[450donn]

Since this was not part of the original question in another thread, and according to one member:


Clearly you do not understand either the question or the beliefs behind it...so best to stay out of it.

...and your comments about the children is way out there: more confirmation that you have no clue.

This site is about answers. If a member cannot give an answer based on knowledge of the situation, then best to stay out of it.


Would you then please explain to us uneducated ones how/why the Catholic Church can do this after the marriage has been consummated, there are children involved etc:
I am not trying to be stubborn or argumentative, I am trying to understand how/where the church gets this doctrine from??

[RickJ]

The question was about the details of an annulment.

Your posts had nothing to do with answering the question. This site is for questions and answers - excepting for these Discussion Boards were "discussions" are permitted and encouraged.

Note the Help link where we point out issues such as these.

[Akoue]

Well, sometimes the Church can't. If the marriage was valid it cannot be annulled. This is why the Church has to investigate, to see if everything was done properly.

The Church gets the doctrine from Scripture. Husband and wife are one flesh, and this is the work of grace not of a civil court. A civil court can not separate what has been joined by grace in the sacrament. And neither can the Church. What the Church can do, however, is look to see whether the joining took place, i.e. whether the marriage was valid in the first place. If the marriage is valid, it cannot be annulled.

[cozyk]

Well, sometimes the Church can't. If the marriage was valid it cannot be annulled. This is why the Church has to investigate, to see if everything was done properly.

The Church gets the doctrine from Scripture. Husband and wife are one flesh, and this is the work of grace not of a civil court. A civil court can not separate what has been joined by grace in the sacrament. And neither can the Church. What the Church can do, however, is look to see whether the joining took place, i.e., whether the marriage was valid in the first place. If the marriage is valid, it cannot be annulled.

Let me get this straight. If a marriage was valid it can not be annulled and therefore the divorce is not recognized and the church says you can not remarry if you still want to play with us. That's our rule and we are sticking to it. You know, you can have a marriage that is valid legally but not valid emotionally. What does the church have to say about that? How can they tell the difference?

[Fr_Chuck]

You are playing with your opinon of marriage, you have your opinion, the church has its very specific written rules that members are suppose to know. They look and ask for details from both parties.

I guess the issues, if you don't like their play ground, don't play ball with them. No one forces you to be catholic, it is a choice, by joining you agree that you will follow the teachings of the church, ( or at least should) you are pro life, against the death penalty and reconise the sacraments, all of them.

[Akoue]

if you still want to play with us.

This way of putting it makes me wonder whether yours is a question worth answering. Are you genuinely interested in understanding the breadth and depth of 2000 years of Catholic theology on this point, or are you just on a soap-box?

That's our rule and we are sticking to it.

Isn't that kind of the point of rules? They aren't rules if they change with the weather. Nor are they rules if people don't actually, you know, follow them. These things weren't just cobbled together on a whim.

[Fr_Chuck]

Some is a matter of teaching and customs, I can't understand not having communion every service, just seems wrong, but I respect those that go to churches that don't. They have their rules, and the rules on marriage is clear in the catholic church,

[cozyk]

This way of putting it makes me wonder whether yours is a question worth answering. Are you genuinely interested in understanding the breadth and depth of 2000 years of Catholic theology on this point, or are you just on a soap-box?



Isn't that kind of the point of rules? They aren't rules if they change with the weather. Nor are they rules if people don't actually, you know, follow them. These things weren't just cobbled together on a whim.

My point is that not only Catholic but many churches are EXclusive, not INclusive. Their "welcome mat" is not out there for just anybody. My mother told me that in her Baptist church years ago, that a man was elected deacon. When they found out he had been married before, they "fired him" from that position. Now, they don't frown on that so much. I think their pool of choices was getting smaller and smaller, so they had to rearrange the rules. Of course they wouldn't say that was the reason, but for some reason, they re-evaluated their position. Same thing with female Sunday school teachers and other leader positions in the church. It is accepted now , when it wasn't earlier. I think there was many positions to fill, and not enough men to keep them filled.

I don't know how many years the annulment issue has been around. Was there a time that divorce was not recognized, period. So remarriage was totally out of the question. Then it was observed that there was WAT TOO MANY members remarrying, so they rearranged their stance and said, "here's what we can do". Let's create a loop-hole
To get around that because we are filling our churches with adultrers and we can't have that. That is why I am curious as to WHEN this came about. Has it always been since the beginning or is it a newer practice that has come about?

[JudyKayTee]

I don't know how many years the annulment issue has been around. Was there a time that divorce was not recognized, period. So remarriage was totally out of the question. Then it was observed that there was WAT TOO MANY members remarrying, so they rearranged their stance and said, "here's what we can do". Let's create a loop-hole
to get around that because we are filling our churches with adultrers and we can't have that. That is why I am curious as to WHEN this came about. Has it always been since the beginning or is it a newer practice that has come about?

The Catholic Church - if that's what you're asking about - has never recognized divorces and has always recognized annulments to the best of my understanding. What "you" do civilly by way of divorce has no value/meaning within the Catholic Church. It's the status of your religious marriage that matters.

But I'll leave it to the religious scholars to figure it all out.

[Fr_Chuck]

Yes, to the government for tax purposes you are married, to the church you are not married.

As stated, in the beginning I would assume followig Jewish tradition, divorce was allowed for adultry, but then normally you can get an annullment for that also.

Also it appears the same people are keeping this going in three different threads, so this one is closing.