Can Annulments be Granted in Error?

[dans0622]

No, just realize that justice is not always served and the annulment process is flawed and that sometimes there are mistakes that cannot be corrected. Never heard anyone in the church admit this, yet people’s lives are seriously affected by this process.

Hello AnneTeresa,

I’d be interested to hear how you think “the annulment process is flawed” and how you would suggest it could be fixed. You have spoken about people who marry long ago and cannot produce witnesses and are thereby “stuck.” Maybe that is an example of a flaw. What is the remedy?

I would also say the law itself admits, in general, the possible shortcomings/errors in the process. That is why there is the possibility of appeal and/or lodging a complaint of nullity.

Dan

 

[AnneTeresa]

my experience is different and have heard tribunal and diocesan officials admit this many times and explain how hard they strive to make sure that justice is served. Because our state’s legal system is also flawed do were therefore bypass it entirely? How is your live adversely affected if, after a civil divorce has already become a reality, your ex obtains an annulment?. What happened was the facts of the case were established to the best intent and abilities of all concerned. How does that harm you? assuming you carried an appeal as far as possible and the judgment was overturned, after your ex is long gone and remarried to someone else. HOw is that going to help you?

Too personal to get into here, but I do think it is a flawed process and that lives can be adversely affected. Glad your experience is different but I think it’s fair to let people know that is is just a legal process and that mistakes can and are made. Every day. Just like any legal system makes errors.

 

[AnneTeresa]

Hello AnneTeresa,

I’d be interested to hear how you think “the annulment process is flawed” and how you would suggest it could be fixed. You have spoken about people who marry long ago and cannot produce witnesses and are thereby “stuck.” Maybe that is an example of a flaw. What is the remedy?

I would also say the law itself admits, in general, the possible shortcomings/errors in the process. That is why there is the possibility of appeal and/or lodging a complaint of nullity.

Dan

Yes, that is one of the flaws. Others have been also mentioned here–people lying, etc. How about poor advice or no advice from your advocate who just pushes the paperwork through without really helping you? Makes it seem just like the courts where the person with the best lawyer wins. Or how about a bishop who wants to “make a point” and has advised the tribunal to cut back on the numbers of annulments it awards? So many different factors…

I don’t know the remedy. I just think that it puts an awful lot of trust in a flawed system. We admit that the people (priests who abuse, etc) in the church are flawed. Let’s be honest and admit that sometimes the church judicial system is also flawed.

Re: possibility of appeal… it reminds me of a rape victim who goes through the long legal process only to have the rapist get off because of some reason. Then the victim has to decide once again–is this worth the time, hassle, emotional toll, cost of my continuing to pursue this with an appeal? Many will decide that no, it is not worth it.

 

[puzzleannie]

Too personal to get into here, but I do think it is a flawed process and that lives can be adversely affected. Glad your experience is different but I think it’s fair to let people know that is is just a legal process and that mistakes can and are made. Every day. Just like any legal system makes errors.

okay, point taken, we don’t have to harp on it

you suggest no alternatives, no remedies, and still do not give any convincing argument that someone’s life is adversely affected if their divorced spouse asks for and is granted an annulment.

 

[AnneTeresa]

okay, point taken, we don’t have to harp on it

you suggest no alternatives, no remedies, and still do not give any convincing argument that someone’s life is adversely affected if their divorced spouse asks for and is granted an annulment.

Just to be clear, I wasn’t talking specifically about the case of someone’s spouse being granted an annulment. That’s was from someone else’s comment. That’s why I didn’t answer your specific questions about that.

 

[Vincent1984]

still do not give any convincing argument that someone’s life is adversely affected if their divorced spouse asks for and is granted an annulment.

One likely consequence: after the annulment is granted, the former spouse is free to do whatever he or she likes. New spouse, new family, act like the old spouse never existed.

Whereas if they were still held to be married, their priests and good Catholic friends and family would encourage them to be honor their lifelong, unbreakable commitment and responsibilities to each other, even if separated and civilly divorced. That’s what the sacrament of marriage is: “for better, for worse”.

So I would be affected if my ex-spouse suddenly started being told by his/her priest that it was OK to forget about me, to ‘move on’ &c.

 

[Bluegoat]

under this logic, there is no real way for any group of people to come to any reasonably true conclusion about the facts of any legal investigation into any matter years after the event, so we should just abandond any effor of any justice system to establish fact

Did you bother to read the whole post I made?

I think everyone recognizes that no justice system is full-proof, but your comment really makes little sense in light of the reason I gave for doubting the annulment process, which related specifically to the sacramental nature of marriage. Legal justice largely depends on fairly clear facts in a clear time frame; even a legal annulment is simply trying to establish if particular external criteria were met. The process of religious annulment is an attempt to discern the action of the holy spirit, which is altogether a different thing. And it also tries to diners the action only at the beginning of the putative marriage, without considering that the marriage could have become sacramental later on when any previous deficiencies were overcome.

There are a few cases where an invalid marriage can probably be spotted fairly clearly - often the same kinds of cases where people are granted legal annulments. As for the rest, I have pretty serious doubts that the results are very meaningful.

 

[Will_S]

Did you bother to read the whole post I made?

I think everyone recognizes that no justice system is full-proof, but your comment really makes little sense in light of the reason I gave for doubting the annulment process, which related specifically to the sacramental nature of marriage. Legal justice largely depends on fairly clear facts in a clear time frame; even a legal annulment is simply trying to establish if particular external criteria were met. The process of religious annulment is an attempt to discern the action of the holy spirit, which is altogether a different thing. And it also tries to diners the action only at the beginning of the putative marriage, without considering that the marriage could have become sacramental later on when any previous deficiencies were overcome.

There are a few cases where an invalid marriage can probably be spotted fairly clearly - often the same kinds of cases where people are granted legal annulments. As for the rest, I have pretty serious doubts that the results are very meaningful.

You misunderstand the Catholic understanding of the sacramental nature of marriage. Marriage, like any sacrament, can be validly dispensed, or invalidly attempted. It is not possible for a marriage to be invalid at the time of the nuptials and later somehow become valid.

The purpose of the annulment process is to provide moral certitude (not absolute certainty) as to the validity of a marriage. If a putative marriage is found to be null, then the parties involved can be morally certain that they were not ever married. That is, they can marry another person without sinning gravely. (of course, this assumes that both parties acted in good faith throughout the annulment process).

In reality, only God knows with absolute certainly whether the original marriage was valid or not.

 

[AnneTeresa]

In reality, only God knows with absolute certainly whether the original marriage was valid or not.

Exactly! The annulment process is people trying to do the best they can in the best process they can come up with, but only God really knows.

 

[Bluegoat]

You misunderstand the Catholic understanding of the sacramental nature of marriage. Marriage, like any sacrament, can be validly dispensed, or invalidly attempted. It is not possible for a marriage to be invalid at the time of the nuptials and later somehow become valid.

The purpose of the annulment process is to provide moral certitude (not absolute certainty) as to the validity of a marriage. If a putative marriage is found to be null, then the parties involved can be morally certain that they were not ever married. That is, they can marry another person without sinning gravely. (of course, this assumes that both parties acted in good faith throughout the annulment process).

In reality, only God knows with absolute certainly whether the original marriage was valid or not.

Um, no, I don’t misunderstand the Catholic view of the sacramental nature of marriage. How you got that from what I wrote I don’t know.

 

[Will_S]

Um, no, I don’t misunderstand the Catholic view of the sacramental nature of marriage. How you got that from what I wrote I don’t know.

And it also tries to diners the action only at the beginning of the putative marriage, without considering that the marriage could have become sacramental later on when any previous deficiencies were overcome.

It seemed that you were saying that a marriage could be invalid “at the beginning” and then later become valid. That is not possible.

Further, your use of the word “sacramental” is out of place. Catholic are either married validly (which would be a sacramental marraige) or not. Catholics cannot be truly married without the sacrament. So if you wanted to imply that Catholics could be validly, but nonsacramentally, married, and then that marriage could later somehow become sacramental, that is also incorrect.

In summary, any attempt by Catholics to marry produces either a valid, sacramental marriage or no marriage at all.

 

[agapewolf]

It seemed that you were saying that a marriage could be invalid “at the beginning” and then later become valid. That is not possible.

Further, your use of the word “sacramental” is out of place. Catholic are either married validly (which would be a sacramental marraige) or not. Catholics cannot be truly married without the sacrament. So if you wanted to imply that Catholics could be validly, but nonsacramentally, married, and then that marriage could later somehow become sacramental, that is also incorrect.

In summary, any attempt by Catholics to marry produces either a valid, sacramental marriage or no marriage at all.

Wrong. A Catholic can married a non-baptized person. It would be valid, but not sacramental. If the non-baptized gets baptized at some point, their marriage then becomes sacramental.

 

[Will_S]

Wrong. A Catholic can married a non-baptized person. It would be valid, but not sacramental. If the non-baptized gets baptized at some point, their marriage then becomes sacramental.

My assumption the whole time was that we were talking about Catholics marrying Catholics.

 

[Bluegoat]

It seemed that you were saying that a marriage could be invalid “at the beginning” and then later become valid. That is not possible.

Further, your use of the word “sacramental” is out of place. Catholic are either married validly (which would be a sacramental marraige) or not. Catholics cannot be truly married without the sacrament. So if you wanted to imply that Catholics could be validly, but nonsacramentally, married, and then that marriage could later somehow become sacramental, that is also incorrect.

In summary, any attempt by Catholics to marry produces either a valid, sacramental marriage or no marriage at all.

A Catholic married to a non-christian can indeed be validly, but not sacramentally, married.

As for the first point - are you sure? The general understanding of sacraments would allow for that kind of thing. That is why, for example, if a person is baptized or confirmed with “bad will” and then they become reconciled to the Church they would not be required to be re-baptized. And the marriage of a couple who is unbaptized but married validly, when both become baptized, their marriage “automatically” becomes sacramental, without them having to do anything. The holy spirit, when the couple becomes open to it through baptism, makes up for what was lacking at an earlier time. I’ll point out that this idea of making up what was lacking, though it seems to be ignored in the Catholic treatment of annulment today, would not be odd to an earlier era of Christian, nor to the Eastern Catholics or Orthodox.

 

[Vincent1984]

It seemed that you were saying that a marriage could be invalid “at the beginning” and then later become valid. That is not possible.

It can be possible via a sanatio in radice, depending on what the problem was at the beginning. See canons 1161-1165.

 

[dans0622]

… The general understanding of sacraments would allow for that kind of thing. That is why, for example, if a person is baptized or confirmed with “bad will” and then they become reconciled to the Church they would not be required to be re-baptized. And the marriage of a couple who is unbaptized but married validly, when both become baptized, their marriage “automatically” becomes sacramental, without them having to do anything. The holy spirit, when the couple becomes open to it through baptism, makes up for what was lacking at an earlier time. I’ll point out that this idea of making up what was lacking, though it seems to be ignored in the Catholic treatment of annulment today, would not be odd to an earlier era of Christian, nor to the Eastern Catholics or Orthodox.

Hello Bluegoat,

If the baptism was invalid, it can’t become valid simply by means of the recipient’s good will. If it was valid but ineffective, it can become effective. Regarding marriage, the validation of an invalid marriage is not ignored by the Catholic Church. It’s part of the law on marriage (something like cc. 1155-1165) and is not at all odd to the Latin Church.

Dan