From: kriz@skat.usc.edu (KRIZ)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Cath. Christianity 101 - more disc. on JP II's letter "On the Family"
Date: 25 Jul 1992 19:47:34 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: skat.usc.edu


Trying to keep order in this discussion.

Basically Loren's points/objections:

LP>> The document in question "does not say anything"

DK>> I think it does.  It is a comprehensive theological reflection
	on the purpose and function of the family.  When people
	wish to learn about government, they read political theories
	on government.  Indeed, one could say that we are fairly 
	literate as a society, when it comes to government.  Or
	perhaps better put ... we are absolutely quantum leaps ahead
	in our literacy with regards to government than we are about
	an even more fundamental institution in our society -- the
	family.  

	If nothing else, what this document does, EVEN FOR THE NON-CATHOLIC, 
	is to present a clear standard by which coherent reflection/discussion
	on the role and purpose of the family can begin.

LP>> the discourses on soc.singles, soc.couples, soc.men/women are "better"

DK>> Loren, they are not "better" they are simply "different"  The groups
	mentioned will NEVER be able to answer the most profound questions:
	
	What is the purpose of marriage?  Why should one bother trying
	to stay together?  Why should one bother trying to have kids?
	What does one really owe one's kids, should one stoop to having
	them?

	These are not trivial questions.  Indeed they are exceedingly
	difficult. And beyond that, they are NOT purely "personal"
	questions.  In the trivial case, they require AT THE LEAST
	TWO PEOPLE to agree on them.

	The supreme tragedy of our society is that for all the "feel
	good" rhetoric and calls to "communicate" our society has 
	actively worked to undermine any hope for a common language.

	And thus we are reduced to babble.  And thus the need to focus 
	the discussion.  And thus the use of pastorals like "On the
	Family"


LP>> that somehow discourse on family/marriage or previously on justice
	have "nothing to do with the Bible" 

DK>> That is again absurd.  


LP>> The Catholic documents which I have posted in this series are 
	relatively recent and they "don't have anything to do with
	the Bible"

DK>> All the documents I have posted have cited the Bible.  Further,
	the teachings build on each other.  I have been very careful
	to post the footnoting along with the text of the documents
	which I have posted.  Trace them back.  

DK>> Specifically, there are nearly 200 Biblical citations in the
	Church's Vatican II Document "Lumen Gentium" which serves
	foundational text for just about everything else that has
	since followed in the Church.

LP>> Are you sure it is not "cafeteria in nature"

DK>> The document's purpose was to define the Church.  Having done
	so, it proceeds subsequently to speak. 

	In the subsequent Vatican II document "Gaudium et Spes" (The
	Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World) the
	Council writes:

	   The joys and hopes, the griefs and the anxieties of the men
	   of this age, especially those who are poor or in any way 
	   afflicted, these are the joys and hopes, the griefs and
	   anxieties of the followers of Christ.  Indeed, nothing
	   genuinely human fails to raise an echo in their hearts.
	   For theirs is a community composed of men.  United in
	   Christ, they are led by the Holy Spirit in their journey
	   to the Kingdom of their Father and they have welcomed the
	   news of salvation which is meant for every man.  That is
	   why this community realizes that it is truly linked with
	   mankind and its history by its deepest bonds.

	   Hence, the Second Vatican Council, having probed more profoundly 
	   into the mystery of the Church, now addresses itself without 
	   hesitation, not only to the sons of the Church and to all who
	   invoke the name of Christ, but to the whole of humanity... [For]
	   the Church has always had the duty of scrutinizing the signs of 
	   the times and of interpreting them in the light of the Gospel.
	   Thus, in language intelligible to each generation, she can 
	   respond to the perenial questions which men ask about the present
	   life and the life to come, and about the relationship of the 
	   one to the other"

				-- Gaudium et Spes 1, 2, 4.

Challenge me Loren, tell us why the Church should not "preach good news
to the poor" why it should not "preach the good news to the ends of the
earth"  Why it should stop and *only* say "God bless you and be well,
if they do not have the necessities of life"  Did not Christ say, "Even
as you do onto the least among you, you will have done it to me" [Mt 25:40]?

As for the Church's teaching on marriage.  The Church maintains the 
indissolubility of marriage, (1) because Christ himself declared that, 
and (2) both the relationship between God and the Jews of the Hebrew
Covenant and Christ and his Church in the New Covenent were described 
in terms of a marriage covenant.  The marriage covenant is taken to 
be a sign of the God and his people, one which the Church prays will
never be broken.


Finally,

LP>> What about if the husband and wife hate each other.

DK>> The husband and wife aren't supposed to hate each other.  That may
	seem like a trivial answer.  But its not.  Generalize it outside
	of marriage: Are two people allowed to hate each other in the
	Christian context?  No.  

	There is no "Heaven A" for one person and "Heaven B" for the
	other.  If both people are destined to enter heaven, AT SOME
	POINT THEY **MUST** reconcile.  Now it may be that one person
	is truly unreasonable/at fault.  That person then is damned.

	Jump at me whatever you will Loren, the visible penalty for
	someone who is divorced/remarried is the non-participation
	visibly in the sacraments.  The person is allowed indeed
	encouraged to participate in every aspect of Church life 
	beyond that.  The Church simply articulates visibly its
	opposition to divorce.  

Anyway, rather than discuss around the document, I'm going to
repost it once more... so that people have a clue of what we
are talking about, and learn more about it.

In Christ,

dennis
kriz@skat.usc.edu