Anullment Rates

[bitznbitez]

I have heard all about how the US is an annullment mill and was generally left with the impression that annullments were about as common as divorce among the rest of the nation. Then I ran into this stat :

Partly for these reasons, the number of annulments granted annually in the United States soared from 338 in 1968, to 28,918 in 1974, to a peak of 63,933 in 1991. By 2004 the number had fallen to 46,330, and it fell even further, to 35,009, in 2007—a remarkable decline of 24 percent in three years. (catholicworldreport.com/Item/470/annulment_nation.aspx#.UfbFm42cfuM)

The 35,000 is naturally higher than the 1968 figure of 338 but given the percent catholics in the US -vs- the national figure of 800,000ish divorces per year (cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/marriage_divorce_tables.htm) it seems like all in all the annulment rate is far lower than I perceived.

How do others understand the stats/situation ?

 

[Rachel126]

Could be a couple of things.
I understand the divorce rate has been going down in recent years.
It’s also possible that a lot of Catholics have chosen to forego the annulment process and just get re-married civilly or in another church, for whatever reason. Some people believe the process is more expensive or time consuming than what it really is. Some don’t want to have any contact whatsoever with their ex, and some people think the person won’t cooperate so there is no hope in even trying (not true). There is also a belief among some that an annulment makes their children illegitimate (not true at all).
I suppose in order to really compare, we’d need to see a comparison between number annulments applied for vs. number of annulments granted.

 

[Tarpeian_Rock]

Could be a couple of things.
I understand the divorce rate has been going down in recent years.
It’s also possible that a lot of Catholics have chosen to forego the annulment process and just get re-married civilly or in another church, for whatever reason. Some people believe the process is more expensive or time consuming than what it really is. Some don’t want to have any contact whatsoever with their ex, and some people think the person won’t cooperate so there is no hope in even trying (not true). There is also a belief among some that an annulment makes their children illegitimate (not true at all).
I suppose in order to really compare, we’d need to see a comparison between number annulments applied for vs. number of annulments granted.

Given the number of couples choosing to avoid a church wedding altogether (in favor of “destination weddings,” beaches, hillsides, etc.), my guess would be that those just choosing to forego the annulment process would be a big part of the explanation.

 

[TK421]

Like the above poster said: in a negative light, more people might be heterodox enough to not care and just civilly remarry.

Also, the US is a very competitive marketplace in terms of religion. In a neopagan world there will be more invalid marriages out there; long-term fornicating couples getting drunk at bachelor’s parties and then a week later getting “married” because it’s a cultural tradition, and because it’s an entertaining and sentimentally sweet thing to do, etc., without a thought in the world about openness to life or divinely-bound lifelong commitment. A much higher rate of annulments than the 1960s shouldn’t exclusively be seen as a bad thing. It can also mean that mid-life converts take the Catholic Church very seriously.

 

[Rachel126]

IMHO, there is a great deal of confusion out there among Catholics about the Church’s marriage and annulment rules. Frankly I think most pastors and Church leadership haven’t done a great job in this area. In my experience it’s not something that is brought up unless a person directly asks about it. A lot of Catholics believe they can divorce and re-marry outside the Church and even though they are aware the Church hasn’t blessed the union, they may not be aware they are actually in sin and not supposed to receive Communion, etc.
Add to that the very sad reality of a lot of Catholics leaving the church in recent decades…

 

[Rachel126]

Also, I read somewhere (no link handy, sorry), that the divorce rate for American couples married in a Catholic Church is around 24%, or about half the rate of the society at large. That’s a good thing! But it also means that you can’t extrapolate too much the national % of Catholics from the national divorce rate.

 

[MJJean]

Could be a couple of things.
I understand the divorce rate has been going down in recent years.
It’s also possible that a lot of Catholics have chosen to forego the annulment process and just get re-married civilly or in another church, for whatever reason. Some people believe the process is more expensive or time consuming than what it really is. Some don’t want to have any contact whatsoever with their ex, and some people think the person won’t cooperate so there is no hope in even trying (not true). There is also a belief among some that an annulment makes their children illegitimate (not true at all).
I suppose in order to really compare, we’d need to see a comparison between number annulments applied for vs. number of annulments granted.

The divorce rate has been going down in recent years. Part of it is economic and part is that the rates of people who get married has also gone down.

I know an awful lot of Catholics who have simply gotten remarried civilly and skipped the annulment process. Either they have left the Catholic Church for other more divorce tolerant religions or just left organized religion altogether.

Like the above poster said: in a negative light, more people might be heterodox enough to not care and just civilly remarry.

Also, the US is a very competitive marketplace in terms of religion. In a neopagan world there will be more invalid marriages out there; long-term fornicating couples getting drunk at bachelor’s parties and then a week later getting “married” because it’s a cultural tradition, and because it’s an entertaining and sentimentally sweet thing to do, etc., without a thought in the world about openness to life or divinely-bound lifelong commitment. A much higher rate of annulments than the 1960s shouldn’t exclusively be seen as a bad thing. It can also mean that mid-life converts take the Catholic Church very seriously.

Can you clarify what you mean by more invalid marriages? As long as a marriage is recognized by law, the Church considers it a valid marriage unless/until proven otherwise. Civil marriages and marriages performed by licensed Pagans are legally recognized and would be recognized by the Church unless they are invalid due to something like one spouse was previously married with no annulment or a close kinship. Did you mean more marriages that can be declared invalid due to the circumstances at the time of the ceremony?

And you touched on something I think plays a HUGE role in the number of annulments granted in the U.S.

According to the Church, reasons for annulment are not understanding the Catholic Church’s teachings regarding marriage when the ceremony took place. This includes believing marriage can be dissolved by divorce, not being open to life (contraception, refusing sex, etc.), no intent to remain faithful, gross immaturity and not fully understanding the duties and obligations of marriage. From what I understand, all of those things listed fall under the umbrella of consent. As in, you can’t consent to a marriage if you have no idea what you are really consenting to. Since the Church requires free consent for a marriage to be valid…well.

Frankly, I do not know many Americans who believe marriage can’t be dissolved by divorce, who intend to remain faithful even when they are at their ceremony, most people use some form of contraception, and not many understand the duties and obligations of marriage anymore. Culturally, we Americans who aren’t Catholic or who are and weren’t given proper religious instruction are are pretty much programmed to make marriages that can be annulled.

And, yup, I am a midlife convert who has added to the annulment stats because I got married many years ago. Well, I hope to have added to the stats. I finished my application a few weeks ago, but I do not have an annulment yet. My priest is sure I will receive a Decree of Nullity based on the facts surrounding my marriage, but it will take about a year. So, I guess I have contributed to the stats for 2014.

 

[George_Stegmeir]

Regardless of ones opinion about Annulment, or how many people apply for and are awarded one, the situation today is much better than when I was young, pre-Vatican II.
Before Vatican II, a Church Annulment was almost unheard of in the US. I grew up in Florida when there was only one Diocese: the Diocese of St. Augustine. Before 1960 there were never more than 3 or 4 Annulments a year. One had to be quite wealthy to get one due to the cost of Church approved attorneys and the cost of investigation.
This, of course caused much misery amongst Catholics who were in an untenable marriage that would have been annuled today.
Many Catholics who got civil divorces in those days and did not re-marry outside the Church were still denied the Sacrements and were shunned by many other Catholics.
Don’t tell me it didn’t happen, because it happened to my parents in the early 1950’s, shortly after I left home. Even my younger brother was given a hard time in Parochial School. The only thing that saved him from ostracism by his classmates was that he was the schools star football player! Still, he was singled out by some of the faculty for being from a “deficient family”. Although he was observant until the end of his life, he carried the scars from school until the day he died.
Thank G*d the Church has a much more realistic and charitable attitude towards annulment today!

 

[MJJean]

IMHO, there is a great deal of confusion out there among Catholics about the Church’s marriage and annulment rules. Frankly I think most pastors and Church leadership haven’t done a great job in this area. In my experience it’s not something that is brought up unless a person directly asks about it. **A lot of Catholics believe they can divorce and re-marry outside the Church and even though they are aware the Church hasn’t blessed the union, they may not be aware they are actually in sin and not supposed to receive Communion, etc. **
Add to that the very sad reality of a lot of Catholics leaving the church in recent decades…

No joke! My MIL was a postulant who found being a nun was not for her and (obviously, since she is my MIL) married and had children instead. My FIL is a devout practicing lifelong Catholic who never misses Mass.

When my husband went back to the Church and I decided to convert we were told we were seen to be committing adultery and living in sin since I had been married before and did not have an annulment. I can’t receive any of the Sacraments except Confession and neither can my husband until my former marriage is annulled. My in-laws, lifetime Catholics in their 80’s, had no idea at all about those rules!

What’s worse is that my husband has taken Communion twice before we were told he was not supposed to.

 

[TK421]

No joke! My MIL was a postulant who found being a nun was not for her and (obviously, since she is my MIL) married and had children instead. My FIL is a devout practicing lifelong Catholic who never misses Mass.

When my husband went back to the Church and I decided to convert we were told we were seen to be committing adultery and living in sin since I had been married before and did not have an annulment. I can’t receive any of the Sacraments except Confession and neither can my husband until my former marriage is annulled. My in-laws, lifetime Catholics in their 80’s, had no idea at all about those rules!

What’s worse is that my husband has taken Communion twice before we were told he was not supposed to.

What?

If you’re living in continence as brother and sister then you can receive the Eucharist whenever you want. You don’t need to wait for the annulment to go through. If you’re not living in continence, then you’re living in grave sin, which is the reason you can’t receive communion to begin with.

Or am I misunderstood here?

 

[hurting]

I have heard all about how the US is an annullment mill and was generally left with the impression that annullments were about as common as divorce among the rest of the nation. Then I ran into this stat :

The 35,000 is naturally higher than the 1968 figure of 338 but given the percent catholics in the US -vs- the national figure of 800,000ish divorces per year (cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/marriage_divorce_tables.htm) it seems like all in all the annulment rate is far lower than I perceived.

How do others understand the stats/situation ?

Re-read the link to which you referred (http://www.catholicworldreport.com/I…x#.UfbFm42cfuM); you can pretty readily infer from the statistics provided that declarations of nullity in the US are pretty likely given the wide latitude afforded tribunals to issue them pursuant to canon 1095.

Anyone with eyes to see can tell that something changed in the 1960’s (it happened contemporaneously with VII) with respect to the US Church’s view toward annulment to result in a 100-150x increase in decrees of nullity granted.

I’d suspect that a great many don’t pursue annulment any more precisely because the explosion in annulments has cheapened the Church’s credibility on the matter.

 

[bitznbitez]

Thanks everyone for the (name removed by moderator)ut.

 

[MJJean]

What?

If you’re living in continence as brother and sister then you can receive the Eucharist whenever you want. You don’t need to wait for the annulment to go through. If you’re not living in continence, then you’re living in grave sin, which is the reason you can’t receive communion to begin with.

Or am I misunderstood here?

No, you didn’t misunderstand. We are not living as brother and sister.

I knew I could not receive Communion because I have never been prepared for the Sacrament. I was told pretty early in the conversion process that I would not be able to receive the Sacraments until the annulment was final and I had my marriage convalidated.

NO ONE, told my husband he was also unable to receive Communion. I actually found that out researching marriage, divorce, remarriage and annulments on my own and had the unpleasant task of informing my husband.

Re-read the link to which you referred (http://www.catholicworldreport.com/I…x#.UfbFm42cfuM); you can pretty readily infer from the statistics provided that declarations of nullity in the US are pretty likely given the wide latitude afforded tribunals to issue them pursuant to canon 1095.

Anyone with eyes to see can tell that something changed in the 1960’s (it happened contemporaneously with VII) with respect to the US Church’s view toward annulment to result in a 100-150x increase in decrees of nullity granted.

I’d suspect that a great many don’t pursue annulment any more precisely because the explosion in annulments has cheapened the Church’s credibility on the matter.

According to canon, anyone who enters into a marriage with the belief at the time of the ceremony that the marriage can be completely dissolved by divorce is considered not to have consented to marriage as the Catholic Church understands marriage. That’s a very large percentage of the population here in the U.S. and could explain the annulment rates.

Not to mention that something like 20% of annulments applied for are denied for lack of grounds before making it to a Tribunal. So, about 80% of the applications go to the Tribunal with at least some grounds which means those 80% have a decent chance of being granted. And no one knows how many people never even apply because their priest says they have no grounds or a very low chance of having an annulment granted.

I would think that Catholics or converts would view the explosion of annulments in a positive light and apply. I suspect a great many don’t pursue annulment because they A) believe the wouldn’t be able to get the annulment granted B) aren’t even aware they should apply for an annulment believing their civil marriages and divorces, since they were not married in the Church, were never recognized by the Church in the first place.or C) have simply left the Church for other religions or no religion.

 

[freiabereinsam]

As others have said, there may be a not-so-bright explanation: fewer annulments may be granted, but that doesn’t mean the amount of spouses seeking annulment is decreasing; and even then, it could simply be the spouses avoiding the annulment process altogether and seeking remarriage elsewhere, without an annulment of the first marriage.

And in any case, the amount of divorces (and annulments) is far too high by any legitimate Christian standard. We still have too many people seeking annulment where grounds for annulment do not exist. Many of these people say something like “but I didn’t know what I was doing”–as if they do not know that marriage is for life. (Of the most popular reasons for annulment, the others are equally dubious.) I mean, is it really a good thing to say “Our annulment rate is down to [x]%” when that x could be 20, and in any case still too high?

 

[MJJean]

As others have said, there may be a not-so-bright explanation: fewer annulments may be granted, but that doesn’t mean the amount of spouses seeking annulment is decreasing; and even then, it could simply be the spouses avoiding the annulment process altogether and seeking remarriage elsewhere, without an annulment of the first marriage.

And in any case, the amount of divorces (and annulments) is far too high by any legitimate Christian standard. We still have too many people seeking annulment where grounds for annulment do not exist. Many of these people say something like “but I didn’t know what I was doing”–as if they do not know that marriage is for life. (Of the most popular reasons for annulment, the others are equally dubious.) I mean, is it really a good thing to say “Our annulment rate is down to [x]%” when that x could be 20, and in any case still too high?

raises hand If we’re doing a head count, I was never lead to believe marriage was for life.

I grew up watching family members and family friends get married, divorced, and remarried. Sure, I was told that marriage was supposed to be for life, but that if a marriage “went bad” divorce was acceptable and so was remarrying and starting over. And this is with a half Catholic-half Lutheran family!

In fact, there are more divorces and remarriages among the Catholic side. Come to think of it, none of the Catholic side who remarried went through the annulment process. They just got remarried civilly or in an Protestant ceremony.

Considering the rate of divorce in the U.S., not that many people grow up thinking marriage really is for life.

 

[freiabereinsam]

raises hand If we’re doing a head count, I was never lead to believe marriage was for life.

I grew up watching family members and family friends get married, divorced, and remarried. Sure, I was told that marriage was supposed to be for life, but that if a marriage “went bad” divorce was acceptable and so was remarrying and starting over. And this is with a half Catholic-half Lutheran family!

In fact, there are more divorces and remarriages among the Catholic side. Come to think of it, none of the Catholic side who remarried went through the annulment process. They just got remarried civilly or in an Protestant ceremony.

Considering the rate of divorce in the U.S., not that many people grow up thinking marriage really is for life.

Anyone who marries in (almost?) any church knows the marriage vows and what they are signing up for. The marriage vow does not consist of the phrase “till death do us part…unless I decide I’m no longer in love with you”. There is a clear expectation that the spouses “forsake all others”, not separate, and certainly not remarry. Then there is also the Bible–and the Bible clearly condemns the majority of divorces and remarriages currently taking place.

Also, the idea of what makes a marriage “go bad” is far too large by any Christian standard (but we’re going back to square one here).

 

[Cojuanco]

Anyone who marries in (almost?) any church knows the marriage vows and what they are signing up for. The marriage vow does not consist of the phrase “till death do us part…unless I decide I’m no longer in love with you”. There is a clear expectation that the spouses “forsake all others”, not separate, and certainly not remarry. Then there is also the Bible–and the Bible clearly condemns the majority of divorces and remarriages currently taking place.

Also, the idea of what makes a marriage “go bad” is far too large by any Christian standard (but we’re going back to square one here).

If that is the case, why have Protestant churches, in spite of these oaths, allowed for dissolution of valid marriages? I am not surprised that Catholics are influenced towards these false teachings when many of their neighbors share them.

 

[MJJean]

Anyone who marries in (almost?) any church knows the marriage vows and what they are signing up for. The marriage vow does not consist of the phrase “till death do us part…unless I decide I’m no longer in love with you”. There is a clear expectation that the spouses “forsake all others”, not separate, and certainly not remarry. Then there is also the Bible–and the Bible clearly condemns the majority of divorces and remarriages currently taking place.

Also, the idea of what makes a marriage “go bad” is far too large by any Christian standard (but we’re going back to square one here).

There is a difference in what people are told and what they actually know (understand). If you’ve been told that marriage is for life and you grow up seeing 50% of the married people you know getting divorced, do you know marriage is for life or do you end up thinking that “til death do us part” is just a sweet, well meant, phrase used because it’s tradition?

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

No, you didn’t misunderstand. We are not living as brother and sister.

FWIW, if you are not living as brother and sister (i.e., you are continuing to have sex), you shouldn’t be going to Confession either, at least in the context of receiving absolution. Parties that confess a sin that they intend to keep on committing should not be receiving absolution.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

Anyone who marries in (almost?) any church knows the marriage vows and what they are signing up for. The marriage vow does not consist of the phrase “till death do us part…unless I decide I’m no longer in love with you”. There is a clear expectation that the spouses “forsake all others”, not separate, and certainly not remarry. Then there is also the Bible–and the Bible clearly condemns the majority of divorces and remarriages currently taking place.

It is actions that matter, not words. “Till death do us part” are empty words if the couple divorces, because obviously death didn’t end the marriage.