Divorce In The Bulletin

[tinytherese]

[quote name='thessalonian' timestamp='1319133626' post='2324267']

If somone is partaking in something that the Church considers a grave moral evil I would not want to participate in it with them unless I was sure that they had mitigating circumstances. That's all I am saying. Further if more people stuck out their marriages when separated it would uphold There may be cases of extreme abuse that do require divorce to protect the woman but not everyone who has anger management issues is going to pull the plug on his wife in the hospital.

[/quote]

According to reputable research, people who are mentally and or physically abusive do not act as they do because they have anger management issues. They do so out of the desire for controlling another person. People stay with such a person because of how manipulative and charming they can be. I know this because I have taken psychology classes and a guest speaker came in to one class who educated us on domestic violence and how to help women in these situations.

[thessalonian]

[quote name='tinytherese' timestamp='1319139312' post='2324328']

According to reputable research, people who are mentally and or physically abusive do not act as they do because they have anger management issues. They do so out of the desire for controlling another person. People stay with such a person because of how manipulative and charming they can be. I know this because I have taken psychology classes and a guest speaker came in to one class who educated us on domestic violence and how to help women in these situations.
[/quote]

If that is true then I guess you would say the Church is wrong in its desire that such couples go through separation. There are all kinds of stuggles in marriage and someone can always find reason to have it end in divorce. Sad that we don't promote marriage by in great faith staying in difficult marriages, all be it separated, in such cases.

[Totus Tuus]

My parents are divorced, and although I think it's just plain weird, and maybe a little disturbing, that that was in the bulletin, I DO think that spouses (especially the wives) need more education on the process for when it does unfortunately need to occur (i.e., in cases of abuse or addiction).

[beatitude]

[quote name='thessalonian' timestamp='1319148386' post='2324364']

If that is true then I guess you would say the Church is wrong in its desire that such couples go through separation. There are all kinds of stuggles in marriage and someone can always find reason to have it end in divorce. Sad that we don't promote marriage by in great faith staying in difficult marriages, all be it separated, in such cases.
[/quote]

Overall I agree, but I think it's important to differentiate between a struggle and an abusive situation. The dangerous thing is that a lot of spouses who are being abused will try to explain away what is happening to them in logical terms ("It's just a bad time for him - he'll get better...") or even start to blame themselves ("If only I could be a better housekeeper/not so lazy/more accommodating, he wouldn't be doing this"). What Tinytherese has written is by and large correct: abuse is more about power and control over another person than anger. Abusive people usually keep the abuse behind closed doors and are very good at being charming in public - they may be well-liked in the community and even seem like the ideal partner. A person with anger problems is different. They struggle to regulate their emotion - they usually can't keep it hidden, or direct their anger to just a few people; outbursts can happen anywhere, any time. If there is no one around when they get angry, they may sometimes take it out on themselves (e.g. through self-harm) or on property (punching walls, throwing objects). It's not manipulative in the way that abuse is, although of course abusive behaviour and anger problems can occur in the same person. I've worked with special ed kids who have been abused, so sadly this is something I know quite a lot about.

[Jaime]

You still haven't refuted anything that I'm saying. Maybe I wasn't clear enough. Under the proper circumstances, the Church is not against divorce. (unlike abortion which was a lousy analogy) If a person is divorcing for the proper reasons, they are not committing a sin. And if they have received an annulment, there was no sin or grave offense in getting a divorce.

That being said, even if someone divorces for poor reasons, they are still in full communion with the Church if they remain chaste.

[organwerke]

[quote name='jaime' timestamp='1319076861' post='2324031']

Well first of all, it allows for the process of annulment to start. Secondly, if they are separated and not divorced and she is hospitalized and cannot advocate for herself, he has the right to advocate for her whether she would want him to or not. Third, the abuser would have legal right and access to her money.

I could continue
[/quote]

Well I think that it depends also on the laws of every country.
Where I live for example, it is not the divorce that allows for the process of annulment to start, but the civil separation that, as thessalonian says, is different from divorce. Then, when the annulment arrives, for an agreement that exists between the State and the Vatican, the acts of annulment can be used to ask the civil law to recognize that even civilly, the marriage was never valid.
So, a person can have an annulment and a situation civilly solved without the need to have a civil divorce.
The concept of divorce in fact is something that is inherently contrary to the doctrine of the Catholic Church, even if it must be said that if divorce comes after annulment it is not contrary to the Catholic Church.

[thessalonian]

[quote name='jaime' timestamp='1319154774' post='2324421']
You still haven't refuted anything that I'm saying. Maybe I wasn't clear enough. Under the proper circumstances, the Church is not against divorce. (unlike abortion which was a lousy analogy) If a person is divorcing for the proper reasons, they are not committing a sin. And if they have received an annulment, there was no sin or grave offense in getting a divorce.

That being said, even if someone divorces for poor reasons, they are still in full communion with the Church if they remain chaste.
[/quote]


Well your first post said "the Church is not against divorce". There was no if. I am glad you clarified. Now I agree with your first sentence. Your second is fine as well, though one may not know at the time of the divorce that it was not a grave offense and therefore it would be advisable to go to confession anyway and at least discuss it with the priest if the divorcee had not sought previous counseling.

On your last point, while they are not excommunicated they may well be in grave sin and so must confess before returning to communion..

The thing I am having difficulty with that I find prevelant in the Church today, and maybe I am reading a bit of this in to your and tinyterse's posts is that the starting point should be divorce is a grave offense first. It will have grave impacts on the family regardless of whether it is justified or not. Finances will be more difficult, children will be lacking one parent or the other's influence, etc. etc. Families will struggle more that are separated or divorce. Backing over someone by accident has nearly as much consequences as backing over them on purpose. I get the impression from too many people that they want to excuse the divorce themselves (I'm talking people who know the couple), Oh he was mean to her or she cheated on him. (infedelity does not automatically make an anullment). Divorce in general is an affront to marriage and thus should be discourage wherever possible and only done when truly needed. And then as the Church does it is only "tolerated".

Edited October 21, 2011 by thessalonian

[thessalonian]

[quote name='beatitude' timestamp='1319150206' post='2324369']

Overall I agree, but I think it's important to differentiate between a struggle and an abusive situation. The dangerous thing is that a lot of spouses who are being abused will try to explain away what is happening to them in logical terms ("It's just a bad time for him - he'll get better...") or even start to blame themselves ("If only I could be a better housekeeper/not so lazy/more accommodating, he wouldn't be doing this"). What Tinytherese has written is by and large correct: abuse is more about power and control over another person than anger. Abusive people usually keep the abuse behind closed doors and are very good at being charming in public - they may be well-liked in the community and even seem like the ideal partner. A person with anger problems is different. They struggle to regulate their emotion - they usually can't keep it hidden, or direct their anger to just a few people; outbursts can happen anywhere, any time. If there is no one around when they get angry, they may sometimes take it out on themselves (e.g. through self-harm) or on property (punching walls, throwing objects). It's not manipulative in the way that abuse is, although of course abusive behaviour and anger problems can occur in the same person. I've worked with special ed kids who have been abused, so sadly this is something I know quite a lot about.
[/quote]


Regardless of the causes and nature of abuse the Church does not grant anullments specifically for it. The Church recommends seaparation for it. I do not consider myself wiser than the Church. I can see where remaining separate but in such a marriage would uphold marriage. I.e. Neighbor says "why don't you get a divorce"..."Because I believe that marriage is for life regardless of the difficult circumstances that may arise".

Edited October 21, 2011 by thessalonian

[thessalonian]

I did send a note last week to the pastor and I see it is not in this weeks bulletin, though the event is next week. He did not respond to me but it seems it may have had an impact.

[MithLuin]

Well, I'm glad it's no longer being advertized in your church's bulletin.

Jesus said, 'What God has joined, let no man seperate.' God has joined the spouses in marriage, and to damage or destroy that in any way is a very sad situation.

Certainly, there are situations where it is necessary (and Jesus did put an 'except' clause in his blanket condemnation of divorce), but it seems clear that divorce is [i]extremely[/i] prevalent in modern American society, and that this is tearing apart the fabric of family life and having a huge impact on our children. Who then grow up and wonder if they can make a marriage work, when both of them grew up in homes where the parents divorced. It's very sobering.

[StMichael]

[quote name='thessalonian' timestamp='1318710050' post='2321705']
By the way the counseling is provided by Catholic Charities. I am am debating whether or not CC should provide such counseling or not. I think it should I guess. It just bothers me that this add is in a parish bulletin seeming to "promote" divorce and help it along. I do think that in a pastoral setting that a priest could direct someone to such counseling. I don't think it should be in the bulletin.
[/quote]

By being in the bulletin, your parish has given it a passive endorsement. Without question the wrong message to send. Then again, from coast to coast, just in the last month I am seeing things coming from the pulpit that simply makes me feel defeated.

I hope in my lifetime, that the Church can get back on track and we can once again focus simply on our faith.

Far too many are doing far too much damage to the Church, in their words, in their actions.

Edited October 21, 2011 by StMichael

[got2luvjc]

[quote name='Norseman82' timestamp='1318993972' post='2323488']
Probably the most infuriating homily I heard was when a priest acting as administrator (later became pastor) recounted how his sister was dating and wanted to marry a divorced man and could not do so in the Catholic Church and how it caused pain in his family and - FROM THE PULPIT - called the Church's rules on divorce and remarriage "stupid".
[/quote]

That would TOTALLY infuriate me. I'd be surprised if my blood pressure didn't skyrocket.

[MithLuin]

I'd pull the priest aside after mass and have a word with him over that. I mean, if I had the time and the guts. I mean, of course it's tough when it's your own family member caught up in something, but you don't [i]say[/i] that from the pulpit.

[Norseman82]

[quote name='got2luvjc' timestamp='1319233233' post='2324848']

That would TOTALLY infuriate me. I'd be surprised if my blood pressure didn't skyrocket.
[/quote]
[quote name='MithLuin' timestamp='1319234556' post='2324868']
I'd pull the priest aside after mass and have a word with him over that. I mean, if I had the time and the guts. I mean, of course it's tough when it's your own family member caught up in something, but you don't [i]say[/i] that from the pulpit.


[/quote] I actually did speak with him after Mass - I told him that I said a prayer for him that he doesn't let his personal biases (or something along that line) get in the way of doing his job.