Joe Cannon, this one’s for you: Marriage, divorce, and annulments
Last Tuesday (March 11) I was interviewed on the Joe Cannon show (940 AM Montreal) regarding the so-called “new sins from the Vatican”. I found this whole affair to be a tempest in a teacup, and I said so on the air. Joe was a challenging interviewer (he clearly likes to keep things punchy), but I found him quite fair. At one point, though, he said he didn’t understand one thing: how a Catholic priest can give communion to a confessed murderer, and not to a divorced and remarried couple. This is a complex topic, of course, so I did the best I could in the 15 seconds I had, but Joe was good to me and pointed out that perhaps we’d have to do a whole other show on that issue. Anytime, Joe, anytime.
Still, I’ve been thinking about this interview since then, so I thought I’d take a moment to write up a blog post for all those persons wondering about the Catholic understanding of marriage and divorce.
From the Catholic point of view, the breakup of a marriage always involves some sort of tragedy. We know this because while little kids may dream one day of being married, they never dream that if they are really really lucky they might also get divorced too. In my experience, marriages break up for one of three types of reasons.
The first category is reasons is sin. One person commits a particular sin or set of sins against the other, often retaliatory sins then happen as well, and the marriage is soon circling the drain. A classic example is an affair: adultery is a sin against the promise of fidelity. Whatever the sins might be, though, a couple can work through them through the gift of forgiveness.
Still, forgiveness is not always easy, because of unhealthy or unrealistic relationship patterns. This brings me to the next major category of reasons for marriage breakup: lack of maturity. Every person is born with a focus on self, and this is quite natural: after all, as babies all we really know is ourselves and our needs. As we grow, however, we go through a process of going from being self-centred to becoming other-centered: we go from narcissism to altruism. From the Catholic point of view, a fully mature person of not just someone who is able to function well in society, but someone who is able to live in an other-centred way. Marriage demands this approach: it is not simply a transaction, and it is even more than a partnership — it is a covenant, in which the could is not involved in “give-and-take” but “give-and-give”. Parenting, especially, requires this approach, because in the end the only good reason to have kids is because you want to love them.
From the Catholic point of view, you cannot get married unless you possess a minimum of maturity in certain ways (for example, you have to be willing to have children). On the other hand, from practical experience we know that it is awfully hard to *stay* married unless you also have a willingness to continue to grow in maturity. A married relationship itself makes this kind of demand on people, because neither person is perfect. There is a constant challenge to grow in mutual understanding, generosity, forgiveness, and care. While marriage requires a minimum of maturity, it is also a school of simple virtues where that maturity is constantly tested and pushed to grow. A marriage which does not possess a minimum of maturity — including sufficient maturity to invest in the further growth process — the marriage will eventually founder. Small incidents or resentments are not resolved and grow into bigger issues, and sooner or later sins (see the first set of reasons) start to creep in as well, and the marriage is in terrible trouble.
The third set of reasons for marriage breakup, in my experience, is something I call force majeure. Force majeure consists of external circumstances which test a marriage to beyond its natural breaking point if it has no outside help. For example, a couple may be married and unfortunately one of the two falls terribly sick, say with a disturbing mental illness. The healthy spouse has to carry a burden of house and home alone, including the burden associated with the illness of the other spouse, and it is tough. The sickness may not be anybody’s fault, but the fact remains that is a challenge and at a certain point the healthy spouse may just give up and throw in the towel. This being said, though, I do not believe that force majeure necessarily needs to marriage breakup, because the pressure only becomes intolerable if there is no outside support mechanism. Simply put, a married couple is not a self-sufficient unit, and it is foolish to think that it can be. A married couple needs to be part of a web of relationships with other family, friends, society, school, church and God, all of whom contribute their share of support in challenging times. Married couples sometimes do not have this support, and that can be the fault of the outside agencies (some extended families, for example, are just bastions of their own dysfunction; sometimes the local church doesn’t have a lot to offer for family support; and so on). Still, sometimes married couples choose themselves to not be part of these networks in a meaningful way, or are too proud or embarassed to turn to them when the need arises. Force majeure gets its marriage-destroying power, then, mainly if it interacts with this sort of lack of maturity (second set of reasons) which then often leads to sins (first set of reasons), and again the marriage of stressed to the breaking point.
While what I have provided here may seem to be a litany of disasters, but in fact it is also a litany of hope, because we see the dangers and develop strategies to avoid them.
First, we need to head off any problems in the first place, by strengthening our network of supportive relationships. From this point of view, this starts with a strong relationship with God and with a local worshipping community *as a couple*. As the saying goes, “a family that prays together stays together”. True spirituality helps people see clearly about themselves, in both their strengths and weaknesses, and automatically brings a connection to people who believe the same things.
Next, we need to be constantly growing in altruism, and again *as a couple*. From a Catholic point of view, this again has a special starting point in holy sex. Sex is holy when it is completely altrustic, free of selfishness through a total giving of self to the other. This is the main reason, actually, why the Catholic Church is opposed to the use of artificial contraception: because it involves telling the other person, “you can have everything of me except my fertility” — the gift is not total, so the sex is not holy. Studies show that couples who live a sexual relationship that this not just healthy but holy have a drastically reduced breakup rate, so it would seem the Catholic Church is onto something here.
Finally, a couple needs to practice mutual honesty and forgiveness. One of the key ways we know something is sinful is when we want to hide it from others. A couple that lives in mutual honesty will find it very hard to lie or keep secrets from the other, because the other will simply know that something is wrong. This becomes a strong incentive to avoid sin, but also to immediately turn to the other for forgiveness. This next point may be particularly hard, and the wounded spouse may want to try and understand *why* the sin was committed or keeps coming back. The sinning spouse may not even know him- or herself. In reality, though, this means that the couple needs to start to take a look at the roots of immaturity and narcissism that are still present in their relationship (i.e. the second tier reasons) and work them through, perhaps with the advice of a counselor (a therapist, a priest, or whomever).
Marriage can be a long and sometimes bumpy road, but those bumps don’t need to lead to breakdowns. Still, breakdowns do occur, and sometimes there does not seem to be hope for reconciliation. So how are we to approach the topic of marriage breakup?
In civil society, such as here in Quebec, we typically see three forms of structured marriage breakup: separation, annulment, and divorce. Most people are familiar with the first and the last, but annulment also exists even in civil law. A famous case of civil annulment was Britney Spears’ hours-long Vegas marriage to Jason Allan Alexander, a childhood friend. It wasn’t a divorce, but an annulment granted by a Nevada judge.
Why don’t we see more civil annulments, rather than divorces? The main reason has to do with the structure of civil marriage itself, which has no theology. Civil marriage is concerned with concrete elements in the external forum, such as property relationships, and that is all: no one can legislate some sort of requirement to actually love your spouse. Also, because there are many different perspectives within a given society as to the nature and/or purpose of marriage, civil law necessarily tends to avoid choosing between them and instead will focus on the merely formal aspects of actually getting married, such as the age of the couple. This sort of thing is externally verifiable, while something like a “lack of maturity” is very hard to measure in a court of law. We see more divorces than annulments, therefore, because there are fewer reasons in civil law for annulments to actually happen. Still, happen they do.
Now the Church also has three structured forms of marriage breakup, corresponding roughly to the civil three. These are “separation of the spouses”, “dissolution of the bond”, and “declaration of nullity”. Let’s see how these match up.
Both kinds of law (civil law and canon law) include the possibility of legal separation. Both kinds of law include the notion that spouses owe certain duties to each other, such as the duty to maintain common living, but both kinds of law admit the possibility that the spouses can separate for certain justifiable reasons. People often see civil separation as a prelude to civil divorce, so they are sometimes surprised to see that the Church also allows the possibility for couples to “justifiably” separate. It is true that the Church does not “believe in divorce” per se, but it is also true that the Church has been around for almost 2000 years and is not stupid. The idea that a “good Catholic woman” is not allowed to leave an abusive husband, for example, is false nonsense. Canon 1153 paragraph 1, for example, states the following:
If either of the spouses causes grave mental or physical danger to the other spouse or to the offspring or otherwise renders common life too difficult, that spouse gives the other a legitimate cause for leaving, either by decree of the local ordinary or even on his or her own authority if there is danger in delay.
That is official Catholic practice. Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise: not your parents, not even a badly misinformed priest.
If civil separation typically leads to civil divorce, though, what about canonical separation? The Church always hopes for a reconciliation for a couple, and as a priest I have personally worked with couples and therapists to help reconciliation happen. When that reconciliation happens, often the marriage is even stronger after, but if it doesn’t some sort of permanent separation may occur even though the couple remains married. There is no time limit on canonical separation: as long as the original reasons for the separation endure, the separation can continue. As I say, though, the couple is still married, and so certain basic obligations are still in place, such as the duty to remain sexually faithful.
Now it often happens that, during the course of a separation, a couple gets a civil divorce. From the point of view of the Church a civil divorce has no binding spiritual force, and if you think about it this only makes sense. After all, who made that judge a priest, that he can declare when something is or isn’t a sacrament? It is none of his business, and if we want to respect the separation of Church and State then we need to accept that civil divorce can only apply to the *external* dimension of marriage, such as property relationships, and not to its spiritual properties. In a civil divorce the couple might not be married in the eyes of the government, but in they eyes of God they still are. Marriage belongs to God and is regulated by the Church in its fundamental properties, and nobody else. The Catholic Church takes these words of Jesus very seriously: “What God has joined, let no man separate.”
It for this reason that the Catholic Church cannot admit people to communion who have married outside the Church. The issue is not the civil divorce per se, it is the fact of living in a conjugal relationship outside of the teaching of the Church, a relationship that involves sexual relations. From the point of view of the Catholic Church, sex outside of marriage is always wrong, and that marriage needs to be one that is consistent with the gospel of Jesus. As I say, it isn’t the civil divorce that is the real issue, and in fact a Catholic priest can even counsel a person to seek a civil divorce in certain circumstances (for example, to protect the property of a spouse so as to be able to continue to properly provide for the children). But if a person starts to live as husband and wife without actually being husband and wife, a contradiction comes into play that prevents a person from being able to receive communion.
But is there such a thing as a “Catholic divorce”? Believe it or not, there actually is, although it applies only in very limited cases. It is called dissolution of the bond, and it can only apply if one of the members of the couple is not baptized OR if the marriage has not been consummated. Regarding the requirement of baptism, the Church believes that the indwelling presence of God that comes with baptism also brings with it all the graces that a couple needs to have a solid marriage, such that dissolution of the bond never becomes truly necessary (or possible). With regards to the consummation of the marriage, this relates to the issue of holy sex that I mentioned earlier: assuming the couple consummates the marriage in a truly human way, one that is respectful of what sexuality is supposed to be about, then the holiness of that sexual union seals the vows “until death do they part”. If either of these things is missing, though, dissolution of the bond can theoretically be obtained (although it is not a given) by means of what is known as the “power of the keys”, i.e. the power delegated by Jesus to St. Peter to bind and loose in spiritual matters.
Does this mean that a Catholic whose marriage collapses can never get married again? If the couple was in a sacramental and consummated marriage that was valid in the first place, then no, they cannot. “What God has joined, let no man separate,” and not even the power of the keys can undo this sort of union. But such situations require us to honestly ask the question: was there ever a valid marriage in the first place? In other words, when the couple actually said “I do”, did God really join them?
With regards to annulments, since we have already covered the basics of civil annulments let’s look at canonical annulments (more properly called “declarations of nullity”). An annulment is not a divorce. A divorce means that the marriage really existed, but is now dissolved. A declaration of nullity means that a valid marriage never actually existed in the first place. Some people consider this to be some sort of legal fiction, but in reality the distinction is very important (and, as we have seen, is even found in civil law). I remember hearing the following testimony of a woman who, after her civil divorce, decided to pursue a declaration of nullity as well:
When I got divorced, I knew it was necessary but I still felt bad. I sometimes felt guilty, wondering maybe I could have given it just one more try. When I decided to go for the declaration of nullity, though, I discovered something important. Because the declaration of nullity process goes back to the beginning of the marriage, and doesn’t just look at the end when things are really bad, I came to see that the problems in my marriage had actually always been there, from the very start. We never really had a chance, and so I didn’t need to feel guilty anymore. I also learned a lot about myself and about what a real relationship should look like, and I know I’ll be better prepared for the next time. It was too bad I needed to do it, but getting a declaration of nullity was one of the best things I ever did.
This quote is a paraphrase, but it covers the essence of what she said. I could not have said it better myself, and from the many times I have counselled an ex-spouse with regards to a declaration of nullity I have found them universally quite pleased with idea of the process and the process itself.
What are the different possible grounds for a declaration of nullity? There are many. Some seem more like technicalities, and these resemble the civil annulment clauses (things like not being old enough, or not having the proper ceremony). The grounds for nullity are greatly expanded in canon law, however, because while civil law keeps away from the theology of marriage, canon law jumps right in. Basically, the Catholic Church believes that God is not stupid and therefore will not actually bind the couple spiritually if they don’t meet some *interior* requirements as well. For example, both parties have to understand that marriage is one and indissoluble, that it is oriented towards the procreation and raising of children and for mutual support and consolation. A minimum of human maturity is required as well, as well as sufficient interior freedom to be able to actually say “I do” and mean it. While these may sound like loopholes which can be used to justify anything, in fact there is a lot of jurisprudence that guides the wisdom of the Church in such matters and helps make things more precise. I actually have a book of one year’s worth of marriage tribunal decisions sitting in my personal library, and I take a look at it every so often. Of course, it is a sad litany of human misery, but at the same time contains a lot of wisdom into how we can help prevent marriages from starting out on the wrong basis.
I’d like to conclude this article with two stories.
My first story is of a time when I visited a Sunday school class composed of a bunch of 12-year-old kids. I was actually passing through, but the catechist in charge invited the kids to “ask Father Tom a question”. One kids shot up his hand and asked, “What does the Church teach about divorce?” What I immediately suspected was later confirmed: his own parents were divorced, and so were the parents of half the kids in the room. So I took some time with them, explaining about the fundamental indissolubility of marriage but also about declarations of nullity. They were intrigued by this idea that a marriage might not be valid despite the ceremony, and they wanted to know more. So I read them a case from my aforementioned book:
According to the Petitioner (the wife), the couple began as good friends and nothing more. At one point in their friendship, she confided in her friend and future husband and told him a secret that she had never told anyone else: that she had once had an abortion. He promised to never reveal her secret to anyone, and their friendship continued to endure. Later, after each had a series of unsuccessful relationships, they decided to get married to each other: after all, weren’t they already best friends? Despite this, during the course of the engagement she realised that he was not actually the one for her, and she told him she wanted to call off the wedding. He replied that unless she married him, he would reveal her secret to her family. They went through with the wedding, with no one else suspecting what had happened, but the marriage did not last. The Respondant (the husband) confirms the details of this story.
As you can imagine, the 3-person tribunal granted this declaration of nullity unanimously, on the canonical grounds of fear: she was basically being blackmailed into getting married, and the Church simply does not accept that God would bless this kind of wedding. It turns out that 12-year-olds also don’t accept that God would bless this kind of wedding either — even if her dress was beautiful, even if everybody else thought they were the perfect couple, even if the reception was fantastic. The externals just don’t matter that much for the Church — it is the internals that count. The kids Got It, and I wonder if we could use an expanded form of this simple afternoon to help adolescents grow in maturity and realism about the real nature of conjugal relationships.
My second story has to do with a couple I met when I was visiting Quebec City in 2001. They were from Salt Lake City, and were on their honeymoon. I was walking around town in my clerical collar, and they simply approached me to say hello (both were practicing Catholics). We went for dinner, and that was when I discovered something surprising: both had been previously married, and had obtained declarations of nullity! In her case, she had requested the declaration after her husband left her, and it was granted — a fairly standard case. His story, however, had a few twists. It turns out that he wasn’t even Catholic when one day, sometime after his marriage had ended, a letter showed up from the Catholic marriage tribunal, inviting him to come in and talk to the tribunal about his marriage. He discovered that the reason he had been sent the letter was because his ex was trying to get a declaration of nullity and the tribunal felt it would only be fair to hear his side of things — even if she was a Catholic and he wasn’t. This surprised him, and he agreed to cooperate. He found the process so healing that he actually converted to Catholicism shortly after the declaration of nullity came through! Later, at a parish picnic, some friends introduced these two to each other, figuring they had something pretty unique in common — they both had received declarations of nullity. It sounds silly, but the couple explained that not only did they have something in common, they also now had a much more solid basis upon which to build a second marriage. They hit it off, fell in love, and now were visiting Quebec City on their honeymoon. I was really edified by their story, because it proved (at least to me) the wisdom of the Church’s approach.
Marriage is a vocation, a calling to a way of life that is full of meaning and dignity. Sadly, it is not always lived this way, and for all sorts of reasons. Still, I believe all the wisdom and graces necessary to make a successful marriage are available to us in Christ and his Church. As a priest, it is my mission to help make this grace and wisdom better known and better available, such as from my pulpit in church on Sunday. Joe, if you are reading this, maybe you can use your own pulpit — your radio program — to do something similar. You’d be doing a favour, not for me, but for all your listeners. Let me know if you’d like a hand with something like that, and I’ll be there.
The Catholic Church accepts and coddles the worst of offenders who destroy their marriages, their abandoned spouses and their own children. I am living it you poor excuse of a priest. That is why I formally defected fron the faith.
Time after time this idiot Pope and many Bishops have bemoaned how difficult the “poor unrepentant adulterers” have it, when they FIND themselves in an adulterous civil marriage, but they says NOTHING about the innocents they CONTINUE to destroy as they KNOWINGLY FLAUNT THEIR “MARRIAGES” AND “FAITHFULNESS AS CATHOLICS” with the CONSENT OF EVERY CATHOLIC PRIEST MY WIFE AND HER SEX PARTNER HAVE COME ACROSS AND EVERY BISHOP!!! I have heard of countless other in similar situations encouraged by priests and bishops in every way.
The Catholic Church accepted the sex partner into the Catholic Church through RCIA as he pounded my wife in the sack.
SO SCREW YOU FOOL!
Our nullity decisions are ignored by the priests and bishops who encourage these bastards to remain together for the “good of the children” of their PLANNED ADULTERY and watch as the children of the valid marriage flounder, lose their faith and the abandoned parent does all he can do to live the example of faithfulness, while the Catholic Church cry for the criminals, when it should excommunicate them and all who help them.
You are simply an ass, Father. A dumb ass and a lousy priest!
What I have told you is the truth and I loathe priests like you who should tell your bishops to go BLANK THEMSELVES!
It would have been better if your parents aborted you, Father. Then you could not create the problems you and your fellow clergy do in your adutlery encouraging pastoral practices and your fairy tale confessions. Resign from the priesthood you loser!
A Victim of Priests/Bishops/Popes like you and your ilk!
Just to let people know, I have decided to respond to this comment from “Abandoned” in two parallel ways.
First, I will contact him by email privately. I don’t plan on mixing it up with him publicly on this forum.
Second, I will post a reply on this forum, not for the benefit for “Abandoned”, but for the benefit of the other readers of this blog. He wrote his comment to me, but in a public forum, so my response will contain a public dimension as well.
Finally, as this comment is full of “verbal violence”, I reserve the right to delete it and any follow-up comments if I feel it best for the sake of this blog and its readership.
To my blog readers,
I must confess I am at a bit of a loss how to respond to “Abandoned”. Still, I have promised such a response, so here it is (for what it is worth).
There is tremendous anger in his comment. I think it is obvious that this is a person who is in pain, due to a terrible loss.
According to “Abandoned”, his wife left him for another man. I gather that she is still with this other man in a second (civil) marriage. As I put in my original post above, this usually leads to a situation where neither partner should receive communion. “Abandoned” reports, however, that both she and her partner *are* receiving the sacraments with the blessing of their pastors. While I do not know all the details of this case, and we only have the point of view of “Abandoned”, but based on what we can see this situation is irregular with regards to the pastoral practice of the Church.
Did the wife have the right to leave? As I mentioned in my blog post above, there are valid reasons to leave a spouse, including when one “renders common life too difficult”. “Abandoned” is clearly a person capable of verbal cruelty. If this cruelty existed during the marriage, I would say the wife had the right to leave.
Did the wife have the right to commit adultery? No. There is no “right” to commit sin, ever.
Did the wife have the right to get remarried in a civil ceremony? No. For a Catholic, the only marriages that are valid are those done in communion with the Catholic Church, although an (initially) invalid marriage *can become* valid by renewing the marriage vows with the Church (something I’ve done lots of times for people in something called “convalidation”).
Does the wife have the right to ongoing pastoral care from the Church? Yes. So does everyone, in fact. That’s why we are here. I get the impression “Abandoned” would like it if the pastors of the Church would have nothing to do with his wife any more. But the Church is a hospital for sinners, and will always welcome them. We are all sinners.
Is the pastoral care the wife receiving appropriate? This is hard to say. According to “Abandoned”, she is not being properly challenged to live the Gospel without compromise. But we simply don’t have all the facts from an impartial source, so we cannot judge.
Is the behaviour of “Abandoned” itself appropriate? No. As I mentioned before, he seems to me to be a soul in pain. That being said, that pain does not justify his verbal violence (although it does help explain it). The Lord Jesus gave us a number of commands to reach moral perfection, including (for example) refraining from harsh words, respect for pastors, unity with the Church, and the love of enemies. These are also hard sayings, as hard as those on divorce and remarriage. We all do well to remember them and live them, lest we make a shipwreck of our souls.
Hi Father,
Wow…sorry you were the target of such an incredible backlash…some seriously offside stuff there. Glad to see you are capable of handling it with class.
Do you mind a question? I have several, actually, but the most minor one is this: When you type “The Lord Jesus gave us a number of commands to reach moral perfection, including (for example) refraining from harsh words, respect for pastors, unity with the Church, and the love of enemies.” I know where to find the last commandment, but the previous ones I am less sure of. Reason being, there was no “Church” or “Church Pastors” during the time of Jesus (unless you mean “Church” in some other sense), so I am confused about how they are commands from Christ. Gotta book/chapter/verse for me?
Eric
Hi Eric,
Some of the terminology is used analogously, to be sure, but Tradition has applied it to the Church (as the New Israel).
“Refraining from harsh words”: Sermon on the Mount, Matthew 5 (verses 21-22 especially).
“Respect for pastors”: Matthew 23:1-2 - re: obedience to those in religious authority, even if they are sinners themselves. There is also the “He who hears you hears me” passage related to the mission of the disciples (Luke 10:16)
“Unity with the Church”: Matthew 18:15-17 - re: the obligation to listen to the Church. Of course, there is also the general prayer of Christ for unity and the commandment of mutual love among his disciples (many examples in the Gospel of John: 13:34-35, 17:20-23).
Hope that helps!
Very Helpful! Thanks!
This one: ““Respect for pastors”: Matthew 23:1-2 - re: obedience to those in religious authority, even if they are sinners themselves.” could be somewhat problematic, no? I don’t want to bring up the whole sex-scandal mess the Church faced a while back, but I know, even as a teacher myself, that “obedience to those in authority even if they are sinners” can lead to all sorts of unpleasantness. What limits, if any, does Canon Law recognize here.
To the main…
If I understood the gist of your post correctly, Eucharist can be given to a _repentant and forgiven_ murderer, while the divorced-and-remarried Catholic, is, by definition, unrepentant, and therefore inelligible for Eucharist. Do I have that right?
If I may chime in, Eric. The Eucharist is the Body and Blood of the New Covenant in Christ and as such is a renewal of our baptism vows (when we first entered the Covenant with God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit). Sacramental confession is the usual way for a Catholic to mend (renew) the Covenant that has been broken by sin. A repentant murderer who confessed his sin has basically renewed his covenant with God and therefore can take Communion as a sign of his unity with Christ (and as nourishment for his soul and healing for his venial sins). But the divorced-and-remarried (or the unmarried person living with a partner or any person that puts himself in a state of serious sin) is living in a way that contradicts his baptism vow to “avoid sin”. The married person that is unfaithful to his/her spouse is also breaking the covenant he/she sealed in the sacrament of marriage (the promise to be faithful unto death) [assuming it was a valid marriage]. That is why divorced-and-remarried cannot (should not) take communion. Communion says : “Amen” to one’s covenant with God and one’s spouse. If you’re not “in communion”, one shouldn’t take “communion”.
People who cannot take communion for a reason or another are encouraged to do a spiritual communion with God, asking for mercy and forgiveness like the Publican in the parable (And of course, should ask for the grace of conversion and repentance).
I found the notion of sin and retaliatory sin in your original post interesting, Fr. Tom. Would you have any other examples that aren’t about adultery?
I wonder if the cost of obtaining an annulment could be a deterrent for some, for example single moms who’s exes have left the church and thus have no interest in obtaining the annulment, and who are just scraping by just keeping the kids fed.
I certainly applaud your posting about marriage, and the cause of break-up and hope to see more postings on this important subject.
It’s my understanding that the Marriage Tribunals will not turn away anyone because they are unable to pay.
Your first commenter was clearly out of line, but I think somewhere in there he touches on something important. The Church does seem to be very passive when it comes to couples seeking divorce. Often, it is only one of the spouses who wants divorce, and the other is left struggling to maintain what they believe is a sacramental marriage — which it is assumed to be unless and until it is declared nul. As far as I know, there is no absolute requirement that a troubled couple seek counselling or otherwise try to repair a damaged marriage. It is really only after civil divorce that the Church gets involved, and by that point, of course, there is virtually no chance that the marriage can be retrieved.
And once they have “moved on,” the Church does appear willing to help the divorced and remarried make things “right.” Most anullments are granted, and sometimes over the vehement objection of the other spouse. That’s not to say they shouldn’t be. Who knows? But it seems there is little support for a spouse who believes his or her marriage is valid and wants to work it out.
My impression, which could easily be wrong, based on second-hand experience, is that grounds could be found to anul virtually any marriage, and that the tribunals are sympathetic to achieving that end.
So, when I read your first commenter, my thought is “there but for the Grace of God go I…” If I were to experience abandonment by my husband, my only consolation would be in the Church… and if I felt abandoned by her, I fear I’d end up sounding a lot like “Abandoned.”
Just wanted to add that I do think you do a great job, Fr. Dowd, as illustrated by all the work you put into this blog. Your explanation of marriage and divorce above was especially good.
Dear Regina,
“But it seems there is little support for a spouse who believes his or her marriage is valid and wants to work it out.
My impression, which could easily be wrong, based on second-hand experience, is that grounds could be found to anul virtually any marriage, and that the tribunals are sympathetic to achieving that end.”
You hit it on the head here, dear!
From direct, first-hand experience you are correct.
The Catholic Church has no interest at all in taking the high road regarding divorce, rolling up its sleeves and working with spouses to
“fix” wounded marriages. As much as it bemoans “easy divorce”, when it has come face to face with a marriage which its own tribunal system has determined is valid and thus a “sacramental marriage”, it simply abandons that marriage other than to forbid a Church second marriage.
I was abandoned, when my wife followed the advice of a Catholic priest, who knew of her involvement with her lover(which as best I could tell began, at least as “friends”, while she and I were still living together). He made absolutely no attempt to contact me, although he knew us both, and told her to divorce me because it was a virtual certainty that she would get the annulment that she deserved.
When I later found out about his involvement I called him and he ridiculed me for my hurt and my wanting to “save” our marriage.
His actions were known to the Catholic Church from very early in the nullity process, which began in 1991. Never, now going on seventeen years has there been any cooperation to bring this priest to justice for the “pastoral advice” he gave which amounted to permission to divorce, without even hearing from me or anyone we knew in common.
Before the throne of God I say this to you, in truth.
I literally could go on for hours about the devastation I have experienced over these many, many years. Suffice it to say that not a single bishop, cardinal or Catholic priest, outside the priest who is a Godfather to one of our precious children, has EVER expressed any desire at all to intervene to even speak about the obligation, unless Canon Law and the teachings of the Catholic Church are meaningless regarding the necessity to heal a valid marriage, to work to restore a valid marriage. It is a true scandal that I have NEVER seen addressed. I have written personally to every cardinal in the United States, many bishops, heads of Roman congregations, two Popes… and have NEVER, NEVER been given any support—none. So much for my remaining faithful to the vows I spoke in January 1980 and continue to live, as a witness to our five, great kids, who each suffer immensely, for their mother’s pure selfishness and the complete lack of caring of the Catholic Church in America and in Rome.
Father Thomas wrote to me privately, as he said he would. In response to his letter, the kindness of his tone and what remains of the deep love I once held for the Catholic Church I have written here and restrained my anger.
Catholics listen too much to what the Church says regarding nullity. Catholics should be given the opportunity to hear from respondents, like myself who have successfully defended valid marriages, to hear our sides of the stories rather than simply “how healing nullity is” when you seek it. Theres is a dark, evil other aspect.
You all should go to Bai MacFarlanes website:
http://www.marysadvocates.org/ and write to her. She has contacts who have seen what I have seen.
I can not write here and tell you all that I am across the board opposed to annulments. I am not. There certainly are situations when
investigations show that a particular marriage is not valid. But in a environment that is so caustic and hostile to marriage as the present era is, beyond question, even when a marriage is determined to not be valid, the Catholic Church should strongly, STRONGLY, encourage convalidation of these marriages, most especially when their are children involved. And when children are involved, I would be in favor of the Catholic Church refusing to allow remarriages and, in particular, when another relationship has already been started, of forbidding it to ever continue, under pain of excommunication. But now I am getting too far down the line.
My last comments:
Before we were divorced I literally, and I have the witnesses to prove it, begged the Church to intervene. I told our pastor I would commit mortal sin to save our marriage, as sick and desperate as that sounds. He flatly refused, period. Some lay friends tried but they lived too far away to have real effect and my wife was already under the influence of very bad people who masqueraded as “real Catholics”.
I continued to beg the Catholic Church thoughout the rest of the next ten to fifteen years, to intervene, but no one cared. I asked every tribunal. No one cared. All they cared about was deciding nullity, even the final two Roman tribunals that confirmed the validity of our marriage, were not interested in healing a valid marriage.
The process is one way only and it is seriously flawed and is very, very destructive towards marriage, in spite of what any canonist will tell you. These man are masters of spin. They are the Lanny Davis’s of the Catholic Church and are nearly completely blind and deaf to the agonies of respondents like me. It is these men and women who have the ears of the bishops and the Pope. Respondents are completely ignored. It is a situation that is out of control, destructive of marriages corporately and individually and, quite literally, there is no interest in Rome to do anything but talk about things.
Amen
Hi Fr. Tom,
I really enjoyed your article and thank you for clearing up a few questions and doubts I have always had (as a Catholic)regarding annulments.
I have been graced with a happy marriage for 30 years, and pray never to require these services. However, I do have personal friends who have gone through divorces and subsequent annulments and I now have a better understanding of the Church’s position.
I especially enjoyed your story of the Sunday school kids “WHO GOT IT” that …..
“The externals just don’t matter that much for the Church — it is the internals that count.”
Unfortunately, many young (and not so young people today)are looking for a partner, a friend, a lover, a spouce etc…with the WRONG internals. One cannot just LOOK for a life partner because he or she is nice, friendly, the right religion, financially sound, a good provider, has the same interests…etc… etc…
That is simply not enough to form a lasting and loving marriage blessed by God. When I was 10 years old, I met a boy (who much later became my husband). That day,as a child, I knew HE WAS THE ONE! I was not looking for a boyfriend, a husband or anything of the sort at 10 years of age! I was merely playing with a bunch of kids my age. We lived on separate continents and didn’t see each other for many years. We dated people in our teens and early adulthood, but God’s grace brought us together again and the love and respect was there. These are the INTERNALS that have made our marriage last.
Don’t get me wrong, it hasn’t always been roses. Outside influences, over the years, such as jobs, money difficulties, family disputes, problems with our kids etc…caused my husband and I to fight, to scream and yell and to say things (we later regretted). But…once we had calmed down, we were again able to hear God’s voice in our hearts forgiving us, we were able to forgive each other and go on.
I think it would be great to have a program for teens and young adults …” … to help adolescents grow in maturity and realism about the real nature of conjugal relationships.”
Happy marriages are a very real and possible thing and many do exist in our Catholic community. I wish young people today didn’t feel the need to FIND someone, but rather prayed to God and let Him guide them to find each other.
I truly believe God brought us together and I thank Him every day for the grace to face life’s trials as a married couple.
What Abandoned said makes me think of something Paul Waters said at one of the Duc in Altum encounters: that the Church has gotten a lot better at preparing couples for marriage with various programs like Engaged Encounter, but once the couple is married, they’re on their own. Paul and Julie have therefore started, with some other couples, a marriage mentoring program, pairing up older and younger couples, but I agree that something for couples who are having serious problems in their marriage should also exist (beyond the word of mouth ‘this marriage therapist actually tries to help you put your marriage back together, instead of telling you to get a divorce’). I also agree with Abandoned that the Church should be trying to marriages to be all that they can be, and non valid marriages (in most instances) to become marriages in the full sense.
Maria, there is an excellent program for couples in difficulty called Retrouvaille (http://www.helpourmarriage.com)that has saved a lot of marriages by teaching communication techniques to couples who have become alienated from one another. The program starts with a live-in weekend, with 3 months of weekly follow-up, and monthly meetings after that/
There is also the Marriage Encounter, which is only a weekend, but one that a dear friend of mine credits for having saved her marriage. Other friends rave about how it has made a good marriage better.
Another great program, for couples who want to live their marriage according to the teachings of the church is Familia. (http://www.familiacanada.net/) In that program there is a fatherhood series, a motherhood series, and a series for couples. There is a 4 year study program, with each year studying a different aspect of Church teachings and the Theology of the Body.
Since there have been a couple more comments I would like to respond to a couple of things.
Terry,
Marriage is not a mating service. Even in the midst of my wife’s manipulations and lies I never, ever thought she would act as she did.
Nor did anyone close to us, to my knowledge. I was told of the extreme disbelief of some people when our marriage feel apart because as well as I did, they thought she was THE ONE FOR ME, and she herself sadi this of and to me many times throughout our marriage.
Marriage is a commitment, period. When it is watered down as the Church has encouraged when it does anthing but excommunicate unjust divorcees, its indissolubility becomes fluid and it is becomes no longer trustworthy and a “bad investment”. Poor terminology, I grant you, but accurate. I would not do it again and I can easily understand how a person could now enter a marriage with alternatives already in the distant works…..in case. It just makes practical sense, in a purely worldly way. You cannot legitimately ask a person to commit to a relationship, of such cost and commitment, when it is not protected by Canon Law and enforced by Canon Law. The Church wants it both ways and is simply completely unmoving regarding accountability. As long as its position remains intractibly in favor of ANY acceptance of unjust divorce, without formal excommunication, nothing it does(as long as society coninues to embrace even easier divorces) will EVER make a fundamental difference and these bishops and priests are willing to sacrifice the innocence of abandoned spouses, by the tens of thousands and children by the hundreds of thousands to their False Charity.
Maria,
This answer is long but I ask you and the others to read it all. I responded to a column published on the internet under the “Dear Padre” section of many Catholic Church bulletins recently. Perhaps some of you even read it. The column, I believe, was written by the
editor of the Liguorian Magazine.
I am including this to show how deeply infected the Catholic Church is regarding pushing annulments. It is not my fantasy. It is real and it is everywhere and it is mortally sinful. I have sent a copy to father Potts and await his reply if he makes one. I cited the Pope because it is a published fact and therefore cannot be pushed off on me a my “creation” from the “right wing” of Catholicism.
If you read this tell me your impressions. Thank you. I only wish I could have sent this reply to the real “Confused” and had it published in all the places the original Column has furthered the casue of divorce/annulment rather than reconciliation and convalidation.
God be with you,
Abandoned (Karl)
———————————————————————-
Dear Padre,
Do I really need an annulment? I am divorced. I asked my pastor how to get an annulment, and he told me not to worry about it because it’s too difficult and expensive. But I thought I had to do this if I ever want to remarry in the Catholic Church. ~ Confused
—————-
Dear Confused,
You must have your marriage annulled if you wish to remarry in the Catholic Church, but you should get an annulment even if you don’t plan to remarry. The Catholic faith holds that marriage is a sacrament, a sacred covenant between two individuals and God. Once entered into, it cannot be dissolved.
The annulment process investigates whether a marriage, although legally valid and binding, was truly sacramental in nature. Certain conditions such as free consent, willingness to have children, open and honest identities, maturity, and other such elements must all be present for the marriage to be a true sacrament. Many of these elements are intangible, and the tribunal tries to discover if they were present. It takes time and hard work to do this in a way that is respectful to and protective of the sacrament and the people involved.
The process is difficult only in that it is a very thorough procedure that touches on emotional issues. The length of the process varies, but it usually takes at least a year. Annulment is a legal process that involves lawyers, investigations, interviews, hearings, and a lot of paperwork and labor, so there are expenses, but they vary according to each case.
I recommend people seek an annulment as soon as possible, while some of the issues are still clear in people’s minds. Unfortunately, most people wait until six months before they plan to remarry, and then they get discouraged and upset when they discover they may have to postpone their wedding plans.
Fr. Rick Potts, C.Ss.R.
—————–
Posted in Dear Padre | 1 Comment
One Response to “Marriage Annulment?”
on April 8, 2008 at 10:26 am1
“Why am I not surprised that a priest would advise, immediately, for annulment, when the Pope counsels for reconciliation via convalidation, even for invalid marriages, especially when there are children?”
“The Roman Pontiffs, especially in their annual Address to the Roman Rota, have often demonstrated the true meaning of matrimonial nullity which is inseparable from the search for the truth, since the declaration of nullity is in no way the dissolution of an existing bond but merely an observation, in the name of the Church, of the inexistence of a true marriage from the start.
Indeed, wherever possible, the Church encourages the convalidation of marriages that are null. John Paul II explained it as follows: “The spouses themselves must be the first to realize that only in the loyal quest for the truth can they find their true good, without excluding a priori the possible convalidation of a union that, although it is not yet a sacramental marriage, contains elements of good, for themselves and their children, that should be carefully evaluated in conscience before reaching a different decision” (Address to the Roman Rota, 28 January 2002, n. 6; ORE, 6 February, p. 6).
In short, it is necessary to rediscover the dignity of marriage in the dimensions of both human nature and salvation in Christ.”
ADDRESS OF CARDINAL JULIÁN HERRANZ
President of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts
Tuesday, 8 February 2005
“My advise to you, Confused. Accept your Cross and unite it with your Savior, Jesus Christ, who bore all our sins for which He was guilty-None! Do so and you will join many, like myself who chose LIFE, rather than trying to find a way out. I chose, rather, to defend our valid marriage. It took twelve, long, painful years but the Roma Rota saw the truth, God Bless Those Holy Judges and in Union with The Holy Father proclaimed the validity of our Sacrament.
To my Confused brother in Christ Jesus, our Savior. Do not run to the Tribunal, unless they call you. Then it would be your obligation to act as required and only in truth. Run to the Cross, climb on it with us and our Savior. Make that choice for Life!
It is your free choice. But, be completely honest with yourself when you search your heart, soul and conscience. Seek, rather, a Catholic priest who sees nullity as a last choice and the who encourages acceptance of the challenge of the married (in the Eyes of God-who is all that matters) celibate vocation, which honors marriages other than only your own through the active refusal to succumb to the fruit of the “divorce mentality”, which is to ‘accept and move on’, which has poisoned most regarding reconciliation, the twin brother of forgiveness, whose unity gives Life.
Be a witness to the character and faith it takes to live up to your word/vows, even when your spouse has abandoned their commitment. That is holiness, my friend. Not out of spite or stubbornness though, out of conviction and for the good of others, whose spouses have abandoned them as well and for the children of these broken families.
Jesus said “Take up your Cross and follow me”. Perhaps that is His wish for you. Seek His will. That is your choice.”
God be with you.
Karl
Karl
That’s exactly it… the accept and move on mentality. I suppose in some cases it’s valid enough, but it shouldn’t be in general. I suspect that priests might get that mentality, well, partly because of the society we live in, but also because probably people only come to them with these problems once it is a fait accompli. And if you have gone through a civil divorce, and there’s no chance of your spouse reconciling with you (say, he or she has been civilly remarried), it does make sense to go through the marriage tribunals while you still remember everything so that you know what your position is. The main thing (I think) is that it never ought to come to the point where it’s a fait accompli.
Not only do priests have to deal with what ought to be the case, they also have to deal with actual situations… It must be a tricky balance, because on the one hand things are never as they should be, and, as I said, I suspect the priests often only get asked for advice once they’re already divorced or asking for one; but on the other hand, if you don’t keep a vision of how it ought to be and work for it, things just slide further and further from what they should be.
Hello,
I, along with too many others, am in the position of being an abandoned Catholic wife in a valid marriage of 41 years. My husband, an alcoholic who lives with an old girlfriend from before we were married, has never pursued a divorce in the almost 7 years he has been gone. We are not even legally separated and share finances. He rarely sees our adult sons or grandchildren - just for a few parties or sports events.
It has been absolute hell on earth for me. And I can’t say the Church has been of much help. I have variously been told by Priests to pretend he was dead; that I could date and eventually get an annulment and not to judge his behavior - that when I said I was worried about his soul.
I am standing faithfully for my marriage and have been kind to my husband through some unbelievable cruelty from him and the other woman. I have turned to Christ and tried to be better about doing my devotions (Rosary, Chaplet) in addition to Mass. But I have suffered badly from depression and struggle to present a “normal” face to the world when I feel so deserted.
A couple of Non-Catholic but very marriage-loyal sites on the internet have helped me - Rejoice Ministries and Marriage Restoration.
What solutions the Catholic Church has need both parties to be willing to get help: Retrouvaille, Third Option - even counseling. Where is the offer for prayer and actualy support the Popes have called for?
I am aware that with alcoholism or other addictions and with adultery, abuse etc., even the Church may have trouble getting a marriage back on track. Priests claim (to me at least) that they can’t reach out to the sinner, the one who leaves. Why not?
More “Prodigal spouses” are ready to come home if only they were given some spiritual assistance to. Do all these people really want to turn over their souls to the devil?
Of course, talking about sins like adultery isn’t popular today - not even from the Catholic altar. My husband actually attends mass at times - how wonderful for him to hear that God through His Divine Son’s death and ressurection did want our sins ended.
I believe the Holy Spirit is working on the souls of the marital sinners, but isn’t getting much real-life cooperation from Holy Mother the Church.
Abandoned - you have a good cause, but prayer and calmness will help your immortal soul. Your wife needs your prayers and you need the Confessional and the Eucharist. Offer your suffering to the Lord and work in a positive way to help our Church.
Praying for all of us.
Karl and vmcsol,
What would you have hoped to find from the Church? Concrete practical things… If there were some kind of Ministry to Abandoned Spouses (that, obviously, wouldn’t require both parties), the only sense in which I could see it legitimately having an ‘accept and move on’ mentality was if it helped the spouse to truly forgive their spouse and then ask ‘how do I live out my marriage vows in my situation?’
vmcsol, you were saying you don’t see why the Church can’t go and seek the lost (well, something to that effect). How would you see this being done?
My point is that nothing is going to change if regular Catholics don’t make it change, or at least offer good, practical suggestions for change.
I do not think it is going to change. There is too much momentum toward the easy way, not like the way I said in my post up above about taking up the cross.
I am at a low ebb right now and do not even feel like thinking about this. Like Jesus in Gethsemane, I wish that God would take this cup from me. I am living the dark night of the soul, everyday. Through sheer force of will I keep going, I wish I could maintain the “optimism” of my post above. I wish I had the faith that I try to put on but no matter how often I try to, the crushing weight of reality/injustice/lonliness nearly destroyes me repeatedly and has so for pushing twenty years.
The Papal visit, as I had anticipated it would be for me, has been a large disappointment. I will be in New York City tomorrow and have no desire to see the Pope. I will spend the time with one of my precious children and a couple of mutual friends for dinner after a long week of work.
I wish the Pope had not come so that, against my better judgement, I would not have allowed myself once again to think he might actually do something. I should have known better. I often wish I could wipe the dust of the Catholic Church and its hold on me from my life but even having defected from it, it will not let me go.
Maria, I don’t even know what to say to you. I would prefer to stop trying, go to sleep and wake up in heaven, but I always wake up to lonliness and near hoplessness. I am grateful for my job and the contact I have with our children. Thay are the only reasons I am still alive. They are the only things I experience God in. I drag this cross because I wake up with it on my chest, It won’t go away.
Hi -
Kari, the first thing I want to emphasize, although it may sound defeatist, is that the ‘accept and move on’ mentality is a big part of the problem. I don’t think Christ expects us to either accept or move on when our spouse breaks his/her marriage vows. I believe we are called to keep our vows and may have to embrace and offer up the terrible pain involved. It is said that adultery alone is a “violent” act of emotional abuse - then you add abandonment and the suffering inflicted on your children - well it’s a wonder we survive it.
No one who hasn’t experienced this agony can understand the feelings, except for our Dear Lord who Himself suffered at the hands of both His followers and tormentors. He is with us today - and I say that having had a very down day.
Kari, priests used to be a very effective weapon for God in directly contacting the wayward spouse and pulling the marriage back together. Both John Paul II and Benedict have written extensively about the urgency of aiding and preserving marriages regardless of their stage. But none of this seems to have made any impact on the American church.
The “move on” attitude has been espoused by the Divorced and Separated groups in the church. I have received their literature and my skin crawls as they list all the “help” they provide. I even talked to a person in my Diocese who found it novel that they might add some prayer to their groups.
And, Kari, your noting that we lay Catholics must be the ones to start the groups is true. But what a formidable task it is - when almost no clergy from the top down takes the time marriage deserves. I have considered it many times, forming a ministry, within the church, that is. But I am held back in part by my reticence to discuss my situation as my group would require publicity and my adult children and other family would be exposed too.
The Church has done amazing things with the Pro-life, anti-abortion situation - Thank God! But I am not the first one to observe, even complain, that the Church would be wise to support marriages with equal fervor. For broken - or no - marriages tend to fuel the abortion problem. And new priests tend to come out of loyal, responsible and observant Catholic marriages and families.
Karl, I feel your pain - and don’t say that lightly. The number of years since it happened aren’t measured like those after a death. But you must not give up on Christ - nor his Church. Look at how Satan (yes, he thrives today) has fostered and encouraged the evil within our Church - clergy abuses - that have tied up our money and time. If the Pope didn’t have to address that mess, maybe he could have spent that time encouraging marriage support and actually referring to the awful lack of morality in our world today.
I couldn’t help but wonder if a TV was in the room where the Pope stayed. Can you imagine him accessing some of our “family hour” shows? I don’t think America is unique in our disgusting habits - Europe is usually ahead of us in improper clothing and entertainment.
You can’t even watch a cooking show without a “peep show” of women’s chests, commercials that are full of sexual innuendos and total acceptance in both the real and entertainment worlds of doing whatever makes you “happy”. Relativism - nothing is really wrong.
Let’s resolve to pray more than ever for the change of our divorce or don’t even both to marry culture…and especially for those who are standing for their marriages.
Karl and all those who try to live their lives with JOY (Jesus, Others - then You) - accept your suffering, offer it us and then resolve to go to confession, receive the Eucharist and change what you can about Christ’s church.
God bless,
V
It’s Maria, not Kari
I agree that the ‘accept and move on’ mentality is a big part of the problem, and I said something to that effect somewhere above. But then I started asking myself what some basic aims of a ‘Ministry to Abandoned Spouses’ group should be, and I figured that first of all it should help the members forgive their spouses — Christian forgiveness, one of the hardest things to do — and it should also help them ask and answer the question ‘how do I live my marriage vows, which are until death, in a context where my spouse has abandoned me?’ I realized that, in a sense, that is an accept and move on approach, but not a bad one. It looks to past events and their perpetrators with forgiveness, and then it asks and helps answer how to live in the present and future. It’s not trying to accept that the marriage is over, and it’s not trying to move on from a married life into a divorced life. Perhaps it’s more of a ‘forgive and live’ mentality, though that doesn’t sound right either.
Hi Maria - Sorry about that!
I think I know what you mean about how to help those who have been abandoned by their spouse but will keep their vows. Standing for the marriage is enormously difficult, as is constantly praying for the soul of your spouse and being willing to take him/her back. We are helped to live this form of marriage because we were given Sanctifying Grace when we stood before God. But our spouses are living on top of a volcano if they persist in their sin - adultery seems to reign as the cause of abandonment of marriage vows, but there are others. The Holy Spirit must be working on them all the time, and if they don’t listen and return to their vows, they will surely perish - go to hell - in the face of Christ’s promised and pure justice.
Christ showed us how much He loved us by his horrific death for our sins, but He didn’t promise us that we would automatically go to heaven. His Father had given us the 10 Commandments long before and Christ spoke often about the consequences of sin. He also promised his mercy and gave his apostles the ongoing ability to hear sins and absolve in His place.
Forgiveness is a powerful tool, but our granting it won’t release our spouse from their sins - they need God’s forgiveness by means of confessing their sins, repenting and if possible making atonement.
A powerful ministry would have to include instruction in the real benefit of marriage, prayers and more prayers for marriages to be restored and ways to help those abandoned become better people in all aspects: physical, mental, spiritual all incorporated into everyday life. We want to be ready when the Holy Spirit moves the “Prodigal” to come home.
I’ve been studying a great deal about Catholic marriage since my alcoholic husband of many years left a few years ago. I have also listened to and read the writings of several ministries who, while not Catholic, share the idea that marriages are forever and God hates divorce.
So far I have not found a Catholic Internet ministry, but there could be one out there. Maybe we need to start it.
We do have to make good lives while our spouses try to kill their souls, but there is just plain a lot of suffering if you care about that person. We have to treat them kindly - not easy - and even to pray for those enablers to turn God and away from adultery and the cruelty of it.
God bless - next time I will check here sooner.
V