Is Mental Illness (Psychosis) The Biggest Reason For Many Catholic Annulments?

[centurionguard]

In today’s Sunday Gospel we are reminded of the account of the “Indissolubility of Marriage”. Mark Chapter 10: verse 9 9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Some will say that the vast numbers of Catholics who seek Annulments weaken the sacramental “Indissolubility of Marriage” or that there’s a discrepant detriment of full mental faculty of understanding of what Sacramental Marriage truly entails.

One might even ask if authoritative Catholic Marriage courses today are sufficient enough to guard against large annulment statistics. Of particular note worth discerning are the qualifications amongst the laity representing the Church in mentoring the marriage courses and those applying for the sacrament.

Here’s some interesting topics to consider:
Why the Church is Granting More Annulments americancatholic.org/newsletters/cu/ac1080.asp

Catholic Marriage: A Union Sealed by the Sacrament of Matrimony
beginningcatholic.com/catholic-marriage.html

The Permanence of Matrimony catholic.com/tracts/the-permanence-of-matrimony#.UHGyTK469Rx

**WHAT GOD HAS JOINED TOGETHER LET NO MAN PUT ASUNDER **
olrl.org/sacramen/marriage.shtml

 

[Tarpeian_Rock]

Psychological issues - as opposed to “psychosis” (which is a very specific and serious category of mental illness) would seem to be a common reason. If someone is truly “psychotic” they have problems far beyond the state of their marriage.

 

[maltmom]

I can only speak for mine which was for his prior bond. I don’t think they break down the stats into categories. If they do, I’d like to see them.

 

[LotusCarsLtd]

I’m curious about people with, say, depression or bipolar who are being treated with medication or therapy (depending on the severity of their condition). Would most of them automatically be disqualified for marriage even WITH treatment?

 

[Newbie2]

Mental disease under successful treatment would not, methinks, be grounds for an annulment, as the person would have been presumably in a normal mental state prior to and during the wedding.

Any mental disease developed after a valid marriage entered into in a normal mental state would not or at least should not, as this falls under “or worse”; the actual marriage having been valid. It would not be considered different than any other sort of disease acquired after being married, theologically speaking (or at least shouldn’t be).

 

[centurionguard]

I’m curious about people with, say, depression or bipolar who are being treated with medication or therapy (depending on the severity of their condition). Would most of them automatically be disqualified for marriage even WITH treatment?

My sister-in-law suffers with Bi-polar being diagnosed with the most severest degree.
Continually controlled by medication, she has a good Catholic marriage as much to be expected considering her husband is terminally ill with A.L.S. (“Lou Gehrig’s Disease”).
They both knew of each others medical conditions prior to their marriage and married for true Love, for better or worse, and in sickness and in health.

In studying Catholic marriages overall and reasons why many end up in annulment I’m trying to find legitimate reasons that cause such marriage within the Church aside from Catholics who choose to divorce via secular courts.

Defining Divorce and Annulment though similar are actually different as viewed by the Church given the fact the Church states in Annulment there never was an authentic sacramental exchange from the beginning for a number of reasons. Studies seem to point to varied forms of Mental Illnesses being at the top of the list.

 

[JulieMWA]

How about a situation where one party has uncontrolled bipolar at the time vows were taken? Health history includes multiple incidents of psychosis. The other party to the marriage had only limited understanding of the extent of the mental illness, and family members did not disclose their knowledge of party 1’s health history in an attempt to protect him.

 

[douglascoombs]

JulieMWA,

If this was not disclosed, that in itself could have been a problem. Talk to a priest (or preferably) a devout canon lawyer.

Doug

 

[Matt_Collins]

Some will say that the vast numbers of Catholics who seek Annulments weaken the sacramental “Indissolubility of Marriage” or that there’s a discrepant detriment of full mental faculty of understanding of what Sacramental Marriage truly entails.

And one might also say that the number of people jumping off bridges weakens the law of gravity. And one would be wrong. The law of gravity will continue to work just fine, completely unweakened. G = 32 ft/sec[sup]2[/sup], both before the person jumps and after.

What is weakened is not the indissolubility of marriage, but rather, people’s understanding of, and appreciation for, the indissolubility of marriage. But the law remains unchanged. This distinction is important, given the current efforts by many to repeal the -]law of gravity/-] indissolubility of marriage. They can try, and they can lie that it has been repealed because, you know, so many people disobey it. But the law remains in force and unweakened, and like the law of gravity, if one ignores it, one does so at one’s own peril.

One might even ask if authoritative Catholic Marriage courses today are sufficient enough to guard against large annulment statistics. Of particular note worth discerning are the qualifications amongst the laity representing the Church in mentoring the marriage courses and those applying for the sacrament.

You don’t really have to ask if that’s true. It’s clear that they are not sufficient. Nor will they ever be. The real education on marriage does not occur in pre-Cana courses. It occurs in the home, in the day-to-day life of the family. The best that will happen is that what the child learns in the home is reinforced by pre-Cana classes.

The concerns about the qualifications of the laity leading pre-Cana courses is echoed in considering the qualifications of those leading the RCIA programs. If the Synod really wants to do something to strengthen families, one of my first suggestions would be to offer solid doctrinal training courses for laity that they must take and actually pass before they could ever step in front of one of these groups to teach. It boggles the imagination to think of the heresy I’ve heard come out of both of them.