Myself, I’m scheduled to be confirmed this Easter Vigil. My marriage had been messed up for years, and we would’ve split regardless of my eventual conversion to the Catholic faith. But the conversion sped up the process because in RCIA I was told I needed a civil divorce and annulment before I could be confirmed. Reason given: marriage has to conform to basic Catholic standards even if one spouse is not Catholic (my wife is not converting with me). Well it hadn’t met even basic Christian standards… ever.
Later, I contacted the Tribunal (after some reading done on here) and they said annulment was only needed if I planned to remarry in the Church at a later date. Well remarriage wasn’t on the horizon I said (and I’m not dating, of course, either – I know that’s a no-no before annulment is granted), so tribunal said Confirmation was a go, but they recommend starting annulment process now to make things easier down the road in case re-marriage comes up. So I started the process.
Two months later, Tribunal contacts me and says it wasn’t necessary to start process of annulment, why am I starting it, what’s the issue? I thought I had explained all that in the lengthy paperwork. Which I typed up on the recommendation of the Tribunal. After the priest suggested it. The priest who the Tribunal now says was wrong in recommending annulment.
Question then is where does the buck stop? Who has the ultimate authority to let me know what’s needed, when is was needed by, and how it affects Confirmation. I thought it was all up to the priest, but he deferred to the Tribunal, and the Tribunal then goes and contradicts itself.
If I didn’t believe that the Eucharist is the actually body and blood of Christ, I would’ve given up on all this a long time ago.
In the end, I believe I’m good to go because even though I am divorced with no annulment (as of this moment), I have not re-married or started dating or anything. But I don’t know. Last conversation with the person from the Tribunal left me confused, especially after they wondered why i was still living with my ex-wife. Answer: divorce only recently went through, and the economy stinks and we have no money. But the marriage and every privilege that went with it is gone. We’re roommates. What’s the problem? Is there a problem? I’m not sure. I’m not even sure anymore if the sky is blue or the earth is round. That’s how much they have my head spinning right now.
Avery77
As I read your post (for about the 4th time) I can see how someone might be confused by your situation and give you what would be the “correct” answer based on what you are describing, even though that’s not the actual situation.
Let me explain:
If I understand correctly, your situation is that you were married but are now divorced. You are seeking membership in the Church. You are currently living with a woman. Based on that information, yes, you would need an annulment and would need to have your marriage regularized before Confirmation. However, since the woman with whom you are living (and I mean those words literally, I’m not trying to imply anything) is also your ex-wife, that puts you into a rather unique situation. Most people would make the natural assumption that since you’re divorced you are no longer living with your ex-wife (after all, that’s usually how it works), but knowing that you are living under the same roof with a woman to whom you are not married would elicit the response that you need to have your situation regularized.
As to your direct question about who gets to make these decisions, here’s how that works:
First, the Church defines things in canon law.
Then, the local pastor interprets and applies that canon law within his own parish. He does so under the guidance of his own education, the policies of the diocese (which must be in harmony with the canon law), and the guidance of the diocese office of matrimonial concerns (whatever name that office might have in a particular diocese) and the marriage Tribunal (the “court”). Only the canon law gets to “decide” what needs to be done. Both the pastor and the diocese are interpreting and applying the law. So neither the priest, nor anyone at the diocese gets to decide what the rules are (for the sake of discussion, let’s not address the powers of governance that the bishop has because that can get us off on a tangent). The decision of the marriage tribunal always supercedes that of the local pastor, so when he deferred to them, he was doing the right thing.
Most people are applying for a declaration of nullity because they want to get married again, so it’s a natural question for the tribunal to ask you your reason for seeking an annulment (not just the legal grounds, but the reason). When someone at the tribunal noticed that you and your ex-wife have the same mailing address, that would certainly cause them to ask you why you would be submitting the petition. In fact, they would be negligent if they did not ask.
What I’m trying to explain in this lengthy post is that it seems to me that the reason you’re getting such different answers is that your situation is a confusing one, and rather unusual. I think that people are trying to give you the right information, but because things aren’t as they seem, the first answer you get might not be the correct one.
.
[SIGN][SIGN][/SIGN][/SIGN]-]/-]