Pauline Privilege or Annulment?

  • Thread starter Thread starter CPConvert
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CPConvert

Guest
I’m currently engaged, going through RCIA & have been previously baptized. My former spouse was not baptized, what would cause the Priest to desire to pursue an annulment vs the pauline privilege?

The annulment process is a bit intimidating, I’m at the stage where the witnesses are being contacted. I have enough reason to believe there is a good chance my first marriage will be annulled:
  1. Lack of form - former spouse never baptized and is an atheist
  2. Lack of maturity at time of marriage - I was married at 18
  3. Lack of free will - because my parents pressured me to get married 2 1/2 weeks after finding out about the pregnancy
Is the annulment process better? I have to say I am a bit nervous purely cause I’m not sure what to expect and how long this process will be.

Any words of insight would be appreciated.
 
Last edited:
Lack of form is not an option unless you were a baptized Catholic. Only Catholics are obligated to follow the Catholic form of marriage.

The second two issues may indeed be grounds for nullity—which is what the process will uncover.

Regarding the Pauline Privilege, were you already baptized at the time of your first marriage?
 
That’s why your priest is talking about annulment then—you don’t qualify for Pauline Privilege. (If it’s any comfort, in my experience, that takes quite a bit longer).
 
JulianN said:
That’s why your priest is talking about annulment then—you don’t qualify for Pauline Privilege.
Click to expand...
It would be Petrine privilege.

OP, I’ve heard an anullment is quickerbut have no personal experience.
CPConvert said:
Lack of form - former spouse never baptized and is an atheist
Click to expand...
Isn’t lack of form. Lack of form would be if you married outside the Church.
 
Yes, my former marriage was done by a justice of the peace, 2 1/2 weeks after finding out I was pregnant at 18. We didn’t have plans of getting married prior to the pregnancy.
 
Last edited:
If you were married by a JP and were baptized Catholic, you simply need a defect of form documentary case.
 
If you were married by a JP, how were you married in the Church?
I am confused?

Catholics, and only Catholics, are bound by Catholic marriage laws. If you were baptised in the Catholic church, you must be married by the Church or have proper dispensation.

Please clarify what you have going on.
 
Now I’m confused—if you were baptized as a Catholic when you were a baby, why are you in RCIA?
 
I didn’t say I was baptized Catholic. Protestant baptism. Never married in a church.
 
Ahhhh, that clears it up.

Yep, full case. Be patient, do not assume anything.
 
Ok. In that case, yes, a full case for nullity. Because you were baptized, the Pauline Privilege doesn’t apply. And the Petrine Privilege is so rare as to be almost unheard of.

Since you are not Catholic, the place of your marriage does not affect the situation.

Good luck!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top