Heartbroken by divorce

[cecilia97]

Thanks for the correction Cecelia. Yes, her husband infideity is the real scandal. Its only my opinion that cooking for him in her home is not wise, and that he and others will take it as accomodating.

No, I think you’re right…just wanted to make it clear where the root of the problem lies.

 

[WICatholic]

I am not sure what number this post comes from… nor the author. I thought it was number 128, it isn’t.

I don’t know about Catholic ministries, but we all have the teaching of the Church, and She teaches the indissolubility of the marriage union.

It hard to find support when you are not in a marriage for whatever reason. I have not found a support group in the Church (only support), but not the reasons you are not in one, from what I surmiss. It seems to me that you are taking a stand against the Church as far as nullities being granted, and seek likeminded supporters. Correct me if I am wrong.

Are you saying that there is no Catholic ministry ie ‘support group’ for the divorced and separated? There was just recently a conference in Maryland for a HUGE one. That particular ministry does little to teach indissolubility, but a lot on how to get what they percieve to be an entitlement. There is little preparation on the possiblity of a Valid finding. There are books written that teach how to fill out the forms.

My stand is FOR, not against. I am FOR indissolubility and permanency of marriage. I am FOR honoring my vows made before God and mankind on my wedding day with my spouse. If you want me to get into a negative view of my stand, then I would have to say that my stand is against forced, unilateral ‘no fault’ divorce in which the Respondent has no due process, no right to defend the legal contract, much less the sacred covenant of Marriage. As part of that stand, I strongly disagree with the thinking of today that IF you make it to divorce court, your marriage could not have been Valid in the first place.

Others may not be protesting the Church’s wisdom on marriage tribunals, but may choose not to remarry for other reasons, like God’s calling in their life, or what’s best for the children. These people need support, too, and it seems there are many people in the Church who can support each other for their various reasons. If you are not finding a particular support group particularly for those who protest the church’s ruling on invalid marraiges (if that is what you are looking for), then maybe there is a reason for that.

This aspect of this thread began when Restore spoke of her stand for her marriage, and almost immediately it was suggested that she may be living in a fantasy world and enabling her husband to continue in Sin. This is not support, which is what JPII called for.

But it is psychoanalyzing. which is something that ‘we’ who live our vows get no matter where we go. It is also something that goes on entirely too often on this and on other Catholic forums (I don’t read those that are not Catholic). It is most often done by those without licenses, as well.

There *are *problems in our Church but God has not abandonned it. He gives you what you need. He knows what you need.

Maybe your non-Catholic friends need your Catholic support more than you need theirs. You have the fullnes of truth, they don’t.

If you are in fact taking a stand against the Church’s rulings on marriage validity, I think you have to be careful about pride, coming from thinking that your own wisdom and interpretations of scripture are superior to the Magisterium of the Church. As someone who was a practising Evangelical for so many years, I attest that there is a pride that comes with private scripture interpretaion and being your own private “magisterium”.

God does, yes, give us what we need. I have been standing long enough for my children to now have children older than they were when their Dad left.

I am not taking a stand against the CHURCH teachings on Nullity, but on many of the AMERICAN thinking. Again, I refer you to JPII

Eliza10:

If, instead, you are standing for the indissoluability of valid marraiges, including your own, because you believe it to be valid, then you are simply being Catholic - nothing more, nothing less.

Precisely. I am also living Catholic teaching on the indissolubility of Marriage. I am also living what I vowed to do on our wedding day. I am also living an example of this teaching for my children and grandchildren. I am not bragging. I am simply living what I was taught in Catholic school before no fault divorce entered our nation. The roots of that can be found in Communist Russia (hmm, what did Our Lady of Fatima say would happen with Russia’s false teachings?)…

But the question I originally posed to you, you haven’t answered - and I am still curious. I am referring to the question I put to you in Post#93, page 7 of this thread. I was responding to of Dulcissima’s who was responding to you. She wrote: "…There is all of the difference in the world between that and standing for a marriage that is valid but which one party left."

And I said, “* Yes. I don’t get the idea that WICatholic sees the difference?”*
(I am sorry I did not then make a separtate post addressed just to you when I asked you. I didn’t think that it might be offending. I’m sorry.)

Yes, I have answered that, but will again. ALL first marriages are to be presumed to be valid until proven to have been NULL. Yes, there are true reasons for Nullity. Most of what goes on today are not part of those reasons. They are things taught by Fr Wrenn, etc. JPII also expressed concern many times about the number of Null decisions from this country. **Many very valid marriages are being destroyed by no fault forced unilateral (and possibly unconstitutional) divorce. **

I also stated very clearly that I have a sister and a very good friend that have very honest and very real Null verdicts. And I have a daughter in a marriage that outside the Church, therefore not a Valid marriage due to Lack of Form. (I’ll add now, a sibling and many friends as well).

I am still wondering, are you against both invalid marriages where one party left, AND valid marriages that one party left? And, do you see a difference?

That said, my question to you is off-topic. If you want to answer by starting a new thread on the topic, I’d be happy to follow you there.

I have no way of knowing (nor do you) if any marriage is Null.

Now, do you want to phrase this just a little differently and say are there legitimate reasons for a verdict of Null? Yes. Not the number handed down in the US, however, for many of the reasons used as grounds.

Regarding your comment about pride and the Magisterium:
Are you under the impression that the US Tribunals are making infallible decrees that cannot be changed? If so, you are mistaken. At any time, as long as both live, if new information can be found that appears to disprove the findings of the Tribunals involved by either party, it can be brought forward. And either verdict MAY as a result be overturned.

How do I know this?

I have a friend who has successfully defended his marriage three times, with Valid findings. Three times. Has this been accepted by anyone other than him? Not by his spouse, nor by the priests she talks to. Instead, he has just been notified that another appeal is being initiated. She is still living with her lover in a non-valid second marriage (and being told to use Internal Forum so that they can recieve the Eucharist) in spite of Valid findings three times.

Do I want to start a new thread? Nope. I just want to see less of Henry VIII’s thinking, and more of Katherine’s (Catherine’s).

God bless!

 

[WICatholic]

Ok, my confusion is cleared up. It was post #127 by Eliza10. This is #128.

Dulcissima asked Norcal (the OP) if it might be possible that she might be living a fantasy because of some of her choices. I said that I had the same thoughts. Meaning: I agree, she should question herself on this. I stated further that the non-denom organization she is turning to is Evangelcial Protestant and has untruths mixed with truth, and I don’t reccommend it as a support group for that reason. She is Catholic and complete wisdom is available in the Catholic Church.

My stand is exactly what hers is, and my stand is based on Catholic teachings, and Jesus’ very clear words 4 separate times, Paul’s statement in 1Cor7 to the married that he says comes from the Lord Himself. My stand is very similar to that of Queen Catherine’s was when Henry decided to divorce her and name another Queen in her place (her letter is online)… but even her stand was based on teaching of the Church from long before she lived.

I will take the support of whoever stands with me for whatever reason as long as it is in line with the teachings of the Church. MANY Catholics stood with Randall Terry in Operation Rescue. Did you know that Randall is now Catholic? MANY Catholics stood with Dr Bernard Nathanson ( he is now Catholic as well). MANY Catholics supported Norma McCorvey ( Norma is now Catholic also). Not once did anyone try to tell me that I should not pray with them, stand with them, agree with them about the teachings against abortion because they were not Catholic and did not have the fullness of the Faith.

But I did hear many Catholics tell me that they felt that abortion should be legal in cases of incest, rape, health of the mother, and that though they were personally opposed, they could not make the choice for the woman involved… who had correct Catholic teaching on abortion?

Dulcissima also talked about enabling, and I did too. I think treating her husband to home-baked dinner in her home on a weekly basis (or even at all) when he has left the marraige and is living in an adulterous relationship with another woman - with whom he is raising a baby - is good reason to suggest she is enabling him to keep on with his sin. Its not a wise move, IMO*. It protects him from any normal consequences of sin. It seems to be seriously lacking boundaries. Seriously. If she wants them all to get together with their children, then straying hubby should treat them all to dinner in a neutral place, like a restaurant. Seriously. Straying hubby just might be gloating to himself or others that he has two women; that his ex makes him a nice dinner in her home each week. He might not see it as his wife being nice, but his wife being stupid, or him making a conquest with his charm.

RESTORE isn’t his ‘EX’. That is a term that depersonalizes the first, and perhaps only spouse. How he sees it isn’t important. What IS important is how God sees Restore. What is important is that Restore lives out what she vowed. She only answers to HIm for what she does. Part of her vocation (and what she will answer for) is how she treats her husband, and how seriously she takes her part in helping to lead him to salvation.

*Some might do this to make the other women jealous (I’m not saying Norcal is doing this). This would very likely make the other woman jealous, since she has a baby with the husband and feels he is her rightful claim. But uncharitable motives, even when understandable, can’t be expected to lead to good.]

On Gregory Popcaks show on Ava Maria Radio today, he quoted St. Gregory the Great who spoke on people that are too nice, and too quiet, who ought to speak up and protest when their toes are stepped on, for the good of the soul of the other person. It made me think of Norcal.

Greg and Lisa Popcak could be asked by Norcal for their wisdom about her situation on their radio program. I think you can email questions. She would get truly wise, truly Catholic advice.

I think you mean Restore, not sure. But Restore does not need further counseling/advice, etc, anymore than the rest of us who live our vows no matter what Man says in divorce courts. We ask, instead, only for what JPII said that we should be receiving from our pastors and fellow Catholics.

I hope you don’t mind my asking, but have you ever taken these repeated suggestions and your concerns about them to a priest somewhere in youir vicinity who is reputed to be good and holy, and told him your particular situation, and thoughtfully considered his counsel?

I have been asked this so many times by so many Catholics. Each thinks that no one else has thought of it, I guess.

I have spoken to many priests over my lifetime. I have spoken to many priests about our divorce. I have had some stand with me, and I have had some tell me that I ‘have a right to an annulment and happiness’. No one has a ‘right’ to an annulment. No one can guarantee happiness. Only I can make myself happy in any circumstance I find myself in.

The Deacon for our son’s wedding knows of my stand. He knows of my concern’s for my children. He spent the rehearsal AND the homily at the wedding speaking clearly about the permanence and indissolubility of marriage, much to the distress of my husband. (By the way, his civil wife told our children that they cannot receive the Eucharist because they are not married in the eyes of the Church, but are living in sin. She told them that long ago. Her own mother lives HER vows after man’s divorce…)

WICatholic, I think you and I have a lot in common except for what I perceive in your thinking (correct me if I have jumped to a wrong conclusion), which is that there is something inherently wrong with the Marriage Tribunal.

That is a judgement I personally wouldn’t make until I have gone through the actual process. If then I felt something was inherently wrong with it, based on that experience, I would address my concerns with a respected and holy Priest and see what he had to say on the subject.

The US Tribunal is not infallible. I don’t need to have an abortion to know that abortion is wrong. I don’t need to ‘go through the process’ to know that there is something wrong in the US system. I have only to read JPII and other Popes, and know what the roots of no fault, forced, unilateral divorce is. I have only to refer to long-standing Catholic teaching.

I also should not have to continually explain choosing to live my vows to fellow Catholics, or to Christians of any sort.

But perhaps you have already done this. And we may be veering off-topic, so as I said above, if you wanted to start another thread on this subject, I would follow you there.

Even if I hadn’t, 1 Cor 7:10-11 clearly tells us that Jesus Himself told us to remain single or reconcile. I can guarantee you, however, that most of us that live our wedding vows have spoken to many people over the length of time that we have been faithful to them, and many of those people are priests.

We don’t need more counseling. We need what JPII said that we have a right to.

Sometimes, instead, our stand really makes others angry…

God bless!

 

[WICatholic]

*And while I am on the topic, I will say another thought I had - and that is that Restore’s actions can cause scandal. Others on the outside will see her as having tolerance and/or aceptance for his behavior. They will think this, and say this to others, and people being the way they are, no one will probably go to her to get the real story on her motives. So the actions will stand exactly how they look to others, and that is the scandal.

Scandal? No. Treating another human being as a human being is NOT scandal even if the person is your ‘former’ spouse. Her motives are not wrong. How it looks to others is twisted, if this is what is judged as scandalous… The SCANDAL is the adultery, the divorce, the child born out of wedlock. That is ‘accepted’ today, but is the true scandal.

 

[Eliza10]

I am not sure what number this post comes from… nor the author…

Glad I am not the only one to mix thing up.

Are you saying that there is no Catholic ministry ie ‘support group’ for the divorced and separated? There was just recently a conference in Maryland for a HUGE one.

Yes, i am aware of those groups, but its not the kind of support I need. The impression I get is often they are supporting each others need to vent about the old marriage - I understand theneed to vent but I don’t have that need - and also so many are looking for the next date or spouse, and thats not my focus. Singles social nights are not what I am looing for.

I don’t know about the entitlement thing of which you speak, and when i am ready to seek an actual annullment, I don’t think I’ll need a support group for it.

…my stand is against forced, unilateral ‘no fault’ divorce in which the Respondent has no due process, no right to defend the legal contract, much less the sacred covenant of Marriage.

Yes, our society doesn’t care about Sacred Covenant, and no-fault divorce is a sad state of affairs.

… I strongly disagree with the thinking of today that IF you make it to divorce court, your marriage could not have been Valid in the first place.

But the Church doesn’t teach that. But I agree that some might assume that without knowing the Church’s teaching.

This aspect of this thread began when Restore spoke of her stand for her marriage, and almost immediately it was suggested that she may be living in a fantasy world and enabling her husband to continue in Sin. This is not support, which is what JPII called for.

I gave my honest opinion that what she is doing is not wise, and not reality-based. I don’t think error should be supported.

But it is psychoanalyzing.

No way! It is judging her actions! Not psychoanalyzing.

which is something that ‘we’ who live our vows get no matter where we go.

Perhaps you have misjudged your critics, as you just misjudged me.

…I am not taking a stand against the CHURCH teachings on Nullity, but on many of the AMERICAN thinking…

Glad you aren’t against the Church teachings on Nullity. Not sure what you mean by American thinking. But we do live in a society that grows a lot of people who are not ready to make vows they can understand and keep.

Yes, there are true reasons for Nullity. Most of what goes on today are not part of those reasons. They are things taught by Fr Wrenn, etc. JPII also expressed concern many times about the number of Null decisions from this country. Many very valid marriages are being destroyed by no fault forced unilateral (and possibly unconstitutional) divorce. …

Where do you get the idea that most of what goes on today are not nullities with “true reason”? You don’t have to explain it all if you don’t want - just send me to a website if there is one. Otherewise this is just an opinion that may or may not be true. I’d like to hear two sides on this issue**.**

…are there legitimate reasons for a verdict of Null? Yes. Not the number handed down in the US, however, for many of the reasons used as grounds…

Again, any research on this? I am not challenging you; you may have good reason to believe this,. But for me, having not researched this, I would need something more before finding a point of agreement with you on the matter.

http://www.regenerating-universe.org/ImagesGTF/Angelo’sJesus.gif

 

[marietta]

WICatholic:

Do you have a job?

marietta

 

[Eliza10]

Hi WICatholic, We agree on many things, like everthing that is the teaching of the Catholic Church! I also admired Queen Catherine both in Man for All Seasons and in the longer BBC production of Henrey VIII. I was very moved by her stance and of course sympathetic to it. Also I stand with Protestants on Catholic issues like abortion. Its great when we can find common issues with Protestants, who are Christians and separated members of the Church.

Yes, of course the Tribunal is not infallible and responds to newly uncovered facts.

Gee, it must be odd “claiming” your marriage when your husband is already married to someone else. I guess its not odd to you, because you have been doing it so long. So I guess I mean it seems odd to me. Not only you, but others that I read of on Restore’s nondenom website, whose said husbands are married to others, and have started new families, brought forth other children with other women, or just slept with one or more or many more other women.

I’m glad you have spoken to many Priests over the years about your issue of adhering to your vows. And as far as your stand “making others angry”, though I don’t see anyone angry on this thread, I can certainly see how it would the 2nd wife angry. Rightly or (more likely) wrongly, she must feel she has a claim on the man and your insistence its* your* claim must make you the focus of her constant ire.

I have a question for you, and this is personal so feel free not to answer, I won’t mind a bit. Or remove yourself personally from the question, and answer hypothetically. My question is, do you find it distasteful or least a grave risk to your entire health to consider physical intimacy with your husband ever again?

I would feel that I would be sleeping with… well, everyone he’s ever slept with, and everyone they’ve ever slept with - there’s where the distaste comes in - and then, there are all those STD’s out there, in shocking percentages, and who knows who had what, and, wow, I don’t think I want to get intimate with all that. Its just not natural.

But perhaps you and likeminded others like those at Restore’s ministry, where the policy is that every wife should take a stand and wait forever for the return of her husband after his escapades and marriages, have in mind a chaste brother/sister arrangement for the restored marriage?

Because I could not see any of this on any Q&A of Restore’s site. But I guess I know what Mrs. Steinkamp would say. She’d say its Gods will to take him back, and you must do His will and put those problems in His hands. And just keep praying him back!

But its personal, so feel free to ignore this question.

You also wrote:

…What is important is that Restore lives out what she vowed. She only answers to HIm for what she does. Part of her vocation… is how she treats her husband, and how seriously she takes her part in helping to lead him to salvation.

… But Restore does not need further counseling/advice, etc,
…

Well this is my one point of disagreement with you. Enabling and supporting sin leads one away from salvation because sin leads away from God. Also Restore linked and reccommended a Protestant Nondenom “ministry” on this thread as a place to turn for “Christian teaching” on marraige, and, wow, that point begs counsel and advice. That ministry has some big problems, and is not a place for Catholics. I will address that another time.

http://www.pallottine.org.au/images/Mother of Good Counsel_pw.jpg

 

[WICatholic]

Glad I am not the only one to mix thing up.

Yes, i am aware of those groups, but its not the kind of support I need. The impression I get is often they are supporting each others need to vent about the old marriage - I understand theneed to vent but I don’t have that need - and also so many are looking for the next date or spouse, and thats not my focus. Singles social nights are not what I am looing for.

I don’t know about the entitlement thing of which you speak, and when i am ready to seek an actual annullment, I don’t think I’ll need a support group for it.

You aren’t the only one, that is for certain…

You have made very similar observations as I have about divorced/separated Catholic groups.

I gave my honest opinion that what she is doing is not wise, and not reality-based. I don’t think error should be supported.

No way! It is judging her actions! Not psychoanalyzing.

We can agree to disagree on that point.

Perhaps you have misjudged your critics, as you just misjudged me.

Usually, they are not critics, but ‘concerned family/friends’ who only ‘want what is best for me’, and ‘want me to be happy’ because I ‘deserve to be happy and have someone so that I am not so lonely’, etc. Alone does not equate with Lonely. Comments llike afraid to move on, so hurt by what happened that I am stuck, living in a fantasy world, made a decision that did not work out the way you hoped it would and maybe God is now telling you it is time to move on, enabling, etc are all ways of saying that we are not facing ‘reality’. That all enters the realm of psychoanalyzing.

Glad you aren’t against the Church teachings on Nullity. Not sure what you mean by American thinking. But we do live in a society that grows a lot of people who are not ready to make vows they can understand and keep.

If this is a true statement, then they are also incapable of understanding what a contract is of any kind. There is nothing hard to understand. There is nothing new under the sun.

Where do you get the idea that most of what goes on today are not nullities with “true reason”? You don’t have to explain it all if you don’t want - just send me to a website if there is one. Otherewise this is just an opinion that may or may not be true. I’d like to hear two sides on this issue**.**

Again, any research on this? I am not challenging you; you may have good reason to believe this,. But for me, having not researched this, I would need something more before finding a point of agreement with you on the matter.

Start with Robert Vasoli’s book.
Read (esp JPII’s words, including the first news brief from Oct 1998) defendingholymatrimony.org/html/contents.html

Read Msgr Clarence J Hettinger’s work. Most of it can be found in Homiletic & Pastoral Review.
Those are just starters.

God bless!

 

[WICatholic]

WICatholic:

Do you have a job?

marietta

Is that any of your business? Does that information add anything to any discussion? Do you ask this of everyone that has a different point of view than you have?

 

[WICatholic]

Yes, of course the Tribunal is not infallible and responds to newly uncovered facts.

Gee, it must be odd “claiming” your marriage when your husband is already married to someone else. I guess its not odd to you, because you have been doing it so long. So I guess I mean it seems odd to me. Not only you, but others that I read of on Restore’s nondenom website, whose said husbands are married to others, and have started new families, brought forth other children with other women, or just slept with one or more or many more other women.

I don’t ‘name/claim’ anything, Eliza. Church teaching clearly says that man’s divorce can do nothing to separate us, and a second marriage attempted outside the Church is no marriage. Jesus Himself calls it adultery. Actually, his civil ‘wife’ told our children long ago what Catholic teaching is on the topic and told them that they cannot receive Communion because they are living in sin according to Church teachings. Her own mother also lives her wedding vows…

I’m glad you have spoken to many Priests over the years about your issue of adhering to your vows. And as far as your stand “making others angry”, though I don’t see anyone angry on this thread, I can certainly see how it would the 2nd wife angry. Rightly or (more likely) wrongly, she must feel she has a claim on the man and your insistence its* your* claim must make you the focus of her constant ire.

On the contrary… we get along quite well. She did not have anything to do with the divorce. We like each other, though we are not friends. She was never my enemy.

As for no one being angry on this thread…

I have a question for you, and this is personal so feel free not to answer, I won’t mind a bit. Or remove yourself personally from the question, and answer hypothetically. My question is, do you find it distasteful or least a grave risk to your entire health to consider physical intimacy with your husband ever again?

You are correct. This is not on topic, and is not something I am going to comment on in any way, either personally or hypothetically.

But perhaps you and likeminded others like those at Restore’s ministry, where the policy is that every wife should take a stand and wait forever for the return of her husband after his escapades and marriages, have in mind a chaste brother/sister arrangement for the restored marriage?

Women are not the only ones living their wedding vows after divorce, Eliza. MANY men are as well. I cannot speak about the organization you are referring to as I am not in any way connected to it. My stand began from my Catholic upbringing, my Catholic Catechism, my Catholic Bible, and my Catholic pastor long ago. Most recently confirmed by both the Deacon and the Pastor presiding at my son’s wedding. The Deacon’s entire homily (and his teaching at the rehearsal the night before) was on this very topic. The priest told me to never give up, because he had just witnessed a couple reconcile that he had been praying for for many years.

Well this is my one point of disagreement with you. Enabling and supporting sin leads one away from salvation because sin leads away from God.

We don’t enable the sin. We don’t support the sin. We don’t condone the sin. We are not in any way responsible for the sin. And our spouses know this very well.

 

[jules11]

I have read a great deal of this thread but not all, I just wanted to say to the OP, I am praying for you and everyone else that has had this terrible thing happen to them. I am right there in the thick of it too. Horrible nightmare that it is.
I am also wondering about the poster, SarahR… A question… how do you stay so cheerful in the midst of such a nightmare? And so recent too. A year ago?
I think I would almost die if I had to deal with what you are!
What a great attitude!

 

[marietta]

WICatholic:

Your curt response to my inquiry as to whether or not you have a job, which was added to this thread at 2:00 this morning, leads me to believe that perhaps you do not, as it seems you don’t have to get up terribly early to be somewhere in the morning.

I asked because you follow your own posts repeatedly with afterthoughts, which consumes a lot of time if done coherently - just wondered whether you had any time constraints on you or if CAF is more than a diversion for you. Some of us on this forum realize how seductive posting can be. And while regular contributions are welcomed, I sometimes wonder about the “protesting too much” nature of some posters.

If I asked this question of everyone who had a different viewpoint than mine, I would have to pose the question before every single post I submit!

I apologize if it feels like I jabbed a nerve with an 18-gauge needle. But it does appear that there’s a little inflammation surrounding the issue.

Just a clarification: the attitudes and suggestions you itemized as springing from “psychoanalysis” actually are more closely related to a psychotherapeutic approach to situation interpretation and problem solving. I am not splitting hairs here - I see nothing Freudian in a suggestion that perhaps you might want to lay down this exile, embrace life and move forward. Of course it is a choice! But labelling others’ concern as “psychoanalysis” diminishes their concern and good will toward you. And the notion that “maybe God is telling you it is time to move on” interests me, because your response is so vehemently dismissive. What if God wants you to have a rich, rewarding life? Is there a way you can better serve Him by accepting the abundance He makes available to you? You get only one shot at this life. Change is a tremendous amount of work laced with some considerable fear, all manageable if approached with God’s will for us in the forefront of our minds and hearts. Do you believe an implosion pleases God? I believe there is such a thing as suffering without purpose.

What kind of support do you need? Would you recognize it if it came and lay on your doorstep? Does support need to be wrapped in some sort of encyclical or dogma? Are you challenged or simply angry when a friend or family member suggests that you make a change in hopes that it will bring you serenity and maybe even a touch of joy?

Your story reminds me of Greyfriars Bobby He was a little Skye Terrier who lived with his master in Edinburgh. On Feb. 15, 1858, Bobby’s master died of tuberculosis. He was buried in Greyfriars Kirkyard. Bobby, who survived his master, John Gray, for 14 years is said to have spent the rest of his master’s life sitting on his master’s grave. Devoted. Inseparable even by death. That was Bobby’s choice.

Maybe this is your choice.

marietta

 

[Eliza10]

I don’t ‘name/claim’ anything, Eliza. Church teaching clearly says that man’s divorce can do nothing to separate us… .

I didn’t mean to offend you with the word “claim” – I claim my son as my own, and, he is. :yup:

Also, believe me when I repeat, as I have already said this to you, when you preach the Catholic teaching on the indissolubility to marraige, you are preaching to the choir. I’m 100% with you.

Actually, his civil ‘wife’ told our children long ago what Catholic teaching is on the topic and told them that they cannot receive Communion because they are living in sin according to Church teachings… .

?? She must have a screw loose. (unless you are saying she is referring to grown children living out of wedlock with lovers?)

…On the contrary… we get along quite well. She did not have anything to do with the divorce.
We like each other, though we are not friends. She was never my enemy…

It makes it a lot easier to like her and to get along quite well with her when she is not someone who was secretly carying on with your husband while you were married, and helping to plot how to hide it from you. Unfortuanately, that is the case with the woman in my ex’s life, whom my son spends time with. I never saw her as my enemy, but I can’t say I like her, or have any desire to “get along quite well” with her. I pray for her but limit conversation with her to as close to zero as possible.

…As for no one being angry on this thread…

? :ehh:

You are correct. This is not on topic, and is not something I am going to comment on in any way, either personally or hypothetically. …

Well of course. I should have never posed it as a question, but intead just shared it as my own thought.

…The priest told me to never give up, because he had just witnessed a couple reconcile that he had been praying for for many years…

Well thats fine news.

…We don’t enable the sin. We don’t support… condone … responsible for the sin. And our spouses know this very well.

I wasn’t talking about you, and I don’t know about the others included in the “we” you are thinking of. But my comment on enabling referred to a specific sitatution Restore mentioned. And when I read the website Restore linked, I perfectly understood why she would do the enabling behavior - its just what her minister/advisor/supporter tells her adherents to do.

 

[WICatholic]

WICatholic:

Your curt response to my inquiry as to whether or not you have a job, which was added to this thread at 2:00 this morning, leads me to believe that perhaps you do not, as it seems you don’t have to get up terribly early to be somewhere in the morning.

I asked because you follow your own posts repeatedly with afterthoughts, which consumes a lot of time if done coherently - just wondered whether you had any time constraints on you or if CAF is more than a diversion for you.
snip
I apologize if it feels like I jabbed a nerve with an 18-gauge needle. But it does appear that there’s a little inflammation surrounding the issue.

marietta

My ‘curt response’ was to a ‘curt question’ that was directed to me that neither fits the topic, nor adds to it in any way.

Each of my responses here has been to another post that was directed to me.

Marietta, I believe that I have hit a nerve, not vice versa.

As to your conclusion, again, it is none of your business, and is not germaine to the topic, but have you never heard of shift workers? God bless!

 

[marietta]

WICatholic:

Bingo!!

Aside: g-e-r-m-a-n-e

marietta

 

[WICatholic]

I didn’t mean to offend you with the word “claim” – I claim my son as my own, and, he is. :yup:

There was no offense taken, Eliza. You did not offend.

?? She must have a screw loose. (unless you are saying she is referring to grown children living out of wedlock with lovers?)

She has no loose screws, I assure you. However, she was not speaking to adult children, and she was speaking about herself and their father. She was speaking truth to them about her own situation, while our children were there for visitation. She took our children to Mass each Sunday that our children were there.

It makes it a lot easier to like her and to get along quite well with her when she is not someone who was secretly carying on with your husband while you were married, and helping to plot how to hide it from you.

Yes, it does. I completely agree with you.

I had to work through my own feelings about her, on a much ‘smaller’ scale. That took time. It did not happen overnight, but also doesn’t mean that there was no plotting/hiding/manipulation involved about the relationship.

God bless, Eliza!

 

[Eliza10]

… Usually, they are not critics, but ‘concerned family/friends’ who only ‘want what is best for me’, and ‘want me to be happy’ because I ‘deserve to be happy and have someone so that I am not so lonely’, etc. Alone does not equate with Lonely. Comments llike afraid to move on, so hurt by what happened that I am stuck, living in a fantasy world, made a decision that did not work out the way you hoped it would and maybe God is now telling you it is time to move on, enabling, etc are all ways of saying that we are not facing ‘reality’. That all enters the realm of psychoanalyzing. …

I do see your point. Other people’s advice often doesn’t hit the mark, and its true that “alone is not equal to lonely”. (Don’t we all know we can be sometimes lonelier in marriage than when alone). Such advice can hurt, but think also of the motive of the person advising. Marietta’s comment, above, is a good point to take into consideration:

"…But labelling others’ concern as “psychoanalysis” diminishes their concern and good will toward you. …"

I see real wisdom in that statement.

I said, “But we do live in a society that grows a lot of people who are not ready to make vows they can understand and keep,” and you replied:

…If this is a true statement, then they are also incapable of understanding what a contract is of any kind. There is nothing hard to understand. There is nothing new under the sun.

Nothing is new under the sun. But truly, some things are hard to understand.

I was dealing with Narcissist Personality Disorder - which is certainly nothing new under the sun but has only recently been given this label and diagnosis to help with understanding the pattern and the deep and twisted roots of this alternate way of experiencing reality. At least one other poster of this thread also has had this as a cause in their marriage for vows not being able to be made with full knowledge and consent.

These people cannot love - not themselves, and certainly not another. So they cannot “have, hold and cherish till death do us part” - not forever, not for one day, not for one hour. (But they can keep up a very convincing imitation of it for as long as they have to… and no longer).

They possess* no empathy.* None. Therefore they cannot even understnd the vow, although they can memorize it. Also the possibility of someone with this disorder ever changing is about as good as a pedophile ever giving up his habit. Success hasn’t been seen. Try learning about this disorder, WICatholic, and you will agree: some things are very hard to understand!

So I tell you that what I learned about my husband’s skewed reality explained why he and others like him do not have the capability to make vows with full knowledge. There are certainly other disorders and other reasons why others cannot as well, although I am not learned in them.

So we come back to what I believe we can agree on. Valid marriages are indissoluable.

…Start with Robert Vasoli’s book…

I looked it up on Amazon. Whoa. :bigyikes: $55.00 for the 264pg book. Published 10 years ago, but only* 2* customer reviews?? Apparently not a widely read book all these years.

First couple sentences from the Editorial reviews (colored emphasis mine):

Vasoli (retired, sociology, Univ. of Notre Dame) submits a severe critique of Catholic annulment as practiced by the Church’s American tribunals. The book’s running title, “Tearing Asunder,” is indicative of the caustic tone underlying his thorough academic documentation.

Hmm. Caustic tone.

Further down the page under product description, it says:

“Robert Vasoli points out… two-thirds…[of our annullments] are granted on ostensibly psychological grounds…” Hmm, I wonder if the scholarly Robert Vasoli would find narcissim hard to understand…

I think of Jonnette Benkovich and Greg and Lisa Popcak (and others). Scholarly may not be the first word you think of for them, but they are very intelligent and very learned. They also possess a high degree of spiritual discernment and superior human sensitivity. They do understand about the mind and how some people are just not capable of some things. I wonder how a conversation between one of these and Vasoli would go on this topic.

…
Read (esp JPII’s words, including the first news brief from Oct 1998) defendingholymatrimony.org/html/contents.html

Okay, he says we have too many annullments, so its good reason to believe we do. And its good reason to view my process, when it comes, with prayer and discernment.

I noticed that Pope JPII said in that link: "“The indissolubility of marriage is a teaching that comes from Christ himself,” he said, "and the first duty of pastors and pastoral workers is therefore to help couples overcome whatever difficulties arise."
One thing I know is, with Narcissim, pastors, pastoral workers, counselors, psychologists and psychiatrists have a near zero success rate trying to give any guidance to a Narcissist. They think they are just fine (better than you, in fact) just the way they are.

…Read Msgr Clarence J Hettinger’s work. Most of it can be found in Homiletic & Pastoral Review. …

Looks to have a very scholarly style of writing, not lite reading. But I’ll keep it in mind. Thanks for the refs.

http://www.spiritsite.com/gallery/art/medmar/BotticelliMadonna.JPG

 

[cecilia97]

Eliza, my heart goes out to you to hear that you’ve also had to deal with a narcissist in your marriage. I’m reading “The Wizard of Oz and Other Narcissists” right now and I can see my ex as well as a few people I’ve dealt with in professional situations. What an eye opener! And you’re right, a narcissist will hardly ever present him/herself to a psychologist for help. That would expose all the terrible “normal”, deeply flawed real self that they have spent their lives trying to hide!

I’m sure you know, but please be on the lookout for continued effects to your self-esteem from living with such a person.

As for WICatholic’s analogy of a marriage to any other type of contract…while I appreciate the sentiment, I do not agree that the analogy works. In fact, I think it belittles the sacrament a little bit to compare it to any other type of contract. What other contract involves God as one of the three parties? And very few other types of contract are lifelong. You contract to do a service for someone, or pay them a certain amount, or work for them for a certain length of time, or sell them something. A narcissist, for example, would have little problem with any of those type of things. But GIVING of himself for his whole life? SACRIFICING? I believe that’s not a word in the narcissist dictionary. And if they do it, they are doing it to make the beautiful facade look better.

BTW…I don’t know if my annulment was “average” or if there is such a thing…but there was not just one cause, we had six possible causes. I did not “allege” narcissism in my statements about my ex. I just described him as truthfully as possible, and it was the Tribunal who decided he might not have been able to contract marriage.

That’s something I think some misunderstand about the nullity process. You don’t necessarily get to choose a legal argument and then choose which facts to state in order to back it up. It’s very “black box” and fair, I think. You state your picture of the past, ex states theirs, and the experts make up the arguments for and against nullity and validity.

OK…sorry about the book on annulments.

 

[Zelie_Louis]

Due to the off-topic posting that has ultimately led to derailing the original purpose - and along with continued bickering, this thread is now closed.