I think you guys are being too hard on bobzills. I’m not sure I agree with all his implications, but he surely has shined a spotlight on a problem. On NUMEROUS occasions I have been amongst acquaintences who have joked about ‘catholic divorces.’ The situation is the very definition of scandal.
To my mind, the numbers most likely indicate that tribunals are simply relying upon the testimony of the couples and ruling accordingly. **Lets face it, we live in a time when the MAJORITY of catholics pick and choose what catholic teachings they want to accept and which they chose to ignore (usually sexual and economic). **I don’t think bob is saying that the tribunals are operating an anullment handout operation, rather he seems to be pointing out that the tribunals are not being particularly judicious. Are they really making any attempt to discern between sincere applicants and those who are making responses that they know will get them the outcome they desire? Don’t kid yourself, there are LOTS of catholics who want the cultural trappings of catholicism without all the pesky moral teachings.
Furthermore, it seems to me that a tribunal ought to include a certain amount of confrontation of sin when it is sinful behavior that consitutes the ‘defective consent.’ This is just brainstorming, but I wonder if those whose defect was their own sin oughtn’t have to demonstrate remorse and repentance somehow before they are allowed to marry in the church again. Perhaps the marriage should be anulled, but their sacramental record should be noted to disallow remarriage until such time as it is clear that the defect is unlikely to reoccur.
Finally, I think it is a spiritual crime that couples are not rigorously inspected with a list of potential defects in consent before marriage. Such a list would not be difficult to provide and would add just a few hours to a final marriage prep session. Couples whose responses indicate a defect in consent should not be allowed to fool themselves into believing they are getting a sacramentally marriage. That doesn’t SOUND very pastoral, but it is actually MORE pastoral than the ‘head-in-sand until anullment time’ policy now in place. I suppose you could even make it more pastoral to allow the wedding to proceed in the church as long as the COUPLE (even if know one else) is clearly informed that it will merely be a natural, not a sacramental marriage: no special graces of the sacrament.) That way the couple isn’t publicly humiliated, but is still left with a clear teaching that they aren’t quite right with God. If the defect is later cleared up, GREAT! Come on back and a quiet private event can make things sacramental - nobody the wiser, except the couple themselves.
