And please, no more time wasted discussing a canonical marital status of a non-catholic married 3x, none of them in a Catholic Church. One hour is long enough. We know that none of him nor his 3 supposed wives give a damn about the canonical marriage, why should we care about their status to it?
Please cover more relevant thing like how ICKSP is being kicked out of Archdiocese of Chicago.
"We know that none of him nor his 3 supposed wives give a damn about the canonical marriage, why should we care about their status to it?"
Because it involves their immortal souls?
"Please cover more relevant thing like how ICKSP is being kicked out of Archdiocese of Chicago."
Has there been an actual announcement by either the ICKSP or the Archdiocese confirming it's happening? Because I've not seen anything concrete besides rumors.
LIke the rest of you probably, I could care less about your ex-president's marital status - I don't think that was the point to the discussion; it was just a very familiar cultural context that was used to then build a fascinating discussion upon, and given all the willy-nilly ways in which our society is treating marriage these days, an extremely pertinent discussion at that :-)!
One wife and two concubines, not necessarily in that order, and since you never know who is going to become Catholic (or return to the faith after a lapse) it's always important to know how to figure out which is which, not only for their own sakes but for the sake of *anyone* who subsequently entered (or enters) into the growing network of serial attempted-marriage. Endlessly fascinating. (Not to you, I grant.)
I am sorry to disagree with your perspective, sir. The time spent on canonical marital status these last two weeks has used a humourous contextual tool to share not only some of the pretty messed-up consequences of our times, but also just how able our Canon Law is, in its depth and complexity, to handle even the most outrageous choices people make these days. I think it is extremely fascinating and enlightening to listen to this banter because while demonstrating the adeptness of our Church to handle anything we can throw at it, we also learn that our two hosts are also up to the task of explaining it. I find it very comforting to know that I have the likes of such as J.D and Ed to whom I can entrust my continued formation in the Catholic Faith. Thanks, guys!
Oh my goodness - what a riot you guys are! I only wish I had fellow Catholics I could share your humour with (I'm surrounded by atheists/agnostics/lukewarmers).
Anyway, I am Canadian, and so you can appreciate how much more I loved this particular podcast. But I have to tell you, honestly guys, for a couple of journalists, your Canadian content today was not your finest hour :-)!
To being with, Nunavut is not a province but a territory. There used to be 2 territories: the Yukon, and the Northwest. And then in 1999, the NWT was broken into 2 parts, with the eastern part (renamed Nunavut) providing the Inuit with the means to set up their own independent government.
As for your pronunciation ... my oh my - what a butcher job ... and I will have NONE OF IT, ha ha!
Nunavut: 3 syllables with the emphasis on the 1st syllable, and the u's are pronounced like the oo in foot. Try it: NOO-na-voot
Iqaluit: 4 syllables with the emphasis on the 2nd syllable, with the u pronounced differently, more like the oo in food than in foot. Try it: i-KA-loo-it.
That's it for today's lesson :-)!
Keep up the great work - you're the cherry on top of my weekend :-)!
Thanks Ed and JD for a wonderful podcast as usual. Love the banter as usual (btw how can I sponsor banter instead of an ad?).
I loved the comparison between Her Majesty's travels and His Holiness' as well as recommendations for leaving to go to an annointing of the sick (there must be ways to ensure the need is actually legitimate just in case His Holiness calls Father's bluff, right?).
Also the O Canada segment was quite enlightening.
JD, I'm now getting very disappointed in the lack of limerick. I demand a Vatican trial limerick! You promised! And I shall keep hounding until you fulfill that promise.
Also I need a level head to help with the Liturgy Wars saga.
Some correction: Nunavut is a territory, not a province.
Also Iqaluit have a mayor who wanted to remove Catholic Church's charitable status. Idk if it's related to why the city is chosen for a visit, but it'll be interesting to see how the mayor will treat the Pope. https://nunatsiaq.com/stories/article/iqaluits-mayor-wants-to-tax-citys-churches/
And please, no more time wasted discussing a canonical marital status of a non-catholic married 3x, none of them in a Catholic Church. One hour is long enough. We know that none of him nor his 3 supposed wives give a damn about the canonical marriage, why should we care about their status to it?
Please cover more relevant thing like how ICKSP is being kicked out of Archdiocese of Chicago.
"We know that none of him nor his 3 supposed wives give a damn about the canonical marriage, why should we care about their status to it?"
Because it involves their immortal souls?
"Please cover more relevant thing like how ICKSP is being kicked out of Archdiocese of Chicago."
Has there been an actual announcement by either the ICKSP or the Archdiocese confirming it's happening? Because I've not seen anything concrete besides rumors.
They're known fornicators, and not been repentant as far as anyone knows. Plus other sins that are not as public.
LIke the rest of you probably, I could care less about your ex-president's marital status - I don't think that was the point to the discussion; it was just a very familiar cultural context that was used to then build a fascinating discussion upon, and given all the willy-nilly ways in which our society is treating marriage these days, an extremely pertinent discussion at that :-)!
> nor his 3 supposed wives
One wife and two concubines, not necessarily in that order, and since you never know who is going to become Catholic (or return to the faith after a lapse) it's always important to know how to figure out which is which, not only for their own sakes but for the sake of *anyone* who subsequently entered (or enters) into the growing network of serial attempted-marriage. Endlessly fascinating. (Not to you, I grant.)
I am sorry to disagree with your perspective, sir. The time spent on canonical marital status these last two weeks has used a humourous contextual tool to share not only some of the pretty messed-up consequences of our times, but also just how able our Canon Law is, in its depth and complexity, to handle even the most outrageous choices people make these days. I think it is extremely fascinating and enlightening to listen to this banter because while demonstrating the adeptness of our Church to handle anything we can throw at it, we also learn that our two hosts are also up to the task of explaining it. I find it very comforting to know that I have the likes of such as J.D and Ed to whom I can entrust my continued formation in the Catholic Faith. Thanks, guys!
Y’all it’s not MaRples!! 😂😂
isn't it though.
Story idea: an explainer on the residential schools.
Oh my goodness - what a riot you guys are! I only wish I had fellow Catholics I could share your humour with (I'm surrounded by atheists/agnostics/lukewarmers).
Anyway, I am Canadian, and so you can appreciate how much more I loved this particular podcast. But I have to tell you, honestly guys, for a couple of journalists, your Canadian content today was not your finest hour :-)!
To being with, Nunavut is not a province but a territory. There used to be 2 territories: the Yukon, and the Northwest. And then in 1999, the NWT was broken into 2 parts, with the eastern part (renamed Nunavut) providing the Inuit with the means to set up their own independent government.
As for your pronunciation ... my oh my - what a butcher job ... and I will have NONE OF IT, ha ha!
Nunavut: 3 syllables with the emphasis on the 1st syllable, and the u's are pronounced like the oo in foot. Try it: NOO-na-voot
Iqaluit: 4 syllables with the emphasis on the 2nd syllable, with the u pronounced differently, more like the oo in food than in foot. Try it: i-KA-loo-it.
That's it for today's lesson :-)!
Keep up the great work - you're the cherry on top of my weekend :-)!
Thanks Ed and JD for a wonderful podcast as usual. Love the banter as usual (btw how can I sponsor banter instead of an ad?).
I loved the comparison between Her Majesty's travels and His Holiness' as well as recommendations for leaving to go to an annointing of the sick (there must be ways to ensure the need is actually legitimate just in case His Holiness calls Father's bluff, right?).
Also the O Canada segment was quite enlightening.
JD, I'm now getting very disappointed in the lack of limerick. I demand a Vatican trial limerick! You promised! And I shall keep hounding until you fulfill that promise.
Also I need a level head to help with the Liturgy Wars saga.
Thanks for all you do.