B
Blueberry_Juice
Guest
Only if you have never been involved in divorce work. I have; and the number of people who find that the problems in the marriage are always the other person’s fault are staggering; in addition, I have had many talks with marriage counselors, who echo the same: the hardest part of counseling is getting the aggreived party to determine what actually happened and what part they played in it.
All undoubtedly fascinating but hardly relevant to the point, which is, I remind you, that speculations about Themait’s marriage and his conduct are tasteless, ill-informed and impudent. Let us also remember that there is no excuse for divorce, no objective reason for seeking one, as is made abundantly clear by one Jesus Christ - not an unimportant figure for Roman Catholics - in sacred scripture. Meanwhile, the dicta of soi-disant “marriage counsellors”, a bogus profession if ever there was one, should be accorded the same weight as those of crystal ball gazers, palm readers and other purveyors of hucksterism to the superstitious and credulous, that is, none whatsoever.
“There are some marriages in which a spouse is truly blindsided and the are very very infrequent. The largest cause of divorce is failure to communicate …”
Is there no end to this irrational rubbish?
" … and it is a rare circumstance where one party is making every effort to try to od so and meeting a “brick wall”; most often, there were disputes and neither side knew how to handle them constructively; it then degenerated into “wroned” silence, they drifted apart… the scenario repeats itself ad nauseum. Add to that the comments about the OP having no idea what the wife is thinking - as she has shut down communications - sorry, there are too many tell-tails to believe that he had no part in the disintegration of this relationship."
Clearly no end to it.
“I don’t come here to beat people up, but to get them to look at things from a different perspective; they would not be here if they could do so already.”
The speculations continue apace.
“Let’s get real here.”
Ye Gods!
“There are approximately 8,000,000 divorced Catholics. That’s eight million.”
Ya don’t say.
" In the year of the largest number of deccrees of nullity, there were about 60,000 granted. A portion of those don’t require anything but simple facts - they are the form cases where the Catholic does not get married in front of a priest. Take those out, and then take out the cases that were Protestants who married, divorced, and then either want to, or already have married a Catholic and are trying to resolve the former marriage. Those are not Catholics, those are Protestants, many of whom were never taught about the permanancy opf marriage. Guess what - intent for permanancy is a major issue. Then remove those who were so poorly catechized as a Catholic that they never had a clue;"
Yes, its abundantly clear that not a few US Catholics are very poorly catechized without having enjoyed the compensatory benefit of an intellectually rigorous secular education. Witness remarkable weight given by some to the platitudes of “marriage counsellors” …
“and go down the list of very real impediments to intent, and you are not left with too many cases. Out of 8,000,000 Catholics.”
Bishop Antoni Stankiewicz, who happens to be Dean of the Sacred Roman Rota by the way doesn’t buy that feeble excuse, neither did Pope John Paul II and neither do I.
“Facatully we can’t say if he is heroic or not.”
Going by what he has said on this thread - and you, after all, have seen fit to extrapolate all manner of ludicrous conclusions from Themait’s words - we very much can say that his attitude is heroic. He has expressed his love for his wife, his confidence in the sacramental nature of his marriage and his desire for a reconciliation. All this despite tremendous provocation. On this thread, he has arguably displayed heroism.
“Having seen all too many cases where there is no heroism at all, I don’t rush to judgement.”
Clearly you can’t recall what you have written on this very thread.
“If he has legitimate information to bring to the tribunal, then by all means he should do so. His choice to intentionally violate the dicatates of the church re: ABC is not in and of itself evidence that either of them either lacked the ability to consent or diagreed with other Church teachings, but it certainly raises an issue that may indicate that they take at least some Church teachings lightly, to put it politely.”
So says the divorce lawyer who implicitly believes that a deserted spouse may to be blame for their own misfortune. Motes and beams.
I repeat my call for those who have denounced Themait and those who indulge in idle speculation about his marriage to apologise to him forthwith.
