tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post1154829319465079986..comments2024-03-28T20:30:10.681-04:00Comments on southern orders: IS THE POPE SHOWING HIS HAND FOR THE UPCOMING SYNOD ON THE FAMILY?Fr. Allan J. McDonaldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16986575955114152639noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-44974239815752961242015-01-24T11:25:03.676-05:002015-01-24T11:25:03.676-05:00He should be very careful about "showing"...He should be very careful about "showing" his hand. Somebody might call the copsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-57648908962245396372015-01-24T07:09:41.503-05:002015-01-24T07:09:41.503-05:00I have a quandry regarding the use of the 'int...I have a quandry regarding the use of the 'internal forum' which you referenced, Father.<br /><br />The situation as I understand it, is that two people attempt to contract a marriage and then later receive a civil divorce. One (or both) of them has genuine grounds for believing the marriage to be invalid; however, evidence is not available to allow the Church formally to judge it so through marriage tribunals.<br /><br />That person then enters into a second marriage considering himself to be free to marry based on the invalidity of the first attempt.<br /><br />My question is this, the second attempted marriage can only be a civilly contracted marriage - you note that the Church can in no way bless the second attempt. Due to the requirment of form for Catholics entering marriage, regardless of the status of the first marriage, it seems to me that the second would still be an invalid marriage...and thus sexual relations within it would be illicit. Am I missing a critical part of the logic of the system?The Moderate Jacobitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02643594581501536867noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-76303326555712117282015-01-23T14:01:40.746-05:002015-01-23T14:01:40.746-05:00JusadBellum:
"I think the Pope's words a...JusadBellum:<br /><br />"I think the Pope's words at the Synod tell us enough as to the direction we're going in.<br />1) He has said more than once that people who attempt to enter matrimony with the wrong idea of God and of marriage (i.e. not being open to life or permanence) are not properly disposed to give or receive the sacrament"<br /><br />>If either one of the partners in a marriage was not open to life prior to the wedding, then that is grounds for annulment ( no pastoral flexibility in application of the annulment procedure would be necessary in that case)<br /><br />"THUS, IMHO, we will see a move to assert that these so-called '2nd marriages' may actually be 2nd common law marriages which could be regularized, not adultery."<br /><br />>Either the first marriage is valid is or it is not ( to be determined by Church tribunal). If it is determined to be invalid, then it can be annulled. If it is annulled, the second marriage can then be convalidated. The conjecture and speculation now has to do with possible changes in determining annulment. The status of the first marriage has to be resolved before the Church can deal with any other marital arrangement.<br /><br />"If this is so, then we're dealing with vast numbers of common law marriages and Pauline Privileges, not a far thornier discussion about genuine adultery."<br /><br />>The Pauline Privileges is one which allows the dissolution of a marriage between two non-baptized persons in the case that one (but not both) of the partners seeks baptism and converts to Christianity and the other partner subsequently leaves the marriage.<br /><br />I don' t think we are dealing with "vast numbers" of those. In any case, if the Pauline Privilege is invoked and determined to be applicable, from what I understand an annulment of the first marriage would not be required.Georgenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-84459538277851850302015-01-23T09:48:12.415-05:002015-01-23T09:48:12.415-05:00I think the Pope's words at the Synod tell us ...I think the Pope's words at the Synod tell us enough as to the direction we're going in.<br /><br />1) He has said more than once that people who attempt to enter matrimony with the wrong idea of God and of marriage (i.e. not being open to life or permanence) are not properly disposed to give or receive the sacrament, so given the atrocious lack of catechesis and moral formation, the atrocious loss of a Catholic ethos and culture, we can't PRESUME that people are married until proven otherwise.<br /><br />This of course stands current canonical thinking on its head, but then the canons presume that people who claim to be Catholics know what they're talking about.<br /><br />If you posit that moderns are CINOs (Catholic in name only) and learn most of their 'catechism' from secular sources, it would follow that really, we're dealing in the main with tens of millions of people who had weddings and got legally married but never really received the sacramental graces.<br /><br />To be fornicating before marriage (as many perhaps a majority do) and to contracept within marriage (with the tacit blessing of many priests and bishops and catechists) is to be objectively in a state of mortal sin and to not have the proper disposition and faith to do what the Church teaches with respect to the proper disposition to be married.<br /><br />THUS, IMHO, we will see a move to assert that these so-called '2nd marriages' may actually be 2nd common law marriages which could be regularized, not adultery.<br /><br />Now, obviously this sad state of affairs could seem like a short cut or get out of jail free card, but it comes at a huge human cost in lives and blood and suffering. <br /><br />The theologians who bruited the idea of NOT evangelizing people in the 1970s so as to leave them in their ignorance and thus 'invincibly ignorant' is on display here in a cynical way.<br /><br />Not a few Cardinals have opined that perhaps 50% of couples are not truly married but only had a wedding and got civilly married based on the surveys of their moral disposition and degree of knowledge of Catholicism to begin with. <br /><br />If this is so, then we're dealing with vast numbers of common law marriages and Pauline Privileges, not a far thornier discussion about genuine adultery.<br /><br />JusadBellumnoreply@blogger.com