Anyone else uneasy about annulments?

[manualman]

I used to think there was a problem in the Church of nullity decrees being handed out far too easily.

Over time, I came to realize that while the system isn’t perfect it isn’t fundamentally the problem. The problem is that we in the church don’t put even 5% of the effort into full, honest and, if necessary, brutal marriage preparation like we do into examining appeals for a nullity decree.

Maybe we should rotate tribunal members into the marriage prep programs and vice versa! Maybe some couples really should be told “Look, I have to be honest with you. You can dress up nice, rent a reception hall and say some pretty vows in front of me, but I already see barriers between you that are not going to allow this to be a sacramental marriage. Marriage is not externally imposed, it can only be given freely to each other. From what I see, this____ and this_____ in your relationship are barriers to you each truly giving yourselves to one another. Please resolve those problems first.”

 

[Texas_Roofer]

GraceDK

I have no experience in annulments I would like to offer you a thought or two: The philosophic problem, are the people before the tribunal described as such? “What is marriage? Marriage is the lifelong partnership of mutual and exclusive fidelity between a man and a woman ordered by its very nature to the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of children (see CCC, no. 1601; CIC, can. 1055.1; GS, no. 48). The bond of marriage is indissoluble – that is, it lasts “until death do us part.” At the heart of married love is the total gift of self that husband and wife freely offer to each other. Because of their sexual difference, husband and wife can truly become “one flesh” and can give to each other “the reality of children, who are a living reflection of their love” (FC, no. 14). (USCCB FAQs). Given that to petition a tribunal the people must be separated, civilly divorced, and actively pursuing a annulment how can one hold the stated condition exists? Another issue you may not be considering is that the incomplete document (probably large numbers) or the unlikely case (probably large numbers) is not denied but left idle. So denial maybe rare because only when one has sufficient case to advance a petition over the opposing spouse is it like to drive to the end of the process a case which is denied.

These are just thoughts which might help you develop a more accurate prospective

 

[Gorgias]

I have yet to apply for the annulment simply because I haven’t. I don’t plan on getting remarried anytime soon, but, I want to know: is this valid?

No one on an internet forum is capable of answering that for you; even a canon lawyer, who might be able to give an informed opinion, would be at a disadvantage trying to give you a reasonable answer. The only “real” answer is: go talk to your parish priest!

If they say it is, I cannot, under any circumstance, be with my ex-wife.

That may be the case. However, if your marriage were found to be valid, that wouldn’t be the only other option; of course, marriage to another woman wouldn’t be an option, either…

 

[Gorgias]

I read some articles and it seems that the two statistical numbers that come up all the time are these that over 95 percent are granted an annulment, when they apply. the other number showed that Americans get far more annullments than the rest of the world combined…

Have you had a chance to read the article that was linked to, earlier in this thread? In it, a canonist addresses exactly these two issues…

 

[Netty1]

When I got married, it was rash, only dated a month and a half prior, was against the will of my parents, never intended on being with her for life “if it didn’t work out”, never wanted kids nor was I open to them with her, no priest, no church, just a JOP, and most importantly- I didn’t know any of that was totally unacceptable. I wasn’t Catholic. When I found out WHAT marriage is according to the Church, and thus, God, I was mortified at what I’d done. It was actually one of the things which drew me to the Church.

Looking back, I can see in no way that I had a valid marriage. Knowing what marriage IS, I would have NEVER married that horrible woman.

I have yet to apply for the annulment simply because I haven’t. I don’t plan on getting remarried anytime soon, but, I want to know: is this valid?

If they say it is, I cannot, under any circumstance, be with my ex-wife. We are already divorced. I despise her in the context of a wife. I don’t even like being around her as a person. If I have a valid marriage, I’ll have to figure out a way to stay in favor of the Church while protecting myself from what amounts to a narcissistic, evil, angry, despicable, stupid woman ( I thought it was the language barrier, no, she’s just an idiot). I wouldn’t be comfortable with her dogsitting, much less being in charge at any point of my theoretical children, or any activity in my life.

Given the things I read on here, it sounds like a lot of Catholics also don’t know what marriage is, and they seek annulment proceedings to determine the validity of the marriage.

The Church does the same thing for Baptism: if it is improper form/matter, it’s invalid. If it’s all proper in form and matter, it’s valid.
Edit: instead of Kris, Bob,
I’ll let Bob Dylan sing me out:

youtube.com/watch?v=yZPh3hpxLKs

I asked this question on behalf of a family member some time ago because she started coming to Mass with me and had benn married (just the once) and divorced.

I was told by members here much wiser and more knowledgeable than me that basically the marriage and divorce will not bar someone from sacraments, but any attempt at co-habitation and marriage will bar someone from taking sacraments.

I took this further because it was a source of distress for her who wanted to join the church (and is now in RCIA) but was too upset to ask in case she was denied.

I finally got her to see my priest who said to her that “divorce is regretable and often tragic but it is not the divorce which is the barrier, it is any attempt at re-marriage without seeking to sort out the previous situation”.

Put plainly, she is divorced and is going ahead with her entry into the church knowing full well that she may never get to remarry if she wants to stay in grace and take the sacraments.

You do not have live with or stay with your now ex-wife. What you do have to do is live a celibate life as though you were still married but not having sex. You cannot behave as though you are single.

If my cousin does want to remarry she has to petition the church for a suitable end to the marriage (even though it was a civil wedding and took places decades ago) and then abide by that decision.

 

[chaunceygardner]

Here is part of what I posted two weeks ago on a thread that was discussing the same question:

A report from 2007, commissioned by the USCCB, was done by Georgetown U called “Marriage in the Catholic Church”. It is 187 pages of interesting info about adult Catholics and matrimony. Here are a few items that might address the topic of this discussion.

The report confirms other info that I have seen that about 20% of Catholics end up divorced. That varies by generation and other demographics. But only **15% of divorced Catholics **have sought an annulment, and about half of those were granted. The report doesn’t clarify what “sought an annulment” means, so some of those may be people who inquired, who perhaps started the process and did not complete it, or were advised against it. But the numbers seem to indicate that only about 1%-2% of Catholic marriages are being annulled.

76% of the adult Catholics surveyed believed divorce was acceptable in “some cases”. The top circumstances were: physical abuse (96%), Emotional Abuse (92%), Infidelity (85%), Addictive behavior (72%). However, fewer than 30% agreed that divorce is usually the best solution. 71% agreed, “at least somewhat, that couples do not take marriage seriously enough when divorce is easily available”.

Adequate preparation may be a big issue in the failure of marriages. The report says that “divorced and separated Catholics are less likely to have discussed each of these topics prior to marriage”: trust and commitment, openness to having children, intimacy or sexuality, family backgrounds or history, and parenting approaches.

We have often heard the “old saw” about communicating, but this survey indicates that this is important. Currently married Catholics label “Finances” as the most challenging aspect of their relationship, and place communication issues third, and trust & commitment issues 8th. For divorced Catholics, communication issues was number one, followed by trust & commitment issues. This may help indicate what goes into the make-up of a successful and happy marriage vs. a problem marriage, with trust and honest and open communication with your spouse very important factors.

Other observations from that thread, plus some of my own thoughts:

Catholics who are divorced or in a bad marital situation will naturally come here and ask other Catholics about annulments. They wouldn’t go to a Protestant forum, would they? So to me it is a good thing that people look to this forum for such guidance.

An annulment is not easy and it can be quite emotionally draining, just like a divorce is. It is also a very personal process, in which one must discuss things about their marriage or pre-marriage situation that they really don’t like bringing up. Other people have to get involved, it is not just a “he said-she said” process. Imagine having to ask your friends and/or relatives to answer questions from “strangers” about you and your spouse.

Also, not all those who get annulments from the Church have been married in the Church. There is a fair number who seek annulments from a prior marriage so they CAN get married in the Church, now that they and/or their spouse to be is Catholic.

Finally, why do most Catholics seek an annulment? Yes, so they can re-marry IN the Church. Why would we want to deny the Sacraments to faithful Catholics because they were forced to get out of a bad marriage? Isn’t the Gospel all about forgiveness and bringing the lost and distressed back into the Church, not shunning them?

 

[EasterJoy]

Is it possible that some tribunals are unjustly lenient in their findings? Sure, it is possible. I don’t think that is why American Catholics suffer from the divorce rate that we do.

I think the larger problem that people marry with no intention of giving true consent, other than crossing their fingers that “worst” won’t actually be their lot in life, or else without the character to ever hope to make good on those vows. Vowing “for better or worse” while holding onto the reservation that you merely hope you won’t actually get “worse” does not result in a valid marriage. That is just one impediment that simple sociological data would indicate must be more prevalent now than a century ago.

I am a big believer in the value of pre-marital counselling, but this prevalent lack of integrity is not something that can be addressed with a pre-Cana conference. It is not that people marry thinking, “Other people sign on for that, but I won’t”. Rather, they are taught what the Church teaches, and they translate it as, “Oh, that must be an overstatement. Nobody could possibly expect that!” They aren’t just unexpectedly hit with how hard marriage is. I mean that they marry with the resolve that there are certain marital difficulties they have no intention of putting up with and marital boundaries that–should push come to shove, mind you, and don’t we hope it won’t come to that–they have no intention of observing.

I think C.S. Lewis described this mindset rather well in The Screwtape Letters:
What you must do is to keep running in his mind (side by side with the conscious intention of doing his duty) the vague idea of all sorts of things he can do or not do, inside the framework of the duty, which seem to make him a little safer. Get his mind off the simple rule (“I’ve got to stay here and do so-and-so”) into a series of imaginary life lines (“If A happened—though I very much hope it won’t—I could do B—and if the worst came to the worst, I could always do C”). Superstitions, if not recognised as such, can be awakened. The point is to keep him feeling that he has something, other than the Enemy and courage the Enemy supplies, to fall back on, so that what was intended to be a total commitment to duty becomes honeycombed all through with little unconscious reservations. By building up a series of imaginary expedients to prevent “the worst coming to the worst” you may produce, at that level of his will which he is not aware of, a determination that the worst shall not come to the worst. Then, at the moment of real terror, rush it out into his nerves and muscles and you may get the fatal act done before he knows what you’re about. For remember, the act of cowardice is all that matters; the emotion of fear is, in itself, no sin and, though we enjoy it, does us no good."

If we give marital consent with an attitude of cowardice similar to what the devil hopes to build in us, we do not give true consent. I also believe it is unjust to pretend to an abandoned spouse that the evidence isn’t there concerning an initial lack of true consent when the evidence is there. When the Church ever denies justice in order to avoid scandal, the scandal is only made worse. The Church cannot go there, not in charity and not in justice. A whitewash is not going to improve the situation.

So while I wish we could say that the Catholic Church has been more successful in giving her children the education, character, and integrity that would make our marriage statistics better than everyone else’s, that is not the case. It is not the case that Catholics have a good idea of how to identify other Catholics to marry who have the courage and character to give true consent. Until it is the case, our marriages will not be more durable than anyone else’s, and not a tribunal in the world is going to change that.

 

[jonbhorton]

I was asking a rhetorical question which wasn’t meant to be answered here when I said, “is this valid?”.

Of course no one here can answer that.

I have no plans of marriage or dating until annulment is complete and only if they find it an invalid marriage, and even then- that might just be the thing I need to free me up for something else than marriage.

Most women I encounter are too weak and ridiculous for me to consider as wife material. I want a woman who can out-shoot me or at least be counted on to provide accurate cover fire without crying about it. Anyone dolled up is automatically someone’s potential headache and would bear no consideration by me for anything other than avoidance.

 

[EasterJoy]

I was asking a rhetorical question which wasn’t meant to be answered here when I said, “is this valid?”.

Of course no one here can answer that.

I have no plans of marriage or dating until annulment is complete and only if they find it an invalid marriage, and even then- that might just be the thing I need to free me up for something else than marriage.

Most women I encounter are too weak and ridiculous for me to consider as wife material. I want a woman who can out-shoot me or at least be counted on to provide accurate cover fire without crying about it. Anyone dolled up is automatically someone’s potential headache and would bear no consideration by me for anything other than avoidance.

If not in Colorado Springs, maybe in Montana or Alaska? Or Eastern Oregon, where, as Karia Chambers put it when describing her own successful marriage, “…we don’t divorce men over there. We just shoot 'em.”

You’ll not find a decree more final than that!

 

[jonbhorton]

If not in Colorado Springs, maybe in Montana or Alaska? Or Eastern Oregon, where, as Karia Chambers put it when describing her own successful marriage, “…we don’t divorce men over there. We just shoot 'em.”

You’ll not find a decree more final than that!

She got a sister in case this annulment goes through?

 

[TheRealJuliane]

I can only offer anecdotal evidence on this thread. I am a Baptist who has been married to a Catholic for 25 years (and two days). When we were looking into a church wedding in 1987, we were informed that because I (a non-Catholic) had married a non-Catholic in a cermony by a non-Catholic in a place other than a Catholic Church, that we were bound to have the marriage annuled by the Catholic Church in order for my wife to continue receiving communion. We have gone through years of trial and effort to get this done and now are in the position where we are finally ready to proceed with the tribunal.

All I can say is this is not something I do lightly. It’s something I am doing for my wife. It’s important to me because it’s important to her. Getting the Church to overturn a quickie short-lived wedding when I was young and foolish in order to recognize a lifelong commitment to the person I love and allow her to resume an active role in the Church is something that I just don’t see causing scandal or ruining the Church’s credibility.

I think that it should be viewed in another light - as a good thing that so many are willing to go through the trouble of completing the process in order to have the Church recognize their commitment. It’s not an easy process, despite what some may say or think, and it’s not something one entertains without a lot of thought and dedication.

Thank you, and Happy Anniversary. You are a good husband.

 

[dans0622]

It seems that a lot of people on CAF

• Have had their previous marriage annulled
• Expect to get an annullment if they apply
• hardly knows anyone who ever received a ‘no’
• thinks its okay to apply at other tribunals if the first one says no.

I had a canon law class at the university some years ago. Taught by a priest and canon lawyer. I was quite surprised when he, a faithful man of the Church, openly admitted that the anullment procedure is very much abused today in America and Europe. Basically a lot of people get annulments from “nice guys” while their past marriage is really valid.
…

Hello GraceDK,

I can’t say I read every post on “annulments” on these forums but in my opinion I see just as many posts like yours as I do those who are suggesting that a certain person should pursue a nullity process or have gone through one or think asking is the same as receiving. Be that as it may, there are certainly decisions that are in favor of the nullity of a marriage but are poorly argued or founded on weak evidence or both. You can see this in some sanitized Rotal sentences published in canon law journals.

Regarding the idea that a person can just try a case somewhere else if the first one says no, that is totally forbidden by the law (if the grounds are the same). So, I find it difficult to accept that this practice actually occurs with the blessing of the second tribunal.

Thanks for your time.

Dan

 

[EasterJoy]

She got a sister in case this annulment goes through?

Don’t you think you’d better find out first whether or not they shoot guys who don’t approve of mascara?

After all, even Calamity Jane was known to wear earrings from time to time!

 

[joanofarc2008]

• Have had their previous marriage annulled
• Expect to get an annullment if they apply
• hardly knows anyone who ever received a ‘no’
• thinks its okay to apply at other tribunals if the first one says no.

Last time I checked it was a sin of pride to judge the intent of another person.

That being said the decree of nullity process is a closed and private process for a reason. This is by Canon Law. I am sure there are others on here that can speak more openly to it but there is a process by which stats are collected every year and analyzed - somehow I believe if there were an issue far greater than the laity of CAF without the stats, reasoning and case data would already be doing something to drastically change the system. That also being said are you yourself willing to help with marriage prep or are you just bringing the problem to light and offering no solution?

 

[mini_me640]

First, since the tribunals know all of the relevant information on the cases, and we don’t, they are certainly in a better position to determine the validity of a marriage than we are.

Second, since Jesus said of the Apostles (and their successors) “what you bind on earth will be bound in heaven and what you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven”, I choose to trust their decisions over my own thoughts on these matters.

 

[Gordon_Sims]

Even if you grant that annulment success rates are abnormally high, how do you determine that it is not a problem with the culture’s understanding of marriage, or the marriage prep process?

I used to agree with the line of thinking that the successful annulment rates were way too high, but after more consideration I think it might have more to do with the state pre-Cana classes appear to have been in for several decades that led to a lot of people entering into marriage when they had no idea what it meant. Our priest told us recently that his pre-Cana program is six months long and he takes an active role in it, meeting with the potential bride & groom regularly and really making sure they understand the sacrament and what they’re getting into. He also said he doesn’t shy away from refusing to marry people.

My wife & I had two short meetings with the priest (less than 30 minutes each), and a half day of seminars, about half of which were canceled because the instructors didn’t show up. We weren’t even required to go to Confession prior to our wedding. At our second meeting with the priest, he looked over our marriage prep workbooks, wrinkled his brow and said that he was leaning toward not recommending marriage to us on the basis of compatibility, but then said there wasn’t enough info in our workbooks and folders for him to go on (you know, since they were at best half completed), so he really couldn’t say one way or another. This was all after talking to us for a grand total of 30-40 minutes at that point. He then told us it was up to us and that he’d go with whatever we decided. He then told us to hold hands, said a quick prayer and said “see you at the wedding.”

It wouldn’t surprise me one bit to hear that a lot of people who went through the same experience are no longer married today, if for no other reason than the fact that we were left having no clue what it was we were getting ourselves into. Just from what I’ve seen at our parish and heard about at other parishes, it would seem that there’s a much better focus on proper pre-Cana now than 15-30 years ago. I’d hope that would lead to less of a need for divorce and annulments.

 

[Sillara]

Finally, why do most Catholics seek an annulment? Yes, so they can re-marry IN the Church. Why would we want to deny the Sacraments to faithful Catholics because they were forced to get out of a bad marriage? Isn’t the Gospel all about forgiveness and bringing the lost and distressed back into the Church, not shunning them?

This is, to me, a large part of the problem when I read about annulments (declarations of nullity). The point is not about forgiveness. It is not about denying the Sacraments to “faithful Catholics” who were “forced to get out of a bad marriage”.

Forgiveness comes with the repentance of sin. It has nothing to do with declarations of nullity, except insofar as some people might have “remarried” without having found out whether or not they were free to marry. Then they would need to repent and turn away from their sin. But again, the declaration of nullity has nothing to do with it.

The Gospel is about accepting those who have repented. The Church will accept anyone who repents. It’s just that sometimes people don’t want to repent. It’s “too hard”. Live alone? Who can do that?

No one said the way of Our Lord was easy. In fact, He said it would be hard.

 

[cviolette]

I know many divorced Catholics who remarried in a different church or civilly. I know only a handful of Catholics who received annulments. It seems more common to just leave the church than try for an annulment.

I grew up in a very Catholic neighborhood. I went to Catholic school. Most of my girlfriends and I were married in the Catholic church because that is all we knew. I pick the church because it was beautiful. I did not understand marriage. I was living with my husband before marriage. Stopped birth control just before getting married. The last time I went to confession was just before I was confirmed. Same with my husband. My father was an abusive husband and father. My husband’s parents were divorced. So neither of us understood what a good marriage looked like. I think we managed to be good parents but neither of us has been a good spouse.

I do think if I had married older, after I returned to my faith and after therapy that I might have had a good marriage.

I am not sure if I could get an annulment but I do not see how a marriage where there is no love could have had God in it. I do think that it was my husband and I who did not include God in our marriage so if I did not get an annulment I would accept the Church’s decision and not remarry.

 

[chevalier]

I am uneasy when I look at reversal rates from the Roman Rota, which are very high (although sometimes the problem is sufficiency of inference from evidence rather than a point of law). While the Rota is not infallible, it’s probably more reliable than lower courts combined.

A nullity decree that said, ‘respondent lacked the full ability to form the necessary deep emotional connection and unimpeded understanding of the petitioner’s emotional needs,’ (I’m just making it up) would be a huge red flag.

 

[Gorgias]

The point is not about forgiveness.

Forgiveness comes with the repentance of sin. It has nothing to do with declarations of nullity.

The Gospel is about accepting those who have repented. The Church will accept anyone who repents. It’s just that sometimes people don’t want to repent. It’s “too hard”. Live alone? Who can do that?

You’ve confused me. On one hand, you admit that nullity and forgiveness have nothing to do with one another. This is correct – there is nothing in nullity that concerns itself with ‘sin’ or ‘forgiveness’.

On the other hand, you say that people don’t want to repent – that living alone is too hard. What’s this have to do with nullity? Where is the call “to repent” to be found, in a case where there is not a situation of sin or forgiveness?