Remarriage and Leaving the Church

[puzzleannie]

Are there a lot of people that remarry who have tried to get an annulment but it was denied, so they feel they can’t be a practicing Catholic, therefore they leave to become Protestant?

I?

they are wrong because they have been badly taught
or they are wrong because they have been properly taught and reject that teaching
divorce by itself does not prevent anyone from practicing their Catholic faith, nor does it bar them from the Eucharist and other sacraments.
What bars them from the sacrament of matrimony is the simple, undeniable fact that they are already married, and civil divorce did not end that condition. They made a free will choice when they married, and when they divorced, and they accept that reality. Or they try to deny a plain fact and in so doing deny Christ who state that fact plainly and unequivocably. They can do as Christ said, determine with the help of the Church if their first marriage was in fact invalid due to some breach of the law, or they can ignore his warning and live with someone outside marriage and voluntarily separate themselves from union with Christ, his Church, and his grace in the sacraments.

 

[Thoughtfulone]

Yes. They are committing adultery AND they are disobeying the lawful authority put over them by Christ.

The Tribunal is authoritatively binding. So, no, such a person would not be free even if they “believe” their marriage was invalid. Feeelings are not a sufficient indicator of validity or invalidity. If a tribunal, after careful and extensive investigation rules the marriage valid (remember, it’s presumed valid from the start) then the petetioner did not give evidence of invalidity.

The parties are bound by the tribunal decision. They may NOT marry.

But there are cases where a party may very well lie, give false testimony, or oppose the annulment out of sheer spite or malice. I’m sure this has happened before. I gave testimony in my mother’s annulment and I assure you, it would have been quite easy for me to lie in my written testimony. It’s not like an in-depth investigation takes place. They read the testimonies and decide.

Again, the tribunal doesn’t MAKE a marriage valid or invalid. I’m sure there have been cases where the tribunal has judged wrongly. If that is true, there would be no adultery.

 

[1ke]

But there are cases where a party may very well lie, give false testimony, or oppose the annulment out of sheer spite or malice. I’m sure this has happened before. I gave testimony in my mother’s annulment and I assure you, it would have been quite easy for me to lie in my written testimony. It’s not like an in-depth investigation takes place. They read the testimonies and decide.

Again, the tribunal doesn’t MAKE a marriage valid or invalid. I’m sure there have been cases where the tribunal has judged wrongly. If that is true, there would be no adultery.

The parties are still bound by the tribunal’s decision.

 

[marica_mandic]

Are there a lot of people that remarry who have tried to get an annulment but it was denied, so they feel they can’t be a practicing Catholic, therefore they leave to become Protestant?

I just tried for a moment to put myself in their shoes. I am single and celibate so I really had to think on this one. If the day comes where I wake up and say I want to date and find a husband (highly unlikely as I don’t have the desire, the time to date, possible denied annulment if applied, etc…) would I leave the church? WOW that is really tough and I feel so bad for those whose annulments were denied and they got remarried anyway. I might do the same. I guess any one of us can fall to mortal sin at any time so if its one thing I have learned on this forum, Don’t judge others!

Anyway, just wondered what the statistics were and what you would do if faced with such a situation. If your annulment was denied would you stay single and celibate or would you try to remarry (if you don’t like the single life) and stay within the church feeling like an outcast or would you join a Protestant church where remarriage is not a sin?

Remarriage is sin for Catholic, I thik that is no solution to be Protestant.
Solution to to try to get Church divorse.

 

[joanofarc2008]

OK so you would remain single and celibate if your spouse divorced you? Lets say you wanted to stay in the marriage but your spouse left you for someone else. I can relate to staying single and celibate because I have no desire to date but for those who do like being married, I feel bad for them who had to divorce through no fault of their own. I’m sorry but I do feel sympathy for them

I am divorced from an abusive marriage. While I do feel badly for the lack of catechesis that occurred in some of the past decades regarding declaration of nullity if my marriage is not declared null. Honestly it is very simple - I have a choice between Christ in the Eucharist or a man in my bed in a marriage which by definition will always be invalid if my past marriage is not declared null. If I am willing to give up the Eucharist for a man it shows a lack of understanding for the Eucharist.

 

[Siochan_Leat]

If I am willing to give up the Eucharist for a man it shows a lack of understanding for the Eucharist.

Exactly!

And, let’s face it, LIFE IS NOT ALWAYS FAIR. To complain about the annulment process and whether someone may be deserving or not, it fails to take into consideration that life isn’t fair. Yes, it stinks, but sometimes the answer is no. We are Catholics and must abide by God’s rules.

 

[markomalley]

Remarriage is sin for Catholic, I thik that is no solution to be Protestant.
Solution to to try to get Church divorse.

No such thing as a Church divorce.

You may be thinking of an “annulment” – which is a determination by the Church that a valid marriage did not exist in the first place.

 

[joanofarc2008]

Exactly!

And, let’s face it, LIFE IS NOT ALWAYS FAIR. To complain about the annulment process and whether someone may be deserving or not, it fails to take into consideration that life isn’t fair. Yes, it stinks, but sometimes the answer is no. We are Catholics and must abide by God’s rules.

Thank you it why we must always remember that our rewards are not here. They are later and the gate is narrow. Nothing 1ke said was wrong btw - it is just sometimes very easy to be reversibly judgemental. We must avoid that as well IMO.

 

[markomalley]

Are there a lot of people that remarry who have tried to get an annulment but it was denied, so they feel they can’t be a practicing Catholic, therefore they leave to become Protestant?

I just tried for a moment to put myself in their shoes. I am single and celibate so I really had to think on this one. If the day comes where I wake up and say I want to date and find a husband (highly unlikely as I don’t have the desire, the time to date, possible denied annulment if applied, etc…) would I leave the church? WOW that is really tough and I feel so bad for those whose annulments were denied and they got remarried anyway. I might do the same. I guess any one of us can fall to mortal sin at any time so if its one thing I have learned on this forum, Don’t judge others!

Anyway, just wondered what the statistics were and what you would do if faced with such a situation. If your annulment was denied would you stay single and celibate or would you try to remarry (if you don’t like the single life) and stay within the church feeling like an outcast or would you join a Protestant church where remarriage is not a sin?

Obviously, you have the Scriptural injunction against remarriage.

[bibledrb]Mark 10:6-12[/bibledrb]

If the two become one flesh, it’s pretty difficult to separate that one flesh.

But here’s the bottom line: The Second Person of the Blessed Trinity says Whosoever shall put away his wife and marry another, committeth adultery against her and if the wife shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery. The Church echos that command in Canon Law.

Who are we to doubt the clear teaching of Christ and His Church?

If I decide that I want to disregard that teaching, then am I not claiming to be smarter than God? Or at least not subject to God? – am I not making myself god in that circumstance? Sort of like in this circumstance:

[BIBLEDRB]Gen 3:5[/BIBLEDRB]

Look at the woman caught in the act of adultery. Jesus got those people who were going to stone her away from her, but then he commanded her to “go and sin no more.”

[BIBLEDRB]John 8:11[/BIBLEDRB]

The cold, hard reality of the situation is that a man and/or woman who is sleeping with one who was already validly married is an adulterer/adulteress. That’s all there is to it. And that man and/or woman needs to make a decision in life: is pursuit of the sexual pleasure more important than following Christ? If not, then they should do as Jesus commanded, “go and sin no more.”

If, on the other hand, the couple determine that sexual pleasure is more important than following Christ, they will have no problem in finding a group that either closes their eyes to it or who actively approve of it. Does that make it right?

 

[briang72]

It’s not like an in-depth investigation takes place. They read the testimonies and decide.

This certainly wasn’t my experience with the Tribunal. My “wife” and I had to answer at least 100 questions each, sometimes with paragraphs of detail about our lives before the “marriage” took place. We both had to provide witnesses to answer lengthy questionairres as well. This included the witnesses at our ceremony, our parents, and any other people who were knowledgable about our relationship before the marriage. They contacted me at one point to warn me that if they didn’t receive the completed questionairres from all of my witnesses they would be forced to stop their process. I was fortunate to have a declaration of nullity reached, after about 10 months of Tribunal process. I would guess that most people are experiencing an even longer time period for decisions. This is not in-depth? I’m not sure what you expect the Tribunal to do. It seems to me that they couldn’t possibly personally interview all of these people an obtain better information about the case than they get from the questionairres.

I would agree that it would be easy to lie, but why would you even bother filing the paperwork if you are going to lie? Seems like if you are going to lie, and still be denied a declaration of nullity, then your lying behavior will continue when you lie to yourself and decide that its still okay to pursue another marriage.

 

[joanofarc2008]

This certainly wasn’t my experience with the Tribunal. My “wife” and I had to answer at least 100 questions each, sometimes with paragraphs of detail about our lives before the “marriage” took place. We both had to provide witnesses to answer lengthy questionairres as well. This included the witnesses at our ceremony, our parents, and any other people who were knowledgable about our relationship before the marriage. They contacted me at one point to warn me that if they didn’t receive the completed questionairres from all of my witnesses they would be forced to stop their process. I was fortunate to have a declaration of nullity reached, after about 10 months of Tribunal process. I would guess that most people are experiencing an even longer time period for decisions. This is not in-depth? I’m not sure what you expect the Tribunal to do. It seems to me that they couldn’t possibly personally interview all of these people an obtain better information about the case than they get from the questionairres.

I would agree that it would be easy to lie, but why would you even bother filing the paperwork if you are going to lie? Seems like if you are going to lie, and still be denied a declaration of nullity, then your lying behavior will continue when you lie to yourself and decide that its still okay to pursue another marriage.

Also if the Tribunal feels they are in need of more in depth information they do call the petitioner, respondents, and/or witnesses in for an interview and/or mental health evaluations.

 

[maryjk]

I would agree that it would be easy to lie, but why would you even bother filing the paperwork if you are going to lie? Seems like if you are going to lie, and still be denied a declaration of nullity, then your lying behavior will continue when you lie to yourself and decide that its still okay to pursue another marriage.

It isn’t you that would lie. It would be the spouse that didn’t want the divorce or the family that wants to punish the person that filed for the annulment.

 

[Thoughtfulone]

It isn’t you that would lie. It would be the spouse that didn’t want the divorce or the family that wants to punish the person that filed for the annulment.

Precisely. There are people out there (like abusive “husbands” or jealous “wives” or even children who favor one parent over another, for example) who would do or say ANYTHING to keep a person from getting an annulment. It’s not as if you have a lawyer or an advocate who is paid to find evidence and plead your case. You fill out the questionnaires, they look at them and render a decision, which takes YEARS and is final. I’m not sure if there is an appeal process or not to be honest.

I don’t think that God would judge a person too harshly who KNOWS their marriage to be invalid but received a negative response to their annulment request because of circumstances like the one above for marrying outside the Church and continuing to receive the sacraments anyway.

 

[briang72]

It isn’t you that would lie. It would be the spouse that didn’t want the divorce or the family that wants to punish the person that filed for the annulment.

Oops, I misunderstood.

But to answer the above concern, I guess this is why there are witnesses from both sides beyond the petitioner and the respondent. Hopefully most false statements would be noticable by the lack of agreement with other witnesses’ responses. Ultimately, we must trust that God is in control, and give the Tribunal this trust.

 

[joanofarc2008]

Precisely. There are people out there (like abusive “husbands” or jealous “wives” or even children who favor one parent over another, for example) who would do or say ANYTHING to keep a person from getting an annulment. It’s not as if you have a lawyer or an advocate who is paid to find evidence and plead your case. You fill out the questionnaires, they look at them and render a decision, which takes YEARS and is final. I’m not sure if there is an appeal process or not to be honest.

I don’t think that God would judge a person too harshly who KNOWS their marriage to be invalid but received a negative response to their annulment request because of circumstances like the one above for marrying outside the Church and continuing to receive the sacraments anyway.

In cases such as these when there appear to be two almost completely different stories of the marriage - tribunals have ways of sorting these things out including in person interviews and psychological evaluations. It is not something that is done without discernment.

 

[EvelynEVF]

I’m in that situation. Left an abusive marriage and the mentally-ill abuser still claims he has no idea why I left, and is contesting my petition. My advocate told me that not only does he refuse to release his psychiatric records, but he makes no mention of his illness or related behaviors in his testimony. If the advocate didn’t know us both, he would never guess that we were describing the same relationship. So I have 13 witnesses, including a licensed counselor and xh’s coworkers and boss. Embarrassing? You bet! And I know he can fight this all the way to Rome and keep me in limbo for years if he so chooses, God forbid.

SO I DON’T DATE, and I don’t even look at anyone as “potential.” I am distressed when I keep hearing about people who don’t know you can’t date before having a declaration of nullity in hand. Even my spiritual director told me that only remarriage was forbidden, not dating. I had a fit and set her straight. As much as it makes me want to scrape my skin off, I’m still married until proven otherwise.

The annulment process is hard and painful. Being a single mom when I suspect I am called to remarry at some point, is hard and painful.

I am very fortunate to have good friends who truly support me, and I actually find it freeing sometimesto be so obviously unavailable, so that I can relax and not worry.

I feel great sympathy for people who either don’t know they can’t date, or who convert after a not-okay remarriage. I know what I need to know, so I am held accountable, even when it hurts.

 

[joanofarc2008]

I’m in that situation. Left an abusive marriage and the mentally-ill abuser still claims he has no idea why I left, and is contesting my petition. My advocate told me that not only does he refuse to release his psychiatric records, but he makes no mention of his illness or related behaviors in his testimony. If the advocate didn’t know us both, he would never guess that we were describing the same relationship. So I have 13 witnesses, including a licensed counselor and xh’s coworkers and boss. Embarrassing? You bet! And I know he can fight this all the way to Rome and keep me in limbo for years if he so chooses, God forbid.

SO I DON’T DATE, and I don’t even look at anyone as “potential.” I am distressed when I keep hearing about people who don’t know you can’t date before having a declaration of nullity in hand. Even my spiritual director told me that only remarriage was forbidden, not dating. I had a fit and set her straight. As much as it makes me want to scrape my skin off, I’m still married until proven otherwise.

The annulment process is hard and painful. Being a single mom when I suspect I am called to remarry at some point, is hard and painful.

I am very fortunate to have good friends who truly support me, and I actually find it freeing sometimesto be so obviously unavailable, so that I can relax and not worry.

I feel great sympathy for people who either don’t know they can’t date, or who convert after a not-okay remarriage. I know what I need to know, so I am held accountable, even when it hurts.

Thanks Evelyn.

The annulment process is just God’s way of saying, “Hey you - yeah you- you need time to heal!” Or atleast in my case it is.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

The longer I read threads like this , I become more a fan of the Orthodox Church’s view on divorce and remarriage…

 

[larry85704]

Last time I went to Mass the priest thanked everybody for coming to church. The church was packed. Do you really think it is the intent of the Church to turn people away from Mass because they are divorced and re-married? I doubt if anybody on this forum would say that anybody should not go to church. Even going to a non-Catholic church is better than staying home.

I am pretty sure many of the people that go to Mass have committed some sin. They go to Communion. They want to feel like they are part of the Church. I don’t think it is fair to single out those who are divorced and re-married. If you really want to be right you apply the rules fairly. So, the issue then becomes how do you know that you have not committed a grave sin and not had it forgiven by the Sacrament of Confession when you receive Communion? Keep in mind there are thousands of things that you can do, or not do, that are grave sins in the Catholic Church.

Doesn’t the Church teach that if you have committed a grave sin you are not supposed to receive the Eucharist until you have gone to Confession?

So, how would this topic go if it were about how people that do not ____ everyday should not receive Communion. And come on, there are “rules” in Canon Law that say a Catholic must do certain things every day, or every week, under penalty of committing a grave sin. But, since this topic is about divorce (i.e. sex) it gets everybody’s interest.

How about lets start a campaign about birth control. Lets say, rightfully so, that anybody that used birth control on Saturday night shouldn’t be going to Communion on Sunday. Lets suppose that everybody that used birth control didn’t go to Communion. Or, lets switch gears and say that everybody that doesn’t pray on Friday shouldn’t go to Communion on Sunday, unless you went to Confession on Saturday. I may be wrong, but I think there are some rather obscure teachings that state you must pray more on Friday under penalty if grave sin. Gee, how many rules do you have to drag up before no-one, not even the priest, receives Communion?

See where this goes? Feel right? Is it a Mass if nobody received Communion?

So, if you want to state that divorced Catholics should be receiving Communion when they are re-married improperly that’s fine. Just don’t be a cafeteria Catholic and stop there.

 

[joanofarc2008]

Last time I went to Mass the priest thanked everybody for coming to church. The church was packed. Do you really think it is the intent of the Church to turn people away from Mass because they are divorced and re-married? I doubt if anybody on this forum would say that anybody should not go to church. Even going to a non-Catholic church is better than staying home.

I am pretty sure many of the people that go to Mass have committed some sin. They go to Communion. They want to feel like they are part of the Church. I don’t think it is fair to single out those who are divorced and re-married. If you really want to be right you apply the rules fairly. So, the issue then becomes how do you know that you have not committed a grave sin and not had it forgiven by the Sacrament of Confession when you receive Communion? Keep in mind there are thousands of things that you can do, or not do, that are grave sins in the Catholic Church.

Doesn’t the Church teach that if you have committed a grave sin you are not supposed to receive the Eucharist until you have gone to Confession?

So, how would this topic go if it were about how people that do not ____ everyday should not receive Communion. And come on, there are “rules” in Canon Law that say a Catholic must do certain things every day, or every week, under penalty of committing a grave sin. But, since this topic is about divorce (i.e. sex) it gets everybody’s interest.

How about lets start a campaign about birth control. Lets say, rightfully so, that anybody that used birth control on Saturday night shouldn’t be going to Communion on Sunday. Lets suppose that everybody that used birth control didn’t go to Communion. Or, lets switch gears and say that everybody that doesn’t pray on Friday shouldn’t go to Communion on Sunday, unless you went to Confession on Saturday. I may be wrong, but I think there are some rather obscure teachings that state you must pray more on Friday under penalty if grave sin. Gee, how many rules do you have to drag up before no-one, not even the priest, receives Communion?

See where this goes? Feel right? Is it a Mass if nobody received Communion?

So, if you want to state that divorced Catholics should be receiving Communion when they are re-married improperly that’s fine. Just don’t be a cafeteria Catholic and stop there.

The problem with divorce and remarriage is that one cannot objectively confess and repent without removing the impediment of the prior marriage and convalidating. Therefore one leaves the confessional still in a state of objective mortal sin. This is why none of your parallels work.