OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 26, 2014, 02:13:03 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The Myth of Schism  (Read 14375 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #90 on: June 08, 2011, 02:01:22 AM »

Am I correct that under Canon Law the legal legitimacy of any children born of the voided marriage is not called into question?
Yes, that's right. According to this Orwellian logic, there was no marriage but the children are legitimate!
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #91 on: June 08, 2011, 02:09:12 AM »

How about spending time and money on a wedding, which is what Stanley was talking about, or investing time and money (in addition to blood, sweat and tears) in a marriage, which I think he was implying (do correct me Stanley if I assUme too much).
I don't think you are assUme-ing too much.
 laugh laugh laugh
As everyone knows, fewer and fewer Catholic couples are exchanging marriage vows and more and more are choosing to live together without getting married. Could part of the reason be because they fear that in the end, a Catholic marriage tribunal will declare their marriage totally null and void? Why then put all this effort and time and money into a Catholic marriage ceremony in the first place, when in the end there is a 90% chance, if contested, that you weren't really married in the first place?
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #92 on: June 08, 2011, 02:14:56 AM »

What purpose does an annullment, as opposed to a divorce (which you have to get in the US before you can start the annullment process, as I assUme you know), serve?
I don't know, except that a question has been raised as to whether or not the annulment process as it has developed after Vatican II, is a charade to provide cover for giving a Church approved divorce while at the same time denying that it is a divorce.
This was not the case before Vatican II, when annulments were given out rarely and only for very serious and obvious impediments that would prevent a valid marriage from taking place.
Logged
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,601


Pokrov


WWW
~
« Reply #93 on: June 08, 2011, 09:02:35 AM »

Christ is ascended!
In the past, annulments were only granted for extremely serious reasons, such as when the other partner had hidden the fact that he was already  married. Today almost anyone in the USA can get a marriage annulment by citing some defect in consent at the time of the taking of the marriage vows. Since in some areas,  about  95% of all Catholics in the USA who apply for an annulment, do get one, then who out there in the Catholic Church is actually married Sacramentally?  Why bother to get married, if in the end, some Catholic marriage tribunal tells you that you were never married in the first place? All that time and money that you spent to go through what you thought was a marriage ceremony in the Catholic Church, was actually totally null and void. All those years, that you spent raising a family and being loyal to someone who you thought was your wife, was really never your wife in the first place. And of course, this never whould have come up, except for your medical overweight condition and the fact that your wife has found herself a slimmer boyfriend. If you had not developed this condition, which was due in part anyway to your wife's cooking,  your wife would have stayed with you and the marriage would have been valid.  
As far as annulment always being the practice in the Roman Church, it really is not true that there has been no change in the conditions required to get an annulment. In the USA, in 1929, 1930, there were something like 10 or so marriage annulments in the whole USA. In recent times, it has gone as high as 60,000 marriage annulments per year. That's an enormous increase due to the watering down of conditions required to get a marriage annulment.
I've heard that the proof that ones marriage is actually Sacramental is if they stay together. You may think the high annulment number is scandalous, but the sad reality is that divorces are not going to go away. Personally, I would rather see the Church acknowledge marriages null and void rather than take a strict, hardline approach and there be thousands who are no longer able to receive Christ in the Holy Eucharist. To me, the latter would be a much sadder situation.

I agree in the sense that the Catholic Church is, shudder, shudder, using a form of 'economia' in the modern use of the annulment process. Since they boxed themselves into a quasi-dogmatic corner centuries ago on the issue when neither eastern ecclesiastical divorces or western annulments were the norm, changing life-styles in the modern world required a 'reboot' so to speak.

As to the proof required by a marriage tribunal, does anyone have a Roman Canon Law understanding of the annulment process and the specific justifications used to determine that a marriage was 'null and void' ab initio? The adbridged version would suffice.

The bolded section cited by Wyatt, to say the least, strikes me as a perversion of the legal maxim  'res ipsa loquitur'. It is about as bold a statement as 'I know you are dead because you are dead.' Yes, that is a truth but...so what? There has to be more, I would think.

Am I correct that under Canon Law the legal legitimacy of any children born of the voided marriage is not called into question? I make that assumption because that is the civil law result when a court of law annuls a marriage in most states. Of course the statutory grounds for a civil annulment are very narrow and would not likely be applicable in Canon Law proceedings or else the numbers of such Canon Law annulments would be much smaller than is reported in the US.  Thank you!
Btw, there is an interesting precedent in IL where a man was given an civil annulment, because he was a communicant of the Vatican, and the woman he married had been married before and divorced, and she had hid that fact.  The basis of the annulment was fraud, given his church's requirements.  I'm curious  if his church required him to get an annulment from them afterwards.

Under IL, the children have standing to challenge or defend the validity of their parents marriage, given their legitimacy is at stake I suppose (the statutes name them, but I don't recall if the case law explains why).

My two cents is that the idea as to whether or not a man and a woman are 'committed' at the time of the wedding is a sophistic legalism coined to justify what is really a 'wink wink' divorce. Call it what you want, justify it with the best of scholastic argument, but as Shakespeare said, 'A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.' Or as Groucho Marx observed, 'If it looks and quacks like a duck, ITS A DUCK.'

Stanley's point is valid. My son married four years ago after a five year relationship with his future wife, the families spent much money on a beautiful wedding, many emotions were involved on the part of all parties. Perhaps celibate clergy can't fathom that, huh?

Did the couple not affirm to us, to our priests and to God that they were (and happily remain) 'committed' to each other when they dared to stand in the nave of the Church and have their marriage sanctified before man and in the presence of God? Give me a break. This is nothing more than a bare, naked legalism and perpetrates a fraud of faith upon those pious Catholics who entered into a marriage IN GOOD FAITH and WITHOUT IMPEDIMENT! Does not the Catholic Church still publish bans in anticipation of a sacramental marriage?

I could go on and on, but I think that my point is clear.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2011, 09:03:32 AM by podkarpatska » Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,152



« Reply #94 on: June 08, 2011, 09:20:41 AM »

Christ is ascended!
Preparation is key as we move more and more away from stability of community and extended family.  Also the best data says that living together sexually prior to marriage is a significant factor in the failure rate of modern marriages.   It is a mess.  I think the annulment process is a good one.  I think a Church approved divorce is all right as well, though I do think I prefer the annulment for a number of reasons.

M.
What purpose does an annullment, as opposed to a divorce (which you have to get in the US before you can start the annullment process, as I assUme you know), serve?

The obvious difference would be remarriage. Are you looking for more of an answer than that?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
bogdan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,615



« Reply #95 on: June 08, 2011, 09:25:20 AM »

I think the real problem is that Christians have ceased to see marriage as a function of Christ, and see it as a function of consent between two individuals. We may pay lip service to Christ, but for all intents and purposes He is an afterthought, rather than the central cause.

If it's just two people entering into a contract, it could indeed be nullified if it came out that one of them somehow never intended to be committed to said contract. But if marriage is a function of Christ, it must be treated like the sacrament it is. How could the couple possibly be divided, except for a select few grievous reasons?
« Last Edit: June 08, 2011, 09:26:58 AM by bogdan » Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #96 on: June 08, 2011, 09:43:16 AM »

I think the real problem is that Christians have ceased to see marriage as a function of Christ, and see it as a function of consent between two individuals. We may pay lip service to Christ, but for all intents and purposes He is an afterthought, rather than the central cause.

If it's just two people entering into a contract, it could indeed be nullified if it came out that one of them somehow never intended to be committed to said contract. But if marriage is a function of Christ, it must be treated like the sacrament it is. How could the couple possibly be divided, except for a select few grievous reasons?

The grounds for divorce in the Russian Orthodox and Greek Orthodox Churches are listed in the opening message at

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,18990.msg279933/topicseen.html#msg279933
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #97 on: June 08, 2011, 10:15:02 AM »

Christ is ascended!
Preparation is key as we move more and more away from stability of community and extended family.  Also the best data says that living together sexually prior to marriage is a significant factor in the failure rate of modern marriages.   It is a mess.  I think the annulment process is a good one.  I think a Church approved divorce is all right as well, though I do think I prefer the annulment for a number of reasons.

M.
What purpose does an annullment, as opposed to a divorce (which you have to get in the US before you can start the annullment process, as I assUme you know), serve?

The obvious difference would be remarriage. Are you looking for more of an answer than that?
I'm sorry, I should have been clearer: a purpose that doesn't consist of Corban to serve hypocrisy in rendering the tribute of vice to virtue, which is even more destructive to the institution of marriage than divorce. And since you can get remarried after a divorce, your answer lacks substance.  So more than a euphemism I'm looking for.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2011, 10:18:56 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #98 on: June 08, 2011, 10:16:10 AM »

Even deeper therapy is needed, beyond preparation for wedding couples.  We have to go from an entitled culture to a culture which knows and values sacrifice.

Amen. I'll never forget the part of my catechumenate where we talked about marriage. My priest was blunt. "Romanticism is an illusion, and marriage is not about happiness. Marriage is martyrdom, working your fingers to the bone and throwing everything away for the sake of another person. You love someone as much as you let them cost you."

Completely blew my mind. But it makes total sense. Until people view marriage that way, nothing will change.

Bravo!!  Right indeed and those who do not want to hear it, or cannot fathom how that might work, or reject it outright, or reject it tacitly are not capable of forging a sacramental marriage regardless of how much money they spend, how much time they spend and how many children they get.   That is, aside from the formal impediments to marriage, the basis for all nullity of the sacrament.

Mary
Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #99 on: June 08, 2011, 10:20:10 AM »

Christ is ascended!
Am I correct that under Canon Law the legal legitimacy of any children born of the voided marriage is not called into question?
Yes, that's right. According to this Orwellian logic, there was no marriage but the children are legitimate!

Why don't they make the couple virgins while they are at it.  That way they can be virgin births as well. Roll Eyes
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #100 on: June 08, 2011, 10:32:05 AM »

Even deeper therapy is needed, beyond preparation for wedding couples.  We have to go from an entitled culture to a culture which knows and values sacrifice.

Amen. I'll never forget the part of my catechumenate where we talked about marriage. My priest was blunt. "Romanticism is an illusion, and marriage is not about happiness. Marriage is martyrdom, working your fingers to the bone and throwing everything away for the sake of another person. You love someone as much as you let them cost you."

Completely blew my mind. But it makes total sense. Until people view marriage that way, nothing will change.

Bravo!!  Right indeed and those who do not want to hear it, or cannot fathom how that might work, or reject it outright, or reject it tacitly are not capable of forging a sacramental marriage regardless of how much money they spend, how much time they spend and how many children they get.   That is, aside from the formal impediments to marriage, the basis for all nullity of the sacrament.
An odd position for the Vatican to take, as it holds the couple as the ministers of the sacrament. Ex opere operato.  And if they are not properly disposed, and that nullifies the sacrament, does the unworthy (and how many of us are worthy) communicant change the Eucharist into bread and wine when he receives it?  Does the unworthiness of the catechumen, who has not yet been enlightened, empty the baptismal waters of the Spirit when he goes in?  Does the unworthy candidate (and who is worthy?) make void the hands laid on him?

The truism is determinative: if you wait until you are ready to get married, you never will (goes for having kids too).  Given that, basically no one can have the sufficient faculties to get married.

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #101 on: June 08, 2011, 10:36:49 AM »

Even deeper therapy is needed, beyond preparation for wedding couples.  We have to go from an entitled culture to a culture which knows and values sacrifice.

Amen. I'll never forget the part of my catechumenate where we talked about marriage. My priest was blunt. "Romanticism is an illusion, and marriage is not about happiness. Marriage is martyrdom, working your fingers to the bone and throwing everything away for the sake of another person. You love someone as much as you let them cost you."

Completely blew my mind. But it makes total sense. Until people view marriage that way, nothing will change.

Bravo!!  Right indeed and those who do not want to hear it, or cannot fathom how that might work, or reject it outright, or reject it tacitly are not capable of forging a sacramental marriage regardless of how much money they spend, how much time they spend and how many children they get.   That is, aside from the formal impediments to marriage, the basis for all nullity of the sacrament.

Mary

I think what is being lost in this discussion is the fact that what is being annulled is a sacramental marriage.  The legitimacy of the children is secured because of the fact that a marriage is both a civil and ecclesial event, and its dissolution is also a civil and an ecclesial event.  

The Church certainly recognizes civil marriages....and blesses them sacramentally when it is requested of them to do so.  A divorce must occur before the decree of nullity, because the civil marriage must be dissolved in order to nullify the sacramental marriage, which is part of the sacramental rite but neither civil act nor ecclesial act is fully bound unless the marriage is intact as it was initially contracted. So it is possible to have a civil divorce but still be sacramentally married in the eyes of God, and thereby in the eyes of the Church.  To say that there never was a sacramental marriage without the dissolution of the civil act is an absurdity.

If divorce does not strip the legitimacy of the children then neither does the recognition that the sacramental marriage is null.

Logged

elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #102 on: June 08, 2011, 10:43:40 AM »

Even deeper therapy is needed, beyond preparation for wedding couples.  We have to go from an entitled culture to a culture which knows and values sacrifice.

Amen. I'll never forget the part of my catechumenate where we talked about marriage. My priest was blunt. "Romanticism is an illusion, and marriage is not about happiness. Marriage is martyrdom, working your fingers to the bone and throwing everything away for the sake of another person. You love someone as much as you let them cost you."

Completely blew my mind. But it makes total sense. Until people view marriage that way, nothing will change.

Bravo!!  Right indeed and those who do not want to hear it, or cannot fathom how that might work, or reject it outright, or reject it tacitly are not capable of forging a sacramental marriage regardless of how much money they spend, how much time they spend and how many children they get.   That is, aside from the formal impediments to marriage, the basis for all nullity of the sacrament.

Mary

I think what is being lost in this discussion is the fact that what is being annulled is a sacramental marriage.  The legitimacy of the children is secured because of the fact that a marriage is both a civil and ecclesial event, and its dissolution is also a civil and an ecclesial event.  

The Church certainly recognizes civil marriages....and blesses them sacramentally when it is requested of them to do so.  A divorce must occur before the decree of nullity, because the civil marriage must be dissolved in order to nullify the sacramental marriage, which is part of the sacramental rite but neither civil act nor ecclesial act is fully bound unless the marriage is intact as it was initially contracted. So it is possible to have a civil divorce but still be sacramentally married in the eyes of God, and thereby in the eyes of the Church.  To say that there never was a sacramental marriage without the dissolution of the civil act is an absurdity.

If divorce does not strip the legitimacy of the children then neither does the recognition that the sacramental marriage is null.



Also what is not well understood, obviously, is the fact that the couple binds one another with their vows before God, but it is the Church that gives the blessing for them to do so and it is the Church's blessing which seals the sacramental marriage.  It is of a very different character from Eucharist or any of the sacraments' if initiation.

One of the interesting things in my Catholic Church's understanding of espousal:  I am able, with the blessing of my spiritual father, to take a solemn vow before God privately to offer my life to him in a consecrated espousal.  It is not the same thing as taking public vows where I would recognized by the whole Church as a religious...HOWEVER that private vow and the blessing of my spiritual father is of such weight that I would have to appeal to Rome to be released from that vow, should I ever want to marry, or simply be released from the vow.   But both elements have to be there.  I have to make the vow and the vow must be blessed by a minister of the Catholic Church.
Logged

Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #103 on: June 08, 2011, 10:48:45 AM »


I think what is being lost in this discussion is the fact that what is being annulled is a sacramental marriage.
 

Blimey,  I don't know what elementary school taught you your Catholic doctrine  ~~   I'm shocked!!!  A sacramental marriage CANNOT be annulled.   It is only because NO sacramental marriage took place that a declaration of nullity is possible.

Catholics, take a little care when Elijahmaria puts her fingers in the pie.  Wink
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #104 on: June 08, 2011, 10:50:46 AM »

Even deeper therapy is needed, beyond preparation for wedding couples.  We have to go from an entitled culture to a culture which knows and values sacrifice.

Amen. I'll never forget the part of my catechumenate where we talked about marriage. My priest was blunt. "Romanticism is an illusion, and marriage is not about happiness. Marriage is martyrdom, working your fingers to the bone and throwing everything away for the sake of another person. You love someone as much as you let them cost you."

Completely blew my mind. But it makes total sense. Until people view marriage that way, nothing will change.

Bravo!!  Right indeed and those who do not want to hear it, or cannot fathom how that might work, or reject it outright, or reject it tacitly are not capable of forging a sacramental marriage regardless of how much money they spend, how much time they spend and how many children they get.   That is, aside from the formal impediments to marriage, the basis for all nullity of the sacrament.

Mary

I think what is being lost in this discussion is the fact that what is being annulled is a sacramental marriage.  The legitimacy of the children is secured because of the fact that a marriage is both a civil and ecclesial event, and its dissolution is also a civil and an ecclesial event.  

The Church certainly recognizes civil marriages....and blesses them sacramentally when it is requested of them to do so.  A divorce must occur before the decree of nullity, because the civil marriage must be dissolved in order to nullify the sacramental marriage, which is part of the sacramental rite but neither civil act nor ecclesial act is fully bound unless the marriage is intact as it was initially contracted. So it is possible to have a civil divorce but still be sacramentally married in the eyes of God, and thereby in the eyes of the Church.  To say that there never was a sacramental marriage without the dissolution of the civil act is an absurdity.

If divorce does not strip the legitimacy of the children then neither does the recognition that the sacramental marriage is null.



Also what is not well understood, obviously, is the fact that the couple binds one another with their vows before God, but it is the Church that gives the blessing for them to do so and it is the Church's blessing which seals the sacramental marriage.  It is of a very different character from Eucharist or any of the sacraments' if initiation.

One of the interesting things in my Catholic Church's understanding of espousal:  I am able, with the blessing of my spiritual father, to take a solemn vow before God privately to offer my life to him in a consecrated espousal.  It is not the same thing as taking public vows where I would recognized by the whole Church as a religious...HOWEVER that private vow and the blessing of my spiritual father is of such weight that I would have to appeal to Rome to be released from that vow, should I ever want to marry, or simply be released from the vow.   But both elements have to be there.  I have to make the vow and the vow must be blessed by a minister of the Catholic Church.

Could you cite the canon law on this?
Logged
synLeszka
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Posts: 532


« Reply #105 on: June 08, 2011, 11:10:48 AM »

These threads are often onesided. Not every Catholic who has divorced and remarried wants the Church to change the discipline. Popular newspaper writer and sci-fi author Rafał Ziemkiewicz, said that he prefers to believe in a high standard of faith, and not in a lax Orthodox or Protestant moral relativism. Excessive amounts of incense doesn't sanctify.

Rafał Ziemkiewicz winner of the 1997 European Science Fiction Society Best Author Award
Logged
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,601


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #106 on: June 08, 2011, 11:13:14 AM »

Even deeper therapy is needed, beyond preparation for wedding couples.  We have to go from an entitled culture to a culture which knows and values sacrifice.

Amen. I'll never forget the part of my catechumenate where we talked about marriage. My priest was blunt. "Romanticism is an illusion, and marriage is not about happiness. Marriage is martyrdom, working your fingers to the bone and throwing everything away for the sake of another person. You love someone as much as you let them cost you."

Completely blew my mind. But it makes total sense. Until people view marriage that way, nothing will change.

Bravo!!  Right indeed and those who do not want to hear it, or cannot fathom how that might work, or reject it outright, or reject it tacitly are not capable of forging a sacramental marriage regardless of how much money they spend, how much time they spend and how many children they get.   That is, aside from the formal impediments to marriage, the basis for all nullity of the sacrament.
An odd position for the Vatican to take, as it holds the couple as the ministers of the sacrament. Ex opere operato.  And if they are not properly disposed, and that nullifies the sacrament, does the unworthy (and how many of us are worthy) communicant change the Eucharist into bread and wine when he receives it?  Does the unworthiness of the catechumen, who has not yet been enlightened, empty the baptismal waters of the Spirit when he goes in?  Does the unworthy candidate (and who is worthy?) make void the hands laid on him?

The truism is determinative: if you wait until you are ready to get married, you never will (goes for having kids too).  Given that, basically no one can have the sufficient faculties to get married.



That is exactly what I was trying to get to. Thank you for carrying out the argument to its logical conclusion. (And I recoil at the stupid charge that Orthodox are against logic. A childish reduction of our critique of scholasticism if ever there were one.)
Logged
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,601


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #107 on: June 08, 2011, 11:22:02 AM »

There has been a lot of posturing on the part of my Roman Catholic friends who are attempting to defend the process of annulment as it is understood by 21st century Roman Catholics.

However, I have yet to see anyone post a simple set of guidelines which govern the process. Since the Roman church seems to have developed Canon Law on many issues that may seem to constitute minutiae to the Orthodox mind, surely there must be some set of rules for the layman to refer to.

Is the problem here the difference in the theology of the west and the east behind the sacrament of marriage which apparently makes each's other's concerns and objections obscure to one holding the 'other' view?

Also, from the Orthodox, if anyone knows, are there not grounds for annulment within Orthodox theology as well that are separate and distinct from those permitted for divorce. If so, please post them so that we could contrast them with the Roman grounds for annulment.

Perhaps the mods might like to split this topic off from the original topic as we have really gone off into a whole 'nother dimension! (for once an interesting and relevant one at that!)
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,152



« Reply #108 on: June 08, 2011, 11:22:53 AM »


I think what is being lost in this discussion is the fact that what is being annulled is a sacramental marriage.
 

Blimey,  I don't know what elementary school taught you your Catholic doctrine  ~~   I'm shocked!!!  A sacramental marriage CANNOT be annulled.   It is only because NO sacramental marriage took place that a declaration of nullity is possible.

I believe what Elijahmaria is saying is that when there's an annullment, it means that there's no sacramental marriage, but it doesn't mean that there's no civil marriage.

Catholics, take a little care when Elijahmaria puts her fingers in the pie.  Wink

Don't worry, I'm always careful about people putting their fingers in the pie.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #109 on: June 08, 2011, 11:26:20 AM »


I think what is being lost in this discussion is the fact that what is being annulled is a sacramental marriage.
 

Blimey,  I don't know what elementary school taught you your Catholic doctrine  ~~   I'm shocked!!!  A sacramental marriage CANNOT be annulled.   It is only because NO sacramental marriage took place that a declaration of nullity is possible.

Catholics, take a little care when Elijahmaria puts her fingers in the pie.  Wink

Ya, you betcha!!!  I was rushing.  What is being declared is the nullity of a sacramental marriage.
Logged

elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #110 on: June 08, 2011, 11:29:01 AM »


I think what is being lost in this discussion is the fact that what is being annulled is a sacramental marriage.
 

Blimey,  I don't know what elementary school taught you your Catholic doctrine  ~~   I'm shocked!!!  A sacramental marriage CANNOT be annulled.   It is only because NO sacramental marriage took place that a declaration of nullity is possible.

I believe what Elijahmaria is saying is that when there's an annullment, it means that there's no sacramental marriage, but it doesn't mean that there's no civil marriage.

Catholics, take a little care when Elijahmaria puts her fingers in the pie.  Wink

Don't worry, I'm always careful about people putting their fingers in the pie.

When my son was a boy, I used to have to bake three pies to get one to last two days.  Now THERE was a man with his fingers in the pie.  When he was very little I lost control of him and he starved for several years before I recovered him...no joke...Took years for him to willingly share food and he is as thin as a rail and eats like a bird...for those who know how birds eat.
Logged

Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,152



« Reply #111 on: June 08, 2011, 11:30:17 AM »

There has been a lot of posturing on the part of my Roman Catholic friends who are attempting to defend the process of annulment as it is understood by 21st century Roman Catholics.

However, I have yet to see anyone post a simple set of guidelines which govern the process.

There's probably no simple answer as to why none of us have done so, but I'd say one big factor is that many of us are frustrated with it ourselves.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #112 on: June 08, 2011, 11:30:51 AM »

a lax Orthodox or Protestant moral relativism.

There is an enormous problem with this statement.

From the 5th century the laws governing marriage and diviorce and sacramental second were codified in the Catholic Church of the East.  This Eastern section of the Church even included the Byzantine provinces of southern Italy, which took the authority of the Patriarch of Constanstinople right up to the gates of Rome.

Now, if the Pope were truly head of the Church, the only conclusion is that from the 5th century onwards he gave his apostolic blessing to divorce and sacramental second marriage.  He gave his blessing for this in the greater part of the Church which he headed because the Eastern section of the Catholic Church was more populous than the Western.  This continued up to 1054 when the Catholic Church of the East split with Catholic Rome.

The Pope permitted hundreds upon hundreds of Eastern and Southern Italian bishops in his Church to approve of divorce and remarriage!!  

So, is it true?  The Pope allowed divorce and remarriage in his Church, and moreover in the larger part of his church, for 600 years?  
Logged
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,601


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #113 on: June 08, 2011, 11:30:59 AM »


I think what is being lost in this discussion is the fact that what is being annulled is a sacramental marriage.
 

Blimey,  I don't know what elementary school taught you your Catholic doctrine  ~~   I'm shocked!!!  A sacramental marriage CANNOT be annulled.   It is only because NO sacramental marriage took place that a declaration of nullity is possible.

I believe what Elijahmaria is saying is that when there's an annullment, it means that there's no sacramental marriage, but it doesn't mean that there's no civil marriage.

Catholics, take a little care when Elijahmaria puts her fingers in the pie.  Wink

Don't worry, I'm always careful about people putting their fingers in the pie.

In other words, the tribunal needs to find an impediment to a sacramental marriage which existed at the time of the ceremony, thereby rendering the ceremony 'lacking in sacramental grace' which would have the legal effect of restoring the 'status quo ante' or making the ceremony 'void ab initio.'

That much I understand and if, for example, two Orthodox were married in good faith and later, without their knowledge of the fact at the time of the ceremony, it was discovered that they were related by blood to a degree which would have prevented the administration of the sacrament, that marriage would be annuled by the Orthodox and the 'status quo ante' would be restored. Even more egegious, if the groom had that knowledge but deceived the priest and the bride's family - that would be fraud - another separate ground for annulment.

Those are easy examples and ones that would apply to the west and the east. Let's give up some more common ones used today by the Roman tribunals.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2011, 11:39:00 AM by podkarpatska » Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #114 on: June 08, 2011, 11:31:11 AM »

That is a great photo.  I wish I could read Polish!!  If his work is as lively and wry as his face, it must be good!!

These threads are often onesided. Not every Catholic who has divorced and remarried wants the Church to change the discipline. Popular newspaper writer and sci-fi author Rafał Ziemkiewicz, said that he prefers to believe in a high standard of faith, and not in a lax Orthodox or Protestant moral relativism. Excessive amounts of incense doesn't sanctify.

Rafał Ziemkiewicz winner of the 1997 European Science Fiction Society Best Author Award
Logged

elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #115 on: June 08, 2011, 11:33:49 AM »


I think what is being lost in this discussion is the fact that what is being annulled is a sacramental marriage.
 

Blimey,  I don't know what elementary school taught you your Catholic doctrine  ~~   I'm shocked!!!  A sacramental marriage CANNOT be annulled.   It is only because NO sacramental marriage took place that a declaration of nullity is possible.

I believe what Elijahmaria is saying is that when there's an annullment, it means that there's no sacramental marriage, but it doesn't mean that there's no civil marriage.

Catholics, take a little care when Elijahmaria puts her fingers in the pie.  Wink

Don't worry, I'm always careful about people putting their fingers in the pie.

In other words, the tribunal needs to find an impediment to a sacramental marriage which existed at the time of the ceremony, thereby rendering the ceremony 'lacking in sacramental grace' which would have the legal effect of restoring the 'status quo ante' or making the ceremony 'void ab initio.'

That much I understand and if, for example, two Orthodox were married in good faith and later, without their knowledge of the fact at the time of the ceremony, it was discovered that they were related by blood to a degree which would have permitted the administration of the sacrament, that marriage would be annuled by the Orthodox and the 'status quo ante' would be restored. Even more egegious, if the groom had that knowledge but deceived the priest and the bride's family - that would be fraud - another separate ground for annulment.

Those are easy examples and ones that would apply to the west and the east. Let's give up some more common ones used today by the Roman tribunals.

I think it is pared back pretty far with respect to the common culture which separates families rather than binding them together to the land or factory or mine.  I think, again, that we need to do better at preparing young men and women for the task before them...and do whatever we can to keep them from cohabiting in advance.
Logged

Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #116 on: June 08, 2011, 11:34:51 AM »


Also, from the Orthodox, if anyone knows, are there not grounds for annulment within Orthodox theology as well that are separate and distinct from those permitted for divorce.

I can think of one.  There may be more.   The Church declares a marriage null and void if one of the parties has tricked the other about their sex and it is in fact a same-sex marriage.  There is no need for a divorce.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #117 on: June 08, 2011, 11:38:28 AM »


I think what is being lost in this discussion is the fact that what is being annulled is a sacramental marriage.
 

Blimey,  I don't know what elementary school taught you your Catholic doctrine  ~~   I'm shocked!!!  A sacramental marriage CANNOT be annulled.   It is only because NO sacramental marriage took place that a declaration of nullity is possible.

Catholics, take a little care when Elijahmaria puts her fingers in the pie.  Wink

Ya, you betcha!!!  I was rushing.  What is being declared is the nullity of a sacramental marriage.

Wrong!  wrong! wrong!     What is being declared is that no marriage ever existed at all.

You cannot declare a sacramental marriage null.
Logged
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,601


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #118 on: June 08, 2011, 11:39:53 AM »

That is a great photo.  I wish I could read Polish!!  If his work is as lively and wry as his face, it must be good!!

Wink
When my father gave me that look, I knew I was cooked!
« Last Edit: June 08, 2011, 11:41:09 AM by podkarpatska » Logged
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,601


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #119 on: June 08, 2011, 11:43:14 AM »


I think what is being lost in this discussion is the fact that what is being annulled is a sacramental marriage.
 

Blimey,  I don't know what elementary school taught you your Catholic doctrine  ~~   I'm shocked!!!  A sacramental marriage CANNOT be annulled.   It is only because NO sacramental marriage took place that a declaration of nullity is possible.

Catholics, take a little care when Elijahmaria puts her fingers in the pie.  Wink

Ya, you betcha!!!  I was rushing.  What is being declared is the nullity of a sacramental marriage.

Wrong!  wrong! wrong!     What is being declared is that no marriage ever existed at all.

You cannot declare a sacramental marriage null.

I think that the civil law carried this over in civil annulments in the Anglo-American system that the legal effect of an annulment is to determine that the ceremony was void ab initio and that the status quo ante was restored. ( Latin for : Void at the beginning and the prior legal status of the parties is restored.)
« Last Edit: June 08, 2011, 11:43:48 AM by podkarpatska » Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #120 on: June 08, 2011, 11:46:12 AM »


That much I understand and if, for example, two Orthodox were married in good faith and later, without their knowledge of the fact at the time of the ceremony, it was discovered that they were related by blood to a degree which would have prevented the administration of the sacrament, that marriage would be annuled by the Orthodox and the 'status quo ante' would be restored.

Not sure about that but I can only speak certainly of the Serbian Church.  Such a marriage would probably stand as a marriage. Such horrible examples as father to daughter marriage would be annulled but most of the marriages within the forbidden degrees of both blood and spiritual relationship would be allowed to continue.   What would certainly happen though  is that the officiating priest would be defrocked.  The canons require this no matter whether the priest were simply innocent or negligent in his enquires prior to the marriage.  Poor priest!
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #121 on: June 08, 2011, 11:50:56 AM »


Those are easy examples and ones that would apply to the west and the east. Let's give up some more common ones used today by the Roman tribunals.

My husband spends too much time at the gym. This proves he did not have the necessary understanding to commit to a true marriage at the time of our marriage.

My wife is excessively devoted to her mother.  This shows she lacked the maturity to make the necessary commitment to the husband at the time of marriage.
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #122 on: June 08, 2011, 12:04:04 PM »


I think what is being lost in this discussion is the fact that what is being annulled is a sacramental marriage.
 

Blimey,  I don't know what elementary school taught you your Catholic doctrine  ~~   I'm shocked!!!  A sacramental marriage CANNOT be annulled.   It is only because NO sacramental marriage took place that a declaration of nullity is possible.

Catholics, take a little care when Elijahmaria puts her fingers in the pie.  Wink

Ya, you betcha!!!  I was rushing.  What is being declared is the nullity of a sacramental marriage.

Wrong!  wrong! wrong!     What is being declared is that no marriage ever existed at all.

You cannot declare a sacramental marriage null.

Blah...you are right...

No time for a third try, I have to go get mother at hospital.  We are moving to residential rehab today.  Keep her in your prayers and I'll try to remember to say this thing properly the FIRST time.

Logged

elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #123 on: June 08, 2011, 12:05:44 PM »


Those are easy examples and ones that would apply to the west and the east. Let's give up some more common ones used today by the Roman tribunals.

My husband spends too much time at the gym. This proves he did not have the necessary understanding to commit to a true marriage at the time of our marriage.

My wife is excessively devoted to her mother.  This shows she lacked the maturity to make the necessary commitment to the husband at the time of marriage.

No.  It should NEVER be that frivolous.  I have never seen one or worked on one case that was that absurd.
Logged

Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #124 on: June 08, 2011, 12:26:39 PM »


Those are easy examples and ones that would apply to the west and the east. Let's give up some more common ones used today by the Roman tribunals.

My husband spends too much time at the gym. This proves he did not have the necessary understanding to commit to a true marriage at the time of our marriage.

My wife is excessively devoted to her mother.  This shows she lacked the maturity to make the necessary commitment to the husband at the time of marriage.

No.  It should NEVER be that frivolous.  I have never seen one or worked on one case that was that absurd.

Reasons for annulment listed in Judging Invalidity ©2002, By Fr. Lawrence G. Wrenn

Working out a couple of hours a day in the gym.
Being described as arrogant and selfish with an "I don't need anyone else" attitude.
Saving one's salary in a personal account.
Seeming to be obsessed with one's body (personal appearance).
Ignoring one's parents on one occasion when they came for a visit.
Seeing the world as his apple. (Psychiatric expert's term)
Never being satisfied with a gift given by one's spouse.
Feeling chronically disenfranchised in one's (spousal) relationship.
Not achieving the desired companionship and intimacy one wants in marriage.
Suffering abandonment issues over a father who died. Protecting herself by putting a hard shell around herself.
Suffering from low self-esteem, self-absorption, and a need for attention.
Lacking emphathy and fearing intimacy.
Comparing oneself to others and always finding them happier. About a month before the wedding he drove his mother to a family reunion, leaving her all alone to make preparations for the wedding.
The psychiatric expert described the respondent as porcupinish. He didn't want people near him; surprises he liked even less. It was noted in the proceedings, however, that he was in love with another woman.
The petitioner's mother always resented her. The mother was unreasonably strict and hypercritical.

Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #125 on: June 08, 2011, 01:37:25 PM »

Christ is ascended!
These threads are often onesided. Not every Catholic who has divorced and remarried wants the Church to change the discipline. Popular newspaper writer and sci-fi author Rafał Ziemkiewicz, said that he prefers to believe in a high standard of faith, and not in a lax Orthodox or Protestant moral relativism. Excessive amounts of incense doesn't sanctify.
Nor does a profusion of Corban, and the refusal to call a spade, a spade.

How does he feel about a lax Vatican moral relativism?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #126 on: June 08, 2011, 01:54:42 PM »

Christ is ascended!

I think what is being lost in this discussion is the fact that what is being annulled is a sacramental marriage.
 

Blimey,  I don't know what elementary school taught you your Catholic doctrine  ~~   I'm shocked!!!  A sacramental marriage CANNOT be annulled.   It is only because NO sacramental marriage took place that a declaration of nullity is possible.

I believe what Elijahmaria is saying is that when there's an annullment, it means that there's no sacramental marriage, but it doesn't mean that there's no civil marriage.
That's going to be a problem in places where there is no civil marriage, only religious.  And throughout most of its history, the Vatican has insisted, and got, absolute control over marriages.  Hence when Henry gave himself his annullment, Mary was barred from succession as being illegitimate.  And why, when Mary seized power, she nullified all the acts of the Church of England, starting with her parents annullment.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #127 on: June 08, 2011, 09:37:41 PM »

Reasons for annulment listed in Judging Invalidity ©2002, By Fr. Lawrence G. Wrenn

Working out a couple of hours a day in the gym.
Being described as arrogant and selfish with an "I don't need anyone else" attitude.
Saving one's salary in a personal account.
Seeming to be obsessed with one's body (personal appearance).
Ignoring one's parents on one occasion when they came for a visit.
Seeing the world as his apple. (Psychiatric expert's term)
Never being satisfied with a gift given by one's spouse.
Feeling chronically disenfranchised in one's (spousal) relationship.
Not achieving the desired companionship and intimacy one wants in marriage.
Suffering abandonment issues over a father who died. Protecting herself by putting a hard shell around herself.
Suffering from low self-esteem, self-absorption, and a need for attention.
Lacking emphathy and fearing intimacy.
Comparing oneself to others and always finding them happier. About a month before the wedding he drove his mother to a family reunion, leaving her all alone to make preparations for the wedding.
The psychiatric expert described the respondent as porcupinish. He didn't want people near him; surprises he liked even less. It was noted in the proceedings, however, that he was in love with another woman.
The petitioner's mother always resented her. The mother was unreasonably strict and hypercritical.


Since these are things that turn up in every marriage at one time or another, it supports the claim that just about any marriage can be annulled by a R. Catholic tribunal in the USA. 
Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #128 on: June 08, 2011, 09:42:16 PM »

That is a great photo.  I wish I could read Polish!!  If his work is as lively and wry as his face, it must be good!!

He is a great fantasy writer and an awful publicist.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,265

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #129 on: June 08, 2011, 11:25:59 PM »

I hate to be "that guy" but methinks this thread hath veered quite far from the OP. Does it need its own thread?
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,152



« Reply #130 on: June 08, 2011, 11:32:31 PM »

I hate to be "that guy" but methinks this thread hath veered quite far from the OP. Does it need its own thread?

Either that or this thread should be renamed.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,601


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #131 on: June 09, 2011, 11:43:53 AM »

Reasons for annulment listed in Judging Invalidity ©2002, By Fr. Lawrence G. Wrenn

Working out a couple of hours a day in the gym.
Being described as arrogant and selfish with an "I don't need anyone else" attitude.
Saving one's salary in a personal account.
Seeming to be obsessed with one's body (personal appearance).
Ignoring one's parents on one occasion when they came for a visit.
Seeing the world as his apple. (Psychiatric expert's term)
Never being satisfied with a gift given by one's spouse.
Feeling chronically disenfranchised in one's (spousal) relationship.
Not achieving the desired companionship and intimacy one wants in marriage.
Suffering abandonment issues over a father who died. Protecting herself by putting a hard shell around herself.
Suffering from low self-esteem, self-absorption, and a need for attention.
Lacking emphathy and fearing intimacy.
Comparing oneself to others and always finding them happier. About a month before the wedding he drove his mother to a family reunion, leaving her all alone to make preparations for the wedding.
The psychiatric expert described the respondent as porcupinish. He didn't want people near him; surprises he liked even less. It was noted in the proceedings, however, that he was in love with another woman.
The petitioner's mother always resented her. The mother was unreasonably strict and hypercritical.


Since these are things that turn up in every marriage at one time or another, it supports the claim that just about any marriage can be annulled by a R. Catholic tribunal in the USA. 

Wow, those sound like a list of grounds for civil divorce based upon mental cruelty or the infamous 'irreconcilable differences' back in the 'good old' fault-based divorced days in the US state laws.

Unless one believes in sorcery or predestination, how on earth are any of these a basis for determining the invalidity of a marriage from the beginning or ab initio. That isn't even creative legalism at work.

If these are the grounds that a Catholic Marital Tribunal really uses, no Catholic can ever, ever criticize the Orthodox with a straight face for the grounds we have established to obtain an ecclesiastical divorce without being a total hypocrite. As you know, I rarely get worked up over differences between us but this one is preposterous unless there is more here than meets the eye. Since no Catholic has posted to the contrary or in addition, it seems as if this may be the truth. Ugh.
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #132 on: June 09, 2011, 12:38:57 PM »

Reasons for annulment listed in Judging Invalidity ©2002, By Fr. Lawrence G. Wrenn

Working out a couple of hours a day in the gym.
Being described as arrogant and selfish with an "I don't need anyone else" attitude.
Saving one's salary in a personal account.
Seeming to be obsessed with one's body (personal appearance).
Ignoring one's parents on one occasion when they came for a visit.
Seeing the world as his apple. (Psychiatric expert's term)
Never being satisfied with a gift given by one's spouse.
Feeling chronically disenfranchised in one's (spousal) relationship.
Not achieving the desired companionship and intimacy one wants in marriage.
Suffering abandonment issues over a father who died. Protecting herself by putting a hard shell around herself.
Suffering from low self-esteem, self-absorption, and a need for attention.
Lacking emphathy and fearing intimacy.
Comparing oneself to others and always finding them happier. About a month before the wedding he drove his mother to a family reunion, leaving her all alone to make preparations for the wedding.
The psychiatric expert described the respondent as porcupinish. He didn't want people near him; surprises he liked even less. It was noted in the proceedings, however, that he was in love with another woman.
The petitioner's mother always resented her. The mother was unreasonably strict and hypercritical.


Since these are things that turn up in every marriage at one time or another, it supports the claim that just about any marriage can be annulled by a R. Catholic tribunal in the USA. 

Wow, those sound like a list of grounds for civil divorce based upon mental cruelty or the infamous 'irreconcilable differences' back in the 'good old' fault-based divorced days in the US state laws.

Unless one believes in sorcery or predestination, how on earth are any of these a basis for determining the invalidity of a marriage from the beginning or ab initio. That isn't even creative legalism at work.

If these are the grounds that a Catholic Marital Tribunal really uses, no Catholic can ever, ever criticize the Orthodox with a straight face for the grounds we have established to obtain an ecclesiastical divorce without being a total hypocrite. As you know, I rarely get worked up over differences between us but this one is preposterous unless there is more here than meets the eye. Since no Catholic has posted to the contrary or in addition, it seems as if this may be the truth. Ugh.

If you read through the list you will see that it is a list pertaining to one man.  Toward the end of the list is what I would call the "clincher":  " It was noted in the proceedings, however, that he was in love with another woman."  Here's another one: "Not achieving the desired companionship and intimacy one wants in marriage." and "Feeling chronically disenfranchised in one's (spousal) relationship. "  That first one is subtle but to me, knowing how these things are phrased, it speaks volumes, and the latter sentence makes it quite clear.  Both of these are strong impediments to sacramental marriage.  The first points to adultery and the second points to the refusal to engage in conjugal relations, and the rest indicates that neither one of them, if you read the last line,  were in any way prepared for marriage...from the start.

« Last Edit: June 09, 2011, 12:41:14 PM by elijahmaria » Logged

Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #133 on: June 09, 2011, 12:50:56 PM »


No time for a third try, I have to go get mother at hospital.  We are moving to residential rehab today.  Keep her in your prayers and I'll try to remember to say this thing properly the FIRST time.



Prayers for your mother, and for you.  And would you please pray for my youngest brother Frank (Raphael in Orthodoxy) who has just been told he has terminal lung cancer.
Logged
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,601


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #134 on: June 09, 2011, 01:22:10 PM »

Reasons for annulment listed in Judging Invalidity ©2002, By Fr. Lawrence G. Wrenn

Working out a couple of hours a day in the gym.
Being described as arrogant and selfish with an "I don't need anyone else" attitude.
Saving one's salary in a personal account.
Seeming to be obsessed with one's body (personal appearance).
Ignoring one's parents on one occasion when they came for a visit.
Seeing the world as his apple. (Psychiatric expert's term)
Never being satisfied with a gift given by one's spouse.
Feeling chronically disenfranchised in one's (spousal) relationship.
Not achieving the desired companionship and intimacy one wants in marriage.
Suffering abandonment issues over a father who died. Protecting herself by putting a hard shell around herself.
Suffering from low self-esteem, self-absorption, and a need for attention.
Lacking emphathy and fearing intimacy.
Comparing oneself to others and always finding them happier. About a month before the wedding he drove his mother to a family reunion, leaving her all alone to make preparations for the wedding.
The psychiatric expert described the respondent as porcupinish. He didn't want people near him; surprises he liked even less. It was noted in the proceedings, however, that he was in love with another woman.
The petitioner's mother always resented her. The mother was unreasonably strict and hypercritical.


Since these are things that turn up in every marriage at one time or another, it supports the claim that just about any marriage can be annulled by a R. Catholic tribunal in the USA. 

Wow, those sound like a list of grounds for civil divorce based upon mental cruelty or the infamous 'irreconcilable differences' back in the 'good old' fault-based divorced days in the US state laws.

Unless one believes in sorcery or predestination, how on earth are any of these a basis for determining the invalidity of a marriage from the beginning or ab initio. That isn't even creative legalism at work.

If these are the grounds that a Catholic Marital Tribunal really uses, no Catholic can ever, ever criticize the Orthodox with a straight face for the grounds we have established to obtain an ecclesiastical divorce without being a total hypocrite. As you know, I rarely get worked up over differences between us but this one is preposterous unless there is more here than meets the eye. Since no Catholic has posted to the contrary or in addition, it seems as if this may be the truth. Ugh.

If you read through the list you will see that it is a list pertaining to one man.  Toward the end of the list is what I would call the "clincher":  " It was noted in the proceedings, however, that he was in love with another woman."  Here's another one: "Not achieving the desired companionship and intimacy one wants in marriage." and "Feeling chronically disenfranchised in one's (spousal) relationship. "  That first one is subtle but to me, knowing how these things are phrased, it speaks volumes, and the latter sentence makes it quite clear.  Both of these are strong impediments to sacramental marriage.  The first points to adultery and the second points to the refusal to engage in conjugal relations, and the rest indicates that neither one of them, if you read the last line,  were in any way prepared for marriage...from the start.



I guess that we can agree to disagree for if you accept such nuances, a good lawyer, skilled in canon low or just civil law could argue a strong case before a tribunal that ANY marriage performed in the Church can be nullified ex post facto. That sticks in my craw.

I find it better to acknowledge the weaknesses and frailties that can afflict us in our human condition and allow for divorce as is the Orthodox position. Aren't we utilizing the very same human failings in our approaches and are they really mutually exclusive?

At least the Orthodox one is honest. Following this reasoning out to the hypothetical, I wonder if you could create a theology in the West that did away with the need to confess sin on the basis that the action that 'was' the sin may have been, or was a product of some extraneous third party factor or force, like the mother in law? It sounds like the explaining away of bad acts that drove me crazy working as a prosecutor in family court over the years. No one would have to take responsibility for bad consequences. There are relativistic Catholic theologians positing just such rubbish in the west.
Logged
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.179 seconds with 72 queries.