Church Abuses of the Sacrament of Marrage with regard to Annulments, etc

[cecilia97]

I am seeking an annulment for the same reason, as I have lots of questions, having been away for awhile. Nothing quite like a good confession! I have no intention of dating, but I would be stupid to say I NEVER will.** I don’t know where I’ll be in 10 years, and I want to know where I stand. I also don’t want to drag up the miserable memories again, should God send me a spouse.**

Amen to that! You are very wise, IMO.

 

[Just_Lurking]

OTOH, how could a marriage be valid when the groom had a mistress and every intention of not ‘forsaking all others’?

Canonical jurisprudence on marital consent distinguishes between the following two cases:

A person intending not to be bound by the obligation of marital fidelity (animus se non obligandi) enters into marriage invalidly.

A person who accepts that he or she will be bound by the obligation of marital fidelity enters into marriage validly, even if that person also intends not to fulfill that obligation (animus non implendi).

Thanks to Verbum in another thread (see here) for much appreciated help on the translation of the Latin terms.

 

[cameron_lansing]

Canonical jurisprudence on marital consent distinguishes between the following two cases:

A person intending not to be bound by the obligation of marital fidelity (animus se non obligandi) enters into marriage invalidly.

A person who accepts that he or she will be bound by the obligation of marital fidelity enters into marriage validly, even if that person also intends not to fulfill that obligation (animus non implendi).

Thanks to Verbum in another thread (see here) for much appreciated help on the translation of the Latin terms.

One has to still be cautious here. The classical distinction between the exclusion of the right and the intention to abuse it (in either case by a positive act of the will, whether explicit or implicit, etc.) appears to be in the process of being re-thought by rotal auditors according to some decisions published in more recent volumes of RRDec or made available for private use. One auditor characterized the distinction as labyrinthine.

 

[Just_Lurking]

One has to still be cautious here. The classical distinction between the exclusion of the right and the intention to abuse it (in either case by a positive act of the will, whether explicit or implicit, etc.) appears to be in the process of being re-thought by rotal auditors according to some decisions published in more recent volumes of RRDec or made available for private use. One auditor characterized the distinction as labyrinthine.

Can I ask you three questions? Wait, does that count as a question? Can I get you to reset the count?

Anyway:

Is this rotal rethinking limited to contra bonum fidei, or more generally?

Is this the same distinction as being a sine qua non of the marriage contract? I couldn’t tell from what I’ve been reading.

Any recommendations for further reading on the psychological aspects of marital consent? Wrenn’s The Invalid Marriage is very broad, but doesn’t go into enough depth for me to be able to relate what it says with other, mostly pre-Vatican II sources. Thanks!

 

[jmcrae]

Catholics are bound to marry in the Catholic Church under its rules unless they get a dispensation from their bishop.

If you are a Catholic and got married outside the Church without a dispensation you will probably be granted a decree of nullity due to lack of canonical form.

It’s important that although it seems as though it’s a “sure thing” that the Declaration of Nullity would be granted in this case (and I knew someone who got one of these in less than two weeks; on the surface it doesn’t seem like a difficult case), that one not assume the conclusion - make sure to follow procedure all the way through to the end - and hopefully the procedure will be very short. But even in a case like this where the result seems certain, we don’t have the right to make the judgment on our own behalf - one still has to follow the procedure and not make any assumptions (ie: don’t make any promises to your boyfriend or girlfriend regarding the future) ahead of time.

 

[ajcoley1]

It would be nice if it were that simple, and no, I don’t expect it to be that easy. I just need to know where I stand. I would be so relieved to not have to bring up the abuse that took place!
(And no, there isn’t anyone waiting for any promise. I’m taking care of me.)

 

[jmcrae]

It would be nice if it were that simple, and no, I don’t expect it to be that easy. I just need to know where I stand. I would be so relieved to not have to bring up the abuse that took place!
(And no, there isn’t anyone waiting for any promise. I’m taking care of me.)

Sounds like you’re doing everything just right.

 

[ajcoley1]

Thank-uou for your encouraging words!

 

[Phemie]

It’s important that although it seems as though it’s a “sure thing” that the Declaration of Nullity would be granted in this case (and I knew someone who got one of these in less than two weeks; on the surface it doesn’t seem like a difficult case), that one not assume the conclusion - make sure to follow procedure all the way through to the end - and hopefully the procedure will be very short. But even in a case like this where the result seems certain, we don’t have the right to make the judgment on our own behalf - one still has to follow the procedure and not make any assumptions (ie: don’t make any promises to your boyfriend or girlfriend regarding the future) ahead of time.

As it’s already been explained here before by someone else – Cameron Lansing, IIRC – a Catholic who marries outside the Church without dispensation for lack of canonical form doesn’t enjoy presumption of validity so technically no decree of nullity is required. Proper documentation of the ‘invalid’ marriage, making sure to dot all the i’s and cross all the t’s, can be done by the pastor, although many bishops prefer to submit it to the Tribunal.

 

[jmcrae]

As it’s already been explained here before by someone else – Cameron Lansing, IIRC – a Catholic who marries outside the Church without dispensation for lack of canonical form doesn’t enjoy presumption of validity so technically no decree of nullity is required. Proper documentation of the ‘invalid’ marriage, making sure to dot all the i’s and cross all the t’s, can be done by the pastor, although many bishops prefer to submit it to the Tribunal.

Yes, but the faint possibility exists of a lack of memory, where a priest or Bishop did authorize the marriage - phone call by the mother-in-law to the Rectory, hey, can my son get married in a Protestant church? Which one? Name, address, date of wedding - conversation ensues regarding various pastoral reasons to permit it, he gives the go-ahead, makes a note in his diary of the incident and records it in his wedding book - in which case, it’s valid.

What the Tribunal does is it checks for any record of a priest or Bishop giving the go-ahead on the wedding - if they can’t find one, they rule that the marriage is invalid.

That’s why these ones are so quick to settle, one way or the other.

 

[DMW1980]

Unless the marriage is taking place in a foreign language, or unless the person has a mental age too low to be considered able in law to consent to marriage in the first place, how can they not understand what they are consenting to?

“Forsaking all others… for as long as you both shall live.”
That’s the vow, you think about it before saying “I do.”

Also, anyone getting married in a Catholic Church has to sign a prenuptial enquiry form with their priest, where they have to sign yes to 4 propositions, that they understand that Catholic marriage is:

1. Lifelong
2. Exclusive
3. Open to life
4. Sacramental
   Also, in most diocese, you have to go through up to 6 months of prenuptial preparation classes in church before your wedding. I was engaged, I know all this from first-hand experience.

In what way, other than sticking your fingers in your ears and going “La-la-la-la!” can you not be aware of what you are consenting to in getting married?

Due to American immigration policy, many are entering into fraudulent civil marriages in order to deceived immigration and obtain green cards. What would be the verdict on the validity of such marriages in the eyes of the Church? In a few cities this has been a major issue for civli authorities.

 

[jmcrae]

Due to American immigration policy, many are entering into fraudulent civil marriages in order to deceived immigration and obtain green cards. What would be the verdict on the validity of such marriages in the eyes of the Church? In a few cities this has been a major issue for civli authorities.

I think most likely they would be found to be “not valid.”

If someone went into such a marriage with open eyes, I think it would be considered the abuse of a Sacrament.

 

[hpeach]

I’m not sure I am posting in the right spot…but here goes. This weekend I got engaged to the most wonderful man! He is a practicing Catholic and he attends Mass every week. I go with him more often than not. As an infant I was baptized and I do remember going to Mass with my family as a child (my Mothers family). As I grew up I attended Baptist church, was baptized but fell away for quite some time. Attending Mass with Lou has been eye opening. I am ready to convert. There is alot for me to learn!

My question is this: what do I need to do in order to get married in the church? I was married for 13 yrs and have 3 children by that marriage. I have been divorced for @ 3 yrs. I am very confused about what is to be done. Lou wants to be married in the church… We are going to set up an appointment w/Father soon but I am anxious to start any processes that are required. I just want to make the right decision for all of us!

 

[jmcrae]

I’m not sure I am posting in the right spot…but here goes. This weekend I got engaged to the most wonderful man! He is a practicing Catholic and he attends Mass every week. I go with him more often than not. As an infant I was baptized and I do remember going to Mass with my family as a child (my Mothers family). As I grew up I attended Baptist church, was baptized but fell away for quite some time. Attending Mass with Lou has been eye opening. I am ready to convert. There is alot for me to learn!

My question is this: what do I need to do in order to get married in the church? I was married for 13 yrs and have 3 children by that marriage. I have been divorced for @ 3 yrs. I am very confused about what is to be done. Lou wants to be married in the church… We are going to set up an appointment w/Father soon but I am anxious to start any processes that are required. I just want to make the right decision for all of us!

First, it needs to be determined whether or not you are actually free to marry. This is done by means of a Marriage Tribunal, and can take a long time. Contact your parish priest immediately to get started on this.

Until they come back and tell you whether or not you are free to marry (keep in mind, they cannot cause you to become free to marry; all they can do is examine the facts and tell you what your actual status is), you should not date anyone or get engaged to anyone. (Yes, I know - barn door open, horse gone, on that one.)

What this means in your case is that you will not be able to set a wedding date until the Tribunal comes back with the results of their investigation of your previous marriage.

If they come back and say that you are free to marry, what you do then is you sit down with a priest and you go through a series of pre-marital interviews.

Once these interviews are completed, you can set a date, send out invitations, and start ordering the flowers and the dress.

 

[morelia92]

I think most likely they would be found to be “not valid.”

If someone went into such a marriage with open eyes, I think it would be considered the abuse of a Sacrament.

I think that is one of the main things the Tribunal based their decison for us on!

I truely don’t wish an anulment on anyone. It is so hard, but I am sorry and I want to honor the Lord.

Be blessed!