Since there is so much confusion about annulments, I thought I'd write a post about them to help clarify what they are.
In our culture, one way we think of people is that they are married, or they are not married. It's black and white. We don't have an in-between concept. Actually, we do have one, but it's only understood in the legal profession. We'll get to that term in a moment.
Let me use an analogy. It's like a circle. The married person has a circle, the unmarried person does not have a circle. We don't usually think of people as having partial circles.... we don't usually think of people as being in a marriage that is not quite whole. We don't usually think of them being in marriages where some important, fundamental element is lacking. We think of them as being married, or not married. This sort of black and white thinking causes confusion when it comes to annulments.
If I understand legal history, annulments used to be part of civil law, but they are not any longer. To my knowledge, the Catholic Church is the only body that recognizes the need for the annulment process any more.
So why does the Catholic Church care about people having partial circles vs. whole circles?
As Christians, we strive to obey Jesus' teachings. One of his teachings regarding marriage is one to a customer, for life. Obviously that's a paraphrase. Let's look at Matthew 19: 4-6:
"Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this cause shall a man leave his father and his mother, and be united to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.' So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What God has joined together, let no one separate."
The ancient Christian teaching, that the Catholics and other orthodox Christian bodies still affirm, is that you can marry once, and as long as your spouse lives, you may not marry another.
So the next questions are: what constitutes a marriage? What constitutes a complete circle?
I am not going to go into detail regarding all of the elements that make a marriage, or a complete circle. But I will say that there are a number of elements that must be present at the time the wedding vows are made.
If any of these elements are missing, then the couple has an incomplete circle and may marry again even though the spouses still live. In legal terms, they have what is called a putative marriage. A putative marriage has elements of a complete marriage, including legitimate children, but it is not complete. It lacks something fundamental.
The Catholic Church views every marriage as presumptively whole (or valid, to use Church terms). In other words, the Church presumes that every single married couple, regardless of their religious background, has a complete circle. That is their starting point.
When a formerly married Catholic wants to marry again, they must seek an annulment from the Church. Since the Church presumes that all married couples have complete circles, the person seeking the annulment, called the Petitioner, must provide evidence that their marriage was an incomplete circle. The other spouse is called the Respondent. The Respondent may disagree with the Petitioner, and is allowed to fight the process by providing evidence to the contrary. If a Respondent believes that the Church is trying to say that the marriage never happened, that the children are illegitimate, or some other harshly negative thing, it is no wonder that some Respondents fight it.
The Church acknowledges that the couple has a circle. This means that the annulment process answers a single question: was the circle a whole circle? Yes or no? It is not making ANY other assessment or judgement regarding the marriage.
The case is tried twice. If both trials come to the verdict that yes, this couple did in fact have an incomplete circle, then a "Decree of Nullity" is issued. Both parties may remarry in the Church.
One reason for so much confusion is due to confusing terminology. The Church uses the terms "valid marriage" to denote a couple with a complete circle, and "invalid marriage" to denote a couple with an incomplete circle. "Invalid" is a pretty harsh term, I think, and people's imaginations really go wild with it. I've seen all sorts of comments across the internet saying things like, "How dare the Church say I wasn't married!" "Is the Church saying I'm illegitimate???" and the like. The term "decree of nullity," also lends to the confusion.
It's not that the Church is saying the people were not married, that the children were illegitimate, that the good times did not exist, or that nothing good ever happened during the marriage. It is saying that the marriage lacked one or more fundamental components to make it whole... that the couple had an incomplete circle, even though to outsiders it may have looked like a complete one.
Marriage is not as black and white as the common person seems to think. I wish the Church would update its terminology and stop using terms that cause so much upset and confusion.
In our culture, one way we think of people is that they are married, or they are not married. It's black and white. We don't have an in-between concept. Actually, we do have one, but it's only understood in the legal profession. We'll get to that term in a moment.
Let me use an analogy. It's like a circle. The married person has a circle, the unmarried person does not have a circle. We don't usually think of people as having partial circles.... we don't usually think of people as being in a marriage that is not quite whole. We don't usually think of them being in marriages where some important, fundamental element is lacking. We think of them as being married, or not married. This sort of black and white thinking causes confusion when it comes to annulments.
If I understand legal history, annulments used to be part of civil law, but they are not any longer. To my knowledge, the Catholic Church is the only body that recognizes the need for the annulment process any more.
So why does the Catholic Church care about people having partial circles vs. whole circles?
As Christians, we strive to obey Jesus' teachings. One of his teachings regarding marriage is one to a customer, for life. Obviously that's a paraphrase. Let's look at Matthew 19: 4-6:
"Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this cause shall a man leave his father and his mother, and be united to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.' So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What God has joined together, let no one separate."
The ancient Christian teaching, that the Catholics and other orthodox Christian bodies still affirm, is that you can marry once, and as long as your spouse lives, you may not marry another.
So the next questions are: what constitutes a marriage? What constitutes a complete circle?
I am not going to go into detail regarding all of the elements that make a marriage, or a complete circle. But I will say that there are a number of elements that must be present at the time the wedding vows are made.
If any of these elements are missing, then the couple has an incomplete circle and may marry again even though the spouses still live. In legal terms, they have what is called a putative marriage. A putative marriage has elements of a complete marriage, including legitimate children, but it is not complete. It lacks something fundamental.
The Catholic Church views every marriage as presumptively whole (or valid, to use Church terms). In other words, the Church presumes that every single married couple, regardless of their religious background, has a complete circle. That is their starting point.
When a formerly married Catholic wants to marry again, they must seek an annulment from the Church. Since the Church presumes that all married couples have complete circles, the person seeking the annulment, called the Petitioner, must provide evidence that their marriage was an incomplete circle. The other spouse is called the Respondent. The Respondent may disagree with the Petitioner, and is allowed to fight the process by providing evidence to the contrary. If a Respondent believes that the Church is trying to say that the marriage never happened, that the children are illegitimate, or some other harshly negative thing, it is no wonder that some Respondents fight it.
The Church acknowledges that the couple has a circle. This means that the annulment process answers a single question: was the circle a whole circle? Yes or no? It is not making ANY other assessment or judgement regarding the marriage.
The case is tried twice. If both trials come to the verdict that yes, this couple did in fact have an incomplete circle, then a "Decree of Nullity" is issued. Both parties may remarry in the Church.
One reason for so much confusion is due to confusing terminology. The Church uses the terms "valid marriage" to denote a couple with a complete circle, and "invalid marriage" to denote a couple with an incomplete circle. "Invalid" is a pretty harsh term, I think, and people's imaginations really go wild with it. I've seen all sorts of comments across the internet saying things like, "How dare the Church say I wasn't married!" "Is the Church saying I'm illegitimate???" and the like. The term "decree of nullity," also lends to the confusion.
It's not that the Church is saying the people were not married, that the children were illegitimate, that the good times did not exist, or that nothing good ever happened during the marriage. It is saying that the marriage lacked one or more fundamental components to make it whole... that the couple had an incomplete circle, even though to outsiders it may have looked like a complete one.
Marriage is not as black and white as the common person seems to think. I wish the Church would update its terminology and stop using terms that cause so much upset and confusion.
Thank you for clarifying- it does seem harsh when not seen in this light. Maybe in another article you might explain what does constitute a "whole" circle and a" partial" circle?
ReplyDeleteMichi, there is a lot that goes into it, and I don't feel qualified to discuss it in much depth.
ReplyDeleteI really just wanted to convey the spirit of the matter. I may be wrong in some of the details, and in fact I suspect I am, but I do think I conveyed the spirit of it properly. The Church has a certain definition of marriage, and in the annulment process is only trying to assess if all the elements of this definition were present for a complete marriage to occur. A finding of incompleteness (aka "invalidity") is not a negative judgement in any sense. Unfortunately, many people seem to believe it is, and this is what I am trying to address. I appreciate your question.