I feel like I want to blame God

[CatherineM]

​But so far the only reason we have to think this is an unsubstantiated hunch from a party who, while probably genuine, is certainly not unbiased.

​I can tell you haven't spent much time in divorce court.  That's all you hear there.  The evidence rules in the Tribunal are different than in civil court.  Unfortunately most of the time all it takes is a signed affidavit that a person never wanted children in the Tribunal.

[Nihil Obstat]

​I can tell you haven't spent much time in divorce court.  That's all you hear there.  The evidence rules in the Tribunal are different than in civil court.  Unfortunately most of the time all it takes is a signed affidavit that a person never wanted children in the Tribunal.

​That seems problematic.

[Maggyie]

​That seems problematic.

Well realistically what can we do differently than asking people to swear to something. Since we lack a truth serum. And often these are private discussions the couple hides from the priest and others to avoid an upset.

However in my experience rarely do people change their minds. Ask them what their stance is today and it reflects what it was. At most it goes from "Hmm, maybe" to "no, definitely not." For validity purposes Maybe is the same as Never. 

That being said I agree with others this is too soon to date after the death of a long term relationship. 

[Ash Wednesday]

I had a confessor point out to me once that we shouldn't blame God for the free will and choices that people make. God has to honor our free will, hence her decision to leave you was hers, and hers alone.

But we can ask God for the grace to deal with the things that come at us. I pray that he give you wisdom and strength during this difficult time.

[Nihil Obstat]

In any case, we have not heard anything from the wife, nor likely will we. We have a person's opinion on someone else's disposition.

[CatherineM]

In any case, we have not heard anything from the wife, nor likely will we. We have a person's opinion on someone else's disposition.

​Very true.  I firmly believe that divorce is a sign that a true bond was never formed.  I think that true sacramental marriages are rare in our society, and when they do happen, they never end in divorce.

[Nihil Obstat]

​Very true.  I firmly believe that divorce is a sign that a true bond was never formed.  I think that true sacramental marriages are rare in our society, and when they do happen, they never end in divorce.

In that case the Church is radically failing in preparing couples for marriage. That would be a scandal on a massive level.

[AccountDeleted]

In that case the Church is radically failing in preparing couples for marriage. That would be a scandal on a massive level.

​It is a scandal because it is happening. 

[AccountDeleted]

​Very true.  I firmly believe that divorce is a sign that a true bond was never formed.  I think that true sacramental marriages are rare in our society, and when they do happen, they never end in divorce.

Yes.

[Credo in Deum]

​Very true.  I firmly believe that divorce is a sign that a true bond was never formed.  I think that true sacramental marriages are rare in our society, and when they do happen, they never end in divorce.

I don't agree.  I believe there are many truly valid sacramental marriages but not a lot of couples who are truly disposed toward the sacramental graces they have received, and continue to receive, through the sacrament of matrimony.  

Edited April 3, 2015 by Credo in Deum

[Nihil Obstat]

Dr. Peters on this topic:

https://canonlawblog.wordpress.com/2014/05/08/even-if-the-pope-said-it-it-was-reckless-to-repeat-it/

I preface my remarks thus: I worked in diocesan tribunals for more than 10 years and concluded that hundreds of the marriage cases I saw therein were canonically null; I have been married for nearly 30 years; and I have seen, in my own family and among my closest friends, dozens of successful and failed marriages, some of those latter being canonically null, others just ruined. In short, my perspectives here are at least as professionally credentialed and as personally experienced as anyone else’s.

1. Marriage is, before anything else, a naturalcontract. Any claim, therefore, about “marriage”—including the shocking claim that half of all marriages are invalid—must be true about marriage as entered into by the great majority of the world’s population; that, or it must be abandoned. So, does Cdl. Kasper really think that half of the marriages around the world are invalid? If not, he should never have expressed himself so.

2. But perhaps the prelate only had in mindsacramental marriages (marriages entered into by two baptized persons) when he asserted that half of all marriages are null. But, if sacramental marriage perfects natural marriage and if grace builds on nature, what would make Christian marriage less stable than natural marriage?

Actually, a few things come to mind.

Some Catholic marriages are invalid for reasons having nothing to do with natural law, because they were, say, entered into by boys under age 16 contrary to Canon 1084 or by renegade priests contrary to Canon 1087. But those invalid marriages represent a proverbial drop in the bucket of invalid unions; their presence hardly allows one to claim that half of all marriages among the baptized, or even among Catholics, are invalid.

Admittedly one source of canonical nullity has no foundation whatsoever in natural law yet accounts for thousands of invalid marriages among Catholics: what I have described as the outdated requirement ofcanonical form. But, while this requirement allows tens of thousands of Catholics to walk away from ‘marriages’ that we would require Protestants (and indeed all non-Catholics) to honor, violation of form does not occur in numbers that would make half of all marriages, even among Catholics, let alone among Protestants, to say nothing of non-Christians, invalid. Not even close.

Or perhaps Cdl. Kasper wants to take on the “automatic sacramentality” point of Church teaching on marriage (see 1983 CIC 1055), and from there tease out a contractual invalidity argument for any sacramentum fidei attentatum sine fide, but I’ve seen nothing so complex offered yet.

Well, there is much more to say, but keeping in mind that this is only a blog post, let me conclude by reminding all that a long, long tradition of Church teaching recognizes humans’ natural capacity for marriage, reminds Christians that the grace of matrimony adds to the stability of marriage, and presumes the validity of all marriages unless and until it is proven otherwise.

 

https://canonlawblog.wordpress.com/2014/05/08/cdl-kaspers-claim-cannot-be-ignored/ 

Either the pope did not say what Kasper claims he said, whereupon the cardinal should immediately retract his words, or the pope really did tell Kasper that half of all marriages (let’s just say half of all Catholicmarriages, although the phrasing here embraces all marriages on earth) are invalid, whereupon the Church needs immediately to examine the truth of that claim. If, Deus vetet, half of all Catholic marriages really are invalidwe are facing an unprecedented sacramental, social, and pastoral catastrophe that demands emergency action.

I’m serious: suppose we awoke to find half of all Catholic baptisms invalid, or half of all Masses, or half of all ordinations, or half of all Confessions, would not virtually everything else in the Church come to a screeching halt until the cause of such stunning invalidity were identified, rooted out, and repaired? Of course! But by the same token, how can the possibility—one being openly attributed to the highest level in the Church—that half of all Catholic marriages are invalid not call for an equally urgent immediate ecclesiastical response? We simply have to know whether the pope (a) is really alerting us to impending disaster, or (b) was just spit-balling ideas with an old colleague (and is now steaming mad at him for broadcasting his idle remarks to the world), or (c) said absolutely nothing of the kind. Precisely because all three scenarios are possible, Fr. Lombardi has to seek a clarification from the Holy See. And, yes, I sympathize with his reluctance to do so.

To be clear, I see no evidence that half of the world’s marriages (or even half of all Catholic marriages) are invalid, but I am certainly open to examining whatever evidence the pope (perhaps) and Cdl. Kasper (at least) might have to support this astounding claim. Indeed such an investigation would be of the highest priority for many in the Church.

[Nihil Obstat]

If sacramental marriages are rare, despite attempts to confect the sacrament being incredibly commonplace, then we have a massive, unprecedented problem that goes right to the very top, and with which probably every single priest and bishop the world over is complicit.

[AccountDeleted]

If sacramental marriages are rare, despite attempts to confect the sacrament being incredibly commonplace, then we have a massive, unprecedented problem that goes right to the very top, and with which probably every single priest and bishop the world over is complicit.

​And some people say you tend to over exaggeration - personally I just don't see it..  

[Nihil Obstat]

​And some people say you tend to over exaggeration - personally I just don't see it..  

I cannot recall "some people" saying that.

Can you name any other situation in which the Church invalidly attempts a sacrament *most of the time* and it is somehow not an unprecedented grave crisis?

[AccountDeleted]

I cannot recall "some people" saying that.

Can you name any other situation in which the Church invalidly attempts a sacrament *most of the time* and it is somehow not an unprecedented grave crisis?

​And some people say you don't have a sense of humor either - personally I disagree with them.