Is the marriage invalid or valid?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rckymtn85
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Exactly right. Each case is unique, especially when the grounds is consent.
 
rcwitness said:
Of course not. It’s about our beautiful annulments, and our entitlement to them
Click to expand...
No one has even intimated that annulments are “beautiful.” They represent the death of hopes and dreams. But the decrees of nullity are not responsible for those deaths. In this case, it’s a person who discovered that an essential quality of her husband, one that would have precluded her consent, had been hidden from her. I doubt she’s feeling any of this is “beautiful.”
 
We don’t know what is in her heart, or what their relationship has been like.

She may be sincere, she may be an anti-Christ.

I find hope, encouragement, and inspiration in St Rita. I don’t see her Spirit in our Church.
 
rcwitness said:
She may be sincere, she may be an anti-Christ.
Click to expand...
What? A scenario in which a woman finds out her husband hid his SSA from her, and she’s an anti-Christ?

It takes some twisting to achieve that particular pretzel.
 
That’s just one issue in the relationship. It doesn’t make her holy. We just don’t know what things are like at all. Maybe he has been a good husband and father, but made a bad choice not to tell her. Maybe she has made worse choices through the marriage.

You are going to be pro-annulment decree no matter what. And I don’t assume that is necessarilly what Jesus wants.
 
@JulianN isn’t pro-annulment decree no matter what. Where do you even get off accusing people like that?

Maybe he’s a terrible husband who has kept more than just this from her. Maybe he’s an awful father. Maybe her children would be better off if she left him and was single.

Why are you pro-husband and anti-wife?
 
Last edited:
rcwitness said:
You are going to be pro-annulment decree no matter what. And I don’t assume that is necessarilly what Jesus wants.
Click to expand...
No. I am pro-finding-out-through-the-canonical-process. Which I know you think always leads to a decree—although it absolutely does not.

The point of the process is to find out if her consent was valid. It doesn’t matter if he’s been a nice guy—I know a lot of nice gay men. But I don’t want to be married to them.

It really doesn’t require a big stretch of imagination to understand that a person might have found SSA in their spouse to be a deal-breaker.
 
Yes, maybe he has other problems, and that’s the real reason she wants an annulment. We just don’t know!

I am pro reconciling, forgiving, suffering with Jesus, anti-divorce, loving your spouse, etc.
 
rcwitness said:
Yes, maybe he has other problems, and that’s the real reason she wants an annulment. We just don’t know!
Click to expand...
Why she ‘wants’ an annulment is completely irrelevant. That isn’t what the Tribunal looks at.
 
The point of the process is to get out of the Marriage, and in most cases marry again.

I’m not anti-annulment. Just the ones that rely on poor grounds.
 
Well, SSA in a spouse is hardly poor grounds! Nor something to forgive, reconcile and move on from—it’s not likely to just go away. It’s an essential part of who he is that would have caused her not to consent to marriage.
 
OK—we’ve been down this path before. You’ve been told by many people with far more knowledge and experience in the process that this isn’t true—but you persist in claiming this falsehood.

I’m out.
 
maybe the reason why she wants the annulment is because she didn’t know a major fact about the man she married and she wouldn’t have married him had she known.

suffering with jesus does not mean allowing people to abuse you and forgiveness is not the same thing as reconciliation. sometimes we can love our spouse best by separating
 
the point of the process is to determine if a valid marriage ever took place. if someone was mistaken about who they were marrying, they couldn’t consent!
 
Last edited:
Tribunal judges care. They know that marriage enjoys the favor of the law
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top