A. The Problem of Divorce
1. Is it good to break up a marriage?
Everyone prefers that marriage and family remain unbroken. What is desirable is for marriage to endure until death do them part. Disagreements arise in difficult cases, where living together becomes so painful that it obscures the goods that marriage protects.
2. What goods does marriage protect?
Marital indissolubility safeguards several vital goods:
- Personal, familial, and social stability, peace, and security. The assurance of love and affection in old age.
- The education, harmonious development, and emotional stability of children—sometimes even their basic sustenance.
- The dignity of the human body, which must never become an article of exchange (with one person today, another tomorrow).
- Indissolubility also protects love, understanding, and mutual support between spouses, especially when trials arise, because knowing they are united forever encourages the necessary effort to build a better life together.
3. What if small difficulties arise?
Minor difficulties are not sufficient reason to sacrifice the goods mentioned above. Rather, they are occasions to learn how to love.
4. What if great difficulties arise?
There are difficulties of such magnitude that they involve the loss of several of the aforementioned goods. For instance, adultery and persistent domestic violence destroy marital loyalty, family peace, and affection. In these arduous cases, separation without complete rupture may be a lesser evil that preserves some of the goods under severe strain, such as the children's education and personal peace. As far as possible, even marital separation should be avoided, because children need a united home.
5. In such situations, wouldn't a new marriage restore those goods?
No; though it is difficult to grasp:
- With divorce, children suffer emotional distress, anxiety, and a confusing absence of clear guidance. For example, it is common to overindulge them in order to win their favor against the other parent, whom they are torn between loving or resenting.
- The guilty party is not reformed by divorce, but rather confirmed in his or her self-centered pattern: if one partner fails to satisfy me, I move on to another, and so on. Conversely, if remarriage is not permitted, that person cannot inflict harm on others, unless they choose to enter the relationship merely as lovers.
- The innocent spouse who does not remarry preserves, both inwardly and before the children, the loyalty of his or her pledged word and conduct. Such a spouse also preserves the dignity of the body, refusing to hand it over to another.
6. But without divorce, that person cannot engage in sex
This concern is rarely raised when divorce is being sought. Everyone knows how readily casual sex is available, and how little genuine happiness it brings.
7. If a marriage fails, isn't it better to try again with someone else and start over?
The idea sounds appealing, but marriage is not a magic wand that fixes broken lives. Marriage exists to establish a family, and precisely the strength and beauty of marriage reside in its indissolubility. Only in this way does the family enjoy enduring security.
8. What should be done in difficult cases (for example, if the husband abandons the home)?
Each situation requires specific, tailored guidance. When a spouse abandons the home, the family continues, even though bonds with him are severely strained. He fails to fulfill his family duties, yet remains the father. If his collaboration cannot be counted upon, the family must be guided forward without him. But bringing in another father does not resolve the problems; it introduces yet another conflict.
9. What about someone who remarries after being widowed?
This is entirely legitimate, and the distinctions from divorce are fundamental. In the case of widowhood:
- The dignity of the body is not compromised, since it remains one with one person forever; in widowhood, the previous spouse is no longer alive in this world.
- Family stability and security remain intact, because it is still a lifelong commitment.
- Children do not endure the emotional friction of rival living parents, nor is resentment toward either parent introduced. There may be minor adjustments, but these are incomparably smaller challenges than those brought by divorce.
10. Is divorce a social problem?
At first glance, divorce appears to be a strictly private affair concerning only the immediate family. However, the problem spills over into society when divorce becomes widespread. Society then becomes populated by wounded children and fractured homes, and the social fabric steadily deteriorates. This is why it is vital to avoid laws that facilitate divorce.
11. How does one end up getting divorced?
Unchecked selfishness often leads to divorce. The temptation toward divorce arises when personal ambitions are consistently prioritized over the common family project. When someone single-mindedly seeks personal pleasure, a point arrives where the spouse and children feel like obstacles. Yet where selfishness is kept in check, marriage can always be preserved, provided there remains a foundational core of loyalty—of fidelity to one's pledged word.
B. Divorce Laws
1. Do divorce laws promote freedom?
Divorce laws may appear to promote freedom, but what they actually foster is family breakdown. Marital infidelity has always existed, with or without divorce; what divorce laws do is facilitate it. When a law makes it easier to do wrong, it undermines genuine freedom, because it encourages poor choices, and choosing evil is always a defect of freedom.
2. What evils do divorce laws produce?
- Divorce breeds more divorce, as widespread international experience demonstrates. Instead of practicing patience and learning mutual understanding, couples contemplate walking away at the first persistent obstacle.
- Personal and familial instability and insecurity are generated (either spouse can initiate divorce at any moment).
- The human person loses dignity, as spouses come to view each other as disposable objects of convenience.
3. Permitting divorce does not force anyone to divorce
Under divorce laws one may certainly choose to stay married; likewise, under laws upholding indissolubility, marital infidelity still occurs. The core issue is not what people can do, but what society chooses to protect. And the family is far more secure when the law defends and protects marital indissolubility.
4. What can those who desire greater marital security do?
If a country's civil marriage laws fail to provide security by refusing to protect marital permanence and indissolubility, that security can be sought through other legal avenues—chiefly financial contracts, which tend to be the most stringently enforced. For instance, couples can execute a notarized agreement stipulating substantial financial penalties in the event of abandonment.
5. That is quite ironic
Indeed. It is ironic that legal systems rigorously enforce the fulfillment of economic agreements while leaving entirely unprotected the reciprocal self-giving of body and person. It is striking that the family is left legally vulnerable in that regard.
6. When marital difficulties arise, is it advisable to immediately consult lawyers?
It is generally ill-advised. It is far better to speak together during calm moments, or to seek the guidance of wise and prudent counselors dedicated to helping preserve the marriage. A conscientious lawyer may be consulted as an impartial mediator to resolve concrete matters or prevent injustices. But the dynamic of legal representation is adversarial, and one does not litigate against someone one loves.
C. Divorce and Religion
1. What does the Catechism say about divorce?
"Divorce is a grave offense against the natural law. It claims to break the contract, to which the spouses freely consented, to live with each other till death (...) If a spouse remarries, he is then in a situation of public and permanent adultery" (n. 2384). "The covenant freely entered into by the spouses imposes on them the obligation to keep it one and indissoluble" (n. 2364). The Gospel presents God's unequivocal command:
«What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder» (Mk 10:9)
2. Can a secular ruler oppose divorce?
A ruler can defend indissolubility, or at least restrict divorce, for the genuine welfare of the nation:
- Children of divorced parents experience significantly greater educational, emotional, and social difficulties.
- Delinquency rates are notably higher among children of fractured homes.
- Economic and social vulnerabilities multiply when families break apart; a united family weathers adversity far more effectively.
- One can approach the question from an entirely secular standpoint and conclude that safeguarding marital permanence is far superior for society than facilitating breakdown.