Ok, so looking more at the divorce/annulment discussion, it's not really appropriate for another thread. Posting in WS on my current active thread is threadjacking myself as I'm working more on perceptions there and how they're starting to change.
So, the divorce/annulment conversation...
BH comes home drunk from going out with buddies (Dad's club at school- they take care of business and then destroy their livers, hah). He started talking about discussing with a priest we know about looking into whether we have grounds for annulment. Just a note: alcohol is truth serum for my BH. He opens WAYYY up when he's drunk and tired.
Also, before I go into this: annulment isn't "Catholic divorce," it's the Church determining whether or not a sacramental marriage actually took place. Usually they look into a person's capacity for consent. If a person is in a state of untreated mental illness, serial cheater before/after marriage, longtime abuser, lied on the marriage record, the marriage really couldn't have taken place. The "incompetent" party truly didn't either understand (serial cheater) or wasn't actually capable (mental illness, abuse) of consenting to a Catholic marriage. Kind of like the underage girl/ creepy older guy thing- even if the underage girl wanted the sex, she was WAY TOO YOUNG (thus incompetent) to consent to it.
So yeah, he's wondering since I have clinical depression (not in an active state during our engagement/wedding- not until the birth of my son), that I was incompetent to consent to a Catholic marriage.
In short, since I have so many mental health issues, he's unsure that we really are married in the Church.
It's a valid question, it hurts me that he's been asking it. I understand where he's coming from- if I wasn't able to consent to a Catholic marriage, then this whole thing didn't "really" happen and he could be free to remarry me in the Church or move on.
That's just what he proposed though- talking to the priest and finding out if there's grounds for an annulment. We wouldn't be given the annulment right away- there's a lengthy period of investigation- but the idea is he would then move forward in pursuit of it. Then he wants to LEGALLY DIVORCE but still live together in the house. That way, "it's a clean break" and we can "see whether we'd marry each other again." He said the spiritual aspect of the marriage was more important to him than the legal aspect and that he doesn't see the point being legally married if there's a good chance we aren't spiritually.
Basically, he thinks that if we go through the legal divorce after investigating an annulment, we could come back together on solid ground and not have any nagging questions about the validity of our marriage. He wants to know whether, given the chance, we would choose to marry each other again.
He asked me what I thought. I told him I was ok talking to the priest, because I would like to know too. As for getting a legal divorce while doing it, I am against it. I'm willing to live as brother and sister in IHS while we figure out the sacramentality of our marriage, but a legal divorce would be too much stress for me, the kids and the family. I wouldn't have any energy for evaluating the sacramentality of our marriage in that circumstance, let alone discern whether I want to REMARRY him.
I told him that if he divorced me legally, I was leaving and not coming back. That is my boundary. He tried to talk me into it for a while, but I held firm on it. Really, how can you unselfishly love another person if you're willing to rip out their heart only to try and reel them back. Seems a bit excessive to me.
I know that I subconsciously had my A on my husband as a way to hurt him as deeply as he hurt me with his vasectomy (I didn't want it, he coerced it with abusive withholding practices). However, I don't think this is that kind of subconscious unaware thing. ESPECIALLY since I wrote D papers and was going to serve unless he got into IC and stayed there. He knows how it feels to be on the end of a divorce.
Anyway, he was drunk during the conversation and likely not as "aware" or able to consider my feelings before our discussion.
So, I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on his deeper motives with the whole legal divorce thing. During our MC session, he walked it back saying that he truly only wanted a fresh start to evaluate whether we would choose each other again given the chance.
I told him that if he divorced me legally with the intention to remarry me that I would not choose him again. That by divorcing me with those intentions he would show me he was capable of being intentionally cruel- capable of intentionally harming me and our children for his own selfish ends.
I then reiterated that I would be open to IHS while we figured the annulment out.
MC then ran with that and said we needed to shift our focus toward renewing our vows, not divorcing/annulments. He agreed and we ended the session on a more positive note.
Only now I'm wondering- which words do I trust? The MC redirect (he seemed relieved to be given the renewal option), or the drunk veritaserum ones?