Annullment - hypothetical

  • Thread starter Thread starter Scott_Polski
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Scott_Polski

Guest
From a strictly juridical/legal standpoint, without regard to the merits of any particular case, and irrespective of any practical considerations, do the parties to an annullment proceeding retain conjugal rights during the pendency of that proceeding, until such time as an official finding of nullity is made?
 
I may be wrong, but:

If an annullment procedure is already underway, the validity of the marriage is obviously suspect. If the possibility that a true marriage does not exists is known to one or both parties involved, how could it be licit to continue in possibly extra-marital relations?
 
If the sacramental validity of the marriage is suspect, any conjugal activity should stop until a determination is made. I would talk with your priest or confessor if you have one.
 
The replies I received certainly come immediately to mind, from a pastoral pespective. However, the hypothetical was meant to address what appears to be a legal dilemma: marriage in the Church is not only sacramental, but contractual (as duly signed and witnessed), with certain rights and responsibilities, both civil and religious. It would seem that prior to any determination of nullity, the parties would still be bound by the contract (the elements of the contract over which the Church has direct authority since, presumably, an annullment action would not have been commenced until a civil divorce had already been granted).

The replies suggest that for one party (or both) to assert contractual rights in such a situation would be inappropriate or unseemly; yet, absent nullification, those contractual rights must logically still inure to the parties. In an annullment proceeding, the validity of the marriage is presumed, even though it represents the very question for decision. That presumption gives rise to the dilemma posed in the hypothetical.

If conjugal rights are indeed suspended by an annullment action, this fact has not been set forth in any of the literature I have seen. Moreover, at first blush, it would seem, technically, that such a suspension would require due process or a waiver.

Annullment actions are not automatic “no-fault” proceedings, like civil divorces, that invariably lead to only one result. Nevertheless, any suspension of even Church-based rights without some form of due process would indicate that the very commencement of the action operates as a tentative favorable result. What then of the presumption of validity? Can pastoral concerns supersede the legal question, even if the legal issue actually addresses what is or is not licit? If so, what, or whose, pastoral concerns come first? Absent any specific annullment regulations, the questions become a maze.

This hypothetical was not intended to be just a mental exercise, although at this point it apparently has become one. Rather, I know that annullment is complex, and I want to be able to fully explain how it is not a “Catholic divorce.”
 
Scott,

Here are my thoughts:
  1. All Catholic marriages in the US are also civil marriages, although not all civil marriages are sacramental marriages.
  2. There is a presumption of validity in all marriages that have proper form, so there are conjugal rights in all such marriages. Without proper form, I don’t think you’re even really considered married in the Church so you don’t even have conjugal rights in that situation.
  3. The Church doesn’t even consider whether the marriage was a valid marriage unless there is first a civil divorce.
  4. A person should not be taking part in an annulment proceeding unless he or she believes that the marriage was not a sacrament, and was therefore never a true marriage in God’s eyes, so there would be no basis for claiming conjugal rights.
So, to take part in an annullment process, which by definition means you are already civilly divorced, would leave you with no basis, either civilly or sacramentally, for conjugal rights. That would be my answer. I hope it’s a little bit helpful.

Catholic Answers is having a segment on annullments some time in June. Maybe you can get this question in on that program!

God bless,
Sharon
 
Scott Polski:
From a strictly juridical/legal standpoint, without regard to the merits of any particular case, and irrespective of any practical considerations, do the parties to an annullment proceeding retain conjugal rights during the pendency of that proceeding, until such time as an official finding of nullity is made?
Click to expand...
The term Declaration of Nullity is proper and not Annullment. I apologize if this sounds condescending
or petty. :o

Some good advice given::yup:
If an annullment procedure is already underway, the validity of the marriage is obviously suspect. If the possibility that a true marriage does not exists is known to one or both parties involved, how could it be licit to continue in possibly extra-marital relations?

If the sacramental validity of the marriage is suspect, any conjugal activity should stop until a determination is made. I would talk with your priest or confessor if you have one.

:amen:
DigitalDeacon
 
To: Sharon

Pardon me for not laying the proper foundation more precisely. The hypothetical was meant to presume an original marriage ceremony, correctly performed, in the Catholic Church. Therefore, the presumption of validity would attach.

To: Digital Deacon

I am aware that “Declaration of Nullity” is the correct term–I assumed that the Forum participants would not be confused by the shorthand. Please excuse my imprecision.

The risk here, of course, is one of rationalization through legal gamesmanship; but to restate, the question is not one of intention, but rather legal status during a specific time certain–the period from the commencement of an action seeking a Declaration of Nullity until a final determination is made.

It is my understanding that the simple commencement of the proceeding does not, in itself, effectively operate as a determination that the marriage in question was null; and I am not aware that the commencement has any specific injunctive effect. Certainly, the proceeding addresses a suspicion, raised by one or both parties, regarding the otherwise presumed-valid marriage; but the proceeding is conducted to establish the accuracy of the suspicion. Such is the end result–and even that can be appealed.

Therein lies the rub–what is the actual legal status of the parties during the interim? From a practical/pastoral perspective, the typical relationships between disputing couples would probably render this analysis academic in any event. Nevertheless, the individual parties should be entitled to know their correct legal status within the Church at all times. Under normal circumstances, a “suspicion” is not good enough.
 
Therein lies the rub–what is the actual legal status of the parties during the interim?
Click to expand...
The LEGAL status is “divorced”. One must obtain a legal divorce before seeking the decree of nullity. As another poster said, if one is seeking a decree of nullity, there is the mindset in that person that the marriage was not valid and therefore, there should be no reason for conjugal relations.

In Christ,
ILO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top