D
dolcessima
Guest
I’m asking this for a friend of mine…especially since I’ve never been married…is adultery grounds for an annulment??? I’ve told her it is, but I’m not 100% sure.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
C
Chris_LaRock
Guest
Mat 5:31 And it hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a bill of divorce.I’m asking this for a friend of mine…especially since I’ve never been married…is adultery grounds for an annulment??? I’ve told her it is, but I’m not 100% sure.
Mat 5:32 But I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, excepting the cause of fornication, maketh her to commit adultery: and he that shall marry her that is put away, committeth adultery.
(DRB)
S
sanctamaria17
Guest
That can only be determined by a tribunal but my understanding of annulments is that there have to be conditions before the marriage for the marriage to be invalid. Anything that happened afterward is moot unless it stems from problems before.
Like, an annulment would be granted if one spouse went in with the understanding that they could be unfaithful or that they could just divorce if they “weren’t compatible” or “weren’t in love anymore”. Not so much if they both went in with eyes open but one decided to cheat anyway. But I’m not a canon lawyer, so I don’t know.
Like, an annulment would be granted if one spouse went in with the understanding that they could be unfaithful or that they could just divorce if they “weren’t compatible” or “weren’t in love anymore”. Not so much if they both went in with eyes open but one decided to cheat anyway. But I’m not a canon lawyer, so I don’t know.
C
Chris_LaRock
Guest
Jesus Christ has already told us that it’s okay to divorce an unfaithful spouse. Why would you need a tribunal to decide what God Himself has already spoken about?That can only be determined by a tribunal but my understanding of annulments is that there have to be conditions before the marriage for the marriage to be invalid. Anything that happened afterward is moot unless it stems from problems before.
Like, an annulment would be granted if one spouse went in with the understanding that they could be unfaithful or that they could just divorce if they “weren’t compatible” or “weren’t in love anymore”. Not so much if they both went in with eyes open but one decided to cheat anyway. But I’m not a canon lawyer, so I don’t know.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
A decree of nullity (often called ‘an annulment’) does not deal with what comes after the marriage (and that includes adultery).
A decree of nullity has to do with the couple as they were leading up to, and at the date of the marriage.
Now, it is possible that the partner who committed adultery did so because he had never intended, from before the marriage and at the marriage, to be faithful.
If that WERE the case, the annulment could be sought–not, I emphasize, BECAUSE of the adultery, but because it was the result of the pre-existing intent of the one partner not to be faithful, at the time of the marriage.
However, it is quite possible that the partner, at the time of marriage, did indeed fully intend to be faithful, and that both partners were absolutely capable of assent.
In this case, what we have is one partner of a true and valid marriage committing a grave sin (adultery). This does not affect the validity of the marriage itself in this case.
A decree of nullity has to do with the couple as they were leading up to, and at the date of the marriage.
Now, it is possible that the partner who committed adultery did so because he had never intended, from before the marriage and at the marriage, to be faithful.
If that WERE the case, the annulment could be sought–not, I emphasize, BECAUSE of the adultery, but because it was the result of the pre-existing intent of the one partner not to be faithful, at the time of the marriage.
However, it is quite possible that the partner, at the time of marriage, did indeed fully intend to be faithful, and that both partners were absolutely capable of assent.
In this case, what we have is one partner of a true and valid marriage committing a grave sin (adultery). This does not affect the validity of the marriage itself in this case.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Actually, Jesus did not tell us we could ‘divorce an unfaithful spouse’. Might I remind posters this is a Catholic forum and the OP is requesting a **CATHOLIC **point of view and authentic CATHOLIC teaching? If you are a nonCatholic and you wish to register your personal opinion, kindly make it clear that you are doing so as a nonCatholic.
C
Chris_LaRock
Guest
Since when could one dismiss scripture as someone else’s opinion?Actually, Jesus did not tell us we could ‘divorce an unfaithful spouse’. Might I remind posters this is a Catholic forum and the OP is requesting a **CATHOLIC **point of view and authentic CATHOLIC teaching? If you are a nonCatholic and you wish to register your personal opinion, kindly make it clear that you are doing so as a nonCatholic.
Mat 5:31 And it hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a bill of divorce.
Mat 5:32 But I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, **excepting the cause of fornication, **maketh her to commit adultery: and he that shall marry her that is put away, committeth adultery.
Mat 5:33 Again you have heard that it was said to them of old, thou shalt not forswear thyself: but thou shalt perform thy oaths to the Lord.
That’s not my opinion. Jesus Christ, God in human flesh, said it. And His opinion trumps anything any man or woman has to say on any subject.
P
puzzleannie
Guest
no not by itselfI’m asking this for a friend of mine…especially since I’ve never been married…is adultery grounds for an annulment??? I’ve told her it is, but I’m not 100% sure.
grounds for annulment are conditions which existed at the time of the marriage that impede full free will consent and which therefore render the union invalid from its inception. adultery and the circumstances surrounding it may shed some light on the attitude and intent of one or both parties that affect full free consent, but by itself. no. check the annulment threads on the Liturgy and Sacraments forum for links to more complete info. You do not help you friend by discussing her situation in more detail, or in giving false information, but by referring her to her pastor for investigation of her circumstances, and advice that pertains to her unique situation.
P
puzzleannie
Guest
If you want to debate what Jesus meant, look at past threads on this verse on the Scripture forum. your interpretation is not the same as that of the church. He actual said, except in cases that violate the law.Jesus Christ has already told us that it’s okay to divorce an unfaithful spouse. Why would you need a tribunal to decide what God Himself has already spoken about?
OP asked about a canon law procedure, and that is the only answer that will help her.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Fornication is not adultery.
The reference Jesus gave dealt, specifically, with invalid marriages.
You see, there were many living in His time who had more than one wife/husband (think of the Samaritan woman at the well, for example–who had several husbands and was actually living with a man to whom she was not married at the time when she spoke to Jesus).
THESE are the people who are engaging in FORNICATION–as they are not validly married. THESE are the people who must ‘divorce’ as they are not validly married to begin with and thus, by definition are living in fornication.
Were they actually validly married, and one partner committed adultery, that would have been CALLED ‘adultery’ which is NOT fornication (by definition).
You want to be sure that you understand what Scripture really says, not some recent ‘man-made’ interpretation of it deliberately constructed to deny the real Scriptural teachings on divorce.
The reference Jesus gave dealt, specifically, with invalid marriages.
You see, there were many living in His time who had more than one wife/husband (think of the Samaritan woman at the well, for example–who had several husbands and was actually living with a man to whom she was not married at the time when she spoke to Jesus).
THESE are the people who are engaging in FORNICATION–as they are not validly married. THESE are the people who must ‘divorce’ as they are not validly married to begin with and thus, by definition are living in fornication.
Were they actually validly married, and one partner committed adultery, that would have been CALLED ‘adultery’ which is NOT fornication (by definition).
You want to be sure that you understand what Scripture really says, not some recent ‘man-made’ interpretation of it deliberately constructed to deny the real Scriptural teachings on divorce.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
I extend to you, Mr. LaRock, an invitation to open up a separate thread (in the Scripture forum) on the definition of the Scriptural passage you quote.
Right now, you are hijacking this thread in which the OP (a Catholic) is seeking clarification of Catholic teaching. We’ve already made that clear, I thought.
Should you wish to ‘argue the matter’, please open a separate thread. Thank you.
Right now, you are hijacking this thread in which the OP (a Catholic) is seeking clarification of Catholic teaching. We’ve already made that clear, I thought.
Should you wish to ‘argue the matter’, please open a separate thread. Thank you.
B
bpbasilphx
Guest
**Mat 5:32 But I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, excepting the cause of fornication, **
**Keep in mind here that even in Tudor English, fornication and adultery are not the same thing.
Fornication refers to sex between two people who are not married to each other or anyone else.
Adultery happens when at least one of the participants is married to a third party.
However, the Greek word “porneia” basically means “prostitution.”
Doubtless it can be extended to apply to what is morally on the level of prostitution. (FTM, Greek has another word for “adultery” as usually understood: moicheia, which is not the word used in Matthew.)
But another meaning at the time the NT was written was a spurious and illegal marriage–usually between too-closely related relatives. I suppose a modern equivalent would be two underage teens running away to another state, or claiming they were of lawful age.
Keep in mind also that during the days of the Roman Empire, Roman law contemplated three different sorts of marriages: coniubium (marriage proper, but only available for certain social classes), concubinium (the concubina had a recognized, if lower status than an uxor [wife]; compare domestic parternships), and contuberium (the only form allowed to slaves). But this does not concern us here.
So we see that Christ’s words and your opinion of His meaning are not exactly the same thing.**
**Keep in mind here that even in Tudor English, fornication and adultery are not the same thing.
Fornication refers to sex between two people who are not married to each other or anyone else.
Adultery happens when at least one of the participants is married to a third party.
However, the Greek word “porneia” basically means “prostitution.”
Doubtless it can be extended to apply to what is morally on the level of prostitution. (FTM, Greek has another word for “adultery” as usually understood: moicheia, which is not the word used in Matthew.)
But another meaning at the time the NT was written was a spurious and illegal marriage–usually between too-closely related relatives. I suppose a modern equivalent would be two underage teens running away to another state, or claiming they were of lawful age.
Keep in mind also that during the days of the Roman Empire, Roman law contemplated three different sorts of marriages: coniubium (marriage proper, but only available for certain social classes), concubinium (the concubina had a recognized, if lower status than an uxor [wife]; compare domestic parternships), and contuberium (the only form allowed to slaves). But this does not concern us here.
So we see that Christ’s words and your opinion of His meaning are not exactly the same thing.**
C
Chris_LaRock
Guest
King James:
Mat 5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
“of fornication”
Strongs # 4202
Porneia: (May include adultery or incest)
Mat 5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
“of fornication”
Strongs # 4202
Porneia: (May include adultery or incest)
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
May I again request that this thread NOT be hijacked? Please open up a separate thread if you wish to argue. Thank you.
D
dolcessima
Guest
Thank you to all of you who have replied to my thread…I have originally let her know to speak to her pastor about it but thought she would be able to recieve one…I was more looking for clearification on the matter after telling her…mainly because I don’t want to give a friend any wrong information.
1
1ke
Guest
I suggest your friend obtain the book Annulment: The Wedding That Was by Michael Smith Foster. She should read the whole book.Thank you to all of you who have replied to my thread…I have originally let her know to speak to her pastor about it but thought she would be able to recieve one…I was more looking for clearification on the matter after telling her…mainly because I don’t want to give a friend any wrong information.
Remember, a marriage is either valid or not at the time the vows are exchanged.
The things a spouse does (or doesn’t do) afterwards cannot make a valid marriage invalid. However, the things they do after the marriage can shed light on whether or not they had valid consent/intent at the time the vows were exchanged. Adultery COULD be an indication that they did not intend the marriage to be exclusive (fidelity). If they had a defect of intent regarding fidelity when they exchanged vows… then the subsequent adultery could be evidence of this.
Any marriage that is suspect has to be submitted to the Tribunal for a very detailed investigation.
No one here can speculate on the circumstances of her marriage. The adultery might be an indicator that there was a defect in consent/intent. But, then again, it might not.
T
TobyLue
Guest
dolcessima - I would suggest you disregard ChrisLaRock’s comments and go with what other people have suggest. If you think about it, if adultery is grounds for annulment then anybody who gets married and wants to get out of marriage and considers getting an annulment would just go and commit adultery and bingo, the marriage done away with and free to get married again. Dissasified a secone, or third, or more times; just go a commit adultery and considered yourself free.
An annulment is NOT a divorce. I highly recomment you check with the St. Joseph Foundation, a group of canon lawyers than can give you a correct answer. They are highly recommented by folks at Catholic Answers.
An annulment is NOT a divorce. I highly recomment you check with the St. Joseph Foundation, a group of canon lawyers than can give you a correct answer. They are highly recommented by folks at Catholic Answers.
I
iluvmybabies
Guest
I was informed that a marriage is valid especially if it’s consumated, and there is no such a thing as an annulment after a marriage was considered to be valid unless there were conditions prior to the marriage…That can only be determined by a tribunal but my understanding of annulments is that there have to be conditions before the marriage for the marriage to be invalid. Anything that happened afterward is moot unless it stems from problems before.
Like, an annulment would be granted if one spouse went in with the understanding that they could be unfaithful or that they could just divorce if they “weren’t compatible” or “weren’t in love anymore”. Not so much if they both went in with eyes open but one decided to cheat anyway. But I’m not a canon lawyer, so I don’t know.
I was also informed that if people commit adultery during marriage that they can divorce but must live celibate-chastised lives without their spouses, if there were no preexisting conditions prior to the marriage…because the marriage will not be classified as invalid and will not receive a term of annulment…
I think that’s how it was communicated to me… Sorry if it’s wrong I am trying to provide the best advise on this as possible based on the information I was given through CAF…
- Status
- Not open for further replies.