annulments...

[tossolul]

What happened to the vows? What happened to the sacrament? What happened to what God has joined together, no man can seperate? Why has it become so widely acceptable to get an annulment, and how can anyone see this as a positive thing? It’s very easy to twist things around to make it look like it’s all one persons fault- but when it comes right down to it, when your married to someone you are one, and you need to work through it as one, without blame, together with God. When you make a promise to God, there is never a reason to break it.

Does anyone else share these feelings, or am I way out of line?

 

[jrabs]

tossolul:

What happened to the vows? What happened to the sacrament? What happened to what God has joined together, no man can seperate? Why has it become so widely acceptable to get an annulment, and how can anyone see this as a positive thing? It’s very easy to twist things around to make it look like it’s all one persons fault- but when it comes right down to it, when your married to someone you are one, and you need to work through it as one, without blame, together with God. When you make a promise to God, there is never a reason to break it.

Does anyone else share these feelings, or am I way out of line?

Out of line.

Sweeping blanket statements are made for the perfect world.

I married someone who was mentally ill. He was incapable of making vows. Did I know this at the time? Nope because I did not live with him beforehand.

 

[Joan_M]

Things should be the way you think. However, unfortunately, they are not. Because of the increasing secularity of our populations, many people get married without the slightest clue as to what is expected in marriage. The church is trying to improve this, by requiring pre-Cana classes, but even then many simply do not understand.

Too many people marry with the idea that they can get a divorce if things do not work out, or they have decided that they will not have children, or that they do not need to be faithful, etc., etc., etc.

The Church is not separating what God joined together. Rather, after examination of the situation at the time of the wedding, they are declaring that there never was a Sacramental marriage.

This is both negative and positive - negative because so many people still have half-baked ideas of what marriage is all about, and positive that after the declaration of nullity, they may be free to marry. I say “may”, since there can be a ruling that one or other (or both) of the parties in the annulment may not marry unless or until they can show some required change.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

tossolul:

What happened to the sacrament?

This is something that has been discussed. I’ll try to summarize what I found on that part of your question.

As far as I can tell, the “sacrament” is subject to being later found not to have happened. It turns out the vows before the priest and witnesses was not, in fact, conferring a sacrament in the case that a tribunal later declares the marriage was not sacramentally valid.

I think that’s the way it came out. OTOH, when I said, “then all Catholic weddings are tentative sacraments so the attendees, including the priest and the spouses, really don’t know if they’re receiving the sacrament of marriage or not” but when I put it like that for some reason, but not a good enough one that I remember what it is, that’s not the proper way to state it.

Alan

 

[tossolul]

Joan M:

Too many people marry with the idea that they can get a divorce if things do not work out, or they have decided that they will not have children, or that they do not need to be faithful, etc., etc., etc.

I wasn’ t trying to say the church was in the wrong, I was more trying to point out what Joan wrote above. It seems like it has almost become casual to talk about getting a divorce in the Catholic faith because ’ you can just get an annulment’.

Jrabs, I empathise with your situation. It’s hard to make this point and not catagorize all together. I do realize there are cases of abuse, where individuals are sick and for the safety of the spouse they need to be hospitalized or seperated. I was more referring to what Joan pointed out.

I was one of those people above, who when I got married didnt’ take my vows as seriously as I should have, and when the going got tough- I was ready to bail. During this process I realized some important things which totally changed my life. I somehow wish that more people could realize what I was shown.

 

[catsrus]

You’re observations on marriage are correct…but an explaination of annulment is in order.
Speaking as a convert who was divorced before I even knew anything about The Church, getting an annulment to be able to be Confirmed (I’m remarried) was not easy at all. It all took 2 and 1/2 years.
Also, the Diocese sent notification of intent to annull to ex so that if there was a conflict of information, or an objection, he had the opportunity to say so.
It may be easy to “twist things around” to place blame, but if one truely loves Mother Church, all questions must be answered to the best of one’s knowledge and recollection. That includes answering honestly even if it puts one in a bad light. Honesty is the key.
Further, witnesses to the marriage are also asked to fill out forms honestly and what they write is not known to the person seeking the annulment.

 

[kage_ar]

IMHO, if we Catholics would stop using the term “annulment” and start using the term “decree of nullity”, if we would stop talking about “gettin an annulment” and refer to the proccss as “having the validity of the marriage investigated” - many misconceptions would be removed.

 

[jrabs]

kage_ar:

IMHO, if we Catholics would stop using the term “annulment” and start using the term “decree of nullity”, if we would stop talking about “gettin an annulment” and refer to the proccss as “having the validity of the marriage investigated” - many misconceptions would be removed.

Now THAT is the voice of reason!!!

I can stop banging my head :banghead:

 

[Liberian]

tossolul:

What happened to the vows? What happened to the sacrament? What happened to what God has joined together, no man can seperate? Why has it become so widely acceptable to get an annulment, and how can anyone see this as a positive thing? It’s very easy to twist things around to make it look like it’s all one persons fault- but when it comes right down to it, when your married to someone you are one, and you need to work through it as one, without blame, together with God. When you make a promise to God, there is never a reason to break it.

Does anyone else share these feelings, or am I way out of line?

Tossolul,

We need to draw a difference between the theological and the pastoral. The theological is the statement of “This is Right and That is Wrong;” the pastoral is the statement of “This is what should be done in the present situation.” Certainly the pastoral must not conflict with the theological, but frequently the emphasis is different.

What you are saying is theologically accurate (as far as I know), but it’s not very good pastorally. You are absolutely right that somebody somewhere needs to draw a line, but that does not necessarily mean that this person here and now should draw it.

Speaking for myself, though, and I am the only person I can speak for, I am trying to draw the line. I regard marriage as indissoluble, and whatever my wife may or may not do I am still married to her.

• Liberian

who asks your prayers that he may continue to feel/think this way

 

[Mt19_26]

jrabs:

Out of line.

Sweeping blanket statements are made for the perfect world.

I married someone who was mentally ill. He was incapable of making vows. Did I know this at the time? Nope because I did not live with him beforehand.

We are called to be perfect by Christ. If you married a person who was mentally ill and you didn’t know it then you were not ready to get married. Are you suggesting that people should live in a trial marriage before they get married in from of God?

 

[Mt19_26]

tossolul:

It’s very easy to twist things around to make it look like it’s all one persons fault- but when it comes right down to it, when your married to someone you are one, and you need to work through it as one, without blame, together with God.

Sadly, many people probably twist things to try to get an annulment granted. The tribunal can only go on the information they are provided to determine if the marriage was indeed never really a marriage at all. If an annulment is granted but the petitioner was entirely truthful the annulment is not valid to the extent that it was granted based on misleading information. This is one reason annulments are on the rise. The other is the lax reasons that tribunals in the U.S. are basing their decisions on. Only the each person in a marriage truly knows their state of mind when their said their vows.

 

[Katie1723]

jrabs:

Out of line.

Sweeping blanket statements are made for the perfect world.

I married someone who was mentally ill. He was incapable of making vows. Did I know this at the time? Nope because I did not live with him beforehand.

Living with someone beforehand doesn’t guarantee anything either.
~ Kathy ~

 

[stanley123]

tossolul:

What happened to what God has joined together, no man can seperate? Why has it become so widely acceptable to get an annulment… When you make a promise to God, there is never a reason to break it.
Does anyone else share these feelings, or am I way out of line?

I agree with you completely. I think that you are absolutely correct. I have gone over this before, and what I see in the RCC in the USA are tribunals which is all too ready and eager to give out annulments. People don’t like it, if I say so, but I ask you to take a look at the figures for annulments in the USA, and ask you what do you see has happened?
Annulments given out by the Catholic Church:
1930: 9
1989: 61, 416.
In other words, we see an increase over this period of time of more than 680,000 percent (six hundred and eighty thousand percent increase).
Also, from what I read, in certain areas of the USA, annulments are given out to more than 90 percent of those who apply for them.

 

[Catholic2003]

1930: 9
1989: 61, 416.

Of those 61,416 annulments, 17,984 were due to lack of form. There is no question that these lack of form annulments are correctly given, because there is documentary proof. These annulments would have been granted under 1917 canon law as well, so it is not a matter of loosening requirements, either by canon law itself or by the tribunals.

So, in an absolute worst case analysis, assuming none of the other 1989 annulments are valid, that leads to a 199,822% increase in truly invalid Catholic marriages since 1930, which must therefore be due to poor catechesis about the requirements of Catholic marriage.

The number of total annulments in 1989 is a mere 342% increase over the number of lack of form annulments. Compared to the 199,822% increase we are absolutely certain about, the 342% figure is hardly proof of any sort at all that the Chuch is lax in handing out annulments.

 

[stanley123]

Catholic2003:

So, in an absolute worst case analysis, assuming none of the other 1989 annulments are valid, that leads to a 199,822% increase in truly invalid Catholic marriages since 1930, which must therefore be due to poor catechesis about the requirements of Catholic marriage.
.

Two questions:
I don’t see why this must be to poor catechesis?
But suppose it were, why has there been poor catechesis after Vatican II, but not before Vatican II ?

 

[Catholic2003]

stanley123:

Two questions:
I don’t see why this must be to poor catechesis?

Well, either they don’t know that Catholics need to be married in the Church, or they don’t know why that is really important. Otherwise, they wouldn’t attempt to marry outside the Church.

stanley123:

But suppose it were, why has there been poor catechesis after Vatican II, but not before Vatican II ?

I don’t know. I don’t even know that Vatican II is the trigger point. There were a lot of other things that happened between 1930 and 1989. It could be related to the rise in contraception use.

 

[stanley123]

Catholic2003:

There were a lot of other things that happened between 1930 and 1989. It could be related to the rise in contraception use.

Well, whatever factor you’re talking about, why have these factors (poor catechesis, rise in contraceptive use) hit Catholics harder than other segments of the population? I notice for example, that the RCC has dropped the TLM since Vatican II? Could there be a correlation there?
Also, why should the rise in contraceptive use be the reason that the annulments have increased so dramatically?

 

[JimG]

I have no experience whatever with marriage tribunals, so this is just a hypothesis. While I’m sure that the tribunal makes every effort to decide each case correctly, perhaps there has been a subtle change of emphasis.

In the 1940’s for example, the presumption may have always been in favor of validity of the marriage. In cases where a spouse was abandoned, say, and the tribunal could not find sufficient evidence for nullity, then the innocent spouse was simply out of luck. She—or he—had to go on with life knowing that no future marriage was possible unless the former spouse died. It was just the way it was.

Today, besides being able to look more closely at psychological factors present at the time of the union, the tribunal likely has a more compassionate outlook. The thinking may be along these lines: “It is a difficult case. It could go either way. If we refuse a decree of nullity, nothing good comes of it. The innocent spouse is relegated to a single life, not free to marry. The guilty spouse has gone his own way. Why not decide in favor of nullity?”

Any actual tribunal judges, feel free to shoot that theory down.

 

[JimG]

I figure that any pre-marriage preparation program, such as Engaged Encounter, will know that it is effective if before the weekend is over, half of those attending decide NOT to go through with the marriage. Those would be the ones who would have been headed for divorce.

 

[Catholic2003]

stanley123:

Also, why should the rise in contraceptive use be the reason that the annulments have increased so dramatically?

Pope Paul VI predicted a number of negative consequences of contraception in Humanae Vitae. It has had some very far reaching effects on society.

Whatever the reason, the mere statistical fact that there were 61,416 annulments in 1989 does not prove that the annulment process is flawed by any means.