What is considered "error determining the will" from Canon 1099

[Ben_Sinner]

Canon 1099 – Provided it does not determine the will, error concerning the unity or the indissolubility or the sacramental dignity of marriage does not vitiate matrimonial consent.

This talks about when the couple have grounds for annulment due to an error regarding the indissolubility of marriage.

At what point is this error they have of the sacrament considered to “determine the will”?

 

[dmar198]

Canon 1099 – Provided it does not determine the will, error concerning the unity or the indissolubility or the sacramental dignity of marriage does not vitiate matrimonial consent.

This talks about when the couple have grounds for annulment due to an error regarding the indissolubility of marriage.

At what point is this error they have of the sacrament considered to “determine the will”?

It occurs to me that some people refuse to get married unless they have the option of divorcing. If the escape clause of divorce is treated as a condition for marrying, then they are really only consenting to a trial marriage, and those are invalid. I Think that’s what this canon is referring to, because the divorce clause is part of their reason for consenting and thus it helps determine their choice.

 

[GEddie]

Canon 1099 – Provided it does not determine the will, error concerning the unity or the indissolubility or the sacramental dignity of marriage does not vitiate matrimonial consent.

This talks about when the couple have grounds for annulment due to an error regarding the indissolubility of marriage.

At what point is this error they have of the sacrament considered to “determine the will”?

I’d say that if it leads to something like one or both of them thinking, “let’s go ahead, we can just divorce if it goes wrong,” that might create grounds for annulment later on.

ICXC NIKA

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

It means that just because someone thinks that divorce is ok or that marriage is not indissoluble does not automatically mean that the marriage is invalid. In order for it to be invalid the person would have had to have made it a condition of his/her consent to the marriage.

After all, I can think objectively that divorce and remarriage is a reality but that doesn’t mean I don’t have the intention of being married to person X till death does us part.

 

[Gorgias]

It means that just because someone thinks that divorce is ok or that marriage is not indissoluble does not automatically mean that the marriage is invalid. In order for it to be invalid the person would have had to have made it a condition of his/her consent to the marriage.

After all, I can think objectively that divorce and remarriage is a reality but that doesn’t mean I don’t have the intention of being married to person X till death does us part.

This.

So, let’s suppose I’m engaged to be married. I’m sitting there, thinking, “well, sure … folks can get divorced, and that’s all good – but my relationship is special! We’re so in love that we’re never gonna get divorced!”

In other words, my idea that divorce is possible doesn’t necessarily have to figure into my consent: although I think that some folks divorce, I’m thinking that I’m never gonna divorce. If that’s my thought, then my marriage isn’t invalid simply because I think that divorce is possible. After all, I’m walking into my marriage thinking that my marriage is “until death do us part.” To say it another way, what ‘determined my will’ was my belief that my marriage was gonna be forever.

So, I can’t later walk up to a priest and say, “my marriage was invalid since I’m cool with the notion of divorce.”

(On the other hand, if I was walking into my wedding day thinking, “meh… if it doesn’t work out, I can just bail and get a divorce”, then that marriage would be able to be proven invalid, if it could be shown that this is what my state of mind was, as I headed to the altar.)

Make sense?

 

[Vico]

Canon 1099 – Provided it does not determine the will, error concerning the unity or the indissolubility or the sacramental dignity of marriage does not vitiate matrimonial consent.

This talks about when the couple have grounds for annulment due to an error regarding the indissolubility of marriage.

At what point is this error they have of the sacrament considered to “determine the will”?

It means it is taken as a condition that marriage is dissoluble. “I marry you only with the condition that it is dissoluble.” [The error amounts to a *sine qua non.]