Is the marriage invalid or valid?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rckymtn85
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Again, the conversation with the spiritual director is far more indicative of one or both knowing or seriously considering revealing it would be a deal killer then it being some simple conversation.

I agree - had he told his intended he had SSA and she proceeded, end of discussion. But that does not appear what happened.
 
That’s a fair assessment.

Even though I disagree that an annulment is justifiable.

If he intended to love her and consent to Christian marriage, then If it was me who was revealed that my spouse has bisexual attractions before vows, I would NOT use that to leave the marriage.

If he/she only married as a cover for denying ssa then that would be a cause to leave the marriage.
 
You always think annulments aren’t justifiable.

Listen, the woman in the situation was deceived. Just because you wouldn’t want to annul the marriage doesn’t mean she wouldn’t want to. She may not annul either, but she could if she wanted to. She was deceived
 
To me (those who wish to appeal and rely on a tribunals judgment aside) having bisexual attractions (without ever acting on the homosexual attractions) would not be a reason to seek an annulment. It’s not a sin to have ssa. Acting on those attractions is sinful, and therefore reason to seek an annulment.

Especially in light of seeking pastoral advice, this should be reason not to assume deceit.

Though I also agree he should have expressed this to his wife.
 
It’s not about having ssa, it’s about withholding the fact that he has ssa from his wife, no matter if his intentions were pure. It’s the fact she was deceived
 
Last edited:
FloridaCatholic said:
You always think annulments aren’t justifiable.
Click to expand...
No, I do agree with many annulments. Just not many of the grey area ones.

Others can give full assent to the tribunal’s judgment.

Remember, the tribunal’s judgmet is not infallible.
 
Lol. K.

Most people wouldn’t say they are going to go to the Supreme Court before they even go to trial, but ok.

I don’t know why you don’t trust the tribunals but I’m sorry you don’t
 
Last edited:
He was honest with his spiritual director but not his fiancé at the time. What don’t you get about her being deceived which is the entire problem?

The guy relied on poor advice. Priests and confessors sometimes give poor advice
 
Last edited:
Because she should still accept his love and desire to honor her instead of pursuing someone else.

Unless his intentions were to use the marriage to deny his ssa
 
I don’t know, I think you can trust priests most of the time. I’m not paranoid.
 
She was lied to at the beginning as to who she was marrying. You’re being uncharitable
 
No, I’m not. He withheld something that should not affect her love for him.

She should have asked if he had attractions to men if that would be a deal breaker. I would.
 
You’re telling someone else what should or should not be a dealbreaker for them personally when it comes to who they should marry. The church does not say we should or should not feel a certain way about who we freely choose to marry. Wow.
 
FloridaCatholic said:
It’s just absurd. lol. Why would anyone think to ask about something if you were deceived into thinking the opposite of that person
Click to expand...
Deceived seems awfully strong. What if the man was attracted to his wife, perfectly intending and willing and capable of meeting his spousal obligations, and had no prior history of actually doing anything with men nor intent to?

Granted, the quality may still very well be grounds for an annulment, but deceit seems to imply some type of malice or deception, which isn’t necessarily the case, even if a mistake was made and the wife should have been aware before being able to give actual consent.
 
Last edited:
This isn’t a divorce. If she wouldn’t have married him had she known there never would have been a marriage. How dare you call her hard hearted? She’s a victim here of deceit and you’re being extremely uncharitable. Flagged.
 
Wesrock said:
40.png
FloridaCatholic:
It’s just absurd. lol. Why would anyone think to ask about something if you were deceived into thinking the opposite of that person
Click to expand...
Deceived seems awfully strong. What if the man was attracted to his wife, perfectly intending and willing and capable of meeting his spousal obligations, and had no prior history of actually doing anything with men nor intent to?

Granted, the quality may still very well be grounds for an annulment, but deceit seems to imply some type of malics or deception, which isn’t necessarily the case, even if a mistake was made.
Click to expand...
Right! And does this warrant dividing the family? I certainly dont think so.
 
rcwitness said:
40.png
Wesrock:
40.png
FloridaCatholic:
It’s just absurd. lol. Why would anyone think to ask about something if you were deceived into thinking the opposite of that person
Click to expand...
Deceived seems awfully strong. What if the man was attracted to his wife, perfectly intending and willing and capable of meeting his spousal obligations, and had no prior history of actually doing anything with men nor intent to?

Granted, the quality may still very well be grounds for an annulment, but deceit seems to imply some type of malics or deception, which isn’t necessarily the case, even if a mistake was made.
Click to expand...
Right! And does this warrant dividing the family? I certainly dont think so.
Click to expand...
I am going to separate (1) grounds for annulment on the one hand and (2) whether the wife is being reasonable and whether she should separate on the other hand, even if we had more info. Whether or not it’s fair or right that the wife considers SSA (whatever that may be, even the most charitable reading on the husband’s part) be a dealbreaker now or then, her lack of knowledge on this matter can be an issue with the consent made at the time of marriage.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top