Dear Mr. Jimmy Lago, please forward
this message to Cardinal Francis George O.M.I.
jlago@archchicago.org
Though I am mailing Cardinal George
a copy of this letter, I am now e-mailing it to him because the quotes
from webpages include the page's address, and anyone can link to original
sources easily.
* * * * *
Mark
Texas
Cardinal Francis George O.M.I.
Archbishop of Chicago
155 East Superior Street
Chicago, IL 60611
June, 2004
Your Eminence:
Elsie Radtke, your Associate Director for the Family Ministries Office, Divorce and Annulment support ministry, will be a presenter at the Smart Marriage Conference this coming July in my home state. (www.smartmarriages.com/workshops.html no. 714). I look forward to her presentation entitled, “Divorce Prevention”, as it is a topic near and dear to my heart. Because of her position of responsibility in your diocese, I would expect the attendees will pay particular attention to her insight into the Church's position on this subject.
I am concerned, however, with what I have read on the Archdiocese of Chicago’s web site concerning marriage and annulment. My concern stems from what appears to be a disparity with Church teaching regarding divorce, separation and the annulment process. Your Eminence, please refer to the attached letter to Elsie Radtke, including citations from the Cathechism, Canon Law, and various papal pronouncements. I would appreciate any insight and direction you offer regarding my letter to her and I have chosen six items to share with you, in your position as Cardinal and Archbishop.
A) Canon 1153.1 states if there is not an immediate danger, one is to get the approval from the local ordinary or ecclesiastical authority before separating from one's spouse. "A spouse who occasions grave danger of soul or body to the other spouse or the children, or otherwise makes the common life unduly difficult, provides the other spouse with a lawful reason to leave, either by decree of the local Ordinary or, if there is danger in delay, even on his or her own authority" (Can 1153.1). Given that no spouse should tolerate physical abuse or a real threat of such, would you explain what else may fulfill the definition of very difficult or dangerous? (section 1 in letter to Elsie Radtke)
A little over a generation ago, prior to the advent of "no-fault" divorce, the spirit of the civil divorce laws was similar to that of Canons 1151-1155. In order to obtain a civil divorce, one party had to be proven guilty of physical abuse, extreme psychological abuse, drug and alcohol abuse, or adultery. Presently, in Illinois, the court will grant a divorce for any or no reason. If the church used to to rely on the civil divorce courts to ensure that couples only split up for morally valid reasons, isn't it critical that canon 1153.1 be implemented rigorously now? Do you agree that the godless civil system too easily enables the destruction of families?
B) Do you agree with Pope Leo XIII
in his 1880 Encyclical, ARCANUM: ..."Marriage...ought not to be regulated
and administered by the will of civil rulers...it is plainly absurd to
maintain that even the very smallest fraction of such power has been transferred
to the civil ruler?"
(footnote 1)
C) Canon 1151 stipulates that, "Spouses have the obligation and the right to maintain their common conjugal life, unless a lawful reason excuses them." Ought the Church distinguish between the perpetrator of divorce and the spousal victim of divorce? Could a spouse be engaging in a grave sin, if he or she seeks a divorce, or abandons his family; or with a court restraining order, forces the innocent spouse to move out of the family home? (section 2 in letter to Elsie Radtke)
D) Should your diocesan website seriously alert its members of the ill affects of divorce on children as divorce is often the most painful event of the lives? Professionals agree it is "traumatic" for children. Ought we inform the Catholic perpetrators of divorce of its long term affects on his or her children as established by recent research?
E) Numerous declarations of nullity based on psychological reasons likely scandalizes the children of divorce who more easily convince themselves that marriage is meaningless; not indissoluble. It gives them more reason to not believe in the grace of the Sacrament. (See footnotes (2),(3), and (4))
F) Your diocesan website recommends the North American Conference for the Separated and Divorced Catholics (NADCSC). This organization publicizes and recommends authors, Fr. Henry Fehren and Fr. William J. Bausch (sections 5b and 6b in Elsie Ratdtke's attached letter). Would you consider these trustworthy references for inquiring Catholics? (sections 7,9 & 11 in letter to Elsie Radtke)
My other concerns and citations are listed in the aformentioned attached letter.
Cardinal George, I wouldn't burden you with such an extensive list of concerns and questions, if it weren't for their foundational importance.
In search of His will,
Mark
Divored/Widowed Parish Ministry
Coordinator
Texas
P.S. Fr. Patrick Lagges, the Archdiocesan Judicial Vicar, is reported to have said in an AP article in November of 2003 that modern-day annulments do not imply that the annulled marriage never existed. How can one understand this comment when considering Catechism 1629, "... the Church, after an examination of the situation by the competent ecclesiastical tribunal, can declare the nullity of a marriage, i.e., that the marriage never existed?" (footnote (5))
Footnotes:
(1) Pope Leo XIII, Arcanum (On Christian
Marriage), Feb. 10, 1880, Section 19-20,23 http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_10021880_arcanum_en.html
(2) Conclusions of the 15th Plenary
Assembly of the Pontifical Council for the Family. Rome, 17-19 October
2002, Section III Consequences of divorce on children.
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/family/documents/rc_pc_family_doc_20021019_xv-plenary-conclusions_en.html
(3) "Children, Springtime of the Family and Society," Pontifical Council for the Family, Jubilee of Families, Themes for Reflection and Dialogue in Preparation for the Third World Meeting of the Holy Father with Families, Rome, October 14-15, 2000,Section 9, Children, Orphans of Living Parents, Grave Problems for Children. http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/family/documents/rc_pc_family_doc_20001014_rome-jubilee-of-families-preparatory-texts_en.html
(3) Ibid., Section 10, The Right of Children to Be Loved, Accepted and Educated in a Family, The School of Humanity.
(5) "[Fr,] Lagges says modern-day
annulments do not imply that children of an annulled marriage are illegitimate,
nor do they imply that the annulled marriage never existed."; by David
Crary; Associated Press; Nov. 6, 2003; World Wide Religious News; http://www.wwrn.org/parse.php?idd=9684&c=121
************* ATTACHED
MESSAGE BELOW