Family
The Companion to JPII and to the Theology of the Body: A Quarter Century of Annual Addresses to the Roman Rota, Part Two
By Joseph Tevington

Hardcopy Issue Date: March, 2006
Online Publication Date: Mar 16, 2006, 14:26

          Editor: Part One of this article was posted in February, 2006.  See www.catholicinsight.com/online/church/family/article_647.shtml.        

          The following statements concerning marriage and its indissolubility were made by Pope John Paul II during the last six years of his life, in his annual address to the Roman Rota, the ultimate organ of the Vatican dealing with annulments:

2000: Neither simple error in opinions or attitudes—nor the Pope—can nullify a valid marriage.

          Opinions opposed to the principle of indissolubility or attitudes contrary to it, but without the formal refusal to celebrate a sacramental marriage, do not exceed the limits of simple error.

          An error concerning indissolubility, by way of exception, can have an invalidating effect on consent if it positively determines the will of the contracting party to decide against the indissolubility of marriage (cf. CIC, can. 1099).

          This can occur only when the erroneous judgement about the indissolubility of the bond has a determining influence on the will’s decision because it is prompted by an inner conviction deeply rooted in the contractant’s mind and is decisively and stubbornly held by him.

          Neither Scripture nor Tradition recognizes any faculty of the Roman Pontiff for dissolving a ratified and consummated marriage; on the contrary, the Church’s constant practice shows the certain knowledge of Tradition that such a power does not exist.

          It seems quite clear then that the non-extension of the Roman Pontiff’s power to ratified and consummated sacramental marriages is taught by the Church’s Magisterium as a doctrine to be held definitively, even if it has not been solemnly declared by a defining act.

2001: Marriage is “ordered to the good of the spouses and the procreation & education of children.”

          The fact... that the natural datum is authoritatively confirmed, and raised by Our Lord to a sacrament, in no way justifies the tendency... to ideologize the idea of marriage... by claiming a different valid conception for a believer or a non-believer, for a Catholic or a non-Catholic, as though the sacrament were a subsequent and extrinsic reality to the natural datum, and not the natural datum itself evinced by reason, taken up and raised by Christ to a sign and means of salvation.

          Man and woman have always had a profound inclination in their being which is not the result of their own creativity and which, in its basic features, fully transcends historical and cultural differences. The only way... that the authentic richness and variety of all that is essentially human can come to light is through fidelity to the requirements of one’s nature.

          Christians... know that for this task they can count on the strength of grace, which is capable of healing nature wounded by sin.

          Marriage and the family are inseparable, because the masculinity and femininity of the married couple are constitutively open to the gift of children. Without this openness there could not even be a good of the spouses worthy of the name. The essential properties, unity and indissolubility, are also inscribed in the very being of marriage, since in no way are they laws extrinsic to it.

          The indissoluble force of the bond itself is based on the natural reality of the union freely established between man and woman.

          By its nature the marital union involves the masculinity and femininity itself of the married couple; therefore it is not a union that essentially requires unusual characteristics in the contracting parties. 

          If that were the case, matrimony would be reduced to a factual integration of persons and their characteristics, and its duration would also depend only on the existence of a no better determined interpersonal affection.

          Even marriage does not escape the logic of Christ’s Cross, which indeed requires effort and sacrifice and involves pain and suffering, but does not prevent, in the acceptance of God’s will, complete and authentic personal fulfilment in peace and serenity of spirit.

          To present consent as the following of a cultural model or one of positive law is not realistic, and risks needlessly complicating the investigation of matrimonial validity. It is a question of seeing whether the persons, in addition to identifying each other’s person, have truly grasped the essential natural dimension of their married state, which implies, as an intrinsic requirement, fidelity, indissolubility, and potential fatherhood or motherhood as goods that integrate a relationship of justice.

          There have been frequent attempts since Vatican II to revitalize the supernatural aspect of marriage which include theological, pastoral, and canonical proposals that are foreign to tradition, such as the attempt to require faith as a prerequisite for marriage.

          To introduce requirements of intention or faith for the sacrament that go beyond that of marrying according to God’s plan from the “beginning”—in addition to the grave risks that I mentioned in Familiaris consortio (n. 68, loc. cit., pp. 164-165): unfounded and discriminatory judgements, doubts about the validity of marriages already celebrated, particularly by baptized non-Catholics—would inevitably mean separating the marriage of Christians from that of other people. This would be deeply contrary to the true meaning of God’s plan, in which it is precisely the created reality that is a “great mystery” in reference to Christ and the Church.

2002: Specifc charges growing from the truth that indissolubility is a good for all humanity.

          The truth about the indissolubility of marriage, like the entire Christian message, is addressed to the men and women of every time and place.

          Testimony to that truth must be given by the Church and, in particular, by individual families as “domestic churches” in which husband and wife recognize that they are bound to each other forever by a bond that demands a love that is ever renewed, generous and ready for sacrifice.

          Pastoral activity must support and promote indissolubility. The doctrinal aspects should be transmitted, clarified, and defended, but even more important are consistent actions.

          Given that God has united them by means of an indissoluble bond, the husband and wife by utilizing all their human resources, together with good will, and by, above all, confiding in the assistance of divine grace, can and should emerge from their moments of crisis renewed and strengthened.

          All too often one thinks almost exclusively of processes that ratify the annulment of marriage or the dissolution of the bond. At times, this mentality extends even to canon law, so that it appears as the avenue for resolving the marital problems of the faithful in a way that does not offend one’s conscience.

          The attitude of the Church is, in contrast, favourable to convalidating, where possible, marriages that are otherwise null (cf. CIC, can. 1676; CCEO, can. 1362).

          An unjust declaration of nullity... is particularly serious, since its official link with the Church encourages the spread of attitudes in which indissolubility finds verbal support, but is denied in practice.

          It could perhaps seem that divorce is so firmly rooted in certain social sectors that it is almost not worth continuing to combat it by spreading a mentality, a social custom, and civil legislation, in favour of the indissolubility of marriage. Yet it is indeed worth the effort!

          This good is at the root of all society, as a necessary condition for the existence of the family. Its absence, therefore, has devastating consequences that spread through the social body like a plague... and that have a negative influence on the new generations who view as tarnished the beauty of true marriage.

          The value of indissolubility cannot be held to be just the object of a private choice: it concerns one of the cornerstones of all society.

          Among the initiatives should be (1) those that aim at obtaining the public recognition of indissoluble marriage in the civil juridical order; (2) resolute opposition to any legal or administrative measures that introduce divorce or that equate de facto unions—including those between homosexuals—with marriage; (3) a pro-active attitude... that tends to improve the social recognition of true marriage. And (4) professionals in the field of civil law should avoid being personally involved in anything that might imply a cooperation with divorce.3

2003: The sacramentality of marriage.

          The crisis concerning the meaning of God, and that concerning moral good and evil, has succeeded in diminishing an acquaintance with the fundamentals of marriage and of the family which is rooted in marriage. For an effective recovery of the truth in this field, it is necessary to rediscover the transcendent dimension that is intrinsic to the full truth of marriage and the family, overcoming every dichotomy that tends to separate the profane aspects from the religious as if there were two marriages, one profane and another sacred.

          On account of the effects of original sin, what was natural in the relationship between man and woman risks being lived in a way that is not in conformity with the plan and will of God, and distancing oneself from God necessarily implies a proportionate dehumanizing of all family relationships. 

          But, in the “fullness of time,” Jesus himself restored the primordial design of marriage (cf. Mt. 19:1-12) and so, in the state of redeemed nature, the union between man and woman not only regains its original holiness, freed from sin, but is really inserted into the very mystery of the covenant of Christ with the Church. 

          The intrinsic link between marriage, established at the beginning [of creation], and the union of the Word Incarnate with the Church, is shown in its salvific efficacy by means of the concept of sacrament.

          Christian life and reflection find in this truth an inexhaustible fountain of light....The ultimate reason... for the duty of faithful love is none other than what is the basis of the divine covenant with the human person: God is faithful. To make possible the fidelity of heart to one’s spouse, even in the hardest cases, one must have re-course to God in the certainty of receiving assistance.

          It is necessary to take seriously the obligation imposed on the judge by canon 1676 to favour and to seek actively the possible convalidation and reconciliation of the marriage. 

          Naturally the same attitude of support for marriage and the family must prevail before turning to the tribunal.

          It is necessary to create a synergy that involves everyone in the church.

          All must keep in mind that they are dealing with a sacred reality and with a question that touches on the salvation of souls.

          The importance of the sacramentality of marriage, and the need of faith for knowing and living fully this dimension, could give rise to some misunderstandings either regarding the admission to the celebration of marriage or judgments about the validity of marriage. The church does not refuse to celebrate a marriage for the person who is well disposed, even if he is imperfectly prepared from the supernatural point of view, provided the person has the right intention to marry according to the natural reality of marriage. In fact, alongside natural marriage, one cannot describe another model of Christian marriage with specific supernatural requisites.

          It is crucial to keep in mind that an attitude on the part of those getting married that does not take into account the supernatural dimension of marriage can render it null and void only if it undermines its validity on the natural level on which the sacramental sign itself takes place. The Catholic Church has always recognized marriages between the non-baptized that become a Christian sacrament through the baptism of the spouses; nor does she have doubts about the validity of the marriage of a Catholic with a non-baptized person if it is celebrated with the necessary dispensation.

          The Holy Rosary, by ancient tradition, has shown itself particularly effective as a prayer which brings the family together (n. 41).4

2004: The validity of marriage is to be assumed.

          What can one say to the argument which holds that the failure of conjugal life implies the invalidity of the marriage? Unfortunately, this erroneous assertion is sometimes so forceful as to become a generalized prejudice that leads people to seek grounds for nullity as a merely formal justification of a pronouncement that is actually based on the empirical factor of matrimonial failure.

          Admission of true nullities should rather lead to ascertaining with greater seriousness at the time of the marriage the necessary prerequisites for matrimony, especially those concerning the consent and true disposition of the engaged couple. Parish priests and those who work with them in this area have the grave duty not to surrender to a purely bureaucratic view of the pre-matrimonial examination of the parties.

          Their pastoral intervention must be dictated by awareness that, at precisely that moment, people are able to discover the natural and supernatural good of marriage and consequently commit themselves to pursuing it.

          The tendency to instrumentally broaden the causes for nullity, losing sight of the bounds of objective truth, involves a structural distortion of the entire process.

          It is necessary instead to rediscover the truth, goodness, and beauty of the marriage institution. Since it is the work of God himself, through human nature and the freedom of consent of the engaged couple, marriage remains an indissoluble personal reality, a bond of justice and love, linked from eternity to the plan of salvation and raised in the fullness of time to the dignity of a Christian sacrament. It is this reality that the Church and the world must encourage!5

2005: Church tribunals must conform to the truth about marriage.

          I would like to place certain considerations concerning the moral dimension of the activity of all who work at the ecclesiastical tribunals, especially the duty to conform to the truth about marriage.

          Individual or collective interests can induce the parties to resort to various kinds of duplicity and even bribery in order to attain a favourable sentence.

          There is also the threat of another risk. In the name of what they claim to be pastoral requirements, some voices have been raised proposing to declare marriages that have totally failed null and void. These persons propose that, in order to obtain this result, recourse should be made to the expedient of retaining the substantial features of the proceedings, simulating the existence of an authentic judicial verdict.

          The objective juridical and moral gravity of such conduct, which in no way constitutes a pastorally valid solution to the problems posed by matrimonial crises, is obvious.

          Bishops are... called to be personally involved in ensuring the suitability of the members of the tribunals... and in verifying that the sentences passed conform to right doctrine. Sacred Pastors cannot presume that the activity of their tribunals is merely a “technical” matter from which they can remain detached, entrusting it entirely to their judicial vicars.

          The criterion that inspires the deontology of the judge is his love for the truth. First and foremost, therefore, he must be convinced that the truth exists.

          It is necessary to resist the fear of the truth that can, at times, stem from the dread of annoying people. The truth, which is Christ himself (cf. Jn. 8:32, 36), sets us free from every form of compromise with interested falsehoods. The judge who truly acts as a judge... neither lets himself be conditioned by feelings of false compassion for people, nor by false models of thought, however widespread these may be in his milieu. He knows that unjust sentences are never a true pastoral solution, and that God’s judgment of his own actions is what counts for eternity. 

          The preliminary investigation of the case is an important stage in the search for the truth. The very reason for its existence is endangered and degenerates into pure formalism when the outcome of the proceedings is taken for granted.6

Conclusion

          In addition to the words of Pope John Paul II above, we might add some comments. Father Leonard Kennedy (in Catholic Insight, 1999, No. 3) lists several reasons for the skyrocketing number of annulments in the United States, as found in his review of Robert Vasoli’s What God Has Joined Together: The Annulment Crisis in the Church: