that the lives of husbands and wives might be made better and happier. This comes about in many ways: by their lightening each other’s burdens through mutual help; by constant and faithful love; by having all their possessions in common; and by the heavenly grace, which flows from the sacrament.43
The purpose of a Christian marriage is the welfare of each of the spouses, and the ultimate goal is to bring each other to heaven. It is sacred. Beyond their focus on each other, the husband and wife must be open to new life and willing to bring “forth children for the Church, ‘fellow citizens with the saints’ … so that ‘a people might be born and brought up for the worship and religion of the true God and our Savior Jesus Christ.’”44
Because Christ raised marriage to the dignity of a sacrament, the Church has always claimed exclusive authority over it while allowing civil authorities to regulate the civil concerns and consequences of marriage. If we look at marriage through the lens of history, we see that for centuries the Church exercised that authority, and civil authorities submitted to it.
By the nineteenth century, however, human frailty and downright disobedience, as reflected in relaxed divorce laws, became more common and more acceptable. The reins of Christian restraint in family life began to loosen. This opened the door to a power grab by civil authorities, who were poised to dismiss the Church’s authority over the marriage contract. These same authorities began to sow seeds of discontent by suggesting that the marriage contract was not a sacrament at all, and that the civil contract and the sacrament were two separate and distinct things.
Thus we see that the dissolubility of marriage and the relaxed view of divorce trampled upon the unity and integrity of the marriage relationship. As part of this process, the state began to restrict the rights of the Church in the area of marriage. What looked like the “separation of Church and state” was actually, in practice, the “removal of the Church from the state” and any influence she might have in the public square. In effect, the Church was gradually excluded from any civil role in decision-making, where she is both competent and wise due to her divine authority.
As the state began to exercise more power over marriage, it also assumed the right to define it, and, “ignoring its fundamental nature, it allowed such corruptions to enter into the positive laws of marriage, such as divorce and remarriage, and serial polygamy.”45 This is the mindset that led to what we now call “civil” marriages. A civil marriage is a marriage performed, recorded, and recognized by a government official. In other words, it is a marriage performed outside of the Church and without the benefit of the grace of the sacrament.
According to Pope Leo, the fundamental change from marital “indissolubility” to “dissolubility” opened the way to the sensitive topic of separation and divorce. He correctly predicted that once divorce was accepted, further moral decline would surely follow. Eventually, it would darken the conscience of society, causing — and spreading — a moral numbness:
There will be no restraint powerful enough to keep it within the bounds marked out…. The eagerness for divorce, daily spreading by devious ways, will seize upon the minds of many like a virulent contagious disease, or like a flood of water bursting through every barrier.… So soon as the road to divorce began to be made smooth by law, at once quarrels, jealousies, and judicial separations largely increased; and such shamelessness of life followed that men who had been in favor of these divorces repented of what they had done, and feared that, if they did not carefully seek a remedy by repealing the law, the State itself might come to ruin.46
Continuing to reflect on the harmfulness of divorce, Pope Leo highlighted its often-forgotten victims: the children. He also underscored the need to protect the “dignity of womanhood,”47 which through divorce is frequently compromised. In the world of divorce, women are at risk of being used for the personal pleasures of men and then left behind to fend for themselves, frequently with a child or more in tow. Hence, from the question “What did God intend?” we must move on to ask, when we don’t follow God’s plan, “What are the consequences?”
What Are the Consequences?
Pope Leo wrote prophetically of the harsh consequences and raw pain for all involved when we deviate from the plan of God as it pertains to marriage. He recognized that there is no end to the painful ramifications of divorce:
Truly, it is hardly possible to describe how great are the evils that flow from divorce. Matrimonial contracts are by it made variable; mutual kindness is weakened; deplorable inducements to unfaithfulness are supplied; harm is done to the education and training of children; occasion is afforded for the breaking up of homes; the seeds of dissension are sown among families; the dignity of womanhood is lessened and brought low, and women run the risk of being deserted after having ministered to the pleasures of men. Since, then, nothing has such power to lay waste families and destroy the mainstay of kingdoms as the corruption of morals, it is easily seen that divorces are in the highest degree hostile to the prosperity of families and States, springing as they do from the depraved morals of the people, and, as experience shows us, opening a way to every kind of evil-doing in public and in private life.48
As Pope Leo correctly predicted, one of the consequences of the disillusionment caused by the breakup of the family was cohabitation. Rather than commit to one another for a lifetime, couples choose to live together for as long as it lasts. For this reason, the pope commended to his brother bishops and priests “those unhappy persons who, carried away by the heat of passion, and being utterly indifferent to their salvation, live wickedly together without the bond of lawful marriage.”49
As for those couples who are struggling in their marriages, and who are seriously contemplating separation? In a post-Christian world such as ours, Pope Leo’s advice may seem rather simplistic. It may even offend our modern sensibilities. Even so, his counsel was to rely on faith in the Lord, the One who never disappoints, trusting in the words of Saint Paul in his Letter to the Romans: “We know that in everything God works for good [for] those who love him” (8:28). The pope wrote:
To sum up all in a few words, there would be a calm and quiet constancy in marriage if married people would gather strength and life from the virtue of religion alone, which imparts to us resolution and fortitude; for religion would enable them to bear tranquilly and even gladly the trials of their state, such as, for instance, the faults that they discover in one another, the difference of temper and character, the weight of a mother’s cares, the wearing anxiety about the education of children, reverses of fortune, and the sorrows of life.50
The virtue of religion is basically giving God his due. As such it falls under the virtue of justice. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says: “Adoration is the first act of the virtue of religion. To adore God is to acknowledge him as God, as the Creator and Savior, the Lord and Master of everything that exists, as infinite and merciful Love.”51 Without being trite, what Leo is saying here is that instead of looking at one another, married people in difficult situations should shift their gaze to God.
Granted, there are some marriages that appear to be beyond repair. While the Church always encourages healing, forgiveness, and reconciliation, she does allow for such situations: “When, indeed, matters have come to such a pitch that it seems impossible for them to live together any longer, then the Church allows them to live apart, and strives at the same time to soften the evils of this separation by such remedies and helps as are suited to their condition; yet she never ceases to endeavor to bring about a reconciliation, and never despairs of doing so.”52
While Pope Leo did not address them in this letter, there are some serious situations that can call into question the validity of a sacramental marriage, even if the couple was married in the Catholic Church by a priest or a deacon. In some cases, a supposed valid marriage may be, in fact, invalid for some serious reason. If a major impediment — for
