The Legitimacy of Today's Annulments.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Michael_Saint
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
In my opinion, the church should do one of two things.

Declare nullity only when a serious impediment or undue pressure exists. Example, impodance, or preganancy and arranged marriage.

OR

Handle it the way the Orthodox do.

Because the whole “a valid marriage never existed” thing is so wide open for abuse, and I believe it creates serious scandal and underminds the church.
 
I base this on the statement of Father Doherty and as well on the article which appeared in the Catholic magazine: US Catholic: Please see the US Catholic , April 1997 issue, p. 6, “Annullments…” and you can read for yourself that of all those who apply for an annulment in the St. Paul Minneapolis area, 97% are approved, and declared invalid.
That would be a rejection rate of about 3%.
In other words, these marriages have not been Sacramentally sanctified by the Holy Spirit.
Your response in no way supports your statement regarding the Orthodox.
 
Handle it the way the Orthodox do.
Oh, yes, that would be much better-- let’s just allow people to get married and divorced up to four times.
Because the whole “a valid marriage never existed” thing is so wide open for abuse, and I believe it creates serious scandal and underminds the church.
Well, the whole “a valid marriage never existed thing” is part of the Catholic faith.
 
Another thought, I believe one of the greatest things Jesus did to elevate the staus of women in society, was to make divorce “illegal”. They were not able to be abandonded, and left to raise their children alone.

Whatever the form, annulment or divorce, the effects are the same. All one need do is look at the fruit to know whether or not a thing is “good”.

What possible good can come from so many families being torn apart. Just start with the thrust into poverty that befalls so many women and children that are left with the “fruits” of divorce, and then take it from there. Every possible negative behavior and circumstance for children is greater for those that come from a broken home. Are things suddenly made better for them simply because their parents received an annulment? I don’t know how anyone can look at this as a good thing, or even an acceptable thing.

I remember when we went through pre-Cana, they gave a little statistical facts talk about the indicators that determine whether or not a couple will stay together. One of the big ones was whether or not the couples parents were still together. With more and more break-ups, what will the future hold?
 
Another thought, I believe one of the greatest things Jesus did to elevate the staus of women in society, was to make divorce “illegal”. They were not able to be abandonded, and left to raise their children alone.
He did not make divorce illegal.

He stated the truth to the Jews about their allowance of remarriage after divorce.
Whatever the form, annulment or divorce, the effects are the same. All one need do is look at the fruit to know whether or not a thing is “good”.
The nullity process itself has no “good” or “bad.” The Tribunal process does not make a marriage null, it only confirms what already exists.
What possible good can come from so many families being torn apart. Just start with the thrust into poverty that befalls so many women and children that are left with the “fruits” of divorce, and then take it from there. Every possible negative behavior and circumstance for children is greater for those that come from a broken home. Are things suddenly made better for them simply because their parents received an annulment? I don’t know how anyone can look at this as a good thing, or even an acceptable thing.
Again, this is your opinion and your experience.

My parents divorced, their marriage was declared null. I am neither poverty stricken nor maladjusted. Their marriage was not valid-- and the Church confirmed that. It is what it is, no more no less. That is my experience.
I remember when we went through pre-Cana, they gave a little statistical facts talk about the indicators that determine whether or not a couple will stay together. One of the big ones was whether or not the couples parents were still together. With more and more break-ups, what will the future hold?
Wow, I’m doomed. Might as well leave my husband now.
 
So who’s to say who’s right, the priest that officiated at the wedding? Or the tribunal, years after the fact, never having known the couple the day of?
If the priest becomes **aware **of an impediment before the wedding, he cannot witness the marriage until the impediment is dispensed or no longer exists.

The priest being unaware of an impediment does not mean an impediment does not exist.
Does anyone really believe that 90% are actually invalid?
Yes. It is not outside the realm of belief. Go spend about 5 minutes on a wedding message board such as Wedding Channel or The Knot on their “religion” section. It becomes apparent very quickly.

And, as for that website, I wouldn’t believe one thing they say. Their home page alone if full of error regarding nullity and the nullity process. And, Sheila Kennedy? Give me a break.
Or does it make more sense that people just want out of an unhappy marriage, and the american tribunal system, in an effert to be compassionate, helps them do just that.
No. I do not believe the Tribunals are rendering nullity decisions without evidence that the marriage is null.

Many of the invalid marriages in the US are* lack of form*.
 
Well, it looks to me like by the introduction of soft psychological factors and other frivolous reasons as grounds for annulments, we have a situation where:many people believe that virtually any failed marriage can be annulled on the basis of incapacity and immaturity.
I think this point above is a good one that should be discussed. Anyone?
 
Well 1ke, it seems we must agree to disagree. We all view the world through our experiences, I guess we shall have to wait and see what the future holds for marriage, catholic and otherwise.

Merry Christmas
 
Another thought, I believe one of the greatest things Jesus did to elevate the staus of women in society, was to make divorce “illegal”. They were not able to be abandonded, and left to raise their children alone.

Whatever the form, annulment or divorce, the effects are the same. All one need do is look at the fruit to know whether or not a thing is “good”.

What possible good can come from so many families being torn apart. Just start with the thrust into poverty that befalls so many women and children that are left with the “fruits” of divorce, and then take it from there. Every possible negative behavior and circumstance for children is greater for those that come from a broken home. Are things suddenly made better for them simply because their parents received an annulment? I don’t know how anyone can look at this as a good thing, or even an acceptable thing.
I think that you have it exactly right here. “Whatever the form, annulment or divorce, the effects are the same.” The results are exactly the same in either case: the family unit is broken and each spouse is free to remarry. Of course, in the case of the Catholic annulment, the spouses are free to remarry with the blessings of the Church.
With so many people getting their Catholic marriages annulled nowadays, question are being raised about whether or not a Catholic annulment is just another name for what other groups call a divorce.
 
Does anyone really believe that 90% are actually invalid? Roughly 60,000 marriages a year? Or does it make more sense that people just want out of an unhappy marriage, and the american tribunal system, in an effort to be compassionate, helps them do just that.
 
. And, Sheila Kennedy? Give me a break.
.
Sheila Kennedy has been seriously hurt by the Catholic annulment process. She entered the marriage in the Catholic Church in good faith, and then all of a sudden the Catholic tribunal tells her that she was never sacramentally married. Then she had to fight for ten years to get the decision of the tribunal overturned. Give you a break? How about giving a break to Sheila Kennedy, who had to live about ten years with this unjust decision of a Catholic marriage tribunal, until it was finally overturned.
 
marci;3122136:
This is an excellent point. If 90% of Catholic marriages are invalid, then who out there in the Catholic world, can be sure that they are married, or that the holy Spirit was present at their marriage ceremony?
That would be 90% of those which end in divorce and and in which one of the parties petitions for a decree of nullity. That’s a far cry from 90% of Catholic marriages.

Of those which are granted, I would like to know how many are granted based on the specific:
  • no intention of having children
  • no intention of being faithful
  • the intention of divorcing if something goes wrong
  • lack of canonical form
  • lack of consent (ie, a situation was present which one party didn’t reveal to the other – infertility, homosexuality, etc)
 
Convalidation should be used whenever possible to remedy an invalid marriage. It is not possible in all cases-- such as this one.

In the case of this particular marriage in question, if he divorces he could then remain single or ask that his marriage be investigated to confirm or refute his suspicion it is invalid. It may be found valid, or it may not-- we don’t have all the facts so we cannot say.
And this is my concern in each and every individual case.
We can lament the number of annulments granted, and generate statistcs to show that there are probably too many, but we cannot know: 1) in each in individual cace or 2) what is in the hearts of the people on the tribunals.

Pax
James
 
Marci,
First of all you have not offended.
The church doesn’t force anyone to stay in a marriage. A couple can divorce civily and still receive the Eurcharist. It is only when they want to remarry that an anullment must be abtained.
I know that, today, people are not bound as tightly by the Church as in times past. But years ago, women in particular, were expected to stay in a bad marriage and not seek divorce. Many others chose to stay due to social stigma.
I do believe that annullments are granted too easily.
They probably are. Our problem here on this board is that we don’t know which ones are valid and which should be denied. Nor do we know which tribunals are being poorly administered.
I dare say that I myself could get one if I wanted to. There were lots of issues before my husband and I married that would have led to the ability to obtain one, and on more than one occasion I considered leaving and divorcing him. However, I didn’t. Not because things weren’t that bad, they were terrible, but **I honestly believed **that I would be breaking the covenant I made.
Here is the crux in my mind. That you honestly believe you need to stay. In my case I honestly believed that I had to get out. (my ex, too, is now a much better person for our break-up)
Not to mention the fact that I couldn’t have imagined doing that to my children.
There again, each situation is unique. My child is, I believe, worse off because his mother and I stayed together.
The thought of not being with them for days or weeks at a time. The thought of my husband not assisting me in forming their faith, or worse, making them go to another church (he’s not catholic).
All of this and more kept me in an extremely unhappy marriage. I remember I used to cry uncontrolably during confession to my priest. Even he basically said it would be OK for me to leave, “God doesn’t want us to be unhappy”.
In the end I decided to accept this suffering and began to pray for the conversion of my husband’s soul.
Long story short (too late) eleven years later I thank God that I didn’t give up. Things are by no means perfect and he hasen’t converted yet, (hope, hope, hope), but I can honestly say that all of the suffering, praying, and hoping has paid off.
First of all thank God for your understanding confessor who stuck with you through this.
Second, it is obvious that you (and hopefully) your husband do not suffer from “terminal selfishness”.
I am truly glad that your life seems to be working out.
I think that if more couples could just hang in there a couple more years they would find that God does work through them and will give them the Graces they need to stay together.
  • or not - (sorry to be flip)
    My first marriage was nearly 20 years, and we both had long ago turned away from the church - I cannot speak to any others.
As a side note: Second marriages are not necessarily better. I believe that over 80% end in divorce.
Statistics like this mean little. It’s taking one data point to prove a point.
What percent of these are divorsed 3 or more times?
How long is the average second marriage?
What is the mean age versus the mean length of marriage?
What is the divorce rate on second marriages for people under thirty vs over thirty?
etc. etc. etc.
All of these would be more useful statistic than the one given.
I agree, however, I think that much of this dilema of divorce boils down to selfishness and a wordly view of happiness. Which is not just an issue for Catholics, but for christians of all faiths in our modern secular society.
AGREED

(continued)
 
Please understand, I do not wish to be insensitive toward your individual situation, (I truely hope I haven’t been offensive).
None taken
But, I think the problem with alot of young couples today is that they are thinking more about the wedding than the marriage. Many want to get married in the big beautiful church, that neither one of them have attended since their conformation.
I think you meant “confirmation” here. Freudian??😃 😃
For many people today they are more concerned about being happy then being holy.
Well said.
I know that was the case for me. I was young and “in love”. There was nothing anyone could say to bring me out of my haze.
Describes my first go round as well.
My big concern with this issue is that I think the single biggest problem with society today is the breakup of the family. I believe the family is the stabilizing force that all societies are founded on, if that most primal institution crumbles, so crumbles society.
I just with the church would be more adament in Her defense of it.
I would not disagree with this, but it beocmes a serious question of where that defence begins. Catechism?? Pre-Cana??
Should we forbid our children from marrying outside the faith as they did years ago?
Where is the root cause of these problems?
It seems to me that the tribunals are a poor place to pick on. It attacks the problem at the wrong end.

Pax
James
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top