Exactly!
And very well put I might add!
Those who think the formal annulment process is the ONLY valid solution to remarriage in the Church also avoid the embarrassing facts:
Nearly everyone knows what they need to say in a formal annulment:
I was still seeing others up to the time we married.
I was immature and did not really mean it or understand it.
I married to get my parents off my back.
I married to move out of an unstable home.
I married for the economic benefits.
ETC!
And if a divorced couple CONSPIRE TO LIE during the formal annulment process? The self righteous seem to have no problem with that common practice at all do they?
Of course the “self-righteous” (whoever they are) have a problem with lying.
If a couple actually conspires to obtain a decree of nullity by lying, then they are culpable. Any attempted subsequent “marriage” will be adultery, though they might carry the secret to their graves.
If the existence of liars somehow calls into question the very existence of the annulment process, then it must call into question the existence of ALL institutions and processes, such as civil courts, that involve the testimony of witnesses.
Sometimes a sarcasm disclaimer actually saves a few moments. I appreciate your thoughts, and I thank you.
I would like to delve still deeper into this area of controversy, though not for reasons involved in any of your examples.