Frustrated with the Church (aka annulments)

[Angel_Bradford]

So, unless I misunderstand the situation, you want your boyfriend to get an annulment from the Baptist Church, right? (I’m thinking, what authority does the Catholic church have in annulling a Baptist marriage?).

It’s certainly a confusing matter, and one for the lawyers. Here’s how I think it should be (I stress SHOULD: in the unlikely event of my becoming Pope, this is how I will judge the situation.)

1. His marriage was in a church not recognised as valid by the Catholic (i.e. the “one true”) Church. Therefore, anything he does in that church has no validity, including marriage. He even commits heresy by participating in the Baptist church. Seriously, people have died for less than this.
2. You have never been married, so Mark 10 does not apply to you:
   "When they were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this. He answered, “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her.And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.”
   Only your boyfriend will be committing adultery, as the divorcee.
3. Were your boyfriend to convert to Catholicism, his previous marriage should be disregarded (or rendered null), leaving you both to marry for the first time in the Catholic Church.

Just throwing up some ideas. No help at all, I realise.

No offense, but your post is fill with inaccurate and incorrect information.

 

[seekdatruth]

Guilty? Of what? I don’t think the Church views marriage as an evil… so the fact that they default to assuming a valid marriage is what most would consider a positive stance on marriage in an age when it’s under assault from all sides. Frankly, I think the Church’s stance on marriage is logically sound and morally bold, and it’s worked well for centuries.

Guilty of being in an “invalid” marriage based only on lack canonical form, which, if I"m correct, is only recently (last 50 years) come to be acceptable criteria for annulment.
It’s a contradiction I"m pointing out here. Lack of form is cut-and-dry, either a marriage isn’t or it wasn’t. Yet a previous marriage by a Protestant in a Protestant church certainly lacks canonical form, otherwise we are allowing for the assumption that there is no such thing as a “valid” Catholic wedding just because it ***is ***within canon law.

 

[hansard]

Hi, Belloc. Thanks for all that. It wasn’t intended to be legal advice, and I’m sure the original poster does not see it as such.

But, seriously, though. We are treating the Catholic Church as the only valid expression of Christianity, aren’t we? All other churches or denominations practise heresy by their very existence and often by their opposition to the Catholic Church.

If Canon 1055 mentions Christian marriage (taking your word for it), then it has to be assumed that it refers to Catholic marriage (Catholics are the only true Christians, right? All the others are well-meaning, but misguided, heretics). If a Protestant marriage is seen as valid in the Catholic Church, then so it must be with every Protestant procedure: sacraments, dogma, beliefs. Married Protestant ministers would be seen as valid, and free to practise Mass in any Christian church (oh, hold on a minute, that’s a sticking point, now, isn’t it?).

Matthew 5:32 refers to those who marry a divorced woman. It is not applicable in this case.

In any case, surely you would have recognised the slight tongue-in-cheek declaration that “in the unlikely event of my becoming Pope, this is how I will judge the situation”. My post was obviously how I would like to have the matter viewed, not how it is actually viewed.

 

[Phemie]

Guilty of being in an “invalid” marriage based only on lack canonical form, which, if I"m correct, is only recently (last 50 years) come to be acceptable criteria for annulment.

You don’t need an annulment if you have lack of canonical form. The marriage was never presumed valid to start off with. All you have to do is show that you are a) Catholic b)married civilly or in another church without dispensation c)divorced. Some dioceses only require that the priest record that in detail.

It’s a contradiction I"m pointing out here. Lack of form is cut-and-dry, either a marriage isn’t or it wasn’t. Yet a previous marriage by a Protestant in a Protestant church certainly lacks canonical form

Since only Catholics are bound by Canon Law, lack of canonical form doesn’t apply to Protestant marriages or the marriages of any other Faith. Any marriage they contract is presumed valid until proven otherwise.

, otherwise we are allowing for the assumption that there is no such thing as a “valid” Catholic wedding just because it ***is ***within canon law.

I have no idea what you mean by that.

 

[seekdatruth]

Since only Catholics are bound by Canon Law, lack of canonical form doesn’t apply to Protestant marriages or the marriages of any other Faith.

BINGO! So why should a Catholic annulment process be imposed on a Protestant?

Any marriage they contract is presumed valid until proven otherwise.

Yet we wouldn’t allow a Protestant minister to perform a marriage in the Catholic Church, nor allow him to perform Mass, would we? When is anything performed in a Protestant Church EVER considered valid in the eyes of the Catholic Church? Oh, wait, just this one thing called marriage, and only where it suits us.

, otherwise we are allowing for the assumption that there is no such thing as a “valid” Catholic wedding just because it is within canon law.

I have no idea what you mean by that.

Here’s an example for you: My marriage is not valid ONLY because it was not performed in the Catholic Church, (those of you who have seen my posts before-YES, MY PREVIOUS “MARRIAGE” WAS DETERMINED NULL). The reason, I am told, for my current marriage being NOT valid is ONLY that it was performed outside of canon law. (By canon law, I mean the one that says only a marriage performed by a priest in a Catholic ceremony is a valid sacrament.) So, therefore any marriage performed outside the CC should be considered null, Protestant to Protestant included. Obviously, canon law DOES apply to the Protestant, otherwise he wouldn’t have to get an annulment.

 

[nodito]

Yet we wouldn’t allow a Protestant minister to perform a marriage in the Catholic Church, nor allow him to perform Mass, would we? When is anything performed in a Protestant Church EVER considered valid in the eyes of the Catholic Church? Oh, wait, just this one thing called marriage, and only where it suits us.

I think herein lies the confusion. When two people get married, even in the Catholic church, they mutually confer the sacrament themselves. The priest does not confer the sacrament on them, like he does during Baptism or Confirmation, he merely receives the wedding vows in the name of the Church and provides the blessing of the Church. The husband and wife are the ones who establish the marriage, and Protestant couples are able to do this just as well as Catholics.

This is fundamentally different from, for example, the Sacrament of the Eucharist, which requires the priest to act in the person of Christ. Only a validly ordained (Catholic) priest can celebrate over the Eucharist, and this is why Protestants don’t have valid communion.

Here’s an example for you: My marriage is not valid ONLY because it was not performed in the Catholic Church. The reason, I am told, for my current marriage being NOT valid is ONLY that it was performed outside of canon law. (By canon law, I mean the one that says only a marriage performed by a priest in a Catholic ceremony is a valid sacrament.) So, therefore any marriage performed outside the CC should be considered null, Protestant to Protestant included. Obviously, canon law DOES apply to the Protestant, otherwise he wouldn’t have to get an annulment.

If you or your spouse was Catholic at the time of the wedding, but you married outside of the Church and did not have a dispensation to do so, then yes, the marriage is in fact invalid. This is not so much the result of the marriage occuring outside the Church as it is of a Catholic attempting to contract marriage in a way that he or she should not have. Catholics are required to do things that others are not required to do, for example, attend Mass weekly and confess once a year. If a Catholic fails to do these things, it has more serious consequences than if a Protestant fails to do them.

Consider an analogy: When I have children, I the right to set the rules for them. I have the right to tell them when to go to bed and what movies they can and can’t watch. I have this right because I’m their parent; I know them, love them, and want what’s best for them. Let’s say I tell my kids they have to be home by 8 pm. Another parent may permit his child to stay out later than that, and that’s his right. But if my child comes home later than 8 without getting permission from me first, he’s in trouble. It’s not that staying out past 8 is inherently wrong, it’s just that as a parent, I’ve been tasked with setting requirements and rules that will keep my kids safe, and this was one of those rules. If they break it, there will be consequences.

Similarly, the Church has said that for our own good, Catholics are normally required to contract marriage according to the ecclesiastical form. This means during a public liturgy of the Church and with witnesses. The Church is our “parent” and has the right to require this of us, because she is responsible for helping us get to heaven. However, she is not responsible in the same way for those who aren’t Catholic, so non-Catholics are free to marry as they see fit.

 

[Phemie]

BINGO! So why should a Catholic annulment process be imposed on a Protestant?

His marriage is presumed valid because he wasn’t bound by canon law. He could get married anywhere he wanted. Protestants are just as capable of contracting valid marriages as Catholics are. An annulment is not guaranteed just because you petition for one.

Yet we wouldn’t allow a Protestant minister to perform a marriage in the Catholic Church, nor allow him to perform Mass, would we?
Neither the priest nor the Protestant minister perform the marriage. The couple performs the marriage and the priest or minister is simply a witness to the vows that they make. Even a lay person can witness the marriage of a Catholic, in the Catholic Church, in certain circumstances.

When is anything performed in a Protestant Church EVER considered valid in the eyes of the Catholic Church? Oh, wait, just this one thing called marriage, and only where it suits us.

Baptisms performed by immersion or pouring and in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit are considered valid even if they are performed in the Protestant Church.

Even a Catholic can marry in the Protestant Church with permission from his/her bishop.

Here’s an example for you: My marriage is not valid ONLY because it was not performed in the Catholic Church, (those of you who have seen my posts before-YES, MY PREVIOUS “MARRIAGE” WAS DETERMINED NULL). The reason, I am told, for my current marriage being NOT valid is ONLY that it was performed outside of canon law. (By canon law, I mean the one that says only a marriage performed by a priest in a Catholic ceremony is a valid sacrament.)
No Canon Law says that FOR A CATHOLIC only a marriage contracted in front of a priest or deacon (or in some cases a lay person appointed by the bishop with Rome’s approval) is valid. BUT it also says that a dispensation can be granted for the Catholic to marry in a Protestant Church or even have a civil ceremony under certain circumstances.

So, therefore any marriage performed outside the CC should be considered null, Protestant to Protestant included. Obviously, canon law DOES apply to the Protestant, otherwise he wouldn’t have to get an annulment.

Canon Law says that you can’t marry someone who is already married. He’s married unless his marriage is found invalid (not a given). Where he married is not what the Tribunal will look at since he was free to marry anywhere. The Tribunal will look at other things that were happening at the time he took his vows. There are specific things that make any marriage invalid in the eyes of the Church. “Not having married in front of a priest or deacon” is not one of those things since that law applies only to Catholics.

 

[brigid12]

You know, I don’t know why I bothered to write this. Aside from a couple of helpful answers, I feel like I’m being patronized and made to feel like an idiot. There are alot of disagreements I have with the Church, and this is one of them, but don’t think for a minute that I’m being a whiney brat and just throwing away doctrine because I don’t agree with it. If that was the case, I wouldn’t be so absolutely angry, frustrated and heartsick with the situation. I have prayed for months and tried to ask for help from tons of resources, and everyday feels like another step back. And that post that said the annulment issue could mean that we’re not meant for each other was not a cute little enlightened statement, it was rude. Do you not think I haven’t agonized over that enough?
I think what really makes me angry is the fact that it feel like God has played a cruel joke on me. He did it to Abraham, why not? When I ask for help people just give me rules and tell us that we’re being unreasonable terrible people. We just want to live the rest of our lives together with God first and we’re both sick of being divided by religion.
As for the fact that he should just man up and get the annulment, I wish it were that easy. He’s the most namly man I know and would give his very life for me, but the annulment thing is such a unique and problematic issue for both of us in every aspect that it would take a miracle. I know none of you will understand, but I don’t know how to write everything that is in both of our hearts.
Again looking back on it, I don’t know why I decided to write about it again. I guess I still had a glimmer of hope that I would get some comfort or help, but as usual with my looking into this, I’m just more frustrated. So nevermind, and for the people who are truly trying to help me, I’m sorry for the rant.

No, actually with Abraham He was making sure of Abraham’s complete obedience - something we fallen humans have a lot of problem with and something that obedience to Papal Authority helps us with. When He stayed Abraham’s hand He was showing His Mercy since Abraham had proven his obedience.
His Mercy is something that annulments can show, if possible, since there are so many (especially today) who have no real idea what marriage is about. The tribunal process was instituted by the successor of Peter for this very thing. It is belief in the Holy Spirit that allows this to be done - even when the individuals involved within the tribunal are sinful.
I will pray for both you and your boyfriend.

 

[msugeotech]

The marriage of 2 non-Catholics are presumed to be valid by the Catholic Church. Since they are not Catholic, they do not have to be married under the norms of Canon Law. I was married for the first time, for 2 short months. I was Episcopal, she was Baptist. Wife left, committed adultery. We divorced. I re-married. Again, still Episcopal, wife was Baptist. That was in 1999. We decided to become Catholic in 2006. Since the Church saw my first marriage as still binding, I had to petition for a Decree of Nullity. The CC does NOT recognize civil divorce. Civil marriage, yes, divorce, no. Since none of us were Catholic, lack of canonical form is not an argument. Canon Law is not binding to non-Catholics that sense. So, since my first marriage was still binding, I had an impediment to my second/current marriage, making it invalid. So, I petitioned for the D of N, filled out the paperwork, gathered my witnesses, and a year later, my first marriage was declared invalid - null, and no longer binding. This means that the marriage never existed, and therefore removing the impediment to my current marriage. So, the presumption of validity automatically falls to my current marriage. And, since neither of us were Catholic, I did NOT have to have my current marriage convalidated. We were confirmed last February. It’s a long, tough process, but well worth it! And I’m glad to be home!

Any questions?

 

[seekdatruth]

I am aware of what the Catholic laws are on the subject. I’m not questioning what they are or how they work. I am questioning whether or not they make sense and are truly what God wants and expects of us. Jesus spent a great deal of his time here on earth breaking the rules and traditions of man. Many people felt that certain formulas of actions and words could save them and make them pleasing in God’s eyes. A great deal of authority was afforded to men by men, and the priests were often consumed in their own greed and vanity. Jesus warned them time and time again how wrong they were for putting the traditions of man above the will of God.
I keep seeing a similar pattern in the Catholic Church, and despite my desire to be a part of all that is beautiful and righteous about it, (pro-life, against ABC, chastity, etc.) it seems wrong to be immersed in so much legalism and judgmental attitudes towards others when all that supposedly separates the righteous from the unrighteous is often a man-made formula, no matter how trivial or easy, which takes it upon itself to accept casualties for the “benefit” of the Church as a whole. I just can not accept that the Catholic Church holds the keys to all graces bestowed by God. God woke me up from my life which I tried to live without Him. He alone turned me back to Himself. I call that grace, since I was certainly not doing anything of merit, in fact I did all I could to avoid it. The Catholic Church, on the other hand, seemed to be pushing me away. No one acted like they wanted me back, nor did they even suggest that I might want to go to Mass, in fact, it feels like an exclusive club. I was never much for those, even when I knew I could get in. I felt pulled to it from God for a while, but now I think He just wanted me to see I’m not missing much.

 

[kage_ar]

It seems that you might want to do some reading on what infallibility.

Very high level, priests, bishops and cardinals are not infallible. Most of the things written or spoken by the pope are not infallible. Only when the pope speaks “ex cathedra” is what he says infallible -and, that is because God made it so.

There are many good sources for this, you will be taking a great walk through Church History. Please begin with the Early Church Fathers.

To help with some of your questions:

“By What Authority” by Mark Shea.

Another is Weigel’s “The Courage to be Catholic”

Lastly, on the annulments question,

Ed Peter’s “Annulments and the Catholic Church”

 

[YADA]

Hi, Belloc. Thanks for all that. It wasn’t intended to be legal advice, and I’m sure the original poster does not see it as such.

But, seriously, though. We are treating the Catholic Church as the only valid expression of Christianity, aren’t we? All other churches or denominations practise heresy by their very existence and often by their opposition to the Catholic Church.

If Canon 1055 mentions Christian marriage (taking your word for it), then it has to be assumed that it refers to Catholic marriage (Catholics are the only true Christians, right? All the others are well-meaning, but misguided, heretics). If a Protestant marriage is seen as valid in the Catholic Church, then so it must be with every Protestant procedure: sacraments, dogma, beliefs. Married Protestant ministers would be seen as valid, and free to practise Mass in any Christian church (oh, hold on a minute, that’s a sticking point, now, isn’t it?).

Matthew 5:32 refers to those who marry a divorced woman. It is not applicable in this case.

In any case, surely you would have recognised the slight tongue-in-cheek declaration that “in the unlikely event of my becoming Pope, this is how I will judge the situation”. My post was obviously how I would like to have the matter viewed, not how it is actually viewed.

How old are you? Does your parish have a library or an Adult Education prgram?

I ask because you have some very incomplete and erroneous concepts about our faith and how that faith is understood and practiced …

Two catholics may not contract a sacrmental marriage before a justice of the peace but it is possible for two non-catholics to contract a sacramental marriage before that same justice of the peace … similar situations apply with religious ceremonies … two non-catholics may contract a sacramental marriage in a Luteran, Baptist, etc …

Catholics are instructd on how to contract a valid and sacramental marriage recognized by the church …

As for ‘other christians’ [baptized non-catholics] … the Chruch recognizes their baptisms as valid as long as the form and matter are correct i they are baptized “In the Name of the fatehr, the Son, and the Holy Spirit” with water … they are not pagans …

 

[Cristiano]

…But, seriously, though. We are treating the Catholic Church as the only valid expression of Christianity, aren’t we? All other churches or denominations practise heresy by their very existence and often by their opposition to the Catholic Church…

We are not treating the Catholic Church as the only valid expression of Christianity. The Catholic Church is the Only and True Church because it was founded by Christ and it has the WHOLE truth. Other denominations are Christian too even if the do not hold the WHOLE truth (see practical heresy).

If Canon 1055 mentions Christian marriage (taking your word for it), then it has to be assumed that it refers to Catholic marriage (Catholics are the only true Christians, right? All the others are well-meaning, but misguided, heretics). If a Protestant marriage is seen as valid in the Catholic Church, then so it must be with every Protestant procedure: sacraments, dogma, beliefs. Married Protestant ministers would be seen as valid, and free to practise Mass in any Christian church (oh, hold on a minute, that’s a sticking point, now, isn’t it?)…

Here you are wrong again! Catholics are not the only Christians! The Catholic Church recognizes as valid the marriage between non-Christians and between non-Catholic Christians. I encourage you to reflect on the difference between natural and sacramental marriage, valid vs. invalid, licit vs. illicit.
The Catholic Church recognizes a lot of protestants beliefs as True! If we were to say that all of them were false then the Catholic Church would contradict herself. However, some protestant beliefs are false.
The Catholic Church even recognizes sacraments from protestant denominations. This is the case of Baptism done conferred with proper formulation by a protestant minister.

 

[PJM]

=katillac1;5108315]Hello all,

Some of you might have read a previous question of mine about the Church’s stance on marrying a divorced man and what all an annulment entails. Well, boyfriend and I have talked, discussed, researched, cried, and argued over it and we’re not getting anywhere. The only thing that has progressed is my frustration and confusion with the Church. Long story short, I have a Baptist boyfriend that has had a previous marriage. He has refused to go through with the annulment, and I don’t blame him. The problem now is more with my spirituality. I’m a cradle Catholic and believe many of the Church’s teachings and what not, especially Marian doctrine and saints, the Eucharist, etc. What I cannot accept (and this is pretty major) is the infallibility of the pope, and the rules of the Church…such as annulments.

So friend if he “refuses to go through the annulment process” what else is he going to refuse to do? Allow you to raise your Children in the Catholic Faith? What about conterception and abortion?

Its nice and good that you belief some Catholic Doctrine and Dogma. Might I point out the the bit about infallibility (Faith and or Morals Only) is a 2000 year old Doctrine. The Catholic Church has never once in her 2000 year history approved of Divorice, becasue of this statement from Jesus, who you proclaim as your God.

Mt. 19: 3" And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?” He answered, "Have you not read that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one’? So they are no longer two but one. * What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder."They said to him, “Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?” He said to them, "For your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for unchastity, and marries another, commits adultery; and he who marries a divorced woman, commits adultery."

The Catholic Faith has never been a faith of convience! Its all about knowing what Jesus who is God taught, and applying to our lifes as God Mandated, in Mt. 16:18-19. Jesus gave Peter the “keys to the gate of heaven”, that is a clear, concise, unlimited power of Governance. The Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to guarentee the TRUTH od ALL Moral and Faith issues. ALL is the key to be grasped here.

*Jn.14: 15 "If you love me, you will keep my commandments. **And I will pray the Father, and he will give you another Counselor, to be with you for ever, even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him; you know him, for he dwells with you, and will be in you. **

18 “I will not leave you desolate; I will come to you.Yet a little while, and the world will see me no more, but you will see me; because I live, you will live also. In that day you will know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you. He who has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me; and he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him.”**

You are quite correct about a great many errant and non-obedient Bishops. My educated guess is that about 75% do not accept the teachings of Rome and the Magistrium, of which they are not a part of. But two wrongs never make one right!

You know the “Way, the TRUTH and the Light” or you would not be posting this querry.

Do what is right! That what WWJD means!

Love and prayers,

Here’s why. I’ve done a ton of research on both sides of the story and I just don’t buy the Catholic argument on Peter being the first pope and the unbroken line and infallibility. I don’t believe that ordained men within the Church can be horrible horrible people and then spout off something about the Church and it becomes right. Let me explain. I’ve read books, read online, talked to my pastor, talked with my parents, and I get different answers from everyone. I was dicussing this frustration of mine with my dad (who happens to be one of the lay members on the national review board for the sexual abuse scandals). He personally knows many many bishops and has rubbed elbows with these people in meetings and discussions and has seen the arguing, and bickering among these men. They don’t agree on alot of stuff about what the Church should do and about how things should be handled, etc. My father is hard lined Catholic and was trying to explain the infallibility of ordained men and the function of priests and bishops to interpret things… In the next sentence he told me stories of his meetings…phew

 

[KestrelRose]

Hello all,
Some of you might have read a previous question of mine about the Church’s stance on marrying a divorced man and what all an annulment entails. Well, boyfriend and I have talked, discussed, researched, cried, and argued over it and we’re not getting anywhere. The only thing that has progressed is my frustration and confusion with the Church. Long story short, I have a Baptist boyfriend that has had a previous marriage. He has refused to go through with the annulment, and I don’t blame him.
…phew

I do not know you, therefore I have no idea how important your faith is to you. If your Catholic faith is important to you, alarm bells should be ringing in your head. If this young man does not respect your values now, what will your future be like with him?

You need to be very honest with yourself. You can’t make him your excuse for leaving the Church. This is your choice.

 

[udoc89]

I do not know you, therefore I have no idea how important your faith is to you. If your Catholic faith is important to you, alarm bells should be ringing in your head. If this young man does not respect your values now, what will your future be like with him?

You need to be very honest with yourself. You can’t make him your excuse for leaving the Church. This is your choice.

Agreed. Katillac1, it doesn’t sound as if your argument is with the Catholic Church so much as with your Baptist boyfriend. If I am reading your post correctly, he is putting conditions on you–I will marry you, but only if you do not ask me to seek a declaration of nullity for my previous marriage.

The Church, or rather your Faith, is not making this decision easy for you. It never is. Life is full of trials and choices, and some of them don’t seem to be black and white. You love him–you want to marry him. However, if you had been sure it was ok to dump your Catholic Faith to marry a divorced man, you wouldn’t have posted here.