Annulments: Reasons for Decision

[theodoric]

I already posted this, but it got deleted somehow…

In short, when an annulment is granted, are full reasons provided to the petitioner and respondent? Are they usually extensive?

I can imagine the decision and reasons would not be provided to third-parties due to civil privacy concerns, but is the decision and the reasons of the Tribunal not impacting on the future marriage of an annulled?

 

[1ke]

In short, when an annulment is granted, are full reasons provided to the petitioner and respondent? Are they usually extensive?

I’m not sure what you mean by the "reason’ being provided to the petitioner and respondent. If you mean the grounds, it is the petitioner that has to supply the grounds in order to open a case of nullity. The petitioner and respondent also provide the proof (or rebuttal) together with their witnesses.

Were you thinking that the petitioner just petitions for nullity and the tribunal figures out whether or not and what grounds there are? It doesn’t work that way.

So, no, the tribunal doesn’t provide a “reason”, they provide the decision.

The tribunal will notify both the petition and respondent of their decision-- affirmative or negative-- by letter.

The tribunal might also place a restriction on one or both parties as it pertains to future marriage when they send their letter affirming the decree of nullity. Their pastor must call the Tribunal Office to receive instructions as to what the restrictions are. Once the requirements have been fulfilled the restriction will be lifted and the party may marry.

 

[ChadS]

I already posted this, but it got deleted somehow…

In short, when an annulment is granted, are full reasons provided to the petitioner and respondent? Are they usually extensive?

I can imagine the decision and reasons would not be provided to third-parties due to civil privacy concerns, but is the decision and the reasons of the Tribunal not impacting on the future marriage of an annulled?

I have seen one official annulment letter in my life and once you took away the various signatures, titles, letterheads etc. the body of the letter was pretty scant. The letter basically said a decree of nullity has been issued for X and X by tribune of such-and-such diocese after reviewing all relevant information etc. It doesn’t go into any detail about what caused them to reach the decision and it doesn’t go into assigning blame or responsibility to one party or the other. It seems like a rather pro forma legal document that attests to something.

The person seeking the annulment also received an unofficial document a few weeks earlier saying that the annulment had been granted, which could serve as proof enough for wedding planning etc. until the official decree came out.

ChadS

 

[theodoric]

Were you thinking that the petitioner just petitions for nullity and the tribunal figures out whether or not and what grounds there are? It doesn’t work that way.

I’m a lawyer, so when I commence a civil action the first thing I do is present the cause of action (which in the context of a marriage tribunal would be analogous to enumerating the grounds). Stating the grounds is insufficient for a reasoned determination of the matter. Evidence supporting the grounds has to be provided and the evidence must be assessed and weighed in the context of the law. No civil judge merely says yes or no, guilty or not- - a judge weighs the evidence, makes a decision and then provides reasons for the decision he has made based on the arguments presented and the evidence offered. To render a decision without providing reasons is considered to be a breach of natural justice.

According to the Diocese of Armagh, “a negative decision of the First Instance Tribunal is always open to appeal to the higher Second Instance Tribunal. An affirmative decision is automatically sent to the higher Second Instance Tribunal where the decision may either be ratified … or overturned.” How can the the Second Instance Tribunal ratify or overturn a decision if they don’t have an expansive and reasoned decision from the First Instance Tribunal to assess?

 

[1ke]

I’m a lawyer, so when I commence a civil action the first thing I do is present the cause of action (which in the context of a marriage tribunal would be analogous to enumerating the grounds). Stating the grounds is insufficient for a reasoned determination of the matter. Evidence supporting the grounds has to be provided and the evidence must be assessed and weighed in the context of the law. No civil judge merely says yes or no, guilty or not- - a judge weighs the evidence, makes a decision and then provides reasons for the decision he has made based on the arguments presented and the evidence offered. To render a decision without providing reasons is considered to be a breach of natural justice.

According to the Diocese of Armagh, “a negative decision of the First Instance Tribunal is always open to appeal to the higher Second Instance Tribunal. An affirmative decision is automatically sent to the higher Second Instance Tribunal where the decision may either be ratified … or overturned.” How can the the Second Instance Tribunal ratify or overturn a decision if they don’t have an expansive and reasoned decision from the First Instance Tribunal to assess?

I wasn’t understanding exactly what you were asking, but you’ve clarified it. You are looking for some sort of summary written by the judges (like the “opinion” given by the Supreme Court on cases).

We will have to wait for a canon lawyer to weigh in for details, but I believe the court does render a “decision” like you mean-- giving a summary of application of the grounds to the facts of the case and the court’s conclusions. I don’t know if it is shared with the petitioner and respondent, or just with the second instance court.

 

[theodoric]

Thanks Deacon Jeff.

**NOTE - I’m not a canonist & I hope one replies to this threard **

I’ve had a look at Book VII of the Code which seems to pertain to procedure in annulment proceedings. The evidence gathered and basis for the decision seem to be termed “the Acts of the Case”.

Can. 1472 §1. The judicial acts, both the acts of the case, that is, those regarding the merit of the question, and the acts of the process, that is, those pertaining to the procedure, must be put in writing.

Can. 1475 §1. When the trial has been completed, documents which belong to private persons must be returned; a copy of them, however, is to be retained.
§2. Without a mandate of the judge, notaries and the chancellor are forbidden to furnish a copy of the judicial acts and documents acquired in the process.

Does Can. 1475(§2) preclude the petitioner or respondent from receiving a copy of the Acts?

A question that arises from the above and my reason for posting this thread is as follows: If I were marrying someone who was validly annulled, I would want to know the Churches reasoning for annulling the marriage which, in appearance and form, seemed to be valid. Would the Church not want a member of the faithful to know the defect which created the nullity before entering into a marriage with someone who produced a defect? I know that the Church can place a “prohibition” on remarriage after an annulment in cases where there is serious concern whether a person currently is capable of entering a valid union or has the proper attitudes toward the essential obligations of marriage. How frequently are prohibitions applied? I feel like circumstance might arise where a prospective future spouse might have serious concerns which might not be shared by the marriage tribunal…

Sorry for the complexity of this thread, but I think the answers should be of interest to most anyone considering marrying someone whose apparent marriage fell under a Declaration of Nullity.

 

[1ke]

If I were marrying someone who was validly annulled, I would want to know the Churches reasoning for annulling the marriage which, in appearance and form, seemed to be valid.

The documents of the case are confidential.

Would the Church not want a member of the faithful to know the defect which created the nullity before entering into a marriage with someone who produced a defect?

You are assuming that your prospective spouse “produced” a defect. There are two parties to marriage, so it may not be the case at all.

I know that the Church can place a “prohibition” on remarriage after an annulment in cases where there is serious concern whether a person currently is capable of entering a valid union or has the proper attitudes toward the essential obligations of marriage.

So in absence of a prohibition you have your answer-- that person is capable of contracting a valid marriage.

Whether or not that person should contract a marriage with you, or you with them, is something entirely different.

B]How frequently are prohibitions applied?

I’ve seen it several in the documentation I’ve received from the tribunal. And we are a small parish. So, I think it’s on this side of rare. It is applied as often as it needs to be applied. Each case is specific.

I feel like circumstance might arise where a prospective future spouse might have serious concerns which might not be shared by the marriage tribunal…

You should always seriously explore concerns, whether the person has never been married, been widowed, or been divorced with a decree of nullity, or found free to marry by procedural means or dissolution of the natural bond.

You shouldn’t move forward with anything if you have concerns about a current relationship.

 

[psalm90]

A relative of mine got an annulment, but it was predicated on the fact that the people involved in the decision RE-WROTE my relative’s statement. My relative said “that’s not what I said” and THEY said “that’s what you wrote” and the decree was issued.

 

[otjm]

A relative of mine got an annulment, but it was predicated on the fact that the people involved in the decision RE-WROTE my relative’s statement. My relative said “that’s not what I said” and THEY said “that’s what you wrote” and the decree was issued.

None of us know the details, so it is a bit difficult to determine exactly what occurred. I would be hesitant to take your relative’s statement as an exact, word-for-word indication that (as your comment seems to indicate that fraud may have occurred) the tribunal did anything improper.

And that is not to fault your relative, either, I have met a number of people over the years who have less than a crystal clear understanding of both the process in general, and the specifics of their case.

 

[theodoric]

Civil cases get decided incorrectly all the time. If they weren’t, we wouldn’t have abortion in the United States. Ecclesiastical courts are not infallible - if they were there wouldn’t be an appeal process and affirmative decisions wouldn’t automatically be sent to the higher Second Instance Tribunal for ratification or reversal. The Church acknowledges that the process is imperfect.

My understanding is that once a vetitum/prohibition is placed on an annulment it is usually permanently removed once ‘appropriate’ corrective steps are made. Apparently this often involves counselling sessions (yes, all cases are different). Once the prohibition is removed, a future spouse will likely never be made aware that a prohibition was ever in place.

For anyone considering marrying a person who received a Church annulment, I would say that being made aware of a former prohibition, though now removed, is very much their business. The removal of a prohibition really only demonstrates that it is licit for a person to attempt to contract a marriage, that there is apparent capacity. and not that they are actually capable of contracting a valid marriage. It’s something to think about…

 

[theodoric]

It’s poor analogy to compare confession to annulment. Confession is a private act with forgiveness conferred (or not conferred) privately. A priest cannot even disclose that someone has attended the confessional. Marriage on the other hand is a public act with the community called together to act as witness. It’s very nature is public. As the Catechism states: "This is the reason why the Church normally requires that the faithful contract marriage according to the ecclesiastical form… It is therefore appropriate that it should be celebrated in the public liturgy of the Church; … Since marriage is a state of life in the Church, certainty about it is necessary (hence the obligation to have witnesses). (CCC 1631) Correspondingly, there is a Decree of Nullity, a public proclamation that what appeared valid is not. When the Church with begins making Decrees of Forgiveness or makes marriage a private and confidential act, I’ll take your point.

I do accept your point about discussing issues with your finacee - very reasonable if you are aware of the issues at play. But with all due respect, Deacon, you must be fully aware that many issues that result in the nullifying of a marriage are concerns that did not present themselves to the parties prior to the marriage liturgy.

The Church takes seriously its duty to protect the sacrament. Fair enough. Not analogy, but example: A male pilot has a Catholic marriage and years later starts a ‘second family’ on the other side of the country - It’s not commonplace, but it has happened. The wife finds this out and petitions for an annulment on grounds of psychic incapacity and simulation of consent. The annulment is granted and a prohibition placed on the husbands decree. The pilot goes through counselling for 5 or 10 years in order to remove the prohibition, the counsellor declares him reformed and the prohibition is removed. Two years later a practising Catholic woman meets the pilot and they get engaged. The pilot doesn’t disclose his prior dual-life. The new fianceetalks about all kinds of things, but unsurprisingly she doesn’t ask ‘honey, have you ever lived a dual life with two families’. In marriage prep the deacon caring for the couple doesn’t mention that there was formerly a prohibition on the pilot’s annulment and assure the woman “The Church takes seriously its duty to protect the sacrament”. They get married, unbeknown to the Deacon, counsellor and new-wife that the pilot was actually still involved with the mistress he had during the prior marriage. When the second wife applies for an annulment she discovers that his tenancies were disclosed during his first annulment proceedings. When the broken woman asks the Deacon who oversaw her marriage preparation and why this wasn’t discussed, given that the Church knew he had previously demonstrated behaviour that led the Church to publicly declare his first marriage null, the Deacon replies: “So what about the removal of the prohibition do you think “is your business”? The Church takes seriously its duty to protect the sacrament. If you had an issue with your future spouse you should have talked about it.”

The strength of a law or policy is assessed by looking at the difficult examples.

 

[1ke]

A male pilot has a Catholic marriage and years later starts a ‘second family’ on the other side of the country - It’s not commonplace, but it has happened. The wife finds this out and petitions for an annulment on grounds of psychic incapacity and simulation of consent. The annulment is granted

Adultery years into a marriage does not demonstrate the grounds you propose. It demonstrates sin, poor character, and bad decision making. It does not demonstrate simulation of consent or “psychic incapacity”.

So already your “example” is assuming things that cannot be assumed.

and a prohibition placed on the husbands decree. The pilot goes through counselling for 5 or 10 years in order to remove the prohibition, the counsellor declares him reformed and the prohibition is removed. Two years later a practising Catholic woman meets the pilot and they get engaged. The pilot doesn’t disclose his prior dual-life. The new fianceetalks about all kinds of things, but unsurprisingly she doesn’t ask ‘honey, have you ever lived a dual life with two families’. In marriage prep the deacon caring for the couple doesn’t mention that there was formerly a prohibition on the pilot’s annulment and assure the woman “The Church takes seriously its duty to protect the sacrament”. They get married, unbeknown to the Deacon, counsellor and new-wife that the pilot was actually still involved with the mistress he had during the prior marriage. When the second wife applies for an annulment she discovers that his tenancies were disclosed during his first annulment proceedings. When the broken woman asks the Deacon who oversaw her marriage preparation and why this wasn’t discussed, given that the Church knew he had previously demonstrated behaviour that led the Church to publicly declare his first marriage null, the Deacon replies: “So what about the removal of the prohibition do you think “is your business”? The Church takes seriously its duty to protect the sacrament. If you had an issue with your future spouse you should have talked about it.”

The strength of a law or policy is assessed by looking at the difficult examples.

You should write for Lifetime TV.

You assume that this person who so disregards Church teaching as to have a nearly 20 year affair and second family would go to 10 years of counseling and fool a counselor for 10 years, fool everyone for 10 years, and that nothing regarding the decree of nullity would ne discussed with the fiancé. Your scenario has someone pretending to be a practicing Catholic and going through all sorts of hoops to be married in the Church. In reality, this person would just go to a JP and be done with it.

You also assume the deacon would not discuss it, but that is not an accurate assumption. There is a difference between the acts of the nullity decree being confidential and the actual decree of nullity being confidential. It is not. And it would be discussed at great length in marriage preparation.

 

[theodoric]

Adultery years into a marriage does not demonstrate the grounds you propose. It demonstrates sin, poor character, and bad decision making. It does not demonstrate simulation of consent or “psychic incapacity”.

So already your “example” is assuming things that cannot be assumed.

The circumstances provide indicia of the concerns that could reasonably underpin valid grounds for an annulment, including simulation of consent and “psychic incapacity”(canon 1095 n.3) - unless you’re suggesting that someone who lives a dual lifestyle is unlikely to be mentally imbalances and merely has “poor character”.

You assume that this person who so disregards Church teaching as to have a nearly 20 year affair and second family would go to 10 years of counseling and fool a counselor for 10 years, fool everyone for 10 years, and that nothing regarding the decree of nullity would ne discussed with the fiancé. Your scenario has someone pretending to be a practicing Catholic and going through all sorts of hoops to be married in the Church. In reality, this person would just go to a JP and be done with it.

“But what is scandal? Scandal is saying one thing and doing another; it is a double life, a double life. A totally double life: ‘I am very Catholic, I always go to Mass, I belong to this association and that one; but my life is not Christian …And so many Christians are like this … And this happens every day, it’s enough to see the news on TV, or to read the papers. In the papers there are so many scandals." - Pope Francis - en.radiovaticana.va/news/2017/02/23/pope_dont_put_off_conversion,_give_up_a_double_life/1294470

The pope wasn’t talking about two families, but it’s not a stretch.

You also assume the deacon would not discuss it, but that is not an accurate assumption. There is a difference between the acts of the nullity decree being confidential and the actual decree of nullity being confidential. It is not. And it would be discussed at great length in marriage preparation.

**Well, that’s what I’m trying to ascertain. ** Elsewhere it was said: “The documents of the case are confidential”; “The Acts are generally considered “confidential” except with respect to the Petitioner and the Respondent.”; and the actually decree appears not to give reasons. Herein is my confusion. Would the Deacon have been aware of the grounds for the annulment and the circumstances that supported the grounds? (Presuming he wasn’t actually involved with the hearing). It sounds to me like "discuss[ing] at great length in marriage preparation entails acknowledging that there was an annulment and leaving all specifics to be expanded upon to whatever degree the parties feel appropriate or are willing to disclose, including the actual defects of the initial marriage itself and former prohibitions which have now been removed.

 

[theodoric]

It’s not just ‘anyway’. No Catholic should find solace in entering into a doomed bond… emotions are invested and children could find themselves in a broken home. I find no comfort in that scenario.

I can understand why the Seal of the Confessional is in place, but I can’t understand why the ‘internal forum’ pertaining to a former prohibition would not be expanded to include a future spouse - they seem very internal to the circumstances of an annulment to me, at least with regard to the actions of the the person with who they are discerning marriage. But I think I have my answer:

Disclosure by the Church to a someone marrying an annulled: That there is a Decree of nullity; there are no prohibitions in place
Non-Disclosure: Whether or not there ever was a prohibition attached to the annulment; the grounds of annulment; the evidence pertaining to the annulment, and; any and all information relating to the circumstances surrounding the annulment to which the Church is privy.

If you review the case law surrounding divorce you see all kinds of far-fetched scenarios that were lived reality. There is tragedy all around us.

 

[1ke]

The pope wasn’t talking about two families, but it’s not a stretch.

My time is much more valuable than this nonsense.

Good day. Exiting absurd thread. You just want argue for argument’s sake, I see no real desire t learn in this situation.

 

[theodoric]

My time is much more valuable than this nonsense.

Good day. Exiting absurd thread. You just want argue for argument’s sake, I see no real desire t learn in this situation.

But I think I have my answer:

Disclosure by the Church to someone marrying an annulled: That there is a Decree of Nullity; there are no prohibitions in place

Non-Disclosure: Whether or not there ever was a prohibition attached to the annulment; the grounds of annulment; the evidence pertaining to the annulment, and; any and all information relating to the circumstances surrounding the annulment to which the Church is privy.

 

[AnnArbor]

One thing you seem to be overlooking is that there is another party to that previous attempt at marriage – and they also have a right to expect confidentiality. Often, one party’s behavior and psychological problems form the basis for the decree; as a third party, you have no right to be privy to that.

 

[Gorgias]

I’m with the others who have responded to your ‘example’ –
it’s more “Lifetime movie” than “real life example.”

Nevertheless…

A male pilot has a Catholic marriage and years later starts a ‘second family’ on the other side of the country - It’s not commonplace, but it has happened. The wife finds this out and petitions for an annulment on grounds of psychic incapacity and simulation of consent.

So… she finds out – and divorces him! – and never contacts the “second family” to let the mistress (who, since you said ‘family’, not ‘wife’, has children by him) that he’s a two-timing son of a gun? And, this mistress, once she knows he was married the whole time, wants to stay with him? And, even if she does, she doesn’t insist he now marries her?

The annulment is granted and a prohibition placed on the husbands decree. The pilot goes through counselling for 5 or 10 years in order to remove the prohibition, the counsellor declares him reformed and the prohibition is removed.

To my experience, he wouldn’t go through counseling until he wants to be married. The deacon who is preparing him for marriage learns of the unfulfilled prohibition when he requests the man’s sacramental records. At that point, the deacon does know what’s up. And, when he conducts the interview with the man, he asks him if there’s anything about himself that he hasn’t shared with his fiancee. And, further, when he interviews the fiancee, he asks her about her knowledge of the cause of the end of the first marriage. At that point, the gig is up, and the deacon refuses to allow them to make an invalid attempt at marriage.

In marriage prep the deacon caring for the couple doesn’t mention that there was formerly a prohibition on the pilot’s annulment

This is even more far-fetched. The deacon doesn’t discuss it with the man?

The strength of a law or policy is assessed by looking at the difficult examples.

I’m all about looking at boundary cases. This isn’t a ‘boundary case’, though: it’s a movie-script fiction.

 

[otjm]

I already posted this, but it got deleted somehow…

In short, when an annulment is granted, are full reasons provided to the petitioner and respondent? Are they usually extensive?

I can imagine the decision and reasons would not be provided to third-parties due to civil privacy concerns, but is the decision and the reasons of the Tribunal not impacting on the future marriage of an annulled?

In any given marriage, there is something like rolling the dice at the craps table, except the permutations are far greater then dice can present. I suspect there are few marriages, whether until death, or until the gavel comes down, in which both parties have the “I never expected this” experience - perhaps multiple times and multiple issues.

And perhaps that is why God provided humans with oxytocin, not incorrectly nicknamed the “stupid” hormone.

All marriages have risk factors. Whether or not a potential spouse has knowledge of the causes underlying a decree of nullity of their intended is far less important than whether or not the intended is a truthful person. Rather than demanding to see the contents of the case, one needs to speak with the intended at length over sufficient time, to be able to assess that person is someone you with to spend the rest of your life with. Aside from the fact that it may have been the other individual, rather than the intended who had the issue resulting in the decree, there seems to be several things afloat here. One is (apparently) a lack of belief that the intended will share what the decree was about; another is that the intended has not changed over time and due to the previous marriage, and (apparently) will never change and is likely to repeat past errors/issues.

In over 70 years, I have yet to meet very many people who did not change/grow up/react differently when they were 32 instead of 22; and more so when they are 42 as opposed to 22. And yes, there are some who never “get it”, but that should be fairly obvious without the need for documentation.

Are there some who are permanently stuck in serial wrong behavior? Absolutely; but almost all of them will give obvious tell-tales to a conscious observer.

There are limits many will put on discussing a prior marriage, and for legitimate reasons. But it would seem far more important to know how the intended now sees the vows and the ongoing nature of marriage, and most major flash points (faith, faith in action, decision making, finances, children, in-laws/outlaws, decision making processes) than knowing nitty gritty details of the grounds of the decree.

If you can’t figure this out without seeing the decree in toto, how are you going to make a decision with someone who has never been married, and so has not had a review of what could be grounds for a decree of nullity in your future marriage to them?

 

[theodoric]

I’m with the others who have responded to your ‘example’ –
it’s more “Lifetime movie” than “real life example.”

It doesn’t really matter if it’s probable, as long as it’s possible. Attacking the probability of the situation doesn’t defeat the concern it reveals. The ability of a rule to deal with challenging hypotheticals is an indicator of its soundness.

To my experience, he wouldn’t go through counseling until he wants to be married.

According to others, what would be required to remove the prohibition would be indicated at the time the prohibition was placed. If he wanted to remarry he could undertake the prescribed care to address the prohibition at any time.

The deacon who is preparing him for marriage learns of the unfulfilled prohibition when he requests the man’s sacramental records.

As I understand what others have said, when the Deacon requests the man’s sacramental records he will be informed that the man was previously married and that a Decree of Nullity was granted. If the prohibition has been previously removed, my understanding is that the Deacon will not even be made aware that there HAD been a prohibition. Further, my understanding is that Acts are not provided to the Deacon if he was not a representative at the time of the Annulment proceedings. Finally, my understanding from what has been written is that once a Decree without prohibitions is in place, the Church is satisfied that man is now free to remarry within the Church and, in respect of confidentiality and in absolute deference to the marriage tribunal’s decision, the circumstances of the previous annulment are no longer brought up. Confidentiality is held within the “internal forum”, which the the Deacon was outside of. As the matter is deemed to be res judicata, the Deacon would not even have access to the Acts or records, only the confirmation that a valid and unrestricted Decree of Annulment is on file.

This is my understanding from the other posters. I don’t think it’s a good thing, but I am satisfied that this is a fair summary: once a Decree without prohibition is in place, the case becomes res judicata and the reasoning of the tribunal and the acts are essentially locked to the knowledge of future spouses and those who weren’t parties to the initial proceeding.