[metmom]

Except for one, these were women whose husbands left them for other women. Most of these women were divorced legally. At least one was a senior citizen, but others were “middle-aged.” I met them at a church meeting. The process of annulment would be very expensive for them, so they first met with their pastors and others who could counsel them on the annulment process. They were told the Church’s position is that, because they were married for so long before their husbands committed adultery and left, an annulment would not be granted.

Unless your last name is *Kennedy*.

A woman whose husband left her for another woman has no recourse. It was not her choice and she should not be punished for it.

[Tired of Taxes]

A woman whose husband left her for another woman has no recourse. It was not her choice and she should not be punished for it.

I share your opinion. I do understand the Church's position on this matter, though: An annulment means that the marriage never existed. After one spouse was faithful and devoted in a marriage that lasted many years, an annulment essentially declares that person as never married. The problem is, without an annulment, the faithful and devoted spouse ends up trapped forever if the other spouse leaves.

This issue was brought up at a church meeting I attended. The rule doesn't affect me at all, but I ended up arguing in support of these other women.

The rule doesn't affect me because I didn't follow the rules to begin with. I was a lapsed Catholic who married a protestant in his church. We never had the marriage blessed by the Catholic Church, so it was never recognized by the Catholic Church.

The rule affects only the people who followed the rules to begin with. So, I'm glad that Pope Francis at least addressed the issue of annulments.