Bringing Back Difficulty to get an Annulment

[otjm]

Regarding the posts saying that people don’t have a clue regarding the nature of marriage: how stupid can a person be to not understand what “for as long as you both shall live” means? Such a person would have to be so dense that they bend and swallow up light whenthey enter a room.

What family today is 100% functional?

I personally think that a lot of the products of these “dysfunctional” homes might be more ready for marriage, since they have seen how NOT to act.

Besides, I think that it would be a great “line in the sand” in showing that marriage is permanent if we adopted a “tough luck, you bought the farm, grow up and work it out approach”.

That first off would be effectively to deny that the Church could make a determination that a sacrament had not occured. Marriage is permanent if both parties have no impediments and both intend to do what the Church intends, are capable of ad do give consent as the Church understands it.

If one of the above parts is lacking, then it ism not that marriage is not permanent; it is that there was no sacrament.

And as far as your first comment, 30% or better of marriages are given a decree of nullity over the issue of form - for example, a Catholic getting married elsewhere without permission. That significan’ty reduces the number of decrees of nullity. The add to that the number of Protestants who had a prior marriage to someone other than a Catholic, got divorced, and now want to marry a Catholic; those go through a tribunal too; how are you going to “train” them?

 

[Norseman82]

That first off would be effectively to deny that the Church could make a determination that a sacrament had not occured. Marriage is permanent if both parties have no impediments and both intend to do what the Church intends, are capable of ad do give consent as the Church understands it.

If one of the above parts is lacking, then it ism not that marriage is not permanent; it is that there was no sacrament.

And as far as your first comment, 30% or better of marriages are given a decree of nullity over the issue of form - for example, a Catholic getting married elsewhere without permission. That significan’ty reduces the number of decrees of nullity. The add to that the number of Protestants who had a prior marriage to someone other than a Catholic, got divorced, and now want to marry a Catholic; those go through a tribunal too; how are you going to “train” them?

The point of my post is this: is it possible that we are going overboard in the other direction? That we are scaring people away from marriage? Is that healthy? And the whole anti-dysfunctional family sentiment strikes me as elitist. God said “It is not good for the man to be alone”. Jesus said that not everyone could handle lifelong celibacy (I’m summarizing), and Paul states that it is better to marry than to burn. NOWHERE does it state “except if you didn’t come from a perfect family”.

I find it odd that people clamor for forgiveness and second chances for fornicators who freely disobey God’s rules yet people who are born into a family situation that they have no control over are dismssed and not even given a first chance.

 

[cecilia97]

The point of my post is this: is it possible that we are going overboard in the other direction? That we are scaring people away from marriage? Is that healthy? And the whole anti-dysfunctional family sentiment strikes me as elitist. God said “It is not good for the man to be alone”. Jesus said that not everyone could handle lifelong celibacy (I’m summarizing), and Paul states that it is better to marry than to burn. NOWHERE does it state “except if you didn’t come from a perfect family”.

I find it odd that people clamor for forgiveness and second chances for fornicators who freely disobey God’s rules yet people who are born into a family situation that they have no control over are dismssed and not even given a first chance.

Lots of issues here:

1. I don’t see that the Church has been scaring anyone away from marriage. Where’s the evidence for that?
2. There may have been a misunderstanding. I haven’t heard anyone on this thread say people from “less than perfect” families are totally and forever “unmarriageable”. Some of us have said that better marriage prep would possible shine light on familiy of origin issues…in order to allow postponement of the wedding until HEALING can take place.

Lastly, I’ll give you a real life example. My ex came from a truly disfunctional family. He’s one f those that could actually claim he’d seen “what not to do”. Since he didn’t/couldn’t become aware of the issues that caused the disfunction, what happened? He basically repeated his parents’ problems during our marriage. He had no other example to follow. It’s all well and good to say “I’m not going to do it that way Mom and Dad did!”. But how does one learn what is RIGHT if they’ve never seen it???

So, in essence, my ex was not only given a FIRST chance…but a second and a third and a fourth…ad naseum. He would not admit any fault or agree to look to himself for the answers.

It’s not my intention to sound elitist. I had a good, strong family upbringing…not because I’m GOOD or my parents are PERFECT, but by the grace of God. I got very lucky/blessed and I surely don’t deserve it. And I did not do everything perfect in my marriage, but I was not the one who abandoned it. But just as students in school have different gifts and reading levels, so too with emotional maturity and the ability to make a strong marraige.

I think better marriage prep through the Church could serve to shine light on these types of problems so they can at least be KNOWN of before the fact. Some could even be dealt with so they never become marital problems.

You don’t have to be perfect to marry. You should be able to admit you’re not.

 

[otjm]

The point of my post is this: is it possible that we are going overboard in the other direction? That we are scaring people away from marriage? Is that healthy? And the whole anti-dysfunctional family sentiment strikes me as elitist. God said “It is not good for the man to be alone”. Jesus said that not everyone could handle lifelong celibacy (I’m summarizing), and Paul states that it is better to marry than to burn. NOWHERE does it state “except if you didn’t come from a perfect family”.

I find it odd that people clamor for forgiveness and second chances for fornicators who freely disobey God’s rules yet people who are born into a family situation that they have no control over are dismssed and not even given a first chance.

Um, I don’t think that is the case. A seriously dysfunctional family certainly can be the source of learned behavior that could be, or lead to, an impediment to consent. It is in no way automatic, but certainly evidence to look at.

And as to anyone clamoring for forgiveness, I recommend reading the Gospels; they are not easy to apply. Keep in mind also, that if a decree of nullity is given, often one or both of the parties are required at the minimum to get counseling and complete it before they will be allowed to remarry. It is not as if theis is just a “get out of jail” ticket.

 

[ASimpleSinner]

While the wording of this survey is slanted to begin with, I am amazed at how many folks are chiming in with the sentiment that annulments are “too easy.”

What is too easy is getting married in the Catholic Church to begin with.

 

[TNT]

VAT II Annulments and the destruction of the Catholic Family Life.

Example Recent Email
I am sorry to bother you but I have a question about a situation I can’t seem to get an answer to.
Basically, I dated my husband for 4 years and was then married for 16. We had 6 children (5 surviving). My husband met someone else who could offer him a more secure financial future (his own words) and filed for a divorce. He was granted an annulment under the fact that he “didn’t realized the vow he was taking and felt pressured into getting married”. Even though the priest who counseled us in pre-cana asked him several times if he knew what vow he was taking and the seriousness and permanency of it. Here is my dilemma. Every time I pray I feel as if our Lord is telling me that the annulment is not valid and I am still considered married in the eyes of God. I would have kept my vows until death and it sickens me that my family is broken. I did not pursue nor did I give any reason in the annulment hearing to say that this marriage should be considered null so my conscience is clear. What is my obligation? Should I consider myself never married and accept the tribunals decision considering I did not pursue any of it? Or should I consider this a farce and consider myself still married. I can not find peace with this. Incidentally, the church has married him to the woman he was committing adultery with. I have 5 children that I must set a proper example to on what is right in the eyes of God but I am still young and would like to be married if that is in the Will of God for me. I just don’t know what to do. Can you please tell me what someone should do in a situation like this. I am not able to talk to my local priest as he told my husband that he could be with his mistress even in front of my children prior to the divorce. I know that is hard to believe but my oldest son told me with his own mouth that the priest told him as “long as his father acts like a gentlemen” in front of him that he could vacation as a family with her while still married to me and living under the same roof. I shudder at the repeating of this. At any rate, thank you for any advise you can offer.
Yours in Christ, Karen

Say the following 7 times before bed, for 21 days:

“It’s the same Church. I am not deceived.”
Orson Wells, 1984

 

[otjm]

VAT II Annulments and the destruction of the Catholic Family Life.

Example Recent Email
I am sorry to bother you but I have a question about a situation I can’t seem to get an answer to.
Basically, I dated my husband for 4 years and was then married for 16. We had 6 children (5 surviving). My husband met someone else who could offer him a more secure financial future (his own words) and filed for a divorce. He was granted an annulment under the fact that he “didn’t realized the vow he was taking and felt pressured into getting married”. Even though the priest who counseled us in pre-cana asked him several times if he knew what vow he was taking and the seriousness and permanency of it. Here is my dilemma. Every time I pray I feel as if our Lord is telling me that the annulment is not valid and I am still considered married in the eyes of God. I would have kept my vows until death and it sickens me that my family is broken. I did not pursue nor did I give any reason in the annulment hearing to say that this marriage should be considered null so my conscience is clear. What is my obligation? Should I consider myself never married and accept the tribunals decision considering I did not pursue any of it? Or should I consider this a farce and consider myself still married. I can not find peace with this. Incidentally, the church has married him to the woman he was committing adultery with. I have 5 children that I must set a proper example to on what is right in the eyes of God but I am still young and would like to be married if that is in the Will of God for me. I just don’t know what to do. Can you please tell me what someone should do in a situation like this. I am not able to talk to my local priest as he told my husband that he could be with his mistress even in front of my children prior to the divorce. I know that is hard to believe but my oldest son told me with his own mouth that the priest told him as “long as his father acts like a gentlemen” in front of him that he could vacation as a family with her while still married to me and living under the same roof. I shudder at the repeating of this. At any rate, thank you for any advise you can offer.
Yours in Christ, Karen

Say the following 7 times before bed, for 21 days:

“It’s the same Church. I am not deceived.”

Orson Wells, 1984

Why do I feel I am being trolled?

 

[ASimpleSinner]

Why do I feel I am being trolled?

Because you are?

How that story added to the understanding of this issue is beyond me. A lot of thoughtful posts and perspectives have been offered here. Being answered or met with this drivel is terribly sad.

 

[TNT]

It ain’t funny folks.
That’s half-a-dozen lifes ditched like so much refuse & it was facilitated by a VAT II tribunal.
This goes on 1,000’s of time/year. 24/7 non-stop.

The VAT II church is wiping itself off the map without any outside adversary.

 

[TNT]

Because you are?

How that story added to the understanding of this issue is beyond me. A lot of thoughtful posts and perspectives have been offered here. Being answered or met with this drivel is terribly sad.

If someone was completely brain dead it would certainly add nothing to the decaying cerebral neurons.

 

[Joab_Anias]

Because you are?

How that story added to the understanding of this issue is beyond me. A lot of thoughtful posts and perspectives have been offered here. Being answered or met with this drivel is terribly sad.

I don’t think its drivel from the perspective of the writer. The concern of one annuled who didn’t initiate it or want the divorce but still feels joined to the other person is legitimate and shouldn’t be made light of because for them its a serious dilema.

I believe the annulment applies to free both parties.

The feelings of being rejected are painful. I can relate. Everyone has their own free will to chose to do this though. If we find ourselves in that position we must forgive the other for the pain caused us but also realize that we must go on. Loving someone doesn’t ensure they love us back and sometimes we get confused about love thinking loving ourselves is what is true.

The church says we are free to remarry if granted an annulment and it also says the bonds of that marriage aren’t broken until a true marriage in selfless love is contracted though this shouldn’t be the reason to contract a new union as it will compound the problems.

She would be free to remarry but if the reasons to do so were wrong the result would likely be no better.

Healing has to take place first. Annulment can be the beginning to that healing but it must be accompanied with forgiveness of self and others. I hope she isn’t blaming the Church and I am sure there is alot more to the story than the circumstances portraited in that story.

Peace.

 

[otjm]

It ain’t funny folks.
That’s half-a-dozen lifes ditched like so much refuse & it was facilitated by a VAT II tribunal.
This goes on 1,000’s of time/year. 24/7 non-stop.

The VAT II church is wiping itself off the map without any outside adversary.

I am not so naive that I do not think that such a thing could have happened.

M problems with it: 1) how was it, if she knew so much, she was not challenging his statement to the tribunal that he didn’t know?
2) Rarely ever does anyone have access to the facts of the case; it is not unkown that one party would make statements about the case that appear to be diametrically opposed to statements made by the other party; someone is not telling the truth, or is twisting it. 3) The comments about what the priest allegedly said are not even second hand; they are third hand, leading again to question their veracity. 4) there is no sourcing of the information enabling anyone to verify its accuracy or lack thereof; one only has to be on the internet for a while to find the urban legends making the rounds as God’s gospel truth. 5) There is a lot of anger, bitterness and hurt associatied with divorce which has a tendency to go on for years; add to that an annulment which often is misunderstood completely by one or both of the parties and look at what comes out. This sounds as if it was written by someone who is angry about annulments, but not necessarily someone who is telling a factual statement about a real situation.

And the very bottom line of the whole thing is that if it were true, it is being proposed as an example of how wrong the Church was to change its rules of evidence and proceedure concerning annulments. However, it is not that, because it does not follow the rules of evidence.

What it implies is that because a judge is corrupt, therefore the laws are wrong. If this in fact took place and the facts are as alleged, it proves nothing wrong with the annulment process itself; it simply proves the judge to be someone who does not follow the law.

 

[Joab_Anias]

The VAT II church is wiping itself off the map without any outside adversary.

Actually just the opposite is the case. The Church continues to grow and has found new exhuberance for Christ and His Merciful example.

Peace.

 

[Joab_Anias]

I am not so naive that I do not think that such a thing could have happened.

M problems with it: 1) how was it, if she knew so much, she was not challenging his statement to the tribunal that he didn’t know?
2) Rarely ever does anyone have access to the facts of the case; it is not unkown that one party would make statements about the case that appear to be diametrically opposed to statements made by the other party; someone is not telling the truth, or is twisting it. 3) The comments about what the priest allegedly said are not even second hand; they are third hand, leading again to question their veracity. 4) there is no sourcing of the information enabling anyone to verify its accuracy or lack thereof; one only has to be on the internet for a while to find the urban legends making the rounds as God’s gospel truth. 5) There is a lot of anger, bitterness and hurt associatied with divorce which has a tendency to go on for years; add to that an annulment which often is misunderstood completely by one or both of the parties and look at what comes out. This sounds as if it was written by someone who is angry about annulments, but not necessarily someone who is telling a factual statement about a real situation.

And the very bottom line of the whole thing is that if it were true, it is being proposed as an example of how wrong the Church was to change its rules of evidence and proceedure concerning annulments. However, it is not that, because it does not follow the rules of evidence.

What it implies is that because a judge is corrupt, therefore the laws are wrong. If this in fact took place and the facts are as alleged, it proves nothing wrong with the annulment process itself; it simply proves the judge to be someone who does not follow the law.

There is always an appeal to the Rota if there is question that the annulment is invalid. Sounds like she is already estranged though.

Peace.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

This truly is scandalous. I’d prefer if the church just allowed divorce and remarriage than to instead ask us to believe the lie that these people were not married to begin with. At least with the first option we’d be honest about what we were doing.

Dogma doesn’t allow divorce and remarriage, but people are demanding it. So… what can we do… lets change the past, and make the marriage non-existent.

VAT II Annulments and the destruction of the Catholic Family Life.

Example Recent Email
I am sorry to bother you but I have a question about a situation I can’t seem to get an answer to.
Basically, I dated my husband for 4 years and was then married for 16. We had 6 children (5 surviving). My husband met someone else who could offer him a more secure financial future (his own words) and filed for a divorce. He was granted an annulment under the fact that he “didn’t realized the vow he was taking and felt pressured into getting married”. Even though the priest who counseled us in pre-cana asked him several times if he knew what vow he was taking and the seriousness and permanency of it. Here is my dilemma. Every time I pray I feel as if our Lord is telling me that the annulment is not valid and I am still considered married in the eyes of God. I would have kept my vows until death and it sickens me that my family is broken. I did not pursue nor did I give any reason in the annulment hearing to say that this marriage should be considered null so my conscience is clear. What is my obligation? Should I consider myself never married and accept the tribunals decision considering I did not pursue any of it? Or should I consider this a farce and consider myself still married. I can not find peace with this. Incidentally, the church has married him to the woman he was committing adultery with. I have 5 children that I must set a proper example to on what is right in the eyes of God but I am still young and would like to be married if that is in the Will of God for me. I just don’t know what to do. Can you please tell me what someone should do in a situation like this. I am not able to talk to my local priest as he told my husband that he could be with his mistress even in front of my children prior to the divorce. I know that is hard to believe but my oldest son told me with his own mouth that the priest told him as “long as his father acts like a gentlemen” in front of him that he could vacation as a family with her while still married to me and living under the same roof. I shudder at the repeating of this. At any rate, thank you for any advise you can offer.
Yours in Christ, Karen

Say the following 7 times before bed, for 21 days:

“It’s the same Church. I am not deceived.”
Orson Wells, 1984

 

[cecilia97]

I don’t think its drivel from the perspective of the writer. The concern of one annuled who didn’t initiate it or want the divorce but still feels joined to the other person is legitimate and shouldn’t be made light of because for them its a serious dilema.

I believe the annulment applies to free both parties.

The feelings of being rejected are painful. I can relate. Everyone has their own free will to chose to do this though. If we find ourselves in that position we must forgive the other for the pain caused us but also realize that we must go on. Loving someone doesn’t ensure they love us back and sometimes we get confused about love thinking loving ourselves is what is true.

The church says we are free to remarry if granted an annulment and it also says the bonds of that marriage aren’t broken until a true marriage in selfless love is contracted though this shouldn’t be the reason to contract a new union as it will compound the problems.

She would be free to remarry but if the reasons to do so were wrong the result would likely be no better.

Healing has to take place first. Annulment can be the beginning to that healing but it must be accompanied with forgiveness of self and others. I hope she isn’t blaming the Church and I am sure there is alot more to the story than the circumstances portraited in that story.

Peace.

All very true. A large part of petitioning for a decree of nullity is obedience. We agree to abide by the Church’s wisdom. Hopefully, the Holy Spirit is invited into the process and everyone listens.

Can individuals in the process lie, conceal, and make mistakes? Yes. But if you’ve been truthful, you can’t go wrong by being obedient to the outcome.

And certainly, if someone has a strong conviction that they still “feel” married, there’s no requirement for them to act as though they aren’t. The fault lies with the person who lied or didn’t listen to the Holy Spirit, not the truthful person who feels like a victim.

We can’t possibly know how many annulments are erroneously granted, but I have to wonder if some people who insist they still feel married just haven’t let go emotionally. It’s hard, and there’s a time and place for denial to protect ourselves. But sometimes it goes too far.

 

[otjm]

This truly is scandalous. I’d prefer if the church just allowed divorce and remarriage than to instead ask us to believe the lie that these people were not married to begin with. At least with the first option we’d be honest about what we were doing.

Scandal is never all that far from the Church; one only has to look at the sex abuse issues to realize that; or take a look at the Church’s history.

That is not to justify a scandal by any means, but simply to put things in perspective: where anyone can make a decision, someone is just about guaranteed to get it wrong.

Someone getting it wrong is not justification of taking away from all the power to make a correct decision.

And as to whether or not that post is scandalous, one has to take a long look at it and question its possible veracity.

If some priest makes an intentionally invalid Eucharistic prayer and does not confect the Eucharist, that is not grounds to stop saying Mass.

If priests violate their vow of celibacy, that is not grounds for throwing out celibacy.

If someone on a tribunal (and the usual number of judges on a case is three, not one, so a majority have to decide) does not follow the law, that is not grounds for throwing out the process of annulments.

And if someone produces an alleged email from someone saying they were totally wronged in an annulmment, that is not grounds for deciding the truth or the falsity of the statements therein. The sitation may have occured, but we have absolutley no way of verifying any of the facts. Before you get scandalized, keep that in mind.

And if anyone tells you their personal story about an annulment, please keep in mind that very often the tribunal may make a finding about the person telling you their story that is less than positive about their maturity, or personality, or other issues as of the date of the marriage. Some people are totally honest about their faults. Others may shade things a bit, and still others simply leave major and massive parts of information out, or flat out lie. Making any judgement about an annulment without knowing all the facts, and I mean all of them, is a fools errand.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

If someone on a tribunal (and the usual number of judges on a case is three, not one, so a majority have to decide) does not follow the law, that is not grounds for throwing out the process of annulments.

And if someone produces an alleged email from someone saying they were totally wronged in an annulmment, that is not grounds for deciding the truth or the falsity of the statements therein. The sitation may have occured, but we have absolutley no way of verifying any of the facts. Before you get scandalized, keep that in mind.

It’s not just one example in an email. The point is, the American annulment tribunals will annul ANY marriage that they are asked to annul. It’s just a rubber stamp for divorce.

All this stuff about marriage requiring us to be mature and capable of complete self-giving… blah blah blah. That’s all nice but we all know that the big reason for marriage is that if a couple are going to start having sex they need to vow to be there for each other for the rest of their lives because the babies need two parents! All this stuff about lovey-dovey happy self-giving is secondary to that, and easy annulments forgets that. It’s always been understood that once the marriage happened and it was consummated and kids were on the way, they were in it for life for better or for worse.

 

[wifeandmomoftwo]

The point is, the American annulment tribunals will annul ANY marriage that they are asked to annul. It’s just a rubber stamp for divorce.

.

Do you have something to back this accusation up with?

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Do you have something to back this accusation up with?

I’ve never heard of a single case anywhere, where the church denied an annulment in Canada or the USA. And a tribunal judge I talked to told me that they’ve never turned one down once it got to trial.

Can you give details on any case where they denied the annulment? All it would take is evidence of one time and I’d be proven wrong.