This is a good analogy, especially if one keeps in mind that the pro-life movement has been totally fruitless for more than 30 years now. Why? Because there are fundamental flaws in the foundation of their philosophy which make it impossible for them to achieve any good. Same thing with any sort of "war against divorce." First one has to understand the nature of marriage before you can defend it. JPII and Msgr. Cormac Burke, for example, spill gallons of ink upholding the indissolubility of marriage while at the same time introducing innovations into the Catholic institution of marriage which are bound to lead to tens of millions of failed marriages.
What kind of person are you? Are you one of those people who quit before you start, because the task seems impossible? Don't you agree that God is responsible for the ultimate victory, but we are all personally responsible for doing the small task God gives us individually? God's work in human history is achieved by thousands of people doing their own small part in His work. Are you the kind of person who would have told the patriots colonists it is impossible to defeat the Britisn? If you were a southern slave, would you have told your friends to never try to escape to obtain freedom, and to never try to make legal and cultural changes because their efforts would be fruitless?
JPII AND YOU. You wrote, First one has to understand the nature of marriage before you can defend it. JPII ... [introduces] innovations into the Catholic institution of marriage which are bound to lead to tens of millions of failed marriages.
What are you talking about? What specifically has JPII written which will lead to failed marriages? Please don't repeat to me the statements made by those misquoting JPII. I am a post Vatican II Catholic, and I am VERY aware of how dissenting Catholics take a couple phrases from Vatican II out of context, then twist them to support their own belief, which contradicts Church teaching. At least with www.vatican.va, everyone can read the original text of all Papal documents, and official Church teaching.
WHO ARE YOU LOYAL TO? Maximilian, do you believe CCC 85, "The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.” This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome?"
Do you believe, CCC 1269, "Having become a member of the Church, the person baptized belongs no longer to himself, but to him who died and rose for us. From now on, he is called to be subject to others, to serve them in the communion of the Church, and to "obey and submit" to the Church's leaders, holding them in respect and affection?"
Do you believe, Canon 212 §1, "Christ's faithful, conscious of their own responsibility, are bound to show Christian obedience to what the sacred Pastors, who represent Christ, declare as teachers of the faith and prescribe as rulers of the Church?"
Do you believe, CCC 1785, "In the formation of conscience the Word of God is the light for our path, we must assimilate it in faith and prayer and put it into practice. We must also examine our conscience before the Lord's Cross. We are assisted by the gifts of the Holy Spirit, aided by the witness or advice of others and guided by the authoritative teaching of the Church?"
Every Catholic loyal to the magisterium knows there are deacons, priests, and others in authority who misrepresent the teachings of the Catholic Church. My questions for you are; Are loyal to the current magisterium? Are you happily married? Are you a baptized, or practicing Catholic?
Your answer will help explain your comments. We may disagree on who's in charge of the Catholic Church and still agree on the indissolubility of marriage. You might, in fact be very interested in challanging Catholic authorities who disagree with the official Church teaching. I always have.