I Hate Divorce, But I Love The Divorced

Our local daily recently featured the efforts of several area churches that offer informational and supportive programs for the separated and divorced. One participant happily noted that the Catholic Church is "beginning to recognize that divorce is real."

This and other quotes are best understood in their contexts: the whole article, the whole interview (much of which didn't likely make the article), the life of the speaker, and so forth. Articles are necessarily selective, and therefore are subject to scrutiny and contention.

Articles also can foster genuine dialogue, the mutual search for truth-in-charity. To that end, I would affirm that the Church has always recognized divorce, in the sense that it's a reality, that people do it. Recognition, permission, and approval are three different words.

Divorce long predates the Church. In Dt 24:1-4, Moses recognized that couples already were divorcing on the basis of "something indecent" that the man found in the woman. Neither the laws nor the culture admitted reciprocity, whenever the woman might have found indecency in the man's conduct. Earlier, in Dt 22:13ff, Moses treated a divorce scenario that involved dishonesty (as many do, from both parties!). Then you have the prophet Malachi, whose biting sound byte says it all: "For I hate divorce, says the Lord, the God of Israel" (2:16; for context see 2:10-17, if not the whole book--it's short).

With curiosity I note that Mal 2:!6 expresses divorce with the Greek participle ἐξαποστείλῃς  ("sending away"), rooted in [ex]apostello, the origin of apostle.

Jesus declared Moses' divorce laws to be a concession, "by reason of the hardness of your hearts" (Mt 19:8f), and reaffirmed the primordial arrangement: "Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator '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. Therefore, what God has joined together, no human being must separate" (19:4-6).

The Church cannot fight the fact that the civil law may terminate the civil dimensions of a marital contract. The Church cannot fight the fact that men and women cease to live together as husband and wife (which often happens long before the civil divorce date, indeed long before the physical separation). For the Church, or anyone, to claim that these are not realities would be insane.

When the woman in the above article praises the Church's recognition of the reality of divorce, I suspect she means to praise her parish and other congregations that are offering forums for compassion, education, and support, even if local-level support has taken a couple of decades to materialize.

+ + + + +

In 1980, a Synod of Bishops first addressed the marital problems that Catholics and others face within the positive context of Church teaching. In conjunction with that synod, Pope John Paul II wrote Familiaris Consortio.  In 1997, Pope John Paul II addressed the Pontifical Council for the Family in response to their meeting "On the Pastoral Care of the Divorced and Remarried."

To summarize the 1997 document:

• The Church will do what she can to assist the baptized who have attempted non-sacramental marriages, affirming the grace of God and the Church's maternal compassion even while affirming Church teachings.
• Remarried Catholics are welcome in the Church. Like everyone else, they must listen to the Word of God and engage in prayer, repentance, and charity, so to foster genuine hope for their eternal salvation.
• Special attention must be paid to the formation of children born to non-sacramental marriage, as well as to their "support network" (close influences among their family and friends).

While non-Catholic religious bodies may sanction second-plus marriages, the Catholic Church maintains that a sacramental marriage remains binding until the death of a spouse, or until the validity of the bond has been disproven by the Church Tribunal's scrutiny. This latter situation is called the "declaration of nullity" or "annulment," for short. It does not intend to pass judgment on the good intentions of a couple, but rather whether the consent they exchanged truly gave rise to the Sacrament of Matrimony. Tribunals rely on the honest testimony of the petitioning spouse and those enlisted to offer corroborating testimony.

Divorced but not remarried Catholics are encouraged to remain faithful to the Sacraments, to prayer, sacrifice, and charity. They must also preserve the integrity and chastity of their initial bond, because it is considered sacramental and binding until proven otherwise. We recognize that many Catholics initiate dating and indeed courtship after (and often before!) civil divorce; to deny this would be as foolish as to deny the reality of divorce itself. These couples must preserve chastity like any other unmarried couple, and must also avoid giving the "wink-wink" impression of being as married as anyone else "except for the technicality."

I recall (and still shudder at the recollection of) one best man who publicly declared of the  groom, "It's about time he makes an honest woman of her (the bride)." A ceremony of the highest solemnity will not make a dishonest person honest. Grace builds upon nature.

As far as I am aware, this couple is no longer married to each other.

"But when the Son of Man comes, will he find valid marriages on earth?" #thingsJesusneversaid

For various reasons some Catholics attempt subsequent marriages without seeking a declaration of nullity for their first union. And there are situations in which the couple had sought a declaration but the Church would not grant it (by far the minority, and for reasons that are beyond the scope of this article, and my competency, to discuss). The Church owes compassion to Catholics in this situation, though they may not partake of the Sacraments of Eucharist or Reconciliation until the initial bond (and any intervening bonds, where applicable) is declared null and the current marriage is solemnized ("convalidated") by a duly-authorized priest or deacon of the Catholic Church.

Some finer points on these matters are treated by this 1994 letter from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Here as always, it is most prudent not to act on one's own intentionally isolated judgment of conscience, but rather to consult a qualified external source on the local level (e.g. a parish priest, deacon, or pastoral minister).

This teaching is hard to accept, but personal experience in my own family attests that it can be accepted and lived, though patience is needed during the time of ineligibility to receive the sacraments, and during the annulment process.

+ + + + +

The Reading Eagle article did not specify whether these post-divorce programs were assisting the (validly or invalidly) remarried. Whether or not remarriage is involved, these spiritual initiatives are laudable. Alongside our premarital preparation programs, they express the Church's ardent care for souls, as well as her insistence upon the sacredness of Holy Matrimony.

Form und Drang: The Appearance of Catholic Marriage

In his recent address to the Roman Rota (a fuller version found here), Pope Benedict XVI makes a strong connection between the contemporary crisis in faith and the increasing invalidity of marital bonds.  He covers the prevalent problems in marital attempts: one or both parties' lack of will, understanding, or ability to enter into what the Church wills and understands as "sacramental marriage."    The Holy Father speaks with characteristic eloquence about the crisis of faith--the rejection of the "divine proposal" undergirding all human proposals.  Alongside understanding, voluntariness, and capacity, there is one more crucial component in a sacramental Catholic marriage: canonical form.

Complete This Form

Baptized Catholics must marry according to the proper "form," or format, for marriage: in the presence of a duly-authorized Catholic priest or deacon and two witnesses.

Obtaining witnesses usually isn't a problem, because couples want people to witness their wedding.  The standard "best man" and "maid/matron of honor" must be a man and a woman who are of sufficient age and mental competence to have a basic understanding of what Jack and Jill are doing in this action.

The problem usually occurs when the couple fails to secure the presence of a Catholic priest or deacon as witness to their vows.  This especially happens with baptized Catholics who do not attend Mass, and who therefore might not consider a specifically Catholic wedding necessary or desirable.  At least six months prior to their wedding date, a Catholic spouse-to-be must approach his or her parish priest (either personally or through the parish administrative assistant) to secure the availability of the church.   In the course of their preparation, couples must follow particular diocesan requirements: attendance at premarital classes, retreats, workshops, etc., and meetings with the priest or deacon who is preparing them for marriage.

If the couple didn't know or care about these requirements, and then marries outside the Church, their marriage is "invalid," and the Catholic party/ies cannot participate in the Sacraments until the marriage is "convalidated," or rectified.  The first step is to approach a priest or deacon.  Under his direction, the Catholic party/ies must make a thorough Confession, and then rectify the invalid marriage by "re-enacting" their wedding vows before a priest or deacon with (at least) two witnesses.  The original "best man" and "maid/matron of honor" need not be the witnesses, but certainly could be.

One typical example of a violation of canonical form takes place with outdoor weddings.  As far as I know, no diocese permits outdoor weddings.  Gardens, parks, and beaches are beautiful places.  They exhibit God's creation and manifest His presence.  But the sacred public action of marriage is limited to the sanctuary of a Catholic Church building.  In this and every unconventional scenario, it is best to consult the Chancery of the particular Diocese.  (Read one canonist's take on the matter.)

If people simply want to do what they want to do--have their "dream wedding" regardless of what the Church has to say about it--perhaps, for our benefit and theirs, it's best to let them go.  If they should eventually desire to return to the practice of their faith and reception of the Sacraments, we can help with convalidating their vows as soon as possible.  Couples must consider their motives, lest they intend to resort to subsequent convalidation just so they can get their way the first time.  Moreover, with the increasing likelihood of divorce, a wedding not conducted according to canonical form is easier to declare null.  We don't welcome divorce, but we don't ignore its unfortunate prevalence either.

Catholics who desire a second marriage in the Church when their first one was not conducted according to canonical form, cannot for that reason ignore that first "attempted" marriage.  It must be declared null by a version of the ecclesiastical annulment process that is less complicated than a "regular" declaration of nullity.  Either process--full-fledged ("formal") or half-fledged ("documentary")--helps the couple to deal squarely with the realities that precipitated the breakup of the first marriage, lest they repeat the physical, emotional, moral, and spiritual errors of the previous situation.  When a third marriage is sought, or for other reasons, the Church may stall a new celebration until the couple undergoes counseling.

Unless they have received an ecclesiastical "dispensation" (a relaxation of the law for this particular case, for just reasons, obtained through the agency of the priest/deacon preparing the couple for marriage), canonical form is the norm.

+ + + + +

Not to sound pessimistic...I shudder at the thought that many people, enmeshed in the "current crisis of faith" that the Pope describes--

• hellbent on autonomy,
• prostrating themselves before none, 
• averse to adversity, 
• willing above all their personal fulfillment as they currently envision it-- 

are incapable of valid sacramental marriage.  "As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be."  "The poor you will always have with you."

"Now they have wine...and soon, they will have whine."

As a priest I cannot judge certain invalidity in any couple's situation, although I may express suspicions, tactfully yet honestly.  In fact, I would be remiss to withhold grave reservations, just as much as a seminary formator would be for a severely narcissistic seminarian's advancement to Holy Orders.  Remember, Matrimony and Holy Orders each support the flourishing of the Church, and each therefore deserves the other's attentive regard.  If I could assist a couple to break off their engagement because one or both parties have discerned good reasons not to be married to each other, that would be a service to them, to the Church, and to society.  At the same time, I would also be remiss to discount or forget the grace of God: though it builds upon people's nature, it is always available to people who become willing to change even their worst character defects.

The Pope affirms at length and in depth the possibility of valid marriage, though formation for such must begin in the home, be nourished in the school, be practiced in the university, barracks, workplace, and wherever people are formed...quam primum (ASAP)!

If it seems, patient reader, like this blog's Reverend Author is on a "marriage kick," it's only because the Church and the world are, too.  People are still giving it a go.  Good for them, and good for the Church!  Marriage continues to be held in considerable esteem, despite the many assaults against it.  Even the assaults are a backward hommage to the institution.