by Chris Bodenner
A reader writes a belated but very helpful email on annulments:
In my 20 years of work as a psychologist for Catholic Church, I have had many occasions get involved in the marriage annulment process as an evaluator, counselor and consultant.
Local diocesan marriage tribunals decide on annulments, not the Vatican. The Vatican only gets involved in the decision if one of the parties appeals to the Vatican for a reversal of the local decision. During the 1980s and 1990s, the overwhelming majority (approaching 90%) of annulment requests were granted by diocesan tribunals in the US.
During the 1980s and 1990s, the overwhelming majority (approaching 90%) of annulment requests were granted by diocesan tribunals in the US. Annulments have become a bit more difficult to obtain in some American dioceses over the five years, but, still, most annulment requests are granted. Furthermore, there is nothing unusual about the church blessing an existing marriage once both parties have been granted annulments. Blessing the marriage simply means the couple exchanges vows in church with a priest presiding. It's called a church blessing, but it is a church wedding. It is usually a private ceremony because the couple has already been legally and publicly recognized as a married couple, though some couples opt for a traditional, public church ceremony. It is perfectly acceptable to do it either way--as a public or a private ceremony.
The bottom line is that there was nothing unusual about the annulments granted to Ted and Vicki Kennedy and nothing unusual about the the church "blessing." It would have been "double standard" if the church denied to Ted and Vicki Kennedy what the Church routinely grants to less famous Catholics.
Here is a summary of reasons that a marriage is considered invalid under canon law:
1) Refusal or inability to consummate the marriage
2) Incest or bigamy
3) Marriage occurred under duress: significant external pressure such as a pregnancy
4) Mental incapacity at the time of the marriage
5) Lack of appreciation for the full implications of marriage as a life-long, faithful, loving commitment with priority given to spouse and children.
6) Psychological incapacity to live the commitment as described above.
7) The marriage wasn't performed according to Catholic canon law8) At the time of the marriage, one or both partners was under the influence of drugs or suffered from substance addiction.
After John Paul II promulgated the revised Code of Canon Law in 1983, annulments became significantly easier to obtain for psychological reasons (#5 & #6 above, based upon Canon 1095)
I don't mean to be snide, but isn't #5 just a euphemism for "I don't want to be married anymore"? A synonymous version of the secular "inconsolable difference" [it was late] "irreconcilable differences"? Or perhaps both husband and wife have to consent to #5, thus making it different that a no-fault divorce. Either way, it kinda defeats the whole purpose of "death do us part" in the eyes of the Church.