Full disclosure; your writer was granted a Decree of Nullity from the Tribunal in the Archdiocese of Toronto, therefore, what I write below is not to be construed as hypocrisy. The annulment was based on a Defect of Canonical Form, it was clear and precise and without question. It took nearly two years (because I was slow). It was not "painful" nor was it "humiliating" nor did it cost a lot of money. I recall that it was somewhere around $900 in three instalments as charitable donations for which tax receipts were issued. If I could not make a donation, it did not stop the process. It was thorough and detailed, witnesses were called and in the end, when the judge determined the issue of lack of form, it could have been decided in ten minutes! C'est la vie!
I didn't cry about it or whine about it. That time was good for me. It taught me patience and opened me up to God's possibilities for me. I didn't demand anything of the Church and I didn't whine about how mean She was. Had it been denied, I would have simply accepted it.
It was not a sacramental marriage, but it was a natural marriage and the fact that it was not sacramental did not invalidate it. That was not a criteria for considering the defect. There were other factors that could have been considered then, perhaps, other than the defect in Form. Under Pope Francis' changes to the annulment procedures, it would have been a slam dunk, notwithstanding the clear defect in form.
I do not support these changes. Not that the Bishop of Rome cares one bit about what I think. Having been through the process I found the whole debate about it insulting and manipulating.
![]()
Marriage must always be presumed to be valid. Lack of faith on one party to the marriage must never be a consideration. The Church has always presumed validity of all marriages because marriage existed before the Church in every culture. It was the Church that elevated it to a Sacrament - a Sacrament exchanged by the man and woman. The Pope may say in one breath that the doctrine is upheld, but the actions of this motu proprio do not support it.
Rorate Caeli blog has an important post to read with critical links to the commentary of some important canonists.
I dare say that under this initiative of Francis, even Henry VIII would have been granted and annulment to marry the whore Anne Boleyn and betray his true wife, Catherine of Aragon with Francis' blessing. Clearly, St Thomas More's martyrdom must have been for nought.
Will the Pope head the advice or will he barrel ahead defying the whole notion of Vatican II collegiality?
How sadly ironic, eh?
I didn't cry about it or whine about it. That time was good for me. It taught me patience and opened me up to God's possibilities for me. I didn't demand anything of the Church and I didn't whine about how mean She was. Had it been denied, I would have simply accepted it.
It was not a sacramental marriage, but it was a natural marriage and the fact that it was not sacramental did not invalidate it. That was not a criteria for considering the defect. There were other factors that could have been considered then, perhaps, other than the defect in Form. Under Pope Francis' changes to the annulment procedures, it would have been a slam dunk, notwithstanding the clear defect in form.
I do not support these changes. Not that the Bishop of Rome cares one bit about what I think. Having been through the process I found the whole debate about it insulting and manipulating.
Marriage must always be presumed to be valid. Lack of faith on one party to the marriage must never be a consideration. The Church has always presumed validity of all marriages because marriage existed before the Church in every culture. It was the Church that elevated it to a Sacrament - a Sacrament exchanged by the man and woman. The Pope may say in one breath that the doctrine is upheld, but the actions of this motu proprio do not support it.Rorate Caeli blog has an important post to read with critical links to the commentary of some important canonists.
I dare say that under this initiative of Francis, even Henry VIII would have been granted and annulment to marry the whore Anne Boleyn and betray his true wife, Catherine of Aragon with Francis' blessing. Clearly, St Thomas More's martyrdom must have been for nought.
Will the Pope head the advice or will he barrel ahead defying the whole notion of Vatican II collegiality?
How sadly ironic, eh?