The following comes from an early December story in the Inland Catholic Byte, an online publication of the San Bernadino diocese.
The Diocese of San Bernardino has joined just a handful of dioceses in the United States that do not charge a fee to those seeking to have their marriage annulled.
The move took effect on August 28, the Feast Day of St. Augustine.
“In this important ministry of reconciliation every obstacle (and excuse) for not applying for an annulment should be removed,” Bishop Gerald Barnes said in a letter announcing the fee waiver. “Too many people feel they are on the outside looking in; the New Evangelization calls us to reach out to them and facilitate their return to the community.”
Father David Andel, J.C.L., judicial vicar for the diocese, said that Pope Francis’ emphasis on forgiveness and reconciliation, particularly in relation to those who have drifted away from the Catholic faith, was a catalyst for the local discussion about waiving annulment fees. After discussing the idea with Father Andel, Bishop Barnes consulted the presbyteral council, his chief body of priest advisors, and received a positive reception.
The average amount of the annulment fee in the diocese of San Bernardino was about $400, Father Andel said, generating about $40,000 a year. Any outstanding annulment fees owed to the diocesan tribunal are also waived. The vast majority of dioceses in the United States charge an annulment fee. The diocese of Cleveland, Ohio and archdiocese of Detroit, Michigan are among those who have also eliminated their annulment fee.
Getting rid of the fee helps put greater focus on the spiritual process of the annulment and its potential for healing, Fr. Andel said.
“There’s been that perception than an annulment can be bought,” he said. “This flies in the face of that….”
To read the entire story, click here.
So, over the next few months when attending Mass will I hear the celebrant advise that Bishop Barnes has requested one more second collection, this one in order to cover the cost of processing annulment requests in the diocese. Where is this $40,000 going to come from now? It would seem that $400 is a more than reasonable fee to pay for the cost of annulment processing.
If $400 stands between the Church canon lawyers and a person’s soul, don’t you think it’s a pretty good bargain? Perhaps if you really care for the souls of others, you’d march right up the the chancery offices with a $400 check in hand, so someone else can participate more effectively in the life of her Church and know more deeply the mercy of Christ.
Cost should be based on who can afford it, with a cap of covering the cost.
Many (in the USA) and Diocese of San Bernardino can afford $400 to help cover the cost of an Annulment proceeding.
Every Diocese that I have ever heard of in the USA waives the fee for those who cannot afford it. Had Bishop Barnes previously instructed his Diocese office of the Tribunal to deny the process based upon cost?
That is the way it was before in our area, and $400 is cheap. About ten years ago I was told it was $700 in my area. Of course there was a sliding fee scale for those who could not afford that much. If it is made too cheap, marriage will become cheap — meaning too easily destroyed.
Nothing is “free”. Someone pays for it.
A very orthodox late Ordinary of a California Diocese once told me “Ken in some Diocese and Archdiocese you can get an annulment on coffee grounds!”
Anne, right on! This is typical Demoncrat thinking that forces others to pay for the errors and faults of others!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts!
May God have mercy on an amoral Amerika and His Church!
Viva Cristo Rey!
Kenneth M. Fisher
Kenneth, I should have said it was $700 over ten years ago. Evidently, they have already brought the price down. Many teachers, school employees and parents have seen children dump their apples and lunches in the trash with the comment, “Oh, it is just a free lunch.” They were told by many, “No, it is not free. The taxpayers are paying for it.” Many people seem not to value what is cheap or “free”. After all they did not have to sweat and work for it.
“Nothing is “free”. Someone pays for it.”
Wise words Anne T. as shown in the very hurtful suffering of RR’s brother and children and RR’s suffering for her brother.
There is no such thing as a free lunch even though the invitation might seem initially appealing. Once again, “Someone pays for it”
SETH is right….”If anyone lied during the process he/she will have to answer to Jesus at their Particular Judgment at death.”
No one can fool Jesus.
YFC, you do not care about the Souls of others, since you support sodomy marriage openly and in print.
Do not give advice to others since you have evil motives. You merely hope that if those who are choosing to continue living in adultery with the valid spouse of another are granted Holy Communion that those who support the mortal sins of homosexual acts will also be granted Holy Communion.
In both cases this is SACRILEGE and SCANDAL, and sends unrepentant Souls to Hell.
Wrong, Paul, I just abhore simony. You should too. It’s not about the gay thing at all.
Stop playing games YFC.
You fully support SODOMY.
No one was posting about SIMONY.
You are of the devil with your deceitfulness.
Men who encourage other men to abandon their families in order to live in same sex unions will always be more than happy to march everyone up with a $400 check in hand in order for someone to annul those vows that they made to God on their wedding day……..And don’t forget the promises that were made to God at their children’s baptism.
V. Do you reject Satan?
R. I do.
V. And all his works?
R. I do.
V. And all his empty promises?
R. I do.
Bishop Barnes says, “Too many people feel they are on the outside looking in;”
Annulments have been handed out like candy canes for years. Bishop Barnes sounds more like a member of Little Anthony and the Imperials instead of a Catholic bishop. Loyalty to God comes from within and if a person is not committing sin there is no reason for them to feel on the outside looking in. If a person has been living in adultery then their conscience should not be “facilitated to pretend that they are not” by tempting them with free applications for annulments.
Catherine if that was a reference to me, I’m not sure where you get the idea that I encourage other men to abandon their families in order to live in same sex unions. I have never ever done such a thing, nor would I. I HAVE pointed out that if a marriage is based on a lie, there was no valid marriage to begin with. That is a statement of fact, not opinion, and is true whether the lie is about the sexuality of the person or some other aspect that prevents a valid marriage from taking place. But this is a far cry from abandonment. If you think I ever recommended that men abandon their families, you have somebody else in mind.
A very much loved late Ordinary of a California Diocese once told me: “Ken in some Archdiocese and Diocese you can get an annulment on ‘Coffee Grounds!'”
God bless, yours in Their Hearts!
May God have mercy on an amoral Amerika and His Church!
Viva Cristo Rey!
Kenneth M. Fisher.
Mr. Fisher: Unfortunately all too true.
Tell that to those who whose petition for annulment was denied.
The decision to forgo the fees is based on charity. I’ve known too many Catholics who want to their first marriage annulled but just cannot afford the fees and costs. Usually these good Catholics are single mothers doing their best to make a good life for their children. God Bless All.
The Church says one needs a formal annulment to dissolve a marriage that may have been a mistake, for a variety of reasons. Some parts of the Church then impose significant legal or administrative fees to obtain that annulment. Thus, the Church requires one to continue in the marriage.
I commend the Diocese for eliminating the fee. Otherwise, the fee becomes an impossible barrier especially for the financially less well off.
Most Diocese in the USA do not charge those who can not afford an annulment, only those who are capable of paying the incurred costs pay.
I guess Bishop Barnes charged even the poor, and now has swung the other direction to not charge even those who can afford it – and thus the entire cost being picked up by everyone in the Diocese – for even the wealthy.
Dottie, I am not now nor ever will be married in the Church, let alone divorced or annulled. But even to me your post is absolutely appalling. Things of the Church should not be bought and paid for. This was part of Martin Luther’s legitimate complaint when he railed against the purchase and sale of indulgences. And he was right.
The right to enter into the sacramental and salvific roles of the Church should never ever be exchanged for money, regardless of whether you have the means to pay or not.
YFC, you are lying again.
There is nothing wrong with having those who can afford it pay for the Administrative Costs which they have CAUSED to be incurred.
Of course those who can not afford it should be subsidized.
Paying for one’s own debts is covered in CCC 2411.
– – – – – – – – –
I repeat Dottie’s post which is accurate and Christian.
Most Diocese in the USA do not charge those who can not afford an annulment, only those who are capable of paying the incurred costs pay.
I guess Bishop Barnes charged even the poor, and now has swung the other direction to not charge even those who can afford it – and thus the entire cost being picked up by everyone in the Diocese – for even the wealthy.”
YFC, the Church did not tell someone who to marry. It is their own fault and their own just debt if they are going to try for an annulment.
People have to be responsible for their own actions and inactions.
Of course those who are unable to pay should be financially assisted.
But requiring the members of the Diocese to pay for everyone’s annulment attempts (including those who can afford to pay the incurred costs), is unjust.
There are many who spend more than $400 a year on football, basketball, and baseball games. – And that is their priority.
When there is no cost at all, it would not surprise me if many with VALID first marriages apply for an Annulment. These annulments are costly and take up the time of the Tribunal where sincere people need to be assisted.
This is nothing like selling indulgences. You are such a troll on this Catholic site. You are evil.
Some people spend more than $400 a year on dining out, entertainment and other luxuries.
If any of them wanted an Annulment, where are there priorities ?
Can these not afford to pay their own debts ?
YFC, and who should pay for the debts incurred by specific persons due to their own actions?
When people purchase cell phones for their kids, designer jeans, designer shoes, designer hand bags, and spend a significant amount of money on their pets – they should pay for their own debts.
When you say “things of the Church” what are you talking about?
“Things” are not free. Services are not free.
And those who are NOT poor should pay for their own personal expenses, which have nothing to do with the actual Sacraments.
The cost only of course, the Church should never make a profit.
As a member of the Diocese, I object to paying the debts for those who can afford to pay them themselves.
Many of these people take vacations that I can not afford. They own skis, boats, jet skis etc. 50 to 60″ TV sets, etc
It should be based upon ability to pay; and cost of services rendered.
Churches are not supposed to be charging for salvation. It’s just that simple. It has nothing to do with paying other people’s debts, buying them cell phones, or 50″ TVs. Seth, here you even get these notions is beyond me.
You are thinking of the sin of simony.
I don’t think that would apply to a fee for annulment, especially if the fee would be waived for those who could not afford it. You are not buying a spiritual grace but you are acknowledging that you need a special service from the Church and that it costs the Church a lot to provide this service. So you would help to defray the costs.
I am sure donations to your diocese marked with the intention to defray costs of marriage tribunal would be appreciated.
YFC, Churches do NOT charge for Salvation (your post below).
If you want SALVATION you adhere to Sacred Scripture the Speech of God, and the CCC.
Apparently salvation is not something you are interested in, so don’t pretend otherwise.
One can easily be saved without an ANNULMENT.
Are you some kind of nut?
Let us remember that VALID marriages can NOT be annulled. And Bishop Barnes needs to make this very clear to insure against disillusionment and scandal.
“Thou shall not commit Adultery” – GOD’s Commandment
Ex 20:14 ; Deut 5:18.
“Thou shall not covet thy Neighbor’s wife” – GOD’s Commandment
Ex 20:17 ; Deut 5.20.
Teachings of JESUS about divorce and remarriage –
Mk 10:6-12; Mt 5:32.
Teaching of JESUS about adultery, mercy, and required repentance – “Go and SIN NO more” Jn 8:11.
St Paul – 1 Cor 11:27-30 about condemnation for receiving Holy Communion unworthily.
CCC: ” 81 Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit.
And [Holy] Tradition transmits in its ENTIRETY the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit.
It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching. “
CCC: ” 1650 Today there are numerous Catholics in many countries who have recourse to civil divorce and contract new civil unions.
In fidelity to the words of Jesus Christ – “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery” the Church maintains that a new union cannot be recognized as valid, if the first marriage was.
If the divorced are remarried civilly, they find themselves in a situation that objectively contravenes God’s law. Consequently, they cannot receive Eucharistic communion as long as this situation persists.
For the same reason, they cannot exercise certain ecclesial responsibilities. Reconciliation through the sacrament of Penance can be granted only to those who have repented for having violated the sign of the covenant and of fidelity to Christ,
and who are committed to living in complete continence. ”
– – – – – – – – –
Divorced persons who do not civilly remarry can receive the Sacraments.
IMPORTANT:
Bishop Barnes and others should make the following perfectly clear to everyone within their own Diocese.
Catholics who are divorced and civilly remarried have 3 choices.
Catholics who are divorced and civilly remarried have 3 choices.
– – – 1. If they believe that their first marriage was NOT VALID, they should contact their Diocese office of Marriage Tribunal for further information and needed forms.
(Remembering that truthfulness is important because we can deceive other human beings, but not Jesus at our particular judgment.)
– – – 2. They can repent and live as brother and sister, and receive the Sacraments. (CCC #1650)
– – – 3. They can choose not to repent, and continue committing adultery with someone else’s valid spouse, and NOT receive the Sacraments, but must raise their children in the Catholic Faith. (CCC # 1651)
Receiving Holy Communion while in the state of Mortal Sin –
– – – 1. Sacrilege against the Body and Blood of our Lord.
– – – 2. Scandal for others which can be an additional mortal sin. CCC 2284, 2285, 2286, 2326.
– – – 3. Teaching of St. Paul 1 Cor 11:27-30 regarding condemnation for receiving unworthily.
Catholics who are divorced and NOT remarried can receive the Sacraments of Penance and Holy Eucharist.
If they believe that that their marriage was not valid, they should contact their Diocese Office Tribunal for annulment information.
An annulment from an invalid marriage will free them to remarry in the Church in the future.
It’s all about education folks, so that people will accurately know the truth.
Bishop Barnes are others are guilty of not encouraging all literate Laity within their Diocese to read the “Catechism of the Catholic Church” which contains the Doctrine of the Faith and the reasons “why”.
For information regarding Divorce, or Divorce and remarriage see:
CCC # 1646 – 1651.
All those contemplating Marriage should be required to read:
CCC #1601 – 1666 prior to marriage.
Also read the footnotes.
Parents do not let your children consider marriage without reading these sections of the CCC.
If you do not own a copy of the “Catechism of the Catholic Church” for more info regarding the CCC including quotes from our Popes please go to:
“What Catholics REALLY Believe SOURCE”
https://whatcatholicsreallybelieve.com/
Here is the CCC table of contents from the Vatican web site:
https://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm
In the USA, the CCC cover is dark green. And on the cover included are the words: “Second Edition” and “revised in accordance with the official Latin text promulgated by Pope John Paul II.”
Dave – it should be an absolute requirement that ALL literate Catholics who are considering Marriage, MUST be required to read CCC: 1601 – 1666.
And required to pass a simple test to insure they understand it.
Otherwise the Sacrament of Marriage should not be administered until they get it right.
The CCC is printed in most languages, so this is not an issue.
Those who are not literate should have CCC 1601-1666 read to them several times, and be required to pass a simple verbal test.
Protestants, protestants, all protestants. Appears as over 2/3rds of the bloggers support annullments, which is against Roman Catholic teaching. No, it’s not against V2 Church teaching, just against Roman Catholic teaching. No wonder the spiritual health of V2 families is in such dire straits. V2 church members statistics regarding divorces aren’t much better than protestants and pagans, and annulments, well annullments are just “feel-better” alibies handed out by the 10s of thousands each year for those proud V2 church members who don’t want to carryout their marriage roles, customs, and courtesies. Call me what you like, but the liberal woman’s movement seems to have contributed greatly to these sour statistics, and it just not a matter of coincidence.
I find it whacky science that a couple married together for 27 + years and having multiple grown children together can get an annulment from the V2 Church, that their marriage id now declared invalid, all because one or both of them didn’t want to forgive and/or amend their lives. Rather than resolving the issues, the V2 Church just exacerbates them handing out annulments like cotton candy. Does anyone really believe Christ would support what the V2 Church is doing? I don’t believe so. It was Jesus who instituted the Sacrament of Matrimony at the Marriage Feast in Cana. What God has joined, let no man put asunder, used to be a commonly spoken in the Sacrament of Matrimony. Perhaps the leading cause of divorce today which is the same thing as an annulment from a common sense point of view, is adultery, but mean spiritedness, distrust, and lying are also leading causes. All evil in the eyes of God. The annulment only gives the V2 Church member the false belief that they are free to marry again, in good grace. Yah right wait til the last judgment, many will be sorrowfully surprised. Go to confession.
Bruce, the Catholic Church has supported annulments with Marriage Tribunals prior to Vatican II.
In order to get an annulment, it must be PROVEN that the marriage was NOT VALID in the first place. This has not changed either.
There are no guarantees that just because someone applies for an annulment that their first marriage was INVALID and that they will be free to marry someone else.
What is being discussed at the Synod was whether to commit Sacrilege and Scandal by giving Holy Communion to those who choose to continue living in the state of Moral Sin – and this is an abomination.
Bruce, first off there is no such thing as the V2 Church. There is the, however, catholic church. And annulments are hardly against church teaching, nor are they cotton candy. And V2 families? Where do I begin?
Bruce, where did you learn Church history? Your teachers should be fired.
Even King Henry 8th applied for an Annulment, but the same as today, his first marriage was VALID so he did not get it.
Annulments have nothing to do with V II. You should try reading the V II documents some time.
If any persons or tribunal members are dishonest in the process, they will have to answer to Jesus at their particular judgments. Ultimately, no one will get away with anything.
It’s insane to think one can fool God.
There were marriage annulments before Vatican II.
Grounds for annulment were things like: a person was coerced into the marriage (did not enter the marriage under their own free will); or fraud such as a person never intended to keep the marriage vow or a person was already in a marriage or a person was deceived into marriage or a person did not intend to and did not consummate the marriage or a person entered the marriage unwilling to have children.
These things invalidate the marriage-the sacrament is not valid
I agree wholeheartedly, Bruce!! There are very few legitimate reasons for a true annulment, but the majority of annulments are given out like candy for reasons that are a ridiculous! I am so sick of it. I feel disgust for the tribunal and Bishop who granted my sister-in-law her annulment. God help them. No matter what they say, or the Church said, my brother’s marriage was valid. My brother didn’t want it and my sister-in-law did and true to form the Church gave it to her. Totally disgusting!
RR, if one party wants an annulment or not has nothing to do with an annulment – the discovery work was/is the Marriage VALID in the first place.
If anyone lied during the process he/she will have to answer to Jesus at their Particular Judgment at death.
No one can fool Jesus.
My understanding on Catholic Marriage is that we all get 1 Ticket to the Dance, and it only gets punched once – and that’s it, so be careful who you invite.
I believe that when a Marriage is at that tipping point, where it can either dissolve or Renew itself with a Re-Commitment – that the ‘Ease’ of Dissolution often looks more inviting that the Effort at Reconciliation, and leads many in to poor decisions that effect not just themselves but all others involved.
An example of this can be seen in the movie “Fireproof” – which is well written story about that Re-Commitment and the Effort & Rewards that can follow it.
Better Yet – Don’t Marry Someone based on ‘Charm’ (deceptive) or Beauty (fleeting) but rather their Love & Respect for the Lord, without whom any Catholic Marriage is Empty.
BTW – it apparently helps if you actually Like Each Other, as opposed to a tradeoff of conjugal relations in return for a shared paycheck that reflects Too Many ‘marriages’ – mostly doomed ones.
Also – Don’t believe all the numbers on Divorce – as the Much / Frequently Divorced (Taylor & Burton as Hollyweird examples) tend to skew the ratios.
People should marry on the following premises:
1) Will this person help me get to Heaven for eternity ?
2) Can I help this person get to Heaven for eternity ?
The answers to these questions prior to marriage will help determine if someone is really your Soul mate, or a fading whim based upon current attraction.
Yep the protestants defending these mass numbers of annullments have jumped out and quickly spoken to defend the errors of the V2 Church. You bet there are two Churches, and one isn’t catholic, its the one that has drastically changed on account of the V2 Council and its liberal aftermath! Yes, yes, we’ve heard it all before there were annullments before the V2 church; and it is sadly true, but no where close to the enormity of what is handed out like cotton candy today. There was real hard unmistakable evidence that led to those yesteryear annullments.
Prior to the V2 Church’s invention/reformation, the Roman Catholic Church only issued a handful, (on the order of 20) annullments per year world-wide if I remember the statistics correctly. Imagine that, less than 20 in a whole year compared to the 10s of thousands per year now. What is so appalling is these defenders of annullments counter the word of God Himself, as though they thought they were at His level! Pharisees, pharisees! What did our Lord think of the pharisees? He called them hypocrits! Remember man that we all are just dust, and to dust we shall return! Pride, that is what lies in the protestants, not humility for if these modern protestants had humility, they’d return to the Roman Catholic Church and out of their love for God would worship and obey Him to the letter of His law!
Bruce, I agree. This is just one of the many many bad fruits of Vatican 2 and its reformed church. Let’s not forget what our Lord said about the quality of fruit and what to do with the trees written in St. Matthew’s Gospel, Chapter 7, verses 16 through 19:
“[16] By their fruits you shall know them. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? [17] Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, and the evil tree bringeth forth evil fruit. [18] A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree bring forth good fruit. [19] Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit, shall be cut down, and shall be cast into the fire. [20] Wherefore by their fruits you shall know them.”
Follow and practice our Lord’s words, rediscover your Roman Catholic Heritage. Find a Roman Catholic Parish that practices that traditional latin rites, Sacraments, and most importantly the TLM.
Put all your heartaches, and headaches with what is upsetting and continually going on in the novus order into your past. Look ahead at the bright, beautiful, reverent, and humble uncompromised, unscandalized, pristine, holy, Roman Catholic Parishes practicing tradition in neighborhoods near you by searching traditio. God will answer all of your spiritual needs if you only ask Him according to St. Alphonsus Ligouri. God cannot refuse those that ask for His goodness.
AMEN!
If we were to just open-mindedly look at the facts, they reveal the truth, but so many do not want to look at the facts because they are so awful, unbelievable, and leads many probably to question, where do we turn to? Believe me, many in the previous generation of ours did so when all the changes were implemented. Millions saw the radical changes were not right in their hearts, lost hope, and lost their faith. Many that stayed in the modernized so-called catholic church did so because they loved God and wanted to be good and faithful Catholics, they had no choice, no where else to turn to that they know of and they were right, because Paul VI verbally ordered abolishment of the TLM and that the novus ordo service be the new worship service. Millions of faithful left because of this, even more so, tens of thousands of clergy left also world-wide.
So how might we ask that so many of todays couples of catholic ancestory be divorcing on the order of the rest of societies protestants — nearly 50% of them? How can this be when through the Sacrament of Matrimony instituted by Jesus gives couples the sanctifying grace they need to live together a holy loving relationship for life?
Yes we are weak that is true and would fail miserably without God’s grace in everything we do, but focusing on marriage, could it be that the novus ordo marriage is missing something, like say maybe the sanctifying grace to hold on through better or worse, richer or poorer, in sickness and in health until death do the couples part? How else can it be explained why there are so many marriage break ups and divorces? What then does this imply for the novus ordo marriage ceremony, that there is a lack or void there in of sanctifying grace, that it is now equal in value to a secular marriage performed by a judge, sea captain, or protestant minister where there is no sanctifying grace dispensed at all? I think so. Yes not sticking to the ancient Sacrament’s latin vows and prayers of the Roman Catholic Church which in-turn displeases God could very well be a reason why there is a lack or complete void in the novus ordo marriage ceremony of sanctifying grace, and consequently the failed marriages of so many novus ordo church members (nearly 50%).
Annulment = V2 Authorized Adultery
Tom, it is not the NO. It is a lack of good teaching about the faith. I have a challenge for all of us. The next time someone you know gets married in the church, ask them to define sanctifying grace. I would be that 99% never heard of it. The last time I heard the term (other than this thread) was back in the mid-50’s.
Sorry Bob One, but you are all wrong. It is all about the NO. The NO represents all the drastic reformations that have happened in the V2 Church, from the prayers and ritual changes in the once 7 holy sacraments, to the physical changes (sterilizing) in the architectures and decorations in the sanctuary, naive, and vestibules. Those redesigns smashed and removed the old beautiful altars and communion rails, tabernacles, baptismal fonts, statues, stain glass windows and the sense of reverence within the old former Roman Catholic Churches. Tabernacles were nolonger the center of attention in the reformed church, but are abundantly found in separate buildings, off in a corner unbeknownst to any visitors without any travel guide. Many churches of old beautiful designs were either demolished or drastically renovated to oust the old and make way for the new. Even the Roman Catholic Catechisms from the Council of Trent, and the Baltimore Catechism were buried. Twenty years later, the V2 Church invented its new age catechism, centered around man just like its worship services, not centered around God. Sorry Bob One but you can’t separate the Norvus Ordo from it all, and the lack of teaching was intentional otherwise how would it ever have happened so widespread and world-wide? These awful bad fruits are just a coincidence, they were all carefully planned and executed.