Most marriages today are invalid, Pope Francis suggests

Actually we were speaking about cohabitation.

Grace is not reserved for the sacrament of marriage alone. If you think the Lord withholds his help from any relationship which is outside the sacrament of marriage, you are mistaken.

 

Agreed there is no sacramental sign of inward grace but grace is present whenever God grants it.

 

Christ established the sacrament of matrimony.

God withholds the grace of the sacrament of matrimony from those who cohabitate. Because they are not married.

The sacraments are the primary means that we can obtain the supernatural life of God without which no one can be saved.

The Council of Trent issued the following condemnation, "If anyone says that the sacraments of the New Law are more or less than seven, namely: Baptism, Confirmation, the Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Order, and Matrimony; or even that any of these seven is not truly and properly a sacrament, let him be anathema."

God's grace depends on the Church which Christ founded.

 

This is exactly what the Franciscan Priest I spoke with mentioned. The Sacrament of Catholic Marriage is to the death. If divorces in the Catholic Church are trending towards a rate over 50%, this would imply that over 50% of Catholic Marriages are invalid.

It reminds me of a story I heard where a woman asked one of the apparitioners, to ask Mother Mary if she should divorce her abusive alcoholic husband. In response Mother Mary said that Jesus had to carried His Cross and she needs to carry hers.

 

I suppose I shouldn't really keep responding but let me just point out that unless you are of the view that holds that only practicing Roman Catholics can be saved (which I think Mac holds), I am merely pointing out that God can and does give supernatural help to all who ask for it. We maybe can argue about the degree of help but not about its reality.

 

I am happy with this...

PiusIX
It is known to us and to you that those who are in invincible ignorance of our most holy religion, but who observe carefully the natural law, and the precepts graven by God upon the hearts of all men, and who being disposed to obey God lead an honest and upright life, may, aided by the light of divine grace, attain to eternal life; for God who sees clearly, searches and knows the heart, the disposition, the thoughts and intentions of each, in His supreme mercy and goodness by no means permits that anyone suffer eternal punishment, who has not of his own free will fallen into sin.

https://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/outside_the_church.htm

 

This is really excellent. Finally someone is humble enough to attempt to see things outside of his own pre-conceived and culturally trained outlook in order to broaden his horizons and charitably consider formations that are deprived of so many things taken for granted in other or opposite cultures:

https://cruxnow.com/commentary/2016/07/02/pope-francis-goes-off-cuff-think-latin-america/

 

Latin America needs to be re-evangelised by not caving into the prevailing culture but by promoting true and authentic Catholic culture.

 

I would need a whole packet of salt to help me swallow that. Next we'll be expected to believe that the Pope's close circle of friends aren't German, Austrian, French and Belgian and they haven't been pushing the liberalisation of Church teaching on sexual morality for years.

 

Before ordering out (of people and a culture completely foreign to most "local" commenters) the log in the eyes of the less fortunate we ought to try to match them in certain things:

while in Latin America the opposite problem is true: People believe they need to go to confession each time they go to Communion, even if they’ve committed no mortal sins.

 

That still doesn't explain how (for want of a more delicate description) two people shacking up together because the man wants to test the merchandise before signing the contract is a real marriage. To suggest that this is part of Latin American Catholic culture is simply ridiculous. I would lay you odds that until relatively recently Latin American Catholic culture was closer to the old Spanish or Portuguese culture where an unmarried woman would be forbidden from any unsupervised mixing with the opposite sex.

I wish that these apologists would stop twisting themselves in knots trying to excuse the inexcusable. If we were to look back at articles written even a year ago by many of the same apologists, I very much doubt that we would find a single one of them who wasn't blaming the secular press for spinning the Pope's comments. If this goes on much longer they will lose all credibility. There's no harm in saying that the Pope got it wrong and that two people living together as man and wife outside a valid marriage are not actually married.

 

Dolours:

I would lay you odds that until relatively recently Latin American Catholic culture was closer to the old Spanish or Portuguese culture where an unmarried woman would be forbidden from any unsupervised mixing with the opposite sex.

Well, you're wrong. And such stereotypical ideas so far from the reality is just why this article proves so true.

The lack of shepherds per population is not only a reality but even those clerics are very distrusted due to the history of the Church authorities seen siding with the conquerers and the wealthiest classes. Thus why, in order to make at least some inroads in trust and also due to the great competition with the Protestant evangelists, priests have gone perhaps overboard in attempting to identify with the poor and those feeling dismissed by Rome with good cause. While the priests are often held suspect the sisters are considered more like "rain from heaven" from as well the history with the holy madre Who understands the poor.

So, yes, good advice to read the "off the cuff" remarks from perhaps a better Latin American cultural perspective. Since so many seem to be concerned about such cultures there are loads of positions for volunteer Catholic instructors in order to satisfy that concern for the souls so misled currently. With all the new arrivals even here in this country I'm sure such corrections in catechesis would be welcomed. Could just be a calling for yourself.

 

But who is responsible for putting all of these liberals in the positions which they hold? You can point your finger at Pope Francis all you like but I think things would be worse if one of these other guys were the Pope.

I wonder why we have the term Don Juan? There are probably some very religious people there and there are probably some who are not.

 

Clearly, they weren't appointed by Pope Francis. I have never blamed Pope Francis for making them Cardinals. I do blame him for giving them very central, influential roles at a time when the Church needs clear teaching that supports traditional marriage. I believe that the rot set into the Church a long time ago, and I don't blame Vatican 11 for it. It started a very long time ago when aristocracy like Don Juan were treated differently than the rest of the faithful. It gave us politically convenient annulments that led eventually to the crisis we have today because, with the exception of the Henry V111 debacle, nobody stood up and shouted stop, and the falling out with Henry might never have happened had Catherine of Aragon's family not been so powerful. At what stage do we stand up and shout stop? Will it be polygamy where the man can afford to keep two wives and there's some value in his fidelity to both of them and the strong bond between the half-siblings? When the words of Jesus Himself are declared too heavy a burden for the faithful, I believe that it is past time to stand up and shout stop.

I am very, very worried that these liberal Cardinals are really running the Church. That's what bothers me. Like the Reformers in Luther's time, some of them will want mild reforms while others won't be satisfied until we go the route of Protestantism where we have a loose association of autonomous, national churches that meets occasionally in Rome to affirm that while they all believe in Church teaching, they tweak it to satisfy the majority of believers in their individual dioceses or cultures, with the Pope being no more than a benevolent host treating them to Vatican hospitality.

To explain where I'm coming from on this....
A couple of years ago there was a meeting in our parish where everybody was invited to talk about how things stood in the Church. It wasn't long after Pope Benedict's letter to the Irish faithful apologising for the abuse scandal, except that the letter wasn't much of an apology. All sorts of things were discussed such as clericalism and the role of women. At that stage a lukewarm Catholic, I was on the brink of losing my faith and couldn't understand why we didn't have women priests among other things. We were divided into small groups and given some kind of questionnaire or comment sheet. There was a man in our group who seemed to be very well informed about the Church in Europe. He was saying everything I wanted to hear then. Yes to married priests, yes to women priests, etc. When it came to clericalism, he told us that in parts of Europe (I think he mentioned Austria), the parishioners get to choose candidates for Bishop. I don't know how true that is but it seemed like a great idea to me then. There was a young girl in our group who tried to defend Tradition but she hadn't a hope against my ignorance and that man's apparent knowledge. Our questionnaire would have ticked every box that the liberal bishops support. I was ready to walk away from the Church but I started doing some research and prayed because you don't walk away from a lifetime's belief just like that. The prayer and research resulted in a real strengthening of my faith. That parish meeting showed me how one man telling people what they want to hear can so easily lead the weak astray. The man in that group said a whole lot that the liberal Cardinals are saying and now I see a red light every time I hear about collegiality and changing Church practice to suit the culture of the day.

I'm not blaming Pope Francis for everything that's wrong in the Church and I'm not calling him a heretic. I'm merely saying that infallibility doesn't stretch to off the cuff remarks whether they are intended or not and making silly excuses for them does nothing to strengthen the Papacy.