T
TheOldColonel
Guest
I’m a Case Analyst with advanced Canon Law training. I gave a correct answer as an expert in my field. If you wish to spread errant information, then that is up to you.
- Status
B
BlackFriar
Guest
This is a good example of when a trained Canon Lawyer doesn’t always have similar pastoral skills in handling his clients actual questions face to face and leaves them to depart with a mistaken understanding.
Hopefully that would be of concern to you as well.
Last edited:
T
TheOldColonel
Guest
I not only answered the question buy was thanked for doing so. You, however, seem to have a need to make errant comments and then attacks anyone who might correct you.
You might consider a more charitable approach to interacting with others who also share these threads. If you are wrong, simply admit it. Such drama is completely unnecessary and reflects very badly.
You might consider a more charitable approach to interacting with others who also share these threads. If you are wrong, simply admit it. Such drama is completely unnecessary and reflects very badly.
A
Arkansan
Guest
Bishops are allowed to handle Pauline Privilege cases without involving the Holy See.
Though it is correct that that is neither an annulment nor an act of the tribunal.
Though it is correct that that is neither an annulment nor an act of the tribunal.
T
TheOldColonel
Guest
You are quite correct, yet most Bishops usually do not handle them in house.
A
Arkansan
Guest
Interesting. I didn’t know that.
T
TheOldColonel
Guest
Well, the Old Colonel is headed for the rack. I have a run at 0530 hours. Thanks for the nice comment.
Last edited:
J
joeybaggz
Guest
Actually, in every diocese in which I have lived, a civil divorce is required before a case will be undertaken. The church does not wish to be a co-respondent in a civil divorce action. I think you were looking for another term maybe???
B
BlackFriar
Guest
Where did you say that the Church can dissolve some marriages?
In fact you gave every impression the Church cannot in your initial responses to my polite observations.
I think the point is quite apposite as it affirms not only that the Church can define which marriages are non existent and which are not…it can go even further than that.
If you are sensitive to polite outside feedback there is little I can do about that.
Feedback is part of life.
It is patent that we were both communicating poorly.
You are the one playing the “justified by truth” card…and still are.
I am more concerned about mutually communicating a position that doesn’t mislead the poster and addresses his actual concern…not simply what an expert narrowly interprets that concern to be.
As I say I do not believe the poster is at all interested in whether it is the Pope or Bishop rather than the Tribunal who ultimately authorises either an annulment or a dissolution.
Last edited:
T
TheOldColonel
Guest
The Canon Law Society of America posts wonderful and informative articles. I invite you to spend some time growing in your knowledge of how tribunals function and in many other edifying topics. That way, you might avoid in the future so many embarrassing words and situations as we see all too clearly here.
J
joeybaggz
Guest
I’m a little surprised that in all the responses, no one has mentioned where the Church finds its authority. Don’t quite know chapter and verse, but when Christ commissions Peter as head of His church, he says, “whatever you hold bound on earth shall be held bound in heaven, and whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” That is where the Church finds its authority to act as it does. I believe that is the question you asked. I’ll let the “experts” keep on keepin’ on.
B
BlackFriar
Guest
Likewise I invite your good self to do some refresher courses in practical pastoral communication/listening skills. That way you might avoid in the future embarrassingly miscommunicating the truth in the very process of communicating it.
God bless.
God bless.
Last edited:
T
TheOldColonel
Guest
See Matthew 18:18. The Power of the Keys to bind and loose on earth is given to Peter. The authority of the church to teach, preach, set policies, judge marriage cases and exercise governance of the sacraments flows from this power. The Pope, as successor of Peter, embodies such power and shares it with his church according to tradition and law. Thanks for the great post.
T
TheOldColonel
Guest
Is there an echo in here? 
W
Whitney
Guest
I agree that this is a point that needs expounded upon. I don’t have issue with the theory of declaring a marriage null, based on the usual reasons listed for consent and truthfulness. But I get lost in what appears to be the sheer number of marriages found to be null. It would make me think that a sizable portion of existing marriages are in fact null unbeknownst to the couple, if the church is finding so many positive results (I.e. no sacrament occurred) at these tribunals.
M
MaryT777
Guest
Because God gave the Church authority in matters on Earth.
Matthew 18:18 New International Version (NIV)
**
18 “Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be[a] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.
Matthew 18:18 New International Version (NIV)
**
18 “Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be[a] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.
T
thistle
Guest
Defining who exactly does what is fine but I think you are missing the point. I’m pretty sure the OP has never heard of P&P situations and has only heard of tribunals.
By using the word tribunals the OP is simply talking about the Church and I’m sure its irrelevant to the OP who specifically in the Church does what.
T
TheOldColonel
Guest
Such edifying information was for someone else who desperately needed it. Indeed, the need was immensely great as you can see.
Last edited:
P
phil19034
Guest
Because the tribunal is determining whether God joined them together or not.
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
Also, valid sacramental marriages may be dissolved if they are unconsummated.
- Status