Annulments here, annulments there

[Phemie]

Heck, how many respondents ever bother to fight the “annulment” in the first place? Joe Kennedy’s ex fought it from the get-go and she fought it all the way to the Rota and won. It took more than 10 years. How many people would bother doing that?

 

[Pug]

According to a poster in another thread, “5% of divorced marriages are found valid.”

I would be interested to see what other posters have to say about “annul-proofing” one’s marriage. I think that it ought not to be necessary. Obtaining a declaration of nullity should be a rarity.

Hmmm. Annul-proofing one’s marriage. If you mean “guarantee before you get married that your marriage will be valid,” then there is no way to do this. There are proper steps to take, but you can’t make a guarantee that is iron-clad. For an easy example, what if you marry a widow, and five years later the supposedly dead spouse turns up alive, having faked their “death”? Or, what if your chosen spouse eventually turns up to be a liar, with a previous husband stashed on another continent? There is no way to know if your future spouse is a liar. You can be mostly sure, but that is it.

 

[Pug]

Heck, how many respondents ever bother to fight the “annulment” in the first place? Joe Kennedy’s ex fought it from the get-go and she fought it all the way to the Rota and won. It took more than 10 years. How many people would bother doing that?

I don’t think many would. 10 years?? Ugh. I’d just want to get on with my life after 6 months of it. (PUG = LAZY BIG HUGE SLOTH)

 

[LittleDeb]

People quote the 90% of US decrees that are overturned by Rome but nobody ever mentions how many that represents. How many times does a respondent appeal a positive decision to the Rota? I doubt that the petitioner ever does, although he/she might appeal a negative decision.

I wish I had the real numbers. I have no idea how they are tracked. I would be interested. 9 out of 10 is 90 percent. But it could be 9,000 instead. I have no idea. I respondent could appeal either decision, so the numbers could be anywhere on the spectrum.

 

[EasterJoy]

EasterJoy, are you saying you think the presumably high number of invalid marriages is due to the kind of people our present culture is producing, when it comes to relationships (and possibly moral responsibility)? I do think a sense of personal responsibility is often regarded like something you would treat with antifungal cream now…and that is a pretty important aspect of capability for marriage.

Yes, that’s what I mean. I don’t mean people are worse in their basic natures. I don’t mean they are constitutionally incapable of marriage (although there are some people who have been very badly scarred by their early lives).

I mean that too many are showing up at the starting line of marathons having only watched dramatizations of foot races on TV. It isn’t overindulgent to believe their contention that the race was over before it started.

Some learn from their first failure, and by a lesson I wouldn’t wish on my worst enemy. I wish them nothing but the best and don’t begrudge them a chance at a real marriage. I just don’t know if there is a way to convince some of them before the next try that they will never finish 26 miles by good looks and dumb luck. It’s a human tragedy, and each one with so many casualties.

 

[Ailina]

T
All thoughts appreciated…but be please nice…I’m a young crazy woman who values her marriage

Oh, I valued my marriage too!! It was my ex-husband who did not. He said his vows with his fingers crossed behind his back, I think.

In any case, while we were engaged, he forgot to mention to me that he “never thought marriage was for life”, words he said to me after our marriage ended. In this No-Fault Divorce country I live in, he was able to abandon his family and just walk away.

So yeah, I’m going through the painfully excruciating annulment process (you figure this is fun???). It’s not exactly a walk in the park, let me tell you. The whole process has pretty much sealed my future for me: I NEVER want to get married again, just so I don’t have to risk going through this again!!!

But I still want to know if I was truly married. I’ve been going through this since December 2007, and still am not at the end of the trail.

 

[JulianN]

People quote the 90% of US decrees that are overturned by Rome but nobody ever mentions how many that represents. How many times does a respondent appeal a positive decision to the Rota? I doubt that the petitioner ever does, although he/she might appeal a negative decision.

Right! In the diocese where I work, during the five years I was a procurator-advocate, there was ONE case on appeal to Rome. And it had been languishing there for years.
It is not that common for either party to appeal – among other things, it’s expensive for the person who files the appeal.

So, even if the Rota overturns 90% of the cases it hears from the U.S. (and I haven’t seen the documentation on that), it does not follow that 90% of U.S. cases are decided incorrectly. My experience with tribunals in the U.S. and Canada has been that they are as careful, thorough and sensitive as they can possibly be.

 

[JulianN]

Ok, but my point is that many marriages that are valid are still found null by the tribunals in the US. Just look at the number of declarations of nullity that are overturned by the Holy See. Do I get to appeal any decision that is made to Rome? If I wanted to, is there a way to make sure my marriage is free from the abuse in the tribunals in the US?

I’m not sure there is a lot of abuse by tribunals in the U.S. The percentage of cases appealed to Rome is very small. And yes, you can appeal any decision to Rome.

The problem with trying to “annul-proof” a marriage is that there are two people involved. You can only speak with certainty (and not even be completely honest there) about what was going on in your own heart and mind at the time of the marriage. You cannot really know what the other person intended, thought, etc.

The tribunals do a thorough job, in my experience, gathering evidence and witness statements – arranging for psychological evaluations if necessary.

I think anyone who has actually been through a formal case will say that the process does not feel as if decrees of nullity are just being handed out.

 

[Tosk]

I’m not sure there is a lot of abuse by tribunals in the U.S. The percentage of cases appealed to Rome is very small. And yes, you can appeal any decision to Rome.

The problem with trying to “annul-proof” a marriage is that there are two people involved. You can only speak with certainty (and not even be completely honest there) about what was going on in your own heart and mind at the time of the marriage. You cannot really know what the other person intended, thought, etc.

The tribunals do a thorough job, in my experience, gathering evidence and witness statements – arranging for psychological evaluations if necessary.

I think anyone who has actually been through a formal case will say that the process does not feel as if decrees of nullity are just being handed out.

What I was talking about is the almost automatic handing out of an annulment based on immaturity or some form of psycho-babble.

It is the same thing that BXVI said when he addressed the Roman Rota recently, “the scandal of seeing the value of Christian marriage being practically destroyed by the exaggerated and almost automatic multiplication of declarations of nullity of marriage in cases of the failure of marriage on the pretext of some immaturity or psychic weakness on the part of the contracting parties.” If you read the whole address BXVI definitely gives the impression that abuse is rife in that American tribunals. vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2009/january/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20090129_rota-romana_en.html

I married really really young so I am sure that it would be pretty easy to get an annulment based on immaturity and I would just want to prevent that. To me an easy annulment has the same effect as an easy divorce, except it just takes longer and you have to jump through more hoops for the annulment. I don’t want no easy way out: ze marriage she is for life. C’est la guerre.

 

[Phemie]

I married really really young so I am sure that it would be pretty easy to get an annulment based on immaturity and I would just want to prevent that. To me an easy annulment has the same effect as an easy divorce, except it just takes longer and you have to jump through more hoops for the annulment. I don’t want no easy way out: ze marriage she is for life. C’est la guerre.

I don’t understand why people who seem to be happily, validly married are so concerned about the validity of their marriage. Unless you end up with a divorce decree this should be the furthest thing from your mind. You are presumed validly married, period. Now go live your married life and stop fretting!

 

[LittleDeb]

What I was talking about is the almost automatic handing out of an annulment based on immaturity or some form of psycho-babble.

It is the same thing that BXVI said when he addressed the Roman Rota recently, “the scandal of seeing the value of Christian marriage being practically destroyed by the exaggerated and almost automatic multiplication of declarations of nullity of marriage in cases of the failure of marriage on the pretext of some immaturity or psychic weakness on the part of the contracting parties.” If you read the whole address BXVI definitely gives the impression that abuse is rife in that American tribunals. vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2009/january/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20090129_rota-romana_en.html

Thank you for the link! It is helpful.

Though your quote is a little misleading. Pope Benedict is actually quoting our late Holy Father from 20 years ago. Pope John Paul II overhauled the decisions 20+ years ago and that is where the quote originally appeared. Pope Benedict seems to be addressing the fact that there are still *some *instances that are happening incorrectly. Still, is the word he uses to emphasize his point.

I haven’t read all the way through it yet, but I remember it coming up 20 years ago that there needed to be more *consistencies *among the dioceses. That they were disagreeing with each other was a bigger concern back then. (Some diocese were very strict while others interpreted very loosely.) People were getting opposite judgments on similar cases.

This seems to be more of the same admonition: ‘stay true to Catholic teaching. Don’t let the secular world influence decisions.’ As we all know, there are certain, rather media prominent dioceses, who are known for their inappropriate applications on Church social justice teachings. cough, cough, orange! cough

I agree with JulianN. Those people who have actually been through one know that they aren’t being handed out like candy. My husband’s was considered a formal case. He entered the marriage not baptized. His former wife had been baptized as an infant in an unknown denomination. They had zero religious instruction before or after marriage. Sometimes it is the more obscure ones that take the longest.

 

[LittleDeb]

Oooo just missed the edit time-frame!

This seems to be the important quote from the address: “It follows that, as a matter of principle, causes of nullity due to psychic incapacity require the judge to employ the service of experts to ascertain the existence of a genuine incapacity (Can. 1680; art. 203 1), which is always an exception to the natural principle of the capacity needed to understand, decide for and carry out the mutual self-giving from which the conjugal bond arises.” [from the above linked article]

Basically he is saying that “young doesn’t necessarily equal stupid,” and that if psychological reasons are used, the judge should have psychological experts verify that it truly rendered them incapable of consent.

It looks like our late Holy Father and current Holy Father are saying what most of us have said here, “We are all just a little bit psychologically disturbed and that is to be expected in marriage. It does not necessarily render us incapable of giving full consent.”

 

[Pug]

I don’t understand why people who seem to be happily, validly married are so concerned about the validity of their marriage. Unless you end up with a divorce decree this should be the furthest thing from your mind. You are presumed validly married, period. Now go live your married life and stop fretting!

Happily???

Hypothetically, say you have an unhappy couple, or perhaps an obviously dysfunctional couple, although as separate individuals they may seem somewhat functional, but they don’t divorce because they are not supposed to divorce, of course. So they remain in their bizarre marriage, maybe sharing a roof, maybe not, but in actual fact their marriage was null to begin with and they could have gone their separate ways, but with the process the way it is, they will never find out that they could go their separate ways.

And, if that unhappy couple should happen to become happy at some point, I think they might talk to a priest and to out if the marriage needs to be rectified (if it was truly invalid to start, then validity might not suddenly appear like a breath of wind). Go get it fixed and the happy marriage will be even more fruitful, presuming the reason for the potential invalidity has ceased to be.

Note to Convert in 99 in case if you read this post: I am talking about an unhappy couple with known problems and issues, not vague concerns…you should just presume your marriage is valid, okay?

 

[LittleDeb]

Happily???

Hypothetically, say you have an unhappy couple, or perhaps an obviously dysfunctional couple, although as separate individuals they may seem somewhat functional, but they don’t divorce because they are not supposed to divorce, of course. So they remain in their bizarre marriage, maybe sharing a roof, maybe not, but in actual fact their marriage was null to begin with and they could have gone their separate ways, but with the process the way it is, they will never find out that they could go their separate ways.

So it appears you have met my aunt and uncle.

 

[Pug]

So it appears you have met my aunt and uncle.

Shhhh! My spies are everywhere…

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

Obtaining a declaration of nullity should be a rarity.

Says who? You?
A declaration of nullity has nothing to do with how many or how few are granted, it is based solely on the facts of the individual case before the Tribunal. If a case before the Tribunal has sufficient grounds to issue the decree then it is done so. If a case before the Tribunal does not have sufficient grounds, then none is granted. Its as simple as that.

There’s no such thing as: “Well, we’ve granted X number of anulements this year, time to start denying cases.”

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

Some cases are dropped right away because there is not enough evidence to even examine. Those are still presumed valid and therefore skew the numbers.

Indeed, that’s a little know fact. A canon lawyer would not bring a case to the judges if he didn’t think it had a chance of succeeding.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

There are people who go into marriage with the “well, if it doesn’t work for me, divorce is an option” mentality.

Someone who says that does not enter into a valid marriage since they are not really consenting to a life long, 'till-death-does-us-part marriage.

 

[agapewolf]

Says who? You?
A declaration of nullity has nothing to do with how many or how few are granted, it is based solely on the facts of the individual case before the Tribunal. If a case before the Tribunal has sufficient grounds to issue the decree then it is done so. If a case before the Tribunal does not have sufficient grounds, then none is granted. Its as simple as that.

There’s no such thing as: “Well, we’ve granted X number of anulements this year, time to start denying cases.”

Newengland, I completely agree with you, but if we were to examine the statement more closely “obtaining a declaration of nullity should be a rarity”…

shouldn’t we all agree with that? What I mean by this, is actually having so few divorces that requests for annullments would even be less?

Again, you’re right…its not based on a quota. But I think the statement rings true in some sense.

 

[KCT]

I’ve not read all the posts so this could be a repeat question . . .

Are annulments being too easily granted or have people been so poorly prepared for marriage, that all these annulments are reasonable .