A
Ammi
Guest
How about couples dont judge and divorce, but work towards reconciliation?
Last edited:
- Status
R
Rozellelily
Guest
Ideally they would.
In reality though, a lot of people won’t stay with a partner once they have broken the marital vow + slept with another.
There could always be the thought if a person does it once, what will stop them do again in hard times?
Maybe the unfaithful spouse can use this time to make an inner change by doing an “internal spring clean” instead of just expect/demand to stay married.
Self growth to come to a place where there becomes a feeling “I will not be the type of man that will be unfaithful under any circumstances” & not go outside the marriage to fix problem inside the marriage. Not give wife mixed messages about the cheating etc.
(All partners need to recognize their part in marriage breakdown still too of course.)
Wife may naturally and with prayer to God come back (depending on the depth of feeling of betrayal & hurt) but how can expect even consider come back and reconcile if husband still the same person?
There needs to be focus on making the wife having positive feelings again for husband and not “clinical” speak like “it’s marital duty to have sex” etc.
This is just an assumption, but if the wife is perhaps feeling husband is not able to show empathy/ put in her shoes for finding out about infidelity, is a reconciliation even plausible?
In reality though, a lot of people won’t stay with a partner once they have broken the marital vow + slept with another.
There could always be the thought if a person does it once, what will stop them do again in hard times?
Maybe the unfaithful spouse can use this time to make an inner change by doing an “internal spring clean” instead of just expect/demand to stay married.
Self growth to come to a place where there becomes a feeling “I will not be the type of man that will be unfaithful under any circumstances” & not go outside the marriage to fix problem inside the marriage. Not give wife mixed messages about the cheating etc.
(All partners need to recognize their part in marriage breakdown still too of course.)
Wife may naturally and with prayer to God come back (depending on the depth of feeling of betrayal & hurt) but how can expect even consider come back and reconcile if husband still the same person?
There needs to be focus on making the wife having positive feelings again for husband and not “clinical” speak like “it’s marital duty to have sex” etc.
Is it judgment though or is it more about feelings of betrayal?
This is just an assumption, but if the wife is perhaps feeling husband is not able to show empathy/ put in her shoes for finding out about infidelity, is a reconciliation even plausible?
Last edited:
A
Ammi
Guest
Usually only because they feel they have entitlement to find a new partner.
Then dont reconcile, if they are pure and can remain single. If NOT, then work on healing what caused the problem.
Maybe both spouses have unfaithful behavior to focus on?
Yes. Unless the “innocent spouse” decides to have their own adulterous relationship.
So what is the alternative? Wife dates and has her own lovers, while husband is judged?
If there is no judgment, then there is no divorce.
All things are possible through Christ.
Last edited:
R
Rozellelily
Guest
Will this depend on though if the spouse is practicing Catholic?
I guess not just Catholic but also who believes in the “permanence” of marriage, whether the marriage was sacrament marriage in the first place and both people were mature. Was the spouse going into the marriage believing & fully consenting that they “accept” being married to the person forever even if infidelity occurs?
It could be harder to determine “intent to be faithful” as I’m sure few people go to wedding day with intention be unfaithful(!) but I’m sure priests have experience determine maturity etc in annulment processes.
If a spouse has negative feelings about Catholic beliefs, should this be looked at first?
It is impossible to make/expect someone agree to something they don’t first believe in.
Has priest/s confirmed that it is adulterous?
It is interesting thought, but at the same time there are great many people who would not remain forever in unfaithful marriage (can only speaking for in my country).
I read an article from Archdiocese which stated that one of the grounds for Catholic annulment could be if the partner expected a quality/moral trait of a spouse to be free from arrest record & then the spouse weren’t.
Is this any less judgmental then expecting partner with quality of faithfulness?
I see us all judging to a degree in life -what standard/expectation we want for ourselves and relationships.
I agree with you about all things being possible through Christ and I sincerely hope this happens here
If by any chance not, then i hope at least can find peace with the circumstances.
Last edited:
A
Ammi
Guest
Even Protestants, who believe adultery is grounds for divorce, are able to confer the Sacrament to one another.
How would anyone know? My pastor and I believe that this must be confessed by a spouse, rather than other people assuming to know intentions of heart and mind.
It’s not necessary to know every Catholic belief, to be a Sacrament, but to intend what the Church believes and professes.
I’m not sure what you are asking with this? Many Catholic marriages result in a spouse cheating, and then the other spouse cheating even before seeking a decree of nullity. And some cheat with someone they know is less faithful than the spouse they are judging!!
You have to explain what you mean by “would not remain forever in unfaithful marriage”. This has the implication that the “innocent spouse” is free to leave and remarry. If the “innocent spouse” divorces only because they intend to remarry, then that is not so “innocent” is it?
I’m not saying judgments cannot be made. Sometimes it’s necessary. But when one spouse judges another, then they better not be doing the same thing which they are judging their spouse for. You mentioned that we should intend to be faithful no matter what the circumstances. I agree. If one spouse falls into adultery under different circumstances than the other, it does not mean that one is justified to judge the other. If a spouse is cheated on, and follows the guidance of the Church, and is found free to marry another, then they have shown themselves to be innocent. But if they fall into their own sins against the faith and Sacrament, they have shown themselves to be insincere.
I think it is very rare these days. Tribunals are much more likely to offer a decree, when there is such trouble in a relationship. The grounds can cover anything, if a tribunal is so bold as to assume to judge intentions of the heart. Especially when both spouses desire to find another partner.I agree with you about all things being possible through Christ and I sincerely hope this happens here
Last edited:
K
Kindnessmatters
Guest
Divorce courts start from the premise that a marriage is irreconcilable. Then they have two goals…first, to make sure kids are safe, provided for and cared for (idealy by both parents); second that the divorcing parties get a fair financial settlement and hopefully do not end up destitute. So…money and division of the kid’s time and parenting decisions.
Divorce does not repair anything but can be unavoidable. Actual fault always exists in divorces but the court does not address it. It is the wrong venue. Hopefully parties turn to faith and practical resources to address their faults.
We need to be careful in judging divorced people too harshly. I filed for divorce. First, my husband told me he was am atheist, told me he would not and could not be monogamous, hid money from me, started an affair and moved out of the house, using marital funds to rent and furnish an apartment He refused counseling. To protect myself and our son, I filed to resolve issues of parenting responsibility, property and finances and later secured annulment.
The idea of first securing a Bishop’s approval to divorce is highly impractical. It is often done on an emergency basis to secure assets and prevent kidnapping ,or abuse of parties or children by the other spouse. Similarly, securing bishop approval to temporarily separate makes zero sense. In quite a number of cases, it can literally prevent abuse or even homicide to simply leave with haste.
Divorce does not repair anything but can be unavoidable. Actual fault always exists in divorces but the court does not address it. It is the wrong venue. Hopefully parties turn to faith and practical resources to address their faults.
We need to be careful in judging divorced people too harshly. I filed for divorce. First, my husband told me he was am atheist, told me he would not and could not be monogamous, hid money from me, started an affair and moved out of the house, using marital funds to rent and furnish an apartment He refused counseling. To protect myself and our son, I filed to resolve issues of parenting responsibility, property and finances and later secured annulment.
The idea of first securing a Bishop’s approval to divorce is highly impractical. It is often done on an emergency basis to secure assets and prevent kidnapping ,or abuse of parties or children by the other spouse. Similarly, securing bishop approval to temporarily separate makes zero sense. In quite a number of cases, it can literally prevent abuse or even homicide to simply leave with haste.
A
Ammi
Guest
The Church recognizes there are emergency cases, when the internal forum of a person has authority and is justified to file a lawsuit against a spouse.
Realistically (though I could be wrong) I imagine the great majority of divorces are not emergencies. And how many of those have filed divorce in fellowship with and formal approval by the Church?
It’s a scandal going on and growing that canon law is being abused and rejected.
I believe it is strongly related to many Catholic’s fear of their own sins being exposed in the process.
Realistically (though I could be wrong) I imagine the great majority of divorces are not emergencies. And how many of those have filed divorce in fellowship with and formal approval by the Church?
It’s a scandal going on and growing that canon law is being abused and rejected.
I believe it is strongly related to many Catholic’s fear of their own sins being exposed in the process.
Last edited:
J
JulianN
Guest
This formal approval process is not available in most dioceses. And adding it to the chancery’s tasks would overwhelm the staff and budgets of most dioceses. It’s simply not practical.
A
Ammi
Guest
Delegation to the parish priest is still “ecclesiastical authority”.
J
JulianN
Guest
And would still be overwhelming. It’s hard enough for a parish staff to keep up with nullity petitions, which represent a fraction of divorce cases.
A
Ammi
Guest
In the beginning, it would be challenging. Until divorce rates diminish to where they were before the divorce culture grew out of proportion because Catholics no longer seek to walk through discernment with the Church.
That is called “facing the music”. The scandal of “no fault divorce” (evolving into the Catholic concept of marriage) has produced a mentality that divorce is a way to better your life. Children are being raised by second marriages in vast numbers, because their parent’s parents divorced and became a normal option for them.
The Catechism Teaches this! It calls divorce contagious.
It’s because so many Catholics confuse secular beliefs and culture with divine faith.
Now, there is a Catholic system which follows suit, after secular divorce affords Catholics the delusion that the marriage doesnt exist anymore, and we just need the formal stamp of a tribunal at the back end of the whole dysfunctional process.
That is called “facing the music”. The scandal of “no fault divorce” (evolving into the Catholic concept of marriage) has produced a mentality that divorce is a way to better your life. Children are being raised by second marriages in vast numbers, because their parent’s parents divorced and became a normal option for them.
The Catechism Teaches this! It calls divorce contagious.
It’s because so many Catholics confuse secular beliefs and culture with divine faith.
Now, there is a Catholic system which follows suit, after secular divorce affords Catholics the delusion that the marriage doesnt exist anymore, and we just need the formal stamp of a tribunal at the back end of the whole dysfunctional process.
Last edited:
J
JulianN
Guest
That’s a genie you won’t be able to put back in the bottle.
A
Ammi
Guest
Not with that spirit
J
JulianN
Guest
This indicates a severe misunderstanding of the nullity process and the work of Tribunals.
A
Ammi
Guest
Exactly. Our culture is misunderstood because it has formed its mind on the State’s view of marriage. And the Church has implemented a system that if rife for abuse because it’s at the back end of the discernment process of marriage.
I have had discussion with my diocese Defender of the bond. And my pastor affirmed my conviction to disregard his approach.
I have had discussion with my diocese Defender of the bond. And my pastor affirmed my conviction to disregard his approach.
Last edited:
J
JulianN
Guest
No, the fact that you think Tribunals rubber stamp “delusions” that a marriage doesn’t exist indicates that you do not understand the process, nor the canon law involved.
Last edited:
A
Ammi
Guest
Two popes didnt think this is a misunderstanding.
J
JulianN
Guest
Really? Two popes claimed Tribunals were consistently rubber-stamping delusions? Can you provide some sources?
J
JulianN
Guest
Yeah—that doesn’t say what you were implying. While the pope cautioned tribunals to exercise judgments with care, he did not say they were merely rubber stamping delusions.
Most unsuccessful nullity cases are weeded out prior to reaching a Tribunal, and that’s out of the small fraction who even apply. People who take marriage casually don’t bother with decrees of nullity.
Most unsuccessful nullity cases are weeded out prior to reaching a Tribunal, and that’s out of the small fraction who even apply. People who take marriage casually don’t bother with decrees of nullity.
- Status