Synod on the Family, Part IV | National Catholic Reporter

Synod on the Family, Part IV | National Catholic Reporter by MSW.  MGB: MSW starts by saying that the focus should not be on the second marriage and its status, but on the failed first marriage. I agree and that is what annullments do and what justifiable divorce should do, as I explained in my remarks on part iii.  Briefly, there are some reasons where ending the marriage, rather than explaining away its validity, are a matter of simple justice, being cheated on, being beaten, suffering an active drunk, etc.  The offended party should have all rights to remarry or forgive and the offending spouse should be at their mercy - and not able to marry again unless forgiven. The law may recognize no fault divorce, the Church should not.



Second, he talks about the promises of marriage and how divorce breaks them (rather than the second marriage).  He mentions the openess to children in reference to gay marriage - but frankly many gay families have children - either because of science, divorce or inheritance from a dead sibling.  Dealing with divorce rationally honors the safety of all children of divorce, born or inherited.



Third, he talks about the validity, rather than legitimacy, of both Catholic and Protestant marriages and how that doctrine evolved.  Without saying that natural marriage points to sacramental marriage, as some do, it should be recognized that the couple makes the marriage - not the Priest - which argues for accepting non-Christian marriages as both licit and valid - or those with no minister at all (like in Pennsylvania). My guess is that all the discussion has to do with the Chruch maintaining a monopoly it was never meant to have.  MSW raises the question of a woman married as a Baptist who wanted to covert after her divorce from a violent spouse.  Rather then get technical about where the marriage occurred, we should admit that divorce for abuse is probably a good call and should be respected.  She was victimized once, lets not victimize her again.



Fourth, he talks about the current tribunal system and its assumption that the marriage is valid until proven otherwise.  He suggests that the failure of the marriage is evidence of its invalidity - which could be true.  This proposal looks to me like wondering how many angels can dance on the head of a pin (the answer is five, by the way).  If the Church is out to validate Gospel passages (who says Catholics don't proof text!), it should consider that Jesus made an exception for immorality in allowing divorce.  That term may have had a narrow meaning in ancient times - but it can be broadened to account for the fact that wives are no longer property (actually a recent development - and not yet achieved in states with covenenture).  Again, see my comments above.  



He also talks about the insensitivity of those opposing reform.  I suspect it is not insensitivity but fear of offending God by teaching error - of course their conception of God looks more like an ogre than Jesus. Destroying the arguments of the ogre worshipers should be the priority at these Synods.  We hope Francis is open to that.



This is doubly so on the issue of when one can and cannot take Communion.  The Eucharist should not ever be used as the carrot to get people into Confession frequently.  If Confession is the problem, using the Eucharist as a weapon won't solve it. It certainly won't solve domestic difficulties either.



MSW suggests that we treat the failure of marriage as a sin, with a penitential focus in the rite for second marriages (as the Orthodox do). Again, I strongly disagree.  Unless there really is no fault in the divorce, there are often times where someone sinned grievously against the other spouse.  The spouse who was a victim should not be victimized again in contracting a new sacramental marriage.  The one who did the harm that led to the divorce should have to repent - but not in the secrecy of confession - and until there is adequate change, the baptismal record should indicate the person is not allowed to marry in the Church.



He concludes that hopefully the Spirit will guide the Synod Fathers and that they pray for guidance.  I hope so too, but that will take real conversion - especially by those who are certain that the status quo is correct (or who would go further into the past that never was.  Let us hope to be amazed.