I've seen this rag, US Catholic, around town--at one time, copies were available in the entryway at St. Anthony's on 76th/Stevenson. A relative-by-marriage subscribed to it, too.
When did it become Playboy?
From U.S. Catholic comes this travesty.
Are cohabiting Catholics always “living in sin”? Two respected family ministry researchers argue “no” and suggest the recovery of an ancient ritual for those moving toward marriage.
...Recent focus groups of young Catholic adults on “problematic aspects of church teaching” found that they disagreed with church teaching on premarital sex and cohabitation and do not see a fundamental difference in a loving relationship before and after a wedding. Our experience with young adults leads us to doubt the claim that they are living in sin. It would appear closer to the truth that they are growing, perhaps slowly but nonetheless surely, into grace.
Here's a perversion of JPII's writings which is stunning:
In his 1981 encyclical Familiaris Consortio (On the Family), Pope John Paul II taught that conjugal love “aims at a deeply personal unity, the unity that, beyond union in one flesh, leads to forming one heart and soul; it demands indissolubility and faithfulness in definitive mutual giving; and it is open to fertility.” This describes the commitment not only of married spouses but also of nuptial cohabitors who have definitively committed to a loving relationship with one another but who have not yet celebrated their wedding.
Really? JPII was speaking to pre-marital fornicators? Geez, he shoulda held a conference and reception for them at the Vatican, no?
Oh, there's more:
In the 12th century, Gratian, the master of the school of law at the Catholic University of Bologna, introduced a compromise in the debate between the Romans and the northern Europeans over what brought about marriage. That compromise, still embodied in the Code of Canon Law (canon 1061), is that mutual consent makes a marriage ratified and valid, and sexual intercourse makes it ratified and consummated and, therefore, indissoluble.
Comments The Curt Jester, with olfactory sense working very well:
Whenever a progressive spouts Canon Law you... immediately detect the fragrance of the species Rattus rattus.
Actually, Curt, that fragrance fills the room when they show up for the Liturgeist Meetings, too.
Of course, this line of "thought" raises its own questions.
Now what about "nuptial cohabitators" who change their mind later and never in fact enter into marriage? Do they have to seek a decree of nullity before they can enter another "nuptial cohabitation?"
If so, I know where they can get it.
HT: The Curt Jester
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I am almost 40 and I can tell you in my experience, we were never taught Church teaching on sexuality, not in the home, or in the parish.
All I ever heard was how wrong the Church was on this or that teaching.
Now here is the fall out.
What is funny is that I know Catholics who have no problem with pre-marital sex (they told me that was the case personally with them) yet to co- habit before marriage is awful.
Down the slippery slope...
It is an interesting article. Unfortunately they use the term "Catholic tradition" to offer authority to something that isn't canonically tradition. It is no better than saying Catholic tradition is that we have male altar boys and therefore we are wrong to include girls. What they are describing is custom.
They are certainly correct that typically marriage has been understood via local custom. The problem (outside Trent which they acknowledge) is that custom in the US is to treat the state of an engaged co-habiting couple as concubinage. There absolutely no secular legal support for calling such a state marriage. As far as intentions go, via both custom and law, both secular and religious, the couple understands and intends to co-habit and not be wed. There is no escaping that what you intend is what you do. I can't say I intended to be faithful if I fornicated with someone who isn't my wife.
"nuptial cohabitators", oooh I like the sounds of that!
Post a Comment