I am curious about the reaction of orthodox Catholic Lawyers. It must present quite a dilemma. Will it change your practice? How?

-- David Reuter (davidreuter@earthlink.net), February 01, 2002

Answers

A friend of mine was asked to leave his law firm because he wouldn't handle living wills that called for feeding and hydration to be removed. He would inform people of the ethics of this and reword these wills to make them in accord with Catholic teaching. The in charge folks at the firm didn't like this. He now works as a lawyer in a tax practice - a much safer area. I've often wondered myself how a Catholic attorney could in good conscience handle divorce cases.

-- Christina (introibo2000@yahoo.com), February 01, 2002.

OH goodness,

I agree that divorce is wrong, but if the Pope can anull a wedding. Why can't an attorney divorce someone? They are both humans. So what is the difference?

roni

-- roni barr (roni@hotmail.com), February 19, 2002.

roni you sound like Joel,

You are asking a question you already know the answer too. Also you are attacking the pope for fun in areas discussed hundreds of times already. You just did it on the other thread. Who are you really?

-- Mike H (michael.hitzelberger@vscc.cc.tn.us), February 19, 2002.

I realize that I am only a law student, but why shouldn't we agree with the Holy Father? I am not saying that we should blindly follow everything that Rome says (the Cathechism allows for one to follow their well-informed conscious first), but isn't it really against our beliefs as Catholics? The Pope would be the first to agree that there are grounds where a divorce is essential- hence where annulments are allowed. BUT if we follow what St. Thomas More says "I die the king's good servant, but God's first." We are hear to serve the law but most importantly we are here to serve God and His Son, Jesus Christ. And who of us good practice our honorable profession with an attitude of reletivism? This doesn't mean that we change our practice...it does mean that we would actually counsel some couples in other forms of alternate dispute resolution (ie. professional counseling) and choose PRAYFULLY only the cases that are in dire need of this civil action.

-- Pete Lassiter (palgf7@mizzou.edu), October 15, 2002.

Jmj

Hello, Pete. You wrote:
"I am not saying that we should blindly follow everything that Rome says (the Cathechism allows for one to follow their well-informed conscious first) ..."

Can you please give me the number of the Catechism article to which you are referring (or quote it directly here)?
Also, can you please give an example of something that the Vatican has said during your lifetime that you did not "blindly follow," but instead "follow[ed your] well-informed" conscience instead?

I was wondering, too ... Did you realize that, for a conscience to be "well informed," the Church means that it must be conformed completely to Catholic moral doctrine?

God bless you.
John

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), October 21, 2002.

John,

Good response. This concept of following one's conscience first (which is valid in the proper context) is almost always misquoted and/or misunderstood.

Joan of Arc is a great example where this principle is valid. A bishop was telling her she was acting contrary to Catholic doctrine and laws. Her conscience, on the other hand, said otherwise. It wasn't her placing her conscience as an infallible source of truth over the Church, it was placing her well-formed conscience over a churchman's interpretation of what the Church taught.

But this teaching (about the only teaching of St. Thomas quoted by liberals, except maybe the doubt of the Immaculate Conception) is usually quoted to promote relativism or "cafeteria Catholicism." But, you know, it goes back to the Garden of Eden. The characters and props have changed, but it's the same old story - don't listen to God's clear commandments (given our of infinite love and wisdom), but let the serpent convince you to place yourself as the source of truth and the ultimate authority.

God bless!

-- Hollis (catholic@martinsen.com), October 21, 2002.

I am a new Catholic lawyer (class of '02) and am exceedingly curious about the source of all this debate, since my own conscience has been bothering me a lot about divorces. I am particularly concerned over practical issues: 1. What is the name of the document where the pope has forbidden lawyers to do divorces? Is this an area of Papal infallibility? 2. Why is there no difference between a sacramental marriage and a marriage which may have been contracted in Las Vegas? 3. What should I say to couples, particularly couples with no religious orientation, who come to me seeking a divorce?

-- Joanna Howorth (serafbella@aol.com), December 04, 2003.

1. What is the name of the document where the pope has forbidden lawyers to do divorces? Is this an area of Papal infallibility?

dunno, dont matter. as a catholic we do not recognize divorce. to get divorced and remarried without a proper dispensation is to be placed in a state of sin. By aiding to put people in this place of sin we become guilty of leading others away from the path of life. it makes us an enabler and guilty by association.

2. Why is there no difference between a sacramental marriage and a marriage which may have been contracted in Las Vegas?

principly speaking, there may be no difference whatsoever. it all depends as to the circumstances underwhich the marraige occured. if a doped up drunk unknowingly marries a prostitute in vegas, thats going to hold alot less validity than a sacramental wedding held in proper circumstances. however, if the marraige is done under proper terms and meets the qualifications of sacramental marraige it becomes binding.

3. What should I say to couples, particularly couples with no religious orientation, who come to me seeking a divorce?

um, just say NO. how about, sorry, i dont handle divorce cases.

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), December 04, 2003.

Hi Joanna,

The quote you seek is from the Holy Father's speech to the Sacred Roman Rota in Winter of 2002.

It is not an infallible teaching, just very good advice from a wise man. If you want other good advice from the Holy Father, read his "Love and Responsibility" on marital counseling as well as "Theology of the Body" on the nature of love itself and how marital love reflects God's love.

I too am a lawyer, but fortunately do not involve myself in divorce cases. I don't think it is possible to be a Catholic divorce lawyer. (An effective divorce attorney who remains faithul to all tenets of Catholic doctrine and morality.) Sooner or later, your client will sue you for not being mean and evil to the opposing side. Or you will get fired for not being this way.

What the Holy Father said is as follows:

On the other hand, professionals in the field of civil law should avoid being personally involved in anything that might imply a cooperation with divorce. For judges this may prove difficult, since the legal order does not recognize a conscientious objection to exempt them from giving sentence.

For grave and proportionate motives they may therefore act in accord with the traditional principles of material cooperation. But they too must seek effective means to encourage marital unions, especially through a wisely handled work of reconciliation.

Lawyers, as independent professionals, should always decline the use of their profession for an end that is contrary to justice, as is divorce. They can only cooperate in this kind of activity when, in the intention of the client, it is not directed to the break-up of the marriage, but to the securing of other legitimate effects that can only be obtained through such a judicial process in the established legal order (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 2383). In this way, with their work of assisting and reconciling persons who are going through a marital crises, lawyers truly serve the rights of the person and avoid becoming mere technicians at the service of any interest whatever.

The whole speech may be found on the website of the Holy See.

God bless,

-- Pat Delaney (pat@patdelaney.net), December 05, 2003.

I too am a lawyer, but fortunately do not involve myself in divorce cases.

Good for you. Glad to hear it. Also along the same lines, IMO:

A Catholic druggist should not dispense contraceptives.

A Catholic health care provider should not in any way connect themselves to the abortion industry.

A Catholic innkeeper/hospitality worker should not keep feeding people liquor to the point of their becoming intoxicated.

Catholic parents should do all that they can to enable the mother to stay at home, particularly if there are young children.

There are plenty more examples, of course, but these few leaped to mind.

-- jake (j@k.e), December 05, 2003.

Joanna,

I am the one who asked the original question about a year ago. I work as a professional marriage and family counselor and often face the reality of failing marriages and the question of divorce, annulments, etc.

It is my understanding that the Church always presumes that all marriages are valid until proven invalid by an official Church court called a Tribunal. If proven invalid or null, which is a judgement that a sacramental marriage never existed, a decree of nullity is granted.

However, the Church will not hear a case until a civil divorce is final. What a dilemma! A formal judgement by the Church cannot be made until a final decision by the couple has already been made! That leaves Catholic lawyers, Catholic counselors, Catholic pastors, and Catholic married people in marriages that may or may not be valid, with a hot potato. Clearly, a decision must be made prior to any "official certainty" about the justice of a given civil divorce.

It would be a very helpful to have some dialogue, education, and guidance in this area. Catholic lawyers, counselors, pastors, Tribunal professionals, and hurting couples would certainly benefit from greater clarity in this area.

-- David Reuter (davidreuter@earthlink.net), December 05, 2003.

Jmj

Hello, Joanna. Welcome to the forum.

In his teachings, Pope John Paul II has not forbidden Christian lawyers and judges to play certain limited roles in divorce cases. He stated the following in January of 2002:

"Among the initiatives ['that Christians, along with other persons of good will, promote for the good of the family'] should be those that aim at obtaining the public recognition of indissoluble marriage in the civil juridical order ... Resolute opposition to any legal or administrative measures that introduce divorce or that equate de facto unions -- including those between homosexuals -- with marriage must be accompanied by a pro-active attitude, acting through juridical provisions that tend to improve the social recognition of true marriage in the framework of legal orders that unfortunately admit divorce.

"On the other hand, professionals in the field of civil law should avoid being personally involved in anything that might imply a cooperation with divorce. For judges this may prove difficult, since the legal order does not recognize a conscientious objection to exempt them from giving sentence. For grave and proportionate motives they may therefore act in accord with the traditional principles of material cooperation. But they too must seek effective means to encourage marital unions, especially through a wisely handled work of reconciliation.

"Lawyers, as independent professionals, should always decline the use of their profession for an end that is contrary to justice, as is divorce. They can only cooperate in this kind of activity when, in the intention of the client, it is not directed to the break-up of the marriage, but to the securing of other legitimate effects that can only be obtained through such a judicial process in the established legal order (cf. 'Catechism of the Catholic Church,' n. 2383). In this way, with their work of assisting and reconciling persons who are going through a marital crises, lawyers truly serve the rights of the person and avoid becoming mere technicians at the service of any interest whatever."

Please read the full text of his address here.

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), December 05, 2003.

I forgot to mention, Joanna, that infallibility is not relevant here. As Catholics, we must give our assent, our religious submission of mind and will, to all of the pope's teachings and disciplinary directives. No one is permitted to be a "Cafeteria Catholic," picking and choosing what he/she wants to believe or obey.
JFG

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), December 05, 2003.

I believe the Holy Father was referring in his address to the recourse to civil divorce in order to secure child support or equitable rights such as control of inheritance.

Unfortunately, among Catholics in America, divorce is now also seen as the necessary prelude to obtaining annulment. This not what the Holy Father intended or wanted. That is why he also refers to the intrinsic injustice of divorce.

Divorce violates divine law and the natural law whenever it is pursued in the course of a valid sacramental marriage. It is a violation of the rights of the parties themselves, their family and especially any children of the marriage. And most importantly, it offends God who expects the spouses to be faithful to each other, as He is faithful to them.

This is why the Holy Father counsels attorneys to steer clear of practicing "Family Law".

-- Pat Delaney (pat@patdelaney.net), December 11, 2003.