Posted on 10/27/2003 12:47:07 PM PST by Hermann the Cherusker
As do I. The situation is especially perilous for the Church in Canada, in light of the Halpern decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal.
The Church should not give sanction to the State's perverted definition of marriage by acting as registrar of civil marriage.
The imperial Canadian judiciary is even worse than the American.
There is no contradiction at all. Most of the Annullments are of Protestants.
It is generally accepted that there are about 6 million Catholic marriages (sacramental and non-sacramental) involving Catholics which have been sundered by divorce in the courts over the past 35 years (for some persepctive, 20 million marriages have been contracted in the Church the period 1943 to 2002). It is also generally accepted that only 10% of these have ever availed themselves of a Church annullment. Yet, in the past 35 years, there have been around 2 million annullments granted by the Catholic Church in the US.
600,000 << 2,000,000
It implies that around 2/3 of all annullments granted since 1968 have been to non-Catholics, which is independently confirmed by the testimony of people involved in the tribunals.
Additionally, about 1/4+ of the annullments granted are documentary annullments. These are simply given out when a Catholic comes along and can show invalidity from things like marriage by a justice of the peace, in a Protestant Church without dispensation, to an inelligible person, etc. These cases are simply indisputable as being invalid canonically.
Put 2 and 2 together, and you will realize relatively few of the non-documentary annullments are granted to dissolve putitative Catholic marriages, such as those of the Kennedy's.
These sort of claims were made against the Church by the Protestants as well - that the wealthy always seemed able to get an annullment.
Most annullments appear to be going to Protestant converts. Knowing many Protestants, I assure you that nearly all of them do not believe in the indissolubility of marriage, and many reject the necessity of childbearing and the inherent unity of faithfulness. Such people cannot contract a valid sacramental marriage that would be recognizable upon entering the Church. Example, I know one couple where they contracted a "marraige", but they thought it okay that the wife indulge her lesbianism with a mutual friend. The marriage ended in divorce, with the wife running off with her female friend. The husband, by now sterilized, contracted another "marriage" with a woman who did not want children (no problem there?), and who felt adultery in marriage was okay. I guess you can imagine where that ended up. The man is now on his third "marriage". For him to enter the Church, he needs two annullments. Would you deny them to uphold the "sanctity" and "indissolubility" of those two Protestant "marriages"? Does it make the Church a laughingstock to nullify them?
How about this case. A Catholic friend of my wife and I is marrying in the Church a divorced Catholic man who has returned to the faith. He will have to obtain an annullment for his previous "marriage", which was before a Justice of the Peace to a woman who excluded the possiblity of childbearing. Is it a mockery of Catholic marriage to grant this annullment and let my friend marry her fiance in the Church? I have had two other friends in similar circumstances, who were married civilly and then divorced, and then wanted to marry sacramentally in the Church, but needed and annullment.
These are the real sort of ordinary annullment cases which do not get thrown to the media wolf-pack, like the Kennedy's.
After he had been married for fifteen years, he was notified that he was the respondent in the case for annulment of his marriage, which he was perfectly sure had been valid.
Unless he could read the mind of his wife, I don't see how he could say this. I've found the very existence of annullments leaves some people confused about their obligations. One Catholic woman I knew thought that adultery was grounds for an annullment, and entered into a marriage upon that basis, thinking she had an out in this circumstance. Do you think she contracted a valid marriage? Does her husbands complete valid intent have any bearing upon her invalid intent?
He has now become an expert in this matter and has decided to share with others what he has learned.
I've poured over statistics and talked to tribunalists too. Am I an "expert"?
Were Luther's factual claims about Fr. Tetzel false or true theologically?
His disappointment becuase of the variation from expected outcomes is the direct cause of the schism he initiates.
Last comment. You need to read the original post more closely. Pete Vere referenced a specific authority for his claim:
Hi, I just got back from a regional canon law conference, where Fr. Sable of the Roman Rota gave an interesting presentation.One of the interesting things that came out is the actual annulment rate among Catholics. Turns out that only between 30 and 40% of annulments in the United States pertain to Catholic marriages. The vast majority pertain to non-Catholic marriages of which one party now seeks to marry a Catholic, or convert to Catholicism.
The very Roman Rota that Mr. Vasoli is proclaiming is the true upholder of the sanctity of American Catholic Marriages is the one which is providing this data that the main part of the question is not American Catholics. I suppose you could always write a letter to them if you need to clarify this for yourself. They'd probably be happy to give you a brief overview.
that are Catholic on Catholic annulments don't represent a crisis?
Looking around at American society since 1968, are you surprised there is a crisis? When 50% of Catholics coming to be married are living in sin and when around 80-85% of Catholics reject or don't know the Church's teaching about contraception, you are shocked that many less miss the mark on the true nature of marriage (a much more subtle question to boot)?
Mohammed sez: Strange, but the jihad process may be a tool of evangeliaztion.
Since so few Catholics avail themselves of something that is supposedly being guaranteed to work, we would need to assume a possible reason for this:
1) Weak cases are screened out by the Pastor's of Parishes.
2) 85%+ of divorced Catholics reject modern annullment practice because they hold the indisolubility of marriage at a much higher level than does the Church. (Yet many of these same people remarry outside the Church and continue frequenting the sacraments.)
3) 85%+ of divorced Catholics think annullments are just a big hassle and a joke that they don't need to deal with, because they are already divorced, and that first Church marriage was just to make the folks happy. Plus God understands our hearts, yadda, yadda, yadda ...
I suggest (1) is probably likely for much of it, with a smattering of (2) and (3)'s.
Do you have some alternate theories for why so few Catholic divorcees come before the tribunal? Lets assume all the annullments given out since 1968 were only to Catholics. If so, only 2 million of 6 million divorced Catholic marriages went before a tribunal and were dissolved, leaving 4 million unions in marital limbo.
There must be something at work keeping those 4 millions back from a "guaranteed" process.
In Italy and most of Europe men have many mistresses and the wives accept it . They do not need to divorce, their adultery already condemns them.
I do not think that the italian Catholics are anybody's role model
About 95 percent of Italy’s people are Roman Catholics. Most baptisms, weddings, and funerals are held in churches, but only about 30 percent of all Italians attend church regularly.
In 1978, voters voted to allow abortions.
They have less than replacement birth rates..
So the Catholic Annulment Scandal is really the fault of Protestants.
LOL Yea and we are at fault for the apostasy in Italy. I think we caused the sun spots and the fires in California as well as the war in Iraq
I'm pretty sure "most" is not accurate. Over 50%??? Are you sure???
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.