How to deal with denial of annulment

[Minion_w_a_drum]

OP, maybe your diocese is just amazing, but only a year from start to finish is crazy fast, and I have to wonder if the denial was for lack of evidence/witnesses, something that could be remedied. If the husband, as the petitioner, is willing to look in to it, perhaps he can find something to help solve this. Sometimes it takes a more aggressive advocate.

“a more aggressive advocate.” Can you please explain what this is? My advocate was my parish priest at the time I started the annulment. Before I finished answering the questionnaire (it took me 9 months) he was transferred to another parish, 250 miles away (but in the same diocese.) He remained my advocate, but I never communicated with him until the appellate diocese asked to retry the case… After that, there was little to no communication with him.
As it was explained to me, and advocate was there to answer questions and explain things, if need be. I took that as the purpose of the advocate, and thus really had no reason to contact him. What I mean is, I understood perfectly when the first instance diocese ruled in the affirmative, and I darn well knew what it meant when the court of second instance ruled in the negative…

What I did not know was I could have/should have had an advocate who was willing and able to flex his muscle…

Oh well, it’s too late now.

 

[EvelynEVF]

My advocate was a Very Nice Priest, but he mostly passed messages between me and the head judge when I initiated. After a year of silence, I took matters into my own hands and started writing letters to the judge myself. Movement would happen each time I wrote, for a while, but no resolution. I read in my new pastor, and he was on the phone with the Tribunal frequently, asking where they were and what needed to be done. I finally wrote the bishop, with his support and followup, and suddenly the judge was relieved of all Tribunal duties except for my case, and he was also not to do anything optional at his parish until he was done, either. I’m told that a pastor several years ago would call the Tribunal regularly to make sure his people’s cases were moving, and they did move, because he was so persistent.

So, yes, it did make a difference.

I will be hiring a canon lawyer for the Rota trial. My case stands on its merits, but the last thing I want is a negative finding because somebody didn’t cross a T or dot an I. I wish it weren’t so, but having someone with influence on your side does matter.

 

[Minion_w_a_drum]

My advocate was a Very Nice Priest, but he mostly passed messages between me and the head judge when I initiated. After a year of silence, I took matters into my own hands and started writing letters to the judge myself. Movement would happen each time I wrote, for a while, but no resolution. I read in my new pastor, and he was on the phone with the Tribunal frequently, asking where they were and what needed to be done. I finally wrote the bishop, with his support and followup, and suddenly the judge was relieved of all Tribunal duties except for my case, and he was also not to do anything optional at his parish until he was done, either. I’m told that a pastor several years ago would call the Tribunal regularly to make sure his people’s cases were moving, and they did move, because he was so persistent.

So, yes, it did make a difference.

I will be hiring a canon lawyer for the Rota trial. My case stands on its merits, but the last thing I want is a negative finding because somebody didn’t cross a T or dot an I. I wish it weren’t so, but having someone with influence on your side does matter.

One vow I made after my civil divorce was to never hire a lawyer unless it is absolutely necessary. And in my opinion, an annulment from the RCC is definitely not an absolute necessity.
As I read your final paragraph I practically broke out into a cold sweat as I had flashbacks of the horror that was my civil divorce. And lawyers, in my opinion, were a large contributing factor to that horror.
Add to it the excruciating agony I encountered during my annulment process (which ended in a negative ruling in second instance, but that is another rabbit trail for another day) and it is very accurate to say I want to go through no more legal exercises with mother church- and especially with Rome.

I commend your persistence and fortitude. I myself have no where near what it takes to deal with a Rota trial… In my opinion, you should be awarded heaven based on the sole fact that you have (or will have) endured a legal battle with the highest level of the holy church of Rome.
God Bless you Evelyn EVF!

 

[YADA]

So let me see if I have this right: A man and woman live together as brother and sister. This can be sinful to God IF people know their past. However, it can be acceptable to God IF no one in their parish know their past Is that what you are saying?

Let’s say no one knows their past and they continue to live as brother and sister and are active in their parish. Let’s say they elevate to prominent roles at the parish and people genuinely look up to them as good and outstanding people. Let’s say then that one day the x spouse of the man described in the original post hits town, starts attending the parish and blows the whistle on the 2 pillars of the parish… Now that would definitely start a scandal!!

I just don’t think the decision on whether or not it is scandalous should be based on what the parishioners do or do not know. The knowledge of the parishioners is not static, it is very fluid.

But that is just my opinion…

If they are living as brother and sister they are no longer sinning - even as they are living their civil marriage while living chaste in deference to the lack of the sacramental aspect…It is possible that there are children involved, financial needs and emotional support that also needs to continue … though the marriage entered into while the person was estranged from the Church with a non-Catholic divorced person was wrong, imprudent and sinful … there is no justice if the person has repented and is taking the steps necessary to regularize their relationship [application for a decision on the validity] and live it as fully as possible [chaste] within the teachings of the Church

Thus even if the Ex should up and ‘attempt’ to create division and hate in the Catholic community [an unlikely scenario and would also be wrong] there should be no scandal … just saying …

And - this case just proves two things I have always said when people discuss how “EASY” annulments are handed out … the fact is - they are not … and people always assume annulment decisions refer to “Catholics” … as in Catholics getting married - divorced and annulled … many marriages submitted to Tribunals are between two non Catholics who divorced and where
1] one of those non Catholic persons now want to marry a Catholic
2] divorced non Catholic who married a non practicing Catholic - who may or may not themselves have been married and divorced
3] two non Catholics desire to convert but one or both are divorced and remarried

 

[Minion_w_a_drum]

If they are living as brother and sister they are no longer sinning - even as they are living their civil marriage while living chaste in deference to the lack of the sacramental aspect…It is possible that there are children involved, financial needs and emotional support that also needs to continue … though the marriage entered into while the person was estranged from the Church with a non-Catholic divorced person was wrong, imprudent and sinful … there is no justice if the person has repented and is taking the steps necessary to regularize their relationship [application for a decision on the validity] and live it as fully as possible [chaste] within the teachings of the Church

Thus even if the Ex should up and ‘attempt’ to create division and hate in the Catholic community [an unlikely scenario and would also be wrong] there should be no scandal … just saying …

And - this case just proves twp things I have always said when people discuss how “EASY” annulments are handed out … the fact is - they are not … and people always assume annulment decisions refer to “Catholics” … as in Catholics getting married - divorced and annulled … many marriages submitted to Tribunals are between two non Catholics who divorced and where
1] one of those non Catholic persons now want to marry a Catholic
2] divorced non Catholic who married a non practicing Catholic - who may or may not themselves have been married and divorced
3] two non Catholics desire to convert but one or both are divorced and remarried

I guess I just don’t understand. 2 people, who may even have had children together, civilly married, are living together as brother and sister. I would think this would be not avoiding the near occasion of sin, for starters. Also, even if they are living as brother and sister, but in the same house- possibly even with children, at the very least they would be portraying something much different than that, whether it is happening or not. To me, they would be sending the message to John Q Public that they are civilly married and are living as a married couple. Personally, I know of no catholics who are married outside of the graces of the church that I believe are living as brother and sister- just because that is what they are supposed to do… I don’t know that they are, but their actions indicate they are living as man and wife.
And then factor in children in a house growing up where mom and dad sleep in different bed rooms, don’t show affection (other than sibling type affection.) don’t share things as only truly married people share… What kind of parental example is that? How are those children going to view marriage? God help their future spouses…

Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me.

 

[YADA]

I guess I just don’t understand. 2 people, who may even have had children together, civilly married, are living together as brother and sister. I would think this would be not avoiding the near occasion of sin, for starters. Also, even if they are living as brother and sister, but in the same house- possibly even with children, at the very least they would be portraying something much different than that, whether it is happening or not. To me, they would be sending the message to John Q Public that they are civilly married and are living as a married couple. Personally, I know of no catholics who are married outside of the graces of the church that I believe are living as brother and sister- just because that is what they are supposed to do… I don’t know that they are, but their actions indicate they are living as man and wife.
And then factor in children in a house growing up where mom and dad sleep in different bed rooms, don’t show affection (other than sibling type affection.) don’t share things as only truly married people share… What kind of parental example is that? How are those children going to view marriage? God help their future spouses…

Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me.

Well … you may as well pick up the stone and throw then …

People sin, they figure out it was wrong and then they do the best they can … I do know people who divorced, remarried and had children with those second spouses … then they have a spiritual renewal / conversion … justice does not demand that they obtain a civil divorce because they cannot marry in the Church … tearing asunder another family as imperfect as it is …

What if you committed a very public sin … repented and moved ahead … came to a position of prominence in the Church - would you cause scandal? How would anyone know whether you really repented of your crime? The Confessional has a seal of silence?

Here is a real life example - How about a murderer who later becomes a prominent Church leader and prodigious writer on religious topics? Would that cause scandal because people would see them being admired and honored … but they are forever a murderer …

 

[Minion_w_a_drum]

Well … you may as well pick up the stone and throw then …

People sin, they figure out it was wrong and then they do the best they can … I do know people who divorced, remarried and had children with those second spouses … then they have a spiritual renewal / conversion … justice does not demand that they obtain a civil divorce because they cannot marry in the Church … tearing asunder another family as imperfect as it is …

What if you committed a very public sin … repented and moved ahead … came to a position of prominence in the Church - would you cause scandal? How would anyone know whether you really repented of your crime? The Confessional has a seal of silence?

Here is a real life example - How about a murderer who later becomes a prominent Church leader and prodigious writer on religious topics? Would that cause scandal because people would see them being admired and honored … but they are forever a murderer …

First off, I would have no reason to cast a stone at a couple who civilly divorced and then remarried. Personally, I think there are many such marriages that are good and holy and sacred. That is my opinion, and yes I realize it is counter to the church.
I only said what I said to illustrate what the church is asking. I realize tongue in cheek does not translate very well through cyberspace… The point I was trying to make was the ridiculousness (at least to me) of asking people to live as brother and sister. While it may satisfy one rule, it also does much damage, especially when giving example to the children.

As far a me committing a very public sin and then elevating to prominence in the church, or a murder becoming prominent in the church, yes- my opinion is both would cause at least some degree of scandal.

At least that is the way I see it.

 

[Vico]

I guess I just don’t understand. 2 people, who may even have had children together, civilly married, are living together as brother and sister. I would think this would be not avoiding the near occasion of sin, for starters. Also, even if they are living as brother and sister, but in the same house- possibly even with children, at the very least they would be portraying something much different than that, whether it is happening or not. To me, they would be sending the message to John Q Public that they are civilly married and are living as a married couple. Personally, I know of no catholics who are married outside of the graces of the church that I believe are living as brother and sister- just because that is what they are supposed to do… I don’t know that they are, but their actions indicate they are living as man and wife.
And then factor in children in a house growing up where mom and dad sleep in different bed rooms, don’t show affection (other than sibling type affection.) don’t share things as only truly married people share… What kind of parental example is that? How are those children going to view marriage? God help their future spouses…

Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me.

I know of a Catholic that is civilly married, with children, and does not have marital relations. They sleep in different bedrooms according to what the husband told me. Once our former pastor told me that there were six such couples in the parish (some remarried I gather from other remarks). There is an obligation to separate unless there is a grave reason.

 

[Minion_w_a_drum]

I know of a Catholic that is civilly married, with children, and does not have marital relations. They sleep in different bedrooms according to what the husband told me. Once our former pastor told me that there were six such couples in the parish (some remarried I gather from other remarks). There is an obligation to separate unless there is a grave reason.

And I know of Catholics, married in the church, that live in separate bedrooms. I’ve no idea whether or not they have marital relations and I don’t care to know. I only say this because it is my opinion that such arrangements are a poor example for children and cause much confusion in their potential marriages in the future.

To clarify my stance on this, while living “as brother and sister” to satisfy a church rule I feel couples are doing severe and long lasting damage to the children viewing their example. The good would be they are obeying the rules. The bad would be they are giving wrong example to young impressionable people.
IF they were to live as “normal” married people (as one unit) the bad would be they are breaking a rule. The good would be they are setting a proper example to their children on how married people should live.
There is good and bad in both scenarios.

At least this is the way I see it…

 

[Vico]

And I know of Catholics, married in the church, that live in separate bedrooms. I’ve no idea whether or not they have marital relations and I don’t care to know. I only say this because it is my opinion that such arrangements are a poor example for children and cause much confusion in their potential marriages in the future.

To clarify my stance on this, while living “as brother and sister” to satisfy a church rule I feel couples are doing severe and long lasting damage to the children viewing their example. The good would be they are obeying the rules. The bad would be they are giving wrong example to young impressionable people.
IF they were to live as “normal” married people (as one unit) the bad would be they are breaking a rule. The good would be they are setting a proper example to their children on how married people should live.
There is good and bad in both scenarios.

At least this is the way I see it…

There could be damage done, however they are only to do this if it is morally impossible to separate (grave reason). That makes it not willful and they are able to be properly repentant.

 

[Monica4316]

I think there could be damage to the children if the parents live in separate rooms BUT the alternative, living as husband and wife, does not only break a rule - it is in fact fornication, a mortal sin. It is the same as if a couple is cohabiting which also does damage to the children I believe. I think the only real option is to separate. If there is an absolute impossibility of this, then fornication is still not an option. I even asked my priest about this and he said that no the couple can’t live as husband and wife. They are not married to each other…and the end do not justify the means in Catholic moral teaching. I am sure this must be difficult for many people. I do believe that when we commit to following God, He gives us strength and peace. Prayers for all those in this situation.

 

[Minion_w_a_drum]

There could be damage done, however they are only to do this if it is morally impossible to separate (grave reason). That makes it not willful and they are able to be properly repentant.

If it is morally impossible to separate, then it is my opinion that they should not separate. IF they are living as brother/sister, then they are separating. They are no longer man/wife. Living as brother/sister while casting the appearance that they are married is living a lie. And if a civilly married couple live as brother/sister and they have children in the home, there will be damage done.(IMO)
If by saying when it is morally impossible to separate (grave reason) makes staying married “not willful” I don’t agree. After all, they most likely willfully got civilly married, making their relationship willful.

For the record, I know many couples that include at least one catholic that were not married with the grace of the catholic church that are extremely loving and those marriages are in my humble opinion holy, sacred and sacramental. I also know many marriages that include at least one catholic who are married with the grace of the church that do not appear loving, holy or sacred.

As a person over the age of 50, who was brought up fearing God and the church as that was the way one attains heaven, I’ve come to believe that there are stark differences between how Christ set up his church and how he intended it to be and what the earthly church has made of it. I’m certain I’ll probably burn in hell for this rogue way of thinking, but that is what I believe. And to say anything else would be a lie.

I’ll take to hell with me the solace that I spoke what I believed and did not live a lie.

 

[Monica4316]

The fact is though there is no marriage present if one of the couples was divorced and not annulled, or if two baptized Catholics were not married in the Church. It is not a marriage that just doesn’t follow the rules perfectly. There is no marriage there at all, Sacramental or natural. They may be a loving couple but they are sadly, cohabiting. Marriage is not just a social thing, it is a way the two people are joined together, and it does not happen if one is still married to another person in the eyes of God, or if Catholics don’t marry through the Church, - which is Christ’s Body on earth… Our Lord spoke against divorce in the New Testament, and He forbid it, - the only reason they had it before was because their hearts were hardened. Apparently they even killed their wives if they didn’t want to be married. But now in the new Covenant, we have the fullness of truth…

You said you are concerned about living a lie. But is not a couple lying with their very body if they are not married but living as husband and wife? They are doing what only a married couple could do, without being married. That is the lie in my opinion.

If you are saying that you’d rather be in hell than “live a lie”, are you not claiming that God’s way is a lie, and that sin is truth? there is no truth in sin. The most perfect thing for the couple to do is separate, because they are not married. If they absolutely can’t, it is more of a lie for them to be as husband and wife than celibate, because then they are lying with their very body.

There is no solace in hell. Only God is the truth and He gave His truth to the Church, which is His Body on earth.

 

[Minion_w_a_drum]

The fact is though there is no marriage present if one of the couples was divorced and not annulled, or if two baptized Catholics were not married in the Church. It is not a marriage that just doesn’t follow the rules perfectly. There is no marriage there at all, Sacramental or natural. They may be a loving couple but they are sadly, cohabiting. Marriage is not just a social thing, it is a way the two people are joined together, and it does not happen if one is still married to another person in the eyes of God, or if Catholics don’t marry through the Church, - which is Christ’s Body on earth… Our Lord spoke against divorce in the New Testament, and He forbid it, - the only reason they had it before was because their hearts were hardened. Apparently they even killed their wives if they didn’t want to be married. But now in the new Covenant, we have the fullness of truth…

You said you are concerned about living a lie. But is not a couple lying with their very body if they are not married but living as husband and wife? They are doing what only a married couple could do, without being married. That is the lie in my opinion.

I disagree with your comment that marriage “is a way the two people are joined together.”
I just don’t buy the premise that if two people jump through the hoops and follow all of the rules, then what they will have is holy, sacred and sacramental. And conversely, if they don’t jump through the hoops, if they don’t check off all of the boxes- in order, then they won’t have something that is holy, sacred, sacramental.
In the end, my take away is that my instincts for the last 10 years have been spot on: Single life is much too easy, much too uncomplicated and much too enjoyable to mess around with the idea of getting (re)married.

 

[Monica4316]

I can’t force you to accept the Church teaching. I am saying what it is… The Sacraments are given through the Church. They do not just happen. It is how God set it up because He wills to work through the Church.

 

[Minion_w_a_drum]

The fact is though there is no marriage present if one of the couples was divorced and not annulled, or if two baptized Catholics were not married in the Church. It is not a marriage that just doesn’t follow the rules perfectly. There is no marriage there at all, Sacramental or natural. They may be a loving couple but they are sadly, cohabiting. Marriage is not just a social thing, it is a way the two people are joined together, and it does not happen if one is still married to another person in the eyes of God, or if Catholics don’t marry through the Church, - which is Christ’s Body on earth… Our Lord spoke against divorce in the New Testament, and He forbid it, - the only reason they had it before was because their hearts were hardened. Apparently they even killed their wives if they didn’t want to be married. But now in the new Covenant, we have the fullness of truth…

You said you are concerned about living a lie. But is not a couple lying with their very body if they are not married but living as husband and wife? They are doing what only a married couple could do, without being married. That is the lie in my opinion.

If you are saying that you’d rather be in hell than “live a lie”, are you not claiming that God’s way is a lie, and that sin is truth? there is no truth in sin. The most perfect thing for the couple to do is separate, because they are not married. If they absolutely can’t, it is more of a lie for them to be as husband and wife than celibate, because then they are lying with their very body.

There is no solace in hell. Only God is the truth and He gave His truth to the Church, which is His Body on earth.

Two people not married living as married is living a lie. Just as two people who are married and are living as brother/sister is a lie. Both are wrong. It all comes down to the definition of marriage. The catholic church has a definition. Each individual has a definition. Some individual definition mirrors the church’s definition. Some do not.
I never said I would rather be in hell, quite the contrary.
The rub in this exchange comes down to the fact that, IMO, God’s way and the earthly Church’s way is not always the same. Again, I’ll have to account for this belief one day, and that is on me. But that is what I believe. I’ve seen enough things done by the earthly church to believe in my heart that the earthly church does not always mirror what Christ intended. Christ’s church is perfect. The church on earth is run by humans, and therefor imperfect. Or so I believe.
I simply do not believe that 2 people married without the graces of the church should automatically separate. I know of 20-35 year long marriages that would absolutely destroy families and put many souls in serious jeopardy… All for the sake of not navigating a hoop or checking a box. That is just what I believe. I can’t nor won’t deny it.
You are right in the fact that there is no solace in hell. That gives me great encouragement. As long as I keep being true to myself and what I believe, I may very well not end up there…

 

[Monica4316]

You are right that the Church is made up of imperfect humans but the teachings come from God. We simply can’t be Catholic and disagree with that. The Church is not just a human institution - it is Christ on earth. The Pope, priests, etc, are human but the teachings do not come from them.

The Church teaching, which we are bound to as Catholics, is that - a couple cannot be actually married if the Church says they are not married. If they are living as brother and sister because the Church says they are not married, they are not living a lie. Marriage doesn’t occur just because of their opinion that it has occurred, it is an objective thing and the Church has the say in it.

I hope too we would both end up in Heaven. But we get there by being true to God and His Church. He is never at odds with His own Church’s teaching as it is infallible. No matter how imperfect the people there are, they cannot destroy the infallibility of the Church. Jesus even obeys His priests when they say the Consecration and He comes to us in the Eucharist. Jesus always wants us to be obedient to the Church, His Body. He said to Peter, what he binds on earth will be bound in Heaven. This is the rule of the Church…

Being “true to ourselves” is often just our self will, which is not the narrow path to Heaven. Only God’s Will is, and it is one with His Church.

If you separate Christ and His Church, and say that He wills one thing and the Church officially teaches another (I mean on the level of doctrine which is infallible) - then are you not separating the Body from the Head? There is no division in God and between Christ and the Church, His Bride.

When I said there is no solace in hell, I meant that any solace we had on earth disappears in hell. Please do not seek solace my friend. Seek the truth and Christ crucified, and His Church, and in obedience to that you would have life everlasting.

I hope you do not take my words to be a judgement of you. I do not know your heart, I don’t know you, but you are my brother or sister in Christ. I am a sinner myself and need God’s mercy and prayers. God bless you

 

[Minion_w_a_drum]

You are right that the Church is made up of imperfect humans but the teachings come from God. We simply can’t be Catholic and disagree with that. The Church is not just a human institution - it is Christ on earth. The Pope, priests, etc, are human but the teachings do not come from them.

The Church teaching, which we are bound to as Catholics, is that - a couple cannot be actually married if the Church says they are not married. If they are living as brother and sister because the Church says they are not married, they are not living a lie. Marriage doesn’t occur just because of their opinion that it has occurred, it is an objective thing and the Church has the say in it.

I hope too we would both end up in Heaven. But we get there by being true to God and His Church. He is never at odds with His own Church’s teaching as it is infallible. No matter how imperfect the people there are, they cannot destroy the infallibility of the Church. Jesus even obeys His priests when they say the Consecration and He comes to us in the Eucharist. Jesus always wants us to be obedient to the Church, His Body. He said to Peter, what he binds on earth will be bound in Heaven. This is the rule of the Church…

Being “true to ourselves” is often just our self will, which is not the narrow path to Heaven. Only God’s Will is, and it is one with His Church.

If you separate Christ and His Church, and say that He wills one thing and the Church officially teaches another (I mean on the level of doctrine which is infallible) - then are you not separating the Body from the Head? There is no division in God and between Christ and the Church, His Bride.

When I said there is no solace in hell, I meant that any solace we had on earth disappears in hell. Please do not seek solace my friend. Seek the truth and Christ crucified, and His Church, and in obedience to that you would have life everlasting.

I hope you do not take my words to be a judgement of you. I do not know your heart, I don’t know you, but you are my brother or sister in Christ. I am a sinner myself and need God’s mercy and prayers. God bless you

I do not take your words as judgment of me. One would be foolish to judge another human being. You are also correct in saying you do not know me and you do not know my heart.
As I age one thing becomes more clear to me with each passing day. The only two people that really know my heart are myself and Christ. When I talk to him I ask for very simple things: Guidance, peace, and the intertwining of both. If he grants me these things, then I will rest easy at night with the decisions I make and the beliefs that I hold. And that is exactly where I am in my life.
That said, I was married in the church, civilly divorced and had an annulment denied. And I’ve lived alone now for 11 years. So my sins in life do not include cohabitating and fornication, but they do include a disagreement with mother church (earthly.) I know, I know, sin is sin and God does not differentiate.
That is, if disagreeing with mother church but still obeying the rules, jumping through the hoops and checking all of the boxes is in fact a sin.

When I put it that way, maybe I am living a lie (living counter to what I believe.) See how the single life is now soooo appealing??

 

[Vico]

If it is morally impossible to separate, then it is my opinion that they should not separate. IF they are living as brother/sister, then they are separating. They are no longer man/wife. Living as brother/sister while casting the appearance that they are married is living a lie. And if a civilly married couple live as brother/sister and they have children in the home, there will be damage done.(IMO)
If by saying when it is morally impossible to separate (grave reason) makes staying married “not willful” I don’t agree. After all, they most likely willfully got civilly married, making their relationship willful.

For the record, I know many couples that include at least one catholic that were not married with the grace of the catholic church that are extremely loving and those marriages are in my humble opinion holy, sacred and sacramental. I also know many marriages that include at least one catholic who are married with the grace of the church that do not appear loving, holy or sacred.

As a person over the age of 50, who was brought up fearing God and the church as that was the way one attains heaven, I’ve come to believe that there are stark differences between how Christ set up his church and how he intended it to be and what the earthly church has made of it. I’m certain I’ll probably burn in hell for this rogue way of thinking, but that is what I believe. And to say anything else would be a lie.

I’ll take to hell with me the solace that I spoke what I believed and did not live a lie.

You said: makes staying married “not willful”. They are not staying married, but they acknowledge that they are not truly married, and repent of their fornication, so they are living together as brother and sister.

John 4
15 The woman saith to him: Sir, give me this water, that I may not thirst, nor come hither to draw. 16 Jesus saith to her: Go, call thy husband, and come hither. 17 The woman answered, and said: I have no husband. Jesus said to her: Thou hast said well, I have no husband: 18 For thou hast had five husbands: and he whom thou now hast, is not thy husband. This thou hast said truly. 19 The woman saith to him: Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet.