Newly divorced and considering annulment

  • Thread starter Thread starter Steadfast_love
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
kipedire said:
If a divorcee applies for annulment and the other party does not respond at all. I presume that the annulment will never be pronounced.
Click to expand...
Not the case. It may extend the amount of time for the case to be decided, but decisions can be made without the cooperation of one of the parties.
 
kipedire said:
I presume that the annulment will never be pronounced
Click to expand...
No, it only delays the process a few weeks, the amount of time they have to respond.
My ex did not respond. My annulment took four months from my first contact with the Archdiocese of Philadelphia Marriage Tribunal until I received the letter of nullification.
 
That’s an interesting idea.

I asked an “Advocate” and apparently there’s an option to go to tribunal without notifying the respondent. Just say that the respondent is too scary and it proceeds without him or her.
 
Steadfast_love said:
I asked an “Advocate” and apparently there’s an option to go to tribunal without notifying the respondent. Just say that the respondent is too scary and it proceeds without him or her.
Click to expand...
Those are statements I find to be misleading at best and, at worst, untrue.

Dan
 
I wish they were false. The idea of having a fair and honest trial appealed to me.
 
Last edited:
OP here, thanks everyone. Lots of helpful perspectives on all sides. I’ve decided to step back and concentrate on my single-dad vocation for now. I’ll leave the filing to my ex, and trust the Tribunal to judge rightly.
 
MasterHaster said:
Why do people who divorce automatically seek " annulment"
Click to expand...
they don’t. Only a few of all the people who get a divorce file, and only a percentage of those who file get one. No clue where you get the idea that everyone applies.
atjar1 said:
Six children. How does anyone pretend it was not a marriage? If it walks like a duck, squaks like a duck, it’s a duck. Yet religious leaders devised this thing called annulment because of their opposition to divorce. Both accomplish the same result.
Click to expand...
it would appear that you are very unfamiliar with both what makes the sacrament of marriage and what constitutes grounds for a decree of nullity. There are multiple reasons (not excuses) which will show that as of the day of the wedding, one (or both) of the parties to the wedding either had an impediment, or failed to give assent as the Church requires.

If you wish to educate yourself on the matter, there is a fairly inexpensive book titled Annulment The Wedding That Was by Michael Smith Foster. It explains each of the grounds for a decree of nullity, with explanations understandable to the average lay person.
 
1ke said:
No no no!! A petition for nullity is not an exploratory exercise. You have to have grounds.
Click to expand...
Filling out the petition is not the same as filing the petition. It is a walk through of the grounds. And many people have no clue as to what the grounds are, as exhibited repeatedly in these forums by some of the responses.

Whether the OP fills out the petition, or sits down with a priest or deacon trained in the causes, it pretty much comes out the same - the OP may learn there is either an impediment or a failure of consent, on the basis of something the OP had no clue could be causation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top