Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I don't know where you got your data from, but according to the Vital Statistics of the United States, there were:11,161 annulments in 196011,520 in 196112,692 in 196212,701 in 196313,940 in 1964That's just in the USA.
.Well, this is the difficulty that I alluded to above, that the modernists use the same word "annulment" that was used before Vatican 2 but have substantially changed the meaning so that it now means in effect a simple divorce..So, to your objection, no, the types of annulments that comprise the vast majority of those given out by the Novus Ordo church did not exist before Vatican 2..I quoted the 1983 code of canon law to show you the new, modernist rules on marriage, which are different from the traditional Catholic rules..As far as your statistics, first of all that happened when the modernist revolution had already gotten started under the false pope John 23, so that doesn't prove a huge amount, but in any case it's not clear what's being counted there. Are those lack of form annulments? On what grounds were those thousands of annulments given?.The problem here is that now a person can go into a Novus Ordo church and say "I didn't intend to get married when I went through the ceremony," or "We are too incompatible in our temper", or "My husband is an alcoholic", or any one of the other things listed in that page from the church in Waco, and they will be told that their marriage was never valid. That is something that did not happen before Vatican 2. So, since the Church before Vatican 2 taught the truth, and what the Vatican 2 church teaches now is false, it follows that in any contradiction between those two things we must conclude that the traditional teaching is correct.
.Wait, where did you find this docuмent? Is this even a Catholic source? I don't see any mention on it anywhere of these being Catholic annulments. "Annulment" is also a legal term in civil law. Is it possible that that is what is being counted here?
Annulment is not a legal term in civil law.
.Yes it is.
In not one state I know of is it possible to get a legal annulment.
While this author isn't sedevacantist, he does give a good overview of the whole subject we are discussing. He explains in a little more systematic fashion what I have been trying to get across in this discussion.
.Can you please read the link I just gave, or maybe just spend a couple of minutes on Google. I'm not sure what a statement like this contributes to this discussion.