Fighters and drones have very different capabilities , and one can ' t really substitute for the other . Fighter drones are also still in the realm of SF , as AI tech is still not ready to do independent target identification . <| sep |> This is an article by some theologians . If anyone says that the Church errs in that she taught and teaches that in accordance with evangelical and apostolic doctrine the bond of matrimony cannot be dissolved by reason of adultery on the part of one of the parties , and that both , or even the innocent party who gave no occasion for adultery , cannot contract another marriage during the lifetime of the other , and that he is guilty of adultery who , having put away the adulteress , shall marry another , and she also who , having put away the adulterer , shall marry another , let him be anathema . Do you think the Church errs in that she taught and teaches that certain objective , external forum facts marrying another person after a valid marriage are sufficient to be guilty of adultery ? Of course marriage isn ' t primarily a juridical reality in God ' s eyes ! It is a human relational and spiritual reality repeat it till you ' re blue the Law for man , not man for the law , which reality is signified by an external juridicallyframed Sacrament . This is not how the infallible ordinary magisterium has understood marriage . And the Law for man does not mean you get to play fast and loose when it suits you . If , per impossibile , all the priests died out , I wouldn ' t have the power to consecrate the Eucharist or hear confessions because the spiritual reality means that we need someone to do that . Priesthood is nothing if it does not descend from the apostles . Same with marriage the facts matter . And while the two ideally coincide . well , Francis makes it quite clear that he favors the idea which recognizes not that marriage can ever be dissolved , but that there can be a marriage in the external forum that doesn ' t actually have the moral reality of marriage , and a subsequent relationship that does in spite of the inability to get the external recognition . This is not what the infallible ordinary magisterium says about the reality of marriage . But even if we , or an angel from heaven , should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we preached to you , let him be accursed . But then try to apply this to marriage and people suddenly become partisans of the principle that the visible and invisible , the letter of the law and the spirit of its moral reality . always coincide or in fact are not even two separate concepts . The tradition of the Church has always held that certain acts may substitute for water baptism . In contrast , the tradition of the Church has never held that certain acts may substitute for valid marriage . So the article ' s there are only three possibilities is incorrect . They leave out the concept of a marriage for which there are , indeed , no visible canonically provable externalforum grounds for annulment though admittedly the Church has blurred the lines here by creating the infamous psychological impediment but which nevertheless never corresponded with the moral and spiritual reality of true marriage . Maybe they don ' t think even Kasper is so much of a radical revolutionary as to make marriage primarily about spiritual realities rather than what the Church has always understood marriage to mean . Anyway , the whole discussion is otiose until it can be shown that the infallible magisterium did not teach these things . But they did .