R
rick43235
Guest
I honestly don’t see how anyone can say this with a straight face. They’ve been MARRIED for almost 30 years.
- Status
F
forgetmenot
Guest
While I was writing my response a few moments ago, having been away at work, a number of other replies came in, and I must say ‘wow’ Ailina. I will follow up on the reading materials. Thank you to all those who have responded who are not judgemental but uplifting. I am on this site to seek assistance, not argue what is in my heart and soul. Thank you to those who read my old posts. You must know it was a long time coming. Again, all I can say is thank you and I will keep you all in my thoughts and prayers as well.
A
agapewolf
Guest
Actually, no they haven’t.
K
kage_ar
Guest
They have a civil marriage, not a valid marriage.
F
flyingfish
Guest
It’s possible that the tribunal decided incorrectly. The people on the tribunal are fallible human beings like you and I, the OP’s case is old and they weren’t able to gather a lot of information maybe if they had the information they would have granted it, maybe there are individuals on those particular tribunals who have personal opposition to granting annulments even when there is ground for it.
I would bet that there are plenty invalid marriages that are found to be valid, and likewise plenty of valid marriages that are found to be invalid by these tribunals.
The OP’s husband, having lived that marriage, knows better than any group of strangers whether that marriage was valid or not, and whether his current marriage to the OP is.
The OP and her husband have to do what they believe to be the right thing.
T
Tosk
Guest
I’d say that the tribunal stands a better chance of making the right decision than somebody who has such a strong personal stake in the case. Why even consult the tribunal if you aren’t willing to accept that your first marriage might be found valid?
Honestly, it seems tribunals are more likely to err on the side of the existing union rather than the previous marriage. If there were anyway that the tribunal could have bent the rules to find the first marriage null they would have done it. I honestly don’t see how anyone can advocate disobedience in this case.
The only right thing to do is appeal the case one last time and then either separate or live together as brother and sister if the finding is affirmed.
F
flyingfish
Guest
But the OP’s case is also influenced by the fact that because the other marriage was so long ago they don’t have a lot of information to give to the tribunal.
I don’t know which side this particular tribunal errs on, it would depend on the leanings of its members.
How can anyone advocate disobedience? I don’t think anyone is advocating disobedience, there is nothing disobedient about following your conscience. I don’t understand how anyone can advocate blind obedience in a case where a 30 year marriage is at stake. The price is simply too high.
T
Tosk
Guest
You should always follow a well formed conscience but a well formed conscience will not tell you to disobey the church. It is the same thing as ABC, pre-marital sex, or divorce. The Catholics who disobey in those cases can not justify their actions by appealing to their conscience. I honestly see nothing wrong with ABC but I still obey. I’m not being blind I am just having faith.
So now the tribunal simply must rule in their favour because their existing marriage is officially too big to fail? If the first marriage was valid, which we should assume until proven otherwise, then there never was a marriage at stake to begin with.
F
flyingfish
Guest
This case is not the same as ABC, the Church teaches that ABC is immoral. The Church does not teach that a particular couple had a valid sacramental marriage. It is perfectly consistent with Church teaching that the OP’s previous marriage was not valid.
I am not saying how the tribunal must rule, merely pointing out that the tribunal is made up of fallible human beings in this case making a decision without having much information about the situation. If the OP’s husband follows his conscience in disagreeing with the tribunal’s decision I don’t see the problem, there is nothing objectively morally wrong with thinking that a group of human beings decided incorrectly (especially when it is your past they are deciding about, without having enough information on which to base their decision).
3
30miller
Guest
Although the referenced link appears to cite an overwhelming amount of solid Catholic teaching - it additionally blends in such things as:
“…Someone who wakes up from the nightmare of a disastrous marriage in a state of disorientation may not understand the laws of the Church. The victim of abuse and violence seldom has the objectivity of a trained professional. It takes a long time to recover from a nightmare.If such a person begins to heal, and for the first time finds true love, it is not difficult to see how the new relationship can be perceived to be a gift from God. The couple begins living together, feeling absolutely clean before God. They try for an annulment but are told they have no case or they cannot prove their allegations. What are they to do?..”.
Then it somehow summarizes the entire matter with what seems to be the suggestion that presents most anyone the rationalization that the “internal forum” or “conscience” justification(s) for proceeding into an additional marriage would be valid for most anyone.
Sounds like “feel-good catholicism” to me - it makes you feel good and you get what you want, but it’s not really Catholicism.
F
forgetmenot
Guest
Hello. I wish to again thank those who have been lending support. I am not here to present my husband’s case, although he and the person with whom he had been working thought he had a fairly sound case. His witnesses were very limited; this actually occurred 35 years ago. Also consider that men are less inclined to discuss their personal issues than women, i.e. here I am looking for help. There were several compound factors, but for some reason they failed to add up for the Tribunal. The x refuses to cooperate, though he was told that they needed her (name removed by moderator)ut. I am basically trying to find recommendations as to how to proceed. Did anyone go through the appeal process? Is it better to start from scratch? How can I find a canon lawyer? We need someone to help him write this better. He will be contacting the Tribunal in a few more days to try to speak with the Judge. He is trying to gather his thoughts in the meanwhile. I ask for prayers, support, and recommendations.
C
chevalier
Guest
You can’t reapply under the same “title” (grounds) - you need to appeal the existing verdict and in the given timeframe. I have a vague idea of what I would look at if I were to write an appeal in such a case, but even though I’m a lawyer and actually have had some schooling in canon law, I would still get a canon lawyer because of the short timeframe, simply because he knows all those things, not just some. Obviously, you can get a lawyer from a different diocese - he could help you write the appeal even if you wouldn’t appoint him as your advocate in the trial. Meanwhile, I would look at what’s inconsistent in the written grounds (the “merits” of a verdict) and especially what shows presumptions being made without concrete basis in facts. After that, evidence that was denied or otherwise not processed. And after that, possible ways in which you were not allowed to participate, present facts etc. If it seemed there was wrong understanding of a prescript of canon law (e.g. a judge has his own ideas that aren’t like the 99% other judges’, emotional attitudes etc.), it would help the case, but that’s something one probably shouldn’t embark on without a canon lawyer. In fact, in your case it comes down to finding a canon lawyer ASAP and presenting him with all evidence you have, as well as all things you think are wrong in the verdict.
Note that, “marriage possesses the favour of the law,” which means that doubts are solved in favour of marriage (i.e. validity of the marriage being examined by the tribunal). When there are problems with evidence, it may be necessary to rule for validity even though it’s not actually certain. Especially circumstances connected with deficiencies of reason, inability to assume duties of marriage etc. may be hard to prove after a couple of decades (doesn’t necessarily mean impossible, though).
But you can’t really speculate without referring to what they actually wrote in the verdict (if you’ve been able to see it) or what they said about the merits. Cases involving canon 1095 are harder to win in Rome than they are in the US. You may simply have come across a strict but fair judge with a bit of a rough manner.
K
kage_ar
Guest
Every tribunal has advocates and at least one Canon lawyer. Call the tribunal and talk to them.
The link to that priest, he is teaching squishy things that do not reflect the orthodox teaching of the Church. BTW - the “internal forum” does mean you live as brother and sister.
The link to that priest, he is teaching squishy things that do not reflect the orthodox teaching of the Church. BTW - the “internal forum” does mean you live as brother and sister.
J
jrabs
Guest
excellent post.
M
marci
Guest
I
iluvmybabies
Guest
My exhusband didn’t know either…I gave all information needed and they told me it wasn’t necessary to contact him and then I received the approval, our priest told us that they sent one to him and that was it!
C
chevalier
Guest
Canons 1507-1508 (general laws for trial) are unequivocal, the opposing party absolutely must be contacted (at least in so far as it’s possible). I don’t know of any special laws that would apply to marriage cases. In a normal situation, a whole trial is null if a party wasn’t given notifications. Canons on marriage cases (1671 to 1707) confirm this obligation by referring specifically to Canon 1508 and rules on documentary process also say formalities can be omitted except notification of parties. Things may have been different before the 1983 Code went into force. The only exception could be if it were impossible to find out about the respondent’s address.
I
iluvmybabies
Guest
That is very interesting…thanks for sharing, but that’s what I was told by the Tribunal here where my annullment was filed, and I was told once I had received the approval by the priest that a copy of the approval was sent to my exhusband and that was it…
J
joandarc2008
Guest
I know in cases where there has been domestic violence or other forms of abuse as there was in mine, they do not make it necessary that the spouse does the contacting. In my case the Parish that I seeking my decree in (it was a lack of form nullity) sent it to the other parish to send to his last known address which was his parents so that there would be no tracing back to where I was. So he was notified - assuming his parents gave it to him - however, I did not partake in that process. This may have been what was meant but not communicated well.That is very interesting…thanks for sharing, but that’s what I was told by the Tribunal here where my annullment was filed, and I was told once I had received the approval by the priest that a copy of the approval was sent to my exhusband and that was it…
3
30miller
Guest
Wow! I find their conduct stunning not just because it seriously differed from mine (in Pennsylvania) - but because their conduct is somewhat self-contradictory (by informing the ex of the final verdict - but not of the prior process - what’s up with that?) as well as it makes no sense (and one thing I must say about the process I went through is that it ( like most all beliefs, laws, and processes of the Church) is a very well-thought out process that seems fair to all involved. (In actual practice, of course, this process sometimes comes up lacking due to the shortcomings of those involved - and here I am referring to the diocese itself, the bishop, the Tribunal, the pastor, etc. As we all know - some do not follow the proper beliefs, laws, and processes of the Church. e.g. the granting of an annulment to Joseph Kennedy III without informing his ex and her 10-year fight to have her appeal ruled on (which, fortunately, was ruled in her favor). But by then the damage was done - JK III had already started a new family with her replacement. Justice delayed was (and is) justice denied.My exhusband didn’t know either…I gave all information needed and they told me it wasn’t necessary to contact him and then I received the approval, our priest told us that they sent one to him and that was it!
- Status