The Indissolubility of Marriage and the Council of Trent by E Christian Brugger, The Catholic University of America Press, £74
In the last few years, the Church has been rent with controversy over whether those who are divorced and civilly remarried can licitly receive Holy Communion. Some may have the impression that this is a recent debate in the Church, as it has become so heated so quickly, but it is anything but new.
If we look at Sacred Scripture, we see that marriage and divorce have been debated for thousands of years. In the Sermon on the Mount as recounted in the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus revises the teaching of Moses: “It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of unchastity, makes her an adulteress; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery” (Matthew 5:31-32).
Furthermore, Jesus told the Pharisees that “What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder” (Matthew 19:6). The debate continues to rage, and there is no shortage of controversy or passion attendant to it.
E Christian Brugger is professor and dean of the School of Philosophy and Theology at the University of Notre Dame in Australia. His new book is a masterwork of scholarship, examining the way in which one of the most important and influential ecumenical councils in Church history tackled a question of perennial significance. One of the book’s strengths is the sheer amount of attention to detail he is able to give to his subject. The matter of the book is incredibly particular, and Brugger treats it with a laser focus.
Catholics hold that the teaching of ecumenical councils carries the character of infallibility. This is why decrees of the Council of Trent (1545-63), and the 20 other ecumenical councils, are so scrupulously examined in cases such as this. It is very important to remember, however, that while the decrees and documents of such councils may carry the character of infallibility, the personal records and writings of the council fathers do not have such a quality.
Certainly it can be illuminating to consider why a given council father (or group of fathers) may have pushed for a particular phrasing or a certain proclamation – but they absolutely do not have the weight of the actual council decrees.
The same principle applies to civil law: if the appropriate elected body passes a piece of legislation and it becomes the law of the land, only the text of the law itself is legally binding. It does not matter if Senator X or Member of Parliament Y interpreted the law in one way when he cast his vote, or intended for it to be applied only in a particular circumstance. If that does not bear out in the text, it is not the law.
Perhaps I am labouring this point a bit. But I think it is important to draw attention to this consideration, as Brugger spends a great deal of time on one particular facet of the council’s deliberations: that many of the council fathers wanted the decrees of divorce and remarriage to be phrased in a certain way so as not to alienate the Greeks, whose practices were not fully in accord with Catholic Church teaching. Brugger describes this ideological clash: “The council fathers knew well that Greek Orthodox Christians (‘Graecos’) had practised the custom, or ritus, of divorce and remarriage. It was mentioned several times during the discussions, and some even thought that because of it the council should withhold formulating Canon 7 with an anathema.”
Brugger goes on to describe how the council fathers attempted to address the matter: “The support for the indirect formulation tells us that the fathers wished to teach indissolubility with as little disruption as possible to Greek-Latin relations.”
Lest it be said that the Council of Trent, in avoiding a direct formulation of anathema in regard to the Greeks, left open the possibility of certain situations wherein Christian marriage could be dissolved, the author summarises the council’s teaching: “Trent … unambiguously and without restriction or qualification asserts the proposition that the bond of a Christian marriage is indissoluble, that this is a truth of divine revelation, and that the Council intends the scope of its teaching to stretch as far as the doubts against the teaching may extend.”
The question of the indissolubility of marriage seems to get thornier by the day. Brugger’s brilliant elucidation of some of the most important Church teaching on the matter is an invaluable resource for anyone who wishes to delve into the issue in more depth.
Areas of Catholic Herald business are still recovering post-pandemic.
However, we are reaching out to the Catholic community and readership, that has been so loyal to the Catholic Herald. Please join us on our 135 year mission by supporting us.
We are raising £250,000 to safeguard the Herald as a world-leading voice in Catholic journalism and teaching.
We have been a bold and influential voice in the church since 1888, standing up for traditional Catholic culture and values. Please consider donating.