… that nullifies the promise that the “willing to stay married” spouse made?
Again, the vow is “till death do us part”, not “till my spouse gets tired of the marriage”. (I agree, “till I get tired of the marriage” isn’t praiseworthy; but, it doesn’t absolve the other spouse from their responsibility to the vow… does it?)
Agreed. And, as it currently stands, that’s what the “separation with the bond remaining” solution is.
Now, the other situation is the one in which the ‘wronged’ spouse perceives the need to remarry in order to care for the children of the failed marriage. However, the “internal forum” solution attempts to address this scenario.
Let’s look at this situation in the secular world. (Marriage is more than a contract – it’s a covenant – but it’s a contract, too.) Let’s suppose a couple makes a commitment, together, to buy a house. A few years down the line, one of the pair decides he’s had enough of that contract, and runs off and abandons it. What is the “wronged” person’s commitment to that contract, then? Does he get to abandon it, too, simply because his spouse did?
Does that create hardship? Yes, it does. Does it remove the commitment that the “wronged spouse” made? No… it doesn’t.
I think that the Church is “understanding and compassionate”; however, “authorizing a different marriage” isn’t within the scope of the Church’s authority. After all, it was Jesus himself that set the rule…