What do YOU find are acceptable reasons for divorce?

[ToeInTheWater]

It seems to me that on most of the topics about marital woe posted in Family Life, there is usually at least one poster who suggests divorce and annulment as an option. The attitude among some, seems to be, “hey, what’s the point of staying in an unhappy marriage in this day and age, when 99% of American divorcees can get annulments?” Which is really not much different from “secular” attitudes about marriage.

As opposed to many conservative Protestants, who although they recognize marriages can be ended by divorce in a way Catholics don’t, often are very judgmental of those who get divorced. (For example, the many former Amy Grant fans who abandoned her, even sent her hate mail, after her divorce.)

Even many of the Catholics who don’t presume that annulment will be automatically granted, seem to think that the only sin is remarriage without an annulment, but divorce itself is no big deal, it’s fine to get one for petty reasons or for no reasons at all without any examination of conscience, as long as the one getting divorced accepts the possibility that they might wind up alone and celibate for many years.

Of course, such attitudes often rile up the more traditional Catholics who lament this casual attitude toward divorce, and angrily post that divorce itself is a sin, and even in cases of severe physical abuse, one must consult, not even a priest, but a bishop, before undertaking any divorce proceedings.

So, I was curious as to what the average CAF poster thought about the issue.

 

[mommamaree]

I voted the 4 A’s.

While I consider it morally acceptable for any person to separate (and divorce if necessary) for the behaviors and associated fallout of abuse, addiction, adultery and abandonment, I would never personally advice anyone to seek a divorce. I would encourage them to take steps to protect themselves and their children in extreme situations, but even then, I would not suggest divorce. I would only suggest they speak with a priest and a good lawyer. I take it very seriously Jesus’ direct command “what God hath joined together, let no man put asunder.” For myself, that includes never instigating the divorce of any other couple.

 

[Xantippe]

It seems to me that on most of the topics about marital woe posted in Family Life, there is usually at least one poster who suggests divorce and annulment as an option. The attitude among some, seems to be, “hey, what’s the point of staying in an unhappy marriage in this day and age, when 99% of American divorcees can get annulments?” Which is really not much different from “secular”
attitudes about marriage.

**Well, a good percentage of the time, that remark doesn’t come totally out of the blue–there are indications that the marriage would qualify for annulment.

(I voted for the “four A” answer, but on reflection, the issues that would qualify for annulment probably belong on the list, too.)**

As opposed to many conservative Protestants, who although they recognize marriages can be ended by divorce in a way Catholics don’t, often are very judgmental of those who get divorced. (For example, the many former Amy Grant fans who abandoned her, even sent her hate mail, after her divorce.)

My feeling is that for conservative Protestants, the sin is often seen to be the divorce itself, rather than the remarriage.

Even many of the Catholics who don’t presume that annulment will be automatically granted, seem to think that the only sin is remarriage without an annulment, but divorce itself is no big deal, it’s fine to get one for petty reasons or for no reasons at all without any examination of conscience, as long as the one getting divorced accepts the possibility that they might wind up alone and celibate for many years.

**???

No, not at all. I don’t think CAFers think that divorce is “no big deal.”

I would argue that it’s not unlike NFP. Just as with NFP, if you are willing to accept massive amounts of abstinence, so too with divorce–if you are willing to accept the possibility of lifelong abstinence, you probably had a really good reason for divorce. **

Of course, such attitudes often rile up the more traditional Catholics who lament this casual attitude toward divorce, and angrily post that divorce itself is a sin, and even in cases of severe physical abuse, one must consult, not even a priest, but a bishop, before undertaking any divorce proceedings.

I suspect that most bishops would be very puzzled to find themselves consulted in that respect.

So, I was curious as to what the average CAF poster thought about the issue.

 

[Xantippe]

I voted the 4 A’s.

While I consider it morally acceptable for any person to separate (and divorce if necessary) for the behaviors and associated fallout of abuse, addiction, adultery and abandonment, I would never personally advice anyone to seek a divorce. I would encourage them to take steps to protect themselves and their children in extreme situations, but even then, I would not suggest divorce. I would only suggest they speak with a priest and a good lawyer. I take it very seriously Jesus’ direct command “what God hath joined together, let no man put asunder.” For myself, that includes never instigating the divorce of any other couple.

Welcome back, mommamaree!!!

 

[mommamaree]

Welcome back, mommamaree!!!

Hi, Xantippe!

I have been around, just lurking.

 

[TheLeastofThese]

I voted the 4 A’s.

While I consider it morally acceptable for any person to separate (and divorce if necessary) for the behaviors and associated fallout of abuse, addiction, adultery and abandonment, I would never personally advice anyone to seek a divorce. I would encourage them to take steps to protect themselves and their children in extreme situations, but even then, I would not suggest divorce. I would only suggest they speak with a priest and a good lawyer. I take it very seriously Jesus’ direct command “what God hath joined together, let no man put asunder.” For myself, that includes never instigating the divorce of any other couple.

Well stated!

I also voted the 4 A’s.

 

[KendraDZ1902]

I voted other. I don’t see adultery as a reason to divorce, so I couldn’t vote for the four A’s.

 

[ToeInTheWater]

Well, a good percentage of the time, that remark doesn’t come totally out of the blue–there are indications that the marriage would qualify for annulment.

(I voted for the “four A” answer, but on reflection, the issues that would qualify for annulment probably belong on the list, too.)

True, but I think some of the well-meaning advisors fall into the trap of treating annulment as it is indeed “Catholic divorce” and make statements such as “if he’s beating you, you likely have a case for annulment”. Now, maybe I should be charitable and assume this is shorthand for “if he’s beating you, he likely has some kind of deep-seated mental or psychiatric problem that likely made him unable to contract marriage validly in the first place”.

However, it seems many Catholics seem to think that what occurs AFTER marriage is what the tribunals should consider. Many seem to think an “innocent” spouse in such a situation somehow DESERVES a second chance at marriage even if they don’t really have a case for nullity, and that the Church should be “merciful” and “pastoral”, and of course those who question annulments seem to suspect that this is what’s REALLY going on and why “95% of all annulments are granted”, etc.

And on the more traditional side, many often state that “a marriage that lasted 15 years and produced 5 kids just CAN’T be null”, even though such a marriage certainly isn’t exempt from the 4 As, or one spouse suddenly “coming out” as homosexual, etc.

(I suppose the homosexuality/SSA issue somewhat comes under the "four A"s as many such closeted people will have affairs with the same sex, but I assume that even if this was not the case, if the other spouse had no idea about the SSA and wouldn’t have gone through with the marriage if he or she had known, there is a good case for nullity anyway.)

No, not at all. I don’t think CAFers think that divorce is “no big deal.”

Well, I don’t think most CAFer go as far as thinking it is “no big deal”. However, I have seen (mostly men) state “if my spouse ever cheats on me, I’m OUT” even though the Church encourages reconciliation, and indeed the risk of divorce is one reason many give for not revealing adulterous affairs.

There’s also a topic in Moral Theology about an actual adulterous relationship in which posters have advised the adulterers should be “honest” and file for divorce from their current spouses if they really want to be together, which is certainly standard secular advice in such a situation, but not really Catholic advice (or even those of most major religions).

 

[Usige]

I didn’t vote for the 4 "A"s because neither adultery nor addiction are true grounds for an annulment or divorce. When doing marriage prep those are two stumbling blocks for many couples. The concept of forgiving someone who has betrayed you is hard for many to accept. Adultery is a huge one for many during marriage prep (“If I find s/he cheated on me it’s over.”) Those two might be part of the reasons for divorce, but only if they are part of a larger problem. They can be indicative of other things but are not themselves legitimate reasons to divorce.

 

[robwar]

It seems to me that on most of the topics about marital woe posted in Family Life, there is usually at least one poster who suggests divorce and annulment as an option. The attitude among some, seems to be, “hey, what’s the point of staying in an unhappy marriage in this day and age, when 99% of American divorcees can get annulments?” Which is really not much different from “secular” attitudes about marriage.

As opposed to many conservative Protestants, who although they recognize marriages can be ended by divorce in a way Catholics don’t, often are very judgmental of those who get divorced. (For example, the many former Amy Grant fans who abandoned her, even sent her hate mail, after her divorce.)

Even many of the Catholics who don’t presume that annulment will be automatically granted, seem to think that the only sin is remarriage without an annulment, but divorce itself is no big deal, it’s fine to get one for petty reasons or for no reasons at all without any examination of conscience, as long as the one getting divorced accepts the possibility that they might wind up alone and celibate for many years.

Of course, such attitudes often rile up the more traditional Catholics who lament this casual attitude toward divorce, and angrily post that divorce itself is a sin, and even in cases of severe physical abuse, one must consult, not even a priest, but a bishop, before undertaking any divorce proceedings.

So, I was curious as to what the average CAF poster thought about the issue.

You have an interesting question. I think most Christians either Protestant or Catholic usually accept the four A’s you listed. For the abuse side, separating which may lead to divorce might be the difference in whether someone will live or not. Unlike some conservative Protestants, the Catholic Church does not tell women that they need to stay in such situations and submit. I do get concern about a number of posts I’ve seen when trying to answer someone in a troubled marriage and looking for advice that just go and get an annulment. One shouldn’t be getting an annulment for the purpose of remarriage, one should pursue annulments for the healing that it brings. It is more than a formality in which it seems that too many Catholics view it. Get an annulment to remarry and continue in receiving communion. I’ve known people that have had annulments. I once worked with a Catholic man that had a 2 year failed marriage. He was thinking of looking into getting an annulment and I encouraged him to do so, not to remarry (he wasn’t dating anyone) but for the help and healing and closure that it will bring him. From anyone I’ve known that have obtained them, they all said that the annulment process brought them healing and closure. I think the attitudes you see that view marriage, divorce, annulments and remarriage reflect more on the casual attitudes of society coupled with no fault divorce laws in the mix.

 

[underacloud]

I voted other. I don’t see adultery as a reason to divorce, so I couldn’t vote for the four A’s.

From the Church’s perspective, it’s sort of both yes and no. The Church firmly encourages reconcilliation after adultery. But the Church also recognises the right of the wronged spouse to cease conjugal living.

So I think it is fair to say that adulerty may be acceptable grounds for some, but since the question is “What do YOU find are acceptable reasons” then it’s fair for you to say adultery isn’t a reason in your eyes.

My own answer is that I have no idea how I would react in that situation. I prefer not to contemplate such a thing.

 

[masondoggy]

I believe the only time somebody should be encouraged to end a marriage is when abuse is involved (physical, sexual, emotional, financial) and sometimes when adultery is involved…as in situations where there is repeated adultery with no signs of remorse or desire to stop. I think that falls into the category of physical abuse, though, because it is literally putting the innocent spouses life/health on the line due to STD’s. The Catholic Church allows divorce when it’s necessary to protect the innocent spouse.

I think that on this forum, it SEEMS as a poster is often/always encouraged to divorce because more often than not, the situation has to be pretty bad to get somebody to come to the point of posting here and usually involves some form of abuse.

I very rarely see divorce get mentioned here unless abuse is involved.

 

[ToeInTheWater]

I didn’t vote for the 4 "A"s because neither adultery nor addiction are true grounds for an annulment or divorce. When doing marriage prep those are two stumbling blocks for many couples. The concept of forgiving someone who has betrayed you is hard for many to accept. Adultery is a huge one for many during marriage prep (“If I find s/he cheated on me it’s over.”) Those two might be part of the reasons for divorce, but only if they are part of a larger problem. They can be indicative of other things but are not themselves legitimate reasons to divorce.

Well, I personally voted “other” because I think there are some exceptional reasons other than the “4 As” such as “spouse comes out as homosexual” where divorce and annulment is justified. I can also think of situations such as a spouse who has a mental illness such as bipolar disorder that results in their making ridiculous financial decisions, where civil divorce might be required to protect the spouse and children from those decisions, even though that situation might not actually meet any of the 4As.

I also doubt most Christians, at least the more conservative ones, see even the 4 As as reasons to automatically divorce with no attempt at reconciliation. Many conservative Protestants interpret the Bible as specifically allowing for divorce ONLY in the case of adultery, but in practice, counsel that the couple is best off trying to reconcile.

I think we can make a case, though, that ongoing, unrepentant adultery actually IS a form of emotional, even psychological abuse, as many adulterers will play mind games and “gaslight” the innocent spouse, often they want to have their cake and eat it too, want both the excitement of the affair and the spouse taking care of the kids and finances at home. And certainly, unrepentant adulterers often had no intention of being faithful even at the time of marriage – which usually makes for a decree of nullity.

And when I mentioned addiction, I don’t think that’s an automatic out either, but often, serious cases where the addict is committing crimes, doing unsafe things such as driving drunk or high, and otherwise endangering the spouse and children, and this can happen without the addict actually crossing the line into abuse, yet I still think civil divorce may be necessary in these cases.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

Here’s one of life’s biggest lessons that most people don’t learn until they’re at least in their 50’s: You never know what goes on behind closed doors. Even when it’s your best friend, parent, sibling, etc you just don’t know. I don’t view myself as qualified to determine whether another’s divorce was “acceptable” because no matter how much one (or even both) party/parties tell me, I just won’t know the full story.

When I was a small child, a close friend of my family was murdered by her husband of 20 years. He shot her in the chest at point-blank range. Why? Because she was going to go visit her dying mom in the hospital and he wanted her to stay home and cook dinner. As it turns out, she had been suffering terrible abuse for the duration of their marriage. No one, not even her closest friends, knew a thing. Everyone that knew them described them as the “perfect” couple with beautiful children and a nice home.

Another example is my brother’s first wife. We all thought she was the most beautiful, classy, smart, kind, funny, just all-around perfect woman in the world for him. It was only after he finally filed for divorce that we found out about how she was ALWAYS drunk, always cheating on him, how she got pregnant with someone else’s child and then aborted it when my brother said that he wanted to raise it as his own, and so much else. He even has a scar on his side from where she came at him with a knife. Again, this woman seemed just perfect in every way. But sociopaths usually do.

I think that divorce is tragic. I think that it is 100X more tragic when children are involved. But I just can’t pass judgement on whether it’s an “acceptable” decision for someone else because I don’t know the whole story, and more to the point, I’m not entitled to know.

As for my marriage, it’s hard to say. I can’t imagine my husband raising a hand to me, and I can’t imagine myself staying if he did. Same with addiction and adultery. But if any of those things happened, there is no doubt that the circumstances surrounding it would be very complex-so honestly, I can’t say what I would do because I don’t know what kind of situation we’re talking about here. But I definitely wouldn’t appreciate the opinions of others about whether or not my divorce was “acceptable”. I’m a private person and no one would know even half of the story except for me and my husband.

 

[Sunbreak]

I voted for the 4 A’s but I also recognize there could be other reasons for divorce.
As to not recommending divorce, I have to disagree. There are some states that do not offer legal separation as an option. So that puts people in a financial bind of still being responsible for the other person’s finances and support. Also, in a legal separation, the other party can still inherit from the person they are separated from. So instead of the children inheriting, the spouse inherits if something happens.

 

[Xantippe]

True, but I think some of the well-meaning advisors fall into the trap of treating annulment as it is indeed “Catholic divorce” and make statements such as “if he’s beating you, you likely have a case for annulment”. Now, maybe I should be charitable and assume this is shorthand for “if he’s beating you, he likely has some kind of deep-seated mental or psychiatric problem that likely made him unable to contract marriage validly in the first place”.

**Right. **

However, it seems many Catholics seem to think that what occurs AFTER marriage is what the tribunals should consider. Many seem to think an “innocent” spouse in such a situation somehow DESERVES a second chance at marriage even if they don’t really have a case for nullity, and that the Church should be “merciful” and “pastoral”, and of course those who question annulments seem to suspect that this is what’s REALLY going on and why “95% of all annulments are granted”, etc.

**Do have a look at the canon lawyer’s blog post here that was just posted in another thread:

anotherbrickinthelaw.blogspot.com/2015/01/the-rota-overturns-92-of-usa-nullity.html**

It sounds like the 95% stat is a Catholic urban legend.

I think you are correct that a lot of people want others to have a second chance, and that that isn’t orthodox. However, I have to say that the older I get, the more I understand that free will is often limited by psychological circumstances and the longer and longer my mental list of such circumstances gets. At the extreme, some people are simply incapable of marriage.

And on the more traditional side, many often state that “a marriage that lasted 15 years and produced 5 kids just CAN’T be null”, even though such a marriage certainly isn’t exempt from the 4 As, or one spouse suddenly “coming out” as homosexual, etc.

**Yeah, the fact that the couple lasted 15 years just demonstrates that one or both members of the couple tried really hard.
**

(I suppose the homosexuality/SSA issue somewhat comes under the "four A"s as many such closeted people will have affairs with the same sex, but I assume that even if this was not the case, if the other spouse had no idea about the SSA and wouldn’t have gone through with the marriage if he or she had known, there is a good case for nullity anyway.)

Right. Or if the spouse firmly believes that deep down he or she is actually of a different gender than his or her biological sex.

Well, I don’t think most CAFer go as far as thinking it is “no big deal”. However, I have seen (mostly men) state “if my spouse ever cheats on me, I’m OUT” even though the Church encourages reconciliation, and indeed the risk of divorce is one reason many give for not revealing adulterous affairs.

**Yes, one does see that on CAF from time to time. I remember a guy like that over the past year–he eventually flounced and went back to his home at Dalrock (!). And it was totally theoretical–his wife was quite faithful as far as he knew. But he had it all figured out what he’d do if she cheated–marry somebody new. !!!

Come to think of it, that attitude (lack of belief in marriage as permanent) would seem to justify an annulment.

Weird.
**

There’s also a topic in Moral Theology about an actual adulterous relationship in which posters have advised the adulterers should be “honest” and file for divorce from their current spouses if they really want to be together, which is certainly standard secular advice in such a situation, but not really Catholic advice (or even those of most major religions).

Didn’t see that one.

And yes, you’re quite right.

 

[LisaA]

I didn’t vote for the 4 "A"s because neither adultery nor addiction are true grounds for an annulment or divorce. When doing marriage prep those are two stumbling blocks for many couples. The concept of forgiving someone who has betrayed you is hard for many to accept. Adultery is a huge one for many during marriage prep (“If I find s/he cheated on me it’s over.”) Those two might be part of the reasons for divorce, but only if they are part of a larger problem. They can be indicative of other things but are not themselves legitimate reasons to divorce.

I agree we need to clarify the responses. When I answered 4A’s, it was under the assumption the spouse neither sought forgiveness or agreed to mend his/her ways. The mere fact of adultery shouldn’t mean one strike and you’re outta here if the cheater acknowledges the mistake, agrees to mend his/her ways, accepts that the injured spouse will probably demand and should receive assurance and confirmation of the cheater’s movements until trust is re-established. I know of several marriages that were on the rocks due to adultery but through patience, love, and commitment the rift healed and according to both parties the marriage is strong.

Ditto with addiction…does the person go into and complete treatment, do they stay clean and sober, do they take responsibility for their actions and do they in effect make amends? I also know of marriages where a substance or a porn addiction nearly caused the end of the marriage but with treatment, monitoring and continued counselling such damage can be healed. Abuse is a different story, particularly physical abuse. I have to wonder if anyone experiences a single act of physical abuse that is never repeated. Unfortunately I’ve seen too many physically abusive relationships, including my own sister’s marriage and despite apologies, promises and even getting counseling didn’t stop the abuse. It seems a very hard pattern to break.

 

[TarkanAttila]

Divorce is not exactly a sin. To begin with, it is only the dissolution of the state’s recognition of a civil contract. It has absolutely no bearing on whether or not the sacrament actually exists or not. Nevertheless, I do think it is in the interest of the state to know who is and is not married, and I think divorce can and ought to reflect that reality. And I do not think divorce should be sought out, unless it has been determined first that there never was a marriage to begin with. Because even if a husband and wife are physically separated and no longer acting as if married, the marriage may still exist.

But I am not sure that divorce is a sin, as long as it is not used as an excuse for remarriage or other sexual sins.

 

[Eliza10]

I didn’t vote for the 4 "A"s because neither adultery nor addiction are true grounds for an annulment or divorce. When doing marriage prep those are two stumbling blocks for many couples. The concept of forgiving someone who has betrayed you is hard for many to accept. Adultery is a huge one for many during marriage prep (“If I find s/he cheated on me it’s over.”) Those two might be part of the reasons for divorce, but only if they are part of a larger problem. They can be indicative of other things but are not themselves legitimate reasons to divorce.

On the other hand I voted for the 4 A’s but really, its like you said, they are not true grounds. Yes, they are serious problems and when they are outstanding they are frequently indicative of other things. Sometimes when there is adultery you have someone that, when they married thought this was the natural course to take if one is “not happy” or, nothing was “in it” for them anymore. Sometimes an abandoning spouse is one who has a mental disorder who cannot stay in a *happy *home long (I had a non-Catholic friend who had an boyfriend that abandonment her every time things were going *well). * There are so many reasons. The church grants annulments after extensive investigation, and they have real experts to make the judgments.

And we are in a broken world full of sin, and full of broken and hurting people. Its actually not at all far-fetched that lots of people in these times are not psychologically and morally healthy and were not in a state at the time of their marriage to ever be able to mean the vows or keep the vows they made at the time, is it?

---

Back to the OP, who wrote:

It seems to me that on most of the topics about marital woe posted in Family Life, there is usually at least one poster who suggests divorce and annulment as an option. The attitude among some, seems to be, “hey, what’s the point of staying in an unhappy marriage in this day and age, when 99% of American divorcees can get annulments?” Which is really not much different from “secular” attitudes about marriage.

I have never seen anyone lightly suggest it as an option. When anyone mentions it, the OP has some serious martial problems and is writing here at the end of their rope. There actually *are *times when divorce must be considered, and if one is Catholic, then they have questions about annulment, and they have to ask somewhere.

I have read here on this forum* a lot,* and I have not seen this option suggested lightly by anyone. However, I have frequently seen persons accused of suggesting it lightly and easily when that did not seem the case at all. Its as if there are a *few *here who think that *any *mention of it at all is not okay.

As opposed to many conservative Protestants, who although they recognize marriages can be ended by divorce in a way Catholics don’t, often are very judgmental of those who get divorced. (For example, the many former Amy Grant fans who abandoned her, even sent her hate mail, after her divorce.)

That’s not very Christ-like, is it? What is she supposed to do, tell the world her ex’s faults? That wouldn’t be right. But I know. I was Evangelical when my husband left, and I was “partly blamed!” in hte eyes of many. The thinking was that surely when people divorce, it* must *be *both *peoples fault. So nothing I could do (and I tried so hard) could keep our marriage together, but I was looked at as if I were partly to blame. People do like to judge! I suppose assigning blame “to both” makes one feel one is being “fair”.

Even many of the Catholics who don’t presume that annulment will be automatically granted, seem to think that the only sin is remarriage without an annulment, but divorce itself is no big deal, it’s fine to get one for petty reasons or for no reasons at all without any examination of conscience, as long as the one getting divorced accepts the possibility that they might wind up alone and celibate for many years.

I honestly have not seen anyone posting on CAF that thinks divorce is “no big deal”. I have seen people accuse others of this, but I have not seen anyone actually display this attitude of taking divorce lightly. Never. (Unless its a troll. We have at least one prolific troll here at CAF coming here posting under new names ever new “impossible dilemmas!”)

Of course, such attitudes often rile up the more traditional Catholics who lament this casual attitude toward divorce, and angrily post that divorce itself is a sin, and even in cases of severe physical abuse, one must consult, not even a priest, but a bishop, before undertaking any divorce proceedings.

So, I was curious as to what the average CAF poster thought about the issue.

I suppose there are extremists on either side, but I don’t see a great deal of them here. I do find people *accusing others of promoting divorce *who are in fact not promoting divorce, though. That’s the error I see here most. But its not pervasive.

 

[styrgwillidar]

From the catechism:

Divorce

2382 The Lord Jesus insisted on the original intention of the Creator who willed that marriage be indissoluble.174 He abrogates the accommodations that had slipped into the old Law.175 (1614)

Between the baptized, “a ratified and consummated marriage cannot be dissolved by any human power or for any reason other than death.”176

2383 The separation of spouses while maintaining the marriage bond can be legitimate in certain cases provided for by canon law.177 (1649)

If civil divorce remains the only possible way of ensuring certain legal rights, the care of the children, or the protection of inheritance, it can be tolerated and does not constitute a moral offense.

2384 Divorce is a grave offense against the natural law. It claims to break the contract, to which the spouses freely consented, to live with each other till death. Divorce does injury to the covenant of salvation, of which sacramental marriage is the sign. Contracting a new union, even if it is recognized by civil law, adds to the gravity of the rupture: the remarried spouse is then in a situation of public and permanent adultery: (1650)

If a husband, separated from his wife, approaches another woman, he is an adulterer because he makes that woman commit adultery; and the woman who lives with him is an adulteress, because she has drawn another’s husband to herself.178

2385 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.

2386 It can happen that one of the spouses is the innocent victim of a divorce decreed by civil law; this spouse therefore has not contravened the moral law. There is a considerable difference between a spouse who has sincerely tried to be faithful to the sacrament of marriage and is unjustly abandoned, and one who through his own grave fault destroys a canonically valid marriage.179 (1640)

So mark me as other- If civil divorce remains the only possible way of ensuring certain legal rights, the care of the children, or the protection of inheritance.