Help with Catholic views on Annulment in an abusive relationship

[pconwell]

Sorry if this is kinda jumbled, I’m a little emotional right now.

I need some perspective. I’m an atheist and my wife is Catholic. Looking past the obvious conflicts there, I have agreed to follow the Churches teachings for family and children, etc.

The issue is I have recently found out I am emotionally abusive towards my wife. I didn’t realize that I was, and now I feel terrible. She moved out, which I understand, and I’m seeing a counselor. I’m not going to make excuses, I was emotionally abusive and it really harmed our marriage, but I’m trying to fix it.

My question is, she says she doesn’t know if she wants to try to save the marriage because she believes she has a textbook case for annulment due to the abuse. She has agreed to go to counseling with me, so she isn’t completely out - and she has said that if she couldn’t get an annulment, she would definitely stay in the marriage.

Now, my understanding of annulment, as long as the vows were sincere at the time of the wedding, you can’t get an annulment. I’m not trying to use this as a trap against her or anything, I’m just trying to understand the options because she said she would rather get a divorce and if the annulment doesn’t go through, we could always get re-married.

I really want to do the right thing and repair the damage I have done, but I don’t want to be strung along through a divorce and annulment just for the possibility of possibly getting remarried in 3 years if the annulment doesn’t go through.

Anyway, just looking for some perspective.

Thanks,

 

[maryjk]

How about we start with a little honesty?

Your profile says Christian, your post says Atheist. Which is it?

An annulment can only be filed for, after a civil divorce. And yes, it does look at the intent at the time of the ceremony.

If one spouse mislead the other, lets say about the openness to having children, then that would be a problem and a possible reason for an annulment.

 

[Francie3]

pconwell I can understand your hurt and confusion I think.
If your wife does have some intention of returning if unable to get an annulment I’d be confused too. I would think that she needs to work with you to create a fairer and kinder marriage. It is sad that your wife is so ready to give up on your marriage. However, how hurt she is by the abuse you admit to is best known to her.

However a marriage isn’t always valid even if the vows were sincere at the time of the wedding. A Catholic should be aware that there are impediments that make their marriage invalid in the eyes of the Church, not a Sacrament. There are other issues that do mean that a marriage is invalid.
In this case a Catholic can seek a convalidation.

For the marriage of a Catholic to be valid, the marriage must be in the Catholic Church and if marrying a non-Catholic, it requires a permission from the Church. If your wife didn’t choose to do those things she will need to obtain a convalidation.

I’ll look up the links to Canon Law for you
One page pertaining to marriage:
vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3Y.HTM
This link is more readable as you don’t have to go from page to page:
catholicdoors.com/misc/marriage/canonlaw.htm

It should give you some idea of your position.

I hope that you and your wife can resolve things with love and grace.

 

[pconwell]

How about we start with a little honesty?

Your profile says Christian, your post says Atheist. Which is it?

Atheist. I don’t know why my profile says Christian. I am being honest, and I’m not sure why you are coming with an accusatory attitude.

An annulment can only be filed for, after a civil divorce. And yes, it does look at the intent at the time of the ceremony.

If one spouse mislead the other, lets say about the openness to having children, then that would be a problem and a possible reason for an annulment.

As I said, I have agreed to follow the Church’s teaching on family and children, and I agreed at the time of the vows.

 

[maryjk]

Atheist. I don’t know why my profile says Christian. I am being honest, and I’m not sure why you are coming with an accusatory attitude.

It is a simple matter to go into your profile and change it.

As I said, I have agreed to follow the Church’s teaching on family and children, and I agreed at the time of the vows.

Not according to your other posts. In January you posted that your wife wanted to have children, but you didn’t think you were financially ready to do so.

In June, you posted that you wondered if it was okay for her to “demand” that you have children.

Have you changed your mind?

 

[pconwell]

pconwell I can understand your hurt and confusion I think.
If your wife does have some intention of returning if unable to get an annulment I’d be confused too. I would think that she needs to work with you to create a fairer and kinder marriage. It is sad that your wife is so ready to give up on your marriage. However, how hurt she is by the abuse you admit to is best known to her.

However a marriage isn’t always valid even if the vows were sincere at the time of the wedding. A Catholic should be aware that there are impediments that make their marriage invalid in the eyes of the Church, not a Sacrament. There are other issues that do mean that a marriage is invalid.
In this case a Catholic can seek a convalidation.

For the marriage of a Catholic to be valid, the marriage must be in the Catholic Church and if marrying a non-Catholic, it requires a permission from the Church. If your wife didn’t choose to do those things she will need to obtain a convalidation.

I’ll look up the links to Canon Law for you

Thanks. Yes, the wedding was in a Catholic Church with a Deacon (I think). As far as I can tell, none of the Impediments or Grounds for Nullity apply to our case - but I’m not really here to argue that anyway. I’m just really trying to understand her mindset and the logic behind ‘if the church says we have to stay married, I’ll put in the effort’.

 

[pconwell]

It is a simple matter to go into your profile and change it.
Not according to your other posts. In January you posted that your wife wanted to have children, but you didn’t think you were financially ready to do so.

In June, you posted that you wondered if it was okay for her to “demand” that you have children.

Have you changed your mind?

Yes, I should have been more specific, but I was trying to save time. We renewed our vows in the Church (I forget the technical name for what we did), and I agreed to have children regardless of my ‘feelings’ of doubt.

 

[Francie3]

Given what you say regarding the marriage ceremony, she is possibly unlikely to get an annulment, all else being in order.

I hope she will allow herself and you to work for whatever healing is needed.
Hopefully your wife will give your marriage the best chance of surviving and flourishing, working together for a mutually loving relationship.

If you married with the intention of not having children, then that is a problem regarding the validity that she needs to discuss with her priest though you now reluctantly seem to be willing according to past posts. Intent at time of marriage…that impacts on validity of the marriage. However she needs to talk to the priest and I think you could be wise to speak to a priest also to clarify issues.

If you feel pressured to have children when you don’t want to your marriage does have a serious difficulty from both sides.

 

[maryjk]

Thanks. Yes, the wedding was in a Catholic Church with a Deacon (I think). As far as I can tell, none of the Impediments or Grounds for Nullity apply to our case - but I’m not really here to argue that anyway. I’m just really trying to understand her mindset and the logic behind 'if the church says we have to stay married, I’ll put in the effort’.

Because if she receives a decree of nullity, then in the eyes of the Church she has never been married and is free to marry.

If she doesn’t receive one, then she is forever married to you.

 

[Gorgias]

I really want to do the right thing and repair the damage I have done, but I don’t want to be strung along through a divorce and annulment just for the possibility of possibly getting remarried in 3 years if the annulment doesn’t go through.

Just to make sure I understand what you’re saying: your wife is telling you that she wants a divorce and an annulment. If it seems like she will be unable to get the annulment, then you’re willing to go through counseling to resolve your issues. If it seems like she might be able to get an annulment, though, you don’t want to go through the trouble of counselling – after all, why be ‘string along’? So basically, you’re asking whether you should give up your attempts at personal counseling, based on what folks in an internet forum think about the possibility of nullity is? :ehh:

 

[chevalier]

My question is, she says she doesn’t know if she wants to try to save the marriage because she believes she has a textbook case for annulment due to the abuse. She has agreed to go to counseling with me, so she isn’t completely out - and she has said that if she couldn’t get an annulment, she would definitely stay in the marriage.

She does herself display a textbook attitude: even if you don’t want to stay, you stay as long as it is valid. Nor do I want in any way to undermine the importance of emotional suffering. However, if anything is “textbook” about nullity decrees, it is that nothing after the wedding can cause a marriage to become invalid if it was valid the moment the vows were exchanged. Anything which happened afterwards is only useful as evidence pointing to causes preceding the wedding.

There is no such ground of nullity as abuse, consequently, as that would be an internal contradiction. It could point to something preceding the wedding but contrary to common views, it’s very hard to contract an invalid marriage in this connection. A compulsive, psychically determined abuser, could perhaps be incapable of marriage but that would be extremely hard to achieve, it would need to be something close to a person unable to live with another without inflicting torture. Otherwise some lying would have had to be done by a positive act of the will (simulation) or fraud (which requires a positive act of the will too or else it’s hard to be fraudulent).

Just to make sure I understand what you’re saying: your wife is telling you that she wants a divorce and an annulment. If it seems like she will be unable to get the annulment, then you’re willing to go through counseling to resolve your issues. If it seems like she might be able to get an annulment, though, you don’t want to go through the trouble of counselling – after all, why be ‘string along’? So basically, you’re asking whether you should give up your attempts at personal counseling, based on what folks in an internet forum think about the possibility of nullity is? :ehh:

The diocese’s ecclesiastic court could set an appointment with a canon lawyer to discuss the case.

 

[Irishmom2]

I really want to do the right thing and repair the damage I have done, but I don’t want to be strung along through a divorce and annulment just for the possibility of possibly getting remarried in 3 years if the annulment doesn’t go through.

pconwell, the right thing to do whether you remain married, get divorced or get an annulment, is to repair what is broken. It is the best thing for you, it is the best thing for your wife. You either love her unconditionally and do whatever it takes to rebuild your marriage or you don’t. If you approach any counseling alone or together as being strung along, it may not work. Do you really wish to be married to your wife? In some ways, it doesn’t sound like you are willing to make any sacrifices unless it is a sure thing. (Where does the 3 years come into it?)

 

[cmscms]

pconwell, the right thing to do whether you remain married, get divorced or get an annulment, is to repair what is broken. It is the best thing for you, it is the best thing for your wife. You either love her unconditionally and do whatever it takes to rebuild your marriage or you don’t. If you approach any counseling alone or together as being strung along, it may not work. Do you really wish to be married to your wife? In some ways, it doesn’t sound like you are willing to make any sacrifices unless it is a sure thing. (Where does the 3 years come into it?)

OP, if you really cared about your wife, you would go through counscelling and do what it takes to become a better person. The result YOU would get out of it are irrelevant when it is true love.

Also, I think it is awesome that you are willing to admit your wrongs. And I don’t think it is fair that a person who is trying to better himself receive a guilt trip for past actions. However… you need to realize that the pain you cause your wife is significant to her and it is only normal she will really want to protect herself from further hurt. Just finding the courage to leave you was tremendous to her and she does not want to go through that again. Unfortunately for you, that means months perhaps years of her being on her guard and you having past actions thrown in your face. With God’s grace, you will get through it

CM

 

[Gorgias]

There is no such ground of nullity as abuse, consequently, as that would be an internal contradiction.

Be that as it may, the Church nevertheless does not say that the permanence of marriage implies that abused spouses must stay with their abusers. In fact, it’s exactly the opposite – the USCCB says:

In When I Call for Help: A Pastoral Response to Domestic Violence Against Women, the Catholic bishops emphasize that “no person is expected to stay in an abusive marriage.” Violence and abuse, not divorce, break up a marriage. The abuser has already broken the marriage covenant through his or her abusive behavior. Abused persons who have divorced may want to investigate the possibility of seeking an annulment.

 

[Actaeon]

Just to make sure I understand what you’re saying: your wife is telling you that she wants a divorce and an annulment. If it seems like she will be unable to get the annulment, then you’re willing to go through counseling to resolve your issues. If it seems like she might be able to get an annulment, though, you don’t want to go through the trouble of counselling – after all, why be ‘string along’? So basically, you’re asking whether you should give up your attempts at personal counseling, based on what folks in an internet forum think about the possibility of nullity is? :ehh:

No, I think what he’s saying is that she wants to “test the waters” on seeing if she can get an annulment by actually attempting one (including getting a legal divorce), but he prefers NOT going through the costly and emotionally damaging process of divorce and legal remarriage if the annulment won’t go through (in which case, the wife intends to remain married to him). He said nothing about quitting therapy.

That said, I agree with him… maybe she DOES need to be separated from him and living chastely on her own for a time, but she certainly is being a little bit preemptive in suggesting a legal divorce while the case for an annulment is so highly dubious (because later abuse is not grounds for an annulment unless it indicates and impediment to valid consent at the time of vows). In other words, she should speak to her priest and to a canon lawyer in detail about the situation and their recommendation BEFORE pursuing the avenue she’s indicated (aka, legal divorce and an actual tribunal, then remarriage if the tribunal rejects her case).

I agree with him for two reasons: either she is “safe enough” given the OP is getting counseling, and can one day return to the marriage (if valid) in full… in which case she does not need a legal divorce, or she is NOT safe enough to ever return to her spouse, in which case she should pursue legal separation and live apart from him REGARDLESS of whether or not a tribunal judges their marriage valid. Putting the cart before the horse here simply ignores the question: is their situation EVER going to be resolved to where it is safe for her to return or not.

 

[maryjk]

That said, I agree with him… maybe she DOES need to be separated from him and living chastely on her own for a time, but she certainly is being a little bit preemptive in suggesting a legal divorce while the case for an annulment is so highly dubious (because later abuse is not grounds for an annulment unless it indicates and impediment to valid consent at the time of vows). In other words, she should speak to her priest and to a canon lawyer in detail about the situation and their recommendation BEFORE pursuing the avenue she’s indicated (aka, legal divorce and an actual tribunal, then remarriage if the tribunal rejects her case).

It might be more that the OP was against having children. He may have changed his mind, but it sounds like at the time they were married he was against it. In fact, he was here almost a year ago, asking if it was reasonable for her to have changed her mind. She wanted children, he didn’t.

From what I gathered from the OP, keeping in mind we are only hearing one side. She wants a divorce and an annulment. BUT if she won’t receive an annulment, she will end up forever married to the OP so she may as well make the best of it.

 

[chevalier]

Be that as it may, the Church nevertheless does not say that the permanence of marriage implies that abused spouses must stay with their abusers. In fact, it’s exactly the opposite – the USCCB says:

Yes, but staying married is different together from staying in one house and one bed. Both are different from the issue of nullity.

No, I think what he’s saying is that she wants to “test the waters” on seeing if she can get an annulment by actually attempting one (including getting a legal divorce), but he prefers NOT going through the costly and emotionally damaging process of divorce and legal remarriage if the annulment won’t go through (in which case, the wife intends to remain married to him). He said nothing about quitting therapy.

That’s how things should be done and it’s normal, for example, in my corner of Europe. Unfortunately, tribunals in US dioceses require civil divorce prior to processing any nullity case. I believe that attitude has negative consequences but I may be unaware of some rationale or some worse alternatives. I believe people shouldn’t go for divorce if they don’t have a nullity case (separation is the way to go). If I lived, say, with someone who absolutely didn’t want children, and I were convinced that the marriage were null under c. 1095 no. 3 (incapacity) or 1101 no. 2 (simulation), it would basically be fornication to continue to have relations despite the certainty or perhaps even opinion that the marriage were null. But I wouldn’t want to go for civil divorce without first having a definite ruling from the ecclesiastic court. I suppose if an ecclesiastic court forced you to get divorced first, you could enter an amicable one with the mutual promise (binding on honour and in conscience rather than in law) that you’ll get back together if the court rules you’re validly married.

Also, a Catholic who is actually convinced that his or her marriage is null shouldn’t be iniating relations. It’s not a sin to comply if the other spouse asks (who believes or presumes the marriage to be valid) but for a convinced nullity petitioner to ask, it would be grave matter. (This is because a marriage doesn’t end with the declaration of nullity, nor does the declaration simply go back in time and erase the marriage. Someone who is convinced that the marriage is null, is convinced that he or she is not married to the other.)

 

[SonCatcher]

In January you posted that your wife wanted to have children, but you didn’t think you were financially ready to do so.

In June, you posted that you wondered if it was okay for her to “demand” that you have children.

Specific timing of children is in the prudential judgement of the couple. The fact that one spouse disagrees on timing is irrelevant so long as he/she is generally open to life. Of course, the conversation over whether the present is an acceptable time should be ongoing, but that is a separate issue.

 

[maryjk]

Specific timing of children is in the prudential judgement of the couple. The fact that one spouse disagrees on timing is irrelevant so long as he/she is generally open to life. Of course, the conversation over whether the present is an acceptable time should be ongoing, but that is a separate issue.

The indication I got, just by reading other threads the OP posted, was that this was a long term disagreement. And that he was not open to life. Of course I could be wrong.

My main point is, I don’t blame a woman that has been emotionally abused to want out of a marriage. The OP has claimed to have changed. Maybe the wife hasn’t seen that change.

 

[SonCatcher]

My main point is, I don’t blame a woman that has been emotionally abused to want out of a marriage. The OP has claimed to have changed. Maybe the wife hasn’t seen that change.

This, of course, is the main problem of the day. Whether change came too late remains to be seen.