Grounds for Marriage Annulment in the Catholic Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter rcwitness
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
And how do you provide evidence of this?

A family member who just wants to support their relative’s pursuit of another relationship?
 
Yes, but important line here is the last one. It must be directly and principally intended. For example, if you clearly stated that you would not marry someone who’'d ever been arrested and then you discovered your putative spouse, knowing that fact, had deceived you about it – that might play into the grounds for a decree of nullity. A better example might be a spouse who hid the fact they were infertile and knew it. Or neglected to mention a vasectomy or tubal ligation.
 
Last edited:
Not necessarily at all. First of all, you’re presuming that all of these cases are between Catholics – that’s not accurate. Someone who is a divorced Lutheran who now wishes to marry a Catholic goes through the same process as a Catholic. Many cases are situations like this.

Other cases involved people who assumed they would never want to remarry. Then the meet someone, and they decide to file a petition to determine their availability to marry.

It’s not an automatic red flag. In fact, very few divorced people even bother to go through this.
 
rcwitness said:
Then there should be no excuse (1099 at least)
Click to expand...
Unless one party says, “Sure, sure, understood.” but is thinking, “Nah. If things go wrong, I’m getting divorced.” And sometimes, they’ve actually made that comment to people. And those people become witnesses.
 
I just went through an annulment (took about 1.5 years) and truth be told, it’s still a bit complicated to me. Not that I think the process is wrong or that they’re not looking at the right info, and i understand it, but there are so many layers too it that it’s not easy for me to go into detail of the process.
 
Some of the criteria are broader than I expected. Just a “curiosity” comment, nothing implied.
 
Yes, but you understand it’s not that an affirmative answer to one or a couple of those questions means that you’re getting a decree of nullity, right? They are part of an attempt to gain understanding of the larger picture – the petitioner writes a long resume to throughly discuss the marriage.
 
Again, just answering that question in the affirmative is not going to result a decree of nullity. Also, that statistic includes the many, many “lack of form” petitions that are routinely run through Tribunals, although that’s not actually a canonical requirement.

The Tribunal is looking to see whether both parties understood the indissolubility of marriage (and I am going to tell you that you’ll meet very few people who go into marriage thinking that there are no grounds for divorce --for example, a lot of people will tell you that they would divorce an unfaithful spouse), the nature of marriage, and whether they had the psychological capacity to enter into it (Alcoholism and drug addiction are frequent factors in this)
 
If I knew the Tribunal decision could be trusted, I’d be 100% for seeking and then you would have confident affirmation. As it is, it is sketchy in many cases.

But I do believe authentic annulments exist for sure!
 
rcwitness said:
If I knew the Tribunal decision could be trusted, I’d be 100% for seeking and then you would have confident affirmation. As it is, it is sketchy in many cases.

But I do believe authentic annulments exist for sure!
Click to expand...
I’d consider it similar to secular law. Not infallible but as good as can be done. If someone entered a new relationship after their marriage incorrectly being declared null and had told the truth I don’t think they would be personally guilty of adultery.
 
Also, you can’t lie to God. You know in your heart whether you have answered the Tribunal in good faith. If you have, you should rest confidently in their decision.
 
JulianN said:
What would it take for you to trust a Tribunal decision, though?
Click to expand...
Well some cases are evident. Some depend on trusting intentions, motives, honesty, witnesses.

Some cases would need God Himself to declare.
 
Last edited:
Yes—and that’s what the Tribunal assesses. What would it take for you personally to trust their decisions?
 
JulianN said:
Yes—and that’s what the Tribunal assesses. What would it take for you personally to trust their decisions?
Click to expand...
We’ve already established that the Tribunal can and has erred. So I can’t trust the tribunal, but only undisputed evidence.

The tribunal might be able to convince me of some evidence found. Beyond that, when it comes to such a significant matter, I must follow conscience.
 
But the only time that’s relevant is in your own case. You’re certainly not entitled to the ‘undisputed evidence ‘ (and why it would need to be undisputed is not clear) in any other case.

You can only know what was in your heart when you got married—much as you think you know exactly what your spouse was thinking, you don’t.

When push comes to shove, we are all responsible for following our consciences. If you believe you are still married, you should behave accordingly.

However, if a Tribunal reaches a decision with which you disagree, it would not be acceptable for you to expect your ex to behave the same way—nor to tell others, especially your children, that you and your ex are still married and that any new relationship is sinful.
 
I would not even complain about my spouse presenting her case to the Tribunal.

It’s never been suggested, in my marriage.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top