Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Annulment Argument: a Quick Guide to the Two Sides
In the Light of the Law ^ | 9/22/14 | Dr. Ed Peters

Posted on 09/22/2014 6:49:27 PM PDT by marshmallow

There are basically two groups agitating for annulment reform, one saying that there are too many annulments, the other saying that there are too few. Let me suggest that (a) the first group is mistaken if it thinks the annulment problem lies in the annulment process (ie, Book VII of the 1983 Code and Dignitas connubii) and (b) the second group seeks not so much reform of the annulment process as its effective abolishment.

The first group (those holding that there are too many annulments), can scarcely suggest any procedural reforms (short of requiring tribunals to stamp DENIED on every annulment petition) for nothing about current canon and special law makes declaring marriage nullity easy. Under current ecclesiastical law, nullity must be proven, on specific grounds, based on sworn declarations and testimony, over the arguments of an independent officer, and confirmed on appeal. There are, that I can see, no gaps in the process through which marriage cases may slip quietly but wrongly into nullity. Not even the oft-reviled Canon 1095 (the “psychological” canon upon which most annulments around the world are based) can be written off as a mere legislative novelty for it articulates (as best positive law can) jurisprudence developed by the Roman Rota itself over the last 60 or 70 years.

No, the objections of the first group to the number of annulments being declared is, I suggest, not to the annulment process but to the people running that process. Tribunal officers are, it is alleged, too naive, too heterodox, or just too lazy to reach sound decisions on nullity petitions; they treat annulments as tickets to a second chance at happiness owed to people who care enough to fill out the forms. How exactly members of this first group can reach their conclusion.....

(Excerpt) Read more at canonlawblog.wordpress.com ...


TOPICS: Catholic; Ministry/Outreach; Theology
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-36 next last

1 posted on 09/22/2014 6:49:27 PM PDT by marshmallow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
Link provided above is nonfunctional. Sorry. Try clicking HERE to get the rest of the article.
2 posted on 09/22/2014 6:51:36 PM PDT by marshmallow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

I read the entire Bible. I never saw the word “annulment” in it once. Perhaps I have an obsolete version.


3 posted on 09/22/2014 6:54:47 PM PDT by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

I applied for an annulment in July. Let’s see how long it takes for the first uninformed person to call my kids bastards.


4 posted on 09/22/2014 6:57:32 PM PDT by Dan in Wichita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurker; Unam Sanctam; x_plus_one; Patton@Bastogne; Oldeconomybuyer; RightField; aposiopetic; ...

In the Religion forum, on a thread titled The Annulment Argument: a Quick Guide to the Two Sides, Lurker wrote:

I read the entire Bible. I never saw the word “annulment” in it once. Perhaps I have an obsolete version.

So what is the correct view? Never allow divorce? Never acknowledge fraudulent or mistaken weddings happen? Or some super secret jury that allows what you want?


5 posted on 09/22/2014 6:57:50 PM PDT by narses ( For the Son of man shall come ... and then will he render to every man according to his works.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: narses

“So what is the correct view? “

The Biblical one, of course. I’m not surprised the catholic church struggles with it so.


6 posted on 09/22/2014 7:07:07 PM PDT by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

And what do you claim is “the Biblical” view?


7 posted on 09/22/2014 7:16:16 PM PDT by narses ( For the Son of man shall come ... and then will he render to every man according to his works.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

I wish I could be as holy and intelligent as you. Perhaps someday, God willing.


8 posted on 09/22/2014 7:16:26 PM PDT by Dan in Wichita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: narses

You undoubtedly own a Bible. Go read what Jesus said on the subject. He never used the word “annulment” once. Of that I am quite sure.


9 posted on 09/22/2014 7:22:23 PM PDT by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

So you would never get a divorce, right? Or remarry while your real wife was still alive?


10 posted on 09/22/2014 7:23:46 PM PDT by narses ( For the Son of man shall come ... and then will he render to every man according to his works.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: narses

I’m not catholic so there is no need for me to participate in the fraud of “annulment” in the first place.


11 posted on 09/22/2014 7:26:28 PM PDT by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
I read the entire Bible. I never saw the word “annulment” in it once. Perhaps I have an obsolete version.

you weren't paying attention and your sarcasm is evident......annulment means it didn't happen in the first place....thus no need to mention it specifically...

that, by the way, is different from a divorce which many people accept and which disolves, somehow, a God oriented marriage....PATHETIC.

12 posted on 09/22/2014 8:26:47 PM PDT by terycarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: terycarl

It did happen and to pretend it didn’t happen is to deny the truth


13 posted on 09/22/2014 8:28:00 PM PDT by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
The Biblical one, of course. I’m not surprised the catholic church struggles with it so.

believe this....the Catholic church struggles with NOTHING biblical....we didn't change the rules, we established them....

14 posted on 09/22/2014 8:29:35 PM PDT by terycarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: terycarl

“s different from a divorce which many people accept and which disolves, somehow, a God oriented marriage....PATHETIC. ‘

I was married in the Catholic Church and am now divorced. I am NOT pathetic.

.


15 posted on 09/22/2014 8:33:25 PM PDT by Mears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
It did happen and to pretend it didn’t happen is to deny the truth

no, it actually didn't..there are many and varied reasons why a legitimate marriage didn't take place, and a group of people study the particulars and make a decision.

what if it is found that the couple were first cousins?.....what if one or the other people had entered into a previous marriage....what if the husband, or the wife were incapable of consummating the marriage.....what if either one stated that they were unwilling to have children....wwhat if one or the other were still bound by a vow of celebacy or chastity...

16 posted on 09/22/2014 8:37:21 PM PDT by terycarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: terycarl

So please cite for me, Chapter and Verse, wherein Jesus mentioned annulment.

Take your time.


17 posted on 09/22/2014 8:38:23 PM PDT by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Mears
I was married in the Catholic Church and am now divorced. I am NOT pathetic.

of course you are not pathetic....however, if you divorce, and remarry, without an annulment, you are denying biblical and Catholic truth and that is pathetic.

18 posted on 09/22/2014 8:42:09 PM PDT by terycarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: terycarl

Bunny in the hat trick. Now you see it....now you don’t.

Pathetic.


19 posted on 09/22/2014 9:03:40 PM PDT by bonfire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

I think you’ll wait an eternity.


20 posted on 09/22/2014 9:20:11 PM PDT by RginTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-36 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson