— Name withheld, Texas

Answer: Your choice is praiseworthy and fitting. Given that your sister-in-law has MS, it is also reasonable to consider that your wife might need to support her. This is the reason the Church does not possess a definitive standard regarding these challenging marital circumstances.

The usual guideline is that Catholics ought not to participate in the weddings of fellow Catholics taking place outside of the Church or those deemed invalid for other reasons, such as a same-sex “wedding” or a “wedding” involving one or both individuals who have previously been married and lack a decree of nullity. The rationale behind this guideline is that attending a wedding ceremony signifies approval and a celebration of the union about to occur. However, in certain situations, Catholics are unable to endorse what is happening. Consequently, they should refrain from attending. This could create confusion or scandal, leading others to believe that the wedding aligns with Catholic teachings when it does not.

There are, nonetheless, certain instances where declining to go to a wedding might adversely affect family dynamics to the extent that a prudent decision could be made to participate. Given that the primary objective is to bear witness to the Catholic faith and to encourage conversion and a return to the sacraments for those who have strayed, one may reasonably decide that the better option is to attend but plan to later express the importance of legitimizing the marriage to the couple and others involved. Thus, although the typical guideline is to refrain from attending for the aforementioned reasons, it is not an absolute rule, allowing Catholics to reflect on what is most beneficial and likely to be effective in re-engaging the fallen-away Catholics. In your situation, there are additional factors to consider. Your sister-in-law’s condition necessitates your wife’s assistance. Therefore, while you rightly deduce that your attendance should be avoided, your wife’s involvement may be essential from both a charitable and medical perspective. Consequently, I believe you have assessed the situation correctly.

Judgment and environmental catastrophes

Question: Abraham, as we learned not long ago in Mass, continually implores God to spare Sodom even if there were merely 10 righteous individuals present. Given that Sodom was ultimately destroyed, it suggests that fewer than 10 virtuous people existed there. What can we say about regions that face destruction from earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, and so on? These calamities frequently strike impoverished nations or areas. Does God permit the most destitute to experience such devastation at times? I struggle to reconcile this with the concept of a just and merciful God during those moments.

— Jeannine Aucoin, Concord, New Hampshire

Response: The narrative of Abram’s “negotiation” with God concerning the salvation of a few righteous individuals in place of the numerous guilty ones serves as a timeless illustration for prayer and the necessity of recognizing that only a handful of us are deemed righteous in the sight of God, highlighting our profound need for his grace and compassion above all. It is a fact that Lot’s family was saved, yet no others were spared. We must certainly exercise caution when labeling some as wicked while letting others off the hook. Disasters frequently strike both the just and the unjust, as well as the affluent and the impoverished. God’s providence remains enigmatic and supreme.

Msgr. Charles Pope is the pastor of Holy Comforter-St. Cyprian in Washington, D.C., and writes for the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C. at blog.adw.org. Send questions to msgrpope@osv.com.