Posted on 04/10/2017 12:57:43 PM PDT by NKP_Vet
Why is there confusion in the Catholic Church over Amoris Laetitia, and what consequences does it have for Church unity? I argue here that the confusion is ultimately over two de fide dogmas of Christian faith and that one consequence of the confusion is de facto schism within the Catholic Church.
When de fide (“of the faith”) is used in Catholic theology to designate a doctrine, it signifies a truth that pertains to Divine Revelation. The term Divine Revelation refers to truths by which God chose to reveal himself and his will to humanity in order to reconcile the world to himself so men and women might live united with him imperfectly in this world and, after death and judgment, perfectly with him in the Kingdom. Thus, the Church considers de fide doctrines necessary for salvation. Their status in Catholic teaching is irreformable. And their mode of proclamation is infallible.
This essay has three aims. First, it introduces and explains the theological concept of “secondary objects of infallibility” and shows how almost all of the truths pertaining to sexual matters taught by the Catholic Church belong to the category of secondary objects of infallibility, and so are rightly designated de fide doctrines. Second, it argues that beginning with the intra-ecclesial dissent from the papal encyclical Humanae Vitae, the Catholic Church has existed in a grave state of disunity over de fide doctrines, and that this disunity is deepened by the problems caused by Amoris Laetitia. Finally, it offers practical advice to the hierarchy and laity for responding to the crisis.
(Excerpt) Read more at lifesitenews.com ...
Yeah, he musta misplaced it.
Fatima is an upright Catholic and very active in broadcasting ministry.
Thanks ,Fatima.
Thanks Salvation and we all know how wonderful you are,Fatima.
Read LifeSiteNews, OnePeterFive, Canon212, and the Remnant. It’s all been there during the past four years.
You could follow the news, but you don’t. It’s annoying when someone who doesn’t pay attention for years on end pops up and says “Prove it!” As when someone says, “I’ve never seen any evidence that Hillary is a liar! Prove it!” or “I’ve never seen any evidence that Obama’s birth certificate is questionable! Prove it!”
Here. I’ll spoon-feed you this:
http://www.onepeterfive.com/pro-life-speaker-receives-standing-ovation-for-vatican-critique/
http://www.onepeterfive.com/man-elected-pope/
http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/2345-the-pope-and-the-baby-killer
Your interpretation, then, is that if a person commits adultery, their spouse can legitimately divorce them and remarry?
If so, is the adulterous spouse then free to legitimately remarry also?
If so, is the adulterous spouse then free to legitimately remarry also?
What does the text say?
Which text?
Matthew 19:8-9
The text appears to me to address only the issue of the non-adulterous spouse.
If he divorces her because of sexual immorality, and is thus free to remarry, is she also divorced from him and free to remarry?
It seems to be a trend in our society of people who choose to be ignorant and who want others to do their homework for them. But even when you do their homework for them it still does not awaken them from their sloth.
Mother Theresa used to have a saying, “I have not been called to be successful, I have been called to be Faithful”.
In our society it is more like, “I have not been called to be Faithful, I have been called to be normal”. So many have been trained to not be different, to not be too extreme, to not stand out, and to not stand up for the truth. Both public and Catholic schools teach children to be compliant.
When someone points out truth and orthodoxy these compliant minds become uncomfortable and blame the orthodox thinker for ruining their utopia.
The idiocy of ealgeone’s interpretation is that it makes Jesus say: If your spouse drinks, beats you, or refuses to support you, you’re up the creek, because marriage is indissoluble. But if you commit adultery, you get a get-out-of-jail-free card!
The non-idiotic interpretation is that the parenthetical reference to adultery means that the “wife” the man “puts away” must be a REAL wife, not a concubine or mistress. I.e., Jesus is clarifying that when a man is in a “marriage” that is illicit, he does NOT cause her to commit adultery if he ends the sham “marriage.”
Alternatively, if you wish to be rid of a wearisome spouse, enter into an adulterous relationship.
Then, they will divorce you and you’re free to go your own way, and marry someone else.
Unless, somehow, after your spouse has legitimately divorced you for adultery, you are still married to them.
3Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?” 4And He answered and said, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE, 5and said, ‘FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH’? 6“So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.” 7They said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE AND SEND her AWAY?” 8He said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way.
9“And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”
Matthew 19:3-9 NASB
Perhaps you could share you insight to this text?
I've asked you what the Greek rendering of this would be yet you've not replied....though that doesn't surprise me.
Ball's in your court Art.
Or, everyone could just do like the RCC and add to the texts whatever it wants.
9 I say to you,[a] whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery.” Matthew 19:9 New American Bible (Revised Edition)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew19:9&version=NABRE
To the reader of these texts please note:
Roman Cathoicism, in order to justify the use of annulments, has added to the text something not found in the Greek manuscripts.
Catholics are quick to throw Luther under the bus for allegedly adding a word to the text. Here, the RCC has added a whole new understanding of the text.
This cannot be defended. It is rejected by Christianity.
The correct translation of Matthew 19:9 is provided below.
And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.” NASB
Douey Rheims:
And I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and he that shall marry her that is put away, committeth adultery.
Note in D/R says as follows: “Except it be”: In the case of fornication, that is, of adultery, the wife may be put away: but even then the husband cannot marry another as long as the wife is living.
Yes, the hubby can remarry in the event of an unfaithful spouse and it not be adultery.
Perhaps you should actually read the note.
Yes, the hubby can remarry in the event of an unfaithful spouse and it not be adultery.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
hmmm -— Are you , by any chance , a hubby who happened to have had an unfaithful spouse, and are , say , looking for some justification for hmmmm what you did ?
Or am I misinterpreting ?
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.