My brother-in-law Justin and Sister-in-law Sarah are expecting their first child! I am very excited for them! They are due next March! I find it very interesting watching them go through all the exciting and joyful times just like my wife and I did, not so long ago. In just January they entered into the Sacrament of Marriage! Now they are on their way to becoming parents and experiencing the joys of having children! I pray for them that they will be able to navigate through all of lifes difficulties that may come their way.
Monday, July 6, 2009
Right from the Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. I don't think it can be any clearer what the church teaches about marriage and divorce:
347. What sins are gravely opposed to the sacrament of Matrimony?
1645-1648
Adultery and polygamy are opposed to the sacrament of matrimony because they contradict the equal dignity of man and woman and the unity and exclusivity of married love. Other sins include the deliberate refusal of one’s procreative potential which deprives conjugal love of the gift of children and divorce which goes against the indissolubility of marriage.
Here is a link to the compendium:
http://www.vatican.va/archive/compendium_ccc/documents/archive_2005_compendium-ccc_en.html
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Choose Life license plates available in Arizona!!!!
This is pretty exciting. We may just be on our way to winning the fight for life in America despite our current adiministrations efforts otherwise such as trying to take away the freedom of conscience, spending tax dollars on abortions in other countries, and trying to pass the F.O.C.A(so called freedom of choice act) to name a few. More states however are now having these prolife license plates and a recent gallup poll showed that a majority of Americans 51% are indeed prolife, and only 42% prochoice. Check out the poll here: http://www.gallup.com/poll/118399/more-americans-pro-life-than-pro-choice-first-time.aspx . Another telling sign is that they are having a much harder time finding doctors that will perform abortions. That's undoubtedly one of the reasons they want to take away the freedom of conscience. To get a Choose Life license plate in AZ go to http://www.arizonalifecoalition.org/ and download the application. You will also find information on what the money from the license plates will be used for. If you are in a different state check for availability as many states have them available, and other states are working on it still! Lets keep up the good fight!
Thursday, May 21, 2009
I came across an interesting article talking about how No Fault divorce is a plague on our society, and that it originated in the Soviet Union. More interesting is the fact that in 1970 when working on the first no fault divorce law in the U.S., the same group was also working on a law to legalize abortion which later led to roe v. wade. The two laws were the Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act (UMDA) and the other was the Uniform Abortion Act. They were both structured very similar in that they used the term viability. If the child isn't "viable" go ahead and abort him/her. If the marriage isn't "viable" anymore terminate it. Well I am not suprised by this, as the Catholic Church most often says that abortion and divorce are both part of the culture of death in our society, and that they are both grave evils. In the comment section at the end of this article one reader put it this way: Abortion destroys the product of the one-flesh union while divorce destroys the one-flesh union itself. I would say that is satan's master plan in a nut shell. With such an attack on marriage and families in our society we desperately need to pray fervently.
Here is a link to the entire article: http://catholicexchange.com/2009/05/18/118701/
Here is a link to the entire article: http://catholicexchange.com/2009/05/18/118701/
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Prayer to the Shoulder Wound of Jesus
Recently while I was at praying at Adoration I noticed a stack of prayer cards. Most of the time the prayer cards have traditional Catholic Prayers on them. You know the ones everyone knows like the Our Father, Hail Mary, Glory Be, St. Michael Prayer, Prayer to the Immaculate Heart, Prayer to the Sacred Heart, and many others all of which are great prayers. This one however was much different and it really moved me when I read it. It was about St. Bernard of Clairvoux, and how Jesus revealed to him what his most greatest suffering was. Jesus told him it was the wound on his shoulder from bearing the Cross, and that it tore his flesh all the way to the bone. I was awstruck because it made so much sense, and yet it had never even occured to me. He bore the heavy Cross on his shoulder for a considerable amount of time, and he fell under the weight of it at least three times. So it makes perfect sense and I encourage everyone to read the story below and pray the "Prayer to the Shoulder Wound of Jesus"!
Prayer to the Shoulder Wound of Jesus
It is related in the annals of Clairvaux that St. Bernard asked Our Lord which was His greatest unrecorded suffering and Our Lord answered: "I had on My Shoulder, while I bore My Cross on the Way of Sorrows, a grievous Wound, which was more painful than the others and which is not recorded by men. Honor this Wound with thy devotion and I will grant thee whatsoever thou dost ask through Its virtue and merit. And in regard to all those who shall venerate this Wound, I will remit to them all their venial sins and will no longer remember their mortal sins."
This revelation and promise of Our Dear Savior is another proof of His unlimited mercy. You are urged to say these prayers daily and to promulgate this prayer on a continuous basis, so that others may share in this blessing.
THE PRAYER
O Loving Jesus, meek Lamb of God, I a miserable sinner, salute and worship the most Sacred Wound of Thy Shoulder on which Thou didst bear Thy heavy Cross, which so tore Thy Flesh and laid bare Thy Bones as to inflict on Thee an anguish greater than any other Wound of Thy Most Blessed Body. I adore Thee, O Jesus most sorrowful; I praise and glorify Thee and give Thee thanks for this most sacred and painful Wound, beseeching Thee by that exceeding pain and by the crushing burden of Thy heavy Cross to be merciful to me, a sinner, to forgive me all my mortal and venial sins, and to lead me on towards Heaven along the Way of Thy Cross. Amen.
Imprimatur: Thomas D. Beven, Bishop of Springfield, Ma.
Pope Eugenius III, at the earnest request of St. Bernard, granted three thousand years Indulgence to all who with a contrite heart, recite the Lord's Prayer and the Hail Mary 3 times, in honor of the Wound on the Shoulder of Our Blessed Redeemer.
It is related in the annals of Clairvaux that St. Bernard asked Our Lord which was His greatest unrecorded suffering and Our Lord answered: "I had on My Shoulder, while I bore My Cross on the Way of Sorrows, a grievous Wound, which was more painful than the others and which is not recorded by men. Honor this Wound with thy devotion and I will grant thee whatsoever thou dost ask through Its virtue and merit. And in regard to all those who shall venerate this Wound, I will remit to them all their venial sins and will no longer remember their mortal sins."
This revelation and promise of Our Dear Savior is another proof of His unlimited mercy. You are urged to say these prayers daily and to promulgate this prayer on a continuous basis, so that others may share in this blessing.
THE PRAYER
O Loving Jesus, meek Lamb of God, I a miserable sinner, salute and worship the most Sacred Wound of Thy Shoulder on which Thou didst bear Thy heavy Cross, which so tore Thy Flesh and laid bare Thy Bones as to inflict on Thee an anguish greater than any other Wound of Thy Most Blessed Body. I adore Thee, O Jesus most sorrowful; I praise and glorify Thee and give Thee thanks for this most sacred and painful Wound, beseeching Thee by that exceeding pain and by the crushing burden of Thy heavy Cross to be merciful to me, a sinner, to forgive me all my mortal and venial sins, and to lead me on towards Heaven along the Way of Thy Cross. Amen.
Imprimatur: Thomas D. Beven, Bishop of Springfield, Ma.
Pope Eugenius III, at the earnest request of St. Bernard, granted three thousand years Indulgence to all who with a contrite heart, recite the Lord's Prayer and the Hail Mary 3 times, in honor of the Wound on the Shoulder of Our Blessed Redeemer.
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Should married people be NFL-like 'free agents'?
Now that the U.S. has seen same-sex marriages, it has now seen same-sex divorces. Therefore, marriage has not been strengthened by the widened definition.
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
By James Thunder
It was not long after our country saw the first same-sex marriages that we saw our first same-sex divorces. Whatever the truth of the argument that same-sex marriage threatens traditional (heterosexual) marriage, the legalization of same-sex marriages, including the recent legalization by the Iowa Supreme Court and the Vermont legislature, certainly do nothing to strengthen marriage.
Because I am a lawyer, when I hear people argue that “we” need to “strengthen marriage,” I consider first how the law might provide such a tool. One type of law that could strengthen marriage has been the subject of state legislation, state court decisions, and law review articles over the past 70 years. Nonetheless, there has never been much public debate. To the extent that there was been public debate over this type of law, the law has been derided and I maintain wrongly so.
Under what is called “the common law,” spouses had two different causes of action available to them to protect their marriages. One was called “criminal conversation” which required an act of adultery but did not require knowledge by the defendant of the marital status of the married party or breakdown of the marriage. The other was called “alienation of affections” which did not require adultery but did require knowledge by the defendant of the marital status and breakdown of the marriage. These causes of action have been derided as “heart balm” torts, that is, they are brought by jilted parties to soothe their broken hearts.
During the past year, opponents of Proposition 8 in California claimed that rights once granted could not be abolished. That is plainly not so since state supreme courts and state legislatures in 40 of our states have abolished the right of spouses to call upon the law to protect their marriages. One example is the Supreme Court of Missouri’s action in the 2003 case of Helsel v. Noellsch, 107 S.W.3d 231.
The courts and the legislatures that have abolished these marital rights have done so on various grounds. As I repeat them, I will refute them, using arguments made by judges and law review authors. At the same time, I will describe some ways in which our legislatures, rather than scuttling these rights, could modernize them by establishing a cause of action labeled “interference with marital relations.”
1) These causes of action originated in previous centuries when a wife was regarded as a property interest of the husband and the husband utilized these causes of action to protect his property. This is true, but there has been no question that, in modern times, a woman has had as much right as a man to utilize these causes of action. Certainly, the legislature can modernize these rights to ensure that both husbands and wives could bring suit.
2) These causes of action are able to be used only against the rich because lawyers will not represent a plaintiff unless the prospective defendant has a deep pocket. This has also been true, but this argument could be used against a host of causes of action. Again, our legislatures could ensure that suits against defendants of modest means would be financially viable. For example, they could ensure that the loser pays the winner’s attorneys’ fees.
3) These causes of action are vindictive because they are brought only after the marriage has been destroyed and cannot be restored. Several responses. First, given the description above of the two types of causes of action, this argument would only be true for “alienation of affections” not “criminal conversation.”
Second, modern legislation providing for “interference with marital relations” could allow for suits prior to the breakdown of the marriage by providing for injunctive relief in the form of protective orders against interlopers -- just as our legislatures have provided for the issuance of protective orders against abusive spouses and stalkers.
Third, it is not generally thought that the vindication of one’s rights in a court of law is being vindictive. Fourth, this argument could be used against a host of causes of action in which money damages are sought. Lawsuits alleging breach of contract are brought after the contract has been breached and most likely cannot be restored. Fifth, this argument fails to consider the deterrent value of the right to sue. For example, the ability to sue for breach of contract is not successful in deterring all breaches of contract. Law is not a cure-all, but an aid.
4) The amount of money damages cannot be ascertained by a jury. What is a marriage worth? The courts and legislatures in the 40 states which have deprived spouses of a right to sue interlopers have set a value on marriage -- at zero. In fact, it would be an easy thing for legislatures to specify damages in various ways. For example, since the interloper is a home-wrecker, damages could be the price of a median existing home in the area. If we can determine a monetary value in the case of the wrongful death of a spouse, we should be able to determine the monetary value of the wrongful death of a marriage.
5) Only weak marriages are susceptible to interlopers and the weak marriages would have failed for some reason anyway. Should the law not be used to help weak marriages? In so many fields of law, our laws come to the aid of the vulnerable. Our society should encourage the strengthening of weak marriages – not deprive the weak marriages of the aid of the law and let predators exploit the situation. Besides, even strong marriages have their weak times and their lifelong weaknesses.
Since the arguments to abolish these rights have been and can be so easily be refuted, there must be a deeper, unstated, reason why 40 of our courts and legislatures have abolished them.
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
By James Thunder
It was not long after our country saw the first same-sex marriages that we saw our first same-sex divorces. Whatever the truth of the argument that same-sex marriage threatens traditional (heterosexual) marriage, the legalization of same-sex marriages, including the recent legalization by the Iowa Supreme Court and the Vermont legislature, certainly do nothing to strengthen marriage.
Because I am a lawyer, when I hear people argue that “we” need to “strengthen marriage,” I consider first how the law might provide such a tool. One type of law that could strengthen marriage has been the subject of state legislation, state court decisions, and law review articles over the past 70 years. Nonetheless, there has never been much public debate. To the extent that there was been public debate over this type of law, the law has been derided and I maintain wrongly so.
Under what is called “the common law,” spouses had two different causes of action available to them to protect their marriages. One was called “criminal conversation” which required an act of adultery but did not require knowledge by the defendant of the marital status of the married party or breakdown of the marriage. The other was called “alienation of affections” which did not require adultery but did require knowledge by the defendant of the marital status and breakdown of the marriage. These causes of action have been derided as “heart balm” torts, that is, they are brought by jilted parties to soothe their broken hearts.
During the past year, opponents of Proposition 8 in California claimed that rights once granted could not be abolished. That is plainly not so since state supreme courts and state legislatures in 40 of our states have abolished the right of spouses to call upon the law to protect their marriages. One example is the Supreme Court of Missouri’s action in the 2003 case of Helsel v. Noellsch, 107 S.W.3d 231.
The courts and the legislatures that have abolished these marital rights have done so on various grounds. As I repeat them, I will refute them, using arguments made by judges and law review authors. At the same time, I will describe some ways in which our legislatures, rather than scuttling these rights, could modernize them by establishing a cause of action labeled “interference with marital relations.”
1) These causes of action originated in previous centuries when a wife was regarded as a property interest of the husband and the husband utilized these causes of action to protect his property. This is true, but there has been no question that, in modern times, a woman has had as much right as a man to utilize these causes of action. Certainly, the legislature can modernize these rights to ensure that both husbands and wives could bring suit.
2) These causes of action are able to be used only against the rich because lawyers will not represent a plaintiff unless the prospective defendant has a deep pocket. This has also been true, but this argument could be used against a host of causes of action. Again, our legislatures could ensure that suits against defendants of modest means would be financially viable. For example, they could ensure that the loser pays the winner’s attorneys’ fees.
3) These causes of action are vindictive because they are brought only after the marriage has been destroyed and cannot be restored. Several responses. First, given the description above of the two types of causes of action, this argument would only be true for “alienation of affections” not “criminal conversation.”
Second, modern legislation providing for “interference with marital relations” could allow for suits prior to the breakdown of the marriage by providing for injunctive relief in the form of protective orders against interlopers -- just as our legislatures have provided for the issuance of protective orders against abusive spouses and stalkers.
Third, it is not generally thought that the vindication of one’s rights in a court of law is being vindictive. Fourth, this argument could be used against a host of causes of action in which money damages are sought. Lawsuits alleging breach of contract are brought after the contract has been breached and most likely cannot be restored. Fifth, this argument fails to consider the deterrent value of the right to sue. For example, the ability to sue for breach of contract is not successful in deterring all breaches of contract. Law is not a cure-all, but an aid.
4) The amount of money damages cannot be ascertained by a jury. What is a marriage worth? The courts and legislatures in the 40 states which have deprived spouses of a right to sue interlopers have set a value on marriage -- at zero. In fact, it would be an easy thing for legislatures to specify damages in various ways. For example, since the interloper is a home-wrecker, damages could be the price of a median existing home in the area. If we can determine a monetary value in the case of the wrongful death of a spouse, we should be able to determine the monetary value of the wrongful death of a marriage.
5) Only weak marriages are susceptible to interlopers and the weak marriages would have failed for some reason anyway. Should the law not be used to help weak marriages? In so many fields of law, our laws come to the aid of the vulnerable. Our society should encourage the strengthening of weak marriages – not deprive the weak marriages of the aid of the law and let predators exploit the situation. Besides, even strong marriages have their weak times and their lifelong weaknesses.
Since the arguments to abolish these rights have been and can be so easily be refuted, there must be a deeper, unstated, reason why 40 of our courts and legislatures have abolished them.
You can read the rest of this article at the following link:
Sunday, April 26, 2009
I have been spending more time reading Familiaris Consortio. It has a lot of beautiful descriptions of what love, marriage, and family are. It also has a lot of insight into what the family in todays world is up against. There is a lot of information in Familiaris Consortio, and everyone who is married or considering marriage should read it. I am attaching some excerpts of things that particulary struck me as I read it. I also put a link on the side of my blog so that if you like you can read the entire thing on the vatican website. Please pray for families and marriages in this day and age, as they are under immense attack.
At the root of these negative phenomena there frequently lies a corruption of the idea and the experience of freedom, conceived not as a capacity for realizing the truth of God's plan for marriage and the family, but as an autonomous power of self-affirmation, often against others, for one's own selfish well-being.
This shows that history is not simply a fixed progression towards what is better, but rather an event of freedom, and even a struggle between freedoms that are in mutual conflict, that is, according to the well-known expression of St. Augustine, a conflict between two loves: the love of God to the point of disregarding self, and the love of self to the point of disregarding God.
In a deservedly famous page, Tertullian has well expressed the greatness of this conjugal life in Christ and its beauty: "How can I ever express the happiness of the marriage that is joined together by the Church strengthened by an offering, sealed by a blessing, announced by angels and ratified by the Father? ...How wonderful the bond between two believers with a single hope, a single desire, a single observance, a single service! They are both brethren and both fellow-servants; there is no separation between them in spirit or flesh; in fact they are truly two in one flesh and where the flesh is one, one is the spirit."
By virtue of the sacramentality of their marriage, spouses are bound to one another in the most profoundly indissoluble manner. Their belonging to each other is the real representation, by means of the sacramental sign, of the very relationship of Christ with the Church.
Spouses are therefore the permanent reminder to the Church of what happened on the Cross; they are for one another and for the children witnesses to the salvation in which the sacrament makes them sharers. Of this salvation event marriage, like every sacrament, is a memorial, actuation and prophecy: "As a memorial, the sacrament gives them the grace and duty of commemorating the great works of God and of bearing witness to them before their children. As actuation, it gives them the grace and duty of putting into practice in the present, towards each other and their children, the demands of a love which forgives and redeems. As prophecy, it gives them the grace and duty of living and bearing witness to the hope of the future encounter with Christ.
Accordingly, the family must go back to the "beginning" of God's creative act, if it is to attain self-knowledge and self-realization in accordance with the inner truth not only of what it is but also of what it does in history. And since in God's plan it has been established as an "intimate community of life and love,"(44) the family has the mission to become more and more what it is, that is to say, a community of life and love, in an effort that will find fulfillment, as will everything created and redeemed, in the Kingdom of God. Looking at it in such a way as to reach its very roots, we must say that the essence and role of the family are in the final analysis specified by love. Hence the family has the mission to guard, reveal and communicate love, and this is a living reflection of and a real sharing in God's love for humanity and the love of Christ the Lord for the Church His bride.
The family, which is founded and given life by love, is a community of persons: of husband and wife, of parents and children, of relatives. Its first task is to live with fidelity the reality of communion in a constant effort to develop an authentic community of persons.
As the Second Vatican Council writes: "Firmly established by the Lord, the unity of marriage will radiate from the equal personal dignity of husband and wife, a dignity acknowledged by mutual and total love."
Conjugal communion is characterized not only by its unity but also by its indissolubility: "As a mutual gift of two persons, this intimate union, as well as the good of children, imposes total fidelity on the spouses and argues for an unbreakable oneness between them."
Being rooted in the personal and total self-giving of the couple, and being required by the good of the children, the indissolubility of marriage finds its ultimate truth in the plan that God has manifested in His revelation: He wills and He communicates the indissolubility of marriage as a fruit, a sign and a requirement of the absolutely faithful love that God has for man and that the Lord Jesus has for the Church.
The gift of the sacrament is at the same time a vocation and commandment for the Christian spouses, that they may remain faithful to each other forever, beyond every trial and difficulty, in generous obedience to the holy will of the Lord: "What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder."
Various reasons can unfortunately lead to the often irreparable breakdown of valid marriages. These include mutual lack of understanding and the inability to enter into interpersonal relationships. Obviously, separation must be considered as a last resort, after all other reasonable attempts at reconciliation have proved vain.
Pastors must know that, for the sake of truth, they are obliged to exercise careful discernment of situations. There is in fact a difference between those who have sincerely tried to save their first marriage and have been unjustly abandoned, and those who through their own grave fault have destroyed a canonically valid marriage.
At the root of these negative phenomena there frequently lies a corruption of the idea and the experience of freedom, conceived not as a capacity for realizing the truth of God's plan for marriage and the family, but as an autonomous power of self-affirmation, often against others, for one's own selfish well-being.
This shows that history is not simply a fixed progression towards what is better, but rather an event of freedom, and even a struggle between freedoms that are in mutual conflict, that is, according to the well-known expression of St. Augustine, a conflict between two loves: the love of God to the point of disregarding self, and the love of self to the point of disregarding God.
In a deservedly famous page, Tertullian has well expressed the greatness of this conjugal life in Christ and its beauty: "How can I ever express the happiness of the marriage that is joined together by the Church strengthened by an offering, sealed by a blessing, announced by angels and ratified by the Father? ...How wonderful the bond between two believers with a single hope, a single desire, a single observance, a single service! They are both brethren and both fellow-servants; there is no separation between them in spirit or flesh; in fact they are truly two in one flesh and where the flesh is one, one is the spirit."
By virtue of the sacramentality of their marriage, spouses are bound to one another in the most profoundly indissoluble manner. Their belonging to each other is the real representation, by means of the sacramental sign, of the very relationship of Christ with the Church.
Spouses are therefore the permanent reminder to the Church of what happened on the Cross; they are for one another and for the children witnesses to the salvation in which the sacrament makes them sharers. Of this salvation event marriage, like every sacrament, is a memorial, actuation and prophecy: "As a memorial, the sacrament gives them the grace and duty of commemorating the great works of God and of bearing witness to them before their children. As actuation, it gives them the grace and duty of putting into practice in the present, towards each other and their children, the demands of a love which forgives and redeems. As prophecy, it gives them the grace and duty of living and bearing witness to the hope of the future encounter with Christ.
Accordingly, the family must go back to the "beginning" of God's creative act, if it is to attain self-knowledge and self-realization in accordance with the inner truth not only of what it is but also of what it does in history. And since in God's plan it has been established as an "intimate community of life and love,"(44) the family has the mission to become more and more what it is, that is to say, a community of life and love, in an effort that will find fulfillment, as will everything created and redeemed, in the Kingdom of God. Looking at it in such a way as to reach its very roots, we must say that the essence and role of the family are in the final analysis specified by love. Hence the family has the mission to guard, reveal and communicate love, and this is a living reflection of and a real sharing in God's love for humanity and the love of Christ the Lord for the Church His bride.
The family, which is founded and given life by love, is a community of persons: of husband and wife, of parents and children, of relatives. Its first task is to live with fidelity the reality of communion in a constant effort to develop an authentic community of persons.
As the Second Vatican Council writes: "Firmly established by the Lord, the unity of marriage will radiate from the equal personal dignity of husband and wife, a dignity acknowledged by mutual and total love."
Conjugal communion is characterized not only by its unity but also by its indissolubility: "As a mutual gift of two persons, this intimate union, as well as the good of children, imposes total fidelity on the spouses and argues for an unbreakable oneness between them."
Being rooted in the personal and total self-giving of the couple, and being required by the good of the children, the indissolubility of marriage finds its ultimate truth in the plan that God has manifested in His revelation: He wills and He communicates the indissolubility of marriage as a fruit, a sign and a requirement of the absolutely faithful love that God has for man and that the Lord Jesus has for the Church.
The gift of the sacrament is at the same time a vocation and commandment for the Christian spouses, that they may remain faithful to each other forever, beyond every trial and difficulty, in generous obedience to the holy will of the Lord: "What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder."
Various reasons can unfortunately lead to the often irreparable breakdown of valid marriages. These include mutual lack of understanding and the inability to enter into interpersonal relationships. Obviously, separation must be considered as a last resort, after all other reasonable attempts at reconciliation have proved vain.
Pastors must know that, for the sake of truth, they are obliged to exercise careful discernment of situations. There is in fact a difference between those who have sincerely tried to save their first marriage and have been unjustly abandoned, and those who through their own grave fault have destroyed a canonically valid marriage.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
