M
msugeotech
Guest
Could you elaborate a little here? I’m a little confused on what you mean by this - not arguing with you, just curious…
- Status
J
jmcrae
Guest
If not, then it is certainly best if one does not attempt to marry a second time at all, since if it turns out that the Tribunal’s ruling of a Declaration of Nullity is incorrect, then both parties to the second marriage are most certainly going to go to Hell - and since our job, as married persons, is to get each other into Heaven, it seems reckless to attempt a second marriage even with a Declaration of Nullity - it seems as if the most sane course of action is to take up the single life, permanently, after a divorce, if so.
Well, the whole point of the Tribunal is that, as individuals who are close to the situation, we can’t really make an impartial judgement, either way. The Tribunal understands the law and character of marriage, and can investigate the facts impartially.
T
Texas_Roofer
Guest
When the boy and girl approach for marriage we can only ask them to consider the true meaning and discern the seriousness of the request. We can discuss many things with them, however ultimately we do not know if they are ready. In some of the cases I think of: some spouses said they married for rich or poor; but not that poor, or “well she is not the girl I married” ( she gained weight and became a mom), another involved ‘I assumed he/she would ---------‘. In all these cases one spouse said all the correct words but clearly never intended to fulfill the words. The other spouse often did not know poverty, weight gain, children, …… or whatever other issue would cause the other spouse to bailout. Now all these marriages were never really valid because the one spouse had a hidden standard. It is that hidden standard which prevented a real marriage. In all the cases the marriage was presumed valid and often the other spouse lived believing they were validly married.
This is the catch 22 of the tribunal issues like weight gain, motherhood, children issues, poverty, and unemployment typically occur well after the marriage date, yet they are fairly normal by nature. So the problem was not the issue but the refusal of one spouse to accept these normal behaviors from the other spouse. So in all these cases and unrealistic expectation of marriage existed from the beginning. The marriage was predicated with the - so long as you are young, pretty, well employed, and do not but children or anything else before me - standard. That is not a real marriage.
On the flip side of the coin you can have the addict who wants to be a good spouse / parent but is not. These marriages are tough because they appear to start correctly however since their inception one party has developed a problem which damages the family yet was not present at the inception. One spouse may even be incarcerated. These marriages should be held valid for a lack of contrary evidence.
This is the catch 22 of the tribunal issues like weight gain, motherhood, children issues, poverty, and unemployment typically occur well after the marriage date, yet they are fairly normal by nature. So the problem was not the issue but the refusal of one spouse to accept these normal behaviors from the other spouse. So in all these cases and unrealistic expectation of marriage existed from the beginning. The marriage was predicated with the - so long as you are young, pretty, well employed, and do not but children or anything else before me - standard. That is not a real marriage.
On the flip side of the coin you can have the addict who wants to be a good spouse / parent but is not. These marriages are tough because they appear to start correctly however since their inception one party has developed a problem which damages the family yet was not present at the inception. One spouse may even be incarcerated. These marriages should be held valid for a lack of contrary evidence.
T
Texas_Roofer
Guest
T
Texas_Roofer
Guest
On a philosophical note: I find it difficult to accept anybody who willing places drugs, alcohol, money, looks, etc. before the family can be validly married regardless of any other circumstance, but this is my personal opinion and should not be confused with actual church laws/rulings/teachings. (These are currently considerations in the Tribunal.)
R
rolltidefan
Guest
ammccluskey…first of all I would like to say God bless you! I am in your spot except I am actually already married (to a Catholic). I only came here after I married because I wanted to “find” out more about my husbands religion. Not sure that was a good idea at all!! When I first came on here and started reading, I got really down and thought oh my I have never heard of anything like this. Of course, you know as I know that we are prostestants, especially the one I am, not sure which you worship in, just believes that we serve a merciful God and forgiving God. There is no way that I believe that I should suffer the rest of my life because my first husband decided to find a girlfriend and “void” his vow with me. When he did that, he broke and a vow and I was free. The bible speaks of this with death and fornication. I don’t believe that God even expects us to continue to live with an abuser even and then we have to stay single the rest of our lives. Now, I may get showed something extremely different when I get to heaven. But the bible talks in Matthew 19:6 about what God has joined together, let no MAN put asunder. We want to talk about taking the bible for what it says. It says no MAN, I believe that to also be a tribunal or the Catholic Church. Of course I know I am going to get many arguments and contradictions to what this actually meant and that the Catholic church has the power to bind or whatever. That is fine, you all live by that, I don’t. To me it is awful convenient to the amount of “annulements” that are happening now. I think they know they must annul alot of them or they are eventually going to loose many members because there are so many divorces today. You all need to remember that we all that are divorced didn’t ask for a divorce. We didn’t ask for our vows that we took to be took down by sin. But we also are going to live single and lonely for the rest of our lives because of what some selfish person decided to do. On another note, my ex-husband did choose to break the vow, but when he got caught, Oh my Gosh how sorry he was and blah blah. He wanted his family back and etc. He was going to “kill” me and anybody else who stood in the way if I didn’t take him back. Now there are many situations of divorces ending very violent. To me for the tribunal to even suggest that most peoples ex be contacted can be dangerous. Most have healed and gone on and then to bring and drag something back up is not healing at all. I know go read The Wedding that Was…already have and still don’t agree. I would not even chance my ex getting a letter or phone call stating that someone wants to question him about “our marriage” because I want it annuled. And they will contact him and yes he is “involved”. No he may not have to answer their questions but if he is contacted that is involving someone. Not to mention what he would try to tell my kids. I can see me trying to explain that one to them, when it is something I don’t believe in.
My advice to you is…sit and have a serious talk with your future husband. That is the first step. My husband made the choice to marry me. First of all, I was not marrying in the Catholic Church. Second of all, I would have never agreed that any children had to be raised or baptised anything. He had a choice just like I made. So he now goes to church with me. No, you would not be responsible for “making, allowing or whatever you want to call it” leaving the Catholic Church. He is a grown man and he can make his own decisions. He knows the consequences of the rules of the Catholic Church and he can either stay in them or marry you. I have already figured out that when you marry like this in different religions it is very hard. I don’t regret marrying my husband at all but these things are good to know up front. The answer you are getting here is just the honest facts of the rules of the Catholic Church. There is nothing wrong with them, however, I am protestant and was not and am not giving that up and so I was not going to feel I had to do things that I didn’t agree with. I hope you and your future husband work out. It is so hard though to come here and be told things like he is going to hell, you are not married, you are the fault of why he left his church and the list goes on and on and on. After a while though, you remember what God you serve and remember they are just men on here and God is much bigger. God Bless You and I do hope it works out for you.
My advice to you is…sit and have a serious talk with your future husband. That is the first step. My husband made the choice to marry me. First of all, I was not marrying in the Catholic Church. Second of all, I would have never agreed that any children had to be raised or baptised anything. He had a choice just like I made. So he now goes to church with me. No, you would not be responsible for “making, allowing or whatever you want to call it” leaving the Catholic Church. He is a grown man and he can make his own decisions. He knows the consequences of the rules of the Catholic Church and he can either stay in them or marry you. I have already figured out that when you marry like this in different religions it is very hard. I don’t regret marrying my husband at all but these things are good to know up front. The answer you are getting here is just the honest facts of the rules of the Catholic Church. There is nothing wrong with them, however, I am protestant and was not and am not giving that up and so I was not going to feel I had to do things that I didn’t agree with. I hope you and your future husband work out. It is so hard though to come here and be told things like he is going to hell, you are not married, you are the fault of why he left his church and the list goes on and on and on. After a while though, you remember what God you serve and remember they are just men on here and God is much bigger. God Bless You and I do hope it works out for you.
S
Sillara
Guest
rolltidefan,
First of all, I do agree with you that there are far, far too many “annulments” granted, especially in the US. It is simply not that difficult to contract a valid marriage. It is not. Marriage is the vocation of most people. It is not that hard to do.
General Statement:
Having a *good *marriage does, of course, require effort and commitment on the part of both spouses, and, yes, it takes only one person to destroy a marriage, just like it takes only one side to make a war.
That said, it is possible to be validly married to only one person until one or the other dies. Whether that person is good or not, whether he is faithful or not, whether he even wants to live with you or not, he is one’s one and only husband. So, though it might seem “unfair” and “too hard”, it is the responsibility of one who has been abandoned by a spouse to live chastely, behaving as a married person with an absent spouse, not a single person.
No, it does not seem fair. The effects of sin are rarely “fair”. Is it “fair” that the victim of an attempted murder should be the one who is crippled afterward? Is it “fair” that the child conceived in a rape should be the one who gets the death penalty? Is it “fair” that a child should be abused? None of these things are “fair”, but none of them undo Sacraments. Just because someone desecrates the Eucharist does not invalidate the Real Presence in those Hosts; just because someone desecrates the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony does NOT invalidate the marriage.
First of all, I do agree with you that there are far, far too many “annulments” granted, especially in the US. It is simply not that difficult to contract a valid marriage. It is not. Marriage is the vocation of most people. It is not that hard to do.
General Statement:
Having a *good *marriage does, of course, require effort and commitment on the part of both spouses, and, yes, it takes only one person to destroy a marriage, just like it takes only one side to make a war.
That said, it is possible to be validly married to only one person until one or the other dies. Whether that person is good or not, whether he is faithful or not, whether he even wants to live with you or not, he is one’s one and only husband. So, though it might seem “unfair” and “too hard”, it is the responsibility of one who has been abandoned by a spouse to live chastely, behaving as a married person with an absent spouse, not a single person.
No, it does not seem fair. The effects of sin are rarely “fair”. Is it “fair” that the victim of an attempted murder should be the one who is crippled afterward? Is it “fair” that the child conceived in a rape should be the one who gets the death penalty? Is it “fair” that a child should be abused? None of these things are “fair”, but none of them undo Sacraments. Just because someone desecrates the Eucharist does not invalidate the Real Presence in those Hosts; just because someone desecrates the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony does NOT invalidate the marriage.
T
Texas_Roofer
Guest
And there you go ……
btw - Why does this not apply to the first marriage? (since civil divorce is done by men)
….duress first marriage second. So tell me is this your hidden standard? Now what happens if your husband tries to stay catholic, raise the kids catholic? Have you reserved a method to punish him? This is called an impediment, the husband and wife cannot fully unit because the religion issue is permanently installed between them. The wife would not have to be catholic to remove this impediment.
btw - Why does this not apply to the first marriage? (since civil divorce is done by men)
R
rolltidefan
Guest
First of all I would like to say thank you. Thank you for making and stating what you believe with the upmost respect to me without sounding so harsh. You have truly shown God’s love in your statements. Even though I don’t agree with what you have stated, I do repsect fully what you have said because of the manner in which you have done it. So thank you from the bottom of my heart. You are someone that I know people here, who are not Catholics, greatly respect because of this also. You are a prime example of stating what you believe but doing so in a way that is totally respectful.
W
whatevergirl
Guest
I too like how you worded this. I have read through this thread, and it’s all very interesting to me. Personally, I think that the Catholic Church shows more compassion to people going through divorce, because it takes into consideration, why people were married to begin with, and if there was an impediment of some sort to it, that would cause it to be null. No other faith offers that compassion. Many people feel the process is not compassionate, but really, it is. I think that many have gotten away from the true teachings of Christ, and want to reconstruct what He meant. The Church seems to be following Scripture frankly to the tee, with annulments. I do have mixed feelings about contacting past spouses…especially if they were abusive. Can someone receive a declaration of nullity, based on his/her own testimony, and not a past spouse?
W
wanner47
Guest
OP -
I highly recommend the book that 1ke suggested (Annulments: The Wedding that Was). It sounds to me that neither you nor your fiancé have a very clear idea of what the Church teaches about marriage, and why. If you do intend to raise any potential kids Catholic, you should first learn why the Church teaches what it does.
Also, NO priest should marry a couple if one or both of the parties are in your situation. If a priest does so, he is acting illicitly and that marriage WILL NOT be valid in the eyes of the Church, or in the eyes of God.
I really encourage you and your fiancé to learn about the Church’s teachings on marriage. It is so beautiful!
I highly recommend the book that 1ke suggested (Annulments: The Wedding that Was). It sounds to me that neither you nor your fiancé have a very clear idea of what the Church teaches about marriage, and why. If you do intend to raise any potential kids Catholic, you should first learn why the Church teaches what it does.
Also, NO priest should marry a couple if one or both of the parties are in your situation. If a priest does so, he is acting illicitly and that marriage WILL NOT be valid in the eyes of the Church, or in the eyes of God.
I really encourage you and your fiancé to learn about the Church’s teachings on marriage. It is so beautiful!
D
dixieagle
Guest
The petitioner does NOT have to make any contact with the past spouse - only provide whatever contact details they can; the Tribunal takes care of any contacting.
If the other party chooses not to participate, then witness testimony would carry great weight (as it does in all Tribunal proceedings, I would imagine.)
J
jmcrae
Guest
The vow was not only with you; it was also with God. Your vow to him, also, was to God, and not only to him.
This is absolutely correct, and this is, in fact, our Catholic belief. That’s exactly why the Tribunal has absolutely no power to “grant an annulment” - all it can do is investigate the situation and discern (not decide) whether a valid marriage existed in the first place, and if it did not (notice that they are not causing the marriage to cease to exist, but only discerning whether a marriage had ever existed, or not) they can write you a Declaration of Nullity - which is an entirely different thing than granting an annulment.
But people use the wrong terminology all the time, so if you hear someone saying that the Catholic Church granted them an annulment, mention to them that this is impossible; they can only have given them a declaration of nullity.
It’s also a sad fact that so many couples go into marriage without really intending to make it a permanent arrangement, and without realizing that it’s not merely a contract for sex and living together with another person for so long as they both are pleasant and easy to deal with - it’s an arrangement made by two people with God, for the foundation of a family, for so long as they both shall live.
Uh - well, one of the two had to have asked for a divorce, and one of the two had a reason for needing or wanting one, and whether it was because of something they did that caused the marriage to fall apart, or something the other person did, there is still the fact that the choice was made by at least one person, not to work things out.
That’s brilliant advice.
J
jmcrae
Guest
The other thing is, keep all of the correspondence that you have with the other spouse, and turn it in with the evidence.
I was told of one lady whose petition was not going all that well, because on the surface, the relationship seemed as if it should have worked, and the husband was outwardly pleasant, etc. in the interviews.
But then they told her to turn in all of the correspondence that she had had with him, and although she was embarrassed and didn’t want to, because she thought it would look bad for her, she ultimately turned in a stack of rude and abusive e-mail messages that she had received from her husband after the marriage was over, which were detailing what he thought to be her faults throughout the marriage; the Tribunal took one look at them, realized that he had no concept of the idea of marriage, and wrote her a Declaration of Nullity on the spot.
There was another case I knew of where the man wasn’t contacted at all during the proceedings; the facts of the case were presented with the proper documentation of the wedding and the living arrangements afterwards, and the Tribunal had enough evidence and witnesses that they gave the Declaration of Nullity without contacting the man at all; he was informed after the fact that it had already been granted.
P
Phemie
Guest
That was the case with my friend’s husband. He married his first wife to do the honorable thing: she was pregnant. Obviously, she only married for the same reason because she petitioned for a decree of nullity and the first he heard of it was when the decree arrived in the mail. He didn’t even know what it was. It came at a most opportune moment because he and my friend were in the final stages of marriage preparation and had never realized that his first marriage would be an impediment (needless to say, the pastor’s pre-nuptial investigation had been less than thorough)There was another case I knew of where the man wasn’t contacted at all during the proceedings; the facts of the case were presented with the proper documentation of the wedding and the living arrangements afterwards, and the Tribunal had enough evidence and witnesses that they gave the Declaration of Nullity without contacting the man at all; he was informed after the fact that it had already been granted.
R
rolltidefan
Guest
I would also like to thank you, just I like I did one of the others that responded. You have spoken what you believe with God’s love. I appreciate that and it means alot. I never mind hearing what anybody has to say, as long as they do it in love. I can handle what anybody presumes to be the truth for them and what they believe. Thank you. You are also somebody that I would take what they have to say and really think about it.The vow was not only with you; it was also with God. Your vow to him, also, was to God, and not only to him.
This is absolutely correct, and this is, in fact, our Catholic belief. That’s exactly why the Tribunal has absolutely no power to “grant an annulment” - all it can do is investigate the situation and discern (not decide) whether a valid marriage existed in the first place, and if it did not (notice that they are not causing the marriage to cease to exist, but only discerning whether a marriage had ever existed, or not) they can write you a Declaration of Nullity - which is an entirely different thing than granting an annulment.
But people use the wrong terminology all the time, so if you hear someone saying that the Catholic Church granted them an annulment, mention to them that this is impossible; they can only have given them a declaration of nullity.
It’s also a sad fact that so many couples go into marriage without really intending to make it a permanent arrangement, and without realizing that it’s not merely a contract for sex and living together with another person for so long as they both are pleasant and easy to deal with - it’s an arrangement made by two people with God, for the foundation of a family, for so long as they both shall live.
Uh - well, one of the two had to have asked for a divorce, and one of the two had a reason for needing or wanting one, and whether it was because of something they did that caused the marriage to fall apart, or something the other person did, there is still the fact that the choice was made by at least one person, not to work things out.
That’s brilliant advice.
I would like to respond about the part where you said one of the two had to ask for a divorce. You would be most correct and that would have been me! lol I have seen people that go through things (rough trials, we all go through things with marriage) with their marriage and work it out. I think they are great and wonderful if they can do that. But for me, after finding out he had an affair, unprotected sex and etc. After I lay there on the table in my GYNs office and had to tearfully tell him what happened, be poked and proded on like a science project, have blood drawn and then have to anxiously await to make sure that I didn’t have some disease or even life threatening disease, I decided that I could not stay. For a while, no I had not forgiven him. It has been 4-1/2 years and I have forgiven. I reconnected with my religion and had a forgiveness come over me like I have never experienced in my life. I even apologized to him and also to the woman that he was with for having the attitude that I had, which by the way, they are now together, she left her husband for him. But I know I could not have stayed with him and forgiven him that way. He also deserved a better life and that meant me forgiving him because he did make a mistake and I realized that he was human and though he make a mistake that affected me directly, I had to forgive him. The bible says you have to forgive to be forgiven. Now, it does not mean that I have forgotten what I went through but I can truly say that I have forgiven. I decided that when I looked at him and her that I would not look at them as individuals that tore me apart and actually in the end tore two families apart, but when I looked at them, I saw the cross. Jesus gave his life for us and our sins, so I had to see the cross to forgive. Anyway, that is my story. I can appreciate anybody that can still live with them and work it out, but that was not the choice for me. I am very much at peace with my decision. Also, if it had not been for what my ex had done, I would not have met the best thing that ever happened to me and that is my husband now. So, tragic situations can turn around. I decided that yes of course God wanted plan A to work. That was his plan all along. He despises divorce and so do I. However, I went to plan B and there is no way that anybody here or anywhere else can tell me that God does not bless plan B’s. Because I know he does.
Again, God Bless You for your Christ like love!
- Status