Mass readings today had a significant mistranslation at Luke 20:34

The mass reading for the New Testament was Luke 20:27-38. I was disturbed by a word I heard while it was being read last night at mass. The word was “remarry.” It caught my attention because I did not remember ever seeing the word “remarry” in the entire New Testament, which I can honestly say I’ve read at least five times.

Every day I receive an email from the USCCB with the mass readings. So this morning I did some sleuthing. I pulled up the email with the mass readings, and it matched what I heard. Then I looked it up at BibleGateway and BibleHub. There are a lot of translations available including Catholic translations such as the DRA, NABRE, and RSVCE. I could find no English translation that rendered the end of verse 34 as “remarry.” Not even the NABRE on Bible Gateway renders the end of the verse as “remarry.” So the NABRE at Luke 20:34 on BibleGateway is different than what the Lectionary says, which also uses the NABRE. From the Lectionary:

Jesus said to them, “The children of this age marry and remarry…”

From the NABRE on BibleGateway:

Jesus said to them, “The children of this age marry and are given in marriage…”

I also looked it up in my NABRE that I have here at home, and it matches the Lectionary, not what appears at BibleGateway. 

I looked up the Greek word on a few different sites (here, here and here), and it’s not “remarry.” I posed the question to any of my Catholic Facebook friends who know Greek. One responded and said that it “is in the passive voice, and means to be given in marriage. That is, the children of this age marry and are given in marriage. It doesn’t mean re-marry.”

The mistranslation is disturbing in its own right, but what is worse is that it wrongly shows Jesus speaking of remarriage as if to equate it with marriage. There are many liberal Catholics who are pushing hard for the Church to change the teachings regarding remarriage, which really means that they want to undermine the literal reading the Church has always had of Matthew 19 and Mark 10 where Jesus put a stop to remarriage. This mistranslation fits very nicely into that goal. Except it’s not what Jesus said.

I wrote to the USCCB about this matter. We’ll see if they respond.


Deep Impact is on Amazon Prime

About three weeks ago I wrote about Deep Impact’s interesting subplot about divorce and remarriage. I had to edit the post a bit today since the videos I linked had been taken down. Luckily I found new clips to use. Plus I made a few changes to the content, but didn’t change it in a substantial way.

However, after editing it, I realized that I didn’t mention how I found it. It’s on Amazon Prime. So here is a link to it if you’d like to see it:

Deep Impact on Amazon Prime

Seven times I was forced to abandon one family and start a new one, thanks to “choice” rhetoric

My childhood was very chaotic. After my parents’ divorce, I was forced to abandon one family and start a new seven times before I was 23:

  • First family: my mom, dad, and me
  • Second family: post divorce, still my mom, my dad, and me but living in two homes; my two parents are single
  • Third family: my mother remarries; my dad is single
  • Forth family: my father remarries; both parents are now remarried
  • Fifth family: my father divorces; he is single again; my mother is still married
  • Sixth family: my father remarries again; both parents are remarried
  • Seventh family: my father and his third wife separate; he is single again and my mother is married

Seven different family structures before I was 23 years old.  Just wanted to share that.


Understanding the “blended family” dynamic with diagrams

About four years ago I stumbled across a book called, Blah Blah Blah: What To Do When Words Don’t Work, by Dan Roam. It sounded good so I bought one for my Kindle. This is the book that gave me confidence to start drawing what I saw in order to share it with others. So if you’re ever having trouble making your point, about anything at all, check out the book. It will give you ideas for how to make it in a new way.

I just wanted to give the book a shout out, since it has helped me.

Here is a diagram I just drew that sheds light on the post from the yesterday.


The blue circle represents the “blended family” from yesterday. As you can see, there might be quite a few other people who are exerting pressure and influence on that family. And this is just one configuration–others are possible.

Let’s locate our author from yesterday. She’s inside the red circle:


Now we can see that her dad and her mom are divorced, and her dad is married to her step mom. Let’s locate her step sisters. They are across from her in the green circle:


From their perspective, we can see that their mom is divorced from their dad, and she is married to their step dad.

Let me make it clear that regarding the post from yesterday, I have no information other than what she shared. I don’t know what went on there. I don’t know if the non-resident parents in her life remarried. I’m just using it as an opportunity to show how diagrams can shed light on these situations.

Look at all that chaos. Even if we were to redraw it so that the non-resident parents never remarry, that’s a lot of chaos. Their remarriages only add to it, and not just for them but for the new step siblings.

She described her step-sisters in a pretty negative light. I imagined myself as her step-sister, and I could relate to the way she described all of them. I resented that others were spending more time with my dad than I was; that he was doing fun and interesting things with them that he wasn’t doing with me because I wasn’t there full time; that I felt like an outsider in my dad’s home, and on and on and on. I can’t help but wonder if there were other things going on in her step-sisters lives that made them act that way.

I also think that all of us, kids and adults, are blinded by “kids are resilient” and “they just get over it,” two false ideas that are completely accepted as true. As long as people are being guided by those false ideas, they’re going to assume things about kids in those arrangements that may not be true, or may be only a partial truth.

Let’s consider something else: this diagram shows how a divorced parent on the far left side can exert an influence across the entire diagram, even to step siblings on the far right side. Let’s say, for example, that the mom on the far left is an alcoholic. This influences her children, who in turn influence their dad and their step siblings, who in turn influence those parents and step siblings, and so on. The effect reminds me of how longitudinal waves travel. This explains why kids feel stretched between their parents, but also like a buffer between them. I may have to draw a new diagram to show this effect. I drew it the way I did to show how triads get fractured in order to accommodate adult sexual liberty.

Divorce and remarriage are a mess for the kids. Divorce is bad enough, but remarriages are truly chaotic for kids. I’ve previously described it as torture and I hope this post sheds more light on that characterization.

Alicia Keys’ “Blended Family” song is a lie and I’ll prove it to you

Alicia Keys says that there’s nothing she won’t do for love for the step-child. That is a pleasant sounding statement and lots of people will ooo and aah over it.

However, it is a lie and I’ll prove it to you: guess who’s the one living in “two homes?” It’s not her and her new husband–that would be too inconvenient. So that burden is placed upon the child under the belief that “kids are resilient but adults are profoundly fragile.” Did you notice the new photos in the family album? No sign of the child’s mother. The dynamic in these diagrams is fully at play:


As I have stated before, this dynamic is largely independent of the adults’ post-divorce behavior. It is a consequence of them “moving on.” See also:



Deep Impact’s subplot about divorce and remarriage

The 1998 film Deep Impact has a really interesting subplot about divorce and remarriage. The lead character, whose name is Jenny, has divorced parents. In one of the opening scenes, Jenny and her mom are having lunch. It is the day Jenny’s dad is remarrying a woman who is two years older than Jenny. Jenny’s mom is imagining the wedding ceremony, sort of narrating it out loud to Jenny. She doesn’t seem too emotional about it, but it seems odd to me, to narrate it like that. If she didn’t care, then it wouldn’t even be a subject for conversation, right?

Then at about the 17:10 mark, Jenny is walking into what looks like a hotel lobby. She is meeting her dad and his new wife. The scene is really classic in so many ways, as far as all the stuff I’ve been saying here. Jenny is deeply disturbed about the new marriage. The dad and the new wife are utterly clueless about Jenny’s pain. He tells her that he’s “disturbed” that she didn’t go to the wedding. The new wife tells her that she has to “get over it, life goes on.” Jenny echoes these words in an incredulous way, then the dad echoes them in a bewildered way. Then Jenny steps up to the plate and tells her dad the truth. Hit the pause button as soon as Jenny walks out:

Now let’s fast-forward to almost the 1:03:00 mark. Regarding the subplot, there is one very important detail that happens between the scene above and the one below, but I’ll leave it out since I can make my point without it. Now Jenny has an encounter with her dad in the rain. She tells him that she feels like an orphan:

But wait. How can she feel like an orphan when her dad is right there? All the professionals said that she’d be fine if her parents were happy, and her dad was more than happy, he was absolutely ecstatic at finding a young and beautiful wife.

Here is a popular explanation: Jenny is crazy and needs therapy and medication. And what a convenient explanation that is. Parents don’t need to examine their own behavior. They don’t even have to consider that there might be something terribly wrong with what they’ve done. Instead, label the child of divorce as crazy and having resolvable “anger issues,” insist that the person needs medication and therapy to help them see the error of their thinking. Feelings for first families must be suppressed through re-education efforts such as photoshopping or destroying family photos, pretending that the first family never existed (aka gaslighting), perpetual denigration of ex-spouse and/or ex-spouses’ family to the children, medication for the children, therapy, lies, public shaming, propaganda, euphemisms, role-reversal, chopping down the child’s family tree, falsification of birth certificates, and the implementation of self-refuting family structures, for example this one:


I can hear the sexual libertines now:

“Aren’t all families just collections of individuals? What difference does it make if we rearrange a few pieces here and there? It is the state’s job to annul my familial obligations whenever I choose!”




Things children of divorce aren’t supposed to think about: lost inheritances

There are many things children of divorce are not supposed to think about or question. One of them is how their inheritances get funneled in different directions during and after a divorce. In an intact family, the marital assets usually become the children’s inheritance at the appropriate time. In a divorce, the marital assets usually become diverted in other directions. I am aware of two ways this can happen.

1) The divorce industry. The divorce industry thrives on siphoning marital assets in order to legally separate spouses from each other. Here is a list of common expenses that occur during and after a divorce:

  • The total cost of the attorney’s fees. Rates can go up to $475/hr. according to
  • Court costs
  • Costs for parent education classes
  • Mediation costs
  • Refinancing costs
  • Record deed fees
  • Mandated psychological evaluation and counseling costs
  • Interest on credit cards (parents were often struggling financially after the divorce, much more so than before it)
  • The cost of operating two homes vs one home

2) Remarriage after divorce. Another thing to consider is when one or both parents remarry. A new step-parent might have a legal claim on assets that were acquired during the former marriage. This claim can rise above the children’s claim depending on the state and/or if certain actions were not taken ahead of time to prevent this from happening. If or when the child’s parent dies, those assets can flow to the step-parent and the step-parent might not have any legal obligation to make sure the deceased spouse’s children receive those assets.

During and after divorce, marital assets no longer flow intact to the next generation. This another long term ramification of divorce.