It wasn’t the end of the world when states began to recognize divorce. It wasn’t the end of the world when states allowed those who were divorced to get married again. It isn’t the end of the world that civil authorities continue to define and redefine what civil marriage is and who can get married.
Are some of the combinations of who and what can get married immoral? You bet ya!
Are these illegal in civil law? No.
Thus, with civil authorities abandoning all reference to marriage as defined by God, religions and the Church, the Catholic Church must protect all her sacraments, Holy Matrimony being the one that is mocked the most by civil authorities and those who see civil authority as the highest authority.
Thus there are two terms that Catholics should use for marriage that is valid in the eyes of God: Holy Matrimony, which covers those marriages sanctioned by the Church as a Sacrament or as a holy bond, such as a non-sacramental marriage between a baptized person and an unbaptized person blessed by the Church in a nuptial liturgy.
The Sacrament of Holy Matrimony refers only to those two baptized persons married in the Catholic Church.
I personally don’t believe we should recognize as a sacrament the marriages of Protestant sects which do not recognize marriage as a Sacrament and also follow all civil laws concerning who can be married in a civil union. That would be a great evangelization tool for those who are seeking to become Catholic and will allow for a much simpler annulment procedure if they have any previous marriages outside of the Catholic Church.
As it regards those unions recognized by the state, Catholics should simply call them legal unions or partnerships or civil marriage.
6 comments:
Agreed. While in no way am I advocating a "Catholic Ghetto" mindset, it strikes me that our "aggiornamento" or the last several decades of postconciliar dithering has left most Catholics either ashamed of having a public identity as Catholics or a desire to just blend in with the status quo.
The news media feeds us stories of lapsed Catholics who insist they have not lapsed--I prefer the term "Delusional Catholics" , purporting to support same-sex marriage or abortion rights or programs that fund such nonsense, but when we hear of men who carry rosaries, they are labeled as right-wing "militants" or Q-anon vigilantes or whatever.
Catholics who truly embrace the morality of the Church--and I mean the morality that resonates with 2000 years of Tradition, (not the pseudo-morality that gave us the Catholic Campaign for Human Development) need to carve out a public identity so that when it is known that we are Catholic, it is also taken as a matter of course that we cannot condone certain things and that we are willing to go to the mat to defend our faith. Part of that must include speaking clearly about what marriage IS and what marriage ISN'T.
Of course that would also require some fundamental changes from many priests and bishops in how and what they are teaching us. It would also require a certain consistency that has long been absent in our churches. But, to quote Robert Schuller, "Imagine the possibilities!"
While I in no way am suggesting that Catholics adopt a "ghetto" mentality, I agree with you that Catholics should use and insist on using more accurate language when it comes to society's ongoing descent into the pit. Unfortunately, there are many lapsed Catholic who deny that they are lapsed--I prefer the term "Delusional Catholics" for this group--who are more than happy to not only going along with, but INSIST upon "rights" to abort babies, homosexual pretend "marriages", eliminating any prohibition against artificial contraception, ordaining women and a plethora of other issues in which we are to conform ourselves to the world rather than resist. Many of them are those graying, paunchy folks you see at the guitar Masses--the kind who would insist on Communion in the Hand even if they had two broken arms.
But I digress. Catholics need to have an identity that sets us apart. We should not be so set apart that we isolate ourselves, but it used to be given that if someone was Catholic that they opposed certain things that society was moving toward. Not so much any more. The salt is losing its flavor. If we're going to get that flavor back, we need consistent across-the-board moral teachings from priests and bishops. Obviously THAT isn't going to happen very soon. But, as Robert Schuller used to say, "Imagine the possibilities!"
While I in no way am suggesting that Catholics adopt a "ghetto" mentality, I agree with you that Catholics should use and insist on using more accurate language when it comes to society's ongoing descent into the pit. Unfortunately, there are many lapsed Catholic who deny that they are lapsed--I prefer the term "Delusional Catholics" for this group--who are more than happy to not only going along with, but INSIST upon "rights" to abort babies, homosexual pretend "marriages", eliminating any prohibition against artificial contraception, ordaining women and a plethora of other issues in which we are to conform ourselves to the world rather than resist. Many of them are those graying, paunchy folks you see at the guitar Masses--the kind who would insist on Communion in the Hand even if they had two broken arms.
But I digress. Catholics need to have an identity that sets us apart. We should not be so set apart that we isolate ourselves, but it used to be given that if someone was Catholic that they opposed certain things that society was moving toward. Not so much any more. The salt is losing its flavor. If we're going to get that flavor back, we need consistent across-the-board moral teachings from priests and bishops. Obviously THAT isn't going to happen very soon. But, as Robert Schuller used to say, "Imagine the possibilities!"
Father, I posted the first post earlier and when it didn't show, I thought maybe I forgot to post it right. So I rewrote it and posted a similar one later this morning. Then I wasn't sure if I posted it right again, so I posted it a second time.
I can understand why you would post the first one, then the second, since they are different. But the third is a direct duplicate of the second, so WHY did you post that one too?
Could you please pick one of these three and just leave it up and delete the other two? People are going to think I'm copying Mark Thomas if this continues!
The marriage between two baptized Protestants, a man and a woman, assuming no impediments, is a sacramental marriage and, therefore, indissoluble.
The sacramentality of the marriage is not determined by what their denomination teaches or believes about marriage as a sacrament. The sacramentality of that marriage is not impacted by what their denomination believes or practices regarding the marriage of LGBTQ people.
The sacramentality flows from the Baptism of the individuals and is realized by the exchange of vows. CCC 1626 "The Church holds the exchange of consent between the spouses to be the indispensable element that "makes the marriage."
Way back in 2012, I actually wrote a blog article that is quite similar to the current article, and I revised it a bit in 2015. My article also contains some advice on countering the madness even more in play today. For anyone interested in more ways to fight the malevolence behind the secular attacks on true marriage, see https://vlogicusinsight.wordpress.com/2015/07/26/saving-and-promoting-true-marriage-once-again/
Post a Comment