Grounds for Annulment is Relevant to Obligations

If it was discovered at the reception how drunk the person is the priest would say, “We need to have you guys come in here and fix that” – because –. That’s an example of your brain and mind not working when you’re actually consenting, so those ones make sense. The ones that are more (I’ll call them gray) …

This is what I see. At the time of a civil divorce. I’ll just say the woman for the sake of the discussion. A woman dumps her husband and she’s complaining he’s terrible he’s awful she can’t stand him she’s sick of him she doesn’t love him anymore she needs to go do her own thing.  She might not even say she can’t stand him. She just needs to do her own thing: “I’m so sorry, I’m done with this, it’s me time now.  [(Christine Bacon)  I was too young. I didn’t I didn’t have – – yeah – – I didn’t have a life.] “It’s me time now.” That’s what she says at the time of the divorce. She gets her no-fault divorce.  The whole thing happens.

Then, however many months and years later, she files for an annulment, but her grounds for annulment are … .  Well, she’s – um – instructed and taught by tribunal personnel or diocesan personnel, when they look at all the grounds for annulment; it’s like “No, no, no, no. Here’s one that we can make stick.” So, they do grave lack of discretion of judgment. She doesn’t even know that she’s alleging that she suffered a serious psychopathology at the time of the wedding. But that’s what they’re doing at the tribunal.

And if they issued the annulment, and they’re supposed to show the obligations of parties as a result of the trial, what does she owe her husband?

It’s like – If she was really so psychologically messed up at the time of the wedding, he was living all those years thinking he’s married to her. If she’s that psychologically messed up, should she be alone with the kids? [(Christine Bacon) Good point!] At the time of the separation, she should be thinking about of all of this.

But, this is where something screwy. It doesn’t make any sense. This is not real. This is not honest. This is not justice. If the woman really suffered a serious psychopathology making her so messed up that she couldn’t understand permanence, openness to children, and sexual fidelity, that’s going to appear pretty quickly into the wedding. [(Christine Bacon) Yeah, yeah] You’re not going to have five kids, or three kids, and be together 12 years before you realize that.

So, she should be confessing that. And then, the obligations of the spouses towards each other and the children, as a result of the trial, should be based on that and restorative justice is a principle that makes sense. The woman should be making reparation as much as possible. [(Christine Bacon) Yeah] Or, maybe, the husband’s like “you know, this is the mom of our kids. I get it. She was messed up. It would be better for all of us …” [(Christine Bacon) if we stayed together and got Mom the help she needed.] Right, and let’s get married. [(Christine Bacon) There’s so much. You and I could talk about this forever.]