Annulment vs. Civil Divorce

[Becca3]

I want to know the difference between an annulment and a civil divorce. I was divorced from my ex-husband in front of a civil judge in a courthouse but was never annulled. What is the difference? And why would I have to seek an annulment? We were both married in a courthouse and not in a church. We were both baptized in another church denomination. So, that means that our marriage was valid and sacramental, so does that mean I still have to seek an annulment??

 

[1ke]

I want to know the difference between an annulment and a civil divorce. I was divorced from my ex-husband in front of a civil judge in a courthouse but was never annulled. What is the difference?

A divorce ends a legal relationship and obligations under civil law.

It does not dissolve the marriage bond, which if validly entered into between two baptized people can be dissolved by no power but death of a spouse.

And why would I have to seek an annulment?

You would only need to seek a determination on your freedom to marry if you planned to enter into a new marriage. You are not free to do so now. If you think your first marriage was invalid, then you would need to petition the Church to investigate it. There are certain things, called impediments or defects, which may render an attempt at marriage invalid.

We were both married in a courthouse and not in a church. We were both baptized in another church denomination. So, that means that our marriage was valid and sacramental, so does that mean I still have to seek an annulment??

Yes. Non-Catholics marry validly when they marry each other civilly. A valid sacramental marriage cannot be dissolved by any power but death. If your marriage was valid, you are not free to marry another. If your marriage attempt had a defect, then you may in fact be free and a nullity process would investigate this.

You are not required to seek a decree of nullity. If you do not, then you would remain single.

A civil divorce does not dissolve a valid marriage, it merely ends the civil obligations.

 

[EasterJoy]

Yes. Non-Catholics marry validly when they marry each other civilly. A valid sacramental marriage cannot be dissolved by any power but death. If your marriage was valid, you are not free to marry another. If your marriage attempt had a defect, then you may in fact be free and a nullity process would investigate this.

You are not required to seek a decree of nullity. If you do not, then you would remain single.

A civil divorce does not dissolve a valid marriage, it merely ends the civil obligations.

Is it common for non-Catholic Christian marriages to be undertaken with the defect that the parties begin their marriage *in the belief *that although a divorce would be a regrettable outcome to their marriage, their bond nevertheless may be dissolved if a peaceful common life later seems to them an unrealistic or impossible aim?

 

[1ke]

Is it common for non-Catholic Christian marriages to be undertaken with the defect that the parties begin their marriage *in the belief *that although a divorce would be a regrettable outcome to their marriage, their bond nevertheless may be dissolved if a peaceful common life later seems to them an unrealistic or impossible aim?

I can’t speak to that. I don’t think we can generlize. Intent and consent are presumed valid (i.e. the words they say are presumed to conform to their internal act of the will), they would have to prove a defect of intent.

 

[Becca3]

You would only need to seek a determination on your freedom to marry if you planned to enter into a new marriage. You are not free to do so now. If you think your first marriage was invalid, then you would need to petition the Church to investigate it. There are certain things, called impediments or defects, which may render an attempt at marriage invalid.

If your marriage attempt had a defect, then you may in fact be free and a nullity process would investigate this.

You are not required to seek a decree of nullity. If you do not, then you would remain single

What kind of defects are you talking about?? How about alcoholicism and abuse? Would that qualify me to be free to marry another?

And I am confused, You said that I am not free to do so but yet I am not required to seek nullity??

 

[EasterJoy]

I can’t speak to that. I don’t think we can generlize. Intent and consent are presumed valid (i.e. the words they say are presumed to conform to their internal act of the will), they would have to prove a defect of intent.

I mean do the parties contend that while their prouncement of their vows was in good faith (as would be presumed), their understanding of what they were promising at the time of their vows that of their own denomination, which taught that the honest pronouncement of the vows still allowed for divorce later?

 

[Becca3]

I mean do the parties contend that while their prouncement of their vows was in good faith (as would be presumed), their understanding of what they were promising at the time of their vows that of their own denomination, which taught that the honest pronouncement of the vows still allowed for divorce later?

Yes, that is what I was thinking too. The denomination that I was in allows for divorce and if done so, it is permanent and the bonds are broken. It was in good faith in the beginning but at the end there were defects in the marriage that prevented it from continuing on in good faith.

 

[jmjconder]

There is some inaccurate information on some of the posts. I suggest you follow 1ke’s post - he clearly laid out the fullness of the Church’s teaching on this subject - 100% true.

 

[styrgwillidar]

Yes, that is what I was thinking too. The denomination that I was in allows for divorce and if done so, it is permanent and the bonds are broken. It was in good faith in the beginning but at the end there were defects in the marriage that prevented it from continuing on in good faith.

There is a group forum on divorce and annulment which has a poster who is a canon lawyer. He can advise you on specific questions.

From a Catholic perspective, what matters is the conditions at the time the marriage started. So, if a Catholic marriage is entered into in ‘good faith’, that is- proper form, full consent, understanding that marriage is permanent bond etc. than it doesn’t matter what happens later. That is ‘defects’ in the marriage later don’t create a situation where it is no longer valid. However, the Church acknowledges that conditions within the marriage may occur which preclude the couple continuing to live together, even acknowledge that civil divorce may be required. But that doesn’t end the valid marriage entered into in ‘good faith’. If it is valid at the beginning it always remains so, the defect has to be there at the beginning to preclude having entered into a valid marriage.

So in reality, saying the Church annuls a marriage or grants an annulment really isn’t accurate lingustically. Since using annulment as a verb implies the church is taking an action to invalidate a marriage, which isn’t true. The Church declares a marrige to have been found null. It investigates the marriage, focusing on it’s initiation, and may issue a declaration of nullity. A declaration that was never a valid marriage from the beginning.

It is not the undoing of the marriage bond by the Church, its a statement there never was a sacramental marriage.

 

[Jyous]

As stated previously by 1ke

A divorce ends a legal relationship and obligations under civil law.

An annullment states that there was never a valid marriage to begin with.

If you wish to remarry you will need to have your previous marriage evaluated for validity and annulled if possible (not sure I’m saying that the right way). If you don’t wish to remarry it isn’t an issue. An internet forum cannot answer whether it was valid or not, that’s what marriage tribunals are for.

 

[Becca3]

There is a group forum on divorce and annulment which has a poster who is a canon lawyer. He can advise you on specific questions.

From a Catholic perspective, what matters is the conditions at the time the marriage started. So, if a Catholic marriage is entered into in ‘good faith’, that is- proper form, full consent, understanding that marriage is permanent bond etc. than it doesn’t matter what happens later. That is ‘defects’ in the marriage later don’t create a situation where it is no longer valid. However, the Church acknowledges that conditions within the marriage may occur which preclude the couple continuing to live together, even acknowledge that civil divorce may be required. But that doesn’t end the valid marriage entered into in ‘good faith’. If it is valid at the beginning it always remains so, the defect has to be there at the beginning to preclude having entered into a valid marriage.

So in reality, saying the Church annuls a marriage or grants an annulment really isn’t accurate lingustically. Since using annulment as a verb implies the church is taking an action to invalidate a marriage, which isn’t true. The Church declares a marrige to have been found null. It investigates the marriage, focusing on it’s initiation, and may issue a declaration of nullity. A declaration that was never a valid marriage from the beginning.

It is not the undoing of the marriage bond by the Church, its a statement there never was a sacramental marriage.

Oh I see now. Thank you so much. I would like to see this canon lawyer and ask him a bunch of questions. Thank you.

 

[Becca3]

As stated previously by 1ke

An annullment states that there was never a valid marriage to begin with.

If you wish to remarry you will need to have your previous marriage evaluated for validity and annulled if possible (not sure I’m saying that the right way). If you don’t wish to remarry it isn’t an issue. An internet forum cannot answer whether it was valid or not, that’s what marriage tribunals are for.

Yes, I will have to talk to a priest and let him find out for me.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

There is some inaccurate information on some of the posts. I suggest you follow 1ke’s post - he clearly laid out the fullness of the Church’s teaching on this subject - 100% true.

FYI - 1ke is a female.

 

[aemcpa]

There is some inaccurate information on some of the posts. I suggest you follow 1ke’s post - he clearly laid out the fullness of the Church’s teaching on this subject - 100% true.

*she

 

[Becca3]

Oh he is a she! Thank for clarifying that for us!

 

[aemcpa]

Yes, that is what I was thinking too. The denomination that I was in allows for divorce and if done so, it is permanent and the bonds are broken. It was in good faith in the beginning but at the end there were defects in the marriage that prevented it from continuing on in good faith.

The denomination you were in does not have the authority to allow for divorce, because only the Catholic Church was given the power to bind and loose. Your former denomination, frankly, is lying to people when it tells them that their marriages are dissolved by divorce.

 

[1ke]

What kind of defects are you talking about?? How about alcoholicism and abuse? Would that qualify me to be free to marry another?

A defect at the time the vows are exchanged. As to what that may have been, I would be hesitant to speculate. Make an appointment with your priest.

Alcoholism and abuse may have created impediments or defects-- for example, if a person was drunk at their own wedding there could have been a defect of consent. Or the abuse could be evidence of an impediment at the time the vows were exchanged.

I highly recommend the book Annulment: The Wedding That Was by Michael Smith Foster (available on Amazon). It will give you a better understanding of what nullity is and isn’t.

And I am confused, You said that I am not free to do so but yet I am not required to seek nullity??

You can become a Catholic and practice your faith and live your life without a decree of nullity. A person who marries, divorces, and remains single can participate fully in the life of the Church and need never petition for a decree of nullity.

You would only need to pursue a decree of nullity if you plan to marry someone else. You cannot marry anyone else unless your first marriage is found to be null, or your first spouse passes away.

 

[Becca3]

A defect at the time the vows are exchanged. As to what that may have been, I would be hesitant to speculate. Make an appointment with your priest.

Alcoholism and abuse may have created impediments or defects-- for example, if a person was drunk at their own wedding there could have been a defect of consent. Or the abuse could be evidence of an impediment at the time the vows were exchanged.

I highly recommend the book Annulment: The Wedding That Was by Michael Smith Foster (available on Amazon). It will give you a better understanding of what nullity is and isn’t.

You can become a Catholic and practice your faith and live your life without a decree of nullity. A person who marries, divorces, and remains single can participate fully in the life of the Church and need never petition for a decree of nullity.

You would only need to pursue a decree of nullity if you plan to marry someone else. You cannot marry anyone else unless your first marriage is found to be null, or your first spouse passes away.

Yes I am planning on marrying someone else. So, in order to define my first marriage being null, meaning I had married outside of the Church in a courthouse. That would make it null. I remember the ceremony where the clerk didn’t even bring up God’s name.

 

[1ke]

Yes I am planning on marrying someone else. So, in order to define my first marriage being null, meaning I had married outside of the Church in a courthouse. That would make it null. I remember the ceremony where the clerk didn’t even bring up God’s name.

No, that would not make it null.

Civil marriages between non-Catholics are valid. You stated neither you nor your first spouse were Catholics.

Each situation is entirely unique. Only general information can be given here. So, I really encourage you to make an appointment with your local Catholic pastor who will walk through an extensive interview to get all the pertinent details and then guide you from there.

 

[Becca3]

No, that would not make it null.

Civil marriages between non-Catholics are valid. You stated neither you nor your first spouse were Catholics.

Each situation is entirely unique. Only general information can be given here. So, I really encourage you to make an appointment with your local Catholic pastor who will walk through an extensive interview to get all the pertinent details and then guide you from there.

Oh ok. Yes I will have to make an appointment with the pastor. Thank you.