Spare us....
-the desire to use Pauline Privilege as "proof" the Church tolerated another marriage among baptized Christians;
-the contention there was no "sacrament" of marriage until the technical term sacramentum got used by Peter Lombard;
--that Trent, in a desire to keep some post-Florentine hope alive about reunion with the East, did not make a full-throated denunciation of epikeia;
--that there really is very much new in subsequent Kasper books from Zur Theologie der christlichen Ehe of 1978.

I did not think that a comments section required footnotes.  The "revisionism" really lies in bending things like the Pauline Privilege, a technical theological term, etc. to "prove" that the theology of marriage is as fluid as Kasper, Schillebeeckx, and others would like to pretend it to be so that they can advance their thesis that marriage is basically a civil estate that the Church took over.