Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pope Francis says half of marriages today are invalid. He's wrong.
The Week ^ | 5/20/14 | Michael Brendan Dougherty

Posted on 05/22/2014 7:38:39 AM PDT by BlatherNaut

T o much fanfare in the press, Pope Francis has started a "dialogue" about the Catholic Church's marriage practices. The part that has received the most attention is whether civilly divorced and civilly remarried Catholics should be admitted to Holy Communion, without having to abandon their second marriage, which the church recognizes as continuing adultery. This issue will be addressed by the bishops of the Catholic Church at a "Synod on the Family" over this year and next.

Unfortunately, the pope's favorite theologian and the pope himself have initiated this discussion in a befogging cloud of pessimism. The pope is said to have speculated that 50 percent of Catholic marriages are invalid, which is to say they were somehow deficient in form (how the sacrament was conducted) or in intent (the couple didn't intend to marry as the church teaches) and thus are eligible for annulments. Such a dire assessment reeks of high-handed clericalism. Worse, it amounts to the pope doubting not just the sincerity of many Catholics, but the grace of God himself.

First, some background. On the one side there is the Catholic Church's doctrinal watchdog, Cardinal Muller, the German prelate leading the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, who fired a pre-emptive shot last year. The words of Christ forbid remarriage, and the theology of the church proclaims that the marital union reflects the faithfulness of Christ to the church. As Muller put it, "Faithfulness to marital consent is a prophetic sign of the salvation that God bestows upon the world."

On the other side, the pope has raised the profile of another German theologian, Cardinal Walter Kasper, who for 30 years has been tub-thumping for marriage reform, saying it is a kind of mercy. He holds that while civil remarriages cannot be recognized by the church, asking the civilly remarried to abandon their second marriage or be excluded from communion is untenable. During a media blitz earlier this month, Kasper revealed to Commonweal magazine the pope's eye-popping assessment that half of Catholic marriages are likely invalid.

But when Cardinal Kasper was confronted with the arguments of his opponents — namely that others in a state of mortal sin are required to confess their sins and make some kind of change to remedy their state of life — he balked at the suggestion that the civilly remarried should be required to live according to the church's teaching, that is, with sexual fidelity to the first, valid marriage. "To live together as brother and sister?" he asked. "Of course I have high respect for those who are doing this. But it's a heroic act, and heroism is not for the average Christian."

This is exactly where the game is given away. In the cardinal's theology, there are "average Christians" who cannot be expected to live up to the Christian ideal of marriage, even though it was their vocation. The pope's own reported view that 50 percent of marriages may be invalid is another sign that clerics at the highest level of the church regard the vocation of family as simply beyond the reach of many of the church's members. Kasper continued, "Many canon lawyers tell me that today in our pluralistic situation we cannot presuppose that couples really assent to what the church requires. Often it is also ignorance."

In other words, Christians are too confused and ignorant to know what a marriage is. They do not understand or take seriously the vows they make. Poor things. This dire reading of the signs of the times allows the "solution" that reformers like Kasper have been demanding, a de facto abandonment of the church's teaching on the indissolubility of marriage. And it justifies this change — or at least, smooths its reception — by too eagerly embracing a conservative premise: The culture of marriage has gone to the dogs.

Even contemplating this reform indicates how far we are moving away from a Catholic Church that used to bestride the world with confidence, recognizing and affirming the goodness of marriage, even marriages made outside itself. Instead we are being confined in a more crabbed and doubting institution, one that dismisses many of the extant marriages within the church as no more sure than a coin flip.

Perhaps the cardinal should speak more plainly. He is not defending the dignity of "average Christians"; he's condemning many of his co-religionists to a life as semi-Christians. His idea of mercy is to tell believers that, in view of the way things are — pluralism and all that — there's no need for them to live as Christians have lived before them. Come to Communion, but leave Christian heroism to the experts.

My prediction is that the synod will issue a document strenuously claiming to affirm the indissolubility of marriage, while instituting a practice that contradicts it. The remarried will be encouraged to examine their consciences and consult with pastors in the hope of having Communion. The practical effect will be a new perceived "right" for the divorced to approach the altar, and much acrimony for any pastor who objects in any case, not only from his parishioners, but from his bishop as well.

In the context of adjudicating annulments, Polish Bishop Antoni Stankiewicz said that any view that dismisses so many unions as invalid reflects an "anthropological pessimism" that would hold that "it's almost impossible to get married, in view of the current cultural situation." If the pope's view is that 50 percent of Catholic marriages are invalid, it is not just an insult to our natural human ability to marry, but also an insult to St. Paul, who said that the moral law is written on men's hearts. And it's an insult to God's grace to imagine that our own age is somehow different, that we cannot depend on God's help to live out the vocations He gives us.

If marriage is, as Cardinal Muller holds, a reflection of God's faithfulness to those He loves, then the obverse holds as well. As such, Cardinal Kasper's belief amounts to nothing less than a slur on God's fidelity. If Christians can't expect God to help them live the married life, if they cannot expect him to be faithful to His promises, why the fuss if we are not faithful to our own?


TOPICS: Catholic
KEYWORDS: popefrancis
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-77 next last

1 posted on 05/22/2014 7:38:39 AM PDT by BlatherNaut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BlatherNaut
I am beginning to think that Francis is to the Catholic Church as Ubama is to the United States.
2 posted on 05/22/2014 7:39:51 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum ("The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the government." --Tacitus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlatherNaut

“If marriage is, as Cardinal Muller holds, a reflection of God’s faithfulness to those He loves, then the obverse holds as well. As such, Cardinal Kasper’s belief amounts to nothing less than a slur on God’s fidelity. If Christians can’t expect God to help them live the married life, if they cannot expect him to be faithful to His promises, why the fuss if we are not faithful to our own?”

This last paragraph is total B.S.


3 posted on 05/22/2014 7:42:26 AM PDT by babygene ( .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

“I am beginning to think that Francis is to the Catholic Church as Ubama is to the United States.”

On some issues I would agree. However on this one, I think the 50% number thrown about in very conservative. It’s probably much higher.


4 posted on 05/22/2014 7:46:16 AM PDT by babygene ( .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BlatherNaut

Mennonites and Amish hold to the same premise.

If you are divorced, you cannot remarry. If you do, their point of view is that you are in a state of perpetual adultury as long as you remain remarried while any prior spouse is still living.


5 posted on 05/22/2014 7:46:32 AM PDT by Westbrook (Children do not divide your love, they multiply it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Westbrook

I agree as well. That is actually the Christian position.

The Messianic Prophet John lost his head over it.


6 posted on 05/22/2014 7:49:25 AM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: BlatherNaut

The Church has been requiring many weeks of Pre Cana instruction of engaged couples for at least four decades now.

If half of all resulting marriages are invalid, somebody is screwing-up BIGTIME there.


7 posted on 05/22/2014 7:50:16 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlatherNaut

Unfortunately, the author engages in a logical fallacy, post hoc, ergo propter hoc.

While Cardinal Kasper makes the statement about heroic virtue, the statement isn’t equivalent with the Pope’s statement.

When one looks at how many Americans are civilly married, it is likely that half have no serious commitment to “... death do us part,” nor to procreation. In those cases, and ONLY from a religious point of view, can those marriages be considered invalid.

I don’t agree with Cardinal Kasper. However, I do agree that marriage and Holy Matrimony haven’t been taken seriously. I also agree, that is likely there are an enormous amount of marriages that are/were “defective,” by religious standards. However, I don’t really know what to do about it.


8 posted on 05/22/2014 7:52:54 AM PDT by SpirituTuo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog
“The Church has been requiring many weeks of Pre Cana instruction of engaged couples for at least four decades now.
If half of all resulting marriages are invalid, somebody is screwing-up BIGTIME there.”

I absolutely agree.

9 posted on 05/22/2014 7:59:23 AM PDT by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: BlatherNaut

I gotta tell ya, not a big fan of this pope.


10 posted on 05/22/2014 8:00:39 AM PDT by longfellow (Bill Maher, the 21st hijacker.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SpirituTuo

“However, I don’t really know what to do about it.”

IMHO, you do your best to do what you believe is right, and put your faith in God’s wisdom and mercy. No one on the planet can read the mind of God, and we are every one of us fallible. Marriages fail. It’s a fact, and a sad one at that. My parents, on the other hand, stayed together and nearly destroyed each other over a lifetime - and the profound pathology led to child abuse. What can you say?


11 posted on 05/22/2014 8:06:30 AM PDT by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: BlatherNaut

So one should stay in a union where violence, domination, intimidation, covert hostility and complete lack of communication are daily grinds?

if so, it’s appalling that shooting the offender for the sake of peace is unlawful.


12 posted on 05/22/2014 8:08:15 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously-you won't live through it anyway-Enjoy Yourself ala Louis Prima)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlatherNaut
Me thinks that Men (and woman) live in a broken world. The prince of the power of the air deceives night and day without relenting.

Many people fall into the snare of sin and temptation. Many fall prey to their own emotions rather than the spiritual guidance of a Holy G_d. Spiritual blindness if you will.

People will make poor choices throughout life. G_d calls them back time and again. As for catholic dogma, it seems that the only un-forgiven sin is divorce/remarriage.

Even priest that betray the trust of an innocent can be restored to the sacrament, but unfortunately not the once young couple that grew apart, not those who were not truly compatible, or those who fell to weakness and committed sin against their partner are ever forgiven and restored according to church teaching. Very unfortunate.

G_d is so much bigger than all this. His grace extends to those who have messed up. It's all about being sin focused or grace focused.

13 posted on 05/22/2014 8:11:35 AM PDT by servantboy777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle

“I absolutely agree.”

I went through this instruction 46 years ago, and it amounted to nothing except a social gathering with the girls showing off their diamonds.

(still married BTW)


14 posted on 05/22/2014 8:13:25 AM PDT by babygene ( .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

“if so, it’s appalling that shooting the offender for the sake of peace is unlawful.”

If you shot her/him you wouldn’t be banned from Communion...


15 posted on 05/22/2014 8:16:07 AM PDT by babygene ( .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
I agree. He really does seem to be lost.

There are too many good 2nd marriages around to say they're all wrong.

Pope Francis: Let's deal with the absurd and proclaim "there is no such thing as gay marriage".

16 posted on 05/22/2014 8:18:01 AM PDT by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BlatherNaut

“The words of Christ forbid remarriage” That is incorrect. If your spouse dies you are free to remarry another believer.


17 posted on 05/22/2014 8:18:43 AM PDT by sigzero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: babygene

Then again, I’m not Catholic.

I hold nothing against the church though.

Each doctrine has it’s own uniqueness but, were I ever to marry and have children, I have always thought it prudent to send my children to Catholic schooling.


18 posted on 05/22/2014 8:24:08 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously-you won't live through it anyway-Enjoy Yourself ala Louis Prima)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: BlatherNaut
My parents were both Catholic & both were married & divorced before meeting each other.

A timely donation to their church allowed everyone to....overlook....their past marriage histories.

19 posted on 05/22/2014 8:26:57 AM PDT by gdani (Every day, your Govt surveils you more than the day before)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: babygene
“I went through this instruction 46 years ago, and it amounted to nothing except a social gathering with the girls showing off their diamonds.”

Yes, I went through it with multiple other couples. They asked questions meant to lead to consideration about ‘issues’ that might pop up in a marriage. I remember them asking the general question: ‘True or False: Marry me, marry my family’. One guy answered: “That's right. You marry me, you marry my mamma”. Don't know how that one worked out, but if the right questions are asked, these things can have practical significance.

20 posted on 05/22/2014 8:42:02 AM PDT by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: servantboy777

Great post, and I agree entirely.


21 posted on 05/22/2014 8:43:38 AM PDT by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Vendome
There's a difference between divorce (which may be just a civil procedure) and divorce/remarriage.

A husband or wife may have, not just the right, but the moral responsibility to separate from their spouse, esp.in cases of abuse. Even if the separation is accompanied by a civil divorce, no moral fault is incurred.

That is, unless a second marriage is attempted. Then --- as Jesus Christ Himself said (three times, in Matthew, Mark, and Luke)--- the second union be adultery as long as the original spouse is still living.

22 posted on 05/22/2014 8:43:52 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Make love. Accept no substitutes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: BlatherNaut
"The pope is said to have speculated..." is in itself a wrongful speculation. To put that in the headline as if it were fact, is unjust, a falsehood.
23 posted on 05/22/2014 8:47:00 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (To err is human, but to really screw up requires digital technology.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Good catch. Speculation is NOT fact!


24 posted on 05/22/2014 8:51:43 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: BlatherNaut

There are MANY marriages that are illegitimate in the ‘Christian’ world today. No doubt about it.


25 posted on 05/22/2014 8:57:27 AM PDT by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

“There are too many good 2nd marriages around to say they’re all wrong.”

That all depends on your definition of “good”. God made it pretty clear they don’t fit His definition.


26 posted on 05/22/2014 9:02:19 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: BlatherNaut

My son’s marriage ended in divorce after 4 months when his “wife” had an affair, dumped his stuff on the curb, changed the locks and moved her boyfriend in all before any divorce was final. I was troubled by this and spent some time discussing the situation with an old priest who was a close friend and formerly served on the diocese marriage tribunal. His advice was that an annulment in such an extreme case would likely be readily granted almost by filling out the paperwork.


27 posted on 05/22/2014 9:07:01 AM PDT by The Great RJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

I know in both Mathew’s and Mark’s Gospels the question of divorce/remariage is covered, but Luke’s?


28 posted on 05/22/2014 9:13:56 AM PDT by Biggirl (“Go, do not be afraid, and serve”-Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau
"There are too many good 2nd marriages around to say they're all wrong."

You're right if you mean second marriages where the first on was brought to a close by death. You're right if you say 2nd marriages in which the first one was no-marriage, invalid.

But you can't be right if you mean a second marriage where the first marriage vows were valid, and the valid spouse is still living. This is said to be, ongoing adultery, something God hates (Malachi 2:16) and your argument here is not with Canon Law, but with Matt. 19:3–8; Mark 10:2–9; Luke 16:1 --- which is to say, with Jesus Christ Our Lord.

29 posted on 05/22/2014 9:18:49 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (To err is human, but to really screw up requires digital technology.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

Typo. I mean Luke 16:18.


30 posted on 05/22/2014 9:22:36 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (To err is human, but to really screw up requires digital technology.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl

Luke 16:18 “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.


31 posted on 05/22/2014 9:23:55 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (What does the LORD require of you, but to act justly, to love tenderly, to walk humbly with your God)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Thank-you for the Luke posting.


32 posted on 05/22/2014 9:25:21 AM PDT by Biggirl (“Go, do not be afraid, and serve”-Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
"...the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery"

Surely this implies w/ conjugal relations, or the intent to do so, which isn't always the case (i.e. Josephite marriage). Some here argue that a Josephite marriage has to be approved in advance but I believe God's mercy is bigger than that. I married a divorced woman.

For some reason, reminds me of the humorous St. Augustine quote: "Make me chaste and continent, but not yet."

33 posted on 05/22/2014 9:40:08 AM PDT by steve86 ( Acerbic by nature, not nurture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: steve86
Yes, it certainly implies conjugal relations: if there's no adulterous act, it's not adultery.

That's why "adultery" wouldn't be applicable if the man and woman were living as brother and sister. I had never heard that a "Jospehite" marriage has to be approved in advance, but there's a lot of stuff I don't know ---I'm no canon lawyer.

34 posted on 05/22/2014 9:47:07 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (What does the LORD require of you, but to act justly, to love tenderly, to walk humbly with your God)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: BlatherNaut

The answer to this I believe, is to get rid of the tribunals and the Church annulments. They have been corrupt every since they were established.

The Church should leave it up to the conscious of the individual as to whether the original marriage was valid or not. It is, after all, the two people involved who really know the answer to the validity anyway.

Yes they could lie about it but they would be lying to themselves, and that’s hard to do... You could I suppose lie in the confessional as well, but you’d only be hurting youself in doing so.


35 posted on 05/22/2014 9:49:55 AM PDT by babygene ( .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
"The pope is said to have speculated..." is in itself a wrongful speculation. To put that in the headline as if it were fact, is unjust, a falsehood.

Note the source, which the author links: "Merciful God, Merciful Church An Interview with Cardinal Walter Kasper"

"Kasper: That’s a real problem. I’ve spoken to the pope himself about this, and he said he believes that 50 percent of marriages are not valid. "

https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/kasper-interview-popefrancis-vatican

Kasper is quoting the Pope. If one were to apply the reasonable man test, this reference does not qualify as "wrongful speculation", "unjust" or a "falsehood". The fact is that his close associate, Cdl. Kasper, (whom he has publicly complemented for his "serene theology" in regard to this issue) is claiming to quote Francis. The Pope has a massive PR machine at his disposal, and it is well within his power to clarify or correct any misrepresentations made in his name. Yet he has not seen fit to do so. Therefore it is unreasonable to make the charge that the reference is speculative or dismiss it as false.

36 posted on 05/22/2014 10:06:09 AM PDT by BlatherNaut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

I must say that I am not liking Pope Francis. Granted, I was spoiled by having Saint John Paul II, one of the greatest freedom fighters ever, followed by a no nonsense Pope Benedict but Francis has me scratching my head.


37 posted on 05/22/2014 10:40:52 AM PDT by Finatic (Sometimes I think it would be nice to just get it on and get it over with. Once and for all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BlatherNaut
Thank you for that clarification. That really is germane -- makes a difference.

Next I would like a clarification from Card. Kasper on why he thinks it was his role, and not Pope Francis' role, to air this shocking speculation to the public; and why the Church (everywhere? In all Dioceses? On all continents?) has been blessing invalid sacraments for the majority of its faithful? And for how long: since 1983? Since 1965? Since 1054?)

Officiating at or participating in pseudo-sacraments (such as with women simulating a pseudo-Liturgy) incurs automatic excommunication. Am I to think that a fair percentage of priests and bishops are going to be deprived of their faculties for blessing pseudo-marriages? Or, alternatively, for catechetical and pastoral malpractice?

Really, this is all too much.

38 posted on 05/22/2014 11:13:06 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (What does the LORD require of you, but to act justly, to love tenderly, to walk humbly with your God)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: BlatherNaut
By the way, Catholic World Report says that the United States, with 6 percent of the world’s Catholics, accounts for 60 percent of the Church’s annulments. Nice time for all the remaining Jean Jadot and Pio Laghi episcopal heads to roll, may we hope?

But seriously, that ain't happenin'. Let's just deal a sickening blow to the soul of all marriages, so that the majority of marriages are presumed invalid rather than valid. That'll shore up marital stability for sure.

39 posted on 05/22/2014 11:18:19 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (What does the LORD require of you, but to act justly, to love tenderly, to walk humbly with your God)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

So one would be stuck living their lives as Paul.

Great.


40 posted on 05/22/2014 11:30:53 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously-you won't live through it anyway-Enjoy Yourself ala Louis Prima)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: gdani
A timely donation to their church allowed everyone to....overlook....their past marriage histories.

Yep. Plenty of those stories around. It's an open secret that annulments can be "bought" in many diocese(es?)

Quite a separate issue from "50% are invalid" though.


41 posted on 05/22/2014 12:38:48 PM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

That’s bad? Living like a saint?


42 posted on 05/22/2014 1:05:55 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (What does the LORD require of you, but to act justly, to love tenderly, to walk humbly with your God)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Me likey weemens.

I’m a sinner.

I suck.


43 posted on 05/22/2014 3:36:24 PM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously-you won't live through it anyway-Enjoy Yourself ala Louis Prima)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Dr. Edward Peters wrote a good article on that fact (that 6% of the world’s Catholics get 60% of the world’s annulments) some years ago. He mentioned, among other things, that Americans have telephones that work, and automobiles, and can drive to the chancery over roads that don’t have IED’s planted in them, etc.


44 posted on 05/22/2014 4:55:04 PM PDT by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: BlatherNaut
The pope is said to have speculated that 50 percent of Catholic marriages are invalid, which is to say they were somehow deficient in form (how the sacrament was conducted) or in intent (the couple didn't intend to marry as the church teaches) and thus are eligible for annulments.

If you consider intent alone, 50% doesn't sound unreasonable.

For a marriage to be valid, both the husband and wife must intend:

1) a lifetime commitment to each other --at a minimum, never to remarry.

2) openess to children. At a minimum, they must be open to the possibility of children at some time during their marriage.

How many nominal Catholics say to themselves at the time of their wedding, "if this doesn't work out, I can always get a divorce."

How many nominal Catholics never intend to have children?

Then add in all of the nominal Catholics who marry outside of the faith who could easily fall into these two categories.

45 posted on 05/22/2014 5:11:04 PM PDT by St_Thomas_Aquinas ( Isaiah 22:22, Matthew 16:19, Revelation 3:7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vendome
So one should stay in a union where violence, domination, intimidation, covert hostility and complete lack of communication are daily grinds?

In an abusive relationship, the Church permits civil divorce, but not remarriage, assuming that the original marriage was valid. A civil divorce is considered separation.

Additionally, an abusive personality could be indicative of a psychological condition that could make a marriage invalid. But that's just an educated guess.

46 posted on 05/22/2014 5:17:19 PM PDT by St_Thomas_Aquinas ( Isaiah 22:22, Matthew 16:19, Revelation 3:7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: The Great RJ
His advice was that an annulment in such an extreme case would likely be readily granted almost by filling out the paperwork.

Her post-marital actions indicated a mindset that almost certainly existed prior to the wedding, i.e., that she did not intend a lifetime commitment.

The idea of null marriages seems very reasonable to me. I don't know why so many people have such difficulty with it.

47 posted on 05/22/2014 5:22:36 PM PDT by St_Thomas_Aquinas ( Isaiah 22:22, Matthew 16:19, Revelation 3:7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: babygene
Yes they could lie about it but they would be lying to themselves, and that’s hard to do...

Your experience with the human race is different from mine.

48 posted on 05/22/2014 5:24:30 PM PDT by St_Thomas_Aquinas ( Isaiah 22:22, Matthew 16:19, Revelation 3:7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas

Well, that would be an out.

pay the local bishop to declare them insane.

I’ll bet I can prove it too.


49 posted on 05/22/2014 5:43:48 PM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously-you won't live through it anyway-Enjoy Yourself ala Louis Prima)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

Surely there are some abuses. Who knows to what degree? But abuse doesn’t obviate the principle anymore than corrupt judges obviate the necessity of a criminal justice system.


50 posted on 05/22/2014 6:29:32 PM PDT by St_Thomas_Aquinas ( Isaiah 22:22, Matthew 16:19, Revelation 3:7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-77 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson