It wasn't sarcasm. It was my actual physical response when I read your post. There has never been any doubt in my mind that only God gives graces. I never claimed that sin can 'give' graces. You appeared to have this confusion. To remain 'faithful' to a partner in fornication is not a grace, but a curse. Are you saying that Pope Francis never said that 'he is sure cohabitation is a real marriage'? I am not trying to antagonise you, but I feel compelled to speak the truth. Cohabitation is a mortal sin. The sin of fornication.
Why...you cannot say no grace. Even sinful people receive grace. It only takes a mustard seed. sorry had to say it. You can say it shouldn't be...but it is. God still bestows grace even on the wickedest sinner. Also more presupposition Just had to get my 2 cents in Brother al
No Fallen Saint, I think you missed my point. God would not give even an actual grace to stay in an adulterous union. The point I was trying to make is that just because any two people are faithful to each other it doesn't mean it is necessarily from a grace.
Preatorian, you are saying that fidelity only appears to be a grace! and in fact whether a couple is faithful or not, makes no difference because they are all infact living in an adulterous/fornicating relationship and are therefore headed for Hell! Yes they are all going to hell, if they don't act on the actual graces God gives them and then repent but I believe that there are different levels in hell like many saints tell us! If some fornicators remained faithful to their partner, because they accepted the actual grace of fidelity from God, then I think there place in hell would not be as severe as those that had not only fornicated with one person but in fact gave no heed to even a monogamous relationship! So its all about degrees in hell really! And possibly degrees in heaven! But God always supplies the graces whether one goes to hell or heaven.
On one very important point of debate here, it's the pun that is the "lowest form of wit" historically, sarcasm being a relatively new claimant to that crown: "Actually, the quote "The pun is the lowest form of wit" is attributed to the English dramatist John Dennis who wrote this opinion about 300 years ago. However, the pun, which is also known by the term "paraonomasia" has been around much longer than Dennis. Homer's Odyssey has one of the earliest known literary puns. "In the epic, Odysseus identifies himself as “Nobody” when he’s captured by a one-eyed giant." "The pun is a much maligned form of humor. In his seminal work, Wit and Relation to the Unconscious (1917), Sigmund Freud wrote: “Puns are generally counted as the lowest form of wit, perhaps because they are cheaper and can be formed with the least effort.”" "Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, but the highest form of intelligence. Oscar Wilde" ;-)
No Josephite, that is not what I am saying at all. Fidelity to someone can be a grace, but isn't always. I think you will agree with me in these 2 cases: Case 1: Two people courting without any impediments (they are not already married in the Church, etc.) who are faithful to each other could be receiving a grace of fidelity from God. Case 2: Two people who have left their first legitimate sacramental spouses and gotten civilly remarried and lived together for 40 years. There is no grace of "fidelity" here because these two are living in adultery.
I pay no heed to Oscar Wilde and his quotes. see below...... "I am not a Catholic," said Oscar Wilde. "I am simply a violent Papist." This statement, like so many of Wilde's outrageous paradoxes, conceals a sober truth beneath its blithe wit. Another example would be his jest that, of all religions, Catholicism is the only one worth dying in. Looking back over his life more than a hundred years later, we can be forgiven for seeing the irony in such statements, for Wilde's fascination with Catholicism, its mysteries and rituals, did set the stage for his death-bed conversion. And we can certainly perceive justice in the fact that the man who cracked such jokes also believed that life imitated art: ultimately, then, the joke was on him. Oscar Wilde is widely celebrated as an artist persecuted for his homosexuality, a sort of protomartyr for the cause of gay rights.
I wonder if we are all talking past each other at this point. Perhaps we agree on more than we realize. I think we all agree here on the basics. Fidelity to a sinful relationship is not a grace. Fidelity in itself could be a grace under the right circumstances. Example: There is a Catholic couple who has gotten civilly "married", but not sacramentally married. Hence they are not actually in a marriage. They are essentially in a legally binding civil agreement for tax purposes, in case of divorce, birth of children, and other legal reasons, etc. Neither person has an impediment to actual sacramental marriage in the church (they are not already married in the Church to someone else, etc.) Is it possible God could give them a grace to stay together and take up chastity and get married in the Church? In my opinion that would be possible as long as there weren't other impediments (one of them was already married to someone else in the Church, etc.) Now the grace would not be to remain in that state of sin or even to stay in the sinful relationship as it currently is, for God wouldn't do that. That would mean He was willing sin, which is against His nature and impossible. The grace would be to change their lives to bring them into accord with the laws of God.
I agree! But he is the source of the false quote that "sarcasm is the lowest form of wit." It is not; "the pun is the lowest form of wit." Please stop quoting Oscar Wilde's error in this regard. Respect the humble pun! It doesn't get much respect, so at least let it wear its rightful crown as the lowest form of wit. (/humor)
The two people in case 1 are courting without impediments and therefore they are the better couple, they will go to a place of hell that is not as bad as other places because their fornication is not as bad as those in case 2. I see that! The two people in case 2 have not only hurt their first partners but are now living in adultuous relationships and of course there place in hell will be greater than those in case 1. and even though faithful to each other, this union is hell bound for a lower place in hell than case 1 couple! In case 3 the couple that left their first legitimate sacramental spouses and got civilly remarried and lived together for 40 years but were unfaithful to each other during this time, would have an even greater hell then that of the couple in case 2. I think we are on the same page.
Hey! Why are you condemning the couple in case 1 to Hell? They aren't even married yet! Boy you are harsh. (I am just kidding )
It should be new thread...what is hell. No levels in hell...different hells for every soul. Each reaching the same perfection of his/her sin. But at its very core. Hell is the separation from God. Now those are the threads...I like contemplating. Brother al
Dare I ask a question? I believe everyone receives graces. For those who do not believe that God grants graces to cohabiting couples, what then do you make of a loving monogamous couple who cohabit and have a family. Who take their children for baptism, mass and the sacraments and eventually do marry in church? Were their children not gifts from God? I do not believe there is a single soul that was not part of God's plan. It may be the children that helps encourage the couple who already have commitment to one another move toward the sacrament of marriage. I cannot see how anything other than the Holy Spirit is at work here. Please don't slate me, I do not know as much as all of you but I see God's love and mercy in many situations. I could be wrong, but then again so may you be?
Do not deliberately misrepresent other posters' positions here. NO ONE has stated that people living in adultery cannot receive God's grace. We all agree that like any grave sinner they can receive and be prompted to act and repent by God's actual grace. Actual grace is not sanctifying or sacramental grace, it is not salvific, and they receive this free gift from God despite, not because of, their adultery.
Brian I apologise as I am not deliberately trying to misinterpret anyone! I'm starting to wonder are we not all saying the same thing? Do we not all believe then that the Holy Spirit grants graces to cohabiting couples which ultimately helps guide them to the sacrament of marriage?
Of course we are all trying to say the same thing. The Truth We all just have slightly different viewpoints based on whatever we know mixed with our experiences and personality. First off, no one can know the mind of God. All we know is what Christ taught and what the Church teaches in the Magisterium. The Magisterium being a gift which God gave us interpret things for us. It is why we have one Church and the Protestants have 30,000 "churches". To answer the question in your first post, we can not know everything, but we can know at least two things. One, each of those children, no matter what kind of a union they were born in is loved by God as if he or she were the only being God ever created. God can love in that way, we cannot. Even if these children were born out of an adulterous relationship God will still love them. Guess what? God even loved Hitler as if he were the only creature he ever created. Even after all of the things that man did. Wrap your mind around that Secondly though we know that those children born of Catholics in a civil union, a couple in adultery or a couple fornicating were not born in the way God wished them to be. What does that mean exactly? That is beyond my pay grade. Could God have imagined each of these children before time began and intended to place them in a loving sacramentally married family? I would imagine so. After all Adam and Eve didn't follow His plan. Nothing turned out right. But God will do His best to bring good out of the evils we humans do. Much depends upon how much we cooperate with the graces he gives us. As to whether cohabiting Catholic couples can receive grace? Surely they can. Actual grace. All day long. I think everyone agrees on that. The only distinction comes in saying that the grace they are receiving does not come from the sinful relationship, but as Brian said, despite it. In fact the more sinful someone is, the harder it is for them to respond to the actual graces they receive. People become hardened to sin as they get used to it. It is like quicksand. I think all of us will be very surprised at the amount of grace we and others have received.
