I secretly chuckled today as I enjoyed skiing with friends in the sunshine of a beautiful day.
I have such negativity surrounding "exercise" that if I approach this event as an exercise component, my mind turns to grumpily to obligation and sacrifice of time, but if I call it being with nature, being with friends, soaking up sun and vitamin D, then it's wonderful. Musing now on how word choice affects attitude.... how attitude affects how a day plays out..... how days play out create lifetimes. Happy to ski today.
Monday, January 18, 2010
Sunday, January 17, 2010
An understanding of the situation ...
Thanks to a beautifully clear explanation on www.religioustolerance.org, this has to do with mortal sin and salvation. When church rules are inconvenient, they are easily overlooked or bypassed. But the closer we get to the end of our days, the more important interpreting the rules correctly and doing it "right" is a matter literally of heaven or hell. After reading this, I can empathize with her fears that stem from her belief system.
[taken directly from the website referenced above]
The trap that some Catholics find themselves:
Couples that obtain a civil divorce and remarry without first obtaining an annulment are denied access to the Sacraments of Penance (a.k.a. Confession) and Holy Eucharist. (Catechism 1650).
They are caught between a rock and a hard place:
If they continue in the new marriage, then they cannot repent of and confess their sins through the Sacraments of Penance, and return to Communion. Meanwhile, their sins are accumulating. Because the church does not recognize their new marriage, it considers every sexual act within the marriage to be a new act of adultery -- a mortal sin. According to the church's teachings, this means that they will not attain Heaven when they die. They will end up being eternally tormented in Hell. There are only two ways of avoiding this state:
-To be fortunate enough to not die suddenly (e.g. to not die instantly in a car accident or from a massive heart attack). This way, they might be able to receive the Last Anointing by which their mortal sins are forgiven. Needless to say, this is a risky route to take.
-To make an "act of perfect contrition" instead of Confession. But this requires the individual to repent of what the Church considers their sins of adultery, and sincerely intend to never engage in "adultery" in the future.
If they separate from their new spouse, and live alone, and sincerely intend to remain separated unless a annulment is granted, then they can resume their access the Sacraments of Penance and Holy Eucharist. But that would require them to violate their new marriage vows, and terminate their marital relationship. This option often seems profoundly immoral to the couple, particularly if there are children involved.
Judging from the overwhelming percentage of Roman Catholics who never apply for an annulment, it would seem that most have abandoned their idea of mortal sin leading them to Hell. For those Catholics who believe in the teachings of their church, it would seem expedient to apply for an annulment as soon as possible so that they would be free to enter into a new relationship when they wish.
[taken directly from the website referenced above]
The trap that some Catholics find themselves:
Couples that obtain a civil divorce and remarry without first obtaining an annulment are denied access to the Sacraments of Penance (a.k.a. Confession) and Holy Eucharist. (Catechism 1650).
They are caught between a rock and a hard place:
If they continue in the new marriage, then they cannot repent of and confess their sins through the Sacraments of Penance, and return to Communion. Meanwhile, their sins are accumulating. Because the church does not recognize their new marriage, it considers every sexual act within the marriage to be a new act of adultery -- a mortal sin. According to the church's teachings, this means that they will not attain Heaven when they die. They will end up being eternally tormented in Hell. There are only two ways of avoiding this state:
-To be fortunate enough to not die suddenly (e.g. to not die instantly in a car accident or from a massive heart attack). This way, they might be able to receive the Last Anointing by which their mortal sins are forgiven. Needless to say, this is a risky route to take.
-To make an "act of perfect contrition" instead of Confession. But this requires the individual to repent of what the Church considers their sins of adultery, and sincerely intend to never engage in "adultery" in the future.
If they separate from their new spouse, and live alone, and sincerely intend to remain separated unless a annulment is granted, then they can resume their access the Sacraments of Penance and Holy Eucharist. But that would require them to violate their new marriage vows, and terminate their marital relationship. This option often seems profoundly immoral to the couple, particularly if there are children involved.
Judging from the overwhelming percentage of Roman Catholics who never apply for an annulment, it would seem that most have abandoned their idea of mortal sin leading them to Hell. For those Catholics who believe in the teachings of their church, it would seem expedient to apply for an annulment as soon as possible so that they would be free to enter into a new relationship when they wish.
Catholic conundrums
So, once again, the topic of organized religion comes up and not in a pleasant way. As background, I do struggle with Christian creeds and doctrines and theologies and the lack of "wiggle room" in church thinking. I am amazed at how people find such comfort in the belief that by following prescribed rites and rituals and rules, their lemming-like behavior in itself will somehow earn them an accumulation of a kind of holy brownie points they can turn in for guaranteed admission to a preferred after-life society down the road. I find, especially with Catholics, there is a tendency to ignore self-reflection and certainly a tendency to rarely question the myriad incongruities that exist between religious doctrine and the humanity of real life. They readily turn a blind eye to the hypocrisy of the leadership, and often judge others not by their personal actions but by their religious card carrying status.
The scenario I discuss today consists of a Catholic woman, married for 20 years, divorced and re-married to a second husband for 30 years. (She could not marry in the Catholic church this second time presumably because of the first divorce and the 2nd husband not being Catholic). Her current husband, for whom this is a second marriage as well, is in poor health, and she now requests that he have his first marriage annulled. So, not understanding the Catholic religion myself, why does she ask this? After 30 years of marriage to this man, she worries about how it will look to have never had her 2nd marriage blessed by the church? Or is there some kind of afterlife fear for her if he dies without the annulment in place? Does the woman feel a need to save face or save soul? I find this unreasonable and selfish.
So reading more about this on a Catholic website I find the following:
A declaration of nullity states that, according to Church law, a given marriage was not valid (and therefore not binding) at the time a couple spoke their marriage vows.
How does a Catholic governing body have the right to declare that the marriage of two people some fifty years ago is now invalid? (And, as an aside, what does that mean for the children that were born of that marriage?) This family never was Catholic yet, somehow these Catholic strangers have a right to delve into their personal affairs of another time and determine there was no validity to the marriage union? So the marriage of this man and his ex-wife, whose lives were legally and emotionally blended for over 25 years (and to their credit continue to be humanely and compassionately blended for yet another 25 since the divorce), was invalid from the beginning! Amazing!
And I also find amazing this woman who is asking this family to go along with this thinking for her sake and her sake alone. A request that an entire family be "nullified" for a single individual. What am I missing here in her thinking? Can someone who is Catholic help me to understand this?
Whatever this governing body decides won't change the family, their relationship, their past or their future. This decree of annulment may give the woman peace of mind (and really, who can be upset with the creation of peace in any way, shape, or form), but isn't this whole concept of annulment a bit ludicrous? Thoughts?
The scenario I discuss today consists of a Catholic woman, married for 20 years, divorced and re-married to a second husband for 30 years. (She could not marry in the Catholic church this second time presumably because of the first divorce and the 2nd husband not being Catholic). Her current husband, for whom this is a second marriage as well, is in poor health, and she now requests that he have his first marriage annulled. So, not understanding the Catholic religion myself, why does she ask this? After 30 years of marriage to this man, she worries about how it will look to have never had her 2nd marriage blessed by the church? Or is there some kind of afterlife fear for her if he dies without the annulment in place? Does the woman feel a need to save face or save soul? I find this unreasonable and selfish.
So reading more about this on a Catholic website I find the following:
A declaration of nullity states that, according to Church law, a given marriage was not valid (and therefore not binding) at the time a couple spoke their marriage vows.
How does a Catholic governing body have the right to declare that the marriage of two people some fifty years ago is now invalid? (And, as an aside, what does that mean for the children that were born of that marriage?) This family never was Catholic yet, somehow these Catholic strangers have a right to delve into their personal affairs of another time and determine there was no validity to the marriage union? So the marriage of this man and his ex-wife, whose lives were legally and emotionally blended for over 25 years (and to their credit continue to be humanely and compassionately blended for yet another 25 since the divorce), was invalid from the beginning! Amazing!
And I also find amazing this woman who is asking this family to go along with this thinking for her sake and her sake alone. A request that an entire family be "nullified" for a single individual. What am I missing here in her thinking? Can someone who is Catholic help me to understand this?
Whatever this governing body decides won't change the family, their relationship, their past or their future. This decree of annulment may give the woman peace of mind (and really, who can be upset with the creation of peace in any way, shape, or form), but isn't this whole concept of annulment a bit ludicrous? Thoughts?
Saturday, January 16, 2010
January 16, 2010
Decided to switch from posting my thoughts on a wordperfect document in my household electronic file called "Karen" to a blog - my son won't believe I am utilizing technology this way. I'm a bit of a technophobe, but it somehow gives me accountability to have my writing out there on the web instead of in my hard drive. I have copied and pasted old writings from last year when I was overwhelmed with thoughts. Obviously didn't write much once summer came and the depression lifted--I was out doing life instead of moping and writing about it. I suspect now my writings won't be a call for help, but a philosophical place to play out ideas. Having ideas written helps me go back and figure out where I've been and review the choices I've made. I've also lost the ability to write concisely over the years and this will be good practice for me.
May 3, 2009
The medication Lexapro has helped me to get out of my depression. I don’t know what I would have done without it. I started with 10mg and am now at 15mg (at night because it makes me sleepy). I smile for no reason and not much seems to upset me. I feel lighter and happiness comes easily with simple things. I am more in love with Dick than I have been for a while. He’s been very supportive and is really trying to not get upset by so many things. It has made for a much lighter household and we are having fun again with simple things like the art gallery night and going out to dinner and working together on household projects. I wonder if I have had depression my whole life. I don’t remember feeling this lightness since I was a small child. It does make me wonder about how we are put together and what exactly is happiness – a decision to be a certain way?, a chemical?, a point of view?, a gene?
We attended Peter and Betsy’s 25th wedding anniversary celebration last night and everyone commented on what happy delightful people they are. They choose lightness and happiness, and when I look back at their college photos, it was the same then. As family members and friends spoke, it appears they have been this way forever – where does this inborn happiness come from? Is it the household they grew up in or is it something in themselves? They have had adversity, but they don’t dwell on it. It just makes me ponder this thing called happiness and how it works. Seeing Peter and Betsy reminded me of how we didn’t laugh in my house. There was no silliness or lightness. Everything was pretty heavy and analytical and practical. It has taken me many, many years to be comfortable being silly happy. To have whimsy and song and dance and laughter is such a wonderful thing when it happens. I think this is why I watched so many 1940’s and 1950’s comedies on TV when I was a kid. I just couldn’t get enough of watching these people who knew how to be funny. It was so foreign to me.
We attended Peter and Betsy’s 25th wedding anniversary celebration last night and everyone commented on what happy delightful people they are. They choose lightness and happiness, and when I look back at their college photos, it was the same then. As family members and friends spoke, it appears they have been this way forever – where does this inborn happiness come from? Is it the household they grew up in or is it something in themselves? They have had adversity, but they don’t dwell on it. It just makes me ponder this thing called happiness and how it works. Seeing Peter and Betsy reminded me of how we didn’t laugh in my house. There was no silliness or lightness. Everything was pretty heavy and analytical and practical. It has taken me many, many years to be comfortable being silly happy. To have whimsy and song and dance and laughter is such a wonderful thing when it happens. I think this is why I watched so many 1940’s and 1950’s comedies on TV when I was a kid. I just couldn’t get enough of watching these people who knew how to be funny. It was so foreign to me.
January 24, 2009
My depression is so thick these past days. I am just a mass of sadness for no reason. I can’t identify what I grieve for, I can’t identify what I want, I can’t identify who I am under all this emotion. I have always felt invisible and of no importance. Every day is another 24 hours of questioning why am I here – what is this all about and how do I find the strength to go on every day with no reason for being.
I’m home from work today because I can’t stop crying long enough to get myself out of the house. I read this on a self-help website today: “If I have even one person who truly mourned for my loss when I die, not because I am gone, but because that person has grown, then I would feel that my life was worth living”. I think that holds true for me, but then we won’t know til we’re gone, so there’s no feedback from the world at large meanwhile.
I’m home from work today because I can’t stop crying long enough to get myself out of the house. I read this on a self-help website today: “If I have even one person who truly mourned for my loss when I die, not because I am gone, but because that person has grown, then I would feel that my life was worth living”. I think that holds true for me, but then we won’t know til we’re gone, so there’s no feedback from the world at large meanwhile.
The psychic
January 17, 2009: Heading off to see Lisa Williams, psychic and clairvoyant. Dick is away skiing at the Seeley Classic. I am compelled to explore this psychic world. I want to see a psychic in action. I want to see for myself if she uses cold cues or is there something really going on. Will Audrey or Minda or Rose show up? I have to see for myself what this woman does.
August 19, 2008
As 51 years become 52, it seems like there’s a lot to comment on. Ruminations are frequent these years. They banter about in the thinking space provided by the absence of parenting, in the long road miles of weekly bike rides, in the boring interludes at a job that is not challenging enough. Thoughts twirling while alone in hormonal depressions, thoughts poking while lying awake at night as hormones continue their annoying joke-playing.
Already time for yoga class….I’m off to downward dogs and other animals (crane, peacock, pigeon, fish, and perhaps a new vertebrate tonight).
Already time for yoga class….I’m off to downward dogs and other animals (crane, peacock, pigeon, fish, and perhaps a new vertebrate tonight).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)