what a blessing it is to be Catholic

Fact check, i saw a "my litte dark age" orthodox edit and they are more "based" and "redpill" and i get to mix their belifes with what ever else i please so there for the office of peter is discontineued and it probably wasnt anything important any ways

@fabianradomski3178

2 ай бұрын

😂😂

@SgtPiper

2 ай бұрын

No you don't get to mix your beliefs with whatever you please

@republicradio431

2 ай бұрын

@@SgtPiper have u spoken with nazis before? They get to mix what ever, had an orthodox nazi friend before, it made no sence

@SgtPiper

2 ай бұрын

@@republicradio431 Spoke with way more Orthodox Christians then you and I can tell you none of them have been Nazis

@republicradio431

2 ай бұрын

@@SgtPiper not my experience

Nice vid on an important topic. The editing and animations are top notch. Subscribed.

@CatechesisVids

Ай бұрын

Thanks! More to come.

St Photini was the women at the well that was divorced multiple times and yet Christ still found her worthy to be mentioned in the Holy Gospel and to preach to her people about Him.

@CatechesisVids

11 күн бұрын

What makes you think she didn't repent of her sinful life?

@Calciu_83

11 күн бұрын

@@CatechesisVids idk how you got that idea after reading my comment

@CatechesisVids

11 күн бұрын

Well you left two comments, and the other tries to excuse divorce.

@Calciu_83

11 күн бұрын

@@CatechesisVids please delete your account

Just found out your channel, great animations, great points in a simple but not simplificated way, truly phenomenal!

I just found your channel, I really like this style of presentation. Great video!

@CatechesisVids

2 ай бұрын

Thanks, the animations take a long time so it's appreciated.

I would add two caveats as a Catholic: many Orthodox really do believe that a valid marriage lasts even beyond death, and each successive marriage beyond the first is performed in a hush-hush, embarrassed way because it’s a concession to human weakness. (So we shouldn’t make too much of the opinions of a boomer theologian like Evdokimov, we know what it’s like to have those in our Church.) And we don’t make a very good example by throwing around annulments.

@CatechesisVids

2 ай бұрын

Yeah, Evdokimov's take wasn't really worth exploring which is why I tried to focus on the strongest version of the Orthodox argument. But the idea that the marriage endures until after death is actually worse; it means that the Orthodox don't believe in monogamy for sacramental unions.

@andrewpearson1903

2 ай бұрын

@@CatechesisVids Yes, it's very odd that the "eternal monogamy" hangup made it into official Orthodox teaching. I don't know of anyone except Athenagoras who taught that, and it would contradict the Lord's marriage-less description of the kingdom of heaven; unless for some reason, marriages are valid after death, but only until the general judgment?

Amazing job, thank you for taking the time to make this

@CatechesisVids

2 ай бұрын

Glad you enjoyed it!

Calling Photius a heretic when the Pope recognized him as the legitimate Patriarch and condemned Fillioque 879 is hilarious

@CatechesisVids

Ай бұрын

Photius is a heretic, and no Pope has ever condemned the Filioque. I'm not sure what you mean by "legitimate" patriarch, but he presumably participated in the episcopal ordination line and was a true bishop - though he clearly taught error.

@comradelightswitch8814

Ай бұрын

@@CatechesisVids yeah, you don't know what I mean by legitimate Patriarch because you don't know what you're talking about. Read up on the so called Photian Schism before you talk about Saint Photius. He was recognized as Patriarch by Rome in 879, after their false attempt to depose him in 869. In the 879 council Fillioque is also condemned multiple times. The council was ecumenically received and considered by Rome as the 8th Ecumenical until the after great schism, at which point they went back to their 869 position. Admitting they have signed off on an Ecumenical council denouncing papal supremacy and Fillioque would be problematic for obvious reasons

Keep up the good work, new sub❤

@CatechesisVids

2 ай бұрын

Thanks!

Came here from your Facebook page

@CatechesisVids

2 ай бұрын

Thanks for checking out the video

Great video. Thanks for your great work!

This entire video is based on a willfully false understanding about the Orthodox Church. The Orthodox Church has never considered marriage to be anything other than the witness of Christ and His love for the Church. In fact, marriage never ends, including a first marriage with death. Marriage is eternal. Nothing you've said about the Orthodox Church is factual, including your basic understanding of what the church is, which can be traced through Saints recognized by the Church since the beginning, such as St. Ignatius of Antioch. You quotation of an "oriental orthodox" 'bishop' to represent the Orthodox doctrine is duplicitous and vile. They have been heretics since the 4th century and you find it acceptable to lump them in with the Orthodox. St. Ignatius Brianchaninov is not fringe, he represents the fullness of the deposit of Orthodox Tradition inspired by the Holy Spirit that rests in the Saints. Your willful misunderstanding of the Greek term pornea, which literally means any kind of sexual sin, and is used this way consistently throughout the New Testament, is nonsensical. You also seem to imply that the Church Fathers must disagree with Christ, since they allow for divorce under certain circumstances. You also seem to misunderstand that abuse of the economia for a second marriage under certain circumstances is supported by the Church, when in fact, the canonical allowance for a second or third marriage by Saints venerated by the Roman Catholic Church is considered acceptable only under certain unusual circumstances, and that it is still considered lamentable by the Church, hence the penitential character of the service, and even the canonical restriction on having a celebration for these marriages. In fact, you stoop to cherry picking limited quotations of the Saints and even some non-canonized heretics rather than looking to the canons ratified by the Church's councils. Nevertheless, imagine implying that St. Basil the Great had a lapse in judgment. This is insanity. AGAINST THE WHOLE WEIGHT OF THE CHURCH'S COMMON TRADITION would be your war against the actual tradition of the Orthodox Catholic Church. St. Photios the Great was upheld to be correct by an ecumenical council ratified by the papacy. And somehow in this video, the scandalous practice of Roman Catholics to allow for annulments for absolutely inane reasons is not even mentioned. How is this not an equal assault on the holiness of marriage? It is an absolute mockery of the sanctity of marriage, and a very rabbinic way of trying to circumvent the Law of Christ. In Orthodoxy, the scandal is exposed and acknowledged. Those who are in sin are barred from communion, and those who are desire to repent are required to make penance before returning to the Church. In the actual Orthodox Church, there is a pastoral way to reconcile people who have been willfully sinful back to Christ that the Roman Catholics do not withhold in any category of sin except divorce.

@spartanastas5560

2 ай бұрын

Amen Brother... AMEN. And Kali Anastasi

@socialsmigs1626

2 ай бұрын

Marriage isn't eternal. "Until death do us part.".. Ever heard of that? Also, have you never read Matthew 22?

@NickandBear

2 ай бұрын

​@@socialsmigs1626can you find that phrasing in ancient marriage services? This is a very new phrase relative to the original marriage services

@socialsmigs1626

2 ай бұрын

@@NickandBear Alright it's a new "phrasing" as you say, I'll give you that, but Mtth 22 still stands. Are you saying that in the orthodox, you aren't allowed to remarry when your current spouse has died?

@NickandBear

2 ай бұрын

@@socialsmigs1626 i think what's hard for a lot of Catholics, at least in my interactions with them, is that in Orthodoxy, there aren't a lot of "hard and fast" rules. There is no cannon law, there is no book we can go to and say "okay, here's the definitive answer to this question." We have very few dogmas overall, whereas in the Catholic church, everything is very clearly defined. This has been the Western mindset since the time of Roman culture, and it persists in the Western World today. In this situation, the widowed person who is looking to remarry would have to discuss why this is their desire with their priest, and the priest would most likely have to get the Bishops blessing. If the priest doesn't think it's a good reason, he is able to not marry the two. If the priest hears their case and relays it to the bishop, and the bishop doesn't think it's a good idea, they can refuse. Cannons can help guide the decision making process, but ultimately as pastors, the decision should come down to which is better for the individual, to remarry or not. Another difference we find between Orthodox and Catholicism is that in our rite, it's God who grants the union, not the two persons granting the union to each other. We don't allow for annulments because it's honestly just semantics. The person is regretful and then they try to find some legal loophole for why they actually never meant their vows. There have been perfectly valid Catholic marriages that have been annulled because one person is regretful. In Orthodoxy, marriage is understood to be a union with two people including God, therefore if one person cheats, this defacto eliminates the union by virtue of their cheating, and not some divorce process

The Orthodox doctrine is not coming from bishop opinions, but church fathers. "Nor is it clear from Scripture whether a man who has left his wife because of adultery, which he is certainly permitted to do, is himself an adulterer if he marries again. And if he should, I do not think that he would commit a grave sin." ~ St. Augustine, On Faith and Works, Ch. 19:35 "For I think that the Word here seems to deprecate second marriage. For, if there were two Christs, there may be two husbands or two wives; but if Christ is One, one Head of the Church, let there be also one flesh, and let a second be rejected; and if it hinder the second what is to be said for a third? The first is law, the second is indulgence, the third is transgression, and anything beyond this is swinish, such as has not even many examples of its wickedness. Now the Law grants divorce for every cause; but Christ not for every cause; but He allows only separation from the whore; and in all other things He commands patience. He allows to put away the fornicatress, because she corrupts the offspring; but in all other matters let us be patient and endure; or rather be enduring and patient, as many as have received the yoke of matrimony. ~ St. Gregory Nazianzen, Oration 37.8 "In the case of trigamy and polygamy they laid down the same rule, in proportion, as in the case of digamy; namely one year for digamy (some authorities say two years); for trigamy men are separated for three and often for four years; but this is no longer described as marriage at all, but as polygamy; nay rather as limited fornication. It is for this reason that the Lord said to the woman of Samaria, who had five husbands, he whom thou now hast is not your husband. He does not reckon those who had exceeded the limits of a second marriage as worthy of the title of husband or wife. In cases of trigamy we have accepted a seclusion of five years, not by the canons, but following the precept of our predecessors. Such offenders ought not to be altogether prohibited from the privileges of the Church; they should be considered deserving of hearing after two or three years, and afterwards of being permitted to stand in their place; but they must be kept from the communion of the good gift, and only restored to the place of communion after showing some fruit of repentance." ~ St. Basil the Great, Letter 188, canon 4 "There is no law as to trigamy: a third marriage is not contracted by law. We look upon such things as the defilements of the Church. But we do not subject them to public condemnation, as being better than unrestrained fornication." ~ St. Basil the Great, Letter 199, canon 50 "For it is not only bodily sin which is called fornication and adultery, but any sin you have committed, and especially transgression against that which is divine. Perhaps you ask how we can prove this: - they went a whoring, it says, with their own inventions. Do you see an impudent act of fornication? And again, they committed adulSee you a kind of adulterous religion? Do not then commit spiritual adulterv while keeping your bodies chaste. tery in the wood. Do not show that it is unwillingly you are chaste in body by not being chaste where you can commit fornication." ~ St. Gregory Nazianzen, Oration 37.19 "But this can be tolerated the laity as a concession to weakness - even remarriage after the first wife's death by those who cannot stop with the first wife. And the husband of [only] one wife is more highly respected and honoured by all members of the church. But if the man could not be content with one wife who had died if there has been a divorce for some reason - fornication, adultery or something else - and the man marries a second wife or the woman a second husband, God's word does not censure them or bar them from the church and life, but tolerates them because of their weakness. The holy word and God's holy church shows mercy to such a person, particularly if he is devout otherwise and lives by God's law - not by letting him have two wives at once while the one is still alive, but allowing him to marry a second wife lawfully if the opportunity arises, after being parted from the first."

@DANtheMANofSIPA

2 ай бұрын

10:51 the great heretic Photius??? Hes a Catholic Saint bro wdym heretic? How can a heretic be a Catholic saint?

@gentlemanbronco3246

2 ай бұрын

@@DANtheMANofSIPA the orthodox don’t honor the same saints as the catholics after the schism.

@CybermanKing

2 ай бұрын

@@DANtheMANofSIPAWhy are you replying to your own comment? More importantly, since when do Catholics venerate Photios as a saint?

@fabianradomski3178

2 ай бұрын

@@DANtheMANofSIPA "Photios was canonized by the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople in 1847." When did the Catholic Church canonize him?

@socialsmigs1626

2 ай бұрын

Oh please. Save me that 'we follow the church fathers' BS. You don't have a single set of beliefs that all orthodox follow. You don't - it varies from church to church. I've seen it firsthand one orthodox contradicting another one when we were arguing about the dogma of the Immaculate Conception. All you have in common is the sweaty beard

But the Church allows for annulments so a divorced person can remarry sacramentally. The “no-fault” legal divorce laws, annihilated the permanence of a sacramental marriage. 💔 13:33

@CatechesisVids

2 ай бұрын

The Church does not ever allow two sacramental unions; an annulment is the conclusion of the detective work of canon lawyers - it is their judgment that the first marriage was not a marriage at all. So the "second marriage" is really the first marriage.

@christeeleison9064

2 ай бұрын

​@@CatechesisVids Yeah, thanks for the definition of legal fiction

@whitebeans7292

2 ай бұрын

@@christeeleison9064 If you were in a contract with a phone company but deliberately misspelled your name while signing, the terms of the contract could be dissolved because it was never really ratified. Same goes with an “annulment”, it’s just a recognition that there was never a ratified marriage in the first place. So if you were drunk while saying your vows, you couldn’t fully consent and thus the ‘marriage’ never really happened-thus, anullment. You cannot dissolve a ratified, consummated marriage as Jesus says.

@christeeleison9064

2 ай бұрын

@@whitebeans7292 nothing substantial

@christeeleison9064

2 ай бұрын

@@whitebeans7292 imagine if a person isn't saved, are those sacraments "annuled"? Of course not, we can't say baptism was merely water immersion or partaking of the eucharist the eating of mere bread and wine.

Great job brother.

@CatechesisVids

2 ай бұрын

Thanks!

Happy to be Eastern Catholic

@spartanastas5560

2 ай бұрын

Is that pretend Orthodox? You should learn the truth about Orthodoxy from the Orthodox and just cut out the middle church.

@RJDJ__

2 ай бұрын

@@spartanastas5560 Im okay thanks, im not even byzantine

@CatechesisVids

2 ай бұрын

@RJDJ_ I went to a Melkite service and Maronite service this year, which was neat. I want to visit every rite at some point in my life.

@RJDJ__

2 ай бұрын

@@CatechesisVids Same here

@rouxmain934

Ай бұрын

​We don't pretend to be Orthodox, we Byzantine Catholics don't pretend to be schismatics, nor apostolic protestants. To be deep in Church history is to cease to be protestant. Same thing for "Orthodoxy".

Please more long form videos like this!

@CatechesisVids

2 ай бұрын

I'll try! This one required quite a bit more research than my other videos.

@Linkgt

2 ай бұрын

@@CatechesisVids I actually just discovered your channel yesterday, but have been viewing some of your past videos. Great stuff, keep up the good work and you have a new subscriber. The apologetics, especially when it comes against the Orthodox, is sorely needed.

What a catechesis! Thanks!

@CatechesisVids

2 ай бұрын

Glad you liked it!

Fantastic video

@CatechesisVids

2 ай бұрын

Thanks!

The Catholic perspective today is that some marriages in a Catholic holy matrimony sacrament happened by sinful actions by one or both parties. The perspective is that Jesus disapproves of any holy matrimony sacrament that had sinful reasons for the sacrament happening. Jesus himself doesn’t recognize that sacrament was valid. Jesus is not bound to the church’s usage or reasons of its keys to heaven, because after all priests, bishops, cardinals, and popes may and do make mistakes because they are humans who make mistakes. For example in Matthew 16:19 Jesus gives this authority over his Church to Peter: “Whatever you bind on Earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on Earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Jesus gave the church binding and losing powers of souls, but Jesus has the ultimate and final power, entitlement, right and authority to overrule what his church did right and wrong with its power. Therefore, if the annulment tribunal grants an annulment, Jesus is not bound to that decision, because Jesus has infinite and superior knowledge and awareness whether that marriage was corrupted or created through sin. If Jesus so deems that marriage was valid, he is the final decider. Then vice versa, if the church denies the annulment, Jesus knows better and decides it was valid. Catholics do lie and deceive the tribunal, although rarely. Jesus knows if an annulment was based upon lies or cheating. Jesus will disregard the annulment. What this all means is that just because the church grants an annulment, Jesus knows better and will pass judgment against the granted annulment. Jesus may use his superior knowledge in his judgment of salvation or damnation at the time of death. Anyone seeking an annulment therefore can’t be certain the church’s decision is acceptable to Jesus. It is the obligation of the parties to be truly honest. A deception in getting an annulment has to be confessed or that soul is in jeopardy for salvation. Likewise, sin and deception in obtaining a marriage must be confessed. The point being is the church is trying its best to fulfill scripture and tradition given 2000 years of its existence. But Jesus knows best and must be and will be the final decider of all souls whether they are saved or condemned. The best course of action is always partake of frequent good and complete confessions based upon total honesty and learning what are one’s entire life of sins. It isn’t wise nor prudent to stay purposefully ignorant of what are sins, and thereby fail to confess and repent. Any Catholic who gets an annulment isn’t in a safe harbor situation. Everyone who gets an annulment ought to inform the priest in confession exactly the truth about the annulment and express sorrow, regret, and shame about needing and getting an annulment. Tell the priest why the annulment was procured through any sinful ways. Your soul is at stake. Conversely, if the annulment was denied, but in honest good faith you believe the denial was wrong, then you pray directly to Jesus for your salvation if you remarry or engage in sex again. You need to inform the priest in confession that you are guilty of adultery and illicit sex following a denied annulment. You need to explain to the priest that however in all honesty you are in good faith disagreement with the denial, but you are praying and appealing directly to Jesus to have his infinite mercy and forgiveness to save your soul. Many Catholics are denied annulments but proceed to remarry or engage in sex again. But the big mistake is to avoid confession and fail to pray to Jesus for mercy and salvation. Such Catholics must do both, confess as often as necessary and pray constantly until death if such Catholics fall into that most unfortunate paradox of no annulment but engaging in adultery. Chances are extremely good that you can still save your soul if that paradox happens because Jesus truly desires to provide you eternal life rather than damnation if at all possible.

Great vid

@CatechesisVids

2 ай бұрын

Thank you

Been seperated for 15years...3rd party interference. Thru the 15 years...have had thoughts of finding a partner...that didnt work no matter how I tried. Have consulted a lawyer to get opinion how divorce works....that didnt work. Even my priest keep saying No..anullment too. I stop trying now for 8 years. But looking at it and looking at women adopting vanity to the maximum....I backed off from that idea. Todays women will hold the phone more then they will hold you...talk to the phone more then talk to you...then they will many other cheating secrets. So go figure....guys am I wrong???

@samuelagwotu5074

Ай бұрын

Your Not really wrong ! ......sacramental marriage , women in this generation do not understand it, and its not going to get any better in the future either , That vow , right there , will hold you until death.......its a life and death situation , Very serious . I hope you hold on daily mass, the sacraments for completeness , and peace ... pray for me as well

“It is a myth that the medieval church did not allow divorce.” --Civilization of the Middle Ages, Norman F. Cantor "No man should be permitted to leave his wife and take another except in cases of fornication. Divorce is to be allowed only for the purpose of entering religious orders." --Roman Synod of 826, convened by Pope Eugene II (found in "The Place in Papal History of the Roman Synod of 826" by Thomas Noble) No one is pro divorce, and obviously Christ's statements against divorce are very strong and to be taken seriously. But I do not think the Orthodox can be condemned for doing something that was practiced in both East and West prior to the Great Schism.

@CatechesisVids

2 ай бұрын

Practiced isn't in question - allowed by the Church, and in accordance with Christ's teaching - is what is at stake. The narrow way requires a willingness to sacrifice what is easy for what is right. Don't confuse divorce (or any other name for a separation) for permission for divorce *and remarriage*. Don't confuse it with a real ending of the immaterial bond. The immaterial bond between a sacramentally married couple can be ended by no force but death.

@comradelightswitch8814

Ай бұрын

​@@CatechesisVidsThe Roman synod said you could divorce in remarry in cases of adultery. Honest needs to be higher on your priority list

Very good explanation

@CatechesisVids

2 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching

Orthodox do not misunderstand remarriage... Orthodox believe that we should get married once and that is it. But in extreme situations, we have a thing called "Ecconomia," which is a relaxing of the rules to stop someone from giving up all hope. What do you do in a marriage that two people are miserable in? Do you force them to stay together and drive themselves to kill each other and deliver each other to hell? First of all, We are all imperfect human beings. Some Orthodox Churches allow remarriage for this reason: because mistakes happen in everything, and ecconomia gives someone a second chance to get things right. Is it in the canals? I don't think so, but economic is a case by case basis. A Bishop can make an exception to the rule, but he takes responsibility, so they do it rarely. And since Christ said that we can loose or bind in heaven and on earth, I'd expect our Catholic brothers and sisters to understand where we are coming from. Not every marriage is perfect. If we get married in the Orthodox Church, we are more likely to survive than most other denominations because we believe that Christ is the binder in our marriage. It's not to be taken lightly... but sometimes, bad things happen. Economia is designed for those extraordinary circumstances to stop someone from living in hell on earth, and allow them a chance or hope to receive salvation. A strict hand can have many bad results, worst of all, pushing someone away from the Church. If they have no hope of love or salvation, then what purpose does the Church have for that individual? Kindness is a better answer than a steel rod. There is much more to it, but this is an over simplification of what the Orthodox believe.

@justintaylor3044

2 ай бұрын

Matthew 19; Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.” Christ said it is only permitted for sexual immorality only (cheating). If your reason for divorce is that your marriage makes you miserable, you commit adultery for the sake of your mental health. God may still forgive us, but he did not give us permission except for sexual immorality. If there are other verses which may contradict these words may I see them and be happy to change my mind ✝️

@socialsmigs1626

2 ай бұрын

"Oversimplification" "Ecconomoeia" Let's invent words to make it sound smart and sophisticated, and then we have an excuse voila🎉

@spartanastas5560

2 ай бұрын

@@socialsmigs1626 Greek doesn’t translate to english perfectly so it’s subjective. Sound spelling is all we got because it’s a different alphabet. Did you know that? Are you judging me? Sounds like it. Lord have mercy on you.

@spartanastas5560

2 ай бұрын

@@justintaylor3044 I know what the Bible says… and you know that Christ did give the keys to the Kingdom of heaven to all apostles in order to loose or hind sin in heaven…. Now what?

@socialsmigs1626

2 ай бұрын

@@spartanastas5560 Nope. Mtth 19: 7-9 is very clear: "They said to him, “Then why did Moses command that the man give the woman a bill of divorce and dismiss [her]?” 8 He said to them, “Because of the hardness of your hearts Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. 9 I say to you,* whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery.” Try explaining your Economeia in there, I dare you.

Definitely an underrated channel

Based

Eastern Caths remarry

@CatechesisVids

Ай бұрын

All Catholics of either east or west submit to Rome's understanding of nullity else they cease to be Catholic. If any Catholics of an eastern rite pretend that their marriage can be dissolved (as if they were still Orthodox) they sin.

@aceraphael

Ай бұрын

No, we don't.

@mollyporium5086

Ай бұрын

@@aceraphael i meant to say "cant Eastern Caths remarry"

@aceraphael

Ай бұрын

@@mollyporium5086 Sorry, 1I typed it wrong. I got exactly what you meant. No, we cannot remarry and that is uniform throughout the church. The East and the West may have different traditions and liturgies but we don't differ in stuff like this.

You understand neither Orthodoxy, nor the Church's teaching on divorce.

@CatechesisVids

21 күн бұрын

Well I certainly understand the Church's teaching on a divorce, and I feel pretty confident about my understanding of Orthodoxy's teaching as well - though there are particular regional variations that I may not have heard of because Orthodoxy lacks a singular unifying teaching.

To be honest, although I am a Protestant, this is among the strongest selling points for Catholicism for me. Every other understanding feels like it cheapens Jesus' words too much. But I know so many Catholics who are divorced and remarried. Some I assume got annulments (the divorce would be in the civil courts), some I assume didn't have permission at all and are disobeying their church's teaching. If I become Catholic, I'd like to have my marriage sacramentalized, but at the end of the day, it doesn't seem the Catholic Church is that much better at preventing its members from remarrying after divorce than Protestants in practice, although the theology here is far superior in my opinion. However... it is still a strong selling point that if I become Catholic, I can at least have peace of mind that my post-baptism marriage is valid, because marriage where people are allowed to divorce and remarry solely because of their own internal subjective perception of improper behavior of their spouse doesn't even seem like marriage at all to me. I can't honestly tell the spiritual difference between living as a boyfriend and girlfriend and as husband and wife if we get to be the judge and jury over our own divorces, even if we accept that divorce is only permitted for adultery. But what is adultery? Jesus says if a man looks at a woman with lust he's committed adultery in his heart. Well, under the Protestant understanding, that means literally any wife can divorce her husband, rendering marriage completely meaningless. It's Chaos, and there absolutely needs to be an authority figure who has the authority to grant annulments or deny them, otherwise everybody will just do their own thing and claim they are following Jesus.

@CatechesisVids

Ай бұрын

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. You're right that hypocrisy exists across many denominational boundaries. I think (as you're already intuiting) there is a clear difference between what is permitted doctrinally in Catholicism and what is done in practice by baptized Catholics, vs. other traditions that permit divorce both in teaching and practice. Even the first Apostles were sometimes hypocrites, but Christ's teaching remains constant. I would also add that (in the Catholic view) if you're a Protestant who was baptized with an ordinary trinitarian formula, the Catholic Church may already consider your marriage sacramental - because it regards all marriages between two baptized persons (if valid) as sacramental. I made a video about that here if you are curious: kzread.info/dash/bejne/p46ezcxmgMTYYNI.htmlsi=8g5-0Pr4nVPazL09

@JustAskingQuestions8571

Ай бұрын

@@CatechesisVids Very good video, thank you for sharing.

This is why we need to ONLY rely on God’s word, not men. Jesus used the word Porneia in the exception clause. He did not use the word adultery/moichao. Porneia (fornication) is a term that refers to the unmarried. In Matthew 1:19 and John 8:41, porneia describes a betrothal situation where a couple had not yet entered into a covenant marriage. Jesus had just established in 19:4-6 that a covenant marriage is for life (v. 6 “let no man put asunder”). By using the word porneia, He excuses ONLY a betrothal situation in which one could “put away” their espoused/betrothed. This is the ONLY putting away that did not break the marriage covenant with God, whereby, no one was “putting asunder what God had joined together” (19:4,6,8). Matthew was writing to a Jewish audience who was still living under the Jewish/Mosaic practice of betrothal. Mark and Luke were writing to Gentiles, who did not follow the Jewish/Mosaic practice of betrothal. And Paul was writing to Christians who also did not follow the Jewish/Mosaic practice of betrothal, therefore the exception clause was not in Mark, Luke, Corinthians or Romans. The exception clause is only addressing putting away, not remarriage. Remarriage is never permitted, except if your covenant spouse is deceased, 1 Corinthians 7:39. Only death breaks the marriage covenant. 1 Corinthians 7:39. God hates divorce. Therefore, he does not permit it for covenant marriages. 19:4-6,8-9, 5;32; Luke 16:18; Mark 20:1-12. Paul forbade divorce as well. Only separation or reconciliation are the options for Christians, 1 Corinthians 7:10-11.