My husband, Jesus and original sin

[Stubborn]

First of all, the poor woman is in a terrible spot. However it is a spot all too common since pretty much the whole world has lost the faith - but prior to V2, that "spot" did not initially change one single thing because the fact of the matter is that before God, they vowed to remain husband and wife for better or for worse etc. and God expects married couples to live up to that vow - period.  They're the ones who freely and probably anxiously and even insistently made those vows, no one held a gun to their head (too bad in this case) and she even said she does still love the guy.

Don't be in such and all fired rush to recommend divorce. God expects spouses to put up with each other till death - that is what they vowed is it not?  Pre V2, I assure you that it is a vow that God holds very precious, takes very serious and expects it to be upheld.

I'm not saying she does not have grounds for so drastic a measure as divorce, I am merely saying one absolutely must exhaust all other options first - and then, after getting proper council, try some more for the sake of the sanctity of the marriage bond and for the sake of the children.

She really needs to figure out how to see a trad priest about this situation.

 

[Satori]

Marriages between Protestants are considered valid until proven otherwise. Tradmom's way to divorce is not clear simply because she and her husband married as Protestants. In my opinion, we don't have enough information to know whether or not it would be wise for her to leave her husband, much less whether or not she has grounds for divorce. It sounds like a terrible situation but here is one piece of information lacking that might make all the difference: We don't know how these theological arguments are starting. Tradmom, would it be possible to simply refuse to start or take part in these arguments? My husband and I would be at each other's throats if we had these sorts of discussions, but we simply don't anymore. We leave it alone for the most part. I no longer believe anyone converts because of theological arguments unless his heart had already been moved in the direction of conversion, so I don't think you should trouble yourself with trying to convince him intellectually of anything. All you can do is pray for him and try to set a good example of what a pious Catholic wife is like -- very, very hard to do in your situation, but St. Paul is the one who gives the advice on this matter.

[Anastasia]

If he physically harms you when you go to Mass, you have cause to leave and try and protect yourself. It's hard to gauge what his threats of divorce really mean, though: he might be using it as leverage, or the friend might be pressuring him to cut ties with 'the heathen". He could be telling your husband that he must divorce you and find a "biblical wife". Hard to say. If you start to WIN these theological arguments, the friend will definitely increase his efforts in that direction, rather than risk losing his new disciple.
Remember this, too: the reason all these groups subdivide endlessly is because no two men ever agree on all their doctrines when they are their own Pope. It may be now, it may be in two years or so, but they will eventually fall out, call each other heretics, and disavow the other. When this happens, he might realize the entire path this friend led him down was also wrong, and convert to the true faith.

[JayneK]

I never said it was a sin to leave her husband.  I was talking about Catholic teaching on divorce which you apparently do not understand any better than Iolanthe does.

Leaving aside this question, tradmom  has been writing about one of the ways her husband has been preventing her from following her conscience and becoming Catholic is by threatening to divorce her.  Telling her to get a divorce is simply not paying attention to the OP's questions and concerns.

Actually, I did pay attention to exactly that, and it is part of the reason the OP needs to seriously consider taking this step. He is trying to intimidate her with his divorce threats, when in fact she is the one with grounds for divorce. If she shows him she is serious, which she should be, because he is a danger to her temporal and spiritual well-being, it may have the added benefit of making him realize he is not the one with all the power, which is something that needs to be made clear to him.

For some reason, you find it necessary to split hairs about separation vs. divorce. This is not the issue here, as I am sure that if she does consult a priest he will be able to explain those distinctions much better than you or I or any other poster here would be able to do.

The difference between separation and divorce is not "splitting hairs".  The fact that you think it is shows how unqualified you are to give advice on this subject.  You are a young unmarried person without practical experience of marriage, nor do you have a theoretical understanding of Church teaching on this subject.  You advised tradmom to do something which is a usually a sin and there was no indication in her posts that she is in the exceptional situation in which it is allowed.  We have no reason to think that she has grounds for divorce. If she or the children are in danger from her husband, there are grounds for separation.  This is something she should be discussing with a priest, not strangers on internet forums.   

I probably did over-react to your post.  I was upset by seeing someone advising another to sin.  I should have been more patient because you did it from ignorance.

[Underdog]

Please take the bickering to pm.

[JMartyr]

Please take the bickering to pm.

Then there wouldn't  be any posts at all!! 

[Cetil]

Traditionalmom,
   When I read your first post I was certain that your husband was a fundamentalist of some sort. Then you mentioned later that he was Anglican!
That's very ODD! If he wants to avoid a church that is involved with the state why in the world he want to be Anglican?  Beginning with Henry VIII the Anglican "church" was entirely governed by the state. Even to this day, the Queen still formally appoints the archbishop of Canterbury( and the PM is is also involved in church appointments) , though in practice it may be a mere formality. But canon law of the Anglican church still says:
""We acknowledge that the Queen’s most excellent Majesty, acting according to the laws of the realm, is the highest power under God in this kingdom, and has supreme authority over all persons in all causes, as well ecclesiastical as civil."

C.

[QuisUtDeus]

Please take the bickering to pm.

Then there wouldn't  be any posts at all!! 

I'm willing to make that trade.

[Jacafamala]

Marriages between Protestants are considered valid until proven otherwise. Tradmom's way to divorce is not clear simply because she and her husband married as Protestants. In my opinion, we don't have enough information to know whether or not it would be wise for her to leave her husband, much less whether or not she has grounds for divorce. It sounds like a terrible situation but here is one piece of information lacking that might make all the difference: We don't know how these theological arguments are starting. Tradmom, would it be possible to simply refuse to start or take part in these arguments? My husband and I would be at each other's throats if we had these sorts of discussions, but we simply don't anymore. We leave it alone for the most part. I no longer believe anyone converts because of theological arguments unless his heart had already been moved in the direction of conversion, so I don't think you should trouble yourself with trying to convince him intellectually of anything. All you can do is pray for him and try to set a good example of what a pious Catholic wife is like -- very, very hard to do in your situation, but St. Paul is the one who gives the advice on this matter.

Mmmm Hmmmm. This. 

[Scipio_a]

Please take the bickering to pm.

Then there wouldn't  be any posts at all!! 

I'm willing to make that trade.

LOL