Indeed. Our opinions must always be informed by Church teaching. Opinions carry no moral authority in and of themselves and to share our uninformed opinions with others puts them (and us) in moral danger. Same goes for the priests who gave poor advice to Border Collie on this, except there’s more responsibility on them because they should know better.
Once again thanks for all the various replies to my query. I am much more confident now having read the links than I was previously. Although when I read yours Gary, I smiled because that is what the priests actually told me when I asked about this chap. It is all the more worrisome because some of the priests were of an older generation and from Religious Orders. I deliberately sought them out thinking they would be less liberal. In hindsight they were possibly giving me their opinion rather than Church Teaching and perhaps didn't know it either. But having prayed into this, I feel the best approach with this chap is to take it slowly and get to know him better and his wife also possibly, and then gradually bring the conversation around to what's really important. Thanks especially to the women on here who replied to my post, it has helped me pray for a deeper insight and reflection on the dignity of women and how best to speak to both of them when the time comes. God bless BC
This thread is a great example of objective versus subjective truth and why the church and the pope have always been the protector of it and attacked for proclaiming it let alone defending it by the world.
Evenstar, Yes, the marriage was blessed by the Church; but I will promise this: such a union would possess clear grounds for an annulment. Why? Because from the very start every act was known to be non-fertile. If one of the spouses went to a marriage tribunal 3 months after the marriage, there would be no hesitation. The marriage could be annulled immediately when infertility was documented. Now, obviously, if two widows marry in their sixties, this would be a similar situation. My father's second marriage fell into such a category. But here, the understanding is clear, it is a marriage of companionship, entered upon out of mutual love for one another. And at that stage of life, the self-knowledge each future spouse possesses is much better known. It is a tremendous cross for one spouse to enter such a marriage fully accepting no chance of children being conceived. If I as a deacon was talking with such a young, prospective couple seeking marriage, I would probably counsel against it, unless the Holy Spirit gave me a huge inspiration. Why? Because when couples are in their 20s, and given the culture as it now is, it is difficult to discern between infatuation and untested, holy love. One interesting subscript: one priest I know married two elderly persons in the church, but advised them not to get a legal marriage, because they would be much better off financially! Was that a true marriage? Yes. A church marriage trumps a legal marriage. Safe in the Barque of Peter!
