke the vow it is a forgivable sin.

[fatima]

((((Hugs))))