K
Karin
Guest
So you are opposed to a civil divorce? and not the annulment?
They kind of go hand in hand…why stay in a (civil) marriage if you are granted an annulment…that really makes no sense!
- Status
They kind of go hand in hand…why stay in a (civil) marriage if you are granted an annulment…that really makes no sense!
T
tossolul
Guest
I don’t always speak as clearly about things as I would like to…what I meant was both, it is the divorce that bothers me, and for a Catholic- True divorce does not happen until the annulment has been granted…So to a Catholic, and annulment is a true divorce- that is why I use the two terms interchangably in this thread, because we are on a Catholic Forum.
S
stanley123
Guest
Joseph Kennedy and Sheila Rauch Kennedy.
Read the book: “Shattered Faith,” by the Sheila Rauch Kennedy. Here’s how her Catholic husband, Joseph Kennedy explains the Catholic theory of annulments to his non-Catholic wife: “Of course I think we had a true marriage. But that doesn’t matter now. I don’t believe this stuff. Nobody actually believes it. It’s just Catholic gobbledygook.”
S
stanley123
Guest
Right. divorce and annulment go hand in hand, and this supports the point that annulment is just a theory cooked up by Catholic theologians to get around the teaching on the indissolubility of marriage.
J
jrabs
Guest
Divorce and annulments are an emotional topic - but I can be fairly certain that people are not just granted annulments because they merely want out of a marriage and want to marry a new person. There is far more to it.
My guess is that you are not privy to the deeper reasons but you see only surface reasons why the man you describe wants an annulment.
30 years is a long time and I am hoping those years were filled with prayer and time for discernment.
K
Karin
Guest
No comment
K
Karin
Guest
acutally you can not interchange the two words …they mean two different things.
A divorce is a LEGAL (civil) matter that ends a marriage by an official decision in a court of law
while an annulment is a Church matter (has NO civil bearing) it declares that a marriage was never a true marriage in the eyes of a church.
J
jrabs
Guest
Not sure what your point is here. I don’t think Joe Kennedy was an expert on the topic or participated on a tribunal.
Joe’s opinion is uninteresting because it’s not based on fact.
We all know there are vastly different devotions to the Catholic Faith and each person embraces it with differently. Some are not as devout but Catholic in name only.
J
jrabs
Guest
Stanley, Stanley…what can I say??? :whacky:
Is there a smidgeon of fact you can provide us here?
M
manualman
Guest
Oh good! Stanley and I disagree again. I feel more normal now!
There are perfectly valid reasons for annulment. Cases where one or both member really do have a defect that had consistantly prevented him/her from entering into a sacramental marriage throughout the entire relationship.
Mr. Kennedy may, in fact be a bad example. If the man has no real faith in Christ and has not in any real way submitted himself to the Lordship of Christ then, in fact, he CANNOT be sacramentally married. I don’t know the man. But his last name tends to make me suspicious…
As for my example, in the post above, that is a real case in which I can almost guarantee I have a closer, more complete, more intimate knowledge than the tribunal could ever have. No matter. Annulment granted. Next case. (Naming names would be a gross violation of their privacy)
By the logic of the way annulments are considered, NONE of us can really know if our marriage is sacramentally valid or not. Think about that. Are you REALLY sure there were no defects back on that wedding day?
There are perfectly valid reasons for annulment. Cases where one or both member really do have a defect that had consistantly prevented him/her from entering into a sacramental marriage throughout the entire relationship.
Mr. Kennedy may, in fact be a bad example. If the man has no real faith in Christ and has not in any real way submitted himself to the Lordship of Christ then, in fact, he CANNOT be sacramentally married. I don’t know the man. But his last name tends to make me suspicious…
As for my example, in the post above, that is a real case in which I can almost guarantee I have a closer, more complete, more intimate knowledge than the tribunal could ever have. No matter. Annulment granted. Next case. (Naming names would be a gross violation of their privacy)
By the logic of the way annulments are considered, NONE of us can really know if our marriage is sacramentally valid or not. Think about that. Are you REALLY sure there were no defects back on that wedding day?
K
Karin
Guest
Very good point!
A
Aesq
Guest
We are forgetting a major factor here. This factor is regularly ignored by a couple of posters here every time this topic comes up. The factor is . . . . . . that there are a great many converts in the US who have been divorced and remarried prior to their conversion to the Catholic Church. These individuals must have an annulment to come into full communion with the Church. Yet these individuals did not often have any concept of marriage being a sacrament or even what a sacrament was at the time of the marriage for which they are seeking a nullity.
I myself was divorced (but not remarried, although my former spouse is remarried) prior to my conversion. I came from a background that saw nothing wrong with birth control or divorce and remarriage. Do those of you who think that there are too many nullities granted think that I should not be able to have my petition examined?
Maybe, Just Maybe there are other reasons for an increase in nullities in the US other than the Church being lax about them. Maybe conversion is a possible factor here. From my experience all of the nullities that I am aware of which have been petitioned for and granted in my parish have been converts. I am sure I am not aware of all of them. However, I am aware of 10-20 and all of those were converts. Many in my RCIA class. Some required multiple nullities per couple.
I myself was divorced (but not remarried, although my former spouse is remarried) prior to my conversion. I came from a background that saw nothing wrong with birth control or divorce and remarriage. Do those of you who think that there are too many nullities granted think that I should not be able to have my petition examined?
Maybe, Just Maybe there are other reasons for an increase in nullities in the US other than the Church being lax about them. Maybe conversion is a possible factor here. From my experience all of the nullities that I am aware of which have been petitioned for and granted in my parish have been converts. I am sure I am not aware of all of them. However, I am aware of 10-20 and all of those were converts. Many in my RCIA class. Some required multiple nullities per couple.
A
axolotl
Guest
Good point. Some examples are Marilyn Grodi (Marcus’s wife) and our own CarolMarie. Another factor are annulments sought by divorced protestents so they can marry a Catholic. As well as defect of form annulments.
J
jrabs
Guest
Now that is excellent insight.
M
manualman
Guest
Again, nobody (not me anyways) is saying the concept of annulment is bad. But let’s be real. Just how many converts are we making in the US? Praise God there are a steady trickle. But I’d suggest that you are only AWARE of those annulments associated with the RCIA program you are involved with (BTW, good on ya!). The rest you just aren’t hearing about. They don’t exactly advertise in the bulletin.
It’s not even scandalous that there are a lot of annulments granted given since the sorry reality today is that we have a highly unevangelized body of nominal catholics in America.
What is scandalous is the focus on WEDDING DAY defects, rather than a more wholistic evaluation of the way grace had been allowed into the (apparent) marriage.
It’s just plain not consistant. If the church really teaches that it all revolves around the wedding day state of the couple then the church is horribly negligent in NOT promoting regular times of reflection for married couples; in NOT providing a publicised avenue to legitimize the sacrament for those who married with a defect, repented of it, then realized the implications! Shouldn’t the church be seeking to help people uncover the fact that they are living in a non-sacramental marriage? From this ‘wedding day’ focused view, an awful lot of people are lacking the grace of marriage who THINK they have it. And the current practice of the church in regards marriage encourages this belief right up until the moment they decide they want OUT. THEN, all of a sudden, there is talk that the marriage was never a sacrament to begin with. Something ain’t right, I tell ya.
Think about it for a second. How many catholic couples out there today had a contraceptive attitude on their wedding day. Did you? If you did are you sacramentally married? (Even assuming you repented and are now faithfully living a procreative marriage)
It’s not even scandalous that there are a lot of annulments granted given since the sorry reality today is that we have a highly unevangelized body of nominal catholics in America.
What is scandalous is the focus on WEDDING DAY defects, rather than a more wholistic evaluation of the way grace had been allowed into the (apparent) marriage.
It’s just plain not consistant. If the church really teaches that it all revolves around the wedding day state of the couple then the church is horribly negligent in NOT promoting regular times of reflection for married couples; in NOT providing a publicised avenue to legitimize the sacrament for those who married with a defect, repented of it, then realized the implications! Shouldn’t the church be seeking to help people uncover the fact that they are living in a non-sacramental marriage? From this ‘wedding day’ focused view, an awful lot of people are lacking the grace of marriage who THINK they have it. And the current practice of the church in regards marriage encourages this belief right up until the moment they decide they want OUT. THEN, all of a sudden, there is talk that the marriage was never a sacrament to begin with. Something ain’t right, I tell ya.
Think about it for a second. How many catholic couples out there today had a contraceptive attitude on their wedding day. Did you? If you did are you sacramentally married? (Even assuming you repented and are now faithfully living a procreative marriage)
A
Aesq
Guest
M
manualman
Guest
Maybe I need to move there. 
Sounds nice. And very different from my 20-30% nominally catholic region.
Sounds nice. And very different from my 20-30% nominally catholic region.
A
Aesq
Guest
Yeah, lots of fun to live here as a Catholic. 
Some people here think I must have gone insane to convert. I went from being a leader in a couple of thousand adult member methodist church to being just another member in a small parish. Most people just don’t get it. They sure do not understand nullities. Catholics are less than one percent of the population here and that is really the whole diocese. Not just my town or county. We actually gain more new members through RCIA than through transfers from other parishes or new births.
Some people here think I must have gone insane to convert. I went from being a leader in a couple of thousand adult member methodist church to being just another member in a small parish. Most people just don’t get it. They sure do not understand nullities. Catholics are less than one percent of the population here and that is really the whole diocese. Not just my town or county. We actually gain more new members through RCIA than through transfers from other parishes or new births.
M
manualman
Guest
If by that you mean you get hostility and attempts to get you to convert, I’d take that over nearly universal apathy towards things spiritual any day.Yeah, lots of fun to live here as a Catholic.
A
Aesq
Guest
You really probably would not. But this is clearly hijacking this thread at this point.
- Status