Most marriages today are invalid, Pope Francis suggests

1. This pope that we have to endure and remain loyal to, God help us, has pronounced that 'the great majority of sacramental marriages are null'. This is taking it upon himself to make the gravest judgement that can be made about the largest sub-group of the Catholic population of the world. Perhaps, someone might explain how one can enter the pantheon of that overwhelming minority of Catholic married couples who are good enough to qualify for the approval of this unprecedentedly demanding pontiff? Certainly, he considers, if we take him at his word, that we might better meet his standards by fornicating than by trying to meet the exacting standards of this exclusive new club he has decided to propagate. Perhaps someone might also explain why the Vatican has contradicted this statement? Whom are we to follow now? Is the Vatican wrong? If not, what does that mean?

2. Of course, the woman at the well may have sinned again, but she wouldn't have done it with Christic approval. Christ didn't tell her that her adulterous behaviour might be acceptable really or better than the great majority of those who stuck it out with their spouse. There have always been sinners, but this is the first time in 2,000 years I know of a pope accommodating the sin at the expense of those trying to be faithful. The reductio of this nonsense, from which we see the Vatican immediately rowing back, is 'do as you will'.

 

Is it 'boneheaded'?

 

I was trying to be kind.

 

A little more on the subject....

http://www.romereports.com/2016/06/...s-appreciate-fidelity-before-they-get-married

 

http://www.catholicworldreport.com/Item/4854/pope_francis_marriage_and_the_missing_middle_term.aspx
Pope Francis, Marriage, and the Missing Middle Term

Pope Francis greets newly married couples during his general audience in St. Peter's Square at the Vatican in this Sept. 30, 2015, file photo. (CNS photo/L'Osservatore Romano)
For some twenty years I have responded to charges that American tribunals are lax in upholding marriage by, among other things, correlating the jump in American annulment numbers to several changes put into canon law by Rome itself and, more importantly, by arguing that, if pervasive social and catechetical decay really is the danger that intelligent people think it is, then annulment numbers should be rising in response to it. My thesis has earned grudging respect among some very tough tribunal critics—at least among those who think about hard issues instead of simply emoting about them—but, I need hardly say, all of this is complex stuff requiring careful analysis by qualified persons.

Yesterday, however, Pope Francis waded into one part of this long-standing controversy with the preposterous claim that “the great majority of our sacramental marriages are null” ostensibly because people do not understand what permanence is. As happens so often when amateurs plunge into technical areas that they do not understand, Francis has taken a very narrow but plausible point—namely, that a rise in marriage nullity can be linked to a drop in social commitment to permanence—and so grossly exaggerated it that, not only has he damaged his credibility in this regard, he risks contributing to the very downward spiral of failed marriages he decries by, in effect, telling struggling Christian couples that their efforts to save difficult marriages (i.e., frankly, just about every marriage I’ve ever seen) are effectively doomed given that the great majority of Christian marriages are (allegedly) already null!

As we have seen before during this papacy, some claim the pope’s remarks were “off-the-cuff” (a description belied by the video of his remarks) and the Vatican Press Office offers an Orwellian rewriting of what the pope plainly said (suggesting how severe the backlash is this time), but the bottom line is, I fear, that the pope has now given the “All Is Lost” crowd exactly what they suspected: proof that the Church is distancing itself from Christ’s hard teaching on the permanence of marriage.

May I offer amid this mess two preliminary points and a more important third?

1) Being pope makes Francis the “Legislator” but it does not make him a lawyer. Francis apparently has no training in canon law beyond whatever seminary courses he took some 60 years ago. He does not like law or lawyers and shows little awareness of the positive role that law plays in the life of any society including that of the Catholic Church. His opinions about what does or does not constitute technical things like matrimonial ‘validity’ or ‘nullity’ simply cannot be taken at face value.

2) Francis shows little understanding of how tribunals actually go about their difficult and largely thankless mission and he has apparently never experienced a functional tribunal system. Those of us who have experienced functional tribunals do not understand the mean descriptions of tribunal operations and personnel that Francis regularly offers.

Now, about that “middle term”.

3) Setting aside the bleak anthropological and theological assumptions that must underlie the claim that “the great majority” of Christian adults have failed to enter the state in life that all of them are suited for by nature and that baptized persons are especially equipped for by sacramental grace, Francis’ point that a general lessening of appreciation of ‘permanence’ is negatively impacting marriage would be generally accepted by qualified observers. But his suggestion that people’s ignorance of “permanence” (assuming that ignorance can be shown to exist on the massive scale that Francis opines, and for many reasons it cannot be), would, even if true, still fail to prove his claim of rampant marriage nullity because it skips the vital middle term of the pro-nullity argument: very briefly, ignorance and/or error about something like ‘permanence’ does not nullify marriage unless it sufficiently damages an individual’s will to enter marriage. That claim, folks, while possible to prove in specific cases, requires a demanding inquiry by persons who know and respect marriage doctrine and law, and hardly constitutes the stuff of which sweeping pronouncements about pan-Christian marriage collapse can be made. In short, even if Francis is right about growing, society-wide deficits in understanding about ‘permanence’, he is wrong to suggest that such deficits routinely (nay, he holds, in the great majority of marriages!) result in marriage nullity.

In 1988, Pope St. John Paul II, reflecting a great tradition on this point, commented in his address to the Roman Rota that the Church understands that most people enter marriage with some psychological, emotional, and formational deficits in play; nevertheless they marry confident of the validity of their marriage (even if they don’t know that technical term). Married couples, especially Christian married couples, may be sure that Christ understands their difficulties and they should presume about their marriage, even in troubled times, what the Church presumes about their marriage: that it is valid, grace-laden, and fulfilling.

[This essay originally appeared on the "In the Light of the Law" blog and is posted here by kind permission of Dr. Peters.]

 

Of course, the woman at the well may have sinned again, but she wouldn't have done it with Christic approval. Christ didn't tell her that her adulterous behaviour might be acceptable really or better than the great majority of those who stuck it out with their spouse.

Neither did the Pope. Wow, the talents to extrapolate are without end here.

 

Please use the "Reply" button instead of placing a forum member's quote in italics so they know you're quoting them or have otherwise replied to them.

 

http://www.eyeofthetiber.com/2016/0...f-my-mouth-are-invalid-pope-francis-suggests/
“Most Of The Words That Come Out Of My Mouth Are Invalid,” Pope Francis Suggests

Image: Alfredo Borba

Pope Francis said Thursday that the majority of the words that come “spilling” out of his mouth are invalid because most of the time he doesn’t understand that what he says is permanent.

“We live in a culture of the provisional,” the Pontiff said, responding to a question about the “crisis of his pontificate.”

Francis said he often doesn’t comprehend the importance of what he’s saying when speaking off-the-cuff, which he said is “indissoluble.”

“Sadly in today’s pontificate, I don’t understand that what I say will have ramifications for not only my pontificate, but of the many pontificates to come,” he said. “I say something random, and people do not know what it means. And because people listen to me with the philosophy that I am the Pope, they believe I have fully contemplated and formulated what I am saying, which is, in many cases, not the case. This then makes what I say null.”

Francis went on to say that when Catholics have to spend most of their working lives defending what he says, and having to write blog posts or responses to comments on a combox asking if the “pope really said such and such,” clearly there is something invalid in many of the “weird, weird, weird” things that somehow manage to find their way from his brain to his mouth.


*Yes, EOTB is a Catholic satire site. But the best humor has a kernel of Truth. This time the kernel is big enough to choke an elephant.

 

"I've seen a lot of fidelity in these cohabitations, and I am sure that this is a real marriage...": Pope Francis.

How does one extrapolate such a statement from a pope, the very one charged by Christ with the primary function of preserving all Truth as it manifests Itself in doctrine and dogma? Why bother with Catholic marriage at all? How do you think most potentially or actually cohabiting young people will extrapolate this? Unfortunately, for most it will be licence.

 

So good I thought it was real! We are blessed with great satirists with both EOTT and 'eccles'. Perhaps humour is a gift from God to facilitate hope and perseverance.

 

Well, I have read some of this thread. I am bewildered, as are most of you. One of the things that stands out here for me is the use of contraceptives. Some forms of birth control are abortifacient...I believe the Pill, the morning after pill, and the IUD. That just blows my mind. How can we justify that? In any relationship? I see Satan attacking and undermining everything holy and good that God made. We can blame Margaret Sanger for starting this. And I do see that with the economic situation today, two people usually have to work. It puts a dreadful burden on them to use natural forms of birth control only. But they are not doing it alone. They are doing this with God as the Unseen Partner in the marriage. It truly is a sacrament. I will uphold that.

 

I am not talking as if this is the first generation to marry. I am talking about accountability in a sacramental marriage. Many Catholics do not even know what a sacrament is, let alone what a sacramental marriage is. I just went to lunch with a Priest, who told me that when some catholics go to get their children baptized they can't even answer his basic questions.

If people had to be confirmed catholics before getting married, people could then be held more accountable for their divorces. Just being baptized when you were born, followed by two half days of pre-cana doesn't make someone ready for sacramental marriage.

I agree that many are aware of their actions and get a divorce anyway, making them fully accountable. But many people do not know their faith, and therefore do not know what they are being held accountable to when they get married.

 

Even the secular news sites think we might have a problem on our hands.


http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/06/17/enough-is-enough-pope-francis-should-resign.html
Enough is enough, Pope Francis should resign

June 16, 2016: Pope Francis talks during the opening of a meeting of Rome's diocese in Saint John Lateran basilica in Rome, Italy.(Reuters)

Pope Francis’s three-year-old papacy, marred by controversy from the beginning, has hit a new low.

ADVERTISEMENT

After Jorge Mario Bergoglio was elected to succeed Pope Benedict XVI in 2013, he quickly justified his reputation as an unconventional character who put himself on both sides of an argument with vaguely worded pronouncements.

From his “Who am I to judge?” statement on gay people that seemed to offer a hint at a change in church teaching, to his fumbles on contraception, to his recent claim that Donald Trump is not Christian, his off-the-cuff remarks cause headlines across the globe, often followed by some sort of “clarification” from the Holy See Press Office.

His papacy has been a litany of confusing statements for the faithful on the most sensitive and delicate topics. While clear on political topics dear to his heart, but where Catholics can legitimately hold differing opinions, such as immigration, economics and climate change, on matters of doctrine, Francis muddied the waters to an extent that many well-meaning Catholics feel they no longer know where the Church stands on issues of faith.

Most recently, in his latest off-the-cuff ramble on Thursday, he was asked about marriage. He said:

“It’s provisional, and because of this the great majority of our sacramental marriages are null. Because they say ‘yes, for the rest of my life!’ but they don’t know what they are saying. Because they have a different culture. They say it, they have good will, but they don’t know.”

To say that the “great majority” of Catholic marriages are null, or invalid, is a statement that is neither true, wise, nor fair. The Vatican has since toned down his remarks in the written transcript to say “a part of our sacramental marriages are null,” in apparent recognition of the damage Francis’s statement might cause.

For a “pope of the people” he certainly doesn’t give Catholics much credit. For a Catholic marriage to be valid all that is needed is the freedom to marry, consent from both parties, and the intention to marry for life and be open to children. That’s it.

Over the years, some clerics have used an interpretation of canon law to suggest “emotional immaturity” can be a reason for not understanding the responsibilities of marriage, and therefore as invalid and open to annulment. But marriage is not hard to understand, and the Catholic rite of marriage, as well as the preparation couples go through beforehand, makes clear what marriage involves.

For Pope Francis to say the great majority of marriages are null implies that the great majority of Catholic are ignorant fools who cannot understand the responsibilities of a bedrock of society that has existed for thousands of years.

It also suggests severe doubt in the mercy and grace of God. The rule of thumb when the validity of sacraments, whether it be marriage, the Eucharist or the priesthood, is concerned, is to assume validity unless something clearly contradicts that. So just like a priest doubting his faith as he is ordained is still a priest, a bride with jitters is still validly married -- God makes up for our frailties.

Francis’ words put the devil’s doubt into the hearts and minds of good Catholic couples who may be going through a rough time, and who instead of saying “We’re Catholic, we’re married, this is until death parts us,” may now say, “Well, the pope says most marriages aren’t valid anyway...maybe ours isn’t either” and give up.

Francis’ statement demonstrates a lack of faith in the Church and its ability to vet couples seeking marriage, to teach them about what marriage is, and to administer the sacraments effectively. If most marriages are invalid because couples don’t understand a life-long commitment, does that mean most priestly ordinations are invalid too? If so, are most masses invalid? Most confessions?

The Church’s authority rests, in part, on its claim to be able to communicate the sacraments and the teachings of Christ. Francis has cast doubt on the former, has done a poor job of the latter, and by doing so has brought the Church’s legitimacy into question.

His comments come after he dealt more confusion to Catholic marriages by allowing the liberal Cardinal Walter Kasper to take control of last year’s Synod of the Family -- who turned the whole thing into a referendum on gay people and communion for divorced and remarried Catholics.

Francis made things worse this year with his vague document on the family -- Amoris Laetitia -- in which he buried the hot topic of divorced and remarried Catholics in a footnote, and muddied the waters some more by saying that such couples could receive sacraments “in certain cases.” When asked to clarify he said “I don’t remember the footnote.” Wonderful.

Once upon a time Catholics would have been stuck with a bad pope, but since Pope Emeritus Benedict opened the door for a pope resigning when he can no longer do his job, it is time for the faithful to look at Francis and ask -- “is this man able to lead the Holy Catholic Church?”

At this point it is clear, Bergoglio has repeatedly proven himself unable to lead, and is doing incalculable damage to the Church that will take decades to heal.

Pope Francis should resign, and Catholics should demand it, so the Church can begin recovering from the havoc his ill-advised and arrogant papacy has wrought.


Adam Shaw is a Politics Reporter for FoxNews.com. He can be reached here or on Twitter: @AdamShawNY.

 

When I was growing up there was a mill near us where they employed a lot of women. Many married couples worked there and if their marriages were more onerous than single income families it wasn't evident. Their children were looked after by neighbours or relatives until the parents come home from work. Married women often worked at other jobs such as in hotels, restaurants, hospitals and shops, some working part-time and some full-time. They had fewer money worries than their neighbours and their children turned out ok. With no paid maternity leave, pregnant women had to leave the job, and often got their jobs back when they were ready to return to work. Paid maternity leave and job security has made it easier for women to work outside the home so more women take advantage of it but I don't see how both spouses working outside the home creates a greater burden on marriage now than it did then.

 

Sorry, thought people would recognize their own ideas.

 

After this pope's comments, who believes the pope is infallible on faith and morals?

 

Oh dear, now we're to trust the secular news opinions because of course they have no agenda on their own.