Posted on 08/22/2016 5:58:11 PM PDT by ebb tide
"The Eucharist is not a sacrament for the sinner but the sacrament of reconciled sinners. Just as it is the source and principle of mercy. I hope I have been clear!
Nicola Bux, August 13, 2016 at a youth meeting in Schio. The theologian spoke on the theme "The sacraments are not a joke." The Eucharist is not a sacrament for the divorced and remarried, but for reconciled sinners. The liturgist Nicola Bux is one of the most reputable practitioners of the liturgical science and is one of the leading supporters of Benedict XVI's intended liturgical renewal. He is a lecturer at the Theological Faculty of Puglia and the local Institute of Religious Sciences, consultor of the Congregation for Doctrine of the Faith and the Congregation for the Causes of Saints and spiritual assistant of the St. Josef Brotherhood of Bari. Under Pope Benedict XVI. he was also a consultant of the Office for the Liturgical Celebrations of the Pope .
That sounds like a few groups in Jerusalem prior to Pentecost...
That's because God doesn't. Because hate = murder and lust = adultery.
And if you sin one sin you are guilty of the whole law, according to James, the Catholic's favorite book of the Bible.
James 2:8-11 If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing well. But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors. For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it. For he who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” If you do not commit adultery but do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law.
Yup, that’s a good verse.
I've been clear as a bell that I do. If you are still questioning this, then I question your good will and I have nothing more to say to you. Have a nice day.
When I was a Catholic, many years ago, I did not identify myself as a Christian either, so I am not surprised if some, or many don't do it now. Now, I am thankful to be an ex Catholic, and I certainly do indentify as a Christian. My fire insurance is paid up. 😀😆😄
Uh.....no.
Catholic Doctrine on this appears to be a bit muddled by mixing things that can be forgiven in with things that can’t. See http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07409a.htm.
It starts out on the correct tract:
“So, to sin against the Holy Ghost is to confound Him with the spirit of evil, it is to deny, from pure malice, the Divine character of works manifestly Divine. This is the sense in which St. Mark also defines the sin question; for, after reciting the words of the Master: “But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost shall never have forgiveness”, he adds at once: “Because they said: He hath an unclean spirit.” With this sin of pure downright malice, Jesus contrasts the sin “against the Son of man”, that is the sin committed against Himself as man, the wrong done to His humanity in judging Him by His humble and lowly appearance. This fault, unlike the former, might he excused as the result of man’s ignorance and misunderstanding. “
But, then the “Birds of the Air” show up: “But the Fathers of the Church, commenting on the Gospel texts we are treating of, did not confine themselves to the meaning given above. Whether it be that they wished to group together all objectively analogous cases, or whether they hesitated and wavered when confronted with this point of doctrine, which St. Augustine declares (Serm. ii de verbis Domini, c. v) one of the most difficult in Scripture, they have proposed different interpretations or explanations. “
I think it is best to stick with St. Augustine on this one:
“On the other hand, St. Augustine frequently explains blasphemy against the Holy Ghost to be final impenitence, perseverance till death in mortal sin. This impenitence is against the Holy Ghost, in the sense that it frustrates and is absolutely opposed to the remission of sins, and this remission is appropriated to the Holy Ghost, the mutual love of the Father and the Son. In this view, Jesus, in Matthew 12 and Mark 3 did not really accuse the Pharisees of blaspheming the Holy Ghost, He only warned them against the danger they were in of doing so. “
So the Pharisees were just skating on the edge of the Eternal Lake of Fire, but the Sadducees, who denied the resurrection and anything miraculous, were headed straight into it.
Really???? So, now, you're saying that you can "earn" graces? Totally incorrect! Grace is freely given by God to us NOT for anything that we do but as a true Gift from Him!! Grace cannot be earned by works.
Why can’t the adulterous spouse remarry? The marriage is legitimately ended. How is this enforced? Is a record kept somewhere that all preachers must check before marrying couples in non-Catholic ceremonies?
What if one spouse lies about the other? What if the cheating spouse denies the affair? Who investigates to determine the truth? What if one spouse is abusive? There is no biblical provision for ending an abusive marriage unless one spouse is adulterous.
Perhaps you are right and the Catholic Church should have a provision which specifically addresses adultery without regard to valid vows, but that is a doctrinal issue beyond my control. Despite false claims there is not and likely never will be “Catholic divorce”, so these cases would still be processed as annulments. The point is that even if that were considered a “special case”, there would still have to be an investigation into the accusations and that still would take time and resources.
A typical annulment will take about a year, less if everyone cooperates and the grounds are clear, longer if not. The sooner it is started the sooner it ends.
The financial circumstances of the family don’t and shouldn’t affect the investigation into whether or not the marriage is valid. (Other than a waiver of the fee, which is usual) There are other Church resources to help through one’s own parish, but this is one issue where civil authorities have more power and should be used for help with child support, etc.
Are you saying that the only way for a family to survive is through remarriage? Within a year? If there is already a potential new spouse would they not be willing to help before the wedding? What effect would an ‘instant’ annulment have in the immediate aftermath of a separation? You still have to wait for a civil divorce. You still have to find a new spouse.
I believe much of the problem comes from people not realizing that they need the annulment and from the false rumors about how difficult and expensive it is which causes people to avoid the process. Catholics should begin the annulment process when they begin the divorce process. It wont be accepted until the divorce is final, but the paperwork can be made ready.
Waiting until you are planning your next wedding is a bad idea if you want to be married Catholic. Partly this is the fault of the Church for not reaching out to divorced Catholics earlier, but poor Catholic education and poor planning by the new couple are also issues. A year delay after wedding plans are started is considered unacceptable, and many Catholics will give in to the temptation to marry outside of the Church, leading to the whole problem of divorced/remarried Catholics out of communion.
The point is that the Catholic process is what it is, you or I cannot change that. If you want a Catholic marriage you have to play by Catholic rules. Anyone who needs an annulment should seek one. It is not as bad as it is made out to be, and it is worth it in the end. Many out of communion can return, and if an annulment is not granted, at least you know where you stand. (And yes you are still welcome in the church despite not taking communion).
I’m not an expert on annulment, but I do have some experience, so if there are particular questions best not addressed here, feel free to private reply and I’ll try to point you in the right direction.
Love,
O2
••••••••••••••TAGLINE••••••••••••••••••
Can you please show me the exact Biblical scripture where it states that communion should be refused to anyone? Please show me Jesus' exact wording for this. This is man's law not the law of God!
For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.
And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words: going forth out of that house or city shake off the dust from your feet.
Now there is an entire other debate about what constitutes ‘unworthily’, but again, Catholic Church, Catholic rules. There is no Catholic who cannot take advantage of the Sacrament of Reconciliation and then be permitted to worthily accept communion once again. There are some requirements, though. You must be truly sorry for your sins and you must have a firm intention not to commit them again. I believe Someone said something about “go and sin no more”.
The Catholic Church is full of ways to obtain redemption, those who do not believe you should need this through the Church shouldn’t be Catholic. Pick another denomination that bypasses this step. Determine your own worthiness. Personally, I suspect I’m kind of biased about that, so I welcome objective input.
Love,
O2
You can also find what JESUS told Nicodemus in John 3, paying close attention to what JESUS reveal about the brass snake in the desert long before Nicodemus's time.
When you put the "do" into salvation as work that must be performed, you have strayed away from the Gospel Paul preached and the Apostles taught to the Jews first (via Peter sent to the circumcision) then to the Gentiles (via the House of the Roman Centurion Cornelius).
+1
They are all false ways. There's only ONE way, and that's through JESUS and faith in Him and His FINISHED work on the cross.
They are all false ways. There's only ONE way, and that's through JESUS and faith in Him and His FINISHED work on the cross.
And you don't need a church or to go through a church to do it. he'll hear us if we talk to Him.
BINGO!
But adding works to dead faith is not going to make it living faith.
No more than putting a dead body on life support is going to make it a living body.
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.