Yep, another annulment thread

[Suslar]

No … As you know from your love for all your children - they are all legitimate

This comes up because in annulment processes one spouse will try to use this as a reason for an annulment not to be granted … Civil law is what makes - in the eyes of the law- a child legitimate or not …and this deals primarily with inheritances, etc …

All children are gifts from God and are legitimate … … and fun too

Right on - kids are awesome!!!
Every one of 'em is legitimate before God because He made them!!!

The Church doesn’t concern itself with “legitimacy” in terms of the legal system . . . . and honestly, unless you are royalty and worried about succession to the throne or passing on inheritance, does the old notion of “legitimacy” matter?

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Right on - kids are awesome!!!
Every one of 'em is legitimate before God because He made them!!!

The Church doesn’t concern itself with “legitimacy” in terms of the legal system . . . . and honestly, unless you are royalty and worried about succession to the throne or passing on inheritance, does the old notion of “legitimacy” matter?

It doesn’t to me. I’m just relieved it doesn’t matter to the Church either – at least since 1983!

Alan

 

[Suslar]

It doesn’t to me. I’m just relieved it doesn’t matter to the Church either – at least since 1983!

Alan

 

[Gorgias]

While both spouses may not have to be notified - the consent of both parties is necessary - “A marriage cannot be radically sanated if consent is lacking in either or both of the parties” (CIC 1162:1)

The way you’ve phrased this, I’m getting the feeling that you understand ‘consent’ in this context to mean ‘consent to the sanation.’ That’s not what this canon is talking about – it’s talking about ‘consent to the marriage.’ What this canon means is that radical sanation requires there to be persisting marital consent (i.e., if one spouse consented to the marriage, then withdrew that consent, sanation would not be a possibility).

For you to do this without your husbands knowledge or consent would require a serious reason “A sanation can be granted validly even when one or both of the parties are unaware of it, but it is not to be granted except for serious reason” (CIC 1164).

Again, be careful using the legal term ‘consent’ here. She could pursue sanation without her husband’s knowledge, but he would have to continue to consent to the marriage…

 

[YADA]

The way you’ve phrased this, I’m getting the feeling that you understand ‘consent’ in this context to mean ‘consent to the sanation.’ That’s not what this canon is talking about – it’s talking about ‘consent to the marriage.’ What this canon means is that radical sanation requires there to be persisting marital consent (i.e., if one spouse consented to the marriage, then withdrew that consent, sanation would not be a possibility).

Again, be careful using the legal term ‘consent’ here. She could pursue sanation without her husband’s knowledge, but he would have to continue to consent to the marriage…

No I understand that … however, for a radical sanation to take place, several conditions must apply. First and most basically, “A radical sanation is not to be granted unless it is probable that the parties intend to persevere in conjugal life” (CIC 1161:3). If there is evidence the one or both of the parties intends anything less than a permanent marriage, radical sanation is ruled out. …

AND any impediments that exist must be taken care of. “A marriage which is invalid due to an impediment or due to defect of legitimate form can be sanated provided the consent of each party continues to exist” (CIC 1163:1) … the prior marriage is am impediment to this second marriage …

Both parties must have validly consented to their marriage, and this consent must exist simultaneously in both. They must have consented freely to the marriage in a way that did not exclude any of the essential properties of marriage (monogamy, fidelity, permanence, and openness to children). This consent is presumed to have been given in their marriage ceremony outside the Church unless there is evidence otherwise (CIC 1107), and the consent is presumed to exist at the present unless one party has indicated otherwise.

So the conditions existing at the time of this marriage - like an annulment process but be determined before a radical sanation can be granted - doable without the other parties knowledge and consent [to the sanation] - but harder to discern … requires honest testimony by one party - possibly even witnesses …

So the consent in the Canon Law [and that I meant] is [was] not to the sanation but to the marriage vows