Protestants and annulments

  • Thread starter Thread starter Patri
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I can’t answer for every one and I personally struggle with the acceptance of remarriage after a divorce. That is why I ask about the legitimacy of an annulment…we nons are missing the boat it seems but you have not answered my questions.
 
There still are a few Fundamentalist Churches out there that will not marry anyone if either party’s former spouse is still living. Granted fewer now that before the first half of the twentieth century.
Just sayin’
 
can include the bishop himself sitting down with the findings, reading them, presumably seeking wisdom through prayer (I would hope so, anyway), and making a decision on his own. I am all in favor of that. I believe in the bishop himself, who is ultimately the “pastor” of everyone in his diocese, being closely involved in matters involving his faithful, instead of “subbing out” everything to diocesan functionaries.
I was referring to Roman Catholic bishops, who are now, under the new protocols, authorized (or whatever the word would be) to get “hands-on” with the whole annulment procedure, and make the decision themselves. Any annulment, when all is said and done, is ultimately a proclamation by the bishop — the tribunal just functions as his lieutenants. I am totally good with the bishop sitting down, going over the paperwork himself, possibly even calling in the spouses to come meet with him in person (presumably separately), and making the decision on his own. That’s just a bishop being a good bishop.
 
Well, if I’m wrong I hope someone will come along and correct me as this is just me trying to answer your question (from my limited understanding). Jesus Christ gave the authority to the apostles to bind and loosen. It is with that authority that they guide the church in moral matters. Only one church was instituted by Jesus, with one pope (St. Peter) and you can follow him through history to pope Francis. That is why, through the apostolic succession, the Catholic Church can do it and it is valid. Someone with more knowledge, please correct me.
 
where is the Biblical teaching for annulment found
What a strange question. Catholics don’t believe in sola scriptura. Anyway, this question makes it out like a declaration of nullity is a dissolution of an extant bond. As you’ve made clear above, you know that it isn’t.
 
Most Protestant churches allow for divorce and remarriage.
That is a broad sweeping generalization that may or may not be true. I am not Catholic but have no idea whether “most” is a justified term. Some have qualifiers such as desertion, abuse etc. Sort of an unstructured annulment perhaps where the behavior of a spouse determines the legitimacy of remarriage.
 
I think you are saying there is no Biblical foundation for it. I would think if there was surely the Protestants would have discovered it even in the midst of all their “errors.”

When was the Catholic annulment first instituted?
 
Is that what I’m saying? I don’t think that’s what I was saying.

I’m saying that your question supposes that it must be in the bible to be valid. I disagree. For it to be valid, the Church must teach it is valid. It does not need to be in the bible, so long as annulment doesn’t contradict what is explicitly stated in the bible, which it doesn’t, and that the Church has authority to determine it, which it does.
When was the Catholic annulment first instituted?
I dunno. And admittedly it doesn’t matter to me as it isn’t relevant to anything.
 
Is that what I’m saying? I don’t think that’s what I was saying.

I’m saying that your question supposes that it must be in the bible to be valid. I disagree. For it to be valid, the Church must teach it is valid. It does not need to be in the bible, so long as annulment doesn’t contradict what is explicitly stated in the bible, which it doesn’t, and that the Church has authority to determine it, which it does.
40.png
Wannano:
When was the Catholic annulment first instituted?
I dunno. And admittedly it doesn’t matter to me as it isn’t relevant to anything.
Well if you don’t know and furthermore don’t care cuz it’s not relevant to you, you could be respectful of the fact that someone might feel it is relevant to them.
 
What it means is that the majority of Protestant churches do not have a rule against a divorced person remarrying. The only case I personally know was a Methodist pastor who divorced and remarried. The Methodist Chuch would not let him continue as pastor so he became a Baptist minister.
 
Because there was defect or impediment at the time the marriage was attempted regardless of how ago.
 
Thank you for being charitable Angel. I appreciate your honesty in saying you really have only one real life example. Allow me to use your example: suppose that that Methodist minister had been a Catholic instead who became divorced and then applied for an annulment and it was granted. That means it was determined that his marriage was never valid so it did not really exist so he is free to remarry (which is interesting terminology if he never was really married). This means that in God’s eyes he is not committing adultery. Since he is Methodist and there is no annulment provision, even though his marriage would be termed invalid in the CC he is now committing adultery to again marry.
 
Yes, if he were Catholic, divorced, and received an annulment, he would be free to remarry. Although, in the eyes of the RCC, he was never married, he was legally married, hence the term “remarried”.

The same person, as a Methodist, does not fall under the jurisdiction of the RCC and could probably care less about our opinion. If this same divorced Methodist should choose to marry a Catholic, who is under the jurisdiction of the RCC, they would have to seek and be granted an annulment in order for the Catholic to be married in the RCC as the Catholic is obligated to do.

If the divorced Methodist does not seek or is not granted an annulment; he and the Catholic cannot be married in the RCC. They may choose to marry in another church or at the courthouse and, while they are legally married, they are not married in the eyes of the RCC and the Catholic cannot receive Communion.
 
Last edited:
If I am understanding this correctly then I have learned something new today. If I as a divorced non-Catholic would want to marry an eligible Catholic in the CC, the Catholic tribunal would determine the validity of my first non-Catholic marriage and possibly grant me an annulment from my non-Catholic marriage?
 
What it means is that the majority of Protestant churches do not have a rule against a divorced person remarrying. The only case I personally know was a Methodist pastor who divorced and remarried. The Methodist Chuch would not let him continue as pastor so he became a Baptist minister.
There was an Apostolic Church across from my house. A friend of ours belonged there and he wanted to study ministry. Unfortunately he was on his 3rd marriage. They told him that to be a Pastor he would have to get a divorce and return to his first wife. They didn’t believe in remarriage after divorce.

That congregation became too small to sustain a parish and there is no longer such a church in our town.
 
If I am understanding this correctly then I have learned something new today. If I as a divorced non-Catholic would want to marry an eligible Catholic in the CC, the Catholic tribunal would determine the validity of my first non-Catholic marriage and possibly grant me an annulment from my non-Catholic marriage?
Yes. Your non-Catholic marriage is presumed to be valid. Should there be evidence to prove it isn’t then your marriage would be declared null and you would be allowed to marry the Catholic party in the Catholic Church.
 
Wow, I don’t think many know that! Non-Catholics are actually able to get their marriage annulled if they are remarrying to a Catholic. This would do away with the sin of adultery.I have to ponder this info! Thanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top