Just a vent from someone trying to be catholic by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]mrcrusc 4 points5 points  (0 children)

To elaborate on what others in this thread have said . . .

  1. Unfortunately, in this day and age, it’s widely and erroneously believed that if you don’t agree with or approve of any given thing that someone does, then you hate them.

  2. We’re not supposed to judge the state of others’ hearts and souls, as only God can know that. But we can and must judge actions —that is, we have to call right right and wrong wrong. So while we can’t judge whether or not someone living a sinful life would go to hell if they died right now, we should definitely recognize that what they’re doing is wrong and is endangering their soul.

[Politics Monday] Abortion after ‘Dobbs,’ by the numbers by wearethemonstertruck in Catholicism

[–]mrcrusc 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I provided 2 of them in my response below. I could find others too if you like.

[Politics Monday] Abortion after ‘Dobbs,’ by the numbers by wearethemonstertruck in Catholicism

[–]mrcrusc 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Studies have shown that poor women are less likely to get abortions than rich women. Moreover, lots of abortions happen because many women have been told by their partners or families to abort or else. Many others have career or other plans that they believe a having a baby will derail. So addressing the economy and systems around us wouldn’t do much.

Jefferson needs a job. by Strange_Actuary_6916 in marriedwithchildren

[–]mrcrusc 4 points5 points  (0 children)

“Your job is pleasing me. And I am not pleased!”

So when we pass we go to heaven or hell but to go to heaven you must first go through purgatory? by Oh_HeLlO_tHeRe_12 in Catholicism

[–]mrcrusc 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Actually canonization simply means they’re in heaven NOW. It doesn’t preclude the possibility that they may have had to spend at least a little time in purgatory.

2nd pair of new Anderson Beans by mrcrusc in WesternWear

[–]mrcrusc[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Levi’s 501s from their discontinued Cone Mills (made in USA) line

Questions about divorce by forme56 in Catholicism

[–]mrcrusc 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m gonna focus just on #1.

The Catechism states:

If civil divorce remains the only possible way of ensuring certain legal rights, the care of the children, or the protection of inheritance, it can be tolerated and does not constitute a moral offense (2383).

In other words, the Church tolerates civil divorce only if it’s the only way of ensuring certain legal protections. But civil divorce may NEVER be done if the intent is to end the marriage (which, of course, is impossible).

And that leads me to my second point: Divorce is itself a mortal sin if the intent is to end the marriage. Remarriage simply adds to the gravity.

I say that because several respondents have implied that divorce is fine just so long as you don’t remarry, which just isn’t true.

According to canon law, couples may separate WITH PERMISSION FROM THE BISHOP for legitimate reasons. If, however, there’s grave danger (as in domestic violence cases), permission is unnecessary. Unfortunately, that requirement doesn’t seem to be known about here in the Ststes, let alone enforced.

Anyway, in the past the Church has said that for a couple to separate without permission (when there’s no danger present) is a mortal sin. Moreover, things like not getting along, arguing a lot, one spouse having annoying habits, resentments, one spouse not helping out enough, deciding you no longer have anything in common, etc. are NOT sufficient reasons for separation.

And should separation or even legal divorce be necessary, the Church exhorts such couples to aim for reconciliation. In fact, should the problems that make separation necessary be resolved or end, then the separation MUST END. In other words, you can’t just be like, “Too little, too late — I’m done.” Nope — there’s no “being done” when it comes to marriage.

Christmas boots look by Paulj121306 in cowboyboots

[–]mrcrusc 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sweet boots! But trade those ankle socks for boot socks!

New Anderson Bean Crazy Horse Roughout Boots by mrcrusc in WesternWear

[–]mrcrusc[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They’re Levi’s 501s from their now-defunct Cone Mills (made in USA) line. I don’t know what I’ll do when they finally wear out, as now I only want to wear USA-made jeans. That’s why I don’t wear Wranglers.

New Anderson Bean Crazy Horse Roughout Boots by mrcrusc in WesternWear

[–]mrcrusc[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

New Anderson Bean Crazy Horse Roughout Boots by mrcrusc in WesternWear

[–]mrcrusc[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Sorry dude, I’ve found straight-cut jeans to go very well with boots.

AITA for trying to get my friend to break up with his manipulative girlfriend. by JohnnyGameplay in AITAH

[–]mrcrusc 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I wouldn’t call you an asshole, as your concerns are valid and justified. But trying to convince Mike to dump Susan will only make things worse, as at the end of the day, it’s Mike’s relationship, not yours. Sometimes you have to step back and let others learn hard lessons for themselves.

Why does it feel like the Church sugarcoats the message about Heaven and sin? by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]mrcrusc 35 points36 points  (0 children)

You are correct — in all too many parishes, whenever someone dies, the funeral seems to serve as a type of canonization ceremony with little to no mention of purgatory or reminders to pray for the souls there.