Episode Transcript
Speaker 0 00:01 Today's Gospel contains that beautiful scene which our lady tells a waiter and through him, each one of us to do whatever he tells those great doctors of the church, Saint Augustan, Saint Cyril of Alexandria, and the venerable Bede all teach the Lord was present at the wedding. At Cain, a study might give a sanction to marriage and sanctify it by his presence. How we need to recall that in these terrible times that we need to do whatever he tells us. No, the Lord is sanctified marriage. You don't need me to tell you that marriage is under serious attack. Here's the latest insanity from our beloved government. January 7th, 2011 quote the words mother and father will be removed from us passport applications and replaced with gender neutral terminology. The State Department says the words in the old form where mother and father said, Brenda Sprague, deputy assistant, secretary of state for passport services there.
Speaker 0 01:07 Now parent one and parent two, a statement on State Department website noted that these improvements are being made. These improvements are being made to provide a gender neutral description of a child's parents and in recognition of different types of families. Sprague said that the decision to remove the traditional parenting names was not an act of political correctness, close quote, flying as a sin for our government workers, either the words and the old former mother and father, their now parent one and parent two recognition of different types of families. But of course this decision was not an act of political correctness when none of this should come as a surprise. We've been on this trajectory for a very long time in barring divine intervention, it's only gonna get worse, a lot worse. We'll follow that line of thought another day, but we have some more to do before we get to that point.
Speaker 0 02:06 Let's get started. The obvious question that almost nobody in our society seems capable of getting a coherent answer to is what is marriage? So for the sake of time, we'll follow frank sheet quite closely here. Marriage is a contract that results in a relationship. Marriage is a contract. The results, their relationship, a man and a woman are free to marry or not marry. But if they make the agreement to marry, then God attaches certain consequences to their act. To this particular free choice of a man and a woman, God has checked the consequence that a real relationship comes into being. They have stated their will to be man and wife. God takes them at the word and makes themselves. It's a man and woman make the agreement to marry God makes the marriage their husband and wife by their own consent, but by his act, they are now related to each other, closer than a brother to a sister, closer than a father to his son in a relationship made directly by God.
Speaker 0 03:27 As our Lord stated, there are no longer two but one flesh. Matthew 19 six because of their oneness. Is it God main thing, man cannot alter it what God therefore has joined together. Our Lord continues. Let not man put asunder. God alone can bring a marriage into being. Got alone, lays down the conditions by which it can cease to be once this relationship is in being the parties can't alter the conditions nor can the state nor can the Church by God's ordinance. Marriage is the lifelong union of a man and a woman for the propagation of the species. Thus, marriage is not terminable as a contract would be turnable by the consent of the parties or by the will of the state.
Speaker 0 04:26 From this it follows that will the parties can separate where the husband going to other women, the wife to other men there still husband and wife because it was God that made them so they're ignoring of the oneness leaves the oneness. Untouched is beyond their reach beyond any rich but gods. Similarly, a declaration by the state that a husband and wife are no longer husband and wife. A declaration that is of divorce is a mere form of words. The state can say that is broken. The marriage bond between the two people, but it is not broken it during the lifetime of the parties. They remain husband and wife because that is of the nature of marriage is ordained by God.
Speaker 0 05:18 The failure to understand this teaching of the Catholic Church has given rise to much quite irrelevant argument. Those who urge that the church should grant or at any rate permit divorce always do so on the ground that in certain cases it is desirable but to urge that the thing is desirable is no answer to a statement that it is impossible and that is the precise truth. Marriage then is a contract resulting in a relationship or better still there's a relationship resulting from a contract for when the relationship comes into the contract has done its work. It has produced the relationship of marriage and the parties are not governed in their common life, not by the contract which they made, but by the relationship which God made in ratification of their contract as a practical matter resulting from its being. God made marriage is not indissoluble just because the parties at the wedding made vowels of lifelong fidelity.
Speaker 0 06:27 It is in dissoluble because it is marriage. Thank you. Frank Sheet. Marriage is not indissoluble just because the parties at their wedding made vows of lifelong fidelity. It is insoluble because it is marriage. Every one of the married couples here should have had everything. We'll talk about this morning, explained to you in great detail at your marriage preparation classes, but unfortunately it doesn't seem that it's only the State Department. It's gone at a major malfunction mode. So given that marriage is in dissoluble today, we're going to ask ourselves, according to teaching a church, what are the grounds, if any, which permit a married couple to separate, what are the rules which would govern such regrettable situations. Okay. Unless otherwise noted all the quotes, which father I'll cut paste to use useful usual are taken from various commentaries and marriage and Canon law, but it's not an academic exercise. I'm not going to bother naming the texts.
Speaker 0 07:31 We'll start with canon 1114 from the 1983 code of Canon law. It was the same in the old code and I've commentaries before the code. The first code account in law was in 1917 but before that there was plenty of Kenalog just hadn't been codafide and nothing has changed except minor details in what we're going to talk about today. Very nothing that that impacts directly on what we're going to say. Canon 1141 a marriage which is ratified and consummated. A ratified means that the vows have invalidly exchange and contemplated means that the marital act is taken place sometime after the exchange of us. A marriage which has been ratified and consummated cannot be dissolved by any human power or by any cause other than death. This doctrine must be accepted on faith as part of the official teaching of the church itself. Christ church has always taught that marriage is not dissolved by adultery.
Speaker 0 08:27 Contrary to the claims of the Orthodox and protestant churches, thus has vindicated the true meaning of the principle. What God has joined together, let no man put asunder. Given that a ratified and consummated marriage is absolutely indissoluble except by the death of one of the parties. What are the obligations that flow from this new solubility? Because marriage makes a spouse is two in one flesh, they must share a common life. A Canon law determines in chem 1151 spouses have the obligation and the right to maintain a common conjugal life unless a lawful reason. Excuses him. This means they must share a common bed board and dwelling close quotes. We continue to quote by reason of illness work or other just causes a temporary separation of spouses may exist without suspending, however, the right and duty of the spouses to assist each other in other ways.
Speaker 0 09:23 This refers to cases like a soldier being deployed, a welder working on a pipeline far away from home and have to leave his family in that way and so forth. It does not refer, just cause does not refer to someone having hissy fit and going back to their parents. Things like that. Back to the commentary. This is different from legal separation, which consists strictly of illegally declared a suspension of the right and obligation to live together by marriage. A couple owed each other. Mutual Fidelity, mutual aid, both spiritual and material and life in common. The spouses also commit themselves to the spiritual and material welfare of the children. Therefore, behavior on the part of either the spouses which would seriously harm any of these duties would constitute sufficient grounds for separation. For this reason, there are four lawful causes for legal separation, a adultery, B, serious bodily harm afflicted upon the spouse or children.
Speaker 0 10:24 See serious spiritual harm to the other spouse or the children. D desertion close quotes. So the four Lee lawful causes for legal separation or adultery, serious bodily harm inflicted upon the spouse or the children, serious spiritual harm to their spouse or the children and desertion. Now before we move on, we have to explain these causes a little bit more detail. We'll start with adultery. Quote, adultery constitutes an act against the very nature of marriage by which the spouse has become one flesh and as an injury to the incident innocent spouse. Consequently, it is sufficient ground for permanent separation which however is not recommended. Furthermore, permanent separation requires the approval of the competent ecclesiastical authority close quote. So Daltrey is sufficient ground for a permanent separation, which is not recommended, but which must also be approved by the competent Ecclesiastical Authority will address the issue of who the competent ecclesiastical authority is in a minute.
Speaker 0 11:29 But before that, since the sin of adultery has a lot broader meaning than the legal definition of adultery in the Canon law, we'll make sure that we have a clear understanding legal definition in order for adultery to be canonical cause for separation quote first, it must be consciously committed and formally consummated gravely unchaste acts other than the marital act do not fit this legal definition. Second, there must be moral certitude that the adultery took place. Third, the other spouse must not have consented for the other spouse, must not have been responsible for it. For example, by desertion frequent, unreasonable denial of Maryville rights. Fifth, the adultery must not be mutual and six, the adultery must not be condoned in any way. There's tacit condemnation when the innocent party, knowing of the adultery has freely continued to treat the guilty one with the marital affection. Condemnation is presumed unless the innocent party expels desserts or brings legal accusation against the adulterer within six months.
Speaker 0 12:31 So for adultery to be a lawful cause for legal separation, it must be consciously committed and formally consummated. There must be moral certainty that adultery took place. The other spouse must not have consented that their spouse must not have been responsible for it, though their spouse must not have also committed it and it must not have been condoned. One last detail. Although the innocent party has the right to separate on his own authority, he or she is required within six months that separation to initiate the procedures to have the separation formalized can 1152 paragraph three quote, if the innocent spouse spontaneously severed, conjugal living that spouse within six months is to bring a suit for separation before the competent ecclesiastical authority. This authority, after having investigated all the circumstances is to decide whether the innocent spouse can be induced to forgive them as deed and entrepreneur long separation permanently closed quote.
Speaker 0 13:29 So now that we've covered that horrendous crime, let's turn to the other lawful causes for legal separation, serious bodily harm, afflicted upon the spouse or children, serious spiritual harm to the other spouse or children and desertion can law states that these are causes for temporary separation at then when the situation is such that there would be danger and delay, then the spouse may separate under his own authority and that quote, when the reason for the separation ceases to exist, conjugal living is to be restored in less ecclesiastical authority decides otherwise close quote. Basically what it means is when the reason for the separation ends, then the separation has to end because they're married. Now let's turn to the question of Ecclesiastical Authority. Just who is a competent authority to authorize the legal separation of spouses can in 1692 answers. This will simply quote from a commentary on that candidate. The authorization is separate, is an act of jurisdiction reserved to the Diocesan Bishop. Neither pastors nor priests nor those employed by Dawson agencies as marriage counselors or other such capacities, and they authorize a separation. The spouses, not even temporarily under the guise of pastoral or professional clouds thing. Close quote
Speaker 0 14:54 that's worth pondering. I'll repeat it. The authorization is separate, is an act of jurisdiction reserved to Dyess and bishop. Neither pastures nor priests, nor those employed by Dawson agents as in marriage counselors or other such capacities and they authorize a separation to spouses, not even temporarily under the guise of pastoral professional counseling. Uh, as a teacher, you, the church with regards to justifiable causes for separation, Mary V. May very well be and often is a salvation issue. For those who have entered into the married state, would it not seem reasonable to give engaged couples this information during their marriage preparation, but if the bishop is the only authority before God competent to authorize a separation, how is it that we've never heard this? Has anyone here ever heard of a bishop authorizing a separation? Is there some kind of loophole? Actually there is.
Speaker 1 16:10 Yeah.
Speaker 0 16:11 Cool. If the decisions of Ecclesiastical Authority are not recognized by civil law, local bishop may authorize the spouses to present their separation cases to a civil court. But this operation authorization should never be granted. If it is foreseeable that the civil court will decide in a manner that is contrary to divine law. As the legislation of the states favors divorce rather than separation by not providing sufficient protection to the legitimate interests of the party seeking all your separation, the recourse to the civil courts raises grave pastoral and moral problems. Close quote, this is also really worth pondering. We'll repeat if the decisions of the Ecclesiastical Authority are not recognized by the civil law. The local bishop may authorize the spouses to present their separation cases to a civil court, but this authorization should never be granted. If it is foreseeable that the civil court will decide in a manner that is contrary to divine law. As the legislation states favors divorce rather than separation just to pick not exactly randomly Texas, which has no provisions for legal separation as the legislation that states favors divorced rather than separation. By not providing sufficient protection to the legitimate interests of the parties seeking only a separation, the recourse to the civil courts raises grave pastoral and moral problems. It. Certainly,
Speaker 0 17:51 it certainly does. Those grave and pass from oral problems are obvious to anyone with eyes to see. Consider the children
Speaker 0 18:04 well, children and post divorce families do not on the whole book, happier, healthier, better Justin, even if one or both parents are happier for the children. Divorce isn't life transforming experience national studies so that children from divorced and remarried families are more aggressive towards their parents and teachers. They experience more depression, have more learning difficulties and suffer for more problems than with peers than children from intact families. Many of them end up in mental health clinics. In hospitals settings. Most children never really cover. The girls are more likely to seek out six the boys, drugs and alcohol. There's earlier sexual activity. More children born out of wedlock, less marriage, less trust, fewer children overall and more divorce. Numerous studies show that adult children of divorce have more psychological problems than those raised in intact marriages. In fact, at 2001 study found that adults whose parents had divorced when they were children who were twice as likely to commit suicide than their peers from intact families. Close quote,
Speaker 0 19:17 perhaps if the bishops over the past 40 years, perhaps if they are default and the dos in courts and legislatures, uh, for uh, against this uniform divorce act, the way they fight the death penalty, which is certainly an issue that even faithful Catholics may have a difference of opinion, perhaps if they'd preached in season and oddest season that a marriage which has ratified and consummated cannot be resolved by any home and power or any cause other than death. Perhaps had they been preaching in ordering their priest to preach in season, out of season and a clear and unambiguous manner. Christ teaching is full teaching with regards to marriage. The beauty of the vocation that it's a call to holiness for the man and woman who must be prepared. Embrace the cross is do whatever he tells you. If they child also preached perhaps the tough teachings, no divorce, the actual grounds for legal separation, the parameters, the marital act and intrinsic evil of contraception, then we wouldn't have these new kinds of marriage. We wouldn't have parent one and parent two on government forms who wouldn't have the emotional wreckage from so many destroyed families. So many people wounded terribly, unbelievably. Most importantly, we wouldn't have
Speaker 1 20:47 what appears to be the eternal loss of so many immortal souls. That hasn't happened and so we need to pray. We need to pray and we need to act. We all know people that are struggling in their marriage. It's hard, almost impossible for some couples in our divorce culture only makes the pressure to break up even worse since the courts aren't going to help them since the legislature's aren't going to help them, since the executive branch is going to help them and since apparently most chanceries aren't prepared to help them, then we have to help them in every weekend with our prayers and encouragement. That means encouragement if the only one competent of judging a case is a diocesan bishop. Since none of us here are Dawson bishops, we better be careful not to judge the cases. We weren't in their skin. We don't know what happened there. We have to help them with our love and our prayer and our support in every way we can and not get all up at me cause there, but for the grace of God, go anyone of us,
Speaker 0 22:06 we're closed with a letter received by a priest at Christmas. Dear Father
Speaker 1 22:18 <inaudible>,
Speaker 0 22:20 I'm eternally grateful to you
Speaker 0 22:26 for advising me not to leave my husband because as you said, the salvation of my soul and his soul may depend on my stain with him. My husband left the church and became an atheist in the mid eighties he was my own person, persecutor in the practice of the Catholic faith and it was a terrible thing. Persecution. Indeed. In November, 2009 he developed a cough that wouldn't go away after numerous biopsies who's diagnosed with lung cancer and given six months to a year to live has condition rapidly deteriorated. It became very short of breath, had extreme fatigue, loss of oil and ability to eat, et Cetera, et cetera. Father x came to our home on March 24th my husband sent him away. The following day, he has to be taken to the hospital when he could not breathe despite an increase in his oxygen on this day, father y came to see him, but one of our two daughters barred him from getting near my husband because of his dying. Wish that he not want a priest or any religious services. When he died. By this time he was on a continuous morphine drip. Whenever he was lucid, I would tell him that he had nothing to lose,
Speaker 0 23:50 but everything again, if you would let the priest come to give him the anointing of the sick. I told them repeatedly that I believe in heaven and hell. If there was a life after death, then I want to be with him to heaven.
Speaker 0 24:03 I put a brown scapular on them, the green scan and a Miraca smell on his bed sheet. I blessed him with salt and holy water. Often a friend and I pray the divine mercy chat at the Rosary, the three beautiful prayers in the PA to book no Venus to Saint Joseph at St Jude and had masses offered for him. He finally considered for the priest to come. Our daughters had to verify this from him before they let the priest in. Father x administered last rights and March 28th Palm Sunday, my husband received the epistolic blessing. I'm holy. Thursday, April 1st he started taking his last breath at 11:20 PM and he died at 2:20 AM on Good Friday. It was the most peaceful death he shared in our Lord's agony on the cross for three hours and I related sufferings to St dismas. When Saint Desmos asked Jesus to remember in paradise, he had a Catholic parallel service in his buried in a Catholic cemetery. Closed quote,
Speaker 1 25:17 no.
Speaker 0 25:22 From all eternity. God saw that this man was going to arrogantly reject him, arrogantly reject the truth of faith and then torment and persecute his poor wife. God saw that God said all of that. He saw the decades, literally decades of pain and suffering she was going to receive at the hands of her husband. And he also saw that not only would this suffering sanctifier if she let it, God saw that if she remained faithful to her and all their suffering, all our prayers and sacrifices would finally win the grace for her husband to return to the faith in die with the benefit of the sacraments. God saw that from eternity. But suppose she had left him. Suppose she had thrown off the cross and left her husband without her prayers and assistance, where would he certainly have gone when he died? He would have been damned damn for all eternity.
Speaker 1 26:37 Okay.
Speaker 0 26:39 And then when her time arrived to appear before the judgment seat of our Lord, what would our Lord have said to her? What are you doing here? Where is your husband? Did you not know? Once you took that violet to alter that his salvation was wrapped up with yours? Did you not know that? And all it took was a little kindness and encouragement from one man. For her keeping her in the cross. She was faithful. She kept her post, and now perhaps her husband is already thanking the Lord for such a good and faithful wife. Looking forward to that day when he will be able to greet her once again and say, because of you, I have eternal life.
