But there are complicated reasons as to why I don’t oursue annulment, one being that my husbands “ex” in-laws would be hurt.
Perhaps, and perhaps not. Too often we set up straw arguments, and often the reasons for them are deep enough that we are not good at analyzing them ourselves. If you mean that they would know all of what the case showed, there is no reason to presume that. While witnesses are needed (and on a rare occasion a case can go forward without them), it is unlikely anyone outside the immediate case would know any of the details.
For the moment, let’s presume they are hurt; but let’s also presume for the moment that this is a serious moral issue (the Church holds that it is); which is more important - someone being hurt either because of their own prejudices or their lack of knowledge of certain things, or our own moral status? The same could be said of in laws or relatives hurt because someone converted to the Catholic Church. Which is more important; their feelings or our own salvation?
The point is, there is an objective reality. Two marriages were contracted and two marriages ended over complicated, painful issues. The issues could be documented and sent to tribunals for analysis. I have every configence that in both cases, the marriages would be declared null from the start. But what differnce does that make in the context of what is real or what is?
Christ, in the Gospels, said that there is no divorce. That has been held by the Church to mean that a valid marriage cannot be dissolved. The only way the issue of the first marriage can be determined valid or not valid is by submitting it to the tribunal; until then, the Church, in following Christ’s word, has to hold that the first marriage is valid. And from that flows the rest of the rules; that say that if you have a presumed marriage, then divorce and remarry without the Church determining the validity of the first one, you are objectively in an adulterous situation, and cannot receive the Eucharist. We tend not only to be our own worst enemies, but also tend to be less than completely honest with ourselves. Christ gave us the Church as the means to determine such things; He did not leave us to determine each situation on our own.
Many on this site have been quick to point out that my situation makes me an adultress. Well, I’m not. Does a tribunals affirmation of that make it so, or is it so already? After all, a death certificate doesn’t make the dead any more dead than they already are!
At the very end, each of us will be judged by Christ, not by the pope, our bishop, or our pastor. On the other hand, Christ gave us the Church and gave it the authority to make the rules (Whatever you bind on earth…). The Church has said that the first marriage is permanent until death, unless it is shown not to be valid from the first day; so the Church says that objectively, someone in a second marriage is in an adulterous relationship unless and until the first is shown invalid. The Church does not judge your subjective state.
To ignore that, and to ignore the rules, is effectively to say “I don’t need the Church”. As only Christ can judge, it may be that you will be judged innocent; but there is only one time through this life, and getting it wrong has serious consequences. Not a bet I would want to make.
So you might say, we could then be convaliddated in the Church. Does that make us more married? It really doesn’t. After all, it is the couple that confers the Sacrament onto one another. Our covenant is already made. We live it and live up tot it every day and in everything we do.
Not more married - it makes you married at all to the current spouse. And living a married, sacramental life is done so in the context of the Church and it’s authority over the sacraments. Christ gave that power to the Church, not to each of us individually. I feel like I am beating on this issue - but the determination of whether or not a sacramental marriage - a valid one - has occurred - is within the authority of the Church, not the individual to determine.
And as for adoring Christ in the Tabernacle…that is not what Christ came to share with us. He is our spiritual food and we are to partake of His Body and Blood as a means to Commune with Him and With one another. It is as essential as the food we eat to keep our bodies alive. No one would suggest that we merely look at the food instead of eating it. It is NOT really a solution.
You are right that it is not a solution. The solution is to submit all to the tribunal. Again, Christ gave authority to the Church to make the rules, and the Church is not trying to impose itself on us; it is trying to follow Christ. And it was Christ who said that marriage may not end in divorce. If the first marriage was not valid from the beginning, then His rule is not violated. And if the first marriage is valid, then the rule is violated, not because the Church says so, but because Christ says so.
This all is hard; you have, it appears, been in two situations where you have ended up holding the wrong end of the stick. That does not make you a bad person. The Church seeks to heal people who have been through this wringer. The comment “physician, heal thyself” comes to mind. To say that you do not need the Church’s intervention, is to say you do not need the Church - and I don’t really think that really is what you are saying, when it all gets said and done.
