Annulments/support group

[dans0622]

My understanding (and Dan, please correct me if I’m in error here) is that although you can APPEAL to the Rota, the chances that the Rota will actually HEAR your cases is pretty low. I think they tend to be more likely to hear a case if there was a conflict between the initial two decisions, or possibly if there was extremely compelling evidence, but I think they don’t actually hear most cases that are appealed to them.

Well…yes, if the case has already received two decisions in favor or against, it is very unlikely that the Rota would accept a case (unless there are procedural violations that make everything suspect). Technically, there is no “appeal” in those cases (I could now get deeper into some technicalities … but … won’t).

For the most part, cases go to the Rota after one decision and an appeal or after conflicting decisions on the lower levels.

Dan

 

[Huiou_Theou]

That’s interesting. I would tend to think the opposite. Looking at how it works in practice, I’m not sure if there is any “rule of thumb” as far as people being more forthcoming in one setting vs. the other.

Dan

I know this much, human memory does not always work quickly. Having to tell everything in an oral interview would definitely mean that the pressure of wanting to respond and fill the silence while someone gave me a chance to “think” would generally mean that my answers would be far less considered. Errors in memory, or ambiguities, would be far more likely to color the conversation.

During the civil divorce, for example, I had an evaluator who orally interviewed me about my ex-wife; and asked questions about a certain habit of hers and for how long she did it. I knew, if I really thought about it, that she had sometimes pretended to be paralyzed for over a month a time – but in the awkward silence of the interview, I estimated about three days; which was really not true if I had been able to sit there and THINK, but it’s amazing how a feeling of discomfort can color a memory and make me open my mouth before I am really certain of what I want to say. I know that I was gropeing for an answer, and I knew that the interviewer would not believe a long time; and so this insidious feeling that it really had to be a fairly short interval somehow became what I estimated as true, even though the real problem is that I was feeling pressure and couldn’t get my memory to work while feeling panic.

People want to forget negative experiences that they know others won’t believe; and oddly enough, the human mind will do things that prevent accurate recall. If something is traumatic, the memories get exaggerated. If unbelievable, the memories often get rationalized.

The two things I really appreciate about written questions, is that they allowed me to attach photos of family videos that demonstrated some of the more difficult to believe points; and they gave me time to think about why I might be remembering something they way I did.

I think an oral interview would give the Tribunal more information about the person’s social skills, perhaps some idea about mental illness where those symptoms might display in an interview, but also allows them a chance to ask questions that may uncover lies in the testimony (or at least clues as to what needs to be examined more carefully/cross examined) precisely because a person doesn’t have time to think the issue through. (But lack of time cuts both ways, both for and against the truth.).

Experiencing how my ex-wife can manipulate people by rapidly reading their emotional response has always been something that has amazed me. eg: There are some people who are very good at judging what another person is thinking (at least emotionally), and taking advantage of that emotional feedback to mislead the interview or bias it in their favor. That can’t happen in a written interview. That’s why I hope they interview her in writing first, and hopefully do a verbal interview later with someone who’s got a real good “poker” face; although I don’t know how tribunals normally proceed.

 

[MJJean]

That’s interesting. I would tend to think the opposite. Looking at how it works in practice, I’m not sure if there is any “rule of thumb” as far as people being more forthcoming in one setting vs. the other.

Dan

Two of my Witnesses actually expressed anxiety about being called for an in person interview since I warned them it was a possibility. Both said they would feel uncomfortable telling the interviewer some rather unflattering, but necessary, things about me. Both thought it would be a betrayal of our friendship. Yet neither had much of an issue putting it all on paper!

It took a few conversations over weeks with each of them for me to finally get them to understand that those unflattering things were exactly the information the Tribunal needed to have in order to make a determination and that I wouldn’t be hurt or upset with them for speaking the entire truth.

 

[Convert1]

Hi!

I would like to say that my husband and I were married in our local church over a month ago and are extremely happy. As you know, throughout the annulment process, I had to deal with a very bitter ex partner who objected to the decree of nullity. Even after the second conforming decision, he was still threatening to ‘appeal’ to Rome. Despite all the threats, I never heard anything from our tribunal here, let alone Rome. I thank God for that.

I see that many of you are still navigating through stormy waters but trust in the Lord and the truth will come out.

I will continue to keep you all in my prayers.

Nic

Congratulations! God Bless you and your husband! I know everything will work out. But folks like you that lend support are so very special. Best wishes to you and your family.

 

[Convert1]

That’s interesting. I would tend to think the opposite. Looking at how it works in practice, I’m not sure if there is any “rule of thumb” as far as people being more forthcoming in one setting vs. the other.

Dan

Perhaps it depends on the nature of the case. I had difficulty writing my petition and reliving abuse; but not near as bad as actually sitting in front of two total strangers in the tribunal and verbally speaking about various incidents. Writing it took place in a private setting. Openly reliving it and discussing it was even more painful and I did not add as many details as it was so embarrassing and made me so emotional in front of them.
Although, reliving any divorce is difficult whether written or otherwise.

 

[Nic1099]

Congratulations! God Bless you and your husband! I know everything will work out. But folks like you that lend support are so very special. Best wishes to you and your family.

Thanks Convert1

I know how difficult this process can be. My negative experience was at the hands of certain people’s reactions to the Nullity decree. Thankfully, this was not the case with the tribunal staff, both local and national, who were extremely supportive and pastoral while upholding the truth and integrity of the nullity process.

I will continue to pray for all of you going through this process.

 

[EvelynEVF]

Perhaps it depends on the nature of the case. I had difficulty writing my petition and reliving abuse; but not near as bad as actually sitting in front of two total strangers in the tribunal and verbally speaking about various incidents.

Yes, me too. The abuse was so gross, and yet it took me so long to figure out that it really “counted” as abuse and justified divorce (super conservative Protestant at the time), that I could never have sat down with a stranger and discussed it. The shame would have been overwhelming, even though I knew in my head that I had done the right thing.

 

[rose2]

Hello,

Yes, if the case is already in process at the Rota, the new procedures will not apply…except to say that if they make a decision after Dec. 8 and it is affirmative, then the case will be completed (even if that were to be the only affirmative sentence).

There are some differences in how testimony is gathered. The way the process is designed, in-person interviews are the way it should be. But…that doesn’t always happen. There is a sort of “American style” = written questionnaires.

Dan

Thank you for clarifying that and also for all the help you give on this forum. I take the view that I put this process in the back ground and get on with my life but the anxiety about it does surface from time to time. it is not comfortable to be out of sorts with the Church. I love the Church and also am comfortable where things are now in my life. I am fortunate that the sacraments (apart from marriage) have not been withheld but fear it happening and do not like that persons in my church view me a a terrible sinner, which of course we all are!

Anyway I just wanted to thank you it has been a great solace whilst I wait to know I am not alone and to see the straight answers that are presented here. Realising I am not alone helps but it also is an eye opener as to what a problem for the church this all is.

Rose2

 

[Convert1]

Congratulations to my sweet husband who received his final decision of nullity yesterday.
I am so relieved for him!

:extrahappy::extrahappy::extrahappy::bounce::bounce::bounce:

 

[kristis524]

I am sorry to bother everyone yet again, but I am so clueless as to the process and it is frustrating.

The check I wrote for the filing fee finally cleared my bank (after 8 weeks). Someone at the Archdiocese Tribunal wrote some numbers in the “memo” section. Does that mean my petition was at least accepted? I am hoping to hear from them soon, but apparently the words speed and this process should never be used in the same sentence

Thanks again for your help

 

[dans0622]

I am sorry to bother everyone yet again, but I am so clueless as to the process and it is frustrating.

The check I wrote for the filing fee finally cleared my bank (after 8 weeks). Someone at the Archdiocese Tribunal wrote some numbers in the “memo” section. Does that mean my petition was at least accepted? I am hoping to hear from them soon, but apparently the words speed and this process should never be used in the same sentence

Thanks again for your help

Hello,

Can you not call the Tribunal and ask them to tell you what the steps are and when you will be hearing from them (by that I don’t mean specific dates but which events in the process result in a mandatory communication from the Tribunal to you)?

It’s an honest question. Sometimes, I hear that Tribunals say something to the effect of “don’t call us, we’ll call you” (which I think is not ideal…but I don’t answer the phones at any tribunal…).

As for the numbers, it might be the case number/protocol number. I would hope that if they cashed the check, the petition was accepted.

Dan

 

[kristis524]

Hello,

Can you not call the Tribunal and ask them to tell you what the steps are and when you will be hearing from them (by that I don’t mean specific dates but which events in the process result in a mandatory communication from the Tribunal to you)?

It’s an honest question. Sometimes, I hear that Tribunals say something to the effect of “don’t call us, we’ll call you” (which I think is not ideal…but I don’t answer the phones at any tribunal…).

As for the numbers, it might be the case number/protocol number. I would hope that if they cashed the check, the petition was accepted.

Dan

Unfortunately, my Archdiocese takes the “don’t call us, we’ll call you” stance. If it was accepted, I can write them a letter and ask any questions once I get a case number, but all requests must be in writing and have a case number (which I don’t have yet). No information, even general questions, are addressed by telephone

 

[Convert1]

Unfortunately, my Archdiocese takes the “don’t call us, we’ll call you” stance. If it was accepted, I can write them a letter and ask any questions once I get a case number, but all requests must be in writing and have a case number (which I don’t have yet). No information, even general questions, are addressed by telephone

I think that is absolutely ridiculous. You have a right to your advocate. They cannot deny you that. I don’t care what their policy is, I would at least call and find out who your advocate is and how you can contact him/her. I finally communicated with my advocate via email I obtained from the Tribunal website. I don’t see how absolute silence by a tribunal with a petitioner is pastoral whatsoever.

 

[Convert1]

Unfortunately, my Archdiocese takes the “don’t call us, we’ll call you” stance. If it was accepted, I can write them a letter and ask any questions once I get a case number, but all requests must be in writing and have a case number (which I don’t have yet). No information, even general questions, are addressed by telephone

I am not certain to which diocese your have submitted your petition; but almost every single one has at least one email address noted on the tribunal website. Perhaps sending a brief email to them would help you. This happened to me at first and I found emails were the best means as long as I did not abuse the privilege.

 

[kristis524]

I am not certain to which diocese your have submitted your petition; but almost every single one has at least one email address noted on the tribunal website. Perhaps sending a brief email to them would help you. This happened to me at first and I found emails were the best means as long as I did not abuse the privilege.

I got my “protocol number” today. I have no idea if that means my petition was accepted or if they have not made that decision yet. All the letter said is that they received it, gave me the name and protocol number and told me the only requests for any information they will respond to is postal mail and that no phone calls, faxes or e-mails requesting information are accepted.

A little information would be nice. I realize it is a large diocese and they handle a lot of cases, but just the bare bones information would be very much appreciated.

I have to write them a letter with any questions and then wait at least a month for them to send me a response

 

[Convert1]

I got my “protocol number” today. I have no idea if that means my petition was accepted or if they have not made that decision yet. All the letter said is that they received it, gave me the name and protocol number and told me the only requests for any information they will respond to is postal mail and that no phone calls, faxes or e-mails requesting information are accepted.

A little information would be nice. I realize it is a large diocese and they handle a lot of cases, but just the bare bones information would be very much appreciated.

I have to write them a letter with any questions and then wait at least a month for them to send me a response

God Bless You! At least you have some progress. That’s a good thing. My understanding is, if they assign a number to the case they will at least review the grounds for the nullity of the marriage and let you know if they will move forward.

Dan: Have you ever seen a tribunal that disallows all communication except USPS? That seems so odd to me.

 

[dans0622]

I got my “protocol number” today. I have no idea if that means my petition was accepted or if they have not made that decision yet. All the letter said is that they received it, gave me the name and protocol number and told me the only requests for any information they will respond to is postal mail and that no phone calls, faxes or e-mails requesting information are accepted.

A little information would be nice. I realize it is a large diocese and they handle a lot of cases, but just the bare bones information would be very much appreciated.

I have to write them a letter with any questions and then wait at least a month for them to send me a response

Do you have an advocate who knows what the process is and will actually talk to you? How about the diocesan website–any information there?

Dan

 

[dans0622]

…

Dan: Have you ever seen a tribunal that disallows all communication except USPS? That seems so odd to me.

Uhh…I don’t think so. It’s rather medieval. I’m usually a fan of medieval things but…

Dan

 

[Huiou_Theou]

Dan,
I just got my first letter back from the archdiocese two weeks ago concerning the annulment filing. This is a bit scary… because I can see a mess coming up, and am wondering how to navigate the issue.

My ex-wife has shown no interest in cooperating so far, and I did not know where she was baptized when I filed. I could not get a current baptism certificate for her. But the filing forms REQUIRE me to supply a recent certificate. The priest I’m working with for filing said I should include a note telling the tribunal all the information I had on my putative wife, and indicate that they would have to get the information from her.

I wrote the note, and that’s the only certificate missing from the filing packet.
Well, I got a letter back indicating the tribunal received my packet, but it’s not “accepted” yet because it’s missing information.

I am at least happy to note the letter does indicate that someone at the tribunal actually read my note.

They told me,“We will need a copy of the baptismal certificate for your former spouse. Please contact the church of marriage. They should have a copy of her baptismal certificate in your marriage file. You can then contact her church of baptism for a recent copy.”

OK. So I didn’t know that the church where we married was supposed to keep a copy of the certificate, although even if they had it – it would be out of date and can’t be used. So, I called the church, and they told me they had a “note” attached to the wedding file saying my wife was baptized, but the handwriting on the note is mostly illegible. They can’t make out the full name of the parish where she was supposedly baptized. It was St. John something in Grenada Hills…

So, I did a google search and there was only one St. John’s something still open in Grenada Hills, although I don’t have any way to know for certain it’s the same church.

I called them, gave them my wife’s date of birth and maiden name, etc. and the two days that she might have been baptized on (again the baptism notation at the church of wedding was illegible. I know the day but not the month she was baptized.) and asked them to send it to me.

That’s when the secretary asked if we were still married, and when I said we are civilly divorced and the request was for an annulment petition; she then replied that she can’t give me a copy of the certificate because it’s a legal document and I am not the person the document is for.

According to the church, we are still married. But according to civil law we are divorced.
It’s a catch-22, and arcdiocese are presuming us divorced…?

I asked if she would send it to the tribunal, then, and she started being curt with me and saying the tribunal would have to contact her to request a copy. etc. At which point I read her the letter the archdiocese sent me.

Long story short, she eventually took the address of the tribunal but did not at all sound like she was inclined to actually send the document. She was not interested in talking with the priest whom is my contact with the tribunal because he is not the tribunal… and the tribunal is saying this is my responsibility to get a document from a different archdiocese from the one I live in.

So, I’m thinking that apparently the rules are different as to how the tribunal’s operate from one diocese to the next. How common is this problem?

Why is it important that the tribunal have a recent certificate of baptism for my ex, when I thought a tribunal could automatically presume the marriage valid until proven otherwise anyway. I admitted she was baptized as far as I knew, although I couldn’t prove it.

Is there a logical reason a tribunal can’t proceed without a document that they can clearly assume happened, as that would make me less likely to have an annulment granted? (They have my baptism certificate, and wedding certificate, with church seals on them)

Isn’t the danger the tribunal must avoid that of judging the marriage null when it isn’t, and not really a danger of judging it valid when it isn’t? (People can re-apply, I’m told. So a rejection of a decree of nullity can be challenged and sometimes overturned. )

I can’t see that getting the document helps the proceeding in any real way, but it looks like techincal denial of permission, or stubborness on the part of secretaries in power, might be able to hold the annulment trial up indefinitely.

Should this become a problem and not just a worry; Is there a way to request the trial proceed, or can it really be held up forever over a document that I have no “right” to according to the secretary in California?

I mean, I’ve talked with my own archdiocese by letter six times in the past. (not for annulment, but for permission to separate). Four of those times they “lost” the letter I sent them and never responded, until I used USPS registered mail. Yet in this case, I have no way of getting the document sent registered mail…

It’s a point of anxiety…

 

[dans0622]

…
They told me,“We will need a copy of the baptismal certificate for your former spouse. Please contact the church of marriage. They should have a copy of her baptismal certificate in your marriage file. You can then contact her church of baptism for a recent copy.”

OK. So I didn’t know that the church where we married was supposed to keep a copy of the certificate, although even if they had it – it would be out of date and can’t be used. … …

Hello,

What they mean is a recently made copy, which would be up to date with all the notations made through the years (confirmation, marriage). So, they look in the baptismal register and then fill in a new certificate.

…That’s when the secretary asked if we were still married, and when I said we are civilly divorced and the request was for an annulment petition; she then replied that she can’t give me a copy of the certificate because it’s a legal document and I am not the person the document is for…

Well, baptism as well as the record of baptism is, by law, a public event and document. But, the document is only given to a person if it concerns his own status. So, I’m not surprised that you were told that you couldn’t have it…but it would have been ok, in my opinion, for you to have received it.

…According to the church, we are still married. But according to civil law we are divorced.
It’s a catch-22, and arcdiocese are presuming us divorced…?

So, I’m thinking that apparently the rules are different as to how the tribunal’s operate from one diocese to the next. How common is this problem?..

Yes, there are some differences from one place to another. If by “this problem” you mean getting a copy of someone else’s baptismal certificate…it happens. It’s best, it seems to me, if the Tribunal obtains such documents since, as you’ve found out, the person might not be given what’s needed.

…Why is it important that the tribunal have a recent certificate of baptism for my ex, when I thought a tribunal could automatically presume the marriage valid until proven otherwise anyway. I admitted she was baptized as far as I knew, although I couldn’t prove it…

My understanding is that you, a Catholic, married another Catholic, in the Church? And, you are pursuing a declaration of nullity based on some defect in consent? If so, I don’t see any real need for the certificate.

…Is there a logical reason a tribunal can’t proceed without a document that they can clearly assume happened, as that would make me less likely to have an annulment granted? (They have my baptism certificate, and wedding certificate, with church seals on them) …

I can’t see that getting the document helps the proceeding in any real way, but it looks like techincal denial of permission, or stubborness on the part of secretaries in power, might be able to hold the annulment trial up indefinitely…

I don’t think the document has any bearing on anything. Sometimes, we hear Pope Francis talking about “the law”, even “small-minded rules” (I think that was the term he used on one occasion)…this might be an example of what he’s talking about…these little regulations that are usually not a problem, and might even serve a purpose, but are not really essential to the issue at hand. Nevertheless, we can get hung up on them.

…Should this become a problem and not just a worry; Is there a way to request the trial proceed, or can it really be held up forever over a document that I have no “right” to according to the secretary in California?..

You can refer to canons 1504-1505 as well as Dignitas connubii, article 116. Those passages address what a petition must include. You might not even be at the stage of presenting a petition but… Anyway, in those passages, you won’t see anything about the need for a baptismal certificate.

More basically, you can request that a Judge or the Judicial Vicar look at the documents and say whether or not there is enough to proceed. Unfortunately, there may be a few “firewalls” between you and a Judge…

Dan