In synod discussions last week, the Baltic nation of Latvia caught the attention many synod fathers, who were keen to hear why the number of divorces among their Catholic population is so low.

“In Latvia, it is a pity, but we have the highest number of divorces: 86 percent of marriages are divorced civil marriages. But when our civil mass media started to check how it is in the Church, they discovered that we just have 16 percent, and they asked why,” Archbishop Zbignev Stankevics of Riga told EWTN News Oct. 9.

Archbishop Stankevics explained that such a low number of divorces inside the Church is due in part to a “serious preparation for marriage, because we have an obligatory course for persons who want to get married in the Church.”

On the other hand, the archbishop explained that although there is naturally a greater sense of responsibility among people who seek sacramental marriage, “people who have faith don‘t resign when they meet the first difficulties during their married life.”

“For this reason, also, they are fighting for the survival of their family,” he observed.

Other bishops who listened to Archbishop Stankevics' report, which he gave to the synod Oct. 8, said they were at first saddened by study’s initial report of 86 percent of Latvia’s marriages ending in divorce.

However, Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York told journalists at an Oct. 8 event in Rome that his ears perked when the archbishop spoke of the findings in phase two of the study, which revealed the low number of divorces among Catholics in Latvia.

Cardinal Dolan recalled the archbishop’s speech, saying that in it he explained that after the second set of results were released for this study Latvia had a “renewed sense from people who never give the Church a nod.”

People who never said much good about the Church or only looked at the matter with a sociological or economic perspective were suddenly telling themselves, “maybe we ought to look at what they’re doing. They have success here,” the cardinal recounted.

In this context, questions were raised among other synod participants as to what the Church in Latvia is doing to prepare married couples, as well as what specific characteristics the couples bring to their marriage that makes so many of them last while many outside of the Church “are crumbling.”

Also present at the Oct. 9 event was Cardinal George Pell, prefect of the Secretariat for the Economy, who said he was also a bit surprised by the high number of lasting marriages in the country.

The numbers, he said, although eyebrow raising for many, are in fact compatible with numerous sociological studies exploring the advantages of being a religious, practicing individual, particularly in the Church.

Despite the various issues that families currently face, including divorce, polygamy, finances, etc., there are no long faces in the synod hall, Cardinal Pell explained.

“There’s no handwringing, there’s no feeling that we’re beaten or done,” he observed, especially given the resources the Church today has in comparison to past times of great persecution.

“I always think of the Ancient Roman Empire, who was immensely more hostile to Christianity than our present situation,” he said.

“They had none of the advantages that we have, no great colleges, etc., and they didn’t do too badly.”

http://www.ewtnnews.com/catholic-news/Vatican.php?id=10961

Even then, wouldn't Lithuania be the haven for Catholic orthodoxy and not Latvia? It's the majority-Catholic one of the three Balkan states.

I can confidently say that none of that prepared us for marriage.  While I don't know any of the other participants of the retreat, I could confidently say that I really saw little that would recommend a lasting marriage among them.  The one point that stands out in my mind is when one woman asked the group why it was so necessary for the woman to change her name when she married and, in turn, just about every couple could simply agreed that it wasn't necessary.  Finally, I explained that having different family names confuses and sews scandal as it is less clear what the family situation truly is--especially when there are children and most people will simply assume that they are products of irregularities.  The woman agreed that I had a point but asked if I would be willing to change my name instead of asking my fiance to change hers.  My immediate reply was, "Of course not!"  She, as well as almost everyone there, was flummoxed and she asked why.  I answered, "Because I'm the man!  And that is simply not how it is supposed to be."  This caused a roar while the priest remained silent through it all.  The next morning at breakfast, almost every man quietly told me that I had guts and that they agreed with me but couldn't or wouldn't be able to say so in front of their fiances.  

Imagine the kind of husbands and wives these people would make as well as how stable such marriages would be.

I remember reading how around 400 years ago it was not unheard of for a man to take the wife's name in certain circuмstances.