Catholic Annulment: enlighten me

[twopekinguys]

Great responses here. Twopek, I appreciate your objectivity. I wish the protestant churches were a little more (okay, a lot more) concerned with marriage, and remarriage. Maybe I have found myself a ministry!! I value all responses, even the opposing views. Marie, thankyou for the kind words, I am trying not to spit bricks as you put it . I will certainly take some of the advice offered here. Boy this process is no fun!

In the event that a marriage is determined to be valid, is it reasonable that the petitioner would be counseled to reconcile with his or her spouse? Im at a crossroads…Enough damage has been done that I feel I have a right to be free from this marriage, however, where does a husband’s sacrificial love end? Tough question…

I have seen annullments granted with “restrictions”. One of the more common restrictions is that one party, or the other, and sometimes both, receive counselling. I have also seen time limits imposed (i.e. must wait 6 months, or 1 year to remarry.)

Keep in mind, that if a marriage is determined to be “valid” at the end of this process, then neither party is free to marry in the eyes of the Church.

 

[twopekinguys]

Is it possible that the Archdiocese of Los Angeles is acting as the appellate tribunal for the second decision? - that would make the venue and the 30 day time period make sense.

There would have to be a determination from the local Diocese in order for the Archdiocese to act as appellate. From what I am gathering so far, it doesn’t appear that the initial determination has been made yet.

I don’t claim to know everything about annullments, but I do know that you can’t petition the Archdiocese directly for the annullment. It still has to go through normal channels at the local Diocese first, and then on to the Archdiocese.

 

[Publisher]

I have seen annullments granted with “restrictions”. One of the more common restrictions is that one party, or the other, and sometimes both, receive counselling. I have also seen time limits imposed (i.e. must wait 6 months, or 1 year to remarry.)

Keep in mind, that if a marriage is determined to be “valid” at the end of this process, then neither party is free to marry in the eyes of the Church.

I have a question…if the marriage is “invalid” not adhering to “restrictions” wouldn’t make the marriage all of a sudden “valid” would it? If a person is deemed to have an “invalid” marriage (aka no real marriage ever took place), then if they “remarried” sooner than the restrictions…does that somehow “validate” the marriage that was deemed “invalid” IF the restrictions are followed? Either a marriage is valid or it’s not…restrictions do not apply in reality…do they?

 

[twopekinguys]

Moto I’m sorry you have to go through this. I personally had to go through it with my first wife. We both were Catholic at the time and I had a representative from the Catholic Church contact me after my wife had started the annulment process. I expressed that I did not agree with the annulment because I would never say that our marriage was invalid. The response I received was a little frustrating because the Priest basically said “well if you get married again you’re gonna wanna do it within the church right?” My response was well yes of course but if the church doesn’t allow me to marry within the Catholic Church then I can’t obviously do anything about that. His response was “yes you can if an annulment is granted”.

After speaking to a nun who was my representative I was adamant that I had taken a vow and would never say that my vow was invalid. She over the course of several verbal interactions conveyed to me that she doubted an annulment would be granted because there were no grounds. We covered things like abuse, willingness to have children, etc. etc. All the things you covered. As it turns out my wife at the time was trying to pursue another marriage and wanted to get re-married within the Catholic Church. An annulment was never granted because there were no grounds.

I honestly believe the reason that the percent of annulments granted these days is so high is because people don’t take marriage as serious as they should. That’s why more than 50% of them fail. Usually when annulments are sought out both parties are in agreement and they will usually hit on something so that the church grants it. I would say please try to have confidence that it will be handled appropriately and if your wife is truly considering reconciliation than the Catholic Church will never grant an annulment. The person representing your wife should uncover this in their verbal interviews and be quite frank that she should reconcile. I pray that things work out for you.

PEACE Brother.

I am glad to see that the process worked for you and your ex. It shows that the misconception that “anyone” can get an annullment is unfounded.

You made a very key statement in your last paragraph. (bolding mine).

I have heard of cases, (no first hand knowledge), where an annullment was granted because one person didn’t lack the necessary knowledge or mental capacity to enter into a sacramental marriage at the time of the wedding. The reason being, one party or the other was still “drunk” from the partying the night before. Since their judgement was impaired by the alcohol at the time of the vows, they weren’t mentally competent enough to enter into their vows.

Personally, I think that is a crock, but then that is probably one of the reasons I am not on the tribunal

 

[moto5150]

I have a question…if the marriage is “invalid” not adhering to “restrictions” wouldn’t make the marriage all of a sudden “valid” would it? If a person is deemed to have an “invalid” marriage (aka no real marriage ever took place), then if they “remarried” sooner than the restrictions…does that somehow “validate” the marriage that was deemed “invalid” IF the restrictions are followed? Either a marriage is valid or it’s not…restrictions do not apply in reality…do they?

To your point… I believe that the ‘restriction’ would be placed on the petitioner, so as not to re-marry immediately (as opposed to adherence to the restriction being the determining factor in validating a previously ‘invalid’ marriage). This likely applies because most people are seeking annulment because they are trying to re-marry, not because they are trying to get to the bottom of the issue and determine the marriages validity and respond accordingly. Most petitions filed are an attempt to go through the Catholic process so the petitioner can re-marry and remain in good graces with the church. Herein lies the problem. Objectivity goes out the window when motives are to re-marry, as opposed to uncover the truth about one’s previous marriage. Thanks for bringing that up Publisher.

The bottom line: A truly objective person filing for annulment would encourage the respondent to fight against the annulment, and if the respondent was able to present a case to the Tribunal that proved validity, the petitioning spouse, if truly desiring truth and clarity, would return to the repsondent with a heart of reconciliation. hmmmmm… Uncomfortable thought for some, indeed, but God’s heart nonetheless, I believe.

 

[twopekinguys]

I have a question…if the marriage is “invalid” not adhering to “restrictions” wouldn’t make the marriage all of a sudden “valid” would it? If a person is deemed to have an “invalid” marriage (aka no real marriage ever took place), then if they “remarried” sooner than the restrictions…does that somehow “validate” the marriage that was deemed “invalid” IF the restrictions are followed? Either a marriage is valid or it’s not…restrictions do not apply in reality…do they?

Again, let me restate, I am not an expert on annullments.

I don’t think that failure to adhere to the restrictions would automatically make their marriage “valid”. But at the same time, in the eyes of the Church, they aren’t free to marry in the Church until the restrictions have been resolved.

The way I see an annullment with restrictions is that the marriage in question was not valid, but they want the person(s) involved to realize that they may have some sort of issue that needs to be addressed before they enter into another marriage.

For example, maybe one of the parties suffered from undiagnosed depression at the time of their marriage. Obviously, depression can affect a persons ability to make a sound decision. This could all come out during the interviews and questionaires, talking to witnesses, etc. It would seem appropriate (to me) to have that person get some sort of counseling in order to make sure they are in a state of mind to enter into the Sacrament of Marriage with full knowledge and understanding.

Another example could be if a person’s divorce is finalize on December 15, 2009, and they file for an annullment on 1-2-2010, and state that they are wanting to get remarried. Annullment or not, a cooling off period would seem appropriate (to me).

I can say, that in our Diocese, if an annullment is granted with restrictions, then the Celebrant makes sure that whatever the restrictions were, they were resolved before the wedding takes place.

Hope this helps.

 

[YADA]

Moto,

Blessing man - I feel for you …

You addressed the issues I listed off the top of my head as loop holes … thats fine but I believe you addressed them from your frustrations’ with your situation … you are also projecting your frustrations onto the Church …

It is a fact that you and your wife divorced … that break down of your marriage was not caused or influenced by the Catholic Church … your recieved a divorce far more easily from the civil authorities then the anuullmnt proccess …

You are hurting - that is clearly evident in your posts … and your feelings are fluctuating from a desire to reconcile with your wife to feeling like you have a right to be free

Enough damage has been done that I feel I have a right to be free from this marriage, however, where does a husband’s sacrificial love end? Tough question…

What would you do with this freedom? Woud you feel like you could marry again if the right woman came along? … It is a tough question …

I am glad you have the pastor who married you as a witness. Is this the church you and your wife continued to worship in during your marriage? A declaration of ‘vaidity’ is only as good as the evidence to support it …

How your case got to LA and many of your comments have me puzzeled … You are very clear in your condemnation of the Church, the annullment process and the connected catholic gentleman. Yet many of your comments show a distinct lack of understanding [receiving an anullment does not affect the legitimacy of children for example] anullments …

In my diocese - if the former spouses live in different diocese - the party that is not initiating the request has the right to have the case decided in their diocese rather then the initiators. … since this is their right - I have always understood this to be a matter of Canon Law [but I am not a cannon lawyer - and have never played one on TV ]. This is true - even if that party is not catholic. So I am not sure how moving the case to LA would help … and if your ex does not reside in LA why they woulld take it is beyond me … did she move to LA? Is she catholic -or in RCIA? If so, is that RCIA being recieved in LA?

Did the well connected person play a role in the breakdown of your marriage? You have not stated as much, in fact sort of stated the opposite but then seem to hint at it - which might explain your angst with te Church …

As I told you - I worked with a divorced Lutheran who came into the Church … His first marriage to another Lutheran was determined to be valid and sacramental …

And the ‘easy’ anullment may happen but it is not really the norm …

I know people who have received anullments and those who did not … and the cases were not that hard to determine nor understand why they were granted … or why they were upheld …

Let me ask you this … if your wife does not reconcile with you … regardless of what the 'Church" determines … and if you are convinced of the Sacramental Nature of your marriage - Are you prepared to live a celebate life [never taking another wife] until and unless your ex passes away?

 

[moto5150]

YADA…
Thanks again for the (name removed by moderator)ut. I never intended to condemn the church itself. I am thankful that at least the church is doing something about the family crisis in America, even if at times, it does seem as though they add fuel to it, I know this is not their intent.

My perception of the events having unfolded as they did, and still are, definitely frustrate me. The Civil divorce process in the US is an absolute joke. I have no good reason why the case is being heard in Los Angeles.

At this point, I have no desire to recocile with my wife. She has made me free from the marriage, by her actions. However, how often are we asked to do things that we don’t want to do? In scripture…ALL THE TIME. The greatest act of love in the bible, was surrounded with ‘If at all possible, take this cup from me’. In other words, ‘I realy don’t want to do this, but I will anyway’.

I would rather the church say “you had a valid marriage that you didn’t hold together. You got divorced…”

Call it what it is. Does that make sense?