Posted on 07/02/2004 11:15:54 AM PDT by cnkie
John Kerry is a man full of contradiction.
In 1995, already divorced from his first wife Julia Thorne, John Kerry pressed for an annulment.
He didn't bother to tell Ms. Thorne. The church simply informed her by way of a letter that this was the case.
Ms. Thorne had been severely depressed and near suicide when Kerry walked out on her, and in pressing for an annulment he cast his daughters into the bizarre state of illigimacy. (one of them was still a teenager at the time)
Compare that with the Jack Ryan Illinois Senate case where both parents were arguing to keep the records sealed so that their 9 year old son could be spared the embarassment of unsubstantiated allegiations.
(Excerpt) Read more at crosswalk.com ...
Sunday, May 18, 1997
How a Kennedy discards his family
By YVONNE CRITTENDEN -- Toronto Sun
SHATTERED FAITH
Sheila Rauch Kennedy
(Random House)
The Roman Catholic Church's bizarre practice of annulling marriages that were undertaken in good faith between consenting adults, many of them married for years and the parents of children, is the focus of this outspoken book by Sheila Rauch Kennedy, divorced first wife of Congressman Joe Kennedy.
It is just one of the latest in the parade of stories about the Kennedys' mistreatment of women -- including, recently, Robert Kennedy's son Michael, a father of three whose wife is divorcing him over his affair with a 14-year-old babysitter.
Divorced after a 12-year marriage and the birth of twin sons, Sheila Kennedy, an Anglican who married Kennedy in the Catholic faith, received a letter in 1993 from the Boston Catholic Archdiocese informing her that her ex-husband was seeking an annulment of their marriage in order that he could remarry in the Catholic Church.
Stunned and outraged that she was being asked to agree that her marriage had never really existed, and that her sons would henceforth be regarded as children of an unsanctified union, Kennedy decided to fight the action, thus taking on not only the Church but one of the most powerful families in America.
In the process, she threw light on a little understood but widespread practice that has shattered lives and left women, who believed they had been good Catholic wives and mothers, feeling betrayed and deserted by their Church. Many felt the annulment had devastated their children, who even though they were still legitimate in the eyes of the state, lost their faith and self-esteem by the cruelty of this hypocritical practice.
Joe Kennedy warned his ex-wife that by contesting his action, she would be bogged down in ecclesiastical law, and he could not understand why she wouldn't go along with his wishes.
"It's just Catholic gobbledegook," he told her. He reminded her she was "a nobody," while he was powerful and popular.
Undeterred, Sheila Kennedy proceeded. Although Joe eventually won his annulment, as do most petitioners, she is now appealing the decision to Rome, not just for herself but on behalf of the many wives and mothers she interviewed who feel demeaned and humiliated by the practice.
It is an abuse of power and a perverse practice that needs to be revealed for what it is, she writes. A thought-provoking look at a subject that seems well worth reforming or abandoning altogether.
Catholic Divorce Mills?
ANNULMENT STANCE OF DIOCESAN CANONIST ASSAILED
By Tom Barbarie
How is it possible, some might wonder, that entertainer Frank Sinatra -- who divorced first wife Nancy to marry Ava Gardner and, after a brief stopover as Mia Farrow's spouse, took Barbara Marx as wife number four -- could die a Catholic? Why was Henry VIII treated so differently by a church whose official teaching is that marriage is indissoluble, and which furthermore insists that time does not alter its stance on matters of morals?
Is the answer simply that Sinatra had the good fortune to be alive in 20th century America, where kinder, gentler ecclesiastical tribunals are the rule? It was one of those tribunals that cleared Sinatra's path to a valid fourth marriage by agreeing with his claim that his first three marriages were null.
That annulment and the scores of thousands like it granted each year in the U.S. are seen by some as the compassionate workings of a Church whose sensibilities are catching up with the times. Others see them as the product of thinly veiled American Catholic divorce mills.
In a November 1996 article in Homiletic & Pastoral Review, the San Diego diocese's director of canonical affairs, Dr. Edward Peters, defended Church tribunals in this country, where annulments have soared from about 600 per year in 1968 to well over 60,000 in some recent years. (The article, slightly modified, was reprinted as chapter XII of Peters's book, 100 Answers to Your Questions on Annulments, Simon & Schuster/Basilica Press, 1997).
According to Peters, who is a judge on the diocesan tribunal, the increase can be attributed not to a relaxation of the Church's teachings on the permanence of marriage, but to other factors, among them that heterodox, pro-contraceptive marriage preparation courses are "legion" and that psychological factors render large numbers of people truly incapable of contracting valid marriages. With many spouses ignorant of the fact that marriage is ordered to the procreation of children, true matrimonial consent cannot be present, and the granting of later decrees of nullity for such marriages is a slam dunk for a church tribunal.
Peters defended the Code of Canon Law (Canon 1095), which declares incapable of entering a true marriage: "1) those who lack sufficient use of reason; 2) those who suffer from a grave lack of discretionary judgment concerning the essential matrimonial rights and obligations to be mutually given and accepted; [and] 3) those who, because of causes of a psychological nature, are unable to assume the essential obligations of marriage."
This canon is "the best tool for addressing cases in which drug and alcohol abuse, physical or sexual abuse, psychological and psychiatric anomalies, and a variety of other mental and emotional conditions have seriously impacted parties prior to marriage," wrote Peters.
He called citing the fact that Americans, who compose only five percent of the world's Catholics, are granted 80 percent of the world's annulments the "shallowest of all tribunal criticisms. Americans make up 6% of the world's population, but they account for 100% of the men on the moon. So what? America functions. Much of the rest of the world does not."
Peters' arguments drew a strong rebuttal from Robert H. Vasoli, retired professor of sociology at Notre Dame University. Vasoli was himself the respondent in an annulment suit granted by an American tribunal and later overturned by the Roman Rota, the Catholic Church's highest court, which handles appeals.
"My argument in a nutshell is: they're granting too damn many annulments," Vasoli told News Notes.
Taking issue with Peters in his own article in Homiletic & Pastoral Review (April 1998), Vasoli noted the distinction between "documentary" process cases and "ordinary" process cases. The former, he said, which deal with such things as marriages contracted outside the Church by Catholics, are cut-and-dried.
It is in the ordinary process cases, in which Canon 1095 is called into play, and where attempts are made to determine a person's state of mind years ago, that "canonical legerdemain" is used to release people from their vows, he argued.
"John Paul II, in his 1987 and 1988 allocutions to the Rota, significantly clarified and narrowed the reach of the canon's [1095's] second and third sections," said Vasoli. "He specified that both grounds are predicated on the existence of a serious psychopathology....
"In 1995, [the most recent year for which figures are available] "there were 39,419 ordinary process annulments granted by United States tribunals, and for the world the figure was 49,445. In other words, the United States granted 79 percent of all the world's (ordinary process) annulments," he wrote. "It is simply beyond dispute that the U.S. tribunals have used spurious findings of defective consent to annul tens of thousands of marriages."
Following Vatican II, new rules termed the American Procedural Norms were rolled out in 1970 to streamline the annulment process. But Vasoli maintained, "One of their latent functions was to act as canonical proving grounds for measures that would sustain a high rate of annulments." If that contention is true, the norms, used until the latest Code of Canon Law was promulgated in 1983, were wildly successful. "About 90 percent of ordinary process petitions accepted result in affirmative decisions," Vasoli said.
In his own article, Peters put that figure at 95 percent. But, he suspected, this is in part because petitioners with weak cases are dissuaded from pursuing their claims at the earliest stages, that is, in interviews with their pastors or later when the potential petition is first forwarded to tribunal personnel.
Even if this can be conceded as true of documentary process cases, Vasoli said, "separating the wheat from the chaff in the selection or ordinary process petitions is much more complicated." Harking back to the Pope's clarification of "serious psychopathology," the retired Notre Dame professor argued that the people -- often "lower-level helping professionals, such as social workers and counselors" -- who must ascertain the states of mind of petitioners at the time of their marriage are sorely underqualified to do so.
Vasoli urged the unconvinced to read his book, What God has Joined Together: The Annulment Crisis in American Catholicism, released in March by Oxford University Press. "It blows the lid off the whole corrupt system," Vasoli said of his book. "I'm going to get crucified for that book by the canon law establishment."
The overturned declaration of nullity in the Vasoli case has a good deal of company in Rome, the retired professor told News Notes.
"I'd like Peters to explain why over 90 percent of the American cases that go to the Rota are reversed," he said, noting that as a comparison only four out of every thousand cases are reversed by U.S. civil appellate tribunals.
As a diocesan employee, Peters is bound by policy not to speak with News Notes. But because the subject had nothing to do with diocesan business per se, the diocese was contacted and asked if Peters could speak in his own defense. The request was denied.
But Peters finds a defender in Father Peter Stravinskas, nationally renowned theologian and editor of The Catholic Answer, who told New Notes, "I agree absolutely with him." Father Stravinskas referred to his letter published in the May 1998 Catholic World Report, in which he said, "Given the mess in which we have been living for so long now, I am amazed that there are so few annulments."
Stravinskas's letter asked, "Do cohabitation for years and absence from the Church's sacramental life (sometimes for decades) make folks apt candidates for holy matrimony?" Grace builds on nature, wrote Stravinskas, but "when nature has been so warped by psychological, sociological and cultural forces inimical to Christian teaching and values -- especially when that devastation is thoroughly integrated into a lifestyle -- grace is not only obstructed, but even natural goods like the lifelong union of a man and a woman, find difficulty achieving their end."
Father Stravinskas proposed as a solution "more rigorous screening processes and more demanding programs of marital preparation."
About annulments
Question: What is an annulment of a marriage? Why and how does one go about obtaining one?
Your question actually suggests a number of other questions people pose about the need for and process of annulment. Let's start with:
What is an annulment?
An annulment is a declaration by a competent church authority that a marriage is invalid. It is an official judgment that a marriage never took place, in spite of all appearances.
Just as the state requires certain conditions before two people can marry, so does the Catholic church. For instance, the state demands that two people be free to marry, are not already married, are of age, and marry before a licensed official of the state. The church also requires some conditions be met, or else there is no marriage.
So what are these church conditions?
Church law requires that the couple to be married be of age; be married before the legitimate representative of the church - ordinarily the pastor of the parish, and that they are free to enter into the sacrament of marriage. So, if internal consent of one or both of the parties was either missing or vitiated, there is no marriage; if the marriage has not taken place before the local pastor or his representative there is no marriage; or if there are major impediments to the marriage, there is no marriage and a "decree of nullity" could be sought.
Is an annulment a Catholic divorce?
No. A civil divorce is a permanent separation of two people who were validly married. A judge declares that reasons now exist to end the marriage. A civil divorce usually leaves the individuals free to marry again if they so desire. An annulment, however, is a judgment that there was no marriage to begin with.
Can a Catholic get a divorce?
Yes. There may be reasons for Catholics to obtain a civil divorce in order to obtain a variety of legal benefits. So yes, a Catholic could get a divorce for these benefits. However there is no freedom to marry again, unless the Catholic party has obtained an annulment. Note that a civil divorce must have been obtained before beginning the annulment process.
What are the reasons to grant an annulment?
As stated above, the church, like the state, has certain requirements before its members can marry. Both church and state are concerned that marriages be stable. The well being of society depends on this. If any of these major requirements are lacking the grounds for annulment can be investigated. Two areas for investigation are impediments and consent.
What are the impediments?
Impediments are obstacles to a couple getting married. Unless these have been dealt with prior to the wedding, then some of them could invalidate a marriage.
There are a variety of impediments. Some have to do with previous relationships such as a previous marriage, blood relationships, etc. Others have to do with differences of religion and sex. A third category has received a lot of publicity in the recent past. It has to do with the area of consent.
What do you mean by "the area of consent"?
When the priest or deacon asks the couple questions before they take their vows, he is asking "consent" questions. During the ceremony the question is asked: "Do you take John/Mary?" Implied in that question are some very important facts. "Do you know who this person is?" "Do you know what marriage is?" If a person really doesn't understand that this is a faithful partnership for life, if the person is not freely entering into this covenant; if one of the parties is really not who the other thought he/she is then there is no consent. There is no marriage.
Is the area of consent a difficult area to investigate?
Yes. The other areas are facts relatively easy to prove: one did or did not go before a priest or deacon to get married; one was or was not related to another person. But it is not easy to prove that one did not marry for life, or that one had to be faithful. It's not easy to prove fraud or fear. It is not easy to prove that if one knew something at the time of the marriage, they would never have consented to the wedding. And, today, we are much more aware of how various mental conditions undermine a person's freedom of choice.
How does one get an annulment?
An annulment is indicated after some sort of a crisis has been reached in the relationship. One or the other wants to have a decree of nullity declared, allowing them to separate and/or remarry.
Usually the first step is to go to the local pastor and ask for help in beginning the process. He will either take some testimony himself, or refer the party to the diocesan center where a trained person, in what is called the "tribunal," will begin to gather the facts in the case.
How much does it cost ? How long does it take?
The only costs are usually some minor expenses to cover the expenses of paper work and the like. As to time, that depends on the complications and difficulties of obtaining testimony and proof of the situation alleged. Planning on a year would not be far wrong.
If I get a decree of nullity, does that mean my children are illegitimate?
This is a consideration that has bothered many people before, during and after the procedure of seeking an annulment. Simply put the answer is "NO." Church law covers this situation very clearly and recognizes that children who were considered legitimate offspring are still so considered.
FURTHER REFERENCES: Ladislas Orsy, S.J. "Annulments" The New Dictionary of Theology, Komonchak,Collins,Lane, Glazier, Wilmington,DE 1988 Also Ladislas Orsy, Marriage in Canon Law, Wilmington,DE:Glazier,1985. Geoffrey Robinson, Marriage,Divorce and Nullity; A Guide to the Annulment Process in the Catholic Church, Melbourne: Dove Communications, 1984 and London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1985
The endless contradictions of Catholic canon law -- glad somebody understands it.
The significance of this is the Henry VIII overtones. However, JFK Lite lacks the ancient King's human decency.
d.o.l.
Criminal Number 18F
Jack Ryan, in particular the monster that is Ryan's ego, is responsible for his own problems. Indeed, by shoehorning himself into the race (and alienating everybody to the point where he was running behind Baraka before this story broke!) he has done no favours for his party and for the political philosophy he supposedly espouses.
It's funny, now, he and his bimbo of an ex want to make all the mud they once slung at one another go away -- "for the sake of the child," you know, the one neither of them cared a whit about back when the mudslinging was going on. Of course, then there was something more important than the child to both of them at stake: money.
They're just a couple of sad excuses for human beings. Kerry has all the authenticity of a Naugahyde overcoat, but (1) it is unlikely he has this kind of bimbo eruption in his divorce papers, and (2) it's unseemly to look. Once the stuff's out, like the Ryans', it's out and people will consider it, but let it stay buried.
But on Ryan, it's good we got a look at his integrity before he got embedded in the Senate.
d.o.l.
Criminal Number 18F
I am certainly not going to go digging up divorce records, or funding lawsuits therefor, but I think you'll agree that one can learn a lot about a man by his relationship with his wife: just consider Clintons v. Reagans (or Dubya & wife, for that matter).
A man who will lie to his own wife will lie to anyone.
" A man who will lie to his own wife will lie to anyone."
When Kerry was running for Lt Gov on the Dukakis ticket in 1982-he and Julia separated.
But, Kerry conveniently hid that fact during the election .
And Kerry had Julia appear for photo ops, as if they were still happily married-when he knew they were separated.
" He and Julia separated that summer, though the split never became public during the campaign."
Page 185, " John F Kerry, The Complete Biography By The Boston Globe Reporters Who Know Him Best."
" Julia maintained appearances,though, posing for photographs with Michael Dukakis and his wife, Kitty, after John won the primary-and appearing again at the inauguration." Page 185-186 ibid.
Julia later said it was such an emotional burden to have to pretend to be Kerry's devoted wife on the campaign trail, when both of them knew their marriage was over.
The more I read about Kerry-from his bizarre childhood to his financial dealings to his ethnic misidentity to his marriages- you can't reach any other conclusion about Kerry, but, that he's a total sham.
Sheila Rauch Kennedy is no defender of Catholic marriage. She believes that the Church should allow divorce and remarriage without annulments and she even spoke at a Call to Action conference about this issue.
Even if Sinatra married Barbara without the annulment, he would still have been allowed a Catholic funeral. The Catholic Church denies communion, but they don't excommunicate divorced Catholics who remarry illicitly. When they die, they still can receive a Catholic funeral because the Church says that they can't judge them.
read later
bttt
**Ms. Thorne had been severely depressed and near suicide when Kerry walked out on her, and in pressing for an annulment he cast his daughters into the bizarre state of illigimacy. (one of them was still a teenager at the time)**
The author needs to read up on the Catholic Church.
He is wrong about an annulment and children being illegitimate. An annulment merely states that there was NO sacramental marriage. It does not take away the civil marriage, for example. Children are not illigetimate.
You are correct!
You are correct!
Canon law is manmade law, created by fallibe human beings.
The Bible pre-empts Canon Law. "What God hath joined together, let no man put asunder".
Right, rogue. At issue here is not the Church's teachings on the sacrament of matrimony, but the inherent dishonesty of John Kerry, proven in innumerable examples, some of which you have provided here.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.