I cant become a Catholic because of this, am I right?

[abominableangel]

All of this is pure speculation…you will never know until after your move and you pursue it in the new Diocese. Deacons can also be very helpful in this regard. I think (myself included) too much speculation is going on without hearing the decision of the Tribunal. If you are required what they call a “full annulment” it will take some time. Sitting here and going into extreme statements (and yes I am also guilty here) is really not appropriate. I apologize for my statements, see what the Church says about the previous marriage and THEN ask for comments/suggestions. It’s jumping the gun to do anything else. You are in my prayers.

what is a “full annulment” and how does this differ from any other variety?

though yes this is pure speculation, you’re right… but this is just how I am, always thinking three steps ahead without completing the first step, I’ve asked all I can about annulment at this time, I now need to get this started down where i’m moving to.

someone posted a link to an annulment/divorce group on this site but i cant find the link, I joined the group but then didnt bookmark the page.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

what is a “full annulment” and how does this differ from any other variety?

though yes this is pure speculation, you’re right… but this is just how I am, always thinking three steps ahead without completing the first step, I’ve asked all I can about annulment at this time, I now need to get this started down where i’m moving to.

someone posted a link to an annulment/divorce group on this site but i cant find the link, I joined the group but then didnt bookmark the page.

All annulments are “full annulments.” There are other forms that don’t involve as much paperwork, depending upon the impediment at marriage. But your case needs the (name removed by moderator)ut of a priest. I hope you can find the documents to take with you, because it will be more difficult to do from far away. It might be difficult to do in any case. But we wish you the best! Don’t be discouraged!

 

[maltmom]

someone posted a link to an annulment/divorce group on this site but i cant find the link, I joined the group but then didnt bookmark the page.

Click on “Groups” on the bar above. You don’t have to bring down the drop menu. It will show you all of the groups you belong to. You can click on the link there.

 

[Irishgal49]

All annulments are “full annulments.” There are other forms that don’t involve as much paperwork, depending upon the impediment at marriage. But your case needs the (name removed by moderator)ut of a priest. I hope you can find the documents to take with you, because it will be more difficult to do from far away. It might be difficult to do in any case. But we wish you the best! Don’t be discouraged!

I didn’t have to do a full annulment. Because I was Catholic at the time I married and married outside the Church I only had to answer 14 questions and no testimony was required. A “full annulment” is where you have to go through the whole process and a priest is best consulted on what forms you need to complete and what you need to do to proceed.

 

[Marc_Anthony]

Just ask God to take your anxieties and exchange them for peace in your heart, and to help you get through the process one step at a time until the whole thing is done. And that He will show you what to do next, once the process is over.

Ask for guidance. Our Lord will never lead you wrong.

 

[longing4Jesus]

Abominable angel,

My RCIA/conversion journey took 3 1/2 years. All I will say to you is that the waiting made the day I was finally received into the Church so much sweeter… there are no words to express it. I go to daily Mass now and EVERY day I am still overwhelmed with gratitude and may God give me the grace for it always to be so. Persevere, my sister, it is worth it.

 

[Phemie]

I didn’t have to do a full annulment. Because I was Catholic at the time I married and married outside the Church I only had to answer 14 questions and no testimony was required. A “full annulment” is where you have to go through the whole process and a priest is best consulted on what forms you need to complete and what you need to do to proceed.

Yours wasn’t an ‘annulment’ per se since your marriage was never presumed valid. In another country the simple the fact that you had no marriage noted in your baptismal record would have been enough and nothing would have been required of you.

In North America such cases are usually submitted to the Marriage Tribunal, but that depends on the Bishop - our former bishop allowed the priest preparing a couple for marriage to deal with such cases which consist mainly of presenting paperwork (new certificate of Baptism which showed no record of marriage, marriage certificate or marriage registration & divorce decree).

A ‘full annulment’ could be compared to a trial. Your marriage is on trial with the prosecution arguing that it’s not a valid marriage and the Defender of the Bond arguing that it is.

 

[ChibiViolet]

Well, it’s seems now it’s divorce and enter the Church as a celibate moving forward, or not enter the Church. Why do we have to force an annulment then as the only recourse of this person? So if she can’t annul the first and is not willing to divorce the second then she will never become Catholic?

This is my question as well. That is a steep price to pay for most of us.

**But given that there isn’t anything seriously wrong with the first marriage, it just went bad, how can you annul it? ** Or are we divorcing under the pretense of annulment?

How could you know that? Before an annulment, there is a lengthy investigation by a Canon council.

 

[TrueLight]

Well, if the Church wants to allow only annulments, then the Church should only allow annulment. I just find it sad that there are a lot of divorces happening that the Church allows under the pretense of annulments. The defect in canonical form is just becoming a toy for canon lawyers the same way secular laws are toys for secular lawyers. I am troubled that people who have had happy marriages for years suddenly find reasons to annul their marriage just because it went south one day. Suddenly their marriage was invalid all along?

Definitely! I think it is what lacks in society today, that people take marriage so lightly. The reason marriages fail today is people doesn’t take it as serious as it should be. There is a lack of that “total giving of oneself to the marriage”.

I don’t mean to sound offensive here and I’m not directing this at you, but I think the excuse itself which I know is something you just picked up from somewhere, is pathetic. If it was a shotgun marriage or if they were drunk and got married and Vegas, then it is an invalid marriage. Otherwise, I don’t know what else can cloud one’s judgement into marriage.

I think the best thing out of that is that it is clearly something out of ekonomia (economy) and any divorce is a penitentiary act. If you divorce you are to be sorry for your sin. You dissolved the undissolvable, it is a sin. Annulment is not a sin because it is said that the marriage never took place even though the person lived with the other for years and have beget a number of children, etc. (among other scenarios). I think that is what the Catholic way is missing, is that we’re handing “get out of jail free” cards (and some will say that their marriage is indeed like a prison) and we treat the second marriage (and let us not fool ourselves here, it IS a second marriage) is equal to the first. And the worst part really for me is how some people whom I cannot imagine why their marriage was null and void do get their marriages null and void.

I actually agree with you. I had created a thread on this very topic in an effort to understand but a lot of people got upset. I understand it is a sensitive topic for a lot especially since there are many who have already received annulments. I’ll open up a thread on this Ecclesiastical divorce thing because I don’t know what it is.

 

[dans0622]

… The defect in canonical form is just becoming a toy for canon lawyers the same way secular laws are toys for secular lawyers. I am troubled that people who have had happy marriages for years suddenly find reasons to annul their marriage just because it went south one day. Suddenly their marriage was invalid all along? …

Hello,

Sure, let’s blame the canon lawyers and their “toys.” Two questions: Which canon lawyer decided that canonical form (whether in the Eastern or Western tradition) impacted the validity of marriage? What would you want a judge to do with the law regarding canonical form since you do not want it applied in accord with the law?

Dan

 

[jmcrae]

Hello,

Sure, let’s blame the canon lawyers and their “toys.” Two questions: Which canon lawyer decided that canonical form (whether in the Eastern or Western tradition) impacted the validity of marriage? What would you want a judge to do with the law regarding canonical form since you do not want it applied in accord with the law?

Dan

Not to speak for others, but in my case, I just think, in the absence of things like a previous divorce, or consanguinity, every first marriage should be considered valid, full stop, until and unless there is a divorce, and in that case, it should be investigated the same as any Church marriage - the lack of form shouldn’t enter into it except as evidence of something else - haste, or immaturity, for example - but the haste or the immaturity should be the deciding factor; not the form itself.

This is my personal opinion; obviously it is not the position of the Church - nobody should take this as license to go ahead with a wedding that lacks proper form - believe me, the penalty for doing so is extremely high, when you want to baptize your kids and return to the Church.

 

[Phemie]

Not to speak for others, but in my case, I just think, in the absence of things like a previous divorce, or consanguinity, every first marriage should be considered valid, full stop, until and unless there is a divorce, and in that case, it should be investigated the same as any Church marriage - the lack of form shouldn’t enter into it except as evidence of something else - haste, or immaturity, for example - but the haste or the immaturity should be the deciding factor; not the form itself.

This is my personal opinion; obviously it is not the position of the Church - nobody should take this as license to go ahead with a wedding that lacks proper form - believe me, the penalty for doing so is extremely high, when you want to baptize your kids and return to the Church.

Sadly, you can be mature enough to enter a valid marriage and still not be mature enough in your Faith to give up the ‘dream outdoor wedding’.

I see couples around me in Church on Sunday who are in invalid marriages and don’t even realize it because they have had such poor catechesis. They still practice, they have their babies baptized and life goes on as usual. In my parish, the priest knows and doesn’t do anything. In fact, at one such wedding, he was present and gave the couple a blessing and told them the Church was with them. He knew the groom hadn’t received his final decree and they hadn’t petitioned for a dispensation from canonical form. The final decree and the dispensation for disparity of cult didn’t come in until about a week after the wedding.

When I asked my Pastor at the time why the other priest would do this, his reply was that he probably felt guilty because he’d put off doing the interviews so long that he was the reason for the delay in the decree being received because if ever there had been a case where a decree of nullity was a foregone conclusion, this was it.

But in fact, my Pastor was the one who had done the couple’s preparation (doesn’t the Church say that such preparation is not supposed to happen until AFTER the decree is received) in anticipation of a New Year’s Eve wedding in the Church. The place and officiant were changed when it became obvious that the final decree would not be received in time.

 

[dans0622]

Not to speak for others, but in my case, I just think, in the absence of things like a previous divorce, or consanguinity, every first marriage should be considered valid, full stop, until and unless there is a divorce, and in that case, it should be investigated the same as any Church marriage - the lack of form shouldn’t enter into it except as evidence of something else - haste, or immaturity, for example - but the haste or the immaturity should be the deciding factor; not the form itself.

This is my personal opinion; obviously it is not the position of the Church - nobody should take this as license to go ahead with a wedding that lacks proper form - believe me, the penalty for doing so is extremely high, when you want to baptize your kids and return to the Church.

Hello,

If the Church wanted to get rid of “canonical form” and just require that people express their marital consent in whatever way is required by civil law, I would accept it. But, that’s not the way it is. The “way it is” says that Catholics who attempt to marry with no regard for the requirements of canonical form are not in a presumptively valid marriage. That’s not a “toy” for canon lawyers. It is the law and canon lawyers (and anyone else) should not have their integrity questioned for following/applying it.

That’s enough defense of canon lawyers for this week.

Dan

 

[figs]

Thats something else I meant to ask, how should I pray about this, I always feel bad when I ask God for something… I dont want to “use” God as my personal piggy bank or magic 8 ball and I fear that if I pray my annulment be granted that I’m being greedy and unloving towards God.

So I have no idea where to begin with praying about this… any ideas?

Hello abominableangel,
The only advise you can be given is to contact your or a priest. It is the only way forward. Sitting around speculating will get you no where.

If you feel you have been called by God, then persue it. It doesn’t matter what obsticles there are here and now, if Christ wants you, nothing will come between He and you… NOTHING.
I don’t think now is the time to be idle.

I know it all looks like a long, long journey ahead and it is, but look at it this way,
You can do nothing and get to the end of a year and never know, or at the end of that same time you can have an answer to your questions. Since that same time is going to pass anyway, regardless, why not work for an answer during that time?

How is the best way to pray? Excellent question.

I think he best way would be to ask for the grace of faith and the courage and patience to accept God’s will.
And if it is within His will, that He grants you the honor of being called to the supper of the Lamb.
Something along those ideas, that’s how I would pray.

Approach with humility, pray with confidence but pray

Opinions are just opinions, some are going to sound nice, some are going to feel hurtful, others are going to be confusing. Just remember it isn’t up to them. It is up to Christ and His Church and THEY will be the only opinions you’ll need.

God be with you, and I’ll say a prayer for you too

 

[joanofarc2008]

Hello,

If the Church wanted to get rid of “canonical form” and just require that people express their marital consent in whatever way is required by civil law, I would accept it. But, that’s not the way it is. The “way it is” says that Catholics who attempt to marry with no regard for the requirements of canonical form are not in a presumptively valid marriage. That’s not a “toy” for canon lawyers. It is the law and canon lawyers (and anyone else) should not have their integrity questioned for following/applying it.

That’s enough defense of canon lawyers for this week.

Dan

 

[ChibiViolet]

Nor do I think you should. The welfare of your family comes first. I have no doubt that God will see you through this mess, if you are patient and prompt and obedient throughout the process.

God should come first. He created us and suffered and died so that we might live eternally. NO ONE has ever or will ever love us like that. Of course, putting Him first is not always easy and Jesus never said that it would be.

abominableangel, I have been praying for you and will continue to pray for you.

 

[PJM]

=TrueLight;9498998]I actually agree with you. I had created a thread on this very topic in an effort to understand but a lot of people got upset. I understand it is a sensitive topic for a lot especially since there are many who have already received annulments. I’ll open up a thread on this Ecclesiastical divorce thing because I don’t know what it is.

Originally Posted by ConstantineTG
Well, if the Church wants to allow only annulments, then the Church should only allow annulment. I just find it sad that there are a lot of divorces happening that the Church allows under the pretense of annulments. The defect in canonical form is just becoming a toy for canon lawyers the same way secular laws are toys for secular lawyers. I am troubled that people who have had happy marriages for years suddenly find reasons to annul their marriage just because it went south one day. Suddenly their marriage was invalid all along?

IT SEEMS TO ME THAT GOD AND GODS WILL HAVE BEEN ALL BUT ELIMINATED FROM THIS CONVERSATION?

DOES NOT MATTHEWS GOSPEL EXPLAIN GODS VIEW; GOD’S POSITION BASED ON GENESIS 1:26-27?

WE ARE often QUICK TO BLAME THE “CHURCH” WHEN ALL SHE IS DOING IS OBEYING GOD

and IMO annulments are too frequently granted. ITs NOT easy because it was NEVER entended to be easy.

God Bless;
pat/PJM

 

[joanofarc2008]

IT SEEMS TO ME THAT GOD AND GODS WILL HAVE BEEN ALL BUT ELIMINATED FROM THIS CONVERSATION?

DOES NOT MATTHEWS GOSPEL EXPLAIN GODS VIEW; GOD’S POSITION BASED ON GENESIS 1:26-27?

WE ARE often QUICK TO BLAME THE “CHURCH” WHEN ALL SHE IS DOING IS OBEYING GOD

and IMO annulments are too frequently granted. IT[s NOT easy because it was NEVER entended to be easy.

God Bless;
pat/PJM

Do Matthew’s Gospels explain God’s Will - well, let me see - it is Christ that is speaking and Christ is fully human and fully divine so yes, Matthew is God’s view.
[/quote]