Hello all.

I'm the guy who has had an annulment petition pending for about two and one half years. After long searching I realized my sacramental marriage is valid. Recently I learned I needed to appeal my case to the Roman Rota as the diocesan tribunal where my petition was examined has only a nodding, if any, understanding of Rotal Jurisprudence, or for that matter, basic equity and the notion of moral certitude.

My appeal is made.

Be that as it may, I am off to Rome on a pilgrimage. I get to see the Holy father twice, and visit the bones of Saint Peter. Please pray for my wife, my sons and I. I'll keep the fellow travelers I have come to know here in mind as well.

Praise God. Omnia in Bona.

-- Pat Delaney (Pat@patdelaney.net), November 14, 2003

Answers

After long searching I realized my sacramental marriage is valid. Recently I learned I needed to appeal my case to the Roman Rota

What follows from yours words is this -----

1. The tribunal found that your marriage is valid. (That is the only way for you to "realize" this fact, if you "had an annulment petition pending," for you are incapable of "realizing" it on your own.)

2. You are now appealing to the Rota, so that it will overturn the tribunal's decision and grant you an "annulment."

May you have an enjoyable and safe trip.

-- (Anti@Egomania.com), November 15, 2003.

Hope your trip is worth it, Pat. Take care.

KArl

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), November 15, 2003.

pat, again i must point out your supreme ignorance in this matter.

namely:

where my petition was examined has only a nodding, if any, understanding of Rotal Jurisprudence

im sure that, having taken two and a half years to make their decision on the matter, that they put alot of thought into it before choosing to nod or shake their heads.

what amazes me is that you filed this annulment as a plan to trap your wife. how selfish of you. perhaps it is YOU who is blocking sacramental marraige with your immature ways. maybe God is trying to tell you something. are you listening to Him or to your own selfish desires?

trust, pat, thats what faith is all about.

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), November 15, 2003.

paul,

--you need to give it a rest and have faith yourself... -the Tribunal process in Pat's case is ongoing -appeal to the Rota is part of the process available to those seeking Truth...

-- Daniel Hawkenberry (dlm@catholic.org), November 16, 2003.

Dear All:

Rome was more than I ever expected. What a great experience! And with great people too. Having had a chance to get away from it all and look at my tribunal experience from a distance, I have a little bit to share.

Apparently the diocesan tribunal judges I have dealt with are extremely naive, badly mis-trained or downright evil. On top of this, they are cowardly and timid as they feel the need to hide behind the seclusion they create between themselves and the parties they judge.

They have shown an extremely misguided application of the law, both as to substance and procedure. I could easily believe they have not read any Rotal Jurispudence in the last 30 years and instead appear to rely on a template or manual to find for nullity based on defective consent, irrespective of any type of evidence before them.

The defective consent template is probably at least 20-40 years old. The judges were extremely selective in the evidence they considered and how they considered it and in what law they applied. In fact, there are so many egregious errors in the Sentence and in how it was prepared, that I will need to be selective in order to keep focused in my brief to the Rota so that it is manageable and readable.

My question is, what do I do with this experience? There is a terrible evil being perpetrated on the Sacrament of Marriage, and the perpetrators are from within the Church itself. What they are doing is directly contrary to what Jesus Christ teaches in the Gospel. And they have been warned many times by the Holy Father that they are committing an injustice that hurts many people.

I'm sorry, but I'm not ever again going to accept any blathering about so-called "experts" in canon law at diocesan tribunals and how we should simply "submit" to their judgement. They, and their defenders are ignorant, perhaps willfully, or worse.

Sorry, but I'm an expert in administrative and appellate law, and I know absolute horse-hockey in an administrative proceeding when I smell it.

Dear "Anti-Ego" and "little paul":

I regret you feel the need to judge my character and suggest that you examine your conscience to discover for yourselves the inner need you feel for such rationalization and justification. I will pray for you that grow beyond that level.

-- Pat Delaney (pat@patdelaney.net), December 02, 2003.

Apparently the diocesan tribunal judges I have dealt with are extremely naive, badly mis-trained or downright evil. On top of this, they are cowardly and timid as they feel the need to hide behind the seclusion they create between themselves and the parties they judge. They have shown an extremely misguided application of the law, both as to substance and procedure. I could easily believe they have not read any Rotal Jurispudence in the last 30 years and instead appear to rely on a template or manual to find for nullity based on defective consent, irrespective of any type of evidence before them.

The above is absolutely impossible to be correct, given that the egomaniacal writer has admitted being from the (orthodox) Diocese of Arlington in Virginia. If his looney comments were capable of damaging the tribunal judges, I would definitely be advising them to sue the egomaniac's butt into the poor house. But, of course, he is just a whining small fry, to whom probably no one but his mommy pays any attention.

My question is, what do I do with this experience?

Fold it into a triangle, and ...
Seriously ... MOVE ON. God will have happy days ahead for you, if you drop this case and get some psychiatric help. Get rid of the desire for vengeance and vindication.

Moderator, please forbid this turkey from oppressing us with still more of this crud, his "tale of woe" that he has recited 30 or 40 times by now.

-- (Anti@Egomania.com), December 02, 2003.

Hey John! errr, excuse me, Hey "Anti-Ego-boy!"

Who are you callin' turkey? The turkey is a noble animal. I believe you must be racially prejudiced against birds. I accuse you of specieism. Accordingly, I call upon the moderator to banish you to Dante's lowest level, to the Ex Foruma Greenpuna.

-- Pat Delaney (Pat@patdelaney.net), December 02, 2003.

John's on a name-calling mission from God. He's a master. We call him ''Poopy Pants''--

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), December 02, 2003.

Pat, this might be irritating but could you do me a favor and kind of restate your exact situation? Or perhaps point to the original thread where you laid out the dilemma. Karl, if you are around still I was wondering if you could do the same. I would like to really understand what it is that you have been going through; right now I have only sort of a general understanding, probably because I missed some key posts/threads somewhere.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), December 03, 2003.

Sure Emerald, my story follows in a nutshell.

While going through a bad divorce, I was counseled by a social worker who works often with tribunals, that my marriage could be declared null and that I should seek one to have a happy and self- fulfilled life.

Being a conservative Catholic, I was uncomfortable in giving up on my marriage and was conflicted about going forward with this. But also being an attorney, I decided to do my best to help the tribunal come to a just decision. I prepared a huge petition, with any sort of evidence I thought relevant attached relating to all aspects of my marriage. This included two psychological reports from the custody fight in the divorce.

This evidence also included factual narratives, correspondence between my wife and I, and an article my wife published in Crisis Magazine (quite scholarly) right after we married about the importance of the sacramental nature of marriage.

The tribunal informed me that the grounds they adopted for investigation were under Canon 1095, which covers defective consent. Defective consent is by far the most popular ground adopted by American diocese tribunals in declaring sacramental marriages null.

I waited for almost two years for the tribunal to produce an answer and grew impatient. I resolved to find my own answer as I wanted to start getting on with my life (i.e., start dating) but needed to know first if my marriage was valid. So I finally went ahead and did my own analysis using the 1983 Code of Canon Law, the writings/speeches of John Paul II, and the translated decisions of the Roman Rota in the last 10 years on Canon 1095.

To my surprize, I realized that there was no real basis for an annulment between my wife and I. At the time of the marriage, we both were well-formed Catholics, mature, and neither of us suffering from any sort of psychological anomaly. It took me a couple months last winter researching at the Catholic University of America to figure it all out. I prepared a 20 page Opinion letter that detailed my findings for the tribunal to consider.

Much to my surprize, it was at this point that the tribunal decided to finally get active. They were at the end of their LONG evidence gathering stage and invited me in to view what they call the Acts. The Acts are the evidence they deem relevant to the case. I came in and viewed the Acts, but noticed that almost all the most relevant evidence supporting a finding of validity had been removed from consideration.

I was in a bit of a conundrum. I myself have been a judge in thousands of administrative law proceedings. So I can tell when the evidence is being sifted to seek a predetermined outcome versus considered in its entirety toward making a true determination on all the merits. This was precisely the nonsense I had hoped to avoid by carefully presenting all the evidence for consideration. What I wanted was the truth.

So I sought advice from various sources including this forum. The advice I received from all sources was quite diverse and conflicting. In the end, I realized I had discovered my marriage was valid so I requested from the tribunal that the petition I myself had originally filed be withdrawn. In addition, I gave them detailed reasoning in the format of my Opinion Letter why I thought this was the case.

Further to my surprize, they refused my Request for Withdrawal and insisted on moving forward with their own determination. I'm guessing my wife had wanted to proceed. In effect, I had switched roles from being the petitioner and was now the respondent.

A few more months roled by. During this time, the tribunal judges and administrators went into turtle-mode. They did not want to hear from me when I tried to contact them about my reasons why I thought the marriage was valid. All attemts at contact were refused. Rather than fight the system, I decided to wait it out and see what they came up with.

In the end, they simply ignored my advice to them. They came up with a finding of nullity, but they also shared the brief that the judges wrote that includes their detailed reasoning in support of the finding of nullity.

In a word, the document is whacky. There is a grain of truth in the facts they have chosen to deem relevant, but only a grain. Most of it is false testimony by persons with no actual knowledge of the facts (i.e., perjury by my wifes relatives and friends or impossibly disproportionate descriptions of the marriage). The evidence that was submitted, but ignored, that contradicts any of their findings is overwhelming.

For instance, they found my wife to be too immature at the time of the marriage. They base this on allegations of her relatives made in support of her wanting to leave the marriage. Under canon law there needs to be a serious psychological anomaly found for this type of declaration of nullity. And this must be backed up by the detailed opinion of a psychologist or psychiatrist in support of this finding. There is absolutely zero evidence that a psychologist considered any of this or even talked to my wife.

In fact, the tribunal had removed from consideration a 120 page report that was prepared by a certified psychologist for the custody fight in the divorce. In this report the psychologist, consistently, and in many different ways, found that my wife was mature and with very good judgement. There was also absolutely no explanation how my wife could be too immature to understand marriage at the time we married and at the same time publish an article in a national Catholic journal the summer we married about the sacramental nature of marriage. The finding by the tribunal is preposterous.

And the law they have chosen to apply is completely inappropriate. It reflects a fundamental lack of knowledge in canon law and rotal jurisprudence. Much of the reasoning reflects popular theory by some liberal American canonists. These types of theories are constantly and consistently refused at the Roman Rota, and these theories have also been rebuked many times by our Holy Father. The Holy Father, in canon law is referred to as the Sole Authorative Legislator.

Given all this, I was faced with the choice of how I want to handle it. I decided to try and fight the good fight. My wife may come around someday. Who knows. She is a very good person, but is badly misguided at this point on her responsibility with respect to the sacramental nature of marriage. In fact, I would say that in this country, the divorce culture and the anullment culture are one and the same.

I simply decided to say "No Thank You" and will not be a part of that culture. In the end, it will have been the right thing to do. This becomes more apparent all the time. Getting to where I am right now has involved some painful growth. But overall, its actually been a very good thing.

How's that?

-- Pat Delaney (pat@patdelaney.net), December 03, 2003.

How's that, you ask? Perfect: "What I wanted was the truth." I completely believe you; thanks for laying it out.

In other words, things are real and we must to adhere to them, sometimes in genuine and intense pain... but the reward will be great and in the meantime can even be comforting to a soul in the midst of actual pain. Actually, this is a beautiful thing you write above; it's such as actually picking up a cross with Christ, and thanks for standing out front and being a good example to all, and showing genuine charity for your wife. There's a good chance because of this that she may come around, huh?

Sorry for being preachy, but I can't help but be impressed. That's the true Catholic Faith holding under duress and it's the pure pursuit of Truth, where the love of truth eclipses love for self.

"The Holy Father, in canon law is referred to as the Sole Authorative Legislator."

Sounds right to me. Make no mistake, reading the above post by you has made a lot of people's day today. Godspeed and don't forget to visit the catacombs. lol!

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), December 03, 2003.

A true Catholic who is confident that a great diocese's decision was almost surely correct will nonetheless admit that the tribunal slipped -- if the Rota reverses the decision.

But what may remain to be seen is whether or not the Egomaniac who started this thread can accept a Rotal decision upholding the diocese's verdict? This appears to be just the type of guy who would become the next Marty Luther, going Protestant if the Rota doesn't do his bidding. Or -- what would be worse -- he may pretend to remain within the Church, while spending the remaining years of his life acting like a cancer, eating away at the Church by perverting other members' thoughts, telling them that even the Rota is corrupt, etc..

The point is that there is nothing positive to be gained by this appeal. The guy cannot get back together with the woman. She doesn't want him. He want this decision for two reasons: (1) self-satisfaction/self-glorification and (2) revenge against her. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this stuff out.

-- (Anti@Egomania.com), December 03, 2003.

"It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this stuff out."

Of course not. If rocket science were necessary to understand the Holy Catholic Faith, we could all have saved ourselves by now.

Why the constant equating of faith with intelligence? Or wisdom with knowledge?

I see no egomania in his post.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), December 03, 2003.

Thanks Emerald. But for me the pain is old history. If you have ever read Spiritual Passages (about spiritual development) by Fr. Benedict Groeschel, he talks about the joy a person feels when they know their personal desires are in line with God's will.

Groeschel takes it one step further. He says that one can find incredibly greater joy when they are leading an integrated life and actually conform their desire away from what they personally want and toward what they know God wants. Sure, I thought I would have preferred to share my life with a partner. But not if that conflicts with God's will.

As far as "Anti-Ego" (John) is concerned, I'm a little amazed at the length he will reach in trying to impeach my motives. What he is doing is quite erroneous and borderline sinful. Take a look in the Catechism at point 1756.

There are actually many good objects in my appeal. I'm seeking the Truth, upholding and honoring my marriage, and upholding and honoring the Church precept on marriage and also Christ's teaching in the Gospel regarding marital commitment. Given the degree of error in the Sentence in my case, it seems the tribunal's action in my case is anti-thetical to all these very same ends.

The reality here is that it is not simply a matter of the tribunal "slipping" this one time. This type of thing goes on all the time all over the U.S. (and Canada.) That's why 95-98% of appeals to the Rota on defective consent decisions from American tribunals are overturned.

I appealed because I know what the outcome will be. I have to do this for that reason, and not because I'm hoping they will overturn the Arlington decision.

Hope is not a part of my equation here. I know what will happen. I'm simply doing what I know is the right thing to do. Given the miniscule chance I may be wrong, its still the right thing to do. But this is not a close case in any way, shape, or form. The outcome is predeterminable.

Of course, if Hell does happen to freeze over and the Rota affirms the Arlington tribunal decision, I will accept that decision without reservation.

-- Pat Delaney (pat@patdelaney.net), December 03, 2003.

I see no egomania in his post.

That's because you have not been reading his previous 27 messages on the same topic. You don't know how he has repeatedly puffed himself up as a peacock, wiser than many of his betters in the Church. How do I know that you are unfamiliar? Easy ...

(1) Clear knowledge that you have been, shall we say, completely "preoccupied" with unrelated forum discussions until now.

(2) could you do me a favor and kind of restate your exact situation? Or perhaps point to the original thread ["thread" in the singular -- hilarious!] where you laid out the dilemma. ... right now I have only sort of a general understanding, probably because I missed some key posts/threads somewhere. [Yeah, like 99% of them! Disingenuous = dishonesty! Don't be afraid to tell the truth! "I missed some key posts." Hah! With honesty, it would have been stated, "I have been ignoring almost all of your posts before today."]

Why the constant equating of faith with intelligence? Or wisdom with knowledge?

The above is a knee-jerk reaction, written without thinking. I just said that it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what one should do in such situations. In other words, even people with average intelligence (or less) can have enough common sense and good character not to do the improper things that P.D. is doing. What I said, therefore, is the exact opposite of what you were claiming -- that I equate high intelligence with great faith. Sheesh! Doesn't anyone even think any more before posting? Is everyone just a knee-jerker? I believe so, because if they would think more, they would post less, and they would abandon their silly positions -- which they now never do, because they are so in love with themselves and their cozy little positions.

Given the degree of error in the Sentence in my case, it seems the tribunal's action in my case is anti-thetical to all these very same ends. ... I know what the outcome will be. ... I know what will happen. [My emphasis added]

This is exactly why I am calling myself "Anti-Egomania" here. Only an egomaniac would dare to prejudge the case and arrogate to himself the prerogative of the Rota -- to declare whether or not there was error. A layman (with self-interest to boot) is forbidden to declare that there was error -- and should not be blaring that he "know[s] what will happen]. This is unseemly arrogance -- rarely seen outside the incredibly corrupt profession of lawyerdom. One can "hope" for a certain outcome, and one can "suspect" a possibility of error, but one cannot arrogantly declare things as this egomaniacal individual has done, time and again, for months -- thereby earning a banning.

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), December 04, 2003.

John,

Your tone and style are witness to your own weaknesses. You project your own arrogance and ego.

You will be offended, but I tell you this in charity. Get away from this forum for a while and develop some real human relationships.

Try doing some charitable volunteer work for the poor, especially some avenue where you have no intellectual input. You need to grow. Instead you appear to be regressing. And watching your decline these past few months has not been pretty.

Whatever importance you equate with your past history here is no longer relevant. What you need to think about is tomorrow and what kind of person you will be then.

-- Pat Delaney (pat@patdelaney.net), December 04, 2003.

I have to admit I got my time post-dates mixed up, Pat, and see that you've been and come back already. I just plain missed that part of it. I should have asked did you see the catacombs... did you? I'll never forget them, although I was maybe 16 at the time. It would be so different to go again with a different mind, but I doubt it will ever happen again. One thing stuck out in my mind from being somewhere over there, I can't remember which place, but being in this ancient, spiral stairway that had steps worn down concave in the center from centuries of use. I remember thinking that Saints of the Catholic Church had walked up and down these steps. I zone on things like that; I wish I could go over there again.

Did you get to see the Holy Father?

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), December 04, 2003.

Pat, I was not "offended," but only "amused" to receive useless advice from a bottom-feeding scion of the netherworld.
JFG

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), December 04, 2003.

John,

For the most part, your contributions to this topic continue to be useless... -what little you offer is consistently biased logic based conjecture devoid of any compassion that only serves one purpose - your ego... The ego you consistently expose and feed on this topic is clearly evil... I agree with Pat -take a break...

-- Daniel Hawkenberry (dlm@catholic.org), December 04, 2003.

Hi Emerald,

While in Rome, I did get to see the Holy Father twice. For his Sunday address and for the Wednesday general audience. Both were great experiences, and the warmth of feeling in the crowd was palpable.

I did not see the catacombs. They are off the beaten path and we stayed near the subway or downtown. There were so many things to see. Maybe another time.

I think the spiral staircase you remember may be the prison where Saints Peter and Paul were held right before they were martyred. It is part of the ruins of the Roman Forum next to the Colloseaum. The prison was excavated only 50 or so years ago after being buried for centuries. There is a place where Peter or Paul where thrown against a stone wall and their face left an impression.

It was a great trip. I'll have to go back, but have some other places I want to see as well. Jerusalem is high on the list. So is Tokyo, London and various other places. I'll probably take one or more sons on the next trip.

Yes, I am hoping for a reconciliation. But at this point, I'm only praying and being kind. Its totally up to my wife and she has a lot of irrational thoughts and fears. Given that I am not dating, I can devote my attention and resources to my true family, and not worry about dividing myself between an "Ex" and a second wife. Thats one good aspect of being faithful to the marriage, and I think one reason why God wants all people to be more faithful.

God bless,

-- Pat Delaney (pat@patdelaney.net), December 05, 2003.

Jmj

Daniel, it appears that your parents, teachers, and pastors (like Pat's) failed to teach you to make use of the brains God gave you.

You know perfectly well that I have no respect for the actions and opinions of you, Pat, and Karl [assuming you really are three separate people]. Because of this, if you and Pat knew how to use your brains, it would never even occur to you to tell me to "take a break." If you were using your brains, you'd know that the last thing I'm going to do is follow advice from guys like you. Not only is yours bad advice (coming from anyone), but here it comes from people who'd like to be rid of me -- so it is laughable "advice" besides. Worst is your hypocrisy. You pretend to be concerned about me, when all you really want is extended relief from my comments, which refute your theories and make you feel guilty.

Seeing your junk day after day, week after week, month after month, makes any normal person ill, and by it you make yourselves look like complete fools. It is disgusting to see you making a bloody "career" out of a single very personal issue, about which you should have gone silent after one thread. Take it to private e-mail, if you must commiserate with each other about these degrading matters.

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@Hotmail.com), December 05, 2003.

John,

Truth is not degrading -think about it as you continue degrading those who embrace Truth and associated suffering -your pompous assaults are miniscule relative to the suffering voluntarily taken up by those you attack and ridicule...

-- Daniel Hawkenberry (dlm@catholic.org), December 05, 2003.

daniel, truth is degrading when youre getting a dose you dont want...

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), December 05, 2003.

Daniel,

There is no reasoning with the man.

He is full of pride, the primary sin. He can only develop if he admits he has a problem. Unfortunately his whole world appears to revolve about this little etherworld. He can only grow as far as he sets his own horizon, but it is up to him how far that is. Let him be in peace.

How is your case progressing? Don't even count on getting a fair hearing at the diocesan level. I am convinced there is a hidden agenda.

-- Pat Delaney (pat@patdelaney.net), December 05, 2003.

About Karl; I would like to see him profit (for lack of a better way to characterize it) from what he's been through. What can be done for him?

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), December 06, 2003.

As far as I can tell, Karl took his case to the Rota where the validity of his marriage was upheld.

Unfortunately, he holds anger against the lower church officials that counseled his wife to get involved in an extramarital relationship. And he thinks that justice can only be served by the church going back and re-examining his and other anullment proceedings to find and admit all errors.

This will not happen in this world. The world is not a perfect place, nor will it ever be. Karl has to learn to let go and trust in God's providence with regard to his wife, and the lower priests that apparently gave bad counsel.

For Karl, the best we can do is pray and be kind. He needs to find his own way out of his predicament.

-- Pat Delaney (pat@patdelaney.net), December 06, 2003.

paul h,

You, the 'internal forum' man dare judge Truth? You must first reconcile this internal forum 'issue' that hangs rotting around your neck -one bad fruit, strongly suggests one bad tree...

Pat,

My case is doing nothing -I think they are sitting on it with hope that 'duration' might lend credibility to at best an assumed investigative effort... from what I have seen, my case was predetermined -the Tribunal a mere detail...

-- Daniel Hawkenberry (dlm@catholic.org), December 06, 2003.

paul h, You, the 'internal forum' man dare judge Truth? You must first reconcile this internal forum 'issue' that hangs rotting around your neck -one bad fruit, strongly suggests one bad tree...

funny, daniel. a good hearty laugh is all i had for this corny line.

what is amuzing is that, through 'internal forum' YOU have chosen to ignore what the church has told you, your marraige having been invalid. YOU have chosen to ignore that decision and cling to some hateful opinion of the tribunal. the same way i tell those ignoring the tribunal process altogether, i tell you now... you must release YOUR desires and subvert them to what is right.

like i said in the old thread, you and pat are acting like wounded hounds, fighting to the very last because you dont know that youre wrong.

internal forum? ha!

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), December 06, 2003.

paul,

-get your facts straight -my 'case' is still first instance and pending...

-relativistic arguments aside your 'internal forum' position is not based in Truth, not obedient to Rome, and self evidently benefits the only Satan...

-- Daniel Hawkenberry (dlm@catholic.org), December 07, 2003.

"The most solemn moment of my life is the moment when I receive Holy Communion. I long for each Holy Communion, and for every Holy Communion I give thanks to the Most Holy Trinity.

If the angels were capable of envy, they would envy us for two things: one is the receiving of Holy Communion, and the other is suffering.

Today, I am preparing myself for Your coming as a bride does for the coming of her bridegroom. He is a great Lord, this Bridegroom of mine. The heavens cannot contain Him. The Seraphim who stand closest to Him cover their faces and repeat unceasingly: Holy, Holy, Holy.

This great Lord is my Bridegroom. It is to Him that the Choirs sing. It is before Him that the Thrones bow down. By His splendor the sun is eclipsed. And yet this great Lord is my Bridegroom. My heart, desist from this profound meditation on how others adore Him, for you no longer have time for that, as He is coming and is already at your door."

--Saint Sister Mary Faustina of the Blessed Sacrament; Cracow, January 10th, 1938

Marriage, suffering, the Church, and Holy Communion.

"Lord that I may see."

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), December 07, 2003.