Convert... Blessing our marriage... annulments et al

  • Thread starter Thread starter takao_san
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JulianN said:
I am glad to see you now understand that the tribunal is determining validity and not whether there is a sacramental bond.
Click to expand...
Either way, the point is whether its binding or not

[/quote]The petitioner is long past the point of focusing on the breakdown he is remarried. His only focus will be on what was happening at the time of his first marriage that might or might not have an impact on its validity.
[/quote]

Or maybe he is not remarried. In that case, a sincere Christian can pursue either Reconciliation or being single. In which the breakdown may be relative still.
And pastorally speaking, finding an impediment is not always a ‘tragic shame.’ In fact, most petitioners have exactly the opposite feeling about a decision in the positive.
Click to expand...
Feelings are relative to personal desire, which is not necessarily righteous.
 
Last edited:
Ammi said:
Feelings are relative to personal desire, which is not necessarily righteous.
Click to expand...
But you seem to presume a finding of validity his automatically preferable. Hence describing a finding of invalidity a “tragic shame.”

If the goal is indeed truth and righteousness, then neither finding is a “tragic shame.” For many petitioners, a positive decision means freedom from an invalid marriage that was abusive or adulterous. The relationship might have been tragic, the decree of nullity was not.
 
Last edited:
JulianN said:
But you seem to presume a finding of validity his automatically preferable. Hence describing a finding of invalidity a “tragic shame.”
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. I’m not against the tribunal recognizing invalidity. That can be positive, if it’s the truth.
If the goal is indeed truth, then neither finding is a “tragic shame.” For many petitioners, a positive decision means freedom from an invalid marriage that was abusive or adulterous. The relationship might have been tragic, the decree of nullity was not.
Click to expand...
Not finding an impediment should also be considered positive, if they ought to leave a second marriage attempt.
 
Last edited:
Ammi said:
Not finding an impediment should also be considered positive, if they ought to
Click to expand...
It’s a yes or no question. You can’t expect them to say yes and mean either answer. How would that work?
 
The answer is neutral. We did find an impediment, or we did not find one.

The positivity or negativity is relavent to what a spouse desires, which can be righteous or unrighteous.
 
No, an answer cannot be neutral. Even the way you described it is not.

“We did find an impediment “= we found in the positive

“We did not” =we found in the negative.

This is a legal proceeding – it needs a clear answer, not a neutral one.
 
Or if the question is “Is the marriage valid?” The answer is positive, “yes, the marriage is afforded validity”… or negative, “no, the marriage is not valid”

If the purpose of the tribunal is to determine validity, then this way is more accurate
 
Last edited:
Ammi said:
Or if the question is “Is the marriage valid?” The answer is positive, “yes, the marriage is afforded validity”… or negative, “no, the marriage is not valid”

If the purpose of the tribunal is to determine validity, then this way is more accurate
Click to expand...
It feels as if you are splitting hairs in order to make it seem that finding the first marriage valid is somehow the more desirable, or positive, outcome. It’s perfectly accurate the way it is normally worded.
 
Very well.

My point is that the intention is to find invalidity, instead of a neutral investigation. You know that my own visit with a defender of the bond revealed this intention.

Validity needs to be defended, or it will lose more than not. And most petitioners fight for invalidity.

And the tribunal doesnt want to call a civil divorce a valid marriage, and a civil remarriage invalid. They are pressured to conform to the State.
 
I’m going through the same thing: Longing for the church and being able to share the Eucharist again.

I have 2 “priors” (as does my wife) and we have been told by the Diocese canon lawyer that both of us have to have them all annulled even though she has no desire to become Catholic (she’s Christian Science and happy there). Most of my marriage/divorce documents have been assembled and, as my wife’s requirements were just conveyed to us, she is getting started with it. Probably have it done and ready to submit to my priest within 2 weeks. I also have no record of my baptism even though I believe/know I was. I just have no idea where as my parents (long dead) were not really churchgoers.

So, continuing my RCIA, going to bible study, have submitted an application to assist in the local prison ministry at the urging of one of the Fathers here, attending daily mass and generally trying to be useful. I know the process is long but it is God’s time, not mine.
 
Ammi said:
Validity needs to be defended, or it will lose more than not. And most petitioners fight for invalidity.
Click to expand...
Well, since they are actually petitioning for a decree of nullity, yes, they are proposing that their marriages were invalid. They are also required to provide evidence and witnesses to support that allegation.

A petitioner would have no need to go to a Tribunal to petition to have their marriage considered valid – it enjoys that presumption unless found otherwise.
 
True. So when one or both spouses want out and to remarry, they both fight for invalidity.

Who will fight for validity? Are they out there? And what chance do they have, when there isnt much incentive for the tribunal to go against the State.

Anyways, I’d discuss in PM, if you were interested. But I’ll leave the thread, so as not to take it up with these concerns.

Hopefully the OP has valid grounds to pursue.
 
Last edited:
Ammi said:
Who will fight for validity? Are they out there?
Click to expand...
That would be the role of the defender of the bond. Or a spouse who believes the marriage is valid and presents testimony and witnesses to counter what the petitioner has presented.
 
Is each spouse able to read all witness statements?
 
Last edited:
OK, now I have a question:

In reading this thread, it seems that there’s a possibility that the tribunal will not find any way to annul one or more of our marriages. Since this is in opposition to what my priest has said (essentially, “It will happen, it just takes time.”), now I’m concerned I’ll be shut out. Am I right to be concerned?
 
Your priest has a better idea of the grounds being considered and, therefore, a better idea of how likely it is that the Tribunal will find for invalidity. We do not.

That said, decrees of nullity are not automatically granted. It depends on your grounds, the strength of the testimony and the witness statements.
 
As an Advocate, I would no longer be able to serve as one if I ever made such a promise.

We do not know the details, perhaps you both have simple lack of form cases?

For the formal cases, there is never a guarantee of a decree of nullity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top