Is Canon 1099 an Easy Annulment?

[7_Sorrows]

Annulment is a long process (mine took well over a year). While I wasn’t looking at this Canon in particular, your word on anything isn’t enough. They ask for evidence, they interview witnesses, etc. Let’s put it this way, they didn’t take my now openly gay ex husband’s word that he lied to me and married me only as a means to an end as enough (and he did tell them that, I give him credit for being honest). They still wanted more than just his word and my word. Having gone though the process, I can tell you first hand that annulment is not something easy or that the Church takes lightly.

I agree. It is a trying and emotional process. My marriage was also ruled invalid. The process took 2 years for me.
However, i did not find it healing. It is over, but I wish I had never had to go through it in the first place. I don’t like sharing painful episodes of my life and it dredged up many painful memories.
I just received my ruling the end of last year. Not sure I will ever marry again.

 

[rcwitness]

Im sorry for your affliction. Sincerely.

 

[Pup7]

But @(name removed by moderator) is not spinning it in this case. She’s not even close to spin here.

She’s stated pretty much exactly what the CCC says.

 

[Irishmom2]

I am the OP author.

I am not opposed to the canon 1099. I am merely asking if it doesnt seem like the easiest loophole for a couple, or even just one spouse, to receive a decree.

All one would have to do, is say “i only agreed to Marry based on my conviction that if I felt a civil divorce could allow me to be free of the marriage entirely, and so marry another.”

Does the tribunal need any other evidence than this?

I misspoke, I was not referencing you, but the poster you were questioning, YourNameHere. It does not change my opinion that you as the OP have no right to ask anyone for the reason the tribunal gave or what the impediment was.

You can ask all you want. It is just rude. If someone wants to tell you, they will do so without you asking, as one poster has done.

 

[rcwitness]

The right to ask and the right to demand are two very different things, you know?

 

[rcwitness]

You can ask all you want. It is just rude. If someone wants to tell you, they will do so without you asking, as one poster has done.

I asked politely:
If you dont mind me asking, what was their “impediment”?

And if you read the poster’s comments i was asking about, you’ll see that its a ligitimate question.

Please refrain from your very judgmental accusations. I have not disrespected anyone!

 

[His_helpmeet]

I am married to a man who received a declaration of nullity for his first marriage. While we weren’t told the exact grounds, here are some details on the situation:

Hubby and his ex met online. She was only a few months out from the end of a long-term relationship. Her parents were pressuring her to find a nice man and give them grandkids. Hubby lived abroad so he came to visit her for 2 weeks. By this point they had been corresponding for about 5 months. I believe they got engaged during this visit.

After the initial meeting, Hubby returned to his home country, settled his affairs, and returned 3 months later to move in with her. They discovered over the next few months that they weren’t very compatible and didn’t have much in common. They were thinking about calling the engagement off. Then they learned she was pregnant.

They decided to marry given the pregnancy. Hubby could not stay in the country unless he got in on the family class. (He has a disability that made it difficult for him to work in his country and was on benefits. He had done volunteer work but had no formal work history.) To get in on the family class he had to marry the mother of his child. They were married when she was 4 months pregnant. She was non-practicing Lutheran and Hubby was never baptized. They married in a civil ceremony and had no marriage preparation.

4 years into the marriage his wife left him. She told him afterward (and confirmed to another person that she had said this) that as far as she was concerned, marriage was glorified common-law with ceremonial benefits, that the vows she took were purely symbolic and didn’t really mean anything, and if she wasn’t happy she was free to walk away any time she wanted.

By the time she left she and Hubby had both converted to Catholicism. Consequently a full nullity trial was required. Hubby and I met over a year after she left him. She had already moved in with another man. Shortly after Hubby and I met online and before our first in-person meeting she discovered she was pregnant by that man and got engaged to him. Divorce proceedings began in earnest. I bring this up to indicate that I was not the cause of the separation.

Do you think their marriage was truly valid in a sacramental way?

 

[rcwitness]

I honestly dont know.

But why the tribunal doesnt tell people the reason is beyond me! Wouldnt they want to prevent another mistake?

Having a child put of wedlock can have severe, long term consequences.

“If I have not love, I am nothing”

Having sex without love and commitment to Christian, indissoluble Marriage is very ugly. I am guilty of it too.

But when i married my wife, i made a promise to God. And even if i make mistakes, I am to turn back from them. But Marriage relies on BOTH spouses to enter by God and to remain by God.

 

[Maximilian75]

The possible reasons for canonical annulment are public.

To say ‘so and so’s wedding was declared null because —’ is a gross breach of privacy.

 

[rcwitness]

The possible reasons for canonical annulment are public.

To say ‘so and so’s wedding was dissolved because —’ is a gross breach of privacy.

A wedding is not dissolved, unless im mistaken. And who made this rule?

 

[Xanthippe_Voorhees]

Maximilian75:

The possible reasons for canonical annulment are public.

To say ‘so and so’s wedding was dissolved because —’ is a gross breach of privacy.

A wedding is not dissolved, unless im mistaken. And who made this rule?

It’s the same as confession. There’s a list of sins that one can commit in the preperation leaflet but what happens in the confessional is private.

 

[Maximilian75]

Edited.

And who made what rule? The fact that the details of an annullment are not made public is simply out of courtesy…

 

[rcwitness]

Trust me, i do not go around telling people about other’s reasons for annulment. I have asked the reason to people who accuse the annulme t of being “corrupt”. Its a way to test their Spirit, so to speak.

On the other hand, Marriage is a public matter. And sometimes those who are friends or acquaintances are justified to ask what went wrong.

I never said it is necessary to provide an answer. But its not necessarily wrong to ask.

 

[rcwitness]

Making annulment records public and asking the impediment are a far cry from one another.

Id love gor people to address the OP!

 

[Maximilian75]

Well, that’s what you’re saying the Tribunal should do!

And, again, one would gain nothing from this- One can look in the code of canon law and learn far more about this than looking at individual, static cases

 

[His_helpmeet]

In some cases the tribunal will place conditions on the petitioner and/or respondent that must be fulfilled before the person remarries. As you say, the goal is to ensure this does not happen again.

At the time of Hubby’s petition we were dating with a view to marriage and married civilly during the process. Hubby had to provide my contact details, information about my marital status, information about our planned wedding, etc. The tribunal decided that Hubby did not need any additional requirements to be imposed before he could remarry. However, it is conceivable that they could have asked me to come in. Our priest was also aware of our situation and discussed it with us as part of our marriage preparation. (Our marriage was convalidated a few months after the affirmative decision (i.e. marriage not valid) was rendered.)

 

[Xanthippe_Voorhees]

Making annulment records public and asking the impediment are a far cry from one another.

Id love gor people to address the OP!

Again–it’s about decorum and privacy. We can ask someone why they just went to confession but it’s not really right.

And no, no one needs to know but the married couple “what went wrong” what kind of justification can you think of that permits that sort of behavior? A child of those parents can be guided without nitty gritty examples.

 

[Maximilian75]

Second line of post 70

You seriously want the most vulnerable time of a persons life to be public? Civil divorce records are closed for the same reason- It’s no ones buisness but the couples!

 

[rcwitness]

rcwitness:

Making annulment records public and asking the impediment are a far cry from one another.

Id love gor people to address the OP!

Again–it’s about decorum and privacy. We can ask someone why they just went to confession but it’s not really right.

And no, no one needs to know but the married couple “what went wrong” what kind of justification can you think of that permits that sort of behavior? A child of those parents can be guided without nitty gritty examples.

If someone publicly sins, is it wrong to ask if they have repented?

Again, i never suggested “nitty gritty details” be exploited.

 

[Maximilian75]

Do you want all your Confessions ever to be opened to the public?
That’s essentially what you are advocating for here- a massive spiritual invasion of privacy