Cardinal Muller says no to second marriage without annulment

[powerofk]

Honestly, the biggest problems with the annulment process have to do with, first of all, differences in interpretations of the rules; second, the number of witnesses required (and information requested) is different from diocese to diocese; third, the length of time is hugely variant. In other words, the main issues with annulment proceedings seem to be administrative.

Before I married my wife, she had to have an annulment from her first marriage. Okay, fine. She went to the local diocese office (at the time, she was living in the diocese of Las Cruces, NM). The people there told her she needed to go to the diocese she was married in (Juarez, Mexico). So she went to Juarez. And, though they gave her the form, they told her she needed to go through Las Cruces. It went back and forth between these two dioceses for months before the diocese in Las Cruces finally relented and took her case (btw, both dioceses said that she had a good case - the dispute was over who had jurisdiction - neither diocese wished to claim jurisdiction). She did get her annulment (2 years after her case was finally accepted), and we got married. But the thing is, stuff like this happens all the time. Plus, the forms were way different. The form in Juarez was about 2-3 times as long as the form in Las Cruces - and they asked for five witnesses, while the form in Las Cruces asked for three. Plus, it would have taken her about twice as long to go through the process in Juarez.

Honestly, what needs to happen is more making the rules and process the same. There are stories in South America where the average waiting time for annulments is in the 20+ year range. It’s so long there that divorcees pretty much tell the priests that they won’t even bother applying because their ex’s are more likely to die before the annulment is granted. It’s not a loosening of rules that needs to happen - it’s a making the rules the same across the world that needs to happen.

 

[powerofk]

I often wonder why people think Pope Francis is going to throw the baby out with the bathwater?
He won’t change that which he cannot change.

Great that your pastor is giving good info.

Because Pope Francis been plastered as a “reformer who cares about the poor”. And in American parlance, “reformer who cares about the poor” = “Liberal/Progressive” and accepting of everything “Liberal/Progressives” stand for. That’s why “Liberal/Progressives” love him and why “Conservatives” don’t like him that much. It’s how he’s been portrayed. But, honestly, if one pays close attention to what he’s said, he’s said absolutely nothing that contradicts Church teaching (though people, trying to read between the lines, have spun it to what they want the narrative to be). You’re right - he might change disciplines, he might streamline some bureaucracy, etc., but he can’t (and won’t try) to change doctrine.

As for the pastor, it is good that he’s giving good info. Honestly, I think the biggest problem with annulments is that it’s truly impossible to know whether the person who left, understood at the time he/she made the vows what he/she was promising - and if so, if he/she was willing and/or truly able to keep the vows. Seriously. And, honestly, I think that’s one reason why so many annulments are granted in the US, especially because so many respondents refuse to reply (or cannot be found within a reasonable time frame).

 

[smichhertz]

I understand the intent, but the intent and the reality of the process are not even in the same universe. What is the percentage of requested annulments that are not granted? I bet the figures are facinating.

Apparently, most are granted: “In 2012, nine in 10 cases resulted in a ruling of nullity.” - Mark Gray, senior research associate at the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate at Georgetown University

Source: washingtontimes.com/news/2014/oct/15/annulments-plummet-among-us-catholics-amid-fewer-m/?page=all

 

[ProVobis]

It is still beyond my small intellect that remarried Catholics are in worse shape than a monster who has committed murder but has confessed and received absolution.

Both are grave matter as far as Church teaching goes. It is society which has not only allowed remarriages but in fact glamorized them. Sometimes, dread I say, in defiance of the Church.

 

[pianistclare]

Apparently, most are granted: “In 2012, nine in 10 cases resulted in a ruling of nullity.” - Mark Gray, senior research associate at the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate at Georgetown University

Source: washingtontimes.com/news/2014/oct/15/annulments-plummet-among-us-catholics-amid-fewer-m/?page=all

Which illustrates that Americans give little thought to their marriages. They just do it.

 

[smichhertz]

Which illustrates that Americans give little thought to their marriages. They just do it.

That was my thought as well. Some cases are very easily granted and a trial is not needed.

“79 percent were granted through the ordinary process, while 21 percent were granted through the documentary process”(This is 2007 statistics)

Source: catholicworldreport.com/Item/470/annulment_nation.aspx

That would seem to imply that because a trial is not needed in a vast majority of the cases, that they were simple cases that were obviously invalid marriages.

 

[powerofk]

Which illustrates that Americans give little thought to their marriages. They just do it.

Not only that… but…

(1) In the US, there are many marriages contracted between Catholics and non-Catholics, and though not true in all cases, there are some religions that don’t recognize marriage as permanent (which is also taken into effect when a person is not Catholic yet seeking an annulment - usually due to living in a second marriage yet wishing to enter the Church)

(2) The high rate of divorce (and number of children from divorce) makes it much harder for people to understand that marriage is to be permanent.

(3) priests are also pretty unlikely to recommend the annulment process to people that they feel probably do not have a case.

 

[powerofk]

That was my thought as well. Some cases are very easily granted and a trial is not needed.

“79 percent were granted through the ordinary process, while 21 percent were granted through the documentary process”(This is 2007 statistics)

Source: catholicworldreport.com/Item/470/annulment_nation.aspx

That would seem to imply that because a trial is not needed in a vast majority of the cases, that they were simple cases that were obviously invalid marriages.

So 21 percent were just paperwork (in other words, pretty much just stating that the person got married outside the Church) and the other 79% were the long-dragged-out process.

 

[smichhertz]

So 21 percent were just paperwork (in other words, pretty much just stating that the person got married outside the Church) and the other 79% were the long-dragged-out process.

I thought it was the other way around - but perhaps I read that wrong. I’m not sure about the terms.

 

[ARSpade]

I’d say if I had a hope for the Synod it’s better marriage prep and orders to priests On the subject.

My pre Cana was a joke. I’ve heard of worse. Priests should be more willing to say “no” or “wait” instead of “well, you’ve already booked the hall downtown and I’ve never seen you before, but okay.”

They’re both vocations, but it takes years to train to be a priest and a weekend to be a husband. :-/

 

[pianistclare]

I’d say if I had a hope for the Synod it’s better marriage prep and orders to priests On the subject.

My pre Cana was a joke. I’ve heard of worse. Priests should be more willing to say “no” or “wait” instead of “well, you’ve already booked the hall downtown and I’ve never seen you before, but okay.”

They’re both vocations, but it takes years to train to be a priest and a weekend to be a husband. :-/

Wow. I’m sorry you had that experience, but the priest around here really take the couple to task.

 

[ARSpade]

Wow. I’m sorry you had that experience, but the priest around here really take the couple to task.

I’m not saying it was horrible, but it could’ve been a lot better and it was more a box checking thing than an actual check if we were ready for marriage. We’ve learned a lot since that would’ve been helpful then.

Our current parish does it a lot better, but our current diocese is, imho, one of the best. But our priests still get people who just want to get married in a pretty church and don’t care about the theology.

 

[ProVobis]

I’m not saying it was horrible, but it could’ve been a lot better and it was more a box checking thing than an actual check if we were ready for marriage. We’ve learned a lot since that would’ve been helpful then.

Our current parish does it a lot better, but our current diocese is, imho, one of the best. But our priests still get people who just want to get married in a pretty church and don’t care about the theology.

Looking at the dropping marriage rates, is this really projected to be a problem? If anything, marriage has been losing its appeal altogether, with or without its pretty ceremonies.

1965 - 352,458

1970 - 426,309

1975 - 369,133

1980 - 350,745

1985 - 348,300

1990 - 326,079

1995 - 294,144

2000 - 261,626

2005 - 207,112

2010 - 168,400

2014 - 154,450

cara.georgetown.edu/caraservices/requestedchurchstats.html

 

[SWolf]

Looking at the dropping marriage rates, is this really projected to be a problem? If anything, marriage has been losing its appeal altogether, with or without its pretty ceremonies.

1965 - 352,458

1970 - 426,309

1975 - 369,133

1980 - 350,745

1985 - 348,300

1990 - 326,079

1995 - 294,144

2000 - 261,626

2005 - 207,112

2010 - 168,400

2014 - 154,450

cara.georgetown.edu/caraservices/requestedchurchstats.html

If one looks at the site, it looks like the marriage decline is a worldwide trend.

 

[ProVobis]

If one looks at the site, it looks like the marriage decline is a worldwide trend.

You’re right. Maybe that’s why remarriages are glamorized as much as they are. It keeps the wedding planners in business too.

 

[pianistclare]

You’re right. Maybe that’s why remarriages are glamorized as much as they are. It keeps the wedding planners in business too.

You hit it.
Young people want a wedding, less thought to the MARRIAGE.

 

[PTL]

You can help save marriage and family by going here and sign:

americaneedsfatima.org/forms/e15039a.html?lang=en&utm_source=sm-anf&utm_content=E.15039

We need to do our part to help.

 

[sttcatherinefan]

If anything comes out of the Synod regarding divorced Catholics and communion, my hope and prayer is that they simply reaffirm the teachings of our Lord. It’s there in black and white.

However, there is much, much misunderstanding among Catholics when it comes to marriage and annulment. And if the Synod clarifies the teachings of the Church, it will be by the grace of God and of benefit to the faithful. If a 25-year old marries the “wrong” person, what makes that person the wrong one? Abuse? Mental illness? Lack of openness to life? Infidelity? Addiction that existed at marriage and unwillingness to seek treatment? All of these are things which MAY result in an approved annulment. If the now 35-year old has just found someone “better,” an annulment may not be granted. And if not, that person, who may be separated from their spouse, is called to chastity going forward because in the eyes of the Church, they are still married.

Our priest is in the midst of a campaign, if you will, to bring parishioners into his office to discuss these sorts of issues, and has had multiple seminars on divorce/annulment. God bless him. We are fortunate to have a Canon lawyer as a parishioner to help, but this is the type of pastoral care desperately needed in our parishes. That is the type of recommendation that could come out of the Synod. And our priest has said multiple times from the pulpit that $$$ is not an issue. The Church will work with those who cannot afford to contribute money to the annulment process.

Wait? So your pastor is nosing around through people’s private lives and their private relationships. That is way out of the bounds of the proper place of a priest to inquire about the marital status of every single person who is registered there or to try to figure out who is divorced/ remarried, cohabitating, etc. like a nosy Nellie.

 

[Tigg]

If anything comes out of the Synod regarding divorced Catholics and communion, my hope and prayer is that they simply reaffirm the teachings of our Lord. It’s there in black and white.

We are all wondering at this point, even though the bishops’ debate continues, how they could possibly fail to reaffirm the teaching on marriage. It’s Divine Law and unchangeable. Hopefully though, they will be able to streamline the annulment issue.

Our priest is in the midst of a campaign, if you will, to bring parishioners into his office to discuss these sorts of issues, and has had multiple seminars on divorce/annulment. God bless him. We are fortunate to have a Canon lawyer as a parishioner to help, but this is the type of pastoral care desperately needed in our parishes. That is the type of recommendation that could come out of the Synod. And our priest has said multiple times from the pulpit that $$$ is not an issue. The Church will work with those who cannot afford to contribute money to the annulment process.

This is wonderful! God bless your pastor.

 

[sps49]

Wait? So your pastor is nosing around through people’s private lives and their private relationships. That is way out of the bounds of the proper place of a priest to inquire about the marital status of every single person who is registered there or to try to figure out who is divorced/ remarried, cohabitating, etc. like a nosy Nellie.

Bringing a little light and visibility to a subject that is hazy to many parishioners, and inviting dialog does not seem to fulfill the definition of being “nosy.” Perhaps you could expand on your concept of “nosy” for my benefit so that I might understand what you are trying to say about what is in and out of bounds for a priest? At what point should a priest curb his pastoral curiosity?