Are there any Teachings from Saints about annulments?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ammi
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Both. You might as well learn about how the canon law came out, and if any Saints made reference…even though the Bible references this topic clearly.
 
What does the Bible say about invalid marriages?

Btw, I already mentioned St Jerome referencing Deuteronomy 22 and its reference to a forced sexual union.

And Jesus uses the most broad term “porneia” to refer to a sexual relationship that can be divorced.
 
So, you think the Catholic Church allows for loopholes? Are you really saying that?
 
Yes. I agree.

So where do the Saints and doctors talk about porneia and examples? Or Church councils would be great too
 
Last edited:
I’d say there are abuses in applying and interpreting canon law.

Well, maybe I read that from Rome.
 
There are quite obvious cases in which even such a long marriage would not be valid, though. Such as if either party was already married to a living partner, or the two turned out to be too closely related for marriage.

So clearly it can happen that a putative marriage, experienced as real for years, is legally (in civil and canon law) no such thing.

It only gets murky when we are talking about more subtle psychological reasons for defective consent. There, indeed, there is the possibility of abuse. But, as in cases of suicide and “not being Catholic,” the Church has chosen the more merciful path, considering that things which would objectively be sinful might not be so because of factors inside the individual mind. So suicides are no longer assumed to have made a full and free decision, people raised outside the Church aren’t assumed really to have heard its message if they have been brought up to reject it (even if they are not, strictly speaking, literally ignorant of the Church and what she teaches) … and people in failed (putative) marriages can testify that did not really understand or consent to what marriage really is on the day of their wedding.
 
Usagi said:
It only gets murky when we are talking about more subtle psychological reasons for defective consent. There, indeed, there is the possibility of abuse.
Click to expand...
So far, we have two Saints referenced in this thread who talked about invalid marriage and a description of what constitutes them.

The obvious grounds, which are Biblically and historically mentioned are solid. Homosexual unions, close relatives, forced marriage (where the innocent speaks out, and immediately).

The defect of consent is not necessarily wrong either. The problem is when it has become very loosely applied, and the major ground used in the U.S., and Rome has criticized it.

That is when reform comes into play, which St JPII and Cardinal Burke began working towards.

Here is another criticism:

Vincenzo Fagiolo, president of the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts, criticized the large number of annulments granted by marriage tribunals in the United States, saying they were a cause for “grave scandal.”

His comments, published in the July 1, 1993 issue of The Wanderer, included the claim that an “incorrect interpretation of the common canonical laws, and particularly one of these — canon 1095 on psychological immaturity — has allowed judges of American ecclesiastical tribunals to widen jurisprudence enormously.”
 
Last edited:
I agree no-fault divorce is a problem. But this world will never have the standards of the Church. So the Church will always have to guide and determine valid marriage according to Christ.

Whatever government a couple is living in, should not determine the Church’s standard of valid marriage.

But I think you are right about the influence of the United States on the tribunals judgment. It’s a complex situation.

Tribunal judges are in a place of great responsibility! That means they are subject to the warfare of the devil. They are pressured in very crafty ways.

In order to take a stand and uphold the heavenly principles of marriage, they would have to suffer against the hard hearts of people and the constant pressure of this world.

The way that the U.S. is granting decrees of nulity, is a huge compromise to the indissolubility of marriage.

When Rome speaks out (St.JPII, Pope Benedict XVI, the president of the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts, and the Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura) and express criticism and scandal happening in American tribunals, then reform is absolutely required.

When reform is actively pursued, the Church looks to balance her practice and interpretation with Apostolic Teaching through Scripture, councils, Saints, and doctors of the Church.

Where is there ANY support for the way in which the majority of these marriages are being granted invalidity by Popes, Saints, Councils, or doctors of the Church???

This is a very modern (from only around 1983) and very localized (United States) situation occurring.
 
Last edited:
In many cases (divorced, one spouse in a new relationship, parish priests giving Eucharist to an adulterer) what incentive is there to give the spouse, who is defending validity, power to fight against scandal (especially when children are involved) and profaning the Eucharist? It’s much easier to rely on “authority” to decree invalidity and avoid admonishment and bringing the Bishop into the situation. A decree of nullity removes power to fight against scandal and profaning His Eucharist while appearing to uphold the indissolubility of marriage (even appearing to be champions for upholding a high standard of Christian matrimony and mercy).

It’s a win, win for the tribunal.
 
Last edited:
HomeschoolDad said:
but what kind of “statements, behaviors, beliefs, indications” would qualify as proof, and how would you document it, to the satisfaction of a tribunal?
Click to expand...
Basically, we’d be dealing with testimony from the Parties and others who have knowledge. The statements would have to be credible and consistent. The best proof is behavior/statements made before and at the time of the wedding. For instance, the woman reveals to the man that she intends to not have children. He’s disturbed and tells his brother. He is hopeful that things will change after the wedding but they don’t. Her behavior shows that she meant what she said and she has no intention of changing. He submits a petition to the tribunal. She, he, and his brother testify to the facts of the matter in a consistent and corroborative way. Something like that would “work” (although there is more to it than that).

The first of your three examples is more compelling and canonically clear than the other two, at least in terms of simulated consent.

The “level of proof” has to be what the Judges require in order to reach “moral certitude” (a “beyond a reasonable doubt” sort of standard) that the person’s act of consent was actually not marital.

Dan
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top