Financial problems at Catholic Answers said to be related to big salaries, loss of support from traditional Catholics

Catholic-Answers

Click here. Then Scroll down to the com box to see the comments.

Read the whole “back story”

Advertisements

13 Comments

  1. For what it’s worth, the financial problems at “Catholic Answers” are not due, in any measure, to loss of my support. Draw your own conclusions here.

  2. Interesting….
    The Silent Majority=Traditionalist
    I think the Catholic Church is Separating, and the Youth are fleeing!

  3. I always find the site quite a good one? BUT if it is losing money it is in company of most organisations in a recession or double or treble one!

    As for the Church separating? Makes it sound like an egg cracked and about to be whipped. (that is not a metaphor it is just a silly observation)

    • Will you compare them, to “Easy Over?”

      Well, I would say, a question, I asked on Catholic Answers, was answered….about my Divorced sister, taking Communion. She cannot date or remarry or she is Adulterous! Don’t worry, she has never been asked out! TOO Selfish, and Worldly, not like her Older sister, Cathy. 🙂

      • Cathy, My Godmother is on husband number four! (the others are alive etc) She still goes to Church regularly and receives communion and we were informed by a high up authority that it is “entirely her own concern”. So it was a polite way of saying Look after yourselves and don’t be busy about what she does.
        Its a funny old world cause like the Monaco Lot of “dispensations” granted and oh-what-a-surprise . . .often the joe blogs are just ignored, punished or denounced.
        In the end it does get to be very tedious! I do wonder lots of times on this kind of thing and I think that Rome is often “incorrect” on such issues but that’s the more wayward scampy22 so don’t expect me to quote myself on it!
        I expect your sister tries her best and is constantly looking up to her older sis for what is proper! That’s some stuff being heaped on your back there! 😉

      • Scampy22
        Wow
        Your Godmother has got some Record, 4x’s!
        It sounds like she doesn’t follow Catholic Law. No one is going to report you…it is between you and God! It doesn’t matter how many times you take Communion, God will Not forgive your sins…..so it is pointless. Unless you receive an Annulment through the Church!

        Sorry, that’s the way it is!
        Unfaithfulness, is really the only legimate excuse, to get annulments!
        Think of the “old, old, old, day – in the OT” when Adulterer’s were “Stoned!” Jesus Christ eliminated this, by saying Which one of you, who has no sin, throw the First Stone! He added, Go, and Sin No More!
        Repent, Repent, Repent…..The Only Answer!

        Do Not get Married, if you cannot take the Marriage Covenant, seriously! My sister and her EX, did not take the Pre-Cana classes, seriously!
        We should not Pooh Pooh, Matrimonial Laws!

        Don’t Hate Me Because I am Beautiful. 🙂

      • “Unfaithfulness, is really the only legimate excuse, to get annulments!”

        If you’re talking about a spouse who became unfaithful during the course of a valid, sacramental marriage, that kind of unfaithfulness is most certainly not legitimate grounds for an annulment.

        If, however, either spouse took vows “in bad faith”—i.e. with no intention to be faithful to the vow spoken—then there was no valid marriage to begin with.

        If Catholic annulments are being granted under the former circumstances, then the scorners who dismiss these annulments as mere “Catholic divorce” are justified in their attitude.

      • Yep!

        Because infidelity was typically considered grounds for divorce under the Mosaic Law, many Catholics think the same is true today. Not so – although you wouldn’t know it, based on the number of annulments granted by diocesan tribunals.

        Catholic commentary on the Gospel of Mark: 3-5. Jesus knew their evil intention and asked what Moses had commanded. Actually Moses had merely permitted divorce, but had commanded that the woman who was repudiated should be given a bill of divorce which would regularize her position. This legislation did not grant the Hebrews the right to repudiate as a privilege. It simply tolerated an abuse which was due to their evil dispositions. Divorce did not correspond to the primitive institution of marriage.

        6-9. God’s will in regard to marriage and divorce is shown in the primitive institution of marriage as recorded in Gen_1:27;

        2:24. Man and woman united in marriage are linked by bonds as real and permanent as those which unite members of the same family. Divorce, therefore, is contrary to God’s law.

        10-12. Here, in answer to the disciples, who were naturally surprised by teaching contrary to that which all Jews accepted, Jesus reaffirms that neither partner is set free through divorce to marry again. Husband and wife are on an equal footing in this respect. According to Jewish law it was only the husband who had the right to initiate divorce proceedings. In Roman law, at the time of Christ, the wife had the same right as the husband; cf. J. Bon sirven , Le Divorce dans le Nouveau Testament (Tournai 1948) ; U. Holzmeister, Bi 26 ( 1945) 133-46.

        Gimme that old time religion!

        Doug

      • Mark,
        Can I tell you why Casual Catholics get an Annulment? They want to get Married Again and stay in their Church…the Only One, they have ever known!
        My brother, married a ” Run Around ” and they were married 1 year, he got an Annulment, so he could marry his current wife and have children, and raise them RC. He also, had to promise his future father in law, he would Never divorce her, even though ….it was not his fault!
        The first wife had No Intention of honoring her vows…he was suckered into marriage, infact she was drunk during the ceremony.
        If anyone deserved an Annulment, it was he!
        The other Annulment, I wa involved in, was my good friend, who married a Dormant Homosexual, who fainted on the Wedding Aisle!
        I had to testify in their Annulment, by paper inquiry. He could not Consumate, for women repulsed him! Her parents were aged and they wanted to marry off their only girl!
        Obviously she got her Annulment, and remarried and had kids before her parents passed!
        Divorce, is Out Of Control, it’s All About Me!
        Adultry and Abuse are the Only Good Reasons for breaking a Marriage Covenant….till Death Do You Part! Now you can Freely Remarry!

      • “Adultry (sic) and Abuse are the Only Good Reasons for breaking a Marriage Covenant….till Death Do You Part! Now you can Freely Remarry!”

        Unless either spouse pronounced vows in bad faith, or under invalidating circumstances, adultery and abuse may offer grounds for civil divorce, but not for canonical annulment. In such a scenario, neither spouse would be free to remarry, in the eyes of the Church. Sad, perhaps, but true.

      • Hopefully,
        I will never have need of a Canon Lawyer or Civil Divorce Lawyer!
        I think, in either way, with payment….it’s a DONE DEAL!

  4. Not totally correct folks!
    🙂

    Scripture allows for the “Pauline Privilege” for example St Paul states where divorce is granted if one partner refuses to accept the Christian faith and tries to hinder their partner etc. Church Law has always accepted this point although it is very rare.
    Also History alas (sorry to call on that old chestnut) is full of Church dispensations and allowed divorces due to political or High Legal reasons such as war to be avoided. In England for example King Henry 8th asked Wolsey to get a divorce from the Pope for himself and Catherine of Aragon. It was obtained but as History shows never sent because the Queens uncle Charles V had an army standing-by and would have crushed Papal agreement. On the other hand in Monaco the divorce of the Princesses was granted because they had suffered unduly and the Church felt lenient. Offending many it did stress its ability to Bind or Loose on earth according to its own design.

    People often granted annulments because the original wedding was in some way not correct so the above examples by myself are properly to be called Annulments.
    Personally I am at two minds whether this is proper but todate has not affected me and I may be rather anti if it had so I do not know what way to fall on this one? Scampy22 comes down firmly on the fence!

    • “St Paul states where divorce is granted if one partner refuses to accept the Christian faith and tries to hinder their partner etc.”

      “Divorce”? Let’s get back to a declaration of nullity in the context of this circumstance.

      If one (unchurched, non-Catholic or even Catholic, for that matter) spouse in a canonical marriage (blessed by the Church) later tries to hinder the other spouse from practicing the Faith, rearing the children in the Faith et al. simili, this could make a case that the troublesome spouse entered the union in bad faith: having, on the one hand, vowed to facilitate, allow or at least not hinder these matters and, on the other hand, later exhibited evidence of never having intended to honor that vow.

      I am personally acquainted with such a case. Because a pre-condition had to be satisfactorily proven, it was thoroughly investigated before the finding of nullity was granted.

      I prefer—and should observe—the convention of using the phrase “finding of nullity” rather than “granting of an annulment.” Although not so, the latter suggests the undoing of something already done. The former, more accurately, states that there was nothing to undo in the first place.


Comments RSS

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s