what about a wife or husband who faithfully sticks to his/her marriage and is dumped
because her husband/wife picked up with the new hot thing at the office?
Whether they are dumped or not has nothing to do with whether or not there was an impediment at the time of the marriage. It will just about guarantee that the one who was faithful will be angry, emotionally wrought, often seeking vengance, often wounded and not willing to work on healing that wound, often not willing to forgive the other spouse, often seeing themself as the “martyr” who “lived a perfect marriage” (it is always interesting to find that all the wrong in the marriage was the other person’s fault, and that the wronged spouse was a perfect saint), and now angry with the Church because of a finding of an impediment that goes back to the time of the wedding, but does nothing to assuage the grief, anger, hatred, despair and or other emotions that are still present over the subsequent issue.
The short of it is that there is no answer that will ever satisfy the “wronged” spouse because they don’t want to hear any facts; their emotions are what counts. The focus constantly goes to the split; the focus is emotion based and facts have no bearing on that.
and now the wife or husband sees them actively participating in the mass AND receiving the Eucharist because the tribunal granted the ex an annulment on “lack of grave judgment”
or “immaturity”
To begin with, someone who murders and subsequently goes to Reconcilliation, confesses their sin and is forgiven can actively participate in Mass AND receive Eucharist. There is not a whole lot of difference between the two, particularly since you will not know if the ex may or may not have had anything to confess and whether they have done so or not. Christ forgives sins. Ex’s too often do not.
Further, it would appear that you are the wronged party, and you want us to take your side and say how terrible this all was. But none of us have access to the file, none of us know what facts were before the tribunal, and the fact that the tribunal (and the subsequent tribunal, to whom the case was automatically appealed) found that there was lack of grave judgement is not something that any of us can make any rational judgement upon. We have to presume that the tribunal acted within its authority and that there was sufficient evidence that lead to this conclusion. To do otherwise is to presume either that the tirbunal was incompetent - with no facts to support any such conclusion - or that there were insufficent facts - and we don’t have the record to make such a decision.
maybe some of these spouses are being left out in the cold with no support system and no marriage, and even the church is not on their side.
Actually, this is the most telling comment of all. The Church did not abandon anyone. You want the Church to take sides. That is not what the Church does. The Church is not out to say that one side was a better spouse than the other, or that one was more at fault than the other. Fault is not part of the process. The Tribunal doesn’t really care if Spouse A has one affair or 15 affairs after the wedding, or none at all. If either Spouse A or Spouse B lacked grave judgement, that and not any subsequent affair was the grounds for the decree. In fact, it would be grounds for the decree if there was no affair.
The affair is not what is being judged. The failure of the “left behind” spouse to understand this is the source of much grief. The “wronged” spouse wants the tribunal to find the other party at fault, to say that the wronged spouse is vindicated, and to get their “pound of flesh”. When the tribunal does not deliver that, they say the Church does not “support them”. That is because they have decided that “support” means finding fault. But the Church does not do that.
Sheila wanted the Church to find that her husband, one of the Kennedys, was a bad person. He should be punished by being forbidden Communion because he was in a new relationship. That may be the final outcome of their case, but that is not the purpose of the tribunal. Sheila wanted her pound of flesh - and perhaps has received it. Doesn’t that make her a better person? It would appear that you want your pound of flesh. That is not what the tribunal is there for.
The Church - and Christ - is very much on your side; but their being on your side is not in the manner you may want. Christ forgives. In turn, He wants us to forgive others; in fact, we ask Him for forgiveness as we forgive others. That sometimes makes for a very, very hard statement.
