"... Jan Leary, a Catholic, are the start of a possible movement to change Catholic policy surrounding divorce, remarriage, and annulments. They, along with some clergy, feel that the internal forum process or changing to something along the lines of Orthodox position is a practical solution to the problem. ... [The] position is that people make mistakes and, therefore, divorce and remarriage is permitted. ... [What] is crucial is whether the marriage has quit functioning. If the two parties no longer do things together, have sexual relations, like or love each other, and so forth, the marriage no longer exists." (Page 202-203, Jenks)
North American Conference of Separated or Divorced Catholics, Inc. (NACSDC), which is recognized by USCCB and listed in The Official Catholic Directory, is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) corporation which, among other things, advertises and sells educational materials through its catalogue and website. NACSDC has an Annulment book section which sells only four books. The third book is Divorce, Annulments, and the Catholic Church; Healing or Hurtful? By Richard J. Jenks, Ph.D. The back cover of the book states, "This well-referenced book: explores the factors that lead to divorce, ... examines the Church's influence on divorce and remarriage."
Jan Leary, founder of Save Our Sacrament: Reform of Annulment and Respondent Support,states on the back cover of Jenk's book, "This book highlights a key problem, not just what the annulment process, but with an aspect of the entire Catholic Church: that of the hierarchy's devastating mandate of silence on major issues of concern." Jan Leary (PhD, MEd, and MDiv) is one of the original Lay Leadership Council Members for the Voice of the Faithful and she is on its Steering Committee. Voice of the Faithful's trademarked slogan is "Keep the Faith, Change our Church."
Excerpts from Divorce,
Annulments,
and the Catholic Church by Jenks
Page 202
One thing seems certain: divorce will not disappear. If the
Church
is to keep all its members, it must face the fact that the annulment
process
needs to be modified. In my discussions with those Catholics who felt
hurt
and betrayed by the Church for granting an annulment I learned one
thing:
most wanted to remain within the Church.
The future of annulments appears to be murky. In an interview
with
Father Andrew Greeley (May, 1999), he predicted that fewer annulments
will
be sought. He said this would result from younger Catholics,
especially
those with little respect for church authority, ignoring
Page 203
annulments. He also
indicated
a very simple way of dealing with the divorced and remarried Catholics
-- allow them to receive the Eucharist without the turmoil of the
annulment
process.
In a panel session at the Annual Meeting of the Society for the
Scientific
Study of Religion, Sheila Rauch Kennedy (1999) presented the following
analogy:
Imagine for a moment that a pharmaceutical company discovers a cure for an uncomfortable and embarrassing but not life threatening disease such as acne. Although the market potential is clear, the treatment is so painful and time consuming that despite a strong advertising program only 10 percent of those who could be cured are willing to try it. Of that 10 percent, 20 percent find the program too painful and drop out but the 96 percent of the 80 who complete the program are now acne free and pleased with the results. Four percent of the 80, however, experience negative life altering experiences such as severe depression and emotional breakdowns.People such as Sheila Rauch Kennedy, a non-Catholic, along with people such as Jan Leary, a Catholic, are the start of a possible movement to change Catholic policy surrounding divorce, remarriage, and annulments. They, along with some clergy, feel that the internal forum process or changing to something along the lines of Orthodox position is a practical solution to the problem.
While this case is imaginary, consider for a moment these three questions: 1) Do you think the FDA would approve such a program with the overall success rate so small? 2) IF a pharmaceutical company withheld information about the potential negative side effects, could it be held legally and financially liable fro the experiences of the 4 percent? 3) Given this scenario do you think the company would move forward with its program or perhaps seek a different cure?