Why doesn't the marriage tribunal encourage investigation of validity with a legal Separation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ammi
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I didnt imply divorce could not exist for the tribunal to investigate.

The problem is connected to the requirement to divorce. The Church is requiring divorce to listen to a case!!! That is blatantly wrong.

It places the tribunal under pressure to submit to no fault divorces and find an impediment, INSTEAD of not having any pressure and influence to apply an impediment.
 
Because there is no good reason for the Church to indirectly encourage divorce.

And there is a problem in the U.S. tribinals offering nearly automatic decrees.

This has to do with avoiding a contradiction with the no fault divorce State and intending to permit remarriage.

Most people see this. Most of society sees that the U.S. is extremely liberal in issuing nullity. And these convictions were affirmed by myself when I actually spoke with a defender of the bond. Also I have a friend who received a decree based on a very silly “evidence”. She even agreed that it didnt make sense.
 
Last edited:
I’m curious to know, then, if any response will be “sound”? It appears you have already made up your mind.
 
Tell me this… can a couple establish terms of separation such as child support when filing legal separation?

There is a stark difference with what canon law instructs and how the tribunal system operates.
 
Last edited:
Ammi said:
The tribunal should be concerned with the truth, and encouraging couples to reconcile differences and forgive one another.
Click to expand...
This article is nonsensical and doesn’t even address annulment. It also has its facts wrong about Eleanor.
 
Since I don’t live in New Hampshire, not sure how this would be relevant. As I have told you multiple times, in my state, you must file for divorce in order to get child support. And despite your assumption that parents all have lofty ideals and are willing to support their children, that is not always the case.

Also, your proposed arrangement with the tribunal could result in couples finding themselves in invalid marriages from which they could not escape. For example, say one party petitioned the tribunal to determine if the marriage was valid, and the tribunal decided it was not. So they are still legally married, but now it is invalid?

I’m not sure why you have such a concern about the need to get a divorce prior to determining validity. Marriage is both a legal and church institution. The church is simply stating that they want the legal contract dissolved first.
 
Last edited:
The article is beside the point.

The point is that the tribunal contradicts what canon law encourages.

And legal separation can achieve what divorce does, but without the negative consequences divorce has on society and the decision of the tribunals.
 
Ammi said:
The point is that the tribunal contradicts what canon law encourages.

And legal separation can achieve what divorce does, but without the negative consequences divorce has on society and the decision of the tribunals.
Click to expand...
Take your axe and grind it elsewhere.

Stop posting the same thing on new threads!
 
Ammi said:
The Church is requiring divorce to listen to a case!!! That is blatantly wrong.
Click to expand...
Ohhh, now I see. The Catholic Church is wrong, and Ammi is right!

In that case, we are all wasting our time discussing this.
 
Ammi said:
The tribunal should be concerned with the truth, and encouraging couples to reconcile differences and forgive one another.
Click to expand...
As I know you’ve been told in other threads, that’s a pastoral function. That is not what the tribunal is or does. The tribunal is a court.
 
Irishmom2 said:
Ohhh, now I see. The Catholic Church is wrong, and Ammi is right!
Click to expand...
Yes. This.

I am now remembering a very long thread in which this poster argued that the tribunal was only determining sacramentality of marriages and not validity. And that a couple who were validly but not sacramentally married would be free to remarry after divorce with no Tribunal action at all.
 
JulianN said:
Since I don’t live in New Hampshire, not sure how this would be relevant. As I have told you multiple times, in my state, you must file for divorce in order to get child support. And despite your assumption that parents all have lofty ideals and are willing to support their children, that is not always the case.

Also, your proposed arrangement with the tribunal could result in couples finding themselves in invalid marriages from which they could not escape. For example, say one party petitioned the tribunal to determine if the marriage was valid, and the tribunal decided it was not. So they are still legally married, but now it is invalid?

I’m not sure why you have such a concern about the need to get a divorce prior to determining validity. Marriage is both a legal and church institution. The church is simply stating that they want the legal contract dissolved first.
Click to expand...
Why does the Church need to require civil divorce before it gives an evaluation of the Church’s view of marriage?

This leads to couples filing divorce in order to get their opinion on validity. But the Church’s canon only permits divorce under strict circumstances. So we have a conflict of guidance.

The tribunals need to conform to Church law and guidance, instead of conforming to no fault divorce State laws. The result is indirect encouragement to divorce, and intentions to apply impediments extremely liberally to cases.
 
Ammi said:
Why does the Church need to require civil divorce before it gives an evaluation of the Church’s view of marriage?

This leads to couples filing divorce in order to get their opinion on validity.
Click to expand...
A. Because the church gets to decide, and not one of us.
B. No, actually very few people have that much interest in validity. They are going to get divorced. Only a small fraction of those people who get divorced care enough about the church’s teaching to even explore the idea of a declaration of nullity.
 
Irishmom2 said:
40.png
Ammi:
The Church is requiring divorce to listen to a case!!! That is blatantly wrong.
Click to expand...
Ohhh, now I see. The Catholic Church is wrong, and Ammi is right!

In that case, we are all wasting our time discussing this.
Click to expand...
No. The Catholic Church is right. Tribunals are not representing and guiding according to canon law. There is a contradiction.
 
Ammi said:
No. The Catholic Church is right. Tribunals are not representing and guiding according to canon law. There is a contradiction.
Click to expand...
As @TheLittleLady said, cite the canons. You are accusing every canon lawyer and tribunal judge of violating Canon law. They are the duly appointed legal representatives of the church. That’s a very serious accusation; back it up.
 
Last edited:
Ammi said:
Tribunals are not representing and guiding according to canon law. There is a contradiction.
Click to expand...
Perhaps it is you That is misinterpreting the law.

Are you saying you know better than canon lawyers?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top