Breaking: Papal Motu Proprio makes annulment process shorter and simpler by delegating decisions to bishops

[ARSpade]

The only one to know if a marriage existed is the person seeking an annulment.

A priests can help them to discern the validity of their marriage, but the information must come from the individual. A marriage tribunal is disconnected from the individual and relies on documents provided by the couple and witnesses, which are often misleading.

Also, keep in mind in the Sacrament of Marriage, it is the couple who marry themselves to each other, the Church blesses the marriage.

So, only the person seeking the annulment can say what took place in the heart at that time.

JIm

If that were true then the annulment process would basically just be No Fault Divorce with an Imprimatur.

 

[Joe_5859]

I wasn’t expecting something like this until after this October’s Synod. We knew this was coming at some point, though, as it was one of the things the bishops brought up at the last Synod.

Going off of Jimmy Akin’s summary (since the English translation isn’t available yet), it seems to me at first glance that pope Francis made some wise decisions. He eliminated the automatic appeal to a court of second instance in uncontested cases. And the bishop now has the authority to decide cases in a “middle way” for those cases that are more than just documentary, but generally pretty obvious without needing the full investigation.

And the changes go into effect at the start of the Year of Mercy. Very fitting.

 

[dans0622]

The only one to know if a marriage existed is the person seeking an annulment.

A priests can help them to discern the validity of their marriage, but the information must come from the individual. A marriage tribunal is disconnected from the individual and relies on documents provided by the couple and witnesses, which are often misleading.

Also, keep in mind in the Sacrament of Marriage, it is the couple who marry themselves to each other, the Church blesses the marriage.

So, only the person seeking the annulment can say what took place in the heart at that time.

JIm

Hello,

Why would documents/testimony from the individual(s) submitted to the Tribunal be “often misleading” but the statements the same person(s) provides to a parish priest are not?

Dan

 

[Augustine]

There are several reasons why a priest should not be the adjudicator in the matter. Firstly and most importantly, he has no training for it. Bishops, on the other hand, have not only the pastoral responsibility, but they are chosen from among priests who have doctoral credentials, often in Canon Law, thus better prepared. Secondly, priests are already overworked and this would place an undue burden over them. Such a task should be taken by someone assigned to this full time. Finally, since the local Church is found in the bishop in communion with the pope and not in the priest in communion with the bishop, it is important to have uniformity across the local Church, centered on the person of the bishop. Francis acted wisely, much more than some arrogate to.

Pax Christi

 

[Augustine]

I’m pretty stoked about this. I’m beginning RCIA this Thursday and have planning on getting an annulment. Glad to hear that the process will be easier, less expensive, and will probably save a lot of headache, as it potentially will make what could be a “not-too-nice” process between my ex and I less painful. Our marriage didn’t end all too amicably, and the wounds have healed well, and I don’t feel much like re-opening them.

The part that might bring about old wounds was the first part, when both parties are invited to provide a statement from their perspective. This part has not been changed. The part that has been change, the automatic appeal, was mostly a court process of revision that seldom would involve in the parties being contacted again.

However, besides letting the other party know that the annulment out of courtesy, there’s not necessarily more than this between the parties.

Pax Christi

 

[JimR-OCDS]

If that were true then the annulment process would basically just be No Fault Divorce with an Imprimatur.

The annulment process goes by the written testimony of the married person seeking the annulment and three witnesses. All is unreliable compared to a parish priest who knows the person and can provide pastoral care to them.

But the bottom line is that process is still according to the person requesting the annulment,

Jim

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Hello,

Why would documents/testimony from the individual(s) submitted to the Tribunal be “often misleading” but the statements the same person(s) provides to a parish priest are not?

Dan

Because the witness isn’t always providing good written accounts of what they saw.

Jim

 

[JimR-OCDS]

There are several reasons why a priest should not be the adjudicator in the matter. Firstly and most importantly, he has no training for it.i

Gee, if you read this forum, you’ll see that most participants think they’re trained in discerning if a valid marriage existed or not.

Fact is, a priest can be easily trained as the tribunal members are nothing other than trained diocesan priests. I knew one of the members he was my parish priest at one time. Wonderful priest and I’m sure he did as good of a job as possible.

Jim

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

Well, each diocese is already supposed to have a tribunal (or be part of an “interdiocesan” arrangement). I don’t know if the new rules will make it possible for more to be established.

Interesting. I may have misinterpreted what I read in Crux:

For instance, in Francis home city of Buenos Aires, Argentina, there’s one Church court tending to 15 different dioceses, each hundreds of miles apart. As of Tuesday, every bishop is called to “create one [tribunal] as soon as possible, even through seminaries of permanent and continuous formation.”

There are several reasons why a priest should not be the adjudicator in the matter.

Where does it say this is being turned over to priests?

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I believe that the Church understands that although a valid marriage may have existed in the beginning, for some reason, it ceased to exist.

This is not Church doctrine, but a deacon who was involved with the tribunal told me this.

I believe he is right.

Jim

 

[ARSpade]

I believe that the Church understands that although a valid marriage may have existed in the beginning, for some reason, it ceased to exist.

This is not Church doctrine, but a deacon who was involved with the tribunal told me this.

I believe he is right.

Jim

Well, he’s not.

 

[Usige]

Or, a premarital pregnancy that necessitated the marriage. That usually gets put into the lack of discretion ground.

Even here I would think that the simple fact of premarital pregnancy shouldn’t be the only stipulation. For instance if a couple had started marriage plans before conception then the intent to marry seems to have been established. Can one say their consent was in doubt when conception was antecedent to the intent to marry? I am not saying it might not effect consent, but I don’t think that premarital pregnancy in of itself proves defective consent regardless if it shows poor judgement

I guess I’m just saying that even “obvious cases” aren’t always simply obvious based on a handful of facts without knowing the intent and impact of those facts.

 

[Usige]

I believe that the Church understands that although a valid marriage may have existed in the beginning, for some reason, it ceased to exist.

This is not Church doctrine, but a deacon who was involved with the tribunal told me this.

I believe he is right.

Jim

A marriage only ceases to exist when one spouse dies. Your example is exactly why delegating the decision to any priest is problematic. We end up with the same issues we had with birth control were the opinion of a single member of the clergy contradicts Church teaching. Don’t like your priest’s answer then shop around until you get an answer you agree with.

 

[dans0622]

Interesting. I may have misinterpreted what I read in Crux:

For instance, in Francis home city of Buenos Aires, Argentina, there’s one Church court tending to 15 different dioceses, each hundreds of miles apart. As of Tuesday, every bishop is called to “create one [tribunal] as soon as possible, even through seminaries of permanent and continuous formation.”

…

I don’t think you misinterpreted. For a reference, I am thinking of canons 1419-1420, which say the bishop is obliged to appoint a Judicial Vicar (which means that there is to be a tribunal). Canon 1423 addresses the regional/interdiocesan tribunal.

What is addressed in that quote is the “interdiocesan” arrangement I mentioned. In the USA, I know of one such tribunal (Tennessee dioceses, if I recall). 15 dioceses being smashed into one Tribunal is a bit much.

I am very supportive of a greater emphasis on suitable training/education and the establishment of diocesan Tribunals. I hope the Pope’s declaration has an impact on this problem.

Dan

 

[Usige]

I am very supportive of a greater emphasis on suitable training/education and the establishment of diocesan Tribunals. I hope the Pope’s declaration has an impact on this problem.

If we could get establishment of more schools that can grant ecclesiastic law degrees that would help.

 

[dans0622]

Even here I would think that the simple fact of premarital pregnancy shouldn’t be the only stipulation. For instance if a couple had started marriage plans before conception then the intent to marry seems to have been established. Can one say their consent was in doubt when conception was antecedent to the intent to marry? I am not saying it might not effect consent, but I don’t think that premarital pregnancy in of itself proves defective consent regardless if it shows poor judgement

I guess I’m just saying that even “obvious cases” aren’t always simply obvious based on a handful of facts without knowing the intent and impact of those facts.

I agree. Have a “premarital pregnancy case” in front of me right now. Is it invalid? I’m sure that’s how it will end up. Is it “obvious”? I suppose some Judges might think so… I’ll just say that some are much more obvious than this.

For this case, it could have been completed in about four months. Instead, it will take about eight (delayed due to Judge being behind). Would it be faster if it went over to the bishop? Frankly, I don’t think so. But, we’ll see how it goes.

Dan

 

[ProVobis]

The reforms could affect thousands of Catholics worldwide

More…

I wasn’t aware that they had been intentionally slowing the process down. If they don’t have the manpower, taking away the fees isn’t going to help much.

 

[Usige]

I agree. Have a “premarital pregnancy case” in front of me right now. Is it invalid? I’m sure that’s how it will end up. Is it “obvious”? I suppose some Judges might think so… I’ll just say that some are much more obvious than this.

For this case, it could have been completed in about four months. Instead, it will take about eight (delayed due to Judge being behind). Would it be faster if it went over to the bishop? Frankly, I don’t think so. But, we’ll see how it goes.

Dan

I completely agree. I guess I was thinking that some might think the short process would be reduced to a handful of check boxes. If one of the boxes are checked then annulment granted. I certainly hope it is a little more involved than that.

 

[ProdigalSun]

The Bishops should be able to nullify a marriage to the priests in his dioceses.

When they have spoken with the person seeking an annulment and review their situation at the time they got married, the priest should be able to annul the marriage.

This seems to upset Catholics who are able to live according to Church teaching while being happily married.

However, not all Catholics end up in this wonderful state in life and they end up divorced at a very young age.

Anyway, I love the path Pope Francis is taking on this and other issues.

The Church is becoming more in line with what Jesus taught.

Jim

You mean like when Jesus said when a man and Woman are joined in Holy Matrimony that they could choose to canel it at anytime ???

Oh wait a minute, that is not how that goes!

 

[gilliam]

The changes imposed by Pope Francis for the Latin Church include the following:

• One sentence of nullity is enough.
• One judge, under the responsibility of the bishop, is enough to oversee the process.
• Under certain circumstances, each bishop can himself serve as the judge.
• In case of the annulment being “evident,” there will be an even shorter process.
• The local bishops’ conferences are called to help individual bishops through the reform process, and are called to help guarantee, save for the “just and decent remuneration of workers of the courts,” that the process be free of charge.
• Appeal of a sentence, in case it’s required, can be dealt with locally (on the level of the nearest archdiocese), instead of taking it to the Vatican.
• A second appeal can be made to the Apostolic See, meaning the Vatican.

cruxnow.com/church/2015/09/08/pope-francis-streamlines-process-for-granting-annulments/?s_campaign=crux:email:daily