[Maximilian]

Great to see you posting here. You may have noticed several previous FreeRepublic threads on the topic.

I saw some of your material in the Plain Dealer. I think it's great the way you are going after this issue.

You may however, want to figure out how to insert the links to the original web pages. If you have a web page devoted to "Defending Marriage," you should get the links working so that people can see them.

[Maximilian]

I find your writing above to be not very cogent. You don't answer your own question about who or what are attacking marriage. You can't say "divorce is attacking marriage." That sounds an awful lot like the "war on terrorism." There have to be actual people who are carrying out the terrorism, you can't wage war against a concept. Similarly, you can't launch a war against a concept like "divorce." You have to identify the causes and the sources of what has gone wrong, and identify who were the protagonists.

It looks to me like you still have an awful lot of thinking yet to be done.

[Maximilian]

Have you considered the question, "What kind of marriage is under attack?" Surely it is not the secular or even protestant institutions of marriage that are being attacked, since those include divorce. So divorce cannot be attacking an institution that includes the very device of divorce itself.

Next you might say, "It is Catholic marriage that is under attack." I'm afraid you might find out that you have been naive about this point. Catholic marriage today also includes divorce. You are probably well aware of the skyrocketing annulment rate that has resulted in tens of thousands of Catholic annulments.

1. The annulment proceedings cannot even be initiated until the civil divorce is final. So the annulment process automatically includes the divorce process.

2. Annulments are granted virtually automatically. A frequent poster on this board is Sinkspur, who is a deacon of the diocese of Dallas and has had experience with the canonical proceedings there. He has stated that he has never heard of an annulment application ever to have been denied.

3. The Roman Rota is the court of appeals in the Vatican. The head of the Roman Rota has written several articles stating that there are far too FEW annulments, even after the geometric increase of the past few decades which he has presided over. Here is his reasoning:
a)The "personalism" of John Paul II has raised the new concept of "the good of the couple" to a level where it is equal or even superior to the "good of procreation."
b)Traditionally an impediment to the "good of procreation" could be grounds for an annullment.
c)Therefore any impediment to achieving the "good of the couple" can be grounds for an annulment. Any marriage in which each partner does not sincerely wish the fullest development of the other can now be dissolved.

4. Pope John Paul II himself spoke about this situation in a recent speech to the Roman Rota. He told them that they had relied too much on "pastoral criteria" in making their decisions, and that "truth" must once again become one of the criteria for determining the validity of the marriage. Can you believe that? The pope admits that "truth" was NOT one of the criteria being used by the Roman Rota. They considered only the interests of the couple.

Let's recall, every time we speak of an annulment, by definition it was preceded by a civil divorce. And the Catholic Church recognizes it, and allows the couple to remarry. This has been happening tens of thousands of times in recent years. And when the Roman Rota evaluated these decisions, they did not base their reasoning on such antiquated concepts as "truth."

I am familiar with a couple who like you were in charge of a highly-visible Catholic apostalate. They had been married for over 20 years and had a large number of children. The wife became very interested in the "personalism" and the "theology of the body" of John Paul II. Next thing you know they have completed their divorce, and the wife is filing for an annulment. She claims that she is doing the right thing according to the most recent teachings of the Church. Perhaps she is not so wrong about that.

Which still leaves us with the question, "Just which institution of marriage is under attack by divorce, since we can see that the Jewish, the Muslim, the Protestant, the secular and the post-Vatican II Catholic institutions of marriage all include provisions for divorce.

[nickcarraway]

BUMP

[nickcarraway]

ping

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

Welcome to FR Bai. Hope you and your boys are hanging in there.

[Atheist2Theist]

Why don't you consider starting a true blog. You can get one up and running easily and free at blogger.com. If you are going to have multiple posts it would be nice to have one place where they could be read sequentially and it could be a central place on this topic.

There are currently not Catholic blogs on this subject at what is collectively known as St. Blogs. I am sure that Catholic bloggers such as myself would link to it and to be able to shed light on this extremely important topic in our culture.

[old and tired]

My wife and I are heartbroken to learn of your troubles. Please know that you, Bud, and your boys will be in our prayers.

[AskStPhilomena]

I hope I'm not lambasted as a "schismatic" for posting another article from "The Remnant", but I thought you may find the first half of this recent editorial interesting:
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/remnant/kerry.htm

[Salvation]

Maggie Gallagher: Traditional marriage will always prevail

Pope Says Marriage Is Between Heterosexuals

The Sanctity of Marriage

Ten Rules for a Successful Marriage

Doing What Christ Tells Us About Marriage

Divorce, American style: What if one mate says no?

Defending Matrimony