Annulments Poll

[southern california guy]

[quote name='jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff)' timestamp='1288459364' post='2183664']
Well to be fair I think you both are confused on some the subtler aspects of annulment. It wasn't a shot. And its not always clear cut that if a person never gets married in a Catholic ceremony that its obviously invalid. That's why there's an annulment process.
[/quote]

If somebody had a civil marriage, and a civil divorce, do they need to get an annulment before they can remarry in the Catholic church? I was assuming that they did.

[Norseman82]

Rich,

Ome of the commandments of the Church is to observe the Church laws on marriage, so if a Catholic decided to get married civilly instead of sacramentally, they are already in hot water.

[Jaime]

[quote name='southern california guy' timestamp='1288462250' post='2183673']
If somebody had a civil marriage, and a civil divorce, do they need to get an annulment before they can remarry in the Catholic church? I was assuming that they did.
[/quote]

yes

[MithLuin]

[i]*sigh*[/i]

Yet another thread on annulments? I think these conversations would be more worthwhile if we kept them all in the same place. I don't mind starting new threads rather than performing thread necromancy on an old thread from 2 years ago, but when we already have about three active threads on the topic, started by the same posters....do we really need a new thread to address these questions?

[southern california guy]

[quote name='MithLuin' timestamp='1288470315' post='2183705']
[i]*sigh*[/i]

Yet another thread on annulments? I think these conversations would be more worthwhile if we kept them all in the same place. I don't mind starting new threads rather than performing thread necromancy on an old thread from 2 years ago, but when we already have about three active threads on the topic, started by the same posters....do we really need a new thread to address these questions?
[/quote]

I have three active threads? I thought that I only had two. I'll have to go and look. This was an attempt at a poll, but the silence of votes is deafening..

[Jaime]

[quote name='southern california guy' timestamp='1288471161' post='2183708']
I have three active threads? I thought that I only had two. I'll have to go and look. This was an attempt at a poll, but the silence of votes is deafening..
[/quote]

Its because your questions don't have anything to do with anything that makes sense.

Here is an example of a question that is exactly like the questions in your poll.

If Bob and Susan decide they are going to go to Disneyworld for their vacation but along the way, they get lost and go to SeaWorld. And since they are morons, they don't realize till years later that they went to Seaworld. Can they ever say they went to Disneyworld?

the examples in your poll had self evident answers If their marriage was declared annulled then it was never sacramental. there is no need for anyone to ask the question.


Now if you want to have a discussion as to WHY they were annulled that's another topic

[MithLuin]

You have two active threads besides this one: 'Should the Catholic Church allow all Divorcees to Remarry?' and 'Morality - According to Me (I don't agree with everything the Church teaches)'.

In addition to that, Michael Filo has a thread entitled 'Annulments'

So, yes, there were three current/active threads on the topic of marriage and annulment of marriage in the Catholic Church when you started this thread. And, predictably, the people who replied in the other threads were a bit burned out/uninterested in rehashing the topic, so the replies you got here merely confused the issue. We've already posted in detail about how the process of annulment works, when and why it is given, etc. But since you've started a new thread, those posts aren't visible, and people are just posting random stuff that comes to mind, taking us back to square one.

It's frustrating.

[southern california guy]

[quote name='jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff) (the artist formerly known as hot stuff) (the artist formerly known as hot stuff) (the artist formerly known as hot stuff)' timestamp='1288479283' post='2183737']
Its because your questions don't have anything to do with anything that makes sense.

Here is an example of a question that is exactly like the questions in your poll.

If Bob and Susan decide they are going to go to Disneyworld for their vacation but along the way, they get lost and go to SeaWorld. And since they are morons, they don't realize till years later that they went to Seaworld. Can they ever say they went to Disneyworld?

the examples in your poll had self evident answers If their marriage was declared annulled then it was never sacramental. there is no need for anyone to ask the question.


Now if you want to have a discussion as to WHY they were annulled that's another topic
[/quote]

I would argue that what they thought that they did didn't make any difference -- since they are morons. It was what they actually did that mattered.

I would also approve of annulling a marriage if the people who took the vows were mentally retarded and didn't know what they were doing, or if they were mentally insane -- and didn't know what they were doing. The people in my examples were neither. However I wouldn't grant a second marriage to people who'd been proven mentally incompetent.

Edited October 31, 2010 by southern california guy

[southern california guy]

[quote name='MithLuin' timestamp='1288484632' post='2183756']
You have two active threads besides this one: 'Should the Catholic Church allow all Divorcees to Remarry?' and 'Morality - According to Me (I don't agree with everything the Church teaches)'.

In addition to that, Michael Filo has a thread entitled 'Annulments'

So, yes, there were three current/active threads on the topic of marriage and annulment of marriage in the Catholic Church when you started this thread. And, predictably, the people who replied in the other threads were a bit burned out/uninterested in rehashing the topic, so the replies you got here merely confused the issue. We've already posted in detail about how the process of annulment works, when and why it is given, etc. But since you've started a new thread, those posts aren't visible, and people are just posting random stuff that comes to mind, taking us back to square one.

It's frustrating.
[/quote]

Well I never said that I was a genius.

[Jaime]

[quote name='southern california guy' timestamp='1288485182' post='2183758']
I would argue that what they thought that they did didn't make any difference -- since they are morons. [b]It was what they actually did that mattered.
[/b]

[/quote]

exactly why its the same as your three examples. Its what they did (or didn't do) that matters. In all three of your examples, they DIDN'T get married

[southern california guy]

[quote name='jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff)' timestamp='1288540822' post='2183817']
exactly why its the same as your three examples. Its what they did (or didn't do) that matters. In all three of your examples, they DIDN'T get married
[/quote]

In the first example which involved a civil marriage we don't know if the guy intended to stay with her for the rest of his life -- and then changed him mind later when he moved for work and met the girlfriend that he married.

But in the second example you'd argue that he didn't really mean it -- so in god's eyes there wasn't really a marriage.

jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff) we could argue back and forth about this but as I see it, it's a question of morality. Let's take marriage out of the discussion. For arguments sake let's say that a guy tells his girlfriend that he'll always stay with her and he'll never cheat on her. They have kids, and they're together for a number of years, but then he meets this hot young babe and he leaves his original girlfriend and the kids.

Now they were never married. The only commitment was a verbal one. But when he left her he broke the commitment. And the kids were separated from their father. I argue that what he did was immoral and wrong.

In the Ten Commandments there's the commandment "Thou shalt not take the Lord thy Gods name in vain." And many people interpret that to mean that you don't take vows to god that you don't intend to keep.

To me it's a question of morality. If you swear to god (out loud) that you intend to stay with a particular woman for the rest of your life, and you do it in front of her family as well as your own. And then you go and create kids with her. Than you beaver dam better try to keep those vows -- for the sake of the kids if nothing else!

The argument that you didn't really mean them is a pretty weak one to me. The woman you married, her family, as well as your own heard you say that you did. And maybe God can tell if you were lying or not -- but nobody else can! So the vow to God is only one part of the commitment. And it is a commitment whether you meant it or not.

As far as I'm concerned a decent moral man keeps his word -- and doesn't look for ways to back out. A real man would give his life to protect his woman or his kids. He sure as hell wouldn't divorce her and desert his kids for another woman. If that isn't what the Catholic church teaches, than I don't want any part of it.

[Jaime]

[quote name='southern california guy' timestamp='1288574906' post='2183907']
In the first example which involved a civil marriage we don't know if the guy intended to stay with her for the rest of his life -- and then changed him mind later when he moved for work and met the girlfriend that he married.

But in the second example you'd argue that he didn't really mean it -- so in god's eyes there wasn't really a marriage.

jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff) (the artist formerly known as hot stuff) we could argue back and forth about this but as I see it, it's a question of morality. Let's take marriage out of the discussion. For arguments sake let's say that a guy tells his girlfriend that he'll always stay with her and he'll never cheat on her. They have kids, and they're together for a number of years, but then he meets this hot young babe and he leaves his original girlfriend and the kids.

Now they were never married. The only commitment was a verbal one. But when he left her he broke the commitment. And the kids were separated from their father. I argue that what he did was immoral and wrong.

In the Ten Commandments there's the commandment "Thou shalt not take the Lord thy Gods name in vain." And many people interpret that to mean that you don't take vows to god that you don't intend to keep.

To me it's a question of morality. If you swear to god (out loud) that you intend to stay with a particular woman for the rest of your life, and you do it in front of her family as well as your own. And then you go and create kids with her. Than you beaver dam better try to keep those vows -- for the sake of the kids if nothing else!

The argument that you didn't really mean them is a pretty weak one to me. The woman you married, her family, as well as your own heard you say that you did. And maybe God can tell if you were lying or not -- but nobody else can! So the vow to God is only one part of the commitment. And it is a commitment whether you meant it or not.

As far as I'm concerned a decent moral man keeps his word -- and doesn't look for ways to back out. A real man would give his life to protect his woman or his kids. He sure as hell wouldn't divorce her and desert his kids for another woman. If that isn't what the Catholic church teaches, than I don't want any part of it.
[/quote]


Ok well this kind of goes to my point that you don't understand the process of annulment. There are several grounds for annulment. (BTW Catherine is far better at talking about this) but the point of the tribunal is to find out if the marriage was valid in the first place. It doesn't ever say "You were once sacramentally married and now you're not.

Also sticking around is not always what is best for the kids. Its a nice thing to say real loud "STICK IT OUT FOR THE KIDS DANGIT" but sometimes that does more damage.

Here's the deal. If two people are validly and sacramentally married, they have every opportunity to succeed. If they aren't, they can still make it but its tougher.

[southern california guy]

[quote name='jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff) (the artist formerly known as hot stuff) (the artist formerly known as hot stuff)' timestamp='1288579140' post='2183913']
Ok well this kind of goes to my point that you don't understand the process of annulment. There are several grounds for annulment. (BTW Catherine is far better at talking about this) but the point of the tribunal is to find out if the marriage was valid in the first place. It doesn't ever say "You were once sacramentally married and now you're not.

Also sticking around is not always what is best for the kids. Its a nice thing to say real loud "STICK IT OUT FOR THE KIDS DANGIT" but sometimes that does more damage.

Here's the deal. If two people are validly and sacramentally married, they have every opportunity to succeed. If they aren't, they can still make it but its tougher.
[/quote]

I'm wasting my time with this thread. Why is it any more important to stick it out if it's a sacramental marriage than if it's not?

If there's trouble in a sacramental marriage why is any better for the kids if you stick it out? If your definition of a sacramental marriage is one where there is no trouble than all divorces by definition resulted from marriages that were "invalid".

It sounds to me like this is personal to you. Did you get divorced? Sorry but I don't support your position.

Edited November 1, 2010 by southern california guy

[Jaime]

[quote name='southern california guy' timestamp='1288580122' post='2183915']
I'm wasting my time with this thread. Why is it any more important to stick it out if it's a sacramental marriage than if it's not?
[/quote]
Dude its your thread about annulments. If anyone is wasting his time its the rest of us.
[quote]
If there's trouble in a sacramental marriage why is any better for the kids if you stick it out? If your definition of a sacramental marriage is one where there is no trouble than all divorces by definition resulted from marriages that were "invalid".

It sounds to me like this is personal to you. Did you get divorced? Sorry but I don't support your position.
[/quote]

You so don't understand what it means to have a sacramental marriage. You're making a lot of assumptions based on what you perceive as facts but are misconceptions in your head. No I'm not divorced. This isn't a personal issue for me and I'm sorry you don't support my position but the Church does.

[southern california guy]

[quote name='jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff) (the artist formerly known as hot stuff) (the artist formerly known as hot stuff) (the artist formerly known as hot stuff) (the artist formerly known as hot stuff) (the artist formerly known as hot stuff) (the artist formerly known as hot stuff)(the artist formerly known as hot stuff)(the artist formerly known as hot stuff)(the artist formerly known as hot stuff)(the artist formerly known as hot stuff)(the artist formerly known as hot stuff)(the artist formerly known as hot stuff)' timestamp='1288579140' post='2183913']
Also sticking around is not always what is best for the kids. Its a nice thing to say real loud "STICK IT OUT FOR THE KIDS DANGIT" but sometimes that does more damage.
[/quote]

Jamie, what is the point of a marriage? Why is it not okay to have sex when you're single, but fine when you're married? How does the institution of marriage give stability to our society? Why is it better for kids if their parents are married than if they're single? (I'm trying to get you to say that a marriage is a committed relationship that ensures that the kids will grow up with a father and a mother)

I clearly have a completely different perspective on marriage and what is and isn't moral behavior.

How is it moral to enter into an "invalid" marriage and have sex, and create kids? How is that any more moral than living with your girlfriend and having kids with her before you separate. What is the difference?

"Adultery" is merely an immoral act.

Anyway I think I'm going to leave this as my last post on this subject.

And I'm going to call it quits for tonight. My computer is doing something strange. Supposedly I have a virus, but I think that the pop up window that reported the virus is the virus.

Edited November 1, 2010 by southern california guy