Which harms marriage more, state gay marriages or liberal Church annulments?

[martino]

The Church has the authority to grant annulments, even if they do a poor job of administering it. Nobody has the authority to change the meaning of marriage. Marriage was part of creation from the very beginning and has always been limited to men and women.

 

[Ken]

martino:

The Church has the authority to grant annulments, even if they do a poor job of administering it. Nobody has the authority to change the meaning of marriage. Marriage was part of creation from the very beginning and has always been limited to men and women.

OK. Is marriage a lifelong commitment? Is that part of the meaning of marriage?

 

[Burnman]

What’s wrong with having a gay marriage? My wife and I are quite happy with ours!

Now a marriage of homosexuals… totally different story there, don’t ya think?

Bernie

 

[JimG]

Ken:

Is the door closed now? Why will gay marriage open it?

Does divorce or Catholic annulment open the door? Both redefine marriage as less than a life long commitment. So does the Pauline Privilege.

Does contraception open the door? It removed reproduction from the definition.

Yes. The meaning of marriage has already been seriously weakened by contraception, lack of commitment, and no-fault divorce. These same things, I believe, have led to skyrocketing annulments.

Marriage today has been in trouble since these things came about. Gay marriage will merely finish it off.

JimG

 

[Naphali]

I’m actually surprised that I’m in the minority – gay marrige won’t be a CATHOLIC marriage … it will be a civil union, a Justice of the Peace more than likely – we’re talking about OUR faith – a Protestant can get a divorce and never answer to their church for it – we have to answer to our church.

It’s certainly not a perfect system but then nothing is – What two gay people and the legal system have together will do nothing to any of our marriages – but if, God forbid, any of us have spouses that leave/cheat/abuse us and then use a liberally applied annulment process to seem as if they were ‘all right’ with the church THAT would hurt …

 

[JimG]

Naphali:

I’m actually surprised that I’m in the minority – gay marrige won’t be a CATHOLIC marriage … it will be a civil union, a Justice of the Peace more than likely – we’re talking about OUR faith – a Protestant can get a divorce and never answer to their church for it – we have to answer to our church.

I’m reminded of the poem by John Donne:

No man is an island, entire of itself;
Every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were,
as well as if a manor of thy friends or of thine own were.
Any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind.
And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls.
It tolls for thee.

Marriage is not only a Catholic institution, but a public institution. The health of marriage is indicative of the health of a society; ours shows signs of grave illness. The excessive focus on individualism (I’ll do it MY way) turns every individual into his own nation-state, oblivious to his neighbor. The disintegration of marriage is not just bad for the Church; it’s bad for our civilization.

JimG

 

[Ptero]

Ken:

OK. Is marriage a lifelong commitment? Is that part of the meaning of marriage?

Yes, so long as the marriage is valid under canon law. If the marriage is not valid than the two people assuming a marriage are living the sin of fornication.

Perhaps one cause of more annulments today is that more catholics are getting married outside the law of the church; failing to receive a dispensation, etc. Of course this is still a regrettable situation. But it is a different situation than that of more catholics being granted annulments simply because tribunals are being more generous in the granting of annulments

 

[Ken]

Ptero:

Yes, so long as the marriage is valid under canon law. If the marriage is not valid than the two people assuming a marriage are living the sin of fornication.

Perhaps one cause of more annulments today is that more catholics are getting married outside the law of the church; failing to receive a dispensation, etc. Of course this is still a regrettable situation. But it is a different situation than that of more catholics being granted annulments simply because tribunals are being more generous in the granting of annulments

OK. So if lifelong commitment is part of the meaning of marriage, then the Church has changed that meaning through the explosion in annulments.

 

[Ptero]

Ken:

OK. So if lifelong commitment is part of the meaning of marriage, then the Church has changed that meaning through the explosion in annulments.

No, the church has not changed the meaning of marriage! Did you read my entire post, or perhaps it wasn’t clear??

If more Catholics are choosing to ignore the churches laws that make a marriage valid, and so, enter into an invalid marriage, of course there will be more invalid marriages, hence more potential annulments.

 

[tee_eff_em]

Steven Merten:

I cannot help but assume that authorized Church leaders (Pope John Paul II) are not really doing the will of God, by allowing liberal annulments, either.

A declaration of nullity is not something that is “allowed” nor granted as some kind of favor or mercy.

It is a matter of justice.

tee

 

[Makerteacher]

quasimodo:

I don’t want the rules for an annulment to be changed. I want marriage prep to look more like boot camp.

Hear Hear!! I agree wholeheartedly.

I believe the gay marriage agenda is far more damaging because if affects the fundamental understanding of a covenant relationship. A Declaration of Nullity states that a covenant committment never took place due to a defect of consent, but it does not alter the understanding of a covenant.

 

[Makerteacher]

Ken:

OK. So if lifelong commitment is part of the meaning of marriage, then the Church has changed that meaning through the explosion in annulments.

Um, what explosion? Can you back that comment up with valid statistics? I am unaware of the number of annulments applied for or granted.

I do know that, of two friends (whose husbands both committed adultery and left them with the kids), one Decree of Nullity was granted and one was not, due to the various circumstances of the original marriage.

 

[Steven_Merten]

tee_eff_em:

A declaration of nullity is not something that is “allowed” nor granted as some kind of favor or mercy.

It is a matter of justice.

tee

Hello tee eff em

So are you saying that Catholic Church annulments are “a matter of justice” just as Israelite Church divorces were “a matter of justice”? Both were established by God’s authorized Church leaders. Or are you saying that, had the God authorized Church leaders of the Jesus’ day switched from “Church divorce” to “Church annulment”, Jesus would have been happy because now “justice is served”? If so He would have instructed the Jewish Church on proper annulment practices instead of giving His “in the beginning” “male and female” sermon. If the Israelites would have had liberal annulments like the Church of today, they would not have “stubbornly” demanded Church divorce. I do not think simply manipulateing wording would have suddenly made Jesus happy about Church leaders authorizing family breakups in His Jewish Church.

“We know from scriptures that God authorized Church leader (Moses) allowed divorce, but Jesus is not happy about it. Church leaders, evidentally, had the authority to do so, but, according to Jesus, this was not really the will of God. I cannot help but assume that authorized Church leaders (Pope John Paul II) are not really doing the will of God, by allowing liberal annulments, either.”

NAB MARK 10:2

Then some Pharisees came up and as a test began to ask him whether it was permissible for a husband to divorce his wife. In reply he said, “What command did Moses give you? They answered, "Moses permitted divorce and the writing of a decree of divorce.” But Jesus told them: "He wrote that commandment for you because of your stubbornness. At the beginning of creation God made them male and female; for this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and the two shall become as one. They are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore let no man separate what God has joined." Back in the house again, the disciples began to question him about this. He told them, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her; and the woman who divorces her husband and marries another commits adultery."

​

Peace in Christ,
Steven Merten
www.ILOVEYOUGOD.com

 

[triciafrancess]

Steven Merten:

According to the Church, my friend’s brother and his wife, with an accumulation of nine annulments, so far, now has a marriage equivalent to someone who faithfully spends fifty years, through sickness and health, in good times and bad, with their spouce. If they had not gotten the nine annulments they would be in a constant state of adultery through divorce.

I’m confused. Are you saying it would be better for your brother’s friend and his wife to live in a constant state of adultery, rather than in a state of grace?

I don’t understand why you (or anyone) is so offended by someone else’s annulment. I suppose the interpretation of “liberal” depends on your own interpretation. Many adults who want to convert to Catholicism – myself included – are shocked to find out they need to obtain annulments from former marriages, or that a spouse (who might not even be converting) needs to obtain an annulment.

While I now fully support the Church’s position on marriage, I was not aware of it as a protestant, and I didn’t know that remarriage after a divorce is immoral – but the Church still held me and anyone who wants to enter her, accountable for acts they committed before we had full knowledge they were wrong – and, unlike other sins that are washed clean with baptism or can be forgiven in confession, remarriage after divorce is not. How in any way do you interpret that as liberal? The Church takes marriage very, very seriously.

Would you like to see potential Catholics barred from the Church with no recourse for past mistakes? Would you like to see converts divorce their current spouses so they could join the Church. Technically, that would be okay (since it’s the remarriage part that’s sinful – not the divorce necessarily), but would it be moral to break up a family so that one party could fulfill his or her personal desire to become Catholic?

You have my sympathy and commiseration if you have suffered pain due to an annulment. It is difficult and painful even for the person who is seeking it. I will pray tonight for everyone’s marriage, whether it be of 50 days or 50 years, and I also pray that God will heal your pain and anger,

Tricia Frances

 

[Wormwood]

This question is biased. Neither harms marriages. Homosexual marriage does not, in anyway, effect anyone other than the two people involved. What they choose to do with their lives has no bearing on you or your marriage. Would you be offended if people of another religion wanted to get married? They pray to Vishnu and are joined in holy union under their “pagan” gods …is this no less of an abomination under the same scrutinizing and often oversensative eye that deems any deviation in behavior as heresy. I am sure someone can quote extensive verse suggesting God hates homosexuals, but the truth is it is not mentioned in the ten commandments nor is it among the seven deadly sins. I would like to believe that God loves everyone, regaurdless of with whom they fall in love.
Annulments do not harm marriage so much as aleaviate the problems with it. I am sure it was easy to stay married in the biblical setting because most men were polygamists. You are not the same person at 25 that you were at 18. Personalities undergo radical changes and sometimes the person you end up with is not the person you fell in love with. My grandparents are from the traditional school of thought, and they are still together and they hate each other. I am not saying this is always or even mostly the case, just that if two people make each other miserable why should they have to wait for the other one to die for 50 years?
It is tradgic if both people don’t feel the same way, and I am sure the loss of a spouce to contempt is a hard thing to take, but should one person stay in a loveless marriage to appease the other? This gives rise to adultery, which ACTUALLY is a sin.

 

[Salena]

Tantum ergo:

Please don’t judge most of us seeking annulments as trying to cop out, or tribunals as being too liberal, or people in the situation as selfish, stupid, etc. We’re people just like you. We aren’t trying to remake God or His laws for selfish reasons, for the most part (naturally, I’m sure there are some who will abuse the process). In my case, I am not, have not, and do not plan to date, let alone marry, anyone else. I’m not trying to “get” something to which I’m not entitled, or reap “benefits”, or have “Catholic divorce” so that I can marry again.

I agree with the poster who said that a third option would also be good–SELFISHNESS. We see selfishness in both gay marriage AND in those who would attempt to MISUSE annulments but not in annulments per se. Wouldn’t you agree?

I really admire you for your stand, but I’m also confused as to why you are getting an annulment if you do not plan to marry again.
I too am going through the annulment process. I was forced to marry at the age of 16. This was not valid in the least, so I do plan to remarry in the Church if my annulment is granted.
On gay marriage?
Gay marriage is not hurting the santity of marriage. Our treatment of marriage has opened the door for them to seek it for themselves. What kind of example have we set?
Although I don’t agree with gay marriage and believe we should do all in our power to stop them, I do think our lack of treating marriage as a sacred institution is the cause. Homosexuals have witnessed our treatment of the sacrament of marriage. We marry and remarry at a whim, we put off having children, we live together and engage in sex before marriage, so why would they think the bonds of marriage are out of reach for them? We don’t treat it as holy, so why would they have any reason to feel they should be excluded?
The best way to stop gay marriage is to start treating marriage as a sacred bond.

 

[Salena]

triciafrancess:

I’m confused. Are you saying it would be better for your brother’s friend and his wife to live in a constant state of adultery, rather than in a state of grace?

I don’t understand why you (or anyone) is so offended by someone else’s annulment. I suppose the interpretation of “liberal” depends on your own interpretation. Many adults who want to convert to Catholicism – myself included – are shocked to find out they need to obtain annulments from former marriages, or that a spouse (who might not even be converting) needs to obtain an annulment.

While I now fully support the Church’s position on marriage, I was not aware of it as a protestant, and I didn’t know that remarriage after a divorce is immoral – but the Church still held me and anyone who wants to enter her, accountable for acts they committed before we had full knowledge they were wrong – and, unlike other sins that are washed clean with baptism or can be forgiven in confession, remarriage after divorce is not. How in any way do you interpret that as liberal? The Church takes marriage very, very seriously.

Would you like to see potential Catholics barred from the Church with no recourse for past mistakes? Would you like to see converts divorce their current spouses so they could join the Church. Technically, that would be okay (since it’s the remarriage part that’s sinful – not the divorce necessarily), but would it be moral to break up a family so that one party could fulfill his or her personal desire to become Catholic?

You have my sympathy and commiseration if you have suffered pain due to an annulment. It is difficult and painful even for the person who is seeking it. I will pray tonight for everyone’s marriage, whether it be of 50 days or 50 years, and I also pray that God will heal your pain and anger,

Tricia Frances

It’s obvious she’s not saying her brother should live in a constant state of adultry. She’s saying why does he keep divorcing and remarrying and why does the Church keep annuling his prior marriages? How can marriage be taken seriously when we know we can have it annuled if it does not work out?
The Abbot in our diocese told me himself that 99.9% of all divorces are annuled by the Tibunal. It has become so fashionable here that priest are taking it on themselves to annul marriages in their parishes. They may not be valid annulments, but those seeking them feel they are. The priests sees no sense in going to the all the trouble and expense since the majority will be annuled anyway.
This doesn’t hurt marriage?
And potential Catholics nor Catholics themselves will be barred for divorcing. They will be excomminicated for remarrying.
Christ Himself said: “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultry…” You can of course divorce if your spouse is cheating, you just can’t remarry. And also, “Take up your cross and follow me…” and “The road to salvation is narrow and how few there are who choose to follow it…(sorry, not an exact quote, but you get the picture)”
So are you saying God will forgive us for taking the easy way out? Or God will forgive us because we didn’t want to be alone or feel in love again? I don’t think I want to find out.
What it comes down to is the Church will do anything neccesary to keep the pews filled. This is sad and very harmful to the Church.

 

[Ken]

Makerteacher:

Um, what explosion? Can you back that comment up with valid statistics? I am unaware of the number of annulments applied for or granted.

I do know that, of two friends (whose husbands both committed adultery and left them with the kids), one Decree of Nullity was granted and one was not, due to the various circumstances of the original marriage.

One of the major news magazines (Time, Newsweek, US News) reported last year that there were 300 annulments in 1960 and 22,000 in 2001. If I had the reference I’d provide it.

 

[Ken]

**Tricia wrote:

I don’t understand why you (or anyone) is so offended by someone else’s annulment. **

It’s really none or our business, just as divorce in society is none of the Church’s business.

But if the Church takes a stand that divorce should be prohibited, and if Church members take the same stand, then Catholic annulment is fair game for criticism.

 

[JimG]

Ken:

One of the major news magazines (Time, Newsweek, US News) reported last year that there were 300 annulments in 1960 and 22,000 in 2001. If I had the reference I’d provide it.

Thats the number provided in this article from Homiletic and Pastoral Review: catholic.net/RCC/Periodicals/Homiletic/11-96/8/8.html

In the early 1960’s there were about 300 annulments per year granted in America.

Now there are 60,000 per year.

The article was written several years ago, so the number may have changed by now.

JimG