Renowned philosopher signs petition calling on bishops to investigate Pope for heresy

redleghunter · May 7, 2019

Sparagmos said:
Are ya’ll trying to make me feel bad for not seeing it and asking for help? LOL, I’ll remember not to ask again...

Sorry. Someone else asked for it. Thought maybe you saw the post.

chevyontheriver · May 8, 2019

Sparagmos said:
Are ya’ll trying to make me feel bad for not seeing it and asking for help? LOL, I’ll remember not to ask again...

Open Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church, Easter Week, 2019

truefiction1 · May 8, 2019

chevyontheriver said:
That would be an Orthodox perspective on Catholic teaching. The Catholic perspective on Catholic teaching is that a valid marriage lasts as long as both spouses are alive.

The Church (Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic) does not teach that the union between a husband and wife is dissolved by death. Matrimony is a Sacrament and is therefore Eternal in nature.

FireDragon76 · May 8, 2019

redleghunter said:
At the very least he has been ambiguous. Which is a trait the faithful do not need in an age of great confusion.

As if infantilizing them respects their dignity at all...

JCFantasy23 · May 8, 2019

Leading Catholics react to Open Letter accusing Pope Francis of heresy

chevyontheriver · May 8, 2019

truefiction1 said:
The Church (Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic) does not teach that the union between a husband and wife is dissolved by death. Matrimony is a Sacrament and is therefore Eternal in nature.

Is a widower who marries again a bigamist?

Do the Orthodox consider marriages to be eternal and yet a few divorces to be permitted for those who can't stay married?

truefiction1 · May 8, 2019

chevyontheriver said:
Is a widower who marries again a bigamist?

A widower who marries again enters into a union that is not regarded in the same way as a first marriage. Such a union is of a more penitential nature.

chevyontheriver said:
Do the Orthodox consider marriages to be eternal and yet a few divorces to be permitted for those who can't stay married?

Yes, a marriage that sin did not manage to destroy, leading to a state where there was no longer any marriage bond, is eternal. second marriages, whether by widows or by divorcees are rather a different matter. But just because marriages fail or there are additional marriages does not mean that the bond between husband and wife that was consecrated in the Church and endured faithfully and forever will ever be broken. Such is the real reason why Christ hated divorce and preached vehemently against it. Marriage is the creation of a new being that is formed by the joining of one man with one woman, in a bond by which the two become one flesh. This new, one-flesh creation is the work of God, and as Christ says: "What God has joined together, let no man put asunder". Christ's statement here does not mean, however, that after a marriage bond is tragically and entirely destroyed by the sin that is in this world, that a divorce must not be granted. The couple is already divorced in reality and no semblance of a marriage any longer exists or can exist. Sometimes in this evil world, the Church is forced to choose between the lesser of two evils. When this happens. Sometimes these people do remarry, and is it good to exclude them from the Life of the Church and Her Sacraments? It doesn't seem so to us.

chevyontheriver · May 8, 2019

truefiction1 said:
A widower who marries again enters into a union that is not regarded in the same way as a first marriage. Such a union is of a more penitential nature.

Yes, a marriage that sin did not manage to destroy, leading to a state where there was no longer any marriage bond, is eternal. second marriages, whether by widows or by divorcees are rather a different matter. But just because marriages fail or there are additional marriages does not mean that the bond between husband and wife that was consecrated in the Church and endured faithfully and forever will ever be broken. Such is the real reason why Christ hated divorce and preached vehemently against it. Marriage is the creation of a new being that is formed by the joining of one man with one woman, in a bond by which the two become one flesh. This new, one-flesh creation is the work of God, and as Christ says: "What God has joined together, let no man put asunder". Christ's statement here does not mean, however, that after a marriage bond is tragically and entirely destroyed by the sin that is in this world, that a divorce must not be granted. The couple is already divorced in reality and no semblance of a marriage any longer exists or can exist. Sometimes in this evil world, the Church is forced to choose between the lesser of two evils. When this happens. Sometimes these people do remarry, and is it good to exclude them from the Life of the Church and Her Sacraments? It doesn't seem so to us.

Your reply sounds strangely like what the members of Team Francis might say. Marriage is permanent but impermanent and bigamy is fine except second marriages are penitential? Whew.

I'm going to bed.

redleghunter · May 8, 2019

truefiction1 said:
A widower who marries again enters into a union that is not regarded in the same way as a first marriage. Such a union is of a more penitential nature.

What’s the NT support for this view?

In his discourse of dying to the Law Paul compares the bond to marriage:

Romans 7: NASB

1Or do you not know, brethren (for I am speaking to those who know the law), that the law has jurisdiction over a person as long as he lives? 2For the married woman is bound by law to her husband while he is living; but if her husband dies, she is released from the law concerning the husband. 3So then, if while her husband is living she is joined to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is not an adulteress though she is joined to another man.

truefiction1 · May 8, 2019

redleghunter said:
What’s the NT support for this view?

In his discourse of dying to the Law Paul compares the bond to marriage:

Romans 7: NASB

1Or do you not know, brethren (for I am speaking to those who know the law), that the law has jurisdiction over a person as long as he lives? 2For the married woman is bound by law to her husband while he is living; but if her husband dies, she is released from the law concerning the husband. 3So then, if while her husband is living she is joined to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is not an adulteress though she is joined to another man.

We Live by grace, through faith, not law. Those who believe in Christ shall never die, but have passed from death to Life, and this Truth applies to a husband and wife joined in Sacred, Holy Matrimony in Christ. So if we do not die, then neither does our bond in Holy Matrimony in Christ.

The Scriptural basis for this is in the Gospel of the Holy Apostle and Evangelist, John 11:26

redleghunter · May 8, 2019

truefiction1 said:
We Live by grace, through faith, not law. Those who believe in Christ shall never die, but have passed from death to Life, and this Truth applies to a husband and wife joined in Sacred, Holy Matrimony in Christ. So if we do not die, then neither does our bond in Holy Matrimony in Christ.

The Scriptural basis for this is in the Gospel of the Holy Apostle and Evangelist, John 11:26

That verse does not address human earthly relationships. Jesus did have an answer though:

Matthew 22: NASB

23On that day some Sadducees (who say there is no resurrection) came to Jesus and questioned Him, 24asking, “Teacher, Moses said, ‘IF A MAN DIES HAVING NO CHILDREN, HIS BROTHER AS NEXT OF KIN SHALL MARRY HIS WIFE, AND RAISE UP CHILDREN FOR HIS BROTHER.’ 25“Now there were seven brothers with us; and the first married and died, and having no children left his wife to his brother; 26so also the second, and the third, down to the seventh. 27“Last of all, the woman died. 28“In the resurrection, therefore, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had married her.”

29But Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God. 30“For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.31“But regarding the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God: 32‘I AM THE GOD OFABRAHAM, AND THE GOD OF ISAAC, AND THE GOD OFJACOB’? He is not the God of the dead but of the living.” 33When the crowds heard this, they were astonished at His teaching.

truefiction1 · May 8, 2019

chevyontheriver said:
Your reply sounds strangely like what the members of Team Francis might say. Marriage is permanent but impermanent and bigamy is fine except second marriages are penitential? Whew.

I'm going to bed.

Me too.

truefiction1 · May 9, 2019

redleghunter said:
That verse does not address human earthly relationships. Jesus did have an answer though:

Matthew 22: NASB

23On that day some Sadducees (who say there is no resurrection) came to Jesus and questioned Him, 24asking, “Teacher, Moses said, ‘IF A MAN DIES HAVING NO CHILDREN, HIS BROTHER AS NEXT OF KIN SHALL MARRY HIS WIFE, AND RAISE UP CHILDREN FOR HIS BROTHER.’ 25“Now there were seven brothers with us; and the first married and died, and having no children left his wife to his brother; 26so also the second, and the third, down to the seventh. 27“Last of all, the woman died. 28“In the resurrection, therefore, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had married her.”

29But Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God. 30“For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.31“But regarding the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God: 32‘I AM THE GOD OFABRAHAM, AND THE GOD OF ISAAC, AND THE GOD OFJACOB’? He is not the God of the dead but of the living.” 33When the crowds heard this, they were astonished at His teaching.

Marriage in the Kingdom of heaven won't be anything like the course, fleshly marriage of this world. Just as Christ's humanity became a "life-giving spirit" so it will be with those united in Holy Matrimony, who will remain "one flesh", although that flesh will be life-giving, spiritual (supernatural) flesh as Christ's is. But we will no longer be conducting wedding ceremonies or engaging in carnal/sexual behaviors. That is what Christ meant when He says that they will neither marry nor be given in marriage. His questioners were being carnal in their understanding of marriage and He knew it, so He corrected them. Marriage, however, since it is Sacramental, is Eternal.

We mustn't forget: Adam and Eve were husband and wife - before being ejected from Paradise and being deprived of the fruit of the tree of Life. If they had not sinned, and had eaten the fruit of immortality instead (through obedience), would their status as "one flesh" not still be intact forever? Did God intend for Adam and Eve to be married only until they died? No, of course not, because it was not His will for that couple to ever die. They were to be eternal, as was their marriage to one another. It was only by their sin that they became subject to death.

Now, as I stated earlier, since we are alive in Christ and no longer separated by death, our marriage in Christ can abide forever, just as that of the first man, Adam, and his wife Eve, the mother of all the living, was willed to be by God.

chevyontheriver · May 9, 2019

truefiction1 said:
Marriage in the Kingdom of heaven won't be anything like the course, fleshly marriage of this world. Just as Christ's humanity became a "life-giving spirit" so it will be with those united in Holy Matrimony, who will remain "one flesh", although that flesh will be life-giving, spiritual (supernatural) flesh as Christ's is. But we will no longer be conducting wedding ceremonies or engaging in carnal/sexual behaviors. That is what Christ meant when He says that they will neither marry nor be given in marriage. His questioners were being carnal in their understanding of marriage and He knew it, so He corrected them. Marriage, however, since it is Sacramental, is Eternal.

We mustn't forget: Adam and Eve were husband and wife - before being ejected from Paradise and being deprived of the fruit of the tree of Life. If they had not sinned, and had eaten the fruit of immortality instead (through obedience), would their status as "one flesh" not still be intact forever? Did God intend for Adam and Eve to be married only until they died? No, of course not, because it was not His will for that couple to ever die. They were to be eternal, as was their marriage to one another. It was only by their sin that they became subject to death.

Now, as I stated earlier, since we are alive in Christ and no longer separated by death, our marriage in Christ can abide forever, just as that of the first man, Adam, and his wife Eve, the mother of all the living, was willed to be by God.

I have never heard this (Orthodox?) perspective outside of the LDS.

It does share a bit with the views of Team Francis that someone validly married can dump a spouse and take up with someone else and God is cool with it. But marriage is the sign of covenant between Christ and the Church. Imagine Christ not faithful to that marriage.

A valid marriage lasts while both spouses live. That's what Scripture says. Team Francis and you allow exceptions.

When I say Team Francis I mean various cardinals and bishops and theologians who have felt free in recent years to say heretical things, and some of these people were promoted by pope Francis so they feel enabled by him.

truefiction1 · May 9, 2019

chevyontheriver said:
I have never heard this (Orthodox?) perspective outside of the LDS.

It does share a bit with the views of Team Francis that someone validly married can dump a spouse and take up with someone else and God is cool with it. But marriage is the sign of covenant between Christ and the Church. Imagine Christ not faithful to that marriage.

A valid marriage lasts while both spouses live. That's what Scripture says. Team Francis and you allow exceptions.

When I say Team Francis I mean various cardinals and bishops and theologians who have felt free in recent years to say heretical things, and some of these people were promoted by pope Francis so they feel enabled by him.

I've seen people validly dump their spouse for another (because they were having an affair) and then receive an annulment from the Roman Church, marry again as a Roman Catholic and then commune as a Roman Catholic. So, in practice (even if not in theory), the RCC is permitting divorce and remarriage anyway.

Fact is, Adam and Eve were one flesh, as indicated in the Book of Genesis, and had they not sinned, their status as husband and wife would be as eternal as the two of them, just as the marriage of Christ and His Bride (the Church) are eternal. The bond was not to be broken by death. It's not a legal contract. It's a Holy Sacrament. Pope Francis is in some ways closer to the early Church fathers when it comes to things like allowing divorcees to commune, and not making celibacy compulsory for parish priests. That is the problem a lot of Roman Catholics are having with him, as he is not necessarily wrong. We have sufficient evidence that the early Church did not prevent divorcees who were remarried from receiving Communion, but that they were given rules of penance before they could do so. The long standing practice and philosophy of marriage that is held by the RCC are innovations unique to that Church, so if anything, these aspects of Roman Catholicism are heretical, not the cleric who is working to fix them.

redleghunter · May 9, 2019

truefiction1 said:
Marriage in the Kingdom of heaven won't be anything like the course, fleshly marriage of this world. Just as Christ's humanity became a "life-giving spirit" so it will be with those united in Holy Matrimony, who will remain "one flesh", although that flesh will be life-giving, spiritual (supernatural) flesh as Christ's is. But we will no longer be conducting wedding ceremonies or engaging in carnal/sexual behaviors. That is what Christ meant when He says that they will neither marry nor be given in marriage. His questioners were being carnal in their understanding of marriage and He knew it, so He corrected them. Marriage, however, since it is Sacramental, is Eternal.

We mustn't forget: Adam and Eve were husband and wife - before being ejected from Paradise and being deprived of the fruit of the tree of Life. If they had not sinned, and had eaten the fruit of immortality instead (through obedience), would their status as "one flesh" not still be intact forever? Did God intend for Adam and Eve to be married only until they died? No, of course not, because it was not His will for that couple to ever die. They were to be eternal, as was their marriage to one another. It was only by their sin that they became subject to death.

Now, as I stated earlier, since we are alive in Christ and no longer separated by death, our marriage in Christ can abide forever, just as that of the first man, Adam, and his wife Eve, the mother of all the living, was willed to be by God.

Can you point me to a patriarch who taught this?

truefiction1 · May 9, 2019

redleghunter said:
Can you point me to a patriarch who taught this?

All of the patriarchs (unless they are Roman Catholic) of the Church teach this, and have taught it throughout the centuries. The Roman Catholic philosophy of marriage, in which it is considered to be merely a legal contract dissolved at death, is an innovation that appeared in Latin theological schools. It's never been considered an Orthodox doctrine in our 2000 year old Church.

truefiction1 · May 9, 2019

I'll look for a statement from a Patriarch to support what I've been claiming here to be Orthodox teaching, but for the time being, here is a written statement by an Orthodox cleric from the website of the Orthodox Church in America:

"Marriage in Christ allows our human love to become divine and unending. There is no “until death do us part”. The point is just the opposite. Christ comes to our human love, frees it from sin and grants it everlasting joy in His Kingdom of love." The Sacraments - Questions & Answers

truefiction1 · May 9, 2019

For those who are asking, the following link is to an article that was produced by Athenagoras, a bishop of the patriarchate of Constantinople. This article very thoroughly discusses what has always been the Orthodox Christian understanding of marriage, divorce, and remarriage.

Orthodox Research Institute

chevyontheriver · May 9, 2019

truefiction1 said:
I've seen people validly dump their spouse for another (because they were having an affair)

That is not 'validly' dump. If anything it is an invalid dump. It's the Protestant reading that adultery is sufficient cause for divorce.

and then receive an annulment from the Roman Church, marry again as a Roman Catholic and then commune as a Roman Catholic. So, in practice (even if not in theory), the RCC is permitting divorce and remarriage anyway.

Were there grounds for a finding of nullity, that a valid marriage never actually existed?

The bond was not to be broken by death. It's not a legal contract. It's a Holy Sacrament.

But you allow divorce. Incongruous.

Pope Francis is in some ways closer to the early Church fathers when it comes to things like allowing divorcees to commune, and not making celibacy compulsory for parish priests.

He may be more similar to contemporary Orthodox who accept divorce. I doubt very much that he is closer to the early Church Fathers.

That is the problem a lot of Roman Catholics are having with him, as he is not necessarily wrong.

We are having a problem with him in that he seems ready to change doctrine on marriage and on homosexuality and other things.

We have sufficient evidence that the early Church did not prevent divorcees who were remarried from receiving Communion, but that they were given rules of penance before they could do so. The long standing practice and philosophy of marriage that is held by the RCC are innovations unique to that Church, so if anything, these aspects of Roman Catholicism are heretical, not the cleric who is working to fix them.

Hmmm. You still have the incongruity of allowing divorce, remarriage, and restoration of communion but you still maintain marriage is forever. Then you say that remarriage has always been acceptable to the Church. Mind if I don't jump on that bandwagon?

Renowned philosopher signs petition calling on bishops to investigate Pope for heresy

Thank You Jesus!

Well-Known Member

Fool

Well-Known Member

In a Kingdom by the Sea.

Well-Known Member

Fool

Well-Known Member

Thank You Jesus!

Fool

Thank You Jesus!

Fool

Fool

Well-Known Member

Fool

Thank You Jesus!

Fool

Fool

Fool

Well-Known Member

Similar threads