N
NetNuncio
Guest
Hypothetical situation…
A couple gets married with the intent of never having children. This is an obvious reason for an annulment…so there’s no reason to go into that.
However, so adamant that they never wanted kids that they convinced the priest to leave out parts of the Rite of Marriage and the Nuptial Blessing that refers to children. These parts can generally be left out in cases when a couple is marrying that is beyond childbearing years. However, this couple was in their early 20s and simply removed it because they didn’t want kids (yes…I know…the priest should never have allowed this…but he did…no need to go into that).
My question is, then…would this be an acceptable use of Defect of Form? The couple clearly should have promised to welcome children lovingly into the marriage…but they didn’t. This couple has plenty of reasons for an annulment (the husband had a mistress before and after the wedding, they skipped out totally on all marriage prep, they didn’t want children and were contracepting at the time of the marriage, both parties had misgivings about the marriage from the beginning, etc), but I know Defect of Form is so much quicker and far less intrusive.
I’d love everyone’s thoughts on this…however, might I ask a favor? Please do not launch into a diatribe about how they should have made it work, they were terrible people for doing all these terrible things before and during their marriage. Please, if I may beg of everyone, just stick to the matter at hand…do you feel that this case is could properly request a declaration of nullity based on Defect of Form?
A couple gets married with the intent of never having children. This is an obvious reason for an annulment…so there’s no reason to go into that.
However, so adamant that they never wanted kids that they convinced the priest to leave out parts of the Rite of Marriage and the Nuptial Blessing that refers to children. These parts can generally be left out in cases when a couple is marrying that is beyond childbearing years. However, this couple was in their early 20s and simply removed it because they didn’t want kids (yes…I know…the priest should never have allowed this…but he did…no need to go into that).
My question is, then…would this be an acceptable use of Defect of Form? The couple clearly should have promised to welcome children lovingly into the marriage…but they didn’t. This couple has plenty of reasons for an annulment (the husband had a mistress before and after the wedding, they skipped out totally on all marriage prep, they didn’t want children and were contracepting at the time of the marriage, both parties had misgivings about the marriage from the beginning, etc), but I know Defect of Form is so much quicker and far less intrusive.
I’d love everyone’s thoughts on this…however, might I ask a favor? Please do not launch into a diatribe about how they should have made it work, they were terrible people for doing all these terrible things before and during their marriage. Please, if I may beg of everyone, just stick to the matter at hand…do you feel that this case is could properly request a declaration of nullity based on Defect of Form?