The Legitimacy of Today's Annulments.

[bobzills]

The reports do not show that just about any marriage in the USA can be annuled. .

Well, let’s take a look at what we have:

1. Father Doherty quotes a Tribunal official as saying:
   There is no marriage which, given a little time for investigation, we cannot declare invalid.
2. At the site, saveoursacrament.org/
   we read: Another expert in canon law boasted, ‘There isn’t a marriage in America that we can’t annul.’"(Sheila Rauch Kennedy, Shattered Faith, p. 12)
3. Dr. Scott Hahn says “Church lawyers brag they can annul every marriage”, based on “27 different grounds of psychological disturbances”.
4. In the book by Vasoli, he quotes a matrimonial judge as saying: “There is no marriage which, given a little time for investigation, we cannot declare invalid.”
5. In his review of the Vasoli book, Father Kennedy writes: A high percentage of cases that are tried end in a declaration of nullity. From 1984 to 1994 it was 97% for First Instance trials.

 

[bobzills]

Only marriages that have broken down and ended in divorce can even begin to be examined for the possibility of a declaration of nullity…

The tribunals tell an undivorced couple that they have to first get a divorce before applying for an annulment. This is even before a declaration of nullity is given. Couples can get divorced for any reason, or even no reason in some states. And as we have seen, the new reasons for giving out annulments are those which come up in any marriage. So any marriage can be annulled, it the couple wants it to be so. So it really is no different from what other religious groups call a divorce.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

The tribunals tell an undivorced couple that they have to first get a divorce before applying for an annulment. This is even before a declaration of nullity is given. Couples can get divorced for any reason, or even no reason in some states. And as we have seen, the new reasons for giving out annulments are those which come up in any marriage. So any marriage can be annulled, it the couple wants it to be so. So it really is no different from what other religious groups call a divorce.

It would be interesting if we could somehow take good healthy Catholic marriages and put them before the annulment tribunal and see if they would annul them or not. Then we could test the theory that the annulment rate is so high because the non-marriages tend to be the ones that fail. It would be nice if it turned out to be true.

 

[bobzills]

On NUMEROUS occasions I have been amongst acquaintences who have joked about ‘catholic divorces.’ The situation is the very definition of scandal.

Yes, and it gives the impression of some kind of Orwellian time warp situation with an attempt to undo and annul history and claim that the marriage never existed on the basis of a broadening of psychological criteria, while at the same time insisting that the children born from that marriage were legitimate.

 

[Ray_Scheel]

while at the same time insisting that the children born from that marriage were legitimate.

Now you are clearly talking in emotionally-laced riddle-speak, as the sacramentality and/or validity of a marriage have no bearing on the civil legitimacy of children produced from a marriage. Even under the old code of Canon Law, children were considered legitimate under any putative attempt at marriage (and previously illegitimate children would be made legitimate by such an attempt, even if that attempt at marriage was neither sacramental or valid according to the Church).

 

[wifeandmomoftwo]

, while at the same time insisting that the children born from that marriage were legitimate.

you know I really have to take offense at this!
The state of a child’s legitimatize is a LEGAL/CIVIL matter, as long as a child is born of a legal marriage (in the eyes of the State) the child is legitimate! For you to say that my children are not legitimate is rude!

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I am getting so tired of the kind of sweeping generalizations and the general air of punitive, castigating, condemnation of an entire group of people–and yes, while some have said they are not questioning individuals in one post, they make it clear as they continue on with their anecdotal, “I heard this”, “one person says” etc. that they most certainly ARE claiming that if not all, the ‘majority’ of those of us who have received a decree of nullity are not just morally WRONG for even SEEKING the annulment, we are morally wrong because we have lied, cheated, and basically are 'no different from anybody else in either how we came to marriage or how we lived in marriage but while those OTHERS are managing to stay married, WE are trying to PUT ONE OVER on God and the Church in even THINKING that there are ANY circumstances which could make ANY marriage ‘invalid.’

It does hurt to be not only misunderstood but to be vilified wrongly by that misunderstanding.

Well, the end of the year is approaching and despite my hurt and pain at the blatant unfairness of the arguments put forth by some, despite my even greater concern at the subtle yet deep-seated disregard thus demonstrated not only to those who fail to live up to the standards apparently maintained by some posters, but also to the Church itself which is ‘faulted’ as being not only ‘wrong’ but deliberately and maliciously wrong, I will not allow some internet posters to put a damper on my Christmas, or to impact on my soul. Christ loves us when we are ‘unloveable’ and so I love the posters I find it most difficult to love. I bless those who curse me and pray for those who condemn me. I offer up my pain with our Lord and Savior for all who have suffered not only in the situation with divorces, but for whose who have been affected by any sin at any time.

Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Well, the end of the year is approaching and despite my hurt and pain at the blatant unfairness of the arguments put forth by some,

I don’t think anyone has accused you personally of lying to get an annulment. I don’t think anyone has suggested that all annulments are the result of abuse, so please don’t assume that we would think there is anything wrong with your particular annulment. I’m sorry that the concerns I expressed have hurt your feelings. I hope it makes you feel better to consider that we were talking about cases where abuse may have occurred, not about your specific case.

 

[dulcissima]

Well, let’s take a look at what we have:

1. Father Doherty quotes a Tribunal official as saying:
   There is no marriage which, given a little time for investigation, we cannot declare invalid.
2. At the site, saveoursacrament.org/
   we read: Another expert in canon law boasted, ‘There isn’t a marriage in America that we can’t annul.’"(Sheila Rauch Kennedy, Shattered Faith, p. 12)
3. Dr. Scott Hahn says “Church lawyers brag they can annul every marriage”, based on “27 different grounds of psychological disturbances”.
4. In the book by Vasoli, he quotes a matrimonial judge as saying: “There is no marriage which, given a little time for investigation, we cannot declare invalid.”
5. In his review of the Vasoli book, Father Kennedy writes: A high percentage of cases that are tried end in a declaration of nullity. From 1984 to 1994 it was 97% for First Instance trials.

I don’t know why you give so much credence to statements attributed to unnamed “experts in canon law” and “Church lawyers”. You take a few annecdotal statements like that and use them to judge the intentions of all of those in the tribunal process. I do not understand where you make the great leap to assume that our tribunals are perfectly willing to declare valid marriages as invalid.

…and the statistics in your point number 5 only indicate the tribunals have done a good job in screening out cases without merit in the acceptance stage. This makes sense. Why would they waste their resources hearing cases that were unlikely to make it?

 

[dulcissima]

The tribunals tell an undivorced couple that they have to first get a divorce before applying for an annulment. This is even before a declaration of nullity is given. Couples can get divorced for any reason, or even no reason in some states. And as we have seen, the new reasons for giving out annulments are those which come up in any marriage. So any marriage can be annulled, it the couple wants it to be so. So it really is no different from what other religious groups call a divorce.

This is a non-sensical view. Why would couples who married with the right intentions and meant their vows get divorced? It really doesn’t matter if the state allows them to get divorced for any reason or no reason. Divorce is an awful, awful gut-wrenching process, even in a no-fault state. Couples who are commited to their marriage aren’t going to go throgh a divorce just “because”.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

I don’t know why you give so much credence to statements attributed to unnamed “experts in canon law” and “Church lawyers”. You take a few annecdotal statements …

Speaking of anecdotal statements, this reminds me of a woman I dated for a while, who had been through a divorce and got an annulment. She knew one of the tribunal judges, and said that he told her that if she ever needed another annulment, they’re pretty easy to get. LOL.

 

[cecilia97]

Not true. The Church recognizes only “separation”, not “divorce”, in dire circumstances, and ONLY until the spouse reforms.

In many US states, there is no such thing as a “legal” separation that can protect the financial assets of the spouses or force an uninterested party to provide for children or a non-working spouse. Civil divorce separates the worldly assets of the parties and defines support for children…

I haven’t seen anyone on this thread assert that civil divorce severs the sacred marriage bond or gives either party the right to remarry in the Church, so separation vs divorce is really a matter of semantics.

 

[cecilia97]

is there anyone on this thread interested in returning to the original topic, which is the actual tribunal process? could we limit the discussion to those who actually have some knowledge of that process? thank you.

Hi puzzleannie,

Every time I see this conversation on the board, two camps emerge. Those of us with tribunal experiences who are (or feel) discounted/looked down upon by the second camp…people with some book knowledge or opinions about annulments and no experience.

I think it’s hard to find someone with actual nullity petition experience who still thinks “annulments” are too easy to get.

It’s hard for the first group to keep charity towards the second because the topic hits so close to deep wounds, and the second can sometimes come dangerously close to accusing the first of mortal sin.

So we go round and round.

 

[cecilia97]

Actually, I know several people who did go through the nullity process without any plans to date anyone else.

Yep…there are at least a few of us here on CA. Some of us just want to know “where we stand” status-wise…plus, the pain of the nullity process, IMO, would be less for me than meeting someone wonderful 5 years from now only to have to dig up the painful past and maybe even then find out that I could not ligitimately marry.

 

[brigid12]

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?

For one thing, yes, the fruits of divorce are bad for women and for the children. Sometimes, the fruits of staying together are even worse tho’. I have personally lived with the fruits you spoke of. Poverty and loneliness have become the usual fare for me. They were still far superior to the fruits of more physical (et al) abuse and of teaching by showing my daughter that women are too “take” physical abuse and fear since that is their lot. It’s not as tho’ my case is unusual either. As a physically abused woman you have occasion to meet numerous others in the same situation that you’d have never known about otherwise (they’d have never admitted it either - it took me 10 years!)

Although I would agree with the stats about divorced parents having a destructive effect on the children’s future marriage generally, it was the lack of his parents divorce, I think, that lead to my ex’s problems.

BTW, physical abuse is not the only thing to watch. With all the drug use going on, incest of the children is getting to be really scary. Things are not always as cut and dried (and suburban/simple) as many think.

 

[marci]

After having been away for a few days, I can see how heated things have gotten on this thread.

To all those who feel personally offended by the “antagonizers” of the annullment processes. Don’t.

I am speaking for myself, of course, but I would argue that others who have shared my opinion in this matter are coming from the same place.

My motivation in this discussion is to protect the Sacrament of Matrimony. I do not begin to claim to understand or know anyone’s particular circumstance, and I think that if those who have experienced this first hand could calm down and ponder a minute, you may see that you are not the aim of the argument.

We are facing a real crisis in our church. Can you not see it? Are there more anallments because modern catholics don’t know what marriage is, or are there more because the church, through the process, has seemingly given it’s blessing to the dissolution of marriage?

Whatever the case may be, I believe that to dismiss the argument against “guarenteed” annulments out of a misguided sense of charity strikes straight to the heart of our faith.

There are only Seven Sacraments, matrimony is one of them. For centuries this has been one of the foundations of our faith. One of the steps that lead to Heaven. The church saw fit to grant this vocation Sacramental status. It should be approached with reverance, awe and in the fear of God.

I am sorry if anyone feels personally offended by my argument, but the grounds on which I argue are no less than the defense of the faith. Once this basic tenant breaks down, so do many others with which we are obligated to uphold.

As I stated earlier, I believe my marriage could have been annulled had I chosen to go down that road during the early and unhappy times of my marriage, but becuase I knew the promise I made was binding (even though my spouse may not have) I choose to accept the suffering which my decision brought.
I believe that through my sacrifice and prayer, God worked a miracle in my life. He was faithful to me, and granted me the graces to assist me in the vocation I chose in life.
Nothing is impossible with God. It’s not easy, and may not be possible for some to ever truely find happiness in marriage and reconcile, but, like my mother always said, “our reward will not come in this life, but we accept our suffering and offer it up as a sacrifice so that we can gain our reward in Heaven”.

God brought us together for a reason, maybe he gave my husband to me so that I may bring him closer to God. That is what I pray for at every mass during the consecration. Would someone else have done this for him as well, maybe, but the four beautiful children that have been the fruit of our vocation are here because WE were given this gift. I have accepted this role that God has given me with the urgency of one who is trying to save her very soul. I do not take the break-up of so many marriages lightly and neither should anyone else, catholic or not.

That is not to say that I don’t have simpathy for those that suffer in bad marriages, but I certainly will not rejoice in the break up of so many, Whether divorce or annulment, the difference is barely deciferable on our children, our communities, and our culture as a whole.

You can continue to wish that the church will continue the charity bestowed on those unhappy souls seeking to gain the nullity of their marriages. As for me, I will continue to pray that all married people will let go of “self”, set their eyes on the Divine, and recongnize the Sacrament as a gift from God for the purpose of helping them to reach Heaven.

 

[wifeandmomoftwo]

So would I be correct in assuming that you think that whole “annulment” process should be done away with?
That it is better to not seek an annulment??

After having been away for a few days, I can see how heated things have gotten on this thread.

To all those who feel personally offended by the “antagonizers” of the annullment processes. Don’t.

I am speaking for myself, of course, but I would argue that others who have shared my opinion in this matter are coming from the same place.

My motivation in this discussion is to protect the Sacrament of Matrimony. I do not begin to claim to understand or know anyone’s particular circumstance, and I think that if those who have experienced this first hand could calm down and ponder a minute, you may see that you are not the aim of the argument.

We are facing a real crisis in our church. Can you not see it? Are there more anallments because modern catholics don’t know what marriage is, or are there more because the church, through the process, has seemingly given it’s blessing to the dissolution of marriage?

Whatever the case may be, I believe that to dismiss the argument against “guarenteed” annulments out of a misguided sense of charity strikes straight to the heart of our faith.

There are only Seven Sacraments, matrimony is one of them. For centuries this has been one of the foundations of our faith. One of the steps that lead to Heaven. The church saw fit to grant this vocation Sacramental status. It should be approached with reverance, awe and in the fear of God.

I am sorry if anyone feels personally offended by my argument, but the grounds on which I argue are no less than the defense of the faith. Once this basic tenant breaks down, so do many others with which we are obligated to uphold.

As I stated earlier, I believe my marriage could have been annulled had I chosen to go down that road during the early and unhappy times of my marriage, but becuase I knew the promise I made was binding (even though my spouse may not have) I choose to accept the suffering which my decision brought.
I believe that through my sacrifice and prayer, God worked a miracle in my life. He was faithful to me, and granted me the graces to assist me in the vocation I chose in life.
Nothing is impossible with God. It’s not easy, and may not be possible for some to ever truely find happiness in marriage and reconcile, but, like my mother always said, “our reward will not come in this life, but we accept our suffering and offer it up as a sacrifice so that we can gain our reward in Heaven”.

God brought us together for a reason, maybe he gave my husband to me so that I may bring him closer to God. That is what I pray for at every mass during the consecration. Would someone else have done this for him as well, maybe, but the four beautiful children that have been the fruit of our vocation are here because WE were given this gift. I have accepted this role that God has given me with the urgency of one who is trying to save her very soul. I do not take the break-up of so many marriages lightly and neither should anyone else, catholic or not.

That is not to say that I don’t have simpathy for those that suffer in bad marriages, but I certainly will not rejoice in the break up of so many, Whether divorce or annulment, the difference is barely deciferable on our children, our communities, and our culture as a whole.

You can continue to wish that the church will continue the charity bestowed on those unhappy souls seeking to gain the nullity of their marriages. As for me, I will continue to pray that all married people will let go of “self”, set their eyes on the Divine, and recongnize the Sacrament as a gift from God for the purpose of helping them to reach Heaven.

 

[marci]

So would I be correct in assuming that you think that whole “annulment” process should be done away with?
That it is better to not seek an annulment??

No. I do believe that there are very specific, very rare (in this day and age) circumstances in which true impediments to marriage exist. ex. pregnancy, arranged marriage, impotance, mental defect. (maybe not so rare with the pregnancy)

However, the majority of annulments granted today are based on what boils down to immaturity. And what’s worse, is that no matter what they say, it sounds to me like it’s not so much about what happens at the time of the vows, but more about the condition of the marriage in the here and now. That is not the way it is supposed to work.

And what amazes me further still, is that after the fact that a “soft” psycological impediment has been established and an annulment granted, the church allows this same person to marry again. Now does that make any sense? If the church believes a person has an imediment prior to one marriage and declares it null, why then do they assume the imediment suddenly disappears prior to the next marriage?

So to answer your question, no. I do not think annulments should be completely done away with, but I do think that they should be severly restricted. I think the church has an obligation to the faithful in addition to the individual in the process. The church must be careful of the message sent to the laity and the world as to the proper attitude toward the permanance of marriage.

 

[bobzills]

No. I do believe that there are very specific, very rare (in this day and age) circumstances in which true impediments to marriage exist. ex. pregnancy, arranged marriage, impotance, mental defect. (maybe not so rare with the pregnancy)

However, the majority of annulments granted today are based on what boils down to immaturity. And what’s worse, is that no matter what they say, it sounds to me like it’s not so much about what happens at the time of the vows, but more about the condition of the marriage in the here and now. That is not the way it is supposed to work.

And what amazes me further still, is that after the fact that a “soft” psycological impediment has been established and an annulment granted, the church allows this same person to marry again. Now does that make any sense? If the church believes a person has an imediment prior to one marriage and declares it null, why then do they assume the imediment suddenly disappears prior to the next marriage?

So to answer your question, no. I do not think annulments should be completely done away with, but I do think that they should be severly restricted. I think the church has an obligation to the faithful in addition to the individual in the process. The church must be careful of the message sent to the laity and the world as to the proper attitude toward the permanance of marriage.

I wholeheartedly agree with your excellent description of the situation.

 

[JRKH]

Marci,
Welcome back. I hope you had a wonderful and blessed Christmas.

Thank you for a couple of very fine and well presented posts.
I would like to say up front that I can’t think of anything you had said that made me take offence toward you. In fact I consider you as one of those who at least try to see the logic of both positions.

There are only one point where I would like to comment.

My motivation in this discussion is to protect the Sacrament of Matrimony…We are facing a real crisis in our church. Can you not see it? Are there more anullments because modern catholics don’t know what marriage is, or are there more because the church, through the process, has seemingly given it’s blessing to the dissolution of marriage?

I appreciate that you are concerned about preserving the sanctity of the sacrament of Marriage. However, the highlighted portion above really is the crux and core of the matter.
Those of us who have been through the breakup of a marriage feel to a certain extent that the annulment process is being unfairly attacked for a problem that is not theirs. Aren’t they being villified for something they have no control over?
Instead of railing and bewailing the number of annulments and declaring that process broken or worse, deliberately perverted, why not take those same statistics and attack the root cause. Poor catachesis and poorer Pre-Cana.
As you can see there have been a number of persons here who have presented good and valid arguments (on both sides) but I think you’ll agree that a few have been unwilling to try and see the other side of the issue. This is first, poor debate, and second, poor christianity, and third, does not serve to get at the core of the problem.

So the issue in my mind has less to do with the result (annulments). and more to do with the cause as you stated it, “because modern catholics don’t know what marriage is”. If there is to be a push to reduce the number of annullments, then this is where to begin.

In all Charity and
May God Bless you in the Coming Year

James