www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Cardinal who promoted divorce rebuked by Melkite Patriarch

Good quote. I only wish that more Catholics understood that.

Dear Rev. Fr. Deacon,

I'm really after "precision" in cases of nullity where tribunals apply church law to particular cases where marriages have broken down.

You ask if tribunals have the authority to annul marriages. Of course, they do, otherwise people, like a relative of mine, wouldn't be able to get married to his current fiancee in church.

But I would love it if you would answer the question of how can any tribunal know that a couple who have entered the bonds of holy matrimony twenty or more years ago did NOT have the requisite disposition etc. to ensure their marriage was a valid/legitimate one, even after children are produced?

I'm asking, not telling.

As someone who has spent a good deal of my life studying social psychology, I'd like to know how a psychological report on the couple seeking annulment figures into the consideration of a Catholic marriage tribunal? What does THAT add to any theological/spiritual consideration? What does such a secular discipline, which is really indifferent to religious doctrine/morality, have to contribute here?

I can confirm for you that the only thing such a report can do is say that a couple's marriage has NOW broken down and that there is no real hope for a reconciliation. It cannot affirm what their state of mind/soul was twenty plus years ago when they received the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony.

So does this mean the tribunal will somehow have its view of a marriage breakdown impacted by a psychological report and its limitations? Again, I'm asking not telling.

Does the church have the authority to annul the thousands of marriages that have broken down? No one is questioning that. But as this is something that concerns the local Church, Rome has, in the past, raised issues as to how the local Church tribunals are allowing so many annulments.

Does Rome not have the authority to question local church tribunals' decisions then? If so, what does such questioning say about the decision-making processes of those tribunals?

The Orthodox Church's position is well laid down by Timothy Ware in his "The Orthodox Church" which can be easily Googled. I have the text with me, but not the time to write it out here.

In short, the Orthodox Church does indeed annul marriages but without going into the gymnastics of trying to decided of a couple with children had the requisite dispositions that a valid marriage requires.

Also, what about the children of a marriage that has been annulled by the Church?

The annulment that I'm most familiar with caused great consternation for the children whose mother asked if they were now "illegitimate" since her marriage to their father was not ever valid from the very beginning.

One of the members of the tribunal assured her that the children were legitimate since the Church recognizes the validity of the secular marriage certificate they received from city hall.

Now, how does that all fit in with Scripture, Tradition and Ecclesial praxis?

Again, I'm asking, not telling.

Alex

Alex and all,

Thanks for your detailed replies; my own opinion is that "God is in the details." I'd consider myself a details-type guy. The details, however, must be in reference to and derived from a correct fundamental concept. That's what needs clarification. Having children doesn't prove a marriage and the issue of (il)legitimacy and its impact is conditioned by culture and the mores of the times. There can be less "annulments" in Ukraine than the US because the former may be more Christian, may have a better, more developed ethical awareness, a moral maturity. If US tribunals and number of "annulments" are suspect consider this statement by Pope Francis: link [catholicnewsagency.com] .

I think you've answered one of my questions: both Catholic and Orthodox have an "annulment" process (Orthodox also having divorce). What about my other two questions? What's the fundamental theology? It is possible to raise all kinds of criticisms of and difficulties with the "annulment" process. Perhaps these words of Card. Newman mutatis mutandis will help make my point:
Apologia pro Vita Sua (1865) [newmanreader.org]

Dear Rev. Fr. Deacon,

You haven't really answered the issues other than do some grand-standing to defend the Church's infallibility on this matter. Noble, but it doesn't contribute to the points raised here.

What your post does show is that the Church is more willing today to, shall we say, "cancel" the marriage bond by way of an annulment for married Catholics for a wider range of reasons than were to be had years ago.

What we cannot ignore, although you seem to want to, is that societal (rather than theological) conditions today have led to the breakdown of many marriages.

There is a certain pragmatism in the approach of church authorities to this - especially in Europe where Catholics don't really bother with the "tedium" of annulments but simply leave their spouses to shack up with another partner.

There can be very little idealism in such arrangements. Our bishops in Europe are often at their wits' end in dealing with this situation.

It could very well be that the Pope's approach is a necessary one since marriage breakdown is just so widespread.

I understand all that. But we shouldn't try to present this new ecclesial pragmatism as anything other than what it really is.

Alex

Actually I've addressed your points and answered your questions individually and in detail ( link , link , link, link, link , link , link) and have discussed and corrected your hang-up with and misunderstanding of "infallibility" twice ( link, link ) -- I am bewildered that you bring up "infallibility" yet again. So it is not that I have not answered your objections but that you do not like my answers and, in particular, the very basic and few questions I have asked. You just keep repeating your dissatisfaction with the annulment process. You are entitled to be so dissatisfied but as they used to tell us in the army when we griped, that sounds like a personal problem.

Inform us and yourself of your understanding of the theology of marriage by answering directly my three questions. At least then there is a tangible basis and context for your complaints.