Это видео недоступно.
Сожалеем об этом.
The Truth about Divorce and Annulments | Catholic Views
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 сен 2021
- This week on Catholic Views, Heather Eichholz, director of the Marriage Tribunal for the diocese, visits with us about common misconceptions around what the Church teaches about divorce and annulments. What does the Church really teach about Communion after divorce? What about the legitimacy of the children? And will I be judged during the process? This is an episode packed with information and a message of mercy you won't want to miss!
If you have questions regarding these topics, please feel free to reach out to the Tribunal office at www.sfcatholic...
Be sure to like, subscribe and share with your friends!
Have topic ideas for future episodes? Drop them in the comments!
For this week's Biblical Bites click here: • The Long Road | Biblic...
For last week's Catholic Views episode click here: • Works of Mercy | Catho...
Follow us on social media!
Facebook: / sfdiocese
Twitter: / sfdiocese
Instagram: / sfdiocese
Subscribe to our RUclips: / @sfdiocese
Website: www.sfcatholic...
Help us make more videos like this one!
www.sfcatholic...
Thank you so very much for this presentation. This has helped me immensely.
Canon Law requires that the spouse who seeks a civil divorce first obtains permission from the local bishop.
There is a difference between the spouse who seeks a divorce and the spouse who opposes it. The spouse who seeks a civil divorce commits a sin against the other spouse.
It may be different for me because I was abused but I was told seeking a divorce did not effect my ability to receive
That is wrong. If one without good cause breaks the marriage they sin, if that happens it happens. Often the one who files or even demands the divorce was not the one that broke the marriage. And in many cases, both broke the marriage.
@@mary77719 You were told correct. The initial poster is completely wrong.
Early on you say, that a priest told your grandma "We'll just take care of that", and then you said that is why you got into the tribunals to help more people. Taking care of it, and helping more people take care of it. Is it the convenience of communion, or is it solid ground for nullity biblically/cannon law. You also say, God never asks us to do the impossible...who is determining it is impossible? I believe that there are many instances where we are to suffer to some extent in this life. I am divorced. My xW never went to the church and asked for guidance in our marriage. Our marriage was valid despite what any process says, but I am expecting annullment papers at some point. Because it is really a catholic divorce that allows people to move on. The net is wide for what constitutes an annullment, so wide that anyone can fall into it. I believe the church should demand pre-divorce counseling for people in the process, at least to try and guide it biblically. Instead of conveniently cleaning up the mess afterward.
The Bishop is suppose to be contacted before a spouse files for civil divorce. He would then decide. See Mary’s Advocate with Bai Mcfarlane.
@@jsalmeron793 I never knew that I should have contacted the Bishop when I filed for civil divorce. It makes sense, now. I am Catholic from birth, however, I was wayward. In the past nine years, I have seen the light, and now I am seeking an annulment. I don't want an annulment for convenience sake, I want an annulment only if I deserve an annulment. What I do need is the "Body of Christ".
@@iesusegoconfidoinvobis4309 if you had kids, you necessarily had due discretion and capacity.
@@AnnulmentProof Are you a Canon lawyer or on the decision tribunal? If you ever had to face this situation yourself, you would hope for some understanding and Christlike compassion. Yes its a serious breach of the commandment of Christ, but sometimes things happen outside our understanding or control and its a decision where there are no easy or simple answers.
@@bdschm3475 No and no. "its a serious breach of the commandment of Christ" What are you referring to?
I felt like the Catholic Church completely abandoned me by granting an annulment to my cheating spouse who stated he just wanted an “out.”
I’m going through it now saying you just want out is not valid he/she must have said some kind of serious doubts happening at the time of vows or something else at the time of vows
@@mary77719 well I am calling BS. He had an affair and swiftly went on to live with her as soon as he left.
@@seasonalliving2881 what are you talking about?
@@seasonalliving2881 I hope you challenged the annulment all you had to say is you were and are still validly married.
See Mary’s Advocate wth Bai McFarlane. She will explain everything the correct way.
She knows her stuff!
Why would someone refuse to file for divorce until being granted annulment?
You have to be civilly divorced and have waited a reasonable time period. The panel must believe reconciliation is not a reasonable option.
"If your marriage was always good and natural, we grant you the annulment." ?? A natural marriage is just as valid as a sacramental one.
Natural Mariage implies a lack of valid form.
She says there is no guilty or innocent spouse in a divorce. The Church teaches that every divorce has one guilty spouse and one innocent spouse.
not correct please list the Canon.
@@whatsup3270 if no spouses guilty, then divorce is not a sin. Can. 1155 "The innocent spouse.."
"The church does not judge people." False. In separation court, the guilty and innocent spouse is determined via the promoter of Justice, canon 1696.
Another way to look at it. If we’re going to accept her view that civil divorce is not a sin because it’s just a business contract ending then the spouse who left without getting an annulment or permission from the bishop to separate is still guilty of persistent mortal sin and should not present themselves for communion because they are withholding sex from the spouse the church says they are still married to. Canon 1151, CCC 2364
I think you misunderstood. Civil divorce is not a sin because it is a change in legal status, it does not require a change in communion. For example if a man had serious legal issues it might be a mercy to divorce him to protect the house, wife, and children from his legal bills. They would be married Catholics as the Church would not be affected by the civil divorce.
What does Jesus say about divorce? A husband who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery.
But your tribunal understands that things happen. The judges scrutinize the spouses' arguments, and they find cause for nullity in 90% of cases. Everyone lacks due discretion and/or has psychological incapacities.
Christmas just passed. Millions of children visited Mom and her new man in the morning and Dad and his new woman in the afternoon. Misery.
The problem is that you people have erased the primary purpose of marriage and substituted "relationship." In other words happiness. Not happy? Divorce/annul/remarry. The Pharisees should have been so clever.
Well said. About 8% of US annulments are appealed to Rome. Out of those 8%, 95% are overturned. That is very telling. Yet the US gives no assistance to the Respondent whatsoever. Only for the Petitioner. Its shameful.
Nice points however arranged incorrectly. The couple claimed a lifetime bond, even if that was not true*. The couple actually marry themselves; the Church holds a public ceremony. Read the actual documents. I pronounce you man and wife isn't the marriage it is a public proclamation based on the couples claims(not the Priest)
* I remember the marriage prep counselors always saying you never know, he said he would bet against some and they stuck. Others seemed perfect and it was a short lived event.
Marriage is a solemn contract, not a covenant.
A covenant is a sacred contract.
@@JewelBlueIbanez what are the legal terms of the sacred contract?
@@AnnulmentProof A bond with God is not enforce by the laws of men. Natural Marriage is two individuals committed to each other. Civil Marriage is two married by the laws of the State. Sacramental Marriage is a bond with God, and each other.
@@whatsup3270 The 3rd Council of Baltimore decree #126 states that:
"We command all (i.e. baptized) married persons that they must not go to the civil courts to obtain a separation from bed and board without previously receiving permission from the ecclesiastical authority. Should anyone attempt this, let him know that he incurs the guilt of grave sin and that he is to be punished as the bishop shall decide."
At 00:10:25: No, this is not correct. Civil law & Catholic Church both view marriage as a contract that creates obligation. Contract and covenant have the same understanding and they are not mutually exclusive.
A contract is things a covenant is with people read the biblical definition of covenant testament is the same thing that’s why we have the New Testament and the Old Testament the new covenant and the old covenant
She is 100% correct, the State enforce the State marriage contracts. The Church records a bond with both God and the Spouse. The Church commonly recognizes marriages when the State recognize the same as a divorced person. This is very, very common.
God is not a God of divorce.....
The church considers a marriage involving a 13 year old as "valid" ... really?
No
16 for boys
14 for girls
@@Oliveoil91661 that's medieval
@@JGULLIF
😂 Lmbo....Well, I guess when one considers how naive and immature today's children are, I would almost have to agree with you. In fact, I will even put a thumb up on your reply. 😂. I imagine those numbers have just never changed since Mary was 14. Lol. I guess they never imagined a culture like today's West. Once upon a Time, a 16-year-old boy was educated on how to provide for a family.
@@JGULLIF It was pretty normal even just a century ago for people to be married that young. The bourgeois, suburban concept of how many revolutions around the sun someone needs to endure before entering "adulthood" is mostly based on the the common law standards which were erected around the state education system, not anything objective about sexual development. In many cultures, you are a "young woman" once you start menstruating, and you are a "young man" once you have proven yourself in some customary form of work or in a manhood trial of some kind. Even the canon law guidelines are probably based on common law figures, rather than any immutable characteristic of the ages 14 and 16. I imagine they are there for the same reason the common law standards are what they are: convenience.
Nice question, this isn't as simple as we would like. The couple individually has to approach the Church and request the Sacrament which they CONFER ON TO EACH OTHER. Technically the Church marries no one ever (?). The Church holds a public Marriage celebration, originally designed to show the whole tribe these were married no longer single people. I wish the Church would refuse to cooperate if any party was under 21. Which would make some out of communion and prevent baptism of infants! until the parents turned 21.
If your baptized, it is sacramental or nothing. There is no natural marriage.
Not correct. A baptized Catholic if civilly or naturally married is out of communion until the Bishop issues a dispensation.
@@whatsup3270 when the man and the woman are baptized, their marriage is always a sacrament. A "naturally married Catholic" can't exist.
@@AnnulmentProof Really? Millions of Protestants are married and baptized, for some it isn't there first marriage partner, and the Catholic Church has no sacramental records which a requirement for sacraments.
A naturally married Catholic is a baptized catholic who married outside the Church. That catholic can even get a dispensation to allow their natural marriage to be recognized by the Church as a Natural Marriage. Which allows that Catholic to receive the Eucharist.
@@AnnulmentProof No correct. Canon Law only applies to Roman Catholics
@@AnnulmentProof Not correct, my replies are being removed, so I can't elaborate.