131 out of 131 annulment requests granted

[janeway529]

Hello,

It doesn’t really work that way. If the second instance Court comes to a different conclusion, either the case automatically goes to the Rota or the process is finished unless a Party appeals the case to the Rota. Beyond that, I don’t think this is the time or place to get into a discussion of procedure…well, it might be the time or place but I don’t have time.

Dan

Well, different tribunals, I suppose. I know these cases are difficult for the parties involved, so a timely resolution is ideal, when possible. Sending a case to Rome isn’t exactly timely or ideal for the most part. It only prolongs suffering and gives less time for healing, especially if one party is elderly or in RCIA.

 

[dans0622]

Well, different tribunals, I suppose. I know these cases are difficult for the parties involved, so a timely resolution is ideal, when possible. Sending a case to Rome isn’t exactly timely or ideal for the most part. It only prolongs suffering and gives less time for healing, especially if one party is elderly or in RCIA.

Hello,

What tribunals are involved doesn’t matter. Perhaps what you are thinking is that the case could be reinitiated in the first instance Tribunal, using different grounds. This is not “a review” but a completely new process, starting from square one. While possible in theory, this is often not possible in practice because there is no evidence. That being said, I’ve seen it “work” once.

It is also possible that the higher court will determine that the lower court did not actually make a valid decision–the process used by the lower court was invalid. In that case, the higher court will tell the lower court to correct the procedural errors and make a real decision. Maybe that is what you are referring to, but this too is not very common.

Church courts do not handle cases like this: “lower court, your decision itself was wrong. You said “no” but you should have said “yes.” Do the case again and use this decision of ours as your guide.”

Dan

 

[FCGeorge]

I think the annulment process is a wonderful option for people who are divorced. It is unfortunate that more people do not make use of it. I also think there is a lot of confusion as to what grounds would constitute an invalid marriage. However, if you were married and then divorced, ***I think being told that your marriage never had a chance anyway, would be a huge relief in terms of self blame and hesitancy to try again. ***It could be good for people to analyse exactly what went wrong and why and how to avoid such a situation in the future. Unfortunately for the spouse who was 100% faithful to the marriage and married with the right intentions and disposition, it can be hard to accept their marriage was invalid because the other spouse did not have the same dispositions & especially if they have children.

Hello Joy2day,

I think you are getting very close to the root here. As my spiritual director says, when we are committing sin there can be a feeling like sandpaper on the conscience. Deep down we know that we vowed to love until death do us part. We know we vowed this before God. We know that we are united until death. When we abandon the marriage there is a sandpaper rubbing on the conscience. We blame ourselves. We should blame ourselves because we abandoned a marriage and are claiming to no longer be married. God put this in us. That is why it is a grave offense against the natural law. (Please note that separating from an abusive spouse and faithfully praying for their repentance with a heart that is open to reconciliation upon that repentance, is NOT abandoning a marriage.)

If we can get a tribunal to tell us we were never married then that helps to relieve some of that self-blame. Which helps to prevent us from seeing a need to right the wrong. Because there magically becomes no wrong to right. I didn’t abandon a marriage. I left a bad relationship that was somehow not a marriage.

What “dispositions” must a spouse have to be validly married?

There are several Saints who persevered through difficult marriages and remained faithful even after a civil divorce or abandonment. Speaking of the first time you vowed to love until death do you part to someone who also made that vow for the first time… do you really think the choice to get an annulment is a better “option” than the choice that these Saints made? How so? Please do not take this as mean-spirited, I am curious as to the thought process here.

Bryan

 

[janeway529]

Hello,

What tribunals are involved doesn’t matter. Perhaps what you are thinking is that the case could be reinitiated in the first instance Tribunal, using different grounds. This is not “a review” but a completely new process, starting from square one. While possible in theory, this is often not possible in practice because there is no evidence. That being said, I’ve seen it “work” once.

Hmm…I’ve seen this used more than once. The decision was agreed upon, but needed different grounds for a stronger argument based on the evidence.

It is also possible that the higher court will determine that the lower court did not actually make a valid decision–the process used by the lower court was invalid. In that case, the higher court will tell the lower court to correct the procedural errors and make a real decision. Maybe that is what you are referring to, but this too is not very common.

**This one I’ve only seen once, and the case was referred to the Rota for review. It might have been an appeal.
**
Church courts do not handle cases like this: “lower court, your decision itself was wrong. You said “no” but you should have said “yes.” Do the case again and use this decision of ours as your guide.”

Dan

 

[FCGeorge]

The addict is incapable of fulfilling their promise of fidelity.

25% of males in the USA are addicted to porn. 9% of the women in the US use pornography regularly. These have no business getting married.

When one party is incapable of fulfilling their promises then the marriage was a failure before it started.

-Tim-

Hello Tim,

What qualifies someone to be “an addict?” Did the “addiction” need to be manifested at the time of the wedding?

Lets say that Jack looked at enough porn to qualify him as an addict at the time of the marriage ceremony. Lets say that it is now 2 or 20 years later and Jill and Jack are still civilly married. Are they really not validly married because Jack was incapable of marriage?

Or are they somehow validly married until one of them no longer wants to be married and then they can say that the pornography caused their marriage to never have been a valid marriage.

I am fine with saying that someone could have been so addicted to porn that they couldn’t validly marry because they could not pledge fidelity. But then you must be consistent and first define what the acceptable level is and then you must shout it out to all the people who think they are validly married but really are not because they met the “addiction” level of porn at the time of consent.

Bryan

 

[FCGeorge]

Hello,

As for the topic of the thread–chances are that I’d disagree with the decision in at least one of the 131 cases. That’s just statistical probability in light of my own experience.

But, without knowing the particulars, I can’t say that I disagree with any of them. I can’t say that even one of them was wrongly decided. I can’t say that the Rota would certainly overturn even one of them.

Dan

Hello Dan,

Have you seen the study that was completed reviewing the rota decisions in the 80’s? Where they overturned something like 41 of the 46 American tribunal decisions on the 1099 grounds (psychological)?

You can find the study cited in Robert Vasoli’s book,* What God Hath Joined.*

Bryan

 

[Estevao]

^^^I saw that book in my local fundamentalist protestant bookstore, the kind that had anti-evolution books. I’m going to pick it up tomorrow.

Honestly this is a real problem that threatens to push me away from the Catholic Church, kind of like if I were an Orthodox, their nationalism problems I think would lead me to Catholicism. Marriage is a sacrament and an indissoluble sacred bond instituted by Christ himself, where vows are made before God almighty by the alter, and these Church hierarchs make a mockery of it with these Catholic divorces. This is in addition to the hypocrisy of the Church condemning same-sex so-called marriage while denigrating marriage by handing out annulments like candy to go with the pressure of the culture. And how do I know I won’t be a victim of these robber tribunals if my (future) wife decided to turn tails on me and get her catholic divorce? Given the excuses I’ve seen people make for them (Oh, “he had a porn addiction” whatever that is, or he didn’t really understand what marriage was, according to who, some bureaucrat who makes a living handing out “annulments” like candy?)

 

[FCGeorge]

Hello Deacon Jeff,
Thank you for the response. And for your willingness to serve where you are called to serve. I assume that you communicate to the respondent their right to petition to the rota as the court of second instance. In this diocese the Petitioner is told that in the paperwork but the respondent is not. The numbers I have heard of indicate that if the court of second instance is the “automatically” referred-to U.S. court then the chances of getting the second “you were never validly married” verdict is near 100%. Is that not true in Phili and Pitt? When the rota is the court of second instance, however, the “you were never validly married” second verdict is given much less frequently.

This, to me, is a good reason to believe that the warnings the last to Popes have been giving about annulments being handed out too loosely apply to the U.S. tribunals.

I have wondered, however, if our tribunalists read those addresses. Have you read them?

As one poster pointed out, we advocates are trained to not encourage people to persue a decree of nullity if we believe there is NO basis. That is the way the system is designed to work. So a 100% rate is a bit misleading because it does not reflect the number of cases that didn’t make a first cut by the advocate. I know one poster is very concerned about that aspect of the nullity process

This makes a lot of sense and I wished many other diocese did this. It just doesn’t make sense to drag an abandoned spouse and her witnesses through this process if there is no good evidence for invalidity up front.

Sacramental marriage requires “mutual consent”. If either party fails to consent, there simply is no marriage. Consent can be lacking for any number of reasons, including an inability to comply with marital promises of fidelity, permanance and fecundity, (i.e a habit of infidelity),an inablility to appreciate the meaning of those promises, (i.e. having been raised by parents who have multiple divorces and remarriages, or an attitude of acceptance for artifical birth control) compulsion (i.e. a pregnant bride for example pressured by her father, family, etc), simple immaturity (teens who marry without understanding the nature of marriage), or conditional consent (“I will stay married but only if he doesn’t lose his temper with me.”) If only one person fails or was unable to consent, the marriage is null. It would be a waste of time to bring the spouses who are already civilly divorced together.

I appreciate you sharing this. It helps to illuminate things. A couple of questions to better understand…

Are you declaring marriages null in part because the couple practiced contraception? Even if they had children?

When you say, “inability to comply with…” Are you saying, “Look, Jack had an affair, that is proof he didn’t intend to be faithful to Jill when they got married?”

What is the “nature of marriage” that a teen must understand? Are you talking about the 3 bona or is there more?

You say that it “would be a waste of time to bring the spouses who are already civilly divorced together,” Why would it be? How could this be known with certainty?

Yours in the Precious Blood,

Bryan

 

[FCGeorge]

I cannot make any judgment whatsoever regarding the validity of any of the 131 cases. And to say that I could do so based, at the very least, on statistics or anecdotal evidence is to try to justify my passing a judgment on something about which I absolutely have no knowledge.

Am I disturbed by the number of annulments granted? Absolutely. Am I concerned about this message this sends to the world – both Catholic and non-Catholics? Absolutely.

I am not going to start some grass roots movement to transform or even abolish the annulment process. For now, I am going to allow the Magisterium to run things. Meanwhile, I am discouraging my friend from filing for divorce, and fighting for their marriage on my knees. My friends and I are encouraging each other to be chaste according to our states in life, and to live out in faith our God-given vocations.

In other words, we are not concerning ourselves with things outside of our calling to holiness. We are working against divorce where we encounter it, in our own lives and the lives of our friends. And we allow the Magisterium to be the Magisterium, rather than appointing ourselves as junior members.

So yes, I am deeply saddened that 131 proceedings were even necessary in one diocese. But my response is not to question their validity, but to encourage and pray for my married friends, live the vocation God has given me right here, right now, where He has placed me.

My two cents’.

Gertie

Hey Gertie, thank you for fighting against divorce. I am hoping that more can start to see t the nearly automatic handing out of annulments in the U.S. can work against this honorable battle. Annulments are advertised in many dioceses.

Should your friend finalize a civil divorce then she will most certainly be able to find somebody who will work with her to get an annulment (I wish there were more like Deacon Jeff).

Imagine if your friend really had strong shepherds lovingly telling her that abandoning her marriage was a grave offense against the natural law and that persisting in grave offenses places her on a path to eternal separation from our Lord. That she will not join her Heavenly Spouse if she abandons her earthly spouse. That she can choose to do that but she will not be able to receive Holy Communion because it is a grave offense. A shepherd who is willing to tell her that he loves her so much that he has to tell her this “hard” message. That it is a cross but that our Lord will help her carry it. That he will help her carry it.

Bryan

 

[FCGeorge]

^^^I saw that book in my local fundamentalist protestant bookstore, the kind that had anti-evolution books. I’m going to pick it up tomorrow.

Honestly this is a real problem that threatens to push me away from the Catholic Church, kind of like if I were an Orthodox, their nationalism problems I think would lead me to Catholicism. Marriage is a sacrament and an indissoluble sacred bond instituted by Christ himself, where vows are made before God almighty by the alter, and these Church hierarchs make a mockery of it with these Catholic divorces. This is in addition to the hypocrisy of the Church condemning same-sex so-called marriage while denigrating marriage by handing out annulments like candy to go with the pressure of the culture. And how do I know I won’t be a victim of these robber tribunals if my (future) wife decided to turn tails on me and get her catholic divorce? Given the excuses I’ve seen people make for them (Oh, “he had a porn addiction” whatever that is, or he didn’t really understand what marriage was, according to who, some bureaucrat who makes a living handing out “annulments” like candy?)

Hey Estevao,
For those who do not have a local fundamentalist bookstore, you can find it online at Mary’s Advocates!! F

Do not ever leave this Ark, my brother! A tribunal or two could one day tell me that I am not validly married to my wife (we were married in a Catholic Church and both intended to be faithful for life and were open to children and intended to love each other… I* know *such a ruling would be wrong) but they are only fallible representatives of the Church. There is nothing but water to drown in outside this Ark!
Yours in the Precious Blood,

Bryan

 

[FCGeorge]

When I have someone in RCIA who is divorced (and not remarried) I strongly encourage them to apply for a declaration of nullity, even if they don’t have intentions of remarrying. My reasoning is that you don’t know what may happen in the future, and if they meet someone and want to marry after becoming Catholic, I don’t want them to have to choose between remaining in the relationship or remaining in the Church. I think it’s better for them to know their status up front.

This is not surprising in our modern Church. It just wouldn’t have been done for the first 1,900+ years of the Church. Until recently a man who vowed to be faithful for life to the wife of his youth would have been encouraged by Catholic shepherds to remain faithful to those vows for life… even if she civilly divorced him.

It is like the late AB Sheen said, America has become “Christ without the cross.” He explained that in America we like to choose our crosses. Remaining faithful to an abandoning spouse is a difficult cross… must create a god who wouldn’t ask me to carry such a cross.

Since the beginning of our Church men have had to choose between staying in relationships or staying in the Church. Too many of our modern leaders are trying to allow men to stay in whatever relationship they want (homosexual or adulterous or fornicating) with the belief that they haven’t separated themselves from the path to the eternal relationship with God.

Bryan

 

[FCGeorge]

Hello Deacon Jeff, I see that you further addressed this in your next post. But can I ask if you have honestly been involved in a single case where your tribunal actually upheld the validity of the marriage?

(Not accusing here but just wondering.)

Bryan

 

[FCGeorge]

I put the term in quotes for I know there is no such term as a first instance priest of course.A priest or deacon is the first step in my diocese in most cases to get the “ball rolling” so to speak.

I have been through the process and my marriage was annulled. I was fortunate to have an attorney who was trained in Canon law who filed my case for me. He did so as a service to the diocese in cases where perhaps the initial priest or deacon wasn’t sure if there were sufficient grounds and were hesitant to recommend going forward. He told me he never had a case denied.

That has been years ago however.

Mary.

Hey Mary, just trying to clarify, what do you mean by, “he told me he never had a case denied?”

Bryan

 

[SerraSemper]

Hello Deacon Jeff, I see that you caught the error above and addressed it in your next post. But can I ask if you have honestly been involved in a single case where your tribunal actually upheld the validity of the marriage?

(Not accusing here but just wondering because you were not aware of the need for the second similar decision in this case.)

Bryan

I can’t speak for Deacon Jeff, but I can tell you with certitude that he has not been involved in a case where his tribunal “actually upheld the validity of the marriage”. No tribunal will “uphold” the validity of marriage as if it knows for sure the marriage is valid. The most we can do is to say that enough proof has not been submitted to overturn the “presumption” of validity. As a Judge I have voted in favor of a “negative” decision which means that a declaration of nullity is not forthcoming. In some of the negative decisions I have made, I strongly suspected or knew that the marriage was invalid, but could not vote in the affirmative because the judicially admissible proof was not there. Sometimes all the potential witnesses have died. Or the parties were so private nobody knew anything was wrong until the divorce.

 

[FCGeorge]

You have received great replies! Especially the valuable perspective of people who have been through the process, and those people that are an integral part of tribunals.

It is easy to see a number like 131 and be upset and make assumptions. Remember though that it is likely most of those 131 people who filed really CARE what the church teaches and are willing to go through the expense and anguish of the process. Many people I know just divorced and didn’t bother with the annulment process, frankly they could give “a hoot” what the Catholic Church teaches.

So you have 131 people who care about their faith, have a good case because it has been passed on, and have made their case before other highly trained and dedicated people. Sounds right to me, prayers that it is.

Hello Monicad,

How would you then explain the high rate at which the Roman rota looks at the American cases and give the opposite verdict? “You say nullity was proven and we say it was not!”

Bryan

 

[MaryT777]

Hey Mary, just trying to clarify, what do you mean by, “he told me he never had a case denied?”

Bryan

Bryan,
Sorry for the poor wording. In every case he submitted an annulment was granted.
That said I never asked him how many cases he had been involved in.

The marriage tribunal referred me to him when my priest seemed reluctant to file the case because he felt the marriage was most likely valid.

Mary.

 

[SerraSemper]

This is not surprising in our modern Church. It just wouldn’t have been done for the first 1,900+ years of the Church. Until recently a man who vowed to be faithful for life to the wife of his youth would have been encouraged by Catholic shepherds to remain faithful to those vows for life… even if she civilly divorced him.

It is like the late AB Sheen said, America has become “Christ without the cross.” He explained that in America we like to choose our crosses. Remaining faithful to an abandoning spouse is a difficult cross… must create a god who wouldn’t ask me to carry such a cross.

Since the beginning of our Church men have had to choose between staying in relationships or staying in the Church. Too many of our modern leaders are trying to allow men to stay in whatever relationship they want (homosexual or adulterous or fornicating) with the belief that they haven’t separated themselves from the path to the eternal relationship with God.

Bryan

Are you trying to say that men who have experienced divorce should not avail themselves of their **right **to have their marital status examined by the Tribunal?

 

[YADA]

Okay - I looked at the statistics in the link that the OP posted …

There is much data missing in this number …

take the 11 out of 131 number … Most of the posters assume that 100% of these 131 cases involved 2 practicing Catholics married in a Catholic Church . however nothing in the data supports that …

I was a baptized non-Catholic who married an un-baptized person in a civil ceremony at a Justice of the Peace … that marriage ended a civil divorce -

Later I married - in a non catholic ceremony - a then divorced Catholic [who - very young and an un-baptized non Catholic had married a very young marginally Catholic because a child was on the way and later converted to the Catholic faith - then the marriage ended in divorce] …

A couple of years later - a conversion and renewal of faith occurred - we made our way into a relationship with Christ and the Church … We each had to submit our previous marriages before the Church …

Now - it was possible that one or both of our previous marriages would have been found sacramentally valid - And yet I don’t think its beyond the pale to believe that grounds for a decree nor many people here would be shocked or surprised to know that the Church found major problems in the Sacramental nature of the conditions that existed at the moment of these two marriages and the four people who said “I do”

So two marriages - four individual people - were examined and decrees of nullity issued … only one of the four people involved was a Catholic …

My point is that many of those 131 marriages may not have been “Catholic Marriages” performed by a Catholic priest in a Catholic Church after Catholic premarital instruction - may of those 131 marriages may have been contracted between 2 non-Catholics and even between two non-Christians … of the marriages that were “Catholic” - one party may not have been Catholic or even Christian …

Like my marriage - the union found to be invalid may not have had any connection to “Catholic” … it may have been performed by a Justice of the Peace …

I would like to see those statistics …

In addition to the information in the link - it would be good to know this additional information …

Number of Applications were at the time of the Marriage:

Both parties were Catholic,
One party was Catholic and one party was non-Catholic Christian,

Both parties were non-Catholic Christians

Where neither party was Christian - i.e. they were non- believers

Where one party was non-Catholic Christian and one party was a non-believer.

Where one party was a non-Christian faith [Buddhist, Muslim , Jewish, Mormon, etc.,] and the other party was a different non-Christian faith

Were both partied were the same non-Christian faith …

 

[SerraSemper]

Okay - I looked at the statistics in the link that the OP posted …

There is much data missing in this number …

take the 11 out of 131 number … Most of the posters assume that 100% of these 131 cases involved 2 practicing Catholics married in a Catholic Church . however nothing in the data supports that …

I was a baptized non-Catholic who married an un-baptized person in a civil ceremony at a Justice of the Peace … that marriage ended a civil divorce -

Later I married - in a non catholic ceremony - a then divorced Catholic [who - very young and an un-baptized non Catholic had married a very young marginally Catholic because a child was on the way and later converted to the Catholic faith - then the marriage ended in divorce] …

A couple of years later - a conversion and renewal of faith occurred - we made our way into a relationship with Christ and the Church … We each had to submit our previous marriages before the Church …

Now - it was possible that one or both of our previous marriages would have been found sacramentally valid - And yet I don’t think its beyond the pale to believe that grounds for a decree nor many people here would be shocked or surprised to know that the Church found major problems in the Sacramental nature of the conditions that existed at the moment of these two marriages and the four people who said “I do”

So two marriages - four individual people - were examined and decrees of nullity issued … only one of the four people involved was a Catholic …

My point is that many of those 131 marriages may not have been “Catholic Marriages” performed by a Catholic priest in a Catholic Church after Catholic premarital instruction - may of those 131 marriages may have been contracted between 2 non-Catholics and even between two non-Christians … of the marriages that were “Catholic” - one party may not have been Catholic or even Christian …

Like my marriage - the union found to be invalid may not have had any connection to “Catholic” … it may have been performed by a Justice of the Peace …

Good points. It is very common for one person to walk in with 3-5 cases (himself and prospective spouse). Also, it is common for new cases to crop up from people who’ve already had declarations of nullity. Why? Because the factors that led to invalidity in the first place are still present and/or they chose a spouse that wasn’t able to give consent. A good percentage of cases processed by the Tribunals in the USA are those between non-Catholics and non-baptized persons who are not aware of the Church’s position on what makes a valid marriage.

 

[dans0622]

Hello Dan,

Have you seen the study that was completed reviewing the rota decisions in the 80’s? Where they overturned something like 41 of the 46 American tribunal decisions on the 1099 grounds (psychological)?

You can find the study cited in Robert Vasoli’s book,* What God Hath Joined.*

Bryan

Hello,

Yes, I’m aware of those observations. I’ve made similar observations based on more recent Rotal cases involving US tribunals. I don’t remember who I was talking to but it was here on these forums. I think it was last year.

Basically, my point was that the Rota does not “overturn” US decisions as if the US courts both said “invalid” and then the Rota said “valid.” Most cases that end up at the Rota have already had one negative and one affirmative decision. So, no matter what the Rota decides, it will be both contrary to, and in agreement with, what an American tribunal determined. Also, the percentage of US cases decided at the Rota is closer to 40%–60% ratio (invalid–valid) these days.

Dan