I signed a statement of renunciation for my investigation for an annulment. This means that it is on hold and I can open the case at anytime that I want to in the future. Does anyone know whether I can start an investigation for an annulment in another archdiocese after I have signed this statement of renunciation? I would like to ask for an investigation in the state where I was married. The current statement was signed in the state where I live now. I believe with all my heart that my marriage was not valid, but I did not have a good advisor when writing my testimony. I wrote too much about my husband's adulterous affairs later in the marriage. I should have emphasized the terrible problems that occurred before and during the ceremony and honeymoon. With the information that I learned later, I would change the way I testify. I am not trying to pull anything over on the tribunal and I am completely honest. I did not have good advice from my advocate. He never read my testimony. He believes that I should start over. My advocate is on sabatical in Rome and has told me that he will talk to me again in January, 2002. I don't think this is a priority for him at all. The tribunal here says that I can only bring them new testimony. I have told them all of this but they told me to sign the statement of renunciation and bring it up again sometime in the future. They said that it wasn't necessary since I do not have a fiance. But, I do not want to date without an annulment. Thank you.

-- Angie (Ang4321@yahoo.com), September 29, 2001

Answers

Jmj

I think that you are to be greatly commended, Angie, for this faith-filled statement:
"I do not want to date without an annulment."
You provide a saintly example to so many men and women who are in your situation.

I cannot give you a definitive answer to your question ("Does anyone know whether I can start an investigation for an annulment in another archdiocese after I have signed this statement of renunciation?"), because I have never encountered, or read about, this situation ("renunciation").

I did find two sections of the Church's Code of Canon Law that may provide you with a little bit of information. I will quote those sections now, adding comments in brackets. (Because you filed for the Declaration of Nullity, you are called the "plaintiff," and your husband is called the "respondent.")

Canon 1673 -- The following tribunals are competent in cases concerning the nullity of marriage which are not reserved to the Apostolic See:

1° the tribunal of the place where the marriage was celebrated; [This is where you have said that you want to make a new petition.]
2° the tribunal of the place where the respondent has a domicile or quasi-domicile; [This, of #3 below, is where you have filed and renounced, I assume.]
3° the tribunal of the place where the plaintiff has a domicile, provided that both parties live within the territory of the same Episcopal Conference, and that the judicial Vicar of the domicile of the respondent, after consultation with the respondent, gives consent;
4° the tribunal of the place in which in fact most of the evidence is to be collected, provided that consent is given by the judicial Vicar of the domicile of the respondent, who must first ask the respondent whether he or she has any objection to raise.

Canon 1524
§1 The plaintiff may renounce a trial at any stage or at any grade. Likewise, both the plaintiff and the respondent may renounce the acts of the process either in whole or only in part. [This may mean that you can fully withdraw the present case and start over in the other diocese.]
§2 To renounce the trial of an issue, guardians and administrators of juridical persons must have the advice or the consent of those whose agreement is required to conduct negotiations which exceed the limits of ordinary administration.
§3 To be valid, a renunciation must be in writing, and must be signed either by the party, or by a procurator who has been given a special mandate for this purpose; it must be communicated to the other party, who must accept or at least not oppose it; and it must be admitted by the judge.

Canon 1525 Once a renunciation has been admitted by the judge, it has the same effects for the acts which have been renounced as has an abatement of the trial. Likewise, it obliges the person renouncing to pay the expenses of those acts which have been renounced.

[from Canons 1520 and 1522 -- If over a period of six months, no procedural act is performed by the parties, and they have not been impeded from doing so, the trial is abated. ... Abatement extinguishes the acts of the process, but not the acts of the case. The acts of the case may indeed be employed in another instance, provided the case is between the same persons and about the same matter. As far as those outside the case are concerned, however these acts have no standing other than as documents.]

I don't know about you, Angie, but there is plenty of confusing terminology there. Being able to read and understand these canons thoroughly is one of the reasons for the extended, graduate-level studies that canon lawyers must undertake.

There was one thing in your message that confused me. You wrote, "The tribunal here says that I can only bring them new testimony."
What do you mean by "new testimony?" Do you mean new witnesses? Or do you mean additional facts from your own recollection? If it's the latter, then it seems that they would accept all the information that you believe that you should have included in your original statement (and that you would include, if you could start over again elsewhere). So I'm wondering ... Why start over from scratch elsewhere, rather than simply add the missing facts in your present diocese, and then withdraw your renunciation? Is it that you fear that the present tribunal would not trust you, would not believe the additional information?

St. James, pray for us.
God bless you.
John


-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), September 30, 2001.

The tribunal says that because my ex-husband did not go to counseling or to a doctor, there is no proof of my statements. Also, I did not tell many people about what was happening. Only me and my ex-husband know that absolute truth. They said that because I was married over 20 years, they must believe my ex-husband when he says that his actions were due to immaturity and a mid-life crisis, and that he is willing to renew our relationship. So much of what I explained to them happened before, during and right after the marriage. I wish I would have elaborated on that more. They would like to see me marry him again because he is willing. But, believe me when I say that he is still lying and seeing other women. I have tried to give them new testimony (more details) and asked them to ask more questions of my witnesses, but they have only asked my ex-husband more questions and then said that he does not agree with me so they have to assume the marriage is valid. The canon lawyer described it as presuming a marriage is valid until there is proof, which I understand, but then it is my opinion against his so they have chosen to believe him and ask me to be open minded in being married to him. My mother was an excellent witness because she tried so hard to get me to see that I should not marry him but the priest said that her statement is opinion and most mothers side with their daughter. So, I thought that if I went to another archdiocese, I could possibly be heard. I feel like I am just asking to be heard. God was with me through those terrible years and I know that he wants me to keep trying if I can.

-- Angie (Ang4321@yahoo.com), October 02, 2001.

Hello, Angie.
Thanks for providing all that additional information.
I must say that I was surprised to see that you seem to have a great deal of feedback from the tribunal. It almost seems as though they have already made a decision that denies your petition -- i.e., that they have affirmed the validity of your marriage. I'm puzzled that they would make the statements that you have related, but still allowed you to interrupt the proceedings with a "renunciation."
Have I misunderstood something? Have they actually made a final ruling, and you would like to sort of "appeal" it by going to the other diocese? If so, then I think you should do that, if a canon lawyer advises you that such an action is permissible.

May God bless you.
John

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), October 03, 2001.

Thank you for your answers. The tribunal did tell me that if I didn't sign the Statement of Renunciation, then I would have to accept the ruling as negative. They said that I could come back someday if I find new testimony. I am also very surprised that they kept using the words, "mid-life crisis" since it is not a part of Canon Law or the Catechism. I also find it strange that my ex- husband would tell me that since I feel strongly about getting an annulment, he may talk it over with (he used the Canon Lawyer's name) and talk over my feelings and deal with other options. Why is he on a first name basis with the Canon Lawyer and have the ability to talk over options? They have not even asked me to elaborate on any of the answers that I gave them. You can't make a deal to get an annulment; it is based on Canon Law. Therefore, I think it best to go to another diocese. I appreciated your time and insights. Thank you.

-- Angie (Ang4321@yahoo.com), October 03, 2001.