How Many Of Us Want A Religion That Teaches Moral Limitations?

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='BigJon16' timestamp='1323651754' post='2349463']

You are right. That was a bit harsh. I apologize, if you would accept it.


[/quote]
Can I give a prop to this part of the post? Okay all of it then!

Edited December 12, 2011 by Mark of the Cross

[Ice_nine]

I thought getting a divorce didn't bar you from communion so long as you didn't remarry. Am I wrong? I mean if you marry someone and they start beating you or abandon you how can you be held accountable for someone else's actions?

Edited December 12, 2011 by Ice_nine

[Jaime]

[quote name='Ice_nine' timestamp='1323655767' post='2349502']
I thought getting a divorce didn't bar you from communion so long as you didn't remarry. Am I wrong? I mean if you marry someone and they start beating you or abandon you how can you be held accountable for someone else's actions?
[/quote]


You are correct. If someone divorces they are still in full communion with the Church as long as they remain chaste and don't remarry. Honestly that is the same requirement for all of us. (the chaste part)

[Jaime]

[quote name='southern california guy' timestamp='1323641299' post='2349300']

I wouldn't call it an unpleasant disposition. I would call it candor. I think that there are a lot of us who prefer the old-fashioned Catholic church. Quite honestly the Catholic priest and the Catholic church, here in Escondido, is very very good. And I think that good Priests attract big congregations. I think that most people prefer old-fashioned Catholicism. They just don't speak out as loudly as those who want change.
[/quote]


I wouldn't call it an unpleasant disposition either. However the fiddler thought it was a better choice of words than I had.

[penguin31]

[quote name='Ice_nine' timestamp='1323655767' post='2349502']
I thought getting a divorce didn't bar you from communion so long as you didn't remarry. Am I wrong? I mean if you marry someone and they start beating you or abandon you how can you be held accountable for someone else's actions?
[/quote]

CCC 1650-51:
[quote]
Today there are numerous Catholics in many countries who have recourse to civil divorce and contract new civil unions. In fidelity to the words of Jesus Christ - "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery"160 the Church maintains that a new union cannot be recognized as valid, if the first marriage was. If the divorced are remarried civilly, they find themselves in a situation that objectively contravenes God's law. Consequently, they cannot receive Eucharistic communion as long as this situation persists. For the same reason, they cannot exercise certain ecclesial responsibilities.[b] Reconciliation through the sacrament of Penance can be granted only to those who have repented for having violated the sign of the covenant and of fidelity to Christ, and who are committed to living in complete continence.[/b]

[b]Toward Christians who live in this situation, and who often keep the faith and desire to bring up their children in a Christian manner, priests and the whole community must manifest an attentive solicitude, so that they do not consider themselves separated from the Church, [/b]in whose life they can and must participate as baptized persons: They should be encouraged to listen to the Word of God, to attend the Sacrifice of the Mass, to persevere in prayer, to contribute to works of charity and to community efforts for justice, to bring up their children in the Christian faith, to cultivate the spirit and practice of penance and thus implore, day by day, God's grace.[/quote]

CCC, 2386:
[quote][b]It can happen that one of the spouses is the innocent victim of a divorce decreed by civil law; this spouse therefore has not contravened the moral law. There is a [i]considerable[/i] difference between a spouse who has sincerely tried to be faithful to the sacrament of marriage and is unjustly abandoned, and one who through his own grave fault destroys a canonically valid marriage[/b].[/quote]

If for some reason you become divorced civilly, by seeking reconciliation for any role you may have played in the occurrence of the sin and by refraining from a romantic relationship with another you remain in full communion with the Church.

[Norseman82]

One must also realize the challenge facing a homilist who must present the truth delicately because young children are present at Mass.

But I also understand the quandry SCG faces. What the Church believes in "on paper" often has not been translated into preaching or popular support among the laity culture, especially during the "lost years" between the old Baltimore Catechism and the new Catechism released in the 1990s. I heard one priest describe the summation of catechesis during that period as "God is love; now let's make a banner".

I know many of you are losing patience with SCG, but those "lost years" leave a bad taste that will take a long time to go away from some of us. Many of you are younger and are fortunate enough to not have lived through those years. Some of us are still dealing with (and fighting) the aftereffects, and it will manifest itself in many ways (like in the frustrations with the dating situation that the 40-yo virgin demographic faces).

Edited December 12, 2011 by Norseman82

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Norseman82' timestamp='1323661117' post='2349579']One must also realize the challenge facing a homilist who must present the truth delicately because young children are present at Mass.[/quote]
props for this.

[CatherineM]

It's okay to force kids to read Heather has two Mommies in 2nd grade, but we can't explain from the pulpit why we have an issue with it because they are too young?

I had a priest tell me once that he never worried about that when preparing a homily. He said it was like commercials for feminine things on TV. Until we are old enough to know what they are, we pretty much ignore those commercials. He never worried about little kids paying attention to him.

[Nihil Obstat]

Better at least for kids to hear it from a priest in a Catholic Church than to hear it on tv or from their friends in the schoolyard. There's a time and a place to discuss everything, and I agree with Catherine that the most delicate topics are going to go way over the heads of those too young to have those discussions.

[penguin31]

[quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1323664119' post='2349624']
It's okay to force kids to read Heather has two Mommies in 2nd grade, but we can't explain from the pulpit why we have an issue with it because they are too young?

I had a priest tell me once that he never worried about that when preparing a homily. He said it was like commercials for feminine things on TV. Until we are old enough to know what they are, we pretty much ignore those commercials. He never worried about little kids paying attention to him.
[/quote]

Worst case scenario, the child asks the parent what's being talked about. At which point the Priest having delivered that homily comes in handy, as the parent can then take the opportunity to answer the child as appropriate - and with Fr.'s message still ringing loudly in their ears, the kid gets a response from their parents far more likely to be in line with Catholic teaching.

[Amppax]

[quote name='southern california guy' timestamp='1323637280' post='2349257']
Without the moral limitations I almost feel like it's not even a religion. Especially if all that is taught are vague notions like "loving" everybody or "loving Jesus". I want to hear moral absolutes. I want to hear specific morality that I can actually apply to my life taught. I don't want to hear stuff like "Make Jesus the center of your life." or "Make Jesus the center of your marriage" because I don't really know what the hell that means -- it's just too vague and open to interpretation.
[/quote]

Here, have some Catechism:

[quote]1 God, infinitely perfect and blessed in himself, in a plan of sheer goodness freely created man to make him share in his own blessed life. For this reason, at every time and in every place, God draws close to man. [b]He calls man to seek him, to know him, to love him with all his strength[/b]. He calls together all men, scattered and divided by sin, into the unity of his family, the Church. To accomplish this, when the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son as Redeemer and Saviour. [b]In his Son and through him, he invites men to become, in the Holy Spirit, his adopted children and thus heirs of his blessed life.[/b][/quote]

That is the first paragraph of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. So if someone is teaching that we are to love God, then I'm alright with that. And I don't think that it means throwing moral absolutes out at all. But if we look to the Church only as a teacher of moral lessons, then we miss the main point. If more people experience true conversion, and are truly seeking a deeper relationship with God, then the morals will follow.

[organwerke]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1323641412' post='2349301']
Richard does have a point in that, while yes the Church obviously does teach all these things and more, you won't often hear that from the pulpit. Rare is the priest who will deny cohabitating or divorced and 'remarried' people Communion, or who will preach against artificial birth control, or who will denounce sodomy and the omosexual culture. SoCal, if I might be so bold, I think this is precisely why you have the problems you do with the Church. It's the same reason Catholic culture has become almost nil in the last fifty years. Our priests are scared of the laity, the laity aren't listening anyway, and in the end it's just a vicious cycle that leads to greater laxity, more lapsed Catholics, and greater evil.
[/quote]

Ok, but how do you reconcile SCG's position on annulments with the Catholic teaching?
Why a person who got an annulment and remarried should be seen with prejudice when receives Communmion?
This happens, and I've seen it. And the paradox is that this kind of critics mainly comes from people who don't consider themsleves in line with the Catholic Church, and from people who are divorced and judge annulments as a "priviliege" for catholics. But the simple fact is that there are marriages who are really invalid, and marriages which aren't. Those who think their marriage may be invalid may ask for annulment, there is no privilege for catholics rather than non-catholics.
I understand the concerns of giving too many annulments (but I am firmly persuaded that the main problem is not giving annulments, but letting to celebrate too many marriages that are very week from their origin), but at this point we return to the starting post: there are moral rules and limitations, but we could never know exactly and in detail who is living these rules and who is not, because we could not know many elements to judge.
So I judge the persons basically for what they preach (if they clairly say they are pro-abortion, pro communion to divorced and remarried people etc) and not for how I think they are living.

Edited December 12, 2011 by organwerke

[Papist]

[quote name='southern california guy' timestamp='1323651560' post='2349460']

You call me a troll for supporting [color=#ff0000][b]the old Catholic church[/b][/color] over some of the modern stuff?

Instead of calling me a name and attempting to make fun of me why don't you tell us your position?
[/quote]
That's akin to saying the old Jesus Christ. That mister, is most offensive.

[Papist]

[quote name='BigJon16' timestamp='1323651754' post='2349463']
Another thing is that you seem to be judging the Church based on some personal experiences from parishes and such. But that doesn't speak for what Catholicism stands for entirely.

"Don't judge the Peter by the actions of the Judas"
[/quote]
It was Frank Sheed who said, “The Church is the cause of the holiness of its members, but its holiness is not measured by their response.” Many have a difficult time distinguishing the two.

[MarysLittleFlower]

I think that moral limitations are important and they are not "limitations" really, they're more - how to find TRUE freedom.... sin is not freedom at all, though it might seem that way. The rules are limitations just like gravity is a limitation: like it or not, if you jump off a cliff you're going to fall down...so it's not "restrictive" to make a rule to not jump off cliffs. God made moral rules for our own good.

I think that love and truth go together, and I think Pope Benedict talked about this.. if our religions is all about "tolerance" and nothing else, there is no truth, and love also becomes sentimentality.

Edited December 12, 2011 by MarysLittleFlower