In repeating Christ’s authentic message message about divorce I do not judge anyone.

You are wrong in attributing to me that sin.

@ Dr Francis Saliba:

Please remind me what Jesus said about divorce.

@Dr. Saliba

I am not a Spiritual Director, but the Lord certainly is. May I suggest a reading from John 4:4-42, pertaining to Jesus and the Samaritan Woman.

If only our personal attitudes were of the mind and attitude of Christ regarding the sometimes anomalous and irregular situations of marital relationship as exemplified by this case.

The Lord’s approach to her was not the typical approach of judgmental Jews, and she asked the Lord, “Why are you asking me for a drink?” The Lord replied, “If you only knew the gift God has for you and who I am, you would ask me, and I would give you living water.”

This offer from the Lord is even more astonishing, beyond the fact of her being a Samaritan woman, for she had a rather messy personal life in her relationships with men.

But the woman, in her misunderstanding of the Lord’s meaning, tells Jesus, “Please, Sir, give me some of that water! Then I’ll never be thirsty again, and I won’t have to come here to haul water.” And, Jesus immediately broadens his offer, when he tells her, “Go and get your husband.”

Her truthful response, however, was “I don’t have a husband.” Then Jesus tells her, not in any critical or condescending way, not with judgment of immorality, nor considering her as arrogant (as others may be), but in response to her truth he will offer her the truth about himself and he will provide the Spirit of God in her.

Jesus tells her: “You’re right! You don’t have a husband–for you have had five husbands, and you aren’t even married to the man you’re living with now.”

Eventually, with her encounter with Christ, she even left her water jar at the well, and ran to tell others of the village of Sychar, “Come and meet a man who told me everything I ever did! Can this be the Messiah?”

We don’t know what this woman did with her marital life, and its not our business. But the Lord first revealed himself as the Messiah, directly, to her.

It is not our business to tell people what to do with their lives. People have to figure that out for themselves, and with their God, in their good faith. God does not inflict himself upon anyone, but he does offer the gift.

What we do know, is that because of her, the townspeople begged Jesus to stay with them for two more days. In the end, they told her, “Now we believe because we have heard him ourselves, not just because of what you told us. He is indeed the Savior of the world.” That also is pretty much a challenge to each of us to really listen to the Lord speaking to us, as he does, if we are really listening.

Many people will not hear the Lord in the approach of many of those who scream “NO to divorce,” if we place our individual judgments regarding the personal and spiritual lives others as superior to the ways of God with us and with those we may judge.” The Lord specifically told us not to judge anyone.

And if we inflict turmoil on the lives of others because we deny them the freedom of THEIR personal conscience, those who so inflict themselves on others are tyrants. Whatever your concept of God might be, God is certainly not a tyrant. And using violence against those who may worship him in Spirit and Truth (even when we don’t know it), is violence if we inflict it on others by denying them their personal freedom, the most superior moral value and responsibility God leaves with us.

I would suggest that you reflect hard before you decide to become “God” in your judgment of what others sometimes must do with their lives–but then are prevented from doing so because society may deny the basic freedom God may provide for them in his mercy and love.

Sorry for the sermon, but I can’t tell you what to do. But I know what I am doing on the matter of divorce.

@ Dr Francis Saliba:

I would think it is highly contradictory to believe that divorce is immoral and against the public interest, and at the same time to believe that the introduction of divorce is no problem at all.

Is something immoral and against the public interest a problem or not? Please make up your mind.

I would say that anything that goes against the public interest is by definition a problem. But then, I don’t suffer from dissociative identity disorder.

@ Dr Francis Saliba:

I won’t ask you to explain it to me. There is no explanation for the clearly absurd.

Under certain conditions divorce is admissible for genuine practicing Catholics, without sinning, as per the declaration of the Apostolic Signatura quoted by Dr F Portelli.

Do not ask me to explain it to you – you do not have the apt predisposition to learn and to understand: you are only hell-bent on harming the Catholic Church in every possible way.

Since you are back at your game of pretending to be obtuse let me paraphrase for you.

It is immaterial for me whether divorce laws are introduced or not – no problem for me at all.

I do not agree with divorce because it is my considered opinion that it is immoral and against the public interest.

I will vote “no” because voting “yes” would mean either that I had been seduced by the deceptive arguments of the “yes” campaigners or that I accept their imposition that I should abstain or vote against my conscience so as to accomodate them. As if!

Divorce is not a substitute for Church annulments. It has nothing to do with it.

Divorce is not for practicing Catholics.

@ Dr Francis Saliba:

“I have no problem with the introduction of divorce”.

“(Divorce is) unacceptable to me because in my estimate (it is) immoral and against the public interest”.

So, which one is it?

@ Dr Francis Saliba:

If you had no problem with the introduction of divorce, you would vote yes, and opt not to divorce yourself.