Pope Francis on Divorce and Remarriage

[McCall1981]

Yes, it’s their idea of a refutation. What needs to be said is a simple reiteration of Church law on the matter. No one has to divulge personal conversations that the Pope has with people…they just have to come out with a reaffirmation of Church teaching. That would let the world know that the Church is not wavering on Doctrine. Until then …we wait. And in all actuality we do need to hear this from the Holy Father himself…not Fr. Lombardi nor any other Vatican Official…I do believe this needs to come from the horses mouth. That would definitely end the story.

I completely agree.

I just brought it up because everyone seems to be taking this statement as essentially a “no comment”.

But to me (and maybe I’m wrong) Fr. Lombardi seems to be saying that what has been communicated can’t be considered reliable and is a source of misunderstanding. To me, that sounds like he’s (very softly) refuting what the reports are saying, rather than not commenting at all.

 

[Tomdstone]

That link uses a lot of words to try to get around Christ’s simple words.

But they are a “Sister Church” of the Roman Catholic Church, and the Roman Catholic Church is engaged in discussions on eventual reunion with them.

 

[Teelynn]

I completely agree.

I just brought it up because everyone seems to be taking this statement as essentially a “no comment”.

But to me (and maybe I’m wrong) Fr. Lombardi seems to be saying that what has been communicated can’t be considered reliable and is a source of misunderstanding. To me, that sounds like he’s (very softly) refuting what the reports are saying, rather than not commenting at all.

Yep, it seems to be at least leaning in the direction of a “no comment”.

 

[Tigg]

I read Fr. Lonbardi’s statement as a refutation.

“That which has been communicated in relation to this matter…cannot be confirmed as reliable, and is a source of misunderstanding and confusion.”

It’s a very soft, vague refutation, and I sincerely wish it was stronger, but I do think its a refutation.

You’re right, but one small whisper will not be heard by the crowd who roars in jubilation at the thought of the Church “changing her teachings.” (Note the quotes, please!)

 

[Teelynn]

You’re right, but one small whisper will not be heard by the crowd who roars in jubilation at the thought of the Church “changing her teachings.” (Note the quotes, please!)

This is my point EXACTLY. He inferred that this conversation was a “private” phone conversation…Hmm…maybe it WAS private before this couple decided to go PUBLIC with it themselves. A PRIVATE conversation that was made PUBLIC (on FACEBOOK of all things!) and probably misinterpreted and misconstrued to the joy of those who want to recreate their own Church.

 

[Mark121359]

Yep, correct, the phone call did in fact take place, but (and this is a BIG BUT) no one knows exactly what was said.

You’re right, but one small whisper will not be heard by the crowd who roars in jubilation at the thought of the Church “changing her teachings.” (Note the quotes, please!)

And that’s why I believe, why even make this phone call period, if it’s going to give rise to this much confusion and scandal? How many Catholics will now sit back and say to themselves, I can go ahead and receive Communion because the Church says it’s O.K.? Especially since at least in my view, there has been a serious neglect of the instructing of the faithful in even the basic fundamentals of the Catholic faith systematically for decades.
I wish I had a nickel for how many times I’ve heard how Catholics do not know what their Church teaches, even on such basic questions such as the Incarnation, the Trinity, original sin, mortal sin, venial sin, heaven, hell, purgatory, the Real Presence, bodily resurrection, and so on. And now this couple saying the head of the RCC says; “A divorcee who takes communion is not doing anything wrong,” and that “there was no problem” with her taking communion, even though the husband had previously been divorced without an annullment. If these statements prove to be true, you think we’re a divided Church now?..wait for the fallout from this. The October Synod is looking more and more like it will be a watershed event! Cardinal Raymond Burke talked about it a while back on EWTN. What he says should concern you. Move to the 9:45 mark of interview…
youtube.com/watch?v=hQTiup-Eeaw&index=12&list=PL0B89A05F9F6D3E47

Peace, Mark

 

[Veridical16]

St. Epiphanius of Cyprus (d403) says, “He who cannot keep continence after the death of his first wife, or who has separated from his wife for a valid motive, as fornication, adultery, or another misdeed, if he takes another wife, or if the wife takes another husband, the divine word does not condemn him nor exclude him from the Church or the life; but she tolerates it rather on account of his weakness” (Against Heresies).
See: stgeorgegoc.org/divorceChurchHistory.html

And Saints are not protected from Infallibility, just as St. Thomas Aquinas proves…

Orthodox are in schism, they do not have the papacy to protect them when they study saints quotes, hence you will see websites deriding Saints quotes which emphasize filial piety towards the Pope from St Robert bellarmine to St. Catherine of Siena, hence we see Putin divorcing his wife non-chalantly.

Let’s examine that isolated quote and it can not necessarily be interpreted as an approval for Divorce.

does not condemn him nor exclude him from the Church or the life; but she tolerates it rather on account of his weakness

If a divorcee is living in a sinful state, he is not yet condemned if he still has not rejected the Church life altogether…If a divorcee, attends mass, but does not partake in the EUCHARIST, he is THUS NOT EXCLUDED from the Church Life, and is at least open to a way of REPENTANCE.

However to say that there are reasons for divorce based on difficulties, does not square with Tradition , down to historical understanding of MOSES’ time itself. Let us compare the saints words to , Jesus’ words themselves **“but from the beginning it was not so” **

In the context of Moses’ time which Jesus references, they did everything they could to persuade the husband from putting away his wife, “BUT FOR THE HARDNESS OF THEIR HEARTS” Anyone with a Sensus Catholicus and Sensus Fidelium can see through the error that citing that St. Epiphanysus quote, if not the quote itself makes…*(“valid motive to put away your wife”) *

Christ as TEACHER taught he expects more from us, since the work of the cross, we have access to KNOW BETTER, the GRACE TO KNOW BETTER. After the Resurrection, a MAN has less excuse for his deeds, as opposed to the “tolerance” God had before for his sins. You heard it was said, an eye for an eye, "* “any man who looks on a woman lustlfully commits adultery” That the Church in her pastoral care , does not validate the 'marriage of the sinful man.
*

To say, all of a sudden is to say God has that same patience for polygamy by David, and now has returned to tolerating these weaknesses that lead to that – is to go against Jesus revealing to us, we are capable of doing better now through grace, by his Sermons on the Mount. Those words are the same mistake, though to a lesser degree ( because of the word “tolerance” ) that Protestants make.
*
“on account of his weakness” * does not DENY that they are succumb to the sin of adultery themselves… Just as St. Thomas Aquinas has supposed erroneous statements about the Blessed Mother’s immaculate conception, so too that quote is to be rejected as in the context of the consistent Church teaching Regarding* “situations to leave one’s spouse” * runs counter to that quote.

That quote is saying, by weakness, *“We understand he has returned to the hardness of the hearts of the jews at the time of Moses” *

There is no excuse for this occurring anymore since the Incarnation.

 

[McCall1981]

Perhaps this is a response to all this from Francis, good stuff here from his talk today to the African Bishops:

“The holiness and indissolubility of Christian matrimony, often disintegrating under tremendous pressure from the secular world, must be deepened by clear doctrine and supported by the witness of committed married couples. Christian matrimony is a lifelong covenant of love between one man and one woman; it entails real sacrifices in order to turn away from illusory notions of sexual freedom and in order to foster conjugal fidelity.” He pointed to the teaching of Blessed John Paul II on marriage and family as a “promising and indeed indispensable means of communicating the liberating truth about Christian marriage.”

And

Pope Francis also addressed the challenges faced by the Church in southern Africa, mentioning the decline in Catholic families and a corresponding drop in vocations, as well as defections from the Church. The Holy Father dwelt on family issues, including abortion, separation and divorce, and violence against women and children. “All these realities,” he said, “threaten the sanctity of marriage, the stability of life in the home and consequently the life of society as a whole. In this sea of difficulties, we bishops and priests must give a consistent witness to the moral teaching of the Gospel.”

southernorderspage.blogspot.com/2014/04/bombshell-pope-francis-clarifies-his.html?m=1

 

[Thorns]

That link uses a lot of words to try to get around Christ’s simple words.

Didnt Christ say the same thing though?

 

[chimo]

The Orthodox view of re-marriage is simply that, although the sacrament of matrimony is for life, out of mercy and as a concession to human weakness the partner who did not wound the bond (ie the victim of another partner’s adultery) should be given another marriage. As Jesus said with Moses, it was out of the people’s “hardness of heart” that he allowed divorce, not because it was good or right in itself (it objectively isn’t).

“Mercy triumphs over judgement” and I might add legalism.

The second marriage in orthodoxy is usually a sombre service, not joyous, to remind the couple that they are only marrying again because of human sin and divine mercy, not because it is “perfectly ok” to do so.

Now, whatever one might think about the soundness of this Eastern practice, it does make Orthodoxy look - as a whole - more concerned for human weakness and more compassionate than us. Whether one likes it or not, that is how it makes us look. Victims of abusive partners feel wronged, as if the church has no compassion for them, when their “partner” might be off with some other gal living it up and they are in misery, consigned to life-long loneliness.

Given that the Orthodox churches have valid sacraments, liturgies, saints and so forth; I highly doubt that the Holy Spirit would have permitted these churches to continue with this practice if it was illicit.

It isn’t the way we do things in the Latin tradition, however, perhaps we should start being truly “universal” and quite thinking that “Latin = the right way”. The way the Catholic Church has approached the issue is through some very liberal interpretations of annulments. I have seen some that are truly concessions to human weakness rather than founded in legalistic fact. People might not like to admit it, but through our often very liberal annulment process, we almost already have a Latin equivalent to the Orthodox “oikonomia”.

Just sayin’

Very excellent post! It is true that the Orthodox Church is more lenient on some matters than are our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters. At what Catholics might call very serious sins the Orthodox may call it only venial in nature. I suspect Rome on some certain conditions puts too much emphasis on declaring it mortal when it is actually venial in nature. This tells me a lot about our two great Churches. They have both grown up with certain leanings towards Justice and Mercy. It seems to me that the Church of Rome leans more toward this Discipline of God’s Justice than the East and the Eastern Church leans more towards this Mercy of God. I find that God has both of these attributes within Himself, Justice and Mercy. It seems Rome is very gifted in administering Discipline and Justice while the East is very gifted in administering Mercy. While both of God’s attributes are found in both Churches the leaning of His Justice in the West and the leaning of His Mercy in the East justifies our reasons why we need to become united. The strength of one Church’s gift may help with the other Church.

 

[Teelynn]

Very excellent post! It is true that the Orthodox Church is more lenient on some matters than are our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters. At what Catholics might call very serious sins the Orthodox may call it only venial in nature. I suspect Rome on some certain conditions puts too much emphasis on declaring it mortal when it is actually venial in nature. This tells me a lot about our two great Churches. They have both grown up with certain leanings towards Justice and Mercy. It seems to me that the Church of Rome leans more toward this Discipline of God’s Justice than the East and the Eastern Church leans more towards this Mercy of God. I find that God has both of these attributes within Himself, Justice and Mercy. It seems Rome is very gifted in administering Discipline and Justice while the East is very gifted in administering Mercy. While both of God’s attributes are found in both Churches the leaning of His Justice in the West and the leaning of His Mercy in the East justifies our reasons why we need to become united. The strength of one Church’s gift may help with the other Church.

Very thought provoking. Another excellent post, just as Vouthon’s post. This did in fact cross my mind that there was a time not long ago that the Church of the West was handing out annulments like candy. I had even heard it said from clergy, that if you had the money they would give you an annulment. I say a time not long ago because I do believe I have heard they’ve tightened up the reigns on the annulments as of late. This being said, I find it very interesting that we are having a discussion about the Mercy of God when we are approaching the feast of Divine Mercy this coming Sunday. (declared by soon to be Saint John Paul ll) and how (it seems to me anyway) Divine Mercy is a slow going Devotion in the West. It is catching on but has been very resisted by some clergy in certain areas. An awesomely beautiful devotion, message and promises made by Our Lord directly to St. Faustina and of course fully approved by the Church and endorsed by John Paul ll as a feast day.

These posts give people something to chew on. Thanks!

 

[Veridical16]

Didnt Christ say the same thing though?

No. Jesus is clear, he says the marriage was lawful, and you end up remarrying he says you’re BOTH ADULTERERS.

It is good that a flood of soon to be St. John Paul II’s intercessory prayers are coming

1. During the talk with the Pharisees, who asked him the question about the indissolubility of marriage, Jesus Christ referred twice to the “beginning.” The talk took place in the following way:

“And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, ‘Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?’ He answered, ‘Have you not read that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder.’ They said to him, ‘Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?’ He said to them, ‘For your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so’” (Mt 19:3ff., cf. also Mk 10:2ff.).

Christ did not accept the discussion at the level at which his interlocutors tried to introduce it. In a certain sense he did not approve of the dimension that they tried to give the problem. He avoided getting caught up in juridico-casuistical controversies. On the contrary, he referred twice to “the beginning.” Acting in this way, he made a clear reference to the relative words in Genesis, which his interlocutors too knew by heart. From those words of the ancient revelation,** Christ drew the conclusion and the talk ended**.

catholicnewsagency.com/document.php?n=811

In the 21st century when many individual men and women, have raised themselves to a level of a god, in obstinacy to the natural law, is it any wonder when they dismiss the simple truth, ’ what God has put together let no man put asunder?

 

[Tomdstone]

No. Jesus is clear, he says the marriage was lawful, and you end up remarrying he says you’re BOTH ADULTERERS.

It is good that a flood of soon to be St. John Paul II’s intercessory prayers are coming

catholicnewsagency.com/document.php?n=811

In the 21st century when many individual men and women, have raised themselves to a level of a god, in obstinacy to the natural law, is it any wonder when they dismiss the simple truth, ’ what God has put together let no man put asunder?

However, is it true that, according to Roman Catholic teaching, Eastern Orthodox who are in good standing with their EO Church are permitted to receive Holy Communion in the Roman Catholic Church? What happens if the person was divorced and remarried in the Eastern Orthodox Church. As I understand it, the EO will tolerate two divorces and allow remarriage under certain strict conditions.

 

[Yause]

However, is it true that, according to Roman Catholic teaching, Eastern Orthodox who are in good standing with their EO Church are permitted to receive Holy Communion in the Roman Catholic Church?

No. Technically, that may be the case, but the caveat is that the individual’s own church has to agree. As far as I know, none of the EO churches have given that permission, rendering it a moot point (and a careful gesture of ecumenism).

 

[Veridical16]

The Orthodox view of re-marriage is simply that, although the sacrament of matrimony is for life, out of mercy and as a concession to human weakness the partner who did not wound the bond (ie the victim of another partner’s adultery) should be given another marriage. As Jesus said with Moses, it was out of the people’s “hardness of heart” that he allowed divorce, not because it was good or right in itself (it objectively isn’t).

We are no longer in the times of the Old Testament. Jesus in his sermon on the Mount, raised his expectations for us, he did not lower them.

Jesus is infinitely Merciful, and he is not a cruel master, but we can’t fall into the sin of presumption that his Grace isn’t enough to OVERCOME HUMAN WEAKNESS.

“Mercy triumphs over judgement” and I might add legalism.

Mercy triumphs over judgment because of the Blessed Mother, but God is still perfectly JUST, and JUSTICE is not legalism. If it weren’t for the Blessed Mother, Jesus would have already come to close up shop.
We are only allowed mercy because he has delayed his coming.

Now, whatever one might think about the soundness of this Eastern practice, Whether one likes it or not, that is how it makes us look. Victims of abusive partners feel wronged, as if the church has no compassion for them, when their “partner”

I know it’s a sensitive subject, and this comment is by no means directed at anyone in this situation who sincerely striving to do everything right and be faithful

( Bishop Fulton Sheen talks about difficult marriages )
**
“Marriage Problems” **
bishopsheen.excerptsofinri.com/audio/Life_is_Worth_Living/Marriage-Problems.mp3

But in RESPECT TO the LESS SERIOUS Catholics in the modern world today, who are more CAFETERIA , than DEVOUT, who scoff at Catholicism position on Divorce.

This kind of argument breaks down, that the Church has been too cruel or rigid. NO.

Maybe Catholics/Orthodox Christians ought to get back to what it means to have the Faith transform you, and not get swept up in the vagaries of SECULAR societal EXPECTATIONS and norms.

**might be off with some other gal living it up and they are in misery, consigned to life-long loneliness. **

That is a false conclusion stemming from The disney version of the idea of Love & Marriage. It causes people to think they are deserving of the perfect idealization ,that our ultimate end in this life is ANOTHER PERSON on Earth.
NO. Our Ultimate end in THIS LIFE and the next, is Christ. And no one is ever really alone, if they have FAITH and if they may have to suffer the consequences of this fallen world? Due to the unfortunate marriage? We pray it doesn’t happen, but if it does we pray for grace and self- denial.

We hear everyone complaining now that Jesus is too harsh, his expectations are too harsh, God even SEEMS Cruel now?
No, I think perhaps people are CRUELER to CHRIST,
A Christian is not to be OF THE WORLD.
Perhaps too many CHRISTIANS are living their marriages by the standard of the CITY OF MAN as St. Augustine observed, with the expectations of the pagans’ weaknesses and adopting them as their own.

I’ve seen this used for other hot-button issues, *“but doesn’t someone need to be in love romantically to only be happy in life?” *
I think it’s an argument, of a Catholic thinking like a modern secular man, rather than contemplating it through the eyes of the eternal word.

 

[Veridical16]

The second marriage in orthodoxy is usually a sombre service, not joyous, to remind the couple that they are only marrying again because of human sin and divine mercy,* not because it is “perfectly ok” to do so.*

Marriages are supposed to be HAPPY if they are oaths made to God. It’s a tacit admission of guilt by the parties already. Remember what jesus said to St. Paul about human weakness, "MY GRACE IS ENOUGH FOR YOU "

If the sacraments are powerful, then what is it for someone to deny himself, and perhaps return to a life of chastity? This is the same thing as,* ’ how far I personally can approach the near occasion of sin without sinning… ’ *Except in the case of the the Orthodox Church is, * "how close can we get to adopting a heretical view on Marriage , without becoming Heretics?? *

it does make Orthodoxy look - as a whole - more concerned for human weakness and more compassionate than us.

Perception isn’t truth. Some people perceive the Lutherans and Anglicans who allow gay marriage to be more compassionate than the Roman Catholic Church. .

St. Paul says heresies are necessary through the ages, and in similar fashion the Orthodox now allowing three remarriages is proof that THEY ARE the ones in Schism and their disobedience to the Pope was not pleasing to God, hence they are not in the safety of the ARK , which is the One Holy Roman Catholic Church.

I highly doubt that the Holy Spirit would have permitted these churches to continue with this practice if it was illicit

There is a time and place when schism is healed.

Given that the Orthodox churches have valid sacraments, liturgies, saints and so forth; I highly doubt that the Holy Spirit would have permitted these churches to continue with this practice if it was illicit.

The efficacious of the sacraments in continuity to the priesthood and bishops is irrelevant to the tolerance of instructions. This has to do with the sacraments in that Church, it has nothing to do with the licitness of what the Orthodox prelates determine about Tradtion and teaching. They no longer have the protection of the obedience of the Pope and the Magisterium. Just because God permits sin to occur, he doesn’t sanction or approve it. This is poor interpretation of "hardness " of hearts and the Orthodox practice is due blindness to seeing it. This behavior has occurred before, when the anabaptists re-examined the OT and decided they wanted polygamy.

It isn’t the way we do things in the Latin tradition, however, perhaps we should start being truly “universal” and quite thinking that “Latin = the right way”. The way the Catholic Church has approached the issue is through some very liberal interpretations of annulments. I have seen some that are truly concessions to human weakness rather than founded in legalistic fact**. People might not like to admit it, but through our often very liberal annulment process, we almost already have a Latin equivalent to the Orthodox “oikonomia”. **

Just sayin’

Just sayin’??
I’ve seen Protestants(who get their doctrine of divorce from King Henry wife murderer) mock the Catholic Church about annulments and it is probably deserved on account of those who may have abused the process due to greed or malignancy. But just because the existence of poor implementation exists does not mean that the Catholic Church is Basically Equivalent TO Orthodox “oikonomia”

notwithstanding, allowing “re-” marriage IN THE CHURCH is still based fundamentally on whether the marriage was lawful, not for “valid excuse” to leave the marriage.
Just as the practice of Indulgences were abused, abuse, does not make the teaching and authoritative understanding of such TRUTHS in regard to the sacraments, any less true in the Catholic Church.

 

[Veridical16]

However, is it true that, according to Roman Catholic teaching, Eastern Orthodox who are in good standing with their EO Church are permitted to receive Holy Communion in the Roman Catholic Church? What happens if the person was divorced and remarried in the Eastern Orthodox Church. As I understand it, the EO will tolerate two divorces and allow remarriage under certain strict conditions.

Yause, gave a good answer about the hypothetical.

I do believe that the Eucharist/Christ seeing who receives him worthly is independent of schismatic EO’s determinations, as St. Paul states in his epistle on receiving the sacrament in a state of grace. So the Catholic teaching is applicable to , any reception of a baptized person who may receive worthily, or unworthily in both the Catholic Church, and the Orthodox parishes objectively and depending on their sincerity.
Truth is truth.

 

[Tigg]

It is true that the Orthodox Church is more lenient on some matters than are our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters. At what Catholics might call very serious sins the Orthodox may call it only venial in nature. I suspect Rome on some certain conditions puts too much emphasis on declaring it mortal when it is actually venial in nature.

So….what does this say about the Church and our belief that she *cannot *error in matters of morals? I mean…the presence or absence of mortal sin which causes death to the soul is the very thing that will determine our salvation.

This tells me a lot about our two great Churches. They have both grown up with certain leanings towards Justice and Mercy. It seems to me that the Church of Rome leans more toward this Discipline of God’s Justice than the East and the Eastern Church leans more towards this Mercy of God. I find that God has both of these attributes within Himself, Justice and Mercy. It seems Rome is very gifted in administering Discipline and Justice while the East is very gifted in administering Mercy. While both of God’s attributes are found in both Churches the leaning of His Justice in the West and the leaning of His Mercy in the East justifies our reasons why we need to become united. The strength of one Church’s gift may help with the other Church.

Well, at least you rightly acknowledge that God has both the attributes of mercy and justice. All of His qualities are in perfect harmony with one another. What bothers me today is that contemporary Catholics think dangerously because they believe mercy is more highly prized than justice – as if one is right and the other is wrong. St. Alphonsus Liguori warned that God’s mercy has limits, which are demanded by both His wisdom and justice.

And there can be no mercy without repentance for sin, in fact Msgr. Charles Pope recently wrote about this and called it a modern error.

Those who preach and teach mercy without repentance are deceivers.

**Faith and repentance are the supernaturally transformed and assisted human element that is necessary to unlock mercy and the graces of God. **To ignore or deny this amounts to a denial of human freedom and does not help God’s people. Rather it hinders them, for mercy is accessed through repentance, and without it, the door cannot open. Repentance must be preached to all the nations because repentance, by God’s grace opens the door.

 

[InFlux]

Re. the phone call: Is anyone questioning how a private pastoral phone call to a lay person outside of a papal audience squares with the principle of subsidiarity?

 

[JosieN]

Hi everyone,

At World Youth Day, Pope Francis gave an interview where he hinted at that he liked the Orthodox Church’s teaching allowing divorce and remarriage. Is it possible that the Catholic Church could allow divorce and remarriage? Is that a changeable teaching? I like Pope Francis but this statement makes me feel nervous that there is a sea change coming-

On giving the Sacraments to remarried divorcees
“This is an ongoing issue. I think this is the time to show mercy. Times have changed and the Church faces many problems, partly because of the negative testimonies of certain priests. Clericalism has caused a lot of wounds and these wounds need to be healed with mercy. The Church is a mother and in the Church we need to be merciful towards everyone. We shouldn’t just wait for the wounded to come to us, we need to go out and search for them. I think the time for mercy has come as John Paul II predicted by introducing the Feast of Divine Mercy. Divorced people can take communion, it is those who have divorced and remarried that cannot. Here I must add that the orthodox follow the theology of economics and allow second marriages. When the commission of eight cardinals meets at the beginning of October we will discuss how to proceed. The Church is taking a very close look at pastoral initiatives for marriage. My predecessor in Buenos Aires, Cardinal Quarracino always used to say: “I consider half of today’s marriages to be invalid because people get married without realising it means forever. They do it out of social convenience, etc…” The issue of invalidity needs to be looked into as well.”

vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/the-vatican/detail/articolo/gmg-26831//pag/2/

What about asking mercy from God for our sins and asking God to heal us and make our marriages work? Marriages are hard work and sometimes it takes a lot of prayers and sacrifices to make them work.