Validity of N.O. Annulments

[JLeigh]

Let me say right off that I am very sorry that you are going through this...I can't even imagine the frustration you must be experiencing!

 

 

The reasons stated in his annullment for reasons of nullity is mentally deficient (my fiance). Which...is quite hilarious. But, in actuality it was the ex wife who was deficient in understanding but I suppose they found the fault with him, not her.

 

Here's where I think it gets tricky. You stated that the annulment was granted based on mental deficiency issues, but then you go on to say: "Which...is quite hilarious." That tells me that you don't believe he had any mental deficiencies (forgive me, I'm just thinking out loud) which would indicate that, in your eyes, the annulment was granted based on something that isn't accurate. Following that train of thought, would that not then warrant some further investigation (I hope I'm making sense here ) into the validity of the annulment?

 

 

[AGtoTrad]

Yes, you wouldn't be far off the mark JLo. But that is just my opinion and not part of an investigation for a marriage tribunal. I wasn't married to him then what am I to know?  People do grow up. And of course I'm prejudiced toward his side of things. The ex wife is the one that started the annullment process and it is protected (what she said; even now). So it is all conjecture as to what it was exactly that she said (and he therefore can't or couldn't refute it) to create the idea that he was mentally deficient.

 

No matter, if it was indeed him at the time of this marriage or her that was mentally deficit one of the party wasn't 'with it' at all, and didn't understand the Sacrament of the marriage.

[QuisUtDeus]

I'm guessing she probably would have made the same claims or same type of claims during civil divorce proceedings, so the answer may be there as well.  He should know what she said at that trial.  Maybe you guys can pursue that route and at least know what the grounds might be.  That may help convince the priest.

 

If she said he was a heroin addict and he has no track marks, then obviously she's the one with issues.

[spasiisochrani]

Let me say right off that I am very sorry that you are going through this...I can't even imagine the frustration you must be experiencing!

 

 

The reasons stated in his annullment for reasons of nullity is mentally deficient (my fiance). Which...is quite hilarious. But, in actuality it was the ex wife who was deficient in understanding but I suppose they found the fault with him, not her.

 

Here's where I think it gets tricky. You stated that the annulment was granted based on mental deficiency issues, but then you go on to say: "Which...is quite hilarious." That tells me that you don't believe he had any mental deficiencies (forgive me, I'm just thinking out loud) which would indicate that, in your eyes, the annulment was granted based on something that isn't accurate. Following that train of thought, would that not then warrant some further investigation (I hope I'm making sense here ) into the validity of the annulment?

 

 

 

Are you sure that the tribunal found that he was the one who was mentally deficient?

[Ziggamafu]

UGH.

 

See, this is one of the questions that frustrates me. It basically gives cause to wonder if we can ever be SURE a marriage is valid or not; and if you or others suspect it is not, you may be living in sin.

 

It seems you can never sure about the validity of any sacrament (because of form or intent) or the state of your soul - which is pretty stressful for me. All you can do is make a rough assumption and hope for the best.