You didn't ask if we knew anyone.
My sister got married in a Catholic Church; remarried Protestant. Her husband was unfaithfull. I don't know what standards she had to meet.
Did she remarry in a Protestant Church because she could not in a Catholic? That is the kind of question I would like answered.
You can define something that is cold as having less heat or being absent of heat. Semantics.
Mary being our queen is not a semantical issue.
Mary's Immaculate conception is not a semantical issue.
Limbo or purgatory is not a semantical issue.
Certain teachings are just absent from scripture (some moreso than others)
Besides why would the innocent party of an act of spousal unfaithfulness have to bear the sin of his/her wife/husband? No man can bear the sins of another. The actions of their spouse should not deny them the right to marry again. People however, will commit mistakes. We shouldn't judge them on that - who are we, but sinners ourselves?
The bigger problem is the sin of adultery itself. And that is a problem that is widespread in many religions, across many faiths and strictly dependent on the person's integrity.
I imagine pre-marital sex is just as common a problem in Catholic households as Protestant ones. Is this not adultery by Jesus' standards? Lust is one of Satan's best lures and he attacks indescriminantly. Ideally, one should pray for the divine wisdom to marry someone they can Love forever, a mate chosen from above, where divorce is not an option. Lately though, the sanc y of marriage is under attack and marriage is not lasting. This is a big problem.
And no my father doesn't marry divorcees that divorced for something other than infidelity. He won't even wed "uneven" yolk or young ladies 'with a bun in the oven'.
Last edited by Phenomanul; 10-27-2006 at 03:03 PM.
Understood.
I guess I didn't initially realize that the United Church of GOD was aligned with the belief structure of the Jehova's Witnesses. Now I know.
Interesting link Phenomanul, does that site have an explanation on the validity of the "Trinity"?
Maby I'm missing it. Thanks.
This is a perfect example of how three people read the Bible and come up with three different views, which is why the Sola Scriptura notion, IMO, has a flaw.
SA210 reads the Bible and does not see evidence for the Trinity.
I read the Bible and see evidence for the Trinity but I have to use the help of Tradition and ultimately trust the Catholic Church’s teachings.
Pheno reads the Bible and sees enough evidence to explain the extremely complicated Doctrine of the Trinity
I know of a couple instances where someone re-married in
the Catholic church that had been previously married in
a protestant church. It was my understanding that the
Catholic church did not recognize Protestant marriages as
being truly married.
Ah... but there is one difference.
I would probably consider the Watchtower's version of the Bible as being purposefully 'tainted'.... The translators were not even apt for the task. This was discussed on some other occasion no?
She remarried in a Protestant Church because she is protestant (in fact a youth director) now.
The Bible is pretty clear on the following:
1) There is one God (Deut. 6:4).
2) God the Father is God (1 Pet. 1:2 among many).
3) Jesus the Son of God is God (John 20:28-29, 1 Jn 5:20 among many).
4) Jesus is a distinct person from God the Father (John 5:19-23 among many).
5) Jesus and the Father are one (John 10:30).
6) The Holy Spirit is God (John 14:16-17, Acts 5:3-4 among many).
7) The Holy Spirit is a distinct person from God the Father and God the Son (John 14:26, Acts 13:2,4, Romans 8:26-27).
So three persons are God; there is one God. The Trinity doctrine reconciles this Scriptural evidence.
There are some cults, like the Jehovah's Witnesses, which use deviant translations of the Bible in order to deny the Trinity doctrine. But in a translation faithful to Koine Greek, the evidence is laid out.
It is not a matter of differing opinions on exegesis. This is one of the core beliefs. A sect that denies the Trinity cannot be truly Christian.
That's not really what I meant. UCG is a cult, like LDS, Christian Science, or Jehovah's Witnesses. Those groups have varyingly deviant views not necessarily aligned with one another.
I just referenced a well-known cult as an example of why I have no interest in UCG's views on the afterlife.
I didn't say I didn't know anyone that had been divorced and remarried in the church, merely, that I have no personal knowledge of church policy on this matter. Personally, I don't make it a habit to grill people about the details of their divorce and other matters. That's between God and them, IMO.
Although, Mormons by and large really are lovely people. It's a shame their theology is so whack.
I am not asking about private conversations- but your church's teachings.
They are not SACRAMENTAL.
So you are saying that 2 wrongs make a right?
How does one person's actions take away from the vow made by another? If the wife cheats- how does that release the husband from the vow he made to God? Just because you don't keep your promises does not mean I don't have to keep mine.
See that is the point in Catholicism- if you agree to a sacramental Catholic marriage you believe that divorce is NOT an option. Period. Even if he cheats.Ideally, one should pray for the divine wisdom to marry someone they can Love forever, a mate chosen from above, where divorce is not an option.
Officially: "Divorce and Remarriage - We do not counsel or encourage divorce, nor do we make second class Christians out of those who have been through a divorce or are remarried."
If I remember correctly from the membership class, my particular church will not allow any of our ministers to marry people that have been divorced, except in extreme cir stances such as the victim of infidelity or spousal abuse (I am not positive on that last one). I cannot attest to any other church's practices.
Unlike Catholic churches, Baptist churches are autonomous; so each Pastor would make those determinations. Most Baptist churches require some sort of pre-marital counseling and, as a general rule, will not allow church weddings for girls who are pregnant or couples who are living together.
As far as divorced people are concerned, they run the full spectrum. Some verrry conservative churches teach that divorced people can never remarry, regardless of the cir stances; others are more lenient.
But the bottom line is this: divorce is a sin, just like any other sin, and it can be forgiven. If we kept sinners out of church - they would be empty!
The bottom line continues to be interpretation, which is why I trust the Church ins uted by Christ to guide me.
Pheno says all these concepts are not in the Bible, I say they are, not conclusively but they are there.
I also have said that many other concepts, such as Christ ins uting his visible Church on Earth, the Papacy, the Real Presence, Salvation not only by Faith, auricular confession, etc. are in the Bible because I interpret it a certain way, but my Protestant brothers interpret it a different way and therefore the split between the two Christian denominations.
Why does the Catholic church not allow the exception that Jesus mentioned?
So if you get an annullment granted by the Catholic church, does that mean that you were engaging in pre-marital sex during all that time?
By the way, what about those Catholics that get divorced outside of the church? How does the church handle that? I know quite a few divorced Catholics that have been remarried, in some cases, several times. What is their status in the church?
Exactly
As I said earlier, the Arians denied the Trinity reading the same Bible you and I read. They did up until the V and VI centuries.
And the Bible does not explicitly state the Doctrine of the Trinity, same substance, same person, etc. I quoted some verses that go against the Trinitarian doctrine, but [B]Pheno[/B} came with some explanation of how those verses can be reconciled . If you don’t buy the explanations, you can still claim that God is more important than Christ. And let’s not even get into the Holy Spirit. Saying he is God does not mean he is one of the persons of the Trinity.
The problem still exists.
So are widows to remain perpetually widow? And are we to adopt Jewish tradition that states that the brother take the wife of his deceased brother?
Look, philosophically and theologically speaking we are on the same page as far as divorce goes. I don't believe in it. If I am not married yet, it is precisely because I want to make sure it is with the person that GOD has in His plans for me -- not someone I choose at a whim. And when I marry said person, does that mean we will never have problems? No. We will just have to be wise about how we go about resolving our differences. Most of all, if I love her as "Christ loved the church" I will love her enough to give my life for her (are you listening sickdsm). Most people that are going into marriages nowadays aren't even capable of sincerely evaluating that premise. For me, divorce will not be an option.
Back on point, is I've never claimed that the Protestant church was perfect. But that doesn't mean that divorces don't run amuck in Catholic nations either. It is a worldwide problem associated with our times. And yes, I would agree with 101A that the RCC is doing a better job than most other denominations in stressing the sanc y of marriage.
Nevertheless, divorce is not a problem that is rooted in protestant theology... it isn't. We more than discourage it.
The number one cause of divorce...is marriage.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
