Ask Bishops to Drop Divorce Mandate
- Posted by Mary's Advocates
- On September 10, 2024
- 15 Comments
Mary’s Advocates works to reduce unilateral no-fault divorce. Virtually every diocese in the United States requires a dissatisfied spouse to have a civil divorce prior to the diocese’ tribunal considering an annulment petition. Join in asking the US bishops to drop this policy. I will add your name to the printed petition given to the archbishop of the province in which you reside. Plus, all your names will be on the petition sent to the US Bishops’ Conference. You can choose whether to show your name on this petition’s webpage or only have your name given to the bishops. Join below.
June 5, 2024 note: For those who say that a divorce is required to prevent dioceses from being sued for alienation of affection, this cause of action is only possible in six states (Findlaw.com). Notably, if the grounds for Church annulment exist, the grounds for civil annulment may exist too: i.e. fraud, mental incapacity (HI, MS, NM, NC, SD, UT).
Petition to Bishops
Your Excellency:
In the spirit of canon 212 §3, in keeping with our knowledge and position, we Christian faithful are sharing our views with the Sacred Pastors on matters which pertain to the good of the Church. We bring to your attention an issue of grave urgency. In virtually every diocese in America, a civil divorce decree is required before a Catholic tribunal convenes to determine the validity of a marriage. We respectfully and humbly ask you to begin taking appropriate steps to repeal this divorce mandate.
For a host of reasons, the divorce mandate constitutes a clear and immediate scandal to Catholics and non-Catholics alike. This mandate invites the civil government to adjudicate the obligations of the sacraments, thus giving to Caesar what is rightfully God’s alone.
Furthermore, this mandate violates both the letter and the spirit of both testaments of Scripture, every papal encyclical issued regarding marriage, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and canon law. For a small sampling, we submit the following:
“‘For I hate divorce,’ says the LORD, the God of Israel.” (Mal. 2:16)
“Let no one, then, be deceived by the distinction which some civil jurists have so strongly insisted upon – the distinction, namely, by virtue of which they sever the matrimonial contract from the sacrament, with intent to hand over the contract to the power and will of the rulers of the State, while reserving questions concerning the sacrament of the Church.” (Arcanum of Pope Leo XIII 1880)
“Divorce is a grave offense against the natural law. It claims to break the contract, to which the spouses freely consented, to live with each other till death. Divorce does injury to the covenant of salvation, of which sacramental marriage is the sign.” (CCC 2384)
“Marriage possesses the favor of law; therefore, in a case of doubt, the validity of a marriage must be upheld until the contrary is proven.” (canon 1060)
Clearly, if divorce is a grave offense against the natural law, it necessarily follows: a mandate to obtain a divorce prior to a marriage tribunal hearing is also an offense to natural law.
Hundreds of thousands of people have been victimized by this policy. It is demonstrably true that this mandate has caused—and will continue to cause—immense harm to children, to single men and women who might otherwise be pondering the call to marriage, and to abandoned spouses.
Consider the following:
Children. It is well-established that divorce causes psychological, physical, and development problems for children. Even after they reach adulthood, the scars remain. A study by Psychiatry Research illustrated that “men from divorced families had more than three times the odds of suicidal ideation in comparison to men whose parents had not divorced.” The dioceses should be standing up to protect the innocent, yet the present policy is mandating misery.
Single men and women. Between 1989 and 2020, the Catholic Church in America has fallen from 326,000 annual weddings to fewer than 100,000 weddings. Devout single men and women are increasingly concerned that the Catholic Church will not stand up for them and for the indissolubility of marriage.
Abandoned spouses. There is a common misperception that divorce is desired by both parties. This is incorrect in the extreme. As Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons wrote in 2015, “Over the past 40 years, I have never worked with a Catholic marriage in which both spouses wanted a divorce.”
In truth, the pain is often indescribable for spouses who didn’t want the divorce. For that reason, Pope Saint John Paul II taught that the Church must support them. In Familiaris Consortio, he wrote:
“Loneliness and other difficulties are often the lot of separated spouses, especially when they are the innocent parties. The ecclesial community must support such people more than ever. It must give them much respect, solidarity, understanding and practical help, so that they can preserve their fidelity even in their situation.”
It is important to note that the abandonment often begins with the divorce policy. While the dioceses should establish programs to help couples reconcile and come together, the divorce policy has the opposite effect.
Abandoned spouses and those who support them respectfully ask to be heard. Diocesan personnel too frequently prescribe annulment as the balm for marriage difficulties. Coupled with the divorce requirement, Church leaders overlook the injustice done to children who regularly lose everyday access to the innocent spouse through divorce. The souls of children and the abandoning spouse are in jeopardy.
We ask for efforts to ensure diocesan personnel only recommend marriage counselors who have a correct understanding of the Church teaching on separation, and who are successful at reconciling estranged couples. The Church needs a ministry for innocent separated spouses which provides moral and practical help. We ask for education on the legitimate grounds for separation of spouses and on necessary canonical intervention prior to any civil forum action (i.e. civil separation, divorce, or annulment).
Most of all, clergy need training to avoid a laissez-faire attitude as if divorce is a matter about which the Church has no competence to interpose itself. When a priest makes the offhanded suggestion that a disgruntled spouse could get an annulment, he could be sentencing the other spouse and children to a lifetime of injustice and misery.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please know that you are in our daily prayers.
Sincerely,
Divorced and separated US Catholics who remain faithful to their marriages, and
All those who support marriage
Join Petition
Published Signers
Below are those who opted “yes” to show as signer on Petition’s webpage. Others’ names will be included when petition is delivered to the bishops.
Dr. Michael Sirilla — Professor of Theology, Franciscan University of Steubenville — OH - Steubenville (Diocese)
Mendonça Correia — JD (Universidade Católica de Lisboa), JCD (Universidad Pontificia de Salamanca)
Fr. Nathanael Block, JCL — Licentiate in Canon Law
Fr. Robert Altier, OCDS — Author, God’s Plan for your Marriage — MN - Saint Paul and Minneapolis (Archdiocese)
Raymond Drake — The American Society for the Defense of Tradition Family and Property — PA - Harrisburg (Diocese)
Leila Miller — Author, Primal Loss: The Now-Adult Children of Divorce Speak — AZ - Phoenix (Diocese)
Michael Hichborn — President, Lepanto Institute — VA - Arlington (Diocese)
Bai Macfarlane — Director/Founder, Mary's Advocates — OH - Cleveland (Diocese)
John Francis Clark — Author, Betrayed Without a Kiss — FL - Orlando (Diocese)
Craig Walterscheid — Director, StopThrowingFoodAway.org — CA - Los Angeles (Archdiocese)
Ed Graveline — St. Paul Evangelization — AZ - Tucson (Diocese)
Gregory Denue, JD — Juris Doctorate — NV - Las Vegas (Archdiocese)
Michael Gleason — Teacher, St.Francis Montessori — TX - Fort Worth (Diocese)
James Wallbillich — Tribunal Assessor, Diocesan Tribunal of Baton Rouge — LA - Baton Rouge (Diocese)
Jesus O Romero — Jesse Romero's On Fire Evangelization — AZ - Phoenix (Diocese)
Hilary Towers, LPC, PhD — Member of Directory of Experts, Catholic Women’s Forum — VA - Arlington (Diocese)
Jason Miller, Ph.D. — Licensed Clinical Psychologist — CA - Fresno (Diocese)
Fr Stephen Imbarrato — President LifeMinistriesUS — NM - Santa Fe (Archdiocese)
Christine M. Bacon — President, Sacred Standers, Inc — VA - Richmond (Diocese)
Christopher J. Malloy — Professor and Chair, Theology, The University of Dallas — TX - Dallas (Diocese)
Dr. Irene Alexander — Associate Professor of Moral Theology & Christian Marriage — TX - Dallas (Diocese)
Dr. Thaddeus Kozinski, Ph.D — Philosophy Professor, Memoria College — CA - Sacramento (Diocese)
Kerri Bishop — Coach and Podcaster at Single Mom Smiling — NY - New York (Archdiocese)
Laureen Petrocchi — Miss — RI - Providence (Diocese)
Mark Feliz — CO - Colorado Springs (Diocese)
Sharelle Temaat — CO - Colorado Springs (Diocese)
Deborah Nuzzo — NY - Brooklyn (Diocese)
Steve Boscarino — NH - Manchester (Diocese)
Mark Dietrick — PA - Pittsburgh (Diocese)
Kirsten Diana Huber — TX - Fort Worth (Diocese)
Paula Marie Parola — CA - Monterey (Diocese)
Omar D Garza — TX - San Antonio (Archdiocese)
Jeanne Snider — OH - Cleveland (Diocese)
Darren Szwajkowski — OH - Cincinnati (Archdiocese)
John Farrell — WA - Seattle (Archdiocese)
Lee Hundley Cullom — GA - Atlanta (Archdiocese)
Michael E Dycus — NE - Lincoln (Diocese)
Isabel McPhillips — OH - Cleveland (Diocese)
David Schoenberger — VA - Arlington (Diocese)
Gregory Lemieux — KY - Lexington (Diocese)
Stephen Miller — MA - Boston (Archdiocese)
Dan Kennedy — WA - Seattle (Archdiocese)
William McDonald — AZ - Phoenix (Diocese)
John Steiner — UT - Salt Lake City (Diocese)
Dwayne Coleman — CA - Los Angeles (Archdiocese)
Eugenia Slater — OR - Portland in Oregon (Archdiocese)
Jack E Poldruhi — OH - Cleveland (Diocese)
Michael Randolph — VA - Arlington (Diocese)
Cynthia Babinec-Gammel — IL - Chicago (Archdiocese)
Jane P Miner — OH - Columbus (Diocese)
Hugh Owen — VA - Arlington (Diocese)
Karin Vallery — TX - Galveston-Houston (Archdiocese)
James Alan Aikins — OK - Tulsa (Diocese)
Mary Ann Parks — TX - San Antonio (Archdiocese)
Patrick Joseph McGervey — OH - Cleveland (Diocese)
James C Hanisch — PA - Scranton (Diocese)
Rebecca Kruszka — NY - Buffalo (Diocese)
Katie Guy — TX - Fort Worth (Diocese)
Joseph Sena — CA - Oakland (Diocese)
Vineet Mansukhani — TX - Fort Worth (Diocese)
Mrs. Mark Oursler — FL - Saint Petersburg (Diocese)
Tara Brelinsky — NC - Raleigh (Diocese)
Ellen M Wrinn — TX - Fort Worth (Diocese)
Nancy P. Gordon — MA - Boston (Archdiocese)
Lisa Parkhill, MSN, RN — NJ - Camden (Diocese)
Brett Slusher — OR - Baker (Diocese)
Jordan Moonry (child of divorce) — CO - Denver (Archdiocese)
Austin Steo — DC - Washington (Archdiocese)
Joan D. Ford — MI - Detroit (Archdiocese)
Colin Ahearn — NY - New York (Archdiocese)
Tomás Ryan (pilot) — OH - Columbus (Diocese)
Ronald Mark Ratajczyk — IL - Joliet (Diocese)
Joseph Tevington — PA - Philadelphia (Archdiocese)
Lara Neri — TX - Dallas (Diocese)
Patricia Palmer — CT - Norwich (Diocese)
Ivy Mortison — CA - San Diego (Diocese)
Nadine Turner — NY - Buffalo (Diocese)
Tim Fout — KY - Louisville (Archdiocese)
Thomas Tellson — TX - Dallas (Diocese)
James J. Pansullo — MA - Boston (Archdiocese)
Patrick Gless — CA - Fresno (Diocese)
Mr. & Mrs. Paul Durle — PA - Philadelphia (Archdiocese)
Stacy Milliner — LA - Alexandria (Diocese)
Mrs. Mary C. Donahue — IL - Springfield in Illinois (Diocese)
David M Placek — PA - Pittsburgh (Diocese)
Elizabeth Allen — LA - New Orleans (Archdiocese)
Mary Olivero — NC - Raleigh (Diocese)
Stephen J. Koob — OH - Cincinnati (Archdiocese)
Jane Eve Lullo (RN) — IL - Rockford (Diocese)
James Randall — MO - Springfield-Cape Girardeau (Diocese)
Suzanne Ennis — ME - Portland in Maine (Diocese)
Tim Heffron — VA - Richmond (Diocese)
Janet H Hardy — MA - Worcester (Diocese)
Betsy Kerekes — CA - San Diego (Diocese)
Hannah Carter — CA - Oakland (Diocese)
Gerard Joseph Garno — MI - Detroit (Archdiocese)
Margaret Leth-Nissen — KS - Kansas City in Kansas (Archdiocese)
Joelle Tambuatco — GA - Atlanta (Archdiocese)
John Ruplinger — WI - Milwaukee (Archdiocese)
Michael Perkins — WI - Milwaukee (Archdiocese)
Donna Micklich — CO - Denver (Archdiocese)
Mrs. Christina Ann Wiehoff — IN - Indianapolis (Archdiocese)
Patrick O’Brien — CO - Denver (Archdiocese)
Maurice Prater — MO - Saint Louis (Archdiocese)
Catherine Anderson — GA - Atlanta (Archdiocese)
John Puchner, M.D. — WI - Milwaukee (Archdiocese)
Michael Sanders — AZ - Phoenix (Diocese)
Suzanne Lesniowski — CA - Los Angeles (Archdiocese)
John Cohoat — IN - Indianapolis (Archdiocese)
Genevieve Priest — MI - Lansing (Diocese)
Eusebio Rene Ortiz — TX - Brownsville (Diocese)
Rosanne Farese — MA - Boston (Archdiocese)
Mrs Elizabeth Scott — ND - Fargo (Diocese)
Sylvia Saliba — CA - Orange (Diocese)
William & Eleanore Jones — MN - Winona-Rochester (Diocese)
William (Beau) F. Nunn, Jr. — NC - Charlotte (Diocese)
Laurie M Talbot — MI - Kalamazoo (Diocese)
María Camacho — IL - Chicago (Archdiocese)
Nilsa Garcia — PA - Scranton (Diocese)
Gloria Ortiz — CA - Los Angeles (Archdiocese)
Hélène Makuch — AL - Birmingham (Diocese)
Nicole Peirolo — NC - Charlotte (Diocese)
Maria Martinez — AZ - Phoenix (Diocese)
Timothy John Laxen — MN - Saint Paul and Minneapolis (Archdiocese)
Jose Cortez — CA - San Diego (Diocese)
Nathaniel A.Williams — KY - Louisville (Archdiocese)
Paul zerovnik — OH - Columbus (Diocese)
Janelle Stall — AR - Little Rock (Diocese)
Darrel E. Koch — AR - Little Rock (Diocese)
Priscilla Ashburn — IL - Chicago (Archdiocese)
MaryAnn Stypa — AL - Birmingham (Diocese)
John Peluso — FL - Saint Petersburg (Diocese)
Brad Safranski — MD - Baltimore (Archdiocese)
Michele Bair — MI - Grand Rapids (Diocese)
Delores A. Webb — MI - Lansing (Diocese)
John Gregory Jones — FL - Miami (Archdiocese)
Michelle Geise — IN - Lafayette in Indiana (Diocese)
Karl J Wengenroth — NY - New York (Archdiocese)
Reyes Ponce — VA - Richmond (Diocese)
Leon Dsouza — CA - Los Angeles (Archdiocese)
Joanne Rowan — NY - Syracuse (Diocese)
Patricia Ellen Glynn — FL - Saint Petersburg (Diocese)
Ivan R Loock — OR - Portland in Oregon (Archdiocese)
Pamela Egan — SC - Charleston (Diocese)
Jordan Davis — TX - Galveston-Houston (Archdiocese)
Thomas Michael Kelly — VT - Burlington (Diocese)
Paul List — VT - Burlington (Diocese)
Patrick Preston — IN - Indianapolis (Archdiocese)
Joseph Osborne, Jr — VA - Richmond (Diocese)
KP Powell — TX - Austin (Diocese)
Jeff DiDomenico — AZ - Phoenix (Diocese)
15 Comments
Sure. Since divorce is immoral (except for canonically licit reasons), scandal is likely given whenever a Catholic files for divorce, because it makes it look like there is never anything wrong with a Catholic doing so. However, if the Catholic already has the determination from the tribunal that his/her union was not a binding marriage, this prevents the scandal.
Moreover, in 1880, Pope Leo XIII’s “Arcanum” chastises those who think the rulers of the state should judge the matrimonial contract. “Arcanum” was applied worldwide and the universal law has never changed. The Vicar General of the Archdiocese of Chicago, for example, explained in 1944, “A person may licitly seek a civil divorce in the following circumstances: 1) If the marriage has already been declared null and void by the Church, for in such a case the person is clearly seeking nothing else than the dissolution of the civil effects of an invalid contract. 2) When the bishop decides that there is sufficient reason for permanent or indefinite separation in a valid marriage, and permits the seeking of a civil divorce for the protection of the civil rights of the party.”
Furthermore, the principles used in the civil forum to determine parties' obligations toward each other and their children are contrary to divine law because of no-fault divorce. No-fault divorce regularly punishes the party who caused no reason for separation of spouses and caused no reason for invalidity of marriage.
Below, I consider common causes for invalidity of marriage or dissolution and discuss the benefits of a tribunal judgment being issued even if a civil marriage is still in force.
IMPEDIMENT PRIOR BOND (c. 1085): Consider the example of a man who is in his third civil marriage and he’s questioning whether he can marry his third civil-wife in the Catholic Church. His current civil-wife is really only a state-recognized cohabitation partner. If a Tribunal were to study his first and second civil marriages, the state doesn’t care whether the Church considers either of those marriages binding on the man. If the Church were to find that the man entered a validly binding marriage with his second civil-wife, then the state doesn’t care that the Church found his third marriage to be non-binding. Furthermore, since the supreme law in the Church is always the salvation of souls (c. 1752), it would be good pastoral practice to inform the man of his status regarding his civil-marriages.
DISPARITY OF CULT IMPEDIMENT (c. 1086), LACK OF FORM, DEFECT OF FORM MIXED MARRIAGE (c. 1108, 1124) : If a Catholic marries a non-baptized person (w/o dispensation), marries in a Protestant service (w/o dispensation), or gets married with a civil officiant, he knows he’s not marrying in the Catholic Church. A tribunal’s conclusion would simply repeat what a pastor and true Catholic friends should have already been telling the parties; that is, they are not validly married. There is no requirement that a Catholic must be civilly divorced before diocesan personnel can admonish him about his irregular situation. If the parties have children, keeping the family together seems to be the most merciful outcome for the whole family. The parties should be encouraged to marry in the Church and always work on strengthening their marriage.
IMPOTENCE & NON-CONSUMMATION (c. 1142, 1084) In these cases, the lawful cause of dissolution surfaces almost immediately after the wedding. It would be better for the community to know that there the licit basis for separation and invalidity has been substantiated by the tribunal, prior to the parties getting divorced. Moreover, some states have non-consummation as a civil grounds for invalidity of a marriage.
PAULINE c. 1143: In case the Pauline privilege applies, the newly-baptized Catholic deserves some certainty before he/she files for divorcing the non-believer. So, for this reason the chancery should issue a judgment while the civil marriage is still in force.
PSYCHOLOGICAL GROUNDS (c. 1095): In the case of a person who has total lack of reason – 1095, °1 – justice would be better served if this incapacity was determined prior to civil divorce. After the Church annulment, the party with the sound mind could apply for a civil annulment based on mental incapacity to contract and this would result in a more just outcome, compared to the no-fault divorce routine, which is arguably contrary to divine law.
Since canon law is based on true, natural justice, one who causes harm should be required, as much as possible, to repair the damage he causes another. The one causing harm should not be rewarded. Again, no-fault divorce regularly punishes the party who caused no reason for separation of spouses and caused no reason for invalidity of marriage.
Furthermore, tribunals in every contentious case are obligated to “determine the obligations of the parties arising from the trial and the manner in which these are to be fulfilled” (c. 1611, 2°) and this determination should be a consideration if/when parties terminate their civil marriage status. In nullity of marriage cases, tribunals are supposed to instruct the parties of their “moral and even civil obligations binding them toward one another and toward their children to furnish support and education” (c. 1691 §1). This determination would be very important for any settlement or judgment regarding property, custodial parenting, education of children, and support.
SIMULATION (c. 1101) Prior to any civil divorce, if a tribunal were to determine that a party simulated openness to children, then the aggrieved party could benefit from petitioning in the civil forum for a civil l annulment based on fraud. Since diocesan tribunals are supposed to instruct the parties of their obligations as a result of the canonical trial, the person who willfully excluded children (“simulator”) should be instructed by the tribunal that he/she needs to repair damage caused to the other party. This is more just than the “simulator” being awarded half the marital property, and spousal support, which is common in no-fault divorce. The same principles apply when one of the spouses is cheating on their fiancee (simulating fidelity), or excluded permanence.