New 'Fast-Track Annulments' May Be Rarer Than Expected (Diocese of Madison)

NC Register (the good one) ^ | 9/16/2015 | Joan Desmond

[Mrs. Don-o]

Dioceses across the US have been bombarded with questions about the annulment news from the Rome.

The Diocese of Madison, Wis. has already released a timely document (Frequently Asked Questions Re: Mitis Iudex Dominus Iesus) that should prove helpful to Catholics seeking an annulment and Church leaders concerned about setting realistic expectations...

Who qualifies for the shorter process?

Answer: The shorter process is designed only for those rare cases when it can be employed without injustice. Three strict qualifications have to be met.

1. Both spouses have to petition for it together, or if not, then the other party must at least consent to it.
2. The nullity of the marriage must be manifest. Most marriage nullity cases deal with a defect in marital consent, i.e., with an invisible, internal act of the will placed by the spouses, often several years prior. Clearly, it would be exceptional for such a defect to be patently obvious today.
3. All the facts that make the marriage manifestly null have to be readily available. Unlike the documentary process, the shorter process can involve the questioning of both parties and knowledgeable witnesses, but this is to be done all in one session when possible.

[snip]

Do I qualify for the shorter process?

Answer: Statistically speaking, probably not. Based on a cursory review of the cases heard since 2012 (about two hundred cases in all), well over half eventually received an affirmative, but only three or four appeared in retrospect to meet the qualifications for the use of the shorter process...and qualifying for the shorter process is no guarantee of an eventual declaration of nullity.

As one canonist told me, "It will be up to the local bishop" to maintain the integrity of the annulment process. Diocese of Madison's Q&A here.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Joan Frawley says that the new annulment rules may result in a trickle --- not a stampede --- offering the Diocese of Madison as an example.

The big take-away may be that now it's all going to be on the shoulders of the bishops, themselves, personally.

[verga]

Bump

[ebb tide]

1. Both spouses have to petition for it together, or if not, then the other party must at least consent to it.

Sorry. It still sounds like uncontested "catholic divorce".

[ebb tide]

Catholic Divorce - Head of Vatican Commission Admits in Official Paper: Surge in Number of "Annulments" Intended

Who are you going to believe? Joan Desmond or the Dean of the Tribunal of the Roman Rota, Msgr. Pio Vito Pinto?

[piusv]

Those that offer the whitewashed response?

[Mrs. Don-o]

That's what gets them an expedited process. Not necessarily an annulment. The judgment can still be either "yes" or "no" for the petitioner.

I think a good chunk of the confusion around "Mitis" and "Mitis II" has been the wrong assumption that a quicker process means the attempted marriage will be found invalid. The default position is still that it will be quickly found valid.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Joan Desmond is just reporting what they’re doing in the Diocese of Madison. Your argument would be, not with Desmond, but with Bishop Robert Morlino.

[ebb tide]

That's what gets them an expedited process. Not necessarily an annulment.

What part of Msgr Pinto's description of Francis' channeling the Holy Ghost did you not understand?

...following the invitation of Christ, present in their brother, the Bishop of Rome, to pass from the restricted number of a few thousand annulments to that immeasurable [number] of unfortunates who might have a declaration of nullity --

The above can be found in the link I provided in Post 4 above.

[ebb tide]

And they’re still doing it.

[ebb tide]

Socci: With Papally-Mandated "Catholic Divorce" destroying a Sacrament, Schism Looms Large on the Catholic Horizon

After 2000 years, Divorce is Enforced in the Church -- and a Schism Looms Larger than Ever

[joshua c]

It sounds like sharia finance. They cant pay interest so they call it principal even though they are paying more than the original amount borrowed.

Catholics want to divorce so they get an annulment. It is still a divorce.

[Mrs. Don-o]

"What part of Msgr Pinto's description of Francis' channeling the Holy Ghost did you not understand?"

I wasn't commenting on Pinto. I was commenting on Morlino.

You might want to start a separate thread based on your Pinto link ---- I'm pretty sure that would evoke the discussion you want to have about Pinto.

[Mrs. Don-o]

It's not a divorce if a valid marriage bond cannot be broken by anything but the death of one of the spouses.

If corrupt bishops move to supposedly nullify holy marital vows, it's a mortal sin on the part of the bishops and it is contrary to Canon law as well as contrary to Divine and Natural Law. Just as it would be a violation if, under the present arrangement of Canon Law, corrupt marriage tribunals presumed to "dissolve" validly-contracted marriages.

The law still stands ---- and will always stand --- which recognizes that a valid marriage requires exclusive sexual fidelity until death. I.e. no "second "marriage".

[verga]

Sorry. It still sounds like uncontested "catholic divorce".

Do you understand the difference between a civil ceremony and a sacramental marriage and a religious ceremony marriage?

[ebb tide]

Pinto has very much to do with who is interpreting Francis’ intentions and the anticipated results. There is no disconnect on this tragic development.

[ebb tide]

I do; Francis apparently doesn’t.

He encouraged his own niece to not wait for an annulment before remarrying.

[ebb tide]

If corrupt bishops move to supposedly nullify holy marital vows, it's a mortal sin on the part of the bishops and it is contrary to Canon law as well as contrary to Divine and Natural Law.

The same applies to corrupt popes who give free reign to those corrupt bishops.

[Mrs. Don-o]

"The same applies to corrupt popes who give free reign to those corrupt bishops."

If that were the intent, with full knowledge and consent, yes.

But I don't think the necessary conditions of mortal sin are proved against the Pope in this case.

[verga]

I do;

I see absolutely no evidence of that whatsoever.

[ebb tide]

But I don't think the necessary conditions of mortal sin are proved against the Pope in this case.

I really don't care what you think. I care what Jesus Christ thinks. And Christ clearly made His thoughts known on the indissolubility of the Sacrament of Marriage.