annulment turned down, what is next step

[chevalier]

Thanks, Chevalier. I needed a little more imput here. I know we’re gonna pick up the ball again in the future and when we do we’ll be securing the proper assistance. By the way, do you know anything about the Knights of Notre Dame?

Nope, no, I don’t. Do get proper assistance because you’ll need to challenge the existing verdict. I don’t know what you mean by the tribunal being liberal about reapplying, but the law is you can’t reapply on the same grounds, you need to challenge the existing verdict (there’s more than one way of doing that but it’s about the verdict being wrong, it’s not just applying again like it never existed). By the way, here’s Dignitas Connubii:

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/intrptxt/documents/rc_pc_intrptxt_doc_20050125_dignitas-connubii_en.html

**Art. 101 **– § 1. Without prejudice to the right of the parties to defend themselves personally, the tribunal is bound by the obligation to provide that each spouse is able to defend his rights with the help of a competent person, most especially when it concerns causes of a special difficulty.

**Art. 112 **– § 1. It pertains to the Bishop Moderator to publish an index or directory in which there are listed the advocates admitted before his tribunal and the procurators who usually represent parties there.

Art. 113 – § 1. At every tribunal there is to be an office or a person available so that anyone can freely and quickly obtain advice about the possibility of, and procedure for, the introduction of their cause of nullity of marriage, if such should be the case.

There’s just no telling a party that sorry, we can’t get you an advocate, we don’t know where to find one etc. I remember you had some problems along those lines.

 

[forgetmenot]

All I can say is wow. Thanks. This Knight’s thing… they basically state they can marry divorced Catholics after they have annulments granted but not through the usual channels… www.catholicanswer.org . When you get a chance, see what you think…

 

[chevalier]

There is no such order, those guys are using a Templar motto (order dissolved in 1307) and they claim Abp. Lefebvre was their Grand Master. Don’t waste time there.

 

[gmarie21]

Forgetmenot, Let us pray for each other (you have been coming to my mind a lot as we have been waiting and received the decision from the tribunal the other day). My husband’s previous marriage had been declared invalid and two months after receiving that news we married sacramentally in the Church . Thenk, a month ago we received a letter from the tribunal reopening his case due to his ex-wife saying she was not given the right to defend herself. Well, we got the decision and now the decision regarding his previous marriage is null (thus making our valid, sacramental marriage no more). The reason, b/c the tribunal was not diligent in finding her (though her phone number has remained the same and was given to them). Yes, a technicallity is why we are no longer seen as married in the eyes of the Church. We are appealing this decision obviously, but jeepers, we sure could use the prayers (my husband’s whole process with this has been like a Ben Stiller movie, one mess up after the other, though not of my husband’s doing). So, please pray for us, b/c you have been in my prayers.

 

[Rachel_1]

All I can say is wow. Thanks. This Knight’s thing… they basically state they can marry divorced Catholics after they have annulments granted but not through the usual channels… www.catholicanswer.org . When you get a chance, see what you think…

I did some checking this morning on this website, and found

• 1. That the site itself is “hidden” meaning, if you look to see who owns the site, they have all that info hidden and are registered by proxy
• 1. The website was created in 1997 and is hosted by GoDaddy
• 1. They claim to have administered Sacraments for thousands of years, yet the email below states clearly that the Ordre des Chevaliers de Notre Dame was formed in 1945.
• 1. They state clearly in their FAQ the following: “The Roman of Latin Rite Church uses the external forum of a marriage tribunal. We use what is termed (in moral theology) the internal forum.”
• 1. They also state clearly on their FAQ: What is considered a proper setting for our wedding ceremony? *One in which you are most comfortable. This may be a Church, an outdoor garden, a chapel, a catering facility, even your home. These are all examples of a proper setting. *

The later two go against what the church teaches. You can’t just have a wedding where ever you want and it still be a Sacrament… I mean, if that’s the case, go to your local KFC and have it there while eating wings… lol (sorry, I couldn’t resist the “catering facility” part of this)

The below email can be found forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=889150 here
From : Association Léon Dupont leon.dupont@worldonline.fr
To : “Paul Smith” smith6paul@hotmail.com
Subject : Re: Fw: Chevaliers de Notre Dame
Date : Thu, 25 Apr 2002 07:19:23 +0700

Dear Mr. Smith,

Thank you for your message.

I belong to the “Ordre des chevaliers de Notre Dame”, in Latin “Militia Sanctae Mariae” and in English “Order of the Knights of Our Lady”. It was founded in 1945 in France and canonically erected by bishops in five different countries. Further to the Counciliar Reformation a split occurred.
(==cutting out history from email==)
So far as I know the “Ordre des Chevaliers de Notre Dame” you are referring to is first and foremost a website, and only a website with a handful of people behind it. As far as I know it is multi-denominational, which means it is not a Catholic Order. It claims to have been founded in the Middle Ages, possibly by Godefroy de Bouillon, it refers to the Sangreal (and why not to King Arthur). However historian never heard of such an Order at the time of the Crusades. It also plagiarizes us in taking many of our appelations.

It unduly also uses the name of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the Priestly Society of St. Pius X.

So, I would be extremely prudent with these people.

Please do no hesitate to contact me again.

Jean Pierre le Roy

 

[chevalier]

Ooops, sorry. Didn’t know a real order of that name existed. Those guys are phonies, anyway.

 

[jmcrae]

No, we weren’t Catholic… well, I’m not sure, I was baptized Catholic as a baby, but not raised Catholic at all, so I don’t know if I was considered Catholic or not?

Let the Tribunal know about this.

My first marriage was both of our first marriage, we were both 18, so if my first marriage is considered valid, and I married #2 while still in that valid marriage, then it should be invalid and I should get an annulment is what you’re saying?

Leaving out every other consideration, the first marriage would be valid, and the second attempt would be invalid. Mention this to them as well.

There was a lot of other stuff with #2 also, like how he beat me, I left him while he was in jail (yes I have the paperwork for this), and afterward he told me he was going to this church and was all changed. He talked me into going even though I was pagan and I sort of got sucked into this church that was very spiritually abusive. The pastor of the church told me one night during prayer that if I didn’t marry him, I’d go to hell, this is the only reason I married him because he had started beating on me again.

DEFINITELY mention this.

When the vows were said, I didn’t know anything about marriage being a Sacrament and everything within me knew marrying him was a mistake. I kept thinking that if the beating continues (because the marriage I was told would make it all better), that I would divorce him. Well, the beating continued and that church didn’t help me at all… they would see me come in with black eyes and stuff and when I would tell them what was going on I would be told “wives submit to your husbands as unto the Lord”… It was just a messed up situation all the way around.

You also should emphasize this.

The entire time I was with him I never felt married to him. Anyway, I think I have multiple “causes” to put down for my annulment to him, I’m just trying to find the easiest, fastest one that will work.

Mention all of them. Don’t leave out a single thing.

BTW, current husband #3 I didn’t marry until after # 1 (vegas) passed away.

The Tribunal needs to be informed of all of these things. Don’t leave anything out.

 

[forgetmenot]

Ok, so much for the knights route… thanks for the info. In actuality I had sent them a couple questions. No wonder they didn’t respond. GMarie, I am terribly sorry to hear what happened. I will definitely keep you in my thoughts and prayers. I can’t believe what happened to you. It does sound like a movie. Actually, it sounds insane. You mentioned appealing. Please keep me posted.

 

[Rachel_1]

jmcrae thanks. forgetmenot, I’m still praying for you and your husband, also gmarie (did I get the name right?)

 

[Rachel_1]

forgetmenot,
I was just thinking about you and Gmarie today, wondering how both of you are doing.

 

[forgetmenot]

Hi. Rachel - Thank you for keeping me in your prayers. My spouse will probably have surgery after the holidays. Success rate appears very good. I hope to get some personal help in dealing with this through a local Catholic office next week. I have found everything too much to handle presently, and I feel I need guidance and perhaps that will help both of us in this trying time. My spouse initially applied to our local diocese, which needed approval to review from the original diocese he was married in. I was recently told by an acquaintance that the original diocese is easier to get things through. I don’t know if the best bet is to go there on the reapplication. Any thoughts anyone? Thanks everyone for bearing with me as we go through this catastrophe.:winter:

 

[Sheeniac]

Forgetmenot, you are in my prayers…

 

[Rachel_1]

Thanks everyone for bearing with me as we go through this catastrophe.:winter:

Try to think positive, pray a lot, know that God loves you.
You’re going through a very hard and probably almost overwhelming time right now… look to Jesus, He will get you through it all

 

[forgetmenot]

Thank you for prayers. I feel like I’ve been very selfish these days with my husband having to go through what he is right now. He says once it’s over then we’ll go the next step which is back to the annulment. He says that for me, but I know he’s hurting terribly right now. There’s not much I can do for him to make him happy right now. Thank you. I want everyone to know that I am very grateful for your help.

 

[BenjaminLumen]

My spouse’s annulment request was just turned down. A short while ago he was advised indirectly that without the x’s (name removed by moderator)ut it had little chance. She refuses to cooperate. When he spoke with the judge he was informed that maturity has no bearing, that ‘everyone is immature’. (I thought this was still considered grounds?) We were give more time and discovered some very important information which was submitted. We had thought this information would at least warrant some psychiatric review but it seems it hasn’t. The whole process has been very secretive from our perspective and we feel that he is not getting the assistance he needs. Where can we go??? The letter he received basically states he has the right to an appeal which will eventually go to a tribunal out of state. He is going to appeal, but it seems like we have no assistance anywhere. He worked with someone to get the paperwork in, but that was it. Is there any possibility that he can start this process again? His case was also heard in the diocese where we live. Can he reapply to the diocese where he was originally married? I believe he is also being punished for his lack of memory. He is 60 years old and it’s well recognized that guys don’t remember everything like women do. It has taken me a great many years to convince him to finally apply (which was last December when we were married 29 years), and many years to come back to his Church. Now he’s so upset I’m sure you can imagine how he feels about it all. If you need a little of our history, you can go back to some of my old posts. I would very much appreciate recommendations; but please refrain from judgement.

Was there any chance of Mortal sin or married in an uncofessed state?? Either you or
your husband…

Any Sodomy?? pardon me, but?? Unconsential Sodomy will probably do the trick…
don’t know , don’t care just throwing it out there…

It may come down to what you are willing to admit in your paperwork and Tribunal…
Man people get carried away … ???..

 

[Seatuck]

Was there any chance of Mortal sin or married in an uncofessed state?? Either you or
your husband…

Any Sodomy?? pardon me, but?? Unconsential Sodomy will probably do the trick…
don’t know , don’t care just throwing it out there…

It may come down to what you are willing to admit in your paperwork and Tribunal…
Man people get carried away … ???..

Do you know anything about the annulment process at all? The judgment is made based on the conditions of consent at the time of the attempted marriage.

Here’s a book that might help you understand.

amazon.com/Annulment-Wedding-Church-Declare-Marriage/dp/0809138441

and another

amazon.com/Annulments-Catholic-Church-Straight-Questions/dp/1932645004/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1260613270&sr=1-1

 

[forgetmenot]

Hi. Trust me, we have a library of books on the topic (bought everyone off Amazon), including the two you’ve mentioned, but even though we read all we could, it was not of help apparently. We do understand the criteria of “before marriage”; thanks, though. He’s pretty much going to have to start from what he originally wrote and expound more. He had a good number of pages to begin with. And as Chevalier recommended we will get a Canon lawyer involved the next go round. Does the “mortal sin” really have any bearing? If so, I’ll ask him about it. At the time of the marriage to his x he pretty much went through the usual ‘just to get married in Church’. Neither he nor the x practiced their faith. I think that’s what bothers me so much - when people get married in Church just for the sake of show and not for what it really means, which I’m sure neither of them understood at the time. I’m hanging in there. We’re upset that what we thought was a go from the standpoint of maturity and psych reasons and was good according to two persons who helped, he was still shot down. It’s upsetting when people are supposed to be helping but apparently know so little about the system. I have still not read the verdict, and when I have enough guts to read it I will. I’m afraid it will probably make me very angry to read and I don’t need anger on top of all the other feelings I have right now. Today I was thinking to myself as we went out for our Christmas tree that if these two people could care less about getting married as a sacrament, then why should that sacrament hold up. It was truly meaningless, and still meaningless to the x as she could care less about responding to the Tribunal’s inquiries. You would think that would reinforce the position that the sacrament holds no value. By the way, she is remarried. I have taken great support from the many people who have replied here, so again I want to thank everyone for their (name removed by moderator)ut. :christmastree1:

 

[forgetmenot]

Well, I read it. I am sick over it. There are wrong dates in it, but more seriously are the presumptions made, the largest of which being a person holding down a good job with an education cannot have inner problems. This will take some serious work. They skipped over testimony essentially because he didn’t have the recall, though witnesses did. The whole point was for him not to lie and attest to things he didn’t remember - it was over 30 years ago. It makes me sick. It’s almost like the judge and defender were on the exact same page. No one sticking up for him, no one reading into what he wrote and what the witnesses said. They read it the way they wanted to. He did not try to twist anything, unfortunately he is not a person to say anything bad about anyone, to his detriment. “Family tales” re: some of the witness statements - Oh my God. Not anger right now, just a feeling of sick over what was written so poorly by their standards and what presumptions were made. We will need serious help. P.S. - anyone able to answer the question about being in the state of mortal sin?

 

[forgetmenot]

I found my own answer to the mortal sin question. Marriage is still valid. Thanks.

 

[agapewolf]

. Today I was thinking to myself as we went out for our Christmas tree that if these two people could care less about getting married as a sacrament, then why should that sacrament hold up. It was truly meaningless, and still meaningless to the x as she could care less about responding to the Tribunal’s inquiries. You would think that would reinforce the position that the sacrament holds no value. 1:

truth is not relative to what people think. Most prostestants don’t believe in the sacramentality of marriage, yet the Catholic church honors it and believes it is among 2 baptized protestants. It’s precisely because the sacrament is so important that the Church, in her charity, gives the benefit of the doubt to the marriage bond. It would be tragic to be handing out annulments to those that are doubtful, because remember, there is a supernatural reality that exists… and if a couple is married spiritually, the church cannot break that.

There are wrong dates in it, but more seriously are the presumptions made, the largest of which being a person holding down a good job with an education cannot have inner problems.

no one reading into what he wrote and what the witnesses said. They read it the way they wanted to. He did not try to twist anything, unfortunately he is not a person to say anything bad about anyone, to his detriment. “Family tales” re: some of the witness statements - Oh my God. Not anger right now, just a feeling of sick over what was written so poorly by their standards and what presumptions were made. We will need serious help. P.S. - anyone able to answer the question about being in the state of mortal sin?

I’m so sorry this is so upsetting to you. What I have to offer here though is my take on some of the things you are saying. I think maybe you are very emotionally involved (understandably) that some of the things you are saying aren’t really arguments. I want to say though that I’m not dismissing what you are saying, or saying that your points are invalid. They may very well be, but I think it might help to look at things more objectively.

you say you want people to*** read into*** what he wrote, but then you are upset about other presumptions made. The tribunal cannot make presumptions, they have to read what is on the page. Because the presumptions you think they made are not in your favor, you are calling them presumptions. But you WANT them to make presumptions in your favor. Can’t have it both ways.

Mortal sin: if one or both of the couple marrying is in mortal sin at the time, the marriage can still be considered valid (non-baptized can enter valid marriages). THey just won’t experience the grace from the sacrament until they go to confession.

Remember, this is not something that is happening to you. This is from choices made in the past that carry very serious consequences. Yes, God forgives, but that doesn’t do away with the consequences. You can go to the sacraments if you choose to live as if you aren’t married. You are not being kept from the church, you are choosing to keep yourself from the church.