Posted on 06/03/2012 1:47:18 PM PDT by Salvation
“That a spouse remains for an extended period in hopes of repairing the fault and becomes convinced they can not is none of your business, and certainly not yours to judge.”
Who’s judging (politicians don’t count)? They get divorced civilly, and the church does whatever it wants to recognize the results of the “unmarriage”
“No, it’s Protestant duplicity when one keeps insisting an annulment is the same thing as a divorce when it manifestly is not. “
An annulment and a divorce have the same result - a church recognized dissolution of marriage. Catholics pretend it never happened, Protestants just divorce. It’s the same result - you disagree that it is the same result, the very definition of duplicity - an argument I attempted to avoid with Catholics by pointing out it’s simply “unmarriage”.
What's manifest is that two people who got married in a church ceremony are now officially declared unmarried any longer and the result, the manifest results, are the same, whether you call it divorce or annulment. What's manifest is the man and woman are no longer called husband and wife and are split up. Same end.
That which we call a rose by any other name......
That would be rejecting God's word just a surely as a child that won't eat their brussel sprouts.
It's not the Holy Spirit guiding people to just eat their fish sticks and fries....
So do murder and natural death: are they the same?
If that's your "Holy Spirit guidance system" you need to learn about Jesus.
“So do murder and natural death: are they the same?”
Doesn’t matter, even the Catholic Church would let the widow remarry. No annulment necessary.
Oh please.
I didn’t ask you about marriage. I asked you about manners of death.
My question demonstrates the fallacy of imputing equivalency by results. Continually bleating “same results” is either wanton ignorance or intellectual dishonesty, neither of which are suited to one who names the name of Christ.
No that means that there are 1.2 billion Catholics who are wrong. And to the extent that they reject Church teaching, they are actually Protestant, though they might call themselves Catholic.
For crying out loud, how often have Protestants maintained that Catholics are not allowed to think for themselves?
There are doctrines, intrinsic to the nature of God, Jesus and the believer that are such the Church holds them to be resolute, absolute truth.
But, in opposition to the specious belief that the Church mandates every action and thought of a Catholic, the truth is that the Church offers her followers, followers of Jesus, a sure norm, a lifeboat in the stormy seas by which they can compare their beliefs and understanding of the Bible and know when they are in union with Christ and when they are not.
It is profoundly sad that without that sure norm, that absolute authority, there are those who read Scripture and believe that the Holy Spirit has guided them to proclaim/believe/accept that Jesus would not be opposed to abortion, euthanasia, eugenics and homosexual “marriage”.
Death is not a sacrament. Marriage is. Unless of course it was a Catholic non-marriage type of marriage to be determined at some future unspecified time.
The law of the U.S., today, allows "no-fault" divorce and so does the Catholic Church, it appears. As long as a suitable excuse is provided, an annulment is a given which permits remarriage IN the church and that definitely is NOT following the stated dogmas of the Church. The criticism is deserved.
The only thing worse than the evil men do that gets blamed on the devil is the hubris that gets blamed on the Holy Spirit.
And your 7 year posting history is a supporting testimony that being Catholic believe in Jesus and are just as saved as those in the store front churches so many "individual believers" attend?
One is saved when one believes and one is baptized when one believes. Your argument is not with me, it with the Bible which says as much, Jesus says as much.
Mark 16:16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.
Peter replied, Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Why does one need the Holy Spirit? Why did Jesus send Him to the Apostles and disciples and to us?
And yes, the shed blood of Jesus saves, opens the gates of heaven and repairs our relationship with God. But, if that is all that people need to be saved and have eternal life with God, then why does one have to believe? Why isn’t everyone saved? Why must one repent?
*****The point is that even though these differing denomination are reading the VERY SAME Bible, they are coming to VERY DIFFERENT conclusions about some fundamental things.*****
*****Nor fundamental things whether you think so or not. I’m telling you they’re not and since it is not your faith we are discussing, you have no ability to decide what are fundamental differences or not. It’s up to those of us whose faith it is to define it.****
And why is that you get to decide that? By what authority do you say that the very nature of God, Jesus and the believer are not fundamental differences?
Catholics don’t get the privilege of defining Protestant beliefs for them.
I am hardly doing that. I can go to numerous websites or read tracts or books written by Protestants that define those beliefs. I have not tried to define yours.
In fact, I never engaged you at all. I asked a question, a sincere one of another poster and you jumped in with all the usual, trite, shallow garbage that is spouted by a bevy of virulent agitators whenever Catholics post a thread like this.
And why is that a protestant can tell me what I believe as a Catholic, even after I have declared that not to be so?
Practice what you preach.
I didn’t ask about sacraments. I didn’t ask about marriage, Catholic or otherwise.
Would it make it easier for you to understand if I call it “unlife?”
Are murder and natural death morally equal since they both result in unlife?
If a "suitable excuse is provided" who are you to invalidate it?
****And once you did these things, you never once spoke with or studied Scripture with any other human being?
I never said that. We were discussing what caused me to feel the need to buy a Bible and anything other than addressing that, what my knowledge about God and Jesus was before that, does not enter into the equation.****
I never said that you did say that. Thus my question and not a statement.
Do you think a marriage between a man and a seven year old girl is a valid marriage or should the Church nullify it?
Do you think that a marriage against the will of either party is a valid marriage or should the Church nullify it?
Do you think the marriage involving a seriously mentally disabled or unconscious person is invalid or should the Church nullify it?
Do you think that the marriage to someone who is already married to one or more other persons is a valid marriage or should the Church nullify it?
These are just a few of the more obvious grounds on which the Church determines that the marriage was never a valid marriage. Can you at least agree that there are some legitimate reasons to annul a marriage?
Peace be with you
Dey gots de Holy Spirit, don'cha know!
*****The Holy Spirit impressed it on me*****
And, for that matter, how did you know it was the Holy Spirit?
How did you even know who the Holy Spirit is?
And did you know when you bought your Bible that it is the inerrant, inspired word of God?
And how did you know which Bible to purchase considering the huge number of various translations?
And does this Bible you own have commentary?
Dey gots de Holy Spirit, don'cha know!
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.