What is the real crisis?

[bobzills]

What you overlook, is that many Catholic couples ARE in long-standing marriages, that by definition may well be flawed sacrementally.

What is your definition of “successful”? That they “play house” in harmony? There is much more to the sacremental definition of matrimony.

You didn’t answer the question.

 

[ethelzguy]

You didn’t answer the question.

You haven’t clarified it?

There is a difference between a legitimate sacremental marriage and marriages that are not, regardless of whether a preist presided.

The Church doesn’t ratify divorces, they issue decrees of nullity based on some flaw in the original sacrement.

 

[bobzills]

You haven’t clarified it?

There is a difference between a legitimate sacremental marriage and marriages that are not, regardless of whether a preist presided.

The Church doesn’t ratify divorces, they issue decrees of nullity based on some flaw in the original sacrement.

A Catholic couple hs to obtaina civil divorce before the application for the annulment would be accepted, at least in the USA. If there was some question about the validity of their marriage and the marriage was successful, they would not file for a divorce, they would ask for a revalidation or a convalidation of the marriage so that they could continue in their successful marriage.

 

[ethelzguy]

A Catholic couple hs to obtaina civil divorce before the application for the annulment would be accepted, at least in the USA. If there was some question about the validity of their marriage and the marriage was successful, they would not file for a divorce, they would ask for a revalidation or a convalidation of the marriage so that they could continue in their successful marriage.

HUH?

Ok, I’ll try this again. Divorce is more common now, probably as a result of social acceptance, otherwise known as peer pressure.

In the past, the peer pressure was to stay together, no matter what, many times resulting in miserable abusive relationships.

Also, keep in mind that in my parents generation and before, many marriages were “set up” by parents and relatives. Does the term “dowry”, or the phrase “given in marriage” ring any bells?

People were stuck together, and they stuck it out likely because of peer pressure as much as any personal religious beliefs…although the religious beliefs of family and friends may have increased the peer pressure to stay together.

What I’m trying to get at, is that just because Herb and Martha stuck it out for 60 years, doesn’t mean that the validity of their sacremental union would have stood up to muster before the tribunal. They just never found out. They could have been forced together by their respective parents.

There are probably LOTS of marriages from generations gone by that would have been granted nullity had it been sought.

The fact is, we will never know…but you can’t place all the marbles on divorce and annulment figures alone.

 

[bobzills]

HUH?

Ok, I’ll try this again. Divorce is more common now, probably as a result of social acceptance, otherwise known as peer pressure.

In the past, the peer pressure was to stay together, no matter what, many times resulting in miserable abusive relationships.

Also, keep in mind that in my parents generation and before, many marriages were “set up” by parents and relatives. Does the term “dowry”, or the phrase “given in marriage” ring any bells?

People were stuck together, and they stuck it out likely because of peer pressure as much as any personal religious beliefs…although the religious beliefs of family and friends may have increased the peer pressure to stay together.

What I’m trying to get at, is that just because Herb and Martha stuck it out for 60 years, doesn’t mean that the validity of their sacremental union would have stood up to muster before the tribunal. They just never found out. They could have been forced together by their respective parents.

There are probably LOTS of marriages from generations gone by that would have been granted nullity had it been sought.

The fact is, we will never know…but you can’t place all the marbles on divorce and annulment figures alone.

The question I asked is still unanswered. If the marriage is successful, why would a Catholic couple apply for a divorce?

 

[Cyril_Ignatius]

Please elaborate and meaningfully defend this position…this is such a tired and poorly understood argument that is trotted out again and again…

As for crisis…I agree there is one brewing in our beloved Church~and it seems to center on the strict traditionalists or fundamentalists of the faith and those who are otherwise. There is growing intolerance within the doors of the Catholic Church itself among some of the faithful for their own who are not perceived to be towing the line, as it were, in terms of professing, living or believing exactly the “right” things and down to the last detail of dogma. Those who fall short in any discernible way are quickly labeled “cafeteria Catholics” or “CINO” and dismissed. It is highly off-putting and offensive~and not just when one is the target, but an affront to be part of an organization that would tolerate such disloyalty towards, and some would say even abuse of, its own members.

For those who respond that they are only calling out the fallen, the stumbling, the public dissenters–I respond that those who have the gifts of faith and understanding as well as the courage to live it out have an even higher duty and calling to take on challenges in the community of believers with charity, patience and most of all discretion so that the honor and character of the entire Church is never degraded or subjected to negative public scrutiny.

I can’t speak for the author, but the statement is certainly true. It is trotted out often because a serious look at the United Nations in our times reveals a very large bureuacratic conglomerate famous for its arrogant attitude towards traditional cultures; an oppressive entity run by a combination of secular liberal careerists from the affluent West and a cadre of elitists from the Third World whose condition and attitudes are far removed from most the people they are supposed to be helping.

The United Nations founding was nobel and well-intentioned, and it’s self-descriptions and public rhetoric sound nice, especially terms like “global community”. And certainly the United nations has done some good things. But it is laden with corruption and political intrigue that undermines it’s original intent.

One place to observe the United nations in action is it’s aggressive “family planning” operations in many parts of the world. Abortion, artificial contraception are pushed on local populations with little regard for the religious and spiritual issues involved, or the actual short and long-term effects of population planning on the people. Dont take my word for it. Go explore the research of Stephen Mosher at the Population Research Institute.
Or read up on the ill-covered “Oil-For-Food” scandal.

 

[ethelzguy]

The question I asked is still unanswered. If the marriage is successful, why would a Catholic couple apply for a divorce?

I guess you would have to ask them. But then again, you haven’t defined a “successful” marriage.

 

[ethelzguy]

Why would a Catholic couple get a divorce if they have a successful marriage?

An annulment represents a marriage that was sacrementally flawed to begin with. It has nothing to do with whether it was successful or not.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

OK. I think that they have watered down the reasons for granting an annulment, to the extent that it really is not that much different from what other churches call divorce.

Obviously not being able to go into details, but having sat in on tribunal hearings, I must most strongly disagree with you.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[peary]

In order to get an annulment, you first have to get a divorce. Why would a couple get divorced if there was no problem in the marriage.

You seem really obsessed with all of this. Why?

 

[Zarathustra89]

The demographic winter of the West is the main crisis. Europe will be Muslim by 2060 with America not far behind.

Thus Spoke Zarathustra

 

[bobzills]

I guess you would have to ask them. But then again, you haven’t defined a “successful” marriage.

No, it is obvious really. If a marriage is going along just fine, then there really is no reason to get a divorce. Remember, before the tribunal will accept a petition for annulment, the couple is required to first obtain a civil divorce.

 

[bobzills]

Obviously not being able to go into details, but having sat in on tribunal hearings, I must most strongly disagree with you.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

BTW, do you agree that before the petition for the annulment is accepted by the tribunal, the couple must first obtain a civil divorce, at least in the USA?

 

[bobzills]

The demographic winter of the West is the main crisis. Europe will be Muslim by 2060 with America not far behind.

Thus Spoke Zarathustra

Of course you are right, at least if things keep going as they have been since Vatican II.

 

[bobzills]

An annulment represents a marriage that was sacrementally flawed to begin with. It has nothing to do with whether it was successful or not.

This is nonresponsive to the question as to why a couple in a successful marriage would get a divorce. Hint: They wouldn’t.

 

[bobzills]

You seem really obsessed with all of this. Why?

Because people here are overlooking the obvious that the teaching on the indissolubility of marriage has been weakened considerably as indicated by the statistics.
Let’s compare the number of divorces with the number of annulments in the USA.
Divorces in the USA
1930: 195, 961
1979: 1,179,000
1998: 1,135,000
Annulments given out by the Catholic Church in the USA:
1930: 9
1989: 61, 416.
The divorces have increased by a factor of about 6 (5.9)
The annulments in the RCC have increased over the same period by a factor of 6824, or more than one thousand times as much as the divorces in the USA at large.

 

[Zarathustra89]

Because people here are overlooking the obvious that the teaching on the indissolubility of marriage has been weakened considerably as indicated by the statistics.
Let’s compare the number of divorces with the number of annulments in the USA.
Divorces in the USA
1930: 195, 961
1979: 1,179,000
1998: 1,135,000
Annulments given out by the Catholic Church in the USA:
1930: 9
1989: 61, 416.
The divorces have increased by a factor of about 6 (5.9)
The annulments in the RCC have increased over the same period by a factor of 6824, or more than one thousand times as much as the divorces in the USA at large.

But I thought that John Paul the “great” ushered in a new age of understanding between the sexes with his theology of the body?

Thus Spoke Zarathustra

 

[bobzills]

But I thought that John Paul the “great” ushered in a new age of understanding between the sexes with his theology of the body?

Thus Spoke Zarathustra

I don;t know, but Pope John Paul II, himself, said that certain applications of a tendency to broaden the requirements for capacity necessary to contract a marraige validly are are rightly perceived as conflicting with the principle of the indissolubility of marriage.

 

[Zarathustra89]

I don;t know, but Pope John Paul II, himself, said that certain applications of a tendency to broaden the requirements for capacity necessary to contract a marraige validly are are rightly perceived as conflicting with the principle of the indissolubility of marriage.

The demographic decline and the divorce rate are related. Feminism is killing the West. We need to become strong again and throw off these “feminine virtues”.

Thus Spoke Zarathustra

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

BTW, do you agree that before the petition for the annulment is accepted by the tribunal, the couple must first obtain a civil divorce, at least in the USA?

Yes - For those cases in which I participated.
Prayers & Blessings
Deacon Ed B