Annulment Vs. Divorce

[mulls]

While their ex-spouses are alive, the only time that a baptized couple can remarry after divorce is when a valid sacramental marriage never existed in the first place. If the competent authority (a diocesan marriage tribunal) establishes this fact, a decree of nullity (commonly called an annulment) can be granted, and the parties are free to remarry (CCC 1629). In this case there is no divorce followed by remarriage in God’s eyes because there was no marriage before God in the first place, merely a marriage in the eyes of men. [/quote

http://www.catholic.com/library/Permanence...f_Matrimony.asp

this seems like such a cop out.

"well, we know that God does not allow for divorce and remarriage, but if we say that people were never married in the first place, than we can let them do what they want."

that's really the way it sounds to me. a man-made loophole, so to speak.

i'm sure you'll say i'm misunderstanding. tell me why.

thanks,

sean

[Jake Huether]

You are misunderstanding, and this is why...

Marriage is a Sacrament. It is an outward sign instituted by Christ to give us Grace. Now, a Sacrament, as it was instituted by Christ, must follow a certain form in order to be valid. If I was baptised in the name of the Father only, it would NOT be a valid Sacrament; I would not be validly baptized. Same with Communion. If the Priest does not adhere to the correct form of the Sacrament, then it is not valid. Same with confession... Same too with Marriage.

If I marry someone becasue I am forced to, yet I do not freely give myself to this person, then how can that be counted as "marriage" before the eyes of God. If the eyes of God can see into my soul, they can see when a marriage is real or not. The Church therefore makes DARN sure that Catholic couples get married for REAL. Although, stubborn as we are, we find ways of muffing up the Sacrament (by lying or whatnot), and this isn't a copout, it's just true. If I don't legitimatly administer the Sacrament of Marriage with my fiancee, then we are not married.

As Iron would say... If I say 2 + 2 is 5 it doesn't make it true. If I say in front of the Church that I wish to marry my wife, yet in my heart I do NOT want to , the it is just not so.

If I seak an annulment later on, then the Church will research my case, and in light of my lie, they will know that the Sacrament is invalid (i.e. never occured).

Granted, people do inDouche make VALID vows, yet later on try to LIE to get an annulment. That is why it takes years in some cases for the Church to come to any sort of a conclusion. But make no mistakes, every declaration of nulidity is infallible (otherwise the Church could declare a valid marriage invalid - which, as the sole holder of Truth on earth, she cannot.)

Anywho... In sum... It isn't a cop out. It's just true. A Sacrament is only as valid as the form that it follows (as well as the intent of the administrator). If a marriage is not valid before the eyes of God, it is not valid. If it is, then that's a different story.

I'm sure you must know that the Church doesn't just hand out annulments...

I'll leave it at that.

[geetarplayer]

It's true. Annulments take plenty of time to be issued. Years, atleast.

-Mark

[mulls]

i know plenty of people who have had annulments, and have remarried in the church. it seems too easy, that's why i ask.

[Dave]

Probably because too many Catholics get married without truly knowing or understanding what marriage is about.

[mulls]

"...in sickness and health, to death do us part..."

how can you not understand this? aren't these sacred vows, which annulment is able to dance around?

[dUSt]

"...in sickness and health, to death do us part..."

how can you not understand this? aren't these sacred vows, which annulment is able to dance around?

Unfortunately, many people read those words, but don't undertsand that they are making a covenant with God. I mean--aren't those same words read by a justice of the peace too?

[Jake Huether]

"...in sickness and health, to death do us part..."

how can you not understand this? aren't these sacred vows, which annulment is able to dance around?

Good question...

I don't think annulment is "dancing around" it though. It are the individuals who wish to "dance around".

With ANY gift given freely (i.e. Grace through the Sacraments) there are those that will abuse it.

I don't think it is the case that people don't understand, Many do NOT WANT to know it. I think the Church is cracking down on this kind of abuse though. When I went to get married they made darn sure Erika wasn't pregnant, etc. etc. I think a lot of times the couple gets "trapped" into marriage (through sin of course). Like if the girlfriend got pregnant and they are feeling "pressure" from the parents, etc. The Church cannot know if the couple is lying, or whatever. For a valid Sacrament to take place, valid vows must take place.

I don't think couples really understand the SERIOUSNESS of "till death...", which really stems FIRST from the couple not understanding the SERIOUSNESS of sin.

And you can't really blame the Church. She goes through all the steps necessary, short of doing a formal background check on you. You understand, don't you, that the Church, infallible as she is, cannot make US infallible also. She cannot produce a polygraph test for each and every couple that want's to be married. Marriage is a Sacrament that is administered by the party "wanting" to be married. The Church is simply the main witness.

If it "seemed easy" to get an annullment, therefore, it wasn't the Church that made it easy. Rather, it is the couple that is making it easy on themselves by sinning and not wishing really to enter the Sacramental life. The road to hell is wide and easy.

You can look at it this way also. You already know that the annullment says that the marriage never took place. Well, "marriage" isn't given by the Church, it is given by the couple. The Church is the main witness. If the couple lies to the Church, the Church can NOT be accountable for "giving" a false Sacrament. If the vow wasn't said correctly, then God knew, and no Sacramental Grace was given. In the end the burden falls on the Church to sort out the couples lies, or whatever, in an effort to know if that Grace was present.

The Church isn't the culprit... The Church, in essence, is the victim... Not only did she do what she could to ensure a valid Sacrament (short of giving it herself), but in the end it is her duty (like any good Mother) to sort out the conflicts and take care of her children.

My guess is that the majority of those getting "annullments" are not even "Catholic" at the time. I know of a couple who is going through the process. The were married before (to other people) NOT in the Church. But by the grace of God they are now converts to the Faith and wish to start anew with the CORRECT understanding of "till death do you part".

[mulls]

With ANY gift given freely (i.e. Grace through the Sacraments) there are those that will abuse it.

so, rather than trying to absolve this abuse for the benefit of all parties, including the Church, the Church instead chooses to say that the marriage was never qualified in the first place?

[Luke2219]

Good replies. I'd like to add a few things.

First, are you sure an annullment is infallible? I'm not so sure about that. The couple could lie, and how can the Church see inside someone's heart?

Second, I was concerned when I learned how many annulments there have been in the past few years and how they have been increasing. My first reaction was that the Church needed to stop giving them away like candy. But after further reflection, I realized that if there are more annulments, that means that there are more invalid marriages. In other words, it's not because the Church is giving them out too easy, but because we're letting people get married too easily. Our couples need to be taught better about what marriage is. And they aren't going to hear it anywhere else but from the Church.

How many couples would be able to honestly say that they would be open to children from beginning to end? If a couple is already using contraception, that can invalidate the marriage because they didn't intend to give ALL of themselves to each other.

Also, how many men or women could say that they would remain faithful to their spouse for the rest of their lives even if their spouse was not faithful to them? It seems to me that most people in today's culture think that if your spouse cheats on them, then the marriage is over.

Also, how many people realize that love isn't something you fall in and out of? Love is something you DO even when you don't FEEL like it.

We're battling this anti-life, anti-family, culture and the rising number of annulments shows that we're losing.

We're not copping-out by granting annulments; we're letting our faithful cop-out at the alter.

[Good Friday]

so, rather than trying to absolve this abuse for the benefit of all parties, including the Church, the Church instead chooses to say that the marriage was never qualified in the first place?

The problem is that Matrimony is a Sacrament, though, and as a Sacrament is has some requirements that must be met before it's valid. One's Baptism would be totally invalid if one were over the age of reason and did not believe in Jesus Christ, for instance. One's Confession would be totally invalid if one were not truly contrite.

With the Sacrament of Matrimony, you are receiving a Sacrament that has prerequisites as well as entering into a covenant that has conditions. Failure to meet those prerequisites and accept those conditions results in an invalid marriage. For instance, if someone enters into a marriage with the intention of never having children, the marriage is invalid. It is a prerequisite of the Sacrament that one must be open to children, and it is a condition of the covenant with God and the spouse that one must be open to children.

Think of it this way. If Noah had not built the Ark, the covenant would not have happened. If Abraham had not obeyed God and given up Isaac, the covenant would not have happened. If the Jews had not sacrificed the Passover lamb, the covenant would not have happened. If one is not baptized, the New Covenant does not happen. Similarly, if one does not accept the conditions of the marriage covenant, the covenant does not happen.

Obviously, the Church's wish is that all people would enter into the Sacrament of Matrimony and the marriage covenant meeting all the prerequisites and conditions. Unfortunately, this is not the case, and so the Church is prepared to tell people when the covenant is invalid and the Sacrament was not received. The Church has been working to better educate people about the prerequisites and conditions of the Sacrament of Matrimony and the marriage covenant. It's the culture that prevents it, a culture largely brought on by Protestantism.

[marielapin]

Well, if this makes you guys feel any better, the priest who did our marriage counciling told us that he had refused to marry several couples who came to him for pre-Cana. He told us that on top of that he explained to them why what they were doing was wrong, in the mind of the Church, and how these actions could have negative results on the strength and duration of their marriage. He also told him that they could not enter into this Sacrament (or the Eucharist for that matter) until they corrected their actions. He even wrote letters to the priests in their home parishes explaining why he was refusing to allow them to marry in the Catholic Church.

He and many other priests are seeming to crack down on couples who have a complete lack of understanding about the Sacrament and its responsibilities.

(examples of this are: cohabitation and sex before marriage, contraception, other sexual sins, and refusal to be open to life or to be honest with their future spouse, etc....)

...hey I just noticed...this is my 1000th post! :D

[Jake Huether]

so, rather than trying to absolve this abuse for the benefit of all parties, including the Church, the Church instead chooses to say that the marriage was never qualified in the first place?

Not quite sure what "absolve" means. And if I did, then I'm not sure how the Church should "absolve" this abuse.

There is no way the Church can escape the abuse. The Church contains humans, and humans are prone to abuse things. So, if the Church were to "absolve" the abuse - the only way would be to not allow humans to marry - in other words, scratch that Sacrament. But that is just silly. Christ in his wisdom instituted Marriage!! The gift is there for those who want it. For those who choose to abuse it, the guilt isn't on the Church, it's on the souls of those who do the abuse.

The Church is a fountain for Truth. But the fact that people can spill poison into the stream doesn't mean that we should shut off the fountain.

And on a side note: The Church isn't comissioned to FORCE us to do what's right. That's whats called free will. The Church presents to us what is best for us. We, as Children of God, and members of the Catholic Church in particular, are given the distinct quality of being able to see what is best for us, and yet close our eyes and ears and choose what we feel will be "best" for us temporarily on earth.

What, Mulls, in your opinion should the Church do?

I know for a fact that NO protestant Churches really have any word whatsoever on this subject. Most doen't consider Marriage a Sacrament anyway. In protestantism you cannot be "out of communion" with the church as long as you confess Christ as your savior. So for a couple that has been married 1 zillion times to 1 zillion different couples it really doesn't matter - in the end all they have to do is cry "Lord, Lord". But we Catholics know that not every one who calles out " Lord, Lord, will be saved".

Not to sound snotty or anything, but I don't understand what your not understanding...

Are you trying to imply that the Catholic Church has a "loophole", when in fact this "loophole" is by far the hardest "way out" among Christian churches. Every other Church doesn't even care about the state of their parishoners, whether they've been married and divorced, or whatever.

Or does your church do something different? What does your church have to say? And if you say that marriage is "for good", then what does your church do about divorce? Is your church active in admonishing it's parishoners about the sin of "re" marriage and adultery. Is it a silent matter? Are you allowed to get divorced, remarry, and then still be "saved". Or are all your divorced and re-married parishoners going to hell?

Divorce simply disolves a marriage. It says the marriage is over. Which, if valid before the eyes of God isn't true. What an annullment says is that the Marriage never happend. And the Church doesn't just make this statement, fyi. She researches the case, and in the even that the Marriage WAS valid, then she does NOT grant an annullment.

It isn't a loophole, its truth. If a Sacrament isn't valid, then it never took place! If I was baptized wrong, I would not have been baptised. And I would have to be baptised. If I was married wrong, then I was never Married. And if I was never married, then that means I can marry.

There is no way to take away the abuse unless you take away the gift. And Christ wants us to have the gift!

Christ also gave us the gift of eternal life! Yet people abuse his death on the Cross! Should Jesus have not died, simply because the majority of humans would abuse it! NO!

[Jake Huether]

Good replies.  I'd like to add a few things.

First, are you sure an annullment is infallible?  I'm not so sure about that.  The couple could lie, and how can the Church see inside someone's heart?

Second, I was concerned when I learned how many annulments there have been in the past few years and how they have been increasing.  My first reaction was that the Church needed to stop giving them away like candy.  But after further reflection, I realized that if there are more annulments, that means that there are more invalid marriages.  In other words, it's not because the Church is giving them out too easy, but because we're letting people get married too easily.  Our couples need to be taught better about what marriage is.  And they aren't going to hear it anywhere else but from the Church.

How many couples would be able to honestly say that they would be open to children from beginning to end?  If a couple is already using contraception, that can invalidate the marriage because they didn't intend to give ALL of themselves to each other.

Also, how many men or women could say that they would remain faithful to their spouse for the rest of their lives even if their spouse was not faithful to them?  It seems to me that most people in today's culture think that if your spouse cheats on them, then the marriage is over.

Also, how many people realize that love isn't something you fall in and out of?  Love is something you DO even when you don't FEEL like it.

We're battling this anti-life, anti-family, culture and the rising number of annulments shows that we're losing.

We're not copping-out by granting annulments; we're letting our faithful cop-out at the alter.

Excellent point.

Again, it isn't the Church. It's US!

The Church has done all it can short of taking away our free will.

It stems from us. Our tend toward a perversion of truth is beaver dam near unbreakable.

My pre-cana experience was a JOKE! Actually, it wasn't the pre-cana weekend. It was just a class taught by a married couple over the course of three days. In the end they had this "quiz" and one of the questions was the Churches possition on contraception! And guess what, the "quiz" somehow had the WRONG answer. It said the PILL was OK in certain cercumstances!

You don't have to guess what I did! I flat out told her the quiz was wrong. And made the class good and clear on the subject. She just sat there and was like, "Oh, well yeah, okay". I think she knew the truth, but didn't want to fight the battle with the pastor (who was probably the one who made the test - I don't know).

But you see, there again, the Teaching of the Church is against contraception. We abuse the Church' teaching and try to make it our own. The Church isn't wrong! WE ARE.

If the Church was to guard against ALL abuse - the only means to acomplish this would be to cease to exist, to stop teaching, to close the books. If we don't know the Truth, then how can we abuse the Truth, right? HAHA.

But remember! The Church is planting seeds. Some will fall on rocks, some among thorns, but others on rich soil!

[mulls]

resolve, not absolve. whoops.