Don John of Austria Posted May 25, 2005 Posted May 25, 2005 [quote name='scardella' date='May 24 2005, 03:49 PM'] Does any sin or mortal sin only affect free choice? Your post says differently at different points. To put it succinctly, though, what's really at stake is whether they are free enough to make an irrevocable consent of the will, which is what happens during the marriage vows. I'm not convinced that a non-Christian cannot make such a consent. I'd like to see documentation or a link on the baptisms by the sword deal. Certaintly sounds fishy to me. [/quote] anything which affect the will affects Free choice, however the irrovocable consent of the will is always available to the sane unpossessed baptised Christian, and might not be available to a sane unpossessed unbaptised heathen; as it is not that their will has been tainted by sin; it simply has never been freedfrom sin at all.
scardella Posted June 1, 2005 Author Posted June 1, 2005 I was talking with a more theologically experienced friend last night, and he reminded me of an important defect in your argument regarding consent of the will. You are assuming that all graces are part and parcel of Sanctifying Grace, which is the share in God's Divine Life. However, there are actual graces, which are supernatural helps, but not Sanctifying Grace. For example, your existance is an actual grace. It is there even if you are in the state of mortal sin. If it wasn't, once Adam had sinned, he would have ceased to exist; likewise the fallen angels would have ceased to exist. This ability of the will to consent to marriage is an actual grace, which can operate independently of the state of the person's soul. To say that God would limit actual graces to those in a state of grace would imply that God would not give someone the grace to accept forgiveness, which is absurd.
Don John of Austria Posted June 1, 2005 Posted June 1, 2005 (edited) [quote name='scardella' date='Jun 1 2005, 12:11 PM'] I was talking with a more theologically experienced friend last night, and he reminded me of an important defect in your argument regarding consent of the will. You are assuming that all graces are part and parcel of Sanctifying Grace, which is the share in God's Divine Life. However, there are actual graces, which are supernatural helps, but not Sanctifying Grace. For example, your existance is an actual grace. It is there even if you are in the state of mortal sin. If it wasn't, once Adam had sinned, he would have ceased to exist; likewise the fallen angels would have ceased to exist. This ability of the will to consent to marriage is an actual grace, which can operate independently of the state of the person's soul. To say that God would limit actual graces to those in a state of grace would imply that God would not give someone the grace to accept forgiveness, which is absurd. [/quote] OH the existance as actual grace arguement, we've had that one before, that is completly irrelevant to the discussion. First Will may or may not be an actual Grace, that is debatable and not something I am simply willing to concede... I emphatically deny that free will is simply something you have by nature of existance, that is not in keeping with tradition, or scripture which both make very clear that sin is an enslaving force. One is not free if one is a slave. Second existance was willed, is willed, and will be willed not because God is required to constantly Will our existance but because when God Wills, He being completly outside of time, which is His creation, and seperate and distinct from Him, is in effect always Willing it's existance. As such the actual grace of existance can not be corraletive to thegrace of free will for all things are Willed to exist yet all things are not willed to have free will, free will is a specific gift given to Man and to the Angels( although being all spirit and will alters their free will a bit) as it is a specific gift it cannot be analgus to the grace of existance which is even given to dirt. So I am not claiming that Actual Grace is in anyway effected by sin, I am specificly denying that Free Will is analgous to The Actual Grace of existance. Further I fail to see how the ability to except forgiveness is grace at all, ones acceptance or regection of forgiveness is immaterial one who is forgiven is forgiven regardless of their acceptance, forgiveness is an action by the forgiver not the forgiven. Now if you mean that God would not give someone the grace to seek forgivness or to desire it which is a requirment for forgivness well then I would say you are simply wrong, Scripture tells us that God has specificly removed that desire before such as with Pharoh and perhaps even with Judas. Further the desire to have Faith and be forgiven is a Sanctifying Grace so either way it is immaterial. Edited June 1, 2005 by Don John of Austria
Don John of Austria Posted June 1, 2005 Posted June 1, 2005 [quote name='Socrates' date='May 20 2005, 12:25 PM'] So Don John, If a non-Catholic (and thereby "non-sacramentally" married) husband and wife, enter into the Church, do they have to get married again? Would they be "living in sin"? [/quote] I apparantly forgot to address this, yes socrates they would have to get remarried, this is usually refered to as being "blessed " by the Church but that blessing is infact the nuptual blessing and is an invokation binding the two in a sacramental marriage.
dspen2005 Posted June 11, 2005 Posted June 11, 2005 i know the Church allows but does prefer that Catholics marry only Catholics.... many spiritual writers of the past have stated that it is the best interest of the Catholic involved to marry another Catholic, otherwise there may be a danger of temptation, or a danger of being weakened in the Faith.
kateri05 Posted June 13, 2005 Posted June 13, 2005 yea double sigh, how did this pop back up? .... sigh
Anastasia13 Posted March 5, 2014 Posted March 5, 2014 This was in the Gospel today: Marriage is the primordial sacrament. It was there "in the beginning", before Jesus raised it to the level of a Sacrament. It's still valid. BTW, I'd still like a chance to look at my notes. Sorry for the micromanage-am on a device without copy function. Marriage was not always a sacrament? How was it raised to a sacrament? When and why?
Tab'le De'Bah-Rye Posted March 5, 2014 Posted March 5, 2014 It isn't a matter of infallible faith and morals but if we are truly catholic Christian we must respect the suggestions of the holy magesterium, like seriously respect ie: take into serious consideration as being from a higher source above the self. And if indeed canon law is incorrect it is still nihil obstat (nothing deliberately contrary to faith) and also if indeed the holy magesteriums understanding of such matters is a bit askew you are not and god is, so where do you go? Really why do we need to hit the ground to open our eyes and see what tripped us, i understand this and do so myself at times but am learning to look and listen. I thought the holy magesterium was a light from the true light to help us see that which we may stumble over in this shadow of sin, surely we must respect this. Get this, your on a train and you know the destination is trouble or an unknown destination ie walking blind, get off the dang train before it gets to the last stop, your choice, and many are on that train right, it's public transport or solo in there own car running red lights when no one is watching. The wide and crooked or the straight and narrow. We are still few even if we are the biggest religious body on the planet, but it is a body not separate bodies or separate individual bodies, and the holy magesterium + pope is the head of that body and Jesus christ is the head of the head, what is there not to get? JESUS IZ LORD!
Tab'le De'Bah-Rye Posted March 5, 2014 Posted March 5, 2014 may i be so kind as to add that as far as i'm aware the magesterium of the church is an infallible matter of faith and morals and as far as i'm aware there aren't many must believes/infallible matteres of faith and morals. Correct me if I'm wrong because i to am fumbling my way through this and mainly only have the holy bible, the holy sacraments and the odd works of the saints, but that the holy magesterium of the church or the brain of the body of Christ consists of the cardinals and the pope and the ordinary magesterium or the eyes,ears and tounge delivering the message of the brain consists of the the bishops,priests and other consecrated religious. That is a full on guess and someone please tell me if i'm incorrect because i have discerned this on my lonesome. And than you have the remainder of the body outside of the head but still ATTACHED to the head of course or you don't have a body right? We truly are blessed if we are even one hair follicle attached to this holy body through the real and perpetual presence of God in the Holy Eucharist, the sacrament of confession and the primacy of the pope and magesterium. Something like that anyway there is one more vein that connects us to the brain in Jesus name, but alas i have already forgotten, perhaps something to do with the holy mother, please remind me. This is the limit to my understanding of such things and NIHIL OBSTAT i have no intentions of misleading anyone here, but i could be misled a little or a lot so feel free to correct in any way shape or form, bear with me and help me grow please. Onward christian souls. God is GOOD.
cmaD2006 Posted March 5, 2014 Posted March 5, 2014 Sorry for the micromanage-am on a device without copy function. Marriage was not always a sacrament? How was it raised to a sacrament? When and why? Not sure if you noticed but you replied to an (almost) 9 year old post.
Anastasia13 Posted March 5, 2014 Posted March 5, 2014 (edited) Not sure if you noticed but you replied to an (almost) 9 year old post. I could have sworn I typed sorry for the necromancy, not micromanage-am. I have not figured out how to cut an paste on a kindle. Edited March 5, 2014 by Light and Truth
cmaD2006 Posted March 5, 2014 Posted March 5, 2014 :) It's all good :) Happy Ash Wednesday and start of Lent :)
CrossCuT Posted March 5, 2014 Posted March 5, 2014 Sorry for the micromanage-am on a device without copy function. Marriage was not always a sacrament? How was it raised to a sacrament? When and why? Maybe he means it in a secular sense. "Marriage" by the state vs in the church.
southern california guy Posted March 6, 2014 Posted March 6, 2014 (edited) So the Catholic church does not consider certain marriages "valid".. So what? Does getting a "dispensation" somehow make the married person feel more committed??? Is it supposed to somehow strengthen the marriage? Is it supposed to make the Catholic in the marriage feel that the marriage is more "official"? Is it supposed to keep other people in the Catholic church have more respect for that marriage? Is it supposed to make God "happy!"? I imagine that a "dispensation" costs money. If you forgo the dispensation are you really only saving money? My older sister married a Muslim, and my younger sister married a protestant. And neither of them bothered with a dispensation. Edited March 6, 2014 by southern california guy
HisChildForever Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 So the Catholic church does not consider certain marriages "valid".. So what? Does getting a "dispensation" somehow make the married person feel more committed??? Is it supposed to somehow strengthen the marriage? Is it supposed to make the Catholic in the marriage feel that the marriage is more "official"? Is it supposed to keep other people in the Catholic church have more respect for that marriage? Is it supposed to make God "happy!"? I imagine that a "dispensation" costs money. If you forgo the dispensation are you really only saving money? My older sister married a Muslim, and my younger sister married a protestant. And neither of them bothered with a dispensation. I think the priest takes care of the dispensation, contacts the diocese for you or something. I think it's really to raise the non-Catholic spouse's understanding of the Catholic spouse's obligations.
AugustineA Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 I enjoyed reading the Canon law on this subject! (I know, weird right) It's only somewhat related.. but I'm not sure I would date a non-Catholic. In fact, I'm certain I wouldn't, unless they were interested in converting. There are too many pros that go with dating/marrying a Catholic girl, the biggest being the shared yoke of the faith and membership in the Church.
Lil Red Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 So the Catholic church does not consider certain marriages "valid".. So what? Does getting a "dispensation" somehow make the married person feel more committed??? Is it supposed to somehow strengthen the marriage? Is it supposed to make the Catholic in the marriage feel that the marriage is more "official"? Is it supposed to keep other people in the Catholic church have more respect for that marriage? Is it supposed to make God "happy!"? I imagine that a "dispensation" costs money. If you forgo the dispensation are you really only saving money? My older sister married a Muslim, and my younger sister married a protestant. And neither of them bothered with a dispensation. a dispensation doesn't cost money, to my knowledge. we weren't asked for a dispensation fee when my husband and I were married. both of your sisters marriages would be considered non-sacramental, possibly invalid (in the eyes of the Church) marriages. but i don't know the technical terms. perhaps CatherineM or another could jump in at this point. idk why, but your post comes off very aggressive and nasty-toned. perhaps it is your usage of ???? and !!!! and ?! ?! for that reason, i'm having a hard time taking your post seriously.
southern california guy Posted March 8, 2014 Posted March 8, 2014 a dispensation doesn't cost money, to my knowledge. we weren't asked for a dispensation fee when my husband and I were married. both of your sisters marriages would be considered non-sacramental, possibly invalid (in the eyes of the Church) marriages. but i don't know the technical terms. perhaps CatherineM or another could jump in at this point. idk why, but your post comes off very aggressive and nasty-toned. perhaps it is your usage of ???? and !!!! and ?! ?! for that reason, i'm having a hard time taking your post seriously. It wasn't totally serious. I suppose I am a little frustrated because I don't really understand the concept behind a "dispensation". If the marriage is "invalid" then how does a "dispensation" change anything? It is still the same type of marriage. It seems to me that the only difference is that the Catholic church has somehow agreed to put their seal of approval on it -- with a "dispensation". Why does a dispensation make the marriage more "sacramental"? Or how does it?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now