The Necessity of Requirements for Sacramental Marriage

Church policies about Sacramental Marriage require members to get on the same page as the other congregants (and presumably the Bible).

Readership: Christians
Theme: A Mini-Series on Church Policy and Sacramental Marriage
Length: 900 words
Reading Time: 4.5 minutes

How do the Catholic Church’s Teachings on Sacramental Marriage Play out in the Church and Society? 

This is a complex question and I’m sure some readers would take great delight in jumping at the chance to go off about the various ways the Catholic church has been converged and/or corrupted.  So to focus this discussion and avoid hot button issues (for now), I’ll continue on some points that have already been raised, especially some quotes from Derek L. Ramsey / Ramman3000.  I’m a little confused about which of Derek’s statements are his own interpretation of Catholicism, and which ones are his own beliefs.  So I’m going to address his statements line by line.

“…for even a man — who follows all the Red Pill advice and achieves a wife who submits and gives him all the sex he could ever want — would still be a failure if he loses his soul.”

Well, obviously, if we are looking at this from an eternal perspective.  The Red Pill is insufficient to save one’s eternal soul (but it sure helps avoid unnecessary suffering). In taking this view, it is assumed that one is already lost.  But if we address the social impacts rather than the soteriological, such a man wouldn’t be a total failure in society and especially in a church fellowship IF he pursues (or is pressured into accepting) either celibacy or marriage and thereby cuts down on his engagement in the culture of lust and fornication that would cause others to stumble / sin and ultimately erode the civilized aspects of society.  OTOH, Red Pill advice would probably increase fornication if sexual continence (i.e. celibacy or marriage) is not already set forth as a goal or a priority.

In this view, a Red Pilled marriage is a small but insufficient step towards righteousness / salvation / sanctification, at least for others, if not for one’s self.  If diligently pursued, especially by the grand majority of people in a church body, I suppose it could culminate in such, by the Power of God. At the very least, there is hope for civilization.

How are the Catholic Church’s Teachings on Sacramental Marriage viewed by “Outsiders”? 

“You can’t help a man with general relationship advice if you fail in the prerequisite that Christ be his Lord first.”

I agree with this.  At least, it becomes a lot easier and more efficient with the Power of God and regeneration.

But when we get to this…

“Salvation under the covenant of Jesus should precede both baptism and marriage, as part of the already established covenant, not sacraments.”

…then all the questions come up.  Yes, it should.  But does that mean people should wait to get married until they “find God”? No, because the statement above describes an ideal situation.  Reality is messy.  Most people are far from the ideal, even many of the elect, and especially early in life. Perhaps this is why the Catholic church defines baptism as the starting point.

As I stated before, I do believe that marriage is more fulfilling / sanctified for those who are believers / saved.  But the quoted text above sounds like the equivalent of saying, “You cannot be truly married unless you are truly saved.”

Maybe I’m boiling this down into a straw man, but even so, people will take such a meaning to heart as I described in the first post in this series.

This begs for clarification. Does “marriage” mean God’s recognition of a one flesh union, or does it mean a marriage that is officially recognized by the church?

If it means the former, then the truth of this statement is doubtful, because marriage goes back to the Adamic covenant, which means it applies to all humanity.

If it means the latter, then it makes perfect sense for the church to pose certain requirements in order to receive its endorsement.

Furthermore, we must beware of logical categorizations that are devoid of faith and/or removed from reality.

Is Sacramental Marriage a Pitch for Cathodoxy?

Thanks to EoS’s insights here and here, we know that the purpose for requiring new converts to go through marital “reeducation” and be married again within the church is to make sure those coming in are clear about what a Sacramental Marriage is and what is required of them. We could think of this as a “quality control” device of the church.

But to those coming in, this…

“…in the Roman Catholic frame one cannot have a sacramental marriage unless one has first experienced the Roman Catholic sacrament of baptism.”

…sounds like a pitch for Catholicism, saying in effect, “If you want to be married in OUR church (according to OUR definition of marriage), then you have to do things OUR way”, which is not unreasonable, IMO, because the church should be setting forth a protocol in which, if followed, people are more likely to find salvation (and better marriages too) if they haven’t already done so.

Along similar lines, even though the above statement is valid if it is instituted as a church policy, this sounds like saying, “You cannot be truly married unless you are truly saved.”  We might as well add, “And you cannot be truly married / saved unless you are truly Red Pilled.”  Followed by, “And you cannot be truly Red Pilled unless you truly love and seek the Truth.”  It makes a fine syllogism, and there is some truth there, but it’s pretty nebulous, difficult in the application, full of sufferings, and somewhat evasive.  That’s the reality.

“If you would be a real seeker after truth, it is necessary that at least once in your life you doubt, as far as possible, all things.”

Rene Descartes (1596-1650)

Thus is the beginning of true humility.

Related

• Σ Frame (NovaSeeker): Dissemination and Dissolution (2020/11/7)
• Σ Frame (Jack): Towards a more complete appreciation of Sanctification (2022/1/10)
• Σ Frame (Jack): The Christ : Church :: Husband : Wife Analogy (2022/8/29)

Regulations vs. Reality

Addressing misconceptions about marriage.

Readership: Christians
Theme: A Mini-Series on Church Policy and Sacramental Marriage
Length: 1,000 words
Reading Time: 5 minutes

The Catholic Church’s Teachings on Sacramental Marriage are a Response to the Brokenness in the Real World

Derek L. Ramsey has written many comments about the Catholic Sacramental Marriage construct.  I suspect that Derek is reading too much into his interpretations of this, but for now, I’ll go along with his claims for the sake of discussion. 

Derek wrote,

“Salvation under the covenant of Jesus should precede both baptism and marriage, as part of the already established covenant, not sacraments.  As Ed Hurst and I noted, Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy falsely assert that marriage and baptism are sacramental, that is, part of saving grace, and thus sacramental marriage cannot satisfy the prerequisite above.”

At first, I agreed with this stance, but after thinking it over and writing the posts in this mini-series, I do think it has some value as a church policy, but not as a doctrine of salvation.  Perhaps that is the primary disconnect in our understanding.

Cathodoxy’s Sacramental Marriage Construct

What is its purpose? What is its authority?

Readership: Christians
Theme: A Mini-Series on Church Policy and Sacramental Marriage
Length: 800 words
Reading Time: 4 minutes

Confusion Surrounds what Marriage is all about

Under Red Pill Apostle’s post, 16 Bible Passages for Teaching Wives and Daughters about Male-Female Roles and Marriage (2023/5/15), there was a long discussion (starting here) about the value and purpose of marriage in terms of whether it is a Civil / Contractual / Covenantal / Natural / Sacramental Marriage.  This opened up a can of worms concerning the definitions and characteristics of each.  I still haven’t figured that all out, but when I do (God willing), I’ll write a post about my conclusions.  Since these definitions remain unclear, and to avoid unfruitful tangents in the comments, I will not dive into these distinctions very deeply.

Instead, in this mini-series, I’ll look at how marriage as an institution is regarded, structured, and handled by the church and how that is perceived by the individual, whether single, married, Christian, or pagan.  I’ll focus on the Catholic church as a topic of discussion, but these observations could well extend to the Orthodox or the Protestant churches as well, according to their respective concepts of marriage, etc.

An open letter to Christian Wives

If a wife isn’t submitting to her husband in all things, then she doesn’t have a Christian marriage!

Readership: All
Theme: Wives and Mothers
Length: 1,900 words
Reading Time: 9 minutes

Wifely Submission has become a Profane Topic and an Illegal Practice

The Western world has created all kinds of exceptions to wifely submission, accompanied by well-developed justifications.

The main reason, the only reason, women submitted before the Sexual Revolution was because they had no choice if they wanted a man’s money and resources.

Now? Women can get their own resources (but never enough — men are still better at getting, managing, and marshaling resources than women are). Now, women are on par with men in every significant way, via legal fictions and constructs, and men go along with it because they want püssy. So, given all this, why should women submit?

No one is going to make them do it — making a woman submit is illegal.

Single moms can’t escape the shame.

Shame on those who forsake the Feminist Life Script to have a child.

Readership: Men
Theme: Wives and Mothers
Length: 2,800 words
Reading Time: 14 minutes

Introduction

In The normalization of the trashy single mother. (2012/10/18), Dalrock noted,

“With the exception of widows, single mothers have traditionally faced strong social stigma.  Feminists have made removing this stigma a priority as it is essential in order to free women from the reciprocal obligations which traditionally have come with motherhood.  Feminism is far more about removing women’s responsibilities than it is about increasing women’s rights, so this is a critical area of focus for feminism.”

He goes on to say that feminists have been very successful removing the stigma associated with unwed motherhood on the surface.

Dealing with the Mother-in-Law Curse

Family baggage from the past can be the death knell to a marriage if not addressed properly.

Readership: Men; Married Men
Theme: Wives and Mothers
Author’s Note: This post is based on a conversation that appeared under Thedeti’s post, What can a husband do in response to a rebellious wife? (2022/1/31).  Comments edited for clarity and readability.
Length: 3,000 words
Reading Time: 15 minutes

Case Study 1 – RedPillBoomer’s Wife and Her Mother

RedPillBoomer says:

My wife was a fairly agreeable woman when I married her 32 years ago.  However, there was one red flag that I didn’t even recognize at the time, her relationship with her mother.  She had ‘mommy issues’ because her mother was a mess in a number of ways.  Fortunately, she didn’t have any daddy issues.  Her relationship with her father was very solid (parents were still married, no divorce).  HOWEVER, even though it was just one red flag that was missed by clueless, Blue Pill me, it made the first ten years of our marriage difficult as she worked through her mommy issues.  We came close to divorce over it.  Thankfully, the mommy issues were correctable, and in the course of time, another decade or so, she got them worked out to the point where now, they are a non-issue.

So, I dodged a bullet, but not without significant personal cost to me during those first ten years.  We have a really good marriage now, and that is a testament in part to her agreeableness.  From that spirit of agreeableness, she worked very hard on overcoming her mommy issues, and eventually did.  She was willing to accept her ‘problem’ and do the work to correct it; but it took a lot of work on her part.  Kudos to her for doing the work.  Kudos to me I guess for being patient.

Misplaced Motherhood

A couple interesting theories to consider.

Readership: All
Theme: Wives and Mothers
Length: 1,000 words
Reading Time: 5 minutes

Introduction

Western liberated adult wimmin feel that they’re made holier and sanctified unto the W0ke Feminist cultural zeitgeist when they escape the natural consequences of sex outside of marriage (i.e. pregnancy).  Abortion and birth control are sacred because these twin idols allow them to sacrifice their apex fertility to Molech, and continue making their sacramental rounds on the carousel, respectively. The highly sought after blessings of faithful devotion and obedience include the regular bliss of perpetual Tingles with every new Ch@d, the deliverance from the responsibilities of motherhood, the deterrence of the most natural opportunity to mature, and that they may avert their GNON ordained purpose of being progenitors of future generations.  All these reasons are why abortion and birth control are central pillars in the feminist religion.  Being on the pill, for a feminist, is like worshipping at the altar of the Strong and Independent self, similar to going to church or reading the Bible would be for a Christian.

We already know the pill is largely responsible for the culture-wide postponement of marriage.  But could it also be possible that the pill is (part of) the following effects as well?

1. The reason why women are drawn to bad boys?
2. The reason why women are slow to mature.
3. The reason why feminist moms ruin everything for their daughters (and sons too), usually with envy, fear, frustration, rage, and self-loathing, but sometimes by subjecting them to being abused by their paramours. 

Let’s consider…

Progressive is Regressive

One year ago, Bill Maher put together this hilarious spoof.

Lest we forget.

New Rule: Along for the Pride | Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO) (2022/5/21) Length: 9:21

When Maher came out with this, it made a big splash because it struck against the overweening QTBGL narrative — a narrative which no one had the balls to address at that time. People were more or less accepting of it, as long as it didn’t affect them personally.

This is one thing that has changed in the year since then, especially since The Bud Light Revolt — more people are realizing that, contrary to what is purported by the mainstream media, the narrative is not reality, nor do the majority of people accept it. People are beginning to realize that the QTBGL agenda is going to march onwards to its ultimate culmination unless they speak up and stand up. So now, more people are more active in challenging it.

Related

• Σ Frame: The QTBGL agenda gets down on its knees to Islamic Law (2019/8/20)
• Σ Frame: Another Schism will Come (2021/10/18)

Eschatological Polygyny

Isaiah predicted some type of polygyny in the end days. What is this all about?

Readership: All
Theme: Wives and Mothers
Author’s Note: This question was posed by a reader through email.
Length: 600 words
Reading Time: 3 minutes

And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach…

Isaiah 4:1 (KJV)

Concubinage and/or polygyny in some form or fashion has been quite common since ancient times up to the present day and across cultures. The Bible contains many examples, including the Kings and Patriarchs of the Old Testament.

What is common in all the examples throughout time is that the MAN always takes on the role of a PROVIDER.

In Asian concubinage, the woman wants the man for comfort, pleasure, PROVISION, and security. In Western soft harems, the woman wants the man for attention, affirmation, PROVISION, and sex. In any culture, if a woman is looking for marriage then she is definitely seeking PROVISION.

But NO WHERE do we see women wanting a man for nothing other than his NAME, as the Biblical prophecy foretells.

Concubinage

An “acceptable” alternative to being a wife.

Readership: All
Theme: Wives and Mothers
Length: 2,200 words
Reading Time: 12 minutes + 13:22 minute video

Introduction

International Dating: Are Chinese women really left over? (2021/7/22) Length: 13:22 minutes

The Chinese woman being interviewed is extremely suave in her explanation of marriage, divorce, and concubinage in China and Taiwan. She’s speaking on behalf of a dating agency, so she paints these “left over” women in the best light possible, describing them as educated, sophisticated, and wealthy. But actually,

• Her concept of urbane women is better described as materialistic.
• Some women are “left over” because no (Asian) man wants them.
• Some women are “left over” because they’re “retired” from concubinage (described below).
• Not all “left over” women are wealthy.

She makes Chinese men out to be “cheaters” and “deadbeats”, which is a gross mischaracterization. From the hypergamous Asian female’s perspective, men are categorized into the “have’s” and the “have not’s”. In this view, the former are “cheaters” and the latter are “deadbeats”. When she says, “nice guys don’t exist in China”, she means the “have’s” (the men who pass their hypergamous filters) are not compliant with the Asian version of the Feminine Imperative. (This is somewhat comparable to how Western women are attracted to cheaters / players / etc. and so they think all men are that way, but they’re only referring to apex alphas. Other men are invisible.)

She claims the men “cheated” in order to justify the women leaving the arrangement, but the picture she paints is not accurate. First, the word “cheating” plays on the Western penchant for monogamy. Second, in informal concubinage, polygyny is generally assumed. Third, most concubines willingly sign up for the easy bread and butter. (A small number are arranged or set up by friends or parents.) Fourth, they knew the lifestyle and the eventual outcome when they signed up for the deal. But her account of the situation implies that concubines up and leave because their harem baron was a “cheater” or otherwise morally corrupt. In reality, most concubines stay with their tycoons until they’re too old to “entertain”, and their “employment” is then terminated. If given the choice, many of them would prefer NOT to depart from Mr. Moneybags.

In sum, she is loquaciously stacking several cards that are popular in the West…

• The false primacy of monogamy.
• “Men and women are equal.”
• “Men are cheaters.”
• “The woman is the victim.”

…thereby reframing the whole situation in order to conceal the true context and present past-prime concubines as women worthy of monogamous marriage. Very svelte!

She also fails to express the male perspective and either the enticing or the uglier aspects of Concubinage. In the remainder of this post, I’ll fill in the blanks.