Another case to evaluate anulment

  • Thread starter Thread starter TMO
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TMO

Guest
I saw another thread with this topic and I wouldn’t like to “steal” the attention for that particular case but I’d like to kindly ask for advice to anyone who can give me good guidance in this particular family situation:

My uncle is currently divorced. He got married around 20 years ago because his wife was pregnant at that time (yup, it was one of those cases). They stayed married but always had issues until his now ex wife cheated on him repeated times. He confronted her and he even tried to make it work but his ex wife rejected him, humiliated him and told him he was disgusted by him and didn’t want to have anything to do with him.

My uncle always has this sadness upon his face. He wants to find another person to build a life with, but he knows he can’t offer marriage to any woman, because of his divorce.

One of my aunt suggests that he can pursue anulment based on the fact that they got married without being fully sure of this step (this is more for my uncle’s ex wife because he was truly in love with her and wanted to honor her).

My question is, what do you do in this cases??? My uncle did EVERYTHING he could to try and make it work with his ex wife but she completely rejected him and treated him like a piece of garbage. What can you do in situation like this one, where the cheating spouse doesn’t want to have anything to do with the other person. Does it mean they have to settle to be alone the rest of their lives? Is this not a valid reason to an anulment? I know infidelity is not a cause for anulment, but such cases do exist and I think that the church should revise these cases, just like the cases of domestic violence, where the victim has to leave/divorce the other spouse for safety reasons.
 
Your uncle needs to make an appointment with a wise and holy priest who can assist him with the annulment process; each case is considered on it’s own merits.
 
Catholic1954 said:
Your uncle needs to make an appointment with a wise and holy priest who can assist him with the annulment process; each case is considered on it’s own merits.
Click to expand...
This is good advice only if the priest in question is a canon lawyer. Most priests do not have this degree and cannot offer a competent opinion. Best bet is for your uncle to contact a canon lawyer at the local tribunal or one in independent practice.
 
I’d suggest first he speak with his priest and then also speak with a canon lawyer at the Tribunal. Some priests are very skilled at asking the right questions, finding grounds where they exist, and helping with the application. Some are not as skilled or are very against divorce and annulment in general and therefore won’t be very helpful. When it comes to something this serious I think the best route is to seek advice from more than one source.
 
MJJean said:
I’d suggest first he speak with his priest and then also speak with a canon lawyer at the Tribunal. Some priests are very skilled at asking the right questions, finding grounds where they exist, and helping with the application. Some are not as skilled or are very against divorce and annulment in general and therefore won’t be very helpful. When it comes to something this serious I think the best route is to seek advice from more than one source.
Click to expand...
My experience in our parish is that anyone who wants to petition for an annulment is put through the long interview and it’s submitted to the Tribunal. What happens from that point on is up to the Tribunal. The priest doesn’t stop anyone from petitioning.
 
TMO said:
I saw another thread with this topic and I wouldn’t like to “steal” the attention for that particular case but I’d like to kindly ask for advice to anyone who can give me good guidance in this particular family situation:

My uncle is currently divorced. He got married around 20 years ago because his wife was pregnant at that time (yup, it was one of those cases). They stayed married but always had issues until his now ex wife cheated on him repeated times. He confronted her and he even tried to make it work but his ex wife rejected him, humiliated him and told him he was disgusted by him and didn’t want to have anything to do with him.

My uncle always has this sadness upon his face. He wants to find another person to build a life with, but he knows he can’t offer marriage to any woman, because of his divorce.

One of my aunt suggests that he can pursue anulment based on the fact that they got married without being fully sure of this step (this is more for my uncle’s ex wife because he was truly in love with her and wanted to honor her).

My question is, what do you do in this cases??? My uncle did EVERYTHING he could to try and make it work with his ex wife but she completely rejected him and treated him like a piece of garbage. What can you do in situation like this one, where the cheating spouse doesn’t want to have anything to do with the other person. Does it mean they have to settle to be alone the rest of their lives? Is this not a valid reason to an anulment? I know infidelity is not a cause for anulment, but such cases do exist and I think that the church should revise these cases, just like the cases of domestic violence, where the victim has to leave/divorce the other spouse for safety reasons.
Click to expand...
It is my understanding that pregnancy prior to marriage is a solid reason for annulment since this removes the freedom of choice in the matter. In other words, there is a hindrance against free will due to the pregnancy. You uncle needs to check into the annulment process. Also, is ex-wife’s constant cheating may constitute “lude conduct” which is also grounds for annulment. Also, though you don’t mention the child’s age, he may have grounds for custody.
 
Phemie said:
My experience in our parish is that anyone who wants to petition for an annulment is put through the long interview and it’s submitted to the Tribunal. What happens from that point on is up to the Tribunal. The priest doesn’t stop anyone from petitioning.
Click to expand...
It really depends on the priest and the parish. At my parish, our Priest is also the Procurator-Advocate and who everyone talks to when they are considering seeking annulment. From what I understand this is not uncommon. If the priest says no most parishioners accept that answer and have no idea they could go directly to the Tribunal. Luckily, our priest is knowledgeable and very helpful in these matters. But this is not true everywhere. Especially in parishes where the priest is very traditional and does not approve of divorce or annulment or where the priest lacks training and knowledge. I have heard of quite a few people who have been told by their priest not to bother applying when it seemed like they did have grounds. Those unfortunate souls usually had no clue they could talk to another priest or apply at the Tribunal themselves and just gave up. Which is why I advise someone seeking annulment make inquiries first with their priest and then independently with their local Tribunal.
 
Lots of great advice here. I just wanted to point out that the decision to grant an annulment is not based on how miserable a person is in the marriage. It is based solely on whether the proper conditions existed at the time of the marriage to make it validly sacramental. That’s it. A valid Catholic marriage requires that (1) the spouses are free to marry; (2) they freely exchange their consent; (3) they intend to marry for life, to be faithful to one another and be open to children; and (4) their consent is given in the presence of two witnesses and before a properly authorized church minister. There may be other impediments as well, such as a Catholic marrying outside the church. Whatever happens within the marriage after that has no bearing on whether or not an annulment can be granted.
 
seagal said:
Lots of great advice here. I just wanted to point out that the decision to grant an annulment is not based on how miserable a person is in the marriage. It is based solely on whether the proper conditions existed at the time of the marriage to make it validly sacramental. That’s it. A valid Catholic marriage requires that (1) the spouses are free to marry; (2) they freely exchange their consent; (3) they intend to marry for life, to be faithful to one another and be open to children; and (4) their consent is given in the presence of two witnesses and before a properly authorized church minister. There may be other impediments as well, such as a Catholic marrying outside the church. Whatever happens within the marriage after that has no bearing on whether or not an annulment can be granted.
Click to expand...
Yes, I’m aware of the concrete situations that are required for an anulment. But you said it very well and I think some cases should be evaluated, I don’t care if people call it heresy but it is true that cases like my uncle’s is very particular and also the domestic violence cases. You said it doesn’t matter if the person is miserable for the rest of their lives. Is it really what the church wants? I know there are lots of cases in wich people rushed, made bad decisions and let their marriages go, but in specific ones like the ones I stated above, I believe they require thorough assesment.
 
TMO said:
Yes, I’m aware of the concrete situations that are required for an anulment. But you said it very well and I think some cases should be evaluated, I don’t care if people call it heresy but it is true that cases like my uncle’s is very particular and also the domestic violence cases. You said it doesn’t matter if the person is miserable for the rest of their lives. Is it really what the church wants? I know there are lots of cases in wich people rushed, made bad decisions and let their marriages go, but in specific ones like the ones I stated above, I believe they require thorough assesment.
Click to expand...
It is not the case that the Church wants people to be miserable. What’s in question is whether or not a valid, true Christian marriage was present in the first place. We cannot change the Law of God. Indeed, if there was evidence that she did not intend to be faithful, they were pressured into marrying, or if she/he did not understand the nature of marriage, there IS a case for a declaration of nullity. My husband went through this a couple of years back. He and his ex had a shotgun wedding that was only done because of a pregnancy; they were already beginning to realize that they weren’t compatible and didn’t have much in common. After she left him, she told him (and confirmed to friends that she had said this) that as far as she was concerned, marriage was glorified common-law with ceremonial benefits, the vows she took were just symbolic and didn’t really mean anything, and if she wasn’t happy, she was free to walk away any time she wanted. Obviously, my husband received the declaration of nullity and we have been sacramentally married for 1 year (civilly for 2.5).

My point is, we can’t just change the laws of God because someone has an issue with them. If it can be demonstrated that they only did marry because of the pregnancy, he has grounds for a declaration of nullity. This is also the case if there were other issues. Believe me, I feel for your uncle - it was very difficult for us to work through DH’s nullity trial. But the point is, God cannot condone sin. If the tribunal decides there WAS a valid marriage, he can appeal to the Roman Rota - but if they say the marriage was valid, unfortunately, he is not free to remarry.

In terms of his ex-wife - she’s not required to participate in the process if she doesn’t want to. They’ll send her a letter, and give her a certain amount of time to respond. I think if she doesn’t respond within that time frame, they send a second letter, and if she still doesn’t respond, they proceed without her - and her participation or lack thereof doesn’t necessarily impact the outcome. (DH’s ex indicated that she did not want to participate - she spoke with our priest directly. He received a declaration of nullity.)
 
TMO said:
Yes, I’m aware of the concrete situations that are required for an anulment. But you said it very well and I think some cases should be evaluated, I don’t care if people call it heresy but it is true that cases like my uncle’s is very particular and also the domestic violence cases. You said it doesn’t matter if the person is miserable for the rest of their lives. Is it really what the church wants? I know there are lots of cases in wich people rushed, made bad decisions and let their marriages go, but in specific ones like the ones I stated above, I believe they require thorough assesment.
Click to expand...
That’s not quite what I said. I said that the granting of annulments is not based on the happiness (or lack thereof) of the people involved.

The Church certainly recognizes that some people simply can’t live together and must separate. The Church also takes marriage very seriously. It was Jesus who said “what God has joined together let not man put asunder” (Matthew 19) and the Church believes him. It’s a hard teaching (and Jesus also recognizes that) but then, being a Christian is hard, especially when our human tendency is to do what makes us happy.
 
seagal said:
Lots of great advice here. I just wanted to point out that the decision to grant an annulment is not based on how miserable a person is in the marriage. It is based solely on whether the proper conditions existed at the time of the marriage to make it validly sacramental. That’s it. A valid Catholic marriage requires that (1) the spouses are free to marry; (2) they freely exchange their consent; (3) they intend to marry for life, to be faithful to one another and be open to children; and (4) their consent is given in the presence of two witnesses and before a properly authorized church minister. There may be other impediments as well, such as a Catholic marrying outside the church. Whatever happens within the marriage after that has no bearing on whether or not an annulment can be granted.
Click to expand...
Yes this is understood, but I think a bit unfortunate. In the case of abuse I think there is plenty of grounds for an anullment, and that more than likely one could argue some sort of deception was involved by the abusive partner at the time of marriage. For example: The abuser successfully hid a drinking or drug problem, or that they were actually abusive.

No one should be expected to stay in that sort of marriage, and I personally believe that the abuser is the one making the marriage null.
 
Cricket2 said:
Yes this is understood, but I think a bit unfortunate. In the case of abuse I think there is plenty of grounds for an anullment, and that more than likely one could argue some sort of deception was involved by the abusive partner at the time of marriage. For example: The abuser successfully hid a drinking or drug problem, or that they were actually abusive.

No one should be expected to stay in that sort of marriage, and I personally believe that the abuser is the one making the marriage null.
Click to expand...
I agree that if one spouse turns out to be a chronic abuser there is probably some underlying condition that would have made the sacrament of marriage invalid, but that’s not necessarily the case. That’s why each case has to be evaluated carefully. As I said in another post, the church doesn’t expect couples to remain together if something like that exists in the marriage, they are able to separate, and of course get a legal divorce if necessary. (In fact, if I’m not mistaken, a couple is required to be legally divorced before annulment proceedings can take place.) But the abuse in and of itself is not grounds for annulment. Marriage is a sacrament, and as with any sacrament the proper conditions must be met at the time it is conferred. If they weren’t, an annulment can be granted. If they were, nothing can negate that.
 
seagal said:
I agree that if one spouse turns out to be a chronic abuser there is probably some underlying condition that would have made the sacrament of marriage invalid, but that’s not necessarily the case. That’s why each case has to be evaluated carefully. As I said in another post, the church doesn’t expect couples to remain together if something like that exists in the marriage, they are able to separate, and of course get a legal divorce if necessary. (In fact, if I’m not mistaken, a couple is required to be legally divorced before annulment proceedings can take place.) But the abuse in and of itself is not grounds for annulment. Marriage is a sacrament, and as with any sacrament the proper conditions must be met at the time it is conferred. If they weren’t, an annulment can be granted. If they were, nothing can negate that.
Click to expand...
I think you are correct. A civil divorce may be required first. I can’t accept the idea of abuse not being grounds for divorce though I do understand the principal. I know if I had married and my spouse had abused me once, that would have been enough for me to separate immediately. He would get help or that would be it. I am not willing to live in those kind of circumstances. Who knows, maybe that is why God never seemed to call me to marriage?
 
1ke said:
Lewd conduct is not grounds for a decree of nullity.
Click to expand...
I thought it was. By lewd conduct I mean extra marital affairs, being involved with porn or other sexually deviant behavior. Could be wrong, or too focused on one aspect of marital problems.
 
Cricket2 said:
I thought it was. By lewd conduct I mean extra marital affairs, being involved with porn or other sexually deviant behavior. Could be wrong, or too focused on one aspect of marital problems.
Click to expand...
Those are sins, not grounds for nullity.
 
1ke said:
Those are sins, not grounds for nullity.
Click to expand...
Well, what constitutes lewd conduct?

I know what I mentioned were sins, but if they don’t constitute lewd conduct what does?

Had I been married and my spouse cheated on me, there would have been a lot of trouble. I am pretty sure our relationship would have been platonic from then on. Very sure as a matter of fact. Yes, I know, forgive!

I would never trust them again either. That makes for a pretty bad relationship. If I had been the cheater I would expect the same from them. Things would never be the same.
 
Cricket2 said:
I thought it was. By lewd conduct I mean extra marital affairs, being involved with porn or other sexually deviant behavior. Could be wrong, or too focused on one aspect of marital problems.
Click to expand...
Such behaviors may or may not be grounds for nullity depending on a number of factors. Certainly, at the very least, the innocent spouse has the right to separate immediately and forever when adultery is discovered. This separation can also include civil divorce.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top