Posted on 09/21/2014 1:29:09 PM PDT by marshmallow
In the Philippines, it’s a big problem and a bigger money maker
As an expert on this matter through hard experience, I would say the following:
The Church has wrestled with divorce and remarriage since the beginning. I just finished reading a book of orthodox Catholic doctrine published in the 1880s which laid out the history over 1500 years of various “solutions”, proposed and/or implemented, before Trent (as the book would have it) ended all debate. But of course, the fundamental issue remains, unchanged, except that millions of Catholics are now affected because of post-1969 changes in civil divorce practice.
The resulting annulment explosion is the problem, and (almost) all bishops hate it. It is the result of a desire to temper justice with mercy (good), but in practice it favors deception and perjury (bad). There is an entire industry that exists to facilitate a successful petition, which will inevitably be granted if certain words are used.
If there is a way to extend mercy, including the recognition of second marriages, while doing away with the lies, most of the bishops would jump at the chance.
Because it happened. That’s how.
Ain't nothing like the real thing, baby.
Chapter and verse, please
That is absolutely not true. The civil marriage is what makes the children legitimate. Anulling a Catholic marriage has absolutely no effect on the children. This is a common misconception but is not reality.
O2
That’s just not true. The Church is explicit that the children of a union that ended in divorce and annulment are legitimate. This is because the Church presumes the couple intended to marry in good faith, and therefore, are not guilty of the sin of fornication, even though there was no true marriage at all.
Just give them a PO box to send their money to.
I’m still confused. With the sheer number of annulments since Vatican II, exactly how does the process need to be “simplified”? Getting an annulment shouldn’t be easy ... or easier.
Annulment by PayPal?
“Our Lord’s words could not be any clearer. To be forgiven any sin, one must be sorry for having committed it, which obviously includes the intention of not committing it anymore.”
That’s naive... Not on our Lord’s part but on YOURS’S for believing such an interpenetration.
I go to confession as a Catholic. My sins are many but there always pretty much the same. Time after time after time, year after year after year.
It may be my wish - with the Lord’s help, not to sin again, but it would be disingenuous to think or state that it was my intention. Surely I know that I will.
After 60+ years and countless confessions. Really...
How do you define “intention”?
I read your comment to say that you knew the details.
You are comparing apples and oranges.
Scouter is actually correct. We are supposed to have a firm purpose of amendment. If you are confessing something without at least thinking you are going to try to change, then you probably shouldn’t be confessing it.
It’s obvious. God is Truth. He knows the innermost thoughts and the deepest motives of every human heart. He cannot be fooled by insincerity. He knows when someone is truly sorry. If you don’t think the intention not to sin again is necessary for forgiveness, then you take God for a fool.
“Yes, they were married, he can tell his kids.”
Your talking out of both sides of your mouth... If the marriage was invalid, as in never happened in the first place, of course the kids would be bastards.
Try as it might, the Church has very little wiggle room here. Your not going to convince very many so affected kids.
In the Religion forum, on a thread titled Pope Orders Review of Annulment Process to Simplify Procedure, Popman wrote:
For my wife’s father to get a RC annulment to be married to another women he had to declare his children were bastards....
Nope. Wrong. False. Try again.
There you go using logic. That’s unfair. The catholic church has no defense against it.
Failure to succeed in one’s intention is not the same thing as being insincere in it. The fact that you keep trying to overcome a sin, especially a sin you find so difficult to conquer, is proof of the sincerity of your intention.
“This is because the Church presumes the couple intended to marry in good faith”
If indeed the Church presumed such a thing, the annulment wouldn’t be granted... The annulment is because they (supposedly) DID NOT marry in good faith.
The Church is dancing around the problem...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.