(photo courtesy of Oly Ruiz of Metro Photo)

Well, you’re not really invited, but you might as well feel like you were there merely by watching this onsite video.

Fact is, this is one of the few times an SDE (same-day edit) captured ample live audio snippets where viewers get a glimpse of the personality of the couple.  Their sense of humor shines through every clip in a familair Pinoy candor. To me, it felt like they were somebody I know personally.  The ceremony presided by a judge in Makati City Hall felt very relaxed, a refreshing departure from the ’sobfest’ we typically expect in a solemn church ceremony.

I know this is not a typical ‘get-it-over-and-done-with’ kinda civil wedding.  But who ever said that a civil ceremony should be plain non-event?

I’ve been told the couple wore a Randy Ortiz during the ceremony, after which, the bride slipped into a Paul Cabral creation in time for their Blue Leaf reception.  Add the fact that they got Jason Magbanua to do their video speaks that this is no ordinary civil ceremony.  Despite these, the video didn’t come off as trying to show off; on the contrary, it felt very spontaneous and unrestrained.  Unpretentious is the word.

Props to David & Jorene for proving that a simple civil wedding ceremony can be equally beautiful!

[This is a follow-up about the controversial women’s group party-list proposal which we posted over the weekend.]

- - - - - -

(via the Philippine News Agency) Several lawmakers on Tuesday expressed disapproval on a proposal that would mandate a 10-year limit on the validity of marriage contract.

Women’s party list group Isa-Ako Babaeng Astig Aasenso (1-ABAA), which is gunning for a seat in the May party-list elections in May, plans to put forth a measure requiring couples to renew marriage every 10 years so that it would not be voided.

Speaker Prospero Nograles said he was not in favor of the proposal as it was against his Catholic beliefs.

Nueva Ecija Rep. Eduardo Nonato Joson also junked the proposal, saying couples who want to get out of the marriage can resort to annulment.

“Okay na yung legal or de facto separation and civil annulment of marriages ngayon,” he said.

Manila Rep. Bienvenido Abante, a pastor, said making marriage renewable reduces it to a “mere legal contract” instead of a relationship.

“What is happening to our values? That’s what happens when people don’t believe in absolutes anymore,” he said.

Muntinlupa Rep. Rufino Biazon said the proposed marriage contract expiration should be opposed “because it will endanger the integrity of the ties that bind Philippine Society.”

“The Filipino family is acknowledged as the basic unit of society and it cannot be denied that marriage is the foundation of most Filipino families. Marriage and families cannot be treated separately and impose policies on one and not consider the other,” he said.

Biazon said the Philippine Constitution guarantees the protection of the family’s integrity and states that marriage is an inviolable social institution.

“The non-expiring marriage contract is not a violation of any human right because entering into a marriage is an option where those engaging in it are well aware of the terms,” he said.

“To give marriage an expiration is also to give families an expiration. It will be dangerous to open Philippine Society to the mindset that marriages and families have a pre-determined end,” he said.

While proponents may argue that the contract is renewable, Biazon said, “the fact that when you enter into marriage you already know it will expire at a certain date, it already affects the way society will look at marital unions.”

“While I will fight for the rights of women, I put more premium in protecting the integrity of the Filipino Family. I will oppose marriage contract expiration,” he said.

On the other hand, Marikina Rep. Marcelino Teodoro said the sanctity of marriage “should not be treated as merely a contract that has an expiry date.”

“We should respect the vows that the couple have exchanged and not give a deadline to it. This proposal bastardizes not only the sanctity of marriage but as well as the Constitution which dictates that marriage is a special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman. This only obscures the inviolability of the family system which is only built upon by marriage,” he said.  (by Lilibeth G. Ison / PNA)

- - - - - - - - - -

related news article:

• Solons say no to ‘renewable’ marriage

(PNA photo | Jess Escaros Jr.)

(excerpted from GMA News) The proposal of the women’s party list group 1-Ako Babaeng Astig Aasenso (1-ABAA) to place expiration dates on marriage contracts raised a ruckus. The controversial proposition was brought to light at the Daungan ng Balita news forum held at the Danarra Hotel in Quezon City last Thursday, January 7, 2009.

1-ABAA, which represents separated and abandoned women, proposed the enactment of a law that would mandate a 10-year limit on the validity of a marriage contract. Its purpose is “to spare incompatible couples the expense of lengthy legal proceedings before their marriages are annulled.”

After all, the marriage license, which the couple obtains before they can get married, has a “built-in” expiration date. Article 20 of the Family Code of the Philippines stipulates that a marriage license is only valid “for a period of one hundred twenty days from the date of issue” and is deemed automatically canceled if the contracting parties have not made use of it by the end of the mandated period.
As 1-ABAA president Margie Tajon put it, “[A marriage contract] should be just like a passport or driver’s license. If we are not interested to renew it, then it expires.” This, of course, seems like a pragmatic solution to toxic unions. These days, as Tajon pointed out, “Those who can’t afford an annulment just suffer forever.”

Bottom line: 1-ABAA wants to amend the Family Code so that marriage will no longer be treated as a special contract. To date, the marriage contract, is defined by the Family Code as “a special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into in accordance with law for the establishment of conjugal and family life.”

When it comes to the legal definition of marriage in the Philippines, you have to pay attention to two crucial words: “special” and “permanent.” It is “special” because, unlike in other types of contracts, the parties involved cannot stipulate on whatever pleases them. The word, “permanent,” is self-explanatory. As such, a Pinoy marriage is pretty much built to last—at least in legal terms.

It goes without saying that the Catholic Church would be at the forefront of parties opposing the 1-ABAA proposal. “Bago naming napag-isipan yan, alam na naming na Church ang number one [na mag-po-protesta],” stated Tajon.

Though the Philippine Constitution mandates the separation of Church and State, the Church’s pronouncements still hold sway over many Filipinos. The 1-ABAA proposal, by the way, would not affect Muslim marriages, since they’re already allowed to divorce and governed by the stipulations of the Islamic religion. [READ MORE…]

- - - - - - - - - -
related articles:

• License to Love (The Marocharim Experiment | opinion)
• Women’s group wants expiry date on marriage (Phil. Star)
• Partylist 1-ABAA favors annulment of marriage over divorce system (Balita.ph)
  

(via Manila Times) Things do go wrong. People do make mistakes, despite vows made before God and man. To come to the realization that a marriage is a failure is bitter pill to swallow. But there are circumstances far worse than separation.

For decades, the unattainable myth of the ideal Filipino family—long kept artificially intact by Church, family and society through guilt and shame—led unhappy spouses to endure abuses, lies and loveless lives for the rest of their days. A marriage that is dead is still so regardless of whether society chooses to recognize the fact or not.

But even in the 21st century when truth is valued over appearances, the price of freedom is still steep. Nonetheless, annulment is a necessary process a couple needs to undergo, whether they like it or not, for them to be free.

Atty. Honorata Victoria defines annulment simply as “the process where the marriage tie of the couple will be severed, hence, capacitating the parties to contract another marriage.”

Citing the Family Code of the Philippines (Executive Order 209), Victoria also differentiates annulment (Articles 45 and 53) and declaration for absolute nullity of marriage (Articles 35, 36, 37 and 38). She explains that annulment only presupposes a marriage valid until annulled, whilst if a marriage is declared null, the marriage is void ab initio (void from the very start).

Civil and Church courts

Recourses for annulment vary, depending on whether a couple had a civil or a Catholic Church wedding.

Pointedly, the Church refuses to accept the word annulment. The Church only declares marriage nullity, concluding that there has been no true marriage from the very beginning.

Reverend Salvador Yun, the parish priest of the Archdiocesan Shrine of Santa Ana, reiterates the finality of marriage vows: “Till death do them part.” However, Rev. Yun concedes that human errors are made. That is why the Church made laws in order to correct something that should have never been done, he explains.

Grounds of annulment

Victoria notes that, for both Civil and Church courts, “The usual and most abused ground for the petition for declaration of absolute nullity of marriage is article 36 of the family code—psychological incapacity.”

She also noted that long before the State accepted psychological incapacity as legitimate grounds for annulment, the Church’s Canon Law had already recognized it. The Church defines psychological incapacity as a ground in which there is a lack of understanding to the idea of marriage, its obligations and rights.

Other grounds that are both present in Civil and Church are lack of legal capacity on the part of the contracting parties (under-aged partners), marriages solemnized without license, mistaken identities, mistaken sexualities, multiple marriages, etc.

The process

For the those married in a civil wedding, the first thing to do is to visit a lawyer and check if certain grounds are present in order to file a petition.

For those married in Church, the first thing to do is to visit a canon lawyer. According to Rev. Yun, if a couple seeks their help, they first try to make the couple realize and accept their mistakes and then attempt to reconcile them.

For civil courts, the petitioner will file his case to the Regional Trial Court of his residence and accomplish a copy of the petition to the Office of the Solicitor General. If this takes place accordingly and all other requisites are completed, a series of trials will take place until the court reaches the judgment that the marriage be declared null and void ab initio.

Since there are limited Church Tribunals in the country, the domicile or residence of not only the petitioner but also the respondent are taken into consideration.

Writing up the whole process only needs some three paragraphs. Yet in reality, annulment takes from one to two years. “If there will be no fight on the property and custody of the minor children, at the average it would take 12 to 24 months from the time of filing,” says Atty. Victoria.

Bro. Jeoffrey Brian Catuiran, Notary to the Tribunal of First Instance in Pasig, emphasizes that a Church tribunal hearing usually take more time if there are few evidences and witnesses that are gathered in order to establish a strong ground on the nullity of marriage.

Applying to the Church courts for marriage nullity, one’s petition is by no means assured. Even celebrities and politicians have been denied a second chance at happiness. As for civil marriages, Atty. Victoria notes, “If there exists ground, the courts usually grant the petition.”

The cost of freedom

Though a civil annulment is faster, it is more expensive than a Church annulment. “[A civil annulment is] very costly. A professional lawyer would range form P50,000 to P100,000 and even more. Then, if the ground is psychological incapacity, the petitioner shall be paying the psychiatrist or psychologist P25,000. Then, the filing fee, it depends on the value of the absolute community of property or conjugal partnership of gains. At the average the petitioner needs at least P100,000,” says Atty. Victoria.

The average cost of a Church annulment is only P60,000. Nevertheless, living in truth and setting one another free is priceless. There is only the rest of one’s life left to live.

Divorce is not legal in the Philippines. It is clearly a legal issue but it’s absence in this country has a lot to do to our being a Roman Catholic nation.

Below are snippets from an article about divorce in the Philippnes in the Christian/Bliblical context; and what makes it an interesting read is because it favors it.  It’s a refreshing to see bible verses cited while divorce is given a thumbs up.

Note that we’re sharing this not to convince anyone to make a stand for or against it.  We simply urge the reader to have an open mind about the issue.

- - - - - - - - - -

(via Doctrines Unite) The Philippines is one of only two countries in the world that I know of where divorce is not legalized, the other of course being Vatican City. The subject I am about to embark upon is usually not openly discussed around these part.

<snip>

This would surely be a shock for Filipinos who have been schooled all their lives about the sanctity of marriage, knowing it is Jesus himself who commanded us, “What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate“ (Matthew 19:6).

<snip>

The Westminster theologians recognized that God has clear guidelines in the matter of marriage, divorce and remarriage. They recognized that sinful man would abuse any gracious act of God, presuming that his grace is license to do whatever is right in their own eyes. He was gracious to the Jews in allowing divorce, but they then divorced their wives for any other cause in addition to sexual immorality and desertion (Matthew 19:3). This was not God’s intention from creation, and it was not his intention when he granted them lawful divorce due to their hardness of heart.

Lawful annulment in the Philippines is commonly granted on the grounds of psychological incapacity, minority (a party below 18 even with the consent of parents), lack of authority of the solemnizing officer, absence of a marriage license, polygamy, mistaken identity, and incestuous marriage. Incest and polygamy fall in the lawful categories of sexual immorality and desertion, but the others are questionable pretexts at best. The only reason why annulment in the Philippines has not become an epidemic like divorce in the West is that only the very rich can afford the legal process.

If divorce is legalized, how is the church going to prevent its abuse, as can be seen in many other countries? Here, the true church has a great responsibility. First, premarital and marriage counseling is a must. One of the major reasons for failed marriages is the lack or absence of Biblical counseling.  Second, the church has to be careful in determining whether the divorce is based on the Biblical grounds of sexual immorality or desertion. This process has to be done when a member files for divorce or intends to marry a divorced person; both cases have to have lawful grounds for divorce.  Third, a member is to be subject to the elders of the church, and if he or she disobeys the determination and advise of the elders, he or she is to be subject to church discipline. Fourth, women who become “widows” (and their young children) because of divorce must be cared for by the benevolence of the church.

Historically, the Roman Catholic Church in the Philippines has always been a tough nut to crack in the matter of divorce, and most of the 80 percent of Filipinos who are Catholics remain loyal to their church. But this intransigence and ignorance of the Biblical grounds for divorce has had disastrous effects on the Filipino family, particularly on women and children. It had also put many churches in various difficult situations when its wayward members see that the most viable option for them is to continue their sinful relationships. [READ FULL ARTICLE]