FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Pope Francis may float compromise on divorce - John L Allen
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
There is a LOT
Just this week I said to a friend of mine who had asked that what I think will happen is this: there will be a lot of talk about the Catholic Church changing its view of divorce.; there will be a lot of discussion about those countries and their problems with this issue; it will seem as though the Church is about to make a huge change. And the Church hierarchy will try to sound as if they have made a huge change. In fact, however, business will remain the same. Right now, you can get an annulment. The bureaucratic procedures for annulments will probably be streamlined, and there will be a sense that canonical judges of one sort or another can make their decisions knowing that there is a lot of grey zone in these problems. But nothing will really change.

The media will have to choose to either frame the non-change as a change and make it seem like the Catholic Church is all different now, when in fact it is not; or they will have to attack the Church as having too many "stalwarts" who may be frustrating the Pope's "desire" to change everything.

The real ones to watch are the really bad, liberal Church rags. I suspect that they will express anger, but also see any kind of perceived change as positive change.

Nothing will really actually change.

Months ago, I asked a priest what the deal is with Pope Francis. To me, he seemed crazy, and always willing to open a discussion up on any nonsense. The priest answered me: "Pope Francis is a Jesuit. He will operate as the Jesuits do: they get everybody together, they all discuss, and then do whatever he wanted to do in the first place."

As I said elsewhere, I think this pope is a bit allergic to decisions, so I suspect he will stretch out long discussions that will look good in the papers, and then there will be no real decisions at the end, but just recommendations on how to be nice to such people, but no actual change.
I don't know what the solution is, though. I'm a hopeless realist. That's always been my problem.

Back in the 1970s, when divorce was on the climb even among Catholics, our parish priest started a support group for "Separated & Divorced Catholics." Some of these people thought they were barred from Holy Communion simply because they were divorced. None of them were remarried. As for annulments, nobody considered it. Back then the annulment process was considered too lengthy, too expensive, and only people like the Sinatras and the Kennedys got one- or that was the impression. 

Most if not all of the folks in the group were the victims of divorce, the spurned ones. They never wanted it.  I saw men, grown men, big burly men, sit in their chairs and sob. They thought their lives were over. In time, the men and women started to pair off. Father was furious. He broke up the support group, but those people went off and became couples anyway. They remarried civilly or by the Lutheran pastor down the street. The ones I knew are still married, after these thirty or forty years, and they are still estranged from the church.

The Church has high standards. We are all called to perfection. But why is it so hard to understand that there is an innate human need to loved and be loved; that neither the church's rulebooks or divorce papers can put an end to that.

I hope they DO make annulments easier, because I see no other hope for these people.
(02-18-2014, 05:51 PM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know what the solution is, though. I'm a hopeless realist. That's always been my problem.

Back in the 1970s, when divorce was on the climb even among Catholics, our parish priest started a support group for "Separated & Divorced Catholics." Some of these people thought they were barred from Holy Communion simply because they were divorced. None of them were remarried. As for annulments, nobody considered it. Back then the annulment process was considered too lengthy, too expensive, and only people like the Sinatras and the Kennedys got one- or that was the impression. 

Most if not all of the folks in the group were the victims of divorce, the spurned ones. They never wanted it.  I saw men, grown men, big burly men, sit in their chairs and sob. They thought their lives were over. In time, the men and women started to pair off. Father was furious. He broke up the support group, but those people went off and became couples anyway. They remarried civilly or by the Lutheran pastor down the street. The ones I knew are still married, after these thirty or forty years, and they are still estranged from the church.

The Church has high standards. We are all called to perfection. But why is it so hard to understand that there is an innate human need to loved and be loved; that neither the church's rulebooks or divorce papers can put an end to that.

I hope they DO make annulments easier, because I see no other hope for these people.

But what does God want, and I speak as a spurned one?

Perhaps God is calling some of us to live with this, just as a person born with same sex attraction is called to live a chaste life. I don't know the answer but just thinking out loud...

Barnhardt had a pretty good article on this....

"The only thing I can say to these men (and also women to whom this happens) is to unite your marital sufferings to Our Lord and Divine Spouse, abandoned, denied and persecuted in His Sorrowful Passion.  God Almighty has been through exactly the same thing that you are going through, only worse, and on a far bigger scale.  There is nothing that could ever be of greater consolation than that truth, which is all a derivative function of the Incarnation, which we continue to celebrate in these 40 days of Christmas."

http://www.barnhardt.biz/2014/01/17/833/
(02-18-2014, 05:51 PM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know what the solution is, though. I'm a hopeless realist. That's always been my problem.

Back in the 1970s, when divorce was on the climb even among Catholics, our parish priest started a support group for "Separated & Divorced Catholics." Some of these people thought they were barred from Holy Communion simply because they were divorced. None of them were remarried. As for annulments, nobody considered it. Back then the annulment process was considered too lengthy, too expensive, and only people like the Sinatras and the Kennedys got one- or that was the impression. 

Most if not all of the folks in the group were the victims of divorce, the spurned ones. They never wanted it.  I saw men, grown men, big burly men, sit in their chairs and sob. They thought their lives were over. In time, the men and women started to pair off. Father was furious. He broke up the support group, but those people went off and became couples anyway. They remarried civilly or by the Lutheran pastor down the street. The ones I knew are still married, after these thirty or forty years, and they are still estranged from the church.

The Church has high standards. We are all called to perfection. But why is it so hard to understand that there is an innate human need to loved and be loved; that neither the church's rulebooks or divorce papers can put an end to that.

I hope they DO make annulments easier, because I see no other hope for these people.

Annulments were actually soaring in the seventies, in the USA there were only a few hundred granted in 1969 but once the bishops could do their own they climbed to over 50,000 a year by 1975. The church's canons on marriage defined at Trent speak for themselves, though when annulments are granted by the abuse of the psychological norms the Church's teaching is practically vitiated already.. I understand the human need to love and be loved, (and for some this means marrying many times) but really what these people need is a robust prayer life and embrace of Christ. The joy of that will make them feel much better and change their perspective.  I think their problem is putting human needs ahead of spiritual ones, and focusing on earthly happiness that will always be chimerical. Now, since annulments typically cost from a few hundred to a few thousand dollars, I really wonder if the bishops are ready to say goodbye to that revenue stream. Call me cynical if you wish but I do wonder how much that calculation enters into things. I am not saying there should be no annulments, but both Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict decried the abuse of the psychological norms in the annulment process.
The question that really puzzles me is how many of those belonging to the "Divorced and remarried" groups have actually tried to get an annulment? Do those groups consist of people who were denied an annulment or what?

C.
(02-18-2014, 05:51 PM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote: [ -> ]The Church has high standards. We are all called to perfection. But why is it so hard to understand that there is an innate human need to loved and be loved; that neither the church's rulebooks or divorce papers can put an end to that.

I hope they DO make annulments easier, because I see no other hope for these people.

My grandparents grew up in a Catholic country, divorce was on par with being a homosexual or a sheep shagger. It was unthinkable, even in communist times. I almost suffocated from laughter after reading that a person named "Strict Catholic Girl" wants the Church to legalize divorce whoops oh I mean "annulments" (wink wink nudge nudge). What reality am I living in? I really think I'm losing my mind. I support a true pastoral solution to the divorce problem, but not one where the Church compromises the teachings of the New Testament.

Marriage isn't about "feelings" or some other sensual nonsense. It's about self-sacrifice. Catholics are supposed be crucified with Christ, they're not supposed to be turning stones into bread. http://www.chastitysf.com/sexuality.htm

If the Church sanctifies divorce then I can tell you what will happen next, the sanctification of sodomy followed by pedophilia. In the year 2064 we'll have FE threads like:

Quote:Posted by: UltraOrthodoxTraditionalCatholicTransgirl

I saw men, grown men, big burly men, sit in chairs and sob. They thought their lives were over. In time, the men and prepubescent boys started pairing off. Father was furious. He broke the support group, but those people went off and become couples anyway. They remarried civilly or by the Fundamental Baptist pastor down the street. The ones I knew are still married, after these thirty or forty years, and they are still estranged from the church.

Posted on: Friday 1st February 2064

You may think I'm exaggerating but I'm not. Divorce/remarriage, as I said before, was unthinkable only 50 years ago in Poland, even when the communists allowed it. The stigma of being a divorcee was equivalent to what a modern Catholic feels when he sees a pederast or a LGBT person. The fact that there are people, on a traditional Catholic forum of all places, that are sympathetic to a heinous crime against nature, only proves one thing, things change and there is nothing you can do about it. The road from divorce/contraception leads to sex without boundaries. At this rate we'll be celebrating Mass at Sts. Aliester Crowley and Martin Luther Cathedral in a hundred years, "do what thou wilt" will be the whole of the canon law.

But then again maybe the gates of hell won't prevail against the Church and Pope Francis won't sanctify divorce. "Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord." - 1 Corinthians 11:27. Allowing a "remarried" Catholic to receive Holy Communion is like telling an armless man to swim across the ocean.

Quote:For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be in one flesh. Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder. They say to him: Why then did Moses command to give a bill of divorce, and to put away? [8] He saith to them: Because Moses by reason of the hardness of your heart permitted you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. [9] And I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and he that shall marry her that is put away, committeth adultery.

[9] Except it be: In the case of fornication, that is, of adultery, the wife may be put away: but even then the husband cannot marry another as long as the wife is living.

Matthew 19
(02-18-2014, 08:43 PM)Skarga Wrote: [ -> ][9] And I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and he that shall marry her that is put away, committeth adultery.

It sounds more like to me that anyone who marries a woman that is divorced because of adultery is guilty of adultery. Not sure if that means the offended spouse cannot marry again but the offending one certainly can't.
(02-18-2014, 10:20 AM)CaptCrunch73 Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-17-2014, 08:55 PM)Cetil Wrote: [ -> ]Cardinal O'Malley gave a recent interview in which  he said he really didn't think it would be possible for the divorced and remarried to receive communion.


C.

The problem I have with this is Cardinal O'Malley has a very consistent pattern. I've seen it over and over again. Cardinal O'Malley will come out in a public interview and state something that is very clear church teaching and take a clear stand, like this. Then in the background an agenda will proceed and that exact thing he spoke out against will silently move forward without him uttering a peep.

- The Gay Mass at St Cecilia's in Boston

He spoke out against this, could've stopped this, didn't stop it and then did nothing when it happened.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massach...olic_mass/

- Euthanasia legislation in Massachusetts, he spoke out against it and the law was defeated. It's coming back and the Archdiocese is silent..

http://bostoncatholicinsider.wordpress.c...is-silent/

I'm sure I could dig up more examples.

DON'T BE FOOLED!!
The CDF had something to say about "gay" masses in Munich and London and they were stopped.
(02-18-2014, 11:40 AM)Ptochos Wrote: [ -> ]Here's a question I've always had about divorce and remarriage. I know what Our Lord said and it clear and uncompromising. However, other things He said are called "counsels of perfection" or something like that and include the demands for poverty and chastity. The Church only expects that from vowed religious.

Now Our Lord said one thing but the Apostle Paul seems to indicate that a very different situation was actually going on in the early Church:

I Tim. 3:2 It behoveth therefore a bishop to be blameless, the husband of one wife, sober, prudent, of good behaviour, chaste, given to hospitality, a teacher,

Titus 1:5-6 For this cause I left thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and shouldest ordain priests in every city, as I also appointed thee: [6] If any be without crime, the husband of one wife, having faithful children, not accused of riot, or unruly.

So - putting aside the issue of priestly celibacy - it seems that divorce and remarriage were so common in the early Church that it was required that priests and bishops NOT be divorced and remarried but married only once.

I'm not trying to argue that the Bible trumps Tradition but rather that there is room for flexibility by the Church. For example, the Orthodox recognize divorce as sinful yet allow 2 divorces. I believe their priests are not allowed to be divorced and remarried and, as an aside if I'm not mistaken, a priest who is ordained as a single man is not allowed to marry after his ordination. I don't know how they justify allowing the 2 divorces but the fact that they do indicates the possibility of the Church being flexible.
The issue of celibacy for priests is a discipline. It could be changed if the pope thinks it would better serve the Church
(02-19-2014, 01:18 AM)Poche Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-18-2014, 10:20 AM)CaptCrunch73 Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-17-2014, 08:55 PM)Cetil Wrote: [ -> ]Cardinal O'Malley gave a recent interview in which  he said he really didn't think it would be possible for the divorced and remarried to receive communion.


C.

The problem I have with this is Cardinal O'Malley has a very consistent pattern. I've seen it over and over again. Cardinal O'Malley will come out in a public interview and state something that is very clear church teaching and take a clear stand, like this. Then in the background an agenda will proceed and that exact thing he spoke out against will silently move forward without him uttering a peep.

- The Gay Mass at St Cecilia's in Boston

He spoke out against this, could've stopped this, didn't stop it and then did nothing when it happened.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massach...olic_mass/

- Euthanasia legislation in Massachusetts, he spoke out against it and the law was defeated. It's coming back and the Archdiocese is silent..

http://bostoncatholicinsider.wordpress.c...is-silent/

I'm sure I could dig up more examples.

DON'T BE FOOLED!!
The CDF had something to say about "gay" masses in Munich and London and they were stopped.

What does the CDF stopping gay masses in Munich and London have to do with a gay mass in Boston, which the CDF didn't stop?

Where is the CDF, or Cardial O'Malley when a pastor in Boston posts heretical info in the bulletin and his sermons?
http://bostoncatholicinsider.wordpress.c...ly-family/
http://bostoncatholicinsider.wordpress.c...l-couples/

What about Boston Catholic Schools implementing Core Curriculum?
http://bostoncatholicinsider.wordpress.c...urriculum/

What about an Archdiocese that is having financial difficulty that is paying ridiculous salaries to secular employees?
http://bostoncatholicinsider.wordpress.c...l-heights/

Or the lack of attention in addressing the gay clergy network in the archdiocese of Boston
http://bostoncatholicinsider.wordpress.c...of-clergy/

Cardinal O'Malley is shrewd when to comes to dealing with media by presenting a very polished devout appearance all the while his archdiocese is in shambles and getting worse day by day...

Once again I say

DON"T BE FOOLED!!
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5