Does Increasing Annulments Increase The Divorce Rate?

[southern california guy]

Okay, I'll try to tackle this. And I'll start by saying that I totally agree with "HisChildForever" on this. Excellent points!


Here's an example that I think argues that annulments encourage divorce. It's from the greenspun.com Catholic forum. (http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=00B3EI)

--------------

[font="Arial"] I disagree with the two authors above.

In the United States, Catholics used to abhor divorce and avoid it if at all possible, even living separate lives but still honoring the marriage vow to some extent depending on the individuals involved. The slim to zero possibilty of getting an annulment actually inhibited people from seeking divorce.

Thats simply not the case now as annulments are relatively easy to come by, given enough time, and if the case is structured the right way and filed with the right tribunal. As John Paul II has stated in his 2003 address to the Sacred Roman Rota, people filing for annulments, by and large, have lost sight of the sacramental nature of marriage.

I don't have any idea how the person above (John Placette) can make the blanket statement that increased annulment rate has no effect on the divorce rate. There is no factual or intuitive basis for that assertion.

In my case, I can assure you that my divorce was directly caused by the increased availability of annulments. It was in the forefront of my wife's reasoning for leaving the marriage, and she comes from a family where annulments are quite common. The sad truth was that in my case, there was zero effort to to save the marriage. I have since found out that the reasoning my wife followed was that "the marriage does not exist, therefore we cannot be wasteful in expending effort to save it."

So intuitively, and empirically, I assert that in the United States, the annulment rate does affect and has increased the divorce rate among Catholics.

Pat

-- Pat Delaney (PatrickRDelaney@yahoo.com), July 14, 2003. [/font]

----------------

He argues that people -- whose parents got an "annulment" -- are likely to divorce. He's not implying that there was a problem at the time they got married. He's implying that they had problems later down the road in the marriage. And he argues that his wife made no effort to save the marriage. The argument that the marriage never existed allowed her to divorce him with a clear conscience -- never considering that she was breaking vows or doing anything wrong. It was too easy of an excuse. And because of her upbringing marriage didn't mean as much to her as it did to him. According to my mom NOBODY ever really has full knowledge of what a marriage is -- until they get married and experience it.

Children who's parents got divorced are also more likely to divorce or not marry at all according to Wolfinger ( http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m4021/is_ISSN_0163-4089/ai_57483843/ ). He writes that in the 70's kids from divorced families were 2.5 times more likely to get divorced themselves. In 1996 he found that the kids from divorced families were still more likely to divorce (1.4 times) but that fewer kids from divorced families were marrying at all.

People get annulments so that they can remarry in the Catholic church. But the statistics on second and third marriages are not very good.

"According to enrichment journal on the divorce rate in America: ( http://www.divorcerate.org/ )

The divorce rate in America for first marriage is 41%
The divorce rate in America for second marriage is 60%
The divorce rate in America for third marriage is 73%"

So this would imply that the Catholic church is inviting divorce by remarrying Catholics. The kids from the second marriages -- that divorced -- would also be more likely to divorce, so a vicious cycle is created.

Since the institution of marriage (Which include vows and commitments) is really about providing a stable relationship to raise kids in (The Family). Divorce isn't so bad if there were no kids in the first marriage. But I'm guessing that these people would be more likely to get a divorce in their second marriage.

I'm guessing that kids whose parents got divorced, got annulments, and remarried are also more likely them to follow the same pattern themselves. Therefore increasing annulments -- also increases divorce. And the statistics in the Catholic church seem to bear that out.

"In all of these cases, the reason must be grave and the evidence that there never was a valid
marriage must be clear. That’s why only 338 annulments were granted in 1968 in the U.S.,
when the pre-Vatican II teaching on marriage was still held by most.

However, with the explosion of the post-Vatican II apostasy, the teaching of the indissolubility of
marriage has been thrown out the window along with the other dogmas. From 1984 to 1994, the
Vatican II Church in the U.S. granted just under 59,000 annually, even though the number of
Catholic marriages has fallen one third since 1965!"
( http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/28_Annulments.pdf )

"Perhaps as few as 10 percent of divorced Catholics even bother to seek an annulment."
(http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:Y1h2GNKsAIIJ:findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_5_39/ai_94873028/+percent+marriages+annulled+1968&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us)

So we must have something like 600,000 Catholic divorces annually in the US.


Are we seeing the impacts of a whole generation of Catholics from broken homes in the US Catholic church today?

Edited January 18, 2010 by southern california guy

[CatherineM]

My parents were both divorced. In fact, they weren't married to each other until my mom needed the paperwork in order to file for Social Security. My mother's first marriage was annulled, my father's wasn't. Not because it was turned down, he had automatic grounds, but because he refused to file. He didn't believe in it. I was raised by my mom and dad, so it's not like I came from a broken home. I don't believe in divorce which seems strange to say since I filed many divorces in my legal career. My husband and I agreed from the beginning that divorce would never be an option. That means we actually have to work things out. Besides, he'd be scared to face me in court.

[Jaime]

State your evidence that annulments are on the rise. there may be a rise in the rate of requests, but I have a feeling the number of annulments has been dropping.

[zunshynn]

[quote name='aalpha1989' date='17 January 2010 - 03:21 PM' timestamp='1263766881' post='2039286']
What HCF and CatherineM have said may be true, but I'm willing to bet that the increase in annulments has deceived couples about the Church's true position. In my experience (all 20 years, I know,) [u]there have been tons of annulments which were admittedly granted when they shouldn't have been.[/u] The couples choose to believe that because the "Church" has said it is ok, they have successfully avoided any concurrence of guilt.
Annulments aren't just seen as Catholic divorce, they're used as Catholic divorce.[/quote]

Prove that. I'm not saying that people have not manipulated the system, but if an annulment has been granted, it's not your place to judge whether or not it is legitimate.

[Norseman82]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='17 January 2010 - 07:21 PM' timestamp='1263774073' post='2039349']
When your grandparents got married, our society wasn't built around throw away things. We repaired radios and TV's. Anyone remember going to the grocery store for a tube to replace in a TV with a burned out one. It was like changing a light bulb. Toasters and coffee pots lasted forever. Now it is cheaper to throw away and buy new.

People entered marriage knowing that divorce was not an option. The only people who got divorced back then were ones married to people who were drunks or disappeared. Then they were pretty much ostracized by friends and family. Today, friends will throw you divorce parties almost like a coming out party that you are back on the market.

It doesn't help that we are all looking for Mr. Right or the perfect woman. 50+ years ago, a marriage was between two people who didn't expect everything to be perfect.
[/quote]

When my grandparents got married, I don't even know if there were radios and TVs!!!

Anyway, I don't know if what has changed was the maturity level as much as the fact that we now have no-fault divorce.

Another thing: the old Baltimore Catechism listed the six precepts of the Church, one of them being to obey the Church's marriage laws. In fact, there was an explicit statement in the old Baltimore Catechism regarding Catholics who married before protestant ministers instead of Catholic priests that such marriages incurred excommunication and Catholics were not to attend or [b]even give gifts[/b] in those cases. Now, when I read the new CCC promulgated in the 1990s, I do not even see the precept "obey the marriage laws of the Church" listed?

[southern california guy]

[quote name='zunshynn' date='17 January 2010 - 09:01 PM' timestamp='1263787310' post='2039443']
Prove that. I'm not saying that people have not manipulated the system, but if an annulment has been granted, it's not your place to judge whether or not it is legitimate.
[/quote]

Here's a Catholic News Service story about annulments that I found interesting. ( http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0900437.htm )

[color="#000080"][b]Pope cautions tribunals against granting annulments too easily[/b]

By Cindy Wooden
Catholic News Service

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Granting marriage annulments too easily and without real cause plays into a modern form of pessimism that basically says human beings are not able to make lifelong commitments to loving another person, Pope Benedict XVI said.

"We run the risk of falling into an anthropological pessimism which, in the light of today's cultural situation, considers it almost impossible to marry," the pope said in a speech Jan. 29 to members of the Tribunal of the Roman Rota.

The tribunal mainly deals with appeals filed in marriage annulment cases.

Pope Benedict said there is still a need to deal with a problem Pope John Paul II pointed out in a 1987 speech to the Roman Rota, that of saving the church community from "the scandal of seeing the value of Christian marriage destroyed in practice by the exaggerated and almost automatic multiplication of declarations of nullity."

Pope Benedict said he agreed with Pope John Paul that too often members of church tribunals see a failed marriage and grant the annulment on the basis of an ill-defined case of "immaturity or psychic weakness."

According to canon law, the validity of a marriage requires that both the man and woman freely and publicly consent to the union and that they have the psychological capacity to assume the obligations of marriage.

Pope Benedict said tribunal judges must remember there is a difference between the full maturity and understanding that people should strive to develop over time and "canonical maturity, which is the minimum point of departure for the validity of a marriage."

In addition, he said, granting an annulment on the basis of the "psychic incapacity" of the husband or wife requires that the tribunal establish and document the fact that the person had a serious psychological or psychiatric problem at the time the wedding was celebrated.

In defending the permanent and sacramental nature of marriage, tribunals are not making life difficult for couples that want to split up, the pope said.

Defending the marriage bond gives witness to the fact that the ability to love and to pledge oneself to another forever is part of human nature, he said.

The church's insistence that it is possible for the vast majority of people to make a lasting commitment to marriage can help couples "discover the natural reality of marriage and the importance it has in the plan of salvation," Pope Benedict said.

It is true that human nature is limited and imperfect, but that does not mean that people, "exercising human freedom supported by grace," cannot make a commitment to loving each other and raising a family together, he said.[/color]

[Norseman82]

[quote name='southern california guy' date='17 January 2010 - 08:09 PM' timestamp='1263776977' post='2039386']

Are we seeing the impacts of a whole generation of Catholics from broken homes in the US Catholic church today?
[/quote]

Here's another thing to chew on: how many priests today have close family members who are divorced, or are even children of divorce themselves? I honestly believe that is affecting some of their ability to speak out forcefully enough against this scourge.

[CatherineM]

The Pope also recently made a small change to Canon Law regarding annulments. In the past, all Catholics, from those who were baptized but not raised Catholic all the way to the most devout Catholic you have ever met, were required to be married in church. Fallen away Catholics who married outside the church got automatic annulments, but not Protestants, who were not under the same requirements. Now, if you have left the Church, that requirement is no longer in affect, so no automatic annulments. It will be interesting to learn how the various tribunals define the line of when you leave the Church. It could mean anyone who joins another church, or only those who have formally resigned. I suspect that some tribunals will go one way, some the other, and eventually it will be ironed out by the Roman Rota.

[southern california guy]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='17 January 2010 - 06:59 PM' timestamp='1263779949' post='2039412']
My parents were both divorced. In fact, they weren't married to each other until my mom needed the paperwork in order to file for Social Security. My mother's first marriage was annulled, my father's wasn't. Not because it was turned down, he had automatic grounds, but because he refused to file. He didn't believe in it. I was raised by my mom and dad, so it's not like I came from a broken home. I don't believe in divorce which seems strange to say since I filed many divorces in my legal career. My husband and I agreed from the beginning that divorce would never be an option. That means we actually have to work things out. Besides, he'd be scared to face me in court.
[/quote]

Did your parents have kids from their first marriages? It's a good thing that your parents second marriage worked out.

I guess that I've been thinking about this lately because I have been listening to Dr Laura Schlessinger on the radio and it seems that the majority of the problems people have involve divorce and the kids caught in the middle of it. I guess that I'm pretty lucky because I have parents who would have never considered divorce.

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='zunshynn' date='17 January 2010 - 11:01 PM' timestamp='1263787310' post='2039443']
Prove that. I'm not saying that people have not manipulated the system, but if an annulment has been granted, it's not your place to judge whether or not it is legitimate.
[/quote]

I know people who openly discuss falsefying documents and lying to tribunals.

[southern california guy]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='17 January 2010 - 08:58 PM' timestamp='1263787119' post='2039442']
State your evidence that annulments are on the rise. there may be a rise in the rate of requests, but I have a feeling the number of annulments has been dropping.
[/quote]

I don't know what the latest statistics are. I hope you're right that they have fallen a little. I've read (I'll find a reference) that something like 97% of all annulments applied for in the US are granted. That's almost one hundred percent..

Here's a quote from an article on a Catholic website:
( http://www.cmri.org/97prog9-1.htm )

[color="#8B0000"]Since the advent of Vatican Council II, the number of annulments in the United States has escalated to a phenomenal proportion. Why, may we ask, has this taken place? Joseph P. Zwach, modern “Catholic” author and civil lawyer, in his well-circulated book Annulment: Your Chance to Remarry within the Catholic Church states:

“Ever since the Church began recognizing psychological grounds for annulments in 1970, there’s been an absolute explosion in their number. In 1968, for example, only 338 annulments were granted in this country. In 1978, more than 27,000 were granted — an increase of 8000%. Last year, I estimate more than 52,000 were granted.”

Prior to Vatican II, the only psychological grounds accepted for annulments were those in which one of the parties to the marriage did not possess the use of reason. Be that as it may, it had to be established with certainty that the one party so lacked the use of reason as to be incapable of a human act of the will to consent to the marriage contract.

The official numbers of annulments in the United States since the Second Vatican Council are as follows:

1984 - 36,461
1985 - 53,320
1987 - 60,570
1988 - 50,000
1989 - 61,416
1990 - 62,824

Let us compare the numbers above with the 392 annulments granted by the Catholic Church world-wide for all the years between 1952 and 1956.
[/color]

[CatherineM]

[quote name='aalpha1989' date='17 January 2010 - 10:53 PM' timestamp='1263790430' post='2039475']
I know people who openly discuss falsefying documents and lying to tribunals.
[/quote]
That never happened on my watch. Had I heard of even a rumor of such a thing happening, I would have reported it immediately. I never put a witness on the stand in civil court or the tribunal that I knew intended to lie. I'm not sure how an individual could falsify documents since we only accepted documents directly from the issuing source such as a court clerk, or a parish. Those documents don't go through the applicant's hands.

If you truly have first hand knowledge of such fraud before the tribunal, you have the moral duty to report it. If it isn't first hand knowledge, then it is just gossip.

[zunshynn]

[quote name='aalpha1989' date='17 January 2010 - 09:53 PM' timestamp='1263790430' post='2039475']
I know people who openly discuss falsefying documents and lying to tribunals.
[/quote]

"Tons" of people?

[CatherineM]

[quote name='southern california guy' date='17 January 2010 - 10:46 PM' timestamp='1263790017' post='2039470']
Did your parents have kids from their first marriages? It's a good thing that your parents second marriage worked out.

[/quote]
My dad had two sons, my mom had two, and then they had me and my youngest brother. There's 19 years difference between me and my oldest brother. Between the 5 of them, they have had 12 wives. I didn't get married until I was 43. I believe watching my brothers divorce and child support and visitation issues, etc, influenced my not wanting to get married or have kids until I was really sure. My parents though, I didn't really think about them being divorced. I thought it was normal for brothers to have different last names. My dad never treated his step-sons any differently than he did his "real" kids. When my mom and dad got together my older brothers were 3 and 5 years old, so I'm sure that made a big difference.

It also wasn't unusual that my parents didn't receive communion. There were lots of parents from my school who didn't. I wonder if we are just more willing to go through the invasion that the annulment process can bring now. When I was a kid, there were lots of divorced people, they just didn't receive communion.

[tinytherese]

What seems to be the real problems why divorce is so common is because this "sexual revolution" really screwed things up. Also, today most people don't seem to realize what love is apart from wonderful feelings. A lot of what went on during the feminist movement didn't help either, along with Roe vs. Wade. I agree that no fault divorce also played a significant role. Not to mention, poor catechesis in parishes, Catholic schools, and homes. (When it comes to Catholics falling away from the faith in many cases and people not seeing why things like contraception, premarital sex, cohabitating, and abortion are immoral.) Also, people who engage in sex prior to marriage and don't change their ways are significantly more likely to get divorced because they haven't trained themselves in faithfulness and haven't learned self-control either. With that comes the higher liklihood for affairs and infidelity is one of the most common reasons why people divorce these days.

Some people don't even seem that motivated to try to fix their marriages once they start having problems. They just throw the baby out with the bathwater so fast. For others, it seems as if they expect marriage to be their perfect happily ever after where everything is just peachy keen and then when reality hits they just figure that they just weren't right for them so they split. Other times, people seem to end marriage because one or both parties was just being selfish. In-laws can even break up couples.

Finally, it seems as if couples don't talk about important issues like children, finances, etc. before the wedding. With that, they don't have a game plan for how their marriage will be or they may even find out too late they didn't find out about important things about their spouse before the wedding. I remember my spanish teacher in high school telling us about her brother who got married and then later divorced his wife because he found out that she didn't want to have children, but he did. So they split. If they would have discussed this before, they might not even have gotten married at all and it would be one less broken up marriage. I think that courtship really needs to be revived today. That way we can better discern if we are marrying the right person. People need to understand that their heart is not the only part to be used when choosing a spouse, but also their head. People claim that "love is blind," but as Jason Evert once put it "Love has its eyes wide open."