Posted on 11/10/2004 6:37:01 PM PST by 1stFreedom
Much has been made regarding Kerry’s annulment and remarriage to his second wife.
It seems that many Catholic politicians are confused about issues of the Catholic faith, especially about annulment. But they aren't the only ones who are confused -- many of the faithful are as well.
Surprisingly much of the confusion about this “Catholic gobblygook” originates from how the American tribunals muddy the waters. The tribunals, in essence, are part of the problem!
Instead of writing a long post about the subject, I chose instead to present my understanding of the controversy as a set of definitions and bullet points.
(I'm a Roman Catholic myself, and this is not an attack on the Church but rather a defense of it's laws and precepts.)
----------------------------------------------------
Marital Bond
• indissoluble by the Church – the Church lacks any authority to dissolve a marital bond between two baptized Christians
• A decision for nullity does not break the bond of a valid marriage
• A person is not free to remarry if they have been validly married before and that spouse is still alive
Petition for annulment
• A request for a judicial investigation to discover the nature of the marital bond -- valid or null
o Canon law defines the laws, rules, and constraints of the investigation
Canon Law
• A set of ecclesial laws established by Church council. When defined by an ecumenical council, they laws are infallibly defined
• Is the basis for judging the validity of the bond
o reasons [grounds] why a marriage could be invalid are very limited
o cannot be overruled or broadly interpreted by a tribunal or a bishop
• States that a bond is presumed to be valid until proven otherwise
The Judicial Investigation
• Is neither a healing process nor a pastoral solution.
o It’s simply an investigation, and nothing more.
• Is only concerned with events and conditions at the time vows are exchanged
Psychological grounds for the incapacity to give consent
• Most anullments are based upon Canon Law # 1095.2: “grave lack of discretion of judgment concerning the essential rights and obligations of the marriage bond." More often than not this law is twisted to read "lack of due discretion".
o Jurisprudence from Rome
o confirms that only a serious anomaly of the psyche can cause this
o The presence of a mental disorder does not automatically mean a "grave lack of discretion of judgment concerning the essential rights and obligations of the marriage bond" existed.
o If the disorder is not considered "grave” then it is not an impediment to valid consent
o The lack of discretion must be directly related to an essential right or duty of marriage
o It is not necessary that the parties have perfect mental health, nor that they foresee every situation that will occur in marriage
o it is not necessary that the parties weigh every aspect of the ethical, social and religious aspects of marriage
Tribunal Judgments
• A Tribunal is fallible, and does not fall under the umbrella of the infallibility of the Church
• Judgments can be erroneous, which is why at least two concurring judgments must be given before a marriage is recognized as being null
• A judgment for nullity can be obtained through willful or unwilling deceit, but still cannot destroy a valid bond.
• Tribunal judgments cannot invalidate a valid bond
o A tribunal judgment can only declare that a sacramental bond never existed.
o Those who knowingly remarry after obtaining an annulment while knowing the annulment itself is not canonical, are placing their souls in mortal jeopardy -- they are still married to the first spouse.
o Only death truly resolves the question of annulment. Why? The decision is never truly final because:
o It’s dependent on honesty and conscious of the parties involved.
• The tribunal only makes it’s decision based upon this honesty, and the tribunal can err
o It’s dependant on the efforts of the tribunal to ensure a just investigation and decision
• An unjust investigation most likely cannot discover the true nature of the bond
Tribunal Problems
• Almost all 180 dioceses in the US, willing or unwillingly:
o Re-word canon law in such a fashion that errantly broadens the grounds for annulment to the point that almost any reason is a basis for a null declaration
o Provide misinformation to those involved in the process
o Regularly deny respondents their rights as enumerated by canon law
o Regularly minimize the role and testimony of the respondent -- participation is optional
o Primarily rely on testimony of the petitioner
o Misrepresent the right to appeal the second instance to the Rota, if not outright hide this fact
Errant, Prevailing Attitudes of Tribunal Staff
•Attitudes which contradict canon law and the judicial investigation
o The process is a "Pastoral healing process."
o “People deserve another chance at happiness” [through a null declaration, regardless of the legitimacy of the grounds]
o “If a petition is accepted, the marriage is obviously invalid”
o “A failed marriage is evidence of an invalid marriage”
So says the Catholic Church.
Cite it please... And please don't use a diocesan website to do so... ;-)
The Catholic Church also holds that if new evidence is introduced, the case is not final....
That presents a quandry... Say his ex realizes what she lost, then provides evidence she mislead the tribunal....
What then is the outcome?
Whoopde doo.
Growth in a "non-denominational" church typically indicates a cult of personalilty surrounding the pastor. It's also very social --- people go because they like the other people, not necesarily because the full Gospel is being preached.
It is important.
In 15 years in the marriage tribunal, nobody ever came forward with "new evidence." Ever.
I suppose its possible, but I've never seen it.
There is only one Jesus...what the heck are you talking about...or are you just talking?
I'm not talking to you.
>>In 15 years in the marriage tribunal, nobody ever came forward with "new evidence." Ever.
I'll almost give that point to you.. In my diocese, only one case in the past eight years has been sent to the Rota for a third instance due to new evidence.
But really, I think most people don't care. Most people fall in to a few categories: those who are bitter and want absolutley nothing to do with the whole "anullment thing", those who don't care and just remarry outside of the church without/before any anullment decision, or just want to sow thier oats with their new found freedom. Most are willing to accept their anullment at face value because of the seduction of being with someone new. Others just accept it out of faith.
In my diocese, 80% of respondants don't even participate. Kinda tells you that they could care less.
>>In 15 years in the marriage tribunal
Sink wanted you all to know where this post was coming from.. now I want you all to know where sink is coming from.... I won't judge his heart, but based upon the debates we have had on this subject, he isn't part of the solution...
Okay...just trying to win a debate...Huh...Looking for someone who cannot argue for Jesus...<
I'll tell you what...You debate for Satan...and I'll argue for Jesus.
Sinkspur wrote: In 15 years in the marriage tribunal
Sink wanted you all to know where this post was coming from.. now I want you all to know where sink is coming from.... I won't judge his heart, but based upon the debates we have had on this subject, he isn't part of the solution...
>>I'm not talking to you.
Believe it or not I do side with Sink sometimes.. This is one of them...
NO mortal dies sinless, but the Lord knows your heart, and knows you seek His counsel.
What CAN change is ignoring His counsel and surrendering to this world and lies of the Evil One who is constantly on the prowl.
>>• A decision for nullity does not break the bond of a valid marriage
What I'm alluding to is that if a tribunal grants a null decision on irrelavant grounds (say the claim was a broken toe nail) it has no effect on a valid marriage.
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.