M
mariam1976
Guest
do you think being a dishonest person and constantly lying is enough reason for the other spouse to end the marriage?
this lead to lack of trust …
this lead to lack of trust …
I think dishonesty can break up a marriage for two grave reasons:someone who lies repeatedly about where and with whom he/she is spending their time, money, affection…
not the last cookie in the jar…![]()
i have read this book… actually bought it for my coworker as it was such a good read…Check out www.marriagebuilders.com or read His Needs, Her Needs.
Hmm, I see what you are getting at. For example, what of those people who lead double lives? If a spouse finds out after marriage, does that show the marriage to be invalid?i have read this book… actually bought it for my coworker as it was such a good read…
anyways to answer chevalier’s question, yes the lying started before marriage but I only came to know about it after we were married, as a lot of aspects are revealed after marriage when you actually start living together…
There’s no reason enough to end a sacramental marriage - and no possibility save death. If you talk about the civil aspect of it, then, well, there are legitimate reasons to seek a civil divorce, although a civil separation would be more proper and preferable.
.
I’m not sure I agree. If the spouse is lying about things like finances, affairs, addictions etc then the other spouse has a duty to her or himself to protect themselves and any children by seeking a civil divorce. Things like bank accounts and child care need to be sorted out by a professional.
Malia
he lied about finances and addictions before marriage and i later on came to know about emotional affairs… though i dont know if he ever stepped over the line since he was constantly lying… you only know from the signs but after a while, you kind of think you are paranoid or going mad as you are unable to trust for anything…I’m not sure I agree. If the spouse is lying about things like finances, affairs, addictions etc then the other spouse has a duty to her or himself to protect themselves and any children by seeking a civil divorce. Things like bank accounts and child care need to be sorted out by a professional.
Malia
**There’s no reason enough to end a sacramental marriage - and no possibility save death. If you talk about the civil aspect of it, then, well, there are legitimate reasons to seek a civil divorce, although a civil separation would be more proper and preferable.
**I’m not sure I agree. If the spouse is lying about things like finances, affairs, addictions etc then the other spouse has a duty to her or himself to protect themselves and any children by seeking a civil divorce. **
I think there are two different issues here. Chevalier is concerned that anyone seeking to separate from a spouse, *to whom one is actually VALIDLY, SACRAMENTALLY, married *not disregard Church law. If someone lives where there are legal separations which adequately protect the adults and any children, then why not do that rather than civilly divorce? But I suspect that such locations are actually in the minority, hence the need for an actual divorce.And in some states, legal separation doesn’t cut it, insofar as custody and finances go.
yes … i need to obtain a ruling of nullity… which is the reason why I need to know if this was a sacramental marriage to begin with…
I think there are two different issues here. Chevalier is concerned that anyone seeking to separate from a spouse, *to whom one is actually VALIDLY, SACRAMENTALLY, married *not disregard Church law. If someone lives where there are legal separations which adequately protect the adults and any children, then why not do that rather than civilly divorce? But I suspect that such locations are actually in the minority, hence the need for an actual divorce.
But if someone suspects that they were never in a valid sacramental marriage to begin with --which *might *be the case if the other spouse has a pattern of lying which precedes the marriage date-- and wishes to obtain a ruling of nullity then civil divorce is necessary.
(Now there is no requirement that one must obtain a ruling of nullity even if it’s almost certain a marriage is invalid and non-sacramental unless one intends to actually enter a valid sacramental marriage.)
yes i do see where u r going with this… he did lie and about things that did not make sense… just becos he wanted to have fun or thought that i didnt need to know the truth… sometimes he would just lie… or thought that i should be too stupid to understand…Well, imho, I do think it’s enough to end a marriage. With what I’ve read it seems this was going on before you were married, so how do you know when he was truthful? You really don’t know do you? A marriage based on lies is like a house with a sand foundation, no stability, security, trust, safety, etc. You see where I’m going with this?
Hi Mariam,yes … i need to obtain a ruling of nullity… which is the reason why I need to know if this was a sacramental marriage to begin with…![]()
Beautiful, and perfectly voices my feelings about my own divorce and how it drew me back to God. We didn’t get the “consolation prize”, we got the Grand Prize!God works in mysterious ways, all of this has brought me closer to Him. I have learned to trust Him and just surrender to His will, He will never let me down. If I had to go through all I’ve been through just to come closer to Him, to know Him, to love my faith and follow church teaching to put Him first in all I do…then it’s been worth all the pain, tears and heartbreak because I won, I got the prize that really matters. I’ve learned to love and trust Him and the peace and joy that come with that I wouldn’t trade for anything!!!
Umm… not so long as civil separation exists. If separation exists to cut off financial ties, establish child support duties, perhaps gain exclusive custody. Divorce essentially provides two things:I’m not sure I agree. If the spouse is lying about things like finances, affairs, addictions etc then the other spouse has a duty to her or himself to protect themselves and any children by seeking a civil divorce. Things like bank accounts and child care need to be sorted out by a professional.
Malia
Yep, and think of different countries on different continents, if such differences exist between the states of one USA, which ultimately come from similar traditions, if not one tradition. I’m not saying one should stick with separation no matter how it’s defined by the law of the land, but that one should stick with separation in so far as it is sufficient. There’s no need to divorce, for example, when the only difference between separation and divorce is the right to remarry civilly - or if the other differences are not material.And in some states, legal separation doesn’t cut it, insofar as custody and finances go.
Yes, thanks.I think there are two different issues here. Chevalier is concerned that anyone seeking to separate from a spouse, *to whom one is actually VALIDLY, SACRAMENTALLY, married *not disregard Church law. If someone lives where there are legal separations which adequately protect the adults and any children, then why not do that rather than civilly divorce? But I suspect that such locations are actually in the minority, hence the need for an actual divorce.
But if someone suspects that they were never in a valid sacramental marriage to begin with --which *might *be the case if the other spouse has a pattern of lying which precedes the marriage date-- and wishes to obtain a ruling of nullity then civil divorce is necessary.
one intends to actually enter a valid sacramental marriage.)(Now there is no requirement that one must obtain a ruling of nullity even if it’s almost certain a marriage is invalid and non-sacramental unless
Depends on the diocese, especially the requirement of civil divorce. Since civil divorce is something that shouldn’t exist (separation with sufficient provisions such as in canon law should exist in civil law), diocesan tribunals shouldn’t request it. What then if they uphold the marriage? I wouldn’t like to be civilly divorced if my hypothetical marraige were canonically valid.It’s a little bit of a catch 22, but I think it’s this way to protect marriage. The Church doesn’t tell people what their annulment “chances” are before they’re divorced (or even after, really). What I mean is…you can’t file for nullity decree until you’re already divorced, and even then you don’t get to “choose” under what grounds to ask for the decree of nullity. You just have to tell the truth and pray for the best.
I’m not sure you see it from the right perspective. A marriage which is null does not end. It simply never existed. A marriage which is not null, does not end.Well, imho, I do think it’s enough to end a marriage. With what I’ve read it seems this was going on before you were married, so how do you know when he was truthful? You really don’t know do you? A marriage based on lies is like a house with a sand foundation, no stability, security, trust, safety, etc. You see where I’m going with this?