Let's talk about Annulment

  • Thread starter Thread starter PilgrimMichelangelo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
And in 1992, the US Dioceses were better staffed and better trained and better equipped than most parts of the world.

Coupled with that was the general malaise of the laity in most parts of Europe, where Mass attendance had already dropped off precipitously; and people who will not attend Mass are not likely to get their knickers in a knot over issues of divorce and remarriage.

As you seem interested in the early 1990’s, you might want to do a survey of how many non-US dioceses actually were able to filed a tribunal. Not having a tribunal in a diocese makes it slightly more difficult to have a marriage reviewed.
 
What are you talking about? Do you think that dioceses in Europe isn’t as well equipped as American ones?
 
No. Europe was the source of Pope Benedict’s comment about a “remnant Church”; and most areas of Europe are hovering somewhere around 5% of the Catholic population attending Mass on a regular (as in, every Sunday) basis. When 90 to 95%+ of the members are not attending Mass regularly, and those who do mostly in the elderly, the issue becomes moot. Meaning, if they can’t be bothered to attend Mass, why would they bother to seek a decree of nullity?

Life is a bit different in Europe; When the Catholic President dies and his wife and his long time mistress stand shoulder to shoulder at his funeral, it speaks of an attitude not particularly seen in the US.

I was speaking of countries around the world, including countries which have different marriage problems than the US; for example, obtaining a decree of nullity may be difficult in some areas due to lack of tribunals; but the problem may not be divorce, but rather, polygamy.
 
I grew in a mostly Protestant neighborhood, but it seems nearly everyone had the same view of marriage: it was for life. Even the couple who argued a lot never contemplated divorce. Times have changed. Do couples even mean what they say in their marriage vows any more?
 
Last edited:
JimG said:
Do couples even mean what they say in their marriage vows any more?
Click to expand...
In my experience, not many of them do. While things are good it isn’t hard to honor the vows, but when things get a bit tough or a bit routine, the “me” factor kicks in and folks seem to put what they want ahead of what they promised to do.

This isn’t just in marriages, it is in our society in general. Selfless has been replaced with selfish.
 
So instead of taking each other for better or worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health, till death do us part,
they take each other for better, for richer, in health, for as long as they like.
 
Annulment is the Catholic divorce.

If someone puts a gun to the bride’s head or one of the parties is mentally incompetent, then yes, that is absolutely and obviously a case for annulment. In traditional Catholic teaching, little else was reason for an annulment - not infidelity (despite Mt 19:9), physical abuse, abandonment, etc.

In the 21st century, annulment seems pretty routinely granted for whatever reason a canon lawyer assists the couple in finding. Then again, many people no longer seek them. Most divorced Catholics I’ve known didn’t seek one - they simply got on with their lives, and some remarried later in civil ceremonies. Their parishes didn’t bar them from communion and the perception that one’s individual conscience is the highest authority is very common.

Others did get annulments but typically only due to family reasons or wanting to remarry in the church.

Divorce, sadly, is all too common and in that we can probably all agree.
 
I have also heard about couple who married when they became pregnant because that seemed like the right thing to do, and later had an annulment (although there was no force from their parents etc). It doesn’t sound right at all to me, and obviously would not have been grounds for an annulment a hundred years ago. I think annulments should be reserved for obvious cases of fraud or force.
 
JimG said:
they take each other for better, for richer, in health, for as long as they like.
Click to expand...
Right. Because it has been alleged that if you look long and hard enough, you can always find a reason to file for your marriage annulment.
 
Another thing that bothers me is how I’ve seen on this forum claims that a couple who gets married with the ”protestant understanding” of marriage (that divorce is possible), are invalidly married. Orthodox christians (and jews and muslims) permit divorce, so does that mean that they can’t be validly married either? What a rabbit hole. Also Canon Law actually states that error regarding the permanency of marriage doesn’t render a marriage invalid, only if the couple never willed to stay together.
 
tuffsmurf said:
Another thing that bothers me is how I’ve seen on this forum claims that a couple who gets married with the ”protestant understanding” of marriage (that divorce is possible), are invalidly married.
Click to expand...
tuffsmurf said:
What a rabbit hole.
Click to expand...
And i think i also saw where it is claimed that if a couple intends to use artificial birth control, that can be used as a reason to file for the annulment? But if the polls are correct and 85% of married Roman Catholics have used artificial birth control, then right there what does that tell you about the possibility to annul 85% of all Roman Catholic marriages? It seems like there are a whole lot of loopholes which in the end will allow many marriages to be annulled.
 
Might be why a parishioner at my church is literally celebrating his successful petition for a decree of nullity with a (socially distanced) party. Crazy times…
 
AlNg said:
And i think i also saw where it is claimed that if a couple intends to use artificial birth control, that can be used as a reason to file for the annulment? But if the polls are correct and 85% of married Roman Catholics have used artificial birth control, then right there what does that tell you about the possibility to annul 85% of all Roman Catholic marriages? It seems like there are a whole lot of loopholes which in the end will allow many marriages to be annulled.
Click to expand...
No, it’s not the use of artificial birth control that invalidates a marriage, it’s the permanent exclusion of children from the marriage.

The question that is asked is “Will you accept children lovingly from God…?” If you say yes but have no intention of ever having children you are lying through your teeth and are not entering into a valid marriage.

A priest who was filling in until we got a new pastor asked that question and one of the parties replied “No.” The seminarian who was assisting couldn’t believe it when the ceremony proceeded as though nothing had happened. Priest told him he was so surprised he didn’t know what to do. I’m hoping he noted it in the prenuptial investigation booklet.
 
dochawk said:
four?

aren’t you off by one?

An emperor was deposed over this (attempting a fourth)
Click to expand...
I misspoke.

Three. But only in extreme cases, and with certain liturgical elements removed.

Thanks for keeping me on track. 😉

Could you provide the story of the Emperor’s deposition? I cannot find the source…
 
Its also worth to note that while Catholic Church would consider Orthodox annulment valid, according to law Orthodox divorce isn’t valid in Catholic eyes. This also applies to Eastern Catholics- by law of Church they shouldn’t practice divorce but annulment.

Underlying difference is in theology. If indeed sin can undo valid Sacrament, which we don’t believe it can, then one has to still make amends for that sin and not draw from it’s “fruits”. Think about it- if I steal money and repent, can I really use that money to buy a new car without sin? If indeed sin has broken the Sacrament, can I draw from “fruits” of that break and remarry happily?

As much as we don’t believe that stopping repentance can undo my Confession if I had serious repentance while at it… disbelief can’t erase Baptism and not even Priesthood… we also believe no sin can break the marriage. Lord even says that there is fornication happening when wife leaves husband- if adultery broke their marriage then he would no longer be her husband. So sin to break marriage must be something else (if it exists, and we believe it doesn’t).

Perhaps practice is very similar or same, but underlying theology matters- if it did not, one could say Pagan services of sacrifice were pleasing to God because in practice they did what Jews did.

Biggest question is whether sin can or can’t break Sacrament. Even Orthodox are somewhat unclear on this because they consider subsequent marriage not Sacramental. Service of subsequent marriage has penitential character. If Sacrament is broken why can’t one enter new Sacramental marriage? If Sacrament is not broken (and husband and wife are still joined in marriage) why can one enter new marriage even if non-Sacramental? The only answer is that Sacrament exists but no longer binds wife and husband together. But then, what effect does Sacrament have? If none, is it not broken?
 
OrbisNonSufficit said:
If indeed sin can undo valid Sacrament, which we don’t believe it can, then one has to still make amends for that sin and not draw from it’s “fruits”. Think about it- if I steal money and repent, can I really use that money to buy a new car without sin? If indeed sin has broken the Sacrament, can I draw from “fruits” of that break and remarry happily?
Click to expand...
In all charity, for I love thee O Catholic brother, dearer than pearls that adorn the crown of Kings, if I sin and am unrepentant, does not this separate me from Christ eternally? Does not the same apply to the mystery of marriage, which is foreshadowed by Christ and His Church in the Sacrament of Marriage? Thus my sins can separate me eternally from Christ, breaking the bonds of Baptism, Confirmation/Chrismation, Eucharist and ascetical life? If I am unfaithful to my First Love, Christ Himself, but repent and return to Him, yet admit my failure to love Him, begging for a second chance does He yet condescend and forgive my trespasses and overturn my sentence via Confession and amendment of life?

In its most pristine, ideal, form, should not marriage be 'until death do us part", foreshadowing Christ and His Church? But in allowance for our human frailty, would not the ‘Good God’ ,to borrow a favorite phrase from St. John Vianney, allow a second penitential marriage according to our weakness, and then finally allow a third marriage on account of our fleshly weakness to be held in His sight, although it falls far from the original ideal?

Just a side note, I fully think that first marriage should be worked through, rather than trashed via divorce/nullification, as the perfect theological vision of the struggle to be a faithful Christian to Christ, but the Orthodox approach allows for human weakness in a realistic application of Divine Mercy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top