Anullments really bother me

[nguyentoi816]

**Nhà thông minh , Thiết bị nhà thông minh , Máy Fax panasonic , Máy Fax , IP Camera hay den dvn.vn **

 

[Suslar]

Adamski and Kelvin, I am thrilled you support marriage so strongly! I am equally thrilled you will not ever have to endure the pain that some of us who responded have had to endure. It’s hard to be alone without a partner after having once had one. But your strong, healthy marriages give me hope that I will one day have a real husband!

But you should know that as was already said, the annulment process is not a walk in the park. It starts with a meeting with the parish priest and filling out a form which you and the priest sign. This is a request to petition the Tribunal to hear your case. If the Tribunal agrees you may have a case, then they send more detailed forms and request more information from the petitioner. They will also ask the other party if they want to participate (and their refusal to do so does not stop the process). Then they seek testimony from at least 3 witnesses who knew you at the time of the marriage. This testimony has to also be signed by a priest or notarized to attest it is true. After all that data gets submitted, the petitioner meets with a Field Advocate. This person is usually very skilled in psychology and will ask questions about your state of mind to be sure you are seeking annulment with good reason - not just to be vindictive or something frivolous. I felt like I was being grilled by mine! Sometimes, psychological tests are.given too. As said above, the process can take 1-3 years. YEARS!!! And it’s emotionally difficult work. Mine took 18 months and dredging up the past was painful. Like others who have experienced the process, I don’t know anyone who would go thru it for less than serious reasons.

But there is a problem now in the universal Church. There are Catholics who have civil divorce but don’t understand the annulment process or have misconceptions about it - and they leave the Church to remarry in another denomination or justice of the peace. What a tragedy! And on the other hand, we have people like me - single after Declaration of Nullity and getting very little support from anyone in the Church. People judge me, question if my daughter is illegitimate (no, I was legally married), and make rude comments. It’s hard to feel left out of couples events. It’s even harder to feel not welcome at family events because my family is non-traditional. If you really want an eye-opening experience, find one of those divorced people who irritate you just because they are divorced and take them for a cup of coffee to talk. I think you’ll be amazed at how circumstances are not at all what they expected or wanted and how they suffer for trying hard to do the right thing.

 

[Adamski]

My marriage experience is what I above expericenced as a child and how my parents repaired what appeared to be an in repairable marriage

Then my second experience is my own marriage

 

[Suslar]

My marriage experience is what I above expericenced as a child and how my parents repaired what appeared to be an in repairable marriage

Then my second experience is my own marriage

I see. At some point or on some level, your father had to have contributed to your mother’s efforts to make things work. One spouse cannot make it work on her own. I did try that for years - giving 100%. That is not a marriage. It takes two.

 

[Contra_Mundum_1]

Just to clarify, the RCC only allows parties to seek Declaration of Nullity AFTER a civil divorce has been granted. If a couple is married and has doubts, they should confer with their pastor and/or someone from their Diocesan Tribunal. If they have “doubts” but are still legally married, marriage counseling can make a world of difference! There is no need to try to seek annulment in such a case.

Oh, I just meant that I believe that there are many marriages potentially not sacramnetal because of the way the parties entered into it.

 

[kelvinf]

Kelvin, you asked about Baptism and other Sacraments and if they can be invalidated later - like if someone changes their mind about what they believe. The answer is No. Once validly Baptized, if cannot be undone. This is true for ALL Sacraments including Confirmation, Marriage and Holy Orders. A Sacrament validly conferred cannot be undone . . one cannot be un-Baptized, un-Confirmed, un-married, un-ordained, etc. The biggest difference between Marriage and all other Sacraments is that it is conferred by the man and woman on each other. The officiant is there to ensure the Rite is followed, but he doesn’t marry the couple - the couple marries one another. So in an Annulment proceeding, the Tribunal looks to see if the Sacrament was properly conferred or if there were impediments that prevented it from happening. The Declaration of Nullity does not mean I was “un-married” - I simply was not ever Sacramentally married. I can rightly list my status as “single.”

I know it’s a hard concept for people to grasp - especially if you’ve never been thru the process. So, please bear with me as I explain I was not ever married. Yes, civilly married (there are wedding pictures and the dress and all that), but not married in the eyes of the Church as determined by the Church (not by me). The Church does not have the power to “un-do” any Sacrament. The Church does not have the power to end marriages. But in Her great mercy, She can declare some unions were never valid from the very start - even if they might have appeared to be so.

Since you asked about Baptism specifically, there are times when the validity is called into question, but not be anything the person being Baptized or his parents did, but by the officiant not following protocol. For instance, in an emergency Baptism where death is likely or in the turbulent 70’s when people used an oddball form (“In the name of the Creator, Sanctifier and Redeemer”) instead of “In the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit”. But in these cases, as with marriage, the presumption is validity unless proven otherwise. Where wrong formula was used/ Rite not followed, the Church does allow for a conditional Baptism that follows the Rite precisely . . not to “re-do” the Baptism, but to ensure the person was validly Baptized.

Well, both baptism and marriage require consent.

Can. 868 §1. For an infant to be baptized licitly:

1/ the parents or at least one of them or the person who legitimately takes their place must consent;

So anything you say about consent regarding marriage should also apply to baptism. If one says a marriage is invalid because there was supposedly no legitimate consent (which I believe is almost impossible to prove), then the same should also hold true for baptism. But that doesn’t seem to be the case.

 

[kelvinf]

Adamski and Kelvin, I am thrilled you support marriage so strongly! I am equally thrilled you will not ever have to endure the pain that some of us who responded have had to endure. It’s hard to be alone without a partner after having once had one. But your strong, healthy marriages give me hope that I will one day have a real husband!

But you should know that as was already said, the annulment process is not a walk in the park. It starts with a meeting with the parish priest and filling out a form which you and the priest sign. This is a request to petition the Tribunal to hear your case. If the Tribunal agrees you may have a case, then they send more detailed forms and request more information from the petitioner. They will also ask the other party if they want to participate (and their refusal to do so does not stop the process). Then they seek testimony from at least 3 witnesses who knew you at the time of the marriage. This testimony has to also be signed by a priest or notarized to attest it is true. After all that data gets submitted, the petitioner meets with a Field Advocate. This person is usually very skilled in psychology and will ask questions about your state of mind to be sure you are seeking annulment with good reason - not just to be vindictive or something frivolous. I felt like I was being grilled by mine! Sometimes, psychological tests are.given too. As said above, the process can take 1-3 years. YEARS!!! And it’s emotionally difficult work. Mine took 18 months and dredging up the past was painful. Like others who have experienced the process, I don’t know anyone who would go thru it for less than serious reasons.

But there is a problem now in the universal Church. There are Catholics who have civil divorce but don’t understand the annulment process or have misconceptions about it - and they leave the Church to remarry in another denomination or justice of the peace. What a tragedy! And on the other hand, we have people like me - single after Declaration of Nullity and getting very little support from anyone in the Church. People judge me, question if my daughter is illegitimate (no, I was legally married), and make rude comments. It’s hard to feel left out of couples events. It’s even harder to feel not welcome at family events because my family is non-traditional. If you really want an eye-opening experience, find one of those divorced people who irritate you just because they are divorced and take them for a cup of coffee to talk. I think you’ll be amazed at how circumstances are not at all what they expected or wanted and how they suffer for trying hard to do the right thing.

I am single and I know what it means to be single and have responsibilities. I have great respect for single moms and I actually believe they should be treated preferentially. Be strong and don’t let people say things about you and your daughter.

Suslar, I don’t think having gone through annulment automatically means one understands annulment more than others. Actually, I think there is a tendency for such persons to always speak in favour of annulments. Sure, you might know the process inside out but my issue is usually with the reasons why people seek annulment and why they are granted and why the number of annulments in some areas are unbelievable.

In a few cases, I can understand how the tribunal can declare that a marriage isn’t valid. Like in the case where someone was forced to marry another person. But in most cases, I don’t understand how they are able to do that. Only God can ultimately read minds and know whether someone was lying or not.

I ultimately believe that, once I take the vow, I am meant to be with that person, come rain or come sun. I will never ever think of annulment. After spending appropriate time discerning marriage and finally marrying someone, there is no turning back. Once the vows have been taken and you are immediately satisfied with it, I don’t see why one should question it when things start going wrong.

 

[Kathryn_Ann]

Would that all couples share the belief in permanency of marriage, but we must be charitable. I had an annulment from a first husband (now deceased recently) during RCIA, before I joined the Church. My first husband left me and our child, completely abandoned us, and although that was not the grounds for the annulment, from the very beginning of the courtship and before the marriage, there were many things we were too young and inexperienced to understand. Just google on “Myths about Catholic Annulment” or 14 Myths about Catholic Annulment" and you may be surprised to see all the misunderstandings about this topic.

God in His Mercy has given us a Holy Church which allows annulments. The Church has the power to do so. “Whatsoever you bind on earth will be bound in Heaven. Whatsoever you loose on earth will be loosed in Heaven.” Annulments are allowed. The Tribunals work hard to look into each individual case. The children’s legitimacy is not affected, and parents are expected to honor all child support ordered by the civil courts.

It’s commendable to be concerned that people be more aware of the sacramentality of marriage. But unless you’ve experienced what the annulment process really is, you may not have realized that God’s mercy is at work when the Church investigates and makes its decision for people seeking an annulment. I can tell you from personal experience that the process is not arbitrary, that all truth is sought, and that everything is done to bring truth to light. Above all, we must be charitable towards people going through this.

 

[jilly4ski]

Well, both baptism and marriage require consent.

Can. 868 §1. For an infant to be baptized licitly:

1/ the parents or at least one of them or the person who legitimately takes their place must consent;

So anything you say about consent regarding marriage should also apply to baptism. If one says a marriage is invalid because there was supposedly no legitimate consent (which I believe is almost impossible to prove), then the same should also hold true for baptism. But that doesn’t seem to be the case.

This canon is about licit and illicit baptisms, not about valid and invalid baptisms. So a valid baptism can be done without a parent’s consent (happen more frequently then we would like when grandparents secretly baptize grandbabies, these babies are validly baptized, just illicitly).

An illicit marriage, would be, for an example, one that was performed outside without permission. While an invalid marriage is one where one person is incapable of entering the marriage (they maybe hid something from their fiance, or was determined never to have children, or is impotent, or don’t think marriage is lifelong, etc. All the sacraments have different requirements for validity. Baptism, needs a person, water, the correct formula (I baptize you in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit), and the correct intent (the intent to do what the church intends, which is very hard to mess up, even atheists can do this).

 

[JRKH]

I am single and I know what it means to be single and have responsibilities. I have great respect for single moms and I actually believe they should be treated preferentially. Be strong and don’t let people say things about you and your daughter.

Suslar, I don’t think having gone through annulment automatically means one understands annulment more than others.

I agree, but experience in a given thing IS useful and so we feel it is worthwhile sharing our experience with others so that we all might benefit from a comprehensive view.

Actually, I think there is a tendency for such persons to always speak in favour of annulments.

I’m not sure what you mean by “speak in favor of annulments” here. Below YOU admit that there are cases that are, in your view, legitimate - so you too are speaking in favor of annulments.

Sure, you might know the process inside out but my issue is usually with the reasons why people seek annulment and why they are granted and why the number of annulments in some areas are unbelievable.

Here again - I think that it is important to ask for sources so that the numbers and the categories can be properly broken down. Only in this way can a proper and productive conversation take place.
Your “issue” - regarding reasons and quantities would be much better served by having good, comprehensive, data to work with.

In a few cases, I can understand how the tribunal can declare that a marriage isn’t valid. Like in the case where someone was forced to marry another person. But in most cases, I don’t understand how they are able to do that. Only God can ultimately read minds and know whether someone was lying or not.

In this I would suggest that you consider that, by Christ’s own command (Mt 18:15-18) the Church is authoritative…That we are to take our issues to the Church and we are to listen to The Church. It is the Church that makes determination and binds and looses.
The Church has established the procedures, the tests, the causes etc by which these matters are to be judged. The Church, through the tribunals, administers these things.
So long as every person involved approaches the matter in prayerful humility and a desire to do the will of God and a willingness to submit to the decision of the Church…I don’t think we need to have “mind readers”.
If - on the other hand - someone DOES subvert the system in some way the sin for that subversion is on their head and not on the head of any other.

I ultimately believe that, once I take the vow, I am meant to be with that person, come rain or come sun. I will never ever think of annulment

. After spending appropriate time discerning marriage and finally marrying someone, there is no turning back. Once the vows have been taken and you are immediately satisfied with it, I don’t see why one should question it when things start going wrong.
I fully agree and I pray that this is exactly how it turns out for you. Taking great care at the front end will avoid much pain later on.

Peace
James

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I see people that have been married for many years and have children seeking Anullments

It really bothers me!!!

If my wife left me I would never seek an Anullment marriage is permenent and I knew what I was doing.

Plus if She left me I would just dedicate more time to Jesus and his church!

Anyone else feel this way?

I think you don’t understand a decree of nullity. It has nothing to do with how long you are married, or how many children you have.

A decree of nullity is based on whether or not a person was able to understand, and fully and freely consent to and be able to do what is necessary for marriage at the time of the vows.

That’s why one can seek a decree of nullity if one was literally forced ‘at gunpoint’ to say ‘I do’. Without the gun, one would have said, “No way!”

Or one can seek a decree of nullity if after say 10 years of marriage and 3 children, one finds that one’s spouse had another wife (or husband) whom they had married, and kept ‘secret’, before they married the second spouse.

It’s based on the person’s ‘capacity’ at the TIME OF THE VOWS.

 

[kelvinf]

I’m not sure what you mean by “silly reasons why people seek to nullify their marriages”…I’ve never seen, or been able to find (online) any sort of official and reliable data on the various reasons submitted. If you have a good and official source for this I would appreciate seeing it. This is something that interests me too.

Well, what I consider silly is my opinion. So not everybody would agree with me. But I will give you an example at the end of this post.

I can understand people being skeptical of the process - especially if they have never been involved in it in any way. Having been through the process myself, I can tell you that it is rather grueling and quite thorough.

There is someone on this forum who tells me all the time that if infedility happens twice in a marriage, then that’s automatically grounds for an annulment. He insists on the at least twice thing. So how on earth can the tribunal determine that there was no legitimate consent at the time of consent? How can the tribunal differential between subsequent failings and no legitimate consent?

Why would one bother to even seek an annulment if they are willing to commit a serious sin in order to obtain it?
I think that this is something that people too often fail to consider. The fact that a person seeks an annulment at all means that they take their faith seriously. If they take the faith seriously, they are not going to deliberately sin to obtain the annulment.
On the other hand, if they DON’T take their faith seriously - If they WOULD be capable of lying to get an annulment - the odds are that they won’t bother to apply for one. If they choose to remarry, they would simply have a civil ceremony and that’s that.

So - as I say - consider carefully the frame of mind of the person who seeks a decree of nullity. Would such a person deliberately attempt to subvert the system - and in so doing commit a grave sin?

Peace
James

Well, I see it differently. It seems to me that most people seek annulments when their marriage isn’t going the way they wanted. If a faithful Catholic is not happy with their marriage, for instance in the case of infidelity, if he or she is tired of dealing with the issue and wants out, then the only way he or she can achieve this “legitimately” is via the annulment system. He or she could argue that because the spouse is currently cheating, therefore the spouse didn’t consent to fidelity. With an annulment, they could marry another person. I believe there is this desire to marry another person because someone can separate from their spouse and still preserve their marriage.

I hope I do not offend you or Suslar in anyway. I am just speaking my mind here and don’t mean to offend anyone. I know that sometimes it is difficult to speak your mind without offending someone but I just want to make it clear that that’s not my intention.

There was one guy on CAF here who had serious issues with his wife. He basically made everyone to believe that the woman was at wrong. Finally, the woman left him. Some suggested as usual that he should seek an annulment. But he said that he has already had two other marriages nullified.
It seems to me that, some people strongly believe that marital problems are grounds for an annulment (according to my observations on this forum) and they actually go ahead to seek an annulment so that they can be free to marry another person. How this guy managed to “marry” 3 women in the Catholic Church, I have no idea.

This is an example of something that doesn’t make much sense to me:

I’ve been married for almost 14 years… We’ve been having problems for almost two years, though. A month ago my husband, in the middle of an argument dropped on me, “I always told you I wouldn’t stay with you just because of the children.” Uhm. No, he had never told me that. If he had, I never would have married him…

Now I’m in doubt as to when we did the convalidation if he felt this way. If he did, it seems to me that the marriage is invalid due to his lack of belief in the permenance of marriage and possible perpetration of fraud on me by not being upfront about it.

If it makes any difference, my pastor has already told me that it’s best to divorce him. Can anyone offer me any insight as to the validity of my marriage?

Why on earth would a Catholic woman, who has been married for 14 years, has been having problems for 2 years, start trying to destroy her marriage simply because of a single sentence the husband made during an argument?

Why on earth would a Catholic priest tell a woman to divorce her husband (if what she is saying is true) simply because of that.

Why are they (the woman and the priest) not trying to save the marriage, but rather, want to destroy the marriage?

When I read such posts (like that of the woman I quoted above) on CAF about annulments, they sicken me.

 

[kelvinf]

This canon is about licit and illicit baptisms, not about valid and invalid baptisms. So a valid baptism can be done without a parent’s consent (happen more frequently then we would like when grandparents secretly baptize grandbabies, these babies are validly baptized, just illicitly).

An illicit marriage, would be, for an example, one that was performed outside without permission. While an invalid marriage is one where one person is incapable of entering the marriage (they maybe hid something from their fiance, or was determined never to have children, or is impotent, or don’t think marriage is lifelong, etc. All the sacraments have different requirements for validity. Baptism, needs a person, water, the correct formula (I baptize you in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit), and the correct intent (the intent to do what the church intends, which is very hard to mess up, even atheists can do this).

Very well.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Well, what I consider silly is my opinion. So not everybody would agree with me. But I will give you an example at the end of this post.

There is someone on this forum who tells me all the time that if infedility happens twice in a marriage, then that’s automatically grounds for an annulment. He insists on the at least twice thing. So how on earth can the tribunal determine that there was no legitimate consent at the time of consent? How can the tribunal differential between subsequent failings and no legitimate consent?

Well, I see it differently. It seems to me that most people seek annulments when their marriage isn’t going the way they wanted. If a faithful Catholic is not happy with their marriage, for instance in the case of infidelity, if he or she is tired of dealing with the issue and wants out, then the only way he or she can achieve this “legitimately” is via the annulment system. He or she could argue that because the spouse is currently cheating, therefore the spouse didn’t consent to fidelity. With an annulment, they could marry another person. I believe there is this desire to marry another person because someone can separate from their spouse and still preserve their marriage.

I hope I do not offend you or Suslar in anyway. I am just speaking my mind here and don’t mean to offend anyone. I know that sometimes it is difficult to speak your mind without offending someone but I just want to make it clear that that’s not my intention.

There was one guy on CAF here who had serious issues with his wife. He basically made everyone to believe that the woman was at wrong. Finally, the woman left him. Some suggested as usual that he should seek an annulment. But he said that he has already had two other marriages nullified.
It seems to me that, some people strongly believe that marital problems are grounds for an annulment (according to my observations on this forum) and they actually go ahead to seek an annulment so that they can be free to marry another person. How this guy managed to “marry” 3 women in the Catholic Church, I have no idea.

This is an example of something that doesn’t make much sense to me:
I’ve been married for almost 14 years… We’ve been having problems for almost two years, though. A month ago my husband, in the middle of an argument dropped on me, “I always told you I wouldn’t stay with you just because of the children.” Uhm. No, he had never told me that. If he had, I never would have married him…

Now I’m in doubt as to when we did the convalidation if he felt this way. If he did, it seems to me that the marriage is invalid due to his lack of belief in the permenance of marriage and possible perpetration of fraud on me by not being upfront about it.

If it makes any difference, my pastor has already told me that it’s best to divorce him. Can anyone offer me any insight as to the validity of my marriage?
Why on earth would a Catholic woman, who has been married for 14 years, has been having problems for 2 years, start trying to destroy her marriage simply because of a single sentence the husband made during an argument?

Why on earth would a Catholic priest tell a woman to divorce her husband (if what she is saying is true) simply because of that.

Why are they (the woman and the priest) not trying to save the marriage, but rather, want to destroy the marriage?

When I read such posts (like that of the woman I quoted above) on CAF about annulments, they sicken me.

no offense, but cherry picked examples presented as though they represent the majority aren’t exactly models of logic.

So, maybe SOME people pursue a decree for the ‘wrong reason’ according to you.
Maybe some actually manage to lie, or ‘pull one over’ on a council.

Does that mean that all, or even MOST decrees are 'sickening"? that all, or MOST people who seek them are wimps, losers, liars and cheats? Because that is what you seem to imply. . .

 

[kelvinf]

no offense, but cherry picked examples presented as though they represent the majority aren’t exactly models of logic.

So, maybe SOME people pursue a decree for the ‘wrong reason’ according to you.
Maybe some actually manage to lie, or ‘pull one over’ on a council.

Does that mean that all, or even MOST decrees are 'sickening"? that all, or MOST people who seek them are wimps, losers, liars and cheats? Because that is what you seem to imply. . .

I stand by what I have said. I said:

It seems to me that most people seek annulments when their marriage isn’t going the way they wanted

That statement was carefully worded and there is nothing wrong with what I said. You can certainly disagree with me if you want.

It seems to me that, some people strongly believe that marital problems are grounds for an annulment (according to my observations on this forum)

Still a carefully worded statement and it’s according to my observation. Your own observation might be different, I don’t disagree.

When I read such posts (like that of the woman I quoted above) on CAF about annulments, they sicken me.

Same here. All very carefully worded statements. I know this topic is sensitive since some folks here seem to have had an annulment. So I tried my best to express my opinion in a way that shouldn’t offend anyone. But it seems like I failed big time.

 

[jilly4ski]

Well, what I consider silly is my opinion. So not everybody would agree with me. But I will give you an example at the end of this post.

There is someone on this forum who tells me all the time that if infedility happens twice in a marriage, then that’s automatically grounds for an annulment. He insists on the at least twice thing. So how on earth can the tribunal determine that there was no legitimate consent at the time of consent? How can the tribunal differential between subsequent failings and no legitimate consent?

Well, I see it differently. It seems to me that most people seek annulments when their marriage isn’t going the way they wanted. If a faithful Catholic is not happy with their marriage, for instance in the case of infidelity, if he or she is tired of dealing with the issue and wants out, then the only way he or she can achieve this “legitimately” is via the annulment system. He or she could argue that because the spouse is currently cheating, therefore the spouse didn’t consent to fidelity. With an annulment, they could marry another person. I believe there is this desire to marry another person because someone can separate from their spouse and still preserve their marriage.

I hope I do not offend you or Suslar in anyway. I am just speaking my mind here and don’t mean to offend anyone. I know that sometimes it is difficult to speak your mind without offending someone but I just want to make it clear that that’s not my intention.

There was one guy on CAF here who had serious issues with his wife. He basically made everyone to believe that the woman was at wrong. Finally, the woman left him. Some suggested as usual that he should seek an annulment. But he said that he has already had two other marriages nullified.
It seems to me that, some people strongly believe that marital problems are grounds for an annulment (according to my observations on this forum) and they actually go ahead to seek an annulment so that they can be free to marry another person. How this guy managed to “marry” 3 women in the Catholic Church, I have no idea.

This is an example of something that doesn’t make much sense to me:

I’ve been married for almost 14 years… We’ve been having problems for almost two years, though. A month ago my husband, in the middle of an argument dropped on me, “I always told you I wouldn’t stay with you just because of the children.” Uhm. No, he had never told me that. If he had, I never would have married him…

Now I’m in doubt as to when we did the convalidation if he felt this way. If he did, it seems to me that the marriage is invalid due to his lack of belief in the permenance of marriage and possible perpetration of fraud on me by not being upfront about it.

If it makes any difference, my pastor has already told me that it’s best to divorce him. Can anyone offer me any insight as to the validity of my marriage?

Why on earth would a Catholic woman, who has been married for 14 years, has been having problems for 2 years, start trying to destroy her marriage simply because of a single sentence the husband made during an argument?

Why on earth would a Catholic priest tell a woman to divorce her husband (if what she is saying is true) simply because of that.

Why are they (the woman and the priest) not trying to save the marriage, but rather, want to destroy the marriage?

When I read such posts (like that of the woman I quoted above) on CAF about annulments, they sicken me.

:ehh: People come to CAF in doubt that their confessions are valid. Why is it any different when people come to CAF wondering if their marriages are valid? If your spouse came to you and told you they will never have children and always knew they would not have children then what? If such a spouse said that, then the validity of ones marriage is indeed in doubt (if it is true that they did not intend to have children at the time of the marriage). The above poster is worried about the validity of her marriage, because it appears that her spouse expressed not only the current but an on going belief that marriage is not lifelong (until death), that he will not stay with her ‘just because of the children.’ If his assertions are true, (not to mention he hid them from her) then indeed, there is doubt about the validity of her marriage.

Now luckily for us, marriage is given the “favor of the law.” And thus, marriages are to be presumed valid until the tribunal determines otherwise. But in some cases (mostly lack of form) the couple will have to do a convalidation- essentially get married.

 

[opus101]

I also have questions about anullments. For instance, what about some of the Saints who married pagans who were unfaithful and irreligious ,and suffered greatly through their lives, offering it for the conversion of their spouses. Were their marriages invalid? And when some of the spouses converted, did the amrriage all of a sudden become valid?

And what about two couples, both in the same situation (let’s say that one of the spouses in each couple did not take the commitment seriously, and never intended to remain faithful). One couple obtains an anullment, and the second couple never divorces or applies for it. Does this mean that the faithful member of the second couple lives his/her life out in an invalid marriage? If the unfaithful spouse undergoes conversion, does that rectify the marriage, or is it still null?

 

[kelvinf]

Would that all couples share the belief in permanency of marriage, but we must be charitable. I had an annulment from a first husband (now deceased recently) during RCIA, before I joined the Church. My first husband left me and our child, completely abandoned us, and although that was not the grounds for the annulment, from the very beginning of the courtship and before the marriage, there were many things we were too young and inexperienced to understand. Just google on “Myths about Catholic Annulment” or 14 Myths about Catholic Annulment" and you may be surprised to see all the misunderstandings about this topic.

Well, I try my best to be charitable. The thing is, I would mostly always support that a marriage should be saved and try to argue against an annulment in most cases I have come across. So my opposition to annulments (in most of the cases I know about) might never go down well with some people.

God in His Mercy has given us a Holy Church which allows annulments. The Church has the power to do so. “Whatsoever you bind on earth will be bound in Heaven. Whatsoever you loose on earth will be loosed in Heaven.” Annulments are allowed.

I don’t deny. It is also allowed for the pope to resign. But if the popes resign habitually, then I would likely question the system.

 

[TimothyH]

Me too! This is exactly what all Catholics ought to learn!

If the Church grants you an anullment then you never had a wife in the first place. You were never married to begin with. There was no marriage. It didn’t happen.

-Tim-

 

[kelvinf]

If the Church grants you an anullment then you never had a wife in the first place.

-Tim-

But I wouldn’t seek an annulment to begin with.

And would that mean that there are people who are married but who aren’t married? Are they sinning? I don’t think so. The words that come out of their mouths while taking the vows play a very big role.