Rose Sweet is dead wrong

Rose Sweet is primarily an advocate for American annulments. She openly accepts "dating" while still married to someone else:https://rosesweet.com/living-as-brother-and-sister/


When I met my husband, Bob, we had to wait for his Catholic Church annulment to go through before we could even consider or plan a marriage. We went a year or so spending time as “brother and sister.”  I was in Southern California and he was five hundred miles away in the San Francisco Bay area.  We took turns driving back and forth to be together and both of us were very physically attracted to the other.  We’d been high school sweethearts forty years prior and had met again at our reunion.  Because we’d been young and innocent together and grew up in the sixties, it was easy for us to feel somewhat like real brother and sister. Still, I remembered his kisses and those first, sweet stirrings of sexual desire from decades ago. We could not wait to make love. Even though he was still married per God.


 The Catechism of the Catholic Church says: No Dating

CCC 1646 By its very nature conjugal love requires the inviolable fidelity of the spouses. This is the consequence of the gift of themselves which they make to each other. Love seeks to be definitive; it cannot be an arrangement "until further notice." The "intimate union of marriage, as a mutual giving of two persons, and the good of the children, demand total fidelity from the spouses and require an unbreakable union between them."157

CCC 1649 Yet there are some situations in which living together becomes practically impossible for a variety of reasons. In such cases the Church permits the physical separation of the couple and their living apart. The spouses do not cease to be husband and wife before God and so are not free to contract a new union. In this difficult situation, the best solution would be, if possible, reconciliation. The Christian community is called to help these persons live out their situation in a Christian manner and in fidelity to their marriage bond which remains indissoluble.159 - can 1151-55. (We are called tell them to get separation legitimated, even if the annulment trial has begun)

She is mixed up and misleading regarding canon law. http://www.catholicsdivorce.com/Is-it-a-sin-to-divorce

Rose Sweet says: Current Canon Law (written when divorce was not so prevalent (1983 saw plenty of divorce) requires one to get the Bishop's permission before filing for civil divorce canon 1692 (in 100% of cases) if it is not an emergency situation (Cn 1153.1). Canon 1153 allows for temporary separation (not divorce) on own authority if in danger However, even bishops understand this is impractical if not impossible to implement in most places. No bishop has the authority to dispense with this canon and the vast majority of these divorces are not in accord with divine law. In my own diocese this year there are over 400 petitions for nullity; giving each party enough time and attention to hear their cause could be at least 6 hours (if not much more!), or 50+ hours per week just on hearing divorce pleas. And this is only a fraction of all divorced Catholics who don't bother with annulments. Clearly the Church needs and wants to help but she is not equipped to handle the deluge of divorce. We need a better system to handle the crisis, but that's for another post! (can't wait). The system is lawfully in place, and remains unused, while the innocent are thrown to the wolves of No-Fault and injustice rules. The local Church could certainly calm this crisis down in short order, but prefers to throw annulments at the problem. I understand that Rose has had 3 of them and may be motivated in part to ameliorate her own conscience.

If you've done everything you can, believe there is no possible solution left, and the marriage has been either unbearable, sinful, or dangerous to you or the children, then you may decide on your own authority (Canon 1153.1) to separate; after consulting with your pastor (he has zero authority regarding separation) or a wise and holy priest you have three right choices: Canons 1151-1155 must be read as a group (text and context) to provide an accurate picture.

( 1 ) Separate for peace, remaining civilly married and true to your vows—and to your spouse—until their death. This may seem impossible but it’s not. Many people have chosen this path and have full and happy lives. The suffering you endure in this choice can be lovingly offered up as a gift to God for the healing and salvation of both of you. This is the Catholic norm.

( 2 ) Separate for safety and file for civil divorce, but only after careful counsel (from whom?) and understanding you’re still married in the eyes of the Church. That means living faithfully to your marriage vows even if apart, until the death of your spouse. You must obtain permission from your bishop, or grave sin (canon 1692.) http://marysadvocates.org/research/catholic-divorce/

PS, Rose Sweet speaks in terms of "former spouse," an oxymoron like "former son or daughter." She shoves the Catholic into "Catholic divorce." I would like to communicate with her but in 2015 she asked me to stop contacting her.

Hugs,
John