Divorce

[PRmerger]

Same thing.

If it’s the same thing, Luv, then by your reasoning he gave “the boot” to his wife, then, right?

 

[bstorm]

Good post. Are these projected scenarios discussed in Cana conferences? Because, if they are not, they should be.
I doubt that many understand that even if your spouse is unfaithful to you and all that that implies (shame, betrayal, lack of income, raising kids by yourself, having a poorer life than your ex who has gone on to marry and have additional children) you cannot wed again even if you do divorce. WOW…wonder how many would still marry?

Everybody would still marry, because something like that will never happen to them.

 

[PRmerger]

Christ said due to unfaithfulness one can divorce.

Actually, what is written is that one may divorce due to porneia, which is an illicit marriage. It has been mistranslated to be “unfaithfulness.”

And it doesn’t even make sense that Jesus would say that you can divorce if you commit adultery–that means that all anyone needs to do to divorce “licitly” is to cheat on his wife with his honey. Then he can say, “Wife, I am divorcing you, and Jesus said, since I cheated on you, that I am now permitted to divorce you!” :whacky:

Also, just a friendly request that you learn how to use the quote feature.

Check out this thread to learn how: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=7783

 

[joanofarc2008]

I would suggest looking at an appeal. Since I think you were under the erroneous belief that adultery was grounds for decree of nullity there is a possibiltiy that you did not focus enough of your case on the time of your marriage. This is something you need to look at with a priest or a Canon advocate. At this point the system in England is probably a bit different than the one here and appeals are complex. It is that simple though that if you are serious this is probably your best course of action. God bless and good luck.

 

[fm1982]

And it doesn’t even make sense that Jesus would say that you can divorce if you commit adultery–that means that all anyone needs to do to divorce “licitly” is to cheat on his wife with his honey. Then he can say, “Wife, I am divorcing you, and Jesus said, since I cheated on you, that I am now permitted to divorce you!”

I think the concern, certainly my concern, is when the innocent person is forced to suffer for trying to follow the teachings of the Church. I would argue that the “cheater” probably isn’t thinking about what Jesus said when they are committing the act, nor are they looking for an excuse to “legally” divorce their spouse. They are showing that they don’t really care. It would be easy enough for the Church to “bind on Earth” that the cheater cannot legally remarry while the victim can.

On the other hand, the victim is being told, tough luck, either live in a relationship with no trust where you are miserable, or live alone and (possibly) be miserable.

In my case where the threat is sterilization or divorce (or abortion) (there is mental illness involved as well), if I choose to follow Church teachings on the matter, instead of the guilty spouse forcing the sterilization, the Church is essentially co-conspiring because at the end of the day if I follow Church teaching I will be effectively sterilized anyways (if she leaves, I cannot remarry, therefore will never have any more children).

We are not in the world of the past where men owned their wives (fortunately), nor are we in societies where people are “shamed” into working out their differences rather than just walking.

If you play with legalese enough, Catholic divorce can be called a Decree of Nullity. Loving, civilly married couples are not going through this process, only those who want to separate. After going through the dirty battles in the civil arena, the Church expects those who have already been harmed to drudge up as much 'dirt" as they can before the marriage to show that it was “invalid”. I would argue that very few people when they get married truly understand what marriage is in terms of the “forever” aspect of it. When you’re young and “in love” forever sounds like a good idea, but do you really, truly understand it? I would argue vigorously that at 23 years old (the age I got married) I had no sweet clue what “forever” “better or worse” meant, just like my wife didn’t understand what “open to children” meant.

To me it seems “cheap” to bring up issues from 6 or 7 years ago (and in many cases more than that) to get a Catholic “divorce”. This is one area where some serious thought needs to go to see if the Church’s current stance truly reflects the teachings of Jesus.

 

[Sillara]

Sometimes when someone sins, an innocent suffers. If someone hacks my arm off, it may seem “unfair”, but I have to go through the rest of my life missing an arm.

If my validly-married spouse abandons me (through divorce or adultery or what-have-you), it may seem “unfair”, but I have to go through the rest of my life alone.

I was Protestant when I married, but even then I understand there could be no remarriage after a divorce. I knew perfectly well that if my husband cheated on me, I would either have to find some way to reconcile or else live alone.

I was 22. It is perfectly possible not to “completely grasp” what marriage will be like but still to know what it is.

It is not the Church who is at fault here. It is the adulterous spouse. It is the adulterous spouse who is forcing the innocent to live alone and lonely. And once the innocent spouse “remarries”, then he is in the same boat; he, too, is committing adultery.

 

[aicirt]

I think the concern, certainly my concern, is when the innocent person is forced to suffer for trying to follow the teachings of the Church. I would argue that the “cheater” probably isn’t thinking about what Jesus said when they are committing the act, nor are they looking for an excuse to “legally” divorce their spouse. They are showing that they don’t really care. It would be easy enough for the Church to “bind on Earth” that the cheater cannot legally remarry while the victim can.

On the other hand, the victim is being told, tough luck, either live in a relationship with no trust where you are miserable, or live alone and (possibly) be miserable.

In my case where the threat is sterilization or divorce (or abortion) (there is mental illness involved as well), if I choose to follow Church teachings on the matter, instead of the guilty spouse forcing the sterilization, the Church is essentially co-conspiring because at the end of the day if I follow Church teaching I will be effectively sterilized anyways (if she leaves, I cannot remarry, therefore will never have any more children).

We are not in the world of the past where men owned their wives (fortunately), nor are we in societies where people are “shamed” into working out their differences rather than just walking.

If you play with legalese enough, Catholic divorce can be called a Decree of Nullity. Loving, civilly married couples are not going through this process, only those who want to separate. After going through the dirty battles in the civil arena, the Church expects those who have already been harmed to drudge up as much 'dirt" as they can before the marriage to show that it was “invalid”. I would argue that very few people when they get married truly understand what marriage is in terms of the “forever” aspect of it. When you’re young and “in love” forever sounds like a good idea, but do you really, truly understand it? I would argue vigorously that at 23 years old (the age I got married) I had no sweet clue what “forever” “better or worse” meant, just like my wife didn’t understand what “open to children” meant.

To me it seems “cheap” to bring up issues from 6 or 7 years ago (and in many cases more than that) to get a Catholic “divorce”. This is one area where some serious thought needs to go to see if the Church’s current stance truly reflects the teachings of Jesus.

If your wife was not open to children, then, I certainly would think, your marriage would be null or however it is to be expressed. Ditto if she entered into it knowing she was going to continue a relationship with someone else.
We have a situation with a family member whose wife told him after three years of marriage that she didn’t want children which was a good thing at the time considering she was having an affair. Getting a letter from her regarding this was seen as a possible advantage by the priest to whom he spoke.

 

[muffindell]

I’m sorry that I’ve caused so much anger, it was not my intent. I still attend mass at my local church, the priest blesses me instead of having commuinion. I feel hurt that I am a marked man within the RC church. My wife is Church of England and we also attend service there. My daughter from this marriage was baptised a RC, we will equally teach her the ways of a Christian. My ex-wife remarried and divorced again a few years later, she been with several partners since then.
It’s interesting to note that you get married in front of god and no one can undo that, yet canon law can find a way to see it unvalid; in effect they must have a direct line to God.
Since I was married the second time in a C of E church and the RC church does not accept it’s existence or at least the validity of it then I suppose I’m not married again in the eyes of God, just civilly, so does this mean I can actual take Holy Communion after all?
Jesus taught for the day, using language applicable to 2000 years ago, I wonder how things would look now and what language he would use. I somehow think things would be different.
It’s obvious from some of the comments on this subject that there is a great deal of passion for the subject. I wonder how many of you that that are critical of my actions actually live exactly by the teaching of the RC church, I doubt that you do, that is because God knows that will try to follow the teaching of his son, Jesus, but also knows from time to time we will not get it right. On those occasions he will forgive us and help us see the correct path again. I can’t see why this can’t be applied to my situation, but then again I expect to be told otherwise.

 

[mamaslo]

I am wondering if any of this discussion is helping the OP. I agree with the Church. I am in an irregular marriage, and waiting and living as brother and sister…to a person who feels the way the OP does, he is not Catholic. His annulment may be denied just by the mere fact that OH did not take it any other way than offensively. So we may end up living as brother and sister forever…because he didnot prove that the marriage was invalid.

The thing that I wonder if the OP realizes is that the marriage tribunal is a legal process with spiritual and physical consequences. An appeal would be a good idea. I have a gut feeling that the reason it was not granted is that maybe he did not understand what had to be proven in order to be granted an annulment. If you realized at the time the consequences you live with now, and are heartbroken over, then maybe you would have done the legal part differently…given more detail. See if you can try again. The church didn’t reject you, they just said…you have not given us enough evidence to prove otherwise that your first marriage was invalid. Just like any other legal process in the world.

The next time make sure you employ someone who can help you better. Priests are good but not generally lawyers. Sir, see what you can do to try again, and they are going to go back to the time leading up to the day of the wedding. that is what witnesses are for, so get as many as possible.

I know it is painful, but it may be possible that your facts did not come across as reasons that are acceptable. Often, the proof is in the puddin’…in other words buy the book 1ke suggested, it may help you reorganize your case.

You did choose to marry in an irregular marriage. Marriage itself is a prayer offered up to God, and if it is considered adultery for you to be there, how can it be a prayer? I am not saying that as a judgement but as a question to you…your current wife deserves the purity as do you. It is a difficult situation, you love her, and your family. At one time you loved your first wife, and maybe there is healing already taking place there, but you need to look at it all again and see if there is anything you can do…as if your life depended on it…and that of your current wife.
peace.

 

[GraceDK]

I would presume that, given that infidelity was present, there must be more to the story of why the petition to annul the marriage was denied. Mind you, I’m not asking for those details – I don’t need to know (nor should it be posted on a public forum), and I don’t know how annulments tend to resolve themselves there (in Britain?), but there has to be more to the story.

I’m sorry that things didn’t turn out for you as you might have hoped.

Did the Church turn its back on you, or did you leave the Church?

Im surprised how many here write they are Catholics yet don’t know that the
validity of a marriage is decided at the time where the marriage is entered.

A person can do nasty things later on, but this doesn’t mean their spouse has the right to “dissolve the marriage”.

Marriage is valid when entered or not at all.
The OP’s was valid when he entered it.

The adultery comitted by his spouse does not relieve him from his own duty to stay faithful. Instead of respecting Church authority he had also comitted adultery and taken another person with him into this fall.

…

Sorry OP, but if you wanna receive the Eucharist you gotta study what the Church teaches, also about that Biblical passage. Not what later invented Christian groups say. Its a known fact that some Protestants precisely go out and openly commit adultery with someone they later fell in love with, in order to be released from their valid marriages. This of course is not condoned by the Lord who in His Word compares marriage to his own Covenant love.
You are bound by Canon Law, and I hope you will get in contact with some good Catholic priest who will explain your situation to you.

Reconciliation is possible so that you can receive the Sacraments again, but only if you seriously attempt to repent from your sin and really try to understand what the church teaches and why she has taught so for 2000 years.
If you do not recognize the Catholic Church as the Church Jesus founded, and the teaching authority of the Church as such, you should not receive Eucharist, but openly step out.

I know this is not the answer you were hoping for but I wont give you any nonsense

 

[muffindell]

Just one more question, where in the bible does it say that I can’t receive Holy Communion?

 

[PRmerger]

Just one more question, where in the bible does it say that I can’t receive Holy Communion?

Firstly you’ll have to show where in the Bible it says that everything we proclaim and believe about God has to be found in the Bible.

 

[Luvtosew]

I don’t believe most of you know God, but you know the Cathechism.

How did a person running for office of the presidency become a Catholic in 2008?

Where do you think David is now, he was a murderer and an adultress?

What about people who cheat on their spouses, go to confession and then receive communion.

Do people not get a second chance in life?

there seem to be several posters who just love to condem other humans and put them in the ground, stomp on them and tell them how horrible they are.

 

[muffindell]

PRmerger, sorry it’s such a difficult question, but everything we know about God and Jesus is in the bible, there is no alternative record - or did I miss something?

 

[GraceDK]

Just one more question, where in the bible does it say that I can’t receive Holy Communion?

The Bible says clearly that if we partake of the Eucharist unworthily then we endanger ourselves.
It happens to every one once in a while that they don’t receive Eucharist because they know or believe that they have a grave sin on their conscience, and they need to go to confession/repent from that sin in order to be reconciled with the Church family before they can receive Communion.

The real questions you should ask yourself is:

-What do I believe is the Church? is it a spiritual gathering, with no borders, where everyone can interpret Scripture by themselves ? (Protestant stance)
-By what authority does the Church teach anything/interpret Scripture?
-Do I believe in this authority?
-If I do not believe that the Church is whom she says she is, and has the authority she claims to have, then why do I care? Why do I even wanna partake of her Sacraments and not as well the un-institutionalised Lords supper in evangelical churches?

Look, I think you have been put in a very tough spot, and that you have put yourself in a very touch spot too, where you wanna rebel and rationalize the choices which you made.

As a convert to Catholicism I am happy that the nature of Marriage is respected in the Catholic Church. I come from Lutheranism which is on a slippery slope downwards, people get married there many times in the churches, they have no unified teaching… even they started to bless “homosexual unions” in their churches because they feel sorry for the homosexuals.

The road to hell is full of good intentions… and as anyone of us know, our own emotions can oftentimes be made into idols. I know its NOT the easiest choice to be Catholic. You are Catholic because you believe the Catholic Church is the Church with the KEYS, or you leave. Being Catholic is not easy… and it hasn’t been for me. Yet its one of the greatest gifts God has given me.

 

[PRmerger]

PRmerger, sorry it’s such a difficult question, but everything we know about God and Jesus is in the bible, there is no alternative record - or did I miss something?

Everything we know about God and Jesus comes from the Church, muffindell. Not the Bible.

The Bible does not say that everything we know about God and Jesus is in the Bible, so that’s a curious thing for you to propose. Its contradictory, no?

 

[PRmerger]

Do people not get a second chance in life?

Of course people get a second chance in life. No one here is proposing that we don’t.

What we are saying is that if you are married to someone, you cannot get married to another person. That’s called adultery.

I cannot change what Jesus said, even though I would very much like to.

So, if a person cheats on his wife, let’s say, and continues to cheat on his wife, he ought not receive communion. You agree with that, yes?

 

[PRmerger]

I think the concern, certainly my concern, is when the innocent person is forced to suffer for trying to follow the teachings of the Church.

I daresay, fm, that if anyone is following the teachings of the Church,* he’s going to suffer. *

That should not be a criterion for dismissing that which Jesus taught–“But Jesus, I’m going to suffer if I take off my cloak and give it to someone who has none!”

 

[GraceDK]

PRmerger, sorry it’s such a difficult question, but everything we know about God and Jesus is in the bible, there is no alternative record - or did I miss something?

The Catholic Church wrote, gathered (in 382 AD), interpreted and preserved the true Canon of Schripture until this day.
To believe in Scripture is logically to to believe in the Church, if one has any historical awareness.
The church wasn’t born yesterday. What was born yesterday was a culture where impurity and infidelity is called normal.

Watch this:
This is what God calls us to when it comes to marriage. Its WILD and it takes heroes… here is Todd White, an evangelical who was saved from a gansterlifestyle, and he talks about a real marriage where everything went real BAD… yea, as bad as it did for you…
youtube.com/watch?v=CAGwH4L10s4

 

[PRmerger]

because at the end of the day if I follow Church teaching I will be effectively sterilized anyways (if she leaves, I cannot remarry, therefore will never have any more children).

No, fm, you will not be sterilized. You will simply not have produced offspring.

Sterilized means you have interfered with your reproductive organ’s purpose.