SAN ANTONIO, Dec. 30 (UPI) — A teacher at a Roman Catholic school in San Antonio fired after she married a divorced man has filed a federal discrimination complaint.
The principal of Central Catholic High School urged Marquis LaFortune, 25, a week before her wedding in November to resign or to have her husband-to-be seek an annulment of his first marriage, options she turned down. She told the San Antonio Express-News that the firing took some of the joy out of the preparations for the marriage.
“I would have resigned if I’d felt like I’d done something wrong,” she said. “I couldn’t get out of bed. It’s just been this cloud. It was supposed to be the best week of my life, and I had to pull myself together for the ceremony.”[article]
“I would have resigned if I’d felt like I’d done something wrong,” – because how you “feel” about it is important.
LaFortune has filed a complaint with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
The Catholic Church is an equal opportunity employer and anybody who teaches in a Catholic school and tries to get remarried should be fired.
School officials learned of her fiance’s marital status from an article in The Pep, the school’s newspaper. She helped manage the paper.
Doh!
42 comments
What the article fails to mention is that the aggrieved teacher was probably violating her contract. Most Catholic schools require teachers to agree NOT to cause scandal by public disregard for Church teaching (e.g., marriage laws).
Bravo to the principal for having the courage to do the difficult but right thing.
Her husband called his ex-wife on his honeymoon with LaFortune (yes, that’s right) and “learned” that he already had an annulment. He “forgot” to tell LaFortune about it.
You can’t make this stuff up.
Let’s see…her termination for adultery was upsetting enough to ruin her “wedding” week but not upsetting enough to prevent her from contacting a lawyer, visiting his office, gathering the necessary paperwork, filling out the paperwork, paying the bill, and filing the lawsuit.
Hmmmmm…methinks I smell money, money, money!!!
Fr. Philip, OP
But once again, Catholic theology has to be boiled down to feelings. People “feel” they should be able to get divorced/marry divorcees/use birth control/get an abortion/cohabitate/etc. because it’s what THEY want to do. Church teaching – bah, we don’t need no stinkin’ Church teaching, ’cause it makes us “feel” bad and stuff.
If the husband didn’t know he had an annulment, he didn’t have an annulment. Period.
I don’t get it. I just don’t get it. I hope all Catholic institutions have airtight contracts detailing that employees MUST follow Church teaching or be fired. It’s not that hard.
I hope the diocese counter sues to recoup the expenses of defending itself against her frivolous claim. If she didn’t want to obey the school’s rules she shouldn’t have signed the contract to work there.
At least Catholics in San Antonio now know which school to send their kids to.
What is the purpose and justification for firing a person for unrepentant adultery and remarriage when the Catholic Church, as I would personally testify before the Pope if he had the guts/integrity/concern for good to speak with me face to face, knows that my wife was counseled into both divorce and annulment in order to help her deal with her already begun relationship with her now long-time adulterous partner AND I was criticized by the Church, through its priests, for wanting to heal our, twice held as valid by the Roman Rota, sacramental marriage? Situations like ours are legion in the Catholic Church today.
Seems to me there is a seriously uneven playing field here or double standard as my “older” generation called it.
Now, almost twenty years later the Catholic Church bends over backwards to accomodate this adulterous pair, even allowing the male adulterer to be a Cantor in the Byzantine Catholic Church(in direct violation of Canon Law, I believe) and ignores my protestations. I had to force the previous Byzantine Eparch to make him put a halt to the “pillar of the Church” Byzantine Catholic priest, who has powerful friends in Rome, to end his giving this pair of scandalous and unrepentant adulterers the Eucharist, at least in public, and as far as I can tell he supports their long affair, as it is “for the good of the children”. Interestingly, he apparently cares little about the three of our five children who no longer practice their faith due, primarily, to this whole affair and its handling for almost twenty years, but there are no consequences for the priest(any of the many who have supported this pair) or the adulterous pair. Fire a teacher but not the parents or the priest(s) who encourages the unrepentant adulterers? Or the bishops?
Give me a break!
Such firings by the Catholic Church are a travesty and dangerous to the faith IF such application of justice is not consistant among all who profess to be Catholics, not simply those employed as teachers by the Catholic Church. Who ARE the primary teachers to Catholic children? Their parents? Does THEIR behavior not hold more influence over their children? What are the teachers of both the parents AND the children teaching them(the bishop)? Why is this inconsistancy not important and scandalous? Why? Because the situation itself is scandalous. Our bishops are scandalous. Catholic parents are scandalous. The whole damn situation about marriage is scandalous, yet the Pope does nothing but talk, talk, talk as did his predecessor! When will some Pope act to defend marriage with more than words among Catholics themselves or his fellow bishops? Not in my lifetime, I would wager, sadly.
Why the heck does anyone wonder how the Church has become such a cesspool with the leaders that we have and their failure to live by example and to hold to account?
Yes, I know they and the Church are primarily teachers and not police. But, as I found out when I was unwittingly disruptive in class as a young child/student in the fourth grade, which due to my youthful exuberence and love for school and its dynamics I was completely unaware of until I overheard my beloved teacher, Sister Martin Marie, whom I remain in loose contact with to this day, inform my mother of my antics after I was made to sit outside the classroom where I could hear the lessons, not be seen and I was not allowed to make personal contact during classtime in order to allow others to learn(as I was being taught myself by the gracious discipline of this blessed nun but which took many years to finally be comprehended in the full perspective) that good teachers must enforce discipline among their flock/students or others are deprived of their education(scandal) even if it means separating one of them from the rest of the body until they learn their lesson.
In America, we have no such teachers among our bishops and precious few among our clergy and laity.
I know of not a single instance where, since 1977, a bishop has excommunicated a Catholic for unrepentant adultery, unjust divorce or civil remarriage without a thorough nullity investigation(confirmed in Rome, which not one of the American dioceses can hold a candle to jurisprudentially, although I am sure any number of canonists would make “good” cases that there are, even though their stats do not mirror that Roman court, as far as I have seen and the Rotal rate of overturning American appealed decisions has not changed all the much, to my knowledge, in years and years). No, they “love” the sinner and “hate” the sin as generation after generation of marriages are more and more meaningless and more and more children become less and less interested in their faith.
The Catholic Church in America is a disaster, clerics and laity, regarding marriage and its protection. How dare this teacher be terminated, while in countless situations like ours the same behavior is rewarded and supported.
If the local ordinary approves of this but has not disciplined others, for their similar behaviors in marriages, regardless of their employment as if such behavior occurs in a vaccum without consequences, he should resign his see or be forced from it. Then the Pope should resign.
Karl,
You are confusing “The Church” with the diocese. In strictly legal terms there is no such thing as “The Church.” The church is made up of legally independent dioceses run by their appointed bishops. When it comes to personnel issues, policies and enforcement differ from diocese to diocese. What’s overlooked in one diocese is cause for termination in another. Depends on the bishop.
It’s a common misconception that The Church is a legal corporation like IBM or Pepsi-Co. Not so. The Pope is not the CEO of Catholic, Inc. Also, the diocese has no authority to fire divorced/remarried Catholics working outside the Church payroll. Employees of the Church, regardless of their religious affiliation, are generally held to the moral standards of the Church. But, again, what we mean by “generally held” differs from diocese to diocese.
What’s tolerated in the Archdiocese of San Francisco is not tolerated in the diocese of Lincoln and vice-versa. Should there be a uniform policy and uniform enforcement? Probably. But good luck getting the bishops to agree to that.
Setting aside the moral issue of divorce and remarriage, this woman violated her contract with the diocese. Termination should come as no surprise to her.
Fr. Philip, OP
Presuming she’s Catholic, even if he had had his annulment, they obviously didn’t get married in the Catholic Church. If they had, there would be no question about the annulment.
You are foucsing on semantics, Father. This is a dishonest and misleading tool of those who want to control a discussion as it moves the foucs from what is important. Nor will I accept putting marital questions aside.
I have endlessly heard this lie from Catholic apologists of all levels, none of whom care what is going on and are as guilty as the adulterers in all such cases for not demanding the Catholic hierarchy act to hold to account those mentioned.
I am not making this a personal attack at you but, this line is a typical confuser and avoider of obligation for involvement in a situation that is epidemic in the American Church and is spreading world-wide.
We, in Christ, are the Catholic Church, but the hierarchy of bishops hold the temporal power, although technically I am not since I formally defected from the Catholic Church about two years ago due to my long battle with countless priests, bishops and laity to over come the lies that annulments are good. A bishop is the Church. If one is corrupted and the group of bishops or the Pope do/does not act to end their reign or bring them to righteousness, then, the Catholic Church, itself, is corrupt. It is correct that Christ can never be corrupted and that the Cathoilic Church is in union with Him but to fall back on this truth TO AVOID accountability is disingenuous and destructive. That is why I reject your argument, because there is no rejoined(as there should always be when this concept is cited as a defense) that places responsibility where it belongs, with canon laws in place to address it, fully, not cosmetically, and not in the “Roman way” of waiting for someone to die, even as they continue their “raping and pillaging”, as unjust divorce is.
Annulments are neutral and even those which are properly adjudicated do “harm” since they appear to dissolve a marriage, which on the surface is supposed to be, from a Catholic perspective, indissoluble. However, when ,as in our case, there is, not was because no justice has ever been available to me, my family or our friends, corruption that has been documented and there is no method of accounting for those who are corrupted, the system must be shut down as a whole, immediately. The Pope in conjunction with his fellow bishops or even the Pope himself could do this, yesterday, but has chosen to allow us to be openly persecuted by his fellow Churchmen. It is wrong and it is deadly serious.
Since this has not been done and I have screamed for almost twenty years, my conclusion is that the whole Catholic Church is a cesspool.
You avoid everything Father.
Every legitimate bishop with a see has the authority to excommunicate, and I believe there are canons which give him flexibity in his use of that medicinal penalty, should he feel it is necessary to repair serious damage or scandal. This entire mess is already a long term scandal, and I just do not mean our particular situation, the whole Catholic policy of marital pastoring is a heinous pigsty. Many priests should be given their walking papers as well as their bishops. When a priest does to our marriage what has been done and continues to be done to ours, the priest as well as his bishop, if the bishop fails to act to remove the priest, should be expelled from the priesthood. If there are no canons to allow this then the canon law must be changed. Countless lives and marriage are daily being destroyed by these rogue priests and bishops. If you have not seen this you are rare, blind or corrupted. I hear stories of this corruption frequently where spouses have no recourse. Adultery, I believe, used to bring a permanent ban on future marriage to the guilty parties, which I also believe, has been removed from canon law. This gives direct incentive in the current atmosphere to adultery, children outside of marriage and a built in reason to leave a valid marriage, “for the good of the children” of the adultery and results in a formal OK from the Catholic Church to even receive communion, provided you lie(which is what it really is)and tell the church you are living as “brother and sister” AND the Church does not give a DAMN that you are persecuting your valid spouse and giving the “partnership of life”, that so many false/fake annulments are granted for “not acheiving” to another person with the FULL BLESSING OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, as you deny those promises to the ONE you promised that too. Marriage is a joke, with the blessing of the princes of the Church, including the Pope.
It is a tremendous, gigantic, scandalous disgusting, pastoral hell hole that Rome has encouraged and approved.
Drop by Bai Macfarlane’s yahoo group, you might hear some. We need priests with cohones.
The same should have been done to this woman has has been done to my wife, NOTHING!
MY WIFE HAS A COVENANT WITH ME, THAT TRUMPS A CONTRACT!
You have no point Father, but “civil law”, which the Catholic Church seems not to care about anyway, as it cedes the destruction of our marriages to “civil law” through “no-fault” divorces as the American Gateway to then having to defend our marriages, after we are already destitute and broken by the civil process the Catholic Church encourages and REQUIRES, before American tribunals which are little more than “formalities” intent on “finding” or “making up” “evidence” for nullity.
Swim in the Tiber to the truth Father, see the fruit of what priests, bishops and spouses are doing and not doing rather than only listening to the “good” part of annulments. Or do our souls not matter to you, since we have by experience learned that neither ours nor our childrens matter the the vast majority of clerics or canonists or they would behave differently.
Divorce destroys. It is well past time our lousy bishops and priests do something about it besides advertising for annulments and telling people to get divorce in order to get an annulment. Why don’t you start a ministy to people whose marriages have been upheld by tribunals(in the few instances thast it does happen) and lobby the greater church to pay attention to our situations and act to bring spouses together. It is an outright lie that the Church has no right or power to coerce the faithful towards proper behavior.
Can. 1311 The Church has the innate and proper right to coerce offending members of the Christian faithful with penal sanctions.
The new Code may need some adjustments regarding marriage but the authority to act is there already. Sorry, perhaps, thankfully, I am not a Canon Lawyer, otherwise I might not be able to sleep at night.
Two things about this case bother me. 1.) The principal says that the man should get an annulment, as if that is a given. Doesn’t that say that you can make vows but you can also get out of them? 2.) The woman says joy was taken out of her preparations for marriage. May I add to her depression by quoting Matthew 19:9 “To enter eternal life, do not commit adultery.”
Karl,
Um, yea…thanks for not attacking me personally. Geez.
Annulments do not dissolve marriages. Sacramental marriages cannot be dissolved. A declaration of nullity states that a marriage never place b/c of some defect in either in the form of the sacrament or those confecting the sacrament.
If you brought the attitude you’re displaying here to the bishops and priests in question, no wonder they ignored you. It’s almost impossible to pick out the threads of your complaint from all the barbs and cutting attacks.
Fr. Philip, OP
I just finished reading your conversion story and was in the process of writing a long thoughtful comment there, but I see it would be a waste of time. I misjudged your character, I thought you had some.
Karl, I accept absolutely the Church teachings on the sanctity of the sacramental marriage. The more you “SCREAM”, however, the more sympathy I have for the wife who left you. Of course she should not have remarried, but separation is allowed for abuse, physical, emotional or verbal. There is no judgement here, but I have read your story on several blogs and the intensity of your anger scares me and I don’t even know you. My loving recommendation is that since it has been 20 years, you take a deep breath and for the good of your soul, lay it down. Put this anger on the altar, give it all to our Blessed Lord and walk away. Accept this sorrow and bind it to the cross for the sake of the poor souls in purgatory or some other worthy intention. God Bless You and give you peace.
Karl,
I would like to add a tidbit to Fr. Phillip’s last comment. First, you need to start with the correct terminology: it is not an “anullment” but a “declaration of nullity”. This is important because the first one reflects an action on the part of the Church to dissolve an existing marriage. In reality, the Church determines that something was missing at the time of the marriage so that it was not valid.
In a way, I simpathize with you. I was married and my wife cheated on me with her boss. In my case, however, I had the suspicion that our marriage was probably not valid (in fact, I had that suspicion even before her cheating started). Before deciding whether to walk away or try to save the marriage, I consulted with a priest about my suspicions. In the end, the marriage was declared null rather quickly. (She had lied about certain, important, things before we got married and she was not free to marry at the time).
My point with this comment is that maybe the priest found a reason early on why your marriage may have not been valid to begin with. I feel very sorry about your situation because I know how painful it is when a spouse cheats but bitterness is not the way out. I thank God AND the Church for all the support I received during that time which helped me come out of the abyss. I will pray for you.
Karl,
I can identify to a small degree with your pain. I am currently in the midst of a four year Eucharistic fast due to issues related to divorce and remariage. This fast could conceivably last for the rest of my earthly life. This is difficult. I have read through your comments a couple of times and what comes to my mind is the lives of two Saints. St. Francis of Assisi and St. Catherine of Sienna. These two Saints ( among others, see the Reformation) saw incredible sin in the Church. Your 20 year struggle for “justice” is a long time, however, why give up at 20 years. Why give up ever. You make some very good points (albeit excessively tainted with your pain and suffering). Remember, there is no such thing as worthless suffering for those in Christ. We all die a little each die.
I say that you should take your own advice because it is the Truth and it is the Way of the Cross. For example you said:
“Why the heck does anyone wonder how the Church has become such a cesspool with the leaders that we have and their failure to live by example and to hold to account?”
Why don’t you, “live by the example” as Sts. Francis and Catherine have.
You also said:
“…I am not since I formally defected from the Catholic Church about two years ago due to my long battle with countless priests, bishops and laity to over come the lies that annulments are good. A bishop is the Church. If one is corrupted and the group of bishops or the Pope do/does not act to end their reign or bring them to righteousness, then, the Catholic Church, itself, is corrupt. It is correct that Christ can never be corrupted and that the Cathoilic Church is in union with Him but to fall back on this truth TO AVOID accountability is disingenuous and destructive. That is why I reject your argument, because there is no rejoined(as there should always be when this concept is cited as a defense) that places responsibility where it belongs, with canon laws in place to address it, fully, not cosmetically, and not in the “Roman way” of waiting for someone to die, even as they continue their “raping and pillaging”, as unjust divorce is.”
Karl, the best and perhaps only argument in defense of Christianity is its Saints. I say continue in prayer with their assistance and don’t miss an opportunity that God has given you to fullfil your role as a Saint. You will remain in my prayers. Please pray for me as I am struggling with certain difficulties related to the Christian walk.
PS. Eucharistic devotion has never been known to lead anyone down the wrong path either.
In Christ’s Love,
Pat
Karl, I understand your frustration, but you’re not being charitable. Look at your responses on this thread and ask yourself what you’d think if someone who states that Pope Benedict doesn’t have the intestinal fortitude to meet him face-to-face and discuss his personal circumstances.
Karl, having the power to bind and loose like a bishop, or even having the power to speak infallibly on doctrine like the Pope, doesn’t give bishops and Popes omniscience and the power to mete out perfect justice. God has reserved that for Himself, and we will all come to that Last Judgment.
In the meantime, yes, you suffer. But you also have a working body of some sort, a world full of possibilities, and a life to live. Get past the people who’ve hurt you (and pray for their sorry selves, because they will have to answer for it in the end). Why should you give _them_ the power to make you brood over your wrongs like this? Do you think they spend all this time thinking about you? Probably not. So don’t make yourself their slave by constantly going back over it in your mind.
Make yourself holy and peaceful through your suffering; stop being attached to them and let God make all things new, including your heart. Then you win!
“When slow, consuming heat had seared
The flesh of Lawrence for a space,
He calmly from his gridiron made
This terse proposal to the judge:
‘Pray turn my body, on one side
Already broiled sufficiently,
And see how well your Vulcan’s fire
Has wrought its cruel punishment.’
The prefect bade him to be turned.
Then Lawrence spoke: ‘I am well baked,
And whether better cooked or raw,
Make trial by a taste of me.’
He said these words in way of jest;
Then rising shining eyes to heaven
And sighing deeply, thus he prayed
With pity for unholy Rome.”
This humble, I will never be.
But, yesterday as I was fixing my jacket in the raw cold, outside the train station and attempted to reach for my hat which had fallen from my head a minute or so before, another reached it first claiming it as his own since it was on the ground when he came upon it. I told him that it had fallen from my head earlier but he would not hear that, since it lay, untouched on the ground.
I did not press the matter, even when a few minutes later that same man reappeared saying to all who stood around the platform, “I need thirthy cents to get home. I’ll be OK when I get home”.
I leaned toward him and gave him the two quarters from my right front pocket, where I heard the change tinkle. He looked at me and wished God’s blessing upon me and mine, which I returned to him as well, as he walked away towards home.
You do not know me, Father. But that is OK.
There was a similar case in Wisconsin in the last couple of years–except the fired teacher appealed to the Wisconsin (not Federal) Employment Relations commission.
The (Catholic school’s) ‘morals clause’ was judged valid and binding notwithstanding “rights”. The teacher lost the case.
You are right, Karl, I don’t know you.
And you don’t know me.
Yet, here you are telling me I have no character.
Hypocrisy’s gonna smell the same in 2009 as it did in 2008, Karl.
Can we just get to the heart of the matter?
This principal was brave, and reality is that in most dioceses it is difficult, sometimes even a “white” -martyrdom to stand up for Church teaching on sexual/marriage-related teachings publicly. Even those who agree they should obey Church teaching, and actually love the church for her protective wisdom, will wither under the vociferous attacks that accompany standing up for marriage when one party wants out. It’s a real shame that divorce is so prevalent within our Church when the rest of the world is watching and ready to embrace divorce itself.
Last, whatever personal weaknesses Karl’s painful experience has nurtured in him, the amount of annulments granted in the Church is perplexing, to say the least. When they are granted so widely and, as I have personally witnessed, so easily, it tends to undermine the whole idea of the permanence of the sacrament, and I think it is more than fair for Catholics to be critical of this “state of affairs,” so to speak.
“Hypocrisy’s gonna smell the same in 2009 as it did in 2008, Karl.”
I agree, but the hypocrisy is at the doorstep of those who control the authority in the Catholic Church, primarily, for their inconsistency, their failure to hold clerics accountable in tribunal processes and their lack of sound leadership rather than mere talk.
They have declared open season on marriages with no real recourse for their intended victims(those who endeavor to save their marriages)and they certainly will not listen.
In my job, everyday, Father, I deal with potential and some real anger and attitude. Even the likelihood of real violence has been present on a very rare occasion. My policy is, as long as the voice is not too loud as to cause others around me to be disturbed(fear) and as long as I am not hit, I will listen through anger to discern the facts, as best I can. You must know from living that listening to the facts allays most fears and often opens the way to solve the problems before you.
This was done only in the Rota both times they upheld the validity of our sacrament. But none of my, often documentarily established, violations of Canon Law and clerical regard for the sanctity of marriage were or will ever be addressed by those in power in the Church.
This is real crime and it is sanctioned all the way up into the Vatican. No bishops were held accountable, nor were the clergy, period.
I have every reason to be furious and those who preach otherwise should ask their own priests and bishops why such as this can be allowed to happen with no recourse for the victims, rather than preach at me. If their priests cannot answer them or will not do something to complain to the Vatican about it, these people should demand it. It is basic justice, which the Catholic Church preaches but does not practice. These so called “good” catholics are more concerned about anger than justice. Injustice breeds anger.
I believe Pope Paul VI said, “If you want peace work for justice”. Why, then, does the Catholic Church not follow that thought? Have any of you read the Papal addresses to the Rota with their admonitions by the Pope regarding the dangers in lax annulments?
That none of these people who have commented are outraged at what I have experienced is witness enough to their complacency in the face of Roman collared criminals. It is tacit, if not, vigorous approval. My anger is nothing compared to the evil it takes to interfere in a marriage without finding out what is actually transpiring, before a priest advises a divorce, which he knows is to excuse the adultery and planned relationship. That the Catholic Church does not have canon laws in place to forbid, in perpetuity with excommunication, if needed, any further contact with adulterers(not cheaters in passion, which are malignant enough) is clear malfeasance and cannot realistically be excused as anything but a veiled attempt to encourage the destruction of marriages. That people who have commented focus on the victim rather than the perpetrators and their accomplices is perverse. This IS how Catholics are. And these are supposed to be the “good” ones. Huh.
The clear malignancy of the inculturation of evil is manifested by how quickly people jump to the defense of malicious abandoners and adulterers, while maligning their victims. Why, then, should clerics and canonists not do the same? Do you naive and silly people think that they do not? You are mistaken. How then, can you not see how your own lack of charity toward a victim of unrepentant, clerically encouraged, criminal adultery and theft and all you can name, encourages the Church, through its clergy and canonists, to be vindictive towards the victims similarly? Such behaviors are commonplace, fully accepted and you fools get angry at those who complain about it and expose it. It is shameful and disgusting. It is pure evil.
Go ahead you uncharitable lot, have at it.
If you are not disgusted with yourselves, have a nice Eucharist on Sunday. If any any of you are, you have some hope.
I do not want the prayers of anyone who will not
demand that their priests and bishops will find out what our complaints are about and address them in each diocese by having those of us who have been destroyed by our spouses and the Church, through its practices, communicate with them in person and in writing.
I welcome the prayers of anyone infuriated at the injustices I have, superficially, described here as there is so much more. And I thank anyone for such prayer as they are desperately needed and deserved. I ask no one to hold on to such anger, unless it motivates to positive action in these regards. But to think that all is well and good in the Catholic Church regarding how it deals with hurting marriages and annulments, is to turn your back on pure evil and to choose against what is good.
There are many thousands of me(s) out there. This is happening everywhere, in the Catholic Church. Go ahead, criticize all of us, I am just one who is vocal.
The high school in question does not belong to the Archdiocese of San Antonio but rather to the Society of Mary (Marianist). The Marianist Province of the United States and the Director of Education for the Province Council is the controlling authority. I am sure that all contracts that employees must sign at this school do conform to local Archdiocesan norms.
I do wonder whether the teachers at this school take the Oath of Fidelity as is required.
Bonus: Humor………GOOD DOG!
From:
http://thequintessential.wordpress.com/2008/12/30/263/
In the late 1520s, Henry VIII of England wanted to annul his marriage to Catherine of Aragon because she had not produced a male heir. Catherine was his late brother’s wife, and Henry tried to annul the marriage on such grounds.
In 1527 Henry asked Pope Clement VII to annul the marriage. Although Clement had good relations with Henry, the Pope feared the wrath of Catherine’s nephew, powerful Holy Roman Emperor Charles V.
Henry sent Cardinal Wolsey to Rome to persuade the Pope. As was the custom, the Cardinal bent down to kiss the Pope’s toe. However, Wolsey’s greyhound, Urian, thought his master was being attacked, and it lunged forward to bite the Pope’s bare foot. Enraged, the Pope called off the negotiations; the Catholic Church refused to grant the annulment. Henry went on with his divorce and established the Church of England.
The marriage of the teacher doesn’t look very promising, in any case. The fact that the groom either “didn’t know” or “forgot” that his prior marriage had been declared null is not a good sign.
Hmmm. “Prior marriage” declared “null”. That doesn’t make sense does it? Fr P is there a right way to talk about these situations? A correct term for a spouse who wasn’t or a marriage that wasn’t? Very tricky, that.
No matter how necessary (and merciful) the declaration of nullity can be, our very lack of words to discuss it reflects the terrible loss that occurs when one acknowledges (truly or otherwise) that their past was an illusion. It is difficult to keep your feet on the ground when the past is erased and the future you foresaw is impossible, (because the characters in your story do not and did not exist, actually.)
I wonder if the tendency to walk in circles, as if seeking futilely for a dropped stitch in a knitted pattern is what Karl is battling. If so, it happens after a necessary annulment too, or rather, it begins at the point where a spouse must face the possibility (or reality)that they never were a spouse. The reality of unreality. That’s a paradox, isn’t it?
“The notion of Marriage as ‘a non-binding commitment’ is as ridiculous as that of ‘a square circle’.” Paul Vitz from Psychology as Religion.
Some harsh words spoken and shared here already.
The new year is nearly-here.
Truth was present in 2008 – it will still be available in 2009.
I don’t have it all. You don’t know it all. Only One is Perfect and He is not us.
Let us vow to follow Him more perfectly in 2009. He spoke to sinners – He even sought them out and dined with them. I doubt He shouted at them while they ate together. Like good conversation at a fine meal, let us converse our differences, hoping Truth will visit us both – if we respect and cherish His visit at our “meal”.
I know Karl has been wronged and he is justifiably livid. Sometimes I become livid too. [I too have been abandoned by my marital life-partner.]
For the moralists among us: Which is more consequential – an “employment contract broken” or an exchange of lifelong Vows of Sacramental Marriage mutineed? [The “latter” (I hope you admitted-to.)]
For those who don’t “get it”, both Karl’s and my own Vows have been mutineed by treason. We pine for justice over NOT some “small” offense.
Should the Church ONLY BE CONCERNED about not tolerating SCANDAL by a TEACHER? SHOULDN’T THE CHURCH BE EQUALLY- [MORE!!!] CONCERNED ABOUT NOT TOLERATING THE SAME-TYPE SCANDAL IN ITS PEWS IN EVERY ONE OF ITS CHURCHES?
Isn’t a Catholic Priest WITNESS to each and every celebration of Sacramental Marriage according to canonical form? Why then are Priests so tolerant of rampant-abandonment of solemn, Sacramental Vows?
Karl’s and Karl’s first wife’s Vows have been held to be valid TWICE in the external forum including the Roman Rota. If it is not now PROVEN that Karl’s first wife lives in adultery with anyone other than with Karl – then EVERYONE WHO SAYS OTHERWISE IS A HERETIC and an APOSTATE from the Faith! Why is Karl’s first wife not banished from the scandal of attending Church with anyone else but her Karl?
Is it not A GREATER SCANDAL THAN THE TEACHER-INSTANCE FOR AN ENTIRE PARISH TO “SEE” KARL’S WIFE ATTEND HOLY MASS WEEK-AFTER-WEEK WITH AN ADULTERER-SINNER?
Why is Karl’s first wife not held to 1 Corinthians 7: 10-11?
THIS IS THE YEAR OF ST. PAUL – IF NOT NOW – WHEN?
For most Catholics the declaration of nullity is justification for a new relationship, which in itself is a scandal. Many people are waiting to get married once their “annulment is granted. This is ridiculous and should be strictly forbidden.
This is not the case in every inquiry but it seems so in many of these cases I have heard of over the years. Thus it is particularly tragic when there are children involved as they are living proof that “nothing” is not what existed. When the Church allows the will of parents to trump the will/good of children(most of whom want their parents together, in harmony) it does real harm even if the marriage was never valid and the Pope himself spoke of the desire of the Church for convalidation in such cases.
I think allowing second marriages should be a rare possibility.
If my wife passed away I doubt I would ever marry again. I am a father, first, in that situation and my obligation(s) to our children, and even the children of my wife’s adultery(as they are my wife’s children and our children’s sisters) are always present.
The annulment process needs to be more stringent with forensic questioning by expertly trained, non-clerical personnel. Any falsehood or deception to seek nullity should result in a permanent ban from a Church marriage, if the deception is documented. If a spouse even has dated, in the event of a divorce, which should be forbidden except for extreme cases until AFTER a nullity inquiry, a respondent or petitioner should be forbidden to even see that person ever again, by canon law, unless by accident and they should never be able to marry them in the Church. Their should be a ten-year ban on dating if nullity is proven, which if violated should result in a permanent ban against marriage for the guilty petitioner or respondent in the putative marriage. If there are children of the “null” marriage there should be no dating allowed for the petitioner or respondent until all the children are mature and at least eighteen, and with no righteous objections to either of their parents dating.
Trained respondents who have successfully defended their own marriage and who desire it, should be trained in Canon Law, as well as forensic interviewing, and should be a member of every single tribunal case as one of the three judges and they should have negative veto power over every decision they are part of. I am not sure if the decisions in marriage tribunals must be unanimous(I think they should be) but I have problems, as a scientist, with the validity of any decision as important and far reaching as a nullity decision and with a fixed pool of evidence, that can even possibly result in contrary opinions. There is always room for reasonable doubt if a different conclusion can be reached(or has been reached) with a fixed pool of evidence. The standard for a nullity decision in the positive should be almost absolute certainty. Moral certainty is not sufficient in something like these cases.
The entire tribunal system needs to be shut down and a formal, statistical evaluation, based upon full rehearings of selected American cases throughout representative dioceses America must be carried out to quantify the validity of the past thirty years or so American cases and needs to be carried out by retired Rotal judges supplemented by trained respondents. If the statistics are not the same between the American judges and the Rotal/respondent review process, every nullity must be declared null, since the American use of the ideas of Canon 1095 came into practice, and all cases must be reheard where spouses are living. But before they are reheard the system must be completely revamped with American canonists having one judge position only per three judge tribunals until they are tested vigorously, to ensure that new canonists or retrained canonists will, unfailingly and loyally, adhere to Rotal standards or face dismissal if the variance is serious.
The system, I believe, is a failure and its validity must be either substantiated or proven lacking. The stakes are too high for the Church to continue this system without a complete, statistically valid review. If such a process is not done there can be no faith placed in the system.
“For most Catholics the declaration of nullity is justification for a new relationship”
I think this is true, sadly. There are not even counseling referrals offered to a someone who needs to process a “null marriage” until such time as they seek to marry. Is that because marriage is the usual reason for seeking an annulment?
On the other hand, I think some of your restriction suggestions are too stringent, Karl, and fail to take into account the welfare of families who have suffered abuse and would be better off with an actual husband/father to head the household if God provided such a person. It’s not as if, as much as you have suffered, and I’m sorry for that situation, the Church is by any means always wrong or to be mistrusted. There are many people who are grateful for the mercy and prudence of the Church in the matter of their declaration of nullity who were NOT wrong to petition the Church and who would have accepted the decision of the Church with grace, either way.
People who are grateful are less likely to announce personal details to the world than people who are seeking justice, I think.
I’ll be praying for you in this, the New Year, Karl.
It is my understanding that, unless there are very strenuous conditions, the Church cannot deny a sacrament. Notwithstanding those who publically and scandalously flaunt their dissent (e.g., pro-abortion politicians), would you like to have Fr. A separating people in the Communion line into “worthy” and “not worthy” based on the gossip of other parishioners? Having the Church investigate and decide who is worthy to get married, with the exception of some extraneous circumstances, would open a can of worms not to mention inumerable lawsuits.
With regards to the comment that “the amount of annulments granted in the Church is perplexing, to say the least” I think the problem is at the source. Many marriages today come to be as a result of baby steps taken after a first casual hook-up:
Man “A” and Woman “B” hook up. After a number of “sessions” they call their serial hooking up a “relationship”. After sleeping together every night, they decide that the “logical” thing for them to do would be to move in together. As time goes on, “A” starts feeling pressure from “B” because he is not commited enough to her. In some cases “A” will walk away but most times he proposes and they get engaged. Finally, they want an ocassion to get nice pictures taken and a bunch of relatives and friends giving presents so they have a church wedding. Did they have a clue of what they were doing or what Marriage really is? Heck no! Why are we then surprised when the Church has the same opinion? As a deacon (hopefully some day) doing marriage prep I will tell the couple that they can’t live together and should practice chastity until their marriage. I can’t, however, follow them home every night to ensure that they are following the Church’s directions.
It is indeed a big problem and we have all played a part by tolerating this culture.
One more thing. When my (then) wife started her adulterous relationship with her boss, I consulted with a priest about the posibility of a null marriage. That was an important consideration for me as I had to make a decision whether to fight or walk away. I was told by the priest that the Tribunal (Archdiocese of Arlington in Virginia) would not even look at a case unless there was already a civil divorce. I guess different dioceses will have different policies.
In my attempts to understand what is going on in the Church, in these regards, I learned from reading sources like Cormac Burke, Edward Egan, Clarence Hettinger and Bob Vasoli as well as intensely reading every Papal address to the Rota by JP II and Benedict XVI plus reading Canon Law and applying simple common sense.
My understanding of the simplicity of a marital vow and the very basis of why I so strongly and unbendingly will not change my position, in general, until I am convinced(not swayed) otherwise, is the following Canon, which, if meditated upon, makes it clear about how low the standard is to which the Church Fathers, who promulgated this Canon, hold valid marital consent and which, if one is Catholic, we must hold too unless we are apostate or heretical in our belief(s).
Can. 1096 §1. For matrimonial consent to exist, the contracting parties MUST BE AT LEAST NOT IGNORANT that marriage is a permanent partnership between a man and a woman ordered to the procreation of offspring by means of some sexual cooperation.
§2. This ignorance is NOT PRESUMED after puberty.
AND, when considered in the light of the MATURITY needed, at these proscribed, BY CANON LAW, ages, of CONSENT in this second Canon, I find it nearly impossible to accept the excuses/reasons cited, by Canonists, as so gravely impacting the exercize of the will, as to justify nullity in all but extremely rare circumstances. This even gives me doubts about the Rota, itself, but since that is a Papal court and its ruling are made in union with the Papal office/authority, their decisions CANNOT simply be ignored or disregarded, I would think, without very compelling evidence/reasons.
Can. 1083 §1. A man before he has completed his sixteenth year of age and a woman before she has completed her fourteenth year of age cannot enter into a valid marriage.
§2. The conference of bishops is free to establish a higher age for the licit celebration of marriage.
What these two canons, together, say is that a person must have LESS intellectual ability than a 16yr old, if male, or 14 yr old, if female AND not be capable, OR HAVE SUCH A GRAVELY DIMINISHED FUNCTIONAL CAPACITY TO ENGAGE THEIR WILL as to not be able to NOT BE IGNORANT OF(MEANING SIMPLY NOT BE AWARE OF)….that “marriage is a permanent partnership between a man and a woman ordered to the procreation of offspring by means of some sexual cooperation.”
If this were as widespread as the annulments granted seem to indicate, to be vulgar, we should see the same men and women, as adults, walking around in public with wet pants/skirts around their groins because they would have to be so intellectually INCONTINENT as to not know to “drop their drawers” to urinate. That is how ignorant/or stupid one must be to not be aware of these two, simple, conditions!
I reject that level of ignorance being as widespead as those running tribunals seem to claim it is.
The truth is that annulments ARE CATHOLIC DIVORCE and this is destroying the faith.
In my opinion, the pinhole that the Catholic Church recognizes, to disqualify simple consent through, has been widened to a panorama like the Grand Canyon, and is intimately undermining the institution of marriage by wiping out the confidence one can have that their particular union will last.
If this is not obvious than the dishonesty of thought is tremendous and, to me, mind boggling.
Why would any Catholic marry, when there are built in constructs to facilitate the, non- existence, of a publicly professed vow? Only a complete fool would marry, and to me, someone who would disregard or choose to face the overwhelming likelihood of divorce, these days, is either. themselves, ab initio, incapable of sufficient prudential judgement or a saint.
Our behaviors in the present society do not support that we have so many saints, these days, as there are marriages! Nor do I think we have that level of married/annulled people to support such a dreadful level of intellectual competence.
HOWEVER, ON A LIGHTER AND SERIOUS NOTE, ONE MUST WONDER ABOUT THE INTELLECTUAL ABILITIES OF A CATHOLIC ELECTORATE WHICH/WHO CAN SUPPORT A CANDIDATE WHO EXPRESSLY AND PUBLICLY SUPPORTS STABBING THE SKULL OF AN UNBORN LIVING HUMAN CHILD AND SUCKING ITS BRAINS OUT OR ALLOWING ANOTHER CHILD WHICH SURVIVED, HAVING SOME IF ITS BODY RIPPED APART OR BURNED AWAY WITH CONCENTRATED SALINE, TO BE LEFT ON A COLD STAINLESS STEEL TABLE OR IN A WASTE DISPOSAL UNIT, TO JUST DIE!!!!!
Perhaps the Catholic Church should nullify the marriages of every Catholic who voted, thusly, in this last election AND forbid them from EVER MARRYING in the Catholic Church.
Mr. Flaptrap,
Numerous years ago, but during my never ending ordeal and when I was still formally a member of the Catholic Church, I asked to be allowed to speak to the parish preCana classes.
The priest in charge knew well my experiences and told me that, although he was confident that I would present the truth faithfully, he could not allow me to be part of the process because the horrors that I would tell them, which he admitted to me he knew were true and widespread throughout the American Church, would possibly induce some of them to chose not to marry in the Catholic Church.
Karl,
I hate to say this but, if you approached the priest in charge with the bitterness and anger that comes across the postings above, I can’t really blame him. The problem wouldn’t have been the nature of the message but of the delivery.
Having suffered through the pain of an adulterous wife, I can relate to you in a way. I just wish that there was a way for you to recieve the type of healing that I received. If you want to, ask Mr. Miller to give you my e-mail address and you can contact me directly. Anything I can do to help, please let me know.
Karl,
By the way; It has not been mentioned here yet but you have allowed yourself to be put in a position that is, to my mind, far more dangerous to your soul than anything you have mentioned here. Namely, you have left Christ’s Church. Ultimately Karl it is Christ whom you have to deal with and whom you have a big problem with. Yes, the leadership you describe is abhorant, but; this IS Christ’s Church. You seem to have indicated that you are knowingly rejecting this Church and have defected. You seem to be throwing the baby out with the bath water (or perhaps just keeping the bath water.
Pat
Mr Flapatap,
I will be healed when I see God at my final judgment. Till then it is one day at a time standing as a living witness to the corruption in the Catholic Church, waiting for it to face itself.
The adultery was an acute hurt years ago. Now, it is just another rock in the mountain of injustices the volcano of the Church corruption continues to spew upon me and countless others. The adultery was just the gateway for the Church to attack our marriage.
The priest of whom I speak, is a kind, gentle, now aging priest who knows I respect him and who understands the mess.
I have had no problems with him or he with me.
Thank you.
Karl,
I really hope and pray that the healing happens well before final judgement and that you find peace. If you ever want to discuss it, feel free to reach me (JRCarbon@comcast.net).
Mr. Flapatap,
This,
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=84810
or
http://tinyurl.com/8cxfgt
is what needs healing and the Catholic Church directly supports this hell. I can begin(and the other many thousands of me(s) can begin to heal when the catholic church admits its crimes and changes.
If you are contributing to the Catholic Church coffers, you are a part of the problem and not its solution.
Catholics need, no, are morally required, to demand that their Church changes its tactics to address its crimes or cease supporting the Catholic Church. If they do not they are as guilty as the adulterers who refuse to repent.
Will Catholics thus act, Hell no!
They love adultery. It is exciting to watch people be destroyed.
Karl writes: “It is exciting to watch people be destroyed.”
And that, folks, is what Karl’s fulminations are really about: anti-Catholic bigotry.
Fr. Philip, OP
This is like **so*** one of those Luke 6:45 moments.
I have been a reading of St. Blogs for many years, and it has never failed to be a source of inspiration for me. I have especially enjoyed the many thoughtful comments and discussions that take place from many well meaning people much smarter than myself. I stay within St. Blogs for most of my internet browsing, but on those occasions that I attempt to follow a blog thread/discussion on more profane topics like politics or even sports, I am repulsed by the hellish descent most discussions fall into, replete with f&*ing this and you g*(dm that, and discourse that is nothing more than red-faced, nose-to-nose spittle-flying sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Although we have all seen heated discussions arise on our favorite St Blogs threads, many time we also see waring parties attempt to pull their punches, or at least attempt to show Christian charity, and failing to do that, agree to disagree.
The thread above is a case in point. Hijacked, in my opinion, by a wounded soul who is still crying for justice like the blood of Abel. Our family pet was one of the sweetest and most loyal and noble creatures, if human character can be attributed at all to a canine. One day, she wounded her spine and the tremendous pain wiped away all of her sweetness and loyalty. She cowered in a corner, eyes wide and searching, and would tear the throat out of any family member who approached her. My wife was finally able to throw a heavy blanket over her and I clamped her jaws shut and held them until she could be administered a pain killer.
On other sorts of blogs, Karl, this man of many words and many hurts would have been attacked in kind and then maybe ceremoniously dumped and blocked. I almost sensed a disappointment that he was not treated so, and possibly that added to his offense. I saw many thread-posters approach this man, attempting to help and understand only to be told that he doesn’t “want their prayers” (heck, I’d even take an earnest prayer from Herman Goering, if he offered it to me).
Visceral pain can wipe a man of his humanity. I don’t justify it, but I understand it from personal experience. I have been calumnized and ostracized by family members, and I have harbored damnable resentment and ill-will towards them…
Still, at the end, standing before the God, the LAST thing I want is justice or satisfaction…. for me or anyone else. I don’t what what I deserve, so how can I want the same for anyone else.
My thanks to all the regular contributors to these blogs, and to the voices of true compassion and Christian charity to this poor man, my thanks many times over
She should come and work at a (so called) Catholic school in the town near where I live. We have a couple who were both married to others, conducted a public affair, left their respective spouses and got “married” and both kept their jobs (and, as a matter of fact have enjoyed promotional positions in the school since).