Annulments vs Divorce

[Kaste]

Quote from Davidv:

A valid marriage is a marriage forever, as God designed. The Church does not and cannot declare such a marriage null.

As other posters have commented. a significant number of unions are entered into that are not valid. As people come to their senses and really find out the truth, many find that they have been living in pretend marriages. Then desiring to be reconciled to God and the Church they petition the tribunal for a ruling.

This summarizes well the typical inadequate Catholic position. It still just “doesn’t get it.” This may or may not be intentional, but it seems to be the result of fear that if one is forced to admit the Roman Catholic Church errs on handing out annulments, this will in turn, result in Catholics having to be a bit skeptical of the Church’s teachings and rulings. Maybe some Catholics find comfort in blindly trusting the Church’s rulings and teachings. Any honest objective person will admit that the annulment process, like the teachings of the Church in general, must be accepted with a “trust-by-verify” manner. Tribunals can be wrong. Wait let me say that again. Tribunals can be wrong.

THESE “TRIBUNALS” CAN AND HAVE ERRED.

The problem that this poster (and typical Catholic position) still “doesn’t get” is that the tribunals are abusing the annulment process by widely and loosely interpreting the “improper intent” clause.

Marcdukm listed the original reasons in post 70 for receiving an annulment. The original and true purpose is to declare invalid, *truly invalid *unions such as incest or forced marriages. Nothing like the “improper intent” clause is listed, nor was there any criteria like this novelty which has become, for all practical purposes, a loophole. Tribunals grossly mishandling the “Improper intent” criteria has led to the abuse and twisting of the original purpose of annulments, much like what occured with the abuse of selling indulgences. What started out as a legitimate procedure in the 4th century (if Marcdukm is correct) has turned into a mockery, putting the whole concept in question. Nonsense like this led to the Protestant Reformation.

I do not reject the concept of annulments per se, but I do reject and resent these very fallible and often erring so-called “tribunals” who presume to deterimne invalidity of marriage based on the extremely shakey grounds of “improper intent”. Many valid unions are being ruled invalid by these men.

Let it be known to all here that this discussion highlights the problem that many Catholics blindly trust the Church whereas they should simply realize that one cannot blindly trust the tribunals, anymore than he can the teachings of the Magisterium, even the Pope himself unless something is clearly pronounced infallibly or universally taught. This last part, mind you, is by no means an easy task to determine, so all Christians and Catholics need to be constantly vigilant and a bit skeptical of teachings that just don’t seem to add up, even from Rome. It’s less comfortable than blind trust, but it’s reality.

Solution: Admit Tribunals occassionally declare valid marriages invalid, and so err. Therefore just be a little careful about accepting the Church’s teachings and rulings as if they were from God, because sometimes they are not.

That is the conclusion I have reached from our discussions on this topic.

K

 

[mikemar]

Forgive me if this has already been state, but I didn’t want to read 7 pages of posts. I’m pretty sure that divorce is permitted in the Church. “Divorce”, I think, has never been the problem. It’s the re-marrying part that the Church has always, and most likely WILL ALWAYS prohibit. But the Church would never, for instance, force a woman to stay with a husband who beats her. However, that same woman would not be allowed to re-marry another man until either an annulment of the 1st marriage were granted, or the abusing husband died.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Quote from Davidv:

This summarizes well the typical inadequate Catholic position. It still just “doesn’t get it.” This may or may not be intentional, but it seems to be the result of fear that if one is forced to admit the Roman Catholic Church errs on handing out annulments, this will in turn, result in Catholics having to be a bit skeptical of the Church’s teachings and rulings. Maybe some Catholics find comfort in blindly trusting the Church’s rulings and teachings. Any honest objective person will admit that the annulment process, like the teachings of the Church in general, must be accepted with a “trust-by-verify” manner. Tribunals can be wrong. Wait let me say that again. Tribunals can be wrong.

THESE “TRIBUNALS” CAN AND HAVE ERRED.

The problem that this poster (and typical Catholic position) still “doesn’t get” is that the tribunals are abusing the annulment process by widely and loosely interpreting the “improper intent” clause.

Marcdukm listed the original reasons in post 70 for receiving an annulment. The original and true purpose is to declare invalid, *truly invalid *unions such as incest or forced marriages. Nothing like the “improper intent” clause is listed, nor was there any criteria like this novelty which has become, for all practical purposes, a loophole. Tribunals grossly mishandling the “Improper intent” criteria has led to the abuse and twisting of the original purpose of annulments, much like what occured with the abuse of selling indulgences. What started out as a legitimate procedure in the 4th century (if Marcdukm is correct) has turned into a mockery, putting the whole concept in question. Nonsense like this led to the Protestant Reformation.

I do not reject the concept of annulments per se, but I do reject and resent these very fallible and often erring so-called “tribunals” who presume to deterimne invalidity of marriage based on the extremely shakey grounds of “improper intent”. Many valid unions are being ruled invalid by these men.

Let it be known to all here that this discussion highlights the problem that many Catholics blindly trust the Church whereas they should simply realize that one cannot blindly trust the tribunals, anymore than he can the teachings of the Magisterium, even the Pope himself unless something is clearly pronounced infallibly or universally taught. This last part, mind you, is by no means an easy task to determine, so all Christians and Catholics need to be constantly vigilant and a bit skeptical of teachings that just don’t seem to add up, even from Rome. It’s less comfortable than blind trust, but it’s reality.

Solution: Admit Tribunals occassionally declare valid marriages invalid, and so err. Therefore just be a little careful about accepting the Church’s teachings and rulings as if they were from God, because sometimes they are not.

That is the conclusion I have reached from our discussions on this topic.

K

No, this is what you implied initially, so it would seem someone’s mind was closed all along but it was not mine. Hey, can I ask you a question, **“What do you think is actually being annulled?” ** See it cannot be a marriage, because there was no marriage.

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Kaste,

You should know that the Orthodox Churches also recognize invalid marriages when there is improper form. To a certain degree, the Orthodox Church also recognizes invalidity due to improper intent - was the vow freely given? And there are a number of situations recognized wherein a vow is not freely given.

Blessings,
Marduk

This summarizes well the typical inadequate Catholic position. It still just “doesn’t get it.” This may or may not be intentional, but it seems to be the result of fear that if one is forced to admit the Roman Catholic Church errs on handing out annulments, this will in turn, result in Catholics having to be a bit skeptical of the Church’s teachings and rulings. Maybe some Catholics find comfort in blindly trusting the Church’s rulings and teachings. Any honest objective person will admit that the annulment process, like the teachings of the Church in general, must be accepted with a “trust-by-verify” manner. Tribunals can be wrong. Wait let me say that again. Tribunals can be wrong.

THESE “TRIBUNALS” CAN AND HAVE ERRED.

The problem that this poster (and typical Catholic position) still “doesn’t get” is that the tribunals are abusing the annulment process by widely and loosely interpreting the “improper intent” clause.

Marcdukm listed the original reasons in post 70 for receiving an annulment. The original and true purpose is to declare invalid, *truly invalid *unions such as incest or forced marriages. Nothing like the “improper intent” clause is listed, nor was there any criteria like this novelty which has become, for all practical purposes, a loophole. Tribunals grossly mishandling the “Improper intent” criteria has led to the abuse and twisting of the original purpose of annulments, much like what occured with the abuse of selling indulgences. What started out as a legitimate procedure in the 4th century (if Marcdukm is correct) has turned into a mockery, putting the whole concept in question. Nonsense like this led to the Protestant Reformation.

I do not reject the concept of annulments per se, but I do reject and resent these very fallible and often erring so-called “tribunals” who presume to deterimne invalidity of marriage based on the extremely shakey grounds of “improper intent”. Many valid unions are being ruled invalid by these men.

Let it be known to all here that this discussion highlights the problem that many Catholics blindly trust the Church whereas they should simply realize that one cannot blindly trust the tribunals, anymore than he can the teachings of the Magisterium, even the Pope himself unless something is clearly pronounced infallibly or universally taught. This last part, mind you, is by no means an easy task to determine, so all Christians and Catholics need to be constantly vigilant and a bit skeptical of teachings that just don’t seem to add up, even from Rome. It’s less comfortable than blind trust, but it’s reality.

Solution: Admit Tribunals occassionally declare valid marriages invalid, and so err. Therefore just be a little careful about accepting the Church’s teachings and rulings as if they were from God, because sometimes they are not.

That is the conclusion I have reached from our discussions on this topic.

 

[mardukm]

Dear Kaste,

When I have time (maybe you can remind me in two weeks), I will cite the early Church canons for you to demonstrate that the early Church did recognize certain marriages were invalid. Btw, it might interest you to know that the Church’s recognition of an invalid sacrament is not restricted to marriage. It included other sacraments as well, baptism and ordination being the most common.

Blessings

 

[sidbrown]

Solution: Admit Tribunals occassionally declare valid marriages invalid, and so err.

It might be quite a bit more than occasionally, if you consider that what was done in the Church one hundred years ago was correct.

 

[happilycatholic]

Kaste:

What you are doing is delclaring yourself your own “Church”. You are making the ‘assumption’ that the Church is declaring valid marriages invalid and taking that to an extreme to say the least. You are claiming your own Truth.

Do you have some kind of first-hand knowledge of these many valid marriages that have been set asunder by the Church? Do you claim to have some Divine knowledge of which ones were actually valid and which ones were not? Or are you simply going on what you perceive to be valid marriages being wrongfully declared invalid? Worse, are you believing things you are reading?

I suggest you write your diocese and voice your concerns there.

I am astonished at your claims. It’s like you are accusing us of being naive or ignorant because we don’t take your position on the matter.

I hope you find peace with this. It seems you might have a personal stake it it. I do too but I stop short of blaming the Church for my mistakes and the mistakes of others who marry without the consent of God.

~Tonya

 

[Kaste]

---

Dear Kaste,

When I have time (maybe you can remind me in two weeks), I will cite the early Church canons for you to demonstrate that the early Church did recognize certain marriages were invalid. Btw, it might interest you to know that the Church’s recognition of an invalid sacrament is not restricted to marriage. It included other sacraments as well, baptism and ordination being the most common.

Blessings [Marcdukm]

Dear Marcdukm,

Yes, please cite that material for us when you get a chance, so we can all judge whether or not the Orthodox abuse “proper intent” the same way Catholic tribunals do.

Thanks,

K

 

[PassingThru]

Interesting discussion.

So, to be clear: Tribunals DO err. This would be a safe assumption from a Catholic viewpoint, yes? The only other option if you do not agree with the above statement, is that they are, in effect, infallible.

I don’t any other way around this particular question.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Interesting discussion.

So, to be clear: Tribunals DO err. This would be a safe assumption from a Catholic viewpoint, yes? The only other option if you do not agree with the above statement, is that they are, in effect, infallible.

I don’t any other way around this particular question.

It is certainly possible for tribunals to error; in fact the tribunals have an appeal process built in to the system. And appeals have occurred which over ruled the original findings, however what you will not get from these thread is a true picture of the process. For example to even get to the tribunal the couple has to have separated(1), civilly divorced(2), and at least one of them has had to request the annulment(3) so it is easy to see that the typical married couple does not need to fear a tribunal

 

[happilycatholic]

The annulment process is a long and complicated one. I know, I’m going through it. However, it’s not the only avenue to remarriage in the Church. There are also these:

1.) Petrine Privledge
2.) Pauline Privledge
3.) Favor of the Faith (my situation)
4.) Lack of Form

…and probably more. So to try to spell out the entire process for a particular person would take a degree in canon law and cannot be done from this thread or any other.

Yes, I would suspect the Tribunal can make a mistake, but that wasn’t the mainstream claim in recent discussion on this thread. The point of recent discussion has been the claim that the Church grants annulments against the will of God, or simply put; destroys valid marriages by frivolously handing out annulments.

I find it interesting, especially in this current time, that we are so quick to blame our Church for mistakes made by those who seek remedy from the Church. I’m not saying that there are no Tribunals out there granting annulments that shouldn’t be granted. That would be to say that human beings are without sin. However, if they are doing that, they’d better check themselves. That is no less a sin than any other and it will not go unpunished and they know it. I do not believe that this is something that is common.

The thing I find most distrubing is that this is just one other area that doubt has reared its ugly head. Folks are doubting the Church’s leadership once again.

People, if we can’t trust our Church then we may as well be Protestant. Let me explain: We are bound by Scripture to submit to the Church. The Church has the authority to bind and loose, that includes marriages. If we don’t believe that, then we are not catholic.

Until the Holy Father expresses concern about the number of annulments being granted, I am going to trust that the Holy Spirit does indeed have a handle on it and that we have the Holy Father, Pope Benedict, leading the way.

Trust in God. Trust in YOUR Church which God founded and promised to lead. Don’t try to be your own Church by making your own rules (number of acceptable annulments) and proclaiming yourself a better authority on the matter of annulments than God or the Holy Father.

Let it go.

~Tonya

 

[LilyM]

If the tribunal is going to find that the marriage is invalid, they cannot let the couple live a lie and remain civily married. So, not only is it OK, it is manditory.

So by your view the Church makes the venial sin of divorce a mandatory part of the process of annulment?

And this fact (in your opinion) - that the Church requires the commission of a venial sin by those applying for annulment - doesn’t bother you in the slightest?

In what parallel universe does a Church which governs with Christ’s own authority require venial sin of its members as you claim it does?

 

[DCNBILL]

So by your view the Church makes the venial sin of divorce a mandatory part of the process of annulment?

And this fact (in your opinion) - that the Church requires the commission of a venial sin by those applying for annulment - doesn’t bother you in the slightest?

In what parallel universe does a Church which governs with Christ’s own authority require venial sin of its members as you claim it does?

This is obviously looking at the situation in the wrong way.

Tribunals will only consider cases for nullity in which a civil divorce has already taken place. If the parties are still married then the Church would make efforts at reconcillation rather than separation.

The Peace of Christ to all,

bill

 

[sidbrown]

The annulment process is a long and complicated one. I know, I’m going through it. However, it’s not the only avenue to remarriage in the Church. There are also these:

1.) Petrine Privledge
2.) Pauline Privledge
3.) Favor of the Faith (my situation)
4.) Lack of Form

…and probably more. So to try to spell out the entire process for a particular person would take a degree in canon law and cannot be done from this thread or any other.

Yes, I would suspect the Tribunal can make a mistake, but that wasn’t the mainstream claim in recent discussion on this thread. The point of recent discussion has been the claim that the Church grants annulments against the will of God, or simply put; destroys valid marriages by frivolously handing out annulments.

I find it interesting, especially in this current time, that we are so quick to blame our Church for mistakes made by those who seek remedy from the Church. I’m not saying that there are no Tribunals out there granting annulments that shouldn’t be granted. That would be to say that human beings are without sin. However, if they are doing that, they’d better check themselves. That is no less a sin than any other and it will not go unpunished and they know it. I do not believe that this is something that is common.

The thing I find most distrubing is that this is just one other area that doubt has reared its ugly head. Folks are doubting the Church’s leadership once again.

People, if we can’t trust our Church then we may as well be Protestant. Let me explain: We are bound by Scripture to submit to the Church. The Church has the authority to bind and loose, that includes marriages. If we don’t believe that, then we are not catholic.

Until the Holy Father expresses concern about the number of annulments being granted, I am going to trust that the Holy Spirit does indeed have a handle on it and that we have the Holy Father, Pope Benedict, leading the way.

Trust in God. Trust in YOUR Church which God founded and promised to lead. Don’t try to be your own Church by making your own rules (number of acceptable annulments) and proclaiming yourself a better authority on the matter of annulments than God or the Holy Father.

Let it go.

~Tonya

See this article: "Pope, In Address To US Bishops,
Blasts Number Of Annulments "
defendingholymatrimony.org/html/blasts_annulments.html

 

[Texas_Roofer]

So by your view the Church makes the venial sin of divorce a mandatory part of the process of annulment?

And this fact (in your opinion) - that the Church requires the commission of a venial sin by those applying for annulment - doesn’t bother you in the slightest?

In what parallel universe does a Church which governs with Christ’s own authority require venial sin of its members as you claim it does?

I think there is a misunderstanding here divorce occurs at different levels of moral codes. For example if one spouse wants to remain married and the other spouse lives of free choice the one choosing to leave commits a mortal sin while the one working to stay married commits no sin. The tribunal does require both separation and divorce because the annulment is always last. The annulment is undesirable and only possible if no ability to achieve marriage exists between the couple.

 

[cecilia97]

See this article: "Pope, In Address To US Bishops,
Blasts Number Of Annulments "
defendingholymatrimony.org/html/blasts_annulments.html

I am a faithful Catholic, single, with a decree of nullity. Of course I agree with the statements attributed to Pope JPII in your link. But it seems to me that, for the most part, the statements address a need for pastoral MARRIAGE counseling. I’m all for that. Marriage prep and marriage counseling are in sad shape in a lot of Catholic parishes.

“The indissolubility of marriage is a teaching that comes from Christ himself,” he said, “and the first duty of pastors and pastoral workers is therefore to help couples overcome whatever difficulties arise. The referral of matrimonial cases to the tribunal should be a last resort.”

AMEN! But many are forced to that last resort. We cannot deny that our society is badly, BADLY broken. And what about the new Catholic convert who didn’t have the benefit of any Catholic teaching on matrimony, or any Catholic marriage counseling?

I’ve never met ANYONE who aspired to be divorced. Most of us did not desire the position we’re in. But we want to remain faithful to the Church and Her teachings. We wrestle with these questions. Ultimately I had to trust Christ’s promise to His Apostles in this area…that whatever they hold bound on earth will be held bound in heaven, and that whatever they loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

It is an important lesson in obedience that annulment proceedings teach. Most of the Catholics seeking nullity are not trying to beat the system; we’re just trying to understand our place in the Church and discern our vocations and futures. Petitions are completely optional, so the people seeking nullity are the ONES FOLLOWING THE RULES. Please don’t bash us for trying to be faithful Catholics.

 

[davidv]

So by your view the Church makes the venial sin of divorce a mandatory part of the process of annulment?

And this fact (in your opinion) - that the Church requires the commission of a venial sin by those applying for annulment - doesn’t bother you in the slightest?

In what parallel universe does a Church which governs with Christ’s own authority require venial sin of its members as you claim it does?

No. I don’t think can conclude that from my comment.

If there was no marriage, invalid, in other words, the civil divorce is not a sin, as there is no breaking of a marriage.

 

[DCNBILL]

I am a faithful Catholic, single, with a decree of nullity. Of course I agree with the statements attributed to Pope JPII in your link. But it seems to me that, for the most part, the statements address a need for pastoral MARRIAGE counseling. I’m all for that. Marriage prep and marriage counseling are in sad shape in a lot of Catholic parishes.

“The indissolubility of marriage is a teaching that comes from Christ himself,” he said, “and the first duty of pastors and pastoral workers is therefore to help couples overcome whatever difficulties arise. The referral of matrimonial cases to the tribunal should be a last resort.”

AMEN! But many are forced to that last resort. We cannot deny that our society is badly, BADLY broken. And what about the new Catholic convert who didn’t have the benefit of any Catholic teaching on matrimony, or any Catholic marriage counseling?

I’ve never met ANYONE who aspired to be divorced. Most of us did not desire the position we’re in. But we want to remain faithful to the Church and Her teachings. We wrestle with these questions. Ultimately I had to trust Christ’s promise to His Apostles in this area…that whatever they hold bound on earth will be held bound in heaven, and that whatever they loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

It is an important lesson in obedience that annulment proceedings teach. Most of the Catholics seeking nullity are not trying to beat the system; we’re just trying to understand our place in the Church and discern our vocations and futures. Petitions are completely optional, so the people seeking nullity are the ONES FOLLOWING THE RULES. Please don’t bash us for trying to be faithful Catholics.

Amen Cecilia!

God bless you!

 

[happilycatholic]

I am a faithful Catholic, single, with a decree of nullity. Of course I agree with the statements attributed to Pope JPII in your link. But it seems to me that, for the most part, the statements address a need for pastoral MARRIAGE counseling. I’m all for that. Marriage prep and marriage counseling are in sad shape in a lot of Catholic parishes.

“The indissolubility of marriage is a teaching that comes from Christ himself,” he said, “and the first duty of pastors and pastoral workers is therefore to help couples overcome whatever difficulties arise. The referral of matrimonial cases to the tribunal should be a last resort.”

AMEN! But many are forced to that last resort. We cannot deny that our society is badly, BADLY broken. And what about the new Catholic convert who didn’t have the benefit of any Catholic teaching on matrimony, or any Catholic marriage counseling?

I’ve never met ANYONE who aspired to be divorced. Most of us did not desire the position we’re in. But we want to remain faithful to the Church and Her teachings. We wrestle with these questions. Ultimately I had to trust Christ’s promise to His Apostles in this area…that whatever they hold bound on earth will be held bound in heaven, and that whatever they loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

It is an important lesson in obedience that annulment proceedings teach. Most of the Catholics seeking nullity are not trying to beat the system; we’re just trying to understand our place in the Church and discern our vocations and futures. Petitions are completely optional, so the people seeking nullity are the ONES FOLLOWING THE RULES. Please don’t bash us for trying to be faithful Catholics.

Thank you cecilia. At last someone gets it.

~HC

 

[cecilia97]

Thank you cecilia. At last someone gets it.

~HC

You and your petition are in my prayers, HC. God takes care of all His children and gives us what we need in the proper time. A friend just said to me yesterday that nothing grows on top of the mountain…all the growth happens in the valley. If that’s not a description of the annulment process, I don’t know what is!

God bless you,