The Marriage Tribunal makes that decision, not the spouse. Annulments are investigations that search for such impediments. Not having full knowledge of the Catholic teachings on marriage is insufficient by itself. The act of the spouse is what is examined.
if annulments are not Catholic divorces, and are granted only in those cases where no marriage ever took place because of it being illicit or invalid in some respect or another, then Catholic annulment rates should approach non-Catholic annulment rates rather than non-Catholic divorce rates (as is actually the case.)
I already explained the reasons why there are more Catholic annulments in the last 50 years. Go back and read my previous post.
Part of the difference between Orthodox and Catholic approaches probably comes from our differing view of what happens at our respective marriage services. Catholic/Western marriage ceremonies center around an exchanging of vows, and have the characteristic of a contractual agreement. This is in keeping with generally legalistic Catholic views of Christianity.
That's a stereotype that is clearly not the case. The marriage sacrament is a COVENANT agreement, not a contract. It is thinking like yours that turns people so readily to separation. A covenant is binding, even when the other party falters.
Christ insisted on the original intention of the Father who willed that Marriage be indissoluble. He abrogates the accomodations that slipped into the Old Law. You concept merely adds them back in. This is not the intent of the New Law. Can old wine be poured into new skins???
The service then begins, and in neither the betrothal nor the wedding service are there anything resembling vows.
So is making a vow a bad thing in the thinking of Orthodoxy? Is binding oneself to another a sin?
Therefore, it wouldn't occur to us for the most part that any Orthodox wedding would be invalid. This would be tantamount to saying that the bread and wine at the Divine Liturgy didn't become the Body and Blood of Christ for a particular communicant because he didn't have any clue about what he was receiving.
You are now talking oranges and apples. Sacraments are visible signs of invisible graces. But in the Eucharist, Christ is ACTUALLY present, whether the communicant realizes it or not. In the other sacraments, the fruit of the grace bestowed on the recipient is dependent on the recipient. If one enters into Marriage without intending it to be indissoluble, then grace will not be efficacious.
Do you tell the couple and the priest that they aren't ready for a Catholic marriage, and if they want to get married, that they need to do so outside of the Church? And what exactly would that do for their souls? Would you argue that the many Catholics over the years who left the Catholic church and became Protestants so that they could remarry are spiritually better off from your perspective than had they been able to go through the penitential process of an ecclesiastical divorce prior to being allowed to remarry (in a more subdued ceremony) in the Catholic church?
We tell people what is expected of them as a result of the sacrament of Marriage. It is indissoluble. We suggest they NOT get married if they do not feel they would stay together through better or worse. But it takes some very obstinate thinking on the part of the couple for the priest to refuse the sacrament. Are many former Catholics who left the Church better off spiritually? I don't know. I can't determine another's soul in relationship to God. Maybe that person feels better or is at peace, but then, people who are wicked also feel good about what they do, as well. Feelings doesn't constitute our relationship with God.
But to deal with this problem through the use of the technique of annulment -- saying that a couple who had a Christian wedding, who have lived together and been physically joined together for years, and often borne children together -- that this man and woman were never actually married (sorry, you bastard children), boggles the mind when one realizes that this is supposedly New Testament Christianity in action.
Annulments are not automatically granted. In the above case, I would doubt that the Church would grant an annulment so readily. By the way, the children are not considered bastard children in such cases. The separation of spouses while maintaining the marriage bond can be legitimate in certain cases provided by Canon Law (CIC 1151-1155). If civil divorce remains the only possible way of ensuring certain legal rights, the care of the children, or the protection of inheritance, it can be tolerated and does not constitute a moral offense. (CCC #2383).
The point, though, is that the SEPARATION is allowed - but one cannot re-enter into marriage with another person. This clearly is adultery, as defined by Jesus Christ. So while spouses may separate, one is not free to remarry or take up with another person.
For this is surely at the root of the ubiquitous easy annulments that take place throughout Catholicism. Most people are going to remarry, and the question is whether they are going to leave the Catholic church or not in order to be able to do so.
The Church is called to teach the Truth. Sometimes, the Truth hurts, doesn't it?
"Am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? Or am I trying to please men? If I were still pleasing men, I should not be a servant of Christ". Gal 1:10
The Church is called to be pastoral towards such concerns, but we don't turn a blind eye to the truth because "it might hurt someone's feelings" or "they might leave the Church otherwise" if they didn't get their way.
If a person feels the call to willingly disobey Christ so that that person can marry another in an adulterous relationship, what can I say? Change the Church's rules? So if someone came along and said "we are saved by faith alone", is the Church supposed to change its beliefs to accomodate that person so they won't leave the Church?
Regards
I only have time to respond to a couple of points. I did read your explanation for why there are so many annulments in the Catholic Church today. Here it is:
"The truth of the matter is that society has made divorce too easy. Couples don't truly try to work things out. Why should they? Everyone tells them about no-fault divorce. People are more interested in “getting out while the getting is good...” As a result, it is not surprising that the Church grants more annulments than it once did. There is NOT the full and free commitment to the indissolubility of the covenant as there once was."
So basically, you are saying that because of the effects of society, lots of Catholics are being married in the Catholic Church without a "full and free commitment to the indissolubility of the covenant", and "they don't try to work things out." Therefore, there will as a matter of course be a lot more annulments than in the past.
Yet later, you tell me that in the case of a married couple with children that the Church won't "readily" grant an annulment. You go on to say that separation is permitted under canon law, but not remarriage.
But remarriage is, in practice, the ultimate point to annulments, isn't it? Without it, a Catholic cannot get remarried and still be a communicating member of the Catholic Church. How often, really, are annulments sought in cases where neither member of the couple is wanting to remarry?
I'm not casting stones in a glass house, because in practice, that is when Orthodox ecclesiastical divorces are granted. The purpose to the process is to see if the original marriage is salvagable (which it basically isn't, at this point), to see about the spiritual welfare of the children of the previous marriage, and to give an opportunity for the Church to interject a strong sense of seriousness about the proposed remarriage -- that it is a falling short of the ideal and requires repentance, and that the reason the first marriage fell apart was because there was something spiritually wrong in the first situation that needs to be addressed.
Almost by definition, a couple that is getting divorced does not involve people who are deeply involved in the life of Christ through the Church. Broken marriages involve broken people. The question is how should the Church approach broken people? Christ's actions should make that clear. He always forgave sins, restored them to fellowship, and told them to "go and sin no more." This no more means that Christ was approving of those sins than does the fact that the Orthodox Church allows up to two remarriages mean that we approve of divorce, and it is basically what the Orthodox Church does in the process of granting an ecclesiastical divorce.
Believe me, we in the Orthodox Church take very seriously the ideal of the one-time marriage. In fact, remarriage after the death of a spouse is discouraged, and in the case of clergy, forbidden (to make clear what the ideal is.)