P
pianistclare
Guest
you obviously have a theory.
Let’s hear it.
Let’s hear it.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
My theory is that any statement such as we have seen above: “Wait–haven’t we seen a million articles about how young Japanese are avoiding marriage like the plague?” is proven false by the statistics on the percentage of births to unmarried women I have given for the year 2006. Other years show the same thing. Catholic countries such as France and Ireland have a much higher rate of births to unmarried women than does Japan. And if it is true that “almost no one in Columbia gets married…” then we can see that the percentage of births to unmarried women in Columbia would also be quite high at least in comparison to Japan.you obviously have a theory.
Let’s hear it.
It is true though, that the Japanese are waiting longer to get married.
X
Xantippe
Guest
“Catholic countries such as France.”My theory is that any statement such as we have seen above: “Wait–haven’t we seen a million articles about how young Japanese are avoiding marriage like the plague?” is proven false by the statistics on the percentage of births to unmarried women I have given for the year 2006. Other years show the same thing. Catholic countries such as France and Ireland have a much higher rate of births to unmarried women than does Japan. And if it is true that “almost no one in Columbia gets married…” then we can see that the percentage of births to unmarried women in Columbia would also be quite high at least in comparison to Japan.
It is true though, that the Japanese are waiting longer to get married.
I see that you are a time traveler from the 18th century. Welcome!
P
pianistclare
Guest
no no no. I’m talking about why YOU believe there are so many Catholics getting divorced or annulments.My theory is that any statement such as we have seen above: “Wait–haven’t we seen a million articles about how young Japanese are avoiding marriage like the plague?” is proven false by the statistics on the percentage of births to unmarried women I have given for the year 2006. Other years show the same thing. Catholic countries such as France and Ireland have a much higher rate of births to unmarried women than does Japan. And if it is true that “almost no one in Columbia gets married…” then we can see that the percentage of births to unmarried women in Columbia would also be quite high at least in comparison to Japan.
It is true though, that the Japanese are waiting longer to get married.
I suspect you feel the Catholic teaching about marriage is flawed.
If not, please expound.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
I don’t think the teaching was flawed in 1929.no no no. I’m talking about why YOU believe there are so many Catholics getting divorced or annulments.
I suspect you feel the Catholic teaching about marriage is flawed.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
And what about Ireland and Columbia? Are they Catholic countries? And Japan and China? Would you say that Japan and China are non-Catholic countries?“Catholic countries such as France.”
I see that you are a time traveler from the 18th century. Welcome!
P
pianistclare
Guest
How is it flawed today?I don’t think the teaching was flawed in 1929.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
Annulments are granted for reasons not accepted in 1929. Please see 25 difficulties in the Annulment system, from the perspective of almost 700 Respondents with Save Our Sacrament:How is it flawed today?
saveoursacrament.org/Facts.html
Also please read: A Daughter’s Reflection:
saveoursacrament.org/index.html → A Daughter’s Reflection
P
powerofk
Guest
It’s not. But it no longer has a secular culture that supports the teaching. That, right there, is the crux of the problem. For 99% of their waking hours each week, people are immersed in the secular culture (and I’m giving them 8 hours of sleep here - less than 1% of a week’s time is spent in church for people who go once a week - this actually assumes weekly Mass attendance, which, as we know, is not often the case). The secular culture pushes things like contraception, same-sex “marriage”, abortion, and no-fault divorce as things to be celebrated.How is it flawed today?
I remember a comedy sketch from Wanda Sykes where she was talking about this - it’s almost as if instead of thinking, “Till death do we part”, most people actually mean, “Eh, I’ll give it a shot, and if it doesn’t work, oh well.” People have fallen into the trap that love = romance, and that, once the romance is no longer there, they must not love the other person any more. The fault doesn’t lie in the annulment system (if anything, the problem is that in other countries, the annulment system is so broken that people are more likely to die before a decree of nullity is granted).
I’m aware that a large numbers of decrees of nullity are given to converts. Of course converts would have many - they haven’t been exposed to the Church teachings at all, and so are much more likely (especially in today’s world) to not understand the fact that marriages are supposed to last a lifetime.
But before we fix this problem, we must make sure we properly catechize Catholics on the purpose of marriage, and the fact that it is meant to be for a lifetime. Seriously. There are so many people in the pews that don’t know this! Or, they know the Church teaches it, but are like, “Well, that’s the Church. They’re just made of unmarried men who know nothing at all about marriage! How are they supposed to know how hard marriage can be?”
As such, I suggest that when marriage is mentioned in the Gospel (such as the Wedding at Cana or Jesus’ teachings on divorce, etc.), that it be a married permanent deacon who delivers the homily, if possible. And then invite young people to talk with him and his wife. Another problem has been that marriage, as a sacrament and vocation, has often been forgotten when talking about vocations. As such, whenever we talk about vocations in retreats and religious education classes (especially Confirmation classes), we must - MUST - include a married couple on every vocation panel and help people understand the beauty of the first vocation.
P
pianistclare
Guest
This is an excellent response, but I was asking the other poster.It’s not. But it no longer has a secular culture that supports the teaching. That, right there, is the crux of the problem. For 99% of their waking hours each week, people are immersed in the secular culture (and I’m giving them 8 hours of sleep here - less than 1% of a week’s time is spent in church for people who go once a week - this actually assumes weekly Mass attendance, which, as we know, is not often the case). The secular culture pushes things like contraception, same-sex “marriage”, abortion, and no-fault divorce as things to be celebrated.
I remember a comedy sketch from Wanda Sykes where she was talking about this - it’s almost as if instead of thinking, “Till death do we part”, most people actually mean, “Eh, I’ll give it a shot, and if it doesn’t work, oh well.” People have fallen into the trap that love = romance, and that, once the romance is no longer there, they must not love the other person any more. The fault doesn’t lie in the annulment system (if anything, the problem is that in other countries, the annulment system is so broken that people are more likely to die before a decree of nullity is granted).
I’m aware that a large numbers of decrees of nullity are given to converts. Of course converts would have many - they haven’t been exposed to the Church teachings at all, and so are much more likely (especially in today’s world) to not understand the fact that marriages are supposed to last a lifetime.
But before we fix this problem, we must make sure we properly catechize Catholics on the purpose of marriage, and the fact that it is meant to be for a lifetime. Seriously. There are so many people in the pews that don’t know this! Or, they know the Church teaches it, but are like, “Well, that’s the Church. They’re just made of unmarried men who know nothing at all about marriage! How are they supposed to know how hard marriage can be?”
As such, I suggest that when marriage is mentioned in the Gospel (such as the Wedding at Cana or Jesus’ teachings on divorce, etc.), that it be a married permanent deacon who delivers the homily, if possible. And then invite young people to talk with him and his wife. Another problem has been that marriage, as a sacrament and vocation, has often been forgotten when talking about vocations. As such, whenever we talk about vocations in retreats and religious education classes (especially Confirmation classes), we must - MUST - include a married couple on every vocation panel and help people understand the beauty of the first vocation.
He seems to have a theory of his own.
I don’t understand why anyone would oppose persons getting an annulment. Until you meet good people who are in great pain because they cannot receive, or have their marriage blessed, you wouldn’t understand why it’s so important to them. If the church can bring them back into the fold…I can’t see why people think it’s an abuse of the system. The Lord forgives in the confessional. Youthful mistakes should also be reconciled.
There are many valid reasons for obtaining an annulment. Why wouldn’t we want to minister to these people? Why would a loving Church just want to write them off, too bad, so sad?
Having said this, I’ve known people whose annulments were declined. For very good reasons. And they are devastated. The church doesn’t just rubber stamp. The tribunals look at each case very thoroughly. To think that they just grant things randomly, is to not really understand the workings of the tribunals.
People who marry outside of the church think that marriage can be easily fixed by divorce. It’s not until they are concerned with their eternal lives that it even occurs to them.
You’re right. This needs to be a topic of discuss for the entire parish. Not just couples who arrive for Pre-Cana. They’ve already gotten the memo.
P
powerofk
Guest
#1 reason? The surrounding culture. Part of what makes a marriage valid is the intent to marry for life, and be open to children. I don’t know how many times people have said, “Well, if it doesn’t work out, we can get a divorce and I’ll find someone else.” Or, “I never intend to have any children and so I’ll use contraception, get an abortion if I get pregnant, or even better, sterilize myself before I get married!” Seriously.Annulments are granted for reasons not accepted in 1929.
Either one of these attitudes is immediate grounds for an annulment (of course, the first one is often hard to prove). Back in 1929, such ideas were rare. As far as women were concerned, divorce was only allowed, pretty much, for spousal abandonment. Not even abuse was considered grounds for divorce back then (in fact, it was still considered a man’s right - and in some areas, considered his duty - to abuse his wife). Since divorce was much rarer, of course annulment proceedings were much rarer.
Mainly, the only grounds why anyone would even seek an annulment back then was “discovered blood relations” - in other words, the couple found out after the marriage that they were close relatives (half-siblings or lost close cousins).
T
Tomdstone
Guest
Undisclosed previous marriage and impotence were also cited.Mainly, the only grounds why anyone would even seek an annulment back then was “discovered blood relations” - in other words, the couple found out after the marriage that they were close relatives (half-siblings or lost close cousins).
X
Xantippe
Guest
I haven’t read your links, but you seriously think that only 10 people in the entire US deserved an annulment in 1929?Annulments are granted for reasons not accepted in 1929. Please see 25 difficulties in the Annulment system, from the perspective of almost 700 Respondents with Save Our Sacrament:
saveoursacrament.org/Facts.html
Also please read: A Daughter’s Reflection:
saveoursacrament.org/index.html → A Daughter’s Reflection
What about all the women with secretly gay husbands? Even today, there are probably into six digits of those across the US.
Or what about serious mental illness predating marriage?
Or Vegas weddings?
Or immigration fraud weddings?
Or women marrying FLDS, knowing that they will be the legal wife, to be followed by half a dozen sister wives?
Even with very atypical situations (like the FLDS), it’s very easy to get above 10. There’s almost always 10 of something.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
What we see is “almost no one in Columbia gets married…” We also see in Catholic countries such as Ireland a large percentage of unmarried Catholic women having children, which is not true in non-Catholic countries such as Japan or China to the same extent as it is in Catholic countries.#1 reason? The surrounding culture. .
I am not saying that there is never any reason for a marriage annulment. If a spouse did not disclose a previous marriage, or some such serious reason, such as first cousin, yes, the marriage should be declared invalid. However, if a couple gets married, and has several children, and for 15 years everything is OK, but then all of a sudden the wife decides she wants to be free from the current marriage and with her new boyfriend, then what? She also wants to stay in the Catholic Church and be able to receive Holy Communion with her newfound lover. So she applies for an annulments saying that she did not know what she was getting into when she was married 15 years ago? The tribunals says that she has to get a divorce before they will consider the annulment. So even before it looks at the case, the tribunal requires that the couple divorce? After the divorce, the tribunal in most cases grants the annulment relying on superficial and soft psychological standards which were never accepted before Vatican II to grant her the annulment.
Now take the case of the young Catholic couple in Columbia. They are in love and want to get married. But wait. What if 15 years down the line the Catholic Church tribunal tells them that their marriage, that they thought they had, is really null and void. Then what? They then might think why should we get married at all, if 15 years down the line the Church is going to tell us that we were never really married even though we thought that we had a ceremony in the Church? Why spend all this time and money to get married? And has this not happened according to a poster here? “almost no one in Columbia gets married…”
Please read: A Daughters reflection:
saveoursacrament.org/index.html
P
pianistclare
Guest
In the example you give, no priest would consider advancing an annulment.What we see is “almost no one in Columbia gets married…” We also see in Catholic countries such as Ireland a large percentage of unmarried Catholic women having children, which is not true in non-Catholic countries such as Japan or China to the same extent as it is in Catholic countries.
I am not saying that there is never any reason for a marriage annulment. If a spouse did not disclose a previous marriage, or some such serious reason, such as first cousin, yes, the marriage should be declared invalid. However, if a couple gets married, and has several children, and for 15 years everything is OK, but then all of a sudden the wife decides she wants to be free from the current marriage and with her new boyfriend, then what? She also wants to stay in the Catholic Church and be able to receive Holy Communion with her newfound lover. So she applies for an annulments saying that she did not know what she was getting into when she was married 15 years ago? The tribunals says that she has to get a divorce before they will consider the annulment. So even before it looks at the case, the tribunal requires that the couple divorce? After the divorce, the tribunal in most cases grants the annulment relying on superficial and soft psychological standards which were never accepted before Vatican II to grant her the annulment.
Now take the case of the young Catholic couple in Columbia. They are in love and want to get married. But wait. What if 15 years down the line the Catholic Church tribunal tells them that their marriage, that they thought they had, is really null and void. Then what? They then might think why should we get married at all, if 15 years down the line the Church is going to tell us that we were never really married even though we thought that we had a ceremony in the Church? Why spend all this time and money to get married? And has this not happened according to a poster here? “almost no one in Columbia gets married…”
Please read: A Daughters reflection:
saveoursacrament.org/index.html
Again, annulment is not “catholic divorce”.
Here’s an article:
sustaindemographicdividend.org/articles/international-family-indicators/global-family-structure
T
Tomdstone
Guest
Actually, I think the correct figure is 9 for that year. The number of American marriage annulments remained quite low for a few succeeding years also. However, they began to increase numerically, but I don’t think that they ever increased beyond 500 or so until after Vatican II.I haven’t read your links, but you seriously think that only 10 people in the entire US deserved an annulment in 1929?
What about all the women with secretly gay husbands? Even today, there are probably into six digits of those across the US.
Or what about serious mental illness predating marriage?
Or Vegas weddings?
Or immigration fraud weddings?
Or women marrying FLDS, knowing that they will be the legal wife, to be followed by half a dozen sister wives?
Even with very atypical situations (like the FLDS), it’s very easy to get above 10. There’s almost always 10 of something.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
Not true. Because I know of the actual case. It is not hypothetical.In the example you give, no priest would consider advancing an annulment.
X
Xantippe
Guest
So, why is 9 the perfect number, rather than 500 if both were pre-Vatican II?Actually, I think the correct figure is 9 for that year. The number of American marriage annulments remained quite low for a few succeeding years also. However, they began to increase numerically, but I don’t think that they ever increased beyond 500 or so until after Vatican II.
Here’s another item for the list of rock solid annulment reasons:
–reality TV marriages for ratings
I’m pretty sure we get at least 10 of those a year in the US these days.
P
pianistclare
Guest
So, you are saying: the person went to the priest and saidNot true. Because I know of the actual case. It is not hypothetical.
I want to dump my husband because I have a new lover…and then they proceeded to fill out the papers and they got an annulment just like that?
The priest said NOTHING about reconciling.
The priest said “just pay up and do whatever you please”?
Really?
come on.
Is this why you are so bent on this?
Is this someone close to you that was hurt by the annulment process?
X
Xantippe
Guest
At least according to this, divorce is practically non-existent in Colombia.What we see is “almost no one in Columbia gets married…” We also see in Catholic countries such as Ireland a large percentage of unmarried Catholic women having children, which is not true in non-Catholic countries such as Japan or China to the same extent as it is in Catholic countries.
I am not saying that there is never any reason for a marriage annulment. If a spouse did not disclose a previous marriage, or some such serious reason, such as first cousin, yes, the marriage should be declared invalid. However, if a couple gets married, and has several children, and for 15 years everything is OK, but then all of a sudden the wife decides she wants to be free from the current marriage and with her new boyfriend, then what? She also wants to stay in the Catholic Church and be able to receive Holy Communion with her newfound lover. So she applies for an annulments saying that she did not know what she was getting into when she was married 15 years ago? The tribunals says that she has to get a divorce before they will consider the annulment. So even before it looks at the case, the tribunal requires that the couple divorce? After the divorce, the tribunal in most cases grants the annulment relying on superficial and soft psychological standards which were never accepted before Vatican II to grant her the annulment.
Now take the case of the young Catholic couple in Columbia. They are in love and want to get married. But wait. What if 15 years down the line the Catholic Church tribunal tells them that their marriage, that they thought they had, is really null and void. Then what? They then might think why should we get married at all, if 15 years down the line the Church is going to tell us that we were never really married even though we thought that we had a ceremony in the Church? Why spend all this time and money to get married? And has this not happened according to a poster here? “almost no one in Columbia gets married…”
Please read: A Daughters reflection:
saveoursacrament.org/index.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divorce_demography
mapsofworld.com/world-top-ten/countries-with-lowest-divorce-rate.html
It really does not look like fear of divorce or annulment is driving Colombians’ non-marrying.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.