Remarriage and Leaving the Church

[EvelynEVF]

Larry, sometimes it does seem like there are a zillion rules and something is bound to trip everybody up. Especially when catechesis is often lacking. That’s what we get for being Roman, and Western–every little thing written about to the nth degree. The Easterners tend to leave more things as mystery. The bottom line, though, is the law of love, and everything else springs from that.

I agree with you that there isn’t a difference between someone divorced and remarried, and those carrying around other mortal sins, assuming they understand the gravity of the sin and still did it on purpose.

But we can’t dodge the Eucharist because we feel unworthy and afraid that we might have sin stuck to us that we don’t know about. That’s Jansenism, iirc–people hardly ever received because of their fear. Me, I need Jesus every stinking day, and even the ones that don’t stink. Life is just too hard to live without as much grace as I can get ahold of.

Which is a primary motivation for keeping clean hands and a pure heart, yk?

 

[larry85704]

Sorry, but the Catholic Church has thousands of rules. They are found in the Catechism and Canon Law. Do you know the word sin shows up in the CCC 411 times? Sins is a different word, as is mortal and grave. Masturbation, which everybody thinks is sinful, is described in the CCC as something you are not supposed to do, but the word sin is not present in the text denouncing it.

Some people say the definition of a cafeteria Catholic is one that doesn’t follow all the rules. I say fine, don’t be a cafeteria Catholic. Follow all the rules. Blindly follow all the rules, because only cafeteria Catholics get to choose which ones they want to follow. Then, after you realize that you do not blindly follow all the rules, in all good conscience condemn those who receive Communion because they do not follow the rules that you have selected to follow.

You can’t choose to ignore one thing and condemn others about what they do.

Or, can you be a Catholic and just do the best you can? Isn’t that a more reasonable position? If we all try to do the best we can, where does the judgement that this forum is so fond of making fit in? Now we all need to sincerely try and do the best we can, but should the Church try to help us? What I don’t understand is how enjoying the smell of bacon on Good Friday is a mortal sin. (Maybe it isn’t)

It is my intent here to show just how impractical it is to single out one group of sinners and deny them Communion while allowing other groups of sinners to receive Communion. If anybody were truly without sin, (Jesus, or Mary), I cannot imagine them saying to a sinner, “Go away, do not be with me, you are a sinner.” Yet, when the Eucharist is denied to someone that is what the Church is saying.

And yes, if you get really technical about it, or really picky, you just may convince everybody at Mass on Sunday that they are mortal sinners and therefore nobody should receive Communion. Of course, everybody would leave the Church. The priest, if he were still there, wouldn’t even have the choir to preach to. You see, the Church is supposed to welcome sinners, not scare them off. And your right, finding sin in everything is wrong. People have done it forever. Just seems very wrong to me to pick and choose what sins you want to get all bothered by.

 

[silentstar]

My uncle (now deceased) and his wife married outside the Church. It was a second marriage for both of them and his first wife was nowhere to be found. After they got married she continued going to church and he stopped. My brother in law married a woman who had been previously married, their marriage has lasted a long time. He goes to church. I was not aware that anyone was enforcing this rule, actually. I’ve heard a lot about the need for annulments in general but nothing about confronting people. I didn’t realize priests were doing that.

 

[joanofarc2008]

My uncle (now deceased) and his wife married outside the Church. It was a second marriage for both of them and his first wife was nowhere to be found. After they got married she continued going to church and he stopped. My brother in law married a woman who had been previously married, their marriage has lasted a long time. He goes to church. I was not aware that anyone was enforcing this rule, actually. I’ve heard a lot about the need for annulments in general but nothing about confronting people. I didn’t realize priests were doing that.

The problem is not that priests are doing that or that people are being confronted - the problem is that you have people that are presenting themselves for Eucharist unworthily instead of going through the process. See Corinthians. This is knowing, willful disobedience. It is desecration of the Eucharist.

I also leave you with these words on the Eucharist from St Francis from the Complete Works of St Francis and St Clare I can get you the complete reference if you need it:

“17. Remember, my brothers who are priests, what is written of the law of Moses: that
whoever committed a transgression against even the externals died without mercy by a
decree of the Lord (cf Heb 10:28). 18. How much greater and severer will be the
punishment for the person who tramples on the Son of God, and who treats the blood of
the Covenant which sanctified him as if it were not holy, and who insults the Spirit of
grace (Heb 10:29)? 19. For a person despises, defiles, and tramples on the Lamb of God
when as the Apostle says, he does not recognize (1 Cor 11:29) and discern the holy bread
of Christ from other foods or actions or eats it unworthily or indeed, even if he were
worthy, eats it unthinkingly or without the proper dispositions, since the Lord says
through the prophet: Cursed is that person who performs the work of God fraudulently
(cf Jer 48:10). 20. And He will surely condemn priests who do not wish to take this to
heart saying: I will curse your blessings (Mal 2:2).” (St Francis and St Clare of Assisi 57)

As far as the poster that gives the number of laws etc, what it comes down to is that there are 10 commandments and one main law of Christian fellowship - the rest is explanations of Christian Tradition within those 10 commandments and 1 main law. To have a basic understanding of these 11 things makes the rest a whole lot easier.

 

[Link0126]

Um no, you are not always granted an annulment just because you are the innocent party… Everyone thinks all you have to do is go apply for an annulment and it is granted "poof " its okay to remarry. So not true.

I can tell you we did all the FOCUS and my ex-husband comitted so much adultery. Probably one of the many reasons why I remain single and choose not to date. We are good friends, but he still has not settled down. I always blamed it on him being young. We were married at 21 yrs old had the nuptial mass. That was over 20 yrs ago and he still has not changed.

I am glad that there are those of us who do remain single and celibate by choice and I feel it also helps me to have a close relationship with our Lord. If it is Gods will for me then it shall be done.

I was just trying to put myself in others situation, as I said it is hard to do knowing I don’t care to remarry, but I can’t help to feel sympathy for those who were abandoned and then remarried with being denied an annulment. Sorry I did not explain that in the original post.

Didn’t Jesus say in the Bible divorce was permissible on the grounds of sexual immorality?

 

[joanofarc2008]

Didn’t Jesus say in the Bible divorce was permissible on the grounds of sexual immorality?

Divorce may be licit under these terms but this does not necessarily mean remarriage. When it comes to remarriage - you are probably speaking about Matthew 5:31-32.

No he used the Greek word porneia which in some Bibles - mainly Protestant- has been mistranslated as sexual immorality. The translation means that the marriage is unlawful.

Since there appears to be some misunderstanding of what annulment is and what divorce is and what the teaching is please take a moment and watch this

 

[Rence]

I would agree that it would be easy to lie, but why would you even bother filing the paperwork if you are going to lie? Seems like if you are going to lie, and still be denied a declaration of nullity, then your lying behavior will continue when you lie to yourself and decide that its still okay to pursue another marriage.

I think they refer to those who would lie in order to circumvent the attempts of their ex-spouse to get an annulment. People do this with divorces, why wouldn’t they do this with an annulment? “If I can have you, no one else can”. “If I am unhappy, you have to be as well”.

 

[Rence]

The longer I read threads like this , I become more a fan of the Orthodox Church’s view on divorce and remarriage…

Me too

 

[Rence]

Are there a lot of people that remarry who have tried to get an annulment but it was denied, so they feel they can’t be a practicing Catholic, therefore they leave to become Protestant?

I just tried for a moment to put myself in their shoes. I am single and celibate so I really had to think on this one. If the day comes where I wake up and say I want to date and find a husband (highly unlikely as I don’t have the desire, the time to date, possible denied annulment if applied, etc…) would I leave the church? WOW that is really tough and I feel so bad for those whose annulments were denied and they got remarried anyway. I might do the same. I guess any one of us can fall to mortal sin at any time so if its one thing I have learned on this forum, Don’t judge others!

Anyway, just wondered what the statistics were and what you would do if faced with such a situation. If your annulment was denied would you stay single and celibate or would you try to remarry (if you don’t like the single life) and stay within the church feeling like an outcast or would you join a Protestant church where remarriage is not a sin?

I think it’s really considerate (even sweet) of you to try to understand another person’s perspective. Of course we don’t know what we would do in another person’s situation. It kind of amuses me when people say they know what they would do in another person’s situation…because they don’t.

When my mom finally filed for divorce from my father, she started the annullment process at the same time. She swore swore swore swore, admantly and proudly, that she not only would never get married again, but that she would never date again. She filed for annullment because she couldn’t stand the thought of being attached to my father…I can’t say I ever blamed her.

Anyway, not too long after that, she fell for her second husband. It was a sudden thing, a chance-meeting, something she didn’t plan. It just happened. I honestly don’t remember if she had her annulment or not when they first started dating. But I know she got her annulment relatively quickly and very early in their relationship. But her man (her future husband) didn’t start the anullment process until a few years later. She went to Mass for a while before they started going to Church again together. But I know she went to confession, Mass and Communion weekly, and eventually she brought him back to the Church. He had fallen away years ago. Anyway, they both had their annulments and they got married some time later.

The point is, you don’t know what you would do in another person’s situation not only because it’s not your situation, but you’re not in a situation like it at all. No one knows what they will do in a certain situation until they get there. When people say they do know what they would do, I’m sure they think they know — and know with absolute certainty. But they really don’t. How could they? Saying one would not put themselves in certain situations might sound practical, and in some situations it is. Other times, situations come up and that’s the way it is.

If I had a dollar for every time I’ve heard people judge the actions of others, and then they do almost the same thing if they end up in the same situation (or they did even worse in the same situation), I’d be rich. Some times things just happen, and if you’re lucky, you can keep your head together and be objective and do right by yourself. Other times, people just get caught up in the whirlwind and wind up doing the best they can in their situation. I think the important thing is make it right, even if it takes some time.

No one is perfect. Everyone sins. It’s just easier to point out another person’s sins, not only because that particular sin isn’t one’s weakness, but because they don’t have the same cross to bear.

All these folks who can’t understand why another person would continue a “sinful” relationship don’t have that temptation to tempt them…but I’m sure they have another cross that isn’t a cross at all for someone else.

The “Perfect Catholic” does not exist. We’re all human and therefore we all have flaws.

 

[joanofarc2008]

I think it’s really considerate (even sweet) of you to try to understand another person’s perspective. Of course we don’t know what we would do in another person’s situation. It kind of amuses me when people say they know what they would do in another person’s situation…because they don’t.

When my mom finally filed for divorce from my father, she started the annullment process at the same time. She swore swore swore swore, admantly and proudly, that she not only would never get married again, but that she would never date again. She filed for annullment because she couldn’t stand the thought of being attached to my father…I can’t say I ever blamed her.

Anyway, not too long after that, she fell for her second husband. It was a sudden thing, a chance-meeting, something she didn’t plan. It just happened. I honestly don’t remember if she had her annulment or not when they first started dating. But I know she got her annulment relatively quickly and very early in their relationship. But her man (her future husband) didn’t start the anullment process until a few years later. She went to Mass for a while before they started going to Church again together. But I know she went to confession, Mass and Communion weekly, and eventually she brought him back to the Church. He had fallen away years ago. Anyway, they both had their annulments and they got married some time later.

The point is, you don’t know what you would do in another person’s situation not only because it’s not your situation, but you’re not in a situation like it at all. No one knows what they will do in a certain situation until they get there. When people say they do know what they would do, I’m sure they think they know — and know with absolute certainty. But they really don’t. How could they? Saying one would not put themselves in certain situations might sound practical, and in some situations it is. Other times, situations come up and that’s the way it is.

If I had a dollar for every time I’ve heard people judge the actions of others, and then they do almost the same thing if they end up in the same situation (or they did even worse in the same situation), I’d be rich. Some times things just happen, and if you’re lucky, you can keep your head together and be objective and do right by yourself. Other times, people just get caught up in the whirlwind and wind up doing the best they can in their situation. I think the important thing is make it right, even if it takes some time.

No one is perfect. Everyone sins. It’s just easier to point out another person’s sins, not only because that particular sin isn’t one’s weakness, but because they don’t have the same cross to bear.

All these folks who can’t understand why another person would continue a “sinful” relationship don’t have that temptation to tempt them…but I’m sure they have another cross that isn’t a cross at all for someone else.

The “Perfect Catholic” does not exist. We’re all human and therefore we all have flaws.

And that’s fine. We all have flaws - but we have a choice between that other person and the Eucharist and no one has a right to do otherwise.

 

[catharina]

Didn’t Jesus say in the Bible divorce was permissible on the grounds of sexual immorality?

Please post the Scripture verse in question.
Otherwise there is this, from Matthew, Chapter 5:

"31 “It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife must give her a bill of divorce.’
32 But I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) causes her to commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.”

An unlawful marriage - such as one that can be annulled.

 

[PJM]

=BrushedByAngels;7776968]Are there a lot of people that remarry who have tried to get an annulment but it was denied, so they feel they can’t be a practicing Catholic, therefore they leave to become Protestant?

I just tried for a moment to put myself in their shoes. I am single and celibate so I really had to think on this one. If the day comes where I wake up and say I want to date and find a husband (highly unlikely as I don’t have the desire, the time to date, possible denied annulment if applied, etc…) would I leave the church? WOW that is really tough and I feel so bad for those whose annulments were denied and they got remarried anyway. I might do the same. I guess any one of us can fall to mortal sin at any time so if its one thing I have learned on this forum, Don’t judge others!

Anyway, just wondered what the statistics were and what you would do if faced with such a situation. If your annulment was denied would you stay single and celibate or would you try to remarry (if you don’t like the single life) and stay within the church feeling like an outcast or would you join a Protestant church where remarriage is not a sin?

The answer sadly id YES!

I suspect in Many cases these folks were not "Informed fully, and Practicing Fully, catholics.

In the case of remarriage: a Catholic cannot receive Holy Communion; the “sum and Summit of our Catholic Faith” because IT IS CHRIST HIMSELF.

The answer sadly is YES! To the Original Question

I suspect in Mnay cases these folks were not "Informed fully, and Practicing Fully, catholics“.

In the case of remarriage: a Catholic cannot receive Holy Communion; the “sum and Summit of our Catholic Faith” because IT IS CHRIST HIMSELF, or the other sacraments: SEE BELOW OF SACRAMENT OF CONFESSION. Our personal choices always have consequences. They may nevertheless continue to attend holy Mass.

From EWTN’s Document Library www. EWTN/libraries
PASTORAL MINISTRY TO THE DIVORCED AND REMARRIED Bishop Rene H. Gracida, D. D.

“What about receiving Holy Communion? Taking into account the discussion at the 1980 Synod of Bishops, Pope John Paul II clearly answered this question by saying:
"…the Church reaffirms her practice, which is based upon Sacred Scripture, of not admitting to Eucharistic Communion divorced persons who have remarried. They are unable to be admitted thereto from the fact that their state and condition of life objectively contradict that union of love between Christ and the Church which is signified and effected by the Eucharist…Reconciliation in the sacrament of Penance, which would open the way to the Eucharist, can only be granted to those who, repenting of having broken the sign of the Covenant and of fidelity to Christ, are sincerely ready to undertake a way of life that is no longer in contradiction to the indissolubility of marriage. This means in practice, that when, for serious reasons, such as for example the children’s upbringing, a man and a woman cannot satisfy the obligation to separate, they “take on themselves the duty to live in complete continence, that is, by abstinence from the acts proper to married couples.”

 

[joanofarc2008]

The answer sadly id YES!

I suspect in Many cases these folks were not "Informed fully, and Practicing Fully, catholics.

In the case of remarriage: a Catholic cannot receive Holy Communion; the “sum and Summit of our Catholic Faith” because IT IS CHRIST HIMSELF.

The answer sadly is YES! To the Original Question

I suspect in Mnay cases these folks were not "Informed fully, and Practicing Fully, catholics“.

In the case of remarriage: a Catholic cannot receive Holy Communion; the “sum and Summit of our Catholic Faith” because IT IS CHRIST HIMSELF, or the other sacraments: SEE BELOW OF SACRAMENT OF CONFESSION. Our personal choices always have consequences. They may nevertheless continue to attend holy Mass.

From EWTN’s Document Library www. EWTN/libraries
PASTORAL MINISTRY TO THE DIVORCED AND REMARRIED Bishop Rene H. Gracida, D. D.

“What about receiving Holy Communion? Taking into account the discussion at the 1980 Synod of Bishops, Pope John Paul II clearly answered this question by saying:
"…the Church reaffirms her practice, which is based upon Sacred Scripture, of not admitting to Eucharistic Communion divorced persons who have remarried. They are unable to be admitted thereto from the fact that their state and condition of life objectively contradict that union of love between Christ and the Church which is signified and effected by the Eucharist…Reconciliation in the sacrament of Penance, which would open the way to the Eucharist, can only be granted to those who, repenting of having broken the sign of the Covenant and of fidelity to Christ, are sincerely ready to undertake a way of life that is no longer in contradiction to the indissolubility of marriage. This means in practice, that when, for serious reasons, such as for example the children’s upbringing, a man and a woman cannot satisfy the obligation to separate, they “take on themselves the duty to live in complete continence, that is, by abstinence from the acts proper to married couples.”

You bring up a good point here - when speaking to my priest one day I think most of us are under the impression that Confession gets rid of ALL effects of sin. No, we are given forgiveness but there are some effects that we still have to live with and that we live with for the rest of our lives. There are many Saints for instance that mourned their sins for the rest of their lives (ie - St Francis of Assisi.)

 

[Siochan_Leat]

No, we are given forgiveness but there are some effects that we still have to live with and that we live with for the rest of our lives. There are many Saints for instance that mourned their sins for the rest of their lives (ie - St Francis of Assisi.)

Thanks for posting this. It’s food for my brain.

 

[PJM]

=Irvington;7785550]It is true that many Catholics, as this thread proves, have no place in their hearts for a divorced person. These are quotes from individuals that have never experienced the emotional devastation of being abandoned by a spouse & then being abandoned by Catholics as yourself who judged them without any experience with heart ache involved. The best part is that Jesus never abandoned me. He healed my heart.

I ask that you read John 9:1-18, Mark 3:1-6 . They address the self-righteousness and the judgment contained in this thread.

This whole thread is filled with I am holier than you. You are only lucky that you have not experienced it. Judge only your actions. It is God’s job to judge mine.

I will never leave the Catholic Church. I went to Catholic grade school, high school, and graduated from a Catholic college. I will die Catholic and enter heaven as Catholic. I hope to see you there. Please don’t jeopardize your chance by being a harsh judge of other lest you miss the plank in your own. May God bless you and soften your heart.

Mr DEAR FRIEND IN Christ;

In my many years here on the CAF Forum, I have not seen a single post that supports your view. If anything, most of us feel GREAT sorrow at such a situation. No body wins and everyone LOSES something. Once cannot find any joy or gladness at a divorice; even one where because of real danger to life it becomes necessary. No, my friend, this time your wrong. Love simply does not support such a position.

May God continue to Bless you and yours!

Pat

 

[Thoughtfulone]

A marriage can be null and invalid without the tribunal declaring it as such. In that case, dating would certainly not be a sin.

If I married a guy and a week later found 48 bodies that he hid in a crawl space, I don’t need a tribunal to tell me that he withheld crucial information that would invalidate our marriage. If he then got rid of the bodies and lied about it to the police and the tribunal, then I would still feel quite free to date if I were so inclined after I got over the trauma whether or not the annulment was granted. I would also have no problem taking communion. The only reason I would remarry in another church would be if I were forced to by circumstances such as these, but honestly, I don’t think this would prevent me from taking communion, as I would have certainly chosen to remarry in the Catholic Church had the tribunal known the truth and granted the decree of nullity, as the marriage would CLEARLY be invalid.

This is obviously a vivid example, but I’m sure there are less extreme examples of the same situation.

 

[catharina]

A marriage can be null and invalid without the tribunal declaring it as such. In that case, dating would certainly not be a sin.

I don’t understand what you’re saying. You can’t be talking about a Sacramental
marriage that took place in the Catholic Church, right? Only the Church can
declare that to be so.

 

[EvelynEVF]

The dating might not technically be a sin, but disobedience and presumption certainly would be.

 

[Thoughtfulone]

The dating might not technically be a sin, but disobedience and presumption certainly would be.

Under the circumstances, I would not consider these to be grave sins, but maybe that’s just me.

 

[Thoughtfulone]

I don’t understand what you’re saying. You can’t be talking about a Sacramental
marriage that took place in the Catholic Church, right? Only the Church can
declare that to be so.

What I mean is that a marriage is either valid or invalid AT THE TIME the vows are taken, when the sacrament of marriage is administered by the man and woman themselves. The Church neither administers the sacrament nor is it the determining factor in whether or not the sacrament is valid.

The tribunal merely looks over the facts of the case and cross-references those with canon law in order to be able to tell us whether or not the sacrament was valid when it took place. Therefore, it is very possible for the tribunal (because of a lying spouse or witness, or historically, even a spouse with a certain amount of influence in the Church) to judge a marriage that the couple KNOWS for a fact to be invalid to be valid. This judgement does not make the marriage valid - it is still an invalid marriage that was judged wrongly by the tribunal.

Just as I’m sure the tribunals sometimes judge a valid marriage to be INvalid, I am sure the opposite sometimes happens as well.