Is civil divorce wrong?

  • Thread starter Thread starter rcwitness
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

rcwitness

Guest
We hear the question all the time these days! And “sometimes” the Church condones civil divorce as justified. But how do we know whether a divorce is justified or not? I have a proposition for those who are in a troubled Marriage and are either themselves considering divorce, or their spouse is threatening divorce. Ask your pastor to put in writing (his opinion) whether or not you or your spouse is justified or not to file, and do not file without being in a state of Grace.
 
Last edited:
Seems to me we rarely hear the question. If we (rightly) assume that a civil divorce is simply a legal and permanent separation, then your advice is very good. Indeed, I believe Canon law actually requires the Bishop’s approval. So starting with one’s pastor should be the first step.
 
Right, and I dont think that is a new proposition. What may be specifically different, is to ask the pastor to put into writing his personal judgment.

This way, their is an accountability for his advice.

When it comes to filing a lawsuit against your Christian spouse, I think we should not act without the Church.

However, even in the event of a pastor giving one spouse their approval to divorce, it should not mean they must. Yet, I believe we must have the approval of the Church to file a lawsuit against our Christian spouse.
 
As for Canon Law, i believe there is to be a Church sanctioned separation before any pastoral determination is offered (unless there is a danger in prolonging).
 
Last edited:
The Catechism gives us a brief article:

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a6.htm#2384

Divorce

[2382] The Lord Jesus insisted on the original intention of the Creator who willed that marriage be indissoluble.174 He abrogates the accommodations that had slipped into the old Law.175

Between the baptized, "a ratified and consummated marriage cannot be dissolved by any human power or for any reason other than death."176

[2383] The separation of spouses while maintaining the marriage bond can be legitimate in certain cases provided for by canon law.177

If civil divorce remains the only possible way of ensuring certain legal rights, the care of the children, or the protection of inheritance, it can be tolerated and does not constitute a moral offense.

[2384] Divorce is a grave offense against the natural law. It claims to break the contract, to which the spouses freely consented, to live with each other till death. Divorce does injury to the covenant of salvation, of which sacramental marriage is the sign. Contracting a new union, even if it is recognized by civil law, adds to the gravity of the rupture: the remarried spouse is then in a situation of public and permanent adultery:

If a husband, separated from his wife, approaches another woman, he is an adulterer because he makes that woman commit adultery, and the woman who lives with him is an adulteress, because she has drawn another’s husband to herself.178

2385 Divorce is immoral also because it introduces disorder into the family and into society. This disorder brings grave harm to the deserted spouse, to children traumatized by the separation of their parents and often torn between them, and because of its contagious effect which makes it truly a plague on society.

[2386] It can happen that one of the spouses is the innocent victim of a divorce decreed by civil law; this spouse therefore has not contravened the moral law. There is a considerable difference between a spouse who has sincerely tried to be faithful to the sacrament of marriage and is unjustly abandoned, and one who through his own grave fault destroys a canonically valid marriage.179
 
What do you think about my proposition?

That is, to seek a written statement from the pastor before we have a justified cause to file such a significant lawsuit?
 
In real life, this is a very little known Canon and I’d imagine that most pastors would not be aware of it let alone lay persons.
 
That’s a shame. They should! It’s very important!

That further supports my suggestion to seek their formal, written, advice regarding filing for divorce.
 
Last edited:
No doubt you are correct. Its unfortunate. Perhaps if we focused a little bit more on when divorce is actually allowed and making a couple go through a canonical process, people would have a natural and better understanding of why remarriage is not allowed. Now, the attitude seems to be: go ahead and get divorced, and only stress the fact that we can’t remarry. To many, it probably makes the restrictions on remarrying seem rather arbitrary.
 
tafan2 said:
No doubt you are correct. Its unfortunate. Perhaps if we focused a little bit more on when divorce is actually allowed and making a couple go through a canonical process, people would have a natural and better understanding of why remarriage is not allowed. Now, the attitude seems to be: go ahead and get divorced, and only stress the fact that we can’t remarry. To many, it probably makes the restrictions on remarrying seem rather arbitrary.
Click to expand...
Well said. The mentality is that civil divorce is always approved just because it is under some circumstances.
 
Little known, and not included as part of any marriage prep that I know. I don’t know if the parish priest would the one to make that determination as it seems to need to come from the local ordinary. Beyond that, if the Church wants to assert this right under canon law, it should educate couples from the very beginning.

I did search and found an article from 2009 that addressed this ame issue.
Should couples get bishop’s permission to separate?
 
The permanence of Marriage should be sufficient for Marriage prep.

If the local pastor is obligated to have the Bishop’s authority, them he can include that into his written guidance for the seeking spouse.

Or are you saying the spouse must go directly to the Bishop?
 
Last edited:
rcwitness said:
Or are you saying the spouse must go directly to the Bishop?
Click to expand...
Not at all. I think this, as with most issues should be discussed with a person’s pastor or priest.

I would not assume that education on the permanence of marriage is sufficient. At the time a future couple participates in these instructions, they are not usually thinking of the negative issues that may occur in the future. Additionally, although off-topic a bit, I’m not sure how much of the teachings are absorbed and taken to heart during this time of their life.
 
The article doesn’t say what how the Vatican responded to their letter. It is a very good article. However, I find it hard to believe its been more than 100 years since the canons were enforced. 100 years ago, Catholic divorce was still pretty darn rare and I would suspect that pastors and bishops would have been involved.
 
I took the article as the author’s thoughts and opinion rather than fact. It is a starting place for further search, if someone is inclined, just as the comments of why the canon law remained despite not consistently applied.
 
Yes, I agree. Having been through a divorce after thirteen years of marriage to a Catholic, and I was Protestant at the time, my ex didn’t want counseling or therapy to try to resolve our issues, nor wanted to speak to a priest. The mental state of someone considering divorce typically has at least one of them falling away from the faith. If neither party had fallen away from the faith, I doubt there would be much divorce.
 
And as it is, we have Catholics thinking the Church says divorce is permitted but just not remarriage.

My point of this thread, is to say that the Church needs to be involved more, so they are also responsible for these so called “assumed” justified divorces OR make an actual stand against them.
 
Some spouses will just divorce the other spouse anyway.

While my ex-wife no longer considers herself Catholic and never really has (she was baptized, but never confirmed) and I was not a practicing Catholic when we got married or much at all during our marriage, she would have divorced me regardless of the above. She would have divorced me if I didn’t participate in the divorce as this is a one side divorce state.

In a way I am glad that we didn’t go through the church to get married as I was able to just do a lack of form case with the church and am free to marry again. Please do not get me wrong, I would have stayed in the marriage had she not sought divorce and part of me still regrets that she did seek divorce.

I am just happy that I can remarry in the future and not sin because of something my ex-wife did that made remarrying a sin.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top