Marital Decree Of Nullity

[esperanza]

Hi all.

I am in the midst of an anullment case right now.

I am the respondent, am certain of the valid and sacramental nature of our marriage and am doing all I can to work with the Church in defending my marital bond.

I am representing myself in the process.

5 years ago God called me very clearly to remain faithful to my marriage and pray for reconciliation. God has provided me with a greater comfort and joy than I have ever known in the midst of shock and grief over my husband's abandonment of our marriage. I wouldn't have chosen this path for anything in the world, but I wouldn't change it now for anything.

The price of abandonment? A broken heart.

Of pondering life without children? A yearning soul.

Of constant and desparate prayers for reconciliation? An exhausted spirit.

Of knowing Christ so fully as my Faithful Father, my creator, my provider, my sustainer, my savior, my comforter, my protector, my guider, my life giver and my rock? Priceless.

Gotta give God Glory where Glory is due.

Anyways, In an effort to more fully grasp and understand the anullment process, in addition to prayer, scripture reading, reading of the cathechism and canon law, I am attempting to research the history of marital decrees of nullity with very little success. Does anyone have any information on when and how formal tribunal investigations of marriages began in our church?

Thanks so much for your help!

[ironmonk]

Here are a couple resources for you...

http://www.catholic-pages.com/dir/divorce.asp

http://www.tcld.net/

I hope they help.

God Bless, Love in Christ & Mary,

ironmonk

[esperanza]

Thanks so much for your response Ironmonk. Those sites had several articles I had not seen before. Unfortunately I don't see anything specific to the historical beginnings of formal cases.

Anyone else have any input?

[hyperdulia again]

i have no idea, but i'm praying for you. i have been since your first post at the old forum.

[benedict_x]

I cant help much with the info but you got my prayers sister.

Pax

[cmotherofpirl]

You can only be certain that in your eyes that your marriage was valid and sacramental.

You cannot answer that for your spouse.

God bless.

[esperanza]

Thanks for your responses Hyper, Benedict and C-mom . . . .

Thanks so much for your prayers. I can't tell you how much it means to me.

Perhaps I should have said I have a “sense of certainity” rather than “I am certain”. I must say however that this certainity I sense, does not come through my eyes. Through my eyes, concerning this issue, none of it makes any sense (except that God has allowed these circumstances in my life to enable me – and hopefully my husband - to know Him more fully). Through my eyes – without God - , never in a million years would I willingly seek reconciliation in my circumstances – nor would I passionately be faithful to and defend our marriage. I have learned that it does not matter (ultimately) how I see our marriage or how my spouse sees our marriage. What matters is how God sees. All that matters is truth. What matters is that we live our lives according to His truth. It is through scripture, church teachings and the Holy Spirit that my heart and mind have been transformed to obedience in this regard. Apart from God’s grace, I don’t trust my heart and mind for a minute. Scripture refers to the human heart as “deceitful” and reminds us that His ways are not our ways. I am certain in His ways. I know that no matter what happens in this life, if I follow His ways, if I walk in obedience to our God- if I give my life to Him, fully trust Him and open my heart to His grace–He will provide in ways I could never imagine.

Although I am not sure, it is likely that the heart and mind of my spouse and I conflict in seeing truth regarding our circumstances. I am grateful that Christ has raised marriage to the dignity of a sacrament and that our church defends Christ's teachings with such vigor. I have high hopes that the tribunal will conduct a thorough investigation of our bond in search of objective truth. It is my prayer that through the coorperation and prayers of my husband, myself, our witnesses and the tribunal workers - that God's truth will be evident to all (including me!) and received with open hearts and willing lives.

So back to the question . . . . . . Does anyone else have any information on when formal annulments began in the church?

Thanks for you help.

Esperanza

[esperanza]

Hey you guys! You always have answers for these sorts of things! Help me out! Would it motivate more response if I said I have several protestant friends who claim (without facts of course) thatthe church "invented" the process in recent history so as not to lose divorced and remarried parishoners and their money rather than uphold the sacrament? Please help me defend this practice to my friends.

Thanks! Have a blessed day.

[ironmonk]

Hey you guys!  You always have answers for these sorts of things!  Help me out!  Would it motivate more response  if I said I have several protestant friends who claim (without facts of course) thatthe church "invented" the process in recent history so as not to lose divorced and remarried parishoners and their money rather than uphold the sacrament?  Please help me defend this practice to my friends.

Thanks!  Have a blessed day.

That is a lie spread by anti-Catholics and those who are ignorant of what it is. annulments have been going on longer than the protestant churches have been around.

Explain it this way...

Someone was forced into a marriage by shotgun.

If someone was forced into a marriage against their will, then a marriage never took place. Because for a Marriage to be valid, both parties must be willing, and the Holy Spirit must be involved. If the Holy Spirit was not involved, then it was invalid.

Annulment says that a Sacramental Marriage never happened. It is nothing like divorce. Divorce is when a valid marriage is ended for whatever reason.

Send them to those links, tell them to read and listen to the real player tracks.

God Bless, Love in Christ & Mary

ironmonk

[esperanza]

Thanks so much for your reply Ironmonk!

It's not that I can't explain the practice, they just want to know the biblical or even traditional proof of the practice (as a formal process). What I have found so far is that the "Defender of the Bond" was first appointed in 1741 (or something like that - i don't have it right in front of me).

Please forgive my Catholic ignorance - I've taken alot about our faith and teachings for granted . . . but are there many other practices in the church that began this late?

Thank you so much for your interest! :)

[ironmonk]

Thanks so much for your reply Ironmonk!

It's not that I can't explain the practice, they just want to know the biblical or even traditional proof of the practice (as a formal process).  What I have found so far is that the "Defender of the Bond" was first appointed in 1741 (or something like that - i don't have it right in front of me). 

Please forgive my Catholic ignorance - I've taken alot about our faith and teachings for granted . . .  but are there many other practices in the church that began this late?

Thank you so much for your interest!

Maybe they just changed the name around that date.

As for biblical proof...

St. Matt 16:18 "And so I say to you, you are Peter (Kephas), and upon this rock (Kephas) I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it."

19 I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

"whatever" pretty much covers it, it does not matter when it came to be... It is true because the Catholic Church said it is true. The Catholic Church is guided by God. The Catholic Church is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth. It was built on the Apostles by Christ.

1 Tim 3:15

But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.

They are trying to draw you away from the truth with their questions. Maybe they do not know they are trying that, but that is what they are doing.

It does not matter where or when something began in the Church. Because it all comes down to the simple fact that God guides the Church in Truth. No other Church can say that.

Jesus even tells the Church that they will be guided by the Holy Spirit in regards to things that Jesus did not tell the Church. I clearly see this as a message that the Church will grow in knowledge of what is right and wrong...

John 14:16

And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate to be with you always,

17 the Spirit of truth, which the world cannot accept, because it neither sees nor knows it. But you know it, because it remains with you, and will be in you.

18 I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you.

John 16:7

But I tell you the truth, it is better for you that I go. For if I do not go, the Advocate will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you.

8 And when he comes he will convict the world in regard to sin and righteousness and condemnation:

9 sin, because they do not believe in me;

10 righteousness, because I am going to the Father and you will no longer see me;

11 condemnation, because the ruler of this world has been condemned. Coming of the Advocate

12 "I have much more to tell you, but you cannot bear it now.

13 But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all truth. He will not speak on his own, but he will speak what he hears, and will declare to you the things that are coming.

God Bless, Love in Christ & Mary

ironmonk

Edited July 27, 2003 by ironmonk

[ironmonk]

P.S.

Invite them here... I would be more than happy to dialog any topic of their choice... and I'm sure others here would like to join in the fun.

God Bless, Love in Christ & Mary,

ironmonk

[hyperdulia again]

annullments date long befor the 18th century, for as long as people have been wittingly or unwittingly contracting invalid marriages there have been ways to end those marriages aside from divorce.

Edited July 27, 2003 by hyperdulia again

[esperanza]

Out of curiosity Hyper - where do you find that information concerning formal cases (not something along the lines of "internal forum")? I've been looking everywhere . . .

[hyperdulia again]

I'm not sure what you mean? I don't know much about annullments, I just know that they've been happening for a long time the earliest I can think of is Robert II of France in th 11th Century. If there is more than one kind of annullment I don't know much. I'd love to here about that if there is more than one annullment process.

[esperanza]

Hyper! Did you know that about Robert II off the top of your head?? Glory!

That is definately the earliest date I have seen anullment mentioned with the Pope's involvement. I didn't find details about it - but the term "anullment" was used in describing 1 of his 3 "trips to the alter" . Thanks for that reference.

Re: "other types of anullment" - I am aware that many divorced Catholics utilize a practice called "The Internal Forum" that in my understanding is not a proper practice according to the Church. This is when people think they already know their marriage in invalid, they do not feel the need to submit to the formal procedure with a tribunal investigation and therefore proceed with remarriage and continued participation in receiving the Eucharist. Some use this and never attempt a formal process, others use this after a formal process has taken place, but they disagree with the outcome. Does that make sense?

So when I refer to a formal case - I am meaning the formal involvement of the church declaring the marriage a valid or invalid one.

Ironmonk - I completely agree with you and with the scriptures you posted. Thanks so much. As I read your post - I was wondering in my head still about other practices in the church that began many many years after Christ died and rose - and then I thought that most sacramental practices did not likely FORMALLY begin until the Council of Trent at least. Is that right? I've always assumed the formal presence of marriage, penence, baptism, priesthood, communion ~ were all in place (formally) since the time of Christ. Inform me on this please.

Thanks for helping me keep things straight. Please continue to provide any thoughts/ info you have on this. The complete and utter lack of support I have from my non-christian friends, my parish and the tribunal occassionally makes my head spin. Thanks again for you help

[hyperdulia again]

Sadly Esperanza I did know Robert II off the top of my head, he was the son of my hero Hugh Capet.

I get it now, thank you for that info. You enlightened me, and I'm terribly sorry that I know little about annullments don't know where to go to fimnd out more. :)

[ironmonk]

One thing to note about Councils...

When teachings arise in the Church that have not been declaried as official, then councils settle the dispute. The Councils being guided by God in All Truth.

This is just an anology.... (i don't like baseball ever since they went on strike)

That the Church always taught that football was the game to play, but never has declared it as being the only way to play. Then someone in the Church started teaching baseball was the game to play. Now we would have a conflict, then the Church would step in and call a council. Then the Council would make a infallible decission that Football was the game to play and that baseball was wrong; then the date of the teaching would appear to be later than it actually was.

When teachings come into question of why, we see the Church calling councils and settling the argument.

A real life example would be the New Testament. It wasn't cannonized until 400 AD, but we've been using the Gospels ever since they were written.

Check out these links:

http://www.Catholic.com

http://www.TCLD.net

http://www.Catholicity.com

God Bless, Love in Christ & Mary

ironmonk

[esperanza]

It's all so simple. Thank you. I can't believe I'm as old as I am and have never had to think about/ wonder/ question when and how pratices/ teachings were established. I've just trusted/ assumed and in some cases - not really cared. Thanks for your help.

Esperanza

PS - It doesn't really matter but in my previous post on this thread I should have written "I've always assumed that many practices associated with marriage, penence, baptism, priesthood, communion ~ were all in place (formally) since the time of Christ."

Edited July 27, 2003 by esperanza

[Katholikos]

Does anyone have any information on when and how formal tribunal investigations of marriages began in our church?

I don't think knowing when TRIBUNAL (ecclesiastical court) investigations began in the Church will answer the inquiry into when MARRIAGE QUESTIONS were decided by the Church. Obviously, the answer is: the Church decided marraige questions from the very beginning. The mechanism (whether it was done directly by an Apostle or his successors, or by a tribunal appointed to the task by a successor to the Apostles) is really not important.

St. Paul, for example, writes:

"To the rest I say (not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is an unbeleiver, and she is willing to go on living with him, he should not divorce her; and if any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he is willing to go on living with her, she should not divorce her husband. For the unbelieving husband is made holy through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy through the brother. Otherwise your children would be unclean, whereas in fact, they are holy. If the unbeliever separates, however, let him separate. The brother or sister is not bound in such cases. God has called you to peace. For how do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband; or how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?" 1 Cor 7:12-16 NAB

Please note that here St. Paul is not addressing remarriage. He does that elsewhere.

St. Paul would have decided who met these and other marriage requirements in the Churches which he had founded, and his successors would have continued to act as judge.

Marriage is a Sacrament. The Church has always had jurisdiction over the Sacraments.

The Church's adjudication of matters of marriage, separation, and divorce did not begin with the establishment of tribunals. Tribunals simply became the necessary means by which the Church continued her mission as guardian of the Sacraments as she grew in numbers.

I don't know when tribunals were established. Nor do I think it's important to know. It proves nothing about Church practice. The Church governs the Sacrament of Marriage, as it was in beginning, is now, and ever shall be, amen.