Can My Husband Annul Our Marriage Against My Will?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread

I very much want to make my marriage work, but my husband and I have not been getting along, and it is more likely he would leave if he felt he could get an anulment, and is being encouraged by a therapist (ex priest) that he could do so. I would rather make the marriage work.

My husband is catholic. I was baptized catholic, but never actively practiced.

Here are the issues:

We married in Feb 2003 in Seattle in a private civil ceremony between the two of us.

We later married in Oct 2003 with a catholic priest in Las Vegas in front of our family.

First question, did the second marriage count even though we were "already married"? Did we need to annul the first one in order to get married the second time?

Second question - my husband, a recovering alcoholic, claims the first "didnt count" because he was still drinking. Is that grounds for annulment? Even if we went ahead with the 2nd wedding?

Lastly, in 1990, I was "married" in Mexico in some office somewhere, strictly because the Mexican authorities would not let me leave my car in Mexico with my ex, because we were "not married". The proces was not in English, they spelled my name 3 different ways, and we never registered the paperwork anywhere.

Could this "Mexican Marriage" allow my husband to annul our marriage? If I annuled the Mexican Marriage myself, would my husband still have grounds to annul our marriage, simply because that one existed?

I really dont want to divorce because we "dont get along". I really want to make this marriage work. Does that have any bearing on the decision?

Please advise. Thanks

-- Deborah Marie (me_deb@yahoo.com), February 08, 2005

Answers

Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

I very much want to make my marriage work, but my husband and I have not been getting along, and it is more likely he would leave if he felt he could get an anulment,

Could you talk your husband into trying Retrouvaille? It's a Catholic program with a particular focus on failing marriages. Since he seems concerned about annulment, he may be willing to give other "Catholic things" a try.

and is being encouraged by a therapist (ex priest) that he could do so.

I guess that's one reason why the therapist is an ex-priest.

I would rather make the marriage work. ... Please advise.

I would recommend working on the real issues behind your marital problems. If you can't get your husband to agree to Retrouvialle, then try to find some other way to heal your marriage.

It's very possible that there are sufficient grounds to annul your marriage. If this is a pivotal point in getting your husband to seriously work on repairing your marriage, then you should probably bluff. If you threaten to appeal the first instance diocesan tribunal decision directly to the Roman Rota, it will likely delay the annulment process by five years or more. There is also a widespread but untrue belief that this will guarantee a decision in favor of the validity of your marriage, which you may be able to use to your advantage.

We married in Feb 2003 in Seattle in a private civil ceremony between the two of us.

This civil ceremony did not count from the point of view of the Catholic Church.

First question, did the second marriage count even though we were "already married"?

Your second, Catholic ceremony is the only one that possibly counts, and is the one that will be considered for formal annulment. The fact that you considered yourselves "already married" is evidence that you couldn't have taken the Catholic ceremony seriously enough to give valid marital consent, which would be grounds for annulment.

Did we need to annul the first one in order to get married the second time?

No.

Second question - my husband, a recovering alcoholic, claims the first "didnt count" because he was still drinking. Is that grounds for annulment? Even if we went ahead with the 2nd wedding?

The first ceremony is already invalid because it wasn't done in the Church. It is the state of affairs at the time of the Catholic ceremony that is important.

Could this "Mexican Marriage" allow my husband to annul our marriage?

Very possibly. Did you lie to the priest about this "Mexican marriage"? It should have been taken care of prior to your Catholic ceremony in October 2003.

If I annuled the Mexican Marriage myself, would my husband still have grounds to annul our marriage, simply because that one existed?

Regardless of how anything else in your life plays out, you should work on getting your Mexican marriage annulled. Doing this before your husband applies for an annulment (which can only occur after a final divorce decree) could help remove one possible annulment ground. However, it looks like there are more than enough other possible grounds for your husband to use.

I really dont want to divorce because we "dont get along". I really want to make this marriage work. Does that have any bearing on the decision?

It's good that you want to work on your marriage, but this is not a factor in the annulment decision.

Good luck!

-- Mark (aujus_1066@yahoo.com), February 08, 2005.


Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

Upon additional consideration, I have another concern. I don't know much of anything about civil law, so perhaps our resident laywer Pat can chime in.

My concern is that if you didn't obtain a civil divorce (or a civil annulment) for your Mexican marriage, you could be guilty of bigamy according to U.S. law, which would put an additional damper on things.

-- Mark (aujus_1066@yahoo.com), February 08, 2005.


Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

I went to the Mexican Consulate in the US website, looked up marriage and divorce, and most of the marriage criteria that was supposed to be followed by the Mexican authority, wasnt. No health exam, no translatted forms, just our ID and paying them enough money. It also says:

"Remember that for both your Mexican marriage or divorce certificates to be valid in the United States, they must be translated into English and duly authenticated with the “apostille”, (a sort of certification by the Secretario de Gobierno in that particular Mexican State where such proceedings took place). Consult with the local US legal authorities for details when the apostille must be obtained in the USA. "

This never happened.

They didnt ask for my partners previous divorce paperwork, which they are required to, and it also says he has to wait a full year, and Im not sure of those dates. This didnt happen:

"Persons previously married must present proof of the termination of that marriage in the form of a divorce decree or a death certificate. If the divorce or death took place outside Mexico, it must be authenticated and translated as stated above. Divorcees can marry in Mexico one year after the termination of their previous marriage."

Does that help?

-- Deborah Marie (me_deb@yahoo.com), February 08, 2005.


Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

Deborah,

Thanks for the additional information on your Mexican marriage. I don't know about the civil law issues, either Mexican or U.S., but I have two questions as to the canon law issues:

Was the Mexican marriage performed by a Catholic priest?

Was the priest who married you in October 2003 informed of the Mexican marriage?

-- Mark (aujus_1066@yahoo.com), February 08, 2005.


Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

The Mexican marriage definitely was not performed by a priest, or any type of religious affiliation. It was in a busy office, took about 20 min. I have no idea by what authority. The "witnesess" were given a "tip" to witness, but I dont think anyone even sat in. They just signed the certificate after the fact.

The priest who married us in Oct 2003 was probably not told of the Mexican marriage. I know I didnt lie about it, but I honestly don't recall even being asked. We didnt meet with him in advance, or go through any religious counseling. I could contact him and find out though. I think he may have known about our Feb 2003 Seattle marriage, so I suppose that would have not left the topic open about a previous marriage. Im guessing.

-- Deborah Marie (me_deb@yahoo.com), February 08, 2005.



Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

Because the Mexican marriage wasn't performed by a Catholic priest, it won't be grounds for your husband to use in an annulment. If the priest who married you in Oct. 2003 had bothered to ask, he probably would have told you not to worry about it from the viewpoint of the Catholic church.

Did you have any kind of premarital interview with the priest who married you in October 2003?

-- Mark (aujus_1066@yahoo.com), February 08, 2005.


Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

Another point - I am searching on line to find when my ex was divorced, from his marriage that took place in 1987 in Reno. Mexican law says he must be divorced for a year before remarrying, and so far, I can't find that record. Im not sure if he'd file for divorce where he lived, or where the marriage took place. I do see where that ex-wife has remarried, so Im assuming the divorce went through. It if wasnt recorded properly, or.. if there wasnt a year between his divorce and the Mexican marriage, would that invalidate the Mexican marriage?

-- Deborah Marie (me_deb@yahoo.com), February 08, 2005.

Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

No, we did not have a premarital interview. We talked on the phone about the arrangments, but only met the priest at the chapel.

Assuming the Mexican marriage isnt an issue... do you see anything else that would allow my husband to be granted an anullment?

-- Deborah Marie (me_deb@yaho.com), February 08, 2005.


Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

Deborah,

An important point to note is that your husband can't begin to file for annulment until he has a final divorce decree from you, at which time it is likely too late to save your marital relationship. Thus, the issue of possible annulment grounds won't come to the true test in time to affect your marriage.

I see two possible annulment grounds, Defective Convalidation and Grave Lack of Due Discretion. The latter ground is widely used by the U.S. tribunals. I will post a description of each from _The Invalid Marriage_ by Lawrence Wrenn, who is a doctor of canon law.

-- Mark (aujus_1066@yahoo.com), February 08, 2005.


Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

Defective Convalidation

In such cases, therefore, it is required that both parties a) personally recognize the invalidity or at least the probable invalidity of the former marriage and b) transfer the marital right to their partner, i.e., not merely confirm or reiterate a former exchange of rights but actually give a new marital consent distinct from the former inefficacious one.

This does not usually involve a problem where both parties are Catholic but these requirements demand more than can reasonably be expected of most non-Catholics. Consequently many convalidations involving a non-Catholic can be proven invalid on the ground that the non-Catholic party either failed to recognize the original union as invalid or failed to give new consent.

Finally, it must be remembered that in these cases it is not necessary to prove simulation, i.e. exclusion of marital consent by a positive act of the will; but it is only necessary to prove the negative omission of the new consent required for a valid convalidation.

-- Mark (aujus_1066@yahoo.com), February 08, 2005.



Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

Alcohol Dependence (Lack of Due Comptence)

Marriage cases in which Alcohol Dependence is the only diagnosis are rare. Generally the psychiatric expert sees the alcoholism as one aspect of a larger syndrome. Occasionally, however, the drinking is so heavy and frequent that there is no clear picture of how the person functions when sober, so that a broader diagnosis would not be justified by the evidence.

In determining whether Alcohol Dependence is invalidating of a marriage, the usual four areas must be investigated.

a) Severity

Alcohol Dependence is profoundly disruptive of marriage life. Members of an alcoholic's family often live in fear, embarrassment and deprivation. And, almost by definition, the alcoholic lacks the capacity for those specifically marital acts of self revelation, understanding and loving.

b) Antecedence

Generally, in cases that come before a tribunal, the alcoholic party was either already drinking excessively during the courtship but the other party did not consider it a serious problem, or the alcoholic had a drinking problem earlier in life but had managed to bring it under control prior to the marriage only to have it flare up again afterwards. In such cases it may be presumed that the incompetence resulting from the alcoholism was at least causally antecedent.

c) Perpetuity

Since the essential obligations of marriage are perpetual obligations, a person must, in order to enter a valid marriage, have the capacity, at the time of the exchange of consent, to assume those perpetual obligations. If therefore it is shown 1) that a person suffered at least virtually or causally from Alcohol Dependence at the time of marriage and 2) that the cumulative effect of the drinking eventually deprived the person of the ability to fulfill the essential marital obligations, then the person is considered to have lacked due competence.

d) Relativity

The alcoholic's choice of partner could conceivably be critical. It could happen, for example, that a man who was abusing alcohol at the time of marriage but was not dependent on it, married a woman whose own problems would certainly exacerbate the man's attachment to alcohol. In such a case it could be argued that the alcohol abuse plus the exacerbating spouse would constitute marital incompetence, i.e. the incapacity of the man to function in marriage (that is, to fulfill perpetually the essential obligations of marriage) with this particular woman.

P.S. This was under "Lack of Due Competence" and not "Lack of Due Discretion" as I had thought. Wrenn notes that "It often happens that a person lacks both the due discretion and due competence. In such a case a tribunal is free to select the ground on the basis of the particular circumstances."

-- Mark (aujus_1066@yahoo.com), February 08, 2005.


Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

First, I want to say thank you so much for taking the time to post this information. It is very helpful and educational.

On the Alcohol Dependance - wow - it would seem that every alcoholic, at some stage in their recovery, would have grounds for annullment, simply because they are an alcoholic and going through typical alcoholic patterns.

Especially with the choice of partner. To be able to say "my partners personal issues exacerbate my attachment to alcohol" - that is a pretty broad blanket statement. How would one refute that? If he says "well, that is my truth - you make me want to drink"- is that in itself grounds?

As you say, it normally can't be used as the ONLY grounds, so that is good. Anyway, after each item - I am listing my particulars.

Alcohol Dependence (Lack of Due Comptence)

In determining whether Alcohol Dependence is invalidating of a marriage, the usual four areas must be investigated.

a) Severity Alcohol Dependence is profoundly disruptive of marriage life. Members of an alcoholic's family often live in fear, embarrassment and deprivation. And, almost by definition, the alcoholic lacks the capacity for those specifically marital acts of self revelation, understanding and loving.

b) Antecedence Generally, in cases that come before a tribunal, the alcoholic party was either already drinking excessively during the courtship but the other party did not consider it a serious problem, or the alcoholic had a drinking problem earlier in life but had managed to bring it under control prior to the marriage only to have it flare up again afterwards. In such cases it may be presumed that the incompetence resulting from the alcoholism was at least causally antecedent.

Im not sure what the word means, but here is the history of drinking in our relationship.

Before we met, apparantly my husband had been to rehab. We started as penpals, and when we first talked, he was not drinking. When we first started courting, he did start having occassional slips, but it did not seem like alchoholic drinking at first, as he was gradually leading up to that. When we got married in Feb 03, he was drinking a 3 times a week, and within 2 weeks now that he had insurance due to the civil wedding, he went to another rehab.

After 6 months sober, he apparantly had a slip while on a business trip. A couple days before we were married in Oct 2003, he pulled me aside and confessed that to me, as he didnt want to get married with that secret over his head.

His grandfather died end of Nov 2003 and he started having occassional slips again into the spring of 2004. He;'d get a few weeks sober, then drink. He travels with his job, so these happened out of town, so Im not sure how often. But towards the summer, it started increasing to, Im sure, once a week, even though only a couple times during that period did I ever witness him drunk. In July 2004, while out of town, he received a DUI, and has now been sober ever since.

So, in our two years together, I'd guess there's been about 14 months consisten sobriety, 6 months of bad drinking, and 6 months of getting a few weeks sober, then drinking occassionally without my knowledge.

c) Perpetuity Since the essential obligations of marriage are perpetual obligations, a person must, in order to enter a valid marriage, have the capacity, at the time of the exchange of consent, to assume those perpetual obligations. If therefore it is shown 1) that a person suffered at least virtually or causally from Alcohol Dependence at the time of marriage and 2) that the cumulative effect of the drinking eventually deprived the person of the ability to fulfill the essential marital obligations, then the person is considered to have lacked due competence.

That would definitely apply to the first civil ceremony in Feb 2003, but in Oct 2003, he had been sober since his March rehab, except for the one slip while at a sales conference out of town in September.

To be honest, Im sure the cumulative effect of his drinking has affected his competence in many areas of his life and the way he has learned to deal with people and situations. I dont say he was completely deprived of being able to fullfill marital obligations, but perhaps handicapped.

If my family were brought into this, they'd be shocked that he was even an alcholic, and anything other than a well put together man, so it would really be his word vs my word on this.

d) Relativity The alcoholic's choice of partner could conceivably be critical. It could happen, for example, that a man who was abusing alcohol at the time of marriage but was not dependent on it, married a woman whose own problems would certainly exacerbate the man's attachment to alcohol. In such a case it could be argued that the alcohol abuse plus the exacerbating spouse would constitute marital incompetence, i.e. the incapacity of the man to function in marriage (that is, to fulfill perpetually the essential obligations of marriage) with this particular woman.

Would that mean, if I were a drinker? I am not, and he has even joked that I am the most UN-enabling partner he has ever been with, hence the reason he never would drink at home.

However, if it means my personality "made him drink" - well, of course he would say that. LOL - anyone who has been with an alcoholic has heard that one.

Also, the fact that "we dont get along" - he would probably attribute to this section, such as I over-react to situations and therefore he cant fulfill the obligations.

With that in mind.. and if the Mexican marriage is not an issue... does this alone appear to be grounds?

P.S. This was under "Lack of Due Competence" and not "Lack of Due Discretion" as I had thought. Wrenn notes that "It often happens that a person lacks both the due discretion and due competence. In such a case a tribunal is free to select the ground on the basis of the particular circumstances."

-- Mark (aujus_1066@yahoo.com), February 08, 2005.



-- Deborah Marie (me_deb@yahoo.com), February 09, 2005.


Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

Deborah,

Since you are not divorced (I pray you do not get forced to a divorce) -you might find some inspiration, strategic guidance, and assistance on this site:

Mary's Advocates

-- Daniel Hawkenberry (dlm@catholic.org), February 09, 2005.


Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

Deborah,

It's just my opinion, but it seems likely to me that your husband could very probably obtain an annulment based on the alcoholism alone. The two times in rehab and the DUI provide corroberating evidence, and the lack of pre-Cana classes and a premarital interview with the priest could also contribute to a grave lack of due discretion. But no one can tell you for sure one way or the other except for the diocesan tribunal.

To address the specifics:

"Antecedent" just means that your husband's alcohol problem existed prior to the marriage.

The "Relativity" point is in your favor, as your husband had the good sense to pick someone for a wife who would make it more difficult for him to drink. You should emphasize this when you talk with him about this.

The point about alcoholism not being the only ground is more of a reminder that where there is alcoholism, there are usually many other problems, so the canon lawyers involved should be careful to keep an eye out for these other problems. It's not really saying that alcoholism [I]can't[/I] be used as the only annulment ground. Sorry.

Again, you have my best wishes in this difficult time in your life.

-- Mark (aujus_1066@yahoo.com), February 09, 2005.


Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

To answer your first question:

"Can My Husband Anull [sic] Our Marriage Against My Will?"

No, he cannot annul it period. However, he can petition the Church to have the marriage annulled (the Church can declare nullity, your husband cannot). Can the marriage be annulled against your will? Yes.

If your Las Vegas wedding was not done in a Catholic church, or was done without the proper pre-nuptial inquiry (meaning the permission of the Bishop for the marriage was never sought), then the marriage is probably not valid anyway. A Marriage Tribunal would have to look at all of the facts of the "other" marriages and decide whether or not any of them were valid. IMHO Mexico and Seattle marriages are not valid - Lack of Canonical Form (that is of course if you were a Baptised Catholic at those times).

I commend you for wanting to make your marriage work, but if your husband has given up and wants to part and refuses to listen to you or any good advise, then there is little or nothing you can do to stop him from leaving. The marriage may be valid, but if he is determined to leave, it won't make any difference to him.

PS Ex-priests, depending on why and how they became "ex" are usually not good counsellors for Catholics.

-- Fr. Paul (pjdoucet@hotmail.com), February 11, 2005.



Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

Dear Deborah,

You have my sincere sympathy because it seems your husband is searching for away out and I guarantee you if that is so, he will find it or he will make it up and convince himself he found it.

This is where the Catholic Church , if either of you would request it and if you are practicing Catholics, should step in, investigate and rule. If there is no justification for divorce, the one who insists upon it should be told the consequences and what is right and then if they persist should immediately be formally excommunicated and forbidden civilly from stepping on Church property until there is movement toward a just resolution. That is how it SHOULD be done. But of course we know reality.

In the U.S., it is likely that your husband will divorce you, get his annulment and move on. End of story. Sorry but that is the likely scenario. Not certain of course but most likely.

If you guys have kids, particularly younger ones, than you are in for a really rough ride and my heart breaks for you.

All you can do is whatever keeps you living.

karl

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), February 12, 2005.


Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

Karl,

"If there is no justification for divorce, the one who insists upon it should be told the consequences and what is right and then if they persist should immediately be formally excommunicated and forbidden civilly from stepping on Church property until there is movement toward a just resolution. That is how it SHOULD be done. But of course we know reality."

Thank God the reality is that even those who are excommunicated are never "forbidden civilly from stepping on Church property until there is movement toward a just resolution." Kind of difficult don't you think? 'You are forbidden to step on our property until after you have come back to us for some form of reconciliation'.

Excommunication means one is cut off from the Sacraments and any formal involvement in the Church. It doesn't involve being banished from the premises that would be total condemnation without hope of reconciliation.

-- Fr. Paul (pjdoucet@hotmail.com), February 13, 2005.


Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

Mark, Where are you getting that four part analysis of alcoholism and marital capacity? I don't think its quite right. I've seen that analysis but in very different circumstances for incapacity. Alcoholism is not considered severe enough a disorder to be an invalidating impediment to marital capacity. The psychological disorder needs to be much more severe than mere alcoholism. Pat

-- Pat Delaney (patrickrdelaney@yahoo.com), February 13, 2005.

Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

Dear Fr.

You seem to have missed this line _ until there is movement toward a just resolution._

There are more than ample ways to convey to both a wronged spouse and to the Church, if it really cared.

There is E-mail. There is snail mail(USPS). There is word of mouth from an intermediary. There is the telephone and there is the action of the wronged spouse when they have been restored(or restoration has begun earnestly) what has been stolen from them by the adulterous spouse. After all isn't forgiveness one of Jesus central teachings? It is just that the present Church has confused what true Charity is? True Charity does no harm.

Allowing an unrepentant adulteress into the Church does real harm, particularly with the passage of time and the civil encumberments on most abandoned spouses, but the Catholic Church does not care a thing about those does it?

I have become very radical as I have watched fourteen years of acceptance of my criminal treatment by my wife be fully accepted by every cleric I have com in contact with who has been in a position to act for the good but who have chosen otherwise. IN EVERY SINGLE CASE.

I really do not think that the clergy understand what is really going on. If you did you would behave differently and you would listen to both side. But when a Rotal ruling has confirmed the validity of a SACRAMENT the clergy should be united behind the abandoned spouse(or better behind doing what they can to heal a SACRAMENT). Instead they support the lovers, for the"good of the Children". This is a very abused concept and is to apply only to an innocently abandoned spouse. It can never apply to a spouse who abandoned their marriage, never. It is a fundamental miscarriage of truth and justice.

I live it everyday dear Father. I watch my relationship with our children destroyed and my life destroyed "for the good of the children".

The Catholic Church is simply very, very, very gravely wrong. and is murdering innocent spouses and marriages.

Karl

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), February 13, 2005.


Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

Karl,

I didn't miss the line. How can such a movement even be hoped for if one is cut off completely from saving grace by an action such as you suggest?

"civil encumberments on most abandoned spouses, but the Catholic Church does not care a thing about those does it?"

Incorrect. Canon 1154 - When separation has taken place, appropriate provision is always to be made for the due maintenance and upbringing of children.

Regardless of your situation, excommunication does not involve the denial of physical presence on Church property. The Church is made for sinners, it is the only hope for their salvation.

I do not know the details of your situation, but if she is not going to Communion, functioning as an Extraordinary Minister of Communion or Reader or Catechist or Altar Server, then there is nothing to do but try to seek reconciliation. The Catholic Church is not into shunning or banishing from mere attendance at its celebrations those who are in obstinate and perpetual sin. Jesus knew the heart of Judas but never asked him to leave.

-- Fr. Paul (pjdoucet@hotmail.com), February 14, 2005.


Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

As to the healing of the valid Sacrament, the Code of Canon Law demands that every reasonable and possible effort be made to do so - Canons 1151-55.

-- Fr. Paul (pjdoucet@hotmail.com), February 14, 2005.

Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

In another thread I see where you say the clergy support their adulterous behaviour. Although I do not know what these clergy have said or done exactly, I am of the opinion that the reality is not that they support the "lovers" but they do not DO what You demand, which is to kick them out of the building.

Somehow I also get the feeling that although the Church has officially declared your marriage valid, that if this has been going on for 14+ years their may be a valid reason for the separation.

-- Fr. Paul (pjdoucet@hotmail.com), February 14, 2005.


Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

And father that is exactly where the Catholic Church is wrong. Because in fact it does support adultery and you and the rest of the clerics do not have the integrity to acknowledge it. You idealize, listen to lies, and never ever come down on the side which presumes validity and an obligation to do what it takes to heal a marriage, including excommunication.

It is your psychological bent that drives this.

You dismiss the innocent spouse and coddle the criminals. It is those like yourself who say that women ask to be raped, if you would follow the same logic you use in marriage. that being, it happened it is it must be for a reason.

karl

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), February 14, 2005.


Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

Jesus never asked Judas to leave because 1) his treachery was required as part of the plan for salvation 2) Jesus lived perfection on a daily basis and there could be no other example that would be more likely to turn Judas from his sin. You are using the exception to justify a bad rule, which only exists becasue to do the right thing would take much effort and that is not what the present Church does, unlike the Good Shepherd who would leave the 99 for the One.

You need to search yourself for your pastoral approach is very modernist and accepting of evil, which you refuse to confront. Instead you will judge wrongly the victim. you are a typical modern priest and will not see the truth when it is spoken to you and before you. You will reject the prophet for for folly.

Just as in days gone by priests used to urge people to remain with terribly abuseful spouses(and were wrong by doing so or by not finding out if such was the case), now the pendulum has swung far the other way and you fail to recognize it, to the great detriment of many marriages and spouses and children.

You should listen, for their is truth in what both of us are saying. And what should be done in these cases is not always easily clear but should be done without merely accepting things as they are just because it is or becasue it must be right since it is.

I am just asking you to reconsider your gut reaction.

karl

-- Karl (Parkerkkajwen@hotmail.com), February 14, 2005.


Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

Father,

Rather than going back and forth here, which likely will do much good, which I think is what must be done and what we would both rather happen, please go and join in this link and perhaps just lurk (in the good sense)it might be interesting. Please at least give it a try.

groups.yahoo.com/group/defendingmarriage/

Karl

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), February 14, 2005.


Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

Karl,

Before I go over to the other forum and check it out, I want to say you are being extremely presumptuous in your judgement of me based on what little you have to go by that I have posted.

When you talk of excommunication you demand total banishment from the Church's properties.

I assume your wife is already excommunicated, meaning that she is not entitled to the Sacraments save the danger of death, and that she cannot participate in any formal way in the Church's life (minister of any kind, Catechist, Parish Council, etc.). If this is not the case, then this is wrong unless of course she is living with her "new partner" as brother and sister (sleeping in separate beds in separate rooms). This latter situation would be a pastoral response for the sake of the children she and her "new partner" have. There is presedence within the Church's laws for such as with the case of those entering the Church from a polygamous relationship (the first spouse does not have to be the spouse that the one in question remains with).

-- Fr. Paul (pjdoucet@hotmail.com), February 14, 2005.


Response to Can My Husband Anull Our Marriage Against My Will?

Dear Father,

When a former polygamist converts he or she must choose one of their spouses to marry(if they choose to be married in the Church) as I understand it. But the polygamist under Church Law(which is not the case in divorces and gravely wrong, at least it is not enforced as it is in the polygamy cases of conversion) must continue all civil obligations for the now formewr spouses.

Regarding the brother and sister thing; such an arrangement is valid ONLY for an innocent spouse who has been abandoned wrongly and enters into an illicit affair resulting in children. It is not available for an adulterous spouse who abandoned their legitimate spouse.

If you think otherwise you have benn incorrectly taught but still further on that front.

Since the ends of marriage are equal this arrangement needs to be rethought by Moral Theologians in depth since any such accomodation harms the good of the spouses of the valid marriage. Such was not the case when in days gone by, there was a hierarchy of ends with the good of the children being paramount. This is a fundamental shift/development and cannot be ignored but it is. I have not heard of a sinlgle treatise on this but I am not a scholar.

According to catholic Moral Theology it is forbidden to do evil for the sake of good. This is a basic premise. To live as brother and sister with a person who is not your spouse does grave harm to the valid spouse who is the one the promise isd made to to be a help mate, not the civil spouse. This problem cannot be ignored or glossed over. Marriage is not an institution of thou shalt nots -only. It is a positive institution which involves serious aspects for the good of the spouses which are rendered impossible by the brother and sister arrangement. It is ridiculous to say that it is for my good that my spouse lives with the person she violated our marriage for. Such a prposal is void of any inherent good. It is evil. It cannot be made good. Not even for the good of children. It reemains evil. You cannot make evil good. Not possible.

There is much wrong in these matters in particular, Father.

The Church law yields the right to the innocent spouse, only, to refuse to take back the adulterous spouse. Check it out. But still the Church urges(and rightfully so for both the ends of a valid marriage)a reconciliation. That shows the Church in its desire to heal marriage. In fact the Church desires even those in marriages found to be invalid to convalidate those marriages, again a wise and good thing.

So, taken as a whole, in my opinion, the brother and sister thing is at best awful and wrong in the only circumstance where it is possible, with the innocent spouse, because it harms an equal end of marriage. I think a disciplined approach to the Theology of the change in the Church teaching to an orthodox Catholic and not one who misunderstands true charity(most clerics today especially from my generation)will result ultimately in its rejection, upon honest review. I do not think their is the will to do so because lousy clerics(those holding to false charity) rule and control in most instances but not in all. And there are many who may be sincerely, wrong, but are stll wrong and doing much harm.

With respect to my judgement of you, you are correct in that it is based upon scant evidence, which is always dangerous and as such likely to be harmful, so I will apologize for being hasty. But do let me say that I think the example of your pastoral reasoning are consistant with one who is more likely to use charity falsely than in a disciplined manner but I will grant you the jury is still out.

Father, I have suffered much harm through priests whom are guilty of rash judgement as it is defined in the catechism. This makes me very sensitive in these discussions when their action are defended, even in honest ignorance. I lost everything, Father. Everything. My wife hid her affair from the canonist in her petition but the priest who sponsored it knew she witheld that information and encouraged her in divorcing me, without even seeking anothe rperspective. Father, that is classic rash judgement. he told her to seek an annulment with otu other input and he told her she was judtified to divorce me in the absence of other input.

The Catholioc Church has at every level has been made aware of this with no accoutablilty for this priest who did such incredible harm. I know he did these things, I spoke with him. When I told the judicail vicar of these things he refuse to investigate the perjury, inspite of numerous witness and a mountain of evidence otherwise.

So Father i know where I have been wronged in many cases and I know not a single cleric has been called to accountability on anything I have alleged or proven already and proven long ago. This makes every responsible ordinary culpable of the same. And every sungle one have been notified, long ago.

The corruption I allege, is truly not alleged. It is fact. But so much time has elaped due to the Chjurch and its failure to address my complaints at all, forget in a timely manner, many cannot be proven. Literally I could go on for hours, Father. I just wish you would believe I have told you the facts. Thank you.

karl

-- karl (parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), February 14, 2005.


Mark, Where are you getting that four part analysis of alcoholism and marital capacity?

The Invalid Marriage by Lawrence Wrenn, J.C.D. I can look up the page numbers if you'd like.

-- Mark (aujus_1066@yahoo.com), February 14, 2005.


Mark,

No thanks. That book is not authoritative. It suggests reasoning that conflicts with much established Rotal jurisprudence, especially with regard to Canon 1095. Seriously, put that book in the round- file where it belongs. Father Wrenn will have much to answer for someday.

Speaking of Rotal jurisprudence, I've been amazed at how thoroughly things are handled at the Rota. Its a world apart from how things are considered at most tribunals here in the States.

Pat

-- Pat Delaney (patrickrdelaney@yahoo.com), February 14, 2005.


Karl,

I do not dispute that you have been wronged, and it seems that you are missing my points, so I will try one last time as simply and clearly as I can:

Yes, every reasonable effort should have been made for reconciliation.

I do not condone the way your situation has been handled according to how you describe it.

The Church has decreed that your marriage is valid.

BUT

It seems to me that this 'case' is about 15 years old.

There are 'new' children involved now in the 'new' relationship (sinful and wrong as it may be).

It appears there is no hope for a reconciliation at this late point.

Therefore for the sake of the 'new' children it is pastoral and prudent for the couple to remain together but living as brother and sister. Children trump just about every time.

I know the Law as regards polygamist converts, and was merely using it as an example to show there is precedence for the polygamist to remain with a "spouse" that is not the first. Your wife, except for not being a convert, is analogous to the polygamist.

These are the facts as I see them, and as difficult as I am sure it is for you, you have to move on.

Banishing your wife from Church property is not an answer.

-- Fr. Paul (pjdoucet@hotmail.com), February 14, 2005.


I do get your point, very loudly and very clearly. Thank you.

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), February 14, 2005.

Then please restate my points in your own words to show that you understand.

-- Fr. Paul (pjdoucet@hotmail.com), February 14, 2005.

Father, what you have told me is not what you said but what you mean, as I believe you to mean, and that is that there is no place in the Catholic Church for a person who expects it to pursue truth and justice.

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), February 14, 2005.

As I figured, you don't have a clue what I said because you're obsessed with getting your own way.

I'm sorry if that seems insensitive, but you need a good slap and to be told to wake up (a figure of speech, just in case you claim I mean to do you physical harm).

Barring your wife from Church property is not justice. The truth has been given you; your wife is the only one who can give you justice, we can't twist her arm.

-- Fr. Paul (pjdoucet@hotmail.com), February 14, 2005.


That book is not authoritative. It suggests reasoning that conflicts with much established Rotal jurisprudence, especially with regard to Canon 1095.

If you have any authoritative references, I'm more than happy to add them to my collection. Wrenn's book is used by quite a number of seminaries in their canon law courses.

-- Mark (aujus_1066@yahoo.com), February 15, 2005.


Mark,

Pat can tell you better than I but there are compendia with published Roman Rotal decisions, which can be read and understood to see how the "precedent decisions" differ from those issued in the U.S. where Wrenns type of interpretations are the ones that are routinely, or were routinely over turned. Readingf the Rotal stuff is the best I can suggest.

Karl

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), February 15, 2005.


Mark,

Of course the best examples for fact comparison are the Rota decisions themselves. In the past twelve years, about 100-200 decisions have been translated into English and published in the journal Moniter Eccliasticus. About 40-60 of these translated decisions address Canon 1095 in great depth. Read these and you'll know the truth about Wrenn (he is spreading falsehood).

Moniter Ecclesiasticus is not too hard to find. Its kept at quite a few university libraries in North America.

The best books are in Italian or Latin. The Pontifical University in Rome keeps copies as well as the Library of Congress.

Let me give you two really great titles. These are written by two of the three judges hearing my own Rota case.

Msgr. Caberletti wrote: "The essential object of the consent conjugates them in the canonical wedding: a historical-legal study" Giordano Caberletti. Brescia: Morcelliana, c1986. 199 p.; 24 cm.

Msgr. Erlebach wrote: "The invalidity of the judicial sentence "ob ius defensionis denegatum" in rotal jurisprudence" Grzegorz Erlebach. Vatican City: Publishing bookcase Vatican, 1991. 324 p.; 24 cm.

Both these book were written by priests before they were appointed by the Holy Father to sit as Rota judges. This kind of clinches it for me that their interpretation of canon law is sanctioned by the Holy Spirit.

Also good are the books by Father Woestman:

WOESTMAN, William H., ed., Papal Allocutions to the Roman Rota 1939-1994, Ottawa, Ontario Faculty of Canon Law, Saint Paul University, 1994, xii-243 p. ISBN 0-919261-34-5.

There is also another edition for 1995-2002.

Unfortunately, although these books are written by authoritative judges, or about the authoritative statements by popes (the "sole authoritative legislator") it is unlikely they will be as widely read as Wrenn in the U.S., either in the seminaries here or at the tribunals.

I had heard about a refutation of Wrenn that someone was putting together, but don't know if it was ever finished. It's jsut that there is so much pure drivel published here.

The absolute worst was by some poor example of a civil lawyer expanding on how to get an annulment. The man was a menace. He even had a chapter for people who thought there marriage was canonically valid. His answer was to keep examining your conscience as you might then come to believe you had a concientious basis for following the internal forum. This was a recent book and is available on Amazon.com, as is the stuff by Wrenn.

Seriously Mark, Wrenn and the others writing about "american canon law theory" are just in love with following their own star. But their compass is a badly formed conscience. They're lost and growing farther from reality every passing year.

Thanks for asking.

-- Patrick R. Delaney (patrickrdelaney@yahoo.com), February 15, 2005.


Karl, would you mind giving us the whole story as it has happened? I think this will help us all better understand your situation.

Tim Kirschenheiter

-- Tim K. (tk4386@juno.com), February 15, 2005.


Dear Tim,

If you search around here in old threads you can get the jist and understand it.

No one here really wants to go through that again and I do not mean to be rude.

I simply think that if The Church rules on a petition, if they find that a spouse abandoned their marriage, which they know from the evidence in the vast majority of cases to a much greater extent than they do nullity or not, the abandoning spouse should spend some time with the ordinary so that they can understand that a valid marriage should be convalidated and the rift healed. In the event the guilty party refuses I believe they should be excommunicated and should remain so untill they repent, make restitution for what they have done and heal the marriage.

It is simple straight forward justice, not vengeance.

Of course thay cannot heal the marriage if the aggreived spouse will not take them back, as the Church allows in the case of adultery.

Then, I believe perhaps, the excommunication may not be warranted since they cannot heal the marriage by themselves.

I hope that helps a bit. Vengeance should never play a part in any situation as it does more harm than good. But I do understand why it is so easy to be vengeful, although I think most Americans have no real idea what vengeance really means. Mnay think that rightful restituion is vengeance and they are simply maintaining an anticatholic understanding of it.

Simply put, if I steal $100 from you and it costs you $1000 as the result of not having that original $100, then I owe you, in fact $ 1,000. That IS NOT vengeance that is just restitution. That is exactly how the Catholic Church teaches it.

Karl

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), February 15, 2005.


Tim,

Here is a recent link on another site.

-- Mark (aujus_1066@yahoo.com), February 16, 2005.


Pat,

Thanks for the references. I checked the university library I make use of, but they do not carry Moniter Ecclesiasticus. Also, I don't have any general-topic reading skills in languages other than English, so books in Italian and Latin aren't of much use for me. (I did have to pass several foreign language reading tests in my graduate programs, but these were restricted to technical mathematical writing, which is quite stilted in style and vocabulary.)

-- Mark (aujus_1066@yahoo.com), February 16, 2005.


Wrenn's book is used by quite a number of seminaries in their canon law courses.

Wrenn may have much to answer for. I pray he reconciles himself...

-- Daniel Hawkenberry (dlm@catholic.org), February 16, 2005.


I already have:

Law Sections, selected and translated by Lawrence G. Wrenn. A collection of fifteen law sections on fifteen different grounds involving the the invalidity of marriage. All but one decision are from the Roman Rota. (1994) 93 pp., ISBN 0-943616-65-4.

but it didn't seem to contain anything about alcoholism. I'm guessing that no one here would recommend:

Jurisprudence: A Collection of US Tribunal Decisions, ed. by J.A. Alesandro, J.J. Cuneo, W.A. Varvaro, and V. Vondenberger (2002) vii + 472 pages. ISBN 0-943616-94-8. This volume presents 33 actual decision by various Tribunals in the USA, selected by a special committee of the Canon Law Society of America as particularly worthy of study by canonists. In some the argument is particularly cogent; in others, the issues unusual; in others the canonical and/or theological principles as applied to the facts especially noteworthy. It is hoped that jurisprudential discussion will be sparked by the publication of this volume. The collection is divided into five general categories: (1) traditional grounds of marital nullity (exclusion, error, conditions; (2) mixed traditional and psychological grounds; (3) strictly psychological grounds; (4) cases of formal process (defects of canonical form, invalid sanatio); and (5) non-matrimonial cases (employment, dismissal from the clerical state).

Pat, if there is a specific case involving alcoholism from Moniter Eccliasticus that you could give me the reference for, I may be able to order it through inter-library loan. I guess I just don't see why someone who isn't competent enough to decide when to drive a car should be considered competent enough to decide to enter into Holy Matrimony.

-- Mark (aujus_1066@yahoo.com), February 17, 2005.


I guess I just don't see why someone who isn't competent enough to decide when to drive a car should be considered competent enough to decide to enter into Holy Matrimony.

Mark,

Matrimony while drunk could be cause; however, in my opinion - alcoholism by itself is not proof of something lacking as a cause to nullify. One would have to prove specifically what was not present (rather than just alcoholism was present and infer something else) at the time of marriage.

-- Daniel Hawkenberry (dlm@catholic.org), February 17, 2005.


Matrimonial consent while drunk is a no brainer. Its covered under 1095, No.1. As to the alcoholism cases, I did see two or three decisions on this in the Moniter Ecclesiasticus translations. What I really want to do is order these things, purchase copyrights, and publish them on a website. They are just so incredibly informative.

Its very important to read the full decisions. What I have seen from the Canon Law Society of America (or in actual written sentences from U.S. tribinals) when they do cite the Rota, is that they will paraphrase a case, or cite isolated statements from it. But this was usually very disingenuine. Often the holding of the case would be directly contrary to what the citation alludes. If I did this is in my legal practice, I would be dis-barred or sued for malpractice faster than.....(some witty analogy).

-- Pat Delaney (patrickrdelaney@yahoo.com), February 18, 2005.


Yet Rome allows this to go on and on and on and on and simply issues new guidlines which they HOPE(but know better) will be followed.

This has gone on far, far to long with horrendous consequences to many.

The Pope is entirely culpable and should resign, along with almost every American Bishop(they are worse).

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), February 18, 2005.


Karl,

For heaven's sake, why is the Pope culpable? It seems he is doing all that he possibly can to address the situation.

I have to tell you that I'm a little bit scandalized at your characterization of the church and all her leaders. You are abandoning hope. Thats really wrong. You can't do that. Without trying to criticize or belittle you, I honestly think you should seek counseling.

People make mistakes. Your wife did, so did mine and her family, as did the bishop and his appointed judges in both our cases. They all did. Sooooo what! Its part of our state in life. That doesn't mean I have the right to make the same mistake, and it doesn't mean you have to either.

Two wrongs don't make a right. Seek help (not justice - this is your cross). Get yourself together and move on in a way that's appropriate to your station in life. It can really be a happy life if you give yourself a chance.

I want that for you. And you'll help many more people around you, including your wife and children, if you forgive those who have hurt you and start being thankful for what you have.

-- Pat Delaney (patrickrdelaney@yahoo.com), February 18, 2005.


go pat!

well said! :)

-- kt (jc_died_4_me@hotmail.com), February 18, 2005.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ