Author Topic: Peter Vere Annulment Lawyer Repent! (Read 4414 times)

icterus · « **Reply #15 on:** December 20, 2013, 03:40:11 PM »

Quote

why do you assume the annulments are bogus? It's likely many do not have a proper understanding or example of marriage before.
I've seen the annulment paperwork in two different diocese and it's not something you can just get rubber stamped by saying the spouse didn't take out the trash.

Mainly, the suspicion comes from two things:

1.The very high percentage of marriages judged to be null.

This seems to indicate that it is nearly impossible to achieve a valid marriage in the Church at the present time. It seems this cannot logically be right, it is contradictory to our expectations of the plentitude of graces available in the sacraments.

2.The excessive reliance on interior, invisible, psychological state as evidence of the simluation of consent.

From the new Code:

Quote

Can. 1101 §1 The internal consent of the mind is presumed to conform to the words or the signs used in the celebration of a marriage.

§2 If, however, either or both of the parties should by a positive act of will exclude marriage itself or any essential element of marriage or any essential property, such party contracts invalidly.

Many people feel that excessive weight is given to §2 and very little is given to §1. In this way, the process is open to fraud from various sources.

SeanGovan · « **Reply #16 on:** December 21, 2013, 11:23:22 AM »

Quote from: bowler

This is the WORST sin sanctioned (the Church is still against abortion and ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity) by the conciliar Church!

Adultery is a horrible sin, but it is very far from being the worst sin sanctioned by the Conciliar Church. The worst sins sanctioned by the Conciliar Church are sins against the First Commandment.

bowler · « **Reply #17 on:** December 21, 2013, 08:10:08 PM »

Quote from: Tiffany

We know people are not catechized properly, are taught a false religion, are growing up in broken homes,, many watch Hollywood/TV and have that as their only example of "marriage" why do you assume the annulments are bogus? It's likely many do not have a proper understanding or example of marriage before.
I've seen the annulment paperwork in two different diocese and it's not something you can just get rubber stamped by saying the spouse didn't take out the trash.

People today are better educated and have greater access to learning the truth than any generation ever. Do you think that they somehow are more ignorant , or are the only ignorant Catholics in the entire history of the Church? Your argument is just a cliché that people have repeated for so long that many now believe it, however, it is a ridiculous observation.

What is so difficult to understand about "till death do us part and for better or worse, and in sickness and health? Everybody in the world knows that Catholics marry for life.

This is all about bad will, about the will leading the intellect.

I repeat, 80 annulments per year Worldwide in the 1950's, compared to 35,000 to 63,000 after the 1970's just in the USA. People did not get stupid all of the sudden.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #18 on:** December 22, 2013, 08:40:14 PM »

.

In heaven, "there shall be joy before the angels of God upon one sinner doing penance" (Lk. xv. 10), then what happens whenever an unrpentant sinner does NOT do any penance?

.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #19 on:** December 22, 2013, 08:47:21 PM »

.

Peter Vere Annulment Lawyer Repent!

Or else the angels won't rejoice (etc.).

.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #20 on:** December 22, 2013, 09:18:28 PM »

Quote from: SeanGovan

Quote from: bowler
This is the WORST sin sanctioned (the Church is still against abortion and ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity) by the conciliar Church!

Adultery is a horrible sin, but it is very far from being the worst sin sanctioned by the Conciliar Church. The worst sins sanctioned by the Conciliar Church are sins against the First Commandment.

I would concur that unmistakable public worship of false gods is the greater sin, however, since there are two Great Commandments: Love God, and Love thy neighbor as thyself for the love of God, and adultery violates them both inasmuch as it is opposed to the love of God and it is opposed to the love of neighbor, as well as being opposed to the 6th Commandment specifically ― and according to St. Thomas the sin against faith is the greatest sin and the sin against the First Commandment is of the same genus as the sin against faith; and for anyone to demean the sacrament of Marriage as modern annulments do is also a sin against faith because it opposes the traditional doctrine of the Church ― all-in-all, it's a pretty close call. To deny or to discount the reality of any marriage based on capricious or 'inconvenient' reasons is really tantamount to putting a false god before God, for it rejects the divine precepts of the Church as they were handed down to us in Sacred Tradition.

Therefore, when it is the ostensible Church allowing this abomination of capricious annulments to become commonplace in the last 53 years (since 1960) it seems to me that this public scandal is so closely related to the worship of a false god as to be equally offensive to God as would be the unmistakable public worship of false gods.

And anyone who is getting paid for promoting it bears the responsibility of the effects and implications of the sins of many whose lives are affected by this promotion of evil.

Such a one incurs a tremendous debt to God in temporal punishment due for their sin.

.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #21 on:** December 22, 2013, 09:34:27 PM »

.

Objectively speaking, it makes no difference if an annulment lawyer is told by a priest or a bishop or any such cleric that these new annulments are not improper, because if they are improper in the eyes of God and the cleric(s) is / are wrong, the sin is still the same, because it is a sin in the eyes of God, which is all that matters. The opinions of clerics are of no import, and if they are wrong opinions, anyone who listens to them and believes them and acts accordingly still offends God in the objective order, and therefore the sin is no less than it would have been had the cleric admonished the lawyer not to be involved and the lawyer had ignored that good advice. The difference is that in the former case there are two sinners, the erroneous cleric and the lawyer who believes his lies, whereas in the latter case there is only one sinner, the lawyer who ignores the good advice: be not involved with evil annulments. In either case, the lawyer sins and incurs the guilt of all the effects of all the persons whose lives are affected by the false annulments, which, in the broadest sense, is the entire population of the world. For what would it profit a man to gain the whole world if he were to suffer the loss of his soul?

.

bowler · « **Reply #22 on:** December 26, 2013, 12:34:25 PM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

.

Objectively speaking, it makes no difference if an annulment lawyer is told by a priest or a bishop or any such cleric that these new annulments are not improper, because if they are improper in the eyes of God and the cleric(s) is / are wrong, the sin is still the same, because it is a sin in the eyes of God, which is all that matters. The opinions of clerics are of no import, and if they are wrong opinions, anyone who listens to them and believes them and acts accordingly still offends God in the objective order, and therefore the sin is no less than it would have been had the cleric admonished the lawyer not to be involved and the lawyer had ignored that good advice. The difference is that in the former case there are two sinners, the erroneous cleric and the lawyer who believes his lies, whereas in the latter case there is only one sinner, the lawyer who ignores the good advice: be not involved with evil annulments. In either case, the lawyer sins and incurs the guilt of all the effects of all the persons whose lives are affected by the false annulments, which, in the broadest sense, is the entire population of the world. For what would it profit a man to gain the whole world if he were to suffer the loss of his soul?

.

God's Actual Grace speaks to EVERYONE and tells them what is right and what is wrong. Therefore, no one has any excuse. Moreover, I have to assume that Peter Vere may have received also Sanctifying Grace at some point before he started doing annulments, therefore, God spoke to him clearly.

Solidus · « **Reply #23 on:** December 31, 2013, 05:44:25 PM »

Pete is gone now. His proud and haughty spirit has been the cause of his fall from grace. First he proudly boasted that he scared away Fr. Somerville and now he's the one that has gone off hiding after he got exposed as a fraud and a con-man in the religious liberty/Demographics thread and in this thread.

This man promotes spiritual genocide, the worst crime that can be committed on the face of this Earth. Mao and Stalin killed tens of millions of temporal bodies, religious liberty has killed hundreds of millions of immortal souls which will be damned for all eternity. And it turns up that he's a grenadier in Satan's army that is fighting a world war to annihilate the family, and compounding the sin even further, he helps destroy professing Catholic families!

If he is truly Catholic, I sincerely hope he subjects his mind to reality and he repents of his wicked sins that shouldn't even be thought about, let alone spread and promoted in public. On the other hand he might be a legitimate con-man/charlatan. The American Novus Ordo is filled with these guys, usually men who "converted" from protestantism and then sell books/do speaking tours for a living, they are essentially guys who don't want to compete in the "protestant market" and have opted to exploit the "Novus Ordo" market instead. Whether he's a Catholic that has been caught in the devils snares or whether he's a con-man, he needs to repent and do penance. God save his soul!

bowler · « **Reply #24 on:** December 31, 2013, 09:32:37 PM »

By their deeds you shall know them.