It was more fun preparing couples for the sacrament of matrimony than it was in advising them how to determine that one never took place and that an annulment could be sought so that a rite of marriage could be performed in the Catholic Church. Over the years, I met with many individuals who needed such assistance, especially those who wanted to become a Roman Catholic through the RCIA process and required a “valid” marriage for the completion of this desire.
There is, basically, only one way in which an exchange of vows is not really an exchange of vows: when one party, at least, should have said “no” but said “yes.” There are several formal ways in which one can seek an annulment of a marriage: when the exchange of vows is “forced” rather than being given freely, for example, or when one party cannot really make a libeling commitment or does not really desire to parent children as part of that commitment of mutual love. In each instance, either the bride or the groom (or both!) should have said “no – we should not get married.” Nevertheless, they did. It then became my responsibility to help the petitioner remember the circumstances of the wedding and why it should not have taken place.
Over the thirty years of my active ministry, I probably averaged one person a month who came to me to learn about getting an annulment. In almost every case, I thought I saw a valid reason why one or the other partner should have said “no,” making the possibility of obtaining a formal annulment likely. However, after the initial conversation, few came back to pursue the matter. Evidently, they believed the process would be too painful or, in some way, not possible. That was their individual choice. I never encouraged any of them to do what they did not choose to do, willingly. For those who did return and to whom I offered formal assistance, the vast majority ultimately were granted an annulment, and I could then proceed to work with them for a “con validation” of their current marriage.
I recall one instance in which the husband had been dating two women simultaneously. He married one of them. The other had known about the duplicity but was unwilling to state formally to the Tribunal reviewing the petition that she had been dating the man during his courtship of another woman. Since he had been very “discrete” in his dual relationships, no one else was a witness to his actions. The Tribunal declined his petition for a decree of nullity.
The easiest, formal petitions were those in which the marriage took place because the couple had engaged in active intercourse at a time when they each believed such an interaction must end with a marriage, even if a true love was missing in their relationship. If the respondent agreed the impending birth was the major reason for the wedding, the petitioner usually was granted a decree of nullity.
The petitioner often had to wait a year for the granting of the decree but welcomed the result. In each instance, the petitioner recognized that neither partner had caused the separation and divorce through their “bad” behavior. This was a more consoling view than the one they had when the civil divorce had been granted. If “handled” appropriately, the annulment process was actually a healing procedure in the life of a formerly married couple. The con validation process which followed usually led to a more fruitful preparation than had been experienced the first-time-around. Helping those seeking an annulment became a benefit to me as I prepared others for their first and only sacrament of matrimony.
On the other hand, the petitions which took the least amount of effort on my part were those in which a Catholic married someone without their exchange of vows being witnessed by a priest or deacon. In those cases, I merely had to review all of the paperwork: Catholic baptismal record showing one partner was indeed a Roman Catholic, a wedding license showing the ceremony had not been conducted by a priest or deacon, and a civil divorce decree indicating the legal union was no longer valid. The petitioner had to take time to locate all of the forms, but I had it easy. Even when I encountered my own “woman at the well” who was a Catholic who had been married multiple times but always “outside” the Church.
Helping couples prepare for marriage and assisting those whose marriages ended, were the major interactions I had with others. I must admit my hesitation in giving comfort to the physically ill and to those who lost loved ones through death. I very seldom made visits to either hospitals or funeral homes. I never visited a prison. It was fortunate that my active role as a Permanent Deacon occurred during a time when we were not formally assigned a non-parish ministry by the Archdiocese. I like to believe that my ministry was effective, but there have been tremendous gaps in what I have failed to do. I pray my ministry was sufficient, but there have been times I have had my doubts.