Tell me again about annulment of marriage?

  • Thread starter Thread starter YourNameHere
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
There are also some really easy cases (like, “I was technically Catholic but neither followed nor got dispensed from the Catholic form of marriage,” which I suspect is the most common reason overall) that don’t even need to go to the tribunal. Do we know if those are included in the high percentage of granted petitions?
 
Likely. The “nullity police” are not exactly precise in their statistics reporting.
 
I think you are saying to me that annulment is the wrong word. I agree. We just have to live with that word, though, since everyone uses it. A better word may be obtain a “decree of nullity”.

However, the Pauline privilege looks like a divorce/annulment to me, since no one claims the original natural marriage was invalid. I think they call it dissolve or something.
 
You need to learn something about how cases are reported or not reported.
 
Thank you for the quote. Gven that he was speaking of a theoretical case, and not a specific case, nor a group of specific cases, I find the quote essentially meaningless. And while I have tremendous respect for the Cardinal, cases are decided on Canon Law and the evidence brought forth.

You obviously have no experience of any breadth in tribunal cases. And no, I am not speaking of one or two anecdotal (“My cousin… said”).

Yes, I am well aware of comments both by John Paul 2 and Benedict 16, and I know that decades ago some cases appeared to have not been substantiated to the degree they should have been - which rather than proving the cases were ontologically wrong, may well have been cases which should have been brought under a different section of Canon Law. Much of that has been cleared up.

I suspect that the Cardinal never sat on a tribunal; thus we have his personal opinion not based on facts, but on his feelings. While I respect that people have feelings about matters, feelings cannot be substituted for facts. My suspicion is based on how he answered the question.
 
Last edited:
It becomes valid because of the consent of the parties. So part way along the length of the marriage, it becomes valid. This is subject to various things, one of which is the continuation of the consent of the other party. So they can’t really just look at day one in a case like this.
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.
Click to expand...
 
Im pretty sure that the only way the Church, in most areas, will even consider an application for annulment is if a “legal” divorce has happened. The Church says you have to divorce first. I can’t see this being “always maliciously” sacrilegious as a civil divorce is the only avenue of starting the process of obtaining an annulment in the Church. The Church would be contradicting herself if it recommended something sacrilegious.

The Catechism also says : If civil divorce remains the only possible way of ensuring certain legal rights, the care of the children, or the protection of inheritance, it can be tolerated and does not constitute a moral offence

I sometimes think it would be better for the Church to be able to declare a marriage null before the couple gets a divorce, but there are too many civil issues that need to be addressed and solved (custody and care of children, assets, child support etc)
 
Last edited:
Trying to understand everyone. On my first post was trying to make the point that not every marriage that starts out “not perfect” will end in divorce. My understanding was that it only depended on how a marriage started has to if an annulment might be granted.

After reading the posts seen some hurt out here. Also seen a lot of people smarter than me.

The couple decides for themselves what kind of marriage to have - to keep the marriage together or not. Expectations are different for each person when dating, before marriage and during marriage. The Church is correct to assume every marriage to be valid from the start - but not everyone is going to be on the same page.

God will judge what is valid or not.

It would be nice if everyone would honor their vows and follow the golden rule. But we are humans. If a marriage ends in divorce - their has to be a reason why - the Church can use that reason to make the marriage invalid and grant every annulment. That said, maybe the Church needs to somehow take more steps to help marriages survive. We have Retrouvaille. Are their others?
 
Last edited:
OBinOH said:
But we are humans. If a marriage ends in divorce - their has to be a reason why - the Church can use that reason to make the marriage invalid and grant every annulment. That said, maybe the Church needs to somehow take more steps to help marriages survive. We have Retrouvaille. Are their others?
Click to expand...
The Church cannot grant every request for a decree of nullity. At least in my area, if a request has no grounds, the people asking are discouraged from even applying for the annulment. I presume these people don’t get counted in the official statistics, but I don’t know for sure.

One small thing my diocese does to encourage married folks is to have a giant mass each year for the 25 and 50 year anniversary couples. It at least communicates that the Church is glad they have persevered so long.
 
Last edited:
JimG said:
And yet the Orthdox church permits divorce and remarriage without annulment. The prior marriage is dissolved.
Click to expand...
That is not an accurate description of how the Orthodox handle divorce.

There is not a dissolution; it is more a sorrowful acknowledgment that, wrong though it be, the marriage has died.

Also note that there is only minimal distinction between cases of divorce and death of spouse. In both cases, the second marriage is through ekonomia, not not right. A third is sometimes allowed, but is an exception, while a fourth is never allowed–to the point that a byzantine emperor was deposed for it!

Some of the readings are replaced with more penitential substitutes (but this is changing in at least some Orthodox churches), and at least in the case of divorce, the marriage is not seen as sacramental, but rather there is hope it will become so in time.

Now, just to throw oil on the fire . . . 🤣

The Easter Catholics churches, at least those which existed historically and in their own right rather than being raised by Rome (e.g., Melkite, Ukrainian, Ruthenian and others which entered communion) should be using the same methods as the Orthodox; with regards to these churches, the very existence of eastern code of canon law promulgated from Rome is an abuse . . .

hawk
 
TheOldColonel said:
Under most situations, a valid marriage cannot be dissolved. Yet, the Petrine Privilege is the exception to this. For it is a true privilege granted by the pope and accomplishes the dissolution of a valid natural marriage. These cases go the Holy See and take about five years to complete. I have assisted with two.

Click to expand...
I don’t think you meant to give that link as support for what was said

That said, the qualification I used was a valid sacramental marriage can’t be dissolved. There is no “under most situations” involved. It’s under no circumstance.

Re: a natural marriage
 
Last edited:
In the case of the Petrine and Pauline privileges, the marriage was valid, but not sacramental. In the Petrine privilege, one party is unbaptized. In the Pauline privilege, neither party is baptized. The marriages are valid but not sacramental, because both parties must be baptized for the marriage to be sacramental. A valid, sacramental marriage, once consummated, can as a rule never be dissolved.
 
OBinOH said:
the Church can use that reason to make the marriage invalid and grant every annulment.
Click to expand...
This is not correct.

The things that happen during the marriage MAY indicate a problem from the beginning, but, not always. The way a huge crack in your ceiling may indicate a problem with the foundation or it may indicate that someone upstairs was having horses jump on the floor.

The things that happen in a marriage cannot somehow make a valid marriage become invalid.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top