German bishops: most Catholics perceive Catholic teaching on divorce, remarriage as 'merciless' [CWN]

[TCEL]

Translation: divorce and remarriage is worse than murder.

Pretty disconcerting to think about, isn’t it? Of course circumstances affect all these things. But Jesus did say to not fear those who can kill our body, but rather our soul. Sacraments aren’t just contracts.

 

[GangGreen]

The issue is that people need to hear the hard truth.

What and why. First off priests need to have the guts to tell people that things are wrong and then explain why. The Church tells people that homosexual marriage is wrong. Yet, ask the average person why the Church says that and they don’t know. The Church says that remarriage is wrong, but ask the average person and they don’t know why. The Church comes off as the bully because people don’t understand it.

You can go on and on. The average Catholic shouldn’t think the answer just is “because it’s in the Bible” or “because the Church said so.” I’m sure the average person and even church goer thinks this way. The Church needs to teach theology to the laity and until that happens, then this is going to be an up hill battle.

 

[FollowChrist34]

Yes, that is what amazes me - not just dealing with secular society and media 24/7, but even reading entries on some of these threads. SO many people have NO idea what Christianity (and/or Catholicism) actually consists of and requires of us. They clearly don’t read the Bible, except for tossing around verses that they’ve spotted somewhere to make a particular point. You can immediately tell they’ve never seriously studied and contemplated either the Old or the New Testament. They equally have no awareness of the basic teachings of the Church found in the Catechism (and these are self-identified Catholics). No knowledge of any fathers of the Church. I know, I know: this is the fruit of 50, 60 years of post Vatican II activism, probably also just a general decline in Western education standards. Also, the sentimentality of it all: as long as we all feel good and are forgiven, it’s all cool, man. Personal responsibility, self-control, sin, remorse, penance, humility, conversion, all just really repressive negative conservative, trad ****, man. Whoa, hate speech man!

 

[Bklynguy]

There are few moral teachings of the church that are so utterly explicitly from the lips of Jesus himself as are those on the idea of divorce and remarriage.

I know the EO have somehow rationalized the practice, but when you read Jesus’ own words on the matter I can’t see how the catholic church could ever interpret them any differently than their plain meaning.

Jesus:
I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery.”

If you spin that away, you’ve dismissed Jesus as an authority. Sorry, not going to do it.

Very true. It is amazing how much those “Bible loving” Sola Scriptura Christians just sort of…skip right past that passage.

 

[TCEL]

I do think we need to learn to use honey though, and not put up unnecessary stumbling-blocks; without compromising the truth. It’s all a mess.

 

[Rence]

And this is why Catholics are not to interpret the Bible without reference to the Church. First, I do believe that the New American Bible is the Bible that is approved for in Mass use,.

Sure, the NAB may be “approved” for Mass use, but the Douay has been THE Catholic Bible ever since it was commissioned and published. And though I understand what you say about Catholics are not supposed to “interpret” the Bible without the Church’s teaching, however, it’s difficult to argue the point to someone educated and who can read, and who disagrees with this somewhat newer translation that came out in the NAB.

I mean, come on, to an outsider looking in to this CAF group, it simply looks like, “well we don’t like that translation, let’s make a ‘newer and updated’ one and call it the NAB”. Keep in mind my parents, grandparents, great grandparents, etc. used the Douay and nothing else. Now all of a sudden, it’s not correct? Not convincing to many.

 

[jilly4ski]

Sure, the NAB may be “approved” for Mass use, but the Douay has been THE Catholic Bible ever since it was commissioned and published. And though I understand what you say about Catholics are not supposed to “interpret” the Bible without the Church’s teaching, however, it’s difficult to argue the point to someone educated and who can read, and who disagrees with this somewhat newer translation that came out in the NAB.

I mean, come on, to an outsider looking in to this CAF group, it simply looks like, “well we don’t like that translation, let’s make a ‘newer and updated’ one and call it the NAB”. Keep in mind my parents, grandparents, great grandparents, etc. used the Douay and nothing else. Now all of a sudden, it’s not correct? Not convincing to many.

Of course back in our grandparents and great-grandparents day, divorce was hardly allowed at all, and remarriage unheard of, except in cases of widow/widowerhood. So maybe our grandparents and great-grandparents understood that phrase better then current people who are “educated” and can read?

 

[Rence]

I think people percieve it as ‘merciless’ as they don’t know how annulments work, or what the annulment process is like. Which I don’t really know either so I am unsure whether I think it merciless or not.

The biggest problem for me is, I have an uncle, who is not Catholic, and has been previously divorced, he is married now with his wife who has also been previously divorced, they raise 3 kids together (1 biological to the father and the other two biological to the mother), they are a happy family.

Now the problem lies here, He is Christian (not sure what protestant denomination) but not Catholic, and if I were to teach him and invite him home to the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, what would be expected of the Prodigal son in order to return home? would the Church demand the break up of this household?

The other problem, I don’t know whether entirely true or not, but if a married woman’s husband has an affair on her, or vice versa and she divorces him, I don’t believe it is entirely right to say she can never marry again as Jesus did say “unless they commited a terrible sexual sin.”

I think this is where most people are at, and where they think the Church is merciless towards those who have been wronged.

But I don’t really care about whether I think it okay or not, I only care about whether Christ would think it okay or not.

But we’re not talking about those here on CAF. We’re talking about people in general, and you have to be honest and say that in general, people don’t look at the situations above so legalistically.

I believe on one hand we need to show mercy and provide a way back home for all those divorced and remarried couples who didn’t realise the gravity of “till death do you part” and now realise the error of their previous ways, while on the other hand we need to emphasise the gravity of “till death do you part” for all newly weds/those entering marriage.

Again, I think that’s where most people are at. And again, we’re not talking about a group of people on CAF, but the population out there in the real world in general. If we’re going to be honest, people in general don’t perceive the breaking up a family in order to enter the Church doesn’t seem merciful. Actually it doesn’t even sound “right” to most people in general. And the article isn’t about a group of people on CAF, but about a population of people elsewhere and can apply to those everywhere.

May I ask what advice you guys would give regarding the situation above about my uncle? would this prodigal son be required to break up his household in order to return home?

There is no way we can know that. He would have to apply for an annulment, and the previous marriages would be examined by a tribunal, and yes, if there was no impediment to both of the first marriages they would be considered valid, while the second/present one would be considered not valid and he would be expected to divorce. I’ve heard of the option of living with his current spouse as brother and sister for the sake of the kids – not an acceptable option to most people living out there in the real world, and again, perceived as cruel.

 

[Rence]

The first problem here is that most English Bibles mistranslate Matthew 19:9. If you look at the parallel passages in Luke and Mark there is no mention of an exception for adultery/fornication/unchaste behavior, etc. The word actually used in in Matthew 19:9 is not the Greek word for adultery, *moicheia, *but rather the word porneia. As I understand it in that usage it means unlawful in the sense of prohibited marriages. In essence Jesus was saying divorce was only allow in cases such as marriage between blood relatives because they were never true marriages. Using your translation above the “terrible sexual sin” would be incest not adultery or an affair.

And the above would be perceived by most people not on CAF, and actually out there in the real world, as bogus. If the above were true, they would have put it in the original translation. It’s not like they weren’t scholars who didn’t know how to translate. They had years and years of training and the translation was approved by the Church and put out for the masses to use as THE Catholic bible.

If you read the report the issue is not that many people don’t understand annulments, but rather that they believe that they had valid marriages that simply fell apart. In other words they reject the idea that marriage is a permanent bond that only ends in death.

I think that’s true as well of most people, not just the population in Germany discussed in the article. But I think it’s much harder for people in general to accept these legalistic teachings in situations in which marriages didn’t merely fell apart, but where there was abuses and real wrongs happening.

 

[Rence]

Of course back in our grandparents and great-grandparents day, divorce was hardly allowed at all, and remarriage unheard of, except in cases of widow/widowerhood. So maybe our grandparents and great-grandparents understood that phrase better then current people who are “educated” and can read?

OR, generally speaking, if there was abuse or adultery in a marriage,our grandmothers and great grandmothers of years past couldn’t do anything about their situations at home because they were dependent on their husbands for everything and would have been out in the street if they were divorced. But that’s a whole new thread

 

[manualman]

We need to get away from the fear that by accepting a sinner into the community of the Church we accepting the sin. We need to read the Gospels again and practice what Jesus did.

Sounds nice. What does it mean in practical terms though? Wave away the clear teaching of Christ himself (universally understood until the mid-1900s) and let divorced and remarried people do what they will with nothing said about the pesky sin? What’s the difference between that and endorsing gay marriage? Both allow people to do what they really want to do and in many cases are doing anyways. The case can be made that we’re driving them away with our “harsh and unmerciful” doctrine, no?

Or maybe that’s only in the short term. I’m not too impressed with what’s happening in protestant congregations that openly endorse divorce and remarriage and gay marriages. I’m not convinced they’ve really found the spirit of faithful fidelity that the post-pentecost apostles worked for in the church.

 

[JimG]

t seems to me that what is really merciless is for a man or a woman to enter into a lifelong bond without meaning what they vowed, or simply disregarding their vows at some later point and tossing aside the spouse for a newer model because the no-fault divorce laws allow them to break the marriage at will.

What’s really merciless is for adults to subject children to family breakup through no fault of the child.

I am not placing blame on any particular party. Some spouses are abandoned through no fault of their own; some have no choice but to leave an abusive situation. In that case it is the fault of the other spouse who is breaking the bond of marriage. But contrary to the presumption of no-fault divorce, it is usually somebody’s fault.

 

[Pulvis]

If I may add to JimG’s response, what is really merciless is to allow people to continue in an abject sinful state and fail to educate them as to the truth.

 

[YoungTradCath]

If I may add to JimG’s response, what is really merciless is to allow people to continue in an abject sinful state and fail to educate them as to the truth.

Not to mention the absolute zenith of uncharity.

 

[manualman]

Translation: divorce and remarriage is worse than murder.

What on earth are you talking about? I know people who converted from Christianity to non-Christian faiths. They’ve essentially renounced their baptisms. I know of nobody who considers them worse than murderers.

Perhaps you’re arguing that since a convicted murderer is allowed to receive communion in prison while a divorced and remarried person isn’t allowed to, that’s a judgment of severity of sin. Not. It’s a recognition of the difference for persistence in sin versus repentance for sin.

Maybe you’ve heard of this repentance thing? It’s a big deal in Christianity!

 

[TCEL]

What on earth are you talking about? I know people who converted from Christianity to non-Christian faiths. They’ve essentially renounced their baptisms. I know of nobody who considers them worse than murderers.

Perhaps you’re arguing that since a convicted murderer is allowed to receive communion in prison while a divorced and remarried person isn’t allowed to, that’s a judgment of severity of sin. Not. It’s a recognition of the difference for persistence in sin versus repentance for sin.

Maybe you’ve heard of this repentance thing? It’s a big deal in Christianity!

This. I still think it’s poetically interesting that the commandments against murder and adultery are next to each other. Not murdering does, of course, come first.

 

[TCEL]

Anyway, mercy implies there is something to be forgiven. We humans are so good at getting ourselves into messes, so we certainly need it. Even though it’s really hard, I’m at the point that I can’t imagine what its like to live without Confession.