Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse of the Ruth Institute has requested that you ignore me - "and I do mean ignore" me.
She says I am rude. Is that really it? I am a certified nobody - why bother blogging about little old me and my bad manners?
No, I submit that it's because I persistently raise a direct question that makes Dr. Morse (and almost everybody else) politically uncomfortable.
Are all permanent separation of Catholic spouses properly by bishop's decree only?
Do all Catholic spouses require the bishop's permission to file for divorce?
The questions are one in the same, because they hinge on marriage natural law.
It is a grave offence against natural law to permanently separate unjustly (CCC 2384).
It is an axiom of law that one may not be the judge of one's own case - hence need for bishop's decree/permission.
Ed Peters effectively says no permission required b/c the conjugal life has zero to do w/ natural law. And if that does not square with you, then he offers that Pope John Paul II meant existing canon laws requiring decree/permission to be only "symbolic" - that explains why nobody follows them around here, you see? There is a reason why the status quo will not take further questions.
Dr. Morse says "I am not going to make a pronouncement on this topic, as I am not qualified to do so." One could say they are not qualified to make a pronouncement about abortion without a PhD in biology + a degree in moral theology. Why does one need to be an accomplished canonist to know marriage basics?
To not decide is to decide. In this case, that means to side with the status quo - no permission required. The American Catholic practice default is No-Fault; almost always a violation of natural law, bringing profound suffering to the innocent. The divorce/annulment culture transfers their crosses to these innocent. "Don't ask, don't tell" is the vigorously enforced canonical agnosticism in the USA. To go against this does not sit well in polite Catholic company.
Dr. Morse has made a "pronouncement," that I am rude and that I am not "helping [my] cause," but will not say whether I am right or wrong, so how could she know? Shut up, they explained..
Ad hominem says "I have no argument, so I attack you instead."
If canon law is "not for the faint of heart," than I ask Jennifer Roback Morse, PhD to Joan up, rather than try to have me shut up.
-John Farrell
Painting by Louis Boutet de Monvel in 1911 of Joan of Arc at trial before her judges titled: "The Trial of Joan of Arc"
No comments:
Post a Comment