It’s not biblical!

[GodsGrace]

Hi wondering

Listen, I'm not stupid! I understand that the Catholic organization has given their people all of their explanation as to how these practices and doctrines are somehow inferred from several places of the Scriptures.

But I'm willing to play. What gives the Catholic Church the authority to destroy marriages? Which is what the practice of annulment does. I'm telling you, my father was married to my mother for 25 good years and our family consisted of 4 children. Where do you find that God's word says that the RCC has the authority to have destroyed that marriage?

God bless,
Ted

First of all, I want to make clear that I'm not Catholic.
I happen to know the doctrine for various reasons that are not important.
I'm not sure this is the right thread for this discussion...
If a moderator believes it is NOT...I ask that it be moved to the CATHOLIC FORUM for further discussion.
The only reason I think it MIGHT BE ok here is due to the OP.

First of all I'd say that the church did not destroy your families marriage...
your father did.
Sorry, but that's how it works out.
The girl was single and had nothing much to lose...not the same for father.


An annulment was most probably allowed because your mom had small children and the church
felt she deserved it...Even Jesus said that divorce is allowed when there is adultery involved.



Let's discuss instead what an annulment is:
An annulment means that a VALID marriage never took place.
As opposed to a divorce, an annulment voids the marriage because it was NOT AN HONEST MARRIAGE.

The CC believes marriage to be a serious matter and a life-long commitment.
So let's see what types of situations would allow a "marriage" to be annuled:

1. A marriage is forced, coerced, by one side or the other and is not freely agreed to.
One person marries due to fear.

2. One of the partners lies in order for the marriage to take place.
For instance, the husband may not want any children but tells the woman he does.
After the marriage he advises her that he intends to never father children.

The woman is sterile, but does not advise the father and he finds out after the marriage.

There must be other situations like this, but I can't think of any other right now.

3. One of the partners does not remain faithful. If the other partner can...he/she is encouraged to try to remain in the marriage - if he/she cannot an annulment is in order.


IOW, the marriage took place under dishonest condition or a condition that changed drastically after the marriage took place.


Divorce is also allowed under specific conditions:

1. Adultery
2. Abuse
3. Impoverishment of the family due to habits of one of the partners.


I'd also like to say that there are expenses for the church in getting an annulment.
This is because it's not up to the parish priest to give permission, but up to the Bishop.
A church attorney must be involved in the procedure and he must be a canon specialist.
I think it used to cost about $5,000.
Pope Francis wanted to make this either cost very much less, or have it be free, but I'm not up to date on this.

Doesn't EVERY church have their own rules?

Also, if someone get a divorce from the CC they cannot be remarried in that church (unless it's for one of the reasons above - there might be more).

The church does not want divorce to be too easy.
Nor annulment.

 

[miamited]

Hi Free

No, that is me reading what you're saying and what you're not saying. You have given long rants against the RCC, but when it has come to Mormonism, have said relatively little and downplay what they believe, saying such hings such as, "Sure the Mormons believe that there was some guy that found a bunch of gold tablets, supposedly left by Jesus when he lived in North America."

Ok. I'm not going to argue the point with you. However, the reason I spend more time discussing the wickedness I see in the Catholic organization is because that is what this thread seems to have gone to. The last few dozen threads have all been about how the Catholic organization operates.

Now, if you'd like me to list all of the sins of Mormonism and Jehovah's witnesses and those who fellowship with the WOF, then I can certainly do that for you. Would that cause you to think that I'm being more fair in this discussion?

1. Mormonism Is not Christianity​

2. Mormons Believe God Used to Be a Man​

3. Mormons Claim the Holy Ghost Is Not Worthy of Worship​

4. Mormons Believe in Baptism of the Dead​

5. Mormons Believe Jesus Set up a Parallel Church in South America​

6. Mormons consider other texts to be equal or even above, the Jewish Scriptures.​

There! Now do you feel better?

God bless,
Ted

 

[GodsGrace]

Hi wondering

Yes it has. And it has been such since the early days of the faith, largely by the Roman Empire in those days. But this issue of tolerance is a difficult issue. Paul wrote of a man in the fellowship who was having relations with Father's wife. Saying that he should be put out of fellowship. Shouldn't he have been more tolerant?

I'm pretty sure that God doesn't expect us to be tolerant of sin, especially among His people. Now, we can allow the world to do whatever they want. We can be just as tolerant as any one of us cares to be about what the lost world does. After all, Paul also wrote about that. He said that we should not tolerate sin among the fellowship.

What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.”

Paul seems to say that we are to pretty much let the world go in the way that it will go and God will one day judge them. But for those who proclaim to be a part of us, and are somehow working evil, then we should 'expel the wicked person from among you. So honestly, I don't see that Paul does ask us to or expect us to go out and judge the wickedness of the lost world. He seems to be saying, "Hey! Just leave them alone and let God do as He will do. You preach them the gospel. You love them with the gospel. You conquer their hearts with the gospel. If you are able to convert them, then...THEN the Holy Spirit will come to them and guide them out of their sinful ways.

That's honestly one of the problems with the modern practice of Christianity. We have turned it into a cudgel to beat the sinners with. Not some instrument of love to attract them.

God bless,
Ted

You start out wanting to not have tolerance...it's a difficult issue.
At the end you want us to love everyone.

I'm not speaking of being tolerant of sin.
You sure do put a lot of words into my mouth !
I'm talking about being more tolerant with those that basically believe the tenets of Christianity even if we disagree on some doctrine or other.

What business is it of mine if the CC wants to have confession?
Some Protestant churches do too, and the Orhtodox.

What do I care if they want to teach purgatory?

A denomination can teach what they believe to be correct.
The A of G teach that tongues is proof of having the Holy Spirit.
Don't I have the dwelling?

There's a thread somewhere of what one must believe to be considered a Christian.
THIS IS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.

There are basic tenets....if we agree on those, we should make an effort to GET ALONG as Christians should.

 

[GodsGrace]

Hi Free

Ok. I'm not going to argue the point with you. However, the reason I spend more time discussing the wickedness I see in the Catholic organization is because that is what this thread seems to have gone to. The last few dozen threads have all been about how the Catholic organization operates.

Now, if you'd like me to list all of the sins of Mormonism and Jehovah's witnesses and those who fellowship with the WOF, then I can certainly do that for you. Would that cause you to think that I'm being more fair in this discussion?

1. Mormonism Is not Christianity​

2. Mormons Believe God Used to Be a Man​

3. Mormons Claim the Holy Ghost Is Not Worthy of Worship​

4. Mormons Believe in Baptism of the Dead​

5. Mormons Believe Jesus Set up a Parallel Church in South America​

6. Mormons consider other texts to be equal or even above, the Jewish Scriptures.​

There! Now do you feel better?

God bless,
Ted

The reason it went this way is because the OP was started for the express purpose of stating that we don't agree on a lot.

That ALONE does not make a denomination be unchristian.

 

[miamited]

Hi wondering

First of all, I want to make clear that I'm not Catholic.

I would say that's a good thing. I must admit that your being from Italy, according to your profile, that you were 'likely' Catholic. So I'm glad that you've cleared that up.

Even Jesus said that divorce is allowed when there is adultery involved.

Uhhh, no he didn't. Jesus said that, except for adultery, if someone divorces their spouse, they make the other party an adulterer. Now, I'm sorry, but here again, the matter is comprehension of what Jesus was saying.

If someone divorces their spouse, they make the other spouse an adulterer if they become involved with someone else. The law of marriage was til death and again Jesus confirmed that when he told the people that by death, a spouse is released from their marriage. But guess what, if one of the spouses was an adulterer, than the other spouse is already an adulterer because they are now having relations with an adulterer. So, get it, every divorce makes the parties to the marriage adulterers, but in the case of adultery, it isn't the divorce that makes one an adulterer, but their own actions of adultery. That's what I'm pretty positive Jesus was saying, because look, Jesus knows that God hates divorce!!!

When discussing the law of divorce, Jesus even told them that, that law was given by Moses and that he gave it to them because their hearts were hard. Is that what God's children should be doing? Something that shows that their hearts are hard?

The church does not want divorce to be too easy.

Right, there again, they are out of step with the word of God. The 'church' should not be providing a way, that God does not say is proper, to separate a marriage. Let those people go before the courts and laws of men to settle their problem. It isn't the churches job to agree to allow someone to sin. My father was sinning. The young secretary was sinning. Then the church decided, "Oh that's all right. That marriage really wasn't a marriage."

Naaaaaaah!
Oh, and yes, ultimately the sin of the two were their own responsibilities, but then they had to pull the church into it to bless their adultery.

I'd also like to say that there are expenses for the church in getting an annulment.
This is because it's not up to the parish priest to give permission, but up to the Bishop.
A church attorney must be involved in the procedure and he must be a canon specialist.
I think it used to cost about $5,000.

You really don't see the issue here, do you? Yeah! $5,000 is a lot of money. If the practice itself is ungodly and it seems pretty obvious that it is to me. The real cost isn't going to be realized until the day of God's judgment.

God bless,
Ted

 

[GodsGrace]

Hi wondering

I would say that's a good thing. I must admit that your being from Italy, according to your profile, that you were 'likely' Catholic. So I'm glad that you've cleared that up.

Uhhh, no he didn't. Jesus said that, except for adultery, if someone divorces their spouse, they make the other party an adulterer. Now, I'm sorry, but here again, the matter is comprehension of what Jesus was saying.

If someone divorces their spouse, they make the other spouse an adulterer if they become involved with someone else. The law of marriage was til death and again Jesus confirmed that when he told the people that by death, a spouse is released from their marriage. But guess what, if one of the spouses was an adulterer, than the other spouse is already an adulterer because they are now having relations with an adulterer. So, get it, every divorce makes the parties to the marriage adulterers, but in the case of adultery, it isn't the divorce that makes one an adulterer, but their own actions of adultery. That's what I'm pretty positive Jesus was saying, because look, Jesus knows that God hates divorce!!!

When discussing the law of divorce, Jesus even told them that, that law was given by Moses and that he gave it to them because their hearts were hard. Is that what God's children should be doing? Something that shows that their hearts are hard?

Right, there again, they are out of step with the word of God. The 'church' should not be providing a way, that God does not say is proper, to separate a marriage. Let those people go before the courts and laws of men to settle their problem. It isn't the churches job to agree to allow someone to sin. My father was sinning. The young secretary was sinning. Then the church decided, "Oh that's all right. That marriage really wasn't a marriage."

Naaaaaaah!
Oh, and yes, ultimately the sin of the two were their own responsibilities, but then they had to pull the church into it to bless their adultery.

You really don't see the issue here, do you? Yeah! $5,000 is a lot of money. If the practice itself is ungodly and it seems pretty obvious that it is to me. The real cost isn't going to be realized until the day of God's judgment.

God bless,
Ted

Maybe not.
Maybe you know more about the CC than I do.
Maybe Jesus said even adulterers cannot get divorced.
Maybe dishonest marriages could just be accepted by everyone.

You've got quite a complicated scenario up there.
I had to read it twice.

I'm not SUPPOSED to be involved with someone else if I'm married...
NOT EVEN if my husband is.

We're a long way from fedelta'.

 

[GodsGrace]

Hi wondering

I would say that's a good thing. I must admit that your being from Italy, according to your profile, that you were 'likely' Catholic. So I'm glad that you've cleared that up.

Uhhh, no he didn't. Jesus said that, except for adultery, if someone divorces their spouse, they make the other party an adulterer. Now, I'm sorry, but here again, the matter is comprehension of what Jesus was saying.

If someone divorces their spouse, they make the other spouse an adulterer if they become involved with someone else. The law of marriage was til death and again Jesus confirmed that when he told the people that by death, a spouse is released from their marriage. But guess what, if one of the spouses was an adulterer, than the other spouse is already an adulterer because they are now having relations with an adulterer. So, get it, every divorce makes the parties to the marriage adulterers, but in the case of adultery, it isn't the divorce that makes one an adulterer, but their own actions of adultery. That's what I'm pretty positive Jesus was saying, because look, Jesus knows that God hates divorce!!!

When discussing the law of divorce, Jesus even told them that, that law was given by Moses and that he gave it to them because their hearts were hard. Is that what God's children should be doing? Something that shows that their hearts are hard?

Right, there again, they are out of step with the word of God. The 'church' should not be providing a way, that God does not say is proper, to separate a marriage. Let those people go before the courts and laws of men to settle their problem. It isn't the churches job to agree to allow someone to sin. My father was sinning. The young secretary was sinning. Then the church decided, "Oh that's all right. That marriage really wasn't a marriage."

Naaaaaaah!
Oh, and yes, ultimately the sin of the two were their own responsibilities, but then they had to pull the church into it to bless their adultery.

You really don't see the issue here, do you? Yeah! $5,000 is a lot of money. If the practice itself is ungodly and it seems pretty obvious that it is to me. The real cost isn't going to be realized until the day of God's judgment.

God bless,
Ted

YOU brought up the fact that the CC charged for the annulment.
I'm just explaining to you WHY it did.

 

[miamited]

Hi wondering

Maybe Jesus said even adulterers cannot get divorced.

Jesus didn't... God did! Sure, they can get divorced. They go to the courts and get a divorce like everyone else. My position is, that while they are free to do that of their own will, it is not in keeping with the will of God for them. Personally, I think Hillary Clinton showed us exactly what a godly couple should do after adultery.

Maybe dishonest marriages could just be accepted by everyone.

Oh please, please, please. What in the heck is a dishonest marriage? Isn't that where someone gets married just to acquire a green card? Marriage is nothing more than a man choosing a woman for life and doing the leaving and cleaving thing from the parent to the spouse. There isn't any such thing as a dishonest marriage!!!!!!!!!!! There are marriages that surely don't honor God, but I have yet to find any Scriptural reference that God says that's not a marriage. You see, this is something that your organization has put out there for you to be able to answer these questions, but it comes from the RCC and not from God's word. Listen very, very, very carefully...God Hates Divorce. His church should not be in the business of even being involved in this dissolution process of a marriage. BTW my father and mother's marriage was perfectly right and legal in the sight of God.

I'm not SUPPOSED to be involved with someone else if I'm married...
NOT EVEN if my husband is.

That's right. What are you trying to tell me here. It would seem that your thought isn't quite complete, but as far as what you've said that I've copied here, that statement is absolutely true. However, God says that whether or not you actually perform the act that creates the adultery, that once one of the parties does, then both parties become adulterers because now there is a 'third' and it is no longer 'and the two shall become one'.

BTW don't get too worked up about my personal experience. It happened some 30 years ago, but I just bring it up because, while I don't agree that God has provided the church a way to tear up families, my account is not of some fly by night Las Vegas marriage that fell apart in a few months. My testimony is of a 25 year God honoring marriage. My father and mother were in church service pretty much every week. They both sang in the choirs of the various fellowships we were involved with when I was a child. I'm sorry that you don't agree, but I know, yes I know!!! that that God doesn't want His Church breaking up marriages for the sake of making it easier for its own people to commit adultery.

God bless,
Ted

 

[miamited]

YOU brought up the fact that the CC charged for the annulment.
I'm just explaining to you WHY it did.

Oh listen, I fully understand 'why' they did it. I too, have researched the 'how' and the justification of, annulment. I just disagree that any single word in that process comes from God or is the desire of the one true and living God. Now, it might be the will of some other god, I don't know.

God bless,
Ted

 

[miamited]

Hi wondering
So now, you challenged me to list some of the sins of the RCC that I see. I've listed one and you can't show me Scriptures that supports it. All you've been able to do so far is explain the process. I guess I misunderstood your challenge. Therefore, I don't see any sense in going to the next one.

God bless,
TEd

 

[dwb001]

Hi wondering
So now, you challenged me to list some of the sins of the RCC that I see. I've listed one and you can't show me Scriptures that supports it. All you've been able to do so far is explain the process. I guess I misunderstood your challenge. Therefore, I don't see any sense in going to the next one.

God bless,
TEd

Oh please... just one more.

 

[miamited]

Oh please... just one more.

LOL! Which one do you want me to do next?

 

[Hopeful]

Friend, do a word study on it. It's making a reference to a violent, untimely 'birth' as in an abortion, not an overdue or late pregnancy and birth as you are suggesting.

G1626 - ektrōma - Strong's Greek Lexicon (kjv)

G1626 - ἔκτρωμα éktrōma, ek'-tro-mah; from a comparative of and τιτρώσκω titrṓskō (to wound); a miscarriage (abortion), i.e. (by analogy) untimely birth:—born out of due time.

www.blueletterbible.org

Paul uses a simile to get his point across.
That being, he wasn't around with Jesus.
Look at the context of 1 Cor 15:3-8..."For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:
6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.
7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.
8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time."
What difference would it make if Paul were born of his mom early or late?
The difference was, that Paul wasn't around with the original eleven to see the risen Lord.

 

[dwb001]

LOL! Which one do you want me to do next?

As a non-CC I will say dealers choice.

 

[GodsGrace]

Hi wondering
So now, you challenged me to list some of the sins of the RCC that I see. I've listed one and you can't show me Scriptures that supports it. All you've been able to do so far is explain the process. I guess I misunderstood your challenge. Therefore, I don't see any sense in going to the next one.

God bless,
TEd

Fine.

 

[Hopeful]

Just state what the false doctrines are and we'll go through them...
Something I've done many times.

Christianity is being attacked all over the world.
I think we should be more united, at least in tolerance.

Big mistake there.
Shall we start to intermarry with them like the Israelites did with the heathens of yore?
There can be no "tolerance" of any false faith.
Show then their errors with grace and love, but don't tolerate doctrines that lead away from Godliness.

 

[GodsGrace]

Big mistake there.
Shall we start to intermarry with them like the Israelites did with the heathens of yore?
There can be no "tolerance" of any false faith.
Show then their errors with grace and love, but don't tolerate doctrines that lead away from Godliness.

NOTHING the CC teaches leads AWAY FROM GOD or GODLINESS.

NOTHING.

 

[JackrabbitSlim]

There is no room for hate in the Kingdom of God.
IF you're a member of the Kingdom, Jesus said you are to
LOVE GOD
LOVE YOURSELF
LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR

The neighbor could even by atheist or Catholic, you're still to love them.
The man left for dead by thieves on his way to Jericho was saved by a Samaritan...
much hated by the Jews.

If you're ever hungry one day, you'll find food at your local Catholic church,
and clothing and other necessities for families.

BTW, calling any denomination demonic is against the TOS.
Please be civil.
1.4: Do not misquote or misrepresent another member. Do not state a negative opinion about a member's denomination, leaders, founders, or the veracity of a member's faith. (Exodus 20:16)

I am only responding to you for the sake of others who may read this post, and, not understand, lest they be misled.

1. "There is no room for hate in the Kingdom of God."

1a. Ps. 11:5, "The Lord tests the righteous and the wicked,
And His soul hates one who loves violence."

2. "IF you're a member of the Kingdom, Jesus said you are to
LOVE GOD
LOVE YOURSELF
LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR"

2a. There is a difference between heating a system and hating those who practice in that system. When I was a Baptist, we called that "hating the sin, loving the sinner."

3. "If you're ever hungry one day, you'll find food at your local Catholic church,
and clothing and other necessities for families."

3a. This makes them good by human standards, not by God's.

4. "BTW, calling any denomination demonic is against the TOS."

4a. I have-and will continue to do so- respect the ToS, but, they DO NOT supersede the word of God.

5. "Please be civil "

5a. I am being civil and have a relaxed mentally attitude about this while thing.

6. "1.4: Do not misquote or misrepresent another member. Do not state a negative opinion about a member's denomination, leaders, founders, or the veracity of a member's faith."

6a. I have not done this at all. Everything I've quoted is in the Catholic Catechism, which is, their own statement of belief. Furthermore, the RCC is not a Christian denomination as it is- and I will reiterate this- evil, vile and is filled with doctrines and practices of demons that goes directly against the word and Word of God, and that, I will never tolerate or abide.

7. Exodus 20:16

7a. Again, everything I've quoted comes directly from the statement from the Catholic Catechism. If I were giving a false statement about the RCC, I would claim they are a God fearing Christian church, founded on the Word of God, walking by the means of the Spirit.
Gal. 1:8, "But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!"

 

[miamited]

HI wondering

NOTHING the CC teaches leads AWAY FROM GOD or GODLINESS.

Well, that's your understanding of the doctrines of the RCC. You still haven't been able to show me the godliness of annulment. So, I'm sorry, but your testimony for the RCC is at the very least, questionable. Then you tell me that you're not a Catholic believer and that you really have limited understanding of their practices and doctrines. Tell me again why I should believe that your 'truth' in this matter is more truthful than mine?

God bless,
Ted

 

[GodsGrace]

HI wondering

Well, that's your understanding of the doctrines of the RCC. You still haven't been able to show me the godliness of annulment. So, I'm sorry, but your testimony for the RCC is at the very least, questionable. Then you tell me that you're not a Catholic believer and that you really have limited understanding of their practices and doctrines. Tell me again why I should believe that your 'truth' in this matter is more truthful than mine?

God bless,
Ted

In which post did I state I have limited understanding?