Well this explains a lot:
Pope Francis said Thursday that the great majority of sacramental marriages today are not valid, because couples do not enter into them with a proper understanding of permanence and commitment.
“We live in a culture of the provisional,” the Pope said in impromptu remarks June 16. After addressing the Diocese of Rome’s pastoral congress, he held a question-and-answer session.
A layman asked about the “crisis of marriage” and how Catholics can help educate youth in love, help them learn about sacramental marriage, and help them overcome “their resistance, delusions and fears.”
The Pope answered from his own experience.
Go here to read the rest. PopeWatch wonders if the Pope understands just what a damning indictment of the post Vatican II Church his statement is if his statement is true. It may well not be true as sacramental Catholic marriages, at least in the US, have a failure rate well under 50%. Of course this attitude of the Pope explains why he wants to give Communion to Catholics in adulterous marriages irregular unions since in his view the vast majority of the first marriages didn’t count since they were invalid. Sycophants of the current Pope believe he was chosen by the Holy Spirit. Who knows, perhaps they are correct. Perhaps God in His wrath finally gave us the Pope we deserve instead of the Pope we need. Who can say that God is unjust if that is precisely what is going on?
I made a mistake and read the rest as you suggested. According to PF, cohabitating couples in Northeast Argentina have “a lot of fidelity” and when they do eventually get married he’s sure these are valid marriages, but the “great majority” of sacramental marriages are invalid? So, please cohabitate before marriage because it will increase your odds of a valid marriage. Amazing. Also, PF can connect the dots about arms merchants being the cause of all wars, but he can’t connect the utter failure of catechisis by his church of nice to his opinion that the “vast majority” of couples going through church sponsored marriage prep still don’t know that marriage is a life long commitment? I guess his super powers of divination only help him to see certain things clearly, such as the fact that a proper understanding of Islam rejects all violence. Lord save us!
As a commenter pointed out, surely most ordinations are invalid then. There goes Confession! And if that is all true, then a good many people are not getting Body and Blood during Communion. Hmm, was I validly Confirmed after suffering through RCIA?
.
I came from an Episcopal family, was baptised in a Methodist Church. And I must say, going to this small non-denominational place is looking r.e.a.l. good these days.
.
Recently a VOTF member wondered why so many in the area have left the diocese. Why stay? It isn’t Catholic.
I recall DJH a dying Russian in 1970 telling his son to “outlive these bastards!”. He was referring to the Communist regime. In regard to the current Pontificate, that is my advice to all faithful Catholics.
The Church assumes validity if you enunciated the vow before a priest. Pope Francis seems not to. Pope Francis seems to hold most Catholics non responsible for the vows they surely thought about above the shallow level as the wedding approached. Christ, very unlike Pope Francis, held the Samaritan woman ( who rejected the prophets)…at the well responsible for a previous marriage while He also told her, ” You worship what you do not know, we worship what we know for salvation is from the Jews.” She had the scriptural canon far too abriged and worshipped what she did not know YET Christ saw her as really married and implied she was with a man who was not her real husband. Christ
” accompanied” her nowhere. He confronted her conscience which already suspected the truth…
” 17 The woman answered, and said: I have no husband. Jesus said to her: Thou hast said well, I have no husband:
18 For thou hast had five husbands: and he whom thou now hast, is not thy husband. This thou hast said truly.”
This makes me so sad. First, it’s a very well-known fact that all marriages are presumed to be valid. Second, I’m on my parish’s pre-cana team. We work very hard in those 8 hours to smash into the couples’ heads that you must enter into a marriage freely, totally, fruitfully, and FOREVER. If they get married anyway, after hearing our speeches, what else can you do?? The last sentence in my speech is: It’s okay to wait, or even change your mind. I have been trying so, so hard to ignore the pope’s off-the-cuff remarks, but this latest one just really is getting me down. How can he say this? I’m sure it’s just him trying to justify Amoris Laetitia, but I can’t help but feel a heavy burden that he’s so flippant about such important things.
Ironically, il Papa may be correct, in that due to piss-poor instruction in the faith, there are no doubt many in the last 50 years who have little notion of the permanency of matrimony, and many also who enter into marriage fully intending to contracept for long periods of time. And the annulment culture itself has now created a generation or two of Catholics who might reasonably conclude that after all, marriage is not really permanent.
So in many ways, the culture of easy annulment in the US coupled with near-zero teaching about the impermissibility of contraception have created a situation where in fact many marriages might be genuinely null because few have a correct understanding indissolubility and openess to life.
It can be damaging to say what the pope said, but I think he’s right. How many people enter marriage with a real understanding of its permanence? What’s the divorce rate among Catholics? A kid these days grows up with friends whose parents get divorced and remarried, even if the parents are nominally Catholic. He’s not going to get the permanence of marriage, even if he’s from a two-parent family.
Growing up in the US, for example, how many of us understand permanence at all? A pre-Cana session can state the facts, even explain the thinking behind them, but that intuitive understanding that this is the person for me until I die, that’s hard to develop when the culture says otherwise. I know we’re supposed to be in the word but not of it. But let’s face it, the hard teachings have to be nourished, and not just from the pulpit – although that’s necessary too. Most people with, um, internet access are going to be struggling with a proper theology of the body. (Was that euphemistic enough?) It’s tough out there. How many weddings take place between two people who actually get it?
Or, I could have just refreshed my browser and said, “yeah, what Tom said”.
Bill Bannon wrote, “Pope Francis seems to hold most Catholics non responsible for the vows they surely thought about above the shallow level as the wedding approached.”
How do we judge someone’s intention? It really is not difficult: “What is the natural expression of an intention?” asks Wittgenstein. “Look at a cat when it stalks a bird; or a beast when it wants to escape.”
Just so, a Scottish judge, Lord O’Hagan, observed, “In all inquiries of this sort, I apprehend the true rule is not to regard singly and apart the one transaction on which reliance is placed as constituting the marriage. It is necessary to exercise “a large discourse of reason looking both before and after,” and from all the antecedents and all the consequents to ascertain the true mind and purpose of the parties whose intention determines the character of their act.” Robertson v Stewart 1875 2 RHL 80 at p 108.
That is clearly right.
http://www.citizengo.org/en/sc/35192-radical-leftists-want-criminalize-cardinal-being-christian?dr=3592924::f4976a10563bcac8011f998b7d3588de&utm_source=email&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWXpZNU0yTXhZV1F5WWpWayIsInQiOiJPTHdISUhcL2M1RVZHQVJxWG1hWmo3b2htd1NSWnQ0dW9qWWNqODZuM05aSk5qT3FiVVcxQ1wvZEkrTkg5Q01OZWs2Rm0xUFwvOHZxclwvNEowNE5VZTJoSUlnQjRJeExwdnpJanZ4VzNXd2pGR0U9In0%3D
With deepest respect to your audience I hope you wouldn’t mind if this petition was available for their considerations.
The above is an example of a Bishop worthy of his calling. The hope that never fails is our anchor in this liberal storm. This storm will pass. God bless all Holy Religious and help those in most need of HIS Mercy.
I think the Pope is right to a large extent. I knew a priest (who was no liberal, BTW) who said the same thing, only he used the word ‘half’ rather than ‘most’.
–
It seems to me that this is a subject that may be best left alone. Why? Because the subject of pursuing a perfect valid marriage might for some feed into that imaginary perfect world were nothing ever measures up. Many already do this with spouses, children, weddings, etc. Here might just be one more abuse.
–
Imagine if the Pope kept talking about the ‘unforgivable sin’ in great detail, giving example after example of how to commit it in his desire to help people avoid it. It might be counterproductive, no? Same here.
–
Another point: our Pope on this matter can be interpreted as contradicting God’s command to the prophet Hosea concerning his wife. Yeah, I know, Hosea wasn’t Christian, and it can be argued that was a special case, but just think it over.
I am very sympathetic to what the Pope said. I am very sympathetic to divorce/remarriage/ Communion, AL, the whole Kasper proposal. Really, I am.
.
But is Christ? I’m not betting on it. Was marriage any better back then than it is now? Was marriage prep? Were people’s sexual habits? Maybe the common Jewish people were somewhat better off morally, but some of the leadership (Herod comes to mind) were pretty sketchy. And then the Romans. Oh my. And the question was posed to Jesus-can a man divorce his wife? Surely that question would not have been asked if people weren’t dumping their spouse with some regularity. And Jesus said No, after taking a bit of a sympathetic swipe at Moses and chastizing people for their hard hearts. Heck Christ didn’t even suggest pre-Cana classes.
.
And the Church has always understood that No to mean No.
.
Has there been a time when marriage was easy and sin free? Can’t think of any. I do think the modern welfare state has created a climate where man and woman no longer need each other as much, and that lessing of need for the other does marriage and family no favors. But we in the West do have some helps, some knowledge from sociology and psychology (those two areas are not total cess pool) to help with the lows. Alas, I don’t get the impression the standard to what makes a valid marriage to be all that high.
.
From Edward Peters. If anyone knows Canon Law, it’s this guy. I hope the link will post. Yes, Virginia, the great majority of Christian marriages are valid.
.
http://www.catholicworldreport.com/Blog/4852/the_great_majority_of_christian_marriages_are_valid.aspx
And it appears Vatican bureaucrats agree with Mr. Peters. The Pope changed his mind, offering an official clarification to say that a portion of sacramental marriages are invalid.
.
http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/most-marriages-today-are-invalid-pope-francis-suggests/
The man who can’t judge apparently can judge. It is wrong to assume someone didn’t understand permanence at the time of marriage because there is a divorce later. They failed to live up to expectations. (Kind of like this pope, but I digress.) How human in a fallen world. He condemns those who are in currently successful sacramental marriages while espousing sinful cohabitation as justified as long as it promotes fidelity. I thought an illicit means to a licit end was never justified.
When will this liberal era end? God, please till the soil.
You know what, I think he’s right about this one. He just doesn’t seem to realize he is now the central part of the problem.
DJH wrote, “And it appears Vatican bureaucrats agree with Mr. Peters.”
What puzzles me is how the Holy Father, Vatican officials, Mr Peters, or anyone else can possibly know the actual number of invalid marriages.
It is only when a proof has been led and a decree pronounced that we can be satisfied that any given marriage is valid or invalid.
As for the presumption of validity, this, like the presumption of innocence, simply refers to the burden of proof; it cannot be treated as a statistical generalisation.
The Chair of Peter has been vacant since B16 was forced out. I say forced out because he was not sick and is still able to function as pope. Francis proves daily he’s clueless about what constitutes Catholicism. He acts like a bitter protestant who hates the Catholic Church and he’s sending good people straight to hell with his heretical ramblings. Marriages are fake and the shacked up are as good as a real marriage is just more utter nonsense from this charlatan. I pray that his replacement will be a faithful Catholic. Thanks all I ask, in Jesus name. Amen.
Someone above suggested that if marriages are invalid, then so are ordinations and even the Eucharist. If one Sacrament is worthless, then what of the rest? That’s heresy as far as I am concerned, and the Pope – barring mental defect or disease – is a heretic.
Fortunately on the 17th also, Pope Francis said the laity are the salt of the earth….from CNA:
“Baptism makes each one of the lay faithful a missionary disciple of the Lord, salt of the earth, light of the world, and leaven that transforms reality from within,” remarked the Pope. It’s just that the majority of the salt of the earth are clueless about marriage being til death….lol.
A sacramental marriage of two frail human beings is valid until annulled by the church through a tribunal. Pope Francis wants the priest in the confessional to have the power of annulment. Annulment needs a tribunal.
Mary De Voe wrote, “A sacramental marriage of two frail human beings is valid until annulled by the church through a tribunal.”
No, a declaration of nullity is merely declaratory. It finds that no matrimonial contract or espousals ever existed between the parties. That is why decrees in matrimonial causes are never final, but can always be reopened (Canon 1643 – Cases concerning the status of persons, including cases concerning the separation of spouses, never become res iudicata.”)
A de facto marriage is presumed to be valid, until the Church declares otherwise, a very different proposition.
If – as it has been said – heroism isn’t for the average christian – the majority of marriages for average christians can’t be valid. So PF is perfectly correct and unless the average Christians become somehow inspired that taking up their cross is serious business it will never change. Instead we’re told that we should take up our cross – unless it’s hard. It seems to me that one of the weaknesses of Catholic Church has always been that the heirarchy treats the laity like spiritual children – here are your minimum obligations – here’s a pat on the head and don’t worry about any spiritual heavy lifting. One of the things PF has said that I love is that he wants to strive toward a more adult church. But that seems to mean simply saying “Since you are adults, go do as you please and the church will rubber stamp it.” Making marriage easier and finding greater validity in irregular arrangements will only serve to make things worse and less adult. Hey – I have an idea! How about instead of pre-cana counseling and such, the church should require marriage candidates to undergo a six month long intensive study of the entire new testament – oh, and the books of Tobit, Hosea and Job, and the Song of Solomon. Since marriage is a vocational sacrament, no one should get married in the church without a real education in Christian maturation. Yes, people would fall away in droves and find an easier way to get married. So be it. At least the church would not be culpable for facilitating invalid marriages. You would probably hear an insipid claim that marriage is a vocation equal to the priesthood in value. Can you imagine someone going through 8 hours of pre-priesthood training to become ordained?