What does Divorce do to the Sacrament of Marriage?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Saint_Prince_Caspian
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Saint_Prince_Caspian

Guest
The Sacrament of Marriage is as indelible as the Sacrament of the Priesthood and Baptism.

Nullity means the Sacrament (marriage) never took affect.

Thus, what does divorce mean to the Sacrament of Marriage?

If a man and a woman fulfilled their Sacramental vows of marriage, and the Sacrament took place, then should they divorce, the Sacrament never ceases.

What then is divorce to the Sacrament of Marriage?

I have been through my parents divorce. And, as a child, and then now grown up. That places a serious hardship and Cross on me. I want to say it is hard on my faith. But, to be honest, as about anyone can see in the world. There’s already hardship for anyone to be faithful. The reality is, when your parents who fulfilled the Sacrament of Marriage, but broke those bonds through divorce (another words it is adulterous.) Then, than means your life is set upon a ruinous path of destruction. Or, more poignantly, the gates of Hell, and the pathway leading there, are open wide.

Pope Francis wrote a letter on the Family sometime ago. I did not really read it. But, I did at least in measure understand Cardinal Burke’s concerns over the Holy Father’s letter.

To segway, it might be best to know that Saint Paul countered and corrected Saint Peter. That, Christ gave the Church to the Prince of the Apostle’s (Saint Peter) who was the Holy Father leading the Church particularly after Christ’s Death and Resurrection.

Cardinal Burke actually does raise good questions on the Holy Father’s letter, I believe in as much as Saint Paul raised questions to Saint Peter on the basis of circumcision. Wherefore to cater to the Jewish people (to be inclusive to a tradition.) Did Saint Paul counsel and correct Saint Peter on the fulfillment, since Saint Paul was not only brought as a follower of Christ. But as well as was a Jewish Scholar (Scribe.) Which means, he understood the dynamics of the Newer Rites which prevailed (they did not cease the Law and the Prophets, but Christ fulfilled them.)

This would articular quite clearly as a background and setting on Cardinal Burke’s questions over the Pope’s inclusiveness to Divorced people.)

And, I as a child who suffered a divorce, can vouchsafe that Cardinal Burke would be correct to raise questions on the Holy Father’s letter on the Family.
 
Divorce takes the two participating person’s in the Sacrament of Marriage (the man and the woman), and places them outside of it. Or, to be more forthrightly, the man and woman stop acting in the Sacrament. Trying to break and tear down the Sacrament through Adultery. For, as long as the state of the Sacrament of Marriage is in tact, they are living adulterous lives. They are in Communion with each other in the Marital Sacrament in a unique way that no one else shares. They are one flesh. But to sleep with another person, is immoral and unchaste (regardless of divorce.)

There’s also a problematic impression to the child, too. Whence that divorce happens, they believe the union between the man and the woman is dissolved. And therefore renders them as a family, gone!

The child cannot view Cousins, Uncles, Aunts, and Grandparents as their own. Because the union of the family was believed to have been dissolved between the man and the woman, which therefore impairs the child to believe they are their family.

The only notable and noteworthy way a child would perceive, however, those as Cousins, Uncles, Aunts, and Grandparents, is simply because of a bloodline. But not Sacramental. This hinders the child’s relationship by his or her Baptism, to Christ, God’s Son, and to the Holy Trinity. This also impairs the child to the gift and life of the Communion of Saints. And even his or her view of the Blessed Union of the Holy Family.

That is why, I believe Cardinal Burke had raised questions to the Holy Father’s Letter on the Family. Because, this does harm to the Sacramental Order of the child’s life. And could render them to Hell. Or at least lead them on that way.

But, besides Hell, since most people cannot fathom that until their deathbed, most often. What then takes place as a consequence of Divorce (besides financial burden that always comes about)?

The consequence is the child will be either agnostic, atheist, or a Christian (not-Catholic), or of an Orient Eastern belief outside of Christianity. Or a monotheistic non-Christian religion. Whatever the case maybe, they will not be able to hold themselves to the Sacraments, because of the grave wound done by Divorce. That child’s perception of the Sacramental reality broken.

Does this apply across the board to every child who has undergone the Divorce between their parents? I really don’t know. But, I do know that Divorce is a tragedy. People will defend Divorce. But, the reality is that Divorce is wicked and evil. It doesn’t protect children. A man and woman can physically separate from each other, say they were living in the same home. And one of them was dangerous to either child or spouse, or both. Separation, but living the Sacrament out (as not having marital relations with anyone else.) Would then suffice. And, it would not be adulterous. it’s a Cross to bear and carry. Most people (especially in the Western World) want to live without the Cross they are supposed to bear. They’d prefer the Cross of the World. One which perhaps leaves financial burden, but welcoming to another spousal relationship in their life.
 
Last edited:
That is not how the Sacrament of Marriage (one man, and one woman.) works. The two, rather, become one flesh.

Divorce is an enemy to the Sacrament of Marriage. It does not look at the Covenant of Marriage as indelible and irremovable. But as a contractual union. Opposed to wherefore God’s Covenant is forever. Because He is True and Faithful, wherefore the world (divorce) is not.
 
Last edited:
If a marriage is Sacramental it is valid.

The Tribunal reviews marriages to make sure they were valid. If found invalid, that means there was no Sacrament.

There are also valid Natural Marriages. The Tribunal also will review these for validity.

So, civil divorce does nothing to a Sacramental Marriage except mean that under the eyes of the civil authorities and secular world, the parties are not civilly married.
 
Saint_Prince_Caspian said:
The Sacrament of Marriage is as indelible as the Sacrament of the Priesthood and Baptism.
Click to expand...
The only sacraments that leave an indelible mark on the soul are Baptism, Confirmation, and Holy Orders.

I’m not sure what point you are trying to make with your posts, though. Civil divorce does not have any impact on the sacrament of marriage. Pope Francis never said otherwise.
 
The impact is on the person’s reception of the Sacrament. The tangible reality in living in them. A person receives Baptism. That is indelible. Meaning it takes place and leaves a permanent mark forever.

But, the person who receives it, falls under the scandal of divorce between their parents. Particularly, creating a hardship for them in having been Baptized. Which, you likely have fallen away from the faith. Or who do not believe in the identity and nature of marriage being “one man” and “one woman” - exclusive.

The Sacrament of Marriage, if it is valid, is indelible. If the Sacrament took place, the Church cannot declare that it didn’t (i.e. nullity.) Null means absence, that it never took place.

Divorce presents a crisis to the raising and rearing of children in the Sacraments. Children become misaligned on things notably as Marriage (wherefore many may think it’s okay to sleep with someone before marriage, not be married at all, divorce as their parents did, or believe they will just repeat their parents mistakes, and never opine to receive the Sacrament of Marriage.)

If you are trying to point out that the Sacrament of Marriage isn’t indelible, because when one of the spouses passes away (death do us part.)

Would be wrongly identifying the Sacramental union and state of the man and woman.

For, All Baptized are in One Body (that’s Christ’s Body, His Church, One Sacramental Organism.)

That means, the man and woman are already in “One Body.” But what does it mean for their flesh to become “One”, if they are already Sacramentaly held in One Body, One Image (Christ Himself, through the Bridal Chambers) of His Church?

The person who passes away, in the Marital Covenantel embrace of the Church (becomes married to Christ.) This is not the ordinary marriage we’re envisioning here on earth. But partaking in Communion as with the Saints. Thus, the Marital embrace which the man and woman held here on earth is elevated to a higher order.

When the spouse here on earth becomes widow or widower. He or she is free to marry again. Because, the one who passed away is in the Marital Chamber of marrying fully into Christ’s body. Again, this is in elevating them into the Sacramental Chamber of Christ’s Presence. This marriage (like the Wedding Feast at Cana) denotes a higher cause and order when Christ is indicating His Passion, saying to His Mother (Mary): “It is not my time yet.”

The Marital embrace is an ascent (The Resurrection.)
 
And… (continuing)

Thus, when the soul passes away, they ascend through Baptism and receiving Christ Sacramentally into this new union, whole new body. They are made clean and anew.

Christ’s marriage of humanity to Himself is God’s will to keep man close to Him. And being close to man (Emmanuel - God with us.) And, through His Sacrifice, He is the God Who saves.
The elevated Sacrament of love and understanding. Virtuous.

Thus, the mark of the Sacrament of Marriage is still existent on both the spouse left on earth, and the one who passes away. The one who passes away receives a new body, via their Baptism. And in the Wedding Feast of the Slain Lamb, is given new robes (like the Prodigal Son.) Hence, they are in the Bridal Chambers, and being seated as guests. One in Sacrament and Communion. Meaning, their marriage is with Christ for eternity.

The one who is left on earth has received that same Sacrament, but still lives in the lesser order and state of that Sacrament. They are free either to be chaste and live out single, or join a Holy Order themselves, or to marry in the lesser order of marriage once more.)

By less, this does not undignify the state and Communion of that order of Marriage, in the Sacrament. It just means it isn’t in the elevated discourse in Christ’s Banquet.

The person out of the fruition of marriage, the Sacrament. Who once was married and espoused to someone beforehand (where the person who passed away, is now espoused to Christ.) The person on earth can continue spousalship with another person who is not married. Wherefore the genuine love and interest of Christ’s spousalship is for possibility and greater potential of children to be born, Baptized, and live their lives out as a whole other and new creation on earth.

It is for this charity of children that have the greater potential and possibility of being born. That most often exerts the Sacrament once again to be taken up, and beholden to, once after one of the spouses passes away.
 
I think the Sacrament of Marriage is given to each other by the man and woman. But it is Blest by the Priest. Thus, making it Sacramental (meaning, codified in the full sense of the state of the Sacrament.)

The union isn’t just the man and the woman (i.e. ordinary - civil - natural communion.) But, God is in that Union through the Priest. Which means, the state of that Union is Blest by God through the Priest’s hands. By Christ’s Sacrifice, that gave way to the Sacrament of the Priesthood.

What is the state of marriage then without being blest?

First, God is the author of all creation. Even the ordinary measure, even under civil law, does God bring about Justice. That Justice is giving each according their due. And in the naturla world, a man and a woman are still made in God’s image, and after His likeness. Which thus means, the ordinary act of marital discourse between one man and one woman still takes place. However, it is still in the fallen embrace for whence did the man (Adam), and the woman (Eve) fall from grace.

But, what if they are Baptized, or one of them is. And yet, they do not have the Priest’s blessing? What makes it a Sacrament by the Priest (or Deacon’s) blessing, as opposed when it does not? What is the significance?

The Blessed Sacrament, Our Lord Presence, answers the question (and questions.)

It was by these very words, Christ said to Our Lady at the Wedding Feast at Cana: “It is not my time.”

Christ’s Passion, He laid down His life. The act of self giving, is in other words, the act of marriage. Dying to one’s self. Saint Paul exhorted this when he referred to men honoring their wives. And wives honoring their husbands.

The Sacramental embrace is not only a Sacrament of Sacrifice (even pagan’s can do this.) But, it is relaying the meaning of that Sacrifice by the Holy Order of the Priesthood (in the sharing.) It’s a Sacramental virtue (if there’s a word for it.)

The Priest binds them to the Covenant and the Law. But in the fulfillment of them. The Eternal Covenant and Law (Which is Love - the Two Greatest [Gifts] and Commandments.)

They are bound to God. Not as shackles and chains. But, bound in His Eternal Covenant Law of Love for ever (like the Order of Melchizedek.) Thus, it’s bound to God, and not just the man and the woman. Their ordinary marriage is put at a higher elevation and call than an ordinary marriage is to bring about, and to be.
 
I sympatize with your feeling of emptiness and the moral/psychological cross put on your shoulders as a young man who live the collapsed of his parents sacramental marriage.

It is really hard to see them followed a path that we believed is the wrong…

I have only have know this through in laws, and it is hard enough. For me, for us as a married couple, and for the consistency of raising of our children.
 
Thanks!

But, just as Christ’s Passion. The Death is not the end. But the reality fulfilled. Christ fulfills the reality of Marriage, His Church, through His Sacrifice and Atonement.

When anyone suffers. And able to be Baptized. Their life in suffering isn’t a total loss. But, even through suffering does one gain…Wisdom!

The wonderful part is the Church. She holds onto the understanding and complete Wisdom (unlike Solomon) of Marriage. Both the underlying natural order (which God made and found it was good.) As well as the Elevated (or Supernatural) order it is placed in. There is also the nature of man. Man takes his image and likeness after his Creator. But, in today’s world, man wants God to take Himself as the image after man (man self idolizes himself.) Satan was “non-servium.” But the greater devil is man: “serve me! I am your God!”

That’s the key difference. Satan tried that temptation, but it didn’t work on the mountain with Christ, Our Lord.

Anyways, as for what moral/psychological and emptiness. The suffering told me what marriage is not. And what it is supposed to be.

The world has a deranged view of marriage for the most part. For if the world (society and the law, those in civil authority) understood the ramifications, seriously. Then divorce would not really happen, for the most part. Maybe unavoidable in some circumstances and instances. But it would be something more than divorce. It would be separating two people as reasons of one endangering the other, or children. But, it would never deface the Sacramental Communion and embrace that as the Church see’s it.

The Divorce Culture in most of the Western World follows it’s key example from King Henry VIII. And that basically serves the same premise. If you can’t stand the person (for whatever reason.) You should be able to divorce. Because things are not working out. That’s not what marriage is. It’s not about things working out. If Christ held to that view, then He would not had died, suffered death, and had to pretty much raise Himself from the Dead to give us clue on marriage. Namely, you must die to one’s self. And give yourself to the other.

The emptiness is the tomb ("why do you look for the living among dead? as the Angel asked Saint Mary Magdalene.)

The fulfillment is in the Sacrifice once made in Calvary, now standing outside on the firm earth. Wherefore standing, Saint Mary Magdalene held the feet, wherefore Our Lord said not to hold Him, for He must go to the Father.

That is Marriage. Christ suffered for His Church, His Bride. Which is mankind in the Sacramental Order and Relationship - Communion and Covenant - which all men are called to be.

Thus, there’s no emptiness - no tomb - no death, but eternal life.
 
Continuing…

The marriage of the world, hence it’s contractual union, is that of the tomb. Death. It won’t manage a bit longer than the two people are with each other, and then want to end it. It’s like the Prodigal Son. For he asked for his father’s inheritance (which by Judaic tradition, you don’t get until your father passes away.) Thus, the Prodigal Son treated his father as though he were dead to him. This is how marriage is seen in today’s culture. It is a lively communion, until the person see’s the other person as dead in the relationship. Thus, asking to get their due (their inheritance) from the divorce.

And as the Prodigal Son lived an unchaste (i.e. adulterous life) outside of his father’s home. Squandering his father’s inheritance. That is what happens from a divorce. Thus, it elicits adultery.

Divorce is empty like the tomb. But, having like Lazarus, lived in a tomb. I’m called out of that Death that my father and mother thought their marriage to be. And called into Eternal Life through my Baptism. And thus, through my own suffering, I then know what marriage is not. And what it is supposed to be.

And, my prayers and petitions to Our Lady. Often contemplating marriage like the Wedding Feast at Cana, before the Blessed Sacrament. Do I see what Marriage is. And what I’m called to be. Married.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for your reply!
A lot for thinking!

I am happy that you found meaningness and learn lessons through your difficult path.
You would be better armed for the future, and your own marriage issues.

All married people have less serious or more serious issues.
But statistics showed that people of divorce homes have a more higher rate of divorce than others…

I have a somewhat live experience of waht may be the origins. A person can hev the bests intention on the world toward marriage. But when his own parents marriage failled… well… a lot of things change… anger, mourning… and finally what was previousely seen as an absolute evil to avoid (divorce) could now seen as… a normal situation for everyone, and acceptable for ourselves.

You would navigated much more easily as you seem to have a very mature view theologically and humanly!
 
Saint_Prince_Caspian said:
Thus, what does divorce mean to the Sacrament of Marriage
Click to expand...
A Sacramental Marriage isn’t impacted by a Civil Divorce, the Marriage remains a Marriage until death in the eyes of God & the Church.

Annulment is an official decree that a marriage wasn’t actually a marriage in the first place, so Annulments can’t impact a Sacramental Marriage at all.
 
Impact doesn’t necessarily mean that is ceases the Sacrament for being or present. That’s not what I meant by the question.

For, Christ was without sin. But He suffered by Death of it. Did He cease to be the Son of God? Did He cease to be without sin? No. As the Centurion even stated: “He truly was the Son of God.”

But, did Christ suffer? Was He then impacted? Yes.

Thus, how does Divorce impact the the Sacrament of Marriage?

It distresses that Marital Communion. Meaning, it causes pain and suffering to that Sacrament (as it is apart of the Body of Christ. And thus causes pain through His members.) For Saint Paul who fell off of his horse or donkey (i.e. “Saul. Saul. Why do you persecute me?”)

Thus, that is exactly how Divorce impacts and affects the Sacrament of Marriage. It suffers it.
 
Last edited:
Annulments, rightly, is stating the Socramentof Marriage did not take place, was not fulfilled, or not valid. It’s stating the nullity.

However, it doesn’t distress a relationship that wasn’t there. Whereas on the other hand, Divorce does distress that Sacrament. Meaning, it causes pain to the Body of Christ. Thus as the stoning of the first Martyrs had done.
 
Last edited:
The Church realises that there are times when it can be better for a couple to separate than continue to live together. Sometimes if that happens a civil divorce is useful because it arranges in civil law for the division of assets, support of spouses and children, etc. In other words it resolves what may be problems in secular life.

However, the Church states that the sacred bond of marriage persists. The couple remain married even if the civil courts have granted a divorce. Simply being divorced in this way is not adultery.

After a civil divorce the couple may petition a diocesan tribunal for a decree of nullity of their marriage. If this is granted the couple are no longer married and are free to marry someone. If the tribunal rules the marriage was valid they remain married and cannot get married to anyone else.

The problem with adultery arises if one of the couple either does not apply for an annulment or after having applied for one and been told the marriage is valid they go ahead and marry someone else in a civil marriage ceremony or in a non-Catholic religious ceremony. That marriage is invalid and that person is committing adultery.

Marriage is not a sacrament that leaves an indelible mark on the soul like baptism or holy orders.
 
Two validly baptized persons who are free to marry, when one is male and one is female, be they Catholic or Assembly of God or Nazarene or Presbyterian, etc. may enter a Sacramental Marriage. For the Presbyterian man and the Assembly of God lady, they can marry in a park or in an Elvis Chapel or underwater and, if there are free to marry, the marriage is Sacramental.

If either or both are not validly baptized, and they are both still free to marry, they enter a valid Natural marriage.

It is not complex, it is pretty simple.
 
Saint_Prince_Caspian said:
The Sacrament of Marriage, if it is valid, is indelible.
Click to expand...
You are taking a word (i.e “indelible”) that has a very particular and specific meaning in Catholic sacramental theology and you are using it incorrectly. The sacrament of marriage does not place an indelible mark on the soul. It exists until the death of one of the spouses. That is why a person can marry again after their spouse dies. Remember, Jesus said that in heaven, none are married or given in marriage.

I’m still not sure what your main point is with this thread as I am having difficulty following your train of thought.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top