Annulment: He said, she said

[FrDavid96]

My question is a general one–how does an annulment tribunal handle a situation where the two spouses make diametrically opposite claims about something in which no other witnesses or evidence can be brought to bear? For example, one says the marriage was consummated, the other says it wasn’t. Both stick to their story. How would the tribunal approach such an issue?

JB

Actually, there is a direct answer to your question. It’s in canon 1061

Can. 1061 §1. A valid marriage between the baptized is called ratum tantum if it has not been consummated; it is called *ratum et consummatum *if the spouses have performed between themselves in a human fashion a conjugal act which is suitable in itself for the procreation of offspring, to which marriage is ordered by its nature and by which the spouses become one flesh.

§2. After a marriage has been celebrated, if the spouses have lived together consummation is presumed until the contrary is proven.

§3. An invalid marriage is called putative if at least one party celebrated it in good faith, until both parties become certain of its nullity.

That means that IF the couple has lived together, the burden of proof is on the one who claims that it was not consummated.