“Thank you for stating your opinion so clearly.”
Thank you for the compliment.
“Although it still seems to me that this ‘annulment’ process is pure hypocrisy and just a way for Roman Catholics to free themselves of an unwanted partner without going against their church's teaching against divorce.”
I think that it can be used as a loophole, and can be used in a hypocritical way, but all good things are subject to abuse, are they not? The reasoning behind the concept of annulment is that Jesus holds us to a very high standard (no divorce), but that God is not unfair in that the standard applied to marriage is for REAL marriages, not phony marriages.
You mentioned the fellow who is married for 20 years or so and has a passel of children. What if I told you that he got his girlfriend pregnant, and his prospective father-in-law took out the shotgun and said, “Boy, you're either going to have a wedding or funeral.” And so the young man, in fear for his life, married the young woman, and put up with 20 years of hell until the old man died, and the not-so-young-fellow saw his chances and said, “Hey, I'm getting out while the getting’s good.” And divorced his bride and sought an annulment.
I'll tell you that if he can reasonably demonstrate that he was coerced to marry his wife, he'll be granted a declaration of nullity. Why? Because marriage, in Catholic teaching, is both a covenant and a contract, and contracts entered into under duress are not generally considered binding.
Full, uncoerced, unclouded consent of the will is needed to marry sacramentally. Agreed to get married while drunk and [improbably] found a priest to marry you before you sobered up? Not valid.
There are a variety of other circumstances that nullify the validity of a marriage. Fraud is one (one marries someone and discovers some time later that the spouse is a homosexual, as an example).
Lack of proper intention is another. I had a brother-in-law who, though he said he was forsaking all others, never had any intention of giving up his myriad girlfriends when he married my sister-in-law. In that the Church doesn't teach that either polygamy or concubinage are morally acceptable, and the intention to practice one or both means that one has intended to enter into something other than a sacramental marriage (as sacramental marriages have as one attribute marital fidelity), my sister-in-law could have readily made the case that her erstwhile spouse never had an intention to enter into a sacramental marriage.
I'm sure that nearly any Kennedy could obtain a declaration of nullity on that ground alone.
Similarly, people who marry while rejecting other fundamental Catholic teachings about marriage may also fail to have married validly.
The question of maturity when marrying is a valid one, and marriage tribunals rightly should consider these cases. However, it is also likely true that some individuals and some tribunals abuse this cause and make declarations of nullity where objectively a truly valid marriage actually existed.
But like I said, many good things are often abused.
I will tell you that I've seen folks who wanted annulments who were not granted them, because they didn't have a real case.
So, although the process may be abused in some cases, it's not a “loophole.” It's a process based on a real need, to release people from obligations that don't come up to the standard of sacramental marriage.
sitetest
Bravo! Excellent post.
However, good luck to any Roman Catholics who can manage to get themselves a matrimonial mulligan.
I have enjoyed our conversation - thank you.