marriage and divorce

[jrhiggins]

I attended Mass 10/04 and the three readings where all centered on marriage, they where wonderful to hear. Our Pastor then got up and gave a Homily starting off by denying a request from the Bishops in our state concerning same sex marriage. He further went on to talk about inclusion, which was wonderful, and ended in saying that “Divorce, in and of itself is not a sin”

I was floored because this is the priest that is advising my wife and the rest of the parish which is rather large. I wrote him a quick email to verify what I thought I heard and I heard him correctly. I looked up the catechism of the RC church and quoted it to him as follows:

• "Divorce, for reasons other than safety and security however, is considered a grave offense because it “claims to break the [marriage] contract, to which the spouses freely consented, to live with each other till death” (#2384).

• “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.” (#2385).

He still insisted that the act of divorce was not sin.

I have two questions

Am I wrong in reading that “grave offense” is mortal sin?

What recourse does a parishioner have in correcting a priest projecting his opinion as the church doctrine?

Thanks for your time and God Bless

James

 

[Cristiano]

Maybe you are confused in your understanding of the Church doctrine!

Divorce is not intrinsically grave matter, otherwise the Church would have not added the condition of safety and security.

A moral disorder is not intrinsically a grave matter, otherwise people with SSA would be sinner even when being chaste.

You are trying to make an absolute statement when the Church does not say so. The priest could have added more qualifiers to his statement but probably he would have lost people.

Grave offense or grave matter is not mortal sin. It is only one of the three requirements for mortal sin.

Civil divorce is not sinful when the Church recognizes that the marriage was not valid since the beginning. In order to go through the process of annulment you must be divorced.

Having said that, I think that you are correct when you think that most of divorces could be sinful.

 

[Joe_5859]

Our Pastor then got up and gave a Homily starting off by denying a request from the Bishops in our state concerning same sex marriage.

Your priest was disagreeing with the bishops regarding same sex “marriage”? Am I correct in understanding then that the priest thinks same sex “marriage” is okay? I’d be far more concerned about this than his comments on divorce.

“Grave offense” does not equal “mortal sin.” For a sin to be mortal, it must be a grave offense, but it also must include full knowledge and complete consent. The person whose spouse cheats on them and leave them for someone else is not committing a sin by getting a divorce (though their cheating spouse certainly is). A woman who leaves an abusive husband isn’t committing sin either (as she is doing so for her safety and security as well as the safety of any children they may have).

I would also be kind of put off if my pastor gave a blanket statement that divorce was not a sin and offered no qualifications for that statement. It certainly is a sin in many cases, but often for only one of the spouses (unless both parties want the divorce for reasons other than safety and security).

I’m sure he was just trying to put people’s minds at ease, but I think it does them a disservice. These are the statements that stick with people for a long time. I know someone who put off getting an annulment for over 30 years because some well-meaning priest told them it was “okay” to be divorced and remarried.

 

[jrhiggins]

The true problem I have is my wife is seeking a divorce and using this priest as an advisor.

By definition divorce, absent exception by cannon law, meets all of these requirements.

1. its subject must be a grave (or serious) matter;
2. it must be committed with full knowledge, both of the sin and of the gravity of the offence (no one is considered ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are inborn as part of human knowledge, but these principles can be misunderstood in a particular context – for example, a Samurai committing seppuku would probably not have full knowledge, although suicide is grave matter);
3. it must be committed with deliberate and complete consent, enough for it to have been a personal decision to commit the sin.

I guess my point is that divorce is a premeditated action, there is no such thing as spontaneous divorce.

When I went to this priest for help, he turned me away and has indicated that no professional would involve themselves in a relationship in crisis. I often wondered why my wife would return from meeting with him more sure of her path until he made those statements.

 

[Cristiano]

The true problem I have is my wife is seeking a divorce and using this priest as an advisor.

By definition divorce, absent exception by cannon law, meets all of these requirements.

1. its subject must be a grave (or serious) matter;
2. it must be committed with full knowledge, both of the sin and of the gravity of the offence (no one is considered ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are inborn as part of human knowledge, but these principles can be misunderstood in a particular context – for example, a Samurai committing seppuku would probably not have full knowledge, although suicide is grave matter);
3. it must be committed with deliberate and complete consent, enough for it to have been a personal decision to commit the sin.

I guess my point is that divorce is a premeditated action, there is no such thing as spontaneous divorce.

When I went to this priest for help, he turned me away and has indicated that no professional would involve themselves in a relationship in crisis. I often wondered why my wife would return from meeting with him more sure of her path until he made those statements.

I do not know what the priest and you mean with the sentence “no professional would involve themselves in a relationship in crisis”. You also have to understand that women look at things in a different way and maybe she also heard only what she wanted to hear.

 

[Joe_5859]

The true problem I have is my wife is seeking a divorce and using this priest as an advisor.

By definition divorce, absent exception by cannon law, meets all of these requirements.

1. its subject must be a grave (or serious) matter;
2. it must be committed with full knowledge, both of the sin and of the gravity of the offence (no one is considered ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are inborn as part of human knowledge, but these principles can be misunderstood in a particular context – for example, a Samurai committing seppuku would probably not have full knowledge, although suicide is grave matter);
3. it must be committed with deliberate and complete consent, enough for it to have been a personal decision to commit the sin.

I guess my point is that divorce is a premeditated action, there is no such thing as spontaneous divorce.

When I went to this priest for help, he turned me away and has indicated that no professional would involve themselves in a relationship in crisis. I often wondered why my wife would return from meeting with him more sure of her path until he made those statements.

Ah, you are in my prayers! Sounds like a tough situation. I would recommend finding another priest ASAP to help you. If a priest can’t help you in situations like this, when can he help you!? It’s part of a priest’s job to help married couples work through their problems. There is no “pleading the fifth.” I’m really sorry you have to go through this.

 

[joandarc2008]

The true problem I have is my wife is seeking a divorce and using this priest as an advisor.

By definition divorce, absent exception by cannon law, meets all of these requirements.

1. its subject must be a grave (or serious) matter;
2. it must be committed with full knowledge, both of the sin and of the gravity of the offence (no one is considered ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are inborn as part of human knowledge, but these principles can be misunderstood in a particular context – for example, a Samurai committing seppuku would probably not have full knowledge, although suicide is grave matter);
3. it must be committed with deliberate and complete consent, enough for it to have been a personal decision to commit the sin.

I guess my point is that divorce is a premeditated action, there is no such thing as spontaneous divorce.

When I went to this priest for help, he turned me away and has indicated that no professional would involve themselves in a relationship in crisis. I often wondered why my wife would return from meeting with him more sure of her path until he made those statements.

I am sorry JRHiggins but you seems to be very quick to hear what you want to hear and become very confrontational - even toward your priest. Divorce in itself is not wrong - sometimes seperation is needed. I think you need to ask yourself are you acting in ways that your wife has felt that:

1. Her safety is in jeopardy if she stays
2. Her spiritual growth or the spiritual growth of her children are in jeopardy if she does not seperate
3. That you did not have a full committment or understanding to your vows when you took them (ie - are you cheating or crossing the line)
4. Are the grounds for anullment in your marriage because some of your/her actions have made it clear that one/both of you was not ready/willing to take the sacrament of marriage

If these things exist then no - divorce is not wrong. It is inevitable because while you may be civilly married the sacrament could be invalid. If none of these things exist then I wish you well holding your family together. Find another priest and bounce these things off of him. Right now it seems like one or both of you is hearing what you want to hear and picking out what suits you.

God Bless,

 

[jrhiggins]

Your correct that women look at things differently. My most recent revelation, I call it the “revelation of the obvious” is that the bible and scripture where written by men for men. I think if the bible and scripture were written for women it would be 1/4 of it’s current size. Men need the supporting wheeling and dealing of the supporting text, women get confused by it and end up creating exceptions. God is great at saying “do this and I will do that”, “don’t do this or this will happen”, perfectly tailored for a man. For a woman, it would just be do this or don’t do that.

 

[jrhiggins]

Wow Joan,

You seem to be quick in the confrontational area. Very quick as if you are offended by a man attempting to save his marriage. I chose not to mention the emotional affair my wife had with another priest as she was confirmed in 2008 also. Maybe you are my wife.

The only request I ever made of my priest was to promote a balance in her work that she did for the church (volunteering) and her attention to her home life (her children and her husband). He did the exact opposite, including her and asking of her more and more of her time. Giving her the escape that she wanted or at least thought she did.

I remain faithful and committed to my marriage, and while I cannot change her or make her love me, I can remain there for her giving love and being there should she decide to return and picking her up when she falls. I don’t believe many can know how difficult that is.

 

[daeve]

Maybe you are confused in your understanding of the Church doctrine!

Divorce is not intrinsically grave matter, otherwise the Church would have not added the condition of safety and security.

A moral disorder is not intrinsically a grave matter, otherwise people with SSA would be sinner even when being chaste.

You are trying to make an absolute statement when the Church does not say so. The priest could have added more qualifiers to his statement but probably he would have lost people.

Grave offense or grave matter is not mortal sin. It is only one of the three requirements for mortal sin.

Civil divorce is not sinful when the Church recognizes that the marriage was not valid since the beginning. In order to go through the process of annulment you must be divorced.

Having said that, I think that you are correct when you think that most of divorces could be sinful.

As a divorced Catholic, I find this very offensive. Maybe my husband was sinful in walking out on his family and moving in with a younger woman. The divorce guaranteed that he would assist in supporting his children.

There certainly are people who have committed grave sins, but many of us are innocent parties. Please don’t generalize.

 

[daeve]

Maybe you are confused in your understanding of the Church doctrine!

Divorce is not intrinsically grave matter, otherwise the Church would have not added the condition of safety and security.

A moral disorder is not intrinsically a grave matter, otherwise people with SSA would be sinner even when being chaste.

You are trying to make an absolute statement when the Church does not say so. The priest could have added more qualifiers to his statement but probably he would have lost people.

Grave offense or grave matter is not mortal sin. It is only one of the three requirements for mortal sin.

Civil divorce is not sinful when the Church recognizes that the marriage was not valid since the beginning. In order to go through the process of annulment you must be divorced.

Having said that, I think that you are correct when you think that most of divorces could be sinful.

As a divorced Catholic, I find this very offensive. Maybe my husband was sinful in walking out on his family and moving in with a younger woman. The divorce guaranteed that he would assist in supporting his children.

There certainly are people who have committed grave sins, but many of us are innocent parties. Please don’t generalize.

 

[joandarc2008]

Trust me- I am not your wife. I am much more forgiving. I have even forgiven abuse because there was a willingness to get help and change.

All I am saying is, yes, you have admitted to an emotional affair, which you didn’t admit to in the beginning - you started by degrading the priest and his homily, stating your wife believed it, and that your priest was not there for you. You left out your part in it.

Granted I don’t know you - but to me it seems like you are putting your best foot forward and worried about appearances on an anonymous internet forum. So what do you do in real life? Is it that maybe your wife is seeing things that you aren’t? Have you tried saying to her - “What would your grounds for anullment be?” in order to get a clearer picture of what she sees.

There are three sides to every relationship story: Her side, His side, and what actually happenned.

 

[Nec5]

daeve:
As a divorced Catholic, I find this very offensive. Maybe my husband was sinful in walking out on his family and moving in with a younger woman. The divorce guaranteed that he would assist in supporting his children.

There certainly are people who have committed grave sins, but many of us are innocent parties. Please don’t generalize.Your husband was sinful if he did that and broke his vows. This is why spending a good deal of time together and brutal discussion about marriage are important before marriage. It’s essential in this modernist time to minimize the chance that one or more the potential spouses turns squirrelly. There is no way to completely eliminate it because of sin’s appeal.

Assuming you put that effort into it before getting married, you are indeed a victim of a sinful person and deserve help/prayers. Even if you didn’t, he broke the vows. You did not.

Nonetheless, the majority of divorced people that I know do not share your situation. Generalizations are very useful if the problem is to be successfully combated. A stigma needs to be reattached to divorces. In your case, the stigma should squarely fall on the husband, and you should receive the aforementioned help.

Unfortunately, none of this is likely to change/happen.

 

[jrhiggins]

Trust me- I am not your wife. I am much more forgiving. I have even forgiven abuse because there was a willingness to get help and change.

All I am saying is, yes, you have admitted to an emotional affair, which you didn’t admit to in the beginning - you started by degrading the priest and his homily, stating your wife believed it, and that your priest was not there for you. You left out your part in it.

Granted I don’t know you - but to me it seems like you are putting your best foot forward and worried about appearances on an anonymous internet forum. So what do you do in real life? Is it that maybe your wife is seeing things that you aren’t? Have you tried saying to her - “What would your grounds for anullment be?” in order to get a clearer picture of what she sees.

There are three sides to every relationship story: Her side, His side, and what actually happenned.

Joan,

It was my wife that had the emotional affair with another priest. I do not hide behind an anonymous name and I’ve never tried to hide anything, Life and Christianity should be about putting your best foot forward, being more than you could be through God’s helping hand, we are not much without Him

 

[jrhiggins]

I attended Mass 10/04 and the three readings where all centered on marriage, they where wonderful to hear. Our Pastor then got up and gave a Homily starting off by denying a request from the Bishops in our state concerning same sex marriage. He further went on to talk about inclusion, which was wonderful, and ended in saying that “Divorce, in and of itself is not a sin”

I was floored because this is the priest that is advising my wife and the rest of the parish which is rather large. I wrote him a quick email to verify what I thought I heard and I heard him correctly. I looked up the catechism of the RC church and quoted it to him as follows:

• "Divorce, for reasons other than safety and security however, is considered a grave offense because it “claims to break the [marriage] contract, to which the spouses freely consented, to live with each other till death” (#2384).

• “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.” (#2385).

He still insisted that the act of divorce was not sin.

I have two questions

Am I wrong in reading that “grave offense” is mortal sin?

What recourse does a parishioner have in correcting a priest projecting his opinion as the church doctrine?

Thanks for your time and God Bless

James

I guess my original point was that all over the world as the same readings were being read in mass, the Homilies were in support of marriage, holding it high as a God created intention, something to be protected and worked on. My church sacrificed it to preach inclusion and acceptance. I never said Divorce was a sin, but Divorce in and of itself is a grave offense and it is premeditated. The conditions that make it not a sin are not included when you say “divorce in and of itself”.

from the catechism of the church:

Divorce, for reasons other than safety and security however, is considered a grave offense because it “claims to break the [marriage] contract, to which the spouses freely consented, to live with each other till death” (#2384).

I’ve also always been amazed how forgiveness is stressed and then the talk is over, yeah forgiveness is great but what about the cost of that forgiveness. We will all pay for our transgressions, either direct actions of omissions. It might be here on earth or in purgatory but even if we are forgiven we have to pay the price. I think a good analogy would be a God as a credit card company, each time we ask for forgiveness we just raise out credit limit, but in the end we still have to pay the bill

 

[joandarc2008]

Joan,

It was my wife that had the emotional affair with another priest. I do not hide behind an anonymous name and I’ve never tried to hide anything, Life and Christianity should be about putting your best foot forward, being more than you could be through God’s helping hand, we are not much without Him

My apologies - I read your post wrong.

Look, your wife did something that was not right. It may be SHE has realized that SHE was not ready to make the valid commitment to the sacrament. You both have a lot of work to do. If your priest cannot help you - I would get advice from your bishop as he should be involved in this situation as this priest may move on to other women later. How many times may he have done this before?

If she does leave- please consider an anullment - it will help with the good old fashioned Catholic guilt we are so good at and give you some validation that you are without sin in this.

 

[jrhiggins]

My apologies - I read your post wrong.

Look, your wife did something that was not right. It may be SHE has realized that SHE was not ready to make the valid commitment to the sacrament. You both have a lot of work to do. If your priest cannot help you - I would get advice from your bishop as he should be involved in this situation as this priest may move on to other women later. How many times may he have done this before?

If she does leave- please consider an anullment - it will help with the good old fashioned Catholic guilt we are so good at and give you some validation that you are without sin in this.

After 18 years of marriage and three beautiful children, I love my wife. The emotions that she had toward the priest, I don’t believe were returned, I don’t find fault with the that priest and have forgiven my wife. I’m very good at forgiving, a lot of practice, and I even forgive the priest who thinks that divorce is ok and a priest should not get involved. I would like to correct him before he does damage to others though.

 

[joandarc2008]

After 18 years of marriage and three beautiful children, I love my wife. The emotions that she had toward the priest, I don’t believe were returned, I don’t find fault with the that priest and have forgiven my wife. I’m very good at forgiving, a lot of practice, and I even forgive the priest who thinks that divorce is ok and a priest should not get involved. I would like to correct him before he does damage to others though.

What you are saying does not seem to compute with the whole situation. Are you willing to look at the possibility that your perception may be off?

 

[jrhiggins]

What you are saying does not seem to compute with the whole situation. Are you willing to look at the possibility that your perception may be off?

If my perception is off, so is my counselors. first the 1st 5month of theis year we went to a counselor not for marriage counselor, for my wife to decide if she even wanted to try. His focus was always on her and she stopped going because she didn’t want to face that the issue wasn’t me. That’s his opinion. It is easier to demonize me and put all blame on me then it is to look at yourself as having the issue. His opinion is that once i’m gone she will realize that she still has the problem but it will probably take years. I’m very careful about my perception and try to keep it in check at all times. Taking deep breaths is becoming habit

 

[joandarc2008]

You came on the forum and asked for advice and prayers. Yet, you are filling in information as it suits you which makes it tough to help. Its OK, I offer you prayers. The only other thing I can say is maybe you could suggest counseling by a counselor of HER choosing. It makes it harder to argue the counselor if she chose him/her.