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

[bquinnan]

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.

In other words, yes! The Church beleives that annulment, regardless of whether a person has had one, ten or a hundred annulments, is OK and even one divorce is not OK.

A friend of mine was showing me pictures of his brother’s wedding. I said, “What kind of Church is that? It sure looks like a Catholic Church!” My friend said, “Oh, it is a Catholic Church. My brother got his four previous marriages annuled and his wife got her five marriages annuled. They wanted a nice Catholic wedding to please mom.”

Peace in Christ,
Steven Merten
www.ILOVEYOUGOD.com

If he didn’t get the first marriage annulled until after the remaining four, the other four would have been almost automatically invalid. Then he would just have to show why the first marriage was invalid and get that annuled.

This isn’t entirely impossible – I know so many people (some Catholic) who were raised with a warped view of marriage and don’t consider it a permanent commitment when they make it. If this many and his wife had been in that situation and had only later come to accept the Church’s definition of marriage, it might well be that their previous marriages were invalid.

But I agree with those who say that the Church needs to work on fighting these misconceptions before the wedding. I also have to say that divorce may be at least as damaging to families in America as homosexual mock-marriages will be. It’s far more common, and it is precisely why so many people go into marriage believing it to be a revokable commitment.

I think this culture of divorce may have opened the door to gay “marriages.” After all, a “marriage” following a divorce is essentially a sham, but people – and the government – have accepted them. Now we’re being asked to accept another sham. But I shudder for the children to be raised in these households even more than I do for those growing up in homes where divorce and remarriage are the rule.

 

[bquinnan]

‘Homosexual marriage’ is an objective evil that can not be reconciled with the will of God. “Liberal Church Annulments” is an insult used by judgemental people whose actions can not be reconciled with the will of God.

The church is given the authority to investigate and determine if a declaration of nullity is warranted on a case by case basis. Their judgement is to be respected by the faithful. To forever taint those, men and women, who in good faith, have recieved a declaration of nullity with the notion that it is probablly not be valid is about as unchristian as it gets.

God Bless

Even the pope gave a warning to tribunals to make sure that the marriages they annul really are invalid, and that they should assume marriages are valid until it is proved otherwise. Therefore, it would seem consistent with Church teaching to believe that tribunals are capable of erring.

I also recall Jimmy Akin discussing on Catholic Answers Live once the fact that annulments sometimes are overturned on appeal. This probably only happens when one of the spouses is unhappy with the annulment. But in many cases, both spouses are glad to have the annulment, so they don’t look further into the validity of their first marriage. That would suggest that it is likely that some valid marriages have been erroneously annulled.

 

[LariamTox]

I suppose I have a different view than most. I am a convert and was confirmed this year. I had to have an annulment AND could not become Catholic until I got one even though neither me or my ex were Catholic. It took a year to get and was very painful for me. It was not by any means easy. It should be kept in mind though that if one or both parties lie to the tribunal then that is all the info they have to go by.

 

[terri_fortner]

Whoa! This seems a little far fetched. I know for a fact that in order to even begin the preliminary paperwork for an annulment you must be finished with all civil processes of a divorce. Not just a legal seperation, but a full fledged DIVORCE. So the fact that the woman is pleeding for her marriage to be kept in tact is not plausable, becasue it is already dissolved legally and for all civil purposes. Her marriage is over, and if she hasn’t accepted that then she needs to talk to her priest. Next, when a tribunal decides to grant an annulment it is based upon the facts they have available and their understanding of the marriage and ultimately the guidance of the Holy Spirit. When we doubt God’s ability to guide these men in their judgments to maintain the sanctity of his most Holy Union we are DOUBTING GOD. So I think we need to trust God a little more, that EVERYTHING happens because he allows it to happen and it is happening for His good and glory. If someone has been married 5 times that tells me they never entered those marriages knowing it was FOREVER. Obviously divorce was an option for them, and that violates the rule that you have to understand what marriage is for it to be valid. The hard part is, it is assumed you know what you are doing when you do it, so it must be assessed and looked at AFTER the fact to show its invalidity.

But something tells me we all knew this already. Annulments are not a sin, homosexuality is. So what the little devil (not th OP the little devil in us all) is trying to do is twist us into saying homosexual (civil) marriages are okay; which BTW they are not!
(Just my assessment of the situation)

 

[brigid12]

When the state, that which we teach our children to respect, says that marriage is not a union between just a man and a woman, but a union between two (can then grow to four, five, six,…?) people of any gender, then we not only have more problems with marriage and the family but also with more homosexual activity, polygamy, more emotional abuse, more homosexual adoptions, etc.:nope: