131 out of 131 annulment requests granted

[FCGeorge]

Do they post these for others to view, for each diocese? I am wondering how mine faired.
I know those who are Catholic, married in the Church, have had no problem with annulments or the ones I know.
I don’t even want to think about it. It is probably the same where you are, the rates. 100%

marysadvocates.org/annulment/CLSAProceedingsYr2011.htm

Hopefully this link gets you there Hopey!

Yours in the Precious Blood,

Bryan

 

[EIF5A]

It seems hypocritical to argue against gay marriage when annulments are granted so easily.

Or rather, marriages in the Catholic Church are granted so easily, as if it’s just a symbolic thing akin to a civil piece of paper conferring rights.

If marriage were actually deemed so sacred, this wouldn’t even be an issue — annulments would be granted only for certain unusual cases.

 

[FCGeorge]

Bryan,

You are light on details. Where is the official diocesan news article that supports this post?

Hey Michael, I am not trying to be argumentative. I posted the statistics above. These are numbers that the dioceses submit themselves to Rome.

Does it surprise you that American tribunals hand these out at a 95% clip? Why or why not? This is what I want to understand. How is this being rationalized.

Bryan

 

[FCGeorge]

My answer is anecdotal, but I knew a priest some years ago who was also a psychologist. He counseled couples in troubled marriages, and in some instances would also prepare and submit cases to the tribunal for annulments. He told me he would not submit a case for annulment unless he was certain (based on his experience) that it would be granted. In other words, the reason every case is apparently approved is because of the preparation before the tribunal ever saw the case. If this priest I knew determined that a troubled marriage was still valid, he would not submit it for annulment.

Hello, thanks for the example. As I mentioned in a prior response to someone else, there is no doubt that there are some faithful priests out there doing this. I have spoken to a couple who do this. I have also spoken to more, however, who do not do this. I have personally corresponded with many people who also know priests who do not do this.

Wouldn’t you think that if a priest were to truly want to do this that he would insist on speaking to both spouses whenever possible?

Yet I have corresponded with a number of abandoned spouses who have had their spouses “seek” an annulment. These abandoned spouses receive papers from their diocese stating that the validity of the marriage will be judged. This comes without warning as no priest ever contacted them and said, “hey, I would like to speak with you because your spouse is claiming this or that. I need to know what you claim so that I can know if there really is a justifiable reason for the tribunal to judge this case.”

Also, in your example you mention a priest who is actually working with couples. Many times one of the spouses has abandoned the marriage and has no desire to work on counseling. They have often times even already forced the civil divorce. There seem to be few priests who will not almost automatically recommend the annulment path in this case. (Although for nearly 1,930 years of the history of the Church the path would have been, “We love you and will help you to faithfully carry your cross and pray for the repentance of the prodigal spouse.”)

Yours in the Precious Blood,

Bryan

 

[FCGeorge]

Not having all the information it’s really hard to make any kind of comment. We must pray for these tribunals to have the wisdom of Solomn.

mlz

Yes, thank you for your prayers mlz

 

[MaryT777]

Hello, thanks for the example. As I mentioned in a prior response to someone else, there is no doubt that there are some faithful priests out there doing this. I have spoken to a couple who do this. I have also spoken to more, however, who do not do this. I have personally corresponded with many people who also know priests who do not do this.

Wouldn’t you think that if a priest were to truly want to do this that he would insist on speaking to both spouses whenever possible?

Yet I have corresponded with a number of abandoned spouses who have had their spouses “seek” an annulment. These abandoned spouses receive papers from their diocese stating that the validity of the marriage will be judged. This comes without warning as no priest ever contacted them and said, “hey, I would like to speak with you because your spouse is claiming this or that. I need to know what you claim so that I can know if there really is a justifiable reason for the tribunal to judge this case.”

Also, in your example you mention a priest who is actually working with couples. Many times one of the spouses has abandoned the marriage and has no desire to work on counseling. They have often times even already forced the civil divorce. There seem to be few priests who will not almost automatically recommend the annulment path in this case. (Although for nearly 1,930 years of the history of the Church the path would have been, “We love you and will help you to faithfully carry your cross and pray for the repentance of the prodigal spouse.”)

Yours in the Precious Blood,

Bryan

Bryan,

You make some excellent points. I wonder how many of COUPLES actually come together for a meeting with a priest regarding an annulment. My experience with acting as a witness which is only in 2 cases was one person in the couple filed the annulment and also in both cases the other spouse was not Catholic and wanted no part in this " man made" and other more colorful swear words process.

Mary.

 

[sscott]

I long time ago I read a post by Father Mark Gantley on the EWTN site. He was on the marriage tribunal in Los Vegas. Before he was on the tribunal he thought there were far too many annulments. After he began to serve he realized there were a lot of people who were in marriages which were really easy cases for annulment. One or both parties did not have a basic understanding of marriage. There are many cases where one or both parties have no intention of fidelity or being open to children. He listed about ten common misunderstandings which could lead a tribunal to give an annulment. It’s not that the tribunals are being negligent; they are finding that at the time of the marriage there was a lot of misunderstanding.

 

[babochka]

There isn’t enough information here to really be able to understand this situation. How many Catholics divorce in the diocese in a given year? How many approach their priest to ask about an annulment? How many never turn in the paperwork because they are told they don’t have a case? How many withdraw their requests before they reaches the tribunal because of lack of evidence or lack of cooperative witnesses? If the diocese runs the process well, very few questionable cases will even reach the tribunal.

 

[FCGeorge]

The main reason for all the annulments is porn addiction. Men addicted to porn are getting married and these are incapable of fulfilling their obligation to fidelity. Their vow to be faithful was null before it was even given.

If the diocese of Peoria, IL granted 131 annulments then exactly 131 of them are none of our business.

-Tim-

Hello Tim,

So in your estimation is every single person who still believes themselves to be validly married but was “addicted to porn” at the time of the wedding not really validly married?

If your bold statement is true then why are bishops and priests not out there stating, “Hey men (and women) if you were addicted to porn when you were married then you are not capable of being in a valid marriage. Therefore you are not married. Therefore you need to separate or seek to enter into a valid marriage. Sure, you do not want to hear this but we love your souls enough to tell you this!!!”

Otherwise, your reasoning there seems to turn into a convenient excuse for nullity. Oh, Bob was addicted to porn that is why the marriage isn’t valid.

But John, who was also addicted to porn hasn’t been abandoned by his wife so therefore his marriage is valid.

What qualifies as “an addiction?” Was anyone who viewed porn 3 times prior to marriage
“addicted” at the time of marriage? I am just trying to understand how you would judge this with certainty?

I can’t tell from your message there if you are being snide in your response. I am not trying to argue. I am not asking you, “Hey Tim, please give me the names and reasons for nullity for each individual case.” Rather, looking at the 131 out of 131 result are you at least a little curious how this could be?

Yours in the Precious Blood,

Bryan

 

[MaryT777]

I long time ago I read a post by Father Mark Gantley on the EWTN site. He was on the marriage tribunal in Los Vegas. Before he was on the tribunal he thought there were far too many annulments. After he began to serve he realized there were a lot of people who were in marriages which were really easy cases for annulment. One or both parties did not have a basic understanding of marriage. There are many cases where one or both parties have no intention of fidelity or being open to children. He listed about ten common misunderstandings which could lead a tribunal to give an annulment. It’s not that the tribunals are being negligent; they are finding that at the time of the marriage there was a lot of misunderstanding.

It would be interesting to know the 10 common minsunderstandings…if anyone can find and post them.
Mary.

 

[EIF5A]

It would be interesting to know the 10 common minsunderstandings…if anyone can find and post them.
Mary.

Or why they were granted marriage in the first place.

If heterosexual “marriages” are granted with such leniency, what justification does the Church have to fight so vehemently against gay “marriage”?

What happened to hypocrisy? How can Catholics claim to be morally above worldly things if heterosexual issues are not dealt with the same rigor?

 

[FCGeorge]

Since in almost every case the respondents and the petitioners are already divorced, why would a respondent have "a hope of having their marriage defended’? What difference would it make to them.

Hello felsguy,

I have personally corresponded with a number of Catholics who really do believe their marriage vows. They really do believe that what God joins man cannot put asunder.

They also really believe the Catechism that divorce is a “grave offense against the natural law.”

They also believe the Church’s teaching that if we persist in grave offenses until death we will end up separated from God forever in Hell.

They also truly love their spouses.

So, truly loving their spouses they desire for the spouses to go to Heaven. They understand that their spouses choice to divorce is a grave offense that is leading them on a path away from Heaven.

So, the faithful spouse desires for the prodigal spouse to repent. This includes a willingness to right the wrong of the divorce. To no longer claim that the marriage is over but to recognize and honor the marriage vows made before God.

IF a tribunal makes a claim that there was never a marriage then it becomes that much more difficult for the prodigal spouse to see the need to repent of the divorce. They can simply claim, “See, the Church has told me that I was never even married! I can 'move on!” My abandonment was never even a sin!!"

Sure, IF tribunals were infallible then this would be the case. But they are not infallible. They make wrong decisions. The Roman rota over turns a significant percentage of the decisions American tribunals make, for example. Sadly, however, most abandoned spouses do not either know or care enough to ask that the Roman rota be the court of second instance.

There is also the genuine concern that the faithful spouse often has for the children involved. How do we expect our children to have faith in a Catholic wedding when they see their dad force an annulment down the throat of their mom after 15 years of marriage?

"Hey little Barbara, it is okay, your mom thought she was married for 15 years but she really wasn’t validly married. But don’t you worry, your marriage will be a valid marriage. You don’t have to worry about your husband doing that to you. Trust the Church.

In the 70’s people were justifying divorce by saying that children would be better off if mom and dad were happy. That there would really be little or no negative consequences of divorce in the long run on children. Well, eventually studies showed that to be wrong. One study found that separation of parents takes an average of 5 years off of a child’s life. This was by far the most devastating event. More so than the death of a parent even. I am convinced that annulments are currently being justified in a similar way as divorce was. And that they too have long term consequences. We just have not yet acknowledged this. We are too concerned with the mom and/or dad being able to find a new love interest and “be happy.”

Sorry for the long answer. The short answer is that they love their spouse and children and want their spouses and children to go to Heaven. And they love their Lord and want the vows made before Him to be honored.

Bryan

 

[FCGeorge]

I wish there were valid stats kept by those “gatekeeper” priest or deacons how many people they actually counsel to go ahead and promote the annulment path. It should be 100% for any person who so desires to do so; they should also be aware of their right to appeal a decision. It is their right as a Catholic to have a marriage evaluated by the tribunal for validity. This will effect them for the rest of their life as far as their ability to remarry validly in the Church.

90% is too low in my opinion.

Mary.

Thanks Mary, I believe you summarize well why I believe the percentage is 90%.

When you see that a tribunal is granting 131 annulments out of 131 cases do you believe that every decision was correct? That there really wasn’t a single valid marriage in there?

There was a study done in the early 80’s, I believe, of the decisions made by American tribunals on 1099 grounds (psychological grounds, the far and away leader of grounds).

This study is cited in Robert Vasoli’s What God Hath Joined book.

It found that something like 90% of the times an American tribunal said, “you are not validly married,” the Roman rota said, “You are validly married.” (not enough evidence to show invalidity). Sadly, only 40-some cases were reviewed by the Roman rota. The vast majority of the time a second American diocese will rubber-stamp the first tribunal’s decision.

You seem to mock the “gate-keeper” priest. But, honestly, would you even advise your daughter to get directions to a grocery store from a website that is wrong 90% of the time?

Now, imagine that a priest really does believe what the Church teaches and understands that this is a matter of eternal life and death to souls. Imagine a priest really does love his flock and would sacrifice his own life to defend them from the prowling lion.

Do you not think he would spend the time to try to talk to both spouses before sending them off to a place he knows will grant the annulment candy and time a hand is held out for it?

Yours in the Precious Blood,

Bryan

 

[FCGeorge]

Maybe marriage is, in fact, sacred?

Okay, so EIF5A had an even shorter answer that sums it all up as to why someone would defend the validity of their marriage!

Well done. I noticed that you are “pre-Catholic.” I was there a few years back myself!

I pray you jump into the Ark my friend! There is nothing but flood waters everywhere else.

Yours in the Precious Blood,

Bryan

 

[EIF5A]

Out of the cases cited, how many marriages involved two people who believed in what the Church taught about marriage?

How many just went through the motion to get the Church wedding because that’s what the family wanted?

If the marriages were from at least one out of two people not fully comprehending what marriage is, was there marriage at all? Or is that just a human-based concept?

 

[EIF5A]

Okay, so EIF5A had an even shorter answer that sums it all up as to why someone would defend the validity of their marriage!

Well done. I noticed that you are “pre-Catholic.” I was there a few years back myself!

I pray you jump into the Ark my friend! There is nothing but flood waters everywhere else.

Yours in the Precious Blood,

Bryan

I am far from what a Catholic should be.

Whatever the world might say about the Church, I hope hypocrisy is not one of them…and easy annulment only gives ammunition to the secular world.

 

[FCGeorge]

Bryan,

You make some excellent points. I wonder how many of COUPLES actually come together for a meeting with a priest regarding an annulment. My experience with acting as a witness which is only in 2 cases was one person in the couple filed the annulment and also in both cases the other spouse was not Catholic and wanted no part in this " man made" and other more colorful swear words process.

Mary.

Thanks Mary,

St. Monica was married to a rascal pagan fellow named Patricius. She did not abandon him, however, as she persevered through some difficult times. Many believe that he converted and is now in Heaven in large part due to St. Monica’s faithfulness and perseverance.

When I hear stories like the one above I wonder about the spouse who abandons the marriage and the one who is abandoned. I wonder if there were any children who would have become St. Augustine’s had the abandoner persevered like St. Monica. Maybe Monica could have chosen to abandon her marriage and get an annulment and “move on” with some nice “Christian” fellow and still become St. Monica. Maybe ole Patricius would still have repented and found eternal life in Heaven. I just don’t think so. I don’t think there is another path to Calvary other than carrying the cross of faithfully honoring those vows you speak before God entering you into a marriage with the wife of your youth.

I’m not trying to judge the cases you mention above. There is obviously much more to them. Thanks again Mary, like you, I suspect that not many couples actually meet with the priest and that many times this is because one spouse simply does not care about that “silly” annulment thing or what a priest has to say any way. I just know, however, that there are also many times when an abandoned spouse would like the opportunity to speak with the priest and the abandoning spouse. However, the abandoning spouse wants to have no part of this because they do not want the light shined on the evil of the abandonment and/or the affair that is going on.

Yours in the Precious Blood,

Bryan

 

[felsguy]

Thanks Mary, I believe you summarize well why I believe the percentage is 90%.

When you see that a tribunal is granting 131 annulments out of 131 cases do you believe that every decision was correct? That there really wasn’t a single valid marriage in there?

There was a study done in the early 80’s, I believe, of the decisions made by American tribunals on 1099 grounds (psychological grounds, the far and away leader of grounds).

This study is cited in Robert Vasoli’s What God Hath Joined book.

It found that something like 90% of the times an American tribunal said, “you are not validly married,” the Roman rota said, “You are validly married.” (not enough evidence to show invalidity). Sadly, only 40-some cases were reviewed by the Roman rota. The vast majority of the time a second American diocese will rubber-stamp the first tribunal’s decision.

You seem to mock the “gate-keeper” priest. But, honestly, would you even advise your daughter to get directions to a grocery store from a website that is wrong 90% of the time?

Now, imagine that a priest really does believe what the Church teaches and understands that this is a matter of eternal life and death to souls. Imagine a priest really does love his flock and would sacrifice his own life to defend them from the prowling lion.

Do you not think he would spend the time to try to talk to both spouses before sending them off to a place he knows will grant the annulment candy and time a hand is held out for it?

Yours in the Precious Blood,

Bryan

Bryan, I am truly sorry that this continues to cause you so much pain. While I find your reasoning faulty, it would serve no good purpose for us to continue to argue it. I pray that God will in time give you peace in this matter.

felsguy

 

[FCGeorge]

Out of the cases cited, how many marriages involved two people who believed in what the Church taught about marriage?

How many just went through the motion to get the Church wedding because that’s what the family wanted?

If the marriages were from at least one out of two people not fully comprehending what marriage is, was there marriage at all? Or is that just a human-based concept?

Taking these one at a time (obviously do not know the answer but taking a reasonable guess).

1. I believe that the vast majority of people who get married intend to be faithful to each other. They intend to be married for life. They intend to be open to children at some point in the marriage. If you want to add the “fourth bona” then I would also say that they intend to love their spouse.
2. If they believed the 3 (maybe 4) things in #1 then I’m not sure this matters for validity. Maybe there is something in Canon law though that I have missed.
3. Again would refer back to the answer to #1. If both spouses believe the 3 (maybe 4) things listed there and both spouses are free to marry then they enter into a lifelong covenant that no civil judge has the power to “end.” No tribunal judge has the power to make the marriage into a “not-marriage.” Although both judges can claim to do it.
   (skipping the whole, “Catholic marrying outside the Church without a dispensation” thing).

Yours in the Precious Blood,

Bryan

 

[FCGeorge]

Bryan, I am truly sorry that this continues to cause you so much pain. While I find your reasoning faulty, it would serve no good purpose for us to continue to argue it. I pray that God will in time give you peace in this matter.

felsguy

Hello felsguy. Thanks. I have listened to many speak of how their families have been devastated by this and am curious as to how a light can be shined on it.

It seems to make sense to first understand it better.

If you find the reasoning faulty then I am interested in understanding why. Not to argue or anything like that. Rather, just to understand. I will likely challenge it in order to get deeper to the core.

But that is definitely up to you. Thanks again.

Bryan