Annulments here, annulments there

[Phemie]

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 .

I think it is a multi-faceted problem. Even 40 years ago divorce among Catholics was not frequent; you might be miserable but you stayed married. Today there is little if any difference in the divorce rate of Catholics vs non-Catholics. So if ~50% of Catholic marriages end in divorce you are obviously going to see an increase in the number of petitions for decrees of nullity.

That’s what we haven’t seen in the numbers that are thrown around. We always get “there were X annulments in 1960 compared to Y in 2001”. What we never hear is how many were requested vs how many were granted. How many Catholic divorces did we see in the 60s vs how many we see today?

Today many of the divorced Catholics I know anxiously await the divorce decree to be able to petition for a decree of nullity. I somehow don’t think that was the case 40 years ago. Divorce was a source of shame and it was almost as though they didn’t want the Church to know about it.

I see things today though that lead me to believe that lack of preparation may well be a factor. Not every parish has a good marriage prep program in place, although they are supposed to.

 

[LittleDeb]

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.

This, I believe gets to the crux of the argument. I believe you have clarified where Sillara and I were unable to communicate. Annulments *should *be a rarity, because contracting an invalid marriage *should *be a rarity.

But I can’t see an answer to this problem. The Church has made it more difficult to be married Catholic, by the many classes and prep required. This is a good thing both on the surface and at its deepest level. But it has just led to more people getting married outside the Church or “jumping through the hoops” as fast as they can, learning nothing. They end up invalid by lack of form, or by the many and deep impediments to consent.

I see that the single biggest problem is the secular influence on what it means to be married. Couples look to the world and not to the Church on marriage. How do we turn that around?

 

[Pug]

But I can’t see an answer to this problem. The Church has made it more difficult to be married Catholic, by the many classes and prep required. This is a good thing both on the surface and at its deepest level. But it has just led to more people getting married outside the Church or “jumping through the hoops” as fast as they can, learning nothing. They end up invalid by lack of form, or by the many and deep impediments to consent.

I see that the single biggest problem is the secular influence on what it means to be married. Couples look to the world and not to the Church on marriage. How do we turn that around?

About people getting married outside the Church, I don’t know what could be done about that. A big reason that happens is you have children raised in the faith who don’t accept the faith, so that once they are old enough, they leave the Church. Naturally they marry outside the Church. The only way to fix this is to fix the problem of so many of the baptized falling away. Many of the annulments for defect of form signal something positive…that a fallen away Catholic has returned to the fold.

I don’t think a few marriage prep classes plus a retreat address the depth of the problem for those who are willing to marry according to form. I think there is no “Catholic culture” for many Catholics. I think this is one thing that makes it harder to absorb ideas by osmosis prior to attempting marriage. I wasn’t raised Catholic, though, so it makes it hard for me to say. As a convert, I had nowhere to absorb it after I became Catholic. Maybe it is much easier for kids to do, though. Also, there was no internet when I married, either. Maybe that could actually help now?

 

[agapewolf]

I don’t envy the position our priests are in…

On one hand they can’t deny sacraments. On the other hand, they need to guard the sacraments.

Some couples that dont’ go enter marriage the best way (cohabitating, etc) end up coming to Jesus later and living very solid Catholic moral lives.

However, I wonder, if priests would actually deny marriage to those who showed themselves to have issues (which I know many priests that will marry the couple anyway), and refuse to marry them if they are cohabitating, sleeping together, etc…well, I wonder if the Catholic church’s divorce stats would go way down, and then the Church might have some credibility in her sexual moral teachings.

 

[LittleDeb]

I don’t think a few marriage prep classes plus a retreat address the depth of the problem for those who are willing to marry according to form. I think there is no “Catholic culture” for many Catholics. I think this is one thing that makes it harder to absorb ideas by osmosis prior to attempting marriage. I wasn’t raised Catholic, though, so it makes it hard for me to say. As a convert, I had nowhere to absorb it after I became Catholic. Maybe it is much easier for kids to do, though. Also, there was no internet when I married, either. Maybe that could actually help now?

Such a good point! I think that is what I am trying to say, but you clarified it. ***Authentic ***Catholic culture!

I *am *a cradle Catholic. The train wreck that was the result of “The Spirit of Vatican II” still affects my life. (Note to converts and/or lurkers: Vatican II was a *very ***good **thing. The crazy things done in the “spirit” of Vatican II is the train wreck.) Catholic culture very nearly died in that huge wreck.

I have a convert friend who is really excited about raising her kids as “cradles.” My husband, also a convert, is excited for our kids. I, the one who survived the horrendous wrong teachings in the 70s and 80s, am excited too. That culture of learning is so important. We, as Catholics have to revitalize our culture! The young Catholics I encounter get quite the earful on what it means to live a Catholic marriage. I agree that the internet can help with getting the information out there. We have to all pledge, as Catholics, to help get the information into the hands of those couples entering marriage.

We have to make sure that we are living our marriages as transparent as possible, that the young people see a Catholic marriage inside and out. We have to make sure that we are no longer afraid to speak up when someone is about to contract an invalid marriage. If I learned one thing from being a witness for the nullity process, it is that we Catholics really need to speak up. We have to make *major *adjustments in our culture to repair the massive damage.

 

[EasterJoy]

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.

Exactly.

Too many Catholic marriages are not for life, but it does not follow that the fault belongs to tribunals. I think that even within the Church, far too many people reach chronological adulthood without possessing the minimum amount of integrity required for a valid marriage.

You can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear, but no one can stop the poor sow from trying. Unlike Holy Orders, there is a right to marriage. The Church cannot withhold the sacrament without cause from couples who say they are willing and for whom no impediment is obvious. Lack of integrity is difficult to prove, save by blunt confession. A confession is impossible without self-awareness, and will never happen when the intent is to deceive. If enough of the baptized reach adulthood without desiring integrity, having a working knowledge of what integrity is and what it requires, there will be lots of invalid marriages, no matter what the Rota decrees.

If those who were incapable of a marriage were self-aware, or knew that their partner was so lacking in integrity, of course we wouldn’t have a 50% divorce rate! Who on earth among us would trade a life-long marriage for a string of broken ones? So maybe fostering an awareness of integrity is one part of the solution. (Maybe we need to stop using people who fail at marriage as role models to make quotes about marriage and family life in the newspaper, too. Leave the celebrities alone; their marriages are stressed enough.)

I don’t think Vatican II did this. I’m probably in the minority, but I think the untended scars of 2 world wars and a lot of people trying to fix spiritual wounds by material means was the push that got this ball roIlling. John XXIII saw the bleeding in Europe, both the literal bleeding (as a medic) and the spiritual hemorrhaging that followed, and I think Vatican II was called in order to stop it. Those world wars did not just devastate the landscape, but also family, faith, and religion. No matter how one feels about the efficacy of that cure, it is obvious that the wound still remains. How to treat it, outside of that the start is by prayer, is worth considering, but beyond my guesses. Maybe the scarring of millions of young people who directly or indirectly suffered from millions of brutal deaths is something that just takes a long time to heal. Maybe we just keep at it.

 

[Pug]

I have a convert friend who is really excited about raising her kids as “cradles.” My husband, also a convert, is excited for our kids. I, the one who survived the horrendous wrong teachings in the 70s and 80s, am excited too. That culture of learning is so important. We, as Catholics have to revitalize our culture! The young Catholics I encounter get quite the earful on what it means to live a Catholic marriage. I agree that the internet can help with getting the information out there. We have to all pledge, as Catholics, to help get the information into the hands of those couples entering marriage.

We have to make sure that we are living our marriages as transparent as possible, that the young people see a Catholic marriage inside and out. We have to make sure that we are no longer afraid to speak up when someone is about to contract an invalid marriage. If I learned one thing from being a witness for the nullity process, it is that we Catholics really need to speak up. We have to make *major *adjustments in our culture to repair the massive damage.

Oh, that is so true, the joy/excitement a parent could have in sharing the faith with their children, to give them the thing that is the light of their life.

I don’t know how to make my marriage transparent. Most of my life has been spent keeping most of the things about marriage between the two of us. Hmmmm. Can only the children see these things? Maybe it is a topic for another thread, though, but it is worth thinking about, how those of us who are married can be an example to help serve those who will get married someday.

 

[Diaconia]

There is a simple method to vastly reducing divorce among Catholics – teach and practice Natural Family Planning.

Several studies have shown that couples who use NFP in their marriages divorce at incredibly low rates (I’m talking ~1% here).

The culture of death (which is built on the lies of contraception) reinforce a throw-away mentality among our people:

• Is a child going to inconvenience you? – then just abort it
• Have you “fallen out of love” with your spouse? – then just divorce them
• Can you not afford another child? – then just use contraception to avoid one

and so on

Contraception is nothing but the organic, natural result of a culture filled with materialism, consumerism, rampant individualism, and, at the core – greed and selfishness.

NFP is not only more effective than contraception at delaying the birth of a child, it is completely safe, absolutely natural, and free to boot.

The communication enhancement between a couple using NFP (to either conceive or delay a pregnancy) bonds the couple together in a way that contracepting couples will never understand.

And thus, an infinitesimal rate of divorce among that group.

I don’t know if my own experience is typical, but I would estimate 40% of those couples who come to me for marriage prep are cohabiting.

We have to change hearts one at a time, in a personal approach way.

So endeth the rant, thanks for letting me vent!

God bless you all for caring so much about the sanctity of matrimony,

 

[Michael_Saint]

They’re annulling everywhere! Ok, I am married and do not want an annulment, by any means. However I was looking up some information for somebody else and saw some of the possible “grounds” for getting one. I realized that* I *probably have grounds for an annulment! And I tend to think that given how broadly one can interpret something like “fully free to give consent” in our psycho-babble age that most married couples today could probably get one. Is everyone who could possibly wiggle out of a valid marriage required to make sure their marriage is “wiggle proof” (any such issues decided by a tribunal even if, like me, they do not even WANT an annulment) or is it safe to carry on assuming, like the Church does, that their marriage is valid unless there’s actual evidence to the contrary?

I’d like to add that I am creeped out by the thought that my marriage, which I’ve been so sure is valid, could nevertheless be “argued” into invalidity under the guidelines I saw and not sure if I am supposed to address that somehow. All the questions on here about this seem to be from people who are actually seeking annulments, want to obtain them, and are grasping at every possible reason their first (second, third, etc) marriage didn’t exist. Always to be told “the tribunal will have to evaluate that.” One Ask an apologist question was about whether getting married at 18 would be grounds, and the questioner was told that it would have be evaluated by a tribunal, it COULD be grounds. Well, I was married at 18, too. I think i was perfectly capable of giving consent, but evidently, my marriage COULD be invalid unless a tribunal tells me otherwise??? What, is every person who married under the age of 20 supposed to have their marriage investigated later to make sure they were REALLY mature enough since they MAY not have been and MAY not be in a valid marriage after all?

Sorry, I just find it so frustrating…marriage is permanent. Sometimes people make poor choices, and I am forming the distinct impression that it is too easy to latch onto just about anything as a way out of those past choices because no one likes to think they can’t just have a “do-over” (no offense intended to anyone, I know not every person seeking an annulment falls under that umbrella). No person who is diagnosed at any point in their lives with mental illness can ever rest secure in the permanence of their marriage, because what if the illness was “latent” in its effect during the ceremony and somehow impeded consent? No young person can marry even though it’s legal both civilly and in the Church because there is no surefire way of guaranteeing their maturity when they exchange vows…honestly, how can anyone be really sure they’re really married and not living in sin with the way things are now?

All thoughts appreciated…but be please nice…I’m a young crazy woman who values her marriage

Bingo! There was a previous thread on annulments a while back that I was involved in. Please search for this past thread and reference my statements. I was being argued against and taken to task by those who have “benefited” from the unfortunately lax and corrupt annulment process in America. It is really no surprise as to why they would be such staunch defenders of it.

 

[Michael_Saint]

If you work hard enough you can prove most any marriage invalid. My priest told me the real proof is in the happiness of the spouses and if the marriage is still up and running fairly smoothly. That’s not to say an unhappy spouse or snags in the plan make the marriage invalid, but only when the marriage itself from its beginning has been the cause of these things. Only when divorce has occurred can a marriage even be investigated. As long as the marriage is valid in form, the church presumes validity until the spouses prove otherwise, ie through divorce. Hope that eases your concerns a bit.

Like I said in the previous thread, you can “claim” validity, but the mere “claim” or “presumption” of validity does not make a marriage valid. It is either “valid” or “invalid” at the time of the wedding. If it is “invalid”, our “presumption” of validity does not make it valid.

On the last thread, I put up a link to a guy who gives Catholics advice on annulments. He brags that you can pretty much “prove” invalidity in every marriage. The grounds upon which an annulment can be granted can include pretty much everything.

My mother was married at 18, and grew up in an alcoholic home. Numerous people in a similar situation have had marriages annulled based on the “psychological effects” these had in their lives. If my parents were to get a divorce, the annulment would be granted, no doubt. Do I believe they are married? Absolutely. That leaves only one option - the annulment courts are out to lunch.

 

[Michael_Saint]

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think this is what you’re pointing out. You pose an interesting question. Are you saying, that if most of the people that go through an annulment can get a decree of nullity, how many other couples out there that are happily married could, in theory, prove the same thing? Are they seen as validly married in the eyes of God when they turned out fine, but if looked into, don’t meet the criterria for a valid marriage?
I wanted to clarify your question because if this is what you’re asking it’s an interesting topic, you’re not just complaining about how common it’s becoming.
It’s interesting because the Church claims authority on the validity of marriage as it has a worldy, social aspect to it. Without checking everyone’s happy marriage to make sure of validity the question of whether or not God sees it as valid or invalid is null and void then to the Church. I do realize the Church convalidates marriage, but I don’t think it’s the same as “decree of validity” But this is just my opinion of it. This is a good philosophical thing to chew on.

This is a wise question.

First, yes, many people can and do “prove” invalidity. In fact, there is one poster who is posting on a different thread right now who says he refuses to divorce and get an annulment because he knows he is married, even though he is certain he can get an annulment. He is a wise man, and I think he is right on both counts.

Secondly, the Church simply does this - examines the evidence to see if a valid marriage has taken place. To be a “valid” marriage, there are certain things required by natural law, and there are certain things required by ecclesial law. The Church must decide if those were all met at the time of the marriage.

 

[Michael_Saint]

If you go by the reat and almighty blogosphere, it is easy to come away with the impression that the Church is handing out declarations of nullity like candy. I think those that put forth such ideas are usually people who have not gone through the process and do not know anyone who has gone through the process. It takes a while (anywhere from 9-18 months on average). It’s not as thought people walk in, fill out a questionnaire, and then walk out with the declaration of nullity. That would be handing it out like candy. It’s a thorough process of investigation.

I admit, in my more paranoid moments, I have asked myself similar questions, but I don’t think we need to worry about it too much.

You are right. It is a long and arduous process. But in the end, the declaration of nullity is pretty much a sure thing. Few exceptions to this.

Our OP, on the other hand, has a good case - pressured into marriage by her mother after she got pregnant. I think that is marriage under duress, meaning a real lack of freedom in entering the marriage. But as she said, it is still an agonizing process.

 

[Michael_Saint]

Then something as simple as having a lustful thought during the ceremony about the maid of honor means they didn’t REALLY mean to be faithful, and off we go towards an investigation for a decree of nullity (however you spell it).

Actually, things even more minor than this have been used as proof at annulment hearings, and have been “successful”.

A good Cardinal in Canada said it best back in the 80s. He said we need to get women off these tribunals, because as soon as the female seeking the annulment breaks down and cries, they pretty much decide in favour of the annulment that very moment.

 

[Michael_Saint]

I was freaked out when I first found out about all the things that could make a marriage invalid. It was readily clear to me how easy it *might *prove to be to prove mine was invalid. I wondered what that meant, and if I was supposed to try to get a priest to investigate it, or if I was supposed to stop trying to make it work, etc. I even wondered if we were required to try to get married all over again. It took a long time, but eventually I was mollified by that canon that someone quoted, number 1060. I accepted that they were going to presume my marriage was valid and that they were not going to investigate it unless we divorced. So, since I am not divorced, there is nothing for me to do, since I don’t have an obvious defect of form (that I currently know about) or some similar clearcut item. Since there is nothing for me to do about it, then that is that. I just live with it. I continue to try to make the marriage work, since that appears to be my obligation in the matter at this time.

But this is the whole problem, and throws the legitimacy of the current annulment process into doubt. If your marriage broke up, considering the fact that in your life and the life of your spouse, many things were present when you got married that have been used to grant annulments in other cases where the couples had similar issues, chances are, a canon lawyer COULD prove invalidity. In that case, you must ask yourself - are you really married? In which case you have cause for concern. Or are the tribunals haywire? In which case there are many others who have cause for concern.

 

[Michael_Saint]

Marriage is not that hard to enter; it is meant to be the vocation of most people. It is not that hard.

Rome overturns about 90% of the declarations of nullity that are appealed from the US, for what it is worth.

Agreed. If marriage was as hard to enter as the annulment courts seem to say it is, there is no hope for me validly marrying! Well, I guess it’s single life 'till I die!

 

[Michael_Saint]

Is there a way to annul-proof your marriage?

Considering the sheer number of grounds that one can receive an annulment on these days, this is pretty much mission impossible. You would have to be a veritable saint to validly marry.

 

[Michael_Saint]

We were married in a catholic church and we were both very young, but I believe our marriage is valid. There is also little doubt in my mind, because of the abuse of the system, that we could get a declaration of nullity if we wanted to.

Good for you! Resisting the temptation to seek an annulment. Chances are, they would give you one. But you know you are married. I give you credit. Most people don’t want to “know” whether or not they are really married - they just want the “papers” that will allow them to “try again” with “someone new”.

Most tribunals are simply “searching for loopholes”, because in our divorce-saturated culture, the ones who make the decisions “feel pity” for divorcees, and want to give them a “second-chance” at “love”. I was just watching a program today that showed how so many jurors get biased through their emotional reactions made by affective appeals. It happens in tribunals frequently. They want to believe it is invalid, and they are thus swayed into believing it really is, against their better and more rational judgment.

 

[Michael_Saint]

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.

Remember, every marriage that was “declared” to be “invalid” was at one time “presumed” to be “valid”, but that did not make it so. So, most likely, many marriages we “presume” are valid are really “invalid”, as will be “proved” when they “divorce” and their case goes before the tribunal. Do you see what I am saying?

 

[Michael_Saint]

By ALL means live your life with the presumption of validity! There is absolutely NO sin if a couple receives a later declaration.

I disagree. If you presume it is valid when it is not, though there is no sin if a couple later gets a declaration, the fact of invalidity means they will be living without the sacramental grace of a valid marriage,

 

[cecilia97]

I’ll give my two cents, just because I am midway through this process myself.

First, age in and of itself would not make a marriage invalid…it is the maturity of the individuals at the time of the wedding. If they were immature, if they were easily led, if they were strongarmed, cajoled, or pressured…these seem to be the areas the Tribunal looks at. This is why, further, the application process for a Declaration of Nullity (not an “annulment”, as many here will point out) is not a “he said, she said” proposition. Witnesses who knew the couple at the time of the wedding are contacted. They are asked questions like “Was there pressure on _________ to be married?” There are also questions about mental health, alcohol and drug abuse, premarital counseling (was there any) etc.

I can only assure you that this is a heartwrenching, agonizing process, and can’t imagine anyone would go through it twice. Answering the Tribunal’s questions alone took days of uninterrupted work, it occured to me the reason why dioceses don’t have the forms online for downloading (i.e. “do it yourself”) is that, if you saw it without the comfort and guidance of a spiritual director or priest, you might feel so inclined as to run off and become Episcopalian, rather than go forward with the process.

A judgement has not been made in my case. I pray a judgement in my favor will come soon. If there is one reason for my posting, it is this: the process is not easy, I do not think the Tribunal folks are being “flip” about marriage, but every situation has its unique issues that can be investigated. Hope this makes sense.

As a single, divorced Catholic with a decree of nullity, I second everything SpaceNeedle has said above. The process is harrowing and healing all at once. It can be very scary. It took me two months to complete my questionnaire, and then I found I needed secular counseling and much TLC from my pastor. I waited 14 months for my decisions.

Like any process, you get out what you put in. If someone is going to approach the annulment process lightly, they will either be 1) scared off by the work, 2) attempt to lie, or 3) do a shoddy job of really looking at THEMSELVES in the situation. Tribunals are trained to spot those cases. Those of us who take it seriously are forced to do a lot of learning and maturing, I feel.

Remember, too, that numbers showing how many American annulments are granted are skewed. American Tribunals typical prescreen applications…either at the parish level or otherwise…before even agreeing to accept the case. That means that the weakest nullity petitions are shot down before they even get to the chancery office.