Homosexuality and same-sex attraction involve sophisticated analysis of the particular case by a tribunal according to the approved jurisprudence of the Roman Rota (the “supreme court” for marriage cases in the Church). Because of this, I would not feel free to comment of that aspect of the post. Nor, out of fairness and charity, do I even believe it appropriate to speculate on how this case will turn out. I will just say a prayer for all of you.
I will comment only on some general points. I recommend that your husband discuss your questions with the priest, deacon or lay minister who assisted him in presenting the case. Such a person is called a procurator or procurator advocate and is knowledgable about the law. Generally personnel from a tribunal will explain these points. Either method will be more informative than any board posting can be.
Sometimes non Catholic respondents who were not married to Catholics question the authority of the Church to determine the nullity of their marriages. They also have the understanding that if they took the vows, the marriage was real. In one sense, that’s absolutely true. Something happened which cannot be denied. There was a stability to the union recognized by civil law. Children may have been born, and are considered legitimate under both civil and Church law, despite whatever is later discovered about the validity of the marriage in a tribunal of the Church.
All the Church is saying when a decree of nullity is issued, to be grossly simple, is that despite good faith, appearances and the presumption of law, the exchange of marital consent did not create a bond in such a way that the parties are bound to that marriage. If they are not bound to it, they are, unless restricted for other reasons, each is declared free to give marital consent to another person in the Catholic Church.
As simply as I can say, but not exhaustively . . . She, the responding party, does have the right to give testimony, name witnesses, and to explain the reasons she believes that this marriage is a valid marriage in such a way that it binds the parties (both of them) so that neither can remarry. She also has the right to have competent assistance, and representation if she wishes, from those who are expert in Catholic marriage law. She has a right to review the testimonies before the judges give a decision, and to review the sentence. Those who represent her or serve as her advocate have similar rights. The sentence sets down the nature of the controversy, names the parties, relates the facts, explains the law, and gives the reasons for the decision according to a format set forth in canon law. It must also indicate how it can be appealed. There are other rights she has, such as the right to raise an objection to the tribunal personnel if she believes any would be biased, and others.
If the diocesan tribunal finds the marriage null, the case is sent to an appellate tribunal automatically. In marriage nullity cases, like the cases of invalidity of ordination, two conforming sentences are required.
That second tribunal can either look at the case, decide all is in order and ratify the decision of the first tribunal, by decree. It could also begin a second trial if there is uncertainty about the proofs or legal reasoning in the first tribunal’s sentence. Such a second trial is infrequent. However, before you and your husband could marry in the Catholic Church, those two Church courts must agree that the marriage was null, or invalid.
She retains the right to appeal any decision of nullity made by your diocesan tribunal to its appellate tribunal. She could also appeal it to the Roman Rota. Sometimes a sentence can also be challenged because some procedural law was not observed so that any of the rights I wrote about were violated.
Tribunals do attempt to explain and dialogue with non Catholics so that they understand what is being done. They are not expected to accept our teaching but only to know what it is, and why we feel we must do these things. Perhaps, and we hope, once things are explained by the tribunal, she will become more even minded.
By itself, her objection to the process, cannot stop the case. But an appeal could prolong it. An appeal to the second court should be heard in six months according to law. The Roman Rota has had cases waiting for several years. Before you panic, don’t assume the appeal. Like civil courts, appeals must also be accepted in Church courts after presented.
