1
1ke
Guest
Yeah, it’s pretty sad when priests think they are “helping” to the detriment of one’s immortal soul!
- Status
P
piety101
Guest
Bro Rich
I don't happen to have a copy of the canon of Elvira. Would you please post where they said a divorced Christian can remarry, while their ex spouse is alive, by being given an "annulment" from the church. I await your post. Thank you. :)
F
fix
Guest
The decree of nullity is saying the church has found a marriage never existed from the start.Bro Rich
I don’t happen to have a copy of the canon of Elvira. Would you please post where they said a divorced Christian can remarry, while their ex spouse is alive, by being given an “annulment” from the church. I await your post. Thank you.
P
piety101
Guest
That is totally ridiculous. A person is married umpteen years with a person, probably has a child by them, divorces and seeks an annulment to remarry and the church says that marriage never existed? Huh? I don’t believe any church father was in agreement with that statement. I have yet to read the actual statement. What year was this canon statement made anyway? 
C
ChrisR246
Guest
Sacramentally it didn’t. There is a difference4 between the civil marriage and a Sacramental marriage. Any Sacrament does not happen if it lacks valid form or matter. A valid baptism can not take place without water beign poured on the head and the Trinity invoked. A valid sacramental marriage requires a man and a woman who are capable of and intend to uphold the vows they make and it requires an ordained minister of the Catholic Church to witness it.
So however many years later, if , for example, it comes to light through the tribunal investigation that one spouse never intended to maintain their vows, the sacramental marriage did not take place.
S
Shibboleth
Guest
If I baptize someone in the name of the Foot, Dirt, and Sky are they baptized? NO… the nature of the sacrament has been altered in such a way as to make it invalid. That person might go on for years not realizing that they were not correctly baptized but time does not fix the original problem. The baptism never existed.That is totally ridiculous. A person is married umpteen years with a person, probably has a child by them, divorces and seeks an annulment to remarry and the church says that marriage never existed? Huh? I don’t believe any church father was in agreement with that statement. I have yet to read the actual statement. What year was this canon statement made anyway?
If something is done invalidly then it is invalid irregardless of the time that passes. Any Church Father would agree with that statement.
1
1ke
Guest
I suggest the book Annulment: The Wedding That Was, by Michael Smith Foster if you have a real interest in understanding what a decree of nullity is and is not in the Catholic Church. You can read up on what a Sacramental marriage is and what a decree of nullity means and then it will probably be more profitable to have a conversation after you have a little more knowledge on the subject.That is totally ridiculous. A person is married umpteen years with a person, probably has a child by them, divorces and seeks an annulment to remarry and the church says that marriage never existed? Huh? I don’t believe any church father was in agreement with that statement. I have yet to read the actual statement. What year was this canon statement made anyway?
.
P
piety101
Guest
I just want to know what early church fathers granted such a declaration of nullity to a person who divorced their spouse , after having children and then was told by the church the marriage and children never happened? Please cite the quotes from the church fathers.
S
Shibboleth
Guest
Why do they need to… it is an aspect of Cannon Law. Until the law came about that future marriages would be blocked by Canon Law until one proved that their marriage was invalid it was unnecessary to get a declaration of nullity. Why build a cart if you don’t have a horse to pull it… So you are not going to find it in the Early Church. You are not going to find anything on cloning or abortion in the early church either but that doesn’t mean that the Catholic Church is discredited on these issues.I just want to know what early church fathers granted such a declaration of nullity to a person who divorced their spouse , after having children and then was told by the church the marriage and children never happened? Please cite the quotes from the church fathers.
The hearings are a way to research into whether or not the original contract of marriage was binding. The marriage is not made valid by living together and having Children… why would it? Think about it… a person could live with a woman for 50 years and have 50 children and if they didn’t get married they wouldn’t be married. Time and children have no bearing on that fact.
IF a marriage was not contracted properly the couple is not married from day 1. The fact that a person discovers the error 50 years later has no bearing on the nature of the original contract.
P
piety101
Guest
As Nancy Grace of Court TV says, where is the evidence? What early church fathers ever wrote about any declaration of nullity? I’m still waiting for your evidence. 
L
LSK
Guest
Piety you are confused again. First, the year of the canon statement is 300ad. That makes it pretty early in the Church - and you can research this online at the Vatican archives (just so everyone knows we have a sense of humor, the website shows it as “secret archives”).That is totally ridiculous. A person is married umpteen years with a person, probably has a child by them, divorces and seeks an annulment to remarry and the church says that marriage never existed? Huh? I don’t believe any church father was in agreement with that statement. I have yet to read the actual statement. What year was this canon statement made anyway?
An annullment means that the proper conditions for marriage did not exist from the beginnig. This does not nullify the legitimacy of any children. An annullment is NOT a ‘Catholic Divorce’. You need to read the canon law, the CCC and I would suggest you start with the Catholic Encyclopedia online.
Better yet, Piety, why not put your question to one of the staff apologists? They are, obviously, far more learned than you or I and can give you an accurate, Church sanctioned, answer to your questions regarding annullments and how they work and what they mean.
L
LSK
Guest
piety101 said:1Ke
OK, since you have a fan club on this board, I will ask you a simple question. Where in early church writings whether of the church fathers or from scripture do we read where annulments were given to Christians who divorced and remarried? Did St Peter grant annulments? How about the Popes of the 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th centuries? Would you please supply their written testimony of this and their thoughts on annulments altogether. I await your reply.
Don’t get snotty, Piety. :tsktsk:
Yes, Popes in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th centuries granted annullments. Not often, but they were granted. Oftentimes the reasons for annullments were given were based in the closeness of the blood lines - this reason was used many times in the cases of royal marriages being deemed invalid when a King wished to marry another so as to produce a male heir. I am not saying this was right, I am just saying it did happen. And it did not happen all the time - Henry tried to annull his marriage to Eleanor of Aquitaine and the Pope refused the petition.
Since St. Peter did not write down everything he did, I have no idea if he granted annullments or not. That’s why we have Tradition as well as Holy Scripture. Remember, we Catholics are NOT people of the Book, we are People of the Word.
Finally, you seem to be getting angry at people who disagree with you or point out where you are wrong. Maybe, instead of attacking people, you should start submitting your questions to the staff apologists and find out the official Church position. That way you could participate in the discussions without getting hurt feelings or CAUSING hurt feelings.
B
Br.Rich_SFO
Guest
The thread question is about Holy Communion for divorced (and remarried). That was the intent of my reference to the Council of Elvira (C.300AD). There are several canons from this Church council about Holy Communion being denied to people in various irregular Marriage situations.Bro Rich
I don’t happen to have a copy of the canon of Elvira. Would you please post where they said a divorced Christian can remarry, while their ex spouse is alive, by being given an “annulment” from the church. I await your post. Thank you.
P
piety101
Guest
LSK
As Nancy Grace of Court TV says, where is the evidence? What early church fathers ever wrote about any declaration of nullity? I'm still waiting for your evidence.
1
1ke
Guest
It is not fruitful to discuss this topic with you when you continue to persist in erroneous notions about what a decree of nullity is and refuse to take steps to correct your erroneous assumptions by investigating the information given to you by others on this post. We are NOT going to do the homework for you-- that’s your job.I just want to know what early church fathers granted such a declaration of nullity to a person who divorced their spouse , after having children and then was told by the church the marriage and children never happened? Please cite the quotes from the church fathers.
A decree of nullity does not declare that the marriage did not exist, nor does it declare that children never happened. It declares a Sacrament did not take place. The Sacrament is what gives marriage its indissoluable character.
You need to increase your knowledge on the topic before discussing it further. Honestly, you are just spouting off nonsense as the above quote from you shows.
B
BibleReader
Guest
As a Roman Catholic, your brother-in-law knows that the Roman Catholic Church is the duly appointed minister of the Sacrament of Matrimony. As a consequence, if he “marries” before an anullment is granted, he is not “married” at all, since, implicitly, he can not possibly validly marry before a Roman Catholic priest due to the lack of an anullment!
Sex before marriage is fornicating. Planning to publicly defy Church authority over Catholic marriage by celebrating marriage at a non-Catholic ceremony, and then fornicating outside of the of a Catholic marriage because he knows that he’s not married, and then going to Communion, would probably amount to a conscious sacrilege – abuse of a sacrament.
Why plan to abuse a sacrament?
If he’s resolved to go forward, he should at the very least honor the Eucharist by publicly not receiving the Eucharist.
P
piety101
Guest
Now you say I am spouting off non sense because I ask you to post quotes from the early church fathers about the declaration of nullity? But if I asked you to supply evidence for the necessity for baptism or the validity of the Eucharist, you sure wouldn’t hesitate, now would you? The truth is, there are no church fathers proof texts for a so called “declaration of nullity”, but you won’t admit it.
Marriage in the Catholic church was consider for LIFE or until one spouse would die. They were not free to remarry if the divorced spouse was alive. Even Jesus taught that. So don't accuse me of non sense when I simply asked you to supply evidence from the fathers.
S
Shibboleth
Guest
Well seeing as you have not specified the Apostolic Fathers they have given you proof. The Church Fathers extend up until the 8th century.
C
ChrisR246
Guest
- I take it you do not believe in the development of doctrine?
- We agree, Sacramental Marriage is for LIFE. A decree of nullity states that the Sacrament never took place - there never was a Sacramental marriage in existence. So someone who’s apparent previous Sacramental marriage has been declared null is not remarrying - they are Sacramentally marrying for the first time. There is no living spouse, swince there was no marriage there is no spouse. This has been explained several times in several ways.
- All that being said, I think you ask an interesting question anyway. We know Henry VIII left the Church because he could not get an anulment, right? That was 1533. He didn’t make it up, so it was widely known and accepted by then.
(bold by me)
I’d be interestred in other quotes etc about the development of the doctrine
L
LSK
Guest
This is from the Catechism of the Holy Mother Church:
1627 The consent consists in a “human act by which the partners mutually give themselves to each other”: “I take you to be my wife” - "I take you to be my husband."128 This consent that binds the spouses to each other finds its fulfillment in the two "becoming one flesh."129
[1628](javascript
penWindow(‘cr/1628.htm’)
The consent must be an act of the will of each of the contracting parties, free of coercion or grave external fear.130 No human power can substitute for this consent.131 If this freedom is lacking the marriage is invalid.
1629 For this reason (or for other reasons that render the marriage null and void) the Church, after an examination of the situation by the competent ecclesiastical tribunal, can declare the nullity of a marriage, i.e., that the marriage never existed.132 In this case the contracting parties are free to marry, provided the natural obligations of a previous union are discharged.133
1630 The priest (or deacon) who assists at the celebration of a marriage receives the consent of the spouses in the name of the Church and gives the blessing of the Church. The presence of the Church’s minister (and also of the witnesses) visibly expresses the fact that marriage is an ecclesial reality.
1735 *Imputability *and responsibility for an action can be diminished or even nullified by ignorance, inadvertence, duress, fear, habit, inordinate attachments, and other psychological or social factors.
I have been told that a man or woman who has received a civil divorce and is not engaging in sex outside of marriage is not barred from receiving Holy Communion. This does not seem to apply to your family member.
1627 The consent consists in a “human act by which the partners mutually give themselves to each other”: “I take you to be my wife” - "I take you to be my husband."128 This consent that binds the spouses to each other finds its fulfillment in the two "becoming one flesh."129
[1628](javascript
penWindow(‘cr/1628.htm’) The consent must be an act of the will of each of the contracting parties, free of coercion or grave external fear.130 No human power can substitute for this consent.131 If this freedom is lacking the marriage is invalid.1629 For this reason (or for other reasons that render the marriage null and void) the Church, after an examination of the situation by the competent ecclesiastical tribunal, can declare the nullity of a marriage, i.e., that the marriage never existed.132 In this case the contracting parties are free to marry, provided the natural obligations of a previous union are discharged.133
1630 The priest (or deacon) who assists at the celebration of a marriage receives the consent of the spouses in the name of the Church and gives the blessing of the Church. The presence of the Church’s minister (and also of the witnesses) visibly expresses the fact that marriage is an ecclesial reality.
1735 *Imputability *and responsibility for an action can be diminished or even nullified by ignorance, inadvertence, duress, fear, habit, inordinate attachments, and other psychological or social factors.
I have been told that a man or woman who has received a civil divorce and is not engaging in sex outside of marriage is not barred from receiving Holy Communion. This does not seem to apply to your family member.
- Status