What marriage situations would confirm an annulment?

[Phemie]

On another thread a few months ago we were assured that two people who are physically unable to have sex were not allowed to marry, because it was denying the able one of them their sexual rights. So is a Josephite marriage between two people who are capable of having sex but choose not to?

I am confused,

Yes, a Josephite marriage is one where both are capable of having sex but opt not to. They can’t enter that type of marriage without conselling and part of the counselling would make it clear that if one party decides he/she no longer wants a Josephite marriage the other has to be willing and able to consummate the marriage and continue with a normal marriage.

 

[thistle]

It could be either annulled or dissolved. That is what the priest told me.

That is wrong information then or you misunderstood him.

Annulment is the declaration that a valid marriage never took place.
A valid marriage which is not consummated can be dissolved. A valid marriage can never be annulled.

 

[Phemie]

That is wrong information then or you misunderstood him.

Annulment is the declaration that a valid marriage never took place.
A valid marriage which is not consummated can be dissolved. A valid marriage can never be annulled.

It would depend entirely on why the marriage was not consummated. Was there an intent from the beginning to exclude children from this marriage and not consummating it was the best way to ensure that? Did one of the parties so lack an understanding of the reasons and responsibilities of marriage that consent could not be given? It might be easier to prove either than to get the marriage dissolved.

 

[thistle]

It would depend entirely on why the marriage was not consummated. Was there an intent from the beginning to exclude children from this marriage and not consummating it was the best way to ensure that? Did one of the parties so lack an understanding of the reasons and responsibilities of marriage that consent could not be given? It might be easier to prove either than to get the marriage dissolved.

Yes we don’t have enough information.
I am simply informing that poster that a valid marriage cannot be annulled. It can be dissolved if not consummated but it cannot be annulled.
Annulment means there was never a valid marriage in the first place.

 

[Phemie]

Yes we don’t have enough information.
I am simply informing that poster that a valid marriage cannot be annulled. It can be dissolved if not consummated but it cannot be annulled.
Annulment means there was never a valid marriage in the first place.

Yes, of course, but it’s probably easier to prove that non-consummation stems from reasons that invalidate the marriage rather than go through petitioning Rome to dissolve it.

 

[Elizium23]

So you go through a tribunal and either they find for the nullity of the marriage or they determine it was valid. Being vaild, then you go through the process for dissolution. Alternately, and I’m not a canonist here, but it seems possible that since the marriage is putatively valid, you can attempt a dissolution first and if that fails then you can pursue nullity later. I suppose it would depend on which process is easier to attempt.

 

[His_helpmeet]

A word regarding the dissolution of marriage:

I have not heard that an unconsummated marriage can be dissolved. However, I do know that a marriage can be dissolved in some select circumstances. First, some definitions:

Valid marriage - a marriage in which there is a marriage covenant. In order for a marriage to be valid, it must occur between one man and one woman, to the exclusion of all others, with an intent to be open to new life, a desire to remain faithful until death, free consent of will, and in accordance with Church laws (if at least one individual is Catholic). A marriage cannot occur between close relatives, underage persons, or in situations where permanent inability to have intercourse exists.

Natural marriage - marriage where at least one party is not baptized. This may be a civil or a religious ceremony. Natural marriages are considered de facto valid by the Church.

Sacramental marriage - marriage where both parties are baptized. If one or both parties are not baptized at the time of the marriage, but are baptized subsequently, no convalidation is required (assuming they are already validly married); Baptism alone relegates the marriage to sacramental status.

Only valid, natural marriages can be dissolved. Sacramental marriages may be declared invalid, but they cannot be dissolved.

In the case of two non-baptized parties, if the marriage ends, the bishop can dissolve the marriage. This is called the Pauline Privilege. It is usually restricted to cases in which one individual desires Baptism in the Catholic Church and desires to contract a valid marriage with a Catholic.

In the case of one baptized and one non-baptized party, if the marriage ends and it is not the fault of the baptized party, the Pope can dissolve the marriage. This is called the Petrine Privilege, or the Favour of the Faith.

Other than these circumstances, it is not possible for a marriage to be formally “dissolved” to the best of my knowledge; it may only be declared valid or invalid.

In the case of something that can be easily proven on paper (e.g. consanguinity, prior bond of marriage, marriage outside the Church without a dispensation, etc.) only paperwork is necessary to declare the marriage invalid. This is often called “documentary procedure” and takes usually only a few weeks.

In the case of something more nebulous (e.g. lack of understanding of the nature of marriage, intent not to have children, infidelity, etc.) a formal nullity trial is required. Both the petitioner and the respondent (if he/she agrees) will be interviewed, as will witnesses. Additional documentation may be required. The Church’s goal is to have a formal nullity trial concluded within 18 months, although this is not a firm deadline.

 

[Corki]

In a case where permanent inability to have intercourse exists, a marriage is also not valid. Permanent sterility does not invalidate a marriage, because the only requirement is that the couple be OPEN to new life.

Permanent inability to have intercourse makes a marriage invalid because the nature of the relationship is fundamentally changed. The couple is really only able to live as brother and sister; they are not capable of becoming one flesh through the marital act.

True, if the condition existed at the time of the marriage. If a person develops an inability to have intercourse afterwards, for reasons of illness or injury, that is not grounds (by itself) for an annulment.

 

[Phemie]

A word regarding the dissolution of marriage:

I have not heard that an unconsummated marriage can be dissolved. However, I do know that a marriage can be dissolved in some select circumstances. (…)

Only valid, natural marriages can be dissolved. Sacramental marriages may be declared invalid, but they cannot be dissolved.

Not so.

Can. 1141 A marriage that is ratum et consummatum can be dissolved by no human power and by no cause, except death.
Can. 1142 For a just cause, the Roman Pontiff can dissolve a non-consummated marriage between baptized persons or between a baptized party and a non-baptized party at the request of both parties or of one of them, even if the other party is unwilling.

 

[janeway529]

So you go through a tribunal and either they find for the nullity of the marriage or they determine it was valid. Being vaild, then you go through the process for dissolution. Alternately, and I’m not a canonist here, but it seems possible that since the marriage is putatively valid, you can attempt a dissolution first and if that fails then you can pursue nullity later. I suppose it would depend on which process is easier to attempt.

Usually, the tribunal will pursue the determination of invalidity (if the case is there) rather than dissolution simply because the former is MUCH faster than going through Rome.

 

[Mayita30]

That is wrong information then or you misunderstood him.

Annulment is the declaration that a valid marriage never took place.
A valid marriage which is not consummated can be dissolved. A valid marriage can never be annulled.

This is what the archdiocese told me. A non-consummated marriage needs a proof : the virginit test. When I did the test it came out positive and the Gynecologist told me that normally in cases like these, the husband has to go to a psychiatrist.

With this in mind, it can also be considered that a valid marriage never took place due to psychiatric reasons so an annulment should be done

It could also be processed in a different way by sending it to Rome to have it dissolved by the Pope.

I did not misunderstood them because it is already being processed. I am answering this based on on going experience

 

[thistle]

This is what the archdiocese told me. A non-consummated marriage needs a proof : the virginit test. When I did the test it came out positive and the Gynecologist told me that normally in cases like these, the husband has to go to a psychiatrist.

With this in mind, it can also be considered that a valid marriage never took place due to psychiatric reasons so an annulment should be done

It could also be processed in a different way by sending it to Rome to have it dissolved by the Pope.

I did not misunderstood them because it is already being processed. I am answering this based on on going experience

That is not right.
Either you have a valid marriage which has not been consummated (a dissolution can be sought) or you have a marriage that was never valid in the first place (an annulment can be sought) but a valid marriage CANNOT be dissolved.
I

 

[Phemie]

That is not right.
Either you have a valid marriage which has not been consummated (a dissolution can be sought) or you have a marriage that was never valid in the first place (an annulment can be sought) but a valid marriage CANNOT be dissolved.
I

It’s probably easier to prove that a non-consummated marriage was not valid than to seek dissolution. It would all depend on why the marriage was not consummated.

I can see seeking dissolution if something happened shortly after the marriage to permanently prevent consummation. The marriage may well be valid based on everything that happened before and at the time of the wedding but circumstances (I’m thinking an accident that leaves one or the other permanently incapable of intercourse) prevented consummation so you seek dissolution.

I can’t see most reasons for non-consummation being ‘normal’. And if you can prove that a permanent inability to consummate the marriage was present, but unknown, at the time of the marriage then the marriage can be declared invalid. Or maybe the person is simply so psychologically damaged in this regard that no consent was possible so the marriage is invalid.

 

[Mayita30]

That is not right.
Either you have a valid marriage which has not been consummated (a dissolution can be sought) or you have a marriage that was never valid in the first place (an annulment can be sought) but a valid marriage CANNOT be dissolved.
I

Are you a priest?

The tribunal told me that a person who does not consummate a marriage normally has a psychiatric problem therefore he entered the marriage and said his vows without the proper intention therefore it is invalid and can be annuled.

A person without psychiatric problems may also enter into marriage. Upon refusal to consummate this marriage… This valid marriage may be dissolve

I was told both are valid ways. I am not basing things on theories … I’m basing it on experience

 

[thistle]

Are you a priest?

The tribunal told me that a person who does not consummate a marriage normally has a psychiatric problem therefore he entered the marriage and said his vows without the proper intention therefore it is invalid and can be annuled.

A person without psychiatric problems may also enter into marriage. Upon refusal to consummate this marriage… This valid marriage may be dissolve

I was told both are valid ways. I am not basing things on theories … I’m basing it on experience

Now you are agreeing with me and saying the opposite of what you said before.

Canon Law is very clear.
A valid marriage CANNOT be annulled, no matter the reason.
A valid marriage which has not be consummated can be dissolved.
Annulment applies ONLY to a marriage that was invalid in the first place.

 

[Mayita30]

Now you are agreeing with me and saying the opposite of what you said before.

Canon Law is very clear.
A valid marriage CANNOT be annulled, no matter the reason.
A valid marriage which has not be consummated can be dissolved.
Annulment applies ONLY to a marriage that was invalid in the first place.

Maybe you shoul read everything I posted… I posted from the beginning that I am seeking annulment reason is non consummation and I was given both options. The first option is more economical since you dont have to send it to Rome so less processing expense

 

[thistle]

Maybe you shoul read everything I posted… I posted from the beginning that I am seeking annulment reason is non consummation and I was given both options. The first option is more economical since you dont have to send it to Rome so less processing expense

There is no annulment for non-consummation. It does not exist.
A valid marriage which is not consummated can be dissolved. If the marriage is valid it is impossible to be annulled. Annulment applies to an invalid marriage and NOT a valid marriage.

 

[SpidersfromMars]

There is no annulment for non-consummation. It does not exist.
A valid marriage which is not consummated can be dissolved. If the marriage is valid it is impossible to be annulled. Annulment applies to an invalid marriage and NOT a valid marriage.

Well it sounds like she’s saying the marriage could be invalid not for the lack of consummation per se, but because of what that might reveal about the intent of her husband at the time of the wedding.

That does sound like a very sad situation by the way

 

[Phemie]

There is no annulment for non-consummation. It does not exist.
A valid marriage which is not consummated can be dissolved. If the marriage is valid it is impossible to be annulled. Annulment applies to an invalid marriage and NOT a valid marriage.

Refusal to consummate the marriage will be the proof of the person’s inability to enter a valid marriage. So while ‘non-consummation’ may not be the official reason for the decree of nullity, it is certainly the reason why a case would be accepted by the Tribunal in the first place.

 

[thistle]

Refusal to consummate the marriage will be the proof of the person’s inability to enter a valid marriage. So while ‘non-consummation’ may not be the official reason for the decree of nullity, it is certainly the reason why a case would be accepted by the Tribunal in the first place.

What happens or in this case does not happen after a marriage has taken place are not grounds for annulment. Annulment is only possible based on what is known BEFORE the marriage takes place. As I said in an earlier thread an event or non-event after the marriage has taken place may be used to support something known prior to the marriage but is never in itself grounds for annulment.
What is frustrating me is that the other poster keeps saying that a valid marriage can be annulled. It cannot. It is impossible. Annulment applies to a marriage that was invalid.
A VALID MARRIAGE CAN NEVER BE ANNULLED BUT A VALID MARRIAGE CAN BE DISSOLVED ( in cases of non-consummation).