Posted by Lorenzo
on 9/10/2009, 9:18:21, in reply to "Re: Sad - Son vs Father"
82.106.247.152
--Previous Message--
: How can someone say that the wedding is
: against God's law when the CoP waited that
: the Vatican would declare the nulity of his
: wedding to marry religiously with Micaela
: abiding to the church principles.
:
:
: Uuuh - I really don't want to offend
: somebody on this MB and I honestly don't
: want to start a discussion about religion!
: But, in my very personal opinion, the
: arguments of The Vatican for the annulment
: of the Count of Paris' first marriage seem
: to be more 'politically' than 'religiously'.
: Fact is, The CoP was religiously married to
: the then Countess of Wurttemberg (now
: Duchess of Montpensier), they had five
: children together and therewith, every point
: was fulfilled, that this marriage was
: 'consumed' (it is called this way, isn't
: it?) and was a union before God. And it was
: The Vatican, who declared it nul. God's
: Word, The Holy Bible says, "Therefore
: what God has joined together, let man not
: separate." (Mark 10:9) and "I tell
: you that anyone who divorces his wife,
: except for marital unfaithfulness, and
: marries another woman commits
: adultery" (Matthew 19:9). These words
: are very clear about the existence and the
: possible ending of marriage before the death
: of one partner. There are no political
: points of view in.
:
: But obviously, The Vatican has found after
: 25 years some loopholes on which the
: decision was founded.
:
: A case where Jean seems "more papist
: than the Pope".
:
:
: I don't think, that The Duke of Vendôme is
: more papist than the Pope, but I guess, he
: can't understand and reconstruct The
: Vatican's decision for the annulment of his
: parents' marriage - as many, many others
: can't either. And - again my very personal
: opinion - asking for annulment of the
: marriage was such a disrespectful, egoistic
: and offensive gesture of The CoP against his
: first wife, the mother of his children and
: against these (his!) children, too. He
: obviously only cares for his own welfare...
:
We all do not know the facts. I have to assume that the Vatican performed a correct procedure and had grounds to declare the nullity of the marriage.
As many know, it is not only a question of consummation, but mostly of ascertaining the free will of each of the married parties at the moment of marriage and their full capacity to undertake the obligations of a married couple.
In order to prove a lack of will or capacity, in rare cases documents can help (e.g. a declaration dated the day before the wedding in which the bride explains that she is not ready to marry and that she intends to divorce if things do not go well: I think this is the case of Princess Ira Furstemberg, who was 16 and convinced by her parents to sign sch a declaration).
More likely, however, a decision of the Vatican shall be taken on the basis of experts (psicologists) or sworn declarations of witnesses (e.g. a friend who declares that...). This last case is obviously the one more likely to be subject to abuse.
Speaking theoretically, maybe the anger of the son is due to the fact that he believes that the decision of the Vatican was based on a false declaration. If this is the case, the court HAS to declare the nullity, but the persons directly involved know well that the decision is based on perjury.
The consequence is that, even if the marriage is legally nil and void, the parties should know in their internal forum that it is still valid and binding.
Message Thread:
« Back to thread