What do you think?
Rate this book
Shattered Faith
In 1993, Sheila Rauch Kennedy received a letter from the Boston Catholic Archdiocese announcing that her former husband, Congressman Joseph Kennedy, was seeking an annulment of their marriage. If the Church granted the annulment, the marriage, which had lasted twelve years, would be rendered nonexistent -- not simply ended, as was stated in the divorce decree, but invalid from the start. And their two sons would be regarded as children of an unsanctified union. Joseph Kennedy needed the annulment to remarry within the Church, and he encouraged his ex-wife to ignore the details. Stunned by the hypocrisy of the process and the betrayal of trust it involved, Sheila Rauch Kennedy was determined to defend the legitimacy of her former marriage.
Shattered Faith is the fascinating chronicle of that struggle, and of what Kennedy uncovered about the uses and frequency of annulments in the United States. Interweaving her own experiences with those of other women whose trust in the Church was shattered by annulment, she tells a story that will surprise, anger, and move readers of every faith.
Shattered Faith is the fascinating chronicle of that struggle, and of what Kennedy uncovered about the uses and frequency of annulments in the United States. Interweaving her own experiences with those of other women whose trust in the Church was shattered by annulment, she tells a story that will surprise, anger, and move readers of every faith.
238 pages, Hardcover
First published April 15, 1997
19 people are currently reading
122 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews
March 31, 2011
This case came up in class the other day, and became quite a conversation. However, no one present had read the book, so I took it upon myself to tackle it. I am so very glad I did.
Now, I should note at the outset that I am currently in graduate school earning a degree in canon law, at the end of which I shall begin a career processing cases of nullity just like the ones that Kennedy is grappling with here. I have approached this work, indeed feel called to it, precisely because I have seen it as (at its best) a ministry of healing and reconciliation of persons with the Catholic Church.
It would be easy to pooh-pooh the many technical inaccuracies Kennedy makes throughout the book, but I had to remind myself that I was reading it as an insider, within the very circle she is trying valiantly to understand from the outside. Considering the approach she took, based on the sources she had available to her, I think it is to her credit that she was able to uncover as clear a picture of the annulment process as she did.
Even more to her credit is that she takes the occasion of fighting her own fight to find out about the experiences of many other women, and in telling her tale she is able to extend her narrative, and the import of her message, by weaving in the stories of others to build her case. Her thesis, of course, is that the 'annulment machine' in the American Catholic Church is out of control, and she is hardly the first person, inside the Church or out, to have made this claim: the last two popes have been of much the same opinion, actually.
Another thing, small perhaps, but noticeable, is how carefully she avoids flopping the Kennedy name and family history around between the covers of this book. She writes from an assumption that readers will know who her former husband was, and largely leaves it at that, which I thought was a good way to go about it, even though I was reading this long after this was a news item, and so could have wished for a little more detail.
I still believe that the work I am preparing to do is worth doing, but this book has certainly broadened my perspective on the process and the impact — sometimes devastating — it can have on the lives of those affected. I am taking it as a cautionary tale for me and my colleagues, and I hope it will inspire me to apply with particular care the Church's own rules of justice, and not allow procedures to roll unquestioningly over people's lives in the name of pastoral convenience.
Now, I should note at the outset that I am currently in graduate school earning a degree in canon law, at the end of which I shall begin a career processing cases of nullity just like the ones that Kennedy is grappling with here. I have approached this work, indeed feel called to it, precisely because I have seen it as (at its best) a ministry of healing and reconciliation of persons with the Catholic Church.
It would be easy to pooh-pooh the many technical inaccuracies Kennedy makes throughout the book, but I had to remind myself that I was reading it as an insider, within the very circle she is trying valiantly to understand from the outside. Considering the approach she took, based on the sources she had available to her, I think it is to her credit that she was able to uncover as clear a picture of the annulment process as she did.
Even more to her credit is that she takes the occasion of fighting her own fight to find out about the experiences of many other women, and in telling her tale she is able to extend her narrative, and the import of her message, by weaving in the stories of others to build her case. Her thesis, of course, is that the 'annulment machine' in the American Catholic Church is out of control, and she is hardly the first person, inside the Church or out, to have made this claim: the last two popes have been of much the same opinion, actually.
Another thing, small perhaps, but noticeable, is how carefully she avoids flopping the Kennedy name and family history around between the covers of this book. She writes from an assumption that readers will know who her former husband was, and largely leaves it at that, which I thought was a good way to go about it, even though I was reading this long after this was a news item, and so could have wished for a little more detail.
I still believe that the work I am preparing to do is worth doing, but this book has certainly broadened my perspective on the process and the impact — sometimes devastating — it can have on the lives of those affected. I am taking it as a cautionary tale for me and my colleagues, and I hope it will inspire me to apply with particular care the Church's own rules of justice, and not allow procedures to roll unquestioningly over people's lives in the name of pastoral convenience.
August 6, 2016
I read this when it first came out. It is a very moving book that (1) re-asserts the legitimacy and sanctity of her 10-year marriage and (2) exposes the dishonesty of the Catholic Church in annulling such a marriage.
What Sheila Rauch Kennedy did in this book was to interview dozens of Catholic women whose husband left marriages of long durations (years, decades). Most of these women had several children with their husband. The husband was pursuing annulment in order to marry again in the Catholic church, often (like in Sheila Rauch Kennedy's case) to marry the "other woman" who broke up the marriage. One fact that upset Sheila Rauch Kennedy was that the wife's testimony and experience were not considered in determining whether or not the marriage could have a Catholic annulment. If the erring husband says: the marriage was never a true, Catholic marriage, then that was enough.
The Catholic Church, predictably, was upset with Sheila Rauch Kennedy bringing attention to the practice in America of permitting a man who abandons his wife and children to remarry with the full approval and sanctity of the church.
Catholic annulments are a way of legitimizing divorce by calling it something else. Sheila Rauch Kennedy was right to call attention to what the American Catholic Church was doing.
Update: On June 21, 2007, the Boston Globe reports that Sheila Rauch Kennedy has won a decade-old appeal to the Vatican to reverse the decision that voided their 12-year marriage in the eyes of the church. She is quoted as saying: "I had help from outside of the Archdiocese. Otherwise I wouldn't have known about appealing to Rome and how to do it. I feel for the people who don't get help."
What Sheila Rauch Kennedy did in this book was to interview dozens of Catholic women whose husband left marriages of long durations (years, decades). Most of these women had several children with their husband. The husband was pursuing annulment in order to marry again in the Catholic church, often (like in Sheila Rauch Kennedy's case) to marry the "other woman" who broke up the marriage. One fact that upset Sheila Rauch Kennedy was that the wife's testimony and experience were not considered in determining whether or not the marriage could have a Catholic annulment. If the erring husband says: the marriage was never a true, Catholic marriage, then that was enough.
The Catholic Church, predictably, was upset with Sheila Rauch Kennedy bringing attention to the practice in America of permitting a man who abandons his wife and children to remarry with the full approval and sanctity of the church.
Catholic annulments are a way of legitimizing divorce by calling it something else. Sheila Rauch Kennedy was right to call attention to what the American Catholic Church was doing.
Update: On June 21, 2007, the Boston Globe reports that Sheila Rauch Kennedy has won a decade-old appeal to the Vatican to reverse the decision that voided their 12-year marriage in the eyes of the church. She is quoted as saying: "I had help from outside of the Archdiocese. Otherwise I wouldn't have known about appealing to Rome and how to do it. I feel for the people who don't get help."
June 30, 2011
Fascinating, even though I'm neither Catholic nor divorcing. I respect her ability to write about it without mud-slinging.
August 30, 2024
More than I ever wanted or needed to know about annulment, but I've been curious about this book ever since it came out. I read about this annulment when it happened, and I thought it was ridiculous. I still do. They were married for years and had two children. It was a marriage, real and valid.
I read subsequently that Ms. Kennedy's revelations ruined her husband's political career. So sad. (Not.)
I read subsequently that Ms. Kennedy's revelations ruined her husband's political career. So sad. (Not.)
July 31, 2017
It is detailed narrative of her struggle against her ex-husband's attempt to get an annulment, and the American Roman Catholic institution's complicity in that. A worthy exposure.
I gave it only 3 stars, but that is no criticism of the presentation and purpose of the book.
I gave it only 3 stars, but that is no criticism of the presentation and purpose of the book.
April 15, 2023
I thought this book was just going to be her story. It wasn't. It's a good explanation of what annulment within the Catholic Church looks like. So many stories she shared of other women were heart breaking. She ends the book without telling us if the Vatican over turned the tribunals ruling.
April 28, 2008
Seems like she had very little interesting material and thus wrote about other people's (barely more entertaining) experiences...
September 3, 2009
i'd never understood annulment until i read this book. now i still don't understand it but at least i'm angered by it.
February 7, 2021
Great read. A very honest and poignant story revealing the corruption within the Catholic Church and societies views on marriage of the time .
September 24, 2024
THE DIVORCED WIFE OF A "KENNEDY" FOUGHT HER ANNULMENT (AND EVENTUALLY WON)
Sheila Rauch Kennedy is "a city planner who specializes in housing and community development." She was married to Joseph Patrick "Joe" Kennedy II, a U.S. congressman from 1987-1999, and the eldest son of Robert F. Kennedy and Ethel Kennedy. Although the Boston Archdiocese initially granted Mr. Kennedy the annulment, the original decision was overturned by the Roman Rota in 2005.
She wrote in the Prologue to this 1997 book, "In 1993 my former husband asked the Catholic Church to annul our marriage... We had been divorced for over two years and he wanted to remarry. Since the only way he could do this and remain in good standing within the Church was to have our marriage declared invalid, he was prepared to testify before a church court that in the eyes of God our marriage had never existed... I was expected either to do the same or at least not impede the annulment process...
"I was appalled. My husband and I had known each other for nine years before we married in a Catholic ceremony. We had been married for twelve years ... and we had two wonderful children. I could not understand how anyone could claim that our marriage had never been valid. It seemed that if I were to agree to an annulment I would be lying before God... I began searching for information to help me understand the annulment process... All of the women I spoke with were married for more than twenty years... When the Church declared that the unions to which they had dedicated their lives had never existed, their faith in the institution and in themselves was shattered." (Pg. xiii-xv)
She recalls Joe telling her, "of course I think we had a true marriage. But that doesn't matter now. I don't believe this stuff. Nobody actually believes it. It's just Catholic gobbledygook. But you just have to say it this way because, well, that's the way the Church is." She replied, "We both wanted the divorce, Joe... But there is a big difference between saying that the marriage doesn't work anymore and saying that, in the eyes of God, it never existed." (Pg. 10-11)
She points out, "the Church now seemed to be contradicting its own teachings on the importance of a sanctified marriage... Now the same Church was implying that sanctity didn't really matter. In fact, the Church seemed to be sidestepping the issue entirely by explaining that the children would still be legitimate despite an annulment." (Pg. 14)
The daughter of an "annulled" wife told her, "There is a stigma attached to annulment... while the Church can say the children are legitimate, that's not the general perception. Even a priest who is a friend brought up the issue that we are no longer the children of a proper marriage. He tried to correct himself, but it was clear how he felt. The Church can say what it wishes, but that is the truth of the situation." (Pg. 46)
She observes, "church scholars debated if and when the so-called good-conscience or internal solution could be used... the good-conscience or internal solution allows divorced or remarried Catholics seeking reconciliation with their church but unable to obtain an annulment to partake of the sacraments if they themselves feel doing so is justified and provided their actions do not being 'scandal' upon the Church.
"Some scholars... view it as a way to provide reconciliation without annulling marriage. Others think it makes a mockery of the Church's strong stance against divorce. To make matters worse, the Church in Rome does not approve of the internal solution although the practice continues to be used in the United States, even if unofficially." (Pg. 67)
She laments, "The reality of my situation was now apparent. My marriage was to be defended in two papers that I would never see; one of them would be written by a man I would never be allowed to meet and the other by my advocate. Despite the fact that my advocate was supposed to represent me, I would not know what he wrote or even thought." (Pg. 121)
She suggests, "Wouldn't it be easier... and definitely less hypocritical, particularly for long-term marriages that brought children into the world, if the Church just said, 'Look, folks, you get one crack at a sanctified marriage. If you blow it, you blow it. But if you face up to your mistakes and straighten out, we'll recognize your new marriage as valid. After a while, after you've shown us that you've really straightened out, we'll let you go to confession and take communion. In short, we'll forgive you. We'll welcome you back. We'll recognize your new marriage as valid, but we won't say your first marriage never existed. Nor will we accept divorce and because we won't, we will draw a distinction between valid marriages and those which are both valid and sacramental. Because you were married before, we will regard new marriage as valid but not sacramental." (Pg. 193)
This heartfelt and emotionally-wrenching book will be of great interest to anyone concerned with the issues of divorce and remarriage in the Catholic church.
Sheila Rauch Kennedy is "a city planner who specializes in housing and community development." She was married to Joseph Patrick "Joe" Kennedy II, a U.S. congressman from 1987-1999, and the eldest son of Robert F. Kennedy and Ethel Kennedy. Although the Boston Archdiocese initially granted Mr. Kennedy the annulment, the original decision was overturned by the Roman Rota in 2005.
She wrote in the Prologue to this 1997 book, "In 1993 my former husband asked the Catholic Church to annul our marriage... We had been divorced for over two years and he wanted to remarry. Since the only way he could do this and remain in good standing within the Church was to have our marriage declared invalid, he was prepared to testify before a church court that in the eyes of God our marriage had never existed... I was expected either to do the same or at least not impede the annulment process...
"I was appalled. My husband and I had known each other for nine years before we married in a Catholic ceremony. We had been married for twelve years ... and we had two wonderful children. I could not understand how anyone could claim that our marriage had never been valid. It seemed that if I were to agree to an annulment I would be lying before God... I began searching for information to help me understand the annulment process... All of the women I spoke with were married for more than twenty years... When the Church declared that the unions to which they had dedicated their lives had never existed, their faith in the institution and in themselves was shattered." (Pg. xiii-xv)
She recalls Joe telling her, "of course I think we had a true marriage. But that doesn't matter now. I don't believe this stuff. Nobody actually believes it. It's just Catholic gobbledygook. But you just have to say it this way because, well, that's the way the Church is." She replied, "We both wanted the divorce, Joe... But there is a big difference between saying that the marriage doesn't work anymore and saying that, in the eyes of God, it never existed." (Pg. 10-11)
She points out, "the Church now seemed to be contradicting its own teachings on the importance of a sanctified marriage... Now the same Church was implying that sanctity didn't really matter. In fact, the Church seemed to be sidestepping the issue entirely by explaining that the children would still be legitimate despite an annulment." (Pg. 14)
The daughter of an "annulled" wife told her, "There is a stigma attached to annulment... while the Church can say the children are legitimate, that's not the general perception. Even a priest who is a friend brought up the issue that we are no longer the children of a proper marriage. He tried to correct himself, but it was clear how he felt. The Church can say what it wishes, but that is the truth of the situation." (Pg. 46)
She observes, "church scholars debated if and when the so-called good-conscience or internal solution could be used... the good-conscience or internal solution allows divorced or remarried Catholics seeking reconciliation with their church but unable to obtain an annulment to partake of the sacraments if they themselves feel doing so is justified and provided their actions do not being 'scandal' upon the Church.
"Some scholars... view it as a way to provide reconciliation without annulling marriage. Others think it makes a mockery of the Church's strong stance against divorce. To make matters worse, the Church in Rome does not approve of the internal solution although the practice continues to be used in the United States, even if unofficially." (Pg. 67)
She laments, "The reality of my situation was now apparent. My marriage was to be defended in two papers that I would never see; one of them would be written by a man I would never be allowed to meet and the other by my advocate. Despite the fact that my advocate was supposed to represent me, I would not know what he wrote or even thought." (Pg. 121)
She suggests, "Wouldn't it be easier... and definitely less hypocritical, particularly for long-term marriages that brought children into the world, if the Church just said, 'Look, folks, you get one crack at a sanctified marriage. If you blow it, you blow it. But if you face up to your mistakes and straighten out, we'll recognize your new marriage as valid. After a while, after you've shown us that you've really straightened out, we'll let you go to confession and take communion. In short, we'll forgive you. We'll welcome you back. We'll recognize your new marriage as valid, but we won't say your first marriage never existed. Nor will we accept divorce and because we won't, we will draw a distinction between valid marriages and those which are both valid and sacramental. Because you were married before, we will regard new marriage as valid but not sacramental." (Pg. 193)
This heartfelt and emotionally-wrenching book will be of great interest to anyone concerned with the issues of divorce and remarriage in the Catholic church.
November 22, 2024
Good book as it exposes a lot of the hypocrisy of the Catholic Church. Annulment for a marriage can be bought, and women really dont have a voice with the Church. Its also Very sad though as she tells the story of a few women who went thru the same scenario as she did. Ended rather abruptly tho, which kind of surprised me since she spent a lot of time expressong her feelings
January 21, 2022
Seems like she had very little interesting material and thus wrote about other people's (barely more entertaining) experiences...
September 20, 2024
This was really interesting and shows the hypocrisy of the church I'm glad the Vatican in Rome overturned the annulment the Boston archdiocese approved.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 2, 2016
I always struggled with giving an author a low rating when they are writing about their lives. When I picked up this book, I thought she was going to share her life journey with us. However, this book was just not about her struggle but the struggle of others as well. I am sad to say that I found the stories of the other women more interesting. But I do want to clarify that Mrs. Kennedy endured disappoint after disappoint and never lost her spirit. For that I commend her. Thank you for sharing your story!
June 26, 2012
Sheila Kenney had the courage to call into question the honesty of all religious leadership. Please read an updated Internet article to find out what happened to her marriage in the long run. Fascinating read.
Read
March 20, 2008262.97
July 31, 2009
Sheila Kennedy' struggle over annulment in the catholic faith. Several other women tell their experiences-and how ridiculous the process is.
August 21, 2012
A real eye opener of how things really work in the church
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews