What happens when a church's policy fails miserably because its based on a false princple?

Question

A good example is in the Philippines. It is the only country in the world that doesn't allow divorce. They also make it impossible for people to seperate through an annulment by making costs a 2 years salary. Plus the only law couples have for an annulment is to convince judges you were mentally insane at the time of the wedding.

As a result of all this, millions of couples choose not to marry at all. The culteral changes are hugely negative.

Answer 1

The main church in the Philippines is the RC church. About 80% of the population claim to be Roman Catholic.  

This church does not, and never has adhered to biblical doctrine, choosing from its conception to enforce its own dogma on its followers.

The fault is not that of Gods church.  But of false teachings going back many years. There are many missionaries from bible based churches working in the Philippines who are doing hard, and often dangerous work, in order to bring the true teachings of the bible to these islands.  And to try and bring about a change in many of the repressive laws there.

Answer 2

It would appear the Catholic Church has a more liberal view than what you express. It is strange that civil law would be more harsh than the Church itself. So you sure have me confused since I know the Catholic Church did not influence this type of civil harshness.  

Answer 3

You are talking about a church/religious law? Or is this a Philippine law?

Answer 4

The concept of marriage is not bad.  It's the one doing the selection that missguided.  Man chooses his bride, if you don't follow God's policy in choosing the correct woman, well, your on your own.  Don't blame Him for your mistakes.  Read Proverbs 31, good start for figuring what the perfect woman is like.

Just My Thoughts!

Answer 5

Sorry, just don't see how this is an example of a church's policy that failed because it is based on a false principle.  Even assuming that this policy is a church policy rather than a political/governmental policy, I just don't see it as a failure based on a false principle.  

Are you perhaps suggesting it is better for people to marry and divorce at will than it is to be VERY careful before making the lifetime commitment of marriage?  If so, then I disagree.  

To me it seems like an effective policy if the goal is to encourage people to treat marriage the way it is intended to be treated...as a lifetime commitment to remain with another person in good times and bad!  

I would seriously doubt that the cultural consequences of this law are greater than the cultural consequences of say, the law in the United States related to marriage.  How many millions (billions!...or maybe trillions?) of dollars are spent (wasted) every year disolving marriages that would never take place if we had laws like they have?...and how much of that money comes from taxpayers (courts, legal aid, enforcement of custody and other divorce-related judgments, etc...)???  Is it really better for a child to know that his parents were legally married than it is to know that his parents broke their promises to each other?  Are the personal and societal consequences of having a marital relationship with someone without the legal trappings really better than the personal and societal consequences of divorce?  Personally, I think the latter is FAR more destructive to individuals AND to society as a whole!