[Melech]

Mel Gibson's Divorce Could Be Most Expensive in Hollywood History


fair warning: People Magazine [filth and tumah]
http://www.people.co...0272209,00.html

Are Catholics allowed to divorce?

[Bezalel]

It'll be annulled.

[Melech]

Bezalel, on Apr 21 2009, 09:25 PM, said:

It'll be annulled.

Aint that convenient.

[schiffschul]

Melech, on Apr 22 2009, 02:26 AM, said:

Aint that convenient.

Any more convenient than 'shabbas clocks'? Or a 'heter iska'?

[Moshebendavid]

Annulment is, apparently, a hugely complicated procedure. The person who sits next to me has been through the process, so she answered some of my rudimentary questions which I will gladly share.

First off, Mel will get a divorce. That is how his assets will be handled. He doesn't really have a choice in this. This is not necessarily a problem. The problem is, that divorce doesn't end his marriage "in the eyes of God". So what he has to do to get remarried is get an annulment. According to my coworker, the vast majority of annulments are pursued in the course of (or at least in anticipation of) getting remarried. It's not precisely analogous to divorce in that respect.

My main curiosity was whether you just apply and pay your fee and get the paper, or if they scrutinize the process. Apparently, they scrutinize the process quite a lot. Each party in the marriage is given a series of questions (in mini-essay format, what do they call that? short answer format?). A similar questionaire is then given to four friends (for each party) who can comment on the marriage. Assuming the answers more or less match up, the annulment can be granted if the grounds permit it.

The basic grounds for annulling a marriage are pretty similar to the usual reasons for seeking a divorce: one party refusing to have children, cheating, etc. What happens is: if both parties agree to the reason and want to get the annulment, assuming their paperwork adds up to a similar conclusion, the church will usually grant it for a fee which works on a sliding scale. My coworker told me she believed that $500 a piece was about the lowest fee that a person would be able to pay (if they were pretty poor) to get the annulment. It's a sliding scale, though, so Mel is going to be charged a bit more than that.

I poked around about what grounds could disqualify a person from getting an annulment. If one party doesn't agree to have the marriage annulled, that is a huge problem. Not 100% insurmountable, but that will make the whole process problematic. This is apparently the main reason why annulments are denied.

So I also asked the obvious and common question: so what's the status of the children? If the marriage didn't exist, does that mean that they were born out of wedlock (in Catholicism that's a considerable sin in itself)? She explained that it doesn't work like that. Annulment does not mean that the marriage never existed; of course it existed, there are even witnesses who testified to that fact. What annulment does is say that the marriage was not proper in the "eyes of God". So, in the case of a woman refusing to bear children, the husband makes the case that marriage is for having children (Catholicism agrees with this notion), I cannot have children with this woman due to her refusal, thus the marriage is not a valid one "in the eyes of God". The marriage still happened; and from the perspective of legality (by Catholic law) the children are 100% valid products of that marriage. Though the marriage was eventually deemed invalid, it was operationally valid when the children were conceived.

So yeah, we can say "legal fiction", but it doesn't seem tremendously different from Rabbinic examples where people say "legal fiction". Also, the claim that annulment is a legal fiction is usually based on the misunderstanding that an annulment is the same thing as saying the marriage never existed.

[Sweet]

schiffschul, on Apr 22 2009, 07:22 AM, said:

Any more convenient than 'shabbas clocks'? Or a 'heter iska'?

At least those heterim don't work on a sliding scale.

[Sweet]

Moshebendavid, on Apr 22 2009, 09:32 AM, said:

Annulment is, apparently, a hugely complicated procedure.

So the bottom line is, an annulment is like a get? A divorce in the religious realm? That was not my impression, based on the references I've seen to annulment, unless the misunderstanding is all because "annulment" is a poor choice of word.

I met a guy and his wife in a bar. They had been catholic but became unaffiliated when the guy wanted to get divorced but was told that unless he could come up with $X he would still be married. He also said something about having to pay for an annulment so that predatory priests wouldn't go to jail, and also made mention of the fact that his son would be rendered illegitimate.

Anecdotal, I know, but the impression of one benighted former catholic. Then his wife, who throughout the retelling was getting drunker and drunker, tried to shake my hand. I told her that I do not shake with women, and she apologized, and swooped in for a contrite hug.

[p_almonius]

Sweet, on Apr 22 2009, 05:55 PM, said:

So the bottom line is, an annulment is like a get? A divorce in the religious realm?

I think it's more like "kol hamekadesh, adaita d'rabbanan mekadesh" with a helping of "mekach taut" and a pinch of "convenience is king".
http://en.wikipedia....Catholic_Church

[Moshebendavid]

Sweet, on Apr 22 2009, 09:55 AM, said:

So the bottom line is, an annulment is like a get? A divorce in the religious realm? That was not my impression, based on the references I've seen to annulment, unless the misunderstanding is all because "annulment" is a poor choice of word.

I met a guy and his wife in a bar. They had been catholic but became unaffiliated when the guy wanted to get divorced but was told that unless he could come up with $X he would still be married. He also said something about having to pay for an annulment so that predatory priests wouldn't go to jail, and also made mention of the fact that his son would be rendered illegitimate.

Anecdotal, I know, but the impression of one benighted former catholic. Then his wife, who throughout the retelling was getting drunker and drunker, tried to shake my hand. I told her that I do not shake with women, and she apologized, and swooped in for a contrite hug.

The money factor, as mentioned in the anecdote, is very real. If people were truly poor, the minimum amount my coworker ballparked (keep in mind that was an educated guess on her part based on her own experience, not a real price list) would still be daunting; you're effectively paying $500 for a piece of paper (and, if you buy in, peace of mind). If you aren't dirt poor, it costs more than $500 per person.

Presumably, the costs involved are to cover the process of screening and evaluation, which is certainly not free. When you combine with that a sliding scale that makes the whole situation more difficult; sure, you could say the whole process really costs $1500 which is spread out over a spectrum of people paying $500 - $2500 to average out. But it sure looks like an attempt to cash in "as much as possible" per case, doesn't it?

[NY-LON]

Mel's wife is not Catholic, IIRC, though they had a Catholic wedding. That might either complicate or simplify matters.

[Melech]

NY-LON, on Apr 23 2009, 10:50 AM, said:

Mel's wife is not Catholic, IIRC, though they had a Catholic wedding. That might either complicate or simplify matters.

She's Episcopalian. I have no beef with her. Kudos for divorcing the slime. I wish her well and hope she milks him for hundreds of millions of dollars. My understanding is that traditionalist catholics who are literalist readers of the scriptures hold that marriage as a covenant for life that cannot be severed.

[Short]

Melech, on Apr 23 2009, 11:21 AM, said:

She's Episcopalian. I have no beef with her. Kudos for divorcing the slime. I wish her well and hope she milks him for hundreds of millions of dollars. My understanding is that traditionalist catholics who are literalist readers of the scriptures hold that marriage as a covenant for life that cannot be severed.

...unless you meet someone attractive half your age.

[Melech]

Short, on Apr 23 2009, 11:33 AM, said:

...unless you meet someone attractive half your age.

Well, sure. At that point, all bets are off.

[Rachel]

Melech, on Apr 23 2009, 11:21 AM, said:

I have no beef with her. Kudos for divorcing the slime. I wish her well and hope she milks him for hundreds of millions of dollars.

My thoughts exactly!

[Moshi]

Melech, on Apr 23 2009, 10:21 AM, said:

My understanding is that traditionalist catholics who are literalist readers of the scriptures hold that marriage as a covenant for life that cannot be severed.

I think they've adjusted this position due to the low spiritual level on which our generation finds itself, due to their many sins. I bet King Henry VIII wishes they would've thought of this annulment business a bit sooner.

[Sweet]

Moshi, on Apr 23 2009, 12:41 PM, said:

I think they've adjusted this position due to the low spiritual level on which our generation finds itself, due to their many sins. I bet King Henry VIII wishes they would've thought of this annulment business a bit sooner.

actually, I think he did, but in those days it was only for bigwigs, as you needed the pope's approval, and the pope was in jail. (that's what I heard at the valmadonna exhibit)

[Nechama]

Moshi, on Apr 23 2009, 12:41 PM, said:

I think they've adjusted this position due to the low spiritual level on which our generation finds itself, due to their many sins. I bet King Henry VIII wishes they would've thought of this annulment business a bit sooner.

He did try for an annulment based on the idea that Queen Kathrine was previously married to his brother Arther....

[Moshi]

I see!

Sweet, on Apr 23 2009, 06:56 PM, said:

actually, I think he did, but in those days it was only for bigwigs, as you needed the pope's approval, and the pope was in jail. (that's what I heard at the valmadonna exhibit)

What was the Pope doing in jail?!

[Nechama]

Not jail, but held prisoner by the forces of Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor.... who also was Queen Kathrine's nephew.

[schiffschul]

Melech, on Apr 23 2009, 04:21 PM, said:

She's Episcopalian. I have no beef with her. Kudos for divorcing the slime. I wish her well and hope she milks him for hundreds of millions of dollars.

A marriage between a Catholic and someone of another Christian denomination- if done in a Catholic church by a Catholic priest under dispensation- can only be dissolved via annulment. The only case in which a Catholic is free to remarry without that would be if he was previously married to, say, a Jewess. Such a marriage is not considered valid by the Church.

Quote

My understanding is that traditionalist catholics who are literalist readers of the scriptures hold that marriage as a covenant for life that cannot be severed.

They're not. Bible bashers are, Catholics are not. The interpretation of the Scriptures is defined by the traditions and teachingsof the Magisterium.

Regarding the 'sliding scale' some of the previous posters were mocking, this is from the relevant web-page of the Archdiocese of Southwark:

Quote

While all who are able to do so are asked to contribute towards the cost of this nullity process, those who are unable to afford it do not have to pay anything at all.