Grounds for Marriage Annulment in the Catholic Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter rcwitness
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
rcwitness said:
If we (Catholics who claim superior religion) are practicing religion, we would be able to avoid lawsuits
Click to expand...
I feel as if you’re arguing against your own original position here. We do use a Tribunal to adjudicate matters of canon law, such as marriage. But you’ve been positing that we shouldn’t necessarily accept their decisions.
 
You’ve made a good point, that the Tribunal is a means to implement what St Paul was instructing. And it’s also why I have repeatedly said I’m NOT against the Tribunal!

But the Tribunal is only focussed on one thing. Is there evidence that a Marriage invalid based on whatever is being presented? That doesn’t take wisdom, only plain evidence.
 
Last edited:
I think you said yourself that if your marriage were declared invalid, that you wouldn’t believe it? So I’m not sure why you are arguing for any of this if it would only matter if you got the answer you wanted. Seriously, if a persons marriage were declared valid in this process, someone could just refuse to believe it. There’s really no point in doing that before a divorce because most people wouldn’t stay anyway. And tons of divorces happen due to infidelity. In these cases people already know it’s wrong and they obviously don’t care, so I don’t think a declaration of validity or admonishment would help at all. It isn’t catering to people that don’t care. It’s just that most people that don’t want to be with someone else do not care, they won’t stay anyway.
 
Gingersnaps4 said:
I think you said yourself that if your marriage were declared invalid, that you wouldn’t believe it? So I’m not sure why you are arguing for any of this if it would only matter if you got the answer you wanted. Seriously, if a persons marriage were declared valid in this process, someone could just refuse to believe it. There’s really no point in doing that before a divorce because most people wouldn’t stay anyway. And tons of divorces happen due to infidelity. In these cases people already know it’s wrong and they obviously don’t care, so I don’t think a declaration of validity or admonishment would help at all. It isn’t catering to people that don’t care. It’s just that most people that don’t want to be with someone else do not care, they won’t stay anyway.
Click to expand...
Sorry you got that impression. I have said I wouldn’t NECESSARILY believe it just because the Tribunal came to that conclusion.

With my case, and many others, it depends on interior consent. This is coupled by trusting witnesses that would most likely be friends and family of the one who wishes to receive a decree.

I also have said I sure could be convinced that it is invalid. That would require hearing, and accepting as honest, the Confession of my wife. If she was deceptive at our wedding, why would I automatically trust she is honest now?

I would have to see a genuine spirit.
 
Actually, while people tend to think of the Tribunal as only a marriage adjudicator, that’s not accurate. It investigates all petitions in canon law.
 
I think with a lot of people who end up getting annulments, they may not necessarily be intentionally deceptive at the time of marriage. But maybe if the tribunal and/or a canon lawyer heard everything, it could be found to be invalid. With a case like your wife’s, if she thinks it’s valid but she is with someone else, is there a possibility that she never truly understood the nature of sacramental marriage? Or does she not think it’s valid? Forgive me if I have the background wrong and she isn’t with anyone else, I’m just going off of memory here. I am really sorry about everything you are going through, I know it is very painful.
 
Has nothing to do with them. Ultimately, i don’t trust any man when it comes to that kind of important thing. It’s a matter of evidence.

And I know my wife better than anyone in the Tribunal, who knows her for such a brief time.

Romans 14
Let every one be fully convinced in his own mind.

This is the principle. Though Paul is talking about a much different topic. It still is relevant. We must be convinced in our own mind, when it comes to our observance of the law.

I would only remarry if I was convinced in my own mind. That’s not based on a fallible decree, which depends on other people’s honesty. Though the decree is not obsolete!
 
Last edited:
Good question!

I don’t think she is prepared to face that question.
Which means she would not be able to face the Tribunal now. She is not turning to Jesus in faith. And it’s been a theme in our marriage. And then I would resort to sexual gratification in other ways when she would display long periods of passive aggression. A lack of faith in our marriage. But that’s obvious in all struggling marriages.

Stuff that I pleaded with her to seek couple’s counseling.
.
 
Last edited:
rcwitness said:
What about two Catholics?

Should I lay it out better?

Two mentally sound Catholics approaching the Church for Marriage. Take the pastor’s advice, and hear the Marriage prep course. Both agree to the Marriage after hearing.

Later, one claims they did not agree with what was told them in Marriage prep, yet went through with the vows anyway. And now wants out of the Marriage, on account of the other committing sins (not forgiving).

Is that:

1.) Ignorance which invalidates the vow, yet they still remained Christian?

Or

2.) They knew what Christian Marriage meant and rejected the Christian faith (apostasy), and though all along rejected the grace of the Sacrament, are still bound to the Sacrament (reconcile or live single)?
Click to expand...
How about a Catholic who discovers after the invitations are sent that her fiance has been lying to her about things that are super important to her and she realizes that he’s not the person she thought he was. At that point she realizes that she no longer wants to get married but because the invitations are out she sees no way to avoid embarrassing her family and so goes through with the wedding with the “knowledge” that those vows, once spoken, means that she’s in it until one or the other dies.
 
To me, she made the vows, with proper knowledge. Let her remain married or single.

Embarrassment over invitation plans is reason to excuse your vow? Ugghhh…

But I am not the one placing myself on the Tribunal to act as judge. I can only judge what I do in my own life.

Also, if she doesn’t consummate the Marriage, she still could have it absolved. If she consummated, she furthered her own commitment with more consent (sexual).

She should confide in her pastor (prior to sexual consent)
 
Last edited:
Wannano said:
If I have it right, the Catholic Church does not recognize the legitimacy of a civil marriage. But you are actually pointing out that they do recognize a civil divorce! Not only recognize it but require it? Wow.
Click to expand...
The Church will not investigate a marriage unless it has irreparably broken down. In other words, that there be no reasonable expectation that the parties will reconcile. What better way to judge that than by the fact that they have already divorced??
 
Yes in my heart the marriage was invalid. The only priest I sought for some advice said no priest could give me permission to divorce my husband for the ramifications of such a decision such as divorce are too great.

My previous husband filed for divorce. not me. He refused counseling so what is some Catholic supposed to do when presumed to be in a Sacrament Marriage (We were both Catholic) married in a Catholic Church and one spouse walks out on you?

The ONLY recourse you have it to file for an annulment. Welcome to the tedious process of it.
 
Last edited:
Did you explain what you thought was invalid from the beginning of his vows?

I’m not saying everyone needs to do that. I’m just curious if your pastor had any indication the problem reached to the very beginning.
 
No the pastor who heard my previous spouse say

“I will always use condoms”

"I disagree with many Church teachings…etc etc…

married us and agreed with my X husband.

On our wedding night our room we had was sadly given away to another person due to a misunderstanding. My X took a CHAIR in the hotel lounge and was going to throw it towards the glass mirror yelling you “Mother F-----s” until the guy, (Thank God he was there) said if you throw that chair SIR we will have to call the police.

He put it down. Later when he filed for divorce, I remembered how once I had been at his apt and he had kicked a hole in the wall for some reason. That’s it, I never thought about it again.

I called my mother the night after the wedding and told her how he had the “chair throwing episode” and I hoped I had made the right decision.
That is how my marriage was annulled.

The Tribunal priest who heard my testimony told me " Do you realize, Mary, were in an abusive marriage? I t hen realized it as those words he said to me, that were mean etc was indeed abusive. It’s all I knew from growing up. Enough said.

So No I never thought the hole in the wall he kicked in at his apt prior to marriage was a “red flag” for someone who had anger management issues.

It surely was in retrospect … PM me if you want anymore info.

I will PM you tomorrow night when I am back from vacation.

God bless you, I appreciate you sharing your point of view.

I kid you not, RCwitness, my X husband truly wrote one paragraph back to the Tri bunal when he got the notice of me seeking an annulment

"I XYZ do not give a flying F___ what a bunch of sex maniac child abuse priests say. I will NOT participate in this BS.

LOL I think it helped me in the end…

May God grant all in struggling marriages peace and healing and those going through the difficult process of annulment strength and peace.

We pray to the Lord…

Lord, in your Mercy, hear our prayers.
 
Last edited:
Ok… I was not questioning your discernment or your tribunal’s judgment btw. I was just curious how your pastor can try to assume the marriage is valid, while recognizing reasonable signs that there was impediments of a valid Sacrament.

Seems he doesn’t believe in annulments altogether, actually.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top