Hypothetical Annulment Scenario

[kptrs]

I understand the concept of annulments, but there’s one part about it that I struggle to understand. I’m going to try to articulate it the best I can, and I hope I can obtain a clearer understanding.

Let’s say a couple gets married and at the time of the vows, there is some component that makes it an invalid marriage. Nevertheless, the couple stays together for the rest of their lives, have children, are happy together, etc. Are they living in sin?

For example: A hypothetical couple gets married in the Church and intends to never have children. In the prenuptial inquiry by the priest, when he asks if they are open to having children, they lie and say they are open to having children, but in actuality they are not. This would make their marriage invalid.

Later, they accidentally get pregnant and have one child. They decide they want another child, so they try to have a second. They now have two children and are happy together and stay married for the rest of their lives.

Is this considered an invalid marriage? Are they living in sin?

 

[Maximilian75]

@acanonlawyer

 

[CilladeRoma]

Not a canon lawyer, but it is one of my hobbies are. In my opinion the short answer is no.
The Church presumes that all marriages are valid. In an annulment, one must prove that something regarding form, matter, or intent didn’t happen.
If one is not seeking an annulment, none of this would matter with regards to validity of the marriage.
If one is seeking an annulment, it could be a helpful scenario in the annulment being granted.

 

[kptrs]

In my opinion the short answer is no.

The Church presumes that all marriages are valid. In an annulment, one must prove that something regarding form, matter, or intent didn’t happen.

If one is not seeking an annulment, none of this would matter with regards to validity of the marriage.

If one is seeking an annulment, it could be a helpful scenario in the annulment being granted.

Maybe I’m overthinking it, but this is precisely what confuses me. If this hypothetical couple got a civil divorce and then petitioned for an annulment, they would likely be granted the annulment, in that they originally intended — at the time of the vows — to never have children. But if they never petition for an annulment and continue living as man and wife, the Church sees their marriage as valid…even though it’s not. See what I mean? Either a marriage is valid or it isn’t.

 

[CilladeRoma]

The Church presumes all marriages are valid. It doesn’t matter if one if those elements was incomplete, or not there at all, because the couple is still married.
So, yes, I believe you are over thinking this.

 

[Hereiam]

Luke 10:41-42
…“Martha, Martha, you are anxious and troubled about many things; [only] one thing is needful…”

 

[1ke]

Are they living in sin?

No.

Is this considered an invalid marriage?

No.

Are they living in sin?

No.

FYI there is no such thing as a hypothetical nullity case. Because a married couple is made up of living, breathing, thinking people who have intellect and will. Even if a marriage might have had a defect of consent does not mean that it remains, a couple can make a new, valid act of consent at a later time.

 

[1ke]

Either a marriage is valid or it isn’t.

An objectively invalid marriage can become valid.

 

[Vico]

…
Is this considered an invalid marriage? Are they living in sin?

It is presumed valid and it is indicated by the words used. If the defect is public then it must be corrected publicly. I the defect is occult, then it can be corrected privately, per canon law. Notice in canon law (CIC):

Can. 1159
§1. A marriage which is invalid because of a defect of consent is convalidated if the party who did not consent now consents, provided that the consent given by the other party perseveres.
§2. If the defect of consent cannot be proven, it is sufficient that the party who did not consent gives consent privately and in secret.
§3. If the defect of consent can be proven, the consent must be given in canonical form.

 

[kptrs]

Even if a marriage might have had a defect of consent does not mean that it remains, a couple can make a new, valid act of consent at a later time.

Is this an official, formal thing, like saying their vows again in church with a priest and witnesses, or do you just mean in respect to living their lives together and living out the consent they should have taken in the first place (I.e. having children even though they originally intended not to)?

 

[1ke]

this an official, formal thing, like saying their vows again in church with a priest and witnesses, or do you just mean in respect to living their lives together and living out the consent they should have taken in the first place (I.e. having children even though they originally intended not to)?

Depends.

See canon 1159.

 

[acanonlawyer]

The Church presumes all marriages are valid

I’ll quibble with this and say that the Church holds that when marital consent is properly exchanged, the resulting marriage enjoys the favor of law (is “presumed to be valid”). “Properly exchanged” marital consent means, for Catholics, “getting married in the church” (which doesn’t mean getting married in a church building but marrying in accord with the law of the Church).

Hence, Catholics who totally disregard the law of the Church (even if done without fault) and contract a merely civil union do not contract a marriage that enjoys the favor of law/is presumed valid.

For the OP, however, the hypothetical Parties did marry “in the Church” so their marriage would be presumed valid.

Dan

 

[Elf01]

Agreed that the Church would consider the marriage valid, at least until investigated.

Given their response to the accidental pregnancy I’m not sure they were not open to children even if they did not intend to have any but not sure of the law so maybe you could enlighten me.

Assuming that not intending to have any children is enough to make the marriage invalid then the couple knows they lied to the Priest, and in that scenario would relations be a sin?

I’m inclined to think so, while the Church sees the marriage as valid the couple know better and I would say that if a couple suspects their marriage not to be valid they should refrain from relations.