Offensive?

[CB_Catholic]

I am actually kinda surprised no one else found this offensive. I guess my concern is only mine. Growing up, an annulment was something that only the Pope approved and only happened during some extraordinary circumstance. The post from the Archdiocese, to me, just seemed to undermine the sanctity of the sacrament of marriage. It comes across, as “oppps that didn’t work, no problem, you can just get an annulment.” I know this is part of the whole “Catholics Come Home” program, which is good, it just seems like we are selling out our faith to accommodate people who left the Church.

Yes, and in that time period, growing up, my mother was not even permitted to file for an annulment. She was told to go home and be a better wife to an alcoholic who was beating her regularly, and throwing around the furniture almost daily. I remember that all too well.

Thankfully, my mother was a bit smarter and less gullible than that. Or I doubt she, or even I would be around today.

The Church is exhibiting a bit more compassion toward it’s members these days, I would say.

 

[JReducation]

I am actually kinda surprised no one else found this offensive. I guess my concern is only mine. Growing up, an annulment was something that only the Pope approved and only happened during some extraordinary circumstance. The post from the Archdiocese, to me, just seemed to undermine the sanctity of the sacrament of marriage. It comes across, as “oppps that didn’t work, no problem, you can just get an annulment.” I know this is part of the whole “Catholics Come Home” program, which is good, it just seems like we are selling out our faith to accommodate people who left the Church.

Try looking at this from another perspective.

1. This is just information that saves everyone a lot of time. What often happens is that people show up with a request that their marriage be examined, but don’t have the information necessary to begin the examination. The examination is necessary before you even send the case to trial. You can’t send a case to trial, if there is no possible doubt about the bond.
2. This is written for people who are going to request an review of their marriage. The review has to be granted. You have a canonical right to have your marriage reviewed, which is different from a canonical right to a decree of annulment. There is no such thing.
3. In today’s world, especially in the USA and Europe, the number of invalid marriages is on the rise. I’ll offer some examples.

a. Prenuptual agreements suggests that the party or parties are not convinced of the permanency of marriage. You’re entering into an invalid situation.

b. People who have planned the number of children that they will have and when they will have them. They are no open to the gift of life.

c. People who want a church wedding, because it’s their dream wedding, but they don’t really want a sacramental marriage, because they don’t understand it. They’re entering into an invalid situation.

There are other crazy circumstances that were not common at all in the past. The problem that the priest or deacon has is that the law says that a baptized Catholic has a right to the sacraments. If you don’t know of any reason for not witnessing the marriage, you must do it. People often give all of the right answers in the interviews and Pre-Cana courses., but their minds say something else that only comes out later.

Remember, a decree of nullity is granted when there is an obstacle before the wedding, not something that arises after the wedding. A husband who becomes a wife abuser several years later is not a reason to decree nullity. That case has to be dealt with a civil separation or divorce or whatever is necessary to protect the innocent party. But the parties remain married. The Church holds out hope that the separation may not be permanent.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[thistle]

Does anyone else find this offensive?

From:archstl.org/laityandfamilylife/post/quick-start-annulment-program-divor

"
Posted on January 6, 2012 - 2:29pm

To help divorced and separated Catholics more fully understand the annulment process and begin whatever process may be necessary, Quick-Start sessions provide (1) a brief overview of the sacrament of marriage with an explanation of the annulment process and (2) personal assistance by an advocate to discuss an individual’s situation and begin any application process which may be required. Please bring your marriage history including the date and location of any marriage and divorce as well as your ex-spouse’s name and address."

Nothing offensive about this.

 

[JimmytheButcher]

Does anyone else find this offensive?

From:archstl.org/laityandfamilylife/post/quick-start-annulment-program-divor

"
Posted on January 6, 2012 - 2:29pm

To help divorced and separated Catholics more fully understand the annulment process and begin whatever process may be necessary, Quick-Start sessions provide (1) a brief overview of the sacrament of marriage with an explanation of the annulment process and (2) personal assistance by an advocate to discuss an individual’s situation and begin any application process which may be required. Please bring your marriage history including the date and location of any marriage and divorce as well as your ex-spouse’s name and address."

I wonder if I get an annulment for my Baptism.

Maybe my sponsors didn’t fully know what they were getting me into… I mean isn’t it possible? Maybe they were hiding certain relavant information pertaining to the Sacrament (like they had no real intention in raising me in the Faith, or maybe they just did it because it was a meaningless cultural thing to do and they never actually believed in God at the time.)

Just saying…

 

[pbr7w6]

Try looking at this from another perspective.

Thank you, that was the best explanation I have heard on this topic.

 

[1ke]

Growing up, an annulment was something that only the Pope approved and only happened during some extraordinary circumstance.

You may have been told this, but it is not correct. Neither the 1917 Code of Canon Law nor the 1983 canon reserved decrees of nullity to the pope in extraordinary circumstances. So, unless you grew up in the 1800s, and even then… nullity was not reserved to the Pope… I think you are simply misinformed in your perception of what nullity is and how it is determined.

It comes across, as “oppps that didn’t work, no problem, you can just get an annulment.”

I don’t see why.

I know this is part of the whole “Catholics Come Home” program, which is good, it just seems like we are selling out our faith to accommodate people who left the Church.

How so?

 

[Rascalking]

I know this is part of the whole “Catholics Come Home” program, which is good, it just seems like we are selling out our faith to accommodate people who left the Church.

I LOVE the “Catholics come Home” program. It’s about time the church starts to market all the good things they do. I came home to church because of many things, but that program really did help.

 

[Fox]

Why is it that a non Catholic has to get an annulment from a previous marriage to marry a Catholic? It isn’t even their religion. It is a hard sell to a non Catholic to swallow especially if the divorce was messy or painful. Why would the Church ask a non Catholic to open up old wounds which is painful?

 

[couponfit]

Does anyone else find this offensive?

From:archstl.org/laityandfamilylife/post/quick-start-annulment-program-divor

"
Posted on January 6, 2012 - 2:29pm

To help divorced and separated Catholics more fully understand the annulment process and begin whatever process may be necessary, Quick-Start sessions provide (1) a brief overview of the sacrament of marriage with an explanation of the annulment process and (2) personal assistance by an advocate to discuss an individual’s situation and begin any application process which may be required. Please bring your marriage history including the date and location of any marriage and divorce as well as your ex-spouse’s name and address."

The diocese probably has many members asking questions about this and finds it easier to create a single resource program to help look into these matters. It includes asking those interested to bring information. I’m sure many Catholics go to their priest with no details or few and begin asking questions about this. This is merely a way to coordinate communication for an important matter of canon law.

 

[JReducation]

You may have been told this, but it is not correct. Neither the 1917 Code of Canon Law nor the 1983 canon reserved decrees of nullity to the pope in extraordinary circumstances. So, unless you grew up in the 1800s, and even then… nullity was not reserved to the Pope… I think you are simply misinformed in your perception of what nullity is and how it is determined.

Your response is correct. Here’s the evidence.

Q. What was the most high profile annulment trial in history?
A. The marriage of Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon

Q. Where was the trial held?
A. London ecclesial tribunal

Q. Why did the pope get involved?
A. The case was not going to get a fair hearing in London, because Henry controlled the clergy either by fear or with money. The Bishop John Fisher protested that the scales were tipped in favor of the annulment, so the pope stepped in.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[JReducation]

Your response is correct. Here’s the evidence.

Q. What was the most high profile annulment trial in history?
A. The marriage of Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon

Q. Where was the trial held?
A. London ecclesial tribunal

Q. Why did the pope get involved?
A. The case was not going to get a fair hearing in London, because Henry controlled the clergy either by fear or with money. Catherine refused to cooperate with the tribunal, because she knew that it was a sham. The Bishop John Fisher protested that the scales were tipped in favor of the annulment, so the pope stepped in.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Big_Feet]

Thank you, that was the best explanation I have heard on this topic.

Yes, I happen to agree with you whole-heartedly! Br. JR is a real asset to these forums, and brings a lot forward that one may otherwise not think of. He also does it with such a calm and charitable demeanor!

THANK YOU, Br. JR!! for all that you do here in these forums.

 

[JReducation]

Why is it that a non Catholic has to get an annulment from a previous marriage to marry a Catholic? It isn’t even their religion. It is a hard sell to a non Catholic to swallow especially if the divorce was messy or painful. Why would the Church ask a non Catholic to open up old wounds which is painful?

There are two parts to a marriage, validity and sacramentality. A marrige can be valid, even though it’s not a sacrament. The burden falls on the individual to prove that it was invalid. Let’s say that you were Jewish and were married in the Jewish faith. That marriage is valid and the bond is indissoluble. If you convert, you get your marriage convalidated, but observe the prefix “con”. We don’t say that it’s being validated. It’s already valid. However, it’s not a sacrament. You have to go before the deacon or priest to make it a sacrament.

If you’re a Jew who has been married, even if you do not convert to Catholicism. The marriage is valid and indissoluble. You cannot marry anyone else, because you’re already married. Again, the burden is on you to prove that you were never married.

Marriage is always presumed valid, unless the contrary can be proven. It may not be a sacrament, because Jews, Muslims and atheists do not have sacraments. Most Protestants do not consider marriage a sacrament. However, it can be a valid and indissoluble marriage, if all the conditions for validity are present. If you are Orthodox, then it’s a sacrament.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[figs]

Yes, I happen to agree with you whole-heartedly! Br. JR is a real asset to these forums, and brings a lot forward that one may otherwise not think of. He also does it with such a calm and charitable demeanor!

THANK YOU, Br. JR!! for all that you do here in these forums.

I whole heartedly agree!

Br. JR

 

[1ke]

Let’s say that you were Jewish and were married in the Jewish faith. That marriage is valid and the bond is indissoluble.

Actually, a valid natural marriage is *dissoluable *via the Pauline or Petrine privilege, depending upon circumstances and which one applies.

If you convert, you get your marriage convalidated, but observe the prefix “con”. We don’t say that it’s being validated. It’s already valid. However, it’s not a sacrament. You have to go before the deacon or priest to make it a sacrament.

This is not accurate. Non-Catholics marry validly when they marry civilly. Their marriage is valid. Convalidation makes an invalid marriage valid by the exchange of new consent (or in the case of sanation at the time the original vows were exchanged).

If a non-Catholic person converts to the Catholic Church there is no action taken regarding their valid marriage. If both parties become baptized, the marriage becomes a sacrament by virtue of the baptism.

Convalidation pertains to **invalid **marriages. Those who are non-Catholic and in **valid **marriages do not do a convalidation upon joining the Church.

If you’re a Jew who has been married, even if you do not convert to Catholicism. The marriage is valid and indissoluble. You cannot marry anyone else, because you’re already married. Again, the burden is on you to prove that you were never married.

I think that a better example would be two validly married Christians, whose marriage truly is indissoluable.

Most Protestants do not consider marriage a sacrament. However, it can be a valid and indissoluble marriage, if all the conditions for validity are present. If you are Orthodox, then it’s a sacrament.

If both parties are baptized, it **is **a sacrament. This is not dependent upon whether or not the parties (or their various ecclesial communities) consider marriage a sacrament.

 

[1ke]

Why is it that a non Catholic has to get an annulment from a previous marriage to marry a Catholic? It isn’t even their religion. It is a hard sell to a non Catholic to swallow especially if the divorce was messy or painful. Why would the Church ask a non Catholic to open up old wounds which is painful?

Because the indissoluability of sacramental marriage is not merely Catholic canon law, it is divine law. Therefore, it applies to ALL Christians.

 

[JReducation]

The number of questionable marriages is going to keep rising as long as parents fail to teach kids the meaning of marriage.

If you give your teen a condom to carry around, “just in case,” how to you explain the unitive and procreative dimensions of marriage? JUST IN CASE WHAT?

If a kid grows up in a home where parents limit their family size to 2.3 kids so they can have all of those creature comforts that they WANT, not need, what’s the message that the 2.3 kids are getting?

If a kid hears his parents defend the “morality” of abortion in cases of rape, incest and danger to the life of the mother, what’s the message about the sacredness of human life and the duty of parents to lay down their lives for their children?

If a kid hears about alternative families at school and the parents never help the kid distinguish between the immoral situation and the moral obligation not to bully, tease or make life impossible for Johnny and Joey who plan on setting up house when they graduate from high school, what’s the message about marriage? There is a difference between “This situation is immoral” and “It’s also immoral to bully the person who is in the situation.” But are we helping teens make this distinction? If not, what are we saying about marriage?

You can have all of the marriage prep in the world, but if these messages are engraved in the young person’s mind, these messages are going to influence how he or she defines marriage. That definition may not coincide with Divine Revelation.

I’m not a canon lawyer, but I am an educator who dealt in brain science for many years. I can tell you that how we word things affects how we define them, which in turn affects our attitude toward them.

This is not stuff that Catholics don’t know. Priests and deacons don’t need to preach this every Sunday. If you want to see how much Catholics know, read some threads in Moral Theology Forum and Catholic News Forum. You will see Catholic repeat exactly what the Church says and then defend positions that undermine marriage. You see, you can teach, but you can’t force anyone to do what you teach.

I’m not saying that if we teach our kids properly on marriage that they won’t be idiots and do the wrong thing. Idiocy is not genetic. It’s a choice. Parents have no control over it and no moral responsibility for their children’s choices. We have a responsibility to teach the truth. If we teach the truth, the number of questionable marriages may drop significantly. Most kids will become adults who make the right choices, if they know what those choices are.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[JReducation]

Actually, a valid natural marriage is *dissoluable *via the Pauline or Petrine privilege, depending upon circumstances and which one applies.

This is true, but it cannot be assumed. It has to be examined. The question was why does the person have to go through the process.

This is not accurate. Non-Catholics marry validly when they marry civilly. Their marriage is valid.

In this country, marriage by a minister or rabbi with a license to marry fulfills the civil requirement. I don’t know of any state that requires you to go through a judge or justice of the peace to get married. If there is one, it’s new to me.

The rest of what you said, I’ll yield to you, because I’m not a canon lawyer. I won’t argue what I am not well versed in.

I think that a better example would be two validly married Christians, whose marriage truly is indissoluable.

I’m not sure what would make the marriage between Jews or Musllims invalid and dissoluble. I have never heard this distinction being made before.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Julia_Mae]

I’m not saying that if we teach our kids properly on marriage that they won’t be idiots and do the wrong thing. Idiocy is not genetic. It’s a choice. Parents have no control over it and no moral responsibility for their children’s choices. We have a responsibility to teach the truth. If we teach the truth, the number of questionable marriages may drop significantly. Most kids will become adults who make the right choices, if they know what those choices are.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

I was divorced long before I converted and determined not to marry again, haven’t paid much attention to the issue. But you said something in the Vocations forum that really struck me, and that was that only two kinds of groups in the Church make sacred vows. One of those classes of persons was people being married. (I’m sure you said it differently.)

The weight of it, when put that way, made such an impression. I wonder if it would on young people, if they compared themselves to the others in the Church who make solemn vows.

 

[passer_by]

Does anyone else find this offensive?

From:archstl.org/laityandfamilylife/post/quick-start-annulment-program-divor

"
Posted on January 6, 2012 - 2:29pm

To help divorced and separated Catholics more fully understand the annulment process and begin whatever process may be necessary, Quick-Start sessions provide (1) a brief overview of the sacrament of marriage with an explanation of the annulment process and (2) personal assistance by an advocate to discuss an individual’s situation and begin any application process which may be required. Please bring your marriage history including the date and location of any marriage and divorce as well as your ex-spouse’s name and address."

I think its just that the wording seems to indicate that

“Did you get divorced legally? Just bring your records and we will process it and take care of things for you in the church too”

Perhaps an added line like “Please note that Annulments are not necessarily granted for all divorcees unless there is valid reason to receive one” can clear up the confusion and put things more in perspective.

Because I think as it stands, it seems like Annulment on demand.